Logical deduction – "whenever Shashi makes coffee, Asha puts in sugar": Pick the valid consequence. (i) Shashi makes coffee. (ii) Asha makes coffee. (iii) Shashi puts in sugar. (iv) Asha puts in sugar.

Introduction / Context:
The rule is MakeCoffee(Shashi) ⇒ PutsSugar(Asha). It does not say who makes coffee other times, nor that Shashi puts sugar.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Trigger: Shashi makes coffee.
• Effect: Asha puts sugar.

Concept / Approach:
We need a pair that states the antecedent and its direct consequence: (i) then (iv).

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Statements (ii) and (iii) are irrelevant or incorrect ties to the rule.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
(iv) (i) flips order. (ii) (iii) and (iii) (ii) are not implied by the rule.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming Shashi is the one adding sugar.

Final Answer:
(i) (iv)