Adding textbook version

pages/llm_tutor.py

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ AI_AVATAR_ICON = '✨'
 
 # Create a data/ folder if it doesn't already exist
 try:
-    os.mkdir('data/')
+    os.mkdir('data/groupb')
 except:
     # data/ folder already exists
     pass

pages/textbook.py

@@ -1,35 +1,96 @@
+import time
+import os
+import joblib
 import streamlit as st
-from os import path
-import pymupdf  
+from utils.conceptexcerpts import concept_excerpts
+from utils.exampleexcerpts import example_excerpts
+from google import genai
 
 st.set_page_config(page_title="LSAT Control - Textbook Tutor", page_icon="📘")
-st.title("📘 LSAT Logical Reasoning - Group A")
-
-# Upload the textbook PDF
-pdf_file = path.abspath("utils/textbook.pdf")
-if pdf_file:
-    doc = pymupdf.open(pdf_file, filetype="pdf")
-
-    # Topic selector
-    topic_pages = {
-        "The Basics of Logical Reasoning": [i for i in range(1,36)],
-        "Must Be True": [i for i in range(66,92)],
-        "Main Point Questions": [i for i in range(93,135)],
-        "Conditional Reasoning": [i for i in range(136,191)],
-        "Weaken Questions": [i for i in range(192,218)],
-        "Cause and Effect Reasoning": [i for i in range(219,238)],
-        "Strengthen, Justify, and Assumption": [i for i in range(239,309)],
-        "Find the Flaw": [i for i in range(349,379)],
-        "Evaluate the Argument": [i for i in range(429,439)],
-    }
+st.title("📘 LSAT Logical Reasoning - Textbook Learning (Control)")
+
+new_chat_id = f'{time.time()}'
+MODEL_ROLE = 'ai'
+AI_AVATAR_ICON = '✨'
+
+# Create a data/ folder if it doesn't already exist
+try:
+    os.mkdir('data/groupa')
+except:
+    # data/ folder already exists
+    pass
+
+# Load past chats (if available)
+try:
+    past_chats: dict = joblib.load('data/past_chats_list')
+except:
+    past_chats = {}
+
+# Sidebar allows a list of past chats
+with st.sidebar:
+    st.write('# Past Chats')
+    if st.session_state.get('chat_id') is None:
+        st.session_state.chat_id = st.selectbox(
+            label='Pick a past chat',
+            options=[new_chat_id] + list(past_chats.keys()),
+            format_func=lambda x: past_chats.get(x, 'New Chat'),
+            placeholder='_',
+        )
+    else:
+        # This will happen the first time AI response comes in
+        st.session_state.chat_id = st.selectbox(
+            label='Pick a past chat',
+            options=[new_chat_id, st.session_state.chat_id] + list(past_chats.keys()),
+            index=1,
+            format_func=lambda x: past_chats.get(x, 'New Chat' if x != st.session_state.chat_id else st.session_state.chat_title),
+            placeholder='_',
+        )
+
+    # Save new chats after a message has been sent to AI
+    st.session_state.chat_title = f'ChatSession-{st.session_state.chat_id}'
     
-    topic = st.selectbox("Choose a topic:", list(topic_pages.keys()))
-    pages = topic_pages[topic]
+# Chat history (allows to ask multiple questions)
+try:
+    st.session_state.messages = joblib.load(
+        f'data/{st.session_state.chat_id}-st_messages'
+    )
+    st.session_state.gemini_history = joblib.load(
+        f'data/{st.session_state.chat_id}-gemini_messages'
+    )
+except:
+    st.session_state.messages = []
+    st.session_state.gemini_history = []
+
+choices = ["A", "B", "C", "D", "E"]
+
+# Dropdown to select topic
+topic = st.selectbox("Choose a topic to review:", list(concept_excerpts.keys()))
+
+# Display Concept
+st.subheader("Concept Overview")
+st.markdown(concept_excerpts[topic])
+
+# Display Question
+st.subheader("Practice Question")
+q = example_excerpts[topic]
+st.write(q[0])
+for i, choice in enumerate(choices):
+    st.write(f"{i}). {choice}")
+
+# Show answer
+if st.checkbox("Show Answer"):
+    st.success(f"Correct Answer: {q[1]}")
+
+# Save to file
+joblib.dump(
+    st.session_state.messages,
+    f'data/{st.session_state.chat_id}-st_messages',
+)
+joblib.dump(
+    st.session_state.gemini_history,
+    f'data/{st.session_state.chat_id}-gemini_messages',
+)
+
+
 
-    # Extract and display text
-    text = ""
-    for p in pages:
-        text += doc[p].get_text()
 
-    st.subheader("📖 Concept Explanation")
-    st.write(text)

utils/conceptexcerpts.py

@@ -0,0 +1,295 @@
+Assumption = """
+Question Type: Assumption
+Assumption questions ask you to identify the missing link in the logic of the stimulus
+argument.
