version
stringclasses 1
value | hypothesis
stringlengths 10
229
| hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
39
| facts
stringlengths 0
3.08k
| facts_formula
stringlengths 0
908
| proofs
sequencelengths 0
1
| proofs_formula
sequencelengths 0
1
| negative_hypothesis
stringlengths 10
203
⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
37
⌀ | negative_proofs
sequencelengths 0
1
| negative_original_tree_depth
int64 0
27
⌀ | original_tree_depth
int64 1
3
| 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 76
3.25k
| proof_serial
stringlengths 11
798
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.3 | That rotenone is a morgen. | {C}{a} | fact1: That rotenone is both not a discredit and not a spume. fact2: Something is not a morgen if the thing is not a discredit. fact3: The ligule is not a kind of a morgen. fact4: That rotenone is not a spume. | fact1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}x fact3: ¬{C}{il} fact4: ¬{B}{a} | [
"fact1 -> int1: That rotenone is not a discredit.; fact2 -> int2: That rotenone is not a morgen if that rotenone is not a discredit.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; fact2 -> int2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That rotenone is both not a discredit and not a spume. fact2: Something is not a morgen if the thing is not a discredit. fact3: The ligule is not a kind of a morgen. fact4: That rotenone is not a spume. ; $hypothesis$ = That rotenone is a morgen. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> int1: That rotenone is not a discredit.; fact2 -> int2: That rotenone is not a morgen if that rotenone is not a discredit.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This albiticness does not happens. | ¬{D} | fact1: That autobiographicness occurs. fact2: If this wheedling happens but the mystifying Josephus does not happens that radiance does not happens. fact3: That that publishing Jerez does not happens is prevented by that the pastoral occurs. fact4: That that descaling Violaceae occurs or that this grasping does not occurs or both prevents that this chelatedness occurs. fact5: If that this grasping does not occurs and this chelatedness does not occurs is false then this barreled does not happens. fact6: That publishing Jerez does not happens and the boning lakh does not happens if that radiance does not occurs. fact7: This nailing is caused by that that autobiographicness happens. fact8: That this gushing occurs is triggered by the hypothecating night. fact9: If this chelatedness does not happens then this albiticness or this barreled or both happens. fact10: This grasping does not happens if the fact that this grasping happens but this salaam does not occurs is not correct. fact11: If that either this salaam or this non-exodonticness or both happens does not hold then that descaling Violaceae does not happens. fact12: The automation and this filialness happens if that publishing Jerez does not occurs. fact13: If that descaling Violaceae does not occurs that this grasping does not occurs and this chelatedness does not occurs is false. fact14: The fact that that longer happens hold. fact15: If this filialness occurs that this salaam occurs and/or this exodonticness does not occurs is not correct. fact16: This albiticness occurs if that this barreled occurs hold. | fact1: {A} fact2: ({P} & ¬{O}) -> ¬{N} fact3: {DF} -> {L} fact4: ({G} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{E} fact5: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} fact6: ¬{N} -> (¬{L} & ¬{M}) fact7: {A} -> {B} fact8: {IF} -> {CB} fact9: ¬{E} -> ({D} v {C}) fact10: ¬({F} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{F} fact11: ¬({I} v ¬{H}) -> ¬{G} fact12: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {J}) fact13: ¬{G} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) fact14: {BK} fact15: {J} -> ¬({I} v ¬{H}) fact16: {C} -> {D} | [
"fact7 & fact1 -> int1: The fact that this nailing happens hold.;"
] | [
"fact7 & fact1 -> int1: {B};"
] | This albiticness does not happens. | ¬{D} | [] | 12 | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That autobiographicness occurs. fact2: If this wheedling happens but the mystifying Josephus does not happens that radiance does not happens. fact3: That that publishing Jerez does not happens is prevented by that the pastoral occurs. fact4: That that descaling Violaceae occurs or that this grasping does not occurs or both prevents that this chelatedness occurs. fact5: If that this grasping does not occurs and this chelatedness does not occurs is false then this barreled does not happens. fact6: That publishing Jerez does not happens and the boning lakh does not happens if that radiance does not occurs. fact7: This nailing is caused by that that autobiographicness happens. fact8: That this gushing occurs is triggered by the hypothecating night. fact9: If this chelatedness does not happens then this albiticness or this barreled or both happens. fact10: This grasping does not happens if the fact that this grasping happens but this salaam does not occurs is not correct. fact11: If that either this salaam or this non-exodonticness or both happens does not hold then that descaling Violaceae does not happens. fact12: The automation and this filialness happens if that publishing Jerez does not occurs. fact13: If that descaling Violaceae does not occurs that this grasping does not occurs and this chelatedness does not occurs is false. fact14: The fact that that longer happens hold. fact15: If this filialness occurs that this salaam occurs and/or this exodonticness does not occurs is not correct. fact16: This albiticness occurs if that this barreled occurs hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This albiticness does not happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | There is some person such that if it is not a rape and it is a alkaluria it is not proud. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | fact1: There exists something such that if that thing is not unemployed and that thing admonishes drib that thing is not benthonic. fact2: Some person is not multilane if the person is not Calvinistical and the person is a Plantaginaceae. fact3: If this willet is a basketful and it is a jape it is not a rape. fact4: There exists someone such that if it is not asclepiadaceous and it yens hydrocephaly then it is not unemployed. fact5: This willet is proud if it is not a rape and it is a alkaluria. fact6: There is something such that if it does not punish Jansenism and is unsympathetic then it is homeostatic. fact7: There is some man such that if that person is not subsurface and that person is a Pindaric then that person is dramatic. fact8: This willet is non-proud if this willet is not a rape but it is a alkaluria. fact9: If this willet is syndetic and the person touches Wyszynski this willet is not proud. fact10: If this willet is not a kind of a rape but it is weedless then it is not a disheartenment. fact11: There is somebody such that if it is not Sinitic but a Nitrobacteriaceae it is not lacrimal. fact12: This willet is not a Dracunculidae if this willet is proud and that thing camps. fact13: There exists something such that if it is a rape and it is a alkaluria then it is not proud. fact14: There exists someone such that if this one is a kind of a Newtonian and this one undeceives DoI this one is not a breeding. fact15: That dance is not proud if that dance is not benthonic but it is a Alcides. fact16: The fact that this willet is not a disheartenment hold if this is non-proud thing that is Michelangelesque. fact17: There exists something such that if that is not inhumane and that is a Shevchenko that sugars yen. fact18: There exists something such that if it is not a Bristol and it unnerves logjam then it is not a Dracunculidae. | fact1: (Ex): (¬{BU}x & {GK}x) -> ¬{E}x fact2: (x): (¬{BJ}x & {IT}x) -> ¬{FI}x fact3: ({GC}{aa} & {BD}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} fact4: (Ex): (¬{ER}x & {AN}x) -> ¬{BU}x fact5: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact6: (Ex): (¬{GF}x & {CE}x) -> {BO}x fact7: (Ex): (¬{CJ}x & {GR}x) -> {CB}x fact8: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact9: ({CC}{aa} & {GJ}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact10: (¬{AA}{aa} & {JA}{aa}) -> ¬{FT}{aa} fact11: (Ex): (¬{C}x & {HO}x) -> ¬{BK}x fact12: ({B}{aa} & {S}{aa}) -> ¬{FJ}{aa} fact13: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact14: (Ex): ({IM}x & {GH}x) -> ¬{DK}x fact15: (¬{E}{dd} & {CH}{dd}) -> ¬{B}{dd} fact16: (¬{B}{aa} & {CR}{aa}) -> ¬{FT}{aa} fact17: (Ex): (¬{FH}x & {IO}x) -> {DP}x fact18: (Ex): (¬{Q}x & {K}x) -> ¬{FJ}x | [
"fact8 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact8 -> hypothesis;"
] | There exists some person such that if it is not Calvinistical and is a Plantaginaceae it is not multilane. | (Ex): (¬{BJ}x & {IT}x) -> ¬{FI}x | [
"fact19 -> int1: This somatotropin is not multilane if this somatotropin is not Calvinistical but that person is a Plantaginaceae.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $facts$ = fact1: There exists something such that if that thing is not unemployed and that thing admonishes drib that thing is not benthonic. fact2: Some person is not multilane if the person is not Calvinistical and the person is a Plantaginaceae. fact3: If this willet is a basketful and it is a jape it is not a rape. fact4: There exists someone such that if it is not asclepiadaceous and it yens hydrocephaly then it is not unemployed. fact5: This willet is proud if it is not a rape and it is a alkaluria. fact6: There is something such that if it does not punish Jansenism and is unsympathetic then it is homeostatic. fact7: There is some man such that if that person is not subsurface and that person is a Pindaric then that person is dramatic. fact8: This willet is non-proud if this willet is not a rape but it is a alkaluria. fact9: If this willet is syndetic and the person touches Wyszynski this willet is not proud. fact10: If this willet is not a kind of a rape but it is weedless then it is not a disheartenment. fact11: There is somebody such that if it is not Sinitic but a Nitrobacteriaceae it is not lacrimal. fact12: This willet is not a Dracunculidae if this willet is proud and that thing camps. fact13: There exists something such that if it is a rape and it is a alkaluria then it is not proud. fact14: There exists someone such that if this one is a kind of a Newtonian and this one undeceives DoI this one is not a breeding. fact15: That dance is not proud if that dance is not benthonic but it is a Alcides. fact16: The fact that this willet is not a disheartenment hold if this is non-proud thing that is Michelangelesque. fact17: There exists something such that if that is not inhumane and that is a Shevchenko that sugars yen. fact18: There exists something such that if it is not a Bristol and it unnerves logjam then it is not a Dracunculidae. ; $hypothesis$ = There is some person such that if it is not a rape and it is a alkaluria it is not proud. ; $proof$ = | fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That C2H6 haggles changed and is a conjecture. | ({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) | fact1: That C2H6 is a kind of a sapidity if this Liverpudlian does not misplay handy or is not a sapidity or both. fact2: If somebody is a kind of a sapidity then the fact that she/he is a conjecture hold. fact3: If this pulassan does not strap Nautilidae then the thing does not polish Ms and is not a kind of a forlornness. fact4: This Liverpudlian either does not misplay handy or is not a sapidity or both. fact5: That bud does not polish Ms. fact6: This Liverpudlian either misplays handy or is not a sapidity or both. fact7: If somebody is not a aquaphobia then the fact that it haggles changed and it is a conjecture is wrong. fact8: That that bud is not a forlornness and does not polish Ms is wrong if that bud does not strap Nautilidae. fact9: If this pulassan is not a Muslimism and does not misplay handy then this Liverpudlian is not a Muslimism. fact10: Everything does haggle changed and is a aquaphobia. fact11: This pulassan is not a kind of a Muslimism and does not misplay handy if that bud is a jerk. fact12: That bud does not strap Nautilidae and is non-clitoral. fact13: Somebody is a jerk if the fact that that one is not a forlornness and that one does not polish Ms is wrong. fact14: Either this Liverpudlian does not misplay handy or it is a kind of a sapidity or both. fact15: That that bud misplays handy and is not a jerk is false if that bud does not polish Ms. fact16: The fact that everybody is a aquaphobia is right. fact17: This ivy haggles changed and is a kind of a aquaphobia if this Liverpudlian is not a conjecture. fact18: That C2H6 does not misplay handy and is a jerk if this Liverpudlian does not polish Ms. fact19: If that some person is unconsolable is true then the one daubs Orectolobus. fact20: Some man that is a kind of a Muslimism that is not a sapidity is not a kind of a aquaphobia. fact21: That C2H6 is a kind of a aquaphobia. fact22: This Liverpudlian does not polish Ms if this pulassan does not polish Ms and is not a kind of a forlornness. fact23: If the fact that either this Liverpudlian is a aquaphobia or that is a sapidity or both is wrong that C2H6 is not a aquaphobia. | fact1: (¬{F}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) -> {D}{aa} fact2: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact3: ¬{J}{b} -> (¬{H}{b} & ¬{I}{b}) fact4: (¬{F}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) fact5: ¬{H}{c} fact6: ({F}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) fact7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) fact8: ¬{J}{c} -> ¬(¬{I}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) fact9: (¬{E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact10: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) fact11: {G}{c} -> (¬{E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) fact12: (¬{J}{c} & ¬{K}{c}) fact13: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{H}x) -> {G}x fact14: (¬{F}{a} v {D}{a}) fact15: ¬{H}{c} -> ¬({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) fact16: (x): {B}x fact17: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{bu} & {B}{bu}) fact18: ¬{H}{a} -> (¬{F}{aa} & {G}{aa}) fact19: (x): {BC}x -> {CO}x fact20: (x): ({E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact21: {B}{aa} fact22: (¬{H}{b} & ¬{I}{b}) -> ¬{H}{a} fact23: ¬({B}{a} v {D}{a}) -> ¬{B}{aa} | [
"fact10 -> int1: That C2H6 does haggle changed and is a aquaphobia.; int1 -> int2: That C2H6 haggles changed.; fact2 -> int3: If the fact that that C2H6 is a kind of a sapidity is correct that C2H6 is a conjecture.; fact4 & fact1 -> int4: That C2H6 is a sapidity.; int3 & int4 -> int5: That that C2H6 is a conjecture hold.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact10 -> int1: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}); int1 -> int2: {A}{aa}; fact2 -> int3: {D}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; fact4 & fact1 -> int4: {D}{aa}; int3 & int4 -> int5: {C}{aa}; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | The fact that that C2H6 haggles changed and is a conjecture is wrong. | ¬({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) | [
"fact25 & fact26 -> int6: That that bud does misplay handy but it is not a kind of a jerk is false.; int6 -> int7: There is something such that the fact that that thing misplays handy and is not a jerk does not hold.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That C2H6 is a kind of a sapidity if this Liverpudlian does not misplay handy or is not a sapidity or both. fact2: If somebody is a kind of a sapidity then the fact that she/he is a conjecture hold. fact3: If this pulassan does not strap Nautilidae then the thing does not polish Ms and is not a kind of a forlornness. fact4: This Liverpudlian either does not misplay handy or is not a sapidity or both. fact5: That bud does not polish Ms. fact6: This Liverpudlian either misplays handy or is not a sapidity or both. fact7: If somebody is not a aquaphobia then the fact that it haggles changed and it is a conjecture is wrong. fact8: That that bud is not a forlornness and does not polish Ms is wrong if that bud does not strap Nautilidae. fact9: If this pulassan is not a Muslimism and does not misplay handy then this Liverpudlian is not a Muslimism. fact10: Everything does haggle changed and is a aquaphobia. fact11: This pulassan is not a kind of a Muslimism and does not misplay handy if that bud is a jerk. fact12: That bud does not strap Nautilidae and is non-clitoral. fact13: Somebody is a jerk if the fact that that one is not a forlornness and that one does not polish Ms is wrong. fact14: Either this Liverpudlian does not misplay handy or it is a kind of a sapidity or both. fact15: That that bud misplays handy and is not a jerk is false if that bud does not polish Ms. fact16: The fact that everybody is a aquaphobia is right. fact17: This ivy haggles changed and is a kind of a aquaphobia if this Liverpudlian is not a conjecture. fact18: That C2H6 does not misplay handy and is a jerk if this Liverpudlian does not polish Ms. fact19: If that some person is unconsolable is true then the one daubs Orectolobus. fact20: Some man that is a kind of a Muslimism that is not a sapidity is not a kind of a aquaphobia. fact21: That C2H6 is a kind of a aquaphobia. fact22: This Liverpudlian does not polish Ms if this pulassan does not polish Ms and is not a kind of a forlornness. fact23: If the fact that either this Liverpudlian is a aquaphobia or that is a sapidity or both is wrong that C2H6 is not a aquaphobia. ; $hypothesis$ = That C2H6 haggles changed and is a conjecture. ; $proof$ = | fact10 -> int1: That C2H6 does haggle changed and is a aquaphobia.; int1 -> int2: That C2H6 haggles changed.; fact2 -> int3: If the fact that that C2H6 is a kind of a sapidity is correct that C2H6 is a conjecture.; fact4 & fact1 -> int4: That C2H6 is a sapidity.; int3 & int4 -> int5: That that C2H6 is a conjecture hold.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That barbel is a kind of a Himalaya but it is not a leucocytosis. | ({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | fact1: This Tuareg does outface prepotency and does pump Flemish. fact2: That seer is a heartbreak but the one is not uncontested. fact3: If that barbel is a Ningal and not a clangour then that barbel is not a Himalaya. fact4: That barbel is a heartbreak but this thing does not sintered. fact5: this Herzberg does furnish seer. fact6: That barbel is a kind of a resplendence. fact7: That barbel is a Himalaya if that seer furnishes Herzberg. fact8: That seer is not a Liopelmidae if that this linnet is both not a Liopelmidae and non-Latin does not hold. fact9: That barbel does not sintered. fact10: That something is a kind of a Himalaya and is not a kind of a leucocytosis does not hold if it furnishes Herzberg. fact11: If this metabola is not a birling the fact that this linnet is not a Liopelmidae and it is not Latin is not correct. fact12: That seer does furnish Herzberg. fact13: If something is inadvisable it is not a kind of a birling. fact14: That if that seer is not a Liopelmidae then that that barbel does not bypass perkiness and the person is not a heartbreak does not hold is right. fact15: The fact that if that barbel is a heartbreak that sintereds that barbel is not a leucocytosis is correct. fact16: If this Tuareg outfaces prepotency then either this gitano is not nervous or it does not adolesce or both. fact17: If that barbel does furnish Herzberg then that that seer is a kind of a leucocytosis is correct. fact18: If that barbel is a kind of a Himalaya that seer is a kind of a leucocytosis. fact19: That blabbermouth furnishes Herzberg. fact20: The North is a leucocytosis. fact21: If that something does not bypass perkiness and it is not a heartbreak is not true it does not sintered. fact22: That seer does not subtilise gestalt. | fact1: ({M}{f} & {N}{f}) fact2: ({E}{a} & ¬{EI}{a}) fact3: ({DN}{b} & ¬{DH}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact4: ({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact5: {AA}{aa} fact6: {ER}{b} fact7: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact8: ¬(¬{G}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) -> ¬{G}{a} fact9: ¬{D}{b} fact10: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) fact11: ¬{I}{d} -> ¬(¬{G}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) fact12: {A}{a} fact13: (x): {J}x -> ¬{I}x fact14: ¬{G}{a} -> ¬(¬{F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) fact15: ({E}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact16: {M}{f} -> (¬{L}{e} v ¬{K}{e}) fact17: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact18: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} fact19: {A}{ha} fact20: {C}{gp} fact21: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact22: ¬{GG}{a} | [
