diff --git "a/data/ask_act/validation.jsonl" "b/data/ask_act/validation.jsonl"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/data/ask_act/validation.jsonl"
@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0271_entailed_open_conclusion__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0271_entailed_open_conclusion__owa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0271_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Service B has an incident note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service B", "target_statement": "Service B needs SRE review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service B"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_incident_note::Service B"], "conclusion": "needs_sre_review::Service B", "text": "If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."}], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service B", "closure_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service B", "needs_sre_review::Service B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service B has an incident note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_sre_review::Service B.\nTarget statement: Service B needs SRE review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0237_explicit_negative_open__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0237_explicit_negative_open__owa", "base_id": "library_services_0237_explicit_negative_open", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "explicit_negative_open", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Reader F has an active membership."], "facts_negative": ["Reader D does not has a special request."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "has_special_request::Reader D", "target_statement": "Reader D has a special request.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"], "negative_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader D"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_special_request::Reader D", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader F has an active membership.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Reader D does not has a special request.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_special_request::Reader D.\nTarget statement: Reader D has a special request.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "manufacturing_quality_0085_open_missing_direct__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "manufacturing_quality_0085_open_missing_direct__lcwa", "base_id": "manufacturing_quality_0085_open_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "manufacturing_quality", "family": "open_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "may_ship"], "facts_positive": ["Part B passed the visual check."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_visual_check": "passed the visual check", "has_release_approval": "has release approval", "has_supplier_note": "has a supplier note", "may_ship": "may ship to customers", "needs_engineer_review": "needs engineer review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "query_atom": "has_supplier_note::Part B", "target_statement": "Part B has a supplier note.", "gold_reason_type": "local_open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part B"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_supplier_note::Part B", "closure_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_supplier_note", "gold_missing_entity": "Part B", "gold_missing_atom": "has_supplier_note::Part B", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Part B has a supplier note?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_release_approval, may_ship.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_release_approval: has release approval\n- has_supplier_note: has a supplier note\n- may_ship: may ship to customers\n- needs_engineer_review: needs engineer review\n- passed_visual_check: passed the visual check\n\nPositive facts:\n- Part B passed the visual check.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_supplier_note::Part B.\nTarget statement: Part B has a supplier note.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0189_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0189_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0189_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "facts_positive": ["Rover 4 has a field note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a robot has a field note, then that robot needs operator review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "needs_operator_review::Rover 4", "target_statement": "Rover 4 needs operator review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 4"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_field_note::Rover 4"], "conclusion": "needs_operator_review::Rover 4", "text": "If a robot has a field note, then that robot needs operator review."}], "query_atom": "needs_operator_review::Rover 4", "closure_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 4", "needs_operator_review::Rover 4"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_field_note, has_shift_clearance, may_start_shift, needs_operator_review, passed_diagnostics.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 4 has a field note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a robot has a field note, then that robot needs operator review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_operator_review::Rover 4.\nTarget statement: Rover 4 needs operator review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "procurement_review_0304_entailed_closed_conclusion__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "procurement_review_0304_entailed_closed_conclusion__owa", "base_id": "procurement_review_0304_entailed_closed_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "procurement_review", "family": "entailed_closed_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Vendor E has vendor approval.", "Vendor E submitted a tax form."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a vendor submitted a tax form and has vendor approval, then that vendor may receive a purchase order."], "predicate_glossary": {"submitted_tax_form": "submitted a tax form", "has_vendor_approval": "has vendor approval", "has_risk_note": "has a risk note", "may_receive_purchase_order": "may receive a purchase order", "needs_procurement_review": "needs procurement review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_risk_note", "has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order", "needs_procurement_review", "submitted_tax_form"], "query_atom": "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "target_statement": "Vendor E may receive a purchase order.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_vendor_approval::Vendor E", "submitted_tax_form::Vendor E"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["submitted_tax_form::Vendor E", "has_vendor_approval::Vendor E"], "conclusion": "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "text": "If a vendor submitted a tax form and has vendor approval, then that vendor may receive a purchase order."}], "query_atom": "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "closure_atoms": ["has_vendor_approval::Vendor E", "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "submitted_tax_form::Vendor E"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_risk_note: has a risk note\n- has_vendor_approval: has vendor approval\n- may_receive_purchase_order: may receive a purchase order\n- needs_procurement_review: needs procurement review\n- submitted_tax_form: submitted a tax form\n\nPositive facts:\n- Vendor E has vendor approval.\n- Vendor E submitted a tax form.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a vendor submitted a tax form and has vendor approval, then that vendor may receive a purchase order.\n\nTarget atom: may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E.\nTarget statement: Vendor E may receive a purchase order.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0237_explicit_negative_open__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0237_explicit_negative_open__cwa", "base_id": "library_services_0237_explicit_negative_open", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "explicit_negative_open", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "facts_positive": ["Reader F has an active membership."], "facts_negative": ["Reader D does not has a special request."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "has_special_request::Reader D", "target_statement": "Reader D has a special request.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"], "negative_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader D"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_special_request::Reader D", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_active_membership, has_borrowing_clearance, has_special_request, may_borrow_archive_item, needs_librarian_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader F has an active membership.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Reader D does not has a special request.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_special_request::Reader D.\nTarget statement: Reader D has a special request.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "hospital_access_0014_open_missing_with_closed_distractor__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "hospital_access_0014_open_missing_with_closed_distractor__owa", "base_id": "hospital_access_0014_open_missing_with_closed_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "hospital_access", "family": "open_missing_with_closed_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Dylan has completed safety training.", "Dylan has security clearance."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"completed_training": "has completed safety training", "has_clearance": "has security clearance", "assigned_to_trial": "is assigned to the clinical trial", "may_enter_lab": "may enter Lab A", "needs_supervisor_review": "needs supervisor review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Cora", "target_statement": "Cora is assigned to the clinical trial.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["completed_training::Dylan", "has_clearance::Dylan"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Cora", "closure_atoms": ["completed_training::Dylan", "has_clearance::Dylan"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "assigned_to_trial", "gold_missing_entity": "Cora", "gold_missing_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Cora", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Cora is assigned to the clinical trial?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- assigned_to_trial: is assigned to the clinical trial\n- completed_training: has completed safety training\n- has_clearance: has security clearance\n- may_enter_lab: may enter Lab A\n- needs_supervisor_review: needs supervisor review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Dylan has completed safety training.\n- Dylan has security clearance.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: assigned_to_trial::Cora.\nTarget statement: Cora is assigned to the clinical trial.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "procurement_review_0318_explicit_negative_open__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "procurement_review_0318_explicit_negative_open__cwa", "base_id": "procurement_review_0318_explicit_negative_open", "split": "dev", "domain": "procurement_review", "family": "explicit_negative_open", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_risk_note", "has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order", "needs_procurement_review", "submitted_tax_form"], "facts_positive": ["Vendor C submitted a tax form."], "facts_negative": ["Vendor A does not has a risk note."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"submitted_tax_form": "submitted a tax form", "has_vendor_approval": "has vendor approval", "has_risk_note": "has a risk note", "may_receive_purchase_order": "may receive a purchase order", "needs_procurement_review": "needs procurement review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_risk_note", "has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order", "needs_procurement_review", "submitted_tax_form"], "query_atom": "has_risk_note::Vendor A", "target_statement": "Vendor A has a risk note.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["submitted_tax_form::Vendor C"], "negative_atoms": ["has_risk_note::Vendor A"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_risk_note::Vendor A", "closure_atoms": ["submitted_tax_form::Vendor C"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_risk_note, has_vendor_approval, may_receive_purchase_order, needs_procurement_review, submitted_tax_form.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_risk_note: has a risk note\n- has_vendor_approval: has vendor approval\n- may_receive_purchase_order: may receive a purchase order\n- needs_procurement_review: needs procurement review\n- submitted_tax_form: submitted a tax form\n\nPositive facts:\n- Vendor C submitted a tax form.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Vendor A does not has a risk note.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_risk_note::Vendor A.\nTarget statement: Vendor A has a risk note.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0142_open_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0142_open_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0142_open_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "open_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "facts_positive": ["Account 59 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "target_statement": "Account 59 needs compliance review.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 59"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59"], "conclusion": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "text": "If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."}], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "closure_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 59"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance, has_manual_exception, may_receive_wire, needs_compliance_review, passed_kyc.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 59 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_compliance_review::Account 59.\nTarget statement: Account 59 needs compliance review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0155_explicit_negative_closed__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0155_explicit_negative_closed__cwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0155_explicit_negative_closed", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "explicit_negative_closed", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "facts_positive": ["Account 27 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": ["Account 61 does not has compliance clearance."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 61", "target_statement": "Account 61 has compliance clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 27"], "negative_atoms": ["has_compliance_clearance::Account 61"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 61", "closure_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 27"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance, has_manual_exception, may_receive_wire, needs_compliance_review, passed_kyc.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 27 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Account 61 does not has compliance clearance.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_compliance_clearance::Account 61.\nTarget statement: Account 61 has compliance clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0217_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0217_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa", "base_id": "library_services_0217_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Reader B has an active membership."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B", "target_statement": "Reader B may borrow an archive item.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader B"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_active_membership::Reader B", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader B"], "conclusion": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B", "text": "If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."}], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_borrowing_clearance", "gold_missing_entity": "Reader B", "gold_missing_atom": "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader B", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Reader B has borrowing clearance?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader B has an active membership.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item.\n\nTarget atom: may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B.\nTarget statement: Reader B may borrow an archive item.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0148_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0148_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0148_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "facts_positive": ["Account 59 has a manual exception."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "target_statement": "Account 59 needs compliance review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59"], "conclusion": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "text": "If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."}], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "closure_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59", "needs_compliance_review::Account 59"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance, has_manual_exception, may_receive_wire, needs_compliance_review, passed_kyc.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 59 has a manual exception.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_compliance_review::Account 59.\nTarget statement: Account 59 needs compliance review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0268_entailed_open_conclusion__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0268_entailed_open_conclusion__owa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0268_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Service E has an incident note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service E", "target_statement": "Service E needs SRE review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service E"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_incident_note::Service E"], "conclusion": "needs_sre_review::Service E", "text": "If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."}], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service E", "closure_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service E", "needs_sre_review::Service E"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service E has an incident note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_sre_review::Service E.\nTarget statement: Service E needs SRE review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0165_open_missing_direct__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0165_open_missing_direct__owa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0165_open_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "open_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Rover 4 passed diagnostics."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "has_field_note::Rover 4", "target_statement": "Rover 4 has a field note.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 4"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_field_note::Rover 4", "closure_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 4"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_field_note", "gold_missing_entity": "Rover 4", "gold_missing_atom": "has_field_note::Rover 4", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Rover 4 has a field note?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 4 passed diagnostics.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_field_note::Rover 4.\nTarget statement: Rover 4 has a field note.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0268_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0268_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0268_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "facts_positive": ["Service E has an incident note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service E", "target_statement": "Service E needs SRE review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service E"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_incident_note::Service E"], "conclusion": "needs_sre_review::Service E", "text": "If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."}], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service E", "closure_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service E", "needs_sre_review::Service E"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval, has_incident_note, may_deploy, needs_sre_review, passed_unit_tests.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service E has an incident note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_sre_review::Service E.\nTarget statement: Service E needs SRE review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0130_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0130_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0130_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Account 61 has a manual exception.", "Account 59 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 59", "target_statement": "Account 59 has compliance clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 61", "passed_kyc::Account 59"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 59", "closure_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 61", "passed_kyc::Account 59"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_compliance_clearance", "gold_missing_entity": "Account 59", "gold_missing_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 59", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Account 59 has compliance clearance?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 61 has a manual exception.\n- Account 59 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_compliance_clearance::Account 59.\nTarget statement: Account 59 has compliance clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0237_explicit_negative_open__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0237_explicit_negative_open__lcwa", "base_id": "library_services_0237_explicit_negative_open", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "explicit_negative_open", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_borrowing_clearance", "may_borrow_archive_item"], "facts_positive": ["Reader F has an active membership."], "facts_negative": ["Reader D does not has a special request."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "has_special_request::Reader D", "target_statement": "Reader D has a special request.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"], "negative_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader D"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_special_request::Reader D", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_borrowing_clearance, may_borrow_archive_item.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader F has an active membership.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Reader D does not has a special request.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_special_request::Reader D.\nTarget statement: Reader D has a special request.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0269_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0269_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0269_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "may_deploy"], "facts_positive": ["Service F has an incident note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service F", "target_statement": "Service F needs SRE review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service F"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_incident_note::Service F"], "conclusion": "needs_sre_review::Service F", "text": "If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."}], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service F", "closure_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service F", "needs_sre_review::Service F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval, may_deploy.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service F has an incident note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_sre_review::Service F.\nTarget statement: Service F needs SRE review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0142_open_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0142_open_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0142_open_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "open_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "may_receive_wire"], "facts_positive": ["Account 59 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "target_statement": "Account 59 needs compliance review.", "gold_reason_type": "local_open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 59"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59"], "conclusion": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "text": "If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."}], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "closure_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 59"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_manual_exception", "gold_missing_entity": "Account 59", "gold_missing_atom": "has_manual_exception::Account 59", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Account 59 has a manual exception?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance, may_receive_wire.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 59 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_compliance_review::Account 59.\nTarget statement: Account 59 needs compliance review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "manufacturing_quality_0085_open_missing_direct__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "manufacturing_quality_0085_open_missing_direct__owa", "base_id": "manufacturing_quality_0085_open_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "manufacturing_quality", "family": "open_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Part B passed the visual check."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_visual_check": "passed the visual check", "has_release_approval": "has release approval", "has_supplier_note": "has a supplier note", "may_ship": "may ship to customers", "needs_engineer_review": "needs engineer review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "query_atom": "has_supplier_note::Part B", "target_statement": "Part B has a supplier note.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part B"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_supplier_note::Part B", "closure_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_supplier_note", "gold_missing_entity": "Part B", "gold_missing_atom": "has_supplier_note::Part B", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Part B has a supplier note?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_release_approval: has release approval\n- has_supplier_note: has a supplier note\n- may_ship: may ship to customers\n- needs_engineer_review: needs engineer review\n- passed_visual_check: passed the visual check\n\nPositive facts:\n- Part B passed the visual check.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_supplier_note::Part B.\nTarget statement: Part B has a supplier note.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0273_explicit_negative_closed__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0273_explicit_negative_closed__lcwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0273_explicit_negative_closed", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "explicit_negative_closed", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval"], "facts_positive": ["Service F passed unit tests."], "facts_negative": ["Service D does not has deployment approval."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service D", "target_statement": "Service D has deployment approval.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service F"], "negative_atoms": ["has_deployment_approval::Service D"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service D", "closure_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service F passed unit tests.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Service D does not has deployment approval.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_deployment_approval::Service D.\nTarget statement: Service D has deployment approval.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0169_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0169_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0169_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "facts_positive": ["Rover 3 has a field note.", "Rover 2 passed diagnostics."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 2", "target_statement": "Rover 2 has shift clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 3", "passed_diagnostics::Rover 2"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 2", "closure_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 3", "passed_diagnostics::Rover 2"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_field_note, has_shift_clearance, may_start_shift, needs_operator_review, passed_diagnostics.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 3 has a field note.\n- Rover 2 passed diagnostics.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_shift_clearance::Rover 2.\nTarget statement: Rover 2 has shift clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0209_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0209_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa", "base_id": "library_services_0209_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "facts_positive": ["Reader F has an active membership.", "Reader A has a special request."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F", "target_statement": "Reader F has borrowing clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F", "has_special_request::Reader A"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F", "has_special_request::Reader A"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_active_membership, has_borrowing_clearance, has_special_request, may_borrow_archive_item, needs_librarian_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader F has an active membership.\n- Reader A has a special request.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F.\nTarget statement: Reader F has borrowing clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0138_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0138_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0138_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "facts_positive": ["Account 12 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If an account passed KYC checks and has compliance clearance, then that account may receive a wire transfer."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "may_receive_wire::Account 12", "target_statement": "Account 12 may receive a wire transfer.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 12"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["passed_kyc::Account 12", "has_compliance_clearance::Account 12"], "conclusion": "may_receive_wire::Account 12", "text": "If an account passed KYC checks and has compliance clearance, then that account may receive a wire transfer."}], "query_atom": "may_receive_wire::Account 12", "closure_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 12"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance, has_manual_exception, may_receive_wire, needs_compliance_review, passed_kyc.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 12 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If an account passed KYC checks and has compliance clearance, then that account may receive a wire transfer.\n\nTarget atom: may_receive_wire::Account 12.\nTarget statement: Account 12 may receive a wire transfer.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "manufacturing_quality_0089_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "manufacturing_quality_0089_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa", "base_id": "manufacturing_quality_0089_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "manufacturing_quality", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_release_approval"], "facts_positive": ["Part A has a supplier note.", "Part F passed the visual check."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_visual_check": "passed the visual check", "has_release_approval": "has release approval", "has_supplier_note": "has a supplier note", "may_ship": "may ship to customers", "needs_engineer_review": "needs engineer review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "query_atom": "has_release_approval::Part F", "target_statement": "Part F has release approval.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_supplier_note::Part A", "passed_visual_check::Part F"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_release_approval::Part F", "closure_atoms": ["has_supplier_note::Part A", "passed_visual_check::Part F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_release_approval.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_release_approval: has release approval\n- has_supplier_note: has a supplier note\n- may_ship: may ship to customers\n- needs_engineer_review: needs engineer review\n- passed_visual_check: passed the visual check\n\nPositive facts:\n- Part A has a supplier note.\n- Part F passed the visual check.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_release_approval::Part F.\nTarget statement: Part F has release approval.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "manufacturing_quality_0099_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "manufacturing_quality_0099_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa", "base_id": "manufacturing_quality_0099_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "manufacturing_quality", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Part D passed the visual check."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a part passed the visual check and has release approval, then that part may ship to customers."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_visual_check": "passed the visual check", "has_release_approval": "has release approval", "has_supplier_note": "has a supplier note", "may_ship": "may ship to customers", "needs_engineer_review": "needs engineer review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "query_atom": "may_ship::Part D", "target_statement": "Part D may ship to customers.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part D"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["passed_visual_check::Part D", "has_release_approval::Part D"], "conclusion": "may_ship::Part D", "text": "If a part passed the visual check and has release approval, then that part may ship to customers."