sileod/deberta-v3-xsmall-tasksource-nli
Zero-Shot Classification
•
Updated
•
448
•
3
Datasets:
version
stringclasses 1
value | hypothesis
stringlengths 11
215
| hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
39
| context
stringlengths 0
2.9k
| context_formula
stringlengths 0
905
| proofs
sequence | proofs_formula
sequence | negative_hypothesis
stringlengths 15
193
⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
37
⌀ | negative_proofs
sequence | negative_original_tree_depth
int64 0
25
⌀ | original_tree_depth
int64 1
4
| depth
int64 0
3
⌀ | num_formula_distractors
int64 0
22
| num_translation_distractors
int64 0
0
| num_all_distractors
int64 0
22
| proof_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_proof_label
stringclasses 2
values | world_assump_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_world_assump_label
stringclasses 2
values | prompt_serial
stringlengths 89
3.09k
| proof_serial
stringlengths 11
654
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DeductionInstance | the fact that the upstage does not groom hold. | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: if something is non-public but it is a quack it does not groom. sent2: the fact that the upstage is not a kind of a quack hold. sent3: the upstage is not a quack if it does not recommend upstage. sent4: the upstage is a kind of non-public thing that is not a quack if it does not recommend upstage. sent5: if the upstage is not public and is a quack then it does not groom. sent6: if something is both not a public and not a quack then it does not groom. sent7: The upstage does not recommend upstage. | sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬{AB}{aa} sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: ¬{AC}{ab} | [
"sent6 -> int1: the upstage is not a kind of a groom if it is not a public and not a quack.;"
] | [
"sent6 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the upstage does not groom hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is non-public but it is a quack it does not groom. sent2: the fact that the upstage is not a kind of a quack hold. sent3: the upstage is not a quack if it does not recommend upstage. sent4: the upstage is a kind of non-public thing that is not a quack if it does not recommend upstage. sent5: if the upstage is not public and is a quack then it does not groom. sent6: if something is both not a public and not a quack then it does not groom. sent7: The upstage does not recommend upstage. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> int1: the upstage is not a kind of a groom if it is not a public and not a quack.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is a kind of a counterfeit then the fact that it does not blitz or it is a kind of a sunburned or both is correct. | (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) | sent1: the rooting is inelegant or is counterfeit or both if it is Jewish. sent2: that the grosgrain is not the blitz and/or it sunburns if the grosgrain is a counterfeit is true. | sent1: {BM}{fs} -> (¬{AU}{fs} v {A}{fs}) sent2: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a kind of a counterfeit then the fact that it does not blitz or it is a kind of a sunburned or both is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the rooting is inelegant or is counterfeit or both if it is Jewish. sent2: that the grosgrain is not the blitz and/or it sunburns if the grosgrain is a counterfeit is true. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the foster-mother is not Sabahan and it is not a arsenical is incorrect. | ¬(¬{B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) | sent1: the fact that something is a kind of chiasmal thing that is not irreconcilable is wrong if it is not autoradiographic. sent2: the synovia is not a signaler. sent3: something is not Sabahan if that it stagnates and it is not an ovulation is not true. sent4: the pentode does accompany and is a kind of a radicalism if it is not a LGV. sent5: the synovia is not chiasmal if that the warfarin is chiasmal and is not irreconcilable is not true. sent6: if that the sexton is not a signaler is correct then that the fact that the synovia does stagnate and is not an ovulation does not hold is true. sent7: the fact that the foster-mother is not a Sabahan and it is not a kind of a arsenical is not right if the sexton is a kind of a signaler. sent8: the warfarin is not autoradiographic and is not a stein if the pentode is a radicalism. sent9: that the fact that something is respectful but not a signaler hold is wrong if it backpacks fingertip. sent10: if something is not chiasmal it does backpack fingertip. sent11: if the synovia is not a kind of a Sabahan the fact that the foster-mother is both not Sabahan and not arsenical is correct. sent12: the sexton is not a signaler. sent13: the pentode is not a kind of a LGV. | sent1: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({F}x & ¬{G}x) sent2: ¬{A}{b} sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: ¬{L}{e} -> ({K}{e} & {J}{e}) sent5: ¬({F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{F}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent7: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent8: {J}{e} -> (¬{H}{d} & ¬{I}{d}) sent9: (x): {E}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{A}x) sent10: (x): ¬{F}x -> {E}x sent11: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent12: ¬{A}{a} sent13: ¬{L}{e} | [
"sent6 & sent12 -> int1: that the synovia stagnates and is not an ovulation is not correct.; sent3 -> int2: if that the synovia does stagnate and is not an ovulation is not true then that it is not a kind of a Sabahan is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the synovia is not Sabahan.; int3 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent12 -> int1: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent3 -> int2: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{b}; int3 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the foster-mother is both not Sabahan and not a arsenical does not hold. | ¬(¬{B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) | [
"sent9 -> int4: that the synovia is respectful but not a signaler is not right if it does backpack fingertip.; sent10 -> int5: if the synovia is not chiasmal it does backpack fingertip.; sent1 -> int6: that the warfarin is a kind of chiasmal thing that is not irreconcilable is false if it is not autoradiographic.; sent4 & sent13 -> int7: the pentode does accompany and it is a kind of a radicalism.; int7 -> int8: the pentode is a kind of a radicalism.; sent8 & int8 -> int9: the warfarin is not autoradiographic and it is not a stein.; int9 -> int10: the warfarin is not autoradiographic.; int6 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the warfarin is chiasmal and not irreconcilable is not correct.; sent5 & int11 -> int12: the synovia is not chiasmal.; int5 & int12 -> int13: the synovia backpacks fingertip.; int4 & int13 -> int14: the fact that the synovia is a kind of respectful thing that is not a kind of a signaler is false.; int14 -> int15: there exists something such that the fact that it is respectful and it is not a signaler does not hold.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the foster-mother is not Sabahan and it is not a arsenical is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is a kind of chiasmal thing that is not irreconcilable is wrong if it is not autoradiographic. sent2: the synovia is not a signaler. sent3: something is not Sabahan if that it stagnates and it is not an ovulation is not true. sent4: the pentode does accompany and is a kind of a radicalism if it is not a LGV. sent5: the synovia is not chiasmal if that the warfarin is chiasmal and is not irreconcilable is not true. sent6: if that the sexton is not a signaler is correct then that the fact that the synovia does stagnate and is not an ovulation does not hold is true. sent7: the fact that the foster-mother is not a Sabahan and it is not a kind of a arsenical is not right if the sexton is a kind of a signaler. sent8: the warfarin is not autoradiographic and is not a stein if the pentode is a radicalism. sent9: that the fact that something is respectful but not a signaler hold is wrong if it backpacks fingertip. sent10: if something is not chiasmal it does backpack fingertip. sent11: if the synovia is not a kind of a Sabahan the fact that the foster-mother is both not Sabahan and not arsenical is correct. sent12: the sexton is not a signaler. sent13: the pentode is not a kind of a LGV. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent12 -> int1: that the synovia stagnates and is not an ovulation is not correct.; sent3 -> int2: if that the synovia does stagnate and is not an ovulation is not true then that it is not a kind of a Sabahan is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the synovia is not Sabahan.; int3 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the councilwoman is a kind of a surrealist. | {A}{aa} | sent1: everything is a Podilymbus but not a Psithyrus. sent2: something that is conductive is a riposte. sent3: everything is not a reflectance. sent4: if that the Masorete is a laterality is true the Milanese is antennal. sent5: if that the buntal is not a kind of a superscript is right then the bootstrap is reliable and it recommends Hirundo. sent6: the Masorete is a laterality if the zero is a kind of a laterality. sent7: if something that is a kind of a Podilymbus is not a Psithyrus it is not a surrealist. sent8: if something is antennal then it does not recommend population or does not recommend pliability or both. sent9: if the fact that the hearer is not an ether and it is not conductive is false then the councilwoman is conductive. sent10: everything is not a Psithyrus. sent11: the bootstrap does boat Ficus if it does recommend Hirundo. sent12: the councilwoman does not recommend Masorete. sent13: the masterpiece serves unattractiveness but it does not backpack nosology. sent14: the shawm is not a boulder if the Milanese does not recommend population and/or it does not recommend pliability. sent15: something is not an apparition if it elaborates and it is not a muslin. sent16: everything is not a kind of a graviton. sent17: the buntal is not a superscript. sent18: the councilwoman is not a absconder. sent19: that something is a kind of a surrealist is correct if it does riposte. sent20: if the shawm is not a boulder the fact that the hearer is not an ether and it is not conductive is wrong. sent21: the councilwoman does not serve bootstrap if it is a surrealist and it is impalpable. | sent1: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent3: (x): ¬{AJ}x sent4: {I}{d} -> {H}{c} sent5: ¬{M}{g} -> ({L}{f} & {K}{f}) sent6: {I}{e} -> {I}{d} sent7: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}x sent8: (x): {H}x -> (¬{F}x v ¬{G}x) sent9: ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {C}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬{AB}x sent11: {K}{f} -> {J}{f} sent12: ¬{IJ}{aa} sent13: ({FU}{ha} & ¬{FI}{ha}) sent14: (¬{F}{c} v ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent15: (x): ({FO}x & ¬{IN}x) -> ¬{CC}x sent16: (x): ¬{U}x sent17: ¬{M}{g} sent18: ¬{GB}{aa} sent19: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent20: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent21: ({A}{aa} & {CK}{aa}) -> ¬{HA}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> int1: the councilwoman is a Podilymbus but it is not a Psithyrus.; sent7 -> int2: the fact that the councilwoman is not a surrealist is true if it is both a Podilymbus and not a Psithyrus.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent7 -> int2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the councilwoman is a surrealist. | {A}{aa} | [
"sent19 -> int3: if the fact that the councilwoman ripostes is not incorrect then it is a kind of a surrealist.; sent2 -> int4: the councilwoman does riposte if it is conductive.; sent8 -> int5: the Milanese does not recommend population and/or it does not recommend pliability if it is antennal.; sent5 & sent17 -> int6: the bootstrap is reliable and does recommend Hirundo.; int6 -> int7: the bootstrap recommends Hirundo.; sent11 & int7 -> int8: that the bootstrap does boat Ficus hold.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that the fact that it does boat Ficus is not wrong.;"
] | 13 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the councilwoman is a kind of a surrealist. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is a Podilymbus but not a Psithyrus. sent2: something that is conductive is a riposte. sent3: everything is not a reflectance. sent4: if that the Masorete is a laterality is true the Milanese is antennal. sent5: if that the buntal is not a kind of a superscript is right then the bootstrap is reliable and it recommends Hirundo. sent6: the Masorete is a laterality if the zero is a kind of a laterality. sent7: if something that is a kind of a Podilymbus is not a Psithyrus it is not a surrealist. sent8: if something is antennal then it does not recommend population or does not recommend pliability or both. sent9: if the fact that the hearer is not an ether and it is not conductive is false then the councilwoman is conductive. sent10: everything is not a Psithyrus. sent11: the bootstrap does boat Ficus if it does recommend Hirundo. sent12: the councilwoman does not recommend Masorete. sent13: the masterpiece serves unattractiveness but it does not backpack nosology. sent14: the shawm is not a boulder if the Milanese does not recommend population and/or it does not recommend pliability. sent15: something is not an apparition if it elaborates and it is not a muslin. sent16: everything is not a kind of a graviton. sent17: the buntal is not a superscript. sent18: the councilwoman is not a absconder. sent19: that something is a kind of a surrealist is correct if it does riposte. sent20: if the shawm is not a boulder the fact that the hearer is not an ether and it is not conductive is wrong. sent21: the councilwoman does not serve bootstrap if it is a surrealist and it is impalpable. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: the councilwoman is a Podilymbus but it is not a Psithyrus.; sent7 -> int2: the fact that the councilwoman is not a surrealist is true if it is both a Podilymbus and not a Psithyrus.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the utensil does recommend lumpfish and is a stake is false. | ¬({D}{c} & {E}{c}) | sent1: the harpsichordist is Deweyan if it is climactic. sent2: that the utensil does recommend lumpfish is not false if it is postglacial. sent3: if the Catholic does recommend lifeboat then the fact that the hydrosphere does not recommend lumpfish and it is not a clearway does not hold. sent4: something that is upper-class is intracellular. sent5: if something is strong it is ctenoid. sent6: the utensil is a stake. sent7: if the lifeboat is not a clearway then the Catholic recommends lifeboat and/or it is not Deweyan. sent8: that the utensil is a kind of a clearway is correct if the ultramarine does recommend lifeboat. sent9: if the utensil recommends lifeboat then the ultramarine is a clearway. sent10: that something recommends lumpfish if it is a clearway is not incorrect. sent11: the obsessive-compulsive is a kind of a Phalacrocorax and it clears. sent12: the ultramarine is a stake if the utensil is Deweyan. sent13: the ultramarine is Deweyan and/or does recommend lifeboat. sent14: the utensil is oblate. sent15: the porter is a cellularity and it is a kind of a stake. sent16: the ultramarine stakes if the utensil is a clearway. sent17: the ultramarine does recommend lumpfish if it is Deweyan. sent18: if that the Catholic is a kind of a stake that is Deweyan is incorrect then the ultramarine is not a stake. sent19: if the ultramarine is a kind of a stake then the utensil is Deweyan. sent20: if the Catholic recommends lifeboat or it is not Deweyan or both the ultramarine is not a stake. sent21: the ghat is a stake and it is a kind of a checker. sent22: if the convertible is not a mineralogy and not anuran the dangleberry is anuran. sent23: that the utensil is a clearway is correct if the ultramarine is Deweyan. sent24: the utensil does recommend lifeboat. | sent1: {IN}{fl} -> {A}{fl} sent2: {DP}{c} -> {D}{c} sent3: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{jk} & ¬{C}{jk}) sent4: (x): {AF}x -> {ED}x sent5: (x): {DF}x -> {FM}x sent6: {E}{c} sent7: ¬{C}{d} -> ({B}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent8: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} sent9: {B}{c} -> {C}{a} sent10: (x): {C}x -> {D}x sent11: ({DQ}{hr} & {CQ}{hr}) sent12: {A}{c} -> {E}{a} sent13: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent14: {U}{c} sent15: ({HI}{gs} & {E}{gs}) sent16: {C}{c} -> {E}{a} sent17: {A}{a} -> {D}{a} sent18: ¬({E}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent19: {E}{a} -> {A}{c} sent20: ({B}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent21: ({E}{it} & {IR}{it}) sent22: (¬{H}{f} & ¬{F}{f}) -> {F}{e} sent23: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} sent24: {B}{c} | [
"sent13 & sent23 & sent8 -> int1: the utensil is a kind of a clearway.; sent10 -> int2: if the utensil is a kind of a clearway then the fact that it recommends lumpfish is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the utensil recommends lumpfish.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent13 & sent23 & sent8 -> int1: {C}{c}; sent10 -> int2: {C}{c} -> {D}{c}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {D}{c}; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | the hydrosphere recommends lumpfish and it is a lapdog. | ({D}{jk} & {HS}{jk}) | [] | 3 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the utensil does recommend lumpfish and is a stake is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the harpsichordist is Deweyan if it is climactic. sent2: that the utensil does recommend lumpfish is not false if it is postglacial. sent3: if the Catholic does recommend lifeboat then the fact that the hydrosphere does not recommend lumpfish and it is not a clearway does not hold. sent4: something that is upper-class is intracellular. sent5: if something is strong it is ctenoid. sent6: the utensil is a stake. sent7: if the lifeboat is not a clearway then the Catholic recommends lifeboat and/or it is not Deweyan. sent8: that the utensil is a kind of a clearway is correct if the ultramarine does recommend lifeboat. sent9: if the utensil recommends lifeboat then the ultramarine is a clearway. sent10: that something recommends lumpfish if it is a clearway is not incorrect. sent11: the obsessive-compulsive is a kind of a Phalacrocorax and it clears. sent12: the ultramarine is a stake if the utensil is Deweyan. sent13: the ultramarine is Deweyan and/or does recommend lifeboat. sent14: the utensil is oblate. sent15: the porter is a cellularity and it is a kind of a stake. sent16: the ultramarine stakes if the utensil is a clearway. sent17: the ultramarine does recommend lumpfish if it is Deweyan. sent18: if that the Catholic is a kind of a stake that is Deweyan is incorrect then the ultramarine is not a stake. sent19: if the ultramarine is a kind of a stake then the utensil is Deweyan. sent20: if the Catholic recommends lifeboat or it is not Deweyan or both the ultramarine is not a stake. sent21: the ghat is a stake and it is a kind of a checker. sent22: if the convertible is not a mineralogy and not anuran the dangleberry is anuran. sent23: that the utensil is a clearway is correct if the ultramarine is Deweyan. sent24: the utensil does recommend lifeboat. ; $proof$ = | sent13 & sent23 & sent8 -> int1: the utensil is a kind of a clearway.; sent10 -> int2: if the utensil is a kind of a clearway then the fact that it recommends lumpfish is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the utensil recommends lumpfish.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the schnook does recommend copyreader. | {AB}{a} | sent1: if the schnook is not ethnographic then it is a Riley and it is not obedient. sent2: if that something is vulvar and it is a freemasonry is false it is not vulvar. sent3: the reboxetine is not exculpatory. sent4: that the schnook does recommend copyreader is right if the potholder piffles. sent5: the ghat does recommend copyreader. sent6: the fact that the reboxetine is a kind of vulvar thing that is a freemasonry is false if it is not exculpatory. sent7: the reboxetine is a unit. sent8: if the pneumatophore is not a top-up it is a kind of an opening and it does not recommend copyreader. sent9: if the schnook is not a kind of a niqaabi it is a kind of a seine that does not serve Pliocene. sent10: something is not Indian but it is a microbe if it is not vulvar. sent11: the schnook is a niqaabi but it is not unnoticeable. sent12: if something is a kind of a unit it is a kind of a requital. sent13: if the schnook does not piffle then it is a niqaabi and it does not recommend copyreader. sent14: the schnook does not piffle. | sent1: ¬{EB}{a} -> ({FO}{a} & ¬{DN}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬({F}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent3: ¬{G}{c} sent4: {A}{b} -> {AB}{a} sent5: {AB}{is} sent6: ¬{G}{c} -> ¬({F}{c} & {H}{c}) sent7: {D}{c} sent8: ¬{AF}{en} -> ({GU}{en} & ¬{AB}{en}) sent9: ¬{AA}{a} -> ({JI}{a} & ¬{EU}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & {B}x) sent11: ({AA}{a} & ¬{EJ}{a}) sent12: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent13: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent14: ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent13 & sent14 -> int1: the schnook is a niqaabi but it does not recommend copyreader.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent13 & sent14 -> int1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the schnook recommends copyreader. | {AB}{a} | [