+Some example question stems are
+1. Which one of the following, if assumed, allows the argument’s conclusion to be
+properly drawn?
+2. Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
+3. The final conclusion above follows logically if which one of the following is
+assumed?
+4. The claim made by the official in the argument above depends on the presupposition
+that
+5. Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?
+
+Note: "Presupposition” is simply another word that the LSAT uses for assumption
+
+Strategies
+The most time-efficient way to answer assumption questions is to recognize the missing
+link in the argument as you read the stimulus. Sometimes, the wording of the argument
+and the answer choices can be confusing. So, you might want to employ the technique
+of negating the answer choices that you want to test. 
+
+Because an assumption is an unstated piece of evidence, this technique “knocks out”
+each answer choice that you test, one by one. When you test the correct answer, you are
+knocking out a piece of evidence, and the argument should suffer accordingly.
+In tutoring sessions, we often use the analogy of testing to see if a wall within a house
+or an office is important to the structure by knocking the wall down to see if the roof
+falls in. If the roof falls in, we have shown that the wall was important. If there is no
+effect on the structure, the wall was not a load-bearing wall. In other words, the wall
+was irrelevant to the strength of the structure.
+
+"""
+
+
+Weaken_Strengthen = """
+Question Type: Weaken/Strengthen
+You will have to attack a significant number of weaken and strengthen questions in
+order to end up with a respectable LSAT score. This question type also sometimes
+appears in the Reading Comprehension section of the exam. Since the LSAT is set up to
+test your understanding of the structure of arguments, the correct answer choices for
+weakening and strengthening questions will more often undermine or support their
+respective conclusions structurally rather than by directly attacking stated evidence, or
+by providing new evidence. You can undermine conclusions by finding a key assumption
+in the argument and then finding the answer choice that will make that assumption
+more likely to be true or less likely to be true, as the case may be.
+
+Note: Remember that weakening an argument does not mean disproving it completely and strengthening an
+argument does not mean proving it beyond all doubt. To strengthen an argument is to make the conclusion
+more likely to be true, and to weaken an argument is to make the conclusion at least somewhat less
+likely to be true.
+
+Some example question stems are
+
+Weaken:
+1. Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the above argument?
+2. The prediction that ends the paragraph would be most seriously called into question
+if it were true that
+3. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the researcher’s argument?
+4. Which one of the following, if true, most calls into question the argument that…?
+5. Which one of the following, if true, most undermines the conclusion?
+6. Which one of the following, if true, would be the strongest challenge to the
+author’s conclusion?
+
+Strengthen:
+1. Which one of the following, if established, does most to justify the position
+advanced by the passage?
+2. Which one of the following, if true, provides the best reason in favor of the
+proposal?
+3. Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
+4. Which of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the scientist’s
+reasoning?
+5. Which one of the following, if true, most helps to support the claim that…?
+6. Which one of the following, if true, most supports the proposal?
+
+Strategies
+To answer either a weaken or strengthen question, you must first identify the key
+assumptions in the argument. This should become second nature to you as you practice
+for test day. Once you become proficient at identifying assumptions, you can more easily
+choose answers that either support or undermine them. In some cases of weaken
+questions, the correct answer actually contradicts a statement made in the stimulus
+argument.
