Datasets:

MorishT

/

FLD_diverse_100k_beta

like 1

0.3

Headshaking does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: If humaneness happens and eventuality happens that headshaking does not happens is right. fact2: Additive happens. fact3: Refining occurs. fact4: If that both additive and eventuality occurs is false then eventuality does not happens. fact5: Supercharging Chlamydera occurs. fact6: That additive and eventuality happens is incorrect if ambassadorship does not occurs. fact7: Recapture does not happens. fact8: Ambassadorship does not occurs if the fact that ambassadorship but notunloosing happens is not right. fact9: If eventuality does not occurs both profiting Linux and humaneness occurs. fact10: Jelly does not happens. fact11: The fact that unfriendliness occurs is right. fact12: Cryptographicalness occurs. fact13: That sinecure occurs hold. fact14: That conducting Cryptocercidae occurs and concerting occurs leads to that yearning pogey does not occurs. fact15: The fact that headshaking and humaneness occurs hold if eventuality does not happens. fact16: If thelarche does not occurs the fact that ambassadorship but notunloosing happens is incorrect. fact17: Both tubalness and alluvion occurs. fact18: Eventuality happens.

fact1: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact2: {E} fact3: {AK} fact4: ¬({E} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact5: {FR} fact6: ¬{D} -> ¬({E} & {B}) fact7: ¬{IE} fact8: ¬({D} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{D} fact9: ¬{B} -> ({CC} & {A}) fact10: ¬{IN} fact11: {HH} fact12: {FL} fact13: {GF} fact14: ({FC} & {DC}) -> ¬{O} fact15: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) fact16: ¬{F} -> ¬({D} & ¬{G}) fact17: ({BC} & {FQ}) fact18: {B}

Headshaking occurs.

{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If humaneness happens and eventuality happens that headshaking does not happens is right. fact2: Additive happens. fact3: Refining occurs. fact4: If that both additive and eventuality occurs is false then eventuality does not happens. fact5: Supercharging Chlamydera occurs. fact6: That additive and eventuality happens is incorrect if ambassadorship does not occurs. fact7: Recapture does not happens. fact8: Ambassadorship does not occurs if the fact that ambassadorship but notunloosing happens is not right. fact9: If eventuality does not occurs both profiting Linux and humaneness occurs. fact10: Jelly does not happens. fact11: The fact that unfriendliness occurs is right. fact12: Cryptographicalness occurs. fact13: That sinecure occurs hold. fact14: That conducting Cryptocercidae occurs and concerting occurs leads to that yearning pogey does not occurs. fact15: The fact that headshaking and humaneness occurs hold if eventuality does not happens. fact16: If thelarche does not occurs the fact that ambassadorship but notunloosing happens is incorrect. fact17: Both tubalness and alluvion occurs. fact18: Eventuality happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Headshaking does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this firebase is not a episcleritis is true.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: If that pseudopod is valvular and/or it is non-chlamydeous this firebase is not a kind of a episcleritis. fact2: The mecopteran is not chlamydeous. fact3: Either everyone is a fitted or the one is not an airspeed or both. fact4: Everything is a Xerobates or does not part parabola or both. fact5: If that pseudopod is valvular this firebase is not a episcleritis. fact6: That pseudopod is not a episcleritis. fact7: Everybody is a episcleritis or is not valvular or both. fact8: If that junction is not a Cynoglossum then this firebase is chlamydeous and the thing is valvular. fact9: Somebody is valvular if the thing is not chlamydeous and it is a Cynoglossum. fact10: Either this firebase is a kind of a episcleritis or the thing is not chlamydeous or both. fact11: A non-chlamydeous thing either is a Hela or is not valvular or both. fact12: If the fact that somebody impinges Tytonidae and is valvular does not hold then the one is not valvular. fact13: That junction is not a Cynoglossum if the fact that that spline is a Cynoglossum and/or does not impinge Tytonidae is incorrect. fact14: This microphone is not chlamydeous if this firebase does not impinge Tytonidae and is chlamydeous. fact15: That pseudopod is not a kind of a episcleritis if that this firebase is not chlamydeous hold. fact16: If someone is valvular the one is a episcleritis. fact17: If that pseudopod is a episcleritis or it is not valvular or both then this firebase is not chlamydeous. fact18: This firebase is non-valvular. fact19: This firebase is non-chlamydeous if either that pseudopod is valvular or it is not a episcleritis or both. fact20: If this firebase is not non-chlamydeous and/or is not a episcleritis that pseudopod is not valvular. fact21: Either everyone is valvular or the person is non-chlamydeous or both. fact22: That mizen is not a episcleritis if this firebase is a kind of non-chlamydeous a episcleritis.

fact1: ({A}{aa} v ¬{B}{aa}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact2: ¬{B}{is} fact3: (x): ({BS}x v ¬{HK}x) fact4: (x): ({DT}x v ¬{BF}x) fact5: {A}{aa} -> ¬{C}{a} fact6: ¬{C}{aa} fact7: (x): ({C}x v ¬{A}x) fact8: ¬{D}{b} -> ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact9: (x): (¬{B}x & {D}x) -> {A}x fact10: ({C}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) fact11: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({HR}x v ¬{A}x) fact12: (x): ¬({E}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x fact13: ¬({D}{c} v ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact14: (¬{E}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{bo} fact15: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{aa} fact16: (x): {A}x -> {C}x fact17: ({C}{aa} v ¬{A}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact18: ¬{A}{a} fact19: ({A}{aa} v ¬{C}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact20: ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} fact21: (x): ({A}x v ¬{B}x) fact22: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{he}

That mizen is not a episcleritis.

¬{C}{he}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that pseudopod is valvular and/or it is non-chlamydeous this firebase is not a kind of a episcleritis. fact2: The mecopteran is not chlamydeous. fact3: Either everyone is a fitted or the one is not an airspeed or both. fact4: Everything is a Xerobates or does not part parabola or both. fact5: If that pseudopod is valvular this firebase is not a episcleritis. fact6: That pseudopod is not a episcleritis. fact7: Everybody is a episcleritis or is not valvular or both. fact8: If that junction is not a Cynoglossum then this firebase is chlamydeous and the thing is valvular. fact9: Somebody is valvular if the thing is not chlamydeous and it is a Cynoglossum. fact10: Either this firebase is a kind of a episcleritis or the thing is not chlamydeous or both. fact11: A non-chlamydeous thing either is a Hela or is not valvular or both. fact12: If the fact that somebody impinges Tytonidae and is valvular does not hold then the one is not valvular. fact13: That junction is not a Cynoglossum if the fact that that spline is a Cynoglossum and/or does not impinge Tytonidae is incorrect. fact14: This microphone is not chlamydeous if this firebase does not impinge Tytonidae and is chlamydeous. fact15: That pseudopod is not a kind of a episcleritis if that this firebase is not chlamydeous hold. fact16: If someone is valvular the one is a episcleritis. fact17: If that pseudopod is a episcleritis or it is not valvular or both then this firebase is not chlamydeous. fact18: This firebase is non-valvular. fact19: This firebase is non-chlamydeous if either that pseudopod is valvular or it is not a episcleritis or both. fact20: If this firebase is not non-chlamydeous and/or is not a episcleritis that pseudopod is not valvular. fact21: Either everyone is valvular or the person is non-chlamydeous or both. fact22: That mizen is not a episcleritis if this firebase is a kind of non-chlamydeous a episcleritis. ; $hypothesis$ = That this firebase is not a episcleritis is true. ; $proof$ =

fact21 -> int1: That pseudopod is valvular and/or is not chlamydeous.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This knight is non-paediatric.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: That this knight is a Sarcoptes is not false. fact2: That a former one is not non-paediatric is correct. fact3: Somebody that thins is former. fact4: This knight is a hypermotility and this is not fledged. fact5: That pant does thin if the thing is a huskiness. fact6: That crampon is former and the thing is concise. fact7: That bottlenose does not jut and prevails Kyd. fact8: The carbonate is former. fact9: This knight dignifies Canterbury. fact10: The threads is paediatric if it is a kind of a Sarcoptes. fact11: If that bottlenose does prevail Kyd then the fact that that bottlenose is not former and thins is wrong. fact12: This knight is a kind of former one that thins. fact13: This knight is interfacial thing that is a Lachnolaimus. fact14: Something that drapes Laconia is a plastered. fact15: Somebody thins if it is former. fact16: If somebody whacks licitness it is a electrosleep. fact17: This knight winds and the one is a kind of a Gresham. fact18: This knight is a watchword.

fact1: {CD}{a} fact2: (x): {A}x -> {C}x fact3: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact4: ({FP}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact5: {JI}{k} -> {B}{k} fact6: ({A}{io} & {DP}{io}) fact7: (¬{E}{b} & {D}{b}) fact8: {A}{ag} fact9: {IM}{a} fact10: {CD}{fe} -> {C}{fe} fact11: {D}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) fact12: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact13: ({CO}{a} & {IT}{a}) fact14: (x): {U}x -> {DD}x fact15: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact16: (x): {CH}x -> {BD}x fact17: ({JE}{a} & {JG}{a}) fact18: {II}{a}

This knight is non-paediatric.

¬{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this knight is a Sarcoptes is not false. fact2: That a former one is not non-paediatric is correct. fact3: Somebody that thins is former. fact4: This knight is a hypermotility and this is not fledged. fact5: That pant does thin if the thing is a huskiness. fact6: That crampon is former and the thing is concise. fact7: That bottlenose does not jut and prevails Kyd. fact8: The carbonate is former. fact9: This knight dignifies Canterbury. fact10: The threads is paediatric if it is a kind of a Sarcoptes. fact11: If that bottlenose does prevail Kyd then the fact that that bottlenose is not former and thins is wrong. fact12: This knight is a kind of former one that thins. fact13: This knight is interfacial thing that is a Lachnolaimus. fact14: Something that drapes Laconia is a plastered. fact15: Somebody thins if it is former. fact16: If somebody whacks licitness it is a electrosleep. fact17: This knight winds and the one is a kind of a Gresham. fact18: This knight is a watchword. ; $hypothesis$ = This knight is non-paediatric. ; $proof$ =

fact12 -> int1: This knight is former.; fact2 -> int2: If this knight is former then this knight is paediatric.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That acylglycerol is a Angraecum.

{C}{a}

fact1: Somebody that is either traumatic or not a tilde or both is not a Angraecum. fact2: If that acylglycerol is not a tilde then the one is not a Angraecum. fact3: That acylglycerol is a kind of a Angraecum if that suspensor is traumatic. fact4: That acylglycerol is traumatic.

fact1: (x): ({A}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} fact3: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact4: {A}{a}

That acylglycerol is a Angraecum.

{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody that is either traumatic or not a tilde or both is not a Angraecum. fact2: If that acylglycerol is not a tilde then the one is not a Angraecum. fact3: That acylglycerol is a kind of a Angraecum if that suspensor is traumatic. fact4: That acylglycerol is traumatic. ; $hypothesis$ = That acylglycerol is a Angraecum. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: That acylglycerol is traumatic and/or it is not a kind of a tilde.; fact1 -> int2: If either that acylglycerol is traumatic or it is not a tilde or both then that acylglycerol is not a Angraecum.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That croup is a naira.

{E}{c}

fact1: Jonathon is a kind of a comradeship if Jonathon is jolty. fact2: That croup is not a naira if that Jonathon is a comradeship that is a naira is wrong. fact3: This architecture is not experiential if that this bobolink is experiential and is a Cnossos hold. fact4: The fact that something is a comradeship and it is a kind of a naira is incorrect if it is not jolty. fact5: Jonathon is jolty. fact6: If the fact that this architecture does swill Armadillidiidae and the thing redes forlornness is false this Psyche does not swill Armadillidiidae. fact7: This bobolink is a kind of a Cnossos if this warp is not baboonish. fact8: A restless person is a kind of a comradeship that is not jolty. fact9: The fact that something is not restless and the thing does not swill Armadillidiidae is wrong if that the one is not a naira is incorrect. fact10: If this Psyche is not restless then that croup is a naira. fact11: If something is not experiential then that the thing does swill Armadillidiidae and the thing redes forlornness does not hold. fact12: This bobolink is both not non-experiential and a biped if the thing does not tog buzzing. fact13: This bobolink does not tog buzzing but the one is a Teach. fact14: That croup is restless if this Psyche is not a naira. fact15: This Psyche is not restless and/or it does not swill Armadillidiidae if Jonathon is a comradeship.

fact1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact2: ¬({B}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{E}{c} fact3: ({G}{e} & {I}{e}) -> ¬{G}{d} fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & {E}x) fact5: {A}{a} fact6: ¬({D}{d} & {F}{d}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact7: ¬{H}{f} -> {I}{e} fact8: (x): {C}x -> ({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact9: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) fact10: ¬{C}{b} -> {E}{c} fact11: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({D}x & {F}x) fact12: ¬{K}{e} -> ({G}{e} & {J}{e}) fact13: (¬{K}{e} & {L}{e}) fact14: ¬{E}{b} -> {C}{c} fact15: {B}{a} -> (¬{C}{b} v ¬{D}{b})

This Psyche is a kind of a comradeship.

{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Jonathon is a kind of a comradeship if Jonathon is jolty. fact2: That croup is not a naira if that Jonathon is a comradeship that is a naira is wrong. fact3: This architecture is not experiential if that this bobolink is experiential and is a Cnossos hold. fact4: The fact that something is a comradeship and it is a kind of a naira is incorrect if it is not jolty. fact5: Jonathon is jolty. fact6: If the fact that this architecture does swill Armadillidiidae and the thing redes forlornness is false this Psyche does not swill Armadillidiidae. fact7: This bobolink is a kind of a Cnossos if this warp is not baboonish. fact8: A restless person is a kind of a comradeship that is not jolty. fact9: The fact that something is not restless and the thing does not swill Armadillidiidae is wrong if that the one is not a naira is incorrect. fact10: If this Psyche is not restless then that croup is a naira. fact11: If something is not experiential then that the thing does swill Armadillidiidae and the thing redes forlornness does not hold. fact12: This bobolink is both not non-experiential and a biped if the thing does not tog buzzing. fact13: This bobolink does not tog buzzing but the one is a Teach. fact14: That croup is restless if this Psyche is not a naira. fact15: This Psyche is not restless and/or it does not swill Armadillidiidae if Jonathon is a comradeship. ; $hypothesis$ = That croup is a naira. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this demerara is not non-subordinative but the thing does not nag animatronics is false.

¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

fact1: This jazzman is not a cantering. fact2: The fact that this jazzman does not shut Cousteau and/or this does not localize mysophobia is wrong. fact3: If this demerara is not a cantering this jazzman is not subordinative. fact4: That someone is subordinative and does not nag animatronics is false if it is not a cantering. fact5: If this jazzman is not subordinative this demerara is not a cantering. fact6: Something is not a kind of a cantering if the fact that it sweats mesothelioma and the thing is not a spotlessness hold. fact7: Someone that either is not a cantering or overwearies Rushdie or both overwearies Rushdie. fact8: That saltshaker is not a cantering and/or does overweary Rushdie if this jazzman does sweat mesothelioma. fact9: This demerara does not nag animatronics. fact10: This demerara does not nag animatronics if this jazzman is not a cantering. fact11: Some man that is not a Moho sweats mesothelioma and is not a spotlessness. fact12: The fact that this demerara is subordinative and does not nag animatronics if this jazzman is not a cantering hold. fact13: If the fact that this jazzman either does not shut Cousteau or does not localize mysophobia or both is incorrect the thing sweats mesothelioma.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} fact2: ¬(¬{F}{a} v ¬{E}{a}) fact3: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬{AA}{a} fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact5: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact6: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact7: (x): (¬{A}x v {IH}x) -> {IH}x fact8: {C}{a} -> (¬{A}{fp} v {IH}{fp}) fact9: ¬{AB}{b} fact10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{b} fact11: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact12: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact13: ¬(¬{F}{a} v ¬{E}{a}) -> {C}{a}

That saltshaker overwearies Rushdie and is not a fear.

({IH}{fp} & ¬{AN}{fp})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This jazzman is not a cantering. fact2: The fact that this jazzman does not shut Cousteau and/or this does not localize mysophobia is wrong. fact3: If this demerara is not a cantering this jazzman is not subordinative. fact4: That someone is subordinative and does not nag animatronics is false if it is not a cantering. fact5: If this jazzman is not subordinative this demerara is not a cantering. fact6: Something is not a kind of a cantering if the fact that it sweats mesothelioma and the thing is not a spotlessness hold. fact7: Someone that either is not a cantering or overwearies Rushdie or both overwearies Rushdie. fact8: That saltshaker is not a cantering and/or does overweary Rushdie if this jazzman does sweat mesothelioma. fact9: This demerara does not nag animatronics. fact10: This demerara does not nag animatronics if this jazzman is not a cantering. fact11: Some man that is not a Moho sweats mesothelioma and is not a spotlessness. fact12: The fact that this demerara is subordinative and does not nag animatronics if this jazzman is not a cantering hold. fact13: If the fact that this jazzman either does not shut Cousteau or does not localize mysophobia or both is incorrect the thing sweats mesothelioma. ; $hypothesis$ = That this demerara is not non-subordinative but the thing does not nag animatronics is false. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This advancer is not unclear.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: Someone that is not a Motown is both not an increasing and not diabetic. fact2: The fact that this advancer is not unclear is true if that intercourse does not abdicate and the one is not plumbaginaceous. fact3: This advancer does not abdicate if that intercourse is plumbaginaceous and is non-unclear. fact4: That intercourse is not plumbaginaceous. fact5: If this advancer does not abdicate and the thing is not plumbaginaceous then the fact that that intercourse is not unclear is right. fact6: Kate is not a Kyyiv if it is non-metastable one that subjugates halogen. fact7: That intercourse is not unclear and the man is not plumbaginaceous. fact8: That intercourse is not a Tinamiformes. fact9: If the fact that someone is diabetic is true that the thing is non-unclear thing that is a sclerosis is not correct. fact10: This advancer is not unclear if that intercourse does not abdicate but the one is plumbaginaceous. fact11: Kate is not metastable but this does subjugate halogen if the NOC is not an animist. fact12: A diabetic man is both a sclerosis and not unclear. fact13: Someone that is not a Motown is both diabetic and an increasing. fact14: If the fact that Kate raffles centimeter and the one pilots tantra is false that intercourse is not a rupee. fact15: Something is unclear if that it is not unclear but a sclerosis does not hold. fact16: This advancer is not a Motown if that intercourse is not non-leprous but the man is not a Motown. fact17: If Kate is not a Kyyiv then that the thing raffles centimeter and pilots tantra does not hold. fact18: Somebody that is not a rupee is a kind of leprous thing that is not a Motown. fact19: That intercourse does not abdicate and is not plumbaginaceous. fact20: If that that intercourse is not unclear and/or the one is diabetic is wrong then this advancer is unclear. fact21: The page is not unclear.

fact1: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) fact2: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact3: ({AB}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact4: ¬{AB}{a} fact5: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact6: (¬{L}{c} & {K}{c}) -> ¬{J}{c} fact7: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact8: ¬{HK}{a} fact9: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) fact10: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact11: ¬{M}{d} -> (¬{L}{c} & {K}{c}) fact12: (x): {C}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact13: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) fact14: ¬({I}{c} & {H}{c}) -> ¬{F}{a} fact15: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) -> {B}x fact16: ({G}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact17: ¬{J}{c} -> ¬({I}{c} & {H}{c}) fact18: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({G}x & ¬{E}x) fact19: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact20: ¬(¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact21: ¬{B}{eh}

This advancer is unclear.

{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone that is not a Motown is both not an increasing and not diabetic. fact2: The fact that this advancer is not unclear is true if that intercourse does not abdicate and the one is not plumbaginaceous. fact3: This advancer does not abdicate if that intercourse is plumbaginaceous and is non-unclear. fact4: That intercourse is not plumbaginaceous. fact5: If this advancer does not abdicate and the thing is not plumbaginaceous then the fact that that intercourse is not unclear is right. fact6: Kate is not a Kyyiv if it is non-metastable one that subjugates halogen. fact7: That intercourse is not unclear and the man is not plumbaginaceous. fact8: That intercourse is not a Tinamiformes. fact9: If the fact that someone is diabetic is true that the thing is non-unclear thing that is a sclerosis is not correct. fact10: This advancer is not unclear if that intercourse does not abdicate but the one is plumbaginaceous. fact11: Kate is not metastable but this does subjugate halogen if the NOC is not an animist. fact12: A diabetic man is both a sclerosis and not unclear. fact13: Someone that is not a Motown is both diabetic and an increasing. fact14: If the fact that Kate raffles centimeter and the one pilots tantra is false that intercourse is not a rupee. fact15: Something is unclear if that it is not unclear but a sclerosis does not hold. fact16: This advancer is not a Motown if that intercourse is not non-leprous but the man is not a Motown. fact17: If Kate is not a Kyyiv then that the thing raffles centimeter and pilots tantra does not hold. fact18: Somebody that is not a rupee is a kind of leprous thing that is not a Motown. fact19: That intercourse does not abdicate and is not plumbaginaceous. fact20: If that that intercourse is not unclear and/or the one is diabetic is wrong then this advancer is unclear. fact21: The page is not unclear. ; $hypothesis$ = This advancer is not unclear. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact19 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This acid is metamorphous.

{E}{c}

fact1: That something is unsigned and the thing lives Ionesco is false if this thing is non-metamorphous. fact2: Monique is not metamorphous if this acid Prices okay and is not a Canada. fact3: That warranter is not a Dneprodzerzhinsk. fact4: The fact that Monique is a kind of non-postulational one that does not live Ionesco does not hold if that dulse is unsigned. fact5: That dulse is not a myology but the one is unsigned. fact6: If this acid is unsigned that that dulse is metamorphous but the one is not a myology is incorrect. fact7: If Monique is not a myology the fact that that dulse is not ventral and is not postulational is false. fact8: If that dulse is unsigned then the fact that Monique is postulational but it does not live Ionesco is false. fact9: That dulse is a kind of a Ephesian and the one is a kind of a Asanga if that warranter is not a Dneprodzerzhinsk. fact10: The fact that either that dulse is not a SSW or the one is choreographic or both is wrong if the one is a Asanga. fact11: If someone that is not a kind of a Canada does not Price okay then the thing does not live Ionesco. fact12: This acid is not a Canada if that that dulse is not a SSW and/or the man is choreographic is incorrect. fact13: The fact that that dulse lives Ionesco but the thing is not a myology is incorrect if Monique is postulational. fact14: This acid is not unsigned. fact15: If someone does not live Ionesco then the fact that the one is not postulational and the one is unsigned does not hold. fact16: If the fact that Monique is a kind of a Mantell and the one does Price okay is incorrect then this acid does not Price okay. fact17: Something is not a myology if that the thing is a kind of unsigned thing that lives Ionesco is false. fact18: Something is signed if the fact that the thing is both not postulational and signed is false.

fact1: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({B}x & {C}x) fact2: ({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact3: ¬{M}{d} fact4: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact5: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact6: {B}{c} -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact7: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{GI}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact8: {B}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact9: ¬{M}{d} -> ({K}{a} & {J}{a}) fact10: {J}{a} -> ¬(¬{H}{a} v {I}{a}) fact11: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{C}x fact12: ¬(¬{H}{a} v {I}{a}) -> ¬{G}{c} fact13: {D}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact14: ¬{B}{c} fact15: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {B}x) fact16: ¬({L}{b} & {F}{b}) -> ¬{F}{c} fact17: (x): ¬({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact18: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x

The fact that that dulse is not ventral and the one is not postulational is wrong.

¬(¬{GI}{a} & ¬{D}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That something is unsigned and the thing lives Ionesco is false if this thing is non-metamorphous. fact2: Monique is not metamorphous if this acid Prices okay and is not a Canada. fact3: That warranter is not a Dneprodzerzhinsk. fact4: The fact that Monique is a kind of non-postulational one that does not live Ionesco does not hold if that dulse is unsigned. fact5: That dulse is not a myology but the one is unsigned. fact6: If this acid is unsigned that that dulse is metamorphous but the one is not a myology is incorrect. fact7: If Monique is not a myology the fact that that dulse is not ventral and is not postulational is false. fact8: If that dulse is unsigned then the fact that Monique is postulational but it does not live Ionesco is false. fact9: That dulse is a kind of a Ephesian and the one is a kind of a Asanga if that warranter is not a Dneprodzerzhinsk. fact10: The fact that either that dulse is not a SSW or the one is choreographic or both is wrong if the one is a Asanga. fact11: If someone that is not a kind of a Canada does not Price okay then the thing does not live Ionesco. fact12: This acid is not a Canada if that that dulse is not a SSW and/or the man is choreographic is incorrect. fact13: The fact that that dulse lives Ionesco but the thing is not a myology is incorrect if Monique is postulational. fact14: This acid is not unsigned. fact15: If someone does not live Ionesco then the fact that the one is not postulational and the one is unsigned does not hold. fact16: If the fact that Monique is a kind of a Mantell and the one does Price okay is incorrect then this acid does not Price okay. fact17: Something is not a myology if that the thing is a kind of unsigned thing that lives Ionesco is false. fact18: Something is signed if the fact that the thing is both not postulational and signed is false. ; $hypothesis$ = This acid is metamorphous. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That exploited does not occurs and camouflaging occurs is false.

¬(¬{C} & {D})

fact1: Externalisation and unabusedness happens. fact2: Flare does not happens. fact3: Sympathising and Alpineness occurs. fact4: Non-emptyingness brings about that conversion and Alpineness happens. fact5: Non-modellingness is caused by arguing cacodemon. fact6: That flare does not happens leads to that both camouflaging and salientness happens. fact7: Arguing cacodemon happens. fact8: Pace occurs and categoricalness occurs. fact9: Constricting deathrate occurs. fact10: That flare does not happens prevents non-salientness. fact11: Adoxography does not happens. fact12: Exploited does not occurs if describing Sulidae occurs. fact13: Menacing ballistocardiogram does not occurs. fact14: That grappling occurs and thinking gloom occurs is triggered by non-sensorialness. fact15: Arguing cacodemon occurs and describing Sulidae happens.

fact1: ({AT} & {GK}) fact2: ¬{F} fact3: ({CO} & {AB}) fact4: ¬{HD} -> ({DJ} & {AB}) fact5: {A} -> ¬{EA} fact6: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact7: {A} fact8: ({CC} & {DB}) fact9: {HM} fact10: ¬{F} -> {E} fact11: ¬{IF} fact12: {B} -> ¬{C} fact13: ¬{CE} fact14: ¬{ID} -> ({CG} & {HJ}) fact15: ({A} & {B})

Modellingness does not happens.

¬{EA}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Externalisation and unabusedness happens. fact2: Flare does not happens. fact3: Sympathising and Alpineness occurs. fact4: Non-emptyingness brings about that conversion and Alpineness happens. fact5: Non-modellingness is caused by arguing cacodemon. fact6: That flare does not happens leads to that both camouflaging and salientness happens. fact7: Arguing cacodemon happens. fact8: Pace occurs and categoricalness occurs. fact9: Constricting deathrate occurs. fact10: That flare does not happens prevents non-salientness. fact11: Adoxography does not happens. fact12: Exploited does not occurs if describing Sulidae occurs. fact13: Menacing ballistocardiogram does not occurs. fact14: That grappling occurs and thinking gloom occurs is triggered by non-sensorialness. fact15: Arguing cacodemon occurs and describing Sulidae happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That exploited does not occurs and camouflaging occurs is false. ; $proof$ =

fact15 -> int1: Describing Sulidae happens.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: Exploited does not occurs.; fact6 & fact2 -> int3: Both camouflaging and salientness happens.; int3 -> int4: Camouflaging occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Quartan does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: That impressing sneakiness does not happens causes that both colourfulness and diffuseness occurs. fact2: That secularizing grief does not happens is correct if the fact that servicing studied but notdowsing Clytemnestra occurs does not hold. fact3: Diffuseness does not happens. fact4: That that both dowsing Clytemnestra and non-cognoscibleness happens is wrong if palatalizing Arcadic does not occurs is right. fact5: Ophthalmoscopy prevents impressing sneakiness. fact6: That servicing studied happens but dowsing Clytemnestra does not happens does not hold if palatalizing Arcadic does not occurs. fact7: If that ophthalmoscopy does not occurs or boreas occurs or both does not hold then impressing sneakiness does not happens. fact8: Ophthalmoscopy occurs and boreas happens if constructiveness does not happens. fact9: That cognoscibleness but notpalatalizing Arcadic occurs is caused by that colourfulness occurs. fact10: Quartan occurs but payback does not occurs if secularizing grief does not happens. fact11: If impressing sneakiness does not happens that both diffuseness and colourfulness occurs is not true. fact12: Dowsing Clytemnestra does not occurs if that dowsing Clytemnestra and non-cognoscibleness happens does not hold. fact13: That secularizing grief and servicing studied happens is caused by that dowsing Clytemnestra does not occurs.

fact1: ¬{I} -> ({G} & {H}) fact2: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact3: ¬{H} fact4: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & ¬{F}) fact5: {J} -> ¬{I} fact6: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact7: ¬(¬{J} v {K}) -> ¬{I} fact8: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) fact9: {G} -> ({F} & ¬{E}) fact10: ¬{B} -> ({A} & ¬{GG}) fact11: ¬{I} -> ¬({H} & {G}) fact12: ¬({D} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact13: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C})

Quartan occurs.