"fact7 & fact12 -> int1: That barbel is a Himalaya.;"
] | [
"fact7 & fact12 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] | That that barbel is a Himalaya but it is not a kind of a leucocytosis is incorrect. | ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | [
"fact28 -> int2: If that barbel furnishes Herzberg then that that barbel is a kind of a Himalaya but the person is not a kind of a leucocytosis does not hold.; fact27 -> int3: That barbel does not sintered if the fact that it does not bypass perkiness and is not a heartbreak does not hold.; fact25 -> int4: If this metabola is inadvisable then this metabola is not a birling.; fact24 -> int5: This Tuareg outfaces prepotency.; fact30 & int5 -> int6: This gitano is not nervous or does not adolesce or both.; int6 -> int7: There is something such that it is not nervous and/or it does not adolesce.;"
] | 11 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This Tuareg does outface prepotency and does pump Flemish. fact2: That seer is a heartbreak but the one is not uncontested. fact3: If that barbel is a Ningal and not a clangour then that barbel is not a Himalaya. fact4: That barbel is a heartbreak but this thing does not sintered. fact5: this Herzberg does furnish seer. fact6: That barbel is a kind of a resplendence. fact7: That barbel is a Himalaya if that seer furnishes Herzberg. fact8: That seer is not a Liopelmidae if that this linnet is both not a Liopelmidae and non-Latin does not hold. fact9: That barbel does not sintered. fact10: That something is a kind of a Himalaya and is not a kind of a leucocytosis does not hold if it furnishes Herzberg. fact11: If this metabola is not a birling the fact that this linnet is not a Liopelmidae and it is not Latin is not correct. fact12: That seer does furnish Herzberg. fact13: If something is inadvisable it is not a kind of a birling. fact14: That if that seer is not a Liopelmidae then that that barbel does not bypass perkiness and the person is not a heartbreak does not hold is right. fact15: The fact that if that barbel is a heartbreak that sintereds that barbel is not a leucocytosis is correct. fact16: If this Tuareg outfaces prepotency then either this gitano is not nervous or it does not adolesce or both. fact17: If that barbel does furnish Herzberg then that that seer is a kind of a leucocytosis is correct. fact18: If that barbel is a kind of a Himalaya that seer is a kind of a leucocytosis. fact19: That blabbermouth furnishes Herzberg. fact20: The North is a leucocytosis. fact21: If that something does not bypass perkiness and it is not a heartbreak is not true it does not sintered. fact22: That seer does not subtilise gestalt. ; $hypothesis$ = That barbel is a kind of a Himalaya but it is not a leucocytosis. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That toff is non-auroral. | ¬{B}{aa} | fact1: That toff is Machiavellian. fact2: That toff is a costochondritis if that enalapril is a costochondritis. fact3: That that toff is anthropogenetic and that thing is an exit does not hold. fact4: If that something is not anthropogenetic but it is an exit is not true it is auroral. fact5: That that toff is not anthropogenetic but an exit does not hold if that toff does not locate. fact6: The skipjack locates if that it is not attitudinal and is absorptive does not hold. fact7: The fact that that toff is a Liatris and this one is a pharmaceutical is not correct. fact8: That nombril is anthropogenetic if that nombril is a kind of a narcissism. fact9: That toff is auroral if it is anthropogenetic. fact10: Somebody is not a verbiage but it threatens Speke if it is not a Asparagaceae. fact11: If something is anosmatic that lexicaliseds. fact12: If someone locates it is an exit. fact13: That that that toff is not non-anthropogenetic but an exit is right is not true if that toff does not locate. fact14: The coprolith is anthropogenetic. fact15: If someone is not a verbiage but this person threatens Speke this person is not a Argentine. fact16: If something is anthropogenetic that thing is auroral. fact17: That toff does not locate. fact18: Something is not auroral if either it locates or it is a costochondritis or both. fact19: If the fact that that toff is not a skill and bivouacs Leontodon is false then that thing locates. fact20: If that enalapril is not a kind of a Argentine then the fact that that toff is a costochondritis and the person locates is wrong. fact21: If the fact that the heliopsis does not equilibrize but that is not non-auroral does not hold then the heliopsis is a logomania. fact22: The fact that that toff is both a Chironomus and auroral is incorrect if it is not a Vanzetti. | fact1: {FF}{aa} fact2: {C}{a} -> {C}{aa} fact3: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact5: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact6: ¬(¬{EH}{ak} & {DC}{ak}) -> {A}{ak} fact7: ¬({EA}{aa} & {FD}{aa}) fact8: {AM}{eg} -> {AA}{eg} fact9: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} fact10: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{E}x & {F}x) fact11: (x): {AT}x -> {BD}x fact12: (x): {A}x -> {AB}x fact13: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact14: {AA}{k} fact15: (x): (¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact16: (x): {AA}x -> {B}x fact17: ¬{A}{aa} fact18: (x): ({A}x v {C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact19: ¬(¬{FQ}{aa} & {CM}{aa}) -> {A}{aa} fact20: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({C}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact21: ¬(¬{CK}{is} & {B}{is}) -> {HA}{is} fact22: ¬{P}{aa} -> ¬({EK}{aa} & {B}{aa}) | [
"fact4 -> int1: If that that toff is not anthropogenetic but she is an exit is incorrect she is auroral.; fact17 & fact5 -> int2: The fact that that toff is not anthropogenetic but an exit does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact4 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; fact17 & fact5 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That toff is non-auroral. | ¬{B}{aa} | [
"fact24 -> int3: If that toff locates or is a kind of a costochondritis or both then that toff is not auroral.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That toff is Machiavellian. fact2: That toff is a costochondritis if that enalapril is a costochondritis. fact3: That that toff is anthropogenetic and that thing is an exit does not hold. fact4: If that something is not anthropogenetic but it is an exit is not true it is auroral. fact5: That that toff is not anthropogenetic but an exit does not hold if that toff does not locate. fact6: The skipjack locates if that it is not attitudinal and is absorptive does not hold. fact7: The fact that that toff is a Liatris and this one is a pharmaceutical is not correct. fact8: That nombril is anthropogenetic if that nombril is a kind of a narcissism. fact9: That toff is auroral if it is anthropogenetic. fact10: Somebody is not a verbiage but it threatens Speke if it is not a Asparagaceae. fact11: If something is anosmatic that lexicaliseds. fact12: If someone locates it is an exit. fact13: That that that toff is not non-anthropogenetic but an exit is right is not true if that toff does not locate. fact14: The coprolith is anthropogenetic. fact15: If someone is not a verbiage but this person threatens Speke this person is not a Argentine. fact16: If something is anthropogenetic that thing is auroral. fact17: That toff does not locate. fact18: Something is not auroral if either it locates or it is a costochondritis or both. fact19: If the fact that that toff is not a skill and bivouacs Leontodon is false then that thing locates. fact20: If that enalapril is not a kind of a Argentine then the fact that that toff is a costochondritis and the person locates is wrong. fact21: If the fact that the heliopsis does not equilibrize but that is not non-auroral does not hold then the heliopsis is a logomania. fact22: The fact that that toff is both a Chironomus and auroral is incorrect if it is not a Vanzetti. ; $hypothesis$ = That toff is non-auroral. ; $proof$ = | fact4 -> int1: If that that toff is not anthropogenetic but she is an exit is incorrect she is auroral.; fact17 & fact5 -> int2: The fact that that toff is not anthropogenetic but an exit does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That infecting Lammas but notthe maturing hogwash occurs. | ({AA} & ¬{AB}) | fact1: If that this trapshooting and this backpacking occurs does not hold then that this uncharacteristicness does not occurs hold. fact2: If the inopportuneness does not happens then that this trapshooting occurs and this backpacking occurs is incorrect. fact3: This innateness but notthat Bogartianness occurs if this uncharacteristicness does not occurs. fact4: That non-Germanicness leads to that that non-inopportuneness and that non-unfruitfulness occurs. fact5: The maturing hogwash does not occurs if this sighing sapidity occurs. fact6: This indication does not occurs if this innateness occurs. fact7: If this sighing sapidity occurs then that that Sinhalese does not occurs is not incorrect. fact8: That non-Germanicness is caused by that this fluff does not occurs and that swelling hermaphroditism does not occurs. fact9: That this sighing sapidity occurs and that unmotorisedness occurs is triggered by that this indication does not occurs. fact10: That this flocculating absoluteness occurs and this gourmandizing sthene does not occurs is incorrect if that Sinhalese does not occurs. fact11: If that Sinhalese occurs then that that infecting Lammas happens and the maturing hogwash does not occurs is not correct. | fact1: ¬({I} & {J}) -> ¬{H} fact2: ¬{K} -> ¬({I} & {J}) fact3: ¬{H} -> ({F} & ¬{G}) fact4: ¬{M} -> (¬{K} & ¬{L}) fact5: {B} -> ¬{AB} fact6: {F} -> ¬{D} fact7: {B} -> ¬{A} fact8: (¬{N} & ¬{O}) -> ¬{M} fact9: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) fact10: ¬{A} -> ¬({E} & ¬{DT}) fact11: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) | [] | [] | That infecting Lammas but notthe maturing hogwash occurs. | ({AA} & ¬{AB}) | [] | 5 | 1 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that this trapshooting and this backpacking occurs does not hold then that this uncharacteristicness does not occurs hold. fact2: If the inopportuneness does not happens then that this trapshooting occurs and this backpacking occurs is incorrect. fact3: This innateness but notthat Bogartianness occurs if this uncharacteristicness does not occurs. fact4: That non-Germanicness leads to that that non-inopportuneness and that non-unfruitfulness occurs. fact5: The maturing hogwash does not occurs if this sighing sapidity occurs. fact6: This indication does not occurs if this innateness occurs. fact7: If this sighing sapidity occurs then that that Sinhalese does not occurs is not incorrect. fact8: That non-Germanicness is caused by that this fluff does not occurs and that swelling hermaphroditism does not occurs. fact9: That this sighing sapidity occurs and that unmotorisedness occurs is triggered by that this indication does not occurs. fact10: That this flocculating absoluteness occurs and this gourmandizing sthene does not occurs is incorrect if that Sinhalese does not occurs. fact11: If that Sinhalese occurs then that that infecting Lammas happens and the maturing hogwash does not occurs is not correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That infecting Lammas but notthe maturing hogwash occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | There exists some man such that it is a Melbourne. | (Ex): {A}x | fact1: There exists something such that it is a rupturewort. fact2: If the fact that something dungs and it does scar Puccinia does not hold it does not panel. fact3: There exists some person such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Palmales does not hold. fact4: There is something such that it is a Bidens. fact5: There is someone such that it is a Sabahan. fact6: There exists some man such that it is a Melbourne. fact7: There is somebody such that it is a stagnation. fact8: The seersucker does verbalize Duluth and that is a Melbourne if this nominator does not panel. fact9: There is something such that that kibitzes. fact10: There is something such that it is anoestrous. fact11: There is some person such that he symmetrizes amentia. | fact1: (Ex): {AS}x fact2: (x): ¬({D}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: (Ex): {Q}x fact4: (Ex): {GL}x fact5: (Ex): {ED}x fact6: (Ex): {A}x fact7: (Ex): {IJ}x fact8: ¬{B}{b} -> ({FT}{a} & {A}{a}) fact9: (Ex): {DU}x fact10: (Ex): {IF}x fact11: (Ex): {BE}x | [
"fact6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 -> hypothesis;"
] | There exists something such that that does verbalize Duluth. | (Ex): {FT}x | [
"fact12 -> int1: If that this nominator dungs and does scar Puccinia is wrong then this nominator does not panel.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: There exists something such that it is a rupturewort. fact2: If the fact that something dungs and it does scar Puccinia does not hold it does not panel. fact3: There exists some person such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Palmales does not hold. fact4: There is something such that it is a Bidens. fact5: There is someone such that it is a Sabahan. fact6: There exists some man such that it is a Melbourne. fact7: There is somebody such that it is a stagnation. fact8: The seersucker does verbalize Duluth and that is a Melbourne if this nominator does not panel. fact9: There is something such that that kibitzes. fact10: There is something such that it is anoestrous. fact11: There is some person such that he symmetrizes amentia. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists some man such that it is a Melbourne. ; $proof$ = | fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That cyclonalness happens. | {D} | fact1: If this housing occurs then that burning parsec happens. fact2: That burning parsec happens if this bunce happens. fact3: That cyclonalness does not occurs if this footnoting powered and that burning parsec occurs. fact4: That cyclonalness and this expecting Triglidae occurs if this footnoting powered does not occurs. fact5: That this housing happens and/or this bunce occurs hold. | fact1: {E} -> {C} fact2: {F} -> {C} fact3: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact4: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) fact5: ({E} v {F}) | [
"fact5 & fact1 & fact2 -> int1: That burning parsec happens.;"
] | [
"fact5 & fact1 & fact2 -> int1: {C};"
] | That cyclonalness happens. | {D} | [] | 6 | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If this housing occurs then that burning parsec happens. fact2: That burning parsec happens if this bunce happens. fact3: That cyclonalness does not occurs if this footnoting powered and that burning parsec occurs. fact4: That cyclonalness and this expecting Triglidae occurs if this footnoting powered does not occurs. fact5: That this housing happens and/or this bunce occurs hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That cyclonalness happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This caoutchouc is non-potent and/or is not a kind of an informatics. | (¬{E}{d} v ¬{C}{d}) | fact1: If something stinks then it is not glycogenic. fact2: If that trunks is a orientalism then that fuzz is not urban. fact3: The fact that this caoutchouc is not potent or not an informatics or both if that fender is not a kind of an informatics is correct. fact4: That fender is not an informatics if that trunks is urban. fact5: If some man blethers clocking then it is carunculate. fact6: That fender is a mores that is not a conservative if this icing is not a Carex. fact7: This caoutchouc is not potent and/or it is an informatics. fact8: If there are carunculate things that Humberto stinks and it Shanghais Hammurabi is right. fact9: This megasporangium is not photoconductive. fact10: If that that trunks is not a Photinia and is psychotherapeutic is false that fuzz is not psychotherapeutic. fact11: If some man is a kind of a orientalism that this one is not potent and/or this one is not an informatics is not right. fact12: This caoutchouc is potent and/or is not an informatics. fact13: That fender is potent. fact14: That trunks is urban if that fuzz is a orientalism. fact15: That this megasporangium is a Niger and imbues luxuriance hold if this megasporangium is not photoconductive. fact16: This megasporangium blethers clocking if this megasporangium imbues luxuriance. fact17: If that fender is not an informatics then this caoutchouc is potent and/or is not an informatics. fact18: Someone does not synthesise fedayeen but it is a Carex if it is not glycogenic. fact19: If Humberto does not synthesise fedayeen and is a Carex this icing is not a Carex. fact20: That fuzz is a orientalism. fact21: If that fender is a mores and not a conservative then that trunks is not a conservative. fact22: This caoutchouc either is not potent or is an informatics or both if that fender is not a kind of an informatics. fact23: The fact that somebody is not a Photinia but psychotherapeutic is false if it is not a conservative. | fact1: (x): {L}x -> ¬{J}x fact2: {A}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} fact3: ¬{C}{c} -> (¬{E}{d} v ¬{C}{d}) fact4: {B}{b} -> ¬{C}{c} fact5: (x): {O}x -> {N}x fact6: ¬{H}{e} -> ({I}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact7: (¬{E}{d} v {C}{d}) fact8: (x): {N}x -> ({L}{f} & {M}{f}) fact9: ¬{R}{g} fact10: ¬(¬{G}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact11: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{E}x v ¬{C}x) fact12: ({E}{d} v ¬{C}{d}) fact13: {E}{c} fact14: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact15: ¬{R}{g} -> ({Q}{g} & {P}{g}) fact16: {P}{g} -> {O}{g} fact17: ¬{C}{c} -> ({E}{d} v ¬{C}{d}) fact18: (x): ¬{J}x -> (¬{K}x & {H}x) fact19: (¬{K}{f} & {H}{f}) -> ¬{H}{e} fact20: {A}{a} fact21: ({I}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact22: ¬{C}{c} -> (¬{E}{d} v {C}{d}) fact23: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {D}x) | [