+
+"""
+Conclusion = """
+
+Question Type: Conclusion
+These questions ask you to draw a conclusion from evidence presented within the stimulus.
+In some cases, the conclusion that you are asked to draw is based on only part of
+the stimulus and will not necessarily be the main idea of the stimulus paragraph. Some
+conclusion questions use the terms “infer” and “imply.”
+
+Note: Remember that “imply” and “infer” are just two sides of the same coin; the speaker, or author, implies and
+the listener, or reader, infers.
+
+Some example question stems are
+1. If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true on
+the basis of them?
+2. If the environmentalist’s statements are true, they provide the most support for
+which one of the following?
+3. Which one of the following statements is most strongly supported by the information
+above?
+4. Amy’s reply is structured to lead to which one of the following conclusions?
+5. Which one of the following inferences is most strongly supported by the information
+above?
+6. Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the argument above?
+Strategies
+To correctly answer these questions you must consider the validity of the argument.
+Look for the logical end of the chain of reasoning started in the stimulus argument.
+
+"""
+Method_of_Argument = """
+
+Question Type: Method of Argument
+Method of argument questions ask you to recognize the way that the argument is put
+together. You must choose the answer that properly describes the structure of the stimulus
+argument. Some, but certainly not all, method of argument questions are based on
+dialogues.
+Some examples of question stems are
+1. The scientist’s argument proceeds by
+2. Trillian’s response to Douglas proceeds by
+3. Karen uses which one of the following argumentative techniques in countering
+Rob’s argument?
+4. The argument criticizing the essay employs which one of the following strategies?
+5. The relationship of Svetlana’s statement to Katalya’s argument is that Svetlana’s
+statement
+
+Strategies
+To answer these questions correctly, you must pay attention to the structure of the argument
+rather than to the content or subject matter. Describe the argument in your own
+words (paraphrase) and try to match up the analogous parts of your paraphrased argument
+to the answer choices.
+
+Note: The LSAT purposely uses difficult language to disguise relatively simple arguments. Practice sufficiently so
+that you can recognize the argument amidst the tricky language.
+
+"""
+Principle = """
+
+Question Type: Principle
+These questions ask you to identify a rule, or principle, that supports the stimulus argument
+presented. In some cases, you are required to choose an argument that conforms
+to the stimulus principle.
+Some example question stems are
+1. The reasoning above most closely conforms to which one of the following
+principles?
+2. Which one of the following conforms most closely to the principle illustrated
+above?
+3. Which one of the following employee behaviors most clearly violates the company
+policy outlined above?
+4. Which one of the following illustrates a principle most similar to that illustrated
+by the passage?
+
+Strategies
+The first step in answering these questions is to identify the rule or principle in the
+stimulus argument. Then, select the answer choice that relies on the same rule or principle.
+You should generally avoid any answer choices that include the same subject
+matter as that of the stimulus argument; focus on the rule or principle, not on the
+content.
+"""
+Point_of_Contention = """
+
+Question Type: Point of Contention
+These questions always involve a dialogue between two people who disagree about
+something. You are expected to choose the answer that best describes the crux of the
+disagreement.
+
+Some sample question stems are
+1. Todd’s and Andy’s positions indicate that they disagree about the truth of which
+one of the following?
+2. A point on which Randy and Salvatore’s views differ is whether
+3. William and Max disagree over whether
+4. The dialogue most supports the claim that Heather and Mike disagree about
+whether
+
+Strategies
+Your first step is to understand, then succinctly summarize the first party’s argument.
+Next, determine where the first and second parties differ in their statements.
+Paraphrasing will help you get to the root of the argument and quickly locate the
+correct answer.
+
+"""
+Role_of_Fact = """
+
+Question Type: Role of Fact
+Some of the questions ask about the role, or function, of a specific fact that is included
+in the stimulus argument.
+
+Some sample question stems are
+1. The claim that taxes should increase in proportion to a person’s income plays
+which one of the following roles in the argument?
+2. The claim in the first sentence of the passage plays which one of the following
+roles in the argument?