}], "query_atom": "may_ship::Part D", "closure_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part D"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_release_approval", "gold_missing_entity": "Part D", "gold_missing_atom": "has_release_approval::Part D", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Part D has release approval?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_release_approval: has release approval\n- has_supplier_note: has a supplier note\n- may_ship: may ship to customers\n- needs_engineer_review: needs engineer review\n- passed_visual_check: passed the visual check\n\nPositive facts:\n- Part D passed the visual check.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a part passed the visual check and has release approval, then that part may ship to customers.\n\nTarget atom: may_ship::Part D.\nTarget statement: Part D may ship to customers.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "university_registration_0048_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "university_registration_0048_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa", "base_id": "university_registration_0048_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "university_registration", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Noah has an external scholarship.", "Mia passed the qualifying exam."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_exam": "passed the qualifying exam", "has_advising_clearance": "has advising clearance", "has_external_scholarship": "has an external scholarship", "may_register": "may register for the seminar", "needs_manual_audit": "needs a manual audit"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance", "has_external_scholarship", "may_register", "needs_manual_audit", "passed_exam"], "query_atom": "has_advising_clearance::Mia", "target_statement": "Mia has advising clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_external_scholarship::Noah", "passed_exam::Mia"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_advising_clearance::Mia", "closure_atoms": ["has_external_scholarship::Noah", "passed_exam::Mia"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_advising_clearance", "gold_missing_entity": "Mia", "gold_missing_atom": "has_advising_clearance::Mia", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Mia has advising clearance?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_advising_clearance: has advising clearance\n- has_external_scholarship: has an external scholarship\n- may_register: may register for the seminar\n- needs_manual_audit: needs a manual audit\n- passed_exam: passed the qualifying exam\n\nPositive facts:\n- Noah has an external scholarship.\n- Mia passed the qualifying exam.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_advising_clearance::Mia.\nTarget statement: Mia has advising clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "university_registration_0056_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "university_registration_0056_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa", "base_id": "university_registration_0056_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "university_registration", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance", "may_register"], "facts_positive": ["Lena passed the qualifying exam."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a student passed the qualifying exam and has advising clearance, then that student may register for the seminar."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_exam": "passed the qualifying exam", "has_advising_clearance": "has advising clearance", "has_external_scholarship": "has an external scholarship", "may_register": "may register for the seminar", "needs_manual_audit": "needs a manual audit"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance", "has_external_scholarship", "may_register", "needs_manual_audit", "passed_exam"], "query_atom": "may_register::Lena", "target_statement": "Lena may register for the seminar.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_exam::Lena"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["passed_exam::Lena", "has_advising_clearance::Lena"], "conclusion": "may_register::Lena", "text": "If a student passed the qualifying exam and has advising clearance, then that student may register for the seminar."}], "query_atom": "may_register::Lena", "closure_atoms": ["passed_exam::Lena"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_advising_clearance, may_register.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_advising_clearance: has advising clearance\n- has_external_scholarship: has an external scholarship\n- may_register: may register for the seminar\n- needs_manual_audit: needs a manual audit\n- passed_exam: passed the qualifying exam\n\nPositive facts:\n- Lena passed the qualifying exam.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a student passed the qualifying exam and has advising clearance, then that student may register for the seminar.\n\nTarget atom: may_register::Lena.\nTarget statement: Lena may register for the seminar.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "hospital_access_0017_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "hospital_access_0017_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa", "base_id": "hospital_access_0017_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "hospital_access", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Farid has completed safety training."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a staff member has security clearance and has completed safety training, then that staff member may enter Lab A."], "predicate_glossary": {"completed_training": "has completed safety training", "has_clearance": "has security clearance", "assigned_to_trial": "is assigned to the clinical trial", "may_enter_lab": "may enter Lab A", "needs_supervisor_review": "needs supervisor review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "query_atom": "may_enter_lab::Farid", "target_statement": "Farid may enter Lab A.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["completed_training::Farid"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["completed_training::Farid", "has_clearance::Farid"], "conclusion": "may_enter_lab::Farid", "text": "If a staff member has security clearance and has completed safety training, then that staff member may enter Lab A."}], "query_atom": "may_enter_lab::Farid", "closure_atoms": ["completed_training::Farid"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_clearance", "gold_missing_entity": "Farid", "gold_missing_atom": "has_clearance::Farid", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Farid has security clearance?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- assigned_to_trial: is assigned to the clinical trial\n- completed_training: has completed safety training\n- has_clearance: has security clearance\n- may_enter_lab: may enter Lab A\n- needs_supervisor_review: needs supervisor review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Farid has completed safety training.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a staff member has security clearance and has completed safety training, then that staff member may enter Lab A.\n\nTarget atom: may_enter_lab::Farid.\nTarget statement: Farid may enter Lab A.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0169_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0169_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0169_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Rover 3 has a field note.", "Rover 2 passed diagnostics."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 2", "target_statement": "Rover 2 has shift clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 3", "passed_diagnostics::Rover 2"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 2", "closure_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 3", "passed_diagnostics::Rover 2"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_shift_clearance", "gold_missing_entity": "Rover 2", "gold_missing_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 2", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Rover 2 has shift clearance?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 3 has a field note.\n- Rover 2 passed diagnostics.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_shift_clearance::Rover 2.\nTarget statement: Rover 2 has shift clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "manufacturing_quality_0089_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "manufacturing_quality_0089_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa", "base_id": "manufacturing_quality_0089_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "manufacturing_quality", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "facts_positive": ["Part A has a supplier note.", "Part F passed the visual check."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_visual_check": "passed the visual check", "has_release_approval": "has release approval", "has_supplier_note": "has a supplier note", "may_ship": "may ship to customers", "needs_engineer_review": "needs engineer review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "query_atom": "has_release_approval::Part F", "target_statement": "Part F has release approval.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_supplier_note::Part A", "passed_visual_check::Part F"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_release_approval::Part F", "closure_atoms": ["has_supplier_note::Part A", "passed_visual_check::Part F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_release_approval, has_supplier_note, may_ship, needs_engineer_review, passed_visual_check.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_release_approval: has release approval\n- has_supplier_note: has a supplier note\n- may_ship: may ship to customers\n- needs_engineer_review: needs engineer review\n- passed_visual_check: passed the visual check\n\nPositive facts:\n- Part A has a supplier note.\n- Part F passed the visual check.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_release_approval::Part F.\nTarget statement: Part F has release approval.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0217_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0217_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa", "base_id": "library_services_0217_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_borrowing_clearance", "may_borrow_archive_item"], "facts_positive": ["Reader B has an active membership."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B", "target_statement": "Reader B may borrow an archive item.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader B"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_active_membership::Reader B", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader B"], "conclusion": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B", "text": "If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."}], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_borrowing_clearance, may_borrow_archive_item.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader B has an active membership.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item.\n\nTarget atom: may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B.\nTarget statement: Reader B may borrow an archive item.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0209_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0209_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa", "base_id": "library_services_0209_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Reader F has an active membership.", "Reader A has a special request."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F", "target_statement": "Reader F has borrowing clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F", "has_special_request::Reader A"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F", "has_special_request::Reader A"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_borrowing_clearance", "gold_missing_entity": "Reader F", "gold_missing_atom": "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Reader F has borrowing clearance?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader F has an active membership.\n- Reader A has a special request.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F.\nTarget statement: Reader F has borrowing clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0165_open_missing_direct__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0165_open_missing_direct__cwa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0165_open_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "open_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "facts_positive": ["Rover 4 passed diagnostics."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "has_field_note::Rover 4", "target_statement": "Rover 4 has a field note.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 4"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_field_note::Rover 4", "closure_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 4"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_field_note, has_shift_clearance, may_start_shift, needs_operator_review, passed_diagnostics.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 4 passed diagnostics.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_field_note::Rover 4.\nTarget statement: Rover 4 has a field note.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0209_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0209_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa", "base_id": "library_services_0209_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_borrowing_clearance"], "facts_positive": ["Reader F has an active membership.", "Reader A has a special request."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F", "target_statement": "Reader F has borrowing clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F", "has_special_request::Reader A"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F", "has_special_request::Reader A"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_borrowing_clearance.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader F has an active membership.\n- Reader A has a special request.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_borrowing_clearance::Reader F.\nTarget statement: Reader F has borrowing clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0273_explicit_negative_closed__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0273_explicit_negative_closed__cwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0273_explicit_negative_closed", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "explicit_negative_closed", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "facts_positive": ["Service F passed unit tests."], "facts_negative": ["Service D does not has deployment approval."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service D", "target_statement": "Service D has deployment approval.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service F"], "negative_atoms": ["has_deployment_approval::Service D"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service D", "closure_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval, has_incident_note, may_deploy, needs_sre_review, passed_unit_tests.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service F passed unit tests.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Service D does not has deployment approval.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_deployment_approval::Service D.\nTarget statement: Service D has deployment approval.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0148_entailed_open_conclusion__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0148_entailed_open_conclusion__owa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0148_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Account 59 has a manual exception."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "target_statement": "Account 59 needs compliance review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59"], "conclusion": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "text": "If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."}], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "closure_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59", "needs_compliance_review::Account 59"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 59 has a manual exception.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_compliance_review::Account 59.\nTarget statement: Account 59 needs compliance review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "hospital_access_0017_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "hospital_access_0017_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa", "base_id": "hospital_access_0017_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "hospital_access", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_clearance", "may_enter_lab"], "facts_positive": ["Farid has completed safety training."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a staff member has security clearance and has completed safety training, then that staff member may enter Lab A."], "predicate_glossary": {"completed_training": "has completed safety training", "has_clearance": "has security clearance", "assigned_to_trial": "is assigned to the clinical trial", "may_enter_lab": "may enter Lab A", "needs_supervisor_review": "needs supervisor review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "query_atom": "may_enter_lab::Farid", "target_statement": "Farid may enter Lab A.