"fact14 & fact20 -> int1: That trunks is urban.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: That fender is not an informatics.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact14 & fact20 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & fact4 -> int2: ¬{C}{c}; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | That this caoutchouc is either not potent or not an informatics or both is wrong. | ¬(¬{E}{d} v ¬{C}{d}) | [
"fact27 -> int3: That this caoutchouc is not potent or he/she is not an informatics or both is false if he/she is a orientalism.; fact24 -> int4: That that trunks is not a Photinia but it is psychotherapeutic is incorrect if that it is not a kind of a conservative is correct.; fact35 -> int5: If Humberto is not glycogenic Humberto does not synthesise fedayeen and is a kind of a Carex.; fact34 -> int6: The fact that Humberto is not glycogenic hold if Humberto stinks.; fact31 -> int7: If this megasporangium blethers clocking that it is not carunculate is not correct.; fact36 & fact26 -> int8: That this megasporangium is a Niger and that person imbues luxuriance is not false.; int8 -> int9: The fact that this megasporangium imbues luxuriance is correct.; fact25 & int9 -> int10: This megasporangium does blether clocking.; int7 & int10 -> int11: This megasporangium is carunculate.; int11 -> int12: Someone is carunculate.; int12 & fact33 -> int13: Humberto stinks and it Shanghais Hammurabi.; int13 -> int14: Humberto stinks.; int6 & int14 -> int15: That Humberto is not glycogenic is true.; int5 & int15 -> int16: Humberto does not synthesise fedayeen but that is a Carex.; fact29 & int16 -> int17: This icing is not a kind of a Carex.; fact32 & int17 -> int18: That fender is a mores and is not a kind of a conservative.; fact28 & int18 -> int19: That trunks is not a conservative.; int4 & int19 -> int20: The fact that that that trunks is both not a Photinia and not non-psychotherapeutic does not hold is right.; fact30 & int20 -> int21: That fuzz is non-psychotherapeutic.; int21 -> int22: There is someone such that that person is not psychotherapeutic.;"
] | 18 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If something stinks then it is not glycogenic. fact2: If that trunks is a orientalism then that fuzz is not urban. fact3: The fact that this caoutchouc is not potent or not an informatics or both if that fender is not a kind of an informatics is correct. fact4: That fender is not an informatics if that trunks is urban. fact5: If some man blethers clocking then it is carunculate. fact6: That fender is a mores that is not a conservative if this icing is not a Carex. fact7: This caoutchouc is not potent and/or it is an informatics. fact8: If there are carunculate things that Humberto stinks and it Shanghais Hammurabi is right. fact9: This megasporangium is not photoconductive. fact10: If that that trunks is not a Photinia and is psychotherapeutic is false that fuzz is not psychotherapeutic. fact11: If some man is a kind of a orientalism that this one is not potent and/or this one is not an informatics is not right. fact12: This caoutchouc is potent and/or is not an informatics. fact13: That fender is potent. fact14: That trunks is urban if that fuzz is a orientalism. fact15: That this megasporangium is a Niger and imbues luxuriance hold if this megasporangium is not photoconductive. fact16: This megasporangium blethers clocking if this megasporangium imbues luxuriance. fact17: If that fender is not an informatics then this caoutchouc is potent and/or is not an informatics. fact18: Someone does not synthesise fedayeen but it is a Carex if it is not glycogenic. fact19: If Humberto does not synthesise fedayeen and is a Carex this icing is not a Carex. fact20: That fuzz is a orientalism. fact21: If that fender is a mores and not a conservative then that trunks is not a conservative. fact22: This caoutchouc either is not potent or is an informatics or both if that fender is not a kind of an informatics. fact23: The fact that somebody is not a Photinia but psychotherapeutic is false if it is not a conservative. ; $hypothesis$ = This caoutchouc is non-potent and/or is not a kind of an informatics. ; $proof$ = | fact14 & fact20 -> int1: That trunks is urban.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: That fender is not an informatics.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That ornithischian grazes stranded. | {C}{b} | fact1: That index is a kind of a Dreissena and it misses Petaurista. fact2: That that index does not graze stranded is right if that ornithischian is a kind of a buccaneer. fact3: That ornithischian is a miserliness and that thing is a kind of a nominalism. fact4: That ornithischian does not miss Petaurista. fact5: If that index is a kind of a buccaneer then that ornithischian does not graze stranded. fact6: That index misses Petaurista. fact7: If the fact that that index is algorithmic is true then the fact that that index webs latter but this does not graze stranded does not hold. fact8: That checkpoint is a buccaneer. fact9: If there exists something such that it is not a Dreissena but algorithmic that amber is a kind of a Dreissena. fact10: That index webs latter if that amber is a Dreissena. fact11: If that that something is a IL that is a Liatris is correct is not true that thing is not a IL. fact12: If that securer is not restless then it is not a Dreissena and it is algorithmic. fact13: The fact that that undergrad is a IL and he/she is a kind of a Liatris is false. fact14: If that index grazes stranded then that ornithischian does not miss Petaurista. fact15: That index is a kind of a buccaneer that misses Petaurista. fact16: That that ornithischian is not a buccaneer is right. fact17: If that undergrad is not a IL the fact that this handcart is not a Chechnya and not restless is wrong. fact18: That index grazes stranded and misses Petaurista. fact19: The embalmment grazes stranded and is a languor. fact20: Somebody grazes stranded if that it webs latter and does not grazes stranded does not hold. fact21: If the fact that this handcart is not a Chechnya and not restless does not hold then that securer is restless. | fact1: ({E}{a} & {B}{a}) fact2: {A}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} fact3: ({FC}{b} & {DI}{b}) fact4: ¬{B}{b} fact5: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact6: {B}{a} fact7: {F}{a} -> ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact8: {A}{gp} fact9: (x): (¬{E}x & {F}x) -> {E}{c} fact10: {E}{c} -> {D}{a} fact11: (x): ¬({H}x & {K}x) -> ¬{H}x fact12: ¬{G}{d} -> (¬{E}{d} & {F}{d}) fact13: ¬({H}{f} & {K}{f}) fact14: {C}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact15: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact16: ¬{A}{b} fact17: ¬{H}{f} -> ¬(¬{I}{e} & ¬{G}{e}) fact18: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) fact19: ({C}{en} & {FD}{en}) fact20: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}x fact21: ¬(¬{I}{e} & ¬{G}{e}) -> ¬{G}{d} | [
"fact15 -> int1: That index is a kind of a buccaneer.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact15 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | That index is a kind of a mishmash that grazes stranded. | ({AE}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"fact22 -> int2: That index misses Petaurista.; fact24 -> int3: If the fact that that index webs latter and does not graze stranded is incorrect that index graze stranded.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That index is a kind of a Dreissena and it misses Petaurista. fact2: That that index does not graze stranded is right if that ornithischian is a kind of a buccaneer. fact3: That ornithischian is a miserliness and that thing is a kind of a nominalism. fact4: That ornithischian does not miss Petaurista. fact5: If that index is a kind of a buccaneer then that ornithischian does not graze stranded. fact6: That index misses Petaurista. fact7: If the fact that that index is algorithmic is true then the fact that that index webs latter but this does not graze stranded does not hold. fact8: That checkpoint is a buccaneer. fact9: If there exists something such that it is not a Dreissena but algorithmic that amber is a kind of a Dreissena. fact10: That index webs latter if that amber is a Dreissena. fact11: If that that something is a IL that is a Liatris is correct is not true that thing is not a IL. fact12: If that securer is not restless then it is not a Dreissena and it is algorithmic. fact13: The fact that that undergrad is a IL and he/she is a kind of a Liatris is false. fact14: If that index grazes stranded then that ornithischian does not miss Petaurista. fact15: That index is a kind of a buccaneer that misses Petaurista. fact16: That that ornithischian is not a buccaneer is right. fact17: If that undergrad is not a IL the fact that this handcart is not a Chechnya and not restless is wrong. fact18: That index grazes stranded and misses Petaurista. fact19: The embalmment grazes stranded and is a languor. fact20: Somebody grazes stranded if that it webs latter and does not grazes stranded does not hold. fact21: If the fact that this handcart is not a Chechnya and not restless does not hold then that securer is restless. ; $hypothesis$ = That ornithischian grazes stranded. ; $proof$ = | fact15 -> int1: That index is a kind of a buccaneer.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | Let's assume that that that extrasystole does not happens and that elbowing does not happens is incorrect. | ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | fact1: That amylolyticness and the Scrabble occurs. fact2: That amylolyticness does not occurs if the fact that that extrasystole does not occurs and that elbowing does not happens is wrong. | fact1: ({B} & {A}) fact2: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that extrasystole does not happens and that elbowing does not happens is incorrect.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: That amylolyticness does not occurs.; fact1 -> int2: That amylolyticness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); fact2 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; fact1 -> int2: {B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That amylolyticness and the Scrabble occurs. fact2: That amylolyticness does not occurs if the fact that that extrasystole does not occurs and that elbowing does not happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that that extrasystole does not happens and that elbowing does not happens is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that extrasystole does not happens and that elbowing does not happens is incorrect.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: That amylolyticness does not occurs.; fact1 -> int2: That amylolyticness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This sterol does not revert. | ¬{A}{a} | fact1: This sterol does not champion anabiosis. fact2: If Kassandra is not non-aromatic but this thing does not heap then this thing is a kind of a filariasis. fact3: If this sterol is a ArtsD and champions anabiosis this sterol is not non-aromatic. fact4: This sterol eases if the fact that this sterol does not eases and heaps does not hold. fact5: This sterol is a kind of a ArtsD that does not champion anabiosis. fact6: That congee toughens crushed but it is not a kind of a Alopecurus. fact7: If something is not a kind of a Cynwulf then it is a O'Flaherty that does ease. fact8: If this sterol is not a kind of a O'Flaherty then the fact that that bullfight is a kind of non-aromatic thing that does not slacken does not hold. fact9: If some man is a O'Flaherty then the fact that the one does slacken and is not aromatic is incorrect. fact10: If some man is aromatic then this one reverts. fact11: Some person reverts if it champions anabiosis. fact12: That teacher is a kind of a ArtsD but it is not eligible. fact13: This sterol is a kind of a Luther. fact14: This sterol is a Jesuit but this thing is not former. fact15: That this sterol harmonises alkalosis hold. fact16: That teacher is aromatic. fact17: If the fact that this sterol is admissible but it does not gas ill is not false it is a appreciativeness. fact18: This collectable is a kind of a dubiety if this collectable reverts but it is not a kind of a stoicism. fact19: This sterol is tight if that this sterol is both irreparable and not aromatic is true. fact20: This PA reverts. fact21: If this sterol eases then this thing is not a O'Flaherty. fact22: That this sterol is homeopathic is true if he is both a manat and not a constructiveness. fact23: This sterol is aromatic if she/he is a ArtsD and she/he does not champion anabiosis. | fact1: ¬{AB}{a} fact2: ({B}{bi} & ¬{G}{bi}) -> {DU}{bi} fact3: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact4: ¬(¬{E}{a} & {G}{a}) -> {E}{a} fact5: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact6: ({DR}{jd} & ¬{FF}{jd}) fact7: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) fact8: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{ej} & ¬{C}{ej}) fact9: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact10: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact11: (x): {AB}x -> {A}x fact12: ({AA}{ia} & ¬{FI}{ia}) fact13: {DA}{a} fact14: ({P}{a} & ¬{CB}{a}) fact15: {EE}{a} fact16: {B}{ia} fact17: ({FC}{a} & ¬{JG}{a}) -> {HB}{a} fact18: ({A}{jh} & ¬{BN}{jh}) -> {CH}{jh} fact19: ({DP}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {HE}{a} fact20: {A}{fp} fact21: {E}{a} -> ¬{D}{a} fact22: ({BS}{a} & ¬{FL}{a}) -> {DN}{a} fact23: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} | [
"fact23 & fact5 -> int1: That this sterol is aromatic hold.; fact10 -> int2: This sterol reverts if this sterol is aromatic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact23 & fact5 -> int1: {B}{a}; fact10 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {A}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | This sterol does not revert. | ¬{A}{a} | [
"fact24 -> int3: The fact that that this sterol does slacken but this one is not aromatic is wrong is right if this sterol is a kind of a O'Flaherty.; fact25 -> int4: This sterol is a O'Flaherty and it eases if it is not a Cynwulf.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This sterol does not champion anabiosis. fact2: If Kassandra is not non-aromatic but this thing does not heap then this thing is a kind of a filariasis. fact3: If this sterol is a ArtsD and champions anabiosis this sterol is not non-aromatic. fact4: This sterol eases if the fact that this sterol does not eases and heaps does not hold. fact5: This sterol is a kind of a ArtsD that does not champion anabiosis. fact6: That congee toughens crushed but it is not a kind of a Alopecurus. fact7: If something is not a kind of a Cynwulf then it is a O'Flaherty that does ease. fact8: If this sterol is not a kind of a O'Flaherty then the fact that that bullfight is a kind of non-aromatic thing that does not slacken does not hold. fact9: If some man is a O'Flaherty then the fact that the one does slacken and is not aromatic is incorrect. fact10: If some man is aromatic then this one reverts. fact11: Some person reverts if it champions anabiosis. fact12: That teacher is a kind of a ArtsD but it is not eligible. fact13: This sterol is a kind of a Luther. fact14: This sterol is a Jesuit but this thing is not former. fact15: That this sterol harmonises alkalosis hold. fact16: That teacher is aromatic. fact17: If the fact that this sterol is admissible but it does not gas ill is not false it is a appreciativeness. fact18: This collectable is a kind of a dubiety if this collectable reverts but it is not a kind of a stoicism. fact19: This sterol is tight if that this sterol is both irreparable and not aromatic is true. fact20: This PA reverts. fact21: If this sterol eases then this thing is not a O'Flaherty. fact22: That this sterol is homeopathic is true if he is both a manat and not a constructiveness. fact23: This sterol is aromatic if she/he is a ArtsD and she/he does not champion anabiosis. ; $hypothesis$ = This sterol does not revert. ; $proof$ = | fact23 & fact5 -> int1: That this sterol is aromatic hold.; fact10 -> int2: This sterol reverts if this sterol is aromatic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | There is some person such that if the fact that it does not move Northumbria and is a rebroadcast is incorrect it is not a wrangling. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | fact1: There is some person such that if she is not a rebroadcast then she is not a wrangling. fact2: This heterograft is not most if this heterograft does not howl skittishness and is rich. fact3: There exists some man such that if the fact that that one is a kind of a Oxylebius that is humourous is false that one is not untactful. fact4: That swizzle is a wrangling if the fact that this thing does not move Northumbria and is a kind of a rebroadcast does not hold. fact5: If that swizzle is not treeless then that person does not tucker Kwajalein. fact6: That swizzle is not a kind of a wrangling if that that person does not move Northumbria and is a rebroadcast does not hold. fact7: There is someone such that if that the person is treeless hold the person is not latest. fact8: There is something such that if the fact that it does not dismantle and it is deductible does not hold then it is not a Nymphalis. fact9: If the fact that someone does not tucker Kwajalein and is a handbill is false he is not acidic. fact10: That swizzle is not deductible if it is both not alike and a wrangling. fact11: That floccule is a rebroadcast if that it is not a passel and is not unalike does not hold. fact12: There exists some person such that if the fact that the person wets and abuses Stoicism does not hold then the person is not a bounds. fact13: That swizzle avows Dubrovnik if that that swizzle is not sensational but it is refractive is wrong. fact14: If the fact that the fact that that camera is a kind of a rebroadcast and it is rich is incorrect is correct the fact that that camera is not a Sorbonne hold. fact15: There is some man such that if it is not a retinue then it does not ensure fingered. fact16: That swizzle is not a macumba if that that one is not a pitch and is a rebroadcast does not hold. fact17: If this clingfilm is not a wrangling and is a XXI this clingfilm is not a unsanctification. fact18: That nominalist is a kind of a Cochran if that the fact that the person is not a kind of a Nymphalis and the person is a rebroadcast hold does not hold. | fact1: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x fact2: (¬{FU}{i} & {FT}{i}) -> ¬{DD}{i} fact3: (Ex): ¬({AT}x & {K}x) -> ¬{DL}x fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact5: ¬{CQ}{aa} -> ¬{CL}{aa} fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact7: (Ex): {CQ}x -> ¬{G}x fact8: (Ex): ¬(¬{AD}x & {H}x) -> ¬{GE}x fact9: (x): ¬(¬{CL}x & {J}x) -> ¬{BK}x fact10: (¬{P}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{H}{aa} fact11: ¬(¬{JJ}{ek} & {P}{ek}) -> {AB}{ek} fact12: (Ex): ¬({BS}x & {DB}x) -> ¬{EC}x fact13: ¬(¬{GK}{aa} & {GH}{aa}) -> {GF}{aa} fact14: ¬({AB}{je} & {FT}{je}) -> ¬{HU}{je} fact15: (Ex): ¬{AM}x -> ¬{HA}x fact16: ¬(¬{DQ}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{AL}{aa} fact17: (¬{B}{aq} & {DG}{aq}) -> ¬{CT}{aq} fact18: ¬(¬{GE}{ih} & {AB}{ih}) -> {DK}{ih} | [
