Which of the following is incorrect claim in the context of Vyapti?

Correct option is A

For Cārvākas, it is possible to ascertain that smoke is invariably and universally attended with fire all the time:
Incorrect Claim. Cārvākas reject inference as a valid means of knowledge (Pramāṇa) and deny the possibility of establishing Vyapti.
According to them, universal relations like smoke and fire cannot be ascertained because they rely only on direct perception (Pratyakṣa).
Vyapti (Invariable Concomitance):
It is the universal and invariable relation between two entities, such as smoke and fire, where the presence of one (smoke) necessarily indicates the presence of the other (fire).
It is central to inferential reasoning in Indian philosophy.
Information Booster:
Cārvākas:
Rely on perception (Pratyakṣa) alone and reject inference, thus denying the concept of Vyapti.
Buddhists:
Accept inference and derive Vyapti through observation of specific instances and logical reasoning.
Vedāntins:
Consider Vyapti to be established through consistent experience of co-existence.
Naiyyāyikas:
View Vyapti as the result of repeated observation (Anvaya-Vyatireka) rather than causality or identity.