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["completed_training::Farid"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["completed_training::Farid", "has_clearance::Farid"], "conclusion": "may_enter_lab::Farid", "text": "If a staff member has security clearance and has completed safety training, then that staff member may enter Lab A."}], "query_atom": "may_enter_lab::Farid", "closure_atoms": ["completed_training::Farid"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_clearance, may_enter_lab.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- assigned_to_trial: is assigned to the clinical trial\n- completed_training: has completed safety training\n- has_clearance: has security clearance\n- may_enter_lab: may enter Lab A\n- needs_supervisor_review: needs supervisor review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Farid has completed safety training.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a staff member has security clearance and has completed safety training, then that staff member may enter Lab A.\n\nTarget atom: may_enter_lab::Farid.\nTarget statement: Farid may enter Lab A.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0225_entailed_closed_conclusion__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0225_entailed_closed_conclusion__owa", "base_id": "library_services_0225_entailed_closed_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "entailed_closed_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Reader D has an active membership.", "Reader D has borrowing clearance."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D", "target_statement": "Reader D may borrow an archive item.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader D", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader D"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_active_membership::Reader D", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader D"], "conclusion": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D", "text": "If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."}], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader D", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader D", "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader D has an active membership.\n- Reader D has borrowing clearance.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item.\n\nTarget atom: may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D.\nTarget statement: Reader D may borrow an archive item.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0228_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0228_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa", "base_id": "library_services_0228_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_borrowing_clearance", "may_borrow_archive_item"], "facts_positive": ["Reader A has a special request."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader A", "target_statement": "Reader A needs librarian review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader A"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_special_request::Reader A"], "conclusion": "needs_librarian_review::Reader A", "text": "If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."}], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader A", "closure_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader A", "needs_librarian_review::Reader A"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_borrowing_clearance, may_borrow_archive_item.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader A has a special request.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_librarian_review::Reader A.\nTarget statement: Reader A needs librarian review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0269_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0269_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0269_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "facts_positive": ["Service F has an incident note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service F", "target_statement": "Service F needs SRE review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service F"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_incident_note::Service F"], "conclusion": "needs_sre_review::Service F", "text": "If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."}], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service F", "closure_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service F", "needs_sre_review::Service F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval, has_incident_note, may_deploy, needs_sre_review, passed_unit_tests.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service F has an incident note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_sre_review::Service F.\nTarget statement: Service F needs SRE review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "manufacturing_quality_0099_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "manufacturing_quality_0099_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa", "base_id": "manufacturing_quality_0099_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "manufacturing_quality", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "may_ship"], "facts_positive": ["Part D passed the visual check."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a part passed the visual check and has release approval, then that part may ship to customers."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_visual_check": "passed the visual check", "has_release_approval": "has release approval", "has_supplier_note": "has a supplier note", "may_ship": "may ship to customers", "needs_engineer_review": "needs engineer review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "query_atom": "may_ship::Part D", "target_statement": "Part D may ship to customers.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part D"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["passed_visual_check::Part D", "has_release_approval::Part D"], "conclusion": "may_ship::Part D", "text": "If a part passed the visual check and has release approval, then that part may ship to customers."}], "query_atom": "may_ship::Part D", "closure_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part D"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_release_approval, may_ship.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_release_approval: has release approval\n- has_supplier_note: has a supplier note\n- may_ship: may ship to customers\n- needs_engineer_review: needs engineer review\n- passed_visual_check: passed the visual check\n\nPositive facts:\n- Part D passed the visual check.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a part passed the visual check and has release approval, then that part may ship to customers.\n\nTarget atom: may_ship::Part D.\nTarget statement: Part D may ship to customers.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "procurement_review_0318_explicit_negative_open__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "procurement_review_0318_explicit_negative_open__lcwa", "base_id": "procurement_review_0318_explicit_negative_open", "split": "dev", "domain": "procurement_review", "family": "explicit_negative_open", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order"], "facts_positive": ["Vendor C submitted a tax form."], "facts_negative": ["Vendor A does not has a risk note."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"submitted_tax_form": "submitted a tax form", "has_vendor_approval": "has vendor approval", "has_risk_note": "has a risk note", "may_receive_purchase_order": "may receive a purchase order", "needs_procurement_review": "needs procurement review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_risk_note", "has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order", "needs_procurement_review", "submitted_tax_form"], "query_atom": "has_risk_note::Vendor A", "target_statement": "Vendor A has a risk note.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["submitted_tax_form::Vendor C"], "negative_atoms": ["has_risk_note::Vendor A"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_risk_note::Vendor A", "closure_atoms": ["submitted_tax_form::Vendor C"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_vendor_approval, may_receive_purchase_order.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_risk_note: has a risk note\n- has_vendor_approval: has vendor approval\n- may_receive_purchase_order: may receive a purchase order\n- needs_procurement_review: needs procurement review\n- submitted_tax_form: submitted a tax form\n\nPositive facts:\n- Vendor C submitted a tax form.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Vendor A does not has a risk note.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_risk_note::Vendor A.\nTarget statement: Vendor A has a risk note.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "manufacturing_quality_0089_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "manufacturing_quality_0089_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__owa", "base_id": "manufacturing_quality_0089_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "manufacturing_quality", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Part A has a supplier note.", "Part F passed the visual check."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_visual_check": "passed the visual check", "has_release_approval": "has release approval", "has_supplier_note": "has a supplier note", "may_ship": "may ship to customers", "needs_engineer_review": "needs engineer review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "query_atom": "has_release_approval::Part F", "target_statement": "Part F has release approval.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_supplier_note::Part A", "passed_visual_check::Part F"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_release_approval::Part F", "closure_atoms": ["has_supplier_note::Part A", "passed_visual_check::Part F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_release_approval", "gold_missing_entity": "Part F", "gold_missing_atom": "has_release_approval::Part F", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Part F has release approval?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_release_approval: has release approval\n- has_supplier_note: has a supplier note\n- may_ship: may ship to customers\n- needs_engineer_review: needs engineer review\n- passed_visual_check: passed the visual check\n\nPositive facts:\n- Part A has a supplier note.\n- Part F passed the visual check.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_release_approval::Part F.\nTarget statement: Part F has release approval.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0231_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0231_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa", "base_id": "library_services_0231_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "facts_positive": ["Reader D has a special request."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader D", "target_statement": "Reader D needs librarian review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader D"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_special_request::Reader D"], "conclusion": "needs_librarian_review::Reader D", "text": "If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."}], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader D", "closure_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader D", "needs_librarian_review::Reader D"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_active_membership, has_borrowing_clearance, has_special_request, may_borrow_archive_item, needs_librarian_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader D has a special request.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_librarian_review::Reader D.\nTarget statement: Reader D needs librarian review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "procurement_review_0318_explicit_negative_open__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "procurement_review_0318_explicit_negative_open__owa", "base_id": "procurement_review_0318_explicit_negative_open", "split": "dev", "domain": "procurement_review", "family": "explicit_negative_open", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Vendor C submitted a tax form."], "facts_negative": ["Vendor A does not has a risk note."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"submitted_tax_form": "submitted a tax form", "has_vendor_approval": "has vendor approval", "has_risk_note": "has a risk note", "may_receive_purchase_order": "may receive a purchase order", "needs_procurement_review": "needs procurement review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_risk_note", "has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order", "needs_procurement_review", "submitted_tax_form"], "query_atom": "has_risk_note::Vendor A", "target_statement": "Vendor A has a risk note.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["submitted_tax_form::Vendor C"], "negative_atoms": ["has_risk_note::Vendor A"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_risk_note::Vendor A", "closure_atoms": ["submitted_tax_form::Vendor C"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_risk_note: has a risk note\n- has_vendor_approval: has vendor approval\n- may_receive_purchase_order: may receive a purchase order\n- needs_procurement_review: needs procurement review\n- submitted_tax_form: submitted a tax form\n\nPositive facts:\n- Vendor C submitted a tax form.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Vendor A does not has a risk note.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_risk_note::Vendor A.\nTarget statement: Vendor A has a risk note.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "university_registration_0048_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "university_registration_0048_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa", "base_id": "university_registration_0048_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "university_registration", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance"], "facts_positive": ["Noah has an external scholarship.", "Mia passed the qualifying exam."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_exam": "passed the qualifying exam", "has_advising_clearance": "has advising clearance", "has_external_scholarship": "has an external scholarship", "may_register": "may register for the seminar", "needs_manual_audit": "needs a manual audit"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance", "has_external_scholarship", "may_register", "needs_manual_audit", "passed_exam"], "query_atom": "has_advising_clearance::Mia", "target_statement": "Mia has advising clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_external_scholarship::Noah", "passed_exam::Mia"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_advising_clearance::Mia", "closure_atoms": ["has_external_scholarship::Noah", "passed_exam::Mia"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_advising_clearance.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_advising_clearance: has advising clearance\n- has_external_scholarship: has an external scholarship\n- may_register: may register for the seminar\n- needs_manual_audit: needs a manual audit\n- passed_exam: passed the qualifying exam\n\nPositive facts:\n- Noah has an external scholarship.\n- Mia passed the qualifying exam.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_advising_clearance::Mia.\nTarget statement: Mia has advising clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0165_open_missing_direct__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0165_open_missing_direct__lcwa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0165_open_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "open_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift"], "facts_positive": ["Rover 4 passed diagnostics."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "has_field_note::Rover 4", "target_statement": "Rover 4 has a field note.", "gold_reason_type": "local_open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 4"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_field_note::Rover 4", "closure_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 4"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_field_note", "gold_missing_entity": "Rover 4", "gold_missing_atom": "has_field_note::Rover 4", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Rover 4 has a field note?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_shift_clearance, may_start_shift.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 4 passed diagnostics.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_field_note::Rover 4.\nTarget statement: Rover 4 has a field note.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0271_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0271_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0271_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "may_deploy"], "facts_positive": ["Service B has an incident note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service B", "target_statement": "Service B needs SRE review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service B"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_incident_note::Service B"], "conclusion": "needs_sre_review::Service B", "text": "If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."}], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service B", "closure_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service B", "needs_sre_review::Service B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval, may_deploy.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service B has an incident note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_sre_review::Service B.