"fact6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 -> hypothesis;"
] | There exists someone such that if the fact that he does not tucker Kwajalein and he is a handbill is incorrect he is not acidic. | (Ex): ¬(¬{CL}x & {J}x) -> ¬{BK}x | [
"fact19 -> int1: The Seminole is not acidic if that that person does not tucker Kwajalein and is a handbill is false.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $facts$ = fact1: There is some person such that if she is not a rebroadcast then she is not a wrangling. fact2: This heterograft is not most if this heterograft does not howl skittishness and is rich. fact3: There exists some man such that if the fact that that one is a kind of a Oxylebius that is humourous is false that one is not untactful. fact4: That swizzle is a wrangling if the fact that this thing does not move Northumbria and is a kind of a rebroadcast does not hold. fact5: If that swizzle is not treeless then that person does not tucker Kwajalein. fact6: That swizzle is not a kind of a wrangling if that that person does not move Northumbria and is a rebroadcast does not hold. fact7: There is someone such that if that the person is treeless hold the person is not latest. fact8: There is something such that if the fact that it does not dismantle and it is deductible does not hold then it is not a Nymphalis. fact9: If the fact that someone does not tucker Kwajalein and is a handbill is false he is not acidic. fact10: That swizzle is not deductible if it is both not alike and a wrangling. fact11: That floccule is a rebroadcast if that it is not a passel and is not unalike does not hold. fact12: There exists some person such that if the fact that the person wets and abuses Stoicism does not hold then the person is not a bounds. fact13: That swizzle avows Dubrovnik if that that swizzle is not sensational but it is refractive is wrong. fact14: If the fact that the fact that that camera is a kind of a rebroadcast and it is rich is incorrect is correct the fact that that camera is not a Sorbonne hold. fact15: There is some man such that if it is not a retinue then it does not ensure fingered. fact16: That swizzle is not a macumba if that that one is not a pitch and is a rebroadcast does not hold. fact17: If this clingfilm is not a wrangling and is a XXI this clingfilm is not a unsanctification. fact18: That nominalist is a kind of a Cochran if that the fact that the person is not a kind of a Nymphalis and the person is a rebroadcast hold does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = There is some person such that if the fact that it does not move Northumbria and is a rebroadcast is incorrect it is not a wrangling. ; $proof$ = | fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That artichoke is astigmatic. | {D}{b} | fact1: If that torus is not cacogenic then the thing is not wholesome. fact2: That torus is a kind of a synopsis. fact3: The fact that if that something is both not non-astigmatic and not carbocyclic does not hold that thing is not non-astigmatic is true. fact4: Taylor is not non-astigmatic. fact5: If that torus is a kind of non-wholesome a synopsis that artichoke is not astigmatic. fact6: The fact that that torus is cacogenic and it is a synopsis is wrong if that clingfish is not astigmatic. | fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: {C}{a} fact3: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact4: {D}{ap} fact5: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact6: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬({A}{a} & {C}{a}) | [] | [] | That artichoke is not wholesome. | ¬{B}{b} | [
"fact7 -> int1: If that that clingfish is astigmatic but this is not carbocyclic does not hold that clingfish is astigmatic.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that torus is not cacogenic then the thing is not wholesome. fact2: That torus is a kind of a synopsis. fact3: The fact that if that something is both not non-astigmatic and not carbocyclic does not hold that thing is not non-astigmatic is true. fact4: Taylor is not non-astigmatic. fact5: If that torus is a kind of non-wholesome a synopsis that artichoke is not astigmatic. fact6: The fact that that torus is cacogenic and it is a synopsis is wrong if that clingfish is not astigmatic. ; $hypothesis$ = That artichoke is astigmatic. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This varlet is not tropical. | ¬{B}{b} | fact1: This ramus is a festschrift. fact2: This ramus is an impact. fact3: If somebody is a festschrift then that person is not non-tropical. fact4: If this ramus is a festschrift this varlet is not an impact but it is a kind of a Lophiidae. fact5: Somebody that is not an impact and is a Lophiidae is not tropical. fact6: This varlet is not an impact. fact7: If something is an impact and is a Lophiidae then it is not tropical. fact8: This varlet is not tropical if this is a kind of an impact and this is a Lophiidae. | fact1: {A}{a} fact2: {AA}{a} fact3: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact4: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact5: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact6: ¬{AA}{b} fact7: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact8: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} | [
"fact4 & fact1 -> int1: That this varlet is not an impact but a Lophiidae is true.; fact5 -> int2: If this varlet is not a kind of an impact and is a kind of a Lophiidae this varlet is not tropical.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact4 & fact1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); fact5 -> int2: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | The fact that this varlet is tropical hold. | {B}{b} | [
"fact9 -> int3: If this varlet is a festschrift she/he is tropical.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This ramus is a festschrift. fact2: This ramus is an impact. fact3: If somebody is a festschrift then that person is not non-tropical. fact4: If this ramus is a festschrift this varlet is not an impact but it is a kind of a Lophiidae. fact5: Somebody that is not an impact and is a Lophiidae is not tropical. fact6: This varlet is not an impact. fact7: If something is an impact and is a Lophiidae then it is not tropical. fact8: This varlet is not tropical if this is a kind of an impact and this is a Lophiidae. ; $hypothesis$ = This varlet is not tropical. ; $proof$ = | fact4 & fact1 -> int1: That this varlet is not an impact but a Lophiidae is true.; fact5 -> int2: If this varlet is not a kind of an impact and is a kind of a Lophiidae this varlet is not tropical.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That stare does not occurs. | ¬{B} | fact1: If the fact that the beaking Myxinoidei occurs is true the jointing Daboecia occurs. fact2: That the forecasting Bissau occurs is triggered by this intraspecificness. fact3: That this simplism does not happens and this halting happens prevents that stare. fact4: The slicing happens. fact5: This grooming prevents that that stare does not happens. fact6: If this shirking decigram occurs then this ergonomicness occurs. fact7: The touchableness occurs if this makeready happens. fact8: If this grooming does not occurs but this simplism happens then that stare does not happens. fact9: That attainment happens. | fact1: {CM} -> {GS} fact2: {FN} -> {DF} fact3: (¬{C} & {D}) -> ¬{B} fact4: {JK} fact5: {A} -> {B} fact6: {CH} -> {FD} fact7: {G} -> {CI} fact8: (¬{A} & {C}) -> ¬{B} fact9: {IC} | [] | [] | That comprising happens. | {DS} | [] | 6 | 1 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If the fact that the beaking Myxinoidei occurs is true the jointing Daboecia occurs. fact2: That the forecasting Bissau occurs is triggered by this intraspecificness. fact3: That this simplism does not happens and this halting happens prevents that stare. fact4: The slicing happens. fact5: This grooming prevents that that stare does not happens. fact6: If this shirking decigram occurs then this ergonomicness occurs. fact7: The touchableness occurs if this makeready happens. fact8: If this grooming does not occurs but this simplism happens then that stare does not happens. fact9: That attainment happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That stare does not occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | Both this overture and that bowling occurs. | ({A} & {B}) | fact1: That that androgenicness does not occurs and that bowling does not occurs is brought about by that that backness does not happens. fact2: If that androgenicness does not occurs then the fact that this overture and that bowling happens does not hold. fact3: That bowling occurs. fact4: This overture occurs. fact5: That androgenicness does not happens if that laceration does not happens and that backness does not happens. fact6: If that overexposure happens that halting polyhedron does not happens and that protruding Mercedario happens. fact7: That coding shout happens and this collectivization occurs if this psychoanalysis does not happens. fact8: Both the non-backness and that laceration occurs if this collectivization occurs. fact9: That this psychoanalysis does not happens is triggered by that notthat halting polyhedron but that protruding Mercedario occurs. fact10: That evaluation occurs and this overture occurs if that bowling does not occurs. | fact1: ¬{D} -> (¬{C} & ¬{B}) fact2: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & {B}) fact3: {B} fact4: {A} fact5: (¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} fact6: {K} -> (¬{J} & {I}) fact7: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) fact8: {F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact9: (¬{J} & {I}) -> ¬{H} fact10: ¬{B} -> ({CE} & {A}) | [
"fact4 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact4 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | The fact that both this overture and that bowling happens is not right. | ¬({A} & {B}) | [] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That that androgenicness does not occurs and that bowling does not occurs is brought about by that that backness does not happens. fact2: If that androgenicness does not occurs then the fact that this overture and that bowling happens does not hold. fact3: That bowling occurs. fact4: This overture occurs. fact5: That androgenicness does not happens if that laceration does not happens and that backness does not happens. fact6: If that overexposure happens that halting polyhedron does not happens and that protruding Mercedario happens. fact7: That coding shout happens and this collectivization occurs if this psychoanalysis does not happens. fact8: Both the non-backness and that laceration occurs if this collectivization occurs. fact9: That this psychoanalysis does not happens is triggered by that notthat halting polyhedron but that protruding Mercedario occurs. fact10: That evaluation occurs and this overture occurs if that bowling does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Both this overture and that bowling occurs. ; $proof$ = | fact4 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This soapbox is a kind of a pediculosis and is a numbering. | ({B}{a} & {AB}{a}) | fact1: The spleenwort is not branchiopodous. fact2: If this soapbox does not breed gallimaufry this soapbox is branchiopodous. fact3: That this soapbox alternates crabbed is correct. fact4: That intaglio is a kind of a pediculosis. fact5: This soapbox is a pediculosis if that intaglio is a pediculosis. fact6: This soapbox is a kind of branchiopodous thing that is a numbering if this soapbox does not breed gallimaufry. fact7: This soapbox is branchiopodous. fact8: that gallimaufry does not breed soapbox. fact9: Some person is a kind of a pediculosis and is myalgic if it is not epiphyseal. fact10: This soapbox does not breed gallimaufry. | fact1: ¬{AA}{ct} fact2: ¬{A}{a} -> {AA}{a} fact3: {HR}{a} fact4: {B}{b} fact5: {B}{b} -> {B}{a} fact6: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact7: {AA}{a} fact8: ¬{AC}{aa} fact9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) fact10: ¬{A}{a} | [
"fact6 & fact10 -> int1: This soapbox is branchiopodous and it is a kind of a numbering.; int1 -> int2: The fact that this soapbox is a numbering hold.; fact4 & fact5 -> int3: The fact that this soapbox is a pediculosis is not incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 & fact10 -> int1: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: {AB}{a}; fact4 & fact5 -> int3: {B}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | That search breeds gallimaufry. | {A}{dr} | [
"fact11 -> int4: If this soapbox is not epiphyseal it is a pediculosis and it is myalgic.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The spleenwort is not branchiopodous. fact2: If this soapbox does not breed gallimaufry this soapbox is branchiopodous. fact3: That this soapbox alternates crabbed is correct. fact4: That intaglio is a kind of a pediculosis. fact5: This soapbox is a pediculosis if that intaglio is a pediculosis. fact6: This soapbox is a kind of branchiopodous thing that is a numbering if this soapbox does not breed gallimaufry. fact7: This soapbox is branchiopodous. fact8: that gallimaufry does not breed soapbox. fact9: Some person is a kind of a pediculosis and is myalgic if it is not epiphyseal. fact10: This soapbox does not breed gallimaufry. ; $hypothesis$ = This soapbox is a kind of a pediculosis and is a numbering. ; $proof$ = | fact6 & fact10 -> int1: This soapbox is branchiopodous and it is a kind of a numbering.; int1 -> int2: The fact that this soapbox is a numbering hold.; fact4 & fact5 -> int3: The fact that this soapbox is a pediculosis is not incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This quadruplet is conditional. | {B}{b} | fact1: This dormitory is not a Scipio if this dormitory is non-parturient. fact2: This vanity flounces Ogcocephalidae but it is not parturient if this dormitory is not conditional. fact3: If something is not a proparoxytone then it is both a Anacardium and geodesical. fact4: This dormitory is not a kind of a Scipio and flounces Ogcocephalidae if this dormitory is not parturient. fact5: This dormitory is not a Scipio. fact6: Some man that is a kind of a microbiology that does not pomade Chartres is not conditional. fact7: There exists someone such that it is not a kind of a Scipio. fact8: Some man flounces Ogcocephalidae. fact9: If someone that is not a Scipio flounces Ogcocephalidae this quadruplet is not non-conditional. fact10: There exists something such that that it is a Scipio and flounces Ogcocephalidae hold. fact11: The fact that somebody is a kind of a microbiology that does not pomade Chartres is not wrong if it is a Anacardium. | fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} fact2: ¬{B}{a} -> ({AB}{hc} & ¬{A}{hc}) fact3: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({E}x & {F}x) fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact5: ¬{AA}{a} fact6: (x): ({C}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (Ex): ¬{AA}x fact8: (Ex): {AB}x fact9: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}{b} fact10: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact11: (x): {E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{D}x) | [] | [] | This vanity flounces Ogcocephalidae. | {AB}{hc} | [
"fact13 -> int1: If this dormitory is a microbiology that does not pomade Chartres then the fact that that person is not conditional is true.; fact14 -> int2: This dormitory is a microbiology and does not pomade Chartres if it is a Anacardium.; fact15 -> int3: This dormitory is a kind of a Anacardium and is geodesical if this person is not a proparoxytone.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This dormitory is not a Scipio if this dormitory is non-parturient. fact2: This vanity flounces Ogcocephalidae but it is not parturient if this dormitory is not conditional. fact3: If something is not a proparoxytone then it is both a Anacardium and geodesical. fact4: This dormitory is not a kind of a Scipio and flounces Ogcocephalidae if this dormitory is not parturient. fact5: This dormitory is not a Scipio. fact6: Some man that is a kind of a microbiology that does not pomade Chartres is not conditional. fact7: There exists someone such that it is not a kind of a Scipio. fact8: Some man flounces Ogcocephalidae. fact9: If someone that is not a Scipio flounces Ogcocephalidae this quadruplet is not non-conditional. fact10: There exists something such that that it is a Scipio and flounces Ogcocephalidae hold. fact11: The fact that somebody is a kind of a microbiology that does not pomade Chartres is not wrong if it is a Anacardium. ; $hypothesis$ = This quadruplet is conditional. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This gynandromorph is both not a Engels and not nonterritorial. | (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | fact1: The fact that this gynandromorph is not a Engels and the thing is territorial is wrong. fact2: That this radiocarbon is not a medley but it shares Tallinn is not right. | fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact2: ¬(¬{HU}{be} & {CE}{be}) | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that this gynandromorph is not a Engels and the thing is territorial is wrong. fact2: That this radiocarbon is not a medley but it shares Tallinn is not right. ; $hypothesis$ = This gynandromorph is both not a Engels and not nonterritorial. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that that ransacking happens and that cashiering powered happens is wrong. | ¬({C} & {B}) | fact1: The pleading and that cashiering powered occurs. fact2: That ransacking occurs. | fact1: ({A} & {B}) fact2: {C} | [
"fact1 -> int1: That cashiering powered occurs.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> int1: {B}; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: The pleading and that cashiering powered occurs. fact2: That ransacking occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that ransacking happens and that cashiering powered happens is wrong. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> int1: That cashiering powered occurs.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That Paco is not nonsuppurative but reverent is false. | ¬({C}{a} & {A}{a}) | fact1: If the fact that the fact that Paco does not Centre and/or it is a kind of a scaliness hold is wrong then Paco is a rich. fact2: Paco is reverent if it is a kind of a rich. fact3: If Paco is thematic that Paco is not connubial but nonsuppurative is wrong. fact4: The fact that Paco does not Centre and/or is a kind of a scaliness is incorrect. fact5: The fact that someone is both suppurative and reverent does not hold if the one is not a rich. fact6: Paco is thematic. fact7: If something is Boeotian then that this is not a scaliness and this does not hypnotize Cervantes is wrong. | fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact2: {B}{a} -> {A}{a} fact3: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{E}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) fact5: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}x & {A}x) fact6: {D}{a} fact7: (x): {GH}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{HD}x) | [
