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 7 inhabitants: Michael, Harper, Mason, Daniel, Jack, Riley, and Aurora. In a statement by Michael: "Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight". In a statement by Harper: "Michael is not a knight". Mason noted, "Michael is a knave or Harper is a knave". Daniel was heard saying, "Michael is a knight and Harper is a knight". Jack expressed that Harper is a knight. "If Michael is a knight then Mason is a knight," Riley claimed. Aurora said that If Daniel is a knave then Riley 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 Michael is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
 Assume Riley is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that If Michael is a knight then Mason is a knight.
 Assume Mason is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that Michael is a knave or Harper is a knave.
 Harper cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Michael is not a knight.
 Assume Harper is a knave.  No contradiction is found in their false claim that Michael is not a knight.
 Assume Aurora is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that If Daniel is a knave then Riley is a knave.
 Daniel cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Michael is a knight and Harper is a knight.
 Daniel cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Aurora that If Daniel is a knave then Riley is a knave.
 We have exhausted all possibilities for Daniel, so let us go back and reconsider Aurora.
 Aurora cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Michael that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
 We have exhausted all possibilities for Aurora and Harper, so let us go back and reconsider Mason.
 Mason cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Riley that If Michael is a knight then Mason is a knight.
 We have exhausted all possibilities for Mason, so let us go back and reconsider Riley.
 Riley cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Michael that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
 We have exhausted all possibilities for Riley, so let us go back and reconsider Michael.
 Assume Michael is a knave.  No contradiction is found in their false claim that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
 Assume Riley is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that If Michael is a knight then Mason is a knight.
 Assume Mason is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that Michael is a knave or Harper is a knave.
 Assume Harper is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that Michael is not a knight.
 Aurora cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the false claim of Michael that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
 Assume Aurora is a knave.  No contradiction is found in their false claim that If Daniel is a knave then Riley is a knave.
 Daniel cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Michael is a knight and Harper is a knight.
 Assume Daniel is a knave.  No contradiction is found in their false claim that Michael is a knight and Harper is a knight.
 Assume Jack is a knight.  No contradiction is found in their claim that Harper is a knight.
 Therefore, (1) Michael is a knave
 (2) Harper is a knight
 (3) Mason is a knight
 (4) Daniel is a knave
 (5) Jack is a knight
 (6) Riley is a knight
 (7) Aurora 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 7 inhabitants: Michael, Harper, Mason, Daniel, Jack, Riley, and Aurora. In a statement by Michael: "Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight". In a statement by Harper: "Michael is not a knight". Mason noted, "Michael is a knave or Harper is a knave". Daniel was heard saying, "Michael is a knight and Harper is a knight". Jack expressed that Harper is a knight. "If Michael is a knight then Mason is a knight," Riley claimed. Aurora said that If Daniel is a knave then Riley 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 Michael is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
Assume Riley is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that If Michael is a knight then Mason is a knight.
Assume Mason is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that Michael is a knave or Harper is a knave.
Harper cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Michael is not a knight.
Assume Harper is a knave. No contradiction is found in their false claim that Michael is not a knight.
Assume Aurora is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that If Daniel is a knave then Riley is a knave.
Daniel cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Michael is a knight and Harper is a knight.
Daniel cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Aurora that If Daniel is a knave then Riley is a knave.
We have exhausted all possibilities for Daniel, so let us go back and reconsider Aurora.
Aurora cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Michael that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
We have exhausted all possibilities for Aurora and Harper, so let us go back and reconsider Mason.
Mason cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Riley that If Michael is a knight then Mason is a knight.
We have exhausted all possibilities for Mason, so let us go back and reconsider Riley.
Riley cannot be a knave, because this would contradict the claim of Michael that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
We have exhausted all possibilities for Riley, so let us go back and reconsider Michael.
Assume Michael is a knave. No contradiction is found in their false claim that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
Assume Riley is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that If Michael is a knight then Mason is a knight.
Assume Mason is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that Michael is a knave or Harper is a knave.
Assume Harper is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that Michael is not a knight.
Aurora cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the false claim of Michael that Riley is a knight and Aurora is a knight.
Assume Aurora is a knave. No contradiction is found in their false claim that If Daniel is a knave then Riley is a knave.
Daniel cannot be a knight, because this would contradict the claim of their own that Michael is a knight and Harper is a knight.
Assume Daniel is a knave. No contradiction is found in their false claim that Michael is a knight and Harper is a knight.
Assume Jack is a knight. No contradiction is found in their claim that Harper is a knight.
Therefore, (1) Michael is a knave
(2) Harper is a knight
(3) Mason is a knight
(4) Daniel is a knave
(5) Jack is a knight
(6) Riley is a knight
(7) Aurora is a knave </think>
<answer> (1) Michael is a knave
(2) Harper is a knight
(3) Mason is a knight
(4) Daniel is a knave
(5) Jack is a knight
(6) Riley is a knight
(7) Aurora is a knave </answer>
Michael Harper Mason Daniel Jack Riley Aurora
(1) Michael is a knave
(2) Harper is a knight
(3) Mason is a knight
(4) Daniel is a knave
(5) Jack is a knight
(6) Riley is a knight
(7) Aurora is a knave
(('and', ('telling-truth', 5), ('telling-truth', 6)), ('not', ('telling-truth', 0)), ('or', ('lying', 0), ('lying', 1)), ('and', ('telling-truth', 0), ('telling-truth', 1)), ('telling-truth', 1), ('->', ('telling-truth', 0), ('telling-truth', 2)), ('->', ('lying', 3), ('lying', 5)))
rule