\nTarget statement: Service B needs SRE review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0138_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0138_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0138_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Account 12 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If an account passed KYC checks and has compliance clearance, then that account may receive a wire transfer."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "may_receive_wire::Account 12", "target_statement": "Account 12 may receive a wire transfer.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 12"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["passed_kyc::Account 12", "has_compliance_clearance::Account 12"], "conclusion": "may_receive_wire::Account 12", "text": "If an account passed KYC checks and has compliance clearance, then that account may receive a wire transfer."}], "query_atom": "may_receive_wire::Account 12", "closure_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 12"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_compliance_clearance", "gold_missing_entity": "Account 12", "gold_missing_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 12", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Account 12 has compliance clearance?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 12 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If an account passed KYC checks and has compliance clearance, then that account may receive a wire transfer.\n\nTarget atom: may_receive_wire::Account 12.\nTarget statement: Account 12 may receive a wire transfer.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0228_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0228_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa", "base_id": "library_services_0228_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "facts_positive": ["Reader A has a special request."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader A", "target_statement": "Reader A needs librarian review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader A"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_special_request::Reader A"], "conclusion": "needs_librarian_review::Reader A", "text": "If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."}], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader A", "closure_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader A", "needs_librarian_review::Reader A"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_active_membership, has_borrowing_clearance, has_special_request, may_borrow_archive_item, needs_librarian_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader A has a special request.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_librarian_review::Reader A.\nTarget statement: Reader A needs librarian review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0228_entailed_open_conclusion__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0228_entailed_open_conclusion__owa", "base_id": "library_services_0228_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Reader A has a special request."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader A", "target_statement": "Reader A needs librarian review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader A"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_special_request::Reader A"], "conclusion": "needs_librarian_review::Reader A", "text": "If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."}], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader A", "closure_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader A", "needs_librarian_review::Reader A"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader A has a special request.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_librarian_review::Reader A.\nTarget statement: Reader A needs librarian review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0221_open_derived_missing_antecedent__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0221_open_derived_missing_antecedent__owa", "base_id": "library_services_0221_open_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "open_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Reader F has an active membership."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader F", "target_statement": "Reader F needs librarian review.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_special_request::Reader F"], "conclusion": "needs_librarian_review::Reader F", "text": "If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."}], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader F", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_special_request", "gold_missing_entity": "Reader F", "gold_missing_atom": "has_special_request::Reader F", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Reader F has a special request?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader F has an active membership.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_librarian_review::Reader F.\nTarget statement: Reader F needs librarian review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "manufacturing_quality_0085_open_missing_direct__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "manufacturing_quality_0085_open_missing_direct__cwa", "base_id": "manufacturing_quality_0085_open_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "manufacturing_quality", "family": "open_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "facts_positive": ["Part B passed the visual check."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_visual_check": "passed the visual check", "has_release_approval": "has release approval", "has_supplier_note": "has a supplier note", "may_ship": "may ship to customers", "needs_engineer_review": "needs engineer review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "query_atom": "has_supplier_note::Part B", "target_statement": "Part B has a supplier note.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part B"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_supplier_note::Part B", "closure_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_release_approval, has_supplier_note, may_ship, needs_engineer_review, passed_visual_check.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_release_approval: has release approval\n- has_supplier_note: has a supplier note\n- may_ship: may ship to customers\n- needs_engineer_review: needs engineer review\n- passed_visual_check: passed the visual check\n\nPositive facts:\n- Part B passed the visual check.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_supplier_note::Part B.\nTarget statement: Part B has a supplier note.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0231_entailed_open_conclusion__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0231_entailed_open_conclusion__owa", "base_id": "library_services_0231_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Reader D has a special request."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader D", "target_statement": "Reader D needs librarian review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader D"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_special_request::Reader D"], "conclusion": "needs_librarian_review::Reader D", "text": "If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."}], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader D", "closure_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader D", "needs_librarian_review::Reader D"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader D has a special request.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_librarian_review::Reader D.\nTarget statement: Reader D needs librarian review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0161_closed_missing_direct__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0161_closed_missing_direct__cwa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0161_closed_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "closed_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "facts_positive": ["Rover 6 passed diagnostics."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 6", "target_statement": "Rover 6 has shift clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 6"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 6", "closure_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 6"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_field_note, has_shift_clearance, may_start_shift, needs_operator_review, passed_diagnostics.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 6 passed diagnostics.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_shift_clearance::Rover 6.\nTarget statement: Rover 6 has shift clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0275_explicit_negative_closed__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0275_explicit_negative_closed__owa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0275_explicit_negative_closed", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "explicit_negative_closed", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Service B passed unit tests."], "facts_negative": ["Service F does not has deployment approval."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service F", "target_statement": "Service F has deployment approval.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service B"], "negative_atoms": ["has_deployment_approval::Service F"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service F", "closure_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service B passed unit tests.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Service F does not has deployment approval.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_deployment_approval::Service F.\nTarget statement: Service F has deployment approval.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0130_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0130_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0130_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "facts_positive": ["Account 61 has a manual exception.", "Account 59 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 59", "target_statement": "Account 59 has compliance clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 61", "passed_kyc::Account 59"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 59", "closure_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 61", "passed_kyc::Account 59"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance, has_manual_exception, may_receive_wire, needs_compliance_review, passed_kyc.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 61 has a manual exception.\n- Account 59 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_compliance_clearance::Account 59.\nTarget statement: Account 59 has compliance clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0275_explicit_negative_closed__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0275_explicit_negative_closed__cwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0275_explicit_negative_closed", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "explicit_negative_closed", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "facts_positive": ["Service B passed unit tests."], "facts_negative": ["Service F does not has deployment approval."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service F", "target_statement": "Service F has deployment approval.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service B"], "negative_atoms": ["has_deployment_approval::Service F"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service F", "closure_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval, has_incident_note, may_deploy, needs_sre_review, passed_unit_tests.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service B passed unit tests.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Service F does not has deployment approval.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_deployment_approval::Service F.\nTarget statement: Service F has deployment approval.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0273_explicit_negative_closed__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0273_explicit_negative_closed__owa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0273_explicit_negative_closed", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "explicit_negative_closed", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Service F passed unit tests."], "facts_negative": ["Service D does not has deployment approval."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service D", "target_statement": "Service D has deployment approval.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service F"], "negative_atoms": ["has_deployment_approval::Service D"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service D", "closure_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service F passed unit tests.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Service D does not has deployment approval.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_deployment_approval::Service D.\nTarget statement: Service D has deployment approval.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0161_closed_missing_direct__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0161_closed_missing_direct__owa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0161_closed_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "closed_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Rover 6 passed diagnostics."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 6", "target_statement": "Rover 6 has shift clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 6"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 6", "closure_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 6"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_shift_clearance", "gold_missing_entity": "Rover 6", "gold_missing_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 6", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Rover 6 has shift clearance?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 6 passed diagnostics.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_shift_clearance::Rover 6.\nTarget statement: Rover 6 has shift clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0221_open_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0221_open_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa", "base_id": "library_services_0221_open_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "open_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "facts_positive": ["Reader F has an active membership."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader F", "target_statement": "Reader F needs librarian review.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_special_request::Reader F"], "conclusion": "needs_librarian_review::Reader F", "text": "If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."}], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader F", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_active_membership, has_borrowing_clearance, has_special_request, may_borrow_archive_item, needs_librarian_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader F has an active membership.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_librarian_review::Reader F.\nTarget statement: Reader F needs librarian review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0148_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0148_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0148_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "may_receive_wire"], "facts_positive": ["Account 59 has a manual exception."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "target_statement": "Account 59 needs compliance review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59"], "conclusion": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "text": "If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."}], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "closure_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59", "needs_compliance_review::Account 59"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance, may_receive_wire.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 59 has a manual exception.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_compliance_review::Account 59.\nTarget statement: Account 59 needs compliance review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "hospital_access_0014_open_missing_with_closed_distractor__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "hospital_access_0014_open_missing_with_closed_distractor__lcwa", "base_id": "hospital_access_0014_open_missing_with_closed_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "hospital_access", "family": "open_missing_with_closed_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_clearance", "may_enter_lab"], "facts_positive": ["Dylan has completed safety training.", "Dylan has security clearance."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"completed_training": "has completed safety training", "has_clearance": "has security clearance", "assigned_to_trial": "is assigned to the clinical trial", "may_enter_lab": "may enter Lab A", "needs_supervisor_review": "needs supervisor review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Cora", "target_statement": "Cora is assigned to the clinical trial.", "gold_reason_type": "local_open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["completed_training::Dylan", "has_clearance::Dylan"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Cora", "closure_atoms": ["completed_training::Dylan", "has_clearance::Dylan"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "assigned_to_trial", "gold_missing_entity": "Cora", "gold_missing_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Cora", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Cora is assigned to the clinical trial?