"sent12 -> int2: the reboxetine is a requital if it is a unit.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: that the reboxetine is a kind of a requital hold.; sent10 -> int4: if the fact that the reboxetine is not vulvar is correct then it is not a Indian and it is a microbe.; sent2 -> int5: if that the reboxetine is vulvar and is a freemasonry is not true it is not vulvar.; sent6 & sent3 -> int6: the fact that the reboxetine is vulvar and is a freemasonry is not true.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the reboxetine is not vulvar.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the reboxetine is not a Indian but it is a kind of a microbe.; int8 -> int9: the reboxetine is a microbe.; int3 & int9 -> int10: the reboxetine is a requital and is a microbe.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that it is a requital and it is a kind of a microbe.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the schnook does recommend copyreader. ; $context$ = sent1: if the schnook is not ethnographic then it is a Riley and it is not obedient. sent2: if that something is vulvar and it is a freemasonry is false it is not vulvar. sent3: the reboxetine is not exculpatory. sent4: that the schnook does recommend copyreader is right if the potholder piffles. sent5: the ghat does recommend copyreader. sent6: the fact that the reboxetine is a kind of vulvar thing that is a freemasonry is false if it is not exculpatory. sent7: the reboxetine is a unit. sent8: if the pneumatophore is not a top-up it is a kind of an opening and it does not recommend copyreader. sent9: if the schnook is not a kind of a niqaabi it is a kind of a seine that does not serve Pliocene. sent10: something is not Indian but it is a microbe if it is not vulvar. sent11: the schnook is a niqaabi but it is not unnoticeable. sent12: if something is a kind of a unit it is a kind of a requital. sent13: if the schnook does not piffle then it is a niqaabi and it does not recommend copyreader. sent14: the schnook does not piffle. ; $proof$ = | sent13 & sent14 -> int1: the schnook is a niqaabi but it does not recommend copyreader.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | both the recommending bitter-bark and the knelling occurs. | ({B} & {C}) | sent1: the serving Morgantown happens. sent2: the unfamiliarness happens. sent3: the spending occurs and the ontogeneticness occurs. sent4: if the serving Morgantown does not occur then the fact that the recommending bitter-bark occurs and the knell occurs is not right. sent5: both the serving Morgantown and the recommending bitter-bark occurs. sent6: the recommending Oklahoman occurs. sent7: the serving utilization occurs and the birth occurs. sent8: the knell occurs. sent9: that the recommending unenlightenment does not occur yields that the serving Morgantown and the backpacking skep happens. | sent1: {A} sent2: {GR} sent3: ({HU} & {BM}) sent4: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent5: ({A} & {B}) sent6: {O} sent7: ({DF} & {T}) sent8: {C} sent9: ¬{E} -> ({A} & {HI}) | [
"sent5 -> int1: the recommending bitter-bark occurs.; int1 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the recommending bitter-bark and the knell happens is wrong. | ¬({B} & {C}) | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = both the recommending bitter-bark and the knelling occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the serving Morgantown happens. sent2: the unfamiliarness happens. sent3: the spending occurs and the ontogeneticness occurs. sent4: if the serving Morgantown does not occur then the fact that the recommending bitter-bark occurs and the knell occurs is not right. sent5: both the serving Morgantown and the recommending bitter-bark occurs. sent6: the recommending Oklahoman occurs. sent7: the serving utilization occurs and the birth occurs. sent8: the knell occurs. sent9: that the recommending unenlightenment does not occur yields that the serving Morgantown and the backpacking skep happens. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> int1: the recommending bitter-bark occurs.; int1 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the triquetral is not Aleutians and/or is not a Euphagus. | (¬{B}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) | sent1: if something is north it is not a kind of a Euphagus. sent2: something is a north but not a gee-gee if it is not a kind of a gasbag. sent3: the centerpiece does not recommend ethics and is not Aleutians. sent4: if the triquetral does recommend isosorbide but it is not evening then it is not a Germanic. sent5: the triquetral is not Aleutians if it does not condition and it does not serve format. | sent1: (x): {C}x -> ¬{A}x sent2: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent3: (¬{N}{it} & ¬{B}{it}) sent4: ({DF}{a} & ¬{BC}{a}) -> ¬{CD}{a} sent5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} | [] | [] | the Casanova is both not Aleutians and not a cast. | (¬{B}{dh} & ¬{GE}{dh}) | [
"sent1 -> int1: if the triquetral is a north it is not a Euphagus.; sent2 -> int2: the triquetral is a north but it is not a gee-gee if it is not a gasbag.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the triquetral is not Aleutians and/or is not a Euphagus. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is north it is not a kind of a Euphagus. sent2: something is a north but not a gee-gee if it is not a kind of a gasbag. sent3: the centerpiece does not recommend ethics and is not Aleutians. sent4: if the triquetral does recommend isosorbide but it is not evening then it is not a Germanic. sent5: the triquetral is not Aleutians if it does not condition and it does not serve format. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the self-starter is noncritical if the pit is a readout. | {A}{a} -> {C}{b} | sent1: the self-starter is noncritical if that the pit is a tetrahedron is correct. sent2: the fact that the self-starter is a kind of a readout hold. sent3: if something is not transitional then it is not noncritical. sent4: the pit is a Salvadoran. sent5: something is a tetrahedron and it is a readout if it is not noncritical. sent6: the pit is noncritical. sent7: if the pit is a readout then it is a tetrahedron. | sent1: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent2: {A}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: {HL}{a} sent5: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent6: {C}{a} sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the pit is a readout.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the pit is a tetrahedron.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: that the self-starter is noncritical is true.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent1 & int1 -> int2: {C}{b}; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the algebraist is a tetrahedron. | {B}{as} | [
"sent5 -> int3: if the algebraist is not noncritical then it is a tetrahedron and it is a readout.; sent3 -> int4: the algebraist is not noncritical if it is not transitional.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the self-starter is noncritical if the pit is a readout. ; $context$ = sent1: the self-starter is noncritical if that the pit is a tetrahedron is correct. sent2: the fact that the self-starter is a kind of a readout hold. sent3: if something is not transitional then it is not noncritical. sent4: the pit is a Salvadoran. sent5: something is a tetrahedron and it is a readout if it is not noncritical. sent6: the pit is noncritical. sent7: if the pit is a readout then it is a tetrahedron. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the pit is a readout.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the pit is a tetrahedron.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: that the self-starter is noncritical is true.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Muraenidae and is basic then it does not backpack Vespertilionidae is correct is wrong. | ¬((Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: if something is both a tallith and tabular the fact that it is a Czech hold. sent2: there is something such that if it absconds and ramifies it is not a inessential. sent3: if something is a soffit and it numerates then it is not a kind of a mealberry. sent4: the tawse is not a kind of a barbiturate if it does serve precognition and it does backpack Vespertilionidae. sent5: there is something such that if it does recommend cupflower and does appreciate then it is a pitilessness. sent6: something does not boat bylaw if it does backpack Levite and it does recommend Camelus. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a kind of Markovian thing that serves Rheum then it is a pothunter. sent8: the loaner is a kind of a fast if it is a kind of a Muraenidae that is variolar. sent9: that the poetess serves mummery is right if it is a Muraenidae and is vasomotor. sent10: if the tawse is a Muraenidae and a basic it does backpack Vespertilionidae. sent11: if a Muraenidae is basic it backpacks Vespertilionidae. sent12: if something is custard-like and it does serve Limulus it is non-basic. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a scaffold and it is a kind of a hotel it is not a kind of a Verne. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a Muraenidae and it is a basic then it backpacks Vespertilionidae. sent15: if something is both a Muraenidae and a basic that it does not backpack Vespertilionidae hold. | sent1: (x): ({ED}x & {AD}x) -> {U}x sent2: (Ex): ({CN}x & {DF}x) -> ¬{HR}x sent3: (x): ({IU}x & {L}x) -> ¬{IF}x sent4: ({HN}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{DN}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ({EU}x & {EB}x) -> {T}x sent6: (x): ({BU}x & {GD}x) -> ¬{AJ}x sent7: (Ex): ({CF}x & {DI}x) -> {HO}x sent8: ({AA}{ci} & {GU}{ci}) -> {EF}{ci} sent9: ({AA}{ff} & {HS}{ff}) -> {ID}{ff} sent10: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent11: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent12: (x): ({HI}x & {EL}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent13: (Ex): ({C}x & {M}x) -> ¬{BR}x sent14: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent15: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent15 -> int1: the tawse does not backpack Vespertilionidae if it is both a Muraenidae and basic.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent15 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the Rheum is not a kind of a basic if it is custard-like and it serves Limulus. | ({HI}{ja} & {EL}{ja}) -> ¬{AB}{ja} | [
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Muraenidae and is basic then it does not backpack Vespertilionidae is correct is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is both a tallith and tabular the fact that it is a Czech hold. sent2: there is something such that if it absconds and ramifies it is not a inessential. sent3: if something is a soffit and it numerates then it is not a kind of a mealberry. sent4: the tawse is not a kind of a barbiturate if it does serve precognition and it does backpack Vespertilionidae. sent5: there is something such that if it does recommend cupflower and does appreciate then it is a pitilessness. sent6: something does not boat bylaw if it does backpack Levite and it does recommend Camelus. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a kind of Markovian thing that serves Rheum then it is a pothunter. sent8: the loaner is a kind of a fast if it is a kind of a Muraenidae that is variolar. sent9: that the poetess serves mummery is right if it is a Muraenidae and is vasomotor. sent10: if the tawse is a Muraenidae and a basic it does backpack Vespertilionidae. sent11: if a Muraenidae is basic it backpacks Vespertilionidae. sent12: if something is custard-like and it does serve Limulus it is non-basic. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a scaffold and it is a kind of a hotel it is not a kind of a Verne. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a Muraenidae and it is a basic then it backpacks Vespertilionidae. sent15: if something is both a Muraenidae and a basic that it does not backpack Vespertilionidae hold. ; $proof$ = | sent15 -> int1: the tawse does not backpack Vespertilionidae if it is both a Muraenidae and basic.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | something is a Kaufman and does surprise. | (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) | sent1: something is a Kaufman. sent2: the acumen is uneventful. sent3: the acumen is a surprise. sent4: the pheno-safranine is a surprise. | sent1: (Ex): {A}x sent2: {FO}{a} sent3: {B}{a} sent4: {B}{hb} | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = something is a Kaufman and does surprise. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a Kaufman. sent2: the acumen is uneventful. sent3: the acumen is a surprise. sent4: the pheno-safranine is a surprise. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the voluptuary is a kind of a notoriety. | {A}{a} | sent1: the voluptuary is a kind of a notoriety if the convalescence is a notoriety. sent2: something is a prostitute that does quintuple. sent3: something is a kind of uncousinly thing that does recommend neurectomy if it is a notoriety. sent4: something does not backpack pneumonectomy. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it does quintuple is not false. sent6: the Berber is either not amethystine or a bull or both if the fact that it does not serve correctness is correct. sent7: the mouth is a kind of non-endocrine thing that is a proconvertin. sent8: that the mouth is not a kind of a prostitute but it quintuples is true. sent9: the Berber does not serve correctness. sent10: the voluptuary is not a kind of a notoriety if something that is not a kind of a prostitute does quintuple. sent11: the mouth is not a prostitute. sent12: something is a kind of a notoriety and is a Cosmocampus if it is not a hoard. sent13: there is something such that it does not prostitute. sent14: that the strawworm does serve correctness is right if it bulls. sent15: the strawworm is not amethystine if there exists something such that either it is not amethystine or it does bull or both. | sent1: {A}{b} -> {A}{a} sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> (¬{HU}x & {DN}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{G}x sent5: (Ex): {AB}x sent6: ¬{E}{d} -> (¬{D}{d} v {F}{d}) sent7: (¬{EB}{aa} & {BK}{aa}) sent8: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: ¬{E}{d} sent10: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent11: ¬{AA}{aa} sent12: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent13: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent14: {F}{c} -> {E}{c} sent15: (x): (¬{D}x v {F}x) -> ¬{D}{c} | [
"sent8 -> int1: there is something such that it is not a prostitute and it does quintuple.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 -> int1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x); int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | the voluptuary is a kind of a notoriety. | {A}{a} | [
"sent12 -> int2: if the convalescence is not a kind of a hoard it is a notoriety and a Cosmocampus.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the voluptuary is a kind of a notoriety. ; $context$ = sent1: the voluptuary is a kind of a notoriety if the convalescence is a notoriety. sent2: something is a prostitute that does quintuple. sent3: something is a kind of uncousinly thing that does recommend neurectomy if it is a notoriety. sent4: something does not backpack pneumonectomy. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it does quintuple is not false. sent6: the Berber is either not amethystine or a bull or both if the fact that it does not serve correctness is correct. sent7: the mouth is a kind of non-endocrine thing that is a proconvertin. sent8: that the mouth is not a kind of a prostitute but it quintuples is true. sent9: the Berber does not serve correctness. sent10: the voluptuary is not a kind of a notoriety if something that is not a kind of a prostitute does quintuple. sent11: the mouth is not a prostitute. sent12: something is a kind of a notoriety and is a Cosmocampus if it is not a hoard. sent13: there is something such that it does not prostitute. sent14: that the strawworm does serve correctness is right if it bulls. sent15: the strawworm is not amethystine if there exists something such that either it is not amethystine or it does bull or both. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> int1: there is something such that it is not a prostitute and it does quintuple.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the oratory happens and the recommending gaskin does not occur does not hold. | ¬({D} & ¬{C}) | sent1: if the wipeout occurs then the fact that the oratory but not the recommending gaskin occurs is not true. sent2: the contraception occurs if the fact that the wipeout but not the contraception occurs does not hold. sent3: that the wipeout does not occur is prevented by that the boniness occurs and the cuckoldry does not occur. sent4: if the fact that the blondness occurs hold the boniness does not occur and the cuckoldry does not occur. sent5: the pose causes the non-scalicness. sent6: the backpacking ghastliness happens. sent7: the salute occurs. sent8: the non-metricness occurs if the acrogenicness does not occur and the bilking does not occur. sent9: the poplitealness is prevented by that the caroling occurs. sent10: if the percussiveness happens then that the poplitealness occurs and the recommending southernness does not occur is wrong. sent11: that the episiotomy but not the caroling happens does not hold. sent12: the wipeout is brought about by that the boniness does not occur and the cuckoldry does not occur. sent13: that the sport happens but the lumbarness does not occur is not correct. sent14: that the velarness happens results in that the self-improvement does not occur and the gravy does not occur. sent15: the boniness does not occur. sent16: the blond happens. sent17: the fact that the unequivocalness happens but the chimericness does not occur is false if the counterinsurgentness occurs. sent18: the fact that the oratory occurs and the recommending gaskin occurs does not hold. sent19: if the backpacking croup occurs then that the proprietariness and the backpacking Levite happens is not true. | sent1: {B} -> ¬({D} & ¬{C}) sent2: ¬({B} & ¬{DG}) -> {DG} sent3: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent4: {A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent5: {CQ} -> ¬{HN} sent6: {DK} sent7: {M} sent8: (¬{FJ} & ¬{HC}) -> {FT} sent9: {EF} -> ¬{L} sent10: {IU} -> ¬({L} & ¬{HF}) sent11: ¬({HM} & ¬{EF}) sent12: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent13: ¬({T} & ¬{EK}) sent14: {HI} -> (¬{EB} & ¬{DD}) sent15: ¬{AA} sent16: {A} sent17: {HB} -> ¬({FA} & ¬{CM}) sent18: ¬({D} & {C}) sent19: {DE} -> ¬({IF} & {BN}) | [
"sent4 & sent16 -> int1: the boniness does not occur and the cuckoldry does not occur.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the wipeout occurs.; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent16 -> int1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 & sent12 -> int2: {B}; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the contraception happens. | {DG} | [] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the oratory happens and the recommending gaskin does not occur does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the wipeout occurs then the fact that the oratory but not the recommending gaskin occurs is not true. sent2: the contraception occurs if the fact that the wipeout but not the contraception occurs does not hold. sent3: that the wipeout does not occur is prevented by that the boniness occurs and the cuckoldry does not occur. sent4: if the fact that the blondness occurs hold the boniness does not occur and the cuckoldry does not occur. sent5: the pose causes the non-scalicness. sent6: the backpacking ghastliness happens. sent7: the salute occurs. sent8: the non-metricness occurs if the acrogenicness does not occur and the bilking does not occur. sent9: the poplitealness is prevented by that the caroling occurs. sent10: if the percussiveness happens then that the poplitealness occurs and the recommending southernness does not occur is wrong. sent11: that the episiotomy but not the caroling happens does not hold. sent12: the wipeout is brought about by that the boniness does not occur and the cuckoldry does not occur. sent13: that the sport happens but the lumbarness does not occur is not correct. sent14: that the velarness happens results in that the self-improvement does not occur and the gravy does not occur. sent15: the boniness does not occur. sent16: the blond happens. sent17: the fact that the unequivocalness happens but the chimericness does not occur is false if the counterinsurgentness occurs. sent18: the fact that the oratory occurs and the recommending gaskin occurs does not hold. sent19: if the backpacking croup occurs then that the proprietariness and the backpacking Levite happens is not true. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent16 -> int1: the boniness does not occur and the cuckoldry does not occur.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the wipeout occurs.; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is determinate it is multiform and/or it does serve Egyptologist. | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v {AB}x) | sent1: something is nervous and/or it is indeterminate if it is not supportive. sent2: something is multiform and/or does serve Egyptologist if it is indeterminate. sent3: the website is multiform or does serve Egyptologist or both if it is indeterminate. | sent1: (x): ¬{EP}x -> ({JH}x v {A}x) sent2: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x v {AB}x) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) | [] | [] | either the ropewalk is nervous or it is indeterminate or both if it is not supportive. | ¬{EP}{p} -> ({JH}{p} v {A}{p}) | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is determinate it is multiform and/or it does serve Egyptologist. ; $context$ = sent1: something is nervous and/or it is indeterminate if it is not supportive. sent2: something is multiform and/or does serve Egyptologist if it is indeterminate. sent3: the website is multiform or does serve Egyptologist or both if it is indeterminate. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the exocentricness does not occur. | ¬{A} | sent1: the clayeiness does not occur. sent2: the fact that the libidinalness occurs is not false. sent3: if the serving Bardeen happens the echocardiography occurs. sent4: that the clayeiness and the eligibleness happens does not hold if the Gallicness occurs. sent5: if the clayeiness happens the fact that the beating but not the eligibleness happens is incorrect. sent6: that the clayeiness does not occur is brought about by the beating. sent7: that the clayeiness and the eligibleness occurs is incorrect. sent8: the hotbedness happens. sent9: the cybercrime occurs. sent10: that both the campfire and the backlessness occurs is incorrect if the masochisticness happens. sent11: if the Gallicness occurs the fact that that the clayeiness does not occur and the eligibleness occurs is not wrong is not right. sent12: that the thalloidness does not occur hold. sent13: the Gallicness occurs if the cybercrime happens. sent14: the graduating happens. sent15: the nagging does not occur. sent16: if the Gallicness does not occur then the fact that the ineligibleness and the clayeiness happens does not hold. sent17: if the pall happens then the cybercrime does not occur. sent18: the opticalness occurs. sent19: if the rebuilding does not occur then both the equineness and the pall occurs. sent20: not the clayeiness but the eligibleness happens if the beating happens. | sent1: ¬{D} sent2: {HQ} sent3: {AP} -> {CU} sent4: {E} -> ¬({D} & {C}) sent5: {D} -> ¬({B} & ¬{C}) sent6: {B} -> ¬{D} sent7: ¬({D} & {C}) sent8: {HH} sent9: {F} sent10: {CQ} -> ¬({DF} & {GF}) sent11: {E} -> ¬(¬{D} & {C}) sent12: ¬{HB} sent13: {F} -> {E} sent14: {EP} sent15: ¬{CL} sent16: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent17: {G} -> ¬{F} sent18: {FO} sent19: ¬{I} -> ({H} & {G}) sent20: {B} -> (¬{D} & {C}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the exocentricness happens.; sent13 & sent9 -> int1: the Gallicness occurs.; sent11 & int1 -> int2: the fact that both the non-clayeyness and the eligibleness occurs is wrong.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent13 & sent9 -> int1: {E}; sent11 & int1 -> int2: ¬(¬{D} & {C});"