+3. Joshua’s statement that “this claim simply cannot be proved” plays which one of
+the following roles in his argument?
+4. Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the
+passage by the claim that fish have gills?
+
+Strategies
+To answer these questions correctly, you must determine the reason why the author
+included this particular fact or detail. Most of the incorrect answer choices will either be
+too narrow or too broad, or beyond the scope of the stimulus argument.
+"""
+Flaw = """
+
+Question Type: Flaw
+These questions ask you to identify an error of reasoning in the stimulus argument.
+Some sample question stems are
+1. Which one of the following, if true, identifies a flaw in the plan for the program?
+2. The argument is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument
+3. The reasoning above is questionable because it fails to exclude the
+possibility that
+4. The reasoning in the politician’s argument is flawed because this argument
+5. Ralph’s reasoning in his response to Jessica is most vulnerable to criticism on the
+grounds that it
+6. Which one of the following is a questionable argumentative strategy employed
+in the above argument?
+
+Strategies
+The question stem tells you that a problem exists with the logic of the argument. You
+just have to choose the answer that describes the flaw. Most flawed arguments include
+an unwarranted assumption; in other words, the argument is weakened by a missing link
+between the stated evidence and the stated conclusion. The author of the argument is
+taking something for granted that is not necessarily true.
+"""
+Paradox = """
+
+Question Type: Paradox
+A paradox arises when you are presented with two statements that are both true, yet
+they appear to be mutually contradictory. The key words to help you spot paradox question
+stems are “explain” and “reconcile.”
+Some sample questions stems are
+1. Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain why the people
+mentioned continued to grow beans?
+2. Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain the finding of the
+caffeine study?
+3. Which one of the following, if true, helps to reconcile the statements above?
+4. Which one of the following, if true, does the most to reconcile the apparent
+conflict in the system described above?
+
+Strategies
+The stimulus argument in paradox questions usually includes a term that either must be
+redefined in order to resolve the paradox, or contains a misinterpretation of a term upon
+which the author relies. You must recognize the contradiction that exists and look for an
+answer choice that more clearly defines a critical term.
+We often refer to the “bumblebee paradox” with our tutoring students. Current research
+suggests that a bumblebee’s wings are aerodynamically unsound; as a result, a bumblebee
+should not be able to fly. However, bumblebees do fly, so clearly the term “aerodynamically
+unsound” is poorly defined.
+"""
+Parallel_Structure = """
+
+Question Type: Parallel Structure
+These questions ask you to match up two arguments that share structural characteristics.
+There are usually two parallel structure questions in each Logical Reasoning section. They
+are usually in the second half of the section, and they can usually be recognized by their
+length since each answer choice is a complete argument. Sometimes the stimulus argument
+is flawed. In such a case, you must identify the answer choice argument that shares
+the same flaw.
+
+Some sample question stems are
+1. Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to the
+argument above?
+2. The flawed reasoning in which one of the following arguments most closely
+resembles the flawed reasoning in the professor’s argument?
+3. The reasoning in the argument above most closely parallels that in which one of
+the following?
+4. The flawed pattern of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in
+which one of the following?
+5. Which one of the following contains questionable reasoning most similar to that
+in the argument above?
+6. The pattern of reasoning in which of the following is most similar to that in the
+mayor’s argument?
+
+Strategies
+One way to approach the parallel structure questions is to reason by analogy. In other
+words, if you match up the analogous parts, the structure becomes clearer. The structure
+of the argument is more important than the content or subject matter of the argument.
+Do not be fooled by answer choices that refer to the same subject matter as that
+presented in the stimulus argument. You are expected to see past the facts presented and
+look at the relationship between the evidence and conclusion in the argument.
+"""
+
+concept_excerpts = {
+    "Assumption": Assumption,
+    "Weaken_Strengthen": Weaken_Strengthen,
+    "Conclusion" : Conclusion,
+    "Method_of_Argument" : Method_of_Argument, 
+    "Principle" : Principle, 
+    "Point_of_Contention" : Point_of_Contention,
+    "Role_of_Fact" : Role_of_Fact, 
+    "Flaw" : Flaw, 
+    "Paradox" : Paradox, 
+    "Parallel_Structure" : Parallel_Structure
+}
+

utils/exampleexcerpts.py

@@ -0,0 +1,339 @@
+Assumption_q = f"""
+
+Sample Assumption Question \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. The birth rate in Country X is down this year by 12% compared to last year. The
+death rate in Country X has remained stable for several years. Therefore, the
+population of Country X is decreasing measurably.