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_clearance, may_enter_lab.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- assigned_to_trial: is assigned to the clinical trial\n- completed_training: has completed safety training\n- has_clearance: has security clearance\n- may_enter_lab: may enter Lab A\n- needs_supervisor_review: needs supervisor review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Dylan has completed safety training.\n- Dylan has security clearance.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: assigned_to_trial::Cora.\nTarget statement: Cora is assigned to the clinical trial.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0217_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0217_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa", "base_id": "library_services_0217_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "facts_positive": ["Reader B has an active membership."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B", "target_statement": "Reader B may borrow an archive item.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader B"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_active_membership::Reader B", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader B"], "conclusion": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B", "text": "If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."}], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_active_membership, has_borrowing_clearance, has_special_request, may_borrow_archive_item, needs_librarian_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader B has an active membership.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item.\n\nTarget atom: may_borrow_archive_item::Reader B.\nTarget statement: Reader B may borrow an archive item.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0225_entailed_closed_conclusion__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0225_entailed_closed_conclusion__lcwa", "base_id": "library_services_0225_entailed_closed_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "entailed_closed_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_borrowing_clearance", "may_borrow_archive_item"], "facts_positive": ["Reader D has an active membership.", "Reader D has borrowing clearance."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D", "target_statement": "Reader D may borrow an archive item.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader D", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader D"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_active_membership::Reader D", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader D"], "conclusion": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D", "text": "If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."}], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader D", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader D", "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_borrowing_clearance, may_borrow_archive_item.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader D has an active membership.\n- Reader D has borrowing clearance.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item.\n\nTarget atom: may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D.\nTarget statement: Reader D may borrow an archive item.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0138_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0138_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0138_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "may_receive_wire"], "facts_positive": ["Account 12 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If an account passed KYC checks and has compliance clearance, then that account may receive a wire transfer."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "may_receive_wire::Account 12", "target_statement": "Account 12 may receive a wire transfer.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 12"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["passed_kyc::Account 12", "has_compliance_clearance::Account 12"], "conclusion": "may_receive_wire::Account 12", "text": "If an account passed KYC checks and has compliance clearance, then that account may receive a wire transfer."}], "query_atom": "may_receive_wire::Account 12", "closure_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 12"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance, may_receive_wire.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 12 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If an account passed KYC checks and has compliance clearance, then that account may receive a wire transfer.\n\nTarget atom: may_receive_wire::Account 12.\nTarget statement: Account 12 may receive a wire transfer.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0231_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0231_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa", "base_id": "library_services_0231_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_borrowing_clearance", "may_borrow_archive_item"], "facts_positive": ["Reader D has a special request."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader D", "target_statement": "Reader D needs librarian review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader D"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_special_request::Reader D"], "conclusion": "needs_librarian_review::Reader D", "text": "If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."}], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader D", "closure_atoms": ["has_special_request::Reader D", "needs_librarian_review::Reader D"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_borrowing_clearance, may_borrow_archive_item.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader D has a special request.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_librarian_review::Reader D.\nTarget statement: Reader D needs librarian review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0275_explicit_negative_closed__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0275_explicit_negative_closed__lcwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0275_explicit_negative_closed", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "explicit_negative_closed", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval"], "facts_positive": ["Service B passed unit tests."], "facts_negative": ["Service F does not has deployment approval."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service F", "target_statement": "Service F has deployment approval.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service B"], "negative_atoms": ["has_deployment_approval::Service F"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_deployment_approval::Service F", "closure_atoms": ["passed_unit_tests::Service B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service B passed unit tests.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Service F does not has deployment approval.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_deployment_approval::Service F.\nTarget statement: Service F has deployment approval.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0189_entailed_open_conclusion__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0189_entailed_open_conclusion__owa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0189_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Rover 4 has a field note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a robot has a field note, then that robot needs operator review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "needs_operator_review::Rover 4", "target_statement": "Rover 4 needs operator review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 4"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_field_note::Rover 4"], "conclusion": "needs_operator_review::Rover 4", "text": "If a robot has a field note, then that robot needs operator review."}], "query_atom": "needs_operator_review::Rover 4", "closure_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 4", "needs_operator_review::Rover 4"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 4 has a field note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a robot has a field note, then that robot needs operator review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_operator_review::Rover 4.\nTarget statement: Rover 4 needs operator review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "hospital_access_0014_open_missing_with_closed_distractor__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "hospital_access_0014_open_missing_with_closed_distractor__cwa", "base_id": "hospital_access_0014_open_missing_with_closed_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "hospital_access", "family": "open_missing_with_closed_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "facts_positive": ["Dylan has completed safety training.", "Dylan has security clearance."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"completed_training": "has completed safety training", "has_clearance": "has security clearance", "assigned_to_trial": "is assigned to the clinical trial", "may_enter_lab": "may enter Lab A", "needs_supervisor_review": "needs supervisor review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Cora", "target_statement": "Cora is assigned to the clinical trial.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["completed_training::Dylan", "has_clearance::Dylan"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Cora", "closure_atoms": ["completed_training::Dylan", "has_clearance::Dylan"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: assigned_to_trial, completed_training, has_clearance, may_enter_lab, needs_supervisor_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- assigned_to_trial: is assigned to the clinical trial\n- completed_training: has completed safety training\n- has_clearance: has security clearance\n- may_enter_lab: may enter Lab A\n- needs_supervisor_review: needs supervisor review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Dylan has completed safety training.\n- Dylan has security clearance.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: assigned_to_trial::Cora.\nTarget statement: Cora is assigned to the clinical trial.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "manufacturing_quality_0099_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "manufacturing_quality_0099_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa", "base_id": "manufacturing_quality_0099_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "manufacturing_quality", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "facts_positive": ["Part D passed the visual check."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a part passed the visual check and has release approval, then that part may ship to customers."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_visual_check": "passed the visual check", "has_release_approval": "has release approval", "has_supplier_note": "has a supplier note", "may_ship": "may ship to customers", "needs_engineer_review": "needs engineer review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_release_approval", "has_supplier_note", "may_ship", "needs_engineer_review", "passed_visual_check"], "query_atom": "may_ship::Part D", "target_statement": "Part D may ship to customers.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part D"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["passed_visual_check::Part D", "has_release_approval::Part D"], "conclusion": "may_ship::Part D", "text": "If a part passed the visual check and has release approval, then that part may ship to customers."}], "query_atom": "may_ship::Part D", "closure_atoms": ["passed_visual_check::Part D"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_release_approval, has_supplier_note, may_ship, needs_engineer_review, passed_visual_check.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_release_approval: has release approval\n- has_supplier_note: has a supplier note\n- may_ship: may ship to customers\n- needs_engineer_review: needs engineer review\n- passed_visual_check: passed the visual check\n\nPositive facts:\n- Part D passed the visual check.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a part passed the visual check and has release approval, then that part may ship to customers.\n\nTarget atom: may_ship::Part D.\nTarget statement: Part D may ship to customers.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0155_explicit_negative_closed__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0155_explicit_negative_closed__lcwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0155_explicit_negative_closed", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "explicit_negative_closed", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance"], "facts_positive": ["Account 27 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": ["Account 61 does not has compliance clearance."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 61", "target_statement": "Account 61 has compliance clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 27"], "negative_atoms": ["has_compliance_clearance::Account 61"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 61", "closure_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 27"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 27 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Account 61 does not has compliance clearance.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_compliance_clearance::Account 61.\nTarget statement: Account 61 has compliance clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0169_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0169_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0169_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_shift_clearance"], "facts_positive": ["Rover 3 has a field note.", "Rover 2 passed diagnostics."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 2", "target_statement": "Rover 2 has shift clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 3", "passed_diagnostics::Rover 2"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 2", "closure_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 3", "passed_diagnostics::Rover 2"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_shift_clearance.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 3 has a field note.\n- Rover 2 passed diagnostics.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_shift_clearance::Rover 2.\nTarget statement: Rover 2 has shift clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "hospital_access_0017_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "hospital_access_0017_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa", "base_id": "hospital_access_0017_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "hospital_access", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "facts_positive": ["Farid has completed safety training."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a staff member has security clearance and has completed safety training, then that staff member may enter Lab A."], "predicate_glossary": {"completed_training": "has completed safety training", "has_clearance": "has security clearance", "assigned_to_trial": "is assigned to the clinical trial", "may_enter_lab": "may enter Lab A", "needs_supervisor_review": "needs supervisor review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "query_atom": "may_enter_lab::Farid", "target_statement": "Farid may enter Lab A.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["completed_training::Farid"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["completed_training::Farid", "has_clearance::Farid"], "conclusion": "may_enter_lab::Farid", "text": "If a staff member has security clearance and has completed safety training, then that staff member may enter Lab A."}], "query_atom": "may_enter_lab::Farid", "closure_atoms": ["completed_training::Farid"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: assigned_to_trial, completed_training, has_clearance, may_enter_lab, needs_supervisor_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- assigned_to_trial: is assigned to the clinical trial\n- completed_training: has completed safety training\n- has_clearance: has security clearance\n- may_enter_lab: may enter Lab A\n- needs_supervisor_review: needs supervisor review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Farid has completed safety training.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a staff member has security clearance and has completed safety training, then that staff member may enter Lab A.\n\nTarget atom: may_enter_lab::Farid.\nTarget statement: Farid may enter Lab A.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0268_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0268_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0268_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "may_deploy"], "facts_positive": ["Service E has an incident note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service E", "target_statement": "Service E needs SRE review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service E"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_incident_note::Service E"], "conclusion": "needs_sre_review::Service E", "text": "If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."}], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service E", "closure_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service E", "needs_sre_review::Service E"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval, may_deploy.