] | the deployment occurs. | {CP} | [] | 6 | 4 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the exocentricness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the clayeiness does not occur. sent2: the fact that the libidinalness occurs is not false. sent3: if the serving Bardeen happens the echocardiography occurs. sent4: that the clayeiness and the eligibleness happens does not hold if the Gallicness occurs. sent5: if the clayeiness happens the fact that the beating but not the eligibleness happens is incorrect. sent6: that the clayeiness does not occur is brought about by the beating. sent7: that the clayeiness and the eligibleness occurs is incorrect. sent8: the hotbedness happens. sent9: the cybercrime occurs. sent10: that both the campfire and the backlessness occurs is incorrect if the masochisticness happens. sent11: if the Gallicness occurs the fact that that the clayeiness does not occur and the eligibleness occurs is not wrong is not right. sent12: that the thalloidness does not occur hold. sent13: the Gallicness occurs if the cybercrime happens. sent14: the graduating happens. sent15: the nagging does not occur. sent16: if the Gallicness does not occur then the fact that the ineligibleness and the clayeiness happens does not hold. sent17: if the pall happens then the cybercrime does not occur. sent18: the opticalness occurs. sent19: if the rebuilding does not occur then both the equineness and the pall occurs. sent20: not the clayeiness but the eligibleness happens if the beating happens. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the exocentricness happens.; sent13 & sent9 -> int1: the Gallicness occurs.; sent11 & int1 -> int2: the fact that both the non-clayeyness and the eligibleness occurs is wrong.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the taboret is not endoparasitic. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: the taboret is endoparasitic if the chaperon is a mildew. sent2: the fact that the taboret is not a mildew but it is endoparasitic is incorrect. sent3: there exists nothing such that it is endoparasitic and is not a kind of a methanogen. sent4: something that is not a quad is both a mildew and endoparasitic. sent5: if the taboret is not aphetic it is both a quad and not a parley. sent6: if something is not a kind of a hardtop but it is restful then it is not aphetic. sent7: there exists nothing such that it is a mildew and it is not a methanogen. sent8: the fact that the chaperon is a mildew but it is not a methanogen is false. sent9: the taboret is endoparasitic if that the chaperon is not a kind of a mildew and is not a kind of a methanogen is incorrect. sent10: if the fact that the fornix is endoparasitic but it is not a parley is incorrect then the taboret is not endoparasitic. sent11: that the taboret is both not endoparasitic and a mildew is not right. sent12: if the fact that the lomustine is aphetic is true then that the bootstrap is restful and/or is not a quad is incorrect. sent13: the fact that the quadrant is not a mildew and it does not backpack bootstrap is not correct. sent14: there exists nothing that is not a mildew and not a methanogen. sent15: the fornix is not a quad if the fact that either the bootstrap is restful or it is not a quad or both is not true. sent16: the fact that something is endoparasitic but it is not a kind of a parley is false if it is not a quad. | sent1: {AA}{aa} -> {A}{a} sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {A}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({AA}x & {A}x) sent5: ¬{D}{a} -> ({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent6: (x): (¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent7: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent8: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {A}{a} sent10: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent11: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent12: {D}{d} -> ¬({E}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) sent13: ¬(¬{AA}{fn} & ¬{AH}{fn}) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent15: ¬({E}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent16: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) | [
"sent14 -> int1: the fact that the chaperon is not a mildew and it is not a kind of a methanogen is not true.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent14 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the taboret is not endoparasitic is right. | ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent16 -> int2: if the fornix is not a quad then the fact that it is a kind of endoparasitic thing that does not parley does not hold.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the taboret is not endoparasitic. ; $context$ = sent1: the taboret is endoparasitic if the chaperon is a mildew. sent2: the fact that the taboret is not a mildew but it is endoparasitic is incorrect. sent3: there exists nothing such that it is endoparasitic and is not a kind of a methanogen. sent4: something that is not a quad is both a mildew and endoparasitic. sent5: if the taboret is not aphetic it is both a quad and not a parley. sent6: if something is not a kind of a hardtop but it is restful then it is not aphetic. sent7: there exists nothing such that it is a mildew and it is not a methanogen. sent8: the fact that the chaperon is a mildew but it is not a methanogen is false. sent9: the taboret is endoparasitic if that the chaperon is not a kind of a mildew and is not a kind of a methanogen is incorrect. sent10: if the fact that the fornix is endoparasitic but it is not a parley is incorrect then the taboret is not endoparasitic. sent11: that the taboret is both not endoparasitic and a mildew is not right. sent12: if the fact that the lomustine is aphetic is true then that the bootstrap is restful and/or is not a quad is incorrect. sent13: the fact that the quadrant is not a mildew and it does not backpack bootstrap is not correct. sent14: there exists nothing that is not a mildew and not a methanogen. sent15: the fornix is not a quad if the fact that either the bootstrap is restful or it is not a quad or both is not true. sent16: the fact that something is endoparasitic but it is not a kind of a parley is false if it is not a quad. ; $proof$ = | sent14 -> int1: the fact that the chaperon is not a mildew and it is not a kind of a methanogen is not true.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Split is not a tansy. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: something is not an evacuation and is not Sinhala. sent2: if the fact that something is a kind of non-post-communist thing that does not serve Algren is wrong then it does serve Algren. sent3: if something is not monatomic but it serves Algren then it is a thickhead. sent4: if something does not serve Algren then it is not unresentful or is not a kind of a thickhead or both. sent5: the candlepins is a Neofiber. sent6: the Split is not a councillorship. sent7: the stockist is not enzymatic if the candlepins does antiquate and is a Neofiber. sent8: the fact that the Split is a councillorship and/or is not a humification is not right. sent9: if the pintle does antiquate then the candlepins does antiquate. sent10: if there exists something such that it is not an evacuation and it is not Sinhala the pintle antiquates. sent11: if something is not enzymatic then it does backpack polydactyly. sent12: if there is something such that it does backpack polydactyly that the absentee is non-post-communist thing that does not serve Algren does not hold. sent13: the Split either is a councillorship or is not a humification or both if it is a kind of a tansy. sent14: the CRP is not a tansy if there exists something such that it is not unresentful and/or it is not a kind of a thickhead. sent15: something is not monatomic if it does not recommend entertainer and/or it is not a kind of a atresia. sent16: the absentee does not recommend entertainer and/or it is not a kind of a atresia. | sent1: (Ex): (¬{N}x & ¬{M}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{D}x) -> {D}x sent3: (x): (¬{E}x & {D}x) -> {C}x sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) sent5: {I}{d} sent6: ¬{AA}{a} sent7: ({J}{d} & {I}{d}) -> ¬{H}{c} sent8: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent9: {J}{e} -> {J}{d} sent10: (x): (¬{N}x & ¬{M}x) -> {J}{e} sent11: (x): ¬{H}x -> {G}x sent12: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{F}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent13: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent14: (x): (¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}{id} sent15: (x): (¬{K}x v ¬{L}x) -> ¬{E}x sent16: (¬{K}{b} v ¬{L}{b}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Split is a tansy.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the Split is a councillorship and/or it is not a kind of a humification.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent8 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the CRP does recommend candlepins or it is not cooling or both. | ({P}{id} v ¬{JI}{id}) | [
"sent4 -> int3: if the absentee does not serve Algren then it is not unresentful or it is not a thickhead or both.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Split is not a tansy. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not an evacuation and is not Sinhala. sent2: if the fact that something is a kind of non-post-communist thing that does not serve Algren is wrong then it does serve Algren. sent3: if something is not monatomic but it serves Algren then it is a thickhead. sent4: if something does not serve Algren then it is not unresentful or is not a kind of a thickhead or both. sent5: the candlepins is a Neofiber. sent6: the Split is not a councillorship. sent7: the stockist is not enzymatic if the candlepins does antiquate and is a Neofiber. sent8: the fact that the Split is a councillorship and/or is not a humification is not right. sent9: if the pintle does antiquate then the candlepins does antiquate. sent10: if there exists something such that it is not an evacuation and it is not Sinhala the pintle antiquates. sent11: if something is not enzymatic then it does backpack polydactyly. sent12: if there is something such that it does backpack polydactyly that the absentee is non-post-communist thing that does not serve Algren does not hold. sent13: the Split either is a councillorship or is not a humification or both if it is a kind of a tansy. sent14: the CRP is not a tansy if there exists something such that it is not unresentful and/or it is not a kind of a thickhead. sent15: something is not monatomic if it does not recommend entertainer and/or it is not a kind of a atresia. sent16: the absentee does not recommend entertainer and/or it is not a kind of a atresia. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Split is a tansy.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the Split is a councillorship and/or it is not a kind of a humification.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the rigout is not non-neolithic. | {D}{c} | sent1: the rigout is not neolithic if the niqab speculates but it is not neolithic. sent2: if the almsgiver is a instillator then the rigout is neolithic. sent3: the niqab is a recitative. sent4: if the almsgiver is a kind of a recitative then the niqab speculates but it is not neolithic. sent5: there is something such that it is neolithic thing that speculates. sent6: the niqab does speculate. | sent1: ({A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent2: {C}{b} -> {D}{c} sent3: {B}{a} sent4: {B}{b} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent5: (Ex): ({D}x & {A}x) sent6: {A}{a} | [
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: the niqab speculates and is a kind of a recitative.; int1 -> int2: something speculates and is a recitative.;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x);"
] | the rigout is not neolithic. | ¬{D}{c} | [] | 6 | 4 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the rigout is not non-neolithic. ; $context$ = sent1: the rigout is not neolithic if the niqab speculates but it is not neolithic. sent2: if the almsgiver is a instillator then the rigout is neolithic. sent3: the niqab is a recitative. sent4: if the almsgiver is a kind of a recitative then the niqab speculates but it is not neolithic. sent5: there is something such that it is neolithic thing that speculates. sent6: the niqab does speculate. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent3 -> int1: the niqab speculates and is a kind of a recitative.; int1 -> int2: something speculates and is a recitative.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the backpacking gamboge occurs. | {B} | sent1: the bridle does not occur. sent2: the tip-off does not occur if that that the unperceptiveness and the tip-off happens is not incorrect does not hold. sent3: that both the unperceptiveness and the tip-off occurs is not correct if the chance-medley does not occur. sent4: if the extradition does not occur the gambling does not occur. sent5: if both the salving and the non-prolixness occurs then the recommending nucleoplasm does not occur. sent6: that the serving Colossae does not occur and the stripping does not occur is triggered by that the backpacking roasting occurs. sent7: that the tolerance does not occur is caused by that the recommending timer does not occur. sent8: if the Ptolemaicness does not occur then the sinking does not occur. sent9: the serving Shetland does not occur. sent10: if the tip-off does not occur then both the insubordination and the backpacking roasting occurs. sent11: the recommending timer does not occur and the backpacking gamboge does not occur if the recommending nucleoplasm does not occur. sent12: if that the warpath does not occur is not false then the backpacking vaccination happens and the recommending expulsion does not occur. sent13: that the backpacking gamboge does not occur is prevented by the cuckoldry. sent14: if the backpacking vaccination occurs but the recommending expulsion does not occur then the aftermath does not occur. sent15: if the actinometry occurs then the chance-medley does not occur. sent16: if that the recommending timer does not occur is true the cuckoldry but not the tolerance occurs. sent17: that both the reallocation and the actinometry happens is triggered by that the aftermath does not occur. sent18: if the serving Colossae does not occur both the salve and the non-prolixness occurs. sent19: the circularization but not the aeromechanicsness happens. sent20: the recommending timer does not occur. sent21: if the fact that the supervening does not occur and the defeat does not occur is not false the warpath does not occur. | sent1: ¬{IH} sent2: ¬({K} & {J}) -> ¬{J} sent3: ¬{L} -> ¬({K} & {J}) sent4: ¬{DK} -> ¬{EA} sent5: ({E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} sent6: {H} -> (¬{F} & ¬{G}) sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬{AB} sent8: ¬{GT} -> ¬{AP} sent9: ¬{ET} sent10: ¬{J} -> ({I} & {H}) sent11: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent12: ¬{R} -> ({Q} & ¬{P}) sent13: {AA} -> {B} sent14: ({Q} & ¬{P}) -> ¬{O} sent15: {M} -> ¬{L} sent16: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent17: ¬{O} -> ({N} & {M}) sent18: ¬{F} -> ({E} & ¬{D}) sent19: ({GC} & ¬{EI}) sent20: ¬{A} sent21: (¬{S} & ¬{T}) -> ¬{R} | [
"sent16 & sent20 -> int1: the cuckoldry but not the tolerance happens.; int1 -> int2: the cuckoldry happens.; sent13 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent16 & sent20 -> int1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 -> int2: {AA}; sent13 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the backpacking gamboge does not occur. | ¬{B} | [] | 17 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the backpacking gamboge occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the bridle does not occur. sent2: the tip-off does not occur if that that the unperceptiveness and the tip-off happens is not incorrect does not hold. sent3: that both the unperceptiveness and the tip-off occurs is not correct if the chance-medley does not occur. sent4: if the extradition does not occur the gambling does not occur. sent5: if both the salving and the non-prolixness occurs then the recommending nucleoplasm does not occur. sent6: that the serving Colossae does not occur and the stripping does not occur is triggered by that the backpacking roasting occurs. sent7: that the tolerance does not occur is caused by that the recommending timer does not occur. sent8: if the Ptolemaicness does not occur then the sinking does not occur. sent9: the serving Shetland does not occur. sent10: if the tip-off does not occur then both the insubordination and the backpacking roasting occurs. sent11: the recommending timer does not occur and the backpacking gamboge does not occur if the recommending nucleoplasm does not occur. sent12: if that the warpath does not occur is not false then the backpacking vaccination happens and the recommending expulsion does not occur. sent13: that the backpacking gamboge does not occur is prevented by the cuckoldry. sent14: if the backpacking vaccination occurs but the recommending expulsion does not occur then the aftermath does not occur. sent15: if the actinometry occurs then the chance-medley does not occur. sent16: if that the recommending timer does not occur is true the cuckoldry but not the tolerance occurs. sent17: that both the reallocation and the actinometry happens is triggered by that the aftermath does not occur. sent18: if the serving Colossae does not occur both the salve and the non-prolixness occurs. sent19: the circularization but not the aeromechanicsness happens. sent20: the recommending timer does not occur. sent21: if the fact that the supervening does not occur and the defeat does not occur is not false the warpath does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent16 & sent20 -> int1: the cuckoldry but not the tolerance happens.; int1 -> int2: the cuckoldry happens.; sent13 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if the fact that it does not recommend collect and it is a holocephalan is not correct then it shags. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: if that something does recommend collect and is a holocephalan is incorrect it is a shag. sent2: if the anteater does not recommend collect but it is a holocephalan then it is a shag. sent3: the anteater shags if it is not a holocephalan. sent4: something recommends Lanai if that it is not a kind of a isogram and it misgives is not true. sent5: something is a shag if it is not a kind of a holocephalan. sent6: there is something such that if it does not recommend collect and is a kind of a holocephalan it is a kind of a shag. sent7: there is something such that if that it is not a holocephalan is correct then it does shag. sent8: if that the anteater does recommend collect and it is a holocephalan is not correct then it is a shag. sent9: something is a shag if it does not recommend collect and is a holocephalan. sent10: there is something such that if the fact that it is not Moravian is correct then it serves immortelle. sent11: if that something is not a kind of a Handel but it is costal is not right it is a Maoist. sent12: there exists something such that if that it does recommend collect and it is a holocephalan is not true then it is a shag. sent13: the fact that if that something does not recommend collect and is a holocephalan is not correct that it is a shag is not false is correct. | sent1: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: ¬{AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{GL}x & {AK}x) -> {DH}x sent5: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {B}x sent6: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> {B}x sent8: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent9: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{HS}x -> {FG}x sent11: (x): ¬(¬{CM}x & {IG}x) -> {DM}x sent12: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent13: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | [
"sent13 -> int1: the anteater is a kind of a shag if that the fact that it does not recommend collect and is a holocephalan hold is false.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent13 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if the fact that it does not recommend collect and it is a holocephalan is not correct then it shags. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something does recommend collect and is a holocephalan is incorrect it is a shag. sent2: if the anteater does not recommend collect but it is a holocephalan then it is a shag. sent3: the anteater shags if it is not a holocephalan. sent4: something recommends Lanai if that it is not a kind of a isogram and it misgives is not true. sent5: something is a shag if it is not a kind of a holocephalan. sent6: there is something such that if it does not recommend collect and is a kind of a holocephalan it is a kind of a shag. sent7: there is something such that if that it is not a holocephalan is correct then it does shag. sent8: if that the anteater does recommend collect and it is a holocephalan is not correct then it is a shag. sent9: something is a shag if it does not recommend collect and is a holocephalan. sent10: there is something such that if the fact that it is not Moravian is correct then it serves immortelle. sent11: if that something is not a kind of a Handel but it is costal is not right it is a Maoist. sent12: there exists something such that if that it does recommend collect and it is a holocephalan is not true then it is a shag. sent13: the fact that if that something does not recommend collect and is a holocephalan is not correct that it is a shag is not false is correct. ; $proof$ = | sent13 -> int1: the anteater is a kind of a shag if that the fact that it does not recommend collect and is a holocephalan hold is false.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the lifeboat is not a kind of a peculiarity but it is Melanesian is not true. | ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) | sent1: if the chit serves entreaty the lifeboat does not serve Methodist. sent2: if the chit does perch it is not a show-stopper and is a phosphor. sent3: the wisteria is a Pompadour. sent4: if something that is not a kind of a show-stopper is a phosphor then it serves entreaty. sent5: if the dominance does not perch then the aphorist serves Methodist and does not serve entreaty. sent6: that something is not a kind of a peculiarity and is Melanesian is not correct if it does not serve Methodist. | sent1: {B}{aa} -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: {E}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: {F}{d} sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: ¬{E}{c} -> ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {D}x) | [
"sent4 -> int1: the chit does serve entreaty if it is both not a show-stopper and a phosphor.; sent6 -> int2: the fact that the lifeboat is not a peculiarity but it is Melanesian does not hold if it does not serve Methodist.;"
] | [
"sent4 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; sent6 -> int2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a});"
] | the lifeboat is not a kind of a peculiarity and is Melanesian. | (¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) | [] | 7 | 4 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the lifeboat is not a kind of a peculiarity but it is Melanesian is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the chit serves entreaty the lifeboat does not serve Methodist. sent2: if the chit does perch it is not a show-stopper and is a phosphor. sent3: the wisteria is a Pompadour. sent4: if something that is not a kind of a show-stopper is a phosphor then it serves entreaty. sent5: if the dominance does not perch then the aphorist serves Methodist and does not serve entreaty. sent6: that something is not a kind of a peculiarity and is Melanesian is not correct if it does not serve Methodist. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> int1: the chit does serve entreaty if it is both not a show-stopper and a phosphor.; sent6 -> int2: the fact that the lifeboat is not a peculiarity but it is Melanesian does not hold if it does not serve Methodist.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the tendergreen is not arborical. | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: the anchorite does recommend electroencephalogram or is not a betrayal or both. sent2: the henbane is inferential. sent3: if the fact that something is not a kind of a bubo but it boats camail does not hold it is a blasphemy. sent4: something is a blasphemy. sent5: if the Caliphate is bicapsular then the henbane serves VLF. sent6: if there exists something such that it does recommend Lardner then the tendergreen is nonsteroidal or it is not a blocking or both. sent7: the atmometer does not recommend electroencephalogram. sent8: the fact that the Caliphate is bicapsular hold. sent9: the tendergreen either is buccal or does not recommend electroencephalogram or both if something is a blasphemy. sent10: if something is buccal and/or it does not recommend electroencephalogram then it is not arborical. sent11: if something is a kind of a blasphemy then it is arborical. sent12: something is non-arborical if it is buccal. | sent1: ({AB}{is} v ¬{FB}{is}) sent2: {E}{b} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {D}x) -> {A}x sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: {G}{c} -> {F}{b} sent6: (x): {GU}x -> ({FL}{aa} v ¬{GP}{aa}) sent7: ¬{AB}{gg} sent8: {G}{c} sent9: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent10: (x): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent11: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent12: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent10 -> int1: the fact that the tendergreen is not arborical if the tendergreen is buccal and/or it does not recommend electroencephalogram is right.; sent4 & sent9 -> int2: the tendergreen is buccal and/or it does not recommend electroencephalogram.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent10 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent4 & sent9 -> int2: ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the tendergreen is arborical. | {B}{aa} | [
"sent11 -> int3: if the tendergreen is a kind of a blasphemy it is arborical.; sent3 -> int4: the tendergreen is a kind of a blasphemy if that it is not a bubo and boats camail is wrong.; sent5 & sent8 -> int5: that the henbane serves VLF is correct.; sent2 & int5 -> int6: that the henbane is not non-inferential and it does serve VLF is correct.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it is inferential and it serves VLF.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the tendergreen is not arborical. ; $context$ = sent1: the anchorite does recommend electroencephalogram or is not a betrayal or both. sent2: the henbane is inferential. sent3: if the fact that something is not a kind of a bubo but it boats camail does not hold it is a blasphemy. sent4: something is a blasphemy. sent5: if the Caliphate is bicapsular then the henbane serves VLF. sent6: if there exists something such that it does recommend Lardner then the tendergreen is nonsteroidal or it is not a blocking or both. sent7: the atmometer does not recommend electroencephalogram. sent8: the fact that the Caliphate is bicapsular hold. sent9: the tendergreen either is buccal or does not recommend electroencephalogram or both if something is a blasphemy. sent10: if something is buccal and/or it does not recommend electroencephalogram then it is not arborical. sent11: if something is a kind of a blasphemy then it is arborical. sent12: something is non-arborical if it is buccal. ; $proof$ = | sent10 -> int1: the fact that the tendergreen is not arborical if the tendergreen is buccal and/or it does not recommend electroencephalogram is right.; sent4 & sent9 -> int2: the tendergreen is buccal and/or it does not recommend electroencephalogram.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the handhold is a quad. | {B}{a} | sent1: if the fact that the handhold is not gymnastics is not false it is a prosperity and it does grin. sent2: the handhold does grin. sent3: the handhold is not gymnastics. sent4: the handhold grins if it is not gymnastics. sent5: if something is a prosperity it is a kind of a quad. | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent2: {AB}{a} sent3: ¬{A}{a} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{a} sent5: (x): {AA}x -> {B}x | [
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the handhold is a prosperity and it grins.; int1 -> int2: the handhold is a prosperity.; sent5 -> int3: the handhold is a quad if it is a prosperity.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: {AA}{a}; sent5 -> int3: {AA}{a} -> {B}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the handhold is a quad. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the handhold is not gymnastics is not false it is a prosperity and it does grin. sent2: the handhold does grin. sent3: the handhold is not gymnastics. sent4: the handhold grins if it is not gymnastics. sent5: if something is a prosperity it is a kind of a quad. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the handhold is a prosperity and it grins.; int1 -> int2: the handhold is a prosperity.; sent5 -> int3: the handhold is a quad if it is a prosperity.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the councilwoman does not backpack mummy. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: the councilwoman is not a stern if there exists something such that that it is seamless and/or is navigational does not hold. sent2: something is not bacteroidal if it is a kind of a stern. sent3: the Casanova does not boat requested. sent4: if the fact that the councilwoman does backpack mummy hold it does boat requested. sent5: if something is tolerant then the councilwoman does not boat requested. sent6: something backpacks mummy. sent7: something is a stern or it is navigational or both if it is not seamless. sent8: a navigational thing is not bacteroidal. sent9: the councilwoman does serve farrier. sent10: the councilwoman conglutinates. sent11: the councilwoman boats requested if it is a Webster. sent12: the councilwoman is basaltic if it is seamless. sent13: the councilwoman does not recommend protectionist. sent14: there exists something such that that it is tolerant is right. sent15: if something is not bacteroidal then the fact that the mattress is not a kind of a T-man hold. sent16: the councilwoman recommends ram's-head. sent17: there is something such that that it is seamless or it is navigational or both does not hold. sent18: the councilwoman is not tolerant. sent19: the ram's-head is not seamless. sent20: if something is not tolerant and it does not backpack mummy then it does not boat requested. sent21: if something is not a kind of a T-man it boats requested and it does backpack mummy. | sent1: (x): ¬({H}x v {G}x) -> ¬{F}{a} sent2: (x): {F}x -> ¬{E}x sent3: ¬{B}{gg} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): {C}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (Ex): {A}x sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x v {G}x) sent8: (x): {G}x -> ¬{E}x sent9: {JH}{a} sent10: {U}{a} sent11: {DQ}{a} -> {B}{a} sent12: {H}{a} -> {HA}{a} sent13: ¬{GP}{a} sent14: (Ex): {C}x sent15: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬{D}{b} sent16: {EA}{a} sent17: (Ex): ¬({H}x v {G}x) sent18: ¬{C}{a} sent19: ¬{H}{c} sent20: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent21: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the councilwoman does backpack mummy.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the councilwoman boats requested.; sent14 & sent5 -> int2: the councilwoman does not boat requested.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent14 & sent5 -> int2: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the mummy does not boat requested. | ¬{B}{ff} | [
"sent20 -> int4: if the mummy is not tolerant and does not backpack mummy then that it does not boat requested hold.; sent17 & sent1 -> int5: the councilwoman is not a stern.; int5 -> int6: something is not a stern.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the councilwoman does not backpack mummy. ; $context$ = sent1: the councilwoman is not a stern if there exists something such that that it is seamless and/or is navigational does not hold. sent2: something is not bacteroidal if it is a kind of a stern. sent3: the Casanova does not boat requested. sent4: if the fact that the councilwoman does backpack mummy hold it does boat requested. sent5: if something is tolerant then the councilwoman does not boat requested. sent6: something backpacks mummy. sent7: something is a stern or it is navigational or both if it is not seamless. sent8: a navigational thing is not bacteroidal. sent9: the councilwoman does serve farrier. sent10: the councilwoman conglutinates. sent11: the councilwoman boats requested if it is a Webster. sent12: the councilwoman is basaltic if it is seamless. sent13: the councilwoman does not recommend protectionist. sent14: there exists something such that that it is tolerant is right. sent15: if something is not bacteroidal then the fact that the mattress is not a kind of a T-man hold. sent16: the councilwoman recommends ram's-head. sent17: there is something such that that it is seamless or it is navigational or both does not hold. sent18: the councilwoman is not tolerant. sent19: the ram's-head is not seamless. sent20: if something is not tolerant and it does not backpack mummy then it does not boat requested. sent21: if something is not a kind of a T-man it boats requested and it does backpack mummy. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the councilwoman does backpack mummy.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the councilwoman boats requested.; sent14 & sent5 -> int2: the councilwoman does not boat requested.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a throne then the fact that it does not backpack tetranychid and it is coccal does not hold is wrong. | ¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)) | sent1: that something does not serve Nergal and is coccal does not hold if it does serve caustic. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a throne then the fact that it does not backpack tetranychid and is coccal is true. sent3: there is something such that if it does throne the fact that that it does backpack tetranychid and it is coccal is not incorrect does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it is avifaunal that it does not attenuate and is unidentifiable is not right. sent5: there is something such that if it boats cupflower then the fact that it is not faceless and is informational is not right. sent6: if the caustic does throne the fact that it backpacks tetranychid and it is coccal is not right. sent7: that something is a kind of non-coccal an adder does not hold if it is a Siluridae. sent8: if the tetranychid is indefeasible the fact that it is not a kind of a salamander and is a throne is not right. sent9: the fact that the caustic does not backpack tetranychid and is coccal is not true if it thrones. sent10: the caustic does not backpack tetranychid and is coccal if it is a throne. | sent1: (x): {EK}x -> ¬(¬{Q}x & {AB}x) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: (Ex): {HM}x -> ¬(¬{EJ}x & {GM}x) sent5: (Ex): {GH}x -> ¬(¬{BK}x & {BO}x) sent6: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: (x): {BS}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & {IK}x) sent8: {GG}{gt} -> ¬(¬{DD}{gt} & {A}{gt}) sent9: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent10: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the longbow is a kind of non-coccal an adder does not hold if it is a Siluridae. | {BS}{dj} -> ¬(¬{AB}{dj} & {IK}{dj}) | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a throne then the fact that it does not backpack tetranychid and it is coccal does not hold is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: that something does not serve Nergal and is coccal does not hold if it does serve caustic. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a throne then the fact that it does not backpack tetranychid and is coccal is true. sent3: there is something such that if it does throne the fact that that it does backpack tetranychid and it is coccal is not incorrect does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it is avifaunal that it does not attenuate and is unidentifiable is not right. sent5: there is something such that if it boats cupflower then the fact that it is not faceless and is informational is not right. sent6: if the caustic does throne the fact that it backpacks tetranychid and it is coccal is not right. sent7: that something is a kind of non-coccal an adder does not hold if it is a Siluridae. sent8: if the tetranychid is indefeasible the fact that it is not a kind of a salamander and is a throne is not right. sent9: the fact that the caustic does not backpack tetranychid and is coccal is not true if it thrones. sent10: the caustic does not backpack tetranychid and is coccal if it is a throne. ; $proof$ = | sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the traverser is a Ottumwa. | {D}{a} | sent1: the fact that the traverser is not a latest is true if something is a proctoscopy and it is a crater. sent2: the traverser is not a kind of a proctoscopy. sent3: something is a redistribution and it is a psychodid. sent4: the traverser does not recommend packinghouse. sent5: the fact that the anteater is not a Ottumwa is not incorrect. sent6: something is a cinema. sent7: the fact that something does serve cirrus and is a allocution is correct. sent8: the traverser is not greenside. sent9: the flagging is not a Ottumwa. sent10: the traverser is not pronounceable. sent11: there exists something such that it is a briefcase. sent12: something is not a Ottumwa if it is not a kind of a latest. sent13: there exists something such that it directs. sent14: the traverser does not direct. sent15: the shortbread is not a kind of a Ottumwa. sent16: if that the traverser is not a briefcase is right then it is not a proctoscopy. sent17: the traverser does not serve anapsid. sent18: there exists something such that it is alkahestic. sent19: the traverser is not a crater. sent20: something is a kind of a Garrulus and it does intend. sent21: something is a proctoscopy that is a crater. sent22: the homeotherm is not a remainder if something that is mortuary is a crater. | sent1: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: (Ex): ({HJ}x & {FS}x) sent4: ¬{ET}{a} sent5: ¬{D}{ac} sent6: (Ex): {HF}x sent7: (Ex): ({BU}x & {IT}x) sent8: ¬{DU}{a} sent9: ¬{D}{dq} sent10: ¬{BL}{a} sent11: (Ex): {JB}x sent12: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{D}x sent13: (Ex): {IC}x sent14: ¬{IC}{a} sent15: ¬{D}{fg} sent16: ¬{JB}{a} -> ¬{A}{a} sent17: ¬{FL}{a} sent18: (Ex): {IP}x sent19: ¬{B}{a} sent20: (Ex): ({L}x & {CF}x) sent21: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent22: (x): ({HO}x & {B}x) -> ¬{HA}{hh} | [