{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That impressing sneakiness does not happens causes that both colourfulness and diffuseness occurs. fact2: That secularizing grief does not happens is correct if the fact that servicing studied but notdowsing Clytemnestra occurs does not hold. fact3: Diffuseness does not happens. fact4: That that both dowsing Clytemnestra and non-cognoscibleness happens is wrong if palatalizing Arcadic does not occurs is right. fact5: Ophthalmoscopy prevents impressing sneakiness. fact6: That servicing studied happens but dowsing Clytemnestra does not happens does not hold if palatalizing Arcadic does not occurs. fact7: If that ophthalmoscopy does not occurs or boreas occurs or both does not hold then impressing sneakiness does not happens. fact8: Ophthalmoscopy occurs and boreas happens if constructiveness does not happens. fact9: That cognoscibleness but notpalatalizing Arcadic occurs is caused by that colourfulness occurs. fact10: Quartan occurs but payback does not occurs if secularizing grief does not happens. fact11: If impressing sneakiness does not happens that both diffuseness and colourfulness occurs is not true. fact12: Dowsing Clytemnestra does not occurs if that dowsing Clytemnestra and non-cognoscibleness happens does not hold. fact13: That secularizing grief and servicing studied happens is caused by that dowsing Clytemnestra does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Quartan does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Disheartening Loganiaceae happens.

{C}

fact1: Unventilatedness does not occurs if that unventilatedness occurs and prewarness does not happens does not hold. fact2: Irradiating wisecrack occurs. fact3: The fact that if layering Sertularia does not occurs that unventilatedness but notprewarness happens does not hold is not false. fact4: Non-anagrammaticness and inconspicuousness happens if habituation does not occurs. fact5: Disheartening Loganiaceae does not happens if inconspicuousness occurs and habituation occurs. fact6: Both unforcefulness and safari occurs if clowning Seaborg does not occurs. fact7: Safari prevents teeming. fact8: That lusting Acheson occurs and disheartening Loganiaceae happens is not true if unventilatedness does not occurs. fact9: That habituation happens is right. fact10: Inconspicuousness occurs. fact11: That teeming does not occurs leads to that layering Sertularia does not happens.

fact1: ¬({E} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} fact2: {DG} fact3: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & ¬{G}) fact4: ¬{B} -> (¬{DC} & {A}) fact5: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact6: ¬{K} -> ({J} & {I}) fact7: {I} -> ¬{H} fact8: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {C}) fact9: {B} fact10: {A} fact11: ¬{H} -> ¬{F}

Anagrammaticness does not occurs.

¬{DC}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Unventilatedness does not occurs if that unventilatedness occurs and prewarness does not happens does not hold. fact2: Irradiating wisecrack occurs. fact3: The fact that if layering Sertularia does not occurs that unventilatedness but notprewarness happens does not hold is not false. fact4: Non-anagrammaticness and inconspicuousness happens if habituation does not occurs. fact5: Disheartening Loganiaceae does not happens if inconspicuousness occurs and habituation occurs. fact6: Both unforcefulness and safari occurs if clowning Seaborg does not occurs. fact7: Safari prevents teeming. fact8: That lusting Acheson occurs and disheartening Loganiaceae happens is not true if unventilatedness does not occurs. fact9: That habituation happens is right. fact10: Inconspicuousness occurs. fact11: That teeming does not occurs leads to that layering Sertularia does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Disheartening Loganiaceae happens. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact9 -> int1: Both inconspicuousness and habituation occurs.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That rotary does not disoblige.

¬{D}{b}

fact1: This windowsill is procaryotic and the one is not non-effervescent. fact2: Someone is non-intimate if the fact that it is not a aneuploidy and the one is non-intimate is false. fact3: If this hair is intimate that rotary is not a aneuploidy. fact4: If that rotary is not a aneuploidy then it is procaryotic. fact5: Somebody is procaryotic if the thing is not a aneuploidy. fact6: If someone is not intimate the one does not disoblige and is a aneuploidy. fact7: If the fact that this dasheen is effervescent and procaryotic is false then this hair is not intimate. fact8: Somebody that is not a kind of a aneuploidy is procaryotic and disobliges. fact9: This hair is intimate. fact10: That rotary is procaryotic.

fact1: ({C}{ij} & {E}{ij}) fact2: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x fact3: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact4: ¬{B}{b} -> {C}{b} fact5: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x fact6: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{D}x & {B}x) fact7: ¬({E}{c} & {C}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) fact9: {A}{a} fact10: {C}{b}

This windowsill disobliges and is ambitious.

({D}{ij} & {EC}{ij})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This windowsill is procaryotic and the one is not non-effervescent. fact2: Someone is non-intimate if the fact that it is not a aneuploidy and the one is non-intimate is false. fact3: If this hair is intimate that rotary is not a aneuploidy. fact4: If that rotary is not a aneuploidy then it is procaryotic. fact5: Somebody is procaryotic if the thing is not a aneuploidy. fact6: If someone is not intimate the one does not disoblige and is a aneuploidy. fact7: If the fact that this dasheen is effervescent and procaryotic is false then this hair is not intimate. fact8: Somebody that is not a kind of a aneuploidy is procaryotic and disobliges. fact9: This hair is intimate. fact10: That rotary is procaryotic. ; $hypothesis$ = That rotary does not disoblige. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact9 -> int1: That that rotary is not a aneuploidy hold.; fact8 -> int2: If that rotary is not a aneuploidy that rotary is procaryotic one that disobliges.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That rotary is not non-procaryotic and the thing does disoblige.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that linemen does not occurs and bimetallisticness does not occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{B} & ¬{C})

fact1: That both chirping Lusatian and salvo happens does not hold if jamboree occurs. fact2: Linemen does not occurs if that the fact that chirping Lusatian but notsalvo occurs is wrong is right. fact3: Bimetallisticness does not happens. fact4: Jamboree happens. fact5: Reversionariness triggers that jamboree does not occurs and chevying Hokusai does not occurs. fact6: Closedown does not occurs. fact7: Linemen is prevented by that salvo happens. fact8: If jamboree happens then that chirping Lusatian occurs and salvo does not occurs is false.

fact1: {A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact2: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact3: ¬{C} fact4: {A} fact5: {D} -> (¬{A} & ¬{ES}) fact6: ¬{CG} fact7: {AB} -> ¬{B} fact8: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

Chevying Hokusai does not happens and Abkhazian does not happens.

(¬{ES} & ¬{DR})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That both chirping Lusatian and salvo happens does not hold if jamboree occurs. fact2: Linemen does not occurs if that the fact that chirping Lusatian but notsalvo occurs is wrong is right. fact3: Bimetallisticness does not happens. fact4: Jamboree happens. fact5: Reversionariness triggers that jamboree does not occurs and chevying Hokusai does not occurs. fact6: Closedown does not occurs. fact7: Linemen is prevented by that salvo happens. fact8: If jamboree happens then that chirping Lusatian occurs and salvo does not occurs is false. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that linemen does not occurs and bimetallisticness does not occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact4 -> int1: That chirping Lusatian happens but salvo does not occurs does not hold.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: Linemen does not occurs.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists some person such that if that the person is not a kind of a Midgard and the one is not a dessertspoonful does not hold the person is not a kind of a filiation.

(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

fact1: This cobia is not a filiation if that the thing is not a Midgard and the thing is not a dessertspoonful does not hold.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This cobia is not a filiation if that the thing is not a Midgard and the thing is not a dessertspoonful does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists some person such that if that the person is not a kind of a Midgard and the one is not a dessertspoonful does not hold the person is not a kind of a filiation. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that diatomicness occurs hold.

{C}

fact1: If cartographicalness happens that notdriving but badminton occurs is incorrect. fact2: Both rising and vaginismus happens if badminton does not occurs. fact3: Postmodernness happens. fact4: That both saxicolousness and postmodernness happens prevents diatomicness. fact5: That herbalness happens and saxicolousness happens is brought about by non-postmodernness. fact6: Saxicolousness occurs. fact7: Both non-postmodernness and diatomicness happens if rising happens. fact8: Worldliness prevents non-cartographicalness. fact9: Badminton does not happens if that notdriving but badminton happens is false.

fact1: {H} -> ¬(¬{G} & {F}) fact2: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact3: {B} fact4: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact5: ¬{B} -> ({FT} & {A}) fact6: {A} fact7: {D} -> (¬{B} & {C}) fact8: {I} -> {H} fact9: ¬(¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{F}

Herbalness happens.

{FT}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If cartographicalness happens that notdriving but badminton occurs is incorrect. fact2: Both rising and vaginismus happens if badminton does not occurs. fact3: Postmodernness happens. fact4: That both saxicolousness and postmodernness happens prevents diatomicness. fact5: That herbalness happens and saxicolousness happens is brought about by non-postmodernness. fact6: Saxicolousness occurs. fact7: Both non-postmodernness and diatomicness happens if rising happens. fact8: Worldliness prevents non-cartographicalness. fact9: Badminton does not happens if that notdriving but badminton happens is false. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that diatomicness occurs hold. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact3 -> int1: Saxicolousness occurs and postmodernness occurs.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That predestinationist is not a Lutra.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: That predestinationist revises Taraktagenos if this pushover is not a Lutra. fact2: The fact that that predestinationist is a Lutra that does not revise Taraktagenos does not hold. fact3: Someone that is not a Madreporaria is not a Lutra. fact4: If the fact that this pushover is a Lutra but it is not optimistic is not correct that predestinationist revises Taraktagenos. fact5: That this pushover does revise Taraktagenos and does not descend callosity does not hold. fact6: That predestinationist revises Taraktagenos. fact7: That the mike is a Lutra but that thing is not uncarpeted is wrong. fact8: If that this pushover revises Taraktagenos but the one is not optimistic is wrong that predestinationist is a Lutra. fact9: That predestinationist is a Lutra if this pushover does not revise Taraktagenos. fact10: If that that predestinationist does not revise Taraktagenos hold then this pushover is a Lutra. fact11: If this pushover is not a Lutra then that predestinationist is optimistic. fact12: If this pushover is a Madreporaria and is not a Bhutanese then that predestinationist is not a Madreporaria. fact13: The fact that this pushover revises Taraktagenos but the person is non-optimistic is false. fact14: That predestinationist is not a Lutra if this pushover is not a Bhutanese and the thing is not a Lutra. fact15: If the fact that that predestinationist does revise Taraktagenos but the thing is not a kind of a Lutra is not right this pushover is optimistic. fact16: This pushover is a Lutra. fact17: That predestinationist is biovular. fact18: This pushover does revise Taraktagenos if that that predestinationist is a Lutra but not optimistic does not hold. fact19: The fact that this pushover revises Taraktagenos but that one is not a Lutra is false.

fact1: ¬{B}{a} -> {AA}{b} fact2: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x fact4: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {AA}{b} fact5: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{FL}{a}) fact6: {AA}{b} fact7: ¬({B}{ba} & ¬{AK}{ba}) fact8: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact9: ¬{AA}{a} -> {B}{b} fact10: ¬{AA}{b} -> {B}{a} fact11: ¬{B}{a} -> {AB}{b} fact12: ({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact13: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact14: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact15: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {AB}{a} fact16: {B}{a} fact17: {P}{b} fact18: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {AA}{a} fact19: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

That predestinationist is not a Lutra.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That predestinationist revises Taraktagenos if this pushover is not a Lutra. fact2: The fact that that predestinationist is a Lutra that does not revise Taraktagenos does not hold. fact3: Someone that is not a Madreporaria is not a Lutra. fact4: If the fact that this pushover is a Lutra but it is not optimistic is not correct that predestinationist revises Taraktagenos. fact5: That this pushover does revise Taraktagenos and does not descend callosity does not hold. fact6: That predestinationist revises Taraktagenos. fact7: That the mike is a Lutra but that thing is not uncarpeted is wrong. fact8: If that this pushover revises Taraktagenos but the one is not optimistic is wrong that predestinationist is a Lutra. fact9: That predestinationist is a Lutra if this pushover does not revise Taraktagenos. fact10: If that that predestinationist does not revise Taraktagenos hold then this pushover is a Lutra. fact11: If this pushover is not a Lutra then that predestinationist is optimistic. fact12: If this pushover is a Madreporaria and is not a Bhutanese then that predestinationist is not a Madreporaria. fact13: The fact that this pushover revises Taraktagenos but the person is non-optimistic is false. fact14: That predestinationist is not a Lutra if this pushover is not a Bhutanese and the thing is not a Lutra. fact15: If the fact that that predestinationist does revise Taraktagenos but the thing is not a kind of a Lutra is not right this pushover is optimistic. fact16: This pushover is a Lutra. fact17: That predestinationist is biovular. fact18: This pushover does revise Taraktagenos if that that predestinationist is a Lutra but not optimistic does not hold. fact19: The fact that this pushover revises Taraktagenos but that one is not a Lutra is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That predestinationist is not a Lutra. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Maribel cloisters M3 hold.

{A}{a}

fact1: If this lovely is not a kind of a poltroonery and attains Fouquieria this pyrophyllite is not a poltroonery. fact2: Somebody does not vanish Chlorophyceae if the fact that the one vanish Chlorophyceae and the person is a Cistothorus does not hold. fact3: That this pyrophyllite do notmineer Broussonetia or is heterologous or both does not hold if the fact that this pyrophyllite Browns Zb hold. fact4: The fact that this lovely is not non-artefactual but the thing does not attain Fouquieria does not hold. fact5: The fact that if that this lovely is artefactual one that does not attain Fouquieria is incorrect that this lovely attain Fouquieria is true hold. fact6: If there is something such that it is a kind of a Abutilon then that this beading does vanish Chlorophyceae and the thing is a kind of a Cistothorus is false. fact7: Either this pyrophyllite domineer Broussonetia or the one is not non-heterologous or both. fact8: If Maribel does not cloister M3 this pyrophyllite do notmineer Broussonetia and/or is heterologous. fact9: Someone does not Brown Zb and the one is not exogenous if it does not vanish Chlorophyceae. fact10: that this Zb does Brown pyrophyllite is true. fact11: The fact that somebody do notmineer Broussonetia and/or it is mousy does not hold if it does not cloister M3. fact12: That this pyrophyllite does Brown Zb is true. fact13: If someone that does not Brown Zb is not exogenous it does not cloister M3. fact14: The fact that this lovely is not a poltroonery is correct. fact15: Somebody is a Abutilon if the fact that the thing is a kind of an exercise and this does not campaign freeware is false. fact16: This pyrophyllite domineers Broussonetia or is heterologous or both if Maribel does not cloister M3. fact17: This pyrophyllite domineer Broussonetia. fact18: The fact that Maribel is an exercise but the one does not campaign freeware is incorrect if that this pyrophyllite is not a kind of a poltroonery is true.

fact1: (¬{I}{c} & {K}{c}) -> ¬{I}{b} fact2: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact3: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) fact4: ¬({J}{c} & ¬{K}{c}) fact5: ¬({J}{c} & ¬{K}{c}) -> {K}{c} fact6: (x): {F}x -> ¬({D}{gp} & {E}{gp}) fact7: ({AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) fact8: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) fact9: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) fact10: {AF}{ac} fact11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v {AC}x) fact12: {B}{b} fact13: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact14: ¬{I}{c} fact15: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> {F}x fact16: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) fact17: {AA}{b} fact18: ¬{I}{b} -> ¬({G}{a} & ¬{H}{a})

That this beading do notmineer Broussonetia and/or the one is mousy does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{gp} v {AC}{gp})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this lovely is not a kind of a poltroonery and attains Fouquieria this pyrophyllite is not a poltroonery. fact2: Somebody does not vanish Chlorophyceae if the fact that the one vanish Chlorophyceae and the person is a Cistothorus does not hold. fact3: That this pyrophyllite do notmineer Broussonetia or is heterologous or both does not hold if the fact that this pyrophyllite Browns Zb hold. fact4: The fact that this lovely is not non-artefactual but the thing does not attain Fouquieria does not hold. fact5: The fact that if that this lovely is artefactual one that does not attain Fouquieria is incorrect that this lovely attain Fouquieria is true hold. fact6: If there is something such that it is a kind of a Abutilon then that this beading does vanish Chlorophyceae and the thing is a kind of a Cistothorus is false. fact7: Either this pyrophyllite domineer Broussonetia or the one is not non-heterologous or both. fact8: If Maribel does not cloister M3 this pyrophyllite do notmineer Broussonetia and/or is heterologous. fact9: Someone does not Brown Zb and the one is not exogenous if it does not vanish Chlorophyceae. fact10: that this Zb does Brown pyrophyllite is true. fact11: The fact that somebody do notmineer Broussonetia and/or it is mousy does not hold if it does not cloister M3. fact12: That this pyrophyllite does Brown Zb is true. fact13: If someone that does not Brown Zb is not exogenous it does not cloister M3. fact14: The fact that this lovely is not a poltroonery is correct. fact15: Somebody is a Abutilon if the fact that the thing is a kind of an exercise and this does not campaign freeware is false. fact16: This pyrophyllite domineers Broussonetia or is heterologous or both if Maribel does not cloister M3. fact17: This pyrophyllite domineer Broussonetia. fact18: The fact that Maribel is an exercise but the one does not campaign freeware is incorrect if that this pyrophyllite is not a kind of a poltroonery is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That Maribel cloisters M3 hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that Maribel does not cloister M3 hold.; fact8 & assump1 -> int1: This pyrophyllite do notmineer Broussonetia and/or is heterologous.; fact3 & fact12 -> int2: That this pyrophyllite do notmineer Broussonetia or this is heterologous or both does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That there is someone such that if the fact that the one is non-undesigned one that is not a Volgograd is wrong then that thing does not err substantiality does not hold.

¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)

fact1: There exists someone such that if the fact that the one is a kind of a Northumbria and the one does not basify neurosyphilis is incorrect then the thing does not dither. fact2: The lutetium is not undesigned if the fact that the one does menace France and the thing is not a Prolog does not hold. fact3: Someone is a kind of a HTTP if that the thing does not snowball Saphar and the one does not couple symptom is wrong. fact4: There exists someone such that if the person is a studbook the one is not isotopic. fact5: If the fact that somebody is not a Ulmaceae and does not chase shrewishness is incorrect the one is not a womanlike. fact6: Some person is not a Saururaceae if that he does not prick Ectopistes and the one is not a Eacles is not right. fact7: If the fact that something is not undesigned and the one is not a Volgograd is wrong the one does not err substantiality. fact8: If that the attrition is not undesigned and is not a quintuple does not hold the attrition is not a Eacles.

fact1: (Ex): ¬({BQ}x & ¬{AU}x) -> ¬{GU}x fact2: ¬({DL}{fr} & ¬{IA}{fr}) -> ¬{AA}{fr} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{CF}x & ¬{HI}x) -> {GE}x fact4: (Ex): {CE}x -> ¬{GG}x fact5: (x): ¬(¬{FF}x & ¬{HO}x) -> ¬{U}x fact6: (x): ¬(¬{DQ}x & ¬{EK}x) -> ¬{DH}x fact7: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact8: ¬(¬{AA}{hq} & ¬{AJ}{hq}) -> ¬{EK}{hq}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There exists someone such that if the fact that the one is a kind of a Northumbria and the one does not basify neurosyphilis is incorrect then the thing does not dither. fact2: The lutetium is not undesigned if the fact that the one does menace France and the thing is not a Prolog does not hold. fact3: Someone is a kind of a HTTP if that the thing does not snowball Saphar and the one does not couple symptom is wrong. fact4: There exists someone such that if the person is a studbook the one is not isotopic. fact5: If the fact that somebody is not a Ulmaceae and does not chase shrewishness is incorrect the one is not a womanlike. fact6: Some person is not a Saururaceae if that he does not prick Ectopistes and the one is not a Eacles is not right. fact7: If the fact that something is not undesigned and the one is not a Volgograd is wrong the one does not err substantiality. fact8: If that the attrition is not undesigned and is not a quintuple does not hold the attrition is not a Eacles. ; $hypothesis$ = That there is someone such that if the fact that the one is non-undesigned one that is not a Volgograd is wrong then that thing does not err substantiality does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: The mesh does not err substantiality if the fact that this thing is a kind of non-undesigned one that is not a kind of a Volgograd is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This NMR is both not a cuss and not an evidenced.

(¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

fact1: Somebody that is both not an idle and not dysgenic is not a cuss. fact2: This NMR is not a cuss and the one is not an idle if the one is not ineradicable. fact3: If this redcap is a kind of a cuss then the fact that this NMR is not a cuss and is not a kind of an evidenced does not hold. fact4: This redcap is not an idle and the one is not dysgenic if this redcap is not ineradicable. fact5: That this NMR is not a cuss but the one is an evidenced is incorrect. fact6: This redcap is not dysgenic. fact7: This redcap is not ineradicable.

fact1: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact2: ¬{A}{b} -> (¬{B}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) fact3: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact5: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {D}{b}) fact6: ¬{AB}{a} fact7: ¬{A}{a}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody that is both not an idle and not dysgenic is not a cuss. fact2: This NMR is not a cuss and the one is not an idle if the one is not ineradicable. fact3: If this redcap is a kind of a cuss then the fact that this NMR is not a cuss and is not a kind of an evidenced does not hold. fact4: This redcap is not an idle and the one is not dysgenic if this redcap is not ineradicable. fact5: That this NMR is not a cuss but the one is an evidenced is incorrect. fact6: This redcap is not dysgenic. fact7: This redcap is not ineradicable. ; $hypothesis$ = This NMR is both not a cuss and not an evidenced. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact7 -> int1: This redcap is not an idle and not dysgenic.; fact1 -> int2: This redcap is a cuss if this redcap is not a kind of an idle and is not dysgenic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This redcap is a kind of a cuss.; int3 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This nauseant is not a Pleurobrachiidae.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: This nauseant is a sheen. fact2: This nauseant is not a Pleurobrachiidae if this verdure is non-osteal and she is not a Pleurobrachiidae. fact3: The fact that this nauseant is not a Galeorhinus and the thing is not a Hemachatus does not hold. fact4: If that some man is not a seat and/or it is meaningful is incorrect then that it is not a Pleurobrachiidae is true. fact5: Antony does formulate pebibyte. fact6: If that this nauseant does not formulate pebibyte and does not divorce limbed is incorrect this nauseant is osteal. fact7: This nauseant is not non-osteal if that thing divorces limbed. fact8: This nauseant is astigmatic. fact9: That electroplate is a kind of a Pleurobrachiidae. fact10: That someone does divorce limbed is not incorrect if the one is meaningful. fact11: That this nauseant does not formulate pebibyte and does not divorce limbed does not hold. fact12: Someone is a Pleurobrachiidae if the one is meaningful.

fact1: {AO}{a} fact2: (¬{B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact3: ¬(¬{DR}{a} & ¬{HR}{a}) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{D}x v {A}x) -> ¬{C}x fact5: {AA}{hi} fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact7: {AB}{a} -> {B}{a} fact8: {HH}{a} fact9: {C}{n} fact10: (x): {A}x -> {AB}x fact11: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact12: (x): {A}x -> {C}x

This nauseant is not a Pleurobrachiidae.

¬{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This nauseant is a sheen. fact2: This nauseant is not a Pleurobrachiidae if this verdure is non-osteal and she is not a Pleurobrachiidae. fact3: The fact that this nauseant is not a Galeorhinus and the thing is not a Hemachatus does not hold. fact4: If that some man is not a seat and/or it is meaningful is incorrect then that it is not a Pleurobrachiidae is true. fact5: Antony does formulate pebibyte. fact6: If that this nauseant does not formulate pebibyte and does not divorce limbed is incorrect this nauseant is osteal. fact7: This nauseant is not non-osteal if that thing divorces limbed. fact8: This nauseant is astigmatic. fact9: That electroplate is a kind of a Pleurobrachiidae. fact10: That someone does divorce limbed is not incorrect if the one is meaningful. fact11: That this nauseant does not formulate pebibyte and does not divorce limbed does not hold. fact12: Someone is a Pleurobrachiidae if the one is meaningful. ; $hypothesis$ = This nauseant is not a Pleurobrachiidae. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That both equalizing Dodoma and revolutionariness occurs is wrong.

¬({B} & {C})

fact1: That artiodactyl does not occurs hold. fact2: Batting occurs if the fact that Mauritanian occurs and Filipino does not occurs is correct. fact3: Baccateness happens. fact4: That audiometricness does not happens is correct. fact5: Deglazing Xanthium does not occurs. fact6: Both raping afterpains and curing Apsu occurs if sintereding does not happens. fact7: Both proctoscopy and carousing happens. fact8: Clotting Muncie occurs. fact9: Cajoling MIPS does not occurs. fact10: Companying Phoenix occurs. fact11: Non-allness is prevented by that raping afterpains does not happens. fact12: Both refreshing and counterpunch happens. fact13: If artiodactyl does not happens both revolutionariness and companying Phoenix occurs. fact14: If staining occurs both otherness and non-unmutilatedness happens. fact15: Palatableness and inequitableness happens. fact16: Snowing occurs. fact17: That cajoling MIPS does not occurs is brought about by that staining does not occurs. fact18: If onstageness but notcajoling MIPS occurs equalizing Dodoma occurs. fact19: Disregarding does not occurs. fact20: That onstageness occurs and cajoling MIPS happens leads to equalizing Dodoma. fact21: Staining does not happens. fact22: Megahit does not occurs.

fact1: ¬{E} fact2: ({HB} & ¬{BI}) -> {IC} fact3: {DI} fact4: ¬{DM} fact5: ¬{H} fact6: ¬{CE} -> ({EC} & {GK}) fact7: ({CL} & {DL}) fact8: {ET} fact9: ¬{AB} fact10: {D} fact11: ¬{EC} -> {AK} fact12: ({AO} & {GS}) fact13: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) fact14: {A} -> ({FF} & ¬{EE}) fact15: ({GP} & ¬{FH}) fact16: {HN} fact17: ¬{A} -> ¬{AB} fact18: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact19: ¬{ED} fact20: ({AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact21: ¬{A} fact22: ¬{EJ}

That both equalizing Dodoma and revolutionariness occurs is wrong.

¬({B} & {C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That artiodactyl does not occurs hold. fact2: Batting occurs if the fact that Mauritanian occurs and Filipino does not occurs is correct. fact3: Baccateness happens. fact4: That audiometricness does not happens is correct. fact5: Deglazing Xanthium does not occurs. fact6: Both raping afterpains and curing Apsu occurs if sintereding does not happens. fact7: Both proctoscopy and carousing happens. fact8: Clotting Muncie occurs. fact9: Cajoling MIPS does not occurs. fact10: Companying Phoenix occurs. fact11: Non-allness is prevented by that raping afterpains does not happens. fact12: Both refreshing and counterpunch happens. fact13: If artiodactyl does not happens both revolutionariness and companying Phoenix occurs. fact14: If staining occurs both otherness and non-unmutilatedness happens. fact15: Palatableness and inequitableness happens. fact16: Snowing occurs. fact17: That cajoling MIPS does not occurs is brought about by that staining does not occurs. fact18: If onstageness but notcajoling MIPS occurs equalizing Dodoma occurs. fact19: Disregarding does not occurs. fact20: That onstageness occurs and cajoling MIPS happens leads to equalizing Dodoma. fact21: Staining does not happens. fact22: Megahit does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That both equalizing Dodoma and revolutionariness occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That aquifer is not non-bicameral.

{A}{a}

fact1: If somebody is a kind of a diminutiveness that does iodinated Grimm then the one is not a Pomoxis. fact2: The crabgrass is bicameral. fact3: If the fact that Deandre leaps Xenicus but the one is not asyndetic does not hold then that aquifer is not bicameral. fact4: That aquifer is not non-bicameral. fact5: If somebody is not a autarchy the fact that the thing leaps Xenicus and it is not asyndetic does not hold. fact6: Someone that is not a Pomoxis is not a autarchy. fact7: Deandre is not a Pomoxis if this trillium is not a kind of a Pomoxis.

fact1: (x): ({F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact2: {A}{dq} fact3: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact4: {A}{a} fact5: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) fact6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬{D}x fact7: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{E}{b}

That aquifer is not bicameral.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody is a kind of a diminutiveness that does iodinated Grimm then the one is not a Pomoxis. fact2: The crabgrass is bicameral. fact3: If the fact that Deandre leaps Xenicus but the one is not asyndetic does not hold then that aquifer is not bicameral. fact4: That aquifer is not non-bicameral. fact5: If somebody is not a autarchy the fact that the thing leaps Xenicus and it is not asyndetic does not hold. fact6: Someone that is not a Pomoxis is not a autarchy. fact7: Deandre is not a Pomoxis if this trillium is not a kind of a Pomoxis. ; $hypothesis$ = That aquifer is not non-bicameral. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That blockbuster is arthralgic.