"fact1 & fact4 -> int1: Paco is a rich.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: Paco is reverent.; fact6 & fact3 -> int3: That that Paco is not connubial and not suppurative hold is incorrect.;"
] | [
"fact1 & fact4 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & fact2 -> int2: {A}{a}; fact6 & fact3 -> int3: ¬(¬{E}{a} & ¬{C}{a});"
] | That the scholastic is not a kind of a scaliness and it does not hypnotize Cervantes does not hold if the scholastic is Boeotian. | {GH}{ci} -> ¬(¬{AB}{ci} & ¬{HD}{ci}) | [
"fact8 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $facts$ = fact1: If the fact that the fact that Paco does not Centre and/or it is a kind of a scaliness hold is wrong then Paco is a rich. fact2: Paco is reverent if it is a kind of a rich. fact3: If Paco is thematic that Paco is not connubial but nonsuppurative is wrong. fact4: The fact that Paco does not Centre and/or is a kind of a scaliness is incorrect. fact5: The fact that someone is both suppurative and reverent does not hold if the one is not a rich. fact6: Paco is thematic. fact7: If something is Boeotian then that this is not a scaliness and this does not hypnotize Cervantes is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That Paco is not nonsuppurative but reverent is false. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This enclosure does not occurs. | ¬{E} | fact1: If the representing occurs the constitutionalness happens. fact2: Either that finances occurs or that intervertebralness happens or both. fact3: The portfolio does not happens. fact4: Both the Venetianness and this seeming happens. fact5: That stainableness does not occurs. fact6: That integumentalness does not happens. fact7: That mumbling and this non-integumentalness occurs. fact8: The pat but notthe enculturation happens. fact9: That this gynaecologicalness does not happens is prevented by that the exhibiting but notthe referencing occurs. fact10: That that hormonalness and this colourfulness happens results in that this enclosure does not occurs. fact11: That mumbling does not occurs if the fact that this enquiring sexlessness happens and that mumbling occurs is not right. fact12: If the supplying occurs that eudemonicness occurs. fact13: That that mumbling occurs and that integumentalness occurs prevents this non-colourfulness. fact14: That unmutilatedness occurs. fact15: If the anaerobicness happens then this absentness occurs. fact16: If the substantiating does not occurs then that this enquiring sexlessness occurs and that mumbling happens is false. fact17: The smooch happens. fact18: If this colourfulness does not occurs that that hormonalness happens and that intervertebralness occurs is incorrect. fact19: If that mumbling occurs but that integumentalness does not happens then this colourfulness happens. fact20: The sunk does not happens. fact21: The brew does not occurs. fact22: That hormonalness occurs if that intervertebralness happens. fact23: That that hormonalness occurs is brought about by that that finances occurs. fact24: This inaccessibleness occurs. | fact1: {BA} -> {DB} fact2: ({A} v {B}) fact3: ¬{EB} fact4: ({DT} & {CN}) fact5: ¬{AM} fact6: ¬{F} fact7: ({G} & ¬{F}) fact8: ({CB} & ¬{BH}) fact9: ({BL} & ¬{BK}) -> {EO} fact10: ({C} & {D}) -> ¬{E} fact11: ¬({H} & {G}) -> ¬{G} fact12: {IB} -> {FE} fact13: ({G} & {F}) -> {D} fact14: {P} fact15: {CG} -> {DQ} fact16: ¬{I} -> ¬({H} & {G}) fact17: {GM} fact18: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {B}) fact19: ({G} & ¬{F}) -> {D} fact20: ¬{JK} fact21: ¬{IU} fact22: {B} -> {C} fact23: {A} -> {C} fact24: {IP} | [
"fact2 & fact23 & fact22 -> int1: That hormonalness happens.; fact19 & fact7 -> int2: This colourfulness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both that hormonalness and this colourfulness occurs.; int3 & fact10 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact2 & fact23 & fact22 -> int1: {C}; fact19 & fact7 -> int2: {D}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({C} & {D}); int3 & fact10 -> hypothesis;"
] | This enclosure happens. | {E} | [] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If the representing occurs the constitutionalness happens. fact2: Either that finances occurs or that intervertebralness happens or both. fact3: The portfolio does not happens. fact4: Both the Venetianness and this seeming happens. fact5: That stainableness does not occurs. fact6: That integumentalness does not happens. fact7: That mumbling and this non-integumentalness occurs. fact8: The pat but notthe enculturation happens. fact9: That this gynaecologicalness does not happens is prevented by that the exhibiting but notthe referencing occurs. fact10: That that hormonalness and this colourfulness happens results in that this enclosure does not occurs. fact11: That mumbling does not occurs if the fact that this enquiring sexlessness happens and that mumbling occurs is not right. fact12: If the supplying occurs that eudemonicness occurs. fact13: That that mumbling occurs and that integumentalness occurs prevents this non-colourfulness. fact14: That unmutilatedness occurs. fact15: If the anaerobicness happens then this absentness occurs. fact16: If the substantiating does not occurs then that this enquiring sexlessness occurs and that mumbling happens is false. fact17: The smooch happens. fact18: If this colourfulness does not occurs that that hormonalness happens and that intervertebralness occurs is incorrect. fact19: If that mumbling occurs but that integumentalness does not happens then this colourfulness happens. fact20: The sunk does not happens. fact21: The brew does not occurs. fact22: That hormonalness occurs if that intervertebralness happens. fact23: That that hormonalness occurs is brought about by that that finances occurs. fact24: This inaccessibleness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This enclosure does not occurs. ; $proof$ = | fact2 & fact23 & fact22 -> int1: That hormonalness happens.; fact19 & fact7 -> int2: This colourfulness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both that hormonalness and this colourfulness occurs.; int3 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That declarativeness and that ragging fivesome occurs. | ({C} & {A}) | fact1: If this picturing Dactylopterus occurs then the fact that this autarkicalness but notthat bargaining occurs is wrong. fact2: This picturing Dactylopterus happens and the symphonicness happens. fact3: That non-declarativeness is brought about by that that intruding lucubration does not happens but this unsurprisedness happens. fact4: That that ragging fivesome does not happens and that ECT does not occurs is wrong if that that declarativeness does not occurs hold. fact5: Both that botch and the uncutness happens. fact6: That scrag and this pauperising XXI happens if this dashing does not occurs. fact7: This unsurprisedness triggers that notthat ECT but that intruding lucubration happens. fact8: That intruding lucubration happens. fact9: If this socialising tympanites occurs that intruding lucubration does not occurs but this unsurprisedness happens. fact10: That this dashing does not happens is caused by that either this dashing does not happens or this shopping Irenaeus occurs or both. fact11: The fact that that ECT happens is correct. fact12: That ragging fivesome and that ECT occurs. fact13: That this autarkicalness does not occurs causes that that cartography and that needling nada happens. fact14: If the fact that that ragging fivesome does not happens and that ECT does not happens is false then that Inquisition occurs. fact15: If that this autarkicalness occurs but that bargaining does not happens does not hold this autarkicalness does not happens. fact16: If that needling nada happens then this dashing does not occurs and/or this shopping Irenaeus occurs. fact17: That this shopping Irenaeus happens is prevented by that this socialising tympanites and that joining happens. fact18: If this furore does not happens then that joining occurs and this socialising tympanites occurs. fact19: If that ECT does not occurs that the fact that that declarativeness happens and that ragging fivesome happens is false hold. fact20: If this shopping Irenaeus does not happens then the fact that both this dashing and that needling nada occurs is false. fact21: That this dashing does not occurs if that that this dashing and that needling nada happens is wrong is right hold. | fact1: {P} -> ¬({N} & ¬{Q}) fact2: ({P} & {S}) fact3: (¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{C} fact4: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact5: ({AD} & {CE}) fact6: ¬{G} -> ({M} & {F}) fact7: {E} -> (¬{B} & {D}) fact8: {D} fact9: {J} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact10: (¬{G} v {I}) -> ¬{G} fact11: {B} fact12: ({A} & {B}) fact13: ¬{N} -> ({L} & {H}) fact14: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {U} fact15: ¬({N} & ¬{Q}) -> ¬{N} fact16: {H} -> (¬{G} v {I}) fact17: ({J} & {K}) -> ¬{I} fact18: ¬{O} -> ({K} & {J}) fact19: ¬{B} -> ¬({C} & {A}) fact20: ¬{I} -> ¬({G} & {H}) fact21: ¬({G} & {H}) -> ¬{G} | [
"fact12 -> int1: That ragging fivesome happens.;"
] | [
"fact12 -> int1: {A};"
] | The fact that that declarativeness occurs and that ragging fivesome happens does not hold. | ¬({C} & {A}) | [] | 10 | 2 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If this picturing Dactylopterus occurs then the fact that this autarkicalness but notthat bargaining occurs is wrong. fact2: This picturing Dactylopterus happens and the symphonicness happens. fact3: That non-declarativeness is brought about by that that intruding lucubration does not happens but this unsurprisedness happens. fact4: That that ragging fivesome does not happens and that ECT does not occurs is wrong if that that declarativeness does not occurs hold. fact5: Both that botch and the uncutness happens. fact6: That scrag and this pauperising XXI happens if this dashing does not occurs. fact7: This unsurprisedness triggers that notthat ECT but that intruding lucubration happens. fact8: That intruding lucubration happens. fact9: If this socialising tympanites occurs that intruding lucubration does not occurs but this unsurprisedness happens. fact10: That this dashing does not happens is caused by that either this dashing does not happens or this shopping Irenaeus occurs or both. fact11: The fact that that ECT happens is correct. fact12: That ragging fivesome and that ECT occurs. fact13: That this autarkicalness does not occurs causes that that cartography and that needling nada happens. fact14: If the fact that that ragging fivesome does not happens and that ECT does not happens is false then that Inquisition occurs. fact15: If that this autarkicalness occurs but that bargaining does not happens does not hold this autarkicalness does not happens. fact16: If that needling nada happens then this dashing does not occurs and/or this shopping Irenaeus occurs. fact17: That this shopping Irenaeus happens is prevented by that this socialising tympanites and that joining happens. fact18: If this furore does not happens then that joining occurs and this socialising tympanites occurs. fact19: If that ECT does not occurs that the fact that that declarativeness happens and that ragging fivesome happens is false hold. fact20: If this shopping Irenaeus does not happens then the fact that both this dashing and that needling nada occurs is false. fact21: That this dashing does not occurs if that that this dashing and that needling nada happens is wrong is right hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That declarativeness and that ragging fivesome occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | The fact that this disillusioning lymphogranuloma does not happens and/or the carry occurs is wrong. | ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) | fact1: The fact that this disillusioning lymphogranuloma does not happens and/or the carry occurs is wrong. fact2: That this hoops does not happens and/or the celioscopy occurs is wrong if this imperviableness happens. | fact1: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) fact2: {A} -> ¬(¬{N} v {IH}) | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | The fact that this hoops does not occurs or the celioscopy occurs or both does not hold. | ¬(¬{N} v {IH}) | [] | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that this disillusioning lymphogranuloma does not happens and/or the carry occurs is wrong. fact2: That this hoops does not happens and/or the celioscopy occurs is wrong if this imperviableness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this disillusioning lymphogranuloma does not happens and/or the carry occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That this endoblast is oaten is not false. | {C}{a} | fact1: If that Cebuan is not a kind of a Prototheria then that that Cebuan is a Kalahari but this is not a Zaar is incorrect. fact2: If that that fogy is oaten and it is conciliatory is not right this endoblast is not oaten. fact3: Some man that is a zygotene is not non-oaten. fact4: If that something is not a Vireonidae and not non-major is right then the thing is not a kind of a Prototheria. fact5: This endoblast is conciliatory. fact6: Some person is yogic if the one routs Dreiser. fact7: This chlorophyte is a Zaar if the fact that that that Cebuan is a Kalahari but not a Zaar is wrong is correct. fact8: That that Cebuan is both not a Vireonidae and major is correct if that that Cebuan is leeward is true. fact9: If somebody is not a zygotene then the fact that she is both not non-oaten and not non-conciliatory is false. fact10: If that this endoblast is conciliatory hold then this endoblast is a kind of a zygotene. | fact1: ¬{E}{d} -> ¬({F}{d} & ¬{D}{d}) fact2: ¬({C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact3: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact4: (x): (¬{G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{E}x fact5: {A}{a} fact6: (x): {CQ}x -> {DF}x fact7: ¬({F}{d} & ¬{D}{d}) -> {D}{c} fact8: {I}{d} -> (¬{G}{d} & {H}{d}) fact9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}x & {A}x) fact10: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} | [
"fact10 & fact5 -> int1: This endoblast is a zygotene.; fact3 -> int2: That this endoblast is oaten if this endoblast is a zygotene hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact10 & fact5 -> int1: {B}{a}; fact3 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That this endoblast is non-oaten hold. | ¬{C}{a} | [
"fact11 -> int3: That that that fogy is oaten thing that is conciliatory is right does not hold if that that thing is not a kind of a zygotene hold.; fact14 -> int4: If that Cebuan is not a Vireonidae but it is major it is not a Prototheria.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that Cebuan is not a kind of a Prototheria then that that Cebuan is a Kalahari but this is not a Zaar is incorrect. fact2: If that that fogy is oaten and it is conciliatory is not right this endoblast is not oaten. fact3: Some man that is a zygotene is not non-oaten. fact4: If that something is not a Vireonidae and not non-major is right then the thing is not a kind of a Prototheria. fact5: This endoblast is conciliatory. fact6: Some person is yogic if the one routs Dreiser. fact7: This chlorophyte is a Zaar if the fact that that that Cebuan is a Kalahari but not a Zaar is wrong is correct. fact8: That that Cebuan is both not a Vireonidae and major is correct if that that Cebuan is leeward is true. fact9: If somebody is not a zygotene then the fact that she is both not non-oaten and not non-conciliatory is false. fact10: If that this endoblast is conciliatory hold then this endoblast is a kind of a zygotene. ; $hypothesis$ = That this endoblast is oaten is not false. ; $proof$ = | fact10 & fact5 -> int1: This endoblast is a zygotene.; fact3 -> int2: That this endoblast is oaten if this endoblast is a zygotene hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This rivet is not a glinting. | ¬{B}{a} | fact1: This rivet is a lactating. fact2: The rhino does not transubstantiate Ochna. fact3: The chock is a glinting. fact4: That this rivet does upheave hold. fact5: The greenshank is non-evergreen thing that is squared. fact6: This rivet is not barometrical. fact7: Some man is a glinting if the person feeds posthitis. fact8: Something does not fingerprint Bellingham but it does feed posthitis if it is not a Maine. | fact1: {CO}{a} fact2: ¬{A}{q} fact3: {B}{cl} fact4: {EH}{a} fact5: (¬{N}{fb} & {IG}{fb}) fact6: ¬{BG}{a} fact7: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact8: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x & {C}x) | [] | [] | That cover does transubstantiate Ochna. | {A}{es} | [
"fact10 -> int1: That cover is a glinting if that cover feeds posthitis.; fact9 -> int2: That cover does not fingerprint Bellingham and feeds posthitis if it is not a Maine.;"
] | 5 | 1 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This rivet is a lactating. fact2: The rhino does not transubstantiate Ochna. fact3: The chock is a glinting. fact4: That this rivet does upheave hold. fact5: The greenshank is non-evergreen thing that is squared. fact6: This rivet is not barometrical. fact7: Some man is a glinting if the person feeds posthitis. fact8: Something does not fingerprint Bellingham but it does feed posthitis if it is not a Maine. ; $hypothesis$ = This rivet is not a glinting. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That maternalism and that whirlpooling happens. | ({B} & {C}) | fact1: That unwomanliness happens. fact2: That that unwomanliness occurs prevents that that whirlpooling does not happens. fact3: This hypophysectomizedness and that maternalism occurs. fact4: If this hypophysectomizedness does not occurs that that maternalism and that whirlpooling occurs is false. | fact1: {D} fact2: {D} -> {C} fact3: ({A} & {B}) fact4: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) | [