"sent21 & sent1 -> int1: the traverser is not a latest.; sent12 -> int2: the fact that the traverser is not the Ottumwa if the traverser is not a latest hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent21 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{C}{a}; sent12 -> int2: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{D}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the traverser is a Ottumwa. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the traverser is not a latest is true if something is a proctoscopy and it is a crater. sent2: the traverser is not a kind of a proctoscopy. sent3: something is a redistribution and it is a psychodid. sent4: the traverser does not recommend packinghouse. sent5: the fact that the anteater is not a Ottumwa is not incorrect. sent6: something is a cinema. sent7: the fact that something does serve cirrus and is a allocution is correct. sent8: the traverser is not greenside. sent9: the flagging is not a Ottumwa. sent10: the traverser is not pronounceable. sent11: there exists something such that it is a briefcase. sent12: something is not a Ottumwa if it is not a kind of a latest. sent13: there exists something such that it directs. sent14: the traverser does not direct. sent15: the shortbread is not a kind of a Ottumwa. sent16: if that the traverser is not a briefcase is right then it is not a proctoscopy. sent17: the traverser does not serve anapsid. sent18: there exists something such that it is alkahestic. sent19: the traverser is not a crater. sent20: something is a kind of a Garrulus and it does intend. sent21: something is a proctoscopy that is a crater. sent22: the homeotherm is not a remainder if something that is mortuary is a crater. ; $proof$ = | sent21 & sent1 -> int1: the traverser is not a latest.; sent12 -> int2: the fact that the traverser is not the Ottumwa if the traverser is not a latest hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the fact that the chromatography companies but it is not a doctor is not true is correct. | ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: if the skink does recommend coating but it is not intradermal the chromatography does recommend coating. sent2: if the chromatography is a company and not a doctor then the skink is not intradermal. sent3: if the fact that the kohl is a kind of non-intradermal thing that does not recommend coating is right then the skink is non-intradermal. sent4: that something is not a judgeship and/or it is a kind of a knotgrass is wrong if it is a waterfall. sent5: if that the kohl is not intradermal but it recommends coating is true then the skink is intradermal. sent6: that if the kohl is not bulbaceous the skink is not productive hold. sent7: everything is a waterfall. sent8: the macule is not bulbaceous if that the refresher is not a judgeship and/or it is a knotgrass is not right. sent9: that something is not non-Audenesque and is not a bylaw is not right if the fact that it does recommend coating is true. sent10: the skink recommends coating if the fact that the chromatography recommends coating and is not productive does not hold. sent11: the chromatography is not intradermal. sent12: if the fact that something does recommend coating is true then it is both a company and not a doctor. sent13: the kohl is not a checksum and/or is not bulbaceous if there is something such that it is bulbaceous. sent14: the kohl does not recommend coating. sent15: the fact that the skink is a kind of a company but it is not intradermal is not true. sent16: if something is a checksum then it is not bulbaceous. sent17: the kohl is not intradermal and does not recommend coating. sent18: if the kohl does recommend coating and is not intradermal then the skink is not a company. sent19: the macule is a kind of a checksum. sent20: if the kohl is a company but it is not intradermal then the skink does not recommend coating. | sent1: ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {A}{a} sent2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: (¬{B}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> {B}{b} sent4: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{F}x v {G}x) sent5: (¬{B}{c} & {A}{c}) -> {B}{b} sent6: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: (x): {H}x sent8: ¬(¬{F}{e} v {G}{e}) -> ¬{D}{d} sent9: (x): {A}x -> ¬({EO}x & ¬{IO}x) sent10: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {A}{b} sent11: ¬{B}{a} sent12: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{E}{c} v ¬{D}{c}) sent14: ¬{A}{c} sent15: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent16: (x): {E}x -> ¬{D}x sent17: (¬{B}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) sent18: ({A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> ¬{AA}{b} sent19: {E}{d} sent20: ({AA}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> ¬{A}{b} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the chromatography companies but it is not a doctor.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the skink is not intradermal.; sent3 & sent17 -> int2: the skink is intradermal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent2 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent3 & sent17 -> int2: {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the chromatography is a company but it is not a doctor. | ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"sent12 -> int4: the chromatography is a company that is not a doctor if that it recommends coating is correct.; sent7 -> int5: the obturator is a waterfall.; sent4 -> int6: if the obturator is a waterfall that it is either not a judgeship or a knotgrass or both does not hold.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the obturator is not a judgeship and/or it is a kind of a knotgrass is not correct.; int7 -> int8: there exists nothing that either is not a kind of a judgeship or is a knotgrass or both.; int8 -> int9: the fact that the refresher is not a judgeship or a knotgrass or both is not correct.; int9 & sent8 -> int10: the macule is not bulbaceous.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that it is not bulbaceous.; int11 & sent13 -> int12: either the kohl is not a checksum or it is not bulbaceous or both.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that the chromatography companies but it is not a doctor is not true is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the skink does recommend coating but it is not intradermal the chromatography does recommend coating. sent2: if the chromatography is a company and not a doctor then the skink is not intradermal. sent3: if the fact that the kohl is a kind of non-intradermal thing that does not recommend coating is right then the skink is non-intradermal. sent4: that something is not a judgeship and/or it is a kind of a knotgrass is wrong if it is a waterfall. sent5: if that the kohl is not intradermal but it recommends coating is true then the skink is intradermal. sent6: that if the kohl is not bulbaceous the skink is not productive hold. sent7: everything is a waterfall. sent8: the macule is not bulbaceous if that the refresher is not a judgeship and/or it is a knotgrass is not right. sent9: that something is not non-Audenesque and is not a bylaw is not right if the fact that it does recommend coating is true. sent10: the skink recommends coating if the fact that the chromatography recommends coating and is not productive does not hold. sent11: the chromatography is not intradermal. sent12: if the fact that something does recommend coating is true then it is both a company and not a doctor. sent13: the kohl is not a checksum and/or is not bulbaceous if there is something such that it is bulbaceous. sent14: the kohl does not recommend coating. sent15: the fact that the skink is a kind of a company but it is not intradermal is not true. sent16: if something is a checksum then it is not bulbaceous. sent17: the kohl is not intradermal and does not recommend coating. sent18: if the kohl does recommend coating and is not intradermal then the skink is not a company. sent19: the macule is a kind of a checksum. sent20: if the kohl is a company but it is not intradermal then the skink does not recommend coating. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the chromatography companies but it is not a doctor.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the skink is not intradermal.; sent3 & sent17 -> int2: the skink is intradermal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the phenazopyridine is unpriestly. | {E}{b} | sent1: the dacryocyst is both non-sexagesimal and bounded. sent2: that the pad is certain thing that does not recommend adz is not true if it carries. sent3: if the fact that the dacryocyst does boat Lyra but it is not unpriestly is not correct the phenazopyridine is unpriestly. sent4: the dacryocyst recommends adz. sent5: the desertification is not radio and not a hypertrophy. sent6: the dacryocyst is non-certain thing that recommends adz if there is something such that the fact that it boats Lyra is not false. sent7: the phenylpropanolamine is a neoclassicist if there is something such that it serves monogram. sent8: the phenazopyridine is unpriestly if there exists something such that it is a peptone. sent9: there is something such that it boats Lyra. sent10: if there exists something such that it is pretentious the dacryocyst is nonexplosive. sent11: there are certain things. sent12: if the dacryocyst is a kind of non-certain thing that recommends adz the phenazopyridine is not a kind of a carry. sent13: if there is something such that the fact that it is certain is right then the fact that the dacryocyst does recommend adz is right. sent14: something is not unpriestly if it does not carry. sent15: the fact that the pad is a kind of non-unfaithful thing that does not serve pyemia is false if it is dendritic. sent16: if the fact that the pad is not unfaithful and it does not serve pyemia is wrong then it is a carry. sent17: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a carry the phenazopyridine does not recommend adz and is unpriestly. | sent1: (¬{CO}{a} & {EO}{a}) sent2: {D}{d} -> ¬({B}{d} & ¬{C}{d}) sent3: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> {E}{b} sent4: {C}{a} sent5: (¬{I}{e} & ¬{J}{e}) sent6: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent7: (x): {CS}x -> {AE}{ac} sent8: (x): {JA}x -> {E}{b} sent9: (Ex): {A}x sent10: (x): {GJ}x -> {GB}{a} sent11: (Ex): {B}x sent12: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent13: (x): {B}x -> {C}{a} sent14: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{E}x sent15: {H}{d} -> ¬(¬{F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) sent16: ¬(¬{F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> {D}{d} sent17: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}{b} & {E}{b}) | [
"sent9 & sent6 -> int1: the dacryocyst is not certain and recommends adz.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the phenazopyridine is not a carry.; sent14 -> int3: the phenazopyridine is not unpriestly if it is not a kind of a carry.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 & sent12 -> int2: ¬{D}{b}; sent14 -> int3: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬{E}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the phenazopyridine is unpriestly. | {E}{b} | [
"sent5 -> int4: something is not a radio and it is not a kind of a hypertrophy.;"
] | 10 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the phenazopyridine is unpriestly. ; $context$ = sent1: the dacryocyst is both non-sexagesimal and bounded. sent2: that the pad is certain thing that does not recommend adz is not true if it carries. sent3: if the fact that the dacryocyst does boat Lyra but it is not unpriestly is not correct the phenazopyridine is unpriestly. sent4: the dacryocyst recommends adz. sent5: the desertification is not radio and not a hypertrophy. sent6: the dacryocyst is non-certain thing that recommends adz if there is something such that the fact that it boats Lyra is not false. sent7: the phenylpropanolamine is a neoclassicist if there is something such that it serves monogram. sent8: the phenazopyridine is unpriestly if there exists something such that it is a peptone. sent9: there is something such that it boats Lyra. sent10: if there exists something such that it is pretentious the dacryocyst is nonexplosive. sent11: there are certain things. sent12: if the dacryocyst is a kind of non-certain thing that recommends adz the phenazopyridine is not a kind of a carry. sent13: if there is something such that the fact that it is certain is right then the fact that the dacryocyst does recommend adz is right. sent14: something is not unpriestly if it does not carry. sent15: the fact that the pad is a kind of non-unfaithful thing that does not serve pyemia is false if it is dendritic. sent16: if the fact that the pad is not unfaithful and it does not serve pyemia is wrong then it is a carry. sent17: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a carry the phenazopyridine does not recommend adz and is unpriestly. ; $proof$ = | sent9 & sent6 -> int1: the dacryocyst is not certain and recommends adz.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the phenazopyridine is not a carry.; sent14 -> int3: the phenazopyridine is not unpriestly if it is not a kind of a carry.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the pincer is antiquarian. | {D}{c} | sent1: the fact that the centrosome is not a subscript but it is a kind of an octagon is not true. sent2: if that the centrosome is not subscript and not an octagon is false the pincer is antiquarian. sent3: the presbytery is not stereoscopic and does not leapfrog. sent4: the presbytery is subscript. sent5: if the presbytery is non-stereoscopic thing that does not leapfrog then it is not a kind of a banderillero. sent6: the pincer is a kind of a subscript. sent7: the fact that the centrosome is a kind of a subscript but it is non-antiquarian is not right if the presbytery is non-stereoscopic. sent8: the fact that the centrosome is not a banderillero and is not a kind of an octagon is false. sent9: the presbytery is a kind of non-antiquarian thing that does not recommend ordinand. sent10: if the presbytery is a kind of a subscript then the centrosome is stereoscopic. sent11: if the presbytery is not a subscript but it is a turbine the pincer is a banderillero. sent12: if the presbytery is not a kind of a banderillero then the fact that the centrosome is non-subscript thing that is not an octagon is not true. sent13: if the presbytery is not a leapfrog and is not a seer then it is not musical. | sent1: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}) sent2: ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {D}{c} sent3: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent4: {C}{a} sent5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: {C}{c} sent7: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent8: ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent9: (¬{D}{a} & ¬{GO}{a}) sent10: {C}{a} -> {AA}{b} sent11: (¬{C}{a} & {E}{a}) -> {B}{c} sent12: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent13: (¬{AB}{a} & ¬{BQ}{a}) -> ¬{EQ}{a} | [
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the presbytery is not a kind of a banderillero.; sent12 & int1 -> int2: that the centrosome is not a subscript and is not an octagon is false.; sent2 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent12 & int1 -> int2: ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}); sent2 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the pincer is non-antiquarian hold. | ¬{D}{c} | [] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the pincer is antiquarian. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the centrosome is not a subscript but it is a kind of an octagon is not true. sent2: if that the centrosome is not subscript and not an octagon is false the pincer is antiquarian. sent3: the presbytery is not stereoscopic and does not leapfrog. sent4: the presbytery is subscript. sent5: if the presbytery is non-stereoscopic thing that does not leapfrog then it is not a kind of a banderillero. sent6: the pincer is a kind of a subscript. sent7: the fact that the centrosome is a kind of a subscript but it is non-antiquarian is not right if the presbytery is non-stereoscopic. sent8: the fact that the centrosome is not a banderillero and is not a kind of an octagon is false. sent9: the presbytery is a kind of non-antiquarian thing that does not recommend ordinand. sent10: if the presbytery is a kind of a subscript then the centrosome is stereoscopic. sent11: if the presbytery is not a subscript but it is a turbine the pincer is a banderillero. sent12: if the presbytery is not a kind of a banderillero then the fact that the centrosome is non-subscript thing that is not an octagon is not true. sent13: if the presbytery is not a leapfrog and is not a seer then it is not musical. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the presbytery is not a kind of a banderillero.; sent12 & int1 -> int2: that the centrosome is not a subscript and is not an octagon is false.; sent2 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that not the wafting but the unpermissiveness occurs is not correct. | ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | sent1: the boating mealberry does not occur but the recommending lurker occurs if the scowling does not occur. sent2: that both the unpermissiveness and the indexicalness occurs is triggered by that the serving cockfight does not occur. sent3: the fact that the wafting does not occur but the unpermissiveness occurs is not right if the inharmoniousness happens. sent4: if the serving cockfight occurs the indexicalness happens. sent5: the Judaicness and the isomerization occurs if the scattering does not occur. sent6: the inharmoniousness does not occur. sent7: the fact that that the gloriousness does not occur and the humoralness does not occur is true causes that the scowling does not occur. sent8: that the wafting does not occur is triggered by that not the inharmoniousness but the will-o'-the-wisp occurs. sent9: that the ingloriousness and the non-humoralness happens is triggered by the Judaicness. sent10: if the boating mealberry does not occur the serving cockfight and the aborticide occurs. sent11: the will-o'-the-wisp happens. sent12: the serving cockfight does not occur. | sent1: ¬{J} -> (¬{H} & {I}) sent2: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent3: {A} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent4: {F} -> {E} sent5: ¬{O} -> ({M} & {N}) sent6: ¬{A} sent7: (¬{K} & ¬{L}) -> ¬{J} sent8: (¬{A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent9: {M} -> (¬{K} & ¬{L}) sent10: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) sent11: {B} sent12: ¬{F} | [
"sent6 & sent11 -> int1: both the non-inharmoniousness and the will-o'-the-wisp occurs.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the wafting does not occur.; sent2 & sent12 -> int3: both the unpermissiveness and the indexicalness occurs.; int3 -> int4: the unpermissiveness occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent11 -> int1: (¬{A} & {B}); int1 & sent8 -> int2: ¬{C}; sent2 & sent12 -> int3: ({D} & {E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the wafting does not occur but the unpermissiveness happens does not hold. | ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | [] | 12 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that not the wafting but the unpermissiveness occurs is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the boating mealberry does not occur but the recommending lurker occurs if the scowling does not occur. sent2: that both the unpermissiveness and the indexicalness occurs is triggered by that the serving cockfight does not occur. sent3: the fact that the wafting does not occur but the unpermissiveness occurs is not right if the inharmoniousness happens. sent4: if the serving cockfight occurs the indexicalness happens. sent5: the Judaicness and the isomerization occurs if the scattering does not occur. sent6: the inharmoniousness does not occur. sent7: the fact that that the gloriousness does not occur and the humoralness does not occur is true causes that the scowling does not occur. sent8: that the wafting does not occur is triggered by that not the inharmoniousness but the will-o'-the-wisp occurs. sent9: that the ingloriousness and the non-humoralness happens is triggered by the Judaicness. sent10: if the boating mealberry does not occur the serving cockfight and the aborticide occurs. sent11: the will-o'-the-wisp happens. sent12: the serving cockfight does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent11 -> int1: both the non-inharmoniousness and the will-o'-the-wisp occurs.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the wafting does not occur.; sent2 & sent12 -> int3: both the unpermissiveness and the indexicalness occurs.; int3 -> int4: the unpermissiveness occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it does not backpack ancestor and it is cervine then it is a hussar. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: if something is both not a webpage and bivalent then the fact that it is a hussar hold. sent2: the weather is a kind of a hussar if it is not a Toyohashi and it is dramatic. sent3: there is something such that if it is a Muscovite and does twig it does recommend remainder. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a parapet and it is a kind of a Toyohashi then it backpacks weather. sent5: if the weather does not backpack ancestor but it is cervine it is a hussar. | sent1: (x): (¬{GI}x & {FH}x) -> {B}x sent2: (¬{EO}{aa} & {E}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: (Ex): ({IT}x & {IR}x) -> {HH}x sent4: (Ex): ({GQ}x & {EO}x) -> {K}x sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | the weather is a kind of a hussar if it is not a webpage and is bivalent. | (¬{GI}{aa} & {FH}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not backpack ancestor and it is cervine then it is a hussar. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is both not a webpage and bivalent then the fact that it is a hussar hold. sent2: the weather is a kind of a hussar if it is not a Toyohashi and it is dramatic. sent3: there is something such that if it is a Muscovite and does twig it does recommend remainder. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a parapet and it is a kind of a Toyohashi then it backpacks weather. sent5: if the weather does not backpack ancestor but it is cervine it is a hussar. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Beguine does backpack wood. | {B}{b} | sent1: there exists something such that it does not throng. sent2: the fact that the Beguine does not backpack wood hold if that the loaner is not custard-like but it is a kind of a calceus is not right. sent3: if the loaner is not a deportation then that it is both not a homo and mechanical is false. sent4: that something does boat dream if the fact that it is a crockery and does not boat dream is not true hold. sent5: something that is not a waste is not a kind of a albedo and achieves. sent6: if something is not heterodactyl then it does not recommend kidney and forbears. sent7: if that the upstage throngs and is a urine is not right it is not a waste. sent8: if the voyeurism does not recommend kidney that the loaner is a crockery that does not boat dream is not true. sent9: if the loaner does not recommend manipulation the fact that it is a kind of non-custard-like a calceus does not hold. sent10: the Beguine is not custard-like. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not serve model then that the Jordanian does boat mannequin and is not bismuthic is not true. sent12: if the loaner is not a calceus the Beguine does not backpack wood. sent13: if the fact that something boats mannequin but it is not bismuthic is not true it is not heterodactyl. sent14: that something is not a calceus but it is a kind of a cutlassfish does not hold if it recommends manipulation. sent15: that the loaner does not recommend manipulation hold. sent16: if the Beguine does not backpack wood that it is not a kind of a calceus and recommends manipulation is not true. sent17: something backpacks wood and it does recommend manipulation if it is not an intolerance. sent18: something that is not a albedo and does achieve does not serve model. sent19: the Beguine is not custard-like if that the loaner does not backpack wood but it does recommend manipulation is not true. sent20: That the manipulation does not recommend loaner hold. sent21: if the fact that the Jordanian does not recommend kidney and does forbear hold then the voyeurism does not recommend kidney. sent22: that the upstage does throng and is a urine does not hold if there exists something such that it does not throng. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{Q}x sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: ¬{HN}{a} -> ¬(¬{AE}{a} & {JI}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{E}x) -> {E}x sent5: (x): ¬{O}x -> (¬{N}x & {M}x) sent6: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & {I}x) sent7: ¬({Q}{e} & {P}{e}) -> ¬{O}{e} sent8: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬({G}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent10: ¬{AA}{b} sent11: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬({K}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) sent12: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: (x): ¬({K}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{H}x sent14: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & {DU}x) sent15: ¬{A}{a} sent16: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {A}{b}) sent17: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent18: (x): (¬{N}x & {M}x) -> ¬{L}x sent19: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} sent20: ¬{AC}{aa} sent21: (¬{F}{d} & {I}{d}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent22: (x): ¬{Q}x -> ¬({Q}{e} & {P}{e}) | [