{C}{b}

fact1: That crackleware is arthralgic. fact2: This cornea lists. fact3: The fact that that aquilegia lists is true. fact4: If that agglutinogen is non-revivalistic that she is both a paygrade and erythroid is not correct. fact5: If that this archaeobacteria does not familiarise and this thing does not boot Brummell is wrong then that agglutinogen is non-revivalistic. fact6: That someone that does not bead Irenidae lists and is arthralgic is right. fact7: That khalifah does not bead Irenidae if this cornea canalises haycock. fact8: That blockbuster is not a kind of a paygrade if this cornea is not erythroid and/or is a kind of a paygrade. fact9: If the fact that that agglutinogen is a kind of a paygrade and is erythroid is incorrect then that blockbuster is not a paygrade. fact10: If that agglutinogen beads Irenidae that this cornea does not list and the one can notalise haycock does not hold. fact11: That blockbuster beads Irenidae. fact12: The tabis beads Irenidae. fact13: that Irenidae beads cornea. fact14: This cornea is not imperishable. fact15: That that blockbuster beads Irenidae and canalises haycock is wrong if that blockbuster is not a paygrade. fact16: If the fact that somebody can notalise haycock but the one is a paygrade is not correct then the one canalise haycock. fact17: Somebody that lists is arthralgic. fact18: This cornea is not touchable. fact19: If this cornea lists and beads Irenidae that blockbuster is not arthralgic. fact20: This cornea beads Irenidae. fact21: Someone does not bead Irenidae if that the thing does bead Irenidae and the thing canalise haycock does not hold.

fact1: {C}{ep} fact2: {A}{a} fact3: {A}{ef} fact4: ¬{G}{c} -> ¬({E}{c} & {F}{c}) fact5: ¬(¬{I}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) -> ¬{G}{c} fact6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {C}x) fact7: {D}{a} -> ¬{B}{ab} fact8: (¬{F}{a} v {E}{a}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact9: ¬({E}{c} & {F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact10: {B}{c} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact11: {B}{b} fact12: {B}{jh} fact13: {AA}{aa} fact14: ¬{HG}{a} fact15: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬({B}{b} & {D}{b}) fact16: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> {D}x fact17: (x): {A}x -> {C}x fact18: ¬{FF}{a} fact19: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact20: {B}{a} fact21: (x): ¬({B}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x

That blockbuster is arthralgic.

{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That crackleware is arthralgic. fact2: This cornea lists. fact3: The fact that that aquilegia lists is true. fact4: If that agglutinogen is non-revivalistic that she is both a paygrade and erythroid is not correct. fact5: If that this archaeobacteria does not familiarise and this thing does not boot Brummell is wrong then that agglutinogen is non-revivalistic. fact6: That someone that does not bead Irenidae lists and is arthralgic is right. fact7: That khalifah does not bead Irenidae if this cornea canalises haycock. fact8: That blockbuster is not a kind of a paygrade if this cornea is not erythroid and/or is a kind of a paygrade. fact9: If the fact that that agglutinogen is a kind of a paygrade and is erythroid is incorrect then that blockbuster is not a paygrade. fact10: If that agglutinogen beads Irenidae that this cornea does not list and the one can notalise haycock does not hold. fact11: That blockbuster beads Irenidae. fact12: The tabis beads Irenidae. fact13: that Irenidae beads cornea. fact14: This cornea is not imperishable. fact15: That that blockbuster beads Irenidae and canalises haycock is wrong if that blockbuster is not a paygrade. fact16: If the fact that somebody can notalise haycock but the one is a paygrade is not correct then the one canalise haycock. fact17: Somebody that lists is arthralgic. fact18: This cornea is not touchable. fact19: If this cornea lists and beads Irenidae that blockbuster is not arthralgic. fact20: This cornea beads Irenidae. fact21: Someone does not bead Irenidae if that the thing does bead Irenidae and the thing canalise haycock does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That blockbuster is arthralgic. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact20 -> int1: This cornea does list and it does bead Irenidae.; int1 & fact19 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Everyone displeases oddness.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Everybody is a Vanuatu. fact2: Everything is hateful.

fact1: (x): {BF}x fact2: (x): {IC}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everybody is a Vanuatu. fact2: Everything is hateful. ; $hypothesis$ = Everyone displeases oddness. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This purchase is not a bloat.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: This purchase beeswaxes Synagrops if the fact that the one is thermoelectric man that is not an illegitimacy is false. fact2: If this skateboard is non-tasteless or is a bloat or both then this purchase is not a bloat. fact3: This clapboard is isotropous. fact4: Some person that is not a Papaverales either is not tasteless or is a kind of a bloat or both. fact5: This purchase is not a kind of a Papaverales. fact6: This purchase is not a kind of a Tocqueville. fact7: This purchase is a kind of a bloat if that one does not beeswax Synagrops. fact8: Someone is not a Papaverales if it is not catachrestic. fact9: That this purchase does not prevaricate similarity hold. fact10: This skateboard is a Papaverales or is not tasteless or both if that shinbone is catachrestic. fact11: If someone does not beeswax Synagrops then it is a bloat. fact12: This purchase rationalises outgo. fact13: If that someone is a kind of a bloat that is not a Papaverales is wrong the one does beeswax Synagrops. fact14: If this purchase is not a Papaverales that the fact that this purchase beeswaxes Synagrops but it is not isotropous is false is not false. fact15: If the fact that somebody beeswaxes Synagrops and is not isotropous is wrong then it is a bloat. fact16: That that ocelot colours Thule and is not mindless is incorrect if that ocelot does not beeswax Synagrops.

fact1: ¬({IR}{a} & ¬{AD}{a}) -> {AA}{a} fact2: (¬{C}{b} v {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact3: {AB}{ee} fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}x v {B}x) fact5: ¬{A}{a} fact6: ¬{GF}{a} fact7: ¬{AA}{a} -> {B}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{A}x fact9: ¬{AM}{a} fact10: {D}{c} -> ({A}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) fact11: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {B}x fact12: {GI}{a} fact13: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {AA}x fact14: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact15: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact16: ¬{AA}{ar} -> ¬({CR}{ar} & ¬{JJ}{ar})

This purchase is not a bloat.

¬{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This purchase beeswaxes Synagrops if the fact that the one is thermoelectric man that is not an illegitimacy is false. fact2: If this skateboard is non-tasteless or is a bloat or both then this purchase is not a bloat. fact3: This clapboard is isotropous. fact4: Some person that is not a Papaverales either is not tasteless or is a kind of a bloat or both. fact5: This purchase is not a kind of a Papaverales. fact6: This purchase is not a kind of a Tocqueville. fact7: This purchase is a kind of a bloat if that one does not beeswax Synagrops. fact8: Someone is not a Papaverales if it is not catachrestic. fact9: That this purchase does not prevaricate similarity hold. fact10: This skateboard is a Papaverales or is not tasteless or both if that shinbone is catachrestic. fact11: If someone does not beeswax Synagrops then it is a bloat. fact12: This purchase rationalises outgo. fact13: If that someone is a kind of a bloat that is not a Papaverales is wrong the one does beeswax Synagrops. fact14: If this purchase is not a Papaverales that the fact that this purchase beeswaxes Synagrops but it is not isotropous is false is not false. fact15: If the fact that somebody beeswaxes Synagrops and is not isotropous is wrong then it is a bloat. fact16: That that ocelot colours Thule and is not mindless is incorrect if that ocelot does not beeswax Synagrops. ; $hypothesis$ = This purchase is not a bloat. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact5 -> int1: The fact that this purchase beeswaxes Synagrops but the one is not isotropous is wrong.; fact15 -> int2: This purchase is a bloat if that this purchase does beeswax Synagrops and is not isotropous is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That there is someone such that the one does smart dyspnoea is incorrect.

¬((Ex): {A}x)

fact1: There exists something such that the one smarts dyspnoea. fact2: That if the fact that this ferrite does not humble is right that immune fogs Brinton and the person smarts dyspnoea is correct. fact3: There exists someone such that it is coccal. fact4: If somebody that does belt Keynesianism is not a Wolff then it is not a Myliobatidae. fact5: That immune does not humble if the fact that this ferrite does not fog Brinton and does not water syndicalism does not hold. fact6: There exists something such that the one is Zimbabwean. fact7: Someone that does not humble shakes convertibility and does smart dyspnoea. fact8: Somebody is a kind of a Catalan. fact9: There exists somebody such that the one does endow Lycopersicon. fact10: The caroller does not water syndicalism and does not humble if that mix is not a kind of a Myliobatidae. fact11: Some man does chart Chrysosplenium. fact12: If the caroller does not water syndicalism and does not humble this ferrite does not humble. fact13: There exists someone such that it accomplishes.

fact1: (Ex): {A}x fact2: ¬{B}{b} -> ({C}{a} & {A}{a}) fact3: (Ex): {BC}x fact4: (x): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact5: ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact6: (Ex): {JB}x fact7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({BM}x & {A}x) fact8: (Ex): {DR}x fact9: (Ex): {EK}x fact10: ¬{E}{d} -> (¬{D}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) fact11: (Ex): {GC}x fact12: (¬{D}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact13: (Ex): {IC}x

There is something such that the thing fogs Brinton.

(Ex): {C}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists something such that the one smarts dyspnoea. fact2: That if the fact that this ferrite does not humble is right that immune fogs Brinton and the person smarts dyspnoea is correct. fact3: There exists someone such that it is coccal. fact4: If somebody that does belt Keynesianism is not a Wolff then it is not a Myliobatidae. fact5: That immune does not humble if the fact that this ferrite does not fog Brinton and does not water syndicalism does not hold. fact6: There exists something such that the one is Zimbabwean. fact7: Someone that does not humble shakes convertibility and does smart dyspnoea. fact8: Somebody is a kind of a Catalan. fact9: There exists somebody such that the one does endow Lycopersicon. fact10: The caroller does not water syndicalism and does not humble if that mix is not a kind of a Myliobatidae. fact11: Some man does chart Chrysosplenium. fact12: If the caroller does not water syndicalism and does not humble this ferrite does not humble. fact13: There exists someone such that it accomplishes. ; $hypothesis$ = That there is someone such that the one does smart dyspnoea is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This skateboarder does bach.

{A}{c}

fact1: This pad does bach. fact2: This skateboarder baches if that crosswind is an equestrian. fact3: If that maw is a lashings and the one is advisable that crosswind is an equestrian. fact4: That crosswind is a lashings if that maw is an equestrian. fact5: That that maw is not a lashings hold. fact6: This vegetation is not a kind of a lashings but the one does pillory kt. fact7: If that maw is a kind of a Staphylinidae then that this skateboarder baches and is not an equestrian does not hold. fact8: That maw baches. fact9: That crosswind is an equestrian if that maw is both not a lashings and advisable. fact10: That crosswind baches. fact11: If that bathymeter descants Creon and the one is a Kyoto that bathymeter is not pompous. fact12: That maw is not a kind of a lashings but that thing is advisable. fact13: If someone is not pompous then either the thing does not glut Yedo or the one is not a spike or both. fact14: That crosswind fractions dermatomyositis and it attenuates Mertensia if that bathymeter is not a spike. fact15: If that crosswind fractions dermatomyositis that maw is a kind of a Staphylinidae. fact16: That maw is not a kind of a lashings but the one baches. fact17: That maw is a Aucuba. fact18: If someone does not glut Yedo and/or the one is not a spike the one is not a spike.

fact1: {A}{ig} fact2: {B}{b} -> {A}{c} fact3: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact4: {B}{a} -> {AA}{b} fact5: ¬{AA}{a} fact6: (¬{AA}{bt} & {BI}{bt}) fact7: {C}{a} -> ¬({A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) fact8: {A}{a} fact9: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact10: {A}{b} fact11: ({I}{d} & {J}{d}) -> ¬{G}{d} fact12: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact13: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{H}x v ¬{F}x) fact14: ¬{F}{d} -> ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) fact15: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} fact16: (¬{AA}{a} & {A}{a}) fact17: {DP}{a} fact18: (x): (¬{H}x v ¬{F}x) -> ¬{F}x

This skateboarder does not bach.

¬{A}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This pad does bach. fact2: This skateboarder baches if that crosswind is an equestrian. fact3: If that maw is a lashings and the one is advisable that crosswind is an equestrian. fact4: That crosswind is a lashings if that maw is an equestrian. fact5: That that maw is not a lashings hold. fact6: This vegetation is not a kind of a lashings but the one does pillory kt. fact7: If that maw is a kind of a Staphylinidae then that this skateboarder baches and is not an equestrian does not hold. fact8: That maw baches. fact9: That crosswind is an equestrian if that maw is both not a lashings and advisable. fact10: That crosswind baches. fact11: If that bathymeter descants Creon and the one is a Kyoto that bathymeter is not pompous. fact12: That maw is not a kind of a lashings but that thing is advisable. fact13: If someone is not pompous then either the thing does not glut Yedo or the one is not a spike or both. fact14: That crosswind fractions dermatomyositis and it attenuates Mertensia if that bathymeter is not a spike. fact15: If that crosswind fractions dermatomyositis that maw is a kind of a Staphylinidae. fact16: That maw is not a kind of a lashings but the one baches. fact17: That maw is a Aucuba. fact18: If someone does not glut Yedo and/or the one is not a spike the one is not a spike. ; $hypothesis$ = This skateboarder does bach. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact12 -> int1: That crosswind is an equestrian.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that cephalexin is a surrounding that is a Gomorrha is false.

¬({C}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: That cephalexin is recreational and the one governs. fact2: That walkway is a kind of a droplet if that beefburger is a droplet but the thing is not a Malva. fact3: The fact that this armhole does not define is wrong. fact4: If that beefburger is not a surrounding and it does not define then that cephalexin is not a kind of a surrounding. fact5: If that walkway is a droplet that cephalexin does not Cash and the one does not define. fact6: That cephalexin defines. fact7: That cephalexin does Cash and the one is a Gomorrha. fact8: That cephalexin Cashes. fact9: If that crosscut is not a kind of a Aspidophoroides that beefburger is both a droplet and not a Malva. fact10: Helen is variolous and is a droplet. fact11: That cabasset is chalky and it Cashes if that cephalexin is not a surrounding. fact12: That beefburger is not a kind of a surrounding and the one does not define if that crosscut is not a kind of a Malva. fact13: The fact that someone is a surrounding and the man is a Gomorrha is false if the one does not Cash. fact14: That this theca is a hatching but the one is not a Huron is not right if this thing is a wen. fact15: This theca is a wen and the one impounds Lacerta if this theca is not a voluminousness. fact16: If this theca is vulval and that thing is variolous this theca is not a voluminousness.

fact1: ({Q}{a} & {S}{a}) fact2: ({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> {E}{b} fact3: {D}{dm} fact4: (¬{C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact5: {E}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact6: {D}{a} fact7: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact8: {A}{a} fact9: ¬{G}{d} -> ({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact10: ({M}{fr} & {E}{fr}) fact11: ¬{C}{a} -> ({AM}{fk} & {A}{fk}) fact12: ¬{F}{d} -> (¬{C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) fact13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) fact14: {J}{e} -> ¬({H}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) fact15: ¬{L}{e} -> ({J}{e} & {K}{e}) fact16: ({N}{e} & {M}{e}) -> ¬{L}{e}

That cabasset is chalky and the thing is a Gomorrha.

({AM}{fk} & {B}{fk})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That cephalexin is recreational and the one governs. fact2: That walkway is a kind of a droplet if that beefburger is a droplet but the thing is not a Malva. fact3: The fact that this armhole does not define is wrong. fact4: If that beefburger is not a surrounding and it does not define then that cephalexin is not a kind of a surrounding. fact5: If that walkway is a droplet that cephalexin does not Cash and the one does not define. fact6: That cephalexin defines. fact7: That cephalexin does Cash and the one is a Gomorrha. fact8: That cephalexin Cashes. fact9: If that crosscut is not a kind of a Aspidophoroides that beefburger is both a droplet and not a Malva. fact10: Helen is variolous and is a droplet. fact11: That cabasset is chalky and it Cashes if that cephalexin is not a surrounding. fact12: That beefburger is not a kind of a surrounding and the one does not define if that crosscut is not a kind of a Malva. fact13: The fact that someone is a surrounding and the man is a Gomorrha is false if the one does not Cash. fact14: That this theca is a hatching but the one is not a Huron is not right if this thing is a wen. fact15: This theca is a wen and the one impounds Lacerta if this theca is not a voluminousness. fact16: If this theca is vulval and that thing is variolous this theca is not a voluminousness. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that cephalexin is a surrounding that is a Gomorrha is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

There is none such that the one does not immure intransitivity and is a uninitiate.

(x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

fact1: There is none such that the one does not immure intransitivity and is a uninitiate.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There is none such that the one does not immure intransitivity and is a uninitiate. ; $hypothesis$ = There is none such that the one does not immure intransitivity and is a uninitiate. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Silencing Arenga happens.

{A}

fact1: Unsalableness does not happens if outlining does not happens and/or pursuing does not happens. fact2: That kayaking does not occurs brings about that shirring Actinopoda and unpriestliness happens. fact3: If insensibleness does not occurs or salute does not happens or both insensibleness does not happens. fact4: Shirring Actinopoda results in that outlining does not happens and/or that pursuing does not happens. fact5: Leveraging happens. fact6: If unsalableness does not occurs then insensibleness does not occurs and/or salute does not happens. fact7: Errand occurs. fact8: That jejunostomy does not happens is triggered by that jejunostomy does not occurs or that insensibleness does not happens or both. fact9: Sequencing happens. fact10: If jejunostomy does not occurs then conditioning occurs and silencing Arenga happens.

fact1: (¬{G} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact2: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact3: (¬{C} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} fact4: {H} -> (¬{G} v ¬{F}) fact5: {BD} fact6: ¬{D} -> (¬{C} v ¬{E}) fact7: {DK} fact8: (¬{B} v ¬{C}) -> ¬{B} fact9: {CQ} fact10: ¬{B} -> ({IE} & {A})

Conditioning occurs.

{IE}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Unsalableness does not happens if outlining does not happens and/or pursuing does not happens. fact2: That kayaking does not occurs brings about that shirring Actinopoda and unpriestliness happens. fact3: If insensibleness does not occurs or salute does not happens or both insensibleness does not happens. fact4: Shirring Actinopoda results in that outlining does not happens and/or that pursuing does not happens. fact5: Leveraging happens. fact6: If unsalableness does not occurs then insensibleness does not occurs and/or salute does not happens. fact7: Errand occurs. fact8: That jejunostomy does not happens is triggered by that jejunostomy does not occurs or that insensibleness does not happens or both. fact9: Sequencing happens. fact10: If jejunostomy does not occurs then conditioning occurs and silencing Arenga happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Silencing Arenga happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That causing occurs is not incorrect.

{C}

fact1: Explication is brought about by uraemicness. fact2: That levering occurs is caused by that Portuguese happens. fact3: If descent but notArgentine happens then causing does not occurs. fact4: That vampirism does not happens is prevented by stretching Menispermum. fact5: Karma occurs. fact6: Plugging Starkey happens. fact7: If Argentine occurs then causing occurs. fact8: Saluting occurs. fact9: Voyeuristicness happens. fact10: If dedication occurs revivalisticness happens. fact11: Descent happens. fact12: That descent happens brings about Argentine.

fact1: {I} -> {AA} fact2: {AG} -> {IF} fact3: ({A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{C} fact4: {ES} -> {BO} fact5: {CS} fact6: {IQ} fact7: {B} -> {C} fact8: {GS} fact9: {HI} fact10: {IE} -> {HE} fact11: {A} fact12: {A} -> {B}

Causing does not occurs.

¬{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Explication is brought about by uraemicness. fact2: That levering occurs is caused by that Portuguese happens. fact3: If descent but notArgentine happens then causing does not occurs. fact4: That vampirism does not happens is prevented by stretching Menispermum. fact5: Karma occurs. fact6: Plugging Starkey happens. fact7: If Argentine occurs then causing occurs. fact8: Saluting occurs. fact9: Voyeuristicness happens. fact10: If dedication occurs revivalisticness happens. fact11: Descent happens. fact12: That descent happens brings about Argentine. ; $hypothesis$ = That causing occurs is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact11 -> int1: Argentine occurs.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Leggedness does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: Specialty does not occurs. fact2: If malignantness occurs then non-leggedness and shuffling occurs. fact3: If aeromedicalness does not happens then the fact that both circularization and Kokka occurs is not true. fact4: If the fact that the fact that specialty and/or non-totalitarianness occurs is wrong is right then shuffling happens. fact5: If the fact that circularization and Kokka happens is false circularization does not occurs. fact6: That both non-aeromedicalness and shlepping happens is caused by that colostomy does not occurs. fact7: If leggedness does not happens then the fact that fractionation happens and/or tinning SARS does not happens is incorrect. fact8: If that traumaticness happens or tiling does not happens or both is wrong colostomy does not happens. fact9: That leggedness does not occurs is prevented by shuffling. fact10: That specialty occurs and/or totalitarianness does not happens is wrong. fact11: If circularization does not happens then malignantness happens and defending Momotidae happens.

fact1: ¬{AA} fact2: {C} -> (¬{A} & {B}) fact3: ¬{G} -> ¬({E} & {F}) fact4: ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact5: ¬({E} & {F}) -> ¬{E} fact6: ¬{I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) fact7: ¬{A} -> ¬({FM} v ¬{GF}) fact8: ¬({K} v ¬{J}) -> ¬{I} fact9: {B} -> {A} fact10: ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact11: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D})

The fact that the fact that fractionation occurs or tinning SARS does not happens or both is true is wrong.

¬({FM} v ¬{GF})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Specialty does not occurs. fact2: If malignantness occurs then non-leggedness and shuffling occurs. fact3: If aeromedicalness does not happens then the fact that both circularization and Kokka occurs is not true. fact4: If the fact that the fact that specialty and/or non-totalitarianness occurs is wrong is right then shuffling happens. fact5: If the fact that circularization and Kokka happens is false circularization does not occurs. fact6: That both non-aeromedicalness and shlepping happens is caused by that colostomy does not occurs. fact7: If leggedness does not happens then the fact that fractionation happens and/or tinning SARS does not happens is incorrect. fact8: If that traumaticness happens or tiling does not happens or both is wrong colostomy does not happens. fact9: That leggedness does not occurs is prevented by shuffling. fact10: That specialty occurs and/or totalitarianness does not happens is wrong. fact11: If circularization does not happens then malignantness happens and defending Momotidae happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Leggedness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact10 -> int1: Shuffling happens.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Gait does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: If ovoviviparousness does not occurs the fact that propitiousness does not occurs but capitulating occurs is false. fact2: Non-poeticness brings about that supervising Acrocephalus does not happens. fact3: Creaking does not happens if the fact that either Hebrideanness happens or respectableness does not occurs or both is wrong. fact4: Denuding occurs and gait happens. fact5: If clinicalness occurs then that either Hebrideanness or non-respectableness or both happens does not hold. fact6: If remediation does not occurs then both anemometry and clinicalness occurs. fact7: That accepting hyperlipaemia does not happens is triggered by Edwardianness. fact8: That accepting hyperlipaemia does not happens results in that cardinalship and non-ovoviviparousness occurs. fact9: That creaking does not occurs leads to Edwardianness. fact10: Containerising Molokai and denuding occurs if gait does not occurs. fact11: That gait does not happens is right if denuding does not happens. fact12: Gait does not happens if that capitulating does not occurs and ovoviviparousness does not occurs is wrong. fact13: Offence happens and recompense happens. fact14: That supervising Acrocephalus does not occurs prevents anamorphicness. fact15: The fact that denuding occurs is correct. fact16: Discording occurs and dipolarness occurs if anamorphicness does not happens. fact17: Discording brings about that notremediation but caprioling occurs.

fact1: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) fact2: ¬{T} -> ¬{S} fact3: ¬({K} v ¬{J}) -> ¬{I} fact4: ({A} & {B}) fact5: {L} -> ¬({K} v ¬{J}) fact6: ¬{N} -> ({M} & {L}) fact7: {H} -> ¬{G} fact8: ¬{G} -> ({F} & ¬{E}) fact9: ¬{I} -> {H} fact10: ¬{B} -> ({AI} & {A}) fact11: ¬{A} -> ¬{B} fact12: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{B} fact13: ({GT} & {IA}) fact14: ¬{S} -> ¬{R} fact15: {A} fact16: ¬{R} -> ({P} & {Q}) fact17: {P} -> (¬{N} & {O})

Gait does not occurs.

¬{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If ovoviviparousness does not occurs the fact that propitiousness does not occurs but capitulating occurs is false. fact2: Non-poeticness brings about that supervising Acrocephalus does not happens. fact3: Creaking does not happens if the fact that either Hebrideanness happens or respectableness does not occurs or both is wrong. fact4: Denuding occurs and gait happens. fact5: If clinicalness occurs then that either Hebrideanness or non-respectableness or both happens does not hold. fact6: If remediation does not occurs then both anemometry and clinicalness occurs. fact7: That accepting hyperlipaemia does not happens is triggered by Edwardianness. fact8: That accepting hyperlipaemia does not happens results in that cardinalship and non-ovoviviparousness occurs. fact9: That creaking does not occurs leads to Edwardianness. fact10: Containerising Molokai and denuding occurs if gait does not occurs. fact11: That gait does not happens is right if denuding does not happens. fact12: Gait does not happens if that capitulating does not occurs and ovoviviparousness does not occurs is wrong. fact13: Offence happens and recompense happens. fact14: That supervising Acrocephalus does not occurs prevents anamorphicness. fact15: The fact that denuding occurs is correct. fact16: Discording occurs and dipolarness occurs if anamorphicness does not happens. fact17: Discording brings about that notremediation but caprioling occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Gait does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

If that Debs is not cyclonic then that Debs is cyclonic but the one is a Nymphaea.

¬{A}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: A non-characteristic one is a Nymphaea and hyaloplasmic. fact2: This accretion is not characteristic if the one is a mujahedeen and the thing does recuperate. fact3: That Debs is not agonistic. fact4: This duckpin is a kind of a mujahedeen. fact5: If the songbird does not room elastosis this one is not genealogical and the one is not a Endamoebidae. fact6: If the fact that this duckpin is a mujahedeen is right then this accretion is a kind of a mujahedeen. fact7: That Debs is both a shorn and a Perutz if it does not dampen. fact8: That Debs is not cyclonic but the man is a Nymphaea if that Debs is cyclonic. fact9: If that timbale heals hemoglobinopathy or it is a Stephanomeria or both the songbird does not room elastosis. fact10: That Debs is a Nymphaea. fact11: The currant is not a Nymphaea but the one is a kind of a Qatari if the currant is a Nymphaea. fact12: That Debs does not dampen if the songbird is non-genealogical one that is not a kind of a Endamoebidae. fact13: If that Debs is a shorn then this accretion does recuperate. fact14: That momma is not a kind of a Nymphaea but it is a Carduus if the one is a Nymphaea.

fact1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) fact2: ({E}{fn} & {F}{fn}) -> ¬{D}{fn} fact3: ¬{BE}{a} fact4: {E}{b} fact5: ¬{L}{c} -> (¬{J}{c} & ¬{K}{c}) fact6: {E}{b} -> {E}{fn} fact7: ¬{I}{a} -> ({G}{a} & {H}{a}) fact8: {A}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact9: ({M}{d} v {N}{d}) -> ¬{L}{c} fact10: {B}{a} fact11: {B}{cf} -> (¬{B}{cf} & {BD}{cf}) fact12: (¬{J}{c} & ¬{K}{c}) -> ¬{I}{a} fact13: {G}{a} -> {F}{fn} fact14: {B}{dt} -> (¬{B}{dt} & {GB}{dt})

This accretion is cyclonic.

{A}{fn}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: A non-characteristic one is a Nymphaea and hyaloplasmic. fact2: This accretion is not characteristic if the one is a mujahedeen and the thing does recuperate. fact3: That Debs is not agonistic. fact4: This duckpin is a kind of a mujahedeen. fact5: If the songbird does not room elastosis this one is not genealogical and the one is not a Endamoebidae. fact6: If the fact that this duckpin is a mujahedeen is right then this accretion is a kind of a mujahedeen. fact7: That Debs is both a shorn and a Perutz if it does not dampen. fact8: That Debs is not cyclonic but the man is a Nymphaea if that Debs is cyclonic. fact9: If that timbale heals hemoglobinopathy or it is a Stephanomeria or both the songbird does not room elastosis. fact10: That Debs is a Nymphaea. fact11: The currant is not a Nymphaea but the one is a kind of a Qatari if the currant is a Nymphaea. fact12: That Debs does not dampen if the songbird is non-genealogical one that is not a kind of a Endamoebidae. fact13: If that Debs is a shorn then this accretion does recuperate. fact14: That momma is not a kind of a Nymphaea but it is a Carduus if the one is a Nymphaea. ; $hypothesis$ = If that Debs is not cyclonic then that Debs is cyclonic but the one is a Nymphaea. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that Debs is not cyclonic.; assump1 & fact10 -> int1: That Debs is non-cyclonic person that is a kind of a Nymphaea.; [assump1] & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Withstanding kabbala occurs but pleasing does not occurs.

({C} & ¬{D})

fact1: Hospice and ornithologicalness happens. fact2: The fact that both anterogradeness and autofluorescence happens does not hold. fact3: The fact that Pakistani occurs and romanticisation does not occurs is false. fact4: Both pants and holding occurs. fact5: Madagascanness occurs. fact6: That both withstanding kabbala and pleasing occurs is false if smoking lankiness occurs. fact7: The fact that romanticisation but notgalvanizing Mallophaga happens does not hold. fact8: If mince happens then that pants happens and partaking does not occurs is incorrect. fact9: The fact that method but notunarticulatedness occurs does not hold. fact10: That unreeling Masqat occurs but frapping deadness does not occurs does not hold if smoking lankiness does not occurs. fact11: Vulvectomy happens. fact12: If unconquerableness happens then the fact that the fact that commotion occurs but leadership does not occurs is wrong hold. fact13: That smoking lankiness does not occurs brings about that withstanding kabbala but notpleasing occurs. fact14: If smoking lankiness occurs then the fact that withstanding kabbala occurs and pleasing does not occurs is incorrect. fact15: Smoking lankiness happens and vulvectomy occurs. fact16: Vaporisation happens. fact17: Factorising Bahamas occurs. fact18: If prepayment does not occurs then that smoking lankiness does not happens and vulvectomy does not happens is right. fact19: That deforming occurs is correct. fact20: If that Spartanness happens is true then that crating sorcery happens but Marching yellowness does not happens does not hold. fact21: The fact that the fact that both withstanding kabbala and pleasing occurs does not hold is right.

fact1: ({IN} & {J}) fact2: ¬({CJ} & {ES}) fact3: ¬({CM} & ¬{AN}) fact4: ({EQ} & {CS}) fact5: {EA} fact6: {A} -> ¬({C} & {D}) fact7: ¬({AN} & ¬{FP}) fact8: {AS} -> ¬({EQ} & ¬{DS}) fact9: ¬({DA} & ¬{CC}) fact10: ¬{A} -> ¬({HJ} & ¬{JA}) fact11: {B} fact12: {GN} -> ¬({AG} & ¬{DB}) fact13: ¬{A} -> ({C} & ¬{D}) fact14: {A} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact15: ({A} & {B}) fact16: {JJ} fact17: {JE} fact18: ¬{E} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact19: {II} fact20: {DP} -> ¬({CF} & ¬{AR}) fact21: ¬({C} & {D})

Withstanding kabbala occurs but pleasing does not occurs.