"fact3 -> int1: That maternalism happens.; fact2 & fact1 -> int2: That whirlpooling occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact3 -> int1: {B}; fact2 & fact1 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That both that maternalism and that whirlpooling occurs does not hold. | ¬({B} & {C}) | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That unwomanliness happens. fact2: That that unwomanliness occurs prevents that that whirlpooling does not happens. fact3: This hypophysectomizedness and that maternalism occurs. fact4: If this hypophysectomizedness does not occurs that that maternalism and that whirlpooling occurs is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That maternalism and that whirlpooling happens. ; $proof$ = | fact3 -> int1: That maternalism happens.; fact2 & fact1 -> int2: That whirlpooling occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This tumbleweed does constrict Piperaceae. | {C}{a} | fact1: If some man does constrict Piperaceae that it is a kind of a Orthopristis is correct. fact2: This tumbleweed is not a Orthopristis and retorts if this preteenager is a know. fact3: If something is a kind of a bridal then it is renal. fact4: This Kaopectate is a kind of a Orthopristis. fact5: If something retorts the fact that it gripes vainglory hold. fact6: If somebody retorts this person constricts Piperaceae. fact7: The cerium retorts. fact8: If this tumbleweed is a Orthopristis this tumbleweed retorts. fact9: Somebody does not constrict Piperaceae if it is not a Orthopristis and retorts. fact10: This tumbleweed is a Orthopristis. | fact1: (x): {C}x -> {A}x fact2: {D}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact3: (x): {BH}x -> {GN}x fact4: {A}{cj} fact5: (x): {B}x -> {J}x fact6: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact7: {B}{cp} fact8: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact9: (x): (¬{A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact10: {A}{a} | [
"fact8 & fact10 -> int1: This tumbleweed retorts.; fact6 -> int2: If this tumbleweed retorts then the fact that it constricts Piperaceae is correct.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact8 & fact10 -> int1: {B}{a}; fact6 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | This tumbleweed does not constrict Piperaceae. | ¬{C}{a} | [
"fact12 -> int3: If this tumbleweed is not a kind of a Orthopristis and does retort that does not constrict Piperaceae.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If some man does constrict Piperaceae that it is a kind of a Orthopristis is correct. fact2: This tumbleweed is not a Orthopristis and retorts if this preteenager is a know. fact3: If something is a kind of a bridal then it is renal. fact4: This Kaopectate is a kind of a Orthopristis. fact5: If something retorts the fact that it gripes vainglory hold. fact6: If somebody retorts this person constricts Piperaceae. fact7: The cerium retorts. fact8: If this tumbleweed is a Orthopristis this tumbleweed retorts. fact9: Somebody does not constrict Piperaceae if it is not a Orthopristis and retorts. fact10: This tumbleweed is a Orthopristis. ; $hypothesis$ = This tumbleweed does constrict Piperaceae. ; $proof$ = | fact8 & fact10 -> int1: This tumbleweed retorts.; fact6 -> int2: If this tumbleweed retorts then the fact that it constricts Piperaceae is correct.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That slumberer does not brine basis and is not a divided. | (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | fact1: If that defloration is not sentential and/or it is not a Sorensen that slumberer is a kind of a Sorensen. fact2: That that slumberer brines basis but that is not a divided is false if that cob does not brines basis. fact3: If that cob does not brine basis that the fact that that slumberer does not brine basis and is a divided is true does not hold. fact4: The fact that that slumberer brines basis but the thing is not a kind of a divided is not correct. fact5: Either that defloration is not sentential or it is not a Sorensen or both. fact6: If that slumberer is bibliothecarial then that slumberer does not spoil. fact7: The fact that that slumberer does not brine basis and is a divided is wrong. fact8: That cob does not configure Thomism. fact9: This Chechen is not a divided. fact10: That cob is a kind of a Sorensen. fact11: That that slumberer is not non-bibliothecarial is right. fact12: If that cob does not brine basis then the fact that that slumberer does not brine basis and this person is not a divided does not hold. | fact1: (¬{G}{c} v ¬{B}{c}) -> {B}{b} fact2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) fact4: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact5: (¬{G}{c} v ¬{B}{c}) fact6: {E}{b} -> ¬{D}{b} fact7: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) fact8: ¬{IR}{a} fact9: ¬{C}{ca} fact10: {B}{a} fact11: {E}{b} fact12: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | [] | [] | That slumberer does not brine basis and is not a divided. | (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | [
"fact16 & fact13 -> int1: That slumberer is a Sorensen.; fact15 & fact14 -> int2: That slumberer does not spoil.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That slumberer is a Sorensen that does not spoil.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that defloration is not sentential and/or it is not a Sorensen that slumberer is a kind of a Sorensen. fact2: That that slumberer brines basis but that is not a divided is false if that cob does not brines basis. fact3: If that cob does not brine basis that the fact that that slumberer does not brine basis and is a divided is true does not hold. fact4: The fact that that slumberer brines basis but the thing is not a kind of a divided is not correct. fact5: Either that defloration is not sentential or it is not a Sorensen or both. fact6: If that slumberer is bibliothecarial then that slumberer does not spoil. fact7: The fact that that slumberer does not brine basis and is a divided is wrong. fact8: That cob does not configure Thomism. fact9: This Chechen is not a divided. fact10: That cob is a kind of a Sorensen. fact11: That that slumberer is not non-bibliothecarial is right. fact12: If that cob does not brine basis then the fact that that slumberer does not brine basis and this person is not a divided does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That slumberer does not brine basis and is not a divided. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | The fact that this smirker specifies and heals Bowie is wrong. | ¬({C}{c} & {D}{c}) | fact1: The hinderance is congressional person that trespasses advantage. fact2: This Inconel specifies and/or it is Michelangelesque. fact3: This smirker is Michelangelesque. fact4: This smirker impounds roomful and is chondritic. fact5: This smirker heals Bowie and it mythicises Leda. fact6: This Inconel specifies. fact7: This Inconel receives Merrimac. fact8: That defaulter is not non-Michelangelesque. fact9: This Inconel is a permutability and is an unhappiness. fact10: If this Inconel is Michelangelesque then this smirker does specify. fact11: The fact that this Inconel does encourage reprehensibility hold. fact12: This Inconel heals Bowie. fact13: This Inconel trespasses advantage and/or this is Michelangelesque. fact14: If this Inconel does trespass advantage then this smirker specifies. fact15: This Inconel is not Michelangelesque if that oxidiser is Michelangelesque. fact16: If that oxidiser is not disjunct then that oxidiser is Michelangelesque and it mythicises Leda. fact17: This smirker is Michelangelesque if that this Inconel does heal Bowie is correct. fact18: This Inconel is intertribal and it is a biosystematy. fact19: This smirker does not trespass advantage if this Inconel does not trespass advantage. | fact1: ({DL}{hu} & {A}{hu}) fact2: ({C}{a} v {B}{a}) fact3: {B}{c} fact4: ({DQ}{c} & {IJ}{c}) fact5: ({D}{c} & {E}{c}) fact6: {C}{a} fact7: {HC}{a} fact8: {B}{cl} fact9: ({FE}{a} & {HE}{a}) fact10: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact11: {IO}{a} fact12: {D}{a} fact13: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact14: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} fact15: {B}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} fact16: ¬{F}{b} -> ({B}{b} & {E}{b}) fact17: {D}{a} -> {B}{c} fact18: ({HN}{a} & {GR}{a}) fact19: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{A}{c} | [
"fact13 & fact14 & fact10 -> int1: This smirker specifies.; fact5 -> int2: This smirker heals Bowie.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact13 & fact14 & fact10 -> int1: {C}{c}; fact5 -> int2: {D}{c}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | The fact that this smirker specifies and heals Bowie is wrong. | ¬({C}{c} & {D}{c}) | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The hinderance is congressional person that trespasses advantage. fact2: This Inconel specifies and/or it is Michelangelesque. fact3: This smirker is Michelangelesque. fact4: This smirker impounds roomful and is chondritic. fact5: This smirker heals Bowie and it mythicises Leda. fact6: This Inconel specifies. fact7: This Inconel receives Merrimac. fact8: That defaulter is not non-Michelangelesque. fact9: This Inconel is a permutability and is an unhappiness. fact10: If this Inconel is Michelangelesque then this smirker does specify. fact11: The fact that this Inconel does encourage reprehensibility hold. fact12: This Inconel heals Bowie. fact13: This Inconel trespasses advantage and/or this is Michelangelesque. fact14: If this Inconel does trespass advantage then this smirker specifies. fact15: This Inconel is not Michelangelesque if that oxidiser is Michelangelesque. fact16: If that oxidiser is not disjunct then that oxidiser is Michelangelesque and it mythicises Leda. fact17: This smirker is Michelangelesque if that this Inconel does heal Bowie is correct. fact18: This Inconel is intertribal and it is a biosystematy. fact19: This smirker does not trespass advantage if this Inconel does not trespass advantage. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this smirker specifies and heals Bowie is wrong. ; $proof$ = | fact13 & fact14 & fact10 -> int1: This smirker specifies.; fact5 -> int2: This smirker heals Bowie.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This Protestant does not happens. | ¬{A} | fact1: Both this Protestant and that sustentation happens. fact2: If that this Protestant happens and that PINNING Aristophanes happens is incorrect then this Protestant does not occurs. fact3: If that that PINNING Aristophanes and this crushing cert happens is false then that PINNING Aristophanes does not happens. fact4: The fact that the way occurs and that intuitionistness happens is right. fact5: If the fact that that sustentation but notthat caliphate happens does not hold that sustentation does not occurs. fact6: That sustentation happens. fact7: That duet happens. fact8: That that sustentation and this Jacksonian occurs is brought about by that that PINNING Aristophanes does not occurs. fact9: If that sustentation does not happens that this Protestant and that PINNING Aristophanes happens does not hold. fact10: That caliphate does not occurs if that this domesticating FAA and that caliphate happens does not hold. fact11: That the fact that that sustentation but notthat caliphate occurs hold is false if this crushing cert does not occurs. fact12: This crushing cert is prevented by that this crushing cert does not happens and/or that this disseminating happens. | fact1: ({A} & {B}) fact2: ¬({A} & {C}) -> ¬{A} fact3: ¬({C} & {E}) -> ¬{C} fact4: ({IE} & {AH}) fact5: ¬({B} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact6: {B} fact7: {BG} fact8: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {FO}) fact9: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) fact10: ¬({I} & {D}) -> ¬{D} fact11: ¬{E} -> ¬({B} & ¬{D}) fact12: (¬{E} v {G}) -> ¬{E} | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | This Jacksonian occurs and this soar happens. | ({FO} & {F}) | [] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Both this Protestant and that sustentation happens. fact2: If that this Protestant happens and that PINNING Aristophanes happens is incorrect then this Protestant does not occurs. fact3: If that that PINNING Aristophanes and this crushing cert happens is false then that PINNING Aristophanes does not happens. fact4: The fact that the way occurs and that intuitionistness happens is right. fact5: If the fact that that sustentation but notthat caliphate happens does not hold that sustentation does not occurs. fact6: That sustentation happens. fact7: That duet happens. fact8: That that sustentation and this Jacksonian occurs is brought about by that that PINNING Aristophanes does not occurs. fact9: If that sustentation does not happens that this Protestant and that PINNING Aristophanes happens does not hold. fact10: That caliphate does not occurs if that this domesticating FAA and that caliphate happens does not hold. fact11: That the fact that that sustentation but notthat caliphate occurs hold is false if this crushing cert does not occurs. fact12: This crushing cert is prevented by that this crushing cert does not happens and/or that this disseminating happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This Protestant does not happens. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This consumptive happens. | {D} | fact1: This snowshoe happens and this trilling occurs. fact2: That this consumptive and this nonoperationalness occurs is brought about by that this muttering does not occurs. fact3: This consumptive does not occurs if this muttering and this Californian occurs. fact4: Both this nonoperationalness and this muttering occurs. fact5: This Californian occurs if this peninsularness occurs. | fact1: ({CJ} & {AS}) fact2: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) fact3: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact4: ({A} & {B}) fact5: {E} -> {C} | [
"fact4 -> int1: The fact that this muttering occurs hold.;"
] | [
"fact4 -> int1: {B};"
] | This consumptive happens. | {D} | [] | 6 | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This snowshoe happens and this trilling occurs. fact2: That this consumptive and this nonoperationalness occurs is brought about by that this muttering does not occurs. fact3: This consumptive does not occurs if this muttering and this Californian occurs. fact4: Both this nonoperationalness and this muttering occurs. fact5: This Californian occurs if this peninsularness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This consumptive happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This bandoleer does not actualize debugger. | ¬{D}{a} | fact1: This bandoleer is not non-pyknotic. fact2: If something that is a kind of a protoarchaeology is a covalency then it does not actualize debugger. fact3: Some man is non-dysphoric if he is transmontane and he is a covalency. fact4: Everyone is a covalency. fact5: If this bandoleer is pyknotic then this bandoleer is a protoarchaeology. fact6: The human is connubial and it is pyknotic. fact7: This bandoleer is a gooseneck. | fact1: {A}{a} fact2: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x fact3: (x): ({DA}x & {C}x) -> ¬{S}x fact4: (x): {C}x fact5: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact6: ({EJ}{hb} & {A}{hb}) fact7: {GP}{a} | [
"fact5 & fact1 -> int1: This bandoleer is a protoarchaeology.; fact4 -> int2: This bandoleer is a kind of a covalency.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This bandoleer is a protoarchaeology and is a covalency.; fact2 -> int4: This bandoleer does not actualize debugger if this bandoleer is a protoarchaeology and a covalency.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact5 & fact1 -> int1: {B}{a}; fact4 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); fact2 -> int4: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | If Christa is transmontane and it is a covalency Christa is not dysphoric. | ({DA}{ar} & {C}{ar}) -> ¬{S}{ar} | [
"fact8 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $facts$ = fact1: This bandoleer is not non-pyknotic. fact2: If something that is a kind of a protoarchaeology is a covalency then it does not actualize debugger. fact3: Some man is non-dysphoric if he is transmontane and he is a covalency. fact4: Everyone is a covalency. fact5: If this bandoleer is pyknotic then this bandoleer is a protoarchaeology. fact6: The human is connubial and it is pyknotic. fact7: This bandoleer is a gooseneck. ; $hypothesis$ = This bandoleer does not actualize debugger. ; $proof$ = | fact5 & fact1 -> int1: This bandoleer is a protoarchaeology.; fact4 -> int2: This bandoleer is a kind of a covalency.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This bandoleer is a protoarchaeology and is a covalency.; fact2 -> int4: This bandoleer does not actualize debugger if this bandoleer is a protoarchaeology and a covalency.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This tollon is not a Seanad and it does not disobey brandish. | (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | fact1: That amberfish facsimiles correctness. fact2: The fact that this tollon is not a Seanad but it does disobey brandish is wrong. fact3: This tollon is agrobiological. fact4: That earner is not a kind of a Seanad. fact5: This tollon does not disobey brandish. fact6: If that this tollon does not urge Stravinsky and does not disobey brandish does not hold that amberfish is not a Seanad. fact7: that correctness facsimiles amberfish. fact8: That amberfish does not crest Ganymede. fact9: If some person does not facsimile correctness then the fact that it is not a kind of a Seanad and does not disobey brandish is false. fact10: That amberfish does not urge Stravinsky if this tollon does disobey brandish. fact11: That amberfish urges Stravinsky if that amberfish does facsimile correctness. | fact1: {A}{b} fact2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: {EL}{a} fact4: ¬{AA}{gc} fact5: ¬{AB}{a} fact6: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact7: {AE}{ac} fact8: ¬{JD}{b} fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact10: {AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact11: {A}{b} -> {B}{b} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that this tollon is not a Seanad and does not disobey brandish does not hold.; fact1 & fact11 -> int1: That amberfish does urge Stravinsky.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); fact1 & fact11 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] | Let's assume that that this tollon is not a Seanad and does not disobey brandish does not hold. | ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"fact12 -> int2: If that amberfish does not facsimile correctness then the fact that that amberfish is not a kind of a Seanad and this person does not disobey brandish is false.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That amberfish facsimiles correctness. fact2: The fact that this tollon is not a Seanad but it does disobey brandish is wrong. fact3: This tollon is agrobiological. fact4: That earner is not a kind of a Seanad. fact5: This tollon does not disobey brandish. fact6: If that this tollon does not urge Stravinsky and does not disobey brandish does not hold that amberfish is not a Seanad. fact7: that correctness facsimiles amberfish. fact8: That amberfish does not crest Ganymede. fact9: If some person does not facsimile correctness then the fact that it is not a kind of a Seanad and does not disobey brandish is false. fact10: That amberfish does not urge Stravinsky if this tollon does disobey brandish. fact11: That amberfish urges Stravinsky if that amberfish does facsimile correctness. ; $hypothesis$ = This tollon is not a Seanad and it does not disobey brandish. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | Either that impressionist does not happens or that ballet occurs or both. | (¬{AA} v {AB}) | fact1: If this Hippocraticness does not occurs then the fact that that impressionist does not occurs or that ballet happens or both is false. fact2: If this Hippocraticness does not happens then that sulfuring pediatrics does not occurs and/or that gunfire occurs. fact3: The chairing occurs. fact4: That stiffening partiality happens and/or the unfashionableness occurs. fact5: Either the continuousness occurs or that smatteringing Robeson occurs or both. fact6: The jangle happens. fact7: That impressionist happens or that ballet occurs or both. fact8: If that cognizableness happens either this circumnavigating dither happens or the finis occurs or both. fact9: This foundering does not occurs and/or this DO occurs if this decalescence occurs. fact10: If the fact that that reviewing occurs is true then this debarment and/or this Cashing unprofitableness happens. fact11: Either that non-idlingness or the looting bothered or both occurs. fact12: This thumping occurs. fact13: The ravelling ochlocracy leads to that that brutalization occurs and/or that doomsday happens. fact14: Either that non-processionalness or that hospitableness or both happens. fact15: The hierarchalness occurs. fact16: If the chirping happens then either the inertialness or the leasing respectfulness or both happens. fact17: The sour does not occurs or the thanklessness happens or both. fact18: The befriending microeconomics happens or this agronomicalness occurs or both. fact19: The fact that this Hippocraticness occurs hold. fact20: That the involvement occurs causes that the jabbering Lagostomus occurs and/or this qualitativeness happens. fact21: That that impressionist does not occurs and/or that that ballet occurs is caused by that this Hippocraticness occurs. | fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) fact2: ¬{A} -> (¬{BS} v {CT}) fact3: {EF} fact4: ({L} v {FL}) fact5: ({JH} v {DB}) fact6: {Q} fact7: ({AA} v {AB}) fact8: {EP} -> ({EC} v {AJ}) fact9: {D} -> (¬{JA} v {AD}) fact10: {CK} -> ({HP} v {HF}) fact11: (¬{DG} v {EO}) fact12: {EU} fact13: {FF} -> ({EA} v {DN}) fact14: (¬{CR} v {EK}) fact15: {AP} fact16: {CP} -> ({FI} v {HS}) fact17: (¬{BP} v {AS}) fact18: ({CI} v {DF}) fact19: {A} fact20: {IJ} -> ({CO} v {BG}) fact21: {A} -> (¬{AA} v {AB}) | [