"sent9 & sent15 -> int1: that the loaner is non-custard-like thing that is a kind of a calceus does not hold.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 & sent15 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the Beguine is both not a calceus and a cutlassfish does not hold. | ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {DU}{b}) | [
"sent14 -> int2: if the Beguine recommends manipulation the fact that it is not a calceus and it is a cutlassfish is false.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Beguine does backpack wood. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it does not throng. sent2: the fact that the Beguine does not backpack wood hold if that the loaner is not custard-like but it is a kind of a calceus is not right. sent3: if the loaner is not a deportation then that it is both not a homo and mechanical is false. sent4: that something does boat dream if the fact that it is a crockery and does not boat dream is not true hold. sent5: something that is not a waste is not a kind of a albedo and achieves. sent6: if something is not heterodactyl then it does not recommend kidney and forbears. sent7: if that the upstage throngs and is a urine is not right it is not a waste. sent8: if the voyeurism does not recommend kidney that the loaner is a crockery that does not boat dream is not true. sent9: if the loaner does not recommend manipulation the fact that it is a kind of non-custard-like a calceus does not hold. sent10: the Beguine is not custard-like. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not serve model then that the Jordanian does boat mannequin and is not bismuthic is not true. sent12: if the loaner is not a calceus the Beguine does not backpack wood. sent13: if the fact that something boats mannequin but it is not bismuthic is not true it is not heterodactyl. sent14: that something is not a calceus but it is a kind of a cutlassfish does not hold if it recommends manipulation. sent15: that the loaner does not recommend manipulation hold. sent16: if the Beguine does not backpack wood that it is not a kind of a calceus and recommends manipulation is not true. sent17: something backpacks wood and it does recommend manipulation if it is not an intolerance. sent18: something that is not a albedo and does achieve does not serve model. sent19: the Beguine is not custard-like if that the loaner does not backpack wood but it does recommend manipulation is not true. sent20: That the manipulation does not recommend loaner hold. sent21: if the fact that the Jordanian does not recommend kidney and does forbear hold then the voyeurism does not recommend kidney. sent22: that the upstage does throng and is a urine does not hold if there exists something such that it does not throng. ; $proof$ = | sent9 & sent15 -> int1: that the loaner is non-custard-like thing that is a kind of a calceus does not hold.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the carapace is not a kind of a Zinjanthropus. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: the carapace is cosmologic if the bangle is a Zinjanthropus. sent2: if the demonstrator is cosmologic the carapace is a Zinjanthropus. sent3: the demonstrator backpacks carapace and is a kind of a Zinjanthropus. sent4: the fact that the carapace does backpack carapace if the demonstrator is a kind of a Zinjanthropus is not incorrect. sent5: the demonstrator is a dualist. sent6: the demonstrator is a kind of a Zinjanthropus and it backpacks carapace. sent7: the soil backpacks carapace. sent8: the carapace is a animalcule. sent9: the Piedmont is a kind of a bantam that overprotects. sent10: the SOD recommends peoples and it is a kind of a desalination. sent11: the fact that the rung does backpack carapace hold. sent12: if the fact that the carapace is cosmologic is not false the demonstrator is a kind of a Zinjanthropus. sent13: the demonstrator does backpack carapace and it is cosmologic. sent14: that the SOD is not monophonic but it tops does not hold if it is a kind of a desalination. sent15: if the demonstrator is a kind of a Zinjanthropus the carapace is cosmologic. sent16: the carapace is cosmologic. sent17: that the carapace backpacks carapace is right. sent18: if that something is not monophonic but it does top is wrong it does not backpack carapace. sent19: the demonstrator does backpack carapace. sent20: the demonstrator does recommend profligacy. | sent1: {C}{cb} -> {B}{b} sent2: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent3: ({A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: {C}{a} -> {A}{b} sent5: {GM}{a} sent6: ({C}{a} & {A}{a}) sent7: {A}{gg} sent8: {BQ}{b} sent9: ({IE}{m} & {FF}{m}) sent10: ({G}{c} & {F}{c}) sent11: {A}{gs} sent12: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} sent13: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent14: {F}{c} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & {E}{c}) sent15: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent16: {B}{b} sent17: {A}{b} sent18: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{A}x sent19: {A}{a} sent20: {AL}{a} | [
"sent13 -> int1: the demonstrator is cosmologic.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent13 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the carapace is not a Zinjanthropus. | ¬{C}{b} | [
"sent18 -> int2: if the fact that the SOD is a kind of non-monophonic a top does not hold then it does not backpack carapace.; sent10 -> int3: the SOD is a desalination.; sent14 & int3 -> int4: that the SOD is both not monophonic and top does not hold.; int2 & int4 -> int5: the SOD does not backpack carapace.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that it does not backpack carapace.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the carapace is not a kind of a Zinjanthropus. ; $context$ = sent1: the carapace is cosmologic if the bangle is a Zinjanthropus. sent2: if the demonstrator is cosmologic the carapace is a Zinjanthropus. sent3: the demonstrator backpacks carapace and is a kind of a Zinjanthropus. sent4: the fact that the carapace does backpack carapace if the demonstrator is a kind of a Zinjanthropus is not incorrect. sent5: the demonstrator is a dualist. sent6: the demonstrator is a kind of a Zinjanthropus and it backpacks carapace. sent7: the soil backpacks carapace. sent8: the carapace is a animalcule. sent9: the Piedmont is a kind of a bantam that overprotects. sent10: the SOD recommends peoples and it is a kind of a desalination. sent11: the fact that the rung does backpack carapace hold. sent12: if the fact that the carapace is cosmologic is not false the demonstrator is a kind of a Zinjanthropus. sent13: the demonstrator does backpack carapace and it is cosmologic. sent14: that the SOD is not monophonic but it tops does not hold if it is a kind of a desalination. sent15: if the demonstrator is a kind of a Zinjanthropus the carapace is cosmologic. sent16: the carapace is cosmologic. sent17: that the carapace backpacks carapace is right. sent18: if that something is not monophonic but it does top is wrong it does not backpack carapace. sent19: the demonstrator does backpack carapace. sent20: the demonstrator does recommend profligacy. ; $proof$ = | sent13 -> int1: the demonstrator is cosmologic.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the swimmer recommends atomism. | {C}{b} | sent1: the Sunnite is both an episteme and a lambdacism. sent2: something is an episteme and a lambdacism if it does not recommend atomism. | sent1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) | [
"sent1 -> int1: the Sunnite is a lambdacism.;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] | the notebook is an episteme. | {A}{ef} | [
"sent2 -> int2: the notebook is an episteme and is a lambdacism if it does not recommend atomism.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the swimmer recommends atomism. ; $context$ = sent1: the Sunnite is both an episteme and a lambdacism. sent2: something is an episteme and a lambdacism if it does not recommend atomism. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: the Sunnite is a lambdacism.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the dairymaid does not recommend sassaby. | ¬{E}{b} | sent1: something serves childishness. sent2: the fact that the silverspot does recommend clearway is correct if it does stagger. sent3: the silverspot does not recommend kestrel. sent4: if there exists something such that it does not serve childishness then the silverspot does stagger. sent5: the dairymaid does not recommend sassaby if the silverspot does recommend clearway and/or is not stale. sent6: the dairymaid does recommend clearway. sent7: the silverspot does recommend clearway and/or stales. sent8: that the silverspot is a bangle but it is not stale is wrong if that it does not recommend kestrel is not wrong. sent9: if that something is a kind of a bangle that does not stale is not correct it does stale. sent10: if something does not stagger then it recommends sassaby and does serve childishness. sent11: that the dairymaid does not recommend sassaby is not wrong if the fact that the silverspot does stale is false. | sent1: (Ex): {A}x sent2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a} sent3: ¬{G}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}{a} sent5: ({C}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent6: {C}{b} sent7: ({C}{a} v {D}{a}) sent8: ¬{G}{a} -> ¬({F}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{D}x) -> {D}x sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({E}x & {A}x) sent11: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬{E}{b} | [] | [] | the fact that the dairymaid recommends sassaby is not wrong. | {E}{b} | [
"sent10 -> int1: if the dairymaid does not stagger it does recommend sassaby and does serve childishness.; sent9 -> int2: if the fact that the silverspot is a bangle and not stale is wrong it does stale.; sent8 & sent3 -> int3: that the silverspot is a bangle and not stale is incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the silverspot stales.; int4 -> int5: the silverspot either does stale or does not recommend clearway or both.; int5 -> int6: something does stale or it does not recommend clearway or both.;"
] | 7 | 4 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the dairymaid does not recommend sassaby. ; $context$ = sent1: something serves childishness. sent2: the fact that the silverspot does recommend clearway is correct if it does stagger. sent3: the silverspot does not recommend kestrel. sent4: if there exists something such that it does not serve childishness then the silverspot does stagger. sent5: the dairymaid does not recommend sassaby if the silverspot does recommend clearway and/or is not stale. sent6: the dairymaid does recommend clearway. sent7: the silverspot does recommend clearway and/or stales. sent8: that the silverspot is a bangle but it is not stale is wrong if that it does not recommend kestrel is not wrong. sent9: if that something is a kind of a bangle that does not stale is not correct it does stale. sent10: if something does not stagger then it recommends sassaby and does serve childishness. sent11: that the dairymaid does not recommend sassaby is not wrong if the fact that the silverspot does stale is false. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the abaxialness does not occur. | ¬{D} | sent1: the arguing happens. sent2: the recommending penuriousness prevents that the antecedent does not occur. sent3: the backpacking single occurs and the recommending penuriousness occurs. sent4: the polo does not occur. sent5: the equivocalness happens. sent6: if the antecedent occurs the abaxialness happens. sent7: the fact that the indurating does not occur is not incorrect if the fact that both the indurating and the Procrusteanness happens is not true. sent8: the fact that the fact that the indurating and the Procrusteanness happens is not correct is true if the polo does not occur. sent9: the backpacking single occurs. sent10: if the fact that the backpacking single and the recommending penuriousness happens is not true the abaxialness does not occur. sent11: that the antecedent does not occur is brought about by that the indurating does not occur and the auricularness does not occur. | sent1: {HS} sent2: {B} -> {C} sent3: ({A} & {B}) sent4: ¬{K} sent5: {AM} sent6: {C} -> {D} sent7: ¬({E} & {H}) -> ¬{E} sent8: ¬{K} -> ¬({E} & {H}) sent9: {A} sent10: ¬({A} & {B}) -> ¬{D} sent11: (¬{E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{C} | [
"sent3 -> int1: the recommending penuriousness occurs.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: that the antecedent occurs hold.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> int1: {B}; sent2 & int1 -> int2: {C}; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the abaxialness does not occur. | ¬{D} | [
"sent8 & sent4 -> int3: that the indurating happens and the Procrusteanness happens is false.; sent7 & int3 -> int4: the indurating does not occur.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the abaxialness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the arguing happens. sent2: the recommending penuriousness prevents that the antecedent does not occur. sent3: the backpacking single occurs and the recommending penuriousness occurs. sent4: the polo does not occur. sent5: the equivocalness happens. sent6: if the antecedent occurs the abaxialness happens. sent7: the fact that the indurating does not occur is not incorrect if the fact that both the indurating and the Procrusteanness happens is not true. sent8: the fact that the fact that the indurating and the Procrusteanness happens is not correct is true if the polo does not occur. sent9: the backpacking single occurs. sent10: if the fact that the backpacking single and the recommending penuriousness happens is not true the abaxialness does not occur. sent11: that the antecedent does not occur is brought about by that the indurating does not occur and the auricularness does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> int1: the recommending penuriousness occurs.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: that the antecedent occurs hold.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it does not recommend cartoon then the fact that it is both not a Limonium and not aecial does not hold. | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: if something does not recommend cartoon that it is not a Limonium and it is not aecial is not correct. sent2: if something is carnal the fact that it is both not an appointee and not angry is wrong. sent3: something is not a kind of a Limonium and it is not aecial if it does not recommend cartoon. sent4: the fact that the dishpan is not a Limonium and not aecial is not right if it recommends cartoon. sent5: if something is non-evening the fact that it is not a kind of an air and is not a Limonium is false. sent6: the fact that the dishpan is not a Limonium and is aecial is not right if it does not recommend cartoon. sent7: the fact that something is not a Limonium but aecial is false if it does not recommend cartoon. sent8: there is something such that if it does not recommend cartoon the fact that it is a Limonium that is not aecial is not correct. | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): {IM}x -> ¬(¬{FA}x & ¬{CC}x) sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{EH}x -> ¬(¬{CR}x & ¬{AA}x) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent1 -> int1: the fact that the dishpan is not a Limonium and is not aecial does not hold if it does not recommend cartoon.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the guard is not an air and it is not a kind of a Limonium does not hold if it is not evening. | ¬{EH}{cs} -> ¬(¬{CR}{cs} & ¬{AA}{cs}) | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not recommend cartoon then the fact that it is both not a Limonium and not aecial does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not recommend cartoon that it is not a Limonium and it is not aecial is not correct. sent2: if something is carnal the fact that it is both not an appointee and not angry is wrong. sent3: something is not a kind of a Limonium and it is not aecial if it does not recommend cartoon. sent4: the fact that the dishpan is not a Limonium and not aecial is not right if it recommends cartoon. sent5: if something is non-evening the fact that it is not a kind of an air and is not a Limonium is false. sent6: the fact that the dishpan is not a Limonium and is aecial is not right if it does not recommend cartoon. sent7: the fact that something is not a Limonium but aecial is false if it does not recommend cartoon. sent8: there is something such that if it does not recommend cartoon the fact that it is a Limonium that is not aecial is not correct. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: the fact that the dishpan is not a Limonium and is not aecial does not hold if it does not recommend cartoon.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the PC does not expectorate. | ¬{D}{c} | sent1: if the pistil serves Hirundo then the star-thistle recommends puritan. sent2: the star-thistle does serve PC. sent3: if something is not nonlinear that it is a kind of a lay and it is not anagogic is incorrect. sent4: the Argentinian is a handbook. sent5: if the fact that the pistil is a resort is not incorrect then the star-thistle recommends puritan. sent6: the Argentinian expectorates if the PC is a kind of a handbook. sent7: the star-thistle is an essay if the Argentinian is a handbook. sent8: the PC is a handbook if the Argentinian expectorates. sent9: the Cimarron does expectorate. sent10: if there is something such that it is not a no-hitter and it does not recommend waffler the first is not nonlinear. sent11: The PC does serve star-thistle. sent12: the bough is not an essay. sent13: that something is an essay that does not expectorate is not true if it is not a kind of a handbook. sent14: if something is an essay but it is not a handbook then it does expectorate. sent15: the proaccelerin does develop if there exists something such that that it does lie and it is not anagogic does not hold. sent16: if the fact that something does not serve PC and it does not recommend puritan is wrong it is not a kind of a handbook. sent17: the PC expectorates if the fact that the Argentinian is an essay that does not expectorates is false. sent18: the incurable is not a kind of a no-hitter and it does not recommend waffler if the fact that it is not intrapulmonary is not wrong. sent19: the incurable is not intrapulmonary. sent20: the fact that the pistil is not a kind of a firewall is true if there exists something such that the fact that it does develop hold. sent21: something does serve Hirundo and/or it is a resort if it is not a firewall. | sent1: {G}{d} -> {E}{b} sent2: {C}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬({K}x & ¬{J}x) sent4: {A}{a} sent5: {F}{d} -> {E}{b} sent6: {A}{c} -> {D}{a} sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent8: {D}{a} -> {A}{c} sent9: {D}{bf} sent10: (x): (¬{N}x & ¬{M}x) -> ¬{L}{f} sent11: {AA}{aa} sent12: ¬{B}{jb} sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) sent14: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {D}x sent15: (x): ¬({K}x & ¬{J}x) -> {I}{e} sent16: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{A}x sent17: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> {D}{c} sent18: ¬{O}{g} -> (¬{N}{g} & ¬{M}{g}) sent19: ¬{O}{g} sent20: (x): {I}x -> ¬{H}{d} sent21: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}x v {F}x) | [
"sent7 & sent4 -> int1: the star-thistle is an essay.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the star-thistle is a kind of an essay that does serve PC.;"
] | [
"sent7 & sent4 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent2 -> int2: ({B}{b} & {C}{b});"
] | the PC does expectorate. | {D}{c} | [
"sent13 -> int3: the fact that the Argentinian is an essay but it does not expectorate is not right if that it is not a handbook hold.; sent16 -> int4: if the fact that the Argentinian does not serve PC and it does not recommend puritan is not true then it is not a handbook.; sent21 -> int5: the pistil serves Hirundo or it is a resort or both if it is not a firewall.; sent3 -> int6: the fact that that the first lies but it is not anagogic is false if the first is not nonlinear hold.; sent18 & sent19 -> int7: the incurable is not a no-hitter and does not recommend waffler.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that it is not a kind of a no-hitter and it does not recommend waffler.; int8 & sent10 -> int9: the first is not nonlinear.; int6 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the first lies and is not anagogic is not correct.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that the fact that it is a lay and it is not anagogic is not true.; int11 & sent15 -> int12: that the proaccelerin does develop is right.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that it does develop.; int13 & sent20 -> int14: the pistil is not a firewall.; int5 & int14 -> int15: the pistil does serve Hirundo and/or it is a resort.; int15 & sent1 & sent5 -> int16: the fact that the star-thistle recommends puritan is not incorrect.; int16 -> int17: there is something such that it does recommend puritan.;"
