Food Administration
- resales greatly limited coffee February 6, 1918 through January 12, 1919 ⟨coffee trading during wartime control⟩
greatly limiting resales
judge verdicts (4)
- groundedness 0.70 pass — The claim is supported by the passage, which states that rules issued on February 6, 1918 involved 'greatly limiting resales.' While the passage doesn't explicitly specify that these resales were limited only for coffee (the context makes it clear), the core assertion about resales being greatly limited during February 1918 is directly stated in the text.
- qualifier_fidelity 0.60 fail — The claim has multiple unfaithful qualifiers: (1) VIEWPOINT: The claim attributes this to 'author', but the passage attributes it to 'the Food Administration' - a named source that must be used instead. (2) TIME: The claim specifies 'February 1918' with valid_from '1918-02', but the rules limiting resales were issued on February 6, 1918, and remained in effect throughout 1918 until January 12, 1919 - the valid_from and valid_to dates should reflect this full period (1918-02-06 to 1919-01-12), not just the month of February. (3) CONTEXT: Should specify this relates to coffee trading/merchants during wartime, not left empty.
- groundedness 1.00 pass — The claim is directly stated in the passage. The text explicitly states that rules issued through the Food Administration on February 6, 1918 included 'greatly limiting resales,' which matches the claim's core assertion about resales being greatly limited for coffee during the specified time period.
- qualifier_fidelity 0.95 pass — The claim is highly faithful to the passage. The viewpoint, stance, sentiment, context, and quote are all accurate. The time period is slightly broader than strictly necessary—the passage states rules were issued 'two days' after February 4 (February 6, 1918) and withdrawn January 12, 1919, so the date range is correct. However, a minor deduction applies because while the passage frames this as an action taken through the Food Administration, the sentiment could be interpreted as having a restrictive connotation, though 'neutral' is reasonable given the passage's matter-of-fact tone. All qualifiers are appropriately faithful to the source material.