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service E has an incident note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_sre_review::Service E.\nTarget statement: Service E needs SRE review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "university_registration_0056_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "university_registration_0056_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__cwa", "base_id": "university_registration_0056_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "university_registration", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance", "has_external_scholarship", "may_register", "needs_manual_audit", "passed_exam"], "facts_positive": ["Lena passed the qualifying exam."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a student passed the qualifying exam and has advising clearance, then that student may register for the seminar."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_exam": "passed the qualifying exam", "has_advising_clearance": "has advising clearance", "has_external_scholarship": "has an external scholarship", "may_register": "may register for the seminar", "needs_manual_audit": "needs a manual audit"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance", "has_external_scholarship", "may_register", "needs_manual_audit", "passed_exam"], "query_atom": "may_register::Lena", "target_statement": "Lena may register for the seminar.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_exam::Lena"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["passed_exam::Lena", "has_advising_clearance::Lena"], "conclusion": "may_register::Lena", "text": "If a student passed the qualifying exam and has advising clearance, then that student may register for the seminar."}], "query_atom": "may_register::Lena", "closure_atoms": ["passed_exam::Lena"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_advising_clearance, has_external_scholarship, may_register, needs_manual_audit, passed_exam.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_advising_clearance: has advising clearance\n- has_external_scholarship: has an external scholarship\n- may_register: may register for the seminar\n- needs_manual_audit: needs a manual audit\n- passed_exam: passed the qualifying exam\n\nPositive facts:\n- Lena passed the qualifying exam.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a student passed the qualifying exam and has advising clearance, then that student may register for the seminar.\n\nTarget atom: may_register::Lena.\nTarget statement: Lena may register for the seminar.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "hospital_access_0004_open_missing_direct__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "hospital_access_0004_open_missing_direct__owa", "base_id": "hospital_access_0004_open_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "hospital_access", "family": "open_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Elena has completed safety training."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"completed_training": "has completed safety training", "has_clearance": "has security clearance", "assigned_to_trial": "is assigned to the clinical trial", "may_enter_lab": "may enter Lab A", "needs_supervisor_review": "needs supervisor review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Elena", "target_statement": "Elena is assigned to the clinical trial.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["completed_training::Elena"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Elena", "closure_atoms": ["completed_training::Elena"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "assigned_to_trial", "gold_missing_entity": "Elena", "gold_missing_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Elena", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Elena is assigned to the clinical trial?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- assigned_to_trial: is assigned to the clinical trial\n- completed_training: has completed safety training\n- has_clearance: has security clearance\n- may_enter_lab: may enter Lab A\n- needs_supervisor_review: needs supervisor review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Elena has completed safety training.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: assigned_to_trial::Elena.\nTarget statement: Elena is assigned to the clinical trial.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "university_registration_0056_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "university_registration_0056_closed_derived_missing_antecedent__owa", "base_id": "university_registration_0056_closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "university_registration", "family": "closed_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Lena passed the qualifying exam."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a student passed the qualifying exam and has advising clearance, then that student may register for the seminar."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_exam": "passed the qualifying exam", "has_advising_clearance": "has advising clearance", "has_external_scholarship": "has an external scholarship", "may_register": "may register for the seminar", "needs_manual_audit": "needs a manual audit"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance", "has_external_scholarship", "may_register", "needs_manual_audit", "passed_exam"], "query_atom": "may_register::Lena", "target_statement": "Lena may register for the seminar.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_exam::Lena"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["passed_exam::Lena", "has_advising_clearance::Lena"], "conclusion": "may_register::Lena", "text": "If a student passed the qualifying exam and has advising clearance, then that student may register for the seminar."}], "query_atom": "may_register::Lena", "closure_atoms": ["passed_exam::Lena"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_advising_clearance", "gold_missing_entity": "Lena", "gold_missing_atom": "has_advising_clearance::Lena", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Lena has advising clearance?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_advising_clearance: has advising clearance\n- has_external_scholarship: has an external scholarship\n- may_register: may register for the seminar\n- needs_manual_audit: needs a manual audit\n- passed_exam: passed the qualifying exam\n\nPositive facts:\n- Lena passed the qualifying exam.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a student passed the qualifying exam and has advising clearance, then that student may register for the seminar.\n\nTarget atom: may_register::Lena.\nTarget statement: Lena may register for the seminar.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0221_open_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0221_open_derived_missing_antecedent__lcwa", "base_id": "library_services_0221_open_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "open_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_borrowing_clearance", "may_borrow_archive_item"], "facts_positive": ["Reader F has an active membership."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader F", "target_statement": "Reader F needs librarian review.", "gold_reason_type": "local_open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_special_request::Reader F"], "conclusion": "needs_librarian_review::Reader F", "text": "If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review."}], "query_atom": "needs_librarian_review::Reader F", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_special_request", "gold_missing_entity": "Reader F", "gold_missing_atom": "has_special_request::Reader F", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Reader F has a special request?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_borrowing_clearance, may_borrow_archive_item.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader F has an active membership.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has a special request, then that reader needs librarian review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_librarian_review::Reader F.\nTarget statement: Reader F needs librarian review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0189_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0189_entailed_open_conclusion__lcwa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0189_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift"], "facts_positive": ["Rover 4 has a field note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a robot has a field note, then that robot needs operator review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "needs_operator_review::Rover 4", "target_statement": "Rover 4 needs operator review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 4"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_field_note::Rover 4"], "conclusion": "needs_operator_review::Rover 4", "text": "If a robot has a field note, then that robot needs operator review."}], "query_atom": "needs_operator_review::Rover 4", "closure_atoms": ["has_field_note::Rover 4", "needs_operator_review::Rover 4"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_shift_clearance, may_start_shift.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 4 has a field note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a robot has a field note, then that robot needs operator review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_operator_review::Rover 4.\nTarget statement: Rover 4 needs operator review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "procurement_review_0304_entailed_closed_conclusion__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "procurement_review_0304_entailed_closed_conclusion__lcwa", "base_id": "procurement_review_0304_entailed_closed_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "procurement_review", "family": "entailed_closed_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order"], "facts_positive": ["Vendor E has vendor approval.", "Vendor E submitted a tax form."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a vendor submitted a tax form and has vendor approval, then that vendor may receive a purchase order."], "predicate_glossary": {"submitted_tax_form": "submitted a tax form", "has_vendor_approval": "has vendor approval", "has_risk_note": "has a risk note", "may_receive_purchase_order": "may receive a purchase order", "needs_procurement_review": "needs procurement review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_risk_note", "has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order", "needs_procurement_review", "submitted_tax_form"], "query_atom": "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "target_statement": "Vendor E may receive a purchase order.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_vendor_approval::Vendor E", "submitted_tax_form::Vendor E"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["submitted_tax_form::Vendor E", "has_vendor_approval::Vendor E"], "conclusion": "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "text": "If a vendor submitted a tax form and has vendor approval, then that vendor may receive a purchase order."}], "query_atom": "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "closure_atoms": ["has_vendor_approval::Vendor E", "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "submitted_tax_form::Vendor E"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_vendor_approval, may_receive_purchase_order.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_risk_note: has a risk note\n- has_vendor_approval: has vendor approval\n- may_receive_purchase_order: may receive a purchase order\n- needs_procurement_review: needs procurement review\n- submitted_tax_form: submitted a tax form\n\nPositive facts:\n- Vendor E has vendor approval.\n- Vendor E submitted a tax form.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a vendor submitted a tax form and has vendor approval, then that vendor may receive a purchase order.\n\nTarget atom: may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E.\nTarget statement: Vendor E may receive a purchase order.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0269_entailed_open_conclusion__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0269_entailed_open_conclusion__owa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0269_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Service F has an incident note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service F", "target_statement": "Service F needs SRE review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service F"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_incident_note::Service F"], "conclusion": "needs_sre_review::Service F", "text": "If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."}], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service F", "closure_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service F", "needs_sre_review::Service F"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service F has an incident note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_sre_review::Service F.\nTarget statement: Service F needs SRE review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "hospital_access_0004_open_missing_direct__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "hospital_access_0004_open_missing_direct__cwa", "base_id": "hospital_access_0004_open_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "hospital_access", "family": "open_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "facts_positive": ["Elena has completed safety training."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"completed_training": "has completed safety training", "has_clearance": "has security clearance", "assigned_to_trial": "is assigned to the clinical trial", "may_enter_lab": "may enter Lab A", "needs_supervisor_review": "needs supervisor review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Elena", "target_statement": "Elena is assigned to the clinical trial.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["completed_training::Elena"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Elena", "closure_atoms": ["completed_training::Elena"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: assigned_to_trial, completed_training, has_clearance, may_enter_lab, needs_supervisor_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- assigned_to_trial: is assigned to the clinical trial\n- completed_training: has completed safety training\n- has_clearance: has security clearance\n- may_enter_lab: may enter Lab A\n- needs_supervisor_review: needs supervisor review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Elena has completed safety training.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: assigned_to_trial::Elena.\nTarget statement: Elena is assigned to the clinical trial.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0142_open_derived_missing_antecedent__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0142_open_derived_missing_antecedent__owa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0142_open_derived_missing_antecedent", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "open_derived_missing_antecedent", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Account 59 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "target_statement": "Account 59 needs compliance review.", "gold_reason_type": "open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 59"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_manual_exception::Account 59"], "conclusion": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "text": "If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review."}], "query_atom": "needs_compliance_review::Account 59", "closure_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 59"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "has_manual_exception", "gold_missing_entity": "Account 59", "gold_missing_atom": "has_manual_exception::Account 59", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Account 59 has a manual exception?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 59 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If an account has a manual exception, then that account needs compliance review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_compliance_review::Account 59.\nTarget statement: Account 59 needs compliance review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0130_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0130_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__lcwa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0130_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance"], "facts_positive": ["Account 61 has a manual exception.", "Account 59 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 59", "target_statement": "Account 59 has compliance clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 61", "passed_kyc::Account 59"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 59", "closure_atoms": ["has_manual_exception::Account 61", "passed_kyc::Account 59"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_compliance_clearance.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 61 has a manual exception.\n- Account 59 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_compliance_clearance::Account 59.\nTarget statement: Account 59 has compliance clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "university_registration_0048_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "university_registration_0048_closed_missing_with_open_distractor__cwa", "base_id": "university_registration_0048_closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "split": "dev", "domain": "university_registration", "family": "closed_missing_with_open_distractor", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance", "has_external_scholarship", "may_register", "needs_manual_audit", "passed_exam"], "facts_positive": ["Noah has an external scholarship.", "Mia passed the qualifying exam."