Why is the Dining Philosophers problem always presented with five philosophers? Mark all that apply.

Two philosophers is equivalent to the critical section problem.

Three philosophers is equivalent to the critical section problem

Four philosophers is equivalent to the critical section problem.

With fewer than five philosophers, it is not possible to have deadlock.

With four philosophers, when one philosopher is eating, it determines that exactly one other philosopher can also eat - this is not true with five philosophers.

With four philosophers, two philosophers can starve another philosopher - this can't happen with five philosophers.