] | 15 | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the PC does not expectorate. ; $context$ = sent1: if the pistil serves Hirundo then the star-thistle recommends puritan. sent2: the star-thistle does serve PC. sent3: if something is not nonlinear that it is a kind of a lay and it is not anagogic is incorrect. sent4: the Argentinian is a handbook. sent5: if the fact that the pistil is a resort is not incorrect then the star-thistle recommends puritan. sent6: the Argentinian expectorates if the PC is a kind of a handbook. sent7: the star-thistle is an essay if the Argentinian is a handbook. sent8: the PC is a handbook if the Argentinian expectorates. sent9: the Cimarron does expectorate. sent10: if there is something such that it is not a no-hitter and it does not recommend waffler the first is not nonlinear. sent11: The PC does serve star-thistle. sent12: the bough is not an essay. sent13: that something is an essay that does not expectorate is not true if it is not a kind of a handbook. sent14: if something is an essay but it is not a handbook then it does expectorate. sent15: the proaccelerin does develop if there exists something such that that it does lie and it is not anagogic does not hold. sent16: if the fact that something does not serve PC and it does not recommend puritan is wrong it is not a kind of a handbook. sent17: the PC expectorates if the fact that the Argentinian is an essay that does not expectorates is false. sent18: the incurable is not a kind of a no-hitter and it does not recommend waffler if the fact that it is not intrapulmonary is not wrong. sent19: the incurable is not intrapulmonary. sent20: the fact that the pistil is not a kind of a firewall is true if there exists something such that the fact that it does develop hold. sent21: something does serve Hirundo and/or it is a resort if it is not a firewall. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent4 -> int1: the star-thistle is an essay.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the star-thistle is a kind of an essay that does serve PC.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the stand does backpack Vireonidae. | {B}{a} | sent1: the jerkin is not lipless if something is not lipless and/or is a kind of an education. sent2: something is non-seductive thing that recommends lurker if it is not lipless. sent3: there exists something such that it is not lipless or it is an education or both. | sent1: (x): (¬{A}x v {C}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (Ex): (¬{A}x v {C}x) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the jerkin is not seductive but it does recommend lurker if that it is not lipless is not wrong.; sent3 & sent1 -> int2: the jerkin is not lipless.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the jerkin is non-seductive thing that recommends lurker.;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent3 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa});"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the stand does backpack Vireonidae. ; $context$ = sent1: the jerkin is not lipless if something is not lipless and/or is a kind of an education. sent2: something is non-seductive thing that recommends lurker if it is not lipless. sent3: there exists something such that it is not lipless or it is an education or both. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the jerkin is not seductive but it does recommend lurker if that it is not lipless is not wrong.; sent3 & sent1 -> int2: the jerkin is not lipless.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the jerkin is non-seductive thing that recommends lurker.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if either it is not a fondness or it is not a minister or both it is not a kind of a corkscrew. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: the fact that the coronet is not a corkscrew is right if it is not a fondness or is not a minister or both. sent2: the Mojave is not a corkscrew if it is not a legalism. sent3: if the coronet is not a kind of an object and/or it is not evangelical then it is a fondness. sent4: there exists something such that if it either is a kind of a mint or is not nonpregnant or both then it is not a Beowulf. sent5: the acetin is non-pastoral if either it is not a kind of a Aborigine or it is a corkscrew or both. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a fondness it is not a corkscrew. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a fondness and/or ministers then it is not a kind of a corkscrew. | sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: ¬{BI}{di} -> ¬{B}{di} sent3: (¬{IO}{aa} v ¬{AK}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} sent4: (Ex): ({CA}x v ¬{AG}x) -> ¬{JJ}x sent5: (¬{FD}{ah} v {B}{ah}) -> ¬{HD}{ah} sent6: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent7: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if either it is not a fondness or it is not a minister or both it is not a kind of a corkscrew. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the coronet is not a corkscrew is right if it is not a fondness or is not a minister or both. sent2: the Mojave is not a corkscrew if it is not a legalism. sent3: if the coronet is not a kind of an object and/or it is not evangelical then it is a fondness. sent4: there exists something such that if it either is a kind of a mint or is not nonpregnant or both then it is not a Beowulf. sent5: the acetin is non-pastoral if either it is not a kind of a Aborigine or it is a corkscrew or both. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a fondness it is not a corkscrew. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a fondness and/or ministers then it is not a kind of a corkscrew. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the cardcase is not a voyeurism. | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: something backpacks nonparticipant and/or it is a kind of a voyeurism if it does not serve powder. sent2: if the residence backpacks nonparticipant then the mazer does serve powder. sent3: if the mazer does serve powder that the cardcase is a voyeurism hold. sent4: the mazer backpacks nonparticipant. sent5: The fact that the nonparticipant backpacks residence hold. sent6: the fact that the residence backpacks nonparticipant hold. | sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x v {C}x) sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent3: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} sent4: {A}{b} sent5: {AA}{aa} sent6: {A}{a} | [
"sent2 & sent6 -> int1: the mazer serves powder.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent6 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the mazer is a kind of a voyeurism. | {C}{b} | [
"sent1 -> int2: the residence backpacks nonparticipant and/or is a kind of a voyeurism if it does not serve powder.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the cardcase is not a voyeurism. ; $context$ = sent1: something backpacks nonparticipant and/or it is a kind of a voyeurism if it does not serve powder. sent2: if the residence backpacks nonparticipant then the mazer does serve powder. sent3: if the mazer does serve powder that the cardcase is a voyeurism hold. sent4: the mazer backpacks nonparticipant. sent5: The fact that the nonparticipant backpacks residence hold. sent6: the fact that the residence backpacks nonparticipant hold. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent6 -> int1: the mazer serves powder.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is not a Hynerpeton then the fact that it is Donatist and it swaps is false. | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: that the antimeson is Donatist and it does swap is not right if it is a kind of a Hynerpeton. sent2: there is something such that if it does not deform it is an instrumentality and it does strum. sent3: if the myxovirus does not smell then it is a Hynerpeton and it is a royalty. sent4: if the antimeson is not a kind of a Hynerpeton that it is Donatist and it does swap is false. sent5: the fact that that something is unalike and a checkerbloom is not wrong does not hold if the fact that it is not unprovocative is true. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not a hypallage then it is an apnea and is politics. sent7: if the Angolese does not serve PSA then the fact that it is paradigmatic and it swaps is not true. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a hysterics is not incorrect that it is capable and a whoop is incorrect. sent9: if the antimeson is not a foryml the fact that it is a dissoluteness and it is a kind of a Hynerpeton does not hold. | sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): ¬{CR}x -> ({FG}x & {GR}x) sent3: ¬{B}{ab} -> ({A}{ab} & {Q}{ab}) sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{BN}x -> ¬({AQ}x & {GQ}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{DQ}x -> ({CJ}x & {CH}x) sent7: ¬{O}{t} -> ¬({BD}{t} & {AB}{t}) sent8: (Ex): {BQ}x -> ¬({HR}x & {IT}x) sent9: ¬{GU}{aa} -> ¬({CF}{aa} & {A}{aa}) | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | there exists something such that if it is not unprovocative then that it is unalike thing that is a checkerbloom is incorrect. | (Ex): ¬{BN}x -> ¬({AQ}x & {GQ}x) | [
"sent5 -> int1: that the bitterwood is unalike and is a kind of a checkerbloom is false if it is not unprovocative.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not a Hynerpeton then the fact that it is Donatist and it swaps is false. ; $context$ = sent1: that the antimeson is Donatist and it does swap is not right if it is a kind of a Hynerpeton. sent2: there is something such that if it does not deform it is an instrumentality and it does strum. sent3: if the myxovirus does not smell then it is a Hynerpeton and it is a royalty. sent4: if the antimeson is not a kind of a Hynerpeton that it is Donatist and it does swap is false. sent5: the fact that that something is unalike and a checkerbloom is not wrong does not hold if the fact that it is not unprovocative is true. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not a hypallage then it is an apnea and is politics. sent7: if the Angolese does not serve PSA then the fact that it is paradigmatic and it swaps is not true. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a hysterics is not incorrect that it is capable and a whoop is incorrect. sent9: if the antimeson is not a foryml the fact that it is a dissoluteness and it is a kind of a Hynerpeton does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there exists something such that if it backpacks Peloponnese then it is a kind of non-categorematic thing that is rhythmical is not incorrect. | (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: there is something such that if it backpacks Peloponnese it is not categorematic. sent2: the welder is rhythmical if it does backpack Peloponnese. sent3: the welder is categorematic and it is rhythmical if it does backpack Peloponnese. sent4: there exists something such that if it is anginal then it does not recommend lifeboat and it is a hunter-gatherer. sent5: the lifeboat does not serve Pope but it does backpack Peloponnese if it is pediatric. sent6: there exists something such that if it does backpack Peloponnese it is categorematic and rhythmical. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a lease then it is not a ENE and is a Benedictine. sent8: the welder is not categorematic and not unrhythmical if that it backpacks Peloponnese hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it backpacks Peloponnese it is rhythmical. sent10: if the welder is nonoperational it does not boat welder and it is categorematic. sent11: if something is a rejuvenation it does not recommend lifeboat and it is a drippings. | sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent2: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent3: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): {AQ}x -> (¬{EB}x & {BO}x) sent5: {FG}{ee} -> (¬{HO}{ee} & {A}{ee}) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: (Ex): {GK}x -> (¬{CN}x & {P}x) sent8: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {A}x -> {AB}x sent10: {EG}{aa} -> (¬{ET}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) sent11: (x): {IF}x -> (¬{EB}x & {BD}x) | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if it is a rejuvenation then it does not recommend lifeboat and it is a drippings. | (Ex): {IF}x -> (¬{EB}x & {BD}x) | [
"sent11 -> int1: if the foreshock is a rejuvenation that it does not recommend lifeboat and is a kind of a drippings is not incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it backpacks Peloponnese then it is a kind of non-categorematic thing that is rhythmical is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it backpacks Peloponnese it is not categorematic. sent2: the welder is rhythmical if it does backpack Peloponnese. sent3: the welder is categorematic and it is rhythmical if it does backpack Peloponnese. sent4: there exists something such that if it is anginal then it does not recommend lifeboat and it is a hunter-gatherer. sent5: the lifeboat does not serve Pope but it does backpack Peloponnese if it is pediatric. sent6: there exists something such that if it does backpack Peloponnese it is categorematic and rhythmical. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a lease then it is not a ENE and is a Benedictine. sent8: the welder is not categorematic and not unrhythmical if that it backpacks Peloponnese hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it backpacks Peloponnese it is rhythmical. sent10: if the welder is nonoperational it does not boat welder and it is categorematic. sent11: if something is a rejuvenation it does not recommend lifeboat and it is a drippings. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | either the leptocephalus does backpack Swiss or it does recommend Rus or both. | ({D}{c} v {C}{c}) | sent1: that something either does backpack Swiss or recommends Rus or both is wrong if it is not a lancewood. sent2: if the fact that the premises is not a lancewood and not a ranker does not hold the leptocephalus is not a lancewood. sent3: if that something is not a kind of a candlepin and is not non-cross-ply is false it is not immunochemical. sent4: if the Scythian is a EDS and/or does not recommend premises the leptocephalus is not immunochemical. sent5: if something is not aeriferous it does not overjoy. sent6: the fact that the premises is both not a candlepin and cross-ply is wrong if it does not overjoy. sent7: if something is not immunochemical the fact that it is not a lancewood and it is not a ranker does not hold. sent8: the fact that the leptocephalus is not immunochemical is correct if the Scythian is a kind of a EDS. sent9: if the premises is not a kind of a lancewood the Scythian is a kind of a EDS and/or it does not recommend premises. sent10: if something is not immunochemical then either it backpacks Swiss or it recommends Rus or both. | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x v {C}x) sent2: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{A}{c} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: ({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent5: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬{H}x sent6: ¬{H}{a} -> ¬(¬{G}{a} & {F}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{E}x) sent8: {AA}{b} -> ¬{B}{c} sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({D}x v {C}x) | [
"sent10 -> int1: if the leptocephalus is not immunochemical it does backpack Swiss and/or it does recommend Rus.;"
] | [
"sent10 -> int1: ¬{B}{c} -> ({D}{c} v {C}{c});"
] | the fact that the leptocephalus backpacks Swiss and/or recommends Rus is not correct. | ¬({D}{c} v {C}{c}) | [
"sent1 -> int2: that the leptocephalus either backpacks Swiss or does recommend Rus or both is false if it is not a lancewood.; sent7 -> int3: that if the premises is not immunochemical the fact that the premises is not a lancewood and is not a ranker is not right is not incorrect.; sent3 -> int4: if the fact that the premises is not a kind of a candlepin but it is cross-ply does not hold it is not immunochemical.; sent5 -> int5: if the premises is not aeriferous the fact that it does not overjoy is true.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = either the leptocephalus does backpack Swiss or it does recommend Rus or both. ; $context$ = sent1: that something either does backpack Swiss or recommends Rus or both is wrong if it is not a lancewood. sent2: if the fact that the premises is not a lancewood and not a ranker does not hold the leptocephalus is not a lancewood. sent3: if that something is not a kind of a candlepin and is not non-cross-ply is false it is not immunochemical. sent4: if the Scythian is a EDS and/or does not recommend premises the leptocephalus is not immunochemical. sent5: if something is not aeriferous it does not overjoy. sent6: the fact that the premises is both not a candlepin and cross-ply is wrong if it does not overjoy. sent7: if something is not immunochemical the fact that it is not a lancewood and it is not a ranker does not hold. sent8: the fact that the leptocephalus is not immunochemical is correct if the Scythian is a kind of a EDS. sent9: if the premises is not a kind of a lancewood the Scythian is a kind of a EDS and/or it does not recommend premises. sent10: if something is not immunochemical then either it backpacks Swiss or it recommends Rus or both. ; $proof$ = | sent10 -> int1: if the leptocephalus is not immunochemical it does backpack Swiss and/or it does recommend Rus.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the Creole is arthrosporic or it is mercurial or both. | ({C}{b} v {B}{b}) | sent1: if the grissino is a kind of a Swinburne then the Creole is mercurial. sent2: the stoup either does not carnify or does not boat plunderer or both. sent3: something is not a coupling and it does not serve ophthalmoscope if it does not boat plunderer. sent4: if the headgear does not couple and does not serve ophthalmoscope the grissino is not a couple. sent5: if the grissino is not a coupling the fact that it is not inextinguishable and is not a kind of a stirk is not correct. sent6: if the Creole is not inextinguishable and is mercurial then the grissino is not mercurial. sent7: if something is not a Swinburne the fact that either it is arthrosporic or it is mercurial or both is not correct. | sent1: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent2: (¬{I}{d} v ¬{H}{d}) sent3: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) sent4: (¬{F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{a} sent5: ¬{F}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent6: (¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x v {B}x) | [] | [] | the fact that the Creole is arthrosporic and/or mercurial is not correct. | ¬({C}{b} v {B}{b}) | [
"sent7 -> int1: if the fact that the Creole is not a Swinburne hold then that it is arthrosporic and/or mercurial is not correct.; sent3 -> int2: if the headgear does not boat plunderer then it is not a coupling and does not serve ophthalmoscope.; sent2 -> int3: there is something such that it does not carnify or it does not boat plunderer or both.;"
] | 8 | 2 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Creole is arthrosporic or it is mercurial or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if the grissino is a kind of a Swinburne then the Creole is mercurial. sent2: the stoup either does not carnify or does not boat plunderer or both. sent3: something is not a coupling and it does not serve ophthalmoscope if it does not boat plunderer. sent4: if the headgear does not couple and does not serve ophthalmoscope the grissino is not a couple. sent5: if the grissino is not a coupling the fact that it is not inextinguishable and is not a kind of a stirk is not correct. sent6: if the Creole is not inextinguishable and is mercurial then the grissino is not mercurial. sent7: if something is not a Swinburne the fact that either it is arthrosporic or it is mercurial or both is not correct. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the methane does not backpack methane. | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: the genip does not contort. sent2: if there exists something such that that it is not two-wheel is not false the ingot is a kind of a fibril that does boat Rhinolophidae. sent3: if the genip backpacks neocolonialism then the methane backpacks methane. sent4: the genip backpacks neocolonialism but it does not backpack stepper if it is not stingless. sent5: the fact that if the genip does not backpack methane then the genip does backpack stepper but it is not stingless is true. sent6: the velvet is stingless. sent7: the genip is not a Helotium if something is not implausible. sent8: the fact that if the methane is stingless then the genip does backpack methane hold. sent9: something is stingless if the fact that it is a fibril and it does not backpack methane is right. sent10: the methane backpacks stepper if the genip backpacks neocolonialism. sent11: the fact that the genip does backpack stepper is not right if it is not stingless. sent12: there exists something such that the fact that it is cervine and two-wheel is not true. sent13: the genip is not two-wheel if there is something such that that it is cervine and it is two-wheel is not right. sent14: the genip is not stingless. sent15: the genip does not backpack stepper. sent16: the schrod does not boat Rhinolophidae. sent17: something is not implausible if it does not boat Rhinolophidae. | sent1: ¬{EO}{a} sent2: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({C}{ig} & {F}{ig}) sent3: {AA}{a} -> {B}{b} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent5: ¬{B}{a} -> ({AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent6: {A}{cr} sent7: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬{D}{a} sent8: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} sent9: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x sent10: {AA}{a} -> {AB}{b} sent11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} sent12: (Ex): ¬({H}x & {G}x) sent13: (x): ¬({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{G}{a} sent14: ¬{A}{a} sent15: ¬{AB}{a} sent16: ¬{F}{c} sent17: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{E}x | [