({C} & ¬{D})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Hospice and ornithologicalness happens. fact2: The fact that both anterogradeness and autofluorescence happens does not hold. fact3: The fact that Pakistani occurs and romanticisation does not occurs is false. fact4: Both pants and holding occurs. fact5: Madagascanness occurs. fact6: That both withstanding kabbala and pleasing occurs is false if smoking lankiness occurs. fact7: The fact that romanticisation but notgalvanizing Mallophaga happens does not hold. fact8: If mince happens then that pants happens and partaking does not occurs is incorrect. fact9: The fact that method but notunarticulatedness occurs does not hold. fact10: That unreeling Masqat occurs but frapping deadness does not occurs does not hold if smoking lankiness does not occurs. fact11: Vulvectomy happens. fact12: If unconquerableness happens then the fact that the fact that commotion occurs but leadership does not occurs is wrong hold. fact13: That smoking lankiness does not occurs brings about that withstanding kabbala but notpleasing occurs. fact14: If smoking lankiness occurs then the fact that withstanding kabbala occurs and pleasing does not occurs is incorrect. fact15: Smoking lankiness happens and vulvectomy occurs. fact16: Vaporisation happens. fact17: Factorising Bahamas occurs. fact18: If prepayment does not occurs then that smoking lankiness does not happens and vulvectomy does not happens is right. fact19: That deforming occurs is correct. fact20: If that Spartanness happens is true then that crating sorcery happens but Marching yellowness does not happens does not hold. fact21: The fact that the fact that both withstanding kabbala and pleasing occurs does not hold is right. ; $hypothesis$ = Withstanding kabbala occurs but pleasing does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact15 -> int1: Smoking lankiness happens.; int1 & fact14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That everyone is a pagination is not correct.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Every man is an absurdity. fact2: Everything is a pagination. fact3: Some person is a kind of a Mespilus if it is not a pagination. fact4: If something is not unauthorized that the thing swaggers Kendrew and is a kind of a cardiopathy is incorrect. fact5: Every man is hircine. fact6: Everybody is not unauthorized. fact7: Everyone is a clang. fact8: Everyone is a kind of a dark. fact9: Everything is a moon. fact10: Everybody advises Streisand. fact11: The fact that everybody is warm is true. fact12: Every man is Mancunian. fact13: Everybody is a persiflage. fact14: That everybody is a kind of a Sverige is right. fact15: Everything is homosexual. fact16: Every man is a usefulness. fact17: Everybody is a rancidness.

fact1: (x): {CS}x fact2: (x): {A}x fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> {EJ}x fact4: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) fact5: (x): {BN}x fact6: (x): ¬{D}x fact7: (x): {AT}x fact8: (x): {IN}x fact9: (x): {ES}x fact10: (x): {EH}x fact11: (x): {IR}x fact12: (x): {GL}x fact13: (x): {CF}x fact14: (x): {GA}x fact15: (x): {BU}x fact16: (x): {GT}x fact17: (x): {HS}x

Everything is a Mespilus.

(x): {EJ}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Every man is an absurdity. fact2: Everything is a pagination. fact3: Some person is a kind of a Mespilus if it is not a pagination. fact4: If something is not unauthorized that the thing swaggers Kendrew and is a kind of a cardiopathy is incorrect. fact5: Every man is hircine. fact6: Everybody is not unauthorized. fact7: Everyone is a clang. fact8: Everyone is a kind of a dark. fact9: Everything is a moon. fact10: Everybody advises Streisand. fact11: The fact that everybody is warm is true. fact12: Every man is Mancunian. fact13: Everybody is a persiflage. fact14: That everybody is a kind of a Sverige is right. fact15: Everything is homosexual. fact16: Every man is a usefulness. fact17: Everybody is a rancidness. ; $hypothesis$ = That everyone is a pagination is not correct. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Transparence happens.

{C}

fact1: Transparence does not occurs if malfunctioning and blockage occurs. fact2: Blockage happens. fact3: If blockage does not occurs both transparence and malfunctioning occurs. fact4: If finding does not occurs then the fact that slacking Eelam occurs but Best does not happens is not true. fact5: Malfunctioning occurs. fact6: Blockage does not occurs and socialization does not occurs if camouflaging does not happens. fact7: If that slacking Eelam but notBest happens is false then camouflaging does not happens.

fact1: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact2: {B} fact3: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) fact4: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & ¬{G}) fact5: {A} fact6: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{D}) fact7: ¬({F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E}

Transparence happens.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Transparence does not occurs if malfunctioning and blockage occurs. fact2: Blockage happens. fact3: If blockage does not occurs both transparence and malfunctioning occurs. fact4: If finding does not occurs then the fact that slacking Eelam occurs but Best does not happens is not true. fact5: Malfunctioning occurs. fact6: Blockage does not occurs and socialization does not occurs if camouflaging does not happens. fact7: If that slacking Eelam but notBest happens is false then camouflaging does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Transparence happens. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact2 -> int1: Malfunctioning and blockage occurs.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This shlep is nonexempt and the thing is a Mastotermes.

({C}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: That this homosexualism is both endovenous and not a intractableness is incorrect. fact2: This shlep is nonexempt. fact3: The cabman is not a Erythrocebus. fact4: The fact that this marasca is a Cestoda but the thing is not a Erythrocebus is not true. fact5: That this shlep is a Mastotermes but the one does not wrap Acaridae is incorrect if she/he is not adrenocortical. fact6: That Victor is not a pressor and is a Erythrocebus does not hold if the one does not Base Jainism. fact7: If this shlep is not anticlimactical the fact that this shlep is not endovenous and it is not a Erythrocebus is wrong. fact8: If that someone is not endovenous and is not a kind of a Erythrocebus does not hold the one is a Mastotermes. fact9: Some person is a Verrazzano if the fact that the one is not a Auchincloss and it is not a erysipelas is incorrect. fact10: Someone that is not a Faunus is not anticlimactical and is not a kind of a Clarksburg. fact11: This shlep is a erysipelas. fact12: Somebody is nonexempt if the fact that the one is not a Mastotermes and the one is anticlimactical is right. fact13: This shlep is antenatal. fact14: This shlep is a Denver. fact15: This courgette is a Erythrocebus. fact16: The fact that Reginald is not a Erythrocebus hold. fact17: That slops is not anticlimactical. fact18: This shlep is not corrupting. fact19: This shlep is not anticlimactical. fact20: This shlep is noncolumned and the thing is a kind of a glossalgia.

fact1: ¬({AA}{ge} & ¬{CM}{ge}) fact2: {C}{a} fact3: ¬{AB}{ja} fact4: ¬({CG}{gq} & ¬{AB}{gq}) fact5: ¬{HH}{a} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{CS}{a}) fact6: ¬{EN}{ba} -> ¬(¬{EF}{ba} & {AB}{ba}) fact7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact8: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact9: (x): ¬(¬{HP}x & ¬{EC}x) -> {DG}x fact10: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{D}x) fact11: {EC}{a} fact12: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> {C}x fact13: {FF}{a} fact14: {BJ}{a} fact15: {AB}{cp} fact16: ¬{AB}{ci} fact17: ¬{A}{en} fact18: ¬{DE}{a} fact19: ¬{A}{a} fact20: ({GO}{a} & {JC}{a})

That pointel is nonexempt.

{C}{jb}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this homosexualism is both endovenous and not a intractableness is incorrect. fact2: This shlep is nonexempt. fact3: The cabman is not a Erythrocebus. fact4: The fact that this marasca is a Cestoda but the thing is not a Erythrocebus is not true. fact5: That this shlep is a Mastotermes but the one does not wrap Acaridae is incorrect if she/he is not adrenocortical. fact6: That Victor is not a pressor and is a Erythrocebus does not hold if the one does not Base Jainism. fact7: If this shlep is not anticlimactical the fact that this shlep is not endovenous and it is not a Erythrocebus is wrong. fact8: If that someone is not endovenous and is not a kind of a Erythrocebus does not hold the one is a Mastotermes. fact9: Some person is a Verrazzano if the fact that the one is not a Auchincloss and it is not a erysipelas is incorrect. fact10: Someone that is not a Faunus is not anticlimactical and is not a kind of a Clarksburg. fact11: This shlep is a erysipelas. fact12: Somebody is nonexempt if the fact that the one is not a Mastotermes and the one is anticlimactical is right. fact13: This shlep is antenatal. fact14: This shlep is a Denver. fact15: This courgette is a Erythrocebus. fact16: The fact that Reginald is not a Erythrocebus hold. fact17: That slops is not anticlimactical. fact18: This shlep is not corrupting. fact19: This shlep is not anticlimactical. fact20: This shlep is noncolumned and the thing is a kind of a glossalgia. ; $hypothesis$ = This shlep is nonexempt and the thing is a Mastotermes. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact19 -> int1: That this shlep is a kind of non-endovenous thing that is not a kind of a Erythrocebus does not hold.; fact8 -> int2: If the fact that this shlep is both not endovenous and not a Erythrocebus does not hold the one is a Mastotermes.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That this shlep is a Mastotermes is not incorrect.; int3 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Licentiousness happens.

{D}

fact1: Centering happens. fact2: Offshoot occurs and stooge happens. fact3: Both centering and sedateness occurs. fact4: Affectedness occurs if bottlenecking forcefulness happens. fact5: If affectedness and sedateness happens then licentiousness does not occurs. fact6: Bottlenecking forcefulness occurs.

fact1: {E} fact2: ({GS} & {FU}) fact3: ({E} & {C}) fact4: {A} -> {B} fact5: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact6: {A}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Centering happens. fact2: Offshoot occurs and stooge happens. fact3: Both centering and sedateness occurs. fact4: Affectedness occurs if bottlenecking forcefulness happens. fact5: If affectedness and sedateness happens then licentiousness does not occurs. fact6: Bottlenecking forcefulness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Licentiousness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact6 -> int1: Affectedness occurs.; fact3 -> int2: Sedateness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Affectedness and sedateness occurs.; int3 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this resuscitator is uncaulked is not incorrect.

{B}{c}

fact1: That miner avoids Cacicus. fact2: This tonsil avoids Cacicus if that miner is a kind of non-uncaulked thing that muddies Breuer. fact3: If this resuscitator is uncaulked that miner is not a ABCs but it avoids Cacicus. fact4: This tonsil muddies Breuer if this resuscitator does not avoid Cacicus and is uncaulked. fact5: This irons is uncaulked. fact6: That miner muddies Breuer. fact7: This tonsil is a kind of a mishpocha. fact8: If that miner does avoid Cacicus then this tonsil does not muddy Breuer but the thing is a ABCs. fact9: This tonsil is uncaulked. fact10: If this resuscitator does not muddy Breuer but the one is a ABCs this tonsil is uncaulked. fact11: If this tonsil does not avoid Cacicus but it is a ABCs then the fact that this resuscitator is uncaulked is not wrong. fact12: That this resuscitator is a Tetrao is right. fact13: That miner does not bound hyperactivity and does muddy Breuer. fact14: This tonsil is a ABCs. fact15: This resuscitator muddies Breuer. fact16: This tonsil is a ABCs if that miner does avoid Cacicus. fact17: If this tonsil avoids Cacicus then that miner is not a kind of a ABCs and muddies Breuer. fact18: This resuscitator is a kind of non-sanious one that muddies Breuer. fact19: That miner muddies Breuer if this tonsil is not a kind of a ABCs and avoids Cacicus. fact20: that Cacicus avoids miner. fact21: Someone is not uncaulked if that the one is not a Berlage and avoids Cacicus does not hold. fact22: If this tonsil does not muddy Breuer and is a ABCs then the fact that this resuscitator is not caulked hold. fact23: That miner is caulked and is a Bromeliaceae. fact24: If this tonsil does not muddy Breuer and is uncaulked then that miner avoids Cacicus.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: (¬{B}{a} & {AA}{a}) -> {A}{b} fact3: {B}{c} -> (¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) fact4: (¬{A}{c} & {B}{c}) -> {AA}{b} fact5: {B}{jc} fact6: {AA}{a} fact7: {DP}{b} fact8: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact9: {B}{b} fact10: (¬{AA}{c} & {AB}{c}) -> {B}{b} fact11: (¬{A}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} fact12: {ET}{c} fact13: (¬{JI}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact14: {AB}{b} fact15: {AA}{c} fact16: {A}{a} -> {AB}{b} fact17: {A}{b} -> (¬{AB}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact18: (¬{HL}{c} & {AA}{c}) fact19: (¬{AB}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {AA}{a} fact20: {AC}{aa} fact21: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact22: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} fact23: (¬{B}{a} & {FH}{a}) fact24: (¬{AA}{b} & {B}{b}) -> {A}{a}

This resuscitator is not uncaulked.

¬{B}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That miner avoids Cacicus. fact2: This tonsil avoids Cacicus if that miner is a kind of non-uncaulked thing that muddies Breuer. fact3: If this resuscitator is uncaulked that miner is not a ABCs but it avoids Cacicus. fact4: This tonsil muddies Breuer if this resuscitator does not avoid Cacicus and is uncaulked. fact5: This irons is uncaulked. fact6: That miner muddies Breuer. fact7: This tonsil is a kind of a mishpocha. fact8: If that miner does avoid Cacicus then this tonsil does not muddy Breuer but the thing is a ABCs. fact9: This tonsil is uncaulked. fact10: If this resuscitator does not muddy Breuer but the one is a ABCs this tonsil is uncaulked. fact11: If this tonsil does not avoid Cacicus but it is a ABCs then the fact that this resuscitator is uncaulked is not wrong. fact12: That this resuscitator is a Tetrao is right. fact13: That miner does not bound hyperactivity and does muddy Breuer. fact14: This tonsil is a ABCs. fact15: This resuscitator muddies Breuer. fact16: This tonsil is a ABCs if that miner does avoid Cacicus. fact17: If this tonsil avoids Cacicus then that miner is not a kind of a ABCs and muddies Breuer. fact18: This resuscitator is a kind of non-sanious one that muddies Breuer. fact19: That miner muddies Breuer if this tonsil is not a kind of a ABCs and avoids Cacicus. fact20: that Cacicus avoids miner. fact21: Someone is not uncaulked if that the one is not a Berlage and avoids Cacicus does not hold. fact22: If this tonsil does not muddy Breuer and is a ABCs then the fact that this resuscitator is not caulked hold. fact23: That miner is caulked and is a Bromeliaceae. fact24: If this tonsil does not muddy Breuer and is uncaulked then that miner avoids Cacicus. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this resuscitator is uncaulked is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact1 -> int1: This tonsil does not muddy Breuer but the one is a ABCs.; int1 & fact22 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That everyone dismantles does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: That everything is a quip is true.

fact1: (x): {FS}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That everything is a quip is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That everyone dismantles does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That pogrom does not happens is right.

¬{B}

fact1: The fact that pogrom does not occurs is correct if the fact that poulticing emaciation and vicarialness occurs is wrong. fact2: Non-tensileness or non-grossness or both prevents congregating. fact3: The fact that pogrom does not happens and thundershower occurs is false if congregating does not occurs. fact4: The fact that callosotomy occurs is wrong if the fact that notpogrom but thundershower occurs is false. fact5: That both Afrikaansness and stealing Andrenidae occurs is incorrect if callosotomy does not occurs. fact6: Both pogrom and callosotomy happens if thundershower does not occurs.

fact1: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact2: (¬{F} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} fact3: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{B} & {C}) fact4: ¬(¬{B} & {C}) -> ¬{A} fact5: ¬{A} -> ¬({FA} & {FH}) fact6: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A})

That Afrikaansness and stealing Andrenidae happens does not hold.

¬({FA} & {FH})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that pogrom does not occurs is correct if the fact that poulticing emaciation and vicarialness occurs is wrong. fact2: Non-tensileness or non-grossness or both prevents congregating. fact3: The fact that pogrom does not happens and thundershower occurs is false if congregating does not occurs. fact4: The fact that callosotomy occurs is wrong if the fact that notpogrom but thundershower occurs is false. fact5: That both Afrikaansness and stealing Andrenidae occurs is incorrect if callosotomy does not occurs. fact6: Both pogrom and callosotomy happens if thundershower does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That pogrom does not happens is right. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that bedesman is not a spiritualty but the one is a gibbousness is wrong.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: If this Deltasone is not a spiritualty it is not undeterminable. fact2: The fact that if this parts is not a slurred but the one is isotonic then that bedesman does not hedge is not false. fact3: If that bedesman is not a gibbousness the man is not a designed and not loamy. fact4: This parts is not a kind of a Lancastrian if the depiction is a kind of a Lancastrian. fact5: Something is not hematogenic but the thing is a Erignathus if the thing does not hedge. fact6: That bedesman is not a kind of a spiritualty and is a isomerism. fact7: The proline is not a bouncing if that the one does not wrinkle is right. fact8: The albuterol is not a kind of a gibbousness. fact9: A non-hematogenic thing wrinkles and is antithyroid. fact10: That that bedesman does not wrinkle is true if that bedesman is not a blondness. fact11: If that bedesman does not wrinkle the one is not a spiritualty and is a gibbousness. fact12: If this parts is not a Lancastrian this parts is not a slurred but this person is isotonic. fact13: That bedesman does not wrinkle. fact14: The fact that the fact that some person is not a spiritualty but the one is a kind of a gibbousness is right is wrong if the person does wrinkle. fact15: That bedesman does not gad lunchtime but the one is a certificate.

fact1: ¬{AA}{aj} -> ¬{FE}{aj} fact2: (¬{G}{b} & {F}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact3: ¬{AB}{a} -> (¬{DM}{a} & {GH}{a}) fact4: {H}{c} -> ¬{H}{b} fact5: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{C}x & {D}x) fact6: (¬{AA}{a} & {DC}{a}) fact7: ¬{A}{hu} -> ¬{BQ}{hu} fact8: ¬{AB}{gr} fact9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact10: ¬{GA}{a} -> ¬{A}{a} fact11: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact12: ¬{H}{b} -> (¬{G}{b} & {F}{b}) fact13: ¬{A}{a} fact14: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact15: (¬{EC}{a} & {CQ}{a})

That that bedesman is not a spiritualty but the one is a gibbousness is wrong.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Deltasone is not a spiritualty it is not undeterminable. fact2: The fact that if this parts is not a slurred but the one is isotonic then that bedesman does not hedge is not false. fact3: If that bedesman is not a gibbousness the man is not a designed and not loamy. fact4: This parts is not a kind of a Lancastrian if the depiction is a kind of a Lancastrian. fact5: Something is not hematogenic but the thing is a Erignathus if the thing does not hedge. fact6: That bedesman is not a kind of a spiritualty and is a isomerism. fact7: The proline is not a bouncing if that the one does not wrinkle is right. fact8: The albuterol is not a kind of a gibbousness. fact9: A non-hematogenic thing wrinkles and is antithyroid. fact10: That that bedesman does not wrinkle is true if that bedesman is not a blondness. fact11: If that bedesman does not wrinkle the one is not a spiritualty and is a gibbousness. fact12: If this parts is not a Lancastrian this parts is not a slurred but this person is isotonic. fact13: That bedesman does not wrinkle. fact14: The fact that the fact that some person is not a spiritualty but the one is a kind of a gibbousness is right is wrong if the person does wrinkle. fact15: That bedesman does not gad lunchtime but the one is a certificate. ; $hypothesis$ = That that bedesman is not a spiritualty but the one is a gibbousness is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that notpopularness but amending PSF occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{C} & {D})

fact1: Immunoassay happens. fact2: Blurred occurs but grooving does not occurs. fact3: If electroencephalographicness happens unpopularness and amending PSF happens. fact4: Flexure does not occurs and anticlockwiseness occurs. fact5: That skyrocketing classicalism does not occurs but epiphysialness happens is brought about by non-electroencephalographicness.

fact1: {HT} fact2: ({BF} & ¬{EH}) fact3: {A} -> (¬{C} & {D}) fact4: (¬{BO} & {JG}) fact5: ¬{A} -> (¬{CP} & {FO})

Skyrocketing classicalism does not happens but epiphysialness occurs.

(¬{CP} & {FO})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Immunoassay happens. fact2: Blurred occurs but grooving does not occurs. fact3: If electroencephalographicness happens unpopularness and amending PSF happens. fact4: Flexure does not occurs and anticlockwiseness occurs. fact5: That skyrocketing classicalism does not occurs but epiphysialness happens is brought about by non-electroencephalographicness. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that notpopularness but amending PSF occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that essayer is cytogenetical and Nigerien is incorrect.

¬({D}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: That essayer is Nigerien if that carboxyl is a Bhutan. fact2: That essayer hoots leukemia. fact3: That carboxyl is a kind of a Bhutan and antedates Aeolia. fact4: That carboxyl antedates Aeolia. fact5: If someone hoots leukemia it is a Bhutan. fact6: There exists nobody that does not antedate Aeolia and is a kind of a Bhutan. fact7: If someone is a presumptuousness then it is cytogenetical. fact8: That essayer hoots leukemia and it is a presumptuousness.

fact1: {A}{a} -> {C}{b} fact2: {F}{b} fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: {B}{a} fact5: (x): {F}x -> {A}x fact6: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) fact7: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact8: ({F}{b} & {E}{b})

That that essayer is cytogenetical and Nigerien is incorrect.

¬({D}{b} & {C}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That essayer is Nigerien if that carboxyl is a Bhutan. fact2: That essayer hoots leukemia. fact3: That carboxyl is a kind of a Bhutan and antedates Aeolia. fact4: That carboxyl antedates Aeolia. fact5: If someone hoots leukemia it is a Bhutan. fact6: There exists nobody that does not antedate Aeolia and is a kind of a Bhutan. fact7: If someone is a presumptuousness then it is cytogenetical. fact8: That essayer hoots leukemia and it is a presumptuousness. ; $hypothesis$ = That that essayer is cytogenetical and Nigerien is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: That carboxyl is a Bhutan.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: That essayer is Nigerien.; fact8 -> int3: That essayer is a presumptuousness.; fact7 -> int4: That that essayer is cytogenetical is true if that essayer is a presumptuousness.; int3 & int4 -> int5: That essayer is cytogenetical.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That stomate is not a Characinidae.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: That stomate is a kind of a Characinidae if the one does fade. fact2: That footrest is serous if that footrest is not a Characinidae. fact3: That stomate is not a Turing. fact4: Somebody that is not catapultic but a Turing is not a Characinidae. fact5: This scout is not a kind of a Turing if that stomate is both a Characinidae and a Turing. fact6: If that spine is not a pointedness then this plectrum is a pointedness. fact7: If somebody does not clown enviousness that the one is catapultic and it is Wagnerian is incorrect. fact8: That that stomate does not fade but the one intensifies does not hold if that stomate is not a Turing. fact9: This filum is extinguishable. fact10: Someone that fades is a kind of a Characinidae. fact11: Someone does not clown enviousness if that the man does not scab Abkhazia and clown enviousness does not hold. fact12: This filum is a pointedness. fact13: If this filum is extinguishable and is a pointedness then that spine is not a pointedness. fact14: That this plectrum does not scab Abkhazia and clowns enviousness is incorrect if that thing is a pointedness. fact15: Someone is a Characinidae if that the one does not fade and the one does intensify is wrong. fact16: If that stomate is non-catapultic then that stomate is a Characinidae and the thing is a Turing. fact17: The fact that that stomate fades and does intensify does not hold. fact18: Someone is not catapultic if the fact that the one is a kind of catapultic one that is Wagnerian does not hold. fact19: That that that stomate fades and intensifies does not hold is correct if it is not a Turing.

fact1: {AA}{a} -> {B}{a} fact2: ¬{B}{ct} -> {FL}{ct} fact3: ¬{A}{a} fact4: (x): (¬{C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact5: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{io} fact6: ¬{G}{c} -> {G}{b} fact7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & {E}x) fact8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact9: {I}{d} fact10: (x): {AA}x -> {B}x fact11: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}x fact12: {G}{d} fact13: ({I}{d} & {G}{d}) -> ¬{G}{c} fact14: {G}{b} -> ¬(¬{F}{b} & {D}{b}) fact15: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact16: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact17: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact18: (x): ¬({C}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact19: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

That stomate is not a Characinidae.

¬{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That stomate is a kind of a Characinidae if the one does fade. fact2: That footrest is serous if that footrest is not a Characinidae. fact3: That stomate is not a Turing. fact4: Somebody that is not catapultic but a Turing is not a Characinidae. fact5: This scout is not a kind of a Turing if that stomate is both a Characinidae and a Turing. fact6: If that spine is not a pointedness then this plectrum is a pointedness. fact7: If somebody does not clown enviousness that the one is catapultic and it is Wagnerian is incorrect. fact8: That that stomate does not fade but the one intensifies does not hold if that stomate is not a Turing. fact9: This filum is extinguishable. fact10: Someone that fades is a kind of a Characinidae. fact11: Someone does not clown enviousness if that the man does not scab Abkhazia and clown enviousness does not hold. fact12: This filum is a pointedness. fact13: If this filum is extinguishable and is a pointedness then that spine is not a pointedness. fact14: That this plectrum does not scab Abkhazia and clowns enviousness is incorrect if that thing is a pointedness. fact15: Someone is a Characinidae if that the one does not fade and the one does intensify is wrong. fact16: If that stomate is non-catapultic then that stomate is a Characinidae and the thing is a Turing. fact17: The fact that that stomate fades and does intensify does not hold. fact18: Someone is not catapultic if the fact that the one is a kind of catapultic one that is Wagnerian does not hold. fact19: That that that stomate fades and intensifies does not hold is correct if it is not a Turing. ; $hypothesis$ = That stomate is not a Characinidae. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact3 -> int1: That that stomate does not fade and intensifies is incorrect.; fact15 -> int2: That stomate is a Characinidae if the fact that the man does not fade and this one intensifies is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Both drill and frisk occurs.

({B} & {C})

fact1: Directingness happens. fact2: If that Monegasque occurs but birding FHLMC does not happens does not hold then Monegasque does not happens. fact3: Defiling boon happens. fact4: Linemen does not happens if that either preluding does not occurs or sisterliness does not happens or both is wrong. fact5: Beguine happens. fact6: That frisk occurs hold. fact7: Frisk does not occurs if the fact that preluding does not occurs and sisterliness does not happens is wrong. fact8: Either drill happens or linemen happens or both if frisk does not occurs. fact9: If the fact that bombination does not occurs hold then that Monegasque occurs but birding FHLMC does not happens is wrong. fact10: Bombination does not happens if forking toed occurs and cankering lysogeny does not occurs. fact11: Subordinate occurs. fact12: If Monegasque does not occurs the fact that preluding does not happens or sisterliness does not happens or both is wrong. fact13: That forking toed does not occurs but bombination occurs does not hold if that cankering lysogeny happens hold. fact14: Dawah happens. fact15: Birding FHLMC does not happens and Monegasque does not occurs if bombination does not occurs. fact16: That Spartanness does not occurs triggers that both cankering lysogeny and thermicness occurs. fact17: That linemen happens leads to drill. fact18: That if Monegasque does not occurs then the fact that preluding does not happens and sisterliness does not happens does not hold hold. fact19: If linemen does not happens the fact that drill and frisk occurs is incorrect. fact20: Non-thermicness causes that forking toed happens but cankering lysogeny does not happens. fact21: Bombination does not occurs if the fact that forking toed does not occurs but bombination happens is not right. fact22: Agism triggers admittance.

fact1: {BP} fact2: ¬({F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} fact3: {AI} fact4: ¬(¬{D} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{A} fact5: {IB} fact6: {C} fact7: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} fact8: ¬{C} -> ({B} v {A}) fact9: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & ¬{G}) fact10: ({I} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} fact11: {GE} fact12: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{D} v ¬{E}) fact13: {J} -> ¬(¬{I} & {H}) fact14: {FM} fact15: ¬{H} -> (¬{G} & ¬{F}) fact16: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) fact17: {A} -> {B} fact18: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact19: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact20: ¬{K} -> ({I} & ¬{J}) fact21: ¬(¬{I} & {H}) -> ¬{H} fact22: {IA} -> {FT}

Acropetalness happens.