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_exam": "passed the qualifying exam", "has_advising_clearance": "has advising clearance", "has_external_scholarship": "has an external scholarship", "may_register": "may register for the seminar", "needs_manual_audit": "needs a manual audit"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_advising_clearance", "has_external_scholarship", "may_register", "needs_manual_audit", "passed_exam"], "query_atom": "has_advising_clearance::Mia", "target_statement": "Mia has advising clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "global_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_external_scholarship::Noah", "passed_exam::Mia"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_advising_clearance::Mia", "closure_atoms": ["has_external_scholarship::Noah", "passed_exam::Mia"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_advising_clearance, has_external_scholarship, may_register, needs_manual_audit, passed_exam.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_advising_clearance: has advising clearance\n- has_external_scholarship: has an external scholarship\n- may_register: may register for the seminar\n- needs_manual_audit: needs a manual audit\n- passed_exam: passed the qualifying exam\n\nPositive facts:\n- Noah has an external scholarship.\n- Mia passed the qualifying exam.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_advising_clearance::Mia.\nTarget statement: Mia has advising clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "cloud_deployment_0271_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "cloud_deployment_0271_entailed_open_conclusion__cwa", "base_id": "cloud_deployment_0271_entailed_open_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "cloud_deployment", "family": "entailed_open_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "facts_positive": ["Service B has an incident note."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_unit_tests": "passed unit tests", "has_deployment_approval": "has deployment approval", "has_incident_note": "has an incident note", "may_deploy": "may deploy to production", "needs_sre_review": "needs SRE review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_deployment_approval", "has_incident_note", "may_deploy", "needs_sre_review", "passed_unit_tests"], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service B", "target_statement": "Service B needs SRE review.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service B"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_incident_note::Service B"], "conclusion": "needs_sre_review::Service B", "text": "If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review."}], "query_atom": "needs_sre_review::Service B", "closure_atoms": ["has_incident_note::Service B", "needs_sre_review::Service B"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_deployment_approval, has_incident_note, may_deploy, needs_sre_review, passed_unit_tests.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_deployment_approval: has deployment approval\n- has_incident_note: has an incident note\n- may_deploy: may deploy to production\n- needs_sre_review: needs SRE review\n- passed_unit_tests: passed unit tests\n\nPositive facts:\n- Service B has an incident note.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a service has an incident note, then that service needs SRE review.\n\nTarget atom: needs_sre_review::Service B.\nTarget statement: Service B needs SRE review.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "robotics_operations_0161_closed_missing_direct__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "robotics_operations_0161_closed_missing_direct__lcwa", "base_id": "robotics_operations_0161_closed_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "robotics_operations", "family": "closed_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_shift_clearance"], "facts_positive": ["Rover 6 passed diagnostics."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_diagnostics": "passed diagnostics", "has_shift_clearance": "has shift clearance", "has_field_note": "has a field note", "may_start_shift": "may start its shift", "needs_operator_review": "needs operator review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_field_note", "has_shift_clearance", "may_start_shift", "needs_operator_review", "passed_diagnostics"], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 6", "target_statement": "Rover 6 has shift clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "local_closed_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 6"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_shift_clearance::Rover 6", "closure_atoms": ["passed_diagnostics::Rover 6"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_shift_clearance.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_field_note: has a field note\n- has_shift_clearance: has shift clearance\n- may_start_shift: may start its shift\n- needs_operator_review: needs operator review\n- passed_diagnostics: passed diagnostics\n\nPositive facts:\n- Rover 6 passed diagnostics.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_shift_clearance::Rover 6.\nTarget statement: Rover 6 has shift clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "library_services_0225_entailed_closed_conclusion__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "library_services_0225_entailed_closed_conclusion__cwa", "base_id": "library_services_0225_entailed_closed_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "library_services", "family": "entailed_closed_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "facts_positive": ["Reader D has an active membership.", "Reader D has borrowing clearance."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."], "predicate_glossary": {"has_active_membership": "has an active membership", "has_borrowing_clearance": "has borrowing clearance", "has_special_request": "has a special request", "may_borrow_archive_item": "may borrow an archive item", "needs_librarian_review": "needs librarian review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_active_membership", "has_borrowing_clearance", "has_special_request", "may_borrow_archive_item", "needs_librarian_review"], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D", "target_statement": "Reader D may borrow an archive item.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader D", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader D"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["has_active_membership::Reader D", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader D"], "conclusion": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D", "text": "If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item."}], "query_atom": "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D", "closure_atoms": ["has_active_membership::Reader D", "has_borrowing_clearance::Reader D", "may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_active_membership, has_borrowing_clearance, has_special_request, may_borrow_archive_item, needs_librarian_review.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_active_membership: has an active membership\n- has_borrowing_clearance: has borrowing clearance\n- has_special_request: has a special request\n- may_borrow_archive_item: may borrow an archive item\n- needs_librarian_review: needs librarian review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Reader D has an active membership.\n- Reader D has borrowing clearance.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a reader has an active membership and has borrowing clearance, then that reader may borrow an archive item.\n\nTarget atom: may_borrow_archive_item::Reader D.\nTarget statement: Reader D may borrow an archive item.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "finance_controls_0155_explicit_negative_closed__owa__ask_act", "source_id": "finance_controls_0155_explicit_negative_closed__owa", "base_id": "finance_controls_0155_explicit_negative_closed", "split": "dev", "domain": "finance_controls", "family": "explicit_negative_closed", "subset": "control_explicit_negative", "semantics": "owa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Open-world assumption", "instruction": "Predicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": [], "facts_positive": ["Account 27 passed KYC checks."], "facts_negative": ["Account 61 does not has compliance clearance."], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"passed_kyc": "passed KYC checks", "has_compliance_clearance": "has compliance clearance", "has_manual_exception": "has a manual exception", "may_receive_wire": "may receive a wire transfer", "needs_compliance_review": "needs compliance review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_compliance_clearance", "has_manual_exception", "may_receive_wire", "needs_compliance_review", "passed_kyc"], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 61", "target_statement": "Account 61 has compliance clearance.", "gold_reason_type": "explicit_negative_fact", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 27"], "negative_atoms": ["has_compliance_clearance::Account 61"], "rules": [], "query_atom": "has_compliance_clearance::Account 61", "closure_atoms": ["passed_kyc::Account 27"]}, "gold_truth_value": "false", "gold_action": "deny", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Open-world assumption.\nPredicates are open by default. A target atom that is not explicitly stated, explicitly negated, or derivable from the rules is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: none.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_compliance_clearance: has compliance clearance\n- has_manual_exception: has a manual exception\n- may_receive_wire: may receive a wire transfer\n- needs_compliance_review: needs compliance review\n- passed_kyc: passed KYC checks\n\nPositive facts:\n- Account 27 passed KYC checks.\n\nNegative facts:\n- Account 61 does not has compliance clearance.\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: has_compliance_clearance::Account 61.\nTarget statement: Account 61 has compliance clearance.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "hospital_access_0004_open_missing_direct__lcwa__ask_act", "source_id": "hospital_access_0004_open_missing_direct__lcwa", "base_id": "hospital_access_0004_open_missing_direct", "split": "dev", "domain": "hospital_access", "family": "open_missing_direct", "subset": "core_contrastive", "semantics": "lcwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Locally closed-world assumption", "instruction": "Only the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_clearance", "may_enter_lab"], "facts_positive": ["Elena has completed safety training."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": [], "predicate_glossary": {"completed_training": "has completed safety training", "has_clearance": "has security clearance", "assigned_to_trial": "is assigned to the clinical trial", "may_enter_lab": "may enter Lab A", "needs_supervisor_review": "needs supervisor review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["assigned_to_trial", "completed_training", "has_clearance", "may_enter_lab", "needs_supervisor_review"], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Elena", "target_statement": "Elena is assigned to the clinical trial.", "gold_reason_type": "local_open_world_underivable", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["completed_training::Elena"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [], "query_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Elena", "closure_atoms": ["completed_training::Elena"]}, "gold_truth_value": "unknown", "gold_action": "request_information", "gold_missing_predicate": "assigned_to_trial", "gold_missing_entity": "Elena", "gold_missing_atom": "assigned_to_trial::Elena", "gold_question_to_ask": "Is it true that Elena is assigned to the clinical trial?", "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Locally closed-world assumption.\nOnly the predicates listed as complete are closed. After applying the rules, an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is complete is false; an unstated and underivable atom whose predicate is not complete is unknown.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_clearance, may_enter_lab.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- assigned_to_trial: is assigned to the clinical trial\n- completed_training: has completed safety training\n- has_clearance: has security clearance\n- may_enter_lab: may enter Lab A\n- needs_supervisor_review: needs supervisor review\n\nPositive facts:\n- Elena has completed safety training.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- none\n\nTarget atom: assigned_to_trial::Elena.\nTarget statement: Elena is assigned to the clinical trial.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}
+{"id": "procurement_review_0304_entailed_closed_conclusion__cwa__ask_act", "source_id": "procurement_review_0304_entailed_closed_conclusion__cwa", "base_id": "procurement_review_0304_entailed_closed_conclusion", "split": "dev", "domain": "procurement_review", "family": "entailed_closed_conclusion", "subset": "control_entailed", "semantics": "cwa", "semantic_contract": {"name": "Closed-world assumption", "instruction": "All predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false."}, "closed_predicates": ["has_risk_note", "has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order", "needs_procurement_review", "submitted_tax_form"], "facts_positive": ["Vendor E has vendor approval.", "Vendor E submitted a tax form."], "facts_negative": [], "rules_natural": ["If a vendor submitted a tax form and has vendor approval, then that vendor may receive a purchase order."], "predicate_glossary": {"submitted_tax_form": "submitted a tax form", "has_vendor_approval": "has vendor approval", "has_risk_note": "has a risk note", "may_receive_purchase_order": "may receive a purchase order", "needs_procurement_review": "needs procurement review"}, "vocabulary_predicates": ["has_risk_note", "has_vendor_approval", "may_receive_purchase_order", "needs_procurement_review", "submitted_tax_form"], "query_atom": "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "target_statement": "Vendor E may receive a purchase order.", "gold_reason_type": "entailed_by_fact_or_rule", "symbolic": {"positive_atoms": ["has_vendor_approval::Vendor E", "submitted_tax_form::Vendor E"], "negative_atoms": [], "rules": [{"antecedents": ["submitted_tax_form::Vendor E", "has_vendor_approval::Vendor E"], "conclusion": "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "text": "If a vendor submitted a tax form and has vendor approval, then that vendor may receive a purchase order."}], "query_atom": "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "closure_atoms": ["has_vendor_approval::Vendor E", "may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E", "submitted_tax_form::Vendor E"]}, "gold_truth_value": "true", "gold_action": "approve", "gold_missing_predicate": null, "gold_missing_entity": null, "gold_missing_atom": null, "gold_question_to_ask": null, "prompt": "You are evaluating an operational decision under a formal knowledge-base semantic contract.\nReturn exactly one JSON object with keys truth_value, action, missing_predicate, missing_entity, question_to_ask, and rationale.\n\nAllowed values:\n- truth_value must be one of: true, false, unknown.\n- action must be one of: approve, deny, request_information.\n- If action is request_information, missing_predicate must be the exact predicate name to check, missing_entity must be the exact entity to check, and question_to_ask must ask for that missing atom.\n- If action is approve or deny, missing_predicate, missing_entity, and question_to_ask must be null.\n\nAction mapping:\n- approve iff the target statement is semantically true.\n- deny iff the target statement is semantically false.\n- request_information iff the target statement is semantically unknown.\n\nFormal rule semantics:\n- Positive facts are true.\n- Negative facts make the corresponding target atom false.\n- A rule derives its conclusion only when every antecedent is true.\n- First apply all rules until no new facts can be derived.\n- Then apply the semantic contract to unstated and underivable atoms.\n- For a complete predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is false.\n- For an open predicate P, if P(entity) is not explicitly stated and cannot be derived, then P(entity) is unknown.\n\nSemantic contract: Closed-world assumption.\nAll predicates in the vocabulary are complete. After applying the rules, every unstated and underivable atom is false.\nComplete predicates for this item: has_risk_note, has_vendor_approval, may_receive_purchase_order, needs_procurement_review, submitted_tax_form.\n\nPredicate glossary:\n- has_risk_note: has a risk note\n- has_vendor_approval: has vendor approval\n- may_receive_purchase_order: may receive a purchase order\n- needs_procurement_review: needs procurement review\n- submitted_tax_form: submitted a tax form\n\nPositive facts:\n- Vendor E has vendor approval.\n- Vendor E submitted a tax form.\n\nNegative facts:\n- none\n\nRules:\n- If a vendor submitted a tax form and has vendor approval, then that vendor may receive a purchase order.\n\nTarget atom: may_receive_purchase_order::Vendor E.\nTarget statement: Vendor E may receive a purchase order.\n\nDecide whether to approve the target statement, deny it, or request more information."}