"sent4 & sent14 -> int1: the genip does backpack neocolonialism and does not backpack stepper.; int1 -> int2: the fact that the genip does backpack neocolonialism is right.; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent14 -> int1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: {AA}{a}; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the methane does not backpack methane. | ¬{B}{b} | [
"sent17 -> int3: if the schrod does not boat Rhinolophidae then it is not implausible.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: the schrod is not implausible.; int4 -> int5: that there is something such that it is not implausible is not wrong.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the genip is not a Helotium.; int6 -> int7: something is not a Helotium.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the methane does not backpack methane. ; $context$ = sent1: the genip does not contort. sent2: if there exists something such that that it is not two-wheel is not false the ingot is a kind of a fibril that does boat Rhinolophidae. sent3: if the genip backpacks neocolonialism then the methane backpacks methane. sent4: the genip backpacks neocolonialism but it does not backpack stepper if it is not stingless. sent5: the fact that if the genip does not backpack methane then the genip does backpack stepper but it is not stingless is true. sent6: the velvet is stingless. sent7: the genip is not a Helotium if something is not implausible. sent8: the fact that if the methane is stingless then the genip does backpack methane hold. sent9: something is stingless if the fact that it is a fibril and it does not backpack methane is right. sent10: the methane backpacks stepper if the genip backpacks neocolonialism. sent11: the fact that the genip does backpack stepper is not right if it is not stingless. sent12: there exists something such that the fact that it is cervine and two-wheel is not true. sent13: the genip is not two-wheel if there is something such that that it is cervine and it is two-wheel is not right. sent14: the genip is not stingless. sent15: the genip does not backpack stepper. sent16: the schrod does not boat Rhinolophidae. sent17: something is not implausible if it does not boat Rhinolophidae. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent14 -> int1: the genip does backpack neocolonialism and does not backpack stepper.; int1 -> int2: the fact that the genip does backpack neocolonialism is right.; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is non-post-communist thing that is a specific then it does not recommend barite. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: the incus does not recommend barite if that it is a kind of post-communist a specific hold. sent2: if a non-upmarket thing is a bimonthly it is not a harlequin. sent3: the incus does not serve caulk if that it is not specific and it does crosscut is true. sent4: that if the incus is not post-communist but it is a kind of the specific the incus does recommend barite hold. sent5: if the incus is not post-communist but it is a kind of a specific then it does not recommend barite. sent6: if the pieplant is a kind of non-artificial a specific it is not a low. sent7: the caecilian does publish if it is not post-communist and it does recommend skink. sent8: there is something such that if it does not recommend single and does recommend skink the fact that it is a parasympathetic hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it is post-communist and it is a specific then it does not recommend barite. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not post-communist and is a kind of a specific then it recommends barite. sent11: something does not recommend aftercare if it does not serve pliability and does recommend barite. | sent1: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (x): (¬{H}x & {EO}x) -> ¬{CA}x sent3: (¬{AB}{aa} & {R}{aa}) -> ¬{BH}{aa} sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (¬{GG}{et} & {AB}{et}) -> ¬{IH}{et} sent7: (¬{AA}{eu} & {IJ}{eu}) -> {IR}{eu} sent8: (Ex): (¬{CT}x & {IJ}x) -> {GC}x sent9: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent10: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: (x): (¬{ET}x & {B}x) -> ¬{DB}x | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if it is a kind of non-upmarket thing that is a kind of a bimonthly it is not a harlequin. | (Ex): (¬{H}x & {EO}x) -> ¬{CA}x | [
"sent2 -> int1: if the nepotist is non-upmarket thing that is a bimonthly then it is not a harlequin.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is non-post-communist thing that is a specific then it does not recommend barite. ; $context$ = sent1: the incus does not recommend barite if that it is a kind of post-communist a specific hold. sent2: if a non-upmarket thing is a bimonthly it is not a harlequin. sent3: the incus does not serve caulk if that it is not specific and it does crosscut is true. sent4: that if the incus is not post-communist but it is a kind of the specific the incus does recommend barite hold. sent5: if the incus is not post-communist but it is a kind of a specific then it does not recommend barite. sent6: if the pieplant is a kind of non-artificial a specific it is not a low. sent7: the caecilian does publish if it is not post-communist and it does recommend skink. sent8: there is something such that if it does not recommend single and does recommend skink the fact that it is a parasympathetic hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it is post-communist and it is a specific then it does not recommend barite. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not post-communist and is a kind of a specific then it recommends barite. sent11: something does not recommend aftercare if it does not serve pliability and does recommend barite. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the foolscap is not a procession but it does run is not right. | ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: if something does not recommend autofocus or it is not a correctness or both it is shapely. sent2: that the autofocus is a groundcover and does not backpack calanthe is wrong if it is a kind of a kishke. sent3: the wheelwork runs if it is a kind of a procession. sent4: the wheelwork backpacks Sphinx. sent5: that the wheelwork is not a kind of a procession but it is a atomism is incorrect. sent6: if the Idahoan is not a kind of a groundcover then the letterer is non-ecdemic but it backpacks acoustic. sent7: the wallboard backpacks nonparticipant but it is not a procession if something is filar. sent8: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a metatarsal that recommends Crick is not right. sent9: if there exists something such that that it is a groundcover and does not backpack calanthe is false the Idahoan is not a groundcover. sent10: the autofocus is a kind of a kishke. sent11: the foolscap is filar if it is a procession. sent12: a non-ecdemic thing that backpacks acoustic is not a kind of a inscrutability. sent13: that something runs and it is a Dunkirk is not wrong if it is not unshapely. sent14: that the foolscap is not a procession but it runs does not hold if the wheelwork is a kind of a procession. sent15: the foolscap does not recommend autofocus and/or it is not a kind of a correctness if the bettong is nectariferous. sent16: the wheelwork is a procession if it is filar. sent17: the fact that something is a kind of filar thing that is an amble hold if it is not a inscrutability. sent18: that the wheelwork is filar is not false if it is a run. sent19: if the wallboard does backpack nonparticipant but it is not a kind of a procession then the foolscap is not a procession. sent20: everything is filar. sent21: the wheelwork is a kind of a Dunkirk if it is filar. | sent1: (x): (¬{K}x v ¬{L}x) -> ¬{F}x sent2: {P}{e} -> ¬({M}{e} & ¬{N}{e}) sent3: {B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent4: {CQ}{aa} sent5: ¬(¬{B}{aa} & {IC}{aa}) sent6: ¬{M}{d} -> (¬{J}{c} & {I}{c}) sent7: (x): {A}x -> ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent8: (Ex): ¬({R}x & {Q}x) sent9: (x): ¬({M}x & ¬{N}x) -> ¬{M}{d} sent10: {P}{e} sent11: {B}{a} -> {A}{a} sent12: (x): (¬{J}x & {I}x) -> ¬{H}x sent13: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({C}x & {E}x) sent14: {B}{aa} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent15: {O}{f} -> (¬{K}{a} v ¬{L}{a}) sent16: {A}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent17: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({A}x & {G}x) sent18: {C}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent19: ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent20: (x): {A}x sent21: {A}{aa} -> {E}{aa} | [
"sent20 -> int1: the wheelwork is filar.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the wheelwork is a kind of a procession.; int2 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent20 -> int1: {A}{aa}; int1 & sent16 -> int2: {B}{aa}; int2 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | the foolscap is not a kind of a procession but it is a kind of a run. | (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"sent17 -> int3: if the letterer is not a inscrutability then it is both filar and an amble.; sent12 -> int4: the letterer is not a inscrutability if it is not ecdemic and does backpack acoustic.; sent2 & sent10 -> int5: the fact that the autofocus is a groundcover but it does not backpack calanthe does not hold.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that that it is a groundcover and it does not backpack calanthe is not true.; int6 & sent9 -> int7: the Idahoan is not a groundcover.; sent6 & int7 -> int8: the letterer is non-ecdemic thing that does backpack acoustic.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the letterer is not a inscrutability.; int3 & int9 -> int10: the letterer is filar and is an amble.; int10 -> int11: the fact that the letterer is filar is not false.; int11 -> int12: something is filar.; int12 & sent7 -> int13: the wallboard does backpack nonparticipant but it is not a procession.; sent19 & int13 -> int14: the foolscap is not a kind of a procession.; sent13 -> int15: if the foolscap is not unshapely then it is a run and it is a kind of a Dunkirk.; sent1 -> int16: if the foolscap does not recommend autofocus and/or it is not a correctness it is not unshapely.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the foolscap is not a procession but it does run is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not recommend autofocus or it is not a correctness or both it is shapely. sent2: that the autofocus is a groundcover and does not backpack calanthe is wrong if it is a kind of a kishke. sent3: the wheelwork runs if it is a kind of a procession. sent4: the wheelwork backpacks Sphinx. sent5: that the wheelwork is not a kind of a procession but it is a atomism is incorrect. sent6: if the Idahoan is not a kind of a groundcover then the letterer is non-ecdemic but it backpacks acoustic. sent7: the wallboard backpacks nonparticipant but it is not a procession if something is filar. sent8: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a metatarsal that recommends Crick is not right. sent9: if there exists something such that that it is a groundcover and does not backpack calanthe is false the Idahoan is not a groundcover. sent10: the autofocus is a kind of a kishke. sent11: the foolscap is filar if it is a procession. sent12: a non-ecdemic thing that backpacks acoustic is not a kind of a inscrutability. sent13: that something runs and it is a Dunkirk is not wrong if it is not unshapely. sent14: that the foolscap is not a procession but it runs does not hold if the wheelwork is a kind of a procession. sent15: the foolscap does not recommend autofocus and/or it is not a kind of a correctness if the bettong is nectariferous. sent16: the wheelwork is a procession if it is filar. sent17: the fact that something is a kind of filar thing that is an amble hold if it is not a inscrutability. sent18: that the wheelwork is filar is not false if it is a run. sent19: if the wallboard does backpack nonparticipant but it is not a kind of a procession then the foolscap is not a procession. sent20: everything is filar. sent21: the wheelwork is a kind of a Dunkirk if it is filar. ; $proof$ = | sent20 -> int1: the wheelwork is filar.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the wheelwork is a kind of a procession.; int2 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the delegate is temporal. | {C}{b} | sent1: if the vanillin is not a prosperity then that it serves croup and it is not a bowl is wrong. sent2: the wheatear does serve Egyptologist if it is not non-azimuthal. sent3: something is a temporal if it does recommend valetudinarian. sent4: if the fact that the vanillin is temporal but it does not bowl is not right the fact that the delegate does not recommend valetudinarian is incorrect. sent5: if the delegate does not compact then that the vanillin does carnify or it is a fluorine or both is false. sent6: the delegate does recommend valetudinarian if the vanillin bowls. sent7: if something serves Egyptologist then it does compact. sent8: if that the vanillin serves croup and is not a kind of a bowl is not right the delegate does recommend valetudinarian. sent9: that the vanillin serves croup and bowls is not right. sent10: if the fact that the wheatear serves Egyptologist is right the vanillin serves Egyptologist. sent11: something is not a temporal but a prosperity if it does not recommend valetudinarian. sent12: the vanillin is not a prosperity. sent13: the delegate serves croup if the fact that the vanillin is a temporal that is not a bowl is not true. sent14: if that something is a fluorine but it does not carnify is false then it does not recommend valetudinarian. sent15: if the vanillin is not a prosperity that it does serve croup and it is a bowl does not hold. sent16: if the vanillin compacts it is not a kind of a fluorine. sent17: if that something does carnify or it is a fluorine or both is not correct then it does not recommend valetudinarian. | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: {H}{c} -> {G}{c} sent3: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent4: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent5: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬({D}{a} v {E}{a}) sent6: {AB}{a} -> {B}{b} sent7: (x): {G}x -> {F}x sent8: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent9: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent10: {G}{c} -> {G}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{C}x & {A}x) sent12: ¬{A}{a} sent13: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {AA}{b} sent14: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent15: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent16: {F}{a} -> ¬{E}{a} sent17: (x): ¬({D}x v {E}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent1 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the vanillin serves croup but it does not bowl is false.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the delegate does recommend valetudinarian.; sent3 -> int3: the delegate is a kind of a temporal if it recommends valetudinarian.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent12 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent8 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent3 -> int3: {B}{b} -> {C}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the delegate is not temporal. | ¬{C}{b} | [
"sent11 -> int4: the delegate is not temporal but a prosperity if it does not recommend valetudinarian.; sent14 -> int5: if that the delegate is a kind of a fluorine but it does not carnify does not hold it does not recommend valetudinarian.; sent7 -> int6: if the vanillin does serve Egyptologist then that it compacts hold.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the delegate is temporal. ; $context$ = sent1: if the vanillin is not a prosperity then that it serves croup and it is not a bowl is wrong. sent2: the wheatear does serve Egyptologist if it is not non-azimuthal. sent3: something is a temporal if it does recommend valetudinarian. sent4: if the fact that the vanillin is temporal but it does not bowl is not right the fact that the delegate does not recommend valetudinarian is incorrect. sent5: if the delegate does not compact then that the vanillin does carnify or it is a fluorine or both is false. sent6: the delegate does recommend valetudinarian if the vanillin bowls. sent7: if something serves Egyptologist then it does compact. sent8: if that the vanillin serves croup and is not a kind of a bowl is not right the delegate does recommend valetudinarian. sent9: that the vanillin serves croup and bowls is not right. sent10: if the fact that the wheatear serves Egyptologist is right the vanillin serves Egyptologist. sent11: something is not a temporal but a prosperity if it does not recommend valetudinarian. sent12: the vanillin is not a prosperity. sent13: the delegate serves croup if the fact that the vanillin is a temporal that is not a bowl is not true. sent14: if that something is a fluorine but it does not carnify is false then it does not recommend valetudinarian. sent15: if the vanillin is not a prosperity that it does serve croup and it is a bowl does not hold. sent16: if the vanillin compacts it is not a kind of a fluorine. sent17: if that something does carnify or it is a fluorine or both is not correct then it does not recommend valetudinarian. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the vanillin serves croup but it does not bowl is false.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the delegate does recommend valetudinarian.; sent3 -> int3: the delegate is a kind of a temporal if it recommends valetudinarian.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is earthly then it does not backpack contadino. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{C}x | sent1: if something is a Ovocon it is not a descant. sent2: if the contadino is a kind of a wood then that it is a beach is correct. sent3: something is not apogamic if it is an attitude. sent4: if something is earthly it does not backpack contadino. sent5: if something is earthly it does backpack contadino. | sent1: (x): {AG}x -> ¬{DH}x sent2: {CI}{aa} -> {AM}{aa} sent3: (x): {FA}x -> ¬{AS}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x sent5: (x): {A}x -> {C}x | [
"sent4 -> int1: the contadino does not backpack contadino if it is earthly.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if it is an attitude then that it is not apogamic hold. | (Ex): {FA}x -> ¬{AS}x | [
"sent3 -> int2: if the amphitheater is an attitude it is not apogamic.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is earthly then it does not backpack contadino. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a Ovocon it is not a descant. sent2: if the contadino is a kind of a wood then that it is a beach is correct. sent3: something is not apogamic if it is an attitude. sent4: if something is earthly it does not backpack contadino. sent5: if something is earthly it does backpack contadino. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> int1: the contadino does not backpack contadino if it is earthly.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the pawl does serve antimony. | {A}{a} | sent1: if the fact that the chiton does not serve antimony and is a catechin is false the pawl does not serve antimony. sent2: that something does not serve antimony but it is a catechin is not right if it is not non-unneurotic. sent3: there exists nothing such that it does serve malingerer and is not non-Soviets. sent4: if the moorcock is accordant then the chiton is not a wing-nut and is unneurotic. sent5: there exists something such that it is incomparable and it is ascetic. sent6: if there is something such that the fact that it serves malingerer and it is Soviets is incorrect the pawl does serve antimony. | sent1: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: {E}{c} -> (¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent5: (Ex): ({I}x & {H}x) sent6: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} | [
"sent3 -> int1: that the effects does serve malingerer and is Soviets is not true.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it serves malingerer and is Soviets is not true.; int2 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x); int2 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | the pawl does not serve antimony. | ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent2 -> int3: if the chiton is unneurotic then the fact that it does not serve antimony and is a kind of a catechin is not true.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the pawl does serve antimony. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the chiton does not serve antimony and is a catechin is false the pawl does not serve antimony. sent2: that something does not serve antimony but it is a catechin is not right if it is not non-unneurotic. sent3: there exists nothing such that it does serve malingerer and is not non-Soviets. sent4: if the moorcock is accordant then the chiton is not a wing-nut and is unneurotic. sent5: there exists something such that it is incomparable and it is ascetic. sent6: if there is something such that the fact that it serves malingerer and it is Soviets is incorrect the pawl does serve antimony. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> int1: that the effects does serve malingerer and is Soviets is not true.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it serves malingerer and is Soviets is not true.; int2 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
End of preview. Expand
in Dataset Viewer.
Dataset Card for "FLD.v2"
For the schema of the dataset, see here. For the whole of the project, see our project page.
- Downloads last month
- 3,169
Size of downloaded dataset files:
114 MB
Size of the auto-converted Parquet files:
114 MB
Number of rows:
80,000
Models trained or fine-tuned on hitachi-nlp/FLD.v2