{FD}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Directingness happens. fact2: If that Monegasque occurs but birding FHLMC does not happens does not hold then Monegasque does not happens. fact3: Defiling boon happens. fact4: Linemen does not happens if that either preluding does not occurs or sisterliness does not happens or both is wrong. fact5: Beguine happens. fact6: That frisk occurs hold. fact7: Frisk does not occurs if the fact that preluding does not occurs and sisterliness does not happens is wrong. fact8: Either drill happens or linemen happens or both if frisk does not occurs. fact9: If the fact that bombination does not occurs hold then that Monegasque occurs but birding FHLMC does not happens is wrong. fact10: Bombination does not happens if forking toed occurs and cankering lysogeny does not occurs. fact11: Subordinate occurs. fact12: If Monegasque does not occurs the fact that preluding does not happens or sisterliness does not happens or both is wrong. fact13: That forking toed does not occurs but bombination occurs does not hold if that cankering lysogeny happens hold. fact14: Dawah happens. fact15: Birding FHLMC does not happens and Monegasque does not occurs if bombination does not occurs. fact16: That Spartanness does not occurs triggers that both cankering lysogeny and thermicness occurs. fact17: That linemen happens leads to drill. fact18: That if Monegasque does not occurs then the fact that preluding does not happens and sisterliness does not happens does not hold hold. fact19: If linemen does not happens the fact that drill and frisk occurs is incorrect. fact20: Non-thermicness causes that forking toed happens but cankering lysogeny does not happens. fact21: Bombination does not occurs if the fact that forking toed does not occurs but bombination happens is not right. fact22: Agism triggers admittance. ; $hypothesis$ = Both drill and frisk occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This wrasse is a Galilean.

{A}{a}

fact1: The cucumber is a kind of a Galilean. fact2: The fact that this wrasse is a Jaghatai hold. fact3: Someone that does not upraise Archean and is nonpolitical is not a Galilean. fact4: Everyone is not non-cryptological and the thing is not nonpolitical.

fact1: {A}{ha} fact2: {AM}{a} fact3: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact4: (x): ({D}x & ¬{C}x)

The pragmatist is a Galilean.

{A}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The cucumber is a kind of a Galilean. fact2: The fact that this wrasse is a Jaghatai hold. fact3: Someone that does not upraise Archean and is nonpolitical is not a Galilean. fact4: Everyone is not non-cryptological and the thing is not nonpolitical. ; $hypothesis$ = This wrasse is a Galilean. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This whitey is a Xylocopa and/or the one is phosphorous.

({C}{c} v {D}{c})

fact1: The fact that someone is a kind of a Xylocopa or the one is phosphorous or both is incorrect if the one is not a copse. fact2: This whitey is a copse if this bore is phosphorous. fact3: This bore is phosphorous if that this whitey is a copse is right. fact4: If this bore does loathe this whitey is a Xylocopa. fact5: This bore is a copse and/or the one does loathe. fact6: That Keynesian loathes if this bore is a copse. fact7: The sangapenum is a copse. fact8: This whitey is a Xylocopa if that this bore is a copse is correct.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x v {D}x) fact2: {D}{a} -> {A}{c} fact3: {A}{c} -> {D}{a} fact4: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact5: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact6: {A}{a} -> {B}{d} fact7: {A}{is} fact8: {A}{a} -> {C}{c}

That this whitey is a kind of a Xylocopa or it is phosphorous or both is wrong.

¬({C}{c} v {D}{c})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that someone is a kind of a Xylocopa or the one is phosphorous or both is incorrect if the one is not a copse. fact2: This whitey is a copse if this bore is phosphorous. fact3: This bore is phosphorous if that this whitey is a copse is right. fact4: If this bore does loathe this whitey is a Xylocopa. fact5: This bore is a copse and/or the one does loathe. fact6: That Keynesian loathes if this bore is a copse. fact7: The sangapenum is a copse. fact8: This whitey is a Xylocopa if that this bore is a copse is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = This whitey is a Xylocopa and/or the one is phosphorous. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact8 & fact4 -> int1: This whitey is a Xylocopa.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That minimalist is a Chilomastix.

{B}{b}

fact1: If this chad is a Chilomastix then that minimalist is a Chilomastix. fact2: If Alyssa is not least then this chad is a Chilomastix but it is not a Rilke. fact3: This egghead does carol tribunal. fact4: That minimalist is not a Chilomastix if the fact that the fact that either this chad is cerebellar or this person is a kind of a Schadenfreude or both is true is false. fact5: If that this chad is not a Rilke and/or it is a Chilomastix is wrong that minimalist is non-cerebellar. fact6: Something that does not clitter and is not a shiftlessness is not unadventurous. fact7: If this chad is not a Rilke that this chad is not cerebellar or the one is a kind of a Schadenfreude or both is wrong. fact8: This chad is not non-cerebellar if the thing is not a Rilke. fact9: If this egghead is not an instability then this bottlenose does not clitter and the one is not a kind of a shiftlessness. fact10: This flounder debilitates Melastomataceae and/or this thing is a surrounding. fact11: If someone is unadventurous then this either is not least or does not chelated Tiarella or both. fact12: If some person is a Rilke then that the person is not a construct and/or that one is coordinative does not hold. fact13: That minimalist is not a Chilomastix if that this chad is not cerebellar and/or the one is a Schadenfreude does not hold. fact14: This chad is not a Rilke. fact15: If some person that carols tribunal enfolds stability then the person is not an instability. fact16: If this chad is not a wangle then the fact that either this chad is not a surrounding or the thing is a Mastotermes or both is incorrect. fact17: This chad is cerebellar.

fact1: {B}{a} -> {B}{b} fact2: ¬{C}{c} -> ({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact3: {I}{e} fact4: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact5: ¬(¬{A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact6: (x): (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) -> {D}x fact7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) fact8: ¬{A}{a} -> {AA}{a} fact9: ¬{H}{e} -> (¬{F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) fact10: ({L}{f} v {K}{f}) fact11: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{E}x) fact12: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{EA}x v {N}x) fact13: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact14: ¬{A}{a} fact15: (x): ({I}x & {J}x) -> ¬{H}x fact16: ¬{AD}{a} -> ¬(¬{K}{a} v {CU}{a}) fact17: {AA}{a}

The fact that that camass either is not a construct or is coordinative or both does not hold.

¬(¬{EA}{hi} v {N}{hi})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this chad is a Chilomastix then that minimalist is a Chilomastix. fact2: If Alyssa is not least then this chad is a Chilomastix but it is not a Rilke. fact3: This egghead does carol tribunal. fact4: That minimalist is not a Chilomastix if the fact that the fact that either this chad is cerebellar or this person is a kind of a Schadenfreude or both is true is false. fact5: If that this chad is not a Rilke and/or it is a Chilomastix is wrong that minimalist is non-cerebellar. fact6: Something that does not clitter and is not a shiftlessness is not unadventurous. fact7: If this chad is not a Rilke that this chad is not cerebellar or the one is a kind of a Schadenfreude or both is wrong. fact8: This chad is not non-cerebellar if the thing is not a Rilke. fact9: If this egghead is not an instability then this bottlenose does not clitter and the one is not a kind of a shiftlessness. fact10: This flounder debilitates Melastomataceae and/or this thing is a surrounding. fact11: If someone is unadventurous then this either is not least or does not chelated Tiarella or both. fact12: If some person is a Rilke then that the person is not a construct and/or that one is coordinative does not hold. fact13: That minimalist is not a Chilomastix if that this chad is not cerebellar and/or the one is a Schadenfreude does not hold. fact14: This chad is not a Rilke. fact15: If some person that carols tribunal enfolds stability then the person is not an instability. fact16: If this chad is not a wangle then the fact that either this chad is not a surrounding or the thing is a Mastotermes or both is incorrect. fact17: This chad is cerebellar. ; $hypothesis$ = That minimalist is a Chilomastix. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact14 -> int1: That this chad is not cerebellar and/or is a Schadenfreude is not correct.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Inclosing Sarcocephalus does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: Inclosing Sarcocephalus results in that despoliation happens. fact2: Despoliation does not occurs and pretending dissenting does not occurs.

fact1: {A} -> {B} fact2: (¬{B} & ¬{C})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Inclosing Sarcocephalus results in that despoliation happens. fact2: Despoliation does not occurs and pretending dissenting does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Inclosing Sarcocephalus does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that inclosing Sarcocephalus happens.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: Despoliation happens.; fact2 -> int2: Despoliation does not occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Milontin is not socioeconomic.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: The fact that this grannie does maltreat Sphaerocarpales but the one is not a ungracefulness does not hold if the one is not breathless. fact2: If Jeff is not a ROTC then the fact that that pearler does not bare roundedness but the person allows is incorrect. fact3: If that that pearler does not assault Schumpeter is right the fact that this Milontin is vasomotor and/or is ophthalmic does not hold. fact4: Something does not allow if that that the one does not bare roundedness and allow is not incorrect does not hold. fact5: Someone that is ophthalmic is socioeconomic. fact6: If somebody is non-vasomotor it is not socioeconomic. fact7: If that that something is a kind of a MRTA and/or it is stretched is right is incorrect then the thing is not a kind of a telecast. fact8: Jeff is not a ROTC if the fact that this grannie maltreats Sphaerocarpales and is not a ungracefulness does not hold. fact9: This Milontin is ophthalmic if she is vasomotor. fact10: The fact that the fact that somebody is a MRTA and/or this is stretched hold is incorrect if the one does not allow. fact11: That Achomawi is socioeconomic. fact12: Someone does not assault Schumpeter if it does not tax Hyalospongiae and it does not tranquillising. fact13: Somebody is not socioeconomic if the fact that the one is vasomotor or the one is ophthalmic or both is wrong. fact14: Someone does not tax Hyalospongiae and does not tranquillising if the one is not a telecast. fact15: This Milontin is vasomotor.

fact1: ¬{O}{d} -> ¬({N}{d} & ¬{M}{d}) fact2: ¬{K}{c} -> ¬(¬{L}{b} & {J}{b}) fact3: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{L}x & {J}x) -> ¬{J}x fact5: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}x fact7: (x): ¬({H}x v {I}x) -> ¬{G}x fact8: ¬({N}{d} & ¬{M}{d}) -> ¬{K}{c} fact9: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact10: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬({H}x v {I}x) fact11: {C}{dg} fact12: (x): (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact13: (x): ¬({A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact14: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) fact15: {A}{a}

This Milontin is not socioeconomic.

¬{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this grannie does maltreat Sphaerocarpales but the one is not a ungracefulness does not hold if the one is not breathless. fact2: If Jeff is not a ROTC then the fact that that pearler does not bare roundedness but the person allows is incorrect. fact3: If that that pearler does not assault Schumpeter is right the fact that this Milontin is vasomotor and/or is ophthalmic does not hold. fact4: Something does not allow if that that the one does not bare roundedness and allow is not incorrect does not hold. fact5: Someone that is ophthalmic is socioeconomic. fact6: If somebody is non-vasomotor it is not socioeconomic. fact7: If that that something is a kind of a MRTA and/or it is stretched is right is incorrect then the thing is not a kind of a telecast. fact8: Jeff is not a ROTC if the fact that this grannie maltreats Sphaerocarpales and is not a ungracefulness does not hold. fact9: This Milontin is ophthalmic if she is vasomotor. fact10: The fact that the fact that somebody is a MRTA and/or this is stretched hold is incorrect if the one does not allow. fact11: That Achomawi is socioeconomic. fact12: Someone does not assault Schumpeter if it does not tax Hyalospongiae and it does not tranquillising. fact13: Somebody is not socioeconomic if the fact that the one is vasomotor or the one is ophthalmic or both is wrong. fact14: Someone does not tax Hyalospongiae and does not tranquillising if the one is not a telecast. fact15: This Milontin is vasomotor. ; $hypothesis$ = This Milontin is not socioeconomic. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact15 -> int1: This Milontin is ophthalmic.; fact5 -> int2: If this Milontin is ophthalmic then the one is socioeconomic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Either monetisation does not happens or caduceanness does not happens or both.

(¬{AA} v ¬{AB})

fact1: If the fact that both non-psychogeneticness and brisance occurs is incorrect brisance does not happens. fact2: Surmountableness occurs and raising happens if brisance does not occurs. fact3: The fact that exposure does not occurs and/or sissing does not happens does not hold. fact4: That pituitary does not happens and/or footwork does not happens does not hold. fact5: Caduceanness occurs. fact6: That burnishing Shawwal does not happens and humanistness does not happens is triggered by dramaturgy. fact7: Either that brisance does not happens or insurmountableness or both leads to non-insurmountable. fact8: The fact that monetisation does not happens and/or caduceanness does not happens is false. fact9: That either noncolumnedness does not occurs or legalization does not occurs or both is incorrect. fact10: If humanistness does not happens that brisance does not occurs and psychogeneticness does not occurs is true. fact11: Commandment happens. fact12: That deaminating foaming and dramaturgy occurs is triggered by non-synopticness. fact13: Surmountableness leads to that monetisation does not occurs or non-caduceanness or both. fact14: Synopticness does not occurs if the fact that laboring and non-hematologicalness occurs does not hold. fact15: That secularisation does not happens and/or afloatness does not happens is false if surmountableness does not occurs. fact16: That hitching does not happens and/or abasement does not occurs is false. fact17: If the fact that brisance does not happens is true then raising happens and surmountableness happens. fact18: Mercuricness occurs. fact19: That muff does not occurs or sweetness does not occurs or both does not hold. fact20: That either choiring does not happens or corbeling centesimo does not happens or both does not hold if surmountableness occurs.

fact1: ¬(¬{D} & {C}) -> ¬{C} fact2: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact3: ¬(¬{BB} v ¬{FK}) fact4: ¬(¬{AK} v ¬{ER}) fact5: {AB} fact6: {G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{E}) fact7: (¬{C} v ¬{A}) -> ¬{A} fact8: ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) fact9: ¬(¬{EJ} v ¬{DE}) fact10: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact11: {GO} fact12: ¬{I} -> ({H} & {G}) fact13: {A} -> (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) fact14: ¬({K} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{I} fact15: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{CJ} v ¬{HS}) fact16: ¬(¬{FL} v ¬{JF}) fact17: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact18: {BJ} fact19: ¬(¬{AD} v ¬{IK}) fact20: {A} -> ¬(¬{IE} v ¬{DT})

That either choiring does not happens or corbeling centesimo does not occurs or both is not correct.

¬(¬{IE} v ¬{DT})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that both non-psychogeneticness and brisance occurs is incorrect brisance does not happens. fact2: Surmountableness occurs and raising happens if brisance does not occurs. fact3: The fact that exposure does not occurs and/or sissing does not happens does not hold. fact4: That pituitary does not happens and/or footwork does not happens does not hold. fact5: Caduceanness occurs. fact6: That burnishing Shawwal does not happens and humanistness does not happens is triggered by dramaturgy. fact7: Either that brisance does not happens or insurmountableness or both leads to non-insurmountable. fact8: The fact that monetisation does not happens and/or caduceanness does not happens is false. fact9: That either noncolumnedness does not occurs or legalization does not occurs or both is incorrect. fact10: If humanistness does not happens that brisance does not occurs and psychogeneticness does not occurs is true. fact11: Commandment happens. fact12: That deaminating foaming and dramaturgy occurs is triggered by non-synopticness. fact13: Surmountableness leads to that monetisation does not occurs or non-caduceanness or both. fact14: Synopticness does not occurs if the fact that laboring and non-hematologicalness occurs does not hold. fact15: That secularisation does not happens and/or afloatness does not happens is false if surmountableness does not occurs. fact16: That hitching does not happens and/or abasement does not occurs is false. fact17: If the fact that brisance does not happens is true then raising happens and surmountableness happens. fact18: Mercuricness occurs. fact19: That muff does not occurs or sweetness does not occurs or both does not hold. fact20: That either choiring does not happens or corbeling centesimo does not happens or both does not hold if surmountableness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Either monetisation does not happens or caduceanness does not happens or both. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that Bradley is not larger or does not intone Littorina or both is incorrect is correct.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: There exists no one that either is not a Dactylopteridae or is not interspecific or both. fact2: There exists nobody that is not a kind of a Rhynchoelaps and/or is not a neuroepithelioma. fact3: Bradley blemishes Annonaceae. fact4: There is no person such that the person is not a jaggedness or is not a kind of a pruriency or both. fact5: There is nothing that does not deploy or does not contaminate Liparididae or both. fact6: The kalian is larger. fact7: That the stoep is non-larger and/or the one is not nectariferous does not hold. fact8: There is no one such that that person is visible or not a SEC or both. fact9: Bradley is a Bradbury. fact10: There is nobody such that the thing does not depend and/or the thing is not a prescript. fact11: There is nothing that is not unholy and/or is not a kind of a snow. fact12: Everybody regales amateurishness.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{GK}x v ¬{AR}x) fact2: (x): ¬(¬{JA}x v ¬{CP}x) fact3: {HQ}{aa} fact4: (x): ¬(¬{A}x v ¬{CK}x) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{JC}x v ¬{AH}x) fact6: {AA}{jf} fact7: ¬(¬{AA}{ht} v ¬{EG}{ht}) fact8: (x): ¬(¬{JB}x v ¬{DC}x) fact9: {FJ}{aa} fact10: (x): ¬(¬{CT}x v ¬{ID}x) fact11: (x): ¬(¬{HN}x v ¬{P}x) fact12: (x): {BM}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists no one that either is not a Dactylopteridae or is not interspecific or both. fact2: There exists nobody that is not a kind of a Rhynchoelaps and/or is not a neuroepithelioma. fact3: Bradley blemishes Annonaceae. fact4: There is no person such that the person is not a jaggedness or is not a kind of a pruriency or both. fact5: There is nothing that does not deploy or does not contaminate Liparididae or both. fact6: The kalian is larger. fact7: That the stoep is non-larger and/or the one is not nectariferous does not hold. fact8: There is no one such that that person is visible or not a SEC or both. fact9: Bradley is a Bradbury. fact10: There is nobody such that the thing does not depend and/or the thing is not a prescript. fact11: There is nothing that is not unholy and/or is not a kind of a snow. fact12: Everybody regales amateurishness. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that Bradley is not larger or does not intone Littorina or both is incorrect is correct. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That oilfield is not nonvolatile.

{C}{b}

fact1: The fact that somebody hurls Caryocaraceae and/or is immoral is incorrect if this thing does not magnetise fauvism. fact2: This ribbing is volatile. fact3: That oilfield is volatile if the one hurls Caryocaraceae. fact4: That that oilfield is volatile hold if this ribbing hurls Caryocaraceae. fact5: This ribbing does rebuke. fact6: Something that hurls Caryocaraceae bombs hypnophobia. fact7: Someone that is not a Sulidae and/or does not elude Haemodorum does not magnetise fauvism. fact8: If the fact that this ribbing does hurl Caryocaraceae or the one is immoral or both does not hold then that oilfield is not volatile. fact9: This ribbing is immoral. fact10: That someone is immoral one that is not Wilder is incorrect if the one is not sociopathic. fact11: That oilfield is an alacrity. fact12: That oilfield is not volatile if this ribbing is not immoral but volatile. fact13: The fact that if that quickset is a Podiceps and this thing is a Limeira then that quickset is non-haematopoietic is correct. fact14: That oilfield is a shore. fact15: If that quickset is not haematopoietic then the one is not a kind of a Sulidae or does not elude Haemodorum or both. fact16: Someone is not immoral if that the one is both immoral and non-Wilder is not true. fact17: That that oilfield is immoral is right. fact18: This ribbing hurls Caryocaraceae and the one is volatile if that quickset does not magnetise fauvism. fact19: This ribbing hurls Caryocaraceae if that the one is immoral is correct.

fact1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({B}x v {A}x) fact2: {C}{a} fact3: {B}{b} -> {C}{b} fact4: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} fact5: {FP}{a} fact6: (x): {B}x -> {HT}x fact7: (x): (¬{F}x v ¬{G}x) -> ¬{D}x fact8: ¬({B}{a} v {A}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact9: {A}{a} fact10: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{E}x) fact11: {R}{b} fact12: (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact13: ({I}{c} & {J}{c}) -> ¬{H}{c} fact14: {GU}{b} fact15: ¬{H}{c} -> (¬{F}{c} v ¬{G}{c}) fact16: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{A}x fact17: {A}{b} fact18: ¬{D}{c} -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) fact19: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}

That oilfield is not volatile.

¬{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that somebody hurls Caryocaraceae and/or is immoral is incorrect if this thing does not magnetise fauvism. fact2: This ribbing is volatile. fact3: That oilfield is volatile if the one hurls Caryocaraceae. fact4: That that oilfield is volatile hold if this ribbing hurls Caryocaraceae. fact5: This ribbing does rebuke. fact6: Something that hurls Caryocaraceae bombs hypnophobia. fact7: Someone that is not a Sulidae and/or does not elude Haemodorum does not magnetise fauvism. fact8: If the fact that this ribbing does hurl Caryocaraceae or the one is immoral or both does not hold then that oilfield is not volatile. fact9: This ribbing is immoral. fact10: That someone is immoral one that is not Wilder is incorrect if the one is not sociopathic. fact11: That oilfield is an alacrity. fact12: That oilfield is not volatile if this ribbing is not immoral but volatile. fact13: The fact that if that quickset is a Podiceps and this thing is a Limeira then that quickset is non-haematopoietic is correct. fact14: That oilfield is a shore. fact15: If that quickset is not haematopoietic then the one is not a kind of a Sulidae or does not elude Haemodorum or both. fact16: Someone is not immoral if that the one is both immoral and non-Wilder is not true. fact17: That that oilfield is immoral is right. fact18: This ribbing hurls Caryocaraceae and the one is volatile if that quickset does not magnetise fauvism. fact19: This ribbing hurls Caryocaraceae if that the one is immoral is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That oilfield is not nonvolatile. ; $proof$ =

fact19 & fact9 -> int1: This ribbing hurls Caryocaraceae.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

There exists somebody such that if it is not unashamed that it is lymphocytic and it is a little is wrong.

(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)

fact1: The fact that this deckle is a little and the one is a releasing is wrong if the one does not pocked Nederland. fact2: If Dianne is not unashamed then Dianne is lymphocytic a little. fact3: That this palas hoots dragging and the one is a surprised does not hold if this palas is not a kind of a little. fact4: The fact that Dianne is both lymphocytic and a little does not hold if Dianne is unashamed. fact5: If Dianne is not unashamed the fact that the thing is lymphocytic and the thing is a kind of a little is wrong. fact6: There is somebody such that if the fact that the one is unashamed is correct then that the one is lymphocytic and the one is a little does not hold. fact7: There is somebody such that if the one is not unashamed then the thing is lymphocytic and the thing is a kind of a little. fact8: If Dianne is not a little that Dianne is a Styphelia and the one amends is wrong. fact9: There is someone such that if the thing is not a novelette that the one is religious one that does higgle does not hold. fact10: If Dianne is not irreducible then the fact that that the thing is both not non-prenatal and a little is correct is wrong. fact11: If some person does not dash sleeplessness the fact that the person is a kind of a remote and is a causerie is wrong.

fact1: ¬{FE}{je} -> ¬({AB}{je} & {BR}{je}) fact2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact3: ¬{AB}{ij} -> ¬({C}{ij} & {IL}{ij}) fact4: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact5: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact6: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact7: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact8: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬({ES}{aa} & {EN}{aa}) fact9: (Ex): ¬{AM}x -> ¬({GU}x & {JJ}x) fact10: ¬{CB}{aa} -> ¬({CC}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact11: (x): ¬{AI}x -> ¬({CQ}x & {B}x)

There is some man such that if the man does not dash sleeplessness the fact that he is a remote and the one is a kind of a causerie does not hold.

(Ex): ¬{AI}x -> ¬({CQ}x & {B}x)

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this deckle is a little and the one is a releasing is wrong if the one does not pocked Nederland. fact2: If Dianne is not unashamed then Dianne is lymphocytic a little. fact3: That this palas hoots dragging and the one is a surprised does not hold if this palas is not a kind of a little. fact4: The fact that Dianne is both lymphocytic and a little does not hold if Dianne is unashamed. fact5: If Dianne is not unashamed the fact that the thing is lymphocytic and the thing is a kind of a little is wrong. fact6: There is somebody such that if the fact that the one is unashamed is correct then that the one is lymphocytic and the one is a little does not hold. fact7: There is somebody such that if the one is not unashamed then the thing is lymphocytic and the thing is a kind of a little. fact8: If Dianne is not a little that Dianne is a Styphelia and the one amends is wrong. fact9: There is someone such that if the thing is not a novelette that the one is religious one that does higgle does not hold. fact10: If Dianne is not irreducible then the fact that that the thing is both not non-prenatal and a little is correct is wrong. fact11: If some person does not dash sleeplessness the fact that the person is a kind of a remote and is a causerie is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists somebody such that if it is not unashamed that it is lymphocytic and it is a little is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This kasha does not Ward Mott and the one is not a conk.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: The fact that the fact that this kasha does not Ward Mott and it is not a kind of a conk does not hold is right if this kasha is a kind of a Same. fact2: The fact that the ramie is non-neuropsychological is true if the one dandles Iridoprocne. fact3: If someone is not a Same the one does not Ward Mott and the one is not a conk. fact4: If the fact that some man is a Same and is a Mauldin is wrong then the man is not a Same. fact5: That this kasha is both a Same and a Mauldin does not hold if this kasha is not basipetal. fact6: The fact that this kasha does not Ward Mott but it is a conk does not hold. fact7: If this kasha is a kind of a Same then the fact that this one Wards Mott and the man is not a conk is false.

fact1: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact2: {F}{b} -> ¬{E}{b} fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact4: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact5: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({A}{a} & {C}{a}) fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact7: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

This kasha does not Ward Mott and the one is not a conk.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the fact that this kasha does not Ward Mott and it is not a kind of a conk does not hold is right if this kasha is a kind of a Same. fact2: The fact that the ramie is non-neuropsychological is true if the one dandles Iridoprocne. fact3: If someone is not a Same the one does not Ward Mott and the one is not a conk. fact4: If the fact that some man is a Same and is a Mauldin is wrong then the man is not a Same. fact5: That this kasha is both a Same and a Mauldin does not hold if this kasha is not basipetal. fact6: The fact that this kasha does not Ward Mott but it is a conk does not hold. fact7: If this kasha is a kind of a Same then the fact that this one Wards Mott and the man is not a conk is false. ; $hypothesis$ = This kasha does not Ward Mott and the one is not a conk. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Entertaining Lubumbashi does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: Roller occurs. fact2: That undemonstrativeness happens is true. fact3: Either non-tanningness or unfitness or both is triggered by ICING. fact4: Either improperness or evening Phalguna or both happens. fact5: Roller leads to blessing efficaciousness. fact6: That roller does not happens and blessing efficaciousness happens brings about amelioration. fact7: If dehydrating Amygdalus does not occurs then that both ICING and revolutionary occurs is right.

fact1: {A} fact2: {FU} fact3: {F} -> (¬{E} v ¬{C}) fact4: ({GD} v {HL}) fact5: {A} -> {B} fact6: (¬{A} & {B}) -> {S} fact7: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G})

Amelioration happens.

{S}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Roller occurs. fact2: That undemonstrativeness happens is true. fact3: Either non-tanningness or unfitness or both is triggered by ICING. fact4: Either improperness or evening Phalguna or both happens. fact5: Roller leads to blessing efficaciousness. fact6: That roller does not happens and blessing efficaciousness happens brings about amelioration. fact7: If dehydrating Amygdalus does not occurs then that both ICING and revolutionary occurs is right. ; $hypothesis$ = Entertaining Lubumbashi does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

There exists somebody such that if it is not antitypic and does not embellish Luo it asphyxiates Cephalotus.

(Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x

fact1: Jonathan is a destructiveness if the one is not a antonym and does not leather athleticism. fact2: If someone is not antitypic but it embellishes Luo it asphyxiates Cephalotus. fact3: If this teetotaler is not a bubbling and does not foreclose that the one is not antitypic is incorrect. fact4: If a non-antitypic one does not embellish Luo the one does asphyxiate Cephalotus. fact5: If this teetotaler is antitypic but the one does not embellish Luo then this teetotaler asphyxiates Cephalotus.

fact1: (¬{CO}{id} & ¬{BU}{id}) -> {EQ}{id} fact2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact3: (¬{EN}{aa} & ¬{FK}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} fact4: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact5: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Jonathan is a destructiveness if the one is not a antonym and does not leather athleticism. fact2: If someone is not antitypic but it embellishes Luo it asphyxiates Cephalotus. fact3: If this teetotaler is not a bubbling and does not foreclose that the one is not antitypic is incorrect. fact4: If a non-antitypic one does not embellish Luo the one does asphyxiate Cephalotus. fact5: If this teetotaler is antitypic but the one does not embellish Luo then this teetotaler asphyxiates Cephalotus. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists somebody such that if it is not antitypic and does not embellish Luo it asphyxiates Cephalotus. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: If this teetotaler is not antitypic and the one does not embellish Luo the one asphyxiates Cephalotus.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That there exists something such that it is a kind of a Caucasia does not hold.

¬((Ex): {A}x)

fact1: If that that animal is both not a hydrography and a Caucasia is wrong that potato is a NAWCWPNS. fact2: There is someone such that the one slices astrodynamics. fact3: The fact that that animal is a kind of an eared does not hold if Johnny is not an eared and the thing is not a Rumpelstiltskin. fact4: Johnny is a euphory. fact5: If that animal is not an eared that the fact that that animal is not a hydrography but the thing is a Caucasia hold is false. fact6: There exists someone such that the one is a Vesalius. fact7: If Johnny is a euphory and this thing is a kind of an eared that animal is not an eared. fact8: There exists some man such that the one is a Pynchon. fact9: That potato is not a kind of a hydrography if that animal is both a hydrography and citrous. fact10: There exists somebody such that the one is blinded. fact11: There exists something such that that the one is a kind of a Caucasia is right. fact12: There is somebody such that the thing is inconsiderate. fact13: Somebody that is not a hydrography is both not non-wise and a Caucasia. fact14: Somebody is a kind of a hydrography and the thing is citrous if the thing is not an eared. fact15: Someone is a Doppler. fact16: There is someone such that that thing is unmarred. fact17: There is someone such that the one is a kind of a deep. fact18: If that someone is not a Asclepius but it is a Caucasia is incorrect the one is a Asclepius. fact19: Something is a forestry. fact20: There exists someone such that the one is a Bronte.

fact1: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {HP}{a} fact2: (Ex): {EK}x fact3: (¬{C}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact4: {F}{c} fact5: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) fact6: (Ex): {CK}x fact7: ({F}{c} & {C}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact8: (Ex): {DJ}x fact9: ({B}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact10: (Ex): {DG}x fact11: (Ex): {A}x fact12: (Ex): {GL}x fact13: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({FT}x & {A}x) fact14: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {D}x) fact15: (Ex): {BK}x fact16: (Ex): {GN}x fact17: (Ex): {GB}x fact18: (x): ¬(¬{BN}x & {A}x) -> {BN}x fact19: (Ex): {GI}x fact20: (Ex): {II}x

There exists somebody such that the one is a kind of a NAWCWPNS.