+Which of the following is assumed by the author of the argument above? \n
+(A) The causes of the declining birthrate in Country X can be discovered
+through physician surveys. \n
+(B) Statisticians are able to predict future changes in the size of the population
+of Country X. \n
+(C) Country Y, which has a nearly identical population to Country X, is experiencing
+the same population shift as Country X. \n
+(D) There was no significant migration into Country X during the time under
+discussion. \n
+(E) The causes of the declining birthrate in Country X are primarily economic
+in nature. \n
+
+"""
+
+Assumption_ans = """
+
+The best answer is D. You might be able to answer the question directly by simply recognizing
+the missing piece of evidence and selecting it. However, if you aren’t able to do so,
+you can still determine the correct answer by negating whichever answer choices you view
+as potentially correct. It is not likely that you will have time to carefully negate each choice
+presented. So, you will need to “filter out” choices that you find clearly irrelevant.
+Let’s say that you could easily recognize that answer choice C is irrelevant since it
+discusses Country Y and, therefore, it can’t possibly be the missing link between the
+stated evidence and the stated conclusion, which both involve Country X. Likewise, let’s
+say that you could eliminate answer choice B, which is about predicting the future,
+whereas the stimulus argument is about the recent past. \n
+That leaves answer choices A, D, and E still in contention. Try to negate answer choice
+A. You should come up with something like: “The causes of the declining birthrate in
+Country X cannot be discovered through physician surveys.” Since physicians play no
+part in the stimulus argument, you should recognize that neither the original phrasing
+of answer choice A, nor its negation, has any bearing on the relationship between the
+evidence and the conclusion stated in the argument. Similarly, negating E with “The
+causes of the declining birthrate in Country X are not primarily economic in nature,”
+has no impact on the likelihood that the conclusion is valid. However, if you negate
+answer choice D, you get “There was significant migration into Country X during the
+time under discussion.” This would dramatically call into question the stated conclusion
+that the population of Country X is declining measurably. Therefore, answer choice D
+must be correct.
+
+"""
+
+Weaken_Strengthen_q = """
+Sample Weaken/Strengthen Questions \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. More and more computer software that is capable of correcting not just spelling,
+but also grammar and punctuation is being developed. Therefore, it is increasingly
+unnecessary for working reporters and writers to have a complete knowledge of the
+principles of English grammar and punctuation. Consequently, in training journalists,
+less emphasis should be placed on the principles of grammar so that students
+and professors can concentrate on other important subjects.
+Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given
+for the recommendation above? \n
+(A) The effective use of software that corrects grammar and punctuation
+requires an understanding of grammatical principles. \n
+(B) Much of the software that corrects grammar and punctuation is already
+in use. \n
+(C) Development of more complex ethical guidelines for reporters and writers
+has meant that professors and students in journalism schools must allow
+time for teaching such issues. \n
+(D) Most of the software that is capable of correcting grammar and punctuation
+can be run on the types of computers available to most media outlets. \n
+(E) The journalism curriculum already requires that journalism students be
+familiar with, and able to use, a variety of software packages. \n
+"""
+
+Weaken_Strengthen_ans = """
+The best answer is A. If journalists must be able to understand the principles of
+grammar in order to effectively use the software described, the conclusion of the argument—
+that less emphasis should be placed on such principles in journalism school—is
+less likely to be true. Answer choices B, D, and E are irrelevant to the argument. Answer
+choice C actually strengthens the argument by making the conclusion just slightly more
+likely to be true. \n
+"""
+
+Conclusion_q = """
+Sample Conclusion Question \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. Physician: The continued use of this drug to treat patients with a certain disease
+cannot be adequately supported by the proposition that any drug that treats the
+disease is more effective than no treatment at all. What must also be taken into
+account is that this drug is very expensive and has notable side effects.
+Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the physician’s
+argument?
+(A) The drug is more effective than no treatment at all. \n
+(B) The drug is more effective than other forms of treatment for the disease. \n
+(C) The drug is more expensive than other forms of treatment for the disease. \n
+(D) The drug should not be used to treat the disease unless it is either effective 
+or inexpensive. \n
+(E) The drug’s possible effectiveness in treating the disease is not sufficient
+justification for using it. \n
+"""
+
+Conclusion_ans = """
+The best answer is E. According to the physician, the fact that the drug might be
+somewhat effective is not enough reason to continue to use it. The physician suggests
+that other factors beyond mere effectiveness, such as cost and side effects, be considered
+when deciding whether to use the drug. Answer choice A is incorrect because, although
+it might be inferred from evidence presented in the stimulus, the question stem calls for
+the main point of the argument. Answer choices B and C are incorrect because no
+comparison is made between the drug and any other form of treatment for the disease. \n
+Answer choice D is incorrect because the physician also contends that the side effects of
+the drug should be considered when deciding whether to use the drug.
+"""
+
+Method_of_Argument_q = """
+Sample Method of Argument Question \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. It is widely accepted that eating sugar can cause weight gain. Indeed, many people
+who are susceptible to weight gain report that, in their own experience, eating
+large amounts of sugar is invariably followed by a measurable weight gain within a
+few days. However, it is likely that common wisdom has confused cause and effect.
+Recent studies suggest that hormonal changes associated with stress can cause
+weight gain, and there is ample evidence that people who are fond of sugar tend to
+eat more of it when they are under stress. 
+The argument employs which one of the following argumentative strategies? \n
+(A) It cites evidence that questions the accuracy of the evidence advanced in
+support of the position that is being called into question. \n
+(B) It gives additional evidence that suggests an alternative interpretation of the
+evidence offered in support of the position being challenged. \n
+(C) It relies upon the superiority of science versus common opinion as a means
+of dismissing the relevance of evidence based upon common experience. \n
+(D) It shows that the position being challenged is not consistent with cited,
+proven factual evidence. \n
+(E) It calls into question the intelligence of those who subscribe to a certain
+popularly held belief. \n
+"""
+
+Method_of_Argument_ans = """
+The best answer is B. The additional evidence provided is regarding hormonal
+changes causing weight gain; the alternative interpretation of the correlation between
+sugar consumption and weight gain is the possibility that both the weight gain and sugar
+consumption are, in fact, caused by stress. \n
+"""
+
+Principle_q = """
+Sample Principle Question \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. The best way to create a successful party is to visualize the guests discussing it with
+friends the next day. The hostess should first decide what aspects of the party will
+lead to favorable comments from guests during those conversations and then come
+up with refreshments and activities that will actually cause such post-party talk to
+occur.
+Which one of the following illustrates a principle most similar to that illustrated by
+the passage? \n
+(A) When planning a vacation, some travelers decide first where they want to
+go, and then plan their route. But, for most people, financial issues must
+also be taken into account. \n
+(B) When landscaping the grounds of a new home, you should start with the
+topsoil and then choose your shrubbery and other foliage. \n
+(C) Good moviemakers do not extemporaneously film their movies in one or
+two days with no script; a movie cannot be separated from the story upon
+which it is based. \n
+(D) In negotiating an employment contract, the best method is to make as many
+outlandish demands as possible and then agree to forgo the most outrageous
+of them. \n
+(E) To make a great golf shot, you should picture the ball landing where you
+want it to land, and then you will be able to line up your body and your club
+accordingly. \n
+"""
+Principle_ans = """
+The best answer is E. The underlying principle in the stimulus argument is that it is
+best to work backward from a desired result in order to achieve that result. In the stimulus,
+the desired result is a successful party. In the correct answer, the desired result is a
+great golf shot. Answer choices B, C, and D are incorrect because they work forward
+rather than backward. \n
+"""
+
+Point_of_Contention_q = """
+Sample Point of Contention Question \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. Jason: The Internet is making more information available to more people than
+ever before in history. So, people can simply learn all they need to know without
+seeking the advice of experts. \n
+Mark: In the past, the need for experts actually increased as the volume of knowledge
+increased. Therefore, the Internet will surely increase our dependence on
+experts. \n
+The dialogue most strongly supports the claim that Jason and Mark disagree with
+each other about whether \n
+(A) the Internet will contribute significantly to the increase in the spread of
+information throughout society \n
+(B) the Internet will increase the likelihood that people will seek the advice of
+experts when searching for knowledge \n
+(C) the Internet makes more information available to more people \n
+(D) experts will increase their reliance on the Internet in the future \n
+(E) explaining knowledge to specialists can only be accomplished by Internet
+experts \n
+"""
+Point_of_Contention_ans = """
+The best answer is B. Jason thinks that experts will become irrelevant because of
+direct public access to information. Mark thinks that the opposite will occur.
