A conversation between User and Assistant. The user asks a question, and the Assistant solves it. The assistant first thinks about the reasoning process in the mind and then provides the user with the answer.
User: A very special island is inhabited only by knights and knaves. Knights always tell the truth, and knaves always lie. You meet 6 inhabitants: Mason, Daniel, Evelyn, Samuel, Charlotte, and Victoria. Mason commented, "Daniel is a knave or Daniel is a knight". "If Evelyn is a knave then Samuel is a knave," Daniel mentioned. Evelyn said that Mason is a knight if and only if Daniel is a knave. Samuel stated, "Charlotte is a knave if and only if Charlotte is a knight". Charlotte was heard saying, "Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight". Victoria commented, "Daniel is a knave". So who is a knight and who is a knave? Show your work in <think> </think> tags. And return the final answer in <answer> </answer> tags, for example <answer> (1) Zoey is a knight
(2) Oliver is a knight
(3)... </answer>.
Assistant: Let me solve this step by step.
<think> 
user
Assume Mason is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that Daniel is a knave or Daniel is a knight.
 Assume Daniel is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that If Evelyn is a knave then Samuel is a knave.
 Evelyn cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Mason is a knight if and only if Daniel is a knave.
 Assume Evelyn is a knave.  No contradiction is found in their false claim that Mason is a knight if and only if Daniel is a knave.
 Samuel cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of Daniel that If Evelyn is a knave then Samuel is a knave.
 Assume Samuel is a knave.  No contradiction is found in their false claim that Charlotte is a knave if and only if Charlotte is a knight.
 Assume Charlotte is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight.
 Victoria cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Daniel is a knave.
 Victoria cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Charlotte that Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight.
 We have exhausted all possibilities for Victoria, so let us go back and reconsider Charlotte.
 Assume Charlotte is a knave.  No contradiction is found in their false claim that Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight.
 Victoria cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the false claim of Charlotte that Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight.
 Assume Victoria is a knave.  No contradiction is found in their false claim that Daniel is a knave.
 Therefore, (1) Mason is a knight
 (2) Daniel is a knight
 (3) Evelyn is a knave
 (4) Samuel is a knave
 (5) Charlotte is a knave
 (6) Victoria is a knave
A conversation between User and Assistant. The user asks a question, and the Assistant solves it. The assistant first thinks about the reasoning process in the mind and then provides the user with the answer.
User: A very special island is inhabited only by knights and knaves. Knights always tell the truth, and knaves always lie. You meet 6 inhabitants: Mason, Daniel, Evelyn, Samuel, Charlotte, and Victoria. Mason commented, "Daniel is a knave or Daniel is a knight". "If Evelyn is a knave then Samuel is a knave," Daniel mentioned. Evelyn said that Mason is a knight if and only if Daniel is a knave. Samuel stated, "Charlotte is a knave if and only if Charlotte is a knight". Charlotte was heard saying, "Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight". Victoria commented, "Daniel is a knave". So who is a knight and who is a knave? Show your work in <think> </think> tags. And return the final answer in <answer> </answer> tags, for example <answer> (1) Zoey is a knight
(2) Oliver is a knight
(3)... </answer>.
Assistant: Let me solve this step by step.
<think> 
Assume Mason is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that Daniel is a knave or Daniel is a knight.
Assume Daniel is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that If Evelyn is a knave then Samuel is a knave.
Evelyn cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Mason is a knight if and only if Daniel is a knave.
Assume Evelyn is a knave. No contradiction is found in their false claim that Mason is a knight if and only if Daniel is a knave.
Samuel cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of Daniel that If Evelyn is a knave then Samuel is a knave.
Assume Samuel is a knave. No contradiction is found in their false claim that Charlotte is a knave if and only if Charlotte is a knight.
Assume Charlotte is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight.
Victoria cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Daniel is a knave.
Victoria cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Charlotte that Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight.
We have exhausted all possibilities for Victoria, so let us go back and reconsider Charlotte.
Assume Charlotte is a knave. No contradiction is found in their false claim that Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight.
Victoria cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the false claim of Charlotte that Victoria is a knave if and only if Evelyn is a knight.
Assume Victoria is a knave. No contradiction is found in their false claim that Daniel is a knave.
Therefore, (1) Mason is a knight
(2) Daniel is a knight
(3) Evelyn is a knave
(4) Samuel is a knave
(5) Charlotte is a knave
(6) Victoria is a knave </think>
<answer> (1) Mason is a knight
(2) Daniel is a knight
(3) Evelyn is a knave
(4) Samuel is a knave
(5) Charlotte is a knave
(6) Victoria is a knave </answer>
Mason Daniel Evelyn Samuel Charlotte Victoria
(1) Mason is a knight
(2) Daniel is a knight
(3) Evelyn is a knave
(4) Samuel is a knave
(5) Charlotte is a knave
(6) Victoria is a knave
(('or', ('lying', 1), ('telling-truth', 1)), ('->', ('lying', 2), ('lying', 3)), ('<=>', ('telling-truth', 0), ('lying', 1)), ('<=>', ('lying', 4), ('telling-truth', 4)), ('<=>', ('lying', 5), ('telling-truth', 2)), ('lying', 1))
rule