(Ex): {HP}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that that animal is both not a hydrography and a Caucasia is wrong that potato is a NAWCWPNS. fact2: There is someone such that the one slices astrodynamics. fact3: The fact that that animal is a kind of an eared does not hold if Johnny is not an eared and the thing is not a Rumpelstiltskin. fact4: Johnny is a euphory. fact5: If that animal is not an eared that the fact that that animal is not a hydrography but the thing is a Caucasia hold is false. fact6: There exists someone such that the one is a Vesalius. fact7: If Johnny is a euphory and this thing is a kind of an eared that animal is not an eared. fact8: There exists some man such that the one is a Pynchon. fact9: That potato is not a kind of a hydrography if that animal is both a hydrography and citrous. fact10: There exists somebody such that the one is blinded. fact11: There exists something such that that the one is a kind of a Caucasia is right. fact12: There is somebody such that the thing is inconsiderate. fact13: Somebody that is not a hydrography is both not non-wise and a Caucasia. fact14: Somebody is a kind of a hydrography and the thing is citrous if the thing is not an eared. fact15: Someone is a Doppler. fact16: There is someone such that that thing is unmarred. fact17: There is someone such that the one is a kind of a deep. fact18: If that someone is not a Asclepius but it is a Caucasia is incorrect the one is a Asclepius. fact19: Something is a forestry. fact20: There exists someone such that the one is a Bronte. ; $hypothesis$ = That there exists something such that it is a kind of a Caucasia does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Stiffening maleficence does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: That squeaking does not occurs is prevented by distrustfulness. fact2: Calycineness brings about phrasing. fact3: Roentgenographicness occurs. fact4: Denigrating cystitis happens. fact5: Ascocarpousness occurs. fact6: If denigrating cystitis occurs then stiffening maleficence happens. fact7: Discalceateness happens. fact8: If phrasing happens then notstiffening maleficence but denigrating cystitis occurs.

fact1: {DB} -> {DA} fact2: {D} -> {C} fact3: {CK} fact4: {A} fact5: {S} fact6: {A} -> {B} fact7: {HF} fact8: {C} -> (¬{B} & {A})

Stiffening maleficence does not occurs.

¬{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That squeaking does not occurs is prevented by distrustfulness. fact2: Calycineness brings about phrasing. fact3: Roentgenographicness occurs. fact4: Denigrating cystitis happens. fact5: Ascocarpousness occurs. fact6: If denigrating cystitis occurs then stiffening maleficence happens. fact7: Discalceateness happens. fact8: If phrasing happens then notstiffening maleficence but denigrating cystitis occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Stiffening maleficence does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That both force and amphoricness occurs is false.

¬({A} & {C})

fact1: Freshet prevents that sprinkle does not occurs. fact2: Either disseminating does not occurs or nauticalness occurs or both. fact3: Both impureness and Columbianness occurs. fact4: Spilling prevents that force does not occurs. fact5: If disseminating does not occurs and/or nauticalness occurs spilling happens. fact6: Archery happens if contemning Rhodophyta does not occurs and/or mouthlessness happens.

fact1: {BB} -> {IM} fact2: (¬{AA} v {AB}) fact3: ({D} & {E}) fact4: {B} -> {A} fact5: (¬{AA} v {AB}) -> {B} fact6: (¬{IK} v {K}) -> {N}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Freshet prevents that sprinkle does not occurs. fact2: Either disseminating does not occurs or nauticalness occurs or both. fact3: Both impureness and Columbianness occurs. fact4: Spilling prevents that force does not occurs. fact5: If disseminating does not occurs and/or nauticalness occurs spilling happens. fact6: Archery happens if contemning Rhodophyta does not occurs and/or mouthlessness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That both force and amphoricness occurs is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This Jeroboam is a periphrasis and the one squanders improvidence.

({D}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: If this becket is flakey then this Jeroboam squanders improvidence. fact2: This drum is a kind of a kennel. fact3: The fact that this Jeroboam is a periphrasis and the person squanders improvidence does not hold if this becket is not a simoleons. fact4: A kennel is a periphrasis. fact5: This becket is a simoleons and this one is flakey. fact6: If this drum is a kennel this Jeroboam is a kennel.

fact1: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} fact2: {E}{c} fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) fact4: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact5: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact6: {E}{c} -> {E}{b}

That this Jeroboam is a periphrasis and it squanders improvidence is incorrect.

¬({D}{b} & {C}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this becket is flakey then this Jeroboam squanders improvidence. fact2: This drum is a kind of a kennel. fact3: The fact that this Jeroboam is a periphrasis and the person squanders improvidence does not hold if this becket is not a simoleons. fact4: A kennel is a periphrasis. fact5: This becket is a simoleons and this one is flakey. fact6: If this drum is a kennel this Jeroboam is a kennel. ; $hypothesis$ = This Jeroboam is a periphrasis and the one squanders improvidence. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: This becket is flakey.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: This Jeroboam squanders improvidence.; fact4 -> int3: If this Jeroboam is a kind of a kennel this Jeroboam is a periphrasis.; fact6 & fact2 -> int4: This Jeroboam is a kennel.; int3 & int4 -> int5: This Jeroboam is a periphrasis.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that conceptualization occurs and zymolyticness happens does not hold hold.

¬({AA} & {B})

fact1: That noncausalness happens is caused by scuttlebutt. fact2: That bhakti does not occurs is triggered by that heeding Hildebrand does not happens. fact3: Nonconformance does not happens. fact4: Scuttlebutt triggers that noncausalness but notuniformising specificity occurs. fact5: Noncausalness occurs. fact6: If zymolyticness but notnonconformance happens then unprovokingness does not happens. fact7: Stressing happens. fact8: If noncausalness occurs but uniformising specificity does not happens zymolyticness happens. fact9: Pacifying prying does not occurs. fact10: If nonconformance does not occurs conceptualization but notpacifying prying occurs. fact11: Scuttlebutt happens.

fact1: {E} -> {D} fact2: ¬{CR} -> ¬{HJ} fact3: ¬{A} fact4: {E} -> ({D} & ¬{C}) fact5: {D} fact6: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{HT} fact7: {AO} fact8: ({D} & ¬{C}) -> {B} fact9: ¬{AB} fact10: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact11: {E}

That that conceptualization occurs and zymolyticness happens does not hold hold.

¬({AA} & {B})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That noncausalness happens is caused by scuttlebutt. fact2: That bhakti does not occurs is triggered by that heeding Hildebrand does not happens. fact3: Nonconformance does not happens. fact4: Scuttlebutt triggers that noncausalness but notuniformising specificity occurs. fact5: Noncausalness occurs. fact6: If zymolyticness but notnonconformance happens then unprovokingness does not happens. fact7: Stressing happens. fact8: If noncausalness occurs but uniformising specificity does not happens zymolyticness happens. fact9: Pacifying prying does not occurs. fact10: If nonconformance does not occurs conceptualization but notpacifying prying occurs. fact11: Scuttlebutt happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that conceptualization occurs and zymolyticness happens does not hold hold. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact3 -> int1: Conceptualization but notpacifying prying happens.; int1 -> int2: Conceptualization occurs.; fact11 & fact4 -> int3: Noncausalness occurs and uniformising specificity does not occurs.; int3 & fact8 -> int4: Zymolyticness happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that starch is not a recent and the one is not an encephalitis does not hold.

¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

fact1: This Hualapai is ungregarious. fact2: Someone that dampens undependability is both not nonsweet and not a changing. fact3: That starch is not a recent if this Hualapai is ungregarious and a detox. fact4: If somebody is not ungregarious then that the one is not a recent and it is not an encephalitis is false. fact5: If this heterometabolism is not a detox this Hualapai is a counterfoil but not ungregarious. fact6: The infernal is not a congeneric. fact7: Silvestre is not a NAWCWPNS and/or is non-superjacent if the infernal is not a kind of a congeneric. fact8: If a cant is toroidal the man is not a detox. fact9: Something that is not a recent is both not a recent and not an encephalitis. fact10: If Silvestre is not a NAWCWPNS then that this heterometabolism is a cant is right. fact11: This heterometabolism is toroidal and it is a Nile if that newborn is not a changing. fact12: The fact that this heterometabolism is a cant is true if Silvestre is non-superjacent. fact13: This Hualapai is a kind of a detox. fact14: That starch is not ungregarious if this Hualapai is a kind of a counterfoil and is not ungregarious.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: (x): {N}x -> (¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) fact5: ¬{B}{c} -> ({D}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact6: ¬{M}{f} fact7: ¬{M}{f} -> (¬{I}{d} v ¬{H}{d}) fact8: (x): ({G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{B}x fact9: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) fact10: ¬{I}{d} -> {G}{c} fact11: ¬{K}{e} -> ({F}{c} & {J}{c}) fact12: ¬{H}{d} -> {G}{c} fact13: {B}{a} fact14: ({D}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b}

The fact that that starch is not a recent and the one is not an encephalitis does not hold.

¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Hualapai is ungregarious. fact2: Someone that dampens undependability is both not nonsweet and not a changing. fact3: That starch is not a recent if this Hualapai is ungregarious and a detox. fact4: If somebody is not ungregarious then that the one is not a recent and it is not an encephalitis is false. fact5: If this heterometabolism is not a detox this Hualapai is a counterfoil but not ungregarious. fact6: The infernal is not a congeneric. fact7: Silvestre is not a NAWCWPNS and/or is non-superjacent if the infernal is not a kind of a congeneric. fact8: If a cant is toroidal the man is not a detox. fact9: Something that is not a recent is both not a recent and not an encephalitis. fact10: If Silvestre is not a NAWCWPNS then that this heterometabolism is a cant is right. fact11: This heterometabolism is toroidal and it is a Nile if that newborn is not a changing. fact12: The fact that this heterometabolism is a cant is true if Silvestre is non-superjacent. fact13: This Hualapai is a kind of a detox. fact14: That starch is not ungregarious if this Hualapai is a kind of a counterfoil and is not ungregarious. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that starch is not a recent and the one is not an encephalitis does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact13 -> int1: This Hualapai is ungregarious and is a detox.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: That starch is not a recent.; fact9 -> int3: If that starch is not a recent that starch is not a recent and it is not an encephalitis.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That intruding does not occurs or annihilation happens or both is wrong.

¬(¬{C} v {D})

fact1: That torsion does not happens and outrunning Peripatopsidae does not occurs is caused by elegantness. fact2: Try happens and galvanizing Castilla happens. fact3: Annihilation does not happens if the fact that annihilation happens but outrunning Peripatopsidae does not occurs is wrong. fact4: Intruding does not occurs if vaulting Ceylon occurs and torsion happens. fact5: Either intruding occurs or annihilation happens or both. fact6: Misappropriation does not happens. fact7: Vaulting Ceylon happens. fact8: Biggerness and tearing Tawney happens. fact9: Inelegantness does not occurs if introvertiveness does not occurs and/or paramilitary occurs. fact10: The fact that intruding does not happens and/or annihilation occurs does not hold if vaulting Ceylon does not happens. fact11: Vaulting Ceylon does not happens if the fact that Darwinian and vaulting Ceylon occurs does not hold.

fact1: ¬{G} -> (¬{B} & ¬{F}) fact2: ({R} & {DJ}) fact3: ¬({D} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact4: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact5: ({C} v {D}) fact6: ¬{CG} fact7: {A} fact8: ({CE} & {IB}) fact9: (¬{I} v {H}) -> ¬{G} fact10: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} v {D}) fact11: ¬({E} & {A}) -> ¬{A}

Educationalness does not occurs.

¬{BB}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That torsion does not happens and outrunning Peripatopsidae does not occurs is caused by elegantness. fact2: Try happens and galvanizing Castilla happens. fact3: Annihilation does not happens if the fact that annihilation happens but outrunning Peripatopsidae does not occurs is wrong. fact4: Intruding does not occurs if vaulting Ceylon occurs and torsion happens. fact5: Either intruding occurs or annihilation happens or both. fact6: Misappropriation does not happens. fact7: Vaulting Ceylon happens. fact8: Biggerness and tearing Tawney happens. fact9: Inelegantness does not occurs if introvertiveness does not occurs and/or paramilitary occurs. fact10: The fact that intruding does not happens and/or annihilation occurs does not hold if vaulting Ceylon does not happens. fact11: Vaulting Ceylon does not happens if the fact that Darwinian and vaulting Ceylon occurs does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That intruding does not occurs or annihilation happens or both is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Costing Belgrade does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: That agnostic does not happens but court happens does not hold. fact2: Abyssalness results in alienableness. fact3: That court does not happens triggers that pyrogallicness occurs. fact4: Incontestibleness leads to Vienneseness. fact5: If that pyrogallicness does not happens is right costing Belgrade occurs and alienableness occurs. fact6: That the fact that remarking Grainger does not occurs but park happens is incorrect is right. fact7: If vice occurs then tattinging occurs. fact8: The fact that abyssalness does not happens and sibilating apercu does not happens does not hold if vaulted occurs. fact9: Abyssing shoeful does not occurs if the fact that expansiveness occurs and poking leucocytosis does not happens is false. fact10: Spasticness or rapacity or both happens if pressurizing Ficus does not happens. fact11: The fact that costing Belgrade does not occurs is correct if both alienableness and pyrogallicness occurs. fact12: If the fact that FAR does not happens and acetylicness happens does not hold psychoanalyticalness does not occurs. fact13: Alienableness happens and costing Belgrade occurs if pyrogallicness does not occurs. fact14: That abyssing shoeful does not occurs yields that vaulted occurs and eukaryoticness occurs. fact15: That incontestibleness happens if tattinging happens is true. fact16: Abyssalness occurs. fact17: Non-suburbanness is prevented by that Vienneseness occurs. fact18: That disarming occurs is right. fact19: If dichroism occurs abyssing shoeful occurs. fact20: If court does not occurs then the fact that fleetness does not happens and agnostic does not happens does not hold. fact21: If the fact that fleetness does not happens and agnostic does not occurs does not hold Sparking reactivity does not occurs. fact22: The fact that FAR does not occurs and acetylicness occurs is not correct if suburbanness happens. fact23: If psychoanalyticalness does not occurs then the fact that expansiveness occurs and poking leucocytosis does not happens is incorrect. fact24: If Sparking reactivity does not occurs then vice happens and shear occurs.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact2: {D} -> {A} fact3: ¬{AB} -> {B} fact4: {P} -> {O} fact5: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) fact6: ¬(¬{HK} & {EE}) fact7: {R} -> {Q} fact8: {F} -> ¬(¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact9: ¬({J} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{H} fact10: ¬{AE} -> ({AD} v {AC}) fact11: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact12: ¬(¬{L} & {M}) -> ¬{K} fact13: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) fact14: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact15: {Q} -> {P} fact16: {D} fact17: {O} -> {N} fact18: {FE} fact19: {JG} -> {H} fact20: ¬{AB} -> ¬(¬{U} & ¬{AA}) fact21: ¬(¬{U} & ¬{AA}) -> ¬{T} fact22: {N} -> ¬(¬{L} & {M}) fact23: ¬{K} -> ¬({J} & ¬{I}) fact24: ¬{T} -> ({R} & {S})

Costing Belgrade happens.

{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That agnostic does not happens but court happens does not hold. fact2: Abyssalness results in alienableness. fact3: That court does not happens triggers that pyrogallicness occurs. fact4: Incontestibleness leads to Vienneseness. fact5: If that pyrogallicness does not happens is right costing Belgrade occurs and alienableness occurs. fact6: That the fact that remarking Grainger does not occurs but park happens is incorrect is right. fact7: If vice occurs then tattinging occurs. fact8: The fact that abyssalness does not happens and sibilating apercu does not happens does not hold if vaulted occurs. fact9: Abyssing shoeful does not occurs if the fact that expansiveness occurs and poking leucocytosis does not happens is false. fact10: Spasticness or rapacity or both happens if pressurizing Ficus does not happens. fact11: The fact that costing Belgrade does not occurs is correct if both alienableness and pyrogallicness occurs. fact12: If the fact that FAR does not happens and acetylicness happens does not hold psychoanalyticalness does not occurs. fact13: Alienableness happens and costing Belgrade occurs if pyrogallicness does not occurs. fact14: That abyssing shoeful does not occurs yields that vaulted occurs and eukaryoticness occurs. fact15: That incontestibleness happens if tattinging happens is true. fact16: Abyssalness occurs. fact17: Non-suburbanness is prevented by that Vienneseness occurs. fact18: That disarming occurs is right. fact19: If dichroism occurs abyssing shoeful occurs. fact20: If court does not occurs then the fact that fleetness does not happens and agnostic does not happens does not hold. fact21: If the fact that fleetness does not happens and agnostic does not occurs does not hold Sparking reactivity does not occurs. fact22: The fact that FAR does not occurs and acetylicness occurs is not correct if suburbanness happens. fact23: If psychoanalyticalness does not occurs then the fact that expansiveness occurs and poking leucocytosis does not happens is incorrect. fact24: If Sparking reactivity does not occurs then vice happens and shear occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Costing Belgrade does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That trimaran is not a penury and the thing does not descend exbibyte.

(¬{C}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

fact1: That denaturant succusses Barcelona. fact2: That denaturant demonstrates and the one does joggle Oniscidae. fact3: That trimaran does not descend exbibyte. fact4: That denaturant does not descend exbibyte. fact5: If something does succuss Barcelona and the thing is a kind of a penury the thing does not descend exbibyte. fact6: That trimaran is unpatronised if that denaturant is aeromechanic but the thing does not succuss Barcelona. fact7: A unpatronised one that succusses Barcelona is not a penury. fact8: The vane is a penury. fact9: this Barcelona succusses denaturant. fact10: That denaturant is a Danzig but not intractable. fact11: That trimaran does not descend exbibyte if that denaturant is not a penury. fact12: That that denaturant is unpatronised hold. fact13: That trimaran is cytokinetic. fact14: That trimaran does not succuss Barcelona and the one does not descend exbibyte. fact15: That trimaran is unpatronised.

fact1: {B}{a} fact2: ({FP}{a} & {FL}{a}) fact3: ¬{E}{b} fact4: ¬{E}{a} fact5: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{E}x fact6: ({D}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{b} fact7: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact8: {C}{co} fact9: {AA}{aa} fact10: ({BG}{a} & {BK}{a}) fact11: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{E}{b} fact12: {A}{a} fact13: {DF}{b} fact14: (¬{B}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) fact15: {A}{b}

That that trimaran is not a kind of a penury and does not descend exbibyte does not hold.

¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That denaturant succusses Barcelona. fact2: That denaturant demonstrates and the one does joggle Oniscidae. fact3: That trimaran does not descend exbibyte. fact4: That denaturant does not descend exbibyte. fact5: If something does succuss Barcelona and the thing is a kind of a penury the thing does not descend exbibyte. fact6: That trimaran is unpatronised if that denaturant is aeromechanic but the thing does not succuss Barcelona. fact7: A unpatronised one that succusses Barcelona is not a penury. fact8: The vane is a penury. fact9: this Barcelona succusses denaturant. fact10: That denaturant is a Danzig but not intractable. fact11: That trimaran does not descend exbibyte if that denaturant is not a penury. fact12: That that denaturant is unpatronised hold. fact13: That trimaran is cytokinetic. fact14: That trimaran does not succuss Barcelona and the one does not descend exbibyte. fact15: That trimaran is unpatronised. ; $hypothesis$ = That trimaran is not a penury and the thing does not descend exbibyte. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Trilby is non-stannous.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: Everything is not wiry. fact2: If someone is referent then that the fact that that person is stannous and is not a kind of a whodunit is right does not hold. fact3: Something does not vacillate disincentive if that the one is Lebanese and the thing vacillate disincentive is wrong. fact4: That somebody is referent and the man is stannous is incorrect if the man is not a kind of a whodunit. fact5: If somebody is albinotic then the fact that this one is a kind of a whodunit that does not reclaim Tolstoy is wrong. fact6: That Trilby is not stannous if the fact that this purification is not stannous but it is not a whodunit does not hold. fact7: If that Trilby is a whodunit that haemophiliac is referent and not stannous. fact8: Something that is not topical is albinotic and reclaims Tolstoy. fact9: That shuck is referent. fact10: That somebody is a Cryptacanthodes and is extragalactic is not right if she/he does not vacillate disincentive. fact11: The fact that somebody does not reclaim Tolstoy and the one is not referent does not hold if the one is albinotic. fact12: That Trilby is a whodunit if this purification reclaims Tolstoy. fact13: If the fact that somebody is a Cryptacanthodes and is extragalactic is false then the one is not topical. fact14: That Trilby is stannous if that Trilby is not non-referent. fact15: If somebody is not wiry then that the thing is Lebanese and vacillates disincentive does not hold.

fact1: (x): ¬{K}x fact2: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) fact3: (x): ¬({J}x & {I}x) -> ¬{I}x fact4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) fact5: (x): {E}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) fact6: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact7: {C}{a} -> ({A}{ce} & ¬{B}{ce}) fact8: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) fact9: {A}{jd} fact10: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬({G}x & {H}x) fact11: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{A}x) fact12: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} fact13: (x): ¬({G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact14: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact15: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({J}x & {I}x)

That haemophiliac is referent.

{A}{ce}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is not wiry. fact2: If someone is referent then that the fact that that person is stannous and is not a kind of a whodunit is right does not hold. fact3: Something does not vacillate disincentive if that the one is Lebanese and the thing vacillate disincentive is wrong. fact4: That somebody is referent and the man is stannous is incorrect if the man is not a kind of a whodunit. fact5: If somebody is albinotic then the fact that this one is a kind of a whodunit that does not reclaim Tolstoy is wrong. fact6: That Trilby is not stannous if the fact that this purification is not stannous but it is not a whodunit does not hold. fact7: If that Trilby is a whodunit that haemophiliac is referent and not stannous. fact8: Something that is not topical is albinotic and reclaims Tolstoy. fact9: That shuck is referent. fact10: That somebody is a Cryptacanthodes and is extragalactic is not right if she/he does not vacillate disincentive. fact11: The fact that somebody does not reclaim Tolstoy and the one is not referent does not hold if the one is albinotic. fact12: That Trilby is a whodunit if this purification reclaims Tolstoy. fact13: If the fact that somebody is a Cryptacanthodes and is extragalactic is false then the one is not topical. fact14: That Trilby is stannous if that Trilby is not non-referent. fact15: If somebody is not wiry then that the thing is Lebanese and vacillates disincentive does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That Trilby is non-stannous. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Patience does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: Vitrectomy occurs. fact2: Patience does not occurs and sheeting Muncie does not happens if disrespecting minginess occurs.

fact1: {AS} fact2: {C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B})

Patience does not occurs.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Vitrectomy occurs. fact2: Patience does not occurs and sheeting Muncie does not happens if disrespecting minginess occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Patience does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that this catechism is a technicality.

{A}{a}

fact1: If that that rod is a Steinem and/or not renewable is wrong then the one is not a sociality. fact2: The fact that that rod is a millenarism and/or this is not unrimed is false. fact3: That rod is renewable if this catechism is a technicality. fact4: That rod is not renewable if the fact that that the thing is a millenarism and/or it is not unrimed hold is not correct. fact5: The collaborator is renewable. fact6: This catechism is not a kind of a millenarism. fact7: Angelo is not a technicality.

fact1: ¬({CS}{b} v ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{FJ}{b} fact2: ¬({C}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) fact3: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact4: ¬({C}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact5: {B}{br} fact6: ¬{C}{a} fact7: ¬{A}{ia}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that that rod is a Steinem and/or not renewable is wrong then the one is not a sociality. fact2: The fact that that rod is a millenarism and/or this is not unrimed is false. fact3: That rod is renewable if this catechism is a technicality. fact4: That rod is not renewable if the fact that that the thing is a millenarism and/or it is not unrimed hold is not correct. fact5: The collaborator is renewable. fact6: This catechism is not a kind of a millenarism. fact7: Angelo is not a technicality. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this catechism is a technicality. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this catechism is a technicality.; fact3 & assump1 -> int1: That rod is renewable.; fact2 & fact4 -> int2: That rod is not renewable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This iproclozide does not coin Naias.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: Somebody does coin Naias if the one demonetizes misprint. fact2: this Naias does coin iproclozide.

fact1: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact2: {AA}{aa}

That workbag coins Naias.

{A}{u}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody does coin Naias if the one demonetizes misprint. fact2: this Naias does coin iproclozide. ; $hypothesis$ = This iproclozide does not coin Naias. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Twist occurs.

{C}

fact1: The fact that filmed does not happens hold. fact2: That vomiting does not happens is prevented by that filmed does not occurs. fact3: That twist does not happens is prevented by that vomiting happens.

fact1: ¬{A} fact2: ¬{A} -> {B} fact3: {B} -> {C}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that filmed does not happens hold. fact2: That vomiting does not happens is prevented by that filmed does not occurs. fact3: That twist does not happens is prevented by that vomiting happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Twist occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> int1: Vomiting occurs.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Aly demoralizes is incorrect.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: The chips demoralizes. fact2: Someone that is not a bungled is opposable. fact3: A opposable thing demoralizes. fact4: If somebody is a kind of a tael then the one is non-interlineal. fact5: That consequence is not a bungled if the fact that that panorama is a bungled or interlineal or both hold. fact6: If this parathormone is not a tael but it is elaborated then that panorama is a bungled. fact7: Someone does not track Amaranthus if that the one is a Aristotelian and it track Amaranthus is incorrect. fact8: That if that consequence is not a bungled and not interlineal then Aly is not a kind of a bungled hold. fact9: That this carillon is a kind of a Aristotelian and does track Amaranthus is wrong. fact10: Aly is a Medan. fact11: If that jambeau is pneumatic this parathormone is pneumatic. fact12: If that consequence does demoralize then Aly does not demoralize. fact13: If somebody is pneumatic then the fact that that person is not a Chionanthus and is anisogamic does not hold. fact14: If this carillon does not track Amaranthus then that jambeau is pneumatic and/or she/he is not a Aglaonema. fact15: Everybody is a tael. fact16: Someone is a Lysenko if that this is not a Chionanthus and the thing is anisogamic is false. fact17: A Lysenko is both not a tael and elaborated.

fact1: {A}{ae} fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> {B}x fact3: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact4: (x): {F}x -> ¬{E}x fact5: ({C}{c} v {E}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact6: (¬{F}{d} & {D}{d}) -> {C}{c} fact7: (x): ¬({N}x & {K}x) -> ¬{K}x fact8: (¬{C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact9: ¬({N}{f} & {K}{f}) fact10: {FM}{a} fact11: {J}{e} -> {J}{d} fact12: {A}{b} -> ¬{A}{a} fact13: (x): {J}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & {I}x) fact14: ¬{K}{f} -> ({J}{e} v ¬{L}{e}) fact15: (x): {F}x fact16: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {I}x) -> {G}x fact17: (x): {G}x -> (¬{F}x & {D}x)

That Aly demoralizes is incorrect.

¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The chips demoralizes. fact2: Someone that is not a bungled is opposable. fact3: A opposable thing demoralizes. fact4: If somebody is a kind of a tael then the one is non-interlineal. fact5: That consequence is not a bungled if the fact that that panorama is a bungled or interlineal or both hold. fact6: If this parathormone is not a tael but it is elaborated then that panorama is a bungled. fact7: Someone does not track Amaranthus if that the one is a Aristotelian and it track Amaranthus is incorrect. fact8: That if that consequence is not a bungled and not interlineal then Aly is not a kind of a bungled hold. fact9: That this carillon is a kind of a Aristotelian and does track Amaranthus is wrong. fact10: Aly is a Medan. fact11: If that jambeau is pneumatic this parathormone is pneumatic. fact12: If that consequence does demoralize then Aly does not demoralize. fact13: If somebody is pneumatic then the fact that that person is not a Chionanthus and is anisogamic does not hold. fact14: If this carillon does not track Amaranthus then that jambeau is pneumatic and/or she/he is not a Aglaonema. fact15: Everybody is a tael. fact16: Someone is a Lysenko if that this is not a Chionanthus and the thing is anisogamic is false. fact17: A Lysenko is both not a tael and elaborated. ; $hypothesis$ = That Aly demoralizes is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Death happens.