"fact21 & fact19 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact21 & fact19 -> hypothesis;"
] | Either that sulfuring pediatrics does not happens or that gunfire occurs or both. | (¬{BS} v {CT}) | [] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If this Hippocraticness does not occurs then the fact that that impressionist does not occurs or that ballet happens or both is false. fact2: If this Hippocraticness does not happens then that sulfuring pediatrics does not occurs and/or that gunfire occurs. fact3: The chairing occurs. fact4: That stiffening partiality happens and/or the unfashionableness occurs. fact5: Either the continuousness occurs or that smatteringing Robeson occurs or both. fact6: The jangle happens. fact7: That impressionist happens or that ballet occurs or both. fact8: If that cognizableness happens either this circumnavigating dither happens or the finis occurs or both. fact9: This foundering does not occurs and/or this DO occurs if this decalescence occurs. fact10: If the fact that that reviewing occurs is true then this debarment and/or this Cashing unprofitableness happens. fact11: Either that non-idlingness or the looting bothered or both occurs. fact12: This thumping occurs. fact13: The ravelling ochlocracy leads to that that brutalization occurs and/or that doomsday happens. fact14: Either that non-processionalness or that hospitableness or both happens. fact15: The hierarchalness occurs. fact16: If the chirping happens then either the inertialness or the leasing respectfulness or both happens. fact17: The sour does not occurs or the thanklessness happens or both. fact18: The befriending microeconomics happens or this agronomicalness occurs or both. fact19: The fact that this Hippocraticness occurs hold. fact20: That the involvement occurs causes that the jabbering Lagostomus occurs and/or this qualitativeness happens. fact21: That that impressionist does not occurs and/or that that ballet occurs is caused by that this Hippocraticness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Either that impressionist does not happens or that ballet occurs or both. ; $proof$ = | fact21 & fact19 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that the fact that that everything rags oligodontia and it is not a kind of a verticil hold is true is incorrect. | ¬((x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)) | fact1: Everyone rags oligodontia and is not a verticil. | fact1: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: Everyone rags oligodontia and is not a verticil. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that that everything rags oligodontia and it is not a kind of a verticil hold is true is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That nitrosobacteria redresses Saba. | {B}{a} | fact1: Some man does not redress Saba if it is not a Sabine and it does not sink 1930s. fact2: This turbine does not redress Saba. fact3: That nitrosobacteria does resuscitate McAlester. fact4: If something is unlabeled this does not imbricated gaudery and is not acropetal. fact5: Something is a kind of a Sabine if it imbricateds gaudery. fact6: Some person is a kind of a pyrrhic and is an argot if it does not habituate Berzelius. fact7: Every man is not acapnotic and/or is upstager. fact8: Some man is a Rutledge if this person is a pyrrhic. fact9: That that nitrosobacteria does not sink 1930s is right. fact10: Someone that does not imbricated gaudery is not a Sabine and does not sink 1930s. fact11: If Grace redresses Saba then that that nitrosobacteria does not sink 1930s and the person is not cormous is wrong. fact12: That that nitrosobacteria is not nonmilitary and is not a Tasso is not correct. fact13: Grace is a Rutledge and is unlabeled if that this wolfram is not a pyrrhic is correct. fact14: This wolfram is acropetal if that drift is a kind of a Rutledge. fact15: The fact that some person is unlabeled but she does not imbricated gaudery is wrong if she is acropetal. fact16: that the 1930s does not sink nitrosobacteria is right. fact17: Something that is not acapnotic or is upstager or both does not habituate Berzelius. fact18: Grace imbricateds gaudery if that this wolfram is unlabeled but it does not imbricateds gaudery does not hold. fact19: Something that does not habituate Berzelius and is not an argot is not a pyrrhic. | fact1: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact2: ¬{B}{gg} fact3: {CA}{a} fact4: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{F}x) fact5: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact6: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({H}x & {I}x) fact7: (x): (¬{L}x v {K}x) fact8: (x): {H}x -> {G}x fact9: ¬{A}{a} fact10: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) fact11: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{AI}{a}) fact12: ¬(¬{HN}{a} & ¬{DG}{a}) fact13: ¬{H}{c} -> ({G}{b} & {E}{b}) fact14: {G}{d} -> {F}{c} fact15: (x): {F}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{D}x) fact16: ¬{AA}{aa} fact17: (x): (¬{L}x v {K}x) -> ¬{J}x fact18: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {D}{b} fact19: (x): (¬{J}x & ¬{I}x) -> ¬{H}x | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that nitrosobacteria does not redress Saba.; fact9 & assump1 -> int1: That nitrosobacteria does not sink 1930s and does not redress Saba.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{B}{a}; fact9 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a});"
] | Let's assume that that nitrosobacteria does not redress Saba. | ¬{B}{a} | [
"fact24 -> int2: That nitrosobacteria does not redress Saba if that nitrosobacteria is not a kind of a Sabine and does not sink 1930s.; fact20 -> int3: That nitrosobacteria is not a kind of a Sabine and does not sink 1930s if this one does not imbricated gaudery.; fact21 -> int4: If Grace is unlabeled it does not imbricated gaudery and it is not acropetal.; fact23 -> int5: If this wolfram does not habituate Berzelius and it is not a kind of an argot this wolfram is not a pyrrhic.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Some man does not redress Saba if it is not a Sabine and it does not sink 1930s. fact2: This turbine does not redress Saba. fact3: That nitrosobacteria does resuscitate McAlester. fact4: If something is unlabeled this does not imbricated gaudery and is not acropetal. fact5: Something is a kind of a Sabine if it imbricateds gaudery. fact6: Some person is a kind of a pyrrhic and is an argot if it does not habituate Berzelius. fact7: Every man is not acapnotic and/or is upstager. fact8: Some man is a Rutledge if this person is a pyrrhic. fact9: That that nitrosobacteria does not sink 1930s is right. fact10: Someone that does not imbricated gaudery is not a Sabine and does not sink 1930s. fact11: If Grace redresses Saba then that that nitrosobacteria does not sink 1930s and the person is not cormous is wrong. fact12: That that nitrosobacteria is not nonmilitary and is not a Tasso is not correct. fact13: Grace is a Rutledge and is unlabeled if that this wolfram is not a pyrrhic is correct. fact14: This wolfram is acropetal if that drift is a kind of a Rutledge. fact15: The fact that some person is unlabeled but she does not imbricated gaudery is wrong if she is acropetal. fact16: that the 1930s does not sink nitrosobacteria is right. fact17: Something that is not acapnotic or is upstager or both does not habituate Berzelius. fact18: Grace imbricateds gaudery if that this wolfram is unlabeled but it does not imbricateds gaudery does not hold. fact19: Something that does not habituate Berzelius and is not an argot is not a pyrrhic. ; $hypothesis$ = That nitrosobacteria redresses Saba. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This catamenia does not sweeten ngwee. | ¬{B}{c} | fact1: If that that reprinting overwhelms Myrmeleon and this person is a kind of a Rosicrucianism is not correct this argyle does not sweeten ngwee. fact2: This argyle overwhelms Myrmeleon. fact3: If that something is not a rent and not non-anthropic is incorrect the fact that the thing is not ruminant is correct. fact4: This catamenia does not sweeten ngwee if this argyle does not sweeten ngwee. fact5: If that adoptee is not a rent then that that adoptee is a kind of a Rosicrucianism and this is ruminant is wrong. fact6: If the fact that someone is a Rosicrucianism and ruminant is false then it is not a Rosicrucianism. fact7: If that that reprinting is not a kind of a Cercocebus and do notubt Hercules is incorrect this catamenia sweetens ngwee. fact8: That something is not a sloped and the thing is not a Cercocebus does not hold if the thing overwhelms Myrmeleon. fact9: That something overwhelms Myrmeleon and is a Rosicrucianism is false if the fact that it is not ruminant is correct. fact10: Something overwhelms Myrmeleon and it sweetens ngwee if it is not a kind of a Rosicrucianism. fact11: the Myrmeleon overwhelms argyle. fact12: Something is not a rent if that it is not anthropic and/or it disfavours Uredinales is wrong. | fact1: ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: {A}{a} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact4: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{B}{c} fact5: ¬{E}{fo} -> ¬({C}{fo} & {D}{fo}) fact6: (x): ¬({C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x fact7: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} fact8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{CT}x & ¬{AA}x) fact9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) fact10: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact11: {AC}{aa} fact12: (x): ¬(¬{F}x v {G}x) -> ¬{E}x | [] | [] | The fact that that adoptee is not a sloped and not a Cercocebus is incorrect. | ¬(¬{CT}{fo} & ¬{AA}{fo}) | [
"fact16 -> int1: If that that adoptee does overwhelm Myrmeleon is correct that this thing is not a sloped and this thing is not a Cercocebus is incorrect.; fact17 -> int2: That adoptee overwhelms Myrmeleon and sweetens ngwee if that adoptee is not a Rosicrucianism.; fact14 -> int3: If the fact that that adoptee is a Rosicrucianism and it is not nonruminant is not right it is not a kind of a Rosicrucianism.; fact15 -> int4: If the fact that that adoptee is not anthropic and/or it disfavours Uredinales is false that adoptee is not a rent.;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that that reprinting overwhelms Myrmeleon and this person is a kind of a Rosicrucianism is not correct this argyle does not sweeten ngwee. fact2: This argyle overwhelms Myrmeleon. fact3: If that something is not a rent and not non-anthropic is incorrect the fact that the thing is not ruminant is correct. fact4: This catamenia does not sweeten ngwee if this argyle does not sweeten ngwee. fact5: If that adoptee is not a rent then that that adoptee is a kind of a Rosicrucianism and this is ruminant is wrong. fact6: If the fact that someone is a Rosicrucianism and ruminant is false then it is not a Rosicrucianism. fact7: If that that reprinting is not a kind of a Cercocebus and do notubt Hercules is incorrect this catamenia sweetens ngwee. fact8: That something is not a sloped and the thing is not a Cercocebus does not hold if the thing overwhelms Myrmeleon. fact9: That something overwhelms Myrmeleon and is a Rosicrucianism is false if the fact that it is not ruminant is correct. fact10: Something overwhelms Myrmeleon and it sweetens ngwee if it is not a kind of a Rosicrucianism. fact11: the Myrmeleon overwhelms argyle. fact12: Something is not a rent if that it is not anthropic and/or it disfavours Uredinales is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This catamenia does not sweeten ngwee. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | Edna is not Amharic. | ¬{B}{a} | fact1: Edna is not Amharic if this thripid is not a waxed and is benignant. fact2: This thripid is not a kind of a Otaria. fact3: Something that is not a Appalachia is not a Otaria but Amharic. fact4: Something is not a waxed but it is benignant if it is not a kind of a Otaria. fact5: If that Edna is not a kind of a factor and is a kind of a Appalachia is incorrect then it is not a Appalachia. fact6: This thripid is not a waxed. fact7: That lambchop is not a waxed. fact8: If somebody is not a Appalachia it is a Otaria and it is Amharic. | fact1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: ¬{A}{aa} fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & {B}x) fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact5: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact6: ¬{AA}{aa} fact7: ¬{AA}{en} fact8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) | [
"fact4 -> int1: This thripid is not a waxed and is benignant if this thripid is not a Otaria.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This thripid is not a waxed and is benignant.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact4 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & fact2 -> int2: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | Edna is Amharic. | {B}{a} | [
"fact9 -> int3: Edna is a Otaria and Amharic if she is not a Appalachia.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Edna is not Amharic if this thripid is not a waxed and is benignant. fact2: This thripid is not a kind of a Otaria. fact3: Something that is not a Appalachia is not a Otaria but Amharic. fact4: Something is not a waxed but it is benignant if it is not a kind of a Otaria. fact5: If that Edna is not a kind of a factor and is a kind of a Appalachia is incorrect then it is not a Appalachia. fact6: This thripid is not a waxed. fact7: That lambchop is not a waxed. fact8: If somebody is not a Appalachia it is a Otaria and it is Amharic. ; $hypothesis$ = Edna is not Amharic. ; $proof$ = | fact4 -> int1: This thripid is not a waxed and is benignant if this thripid is not a Otaria.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This thripid is not a waxed and is benignant.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That everything is intestinal is false. | ¬((x): {A}x) | fact1: If somebody is a kind of a veracity then that it is a Augeas is correct. fact2: If that something is a syllabus but this is not intestinal does not hold this is apneic. fact3: Everything is a Guantanamo. fact4: Every person is hypophyseal. fact5: Everything is intestinal. fact6: Every person blacklists. fact7: Every person is a comparative. fact8: The fact that everybody is a Citharichthys hold. fact9: That something is a kind of a syllabus but that thing is not intestinal does not hold if that thing is a Augeas. fact10: Everything is immaterial and it does portend skinniness. fact11: Everything obsesses Empetraceae. fact12: Everything is apneic. fact13: Everything portends skinniness. | fact1: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact2: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {AA}x fact3: (x): {BJ}x fact4: (x): {O}x fact5: (x): {A}x fact6: (x): {AR}x fact7: (x): {R}x fact8: (x): {DL}x fact9: (x): {C}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact10: (x): ({E}x & {F}x) fact11: (x): {AG}x fact12: (x): {AA}x fact13: (x): {F}x | [
"fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | Everything is apneic. | (x): {AA}x | [
"fact17 -> int1: If the fact that this cheesecake is a kind of a syllabus but the person is not intestinal does not hold the person is apneic.; fact16 -> int2: The fact that this cheesecake is both a syllabus and not intestinal is wrong if this cheesecake is a kind of a Augeas.; fact15 -> int3: This cheesecake is a Augeas if this cheesecake is a veracity.; fact14 -> int4: This cheesecake is immaterial and portends skinniness.; int4 -> int5: This cheesecake is not non-immaterial.;"
] | 7 | 1 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 12 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If somebody is a kind of a veracity then that it is a Augeas is correct. fact2: If that something is a syllabus but this is not intestinal does not hold this is apneic. fact3: Everything is a Guantanamo. fact4: Every person is hypophyseal. fact5: Everything is intestinal. fact6: Every person blacklists. fact7: Every person is a comparative. fact8: The fact that everybody is a Citharichthys hold. fact9: That something is a kind of a syllabus but that thing is not intestinal does not hold if that thing is a Augeas. fact10: Everything is immaterial and it does portend skinniness. fact11: Everything obsesses Empetraceae. fact12: Everything is apneic. fact13: Everything portends skinniness. ; $hypothesis$ = That everything is intestinal is false. ; $proof$ = | fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That that yurt dumps Pauropoda is right. | {C}{a} | fact1: That yurt is aneuploid if it bestrides. fact2: That yurt bestrides. fact3: This totem is illegal if it grizzles Diceros. fact4: Someone dumps Pauropoda if it is aneuploid. | fact1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact2: {A}{a} fact3: {CA}{jg} -> {CC}{jg} fact4: (x): {B}x -> {C}x | [
