In the following question, two statements are given followed by two conclusions. Treat the statements as true, even if they seem to be at variance with commonly known facts, and then decide which conclusion definitely follows. Statement 1: Some clever persons are intelligent. Statement 2: No intelligent person is smart. Conclusions: I. Some intelligent persons are clever. II. Some smart persons are clever.

Introduction / Context:
This logical reasoning question deals with three groups of people: clever, intelligent, and smart. You are given two short statements and asked which conclusions must follow if both statements are accepted as completely true. This is a classic syllogism pattern where you must carefully track overlaps and exclusions between sets and avoid adding any extra assumptions.

Given Data / Assumptions:
- Statement 1: Some clever persons are intelligent. This means at least one person is both clever and intelligent. - Statement 2: No intelligent person is smart. This means that the sets intelligent and smart do not overlap at all. - Conclusion I: Some intelligent persons are clever. - Conclusion II: Some smart persons are clever. - We must decide which conclusion is forced by the two statements.

Concept / Approach:
The phrase some A are B means there is at least one element that belongs to both set A and set B. The statement no B is C tells us that sets B and C are completely disjoint. A conclusion is valid only if it must be true in every possible diagram that satisfies the given statements. If we can imagine even one valid diagram where a conclusion fails, that conclusion does not follow.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: From Statement 1, mark at least one person who is both clever and intelligent. Call this person X. So X lies in the intersection of the clever set and the intelligent set. Step 2: Statement 2 says that no intelligent person is smart. Therefore, the intelligent set and the smart set do not intersect at all. Step 3: Consider Conclusion I: some intelligent persons are clever. This is simply a rewording of Statement 1. If some clever persons are intelligent, then those same persons are also intelligent and clever. Therefore, some intelligent persons are clever. Conclusion I definitely follows. Step 4: Now consider Conclusion II: some smart persons are clever. From Statement 2 we only know that intelligent and smart do not overlap. We are not told anything about clever persons who are not intelligent. It is possible that some smart persons are clever, but it is equally possible that none of the clever persons are smart. Step 5: Because both possibilities are allowed by the statements, Conclusion II is not guaranteed. There may be a diagram where no clever person is smart, which would make Conclusion II false. Therefore Conclusion II does not follow.

Verification / Alternative check:
Imagine an example. Suppose there are clever people A and B, and intelligent people include A, but no intelligent person is smart. Also assume that all smart people are different individuals C and D, who are neither clever nor intelligent. In this situation, some clever persons are intelligent, and no intelligent person is smart, so both statements hold. However, there is no smart person who is clever. This confirms that Conclusion I is valid while Conclusion II is not forced by the given information.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
- Any option that includes Conclusion II treats a mere possibility as if it were a necessity. - The option that says both conclusions follow is incorrect because Conclusion II can be false in a valid diagram. - The option that rejects both conclusions ignores the fact that Conclusion I restates the overlap given directly in Statement 1. - The cannot be determined option is wrong because we can clearly and certainly accept Conclusion I.

Common Pitfalls:
A common mistake is to assume that if some clever persons are intelligent and no intelligent person is smart, then clever and smart must overlap or cannot overlap in a particular way. In reality, the problem gives no information about clever persons who are not intelligent. Another pitfall is failing to notice that Conclusion I is simply the same information as Statement 1 expressed from the other side of the overlap.

Final Answer:
Thus, only the first conclusion is logically guaranteed. The correct answer is Only conclusion I follows.