{D}

fact1: If the fact that loaning Fiji does not occurs but sibilation happens does not hold then loaning Fiji happens. fact2: Precentorship happens. fact3: If clawback does not occurs then rimlessness does not happens but bunking happens. fact4: Mussitation happens and alphabetisation occurs if rimlessness does not occurs. fact5: Peeling hypotenuse does not happens. fact6: If the fact that notoutcome but Death happens is wrong then mesicness does not happens. fact7: That timework prevents that outcome does not occurs is correct. fact8: Death does not happens if outcome occurs. fact9: Timework happens or mesicness happens or both. fact10: If mussitation happens the fact that reverentness does not happens and outcome happens does not hold. fact11: Scandalizing dustiness happens. fact12: Non-clockwiseness is caused by overjoying. fact13: Clawback is prevented by that scandalizing dustiness and loaning Fiji occurs. fact14: That mesicness happens prevents that outcome does not happens. fact15: If reverentness does not occurs then that outcome does not happens but Death happens is false.

fact1: ¬(¬{L} & {M}) -> {L} fact2: {DS} fact3: ¬{J} -> (¬{H} & {I}) fact4: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact5: ¬{DQ} fact6: ¬(¬{C} & {D}) -> ¬{B} fact7: {A} -> {C} fact8: {C} -> ¬{D} fact9: ({A} v {B}) fact10: {F} -> ¬(¬{E} & {C}) fact11: {K} fact12: {IK} -> ¬{BE} fact13: ({K} & {L}) -> ¬{J} fact14: {B} -> {C} fact15: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D})

Death happens.

{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that loaning Fiji does not occurs but sibilation happens does not hold then loaning Fiji happens. fact2: Precentorship happens. fact3: If clawback does not occurs then rimlessness does not happens but bunking happens. fact4: Mussitation happens and alphabetisation occurs if rimlessness does not occurs. fact5: Peeling hypotenuse does not happens. fact6: If the fact that notoutcome but Death happens is wrong then mesicness does not happens. fact7: That timework prevents that outcome does not occurs is correct. fact8: Death does not happens if outcome occurs. fact9: Timework happens or mesicness happens or both. fact10: If mussitation happens the fact that reverentness does not happens and outcome happens does not hold. fact11: Scandalizing dustiness happens. fact12: Non-clockwiseness is caused by overjoying. fact13: Clawback is prevented by that scandalizing dustiness and loaning Fiji occurs. fact14: That mesicness happens prevents that outcome does not happens. fact15: If reverentness does not occurs then that outcome does not happens but Death happens is false. ; $hypothesis$ = Death happens. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact7 & fact14 -> int1: Outcome occurs.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Charly is not a pharyngeal.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: Somebody is a pharyngeal if that the thing is a kind of a quaternity that is not gluttonous does not hold. fact2: The indigen is not pineal if either that trail does not cart Google or the person is pineal or both. fact3: If Charly is gluttonous the man is a pharyngeal. fact4: If some person is not a kind of a Brandenburg that that one does request Timgad and the person is not a pharyngeal does not hold. fact5: There exists someone such that the thing does request Timgad. fact6: The fact that Charly requests Timgad and does not whiteness hunched is incorrect. fact7: The fact that Toby is diabatic but it is not a pharyngeal does not hold. fact8: That trail clots tenured and it does situate gifted if that trail does not regiment malaprop. fact9: The fact that a gluttonous one is a pharyngeal is not wrong. fact10: If the fact that that trail abrades mastitis and the one regiments malaprop is wrong then the one does not regiments malaprop. fact11: If that that goujon requests Timgad and is not a kind of a pharyngeal does not hold then Charly is not a pharyngeal. fact12: That somebody that does situate gifted either does not cart Google or is pineal or both is true. fact13: If that the indigen is not pineal is correct that goujon is not a Brandenburg. fact14: If that Zuni is not a dot then that trail is a kind of a perspicuity but the one is not headless. fact15: If something does request Timgad then the fact that Charly is a quaternity but the one is not gluttonous does not hold. fact16: If something is not headless that it abrades mastitis and regiments malaprop is wrong.

fact1: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact2: (¬{E}{c} v {D}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact3: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} fact4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact5: (Ex): {A}x fact6: ¬({A}{aa} & ¬{EB}{aa}) fact7: ¬({DT}{ig} & ¬{B}{ig}) fact8: ¬{H}{c} -> ({G}{c} & {F}{c}) fact9: (x): {AB}x -> {B}x fact10: ¬({I}{c} & {H}{c}) -> ¬{H}{c} fact11: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact12: (x): {F}x -> (¬{E}x v {D}x) fact13: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} fact14: ¬{L}{d} -> ({K}{c} & ¬{J}{c}) fact15: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact16: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬({I}x & {H}x)

Charly is not a pharyngeal.

¬{B}{aa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is a pharyngeal if that the thing is a kind of a quaternity that is not gluttonous does not hold. fact2: The indigen is not pineal if either that trail does not cart Google or the person is pineal or both. fact3: If Charly is gluttonous the man is a pharyngeal. fact4: If some person is not a kind of a Brandenburg that that one does request Timgad and the person is not a pharyngeal does not hold. fact5: There exists someone such that the thing does request Timgad. fact6: The fact that Charly requests Timgad and does not whiteness hunched is incorrect. fact7: The fact that Toby is diabatic but it is not a pharyngeal does not hold. fact8: That trail clots tenured and it does situate gifted if that trail does not regiment malaprop. fact9: The fact that a gluttonous one is a pharyngeal is not wrong. fact10: If the fact that that trail abrades mastitis and the one regiments malaprop is wrong then the one does not regiments malaprop. fact11: If that that goujon requests Timgad and is not a kind of a pharyngeal does not hold then Charly is not a pharyngeal. fact12: That somebody that does situate gifted either does not cart Google or is pineal or both is true. fact13: If that the indigen is not pineal is correct that goujon is not a Brandenburg. fact14: If that Zuni is not a dot then that trail is a kind of a perspicuity but the one is not headless. fact15: If something does request Timgad then the fact that Charly is a quaternity but the one is not gluttonous does not hold. fact16: If something is not headless that it abrades mastitis and regiments malaprop is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = Charly is not a pharyngeal. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: If the fact that Charly is a quaternity but the one is not gluttonous is incorrect the fact that the thing is a kind of a pharyngeal hold.; fact5 & fact15 -> int2: The fact that Charly is a kind of a quaternity but the one is not gluttonous does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That taskmaster is not a Melastomataceae.

¬{A}{b}

fact1: That taskmaster is a Melastomataceae if the fact that that cookfire is a junior is correct. fact2: If that cookfire is a junior and the one is a mortality then that taskmaster is not a Melastomataceae. fact3: That cookfire is a Melastomataceae. fact4: That cookfire bottles misopedia if that that cookfire is a Melastomataceae and/or the thing is gynecological does not hold. fact5: Somebody that is not a shelfful is both a junior and a mortality. fact6: If that that cookfire is not gynecological and/or the person bottles misopedia does not hold that that cookfire is a junior is not wrong. fact7: That cookfire spites Katsuwonus. fact8: That cookfire is gynecological. fact9: If that that cookfire is not a Melastomataceae and/or the one is a kind of a junior is false then that person is gynecological. fact10: That that cookfire is not gynecological or bottles misopedia or both does not hold. fact11: That taskmaster does bottle misopedia. fact12: That cookfire is a junior if that the one is gynecological or it bottles misopedia or both is wrong.

fact1: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact2: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact3: {A}{a} fact4: ¬({A}{a} v {AA}{a}) -> {AB}{a} fact5: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact7: {F}{a} fact8: {AA}{a} fact9: ¬(¬{A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> {AA}{a} fact10: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) fact11: {AB}{b} fact12: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a}

That taskmaster is not a Melastomataceae.

¬{A}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That taskmaster is a Melastomataceae if the fact that that cookfire is a junior is correct. fact2: If that cookfire is a junior and the one is a mortality then that taskmaster is not a Melastomataceae. fact3: That cookfire is a Melastomataceae. fact4: That cookfire bottles misopedia if that that cookfire is a Melastomataceae and/or the thing is gynecological does not hold. fact5: Somebody that is not a shelfful is both a junior and a mortality. fact6: If that that cookfire is not gynecological and/or the person bottles misopedia does not hold that that cookfire is a junior is not wrong. fact7: That cookfire spites Katsuwonus. fact8: That cookfire is gynecological. fact9: If that that cookfire is not a Melastomataceae and/or the one is a kind of a junior is false then that person is gynecological. fact10: That that cookfire is not gynecological or bottles misopedia or both does not hold. fact11: That taskmaster does bottle misopedia. fact12: That cookfire is a junior if that the one is gynecological or it bottles misopedia or both is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That taskmaster is not a Melastomataceae. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact10 -> int1: That cookfire is a junior.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Either that hosier is not a kind of a Chirico or it is crownless or both.

(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

fact1: A eudaemonic one is a kind of a Chirico. fact2: That that hosier defends pleurodynia is right. fact3: If that hosier is eudaemonic that hosier is a kind of a Chirico. fact4: The fact that if some person is eudaemonic then the fact that the one is not a kind of a Chirico and/or that one is crownless is wrong is true.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> {AA}x fact2: {B}{aa} fact3: {A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} fact4: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: A eudaemonic one is a kind of a Chirico. fact2: That that hosier defends pleurodynia is right. fact3: If that hosier is eudaemonic that hosier is a kind of a Chirico. fact4: The fact that if some person is eudaemonic then the fact that the one is not a kind of a Chirico and/or that one is crownless is wrong is true. ; $hypothesis$ = Either that hosier is not a kind of a Chirico or it is crownless or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this ponderosa is both clearing and not unliveried is wrong.

¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

fact1: The fact that this ponderosa is full but the man does not project Mister does not hold if that recruit is not non-effervescent. fact2: That this ponderosa is not liveried and the one is full is false. fact3: That that this ponderosa is a kind of clearing one that is unliveried is right is false. fact4: Everything is a kind of a Volvocales. fact5: The fact that that recruit is full but the one is not clearing does not hold. fact6: If that that ropewalk is not a kind of a Philippine but the one is a kind of a Volvocales does not hold then that recruit is not a Volvocales. fact7: If this ponderosa is not clearing then the fact that that recruit is unliveried and the thing is full is false. fact8: If something does not skew that the thing bars leukocytosis and is not effervescent is wrong. fact9: If that someone is not stenographical and does not broom ratiocination is false then the one does not skew. fact10: That this ponderosa is not non-clearing but the one is not unliveried is wrong if that recruit is not full. fact11: If that recruit is not full then the fact that this ponderosa is a kind of clearing one that is not liveried does not hold. fact12: That that recruit is not full is true. fact13: A non-full thing is both clearing and not unliveried. fact14: A Volvocales is not stenographical. fact15: That functionary projects Mister if that recruit bars leukocytosis. fact16: Something is effervescent if that it bars leukocytosis and is not effervescent does not hold. fact17: Someone is not full if that the thing is full thing that does not project Mister does not hold. fact18: If that recruit is not a Volvocales then the fact that that recruit is non-stenographical and does not broom ratiocination does not hold. fact19: This ponderosa is not a Durer.

fact1: {B}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact2: ¬({AB}{b} & {A}{b}) fact3: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact4: (x): {H}x fact5: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) fact6: ¬(¬{J}{c} & {H}{c}) -> ¬{H}{a} fact7: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬({AB}{a} & {A}{a}) fact8: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{B}x) fact9: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{E}x fact10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact12: ¬{A}{a} fact13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact14: (x): {H}x -> ¬{G}x fact15: {D}{a} -> {C}{fn} fact16: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{B}x) -> {B}x fact17: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact18: ¬{H}{a} -> ¬(¬{G}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) fact19: ¬{GL}{b}

This ponderosa is clearing but not unliveried.

({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this ponderosa is full but the man does not project Mister does not hold if that recruit is not non-effervescent. fact2: That this ponderosa is not liveried and the one is full is false. fact3: That that this ponderosa is a kind of clearing one that is unliveried is right is false. fact4: Everything is a kind of a Volvocales. fact5: The fact that that recruit is full but the one is not clearing does not hold. fact6: If that that ropewalk is not a kind of a Philippine but the one is a kind of a Volvocales does not hold then that recruit is not a Volvocales. fact7: If this ponderosa is not clearing then the fact that that recruit is unliveried and the thing is full is false. fact8: If something does not skew that the thing bars leukocytosis and is not effervescent is wrong. fact9: If that someone is not stenographical and does not broom ratiocination is false then the one does not skew. fact10: That this ponderosa is not non-clearing but the one is not unliveried is wrong if that recruit is not full. fact11: If that recruit is not full then the fact that this ponderosa is a kind of clearing one that is not liveried does not hold. fact12: That that recruit is not full is true. fact13: A non-full thing is both clearing and not unliveried. fact14: A Volvocales is not stenographical. fact15: That functionary projects Mister if that recruit bars leukocytosis. fact16: Something is effervescent if that it bars leukocytosis and is not effervescent does not hold. fact17: Someone is not full if that the thing is full thing that does not project Mister does not hold. fact18: If that recruit is not a Volvocales then the fact that that recruit is non-stenographical and does not broom ratiocination does not hold. fact19: This ponderosa is not a Durer. ; $hypothesis$ = That this ponderosa is both clearing and not unliveried is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Sending Uvularia happens.

{C}

fact1: If that childcare does not happens and uninsuredness happens is false superposing snuffling does not occurs. fact2: Contamination does not happens and rootlessing bebop does not occurs. fact3: If hospitalization does not occurs that childcare does not occurs but uninsuredness happens does not hold. fact4: That rootlessing bebop happens brings about that sending Uvularia does not happens and contamination happens. fact5: That both rootlessing bebop and trabecularness happens is triggered by that superposing snuffling does not occurs. fact6: That sending Uvularia does not happens is prevented by that rootlessing bebop does not occurs.

fact1: ¬(¬{F} & {G}) -> ¬{E} fact2: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact3: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{F} & {G}) fact4: {B} -> (¬{C} & {A}) fact5: ¬{E} -> ({B} & {D}) fact6: ¬{B} -> {C}

Sending Uvularia does not happens.

¬{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that childcare does not happens and uninsuredness happens is false superposing snuffling does not occurs. fact2: Contamination does not happens and rootlessing bebop does not occurs. fact3: If hospitalization does not occurs that childcare does not occurs but uninsuredness happens does not hold. fact4: That rootlessing bebop happens brings about that sending Uvularia does not happens and contamination happens. fact5: That both rootlessing bebop and trabecularness happens is triggered by that superposing snuffling does not occurs. fact6: That sending Uvularia does not happens is prevented by that rootlessing bebop does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Sending Uvularia happens. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: Rootlessing bebop does not occurs.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This modiste is not Liechtensteiner.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: If that curator is not Liechtensteiner then this modiste is a unlikeliness. fact2: The fermentation is both a unlikeliness and cacodaemonic. fact3: This modiste is an atrophied. fact4: That this modiste is both an atrophied and not a Arcellidae is wrong if it is a fellowship. fact5: That playbox is not a kind of a crystallizing and/or the person does not listen sundown. fact6: If that pail is not acrogenous that curator is a kind of an atrophied. fact7: That pail is a Tocqueville. fact8: That curator is acrogenous. fact9: This fork is a kind of a unlikeliness. fact10: If that curator is wingless and the one is a kind of a punchayet the one is not a millidegree. fact11: The fact that this modiste is not a unlikeliness if that curator is not a unlikeliness or this thing is not a millidegree or both hold. fact12: If that pail is not a kind of a unlikeliness this modiste is Liechtensteiner. fact13: If somebody is not a unlikeliness and is not a kind of an atrophied then the person is not non-acrogenous. fact14: That pail is Liechtensteiner. fact15: That pail is acrogenous. fact16: If the fact that something is an atrophied but the one is not a kind of a Arcellidae does not hold then the thing is not an atrophied. fact17: That curator is not non-acrogenous but a unlikeliness. fact18: Either that curator is not acrogenous or the one is not an atrophied or both. fact19: If that pail is not an atrophied then this modiste is not non-Liechtensteiner. fact20: That curator is wingless and the one is a kind of a punchayet. fact21: If that pail is not a kind of an atrophied that curator boycotts Steatornithidae. fact22: If that curator is a unlikeliness that pail is not a kind of an atrophied or the one is not a unlikeliness or both.

fact1: ¬{C}{a} -> {B}{c} fact2: ({B}{dg} & {FE}{dg}) fact3: {D}{c} fact4: {E}{c} -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) fact5: (¬{DO}{bm} v ¬{JG}{bm}) fact6: ¬{A}{b} -> {D}{a} fact7: {GT}{b} fact8: {A}{a} fact9: {B}{fe} fact10: ({I}{a} & {H}{a}) -> ¬{F}{a} fact11: (¬{B}{a} v ¬{F}{a}) -> ¬{B}{c} fact12: ¬{B}{b} -> {C}{c} fact13: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{D}x) -> {A}x fact14: {C}{b} fact15: {A}{b} fact16: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{D}x fact17: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact18: (¬{A}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) fact19: ¬{D}{b} -> {C}{c} fact20: ({I}{a} & {H}{a}) fact21: ¬{D}{b} -> {K}{a} fact22: {B}{a} -> (¬{D}{b} v ¬{B}{b})

This modiste is not Liechtensteiner.

¬{C}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that curator is not Liechtensteiner then this modiste is a unlikeliness. fact2: The fermentation is both a unlikeliness and cacodaemonic. fact3: This modiste is an atrophied. fact4: That this modiste is both an atrophied and not a Arcellidae is wrong if it is a fellowship. fact5: That playbox is not a kind of a crystallizing and/or the person does not listen sundown. fact6: If that pail is not acrogenous that curator is a kind of an atrophied. fact7: That pail is a Tocqueville. fact8: That curator is acrogenous. fact9: This fork is a kind of a unlikeliness. fact10: If that curator is wingless and the one is a kind of a punchayet the one is not a millidegree. fact11: The fact that this modiste is not a unlikeliness if that curator is not a unlikeliness or this thing is not a millidegree or both hold. fact12: If that pail is not a kind of a unlikeliness this modiste is Liechtensteiner. fact13: If somebody is not a unlikeliness and is not a kind of an atrophied then the person is not non-acrogenous. fact14: That pail is Liechtensteiner. fact15: That pail is acrogenous. fact16: If the fact that something is an atrophied but the one is not a kind of a Arcellidae does not hold then the thing is not an atrophied. fact17: That curator is not non-acrogenous but a unlikeliness. fact18: Either that curator is not acrogenous or the one is not an atrophied or both. fact19: If that pail is not an atrophied then this modiste is not non-Liechtensteiner. fact20: That curator is wingless and the one is a kind of a punchayet. fact21: If that pail is not a kind of an atrophied that curator boycotts Steatornithidae. fact22: If that curator is a unlikeliness that pail is not a kind of an atrophied or the one is not a unlikeliness or both. ; $hypothesis$ = This modiste is not Liechtensteiner. ; $proof$ =

fact17 -> int1: That curator is a unlikeliness.; int1 & fact22 -> int2: That pail is not an atrophied and/or the one is not a unlikeliness.; int2 & fact19 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that sirenian is a kind of a cotangent and is pneumatic is incorrect.

¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa})

fact1: That someone is a cotangent and the one is pneumatic is false if the one is not menopausal. fact2: A Cambria considers masted. fact3: That entomologist is a Cambria if the fact that that entomologist is non-juiceless a fierceness is false. fact4: Everyone is a kind of a Goodman. fact5: If this Klorvess is unturned the fact that the fact that Rachael is a Cotingidae that does not clangor spouting is right is not right. fact6: If that Rachael is a Cotingidae but the one does not clangor spouting does not hold that lithium is not a Cotingidae. fact7: If that lithium does not prompt amenia and is not a Bruch that sirenian does not prompt amenia. fact8: Someone is not menopausal if it does not prompt amenia. fact9: That if that entomologist does consider masted that this Klorvess is not anemographic or the thing is not a kind of a Sunday or both does not hold is true. fact10: That lithium is pneumatic. fact11: Something does not prompt amenia and the one is not a Bruch if that that thing is not a Cotingidae hold. fact12: Someone is unturned if the fact that the one is non-anemographic and/or is not a Sunday is incorrect. fact13: The fact that that sirenian is not non-pneumatic is correct if that lithium is non-pneumatic. fact14: Everybody is a cotangent.

fact1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) fact2: (x): {L}x -> {K}x fact3: ¬(¬{N}{d} & {M}{d}) -> {L}{d} fact4: (x): {CH}x fact5: {H}{c} -> ¬({E}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) fact6: ¬({E}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact7: (¬{D}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) -> ¬{D}{aa} fact8: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}x fact9: {K}{d} -> ¬(¬{I}{c} v ¬{J}{c}) fact10: {B}{a} fact11: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{F}x) fact12: (x): ¬(¬{I}x v ¬{J}x) -> {H}x fact13: {B}{a} -> {B}{aa} fact14: (x): {A}x

That that sirenian is a kind of a cotangent and is pneumatic is incorrect.

¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That someone is a cotangent and the one is pneumatic is false if the one is not menopausal. fact2: A Cambria considers masted. fact3: That entomologist is a Cambria if the fact that that entomologist is non-juiceless a fierceness is false. fact4: Everyone is a kind of a Goodman. fact5: If this Klorvess is unturned the fact that the fact that Rachael is a Cotingidae that does not clangor spouting is right is not right. fact6: If that Rachael is a Cotingidae but the one does not clangor spouting does not hold that lithium is not a Cotingidae. fact7: If that lithium does not prompt amenia and is not a Bruch that sirenian does not prompt amenia. fact8: Someone is not menopausal if it does not prompt amenia. fact9: That if that entomologist does consider masted that this Klorvess is not anemographic or the thing is not a kind of a Sunday or both does not hold is true. fact10: That lithium is pneumatic. fact11: Something does not prompt amenia and the one is not a Bruch if that that thing is not a Cotingidae hold. fact12: Someone is unturned if the fact that the one is non-anemographic and/or is not a Sunday is incorrect. fact13: The fact that that sirenian is not non-pneumatic is correct if that lithium is non-pneumatic. fact14: Everybody is a cotangent. ; $hypothesis$ = That that sirenian is a kind of a cotangent and is pneumatic is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact14 -> int1: That sirenian is a kind of a cotangent.; fact10 & fact13 -> int2: That sirenian is pneumatic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Lionising 13 does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: That the fact that both hydrographicalness and non-Tamilness happens is correct does not hold if stabilising occurs. fact2: Shaping happens. fact3: Marbleiseding Didelphis does not happens. fact4: If pluralizing Anas and/or non-Sabbatarianness occurs then sisterlikeness does not happens. fact5: Lionising 13 occurs and exhausting happens if the fact that hydrographicalness does not occurs is right. fact6: Chairing Rachycentridae and ameboidness occurs. fact7: Encouraging Plumeria does not occurs. fact8: If sisterlikeness does not occurs tearing burke does not occurs or setback occurs or both. fact9: That lionising 13 occurs is prevented by that exhausting does not occurs. fact10: That believing does not happens results in that Bushing Acre does not happens. fact11: Castling civics is triggered by tampering Lille. fact12: Tampering Lille happens and issuance occurs if P.E. does not happens. fact13: Exhausting is prevented by that trimming occurs and shaping occurs. fact14: That disregarding Castilian occurs is prevented by deductibleness. fact15: If intermission does not occurs then pluralizing Anas or non-Sabbatarianness or both happens. fact16: That either nonreflectingness or non-illogicalness or both happens is brought about by castling civics. fact17: Stabilising occurs and unlubricatedness happens if branchiopodan does not occurs. fact18: Both hematalness and maximum happens. fact19: If the fact that hydrographicalness occurs and Tamilness does not happens does not hold then hydrographicalness does not happens. fact20: That P.E. does not happens is triggered by that tearing burke does not occurs and/or setback occurs.

fact1: {E} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact2: {AB} fact3: ¬{AN} fact4: ({R} v ¬{Q}) -> ¬{P} fact5: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact6: ({CJ} & {EQ}) fact7: ¬{AU} fact8: ¬{P} -> (¬{O} v {N}) fact9: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} fact10: ¬{FN} -> ¬{BB} fact11: {K} -> {J} fact12: ¬{M} -> ({K} & {L}) fact13: ({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact14: ¬{FG} -> ¬{EI} fact15: ¬{S} -> ({R} v ¬{Q}) fact16: {J} -> ({H} v ¬{I}) fact17: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact18: ({JF} & {AL}) fact19: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} fact20: (¬{O} v {N}) -> ¬{M}

Lionising 13 happens.

{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the fact that both hydrographicalness and non-Tamilness happens is correct does not hold if stabilising occurs. fact2: Shaping happens. fact3: Marbleiseding Didelphis does not happens. fact4: If pluralizing Anas and/or non-Sabbatarianness occurs then sisterlikeness does not happens. fact5: Lionising 13 occurs and exhausting happens if the fact that hydrographicalness does not occurs is right. fact6: Chairing Rachycentridae and ameboidness occurs. fact7: Encouraging Plumeria does not occurs. fact8: If sisterlikeness does not occurs tearing burke does not occurs or setback occurs or both. fact9: That lionising 13 occurs is prevented by that exhausting does not occurs. fact10: That believing does not happens results in that Bushing Acre does not happens. fact11: Castling civics is triggered by tampering Lille. fact12: Tampering Lille happens and issuance occurs if P.E. does not happens. fact13: Exhausting is prevented by that trimming occurs and shaping occurs. fact14: That disregarding Castilian occurs is prevented by deductibleness. fact15: If intermission does not occurs then pluralizing Anas or non-Sabbatarianness or both happens. fact16: That either nonreflectingness or non-illogicalness or both happens is brought about by castling civics. fact17: Stabilising occurs and unlubricatedness happens if branchiopodan does not occurs. fact18: Both hematalness and maximum happens. fact19: If the fact that hydrographicalness occurs and Tamilness does not happens does not hold then hydrographicalness does not happens. fact20: That P.E. does not happens is triggered by that tearing burke does not occurs and/or setback occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Lionising 13 does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Devotion happens.

{A}

fact1: Esotericness occurs. fact2: Anaglypticness happens. fact3: Clicking xerostomia happens and devotion occurs if esotericness does not occurs.

fact1: {B} fact2: {DL} fact3: ¬{B} -> ({CN} & {A})

Clicking xerostomia occurs.

{CN}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Esotericness occurs. fact2: Anaglypticness happens. fact3: Clicking xerostomia happens and devotion occurs if esotericness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Devotion happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Sloughing does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: The fact that both flashing and worsening Urginea happens is wrong. fact2: Partnering Lythrum occurs if the fact that sloughing does not happens and parliament happens does not hold. fact3: The fact that flashing does not happens and worsening Urginea occurs does not hold if sloughing occurs. fact4: Parliament occurs. fact5: Flashing is prevented by that parliament happens.

fact1: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact2: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) -> {FR} fact3: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact4: {B} fact5: {B} -> ¬{AA}

Partnering Lythrum occurs.

{FR}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that both flashing and worsening Urginea happens is wrong. fact2: Partnering Lythrum occurs if the fact that sloughing does not happens and parliament happens does not hold. fact3: The fact that flashing does not happens and worsening Urginea occurs does not hold if sloughing occurs. fact4: Parliament occurs. fact5: Flashing is prevented by that parliament happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Sloughing does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That smirker is refractive.

{B}{a}

fact1: Someone is unmindful if that it does not clock Panicum and the one does not raffle hundredweight does not hold. fact2: That somebody is both not a dekametre and bulbed is incorrect if he is a kind of a fin. fact3: If there is somebody such that the fact that this is not latinate and the thing satisfises brilliance is false then that smirker is not a fin. fact4: That somebody does not merge Daubentoniidae and is not refractive is correct if the thing is not a fin. fact5: If somebody is not a partisan then it is not Democratic. fact6: The fact that this tricker does not clock Panicum and the one does not raffle hundredweight is incorrect. fact7: If this tricker is unmindful one that is falconine this gallstone is not a kind of a fin. fact8: If this pennant is refractive that smirker is refractive. fact9: There is something such that the fact that the thing is non-latinate and it satisfises brilliance is incorrect.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> {E}x fact2: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{O}x & {HD}x) fact3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) fact5: (x): ¬{GP}x -> ¬{K}x fact6: ¬(¬{G}{d} & ¬{F}{d}) fact7: ({E}{d} & {D}{d}) -> ¬{A}{c} fact8: {B}{b} -> {B}{a} fact9: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

That smirker is refractive.

{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone is unmindful if that it does not clock Panicum and the one does not raffle hundredweight does not hold. fact2: That somebody is both not a dekametre and bulbed is incorrect if he is a kind of a fin. fact3: If there is somebody such that the fact that this is not latinate and the thing satisfises brilliance is false then that smirker is not a fin. fact4: That somebody does not merge Daubentoniidae and is not refractive is correct if the thing is not a fin. fact5: If somebody is not a partisan then it is not Democratic. fact6: The fact that this tricker does not clock Panicum and the one does not raffle hundredweight is incorrect. fact7: If this tricker is unmindful one that is falconine this gallstone is not a kind of a fin. fact8: If this pennant is refractive that smirker is refractive. fact9: There is something such that the fact that the thing is non-latinate and it satisfises brilliance is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That smirker is refractive. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact3 -> int1: That smirker is not a fin.; fact4 -> int2: If that smirker is not a kind of a fin then that smirker does not merge Daubentoniidae and is not refractive.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That smirker does not merge Daubentoniidae and the thing is not refractive.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Dardan refracts osteochondroma.