"fact1 & fact2 -> int1: That yurt is aneuploid.; fact4 -> int2: If that yurt is not non-aneuploid that yurt dumps Pauropoda.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 & fact2 -> int1: {B}{a}; fact4 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That yurt is aneuploid if it bestrides. fact2: That yurt bestrides. fact3: This totem is illegal if it grizzles Diceros. fact4: Someone dumps Pauropoda if it is aneuploid. ; $hypothesis$ = That that yurt dumps Pauropoda is right. ; $proof$ = | fact1 & fact2 -> int1: That yurt is aneuploid.; fact4 -> int2: If that yurt is not non-aneuploid that yurt dumps Pauropoda.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This annexing does not occurs. | ¬{C} | fact1: This impress triggers that this outroaring cacodaemon does not happens and/or the non-poorness. fact2: That poorness or this outroaring cacodaemon or both happens. fact3: That the packaging does not occurs yields that this incompatibleness and the cruising happens. fact4: That this impress does not happens is prevented by this incompatibleness. fact5: This annexing occurs if that poorness happens. | fact1: {D} -> (¬{B} v ¬{A}) fact2: ({A} v {B}) fact3: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact4: {E} -> {D} fact5: {A} -> {C} | [] | [] | This annexing does not occurs. | ¬{C} | [] | 8 | 1 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This impress triggers that this outroaring cacodaemon does not happens and/or the non-poorness. fact2: That poorness or this outroaring cacodaemon or both happens. fact3: That the packaging does not occurs yields that this incompatibleness and the cruising happens. fact4: That this impress does not happens is prevented by this incompatibleness. fact5: This annexing occurs if that poorness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This annexing does not occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That shielding Phyllitis does not happens. | ¬{C} | fact1: That bodieding happens and this unifying occurs. fact2: That shielding Phyllitis occurs if that bodieding occurs. fact3: That that probing Ninurta occurs and that bodieding occurs is caused by that this unifying does not occurs. | fact1: ({A} & {B}) fact2: {A} -> {C} fact3: ¬{B} -> ({G} & {A}) | [
"fact1 -> int1: That bodieding occurs.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> int1: {A}; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That probing Ninurta occurs. | {G} | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That bodieding happens and this unifying occurs. fact2: That shielding Phyllitis occurs if that bodieding occurs. fact3: That that probing Ninurta occurs and that bodieding occurs is caused by that this unifying does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That shielding Phyllitis does not happens. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> int1: That bodieding occurs.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That screen is Kafkaesque. | {B}{a} | fact1: That screen swims predicator if that screen is both not an audible and transdermal. fact2: If that screen is not a temper and it is not a obstruent then it is Kafkaesque. fact3: Some man that is a avariciousness is not incompetent and is not a kind of a polygene. fact4: If that liparis is a milepost it is a avariciousness. fact5: That screen is not a temper and not a obstruent. fact6: That liparis is both a milepost and well. fact7: That screen is a Roseau if it is not a kind of a temper and it is not a kind of a Nanking. | fact1: (¬{EN}{a} & {DQ}{a}) -> {FJ}{a} fact2: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact3: (x): {D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{A}x) fact4: {E}{bg} -> {D}{bg} fact5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact6: ({E}{bg} & {F}{bg}) fact7: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{P}{a}) -> {GK}{a} | [
"fact2 & fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact2 & fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | That liparis is a temper. | {AA}{bg} | [
"fact8 -> int1: If that liparis is a kind of a avariciousness the thing is both competent and not a polygene.; fact10 -> int2: That liparis is a milepost.; fact9 & int2 -> int3: That liparis is a avariciousness.; int1 & int3 -> int4: That liparis is not incompetent and is not a kind of a polygene.; int4 -> int5: That liparis is not a polygene.; int5 -> int6: Either that liparis is not a kind of a polygene or this is not non-Kafkaesque or both.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That screen swims predicator if that screen is both not an audible and transdermal. fact2: If that screen is not a temper and it is not a obstruent then it is Kafkaesque. fact3: Some man that is a avariciousness is not incompetent and is not a kind of a polygene. fact4: If that liparis is a milepost it is a avariciousness. fact5: That screen is not a temper and not a obstruent. fact6: That liparis is both a milepost and well. fact7: That screen is a Roseau if it is not a kind of a temper and it is not a kind of a Nanking. ; $hypothesis$ = That screen is Kafkaesque. ; $proof$ = | fact2 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That rounding happens. | {A} | fact1: The fact that this dissension happens is correct. fact2: That both that non-Algerianness and this dorsiflexion occurs leads to that that viaticus does not happens. fact3: That noncrucialness occurs. fact4: That that viaticus occurs and that lightedness occurs brings about that that rounding does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that this Algerianness happens but that demising Paracelsus does not happens does not hold this Algerianness does not occurs. fact6: That lightedness does not occurs if that notthat mercerizing Tisiphone but that lightedness happens is wrong. fact7: That submersing happens. fact8: If that lightedness does not occurs that cheating Chester occurs and that rounding happens. fact9: That that mercerizing Tisiphone does not occurs and that lightedness happens does not hold if that viaticus does not happens. | fact1: {JI} fact2: (¬{E} & {F}) -> ¬{C} fact3: {G} fact4: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{A} fact5: ¬({E} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{E} fact6: ¬(¬{D} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact7: {IP} fact8: ¬{B} -> ({HN} & {A}) fact9: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{D} & {B}) | [] | [] | That cheating Chester happens. | {HN} | [] | 9 | 1 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that this dissension happens is correct. fact2: That both that non-Algerianness and this dorsiflexion occurs leads to that that viaticus does not happens. fact3: That noncrucialness occurs. fact4: That that viaticus occurs and that lightedness occurs brings about that that rounding does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that this Algerianness happens but that demising Paracelsus does not happens does not hold this Algerianness does not occurs. fact6: That lightedness does not occurs if that notthat mercerizing Tisiphone but that lightedness happens is wrong. fact7: That submersing happens. fact8: If that lightedness does not occurs that cheating Chester occurs and that rounding happens. fact9: That that mercerizing Tisiphone does not occurs and that lightedness happens does not hold if that viaticus does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That rounding happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That this prothrombinase is not a Chara but it is a kind of a DMD does not hold. | ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) | fact1: If that this prothrombinase does jam Spilogale and is a Recife is incorrect that whisk is not a kind of a Recife. fact2: Somebody does rap Mankato and colourises noddle if she/he does not abbreviate. fact3: The fact that something jams Spilogale and is a Recife is false if this thing does not gear pharma. fact4: If something is not a kind of a Recife then the fact that it is not a kind of a Chara and it is a kind of a DMD is wrong. fact5: That something is a minimalism but this thing is not cellulosid does not hold if this thing is not a Delbruck. fact6: Something gears pharma and is not cellulosid if the fact that that is not a minimalism is right. fact7: If that moloch is not a clan and abbreviates then this protestant does not abbreviates. fact8: Someone that is not a kind of a Recife is not a Chara and is a kind of an osteoarthritis. fact9: That moloch is not a kind of a clan. fact10: If the fact that the pal is a kind of a Delbruck is correct then that moloch is not a kind of a Delbruck. fact11: Someone is not a kind of a minimalism if it is not a kind of a Thermopsis and it is not a kind of a Delbruck. fact12: That moloch abbreviates and is a American if it is not a Stomatopoda. fact13: Somebody is postpartum if it raps Mankato. fact14: Something that jams Spilogale does not gear pharma and is not a Recife. fact15: If this protestant is postpartum this bitters is not a Thermopsis and she is not a kind of a Delbruck. fact16: That moloch is not a Stomatopoda. fact17: If something that gears pharma is not cellulosid this prothrombinase does not gears pharma. fact18: This protestant does not jam Spilogale if that that moloch is a minimalism and is not cellulosid is wrong. fact19: This prothrombinase is not a Chara but the thing is a DMD. fact20: If this protestant does not jam Spilogale this bitters jam Spilogale. fact21: If this bitters does not gear pharma and is not a kind of a Recife then this prothrombinase is not a kind of a Recife. | fact1: ¬({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{ji} fact2: (x): ¬{K}x -> ({I}x & {J}x) fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & {A}x) fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) fact6: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{E}x) fact7: (¬{M}{d} & {K}{d}) -> ¬{K}{c} fact8: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {GA}x) fact9: ¬{M}{d} fact10: {F}{e} -> ¬{F}{d} fact11: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact12: ¬{N}{d} -> ({K}{d} & {L}{d}) fact13: (x): {I}x -> {H}x fact14: (x): {B}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) fact15: {H}{c} -> (¬{G}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) fact16: ¬{N}{d} fact17: (x): ({C}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}{a} fact18: ¬({D}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{B}{c} fact19: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact20: ¬{B}{c} -> {B}{b} fact21: (¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} | [
"fact19 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact19 -> hypothesis;"
] | That this prothrombinase is not a Chara but it is a kind of a DMD does not hold. | ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) | [
"fact28 -> int1: The fact that this prothrombinase is not a Chara and is a DMD is not right if the one is not a Recife.; fact27 -> int2: If this bitters jams Spilogale this bitters does not gear pharma and is not a Recife.; fact26 -> int3: That that moloch is a minimalism but it is non-cellulosid does not hold if the fact that that moloch is not a Delbruck is right.;"
] | 9 | 1 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 20 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that this prothrombinase does jam Spilogale and is a Recife is incorrect that whisk is not a kind of a Recife. fact2: Somebody does rap Mankato and colourises noddle if she/he does not abbreviate. fact3: The fact that something jams Spilogale and is a Recife is false if this thing does not gear pharma. fact4: If something is not a kind of a Recife then the fact that it is not a kind of a Chara and it is a kind of a DMD is wrong. fact5: That something is a minimalism but this thing is not cellulosid does not hold if this thing is not a Delbruck. fact6: Something gears pharma and is not cellulosid if the fact that that is not a minimalism is right. fact7: If that moloch is not a clan and abbreviates then this protestant does not abbreviates. fact8: Someone that is not a kind of a Recife is not a Chara and is a kind of an osteoarthritis. fact9: That moloch is not a kind of a clan. fact10: If the fact that the pal is a kind of a Delbruck is correct then that moloch is not a kind of a Delbruck. fact11: Someone is not a kind of a minimalism if it is not a kind of a Thermopsis and it is not a kind of a Delbruck. fact12: That moloch abbreviates and is a American if it is not a Stomatopoda. fact13: Somebody is postpartum if it raps Mankato. fact14: Something that jams Spilogale does not gear pharma and is not a Recife. fact15: If this protestant is postpartum this bitters is not a Thermopsis and she is not a kind of a Delbruck. fact16: That moloch is not a Stomatopoda. fact17: If something that gears pharma is not cellulosid this prothrombinase does not gears pharma. fact18: This protestant does not jam Spilogale if that that moloch is a minimalism and is not cellulosid is wrong. fact19: This prothrombinase is not a Chara but the thing is a DMD. fact20: If this protestant does not jam Spilogale this bitters jam Spilogale. fact21: If this bitters does not gear pharma and is not a kind of a Recife then this prothrombinase is not a kind of a Recife. ; $hypothesis$ = That this prothrombinase is not a Chara but it is a kind of a DMD does not hold. ; $proof$ = | fact19 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This epigastricness happens. | {B} | fact1: If that vanishing and the pardonableness happens then this epigastricness happens. fact2: If that astronauticness happens that that psychoneurotic does not occurs and that carunculateness does not occurs is incorrect. fact3: That lurching happens. fact4: That psychoneurotic happens. fact5: That both that vanishing and the pardonableness occurs is brought about by that that psychoneurotic happens. fact6: That posing causes that that astronauticness occurs. fact7: If that kismet happens then both that shrieking elicitation and the combinedness happens. | fact1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact2: {D} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) fact3: {F} fact4: {A} fact5: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact6: {E} -> {D} fact7: {HL} -> ({CI} & ¬{AN}) | [
"fact5 & fact4 -> int1: That vanishing happens and the unpardonableness does not occurs.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact5 & fact4 -> int1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | This epigastricness does not occurs. | ¬{B} | [] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that vanishing and the pardonableness happens then this epigastricness happens. fact2: If that astronauticness happens that that psychoneurotic does not occurs and that carunculateness does not occurs is incorrect. fact3: That lurching happens. fact4: That psychoneurotic happens. fact5: That both that vanishing and the pardonableness occurs is brought about by that that psychoneurotic happens. fact6: That posing causes that that astronauticness occurs. fact7: If that kismet happens then both that shrieking elicitation and the combinedness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This epigastricness happens. ; $proof$ = | fact5 & fact4 -> int1: That vanishing happens and the unpardonableness does not occurs.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | Let's assume that that braces trounces Heming. | {A}{a} | fact1: The fact that this bludgeon does not trounce Heming but it is cerebral is wrong. fact2: That this bludgeon is not antiapartheid but it is not non-cerebral is false. fact3: Someone trounces Heming and she is cerebral if she does not think suaveness. fact4: If that this bludgeon is non-antiapartheid but it is cerebral is false it is not cerebral. fact5: This bludgeon is cerebral if that that braces trounces Heming is right. | fact1: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) fact2: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact4: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact5: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that braces trounces Heming.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: This bludgeon is cerebral.; fact4 & fact2 -> int2: This bludgeon is not cerebral.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{b}; fact4 & fact2 -> int2: ¬{B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | Let's assume that that braces trounces Heming. | {A}{a} | [
"fact6 -> int4: That braces trounces Heming and is cerebral if that braces does not think suaveness.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that this bludgeon does not trounce Heming but it is cerebral is wrong. fact2: That this bludgeon is not antiapartheid but it is not non-cerebral is false. fact3: Someone trounces Heming and she is cerebral if she does not think suaveness. fact4: If that this bludgeon is non-antiapartheid but it is cerebral is false it is not cerebral. fact5: This bludgeon is cerebral if that that braces trounces Heming is right. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that braces trounces Heming. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that braces trounces Heming.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: This bludgeon is cerebral.; fact4 & fact2 -> int2: This bludgeon is not cerebral.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That nook screws xerophthalmia and that thing offs. | ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) | fact1: This drumstick is not non-harsh but a razz. fact2: Everybody signalises. fact3: If this drumstick is not unpowered the fact that that nook marbleizes 20 and is expendable is wrong. fact4: This succinylcholine offs. fact5: The sleepyhead marbleizes 20. fact6: That nook is a kind of a yelled. fact7: The fact that something does not marbleize 20 is right if the fact that it marbleize 20 and is expendable is incorrect. fact8: Everything does screw xerophthalmia. fact9: That southeaster is a yottabit. fact10: That memorizer treads Patellidae if that memorizer survives symbol. fact11: Everything subluxates. fact12: that 20 does not marbleize drumstick. fact13: That memorizer survives symbol. fact14: Something is not expendable if that it is unpowered and it is not a heave is not right. fact15: If something is not expendable it is a lunchtime and screws xerophthalmia. fact16: That southeaster does metabolise. fact17: The fact that some person does screw xerophthalmia and it offs is wrong if it does not marbleize 20. fact18: That nook offs if this drumstick does not marbleize 20. fact19: That somebody is both unpowered and not a heave does not hold if he is not estrous. fact20: If that this drumstick does not marbleize 20 and she does not off is false that southeaster is a kind of a rat. fact21: If that southeaster metabolises and is a yottabit this thing is not estrous. fact22: That this drumstick is unpowered does not hold if that that memorizer is not unpowered and treads Patellidae does not hold. | fact1: ({HU}{a} & {GT}{a}) fact2: (x): {EP}x fact3: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬({C}{aa} & {D}{aa}) fact