+"""
+
+Role_of_Fact_q = """
+Sample Role of Fact Question \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. Some environmentalists have argued that there are two independently sufficient
+justifications for recycling waste materials: one based on economics and the other
+based on the aversion to the continued consumption of pristine global resources.
+But suppose that recycling were not economically efficient. Then it would be less
+clear that an aversion to consuming pristine global resources is enough of a reason
+to recycle.
+Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the argument
+by the supposition that recycling is not economically efficient? \n
+(A) It is used to disprove the environmentalist position that we should recycle. \n
+(B) It is used to show that the two reasons given by environmentalists are each
+individually sufficient. \n
+(C) It is used to disprove the claim that recycling is beneficial. \n
+(D) It is used to weaken the claim that consumption of pristine resources is
+sufficient reason to recycle. \n
+(E) It is used to show that there is no sufficient reason for recycling. \n
+"""
+
+Role_of_Fact_ans = """
+The best answer is D. The author of the argument asks the reader to go along with
+the supposition that recycling is not economically efficient in order to show that a mere
+aversion to consuming pristine resources might not be a sufficient, independent justification
+for recycling after all. Answer choices A, C, and E are incorrect because the argument
+does not actually show that there is no support for recycling. Answer choice B is
+incorrect because the argument is meant to question the reasons given for recycling, not
+to shore up the reasons given by environmentalists. \n
+"""
+
+Flaw_q = """
+Sample Flaw Question \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. Giant Motors is attempting to dominate the automobile market by promoting its
+products with an expensive television advertising campaign. But, the results of recent
+surveys reveal that, in the opinion of 85 percent of all consumers, Giant Motors
+already dominates the market. Since any product with more than half of all sales in
+any given market is already dominant, Giant Motors dominates the market now and
+must only preserve its market share in order to continue to dominate its market.
+The argument commits which one of the following errors in reasoning? \n
+(A) Failing to eliminate the possibility that what seems to be the outcome of a
+specific market condition might actually be the cause of the condition \n
+(B) Confusing a condition necessary for certain outcome to obtain for a condition
+that, alone, is sufficient to assure that result \n
+(C) Treating the failure to establish the falsity of a specific claim as tantamount
+to showing that such a claim is certainly accurate \n
+(D) Accepting evidence that a claim is believed to be true as evidence that the
+claim, itself, is actually true \n
+(E) Describing the results of a survey that was done in the past as acceptably
+predicting future conditions \n
+"""
+Flaw_ans = """
+The best answer is D. The survey results only show the opinions of consumers. The
+stimulus argument relies upon those beliefs as fact in concluding that Giant Motors
+dominates the automobile market. There is no reason to accept the opinion of
+consumers as an accurate measure of Giant Motors’s actual share of the automobile
+market. Each of the other answer choices describes an error in reasoning that is irrelevant
+to the stimulus argument. \n
+"""
+Paradox_q = """
+Sample Paradox Question \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. Researchers concur with one another on the issue of the harm that can result when
+children are exposed to microscopic asbestos fibers. The resulting disease, asbestosis,
+is almost always debilitating and even sometimes fatal. Many older school buildings
+contain asbestos insulation around hot water pipes and heating ducts because, until
+recently, the dangers of asbestos were unknown. Yet, these same researchers also
+agree that laws requiring the removal of asbestos from schools could actually lead
+to an increased likelihood of exposure to asbestos fibers to the students who attend
+those schools.
+Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy
+in the researchers’ positions? \n
+(A) New insulation materials used instead of asbestos are as potentially harmful
+to children as asbestos is. \n
+(B) The money that would be spent on the removal of asbestos from schools
+could be spent in other ways that would be more likely to increase the
+overall health of school children. \n
+(C) Other sources of asbestos, such as automobile and household uses, are
+responsible for more cases of asbestosis than school-based sources are. \n
+(D) Removing the asbestos from older schools disperses a large quantity of
+asbestos fibers into the air, where they are more easily inhaled than when
+they are left in place around the pipes and ducts. \n
+(E) Lead-based paint poses more of a health hazard to children than asbestos
+does. \n
+"""
+
+Paradox_ans = """
+The best answer is D. Answer choice D provides an explanation for the suggestion not
+to remove the asbestos. Essentially, this answer boils down to pointing out that the act of
+removal itself is more dangerous than simply leaving the hazard in place. Answer choices
+A, C, and E are all incorrect because they focus on other potential sources of harm rather
+than the apparent conflict between the two positions that the researchers hold simultaneously:
+1) that asbestos can cause serious harm, and 2) that it should not be removed from
+schools. Answer choice B is incorrect because it focuses on financial issues rather than the
+seemingly logical inconsistency inherent in the researchers’ positions. \n
+"""
+
+Parallel_Structure_q = """
+Sample Parallel Structure Question \n
+Consider the following example: \n
+1. Murcheson’s drawing of the Lincoln Monument contains several inaccuracies.
+Therefore, your attempt to reproduce the drawing of the monument will not be a
+very accurate reproduction of the drawing.
+Which one of the following is most similar in its flawed reasoning to the flawed
+reasoning in the argument above? \n
+(A) Katrina’s presentation was made up primarily of fabrications and distortions.
+So the video recording made of it cannot be of good quality. \n
+(B) An architect who creates a model of an ugly building must necessarily create
+an ugly model, unless the sculpture is a distorted representation of the
+building. \n
+(C) If a puppy’s coloring resembles its mother’s, then if the mother’s fur is curly,
+the puppy’s fur must also be curly. \n
+(D) Kelly imitated Rory. But, Kelly is different from Rory, so Kelly could not
+have imitated Rory very well. \n
+(E) Quentin’s second movie is similar to his first. Therefore, his second movie
+must be entertaining since his first movie won many awards. \n
+"""
+
+Parallel_Structure_ans = """
+The best answer is A. The flaw in the stimulus argument is that it concludes that a
+reproduction of a flawed reproduction cannot, itself, be an accurate reproduction.
+Answer choice A makes the same mistake. In this instance, Murcheson’s drawing and
+Katrina’s presentation fill the same role as one another in their respective arguments.
+And, video recording of Katrina’s presentation is analogous to the attempted reproduction
+in the stimulus argument. Some of the other answer choices are also flawed arguments;
+however, they do not share the same structure. \n
+"""
+
+example_excerpts = {
+    "Assumption": [Assumption_q, Assumption_ans],
+    "Weaken_Strengthen": [Weaken_Strengthen_q, Weaken_Strengthen_ans],
+    "Conclusion" : [Conclusion_q, Conclusion_ans],
+    "Method_of_Argument" : [Method_of_Argument_q, Method_of_Argument_ans], 
+    "Principle" : [Principle_q, Principle_ans], 
+    "Point_of_Contention" : [Point_of_Contention_q, Point_of_Contention_ans],
+    "Role_of_Fact" : [Role_of_Fact_q, Role_of_Fact_ans], 
+    "Flaw" : [Flaw_q, Flaw_ans], 
+    "Paradox" : [Paradox_q, Paradox_ans], 
+    "Parallel_Structure" : [Parallel_Structure_q, Parallel_Structure_ans]
+}