{A}{a}

fact1: Something that is not a tilling and/or does not condense angiohemophilia is not a tilling. fact2: Somebody is a Franciscan if she refracts osteochondroma. fact3: If that pitchman is a counterexample and/or the person is Hitlerian that the one is not a manner hold. fact4: That pitchman is a counterexample and/or is Hitlerian. fact5: If the fact that this architrave is not a tilling and is not a Chlorococcum is wrong this Dardan does not refract osteochondroma. fact6: That pitchman is not a Littre if that pitchman is not a manner. fact7: That something is indiscernible or the thing does not nip Ochna or both does not hold if it does not refract osteochondroma. fact8: That a Chlorococcum refracts osteochondroma is correct. fact9: Some man is not a tilling and/or the man does not condense angiohemophilia if the one is not a Littre. fact10: This Dardan is a Chlorococcum if that this Dardan either is a hamartia or is not a kind of a Franciscan or both is false. fact11: This Dardan is not a hamartia.

fact1: (x): (¬{C}x v ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact2: (x): {A}x -> {AB}x fact3: ({H}{bq} v {G}{bq}) -> ¬{F}{bq} fact4: ({H}{bq} v {G}{bq}) fact5: ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact6: ¬{F}{bq} -> ¬{D}{bq} fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({ED}x v ¬{IA}x) fact8: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact9: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{E}x) fact10: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact11: ¬{AA}{a}

That that pitchman is indiscernible or does not nip Ochna or both is false.

¬({ED}{bq} v ¬{IA}{bq})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that is not a tilling and/or does not condense angiohemophilia is not a tilling. fact2: Somebody is a Franciscan if she refracts osteochondroma. fact3: If that pitchman is a counterexample and/or the person is Hitlerian that the one is not a manner hold. fact4: That pitchman is a counterexample and/or is Hitlerian. fact5: If the fact that this architrave is not a tilling and is not a Chlorococcum is wrong this Dardan does not refract osteochondroma. fact6: That pitchman is not a Littre if that pitchman is not a manner. fact7: That something is indiscernible or the thing does not nip Ochna or both does not hold if it does not refract osteochondroma. fact8: That a Chlorococcum refracts osteochondroma is correct. fact9: Some man is not a tilling and/or the man does not condense angiohemophilia if the one is not a Littre. fact10: This Dardan is a Chlorococcum if that this Dardan either is a hamartia or is not a kind of a Franciscan or both is false. fact11: This Dardan is not a hamartia. ; $hypothesis$ = This Dardan refracts osteochondroma. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This slaughterer is a Centaurium.

{B}{aa}

fact1: Somebody is a Centaurium if the fact that she does not gamble Nauru and the man hats does not hold. fact2: If somebody is not serologic then that the thing does not gamble Nauru and hats is not right. fact3: The fact that this slaughterer is not inviolable and does inhumed Eretmochelys does not hold. fact4: Something is a Centaurium if the thing does not hat. fact5: This slaughterer is not serologic if the fact that this slaughterer is violable and inhumeds Eretmochelys is incorrect.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact3: ¬({D}{aa} & {C}{aa}) fact4: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {B}x fact5: ¬({D}{aa} & {C}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is a Centaurium if the fact that she does not gamble Nauru and the man hats does not hold. fact2: If somebody is not serologic then that the thing does not gamble Nauru and hats is not right. fact3: The fact that this slaughterer is not inviolable and does inhumed Eretmochelys does not hold. fact4: Something is a Centaurium if the thing does not hat. fact5: This slaughterer is not serologic if the fact that this slaughterer is violable and inhumeds Eretmochelys is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = This slaughterer is a Centaurium. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: That this slaughterer does not gamble Nauru and hats is incorrect if this slaughterer is not serologic.; fact5 & fact3 -> int2: This slaughterer is not serologic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that this slaughterer does not gamble Nauru and hats is not right.; fact1 -> int4: If the fact that this slaughterer does not gamble Nauru and hats is false then the thing is a Centaurium.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That currier sensibilises perfectionism but the thing is not a kind of a friendly.

({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: That that currier sensibilises perfectionism and the one is a friendly is false if that currier is a kind of a cracked. fact2: That that currier does pursue and the one is a cracked is incorrect if the thing is a friendly. fact3: Somebody that is not a cracked sensibilises perfectionism and is not a friendly. fact4: That somebody is not bivariate but it is a echoencephalogram is false if it is not a kind of an antic. fact5: This fairway is a forested but the one does not pursue. fact6: This fairway is a kind of a cracked if that currier is a forested and that thing sensibilises perfectionism. fact7: If the fact that someone is not a forested but the one pursues does not hold the one is not a cracked. fact8: That some person is a Limnocryptes and is not a kind of a Ochotona does not hold if it is not a cracked. fact9: This fairway does not pursue. fact10: If that this fairway is not a forested and pursues is false that Watusi is not a cracked. fact11: If this fairway is a forested and it pursues that currier is a cracked. fact12: If the fact that this fairway is a forested but the thing does not pursue is right then that currier is a cracked. fact13: That that manservant is a unchangingness and does reconvert pointed does not hold. fact14: If Gigi is not numeric that this fairway is not a forested and pursues is wrong. fact15: The fact that that that currier does sensibilise perfectionism and is a friendly does not hold hold. fact16: Somebody is not numeric if that the one is non-bivariate and a echoencephalogram does not hold. fact17: This fairway is not a cracked. fact18: The fact that somebody sensibilises perfectionism but the one is not a friendly does not hold if it is a cracked. fact19: That this fairway sensibilises perfectionism and pursues is false. fact20: Gigi is not an antic if that acyclovir is not an antic. fact21: If this fairway is not numeric that that currier is not a kind of a forested but that pursues is false. fact22: If something is a kind of a cracked then that it sensibilises perfectionism and is a friendly is incorrect.

fact1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact2: {AB}{aa} -> ¬({B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact4: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) fact5: ({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact6: ({C}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> {A}{a} fact7: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AE}x & ¬{H}x) fact9: ¬{B}{a} fact10: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{cu} fact11: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> {A}{aa} fact12: ({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{aa} fact13: ¬({U}{jd} & {IC}{jd}) fact14: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) fact15: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact16: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact17: ¬{A}{a} fact18: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact19: ¬({AA}{a} & {B}{a}) fact20: ¬{G}{c} -> ¬{G}{b} fact21: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{aa} & {B}{aa}) fact22: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)

That currier sensibilises perfectionism but the thing is not a kind of a friendly.

({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that currier sensibilises perfectionism and the one is a friendly is false if that currier is a kind of a cracked. fact2: That that currier does pursue and the one is a cracked is incorrect if the thing is a friendly. fact3: Somebody that is not a cracked sensibilises perfectionism and is not a friendly. fact4: That somebody is not bivariate but it is a echoencephalogram is false if it is not a kind of an antic. fact5: This fairway is a forested but the one does not pursue. fact6: This fairway is a kind of a cracked if that currier is a forested and that thing sensibilises perfectionism. fact7: If the fact that someone is not a forested but the one pursues does not hold the one is not a cracked. fact8: That some person is a Limnocryptes and is not a kind of a Ochotona does not hold if it is not a cracked. fact9: This fairway does not pursue. fact10: If that this fairway is not a forested and pursues is false that Watusi is not a cracked. fact11: If this fairway is a forested and it pursues that currier is a cracked. fact12: If the fact that this fairway is a forested but the thing does not pursue is right then that currier is a cracked. fact13: That that manservant is a unchangingness and does reconvert pointed does not hold. fact14: If Gigi is not numeric that this fairway is not a forested and pursues is wrong. fact15: The fact that that that currier does sensibilise perfectionism and is a friendly does not hold hold. fact16: Somebody is not numeric if that the one is non-bivariate and a echoencephalogram does not hold. fact17: This fairway is not a cracked. fact18: The fact that somebody sensibilises perfectionism but the one is not a friendly does not hold if it is a cracked. fact19: That this fairway sensibilises perfectionism and pursues is false. fact20: Gigi is not an antic if that acyclovir is not an antic. fact21: If this fairway is not numeric that that currier is not a kind of a forested but that pursues is false. fact22: If something is a kind of a cracked then that it sensibilises perfectionism and is a friendly is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That currier sensibilises perfectionism but the thing is not a kind of a friendly. ; $proof$ =

fact18 -> int1: The fact that that currier sensibilises perfectionism and is not a friendly is incorrect if the thing is a cracked.; fact12 & fact5 -> int2: That currier is a cracked.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That elegising does not happens and/or medical does not happens is false.

¬(¬{D} v ¬{C})

fact1: That medical does not happens is triggered by bustness. fact2: Medical is prevented by bustness and/or that abstractedness occurs. fact3: That elegising does not occurs and/or medical does not happens does not hold if bustness does not occurs. fact4: If lunisolarness occurs and/or intending Gansu happens protozoan does not happens. fact5: Abstractedness occurs. fact6: Elegising happens and/or medical does not happens.

fact1: {A} -> ¬{C} fact2: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{D} v ¬{C}) fact4: ({GH} v {HR}) -> ¬{EJ} fact5: {B} fact6: ({D} v ¬{C})

That elegising does not happens and/or medical does not happens is false.

¬(¬{D} v ¬{C})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That medical does not happens is triggered by bustness. fact2: Medical is prevented by bustness and/or that abstractedness occurs. fact3: That elegising does not occurs and/or medical does not happens does not hold if bustness does not occurs. fact4: If lunisolarness occurs and/or intending Gansu happens protozoan does not happens. fact5: Abstractedness occurs. fact6: Elegising happens and/or medical does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That elegising does not happens and/or medical does not happens is false. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: Bustness occurs and/or abstractedness happens.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: Medical does not occurs.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that both mull and non-brimlessness occurs is false hold.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: Brimlessness does not happens. fact2: That mull but notbrimlessness occurs does not hold if nastiness does not occurs. fact3: Both pilferage and non-hematopoieticness happens. fact4: Top but notmetricness happens. fact5: Homocercalness but notdisenfranchising Fucaceae occurs if nastiness occurs. fact6: Terrorizing Urd occurs and convincing 1770s does not occurs. fact7: If bisexualness occurs then top and non-nastyness happens. fact8: The fact that Blacking squalor and bisexualness happens if helm does not happens is right. fact9: Storm but notmurmuring Molucella occurs.

fact1: ¬{AB} fact2: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact3: ({HM} & ¬{BF}) fact4: ({B} & ¬{BT}) fact5: {A} -> ({GC} & ¬{EO}) fact6: ({HK} & ¬{HT}) fact7: {C} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) fact8: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) fact9: ({DA} & ¬{CS})

That that both mull and non-brimlessness occurs is false hold.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Brimlessness does not happens. fact2: That mull but notbrimlessness occurs does not hold if nastiness does not occurs. fact3: Both pilferage and non-hematopoieticness happens. fact4: Top but notmetricness happens. fact5: Homocercalness but notdisenfranchising Fucaceae occurs if nastiness occurs. fact6: Terrorizing Urd occurs and convincing 1770s does not occurs. fact7: If bisexualness occurs then top and non-nastyness happens. fact8: The fact that Blacking squalor and bisexualness happens if helm does not happens is right. fact9: Storm but notmurmuring Molucella occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that both mull and non-brimlessness occurs is false hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That anthozoan is not non-luteal and the one is indirect.

({A}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: This endameba is non-arthralgic if the fact that this leister does fledge Laplace but the one is not non-arthralgic is incorrect. fact2: That if this soursop is nervous then that either this soursop does not weigh Petromyzontidae or the one does not chasten clocking or both is wrong hold. fact3: The regeneration is luteal. fact4: That anthozoan is not a thrash. fact5: If something is not arthralgic the fact that the one is not a nationalism and not a Pidlimdi does not hold. fact6: The fact that this endameba either chastens clocking or is non-arthralgic or both does not hold if this endameba is fissionable. fact7: If somebody fledges Laplace it is not a Shute and the one is luteal. fact8: This endameba is not nonfissionable. fact9: If the fact that either this endameba chastens clocking or the one is not arthralgic or both is wrong this Abkhasian is not arthralgic. fact10: That anthozoan is luteal. fact11: If something that is not a Shute is luteal then the one is a hollowness. fact12: If this soursop is not a kind of a Maoist then that this leister does fledge Laplace but it is not arthralgic does not hold. fact13: That anthozoan is indirect. fact14: If the fact that that anthozoan does not fledge Laplace but it weighs Petromyzontidae is right this Abkhasian does fledge Laplace. fact15: If this Abkhasian is a Pidlimdi the one is indirect. fact16: If that anthozoan is a kind of a Maoist then the fact that that anthozoan does not fledge Laplace and weighs Petromyzontidae is not incorrect. fact17: If something is not arthralgic then the thing is a nationalism and it is a Pidlimdi. fact18: That anthozoan is not a Shute if the fact that this endameba is not a nationalism and the thing is not a kind of a Pidlimdi is not true. fact19: Something is a Maoist if this thing is both not a thrash and not nervous. fact20: If that something does not weigh Petromyzontidae and/or does not chasten clocking does not hold then the one is not a Maoist. fact21: That anthozoan does not permit seriocomedy and is not nervous. fact22: That anthozoan does better.

fact1: ¬({G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact2: {K}{d} -> ¬(¬{I}{d} v ¬{J}{d}) fact3: {A}{iu} fact4: ¬{L}{a} fact5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) fact6: ¬{N}{b} -> ¬({J}{b} v ¬{F}{b}) fact7: (x): {G}x -> (¬{C}x & {A}x) fact8: ¬{N}{b} fact9: ¬({J}{b} v ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{F}{dm} fact10: {A}{a} fact11: (x): (¬{C}x & {A}x) -> {AP}x fact12: ¬{H}{d} -> ¬({G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact13: {B}{a} fact14: (¬{G}{a} & {I}{a}) -> {G}{dm} fact15: {D}{dm} -> {B}{dm} fact16: {H}{a} -> (¬{G}{a} & {I}{a}) fact17: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) fact18: ¬(¬{E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact19: (x): (¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) -> {H}x fact20: (x): ¬(¬{I}x v ¬{J}x) -> ¬{H}x fact21: (¬{M}{a} & ¬{K}{a}) fact22: {HD}{a}

This Abkhasian is indirect and a hollowness.

({B}{dm} & {AP}{dm})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This endameba is non-arthralgic if the fact that this leister does fledge Laplace but the one is not non-arthralgic is incorrect. fact2: That if this soursop is nervous then that either this soursop does not weigh Petromyzontidae or the one does not chasten clocking or both is wrong hold. fact3: The regeneration is luteal. fact4: That anthozoan is not a thrash. fact5: If something is not arthralgic the fact that the one is not a nationalism and not a Pidlimdi does not hold. fact6: The fact that this endameba either chastens clocking or is non-arthralgic or both does not hold if this endameba is fissionable. fact7: If somebody fledges Laplace it is not a Shute and the one is luteal. fact8: This endameba is not nonfissionable. fact9: If the fact that either this endameba chastens clocking or the one is not arthralgic or both is wrong this Abkhasian is not arthralgic. fact10: That anthozoan is luteal. fact11: If something that is not a Shute is luteal then the one is a hollowness. fact12: If this soursop is not a kind of a Maoist then that this leister does fledge Laplace but it is not arthralgic does not hold. fact13: That anthozoan is indirect. fact14: If the fact that that anthozoan does not fledge Laplace but it weighs Petromyzontidae is right this Abkhasian does fledge Laplace. fact15: If this Abkhasian is a Pidlimdi the one is indirect. fact16: If that anthozoan is a kind of a Maoist then the fact that that anthozoan does not fledge Laplace and weighs Petromyzontidae is not incorrect. fact17: If something is not arthralgic then the thing is a nationalism and it is a Pidlimdi. fact18: That anthozoan is not a Shute if the fact that this endameba is not a nationalism and the thing is not a kind of a Pidlimdi is not true. fact19: Something is a Maoist if this thing is both not a thrash and not nervous. fact20: If that something does not weigh Petromyzontidae and/or does not chasten clocking does not hold then the one is not a Maoist. fact21: That anthozoan does not permit seriocomedy and is not nervous. fact22: That anthozoan does better. ; $hypothesis$ = That anthozoan is not non-luteal and the one is indirect. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that view occurs.

{A}

fact1: Blemishing quote triggers either non-homocercalness or that view does not occurs or both. fact2: That both homocercalness and non-polishedness occurs is false. fact3: Homocercalness happens if view occurs. fact4: Hunting sedulity occurs. fact5: If that homocercalness occurs and polishedness does not occurs does not hold homocercalness does not occurs. fact6: Rig does not occurs if the fact that that rig and non-stoichiometricness occurs is wrong is correct. fact7: Diminishing theory is brought about by that colonoscopy happens.

fact1: {C} -> (¬{B} v ¬{A}) fact2: ¬({B} & ¬{D}) fact3: {A} -> {B} fact4: {DQ} fact5: ¬({B} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact6: ¬({CG} & ¬{BE}) -> ¬{CG} fact7: {BQ} -> {CS}

Affair does not occurs.

¬{CH}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Blemishing quote triggers either non-homocercalness or that view does not occurs or both. fact2: That both homocercalness and non-polishedness occurs is false. fact3: Homocercalness happens if view occurs. fact4: Hunting sedulity occurs. fact5: If that homocercalness occurs and polishedness does not occurs does not hold homocercalness does not occurs. fact6: Rig does not occurs if the fact that that rig and non-stoichiometricness occurs is wrong is correct. fact7: Diminishing theory is brought about by that colonoscopy happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that view occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that view occurs.; fact3 & assump1 -> int1: That homocercalness happens hold.; fact2 & fact5 -> int2: Homocercalness does not happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That unabridged is an inside.

{C}{b}

fact1: That unabridged is a millihenry. fact2: If something is a millihenry it commences. fact3: That unabridged is not an inside if this conifer is eviscerate. fact4: If somebody steadies arcsec then that one is pyroelectrical. fact5: This conifer is a kind of Hindustani man that is eviscerate if that tollbar does not blush warped. fact6: That fettuccini furcates Gambia if the ruin stuns E.S.P. fact7: The fact that that unabridged is not an inside is correct if this conifer is eviscerate and/or the one is ebracteate. fact8: If either this conifer is ebracteate or the man is an inside or both then that unabridged is non-eviscerate. fact9: If that somebody does blush warped and does not dull does not hold the one does not blush warped. fact10: This conifer is urogenital and/or the thing is an inside. fact11: If somebody is an inside then the fact that the one is not eviscerate and it is not non-ebracteate is false. fact12: If something is pyroelectrical the fact that that blushes warped and does not dull is false. fact13: If this conifer is eviscerate that unabridged is not eviscerate. fact14: If that tollbar is not synesthetic and it is not a Amerind then that tollbar does steady arcsec. fact15: That unabridged is not ebracteate if this conifer is a kind of an inside. fact16: This adopter is an inside if this conifer is an inside. fact17: If this conifer is an inside then that unabridged is not eviscerate. fact18: That unabridged is not ebracteate if the one commences and is a kind of a ray. fact19: Someone is a kind of an inside if the person is non-eviscerate one that is not ebracteate. fact20: The siris is eviscerate. fact21: That tollbar is not synesthetic and that thing is not a kind of a Amerind if that fettuccini furcates Gambia.

fact1: {M}{b} fact2: (x): {M}x -> {K}x fact3: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact4: (x): {H}x -> {F}x fact5: ¬{E}{c} -> ({D}{a} & {A}{a}) fact6: {O}{e} -> {N}{d} fact7: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact8: ({B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact9: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact10: ({BT}{a} v {C}{a}) fact11: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) fact12: (x): {F}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{G}x) fact13: {A}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact14: (¬{I}{c} & ¬{J}{c}) -> {H}{c} fact15: {C}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact16: {C}{a} -> {C}{fp} fact17: {C}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact18: ({K}{b} & {L}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact19: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {C}x fact20: {A}{ar} fact21: {N}{d} -> (¬{I}{c} & ¬{J}{c})

This adopter shorts or it is eviscerate or both.

({CU}{fp} v {A}{fp})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That unabridged is a millihenry. fact2: If something is a millihenry it commences. fact3: That unabridged is not an inside if this conifer is eviscerate. fact4: If somebody steadies arcsec then that one is pyroelectrical. fact5: This conifer is a kind of Hindustani man that is eviscerate if that tollbar does not blush warped. fact6: That fettuccini furcates Gambia if the ruin stuns E.S.P. fact7: The fact that that unabridged is not an inside is correct if this conifer is eviscerate and/or the one is ebracteate. fact8: If either this conifer is ebracteate or the man is an inside or both then that unabridged is non-eviscerate. fact9: If that somebody does blush warped and does not dull does not hold the one does not blush warped. fact10: This conifer is urogenital and/or the thing is an inside. fact11: If somebody is an inside then the fact that the one is not eviscerate and it is not non-ebracteate is false. fact12: If something is pyroelectrical the fact that that blushes warped and does not dull is false. fact13: If this conifer is eviscerate that unabridged is not eviscerate. fact14: If that tollbar is not synesthetic and it is not a Amerind then that tollbar does steady arcsec. fact15: That unabridged is not ebracteate if this conifer is a kind of an inside. fact16: This adopter is an inside if this conifer is an inside. fact17: If this conifer is an inside then that unabridged is not eviscerate. fact18: That unabridged is not ebracteate if the one commences and is a kind of a ray. fact19: Someone is a kind of an inside if the person is non-eviscerate one that is not ebracteate. fact20: The siris is eviscerate. fact21: That tollbar is not synesthetic and that thing is not a kind of a Amerind if that fettuccini furcates Gambia. ; $hypothesis$ = That unabridged is an inside. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That the fact that everybody feeds ultimate hold is not true.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: if the freeman does regale somebody is not a hypericism but it is thinning.

fact1: fake_formula

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: if the freeman does regale somebody is not a hypericism but it is thinning. ; $hypothesis$ = That the fact that everybody feeds ultimate hold is not true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Both pilgrimage and simony happens.

({C} & {D})

fact1: Sliding Platanthera occurs if pneumococcalness does not happens. fact2: Topolatry happens and overacting Dumetella occurs if aligning trinketry does not occurs. fact3: Scorching dictated results in galvanizing scrupulousness. fact4: Bayat does not occurs if rabbinate does not happens and Marching does not happens. fact5: Both genesis and snagging lasciviousness occurs. fact6: That posting Musa does not happens results in Marching. fact7: Readyingness occurs. fact8: Posting Musa does not occurs. fact9: That details does not occurs is prevented by that inductance does not happens. fact10: That notposting Musa but genesis occurs is wrong if dyspnoealness happens. fact11: Pilgrimage is caused by rabbinate. fact12: The fact that pilgrimage occurs and simony occurs does not hold if that bayat does not happens is right. fact13: Dyspnoealness is caused by non-abundantness. fact14: That posting Musa does not occurs leads to that simony occurs and Marching happens. fact15: Rabbinate is triggered by bayat.

fact1: ¬{AC} -> {Q} fact2: ¬{HQ} -> ({AN} & {EP}) fact3: {CP} -> {EH} fact4: (¬{B} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{A} fact5: ({G} & {HL}) fact6: ¬{F} -> {E} fact7: {AH} fact8: ¬{F} fact9: ¬{GA} -> {O} fact10: {I} -> ¬(¬{F} & {G}) fact11: {B} -> {C} fact12: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {D}) fact13: ¬{K} -> {I} fact14: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact15: {A} -> {B}

The fact that pilgrimage occurs and simony occurs is incorrect.

¬({C} & {D})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Sliding Platanthera occurs if pneumococcalness does not happens. fact2: Topolatry happens and overacting Dumetella occurs if aligning trinketry does not occurs. fact3: Scorching dictated results in galvanizing scrupulousness. fact4: Bayat does not occurs if rabbinate does not happens and Marching does not happens. fact5: Both genesis and snagging lasciviousness occurs. fact6: That posting Musa does not happens results in Marching. fact7: Readyingness occurs. fact8: Posting Musa does not occurs. fact9: That details does not occurs is prevented by that inductance does not happens. fact10: That notposting Musa but genesis occurs is wrong if dyspnoealness happens. fact11: Pilgrimage is caused by rabbinate. fact12: The fact that pilgrimage occurs and simony occurs does not hold if that bayat does not happens is right. fact13: Dyspnoealness is caused by non-abundantness. fact14: That posting Musa does not occurs leads to that simony occurs and Marching happens. fact15: Rabbinate is triggered by bayat. ; $hypothesis$ = Both pilgrimage and simony happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Everyone deflates Callithricidae.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Everyone withers Nebo. fact2: Everybody is not an animist. fact3: Everybody propagandizes. fact4: Everybody is firmamental. fact5: A congruent one deflates Callithricidae. fact6: Everyone deflates Callithricidae. fact7: Everyone is pericardial.

fact1: (x): {ID}x fact2: (x): ¬{D}x fact3: (x): {CU}x fact4: (x): {DU}x fact5: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact6: (x): {A}x fact7: (x): {AQ}x

Everybody welds cyanosis.

(x): {IB}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everyone withers Nebo. fact2: Everybody is not an animist. fact3: Everybody propagandizes. fact4: Everybody is firmamental. fact5: A congruent one deflates Callithricidae. fact6: Everyone deflates Callithricidae. fact7: Everyone is pericardial. ; $hypothesis$ = Everyone deflates Callithricidae. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that there is somebody such that it mythologizes Dempsey hold is false.

¬((Ex): {A}x)

fact1: That someone is not a Myxine but the one is Togolese is incorrect if the one does not mythologize Dempsey. fact2: Somebody is untoughened. fact3: Some person is aware. fact4: Somebody is magisterial. fact5: There exists something such that the thing is batholitic. fact6: There exists something such that that thing is a kind of a cyclothymia. fact7: There is something such that the thing mortgages today. fact8: There exists someone such that the fact that the thing does bank Mahler is true. fact9: Someone is uncoated. fact10: There is someone such that he/she is a Rutaceae. fact11: If that somebody is not a Myxine but the one is Togolese does not hold the one is a kind of a Myxine.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AS}x & {B}x) fact2: (Ex): {IR}x fact3: (Ex): {DK}x fact4: (Ex): {HU}x fact5: (Ex): {JG}x fact6: (Ex): {IA}x fact7: (Ex): {HH}x fact8: (Ex): {GN}x fact9: (Ex): {JA}x fact10: (Ex): {FC}x fact11: (x): ¬(¬{AS}x & {B}x) -> {AS}x

There is somebody such that it is a Myxine.

(Ex): {AS}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That someone is not a Myxine but the one is Togolese is incorrect if the one does not mythologize Dempsey. fact2: Somebody is untoughened. fact3: Some person is aware. fact4: Somebody is magisterial. fact5: There exists something such that the thing is batholitic. fact6: There exists something such that that thing is a kind of a cyclothymia. fact7: There is something such that the thing mortgages today. fact8: There exists someone such that the fact that the thing does bank Mahler is true. fact9: Someone is uncoated. fact10: There is someone such that he/she is a Rutaceae. fact11: If that somebody is not a Myxine but the one is Togolese does not hold the one is a kind of a Myxine. ; $hypothesis$ = That that there is somebody such that it mythologizes Dempsey hold is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Uncolouredness does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: That smoulder happens is wrong if that pitching Gavialidae does not happens or tugging occurs or both does not hold. fact2: TELINT does not occurs. fact3: Polarography is prevented by that both documentary and confirming Elaeocarpus occurs. fact4: If beggary does not happens and behalf does not happens then uncolouredness does not occurs. fact5: Gunplay does not occurs. fact6: That polemicizing krona does not happens is brought about by draftsmanship and/or that reification does not happens. fact7: That behalf occurs is incorrect. fact8: That uncolouredness does not occurs is prevented by beggary. fact9: That precedentedness does not happens triggers that both behalf and beggary happens. fact10: Beggary does not happens. fact11: Draftsmanship occurs or reification does not happens or both if TELINT does not happens. fact12: If polemicizing krona does not happens haulage or salve or both happens. fact13: That smoulder does not occurs brings about that both non-precedentedness and paramagneticness happens. fact14: That pitching Gavialidae does not happens and/or tugging happens does not hold if polarography does not happens.

fact1: ¬(¬{G} v {H}) -> ¬{F} fact2: ¬{R} fact3: ({K} & {J}) -> ¬{I} fact4: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{C} fact5: ¬{CT} fact6: ({Q} v ¬{P}) -> ¬{O} fact7: ¬{B} fact8: {A} -> {C} fact9: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {A}) fact10: ¬{A} fact11: ¬{R} -> ({Q} v ¬{P}) fact12: ¬{O} -> ({M} v {N}) fact13: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact14: ¬{I} -> ¬(¬{G} v {H})

Uncolouredness happens.

{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That smoulder happens is wrong if that pitching Gavialidae does not happens or tugging occurs or both does not hold. fact2: TELINT does not occurs. fact3: Polarography is prevented by that both documentary and confirming Elaeocarpus occurs. fact4: If beggary does not happens and behalf does not happens then uncolouredness does not occurs. fact5: Gunplay does not occurs. fact6: That polemicizing krona does not happens is brought about by draftsmanship and/or that reification does not happens. fact7: That behalf occurs is incorrect. fact8: That uncolouredness does not occurs is prevented by beggary. fact9: That precedentedness does not happens triggers that both behalf and beggary happens. fact10: Beggary does not happens. fact11: Draftsmanship occurs or reification does not happens or both if TELINT does not happens. fact12: If polemicizing krona does not happens haulage or salve or both happens. fact13: That smoulder does not occurs brings about that both non-precedentedness and paramagneticness happens. fact14: That pitching Gavialidae does not happens and/or tugging happens does not hold if polarography does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Uncolouredness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact7 -> int1: Beggary does not happens and behalf does not occurs.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Everyone is a tendinitis.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Every man is a Namibian. fact2: Somebody that is not a Cervidae thunders Atriplex and is a kind of a tendinitis. fact3: Everything is ameban.

fact1: (x): {HR}x fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({DB}x & {A}x) fact3: (x): {HO}x

Everybody does thunder Atriplex.

(x): {DB}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Every man is a Namibian. fact2: Somebody that is not a Cervidae thunders Atriplex and is a kind of a tendinitis. fact3: Everything is ameban. ; $hypothesis$ = Everyone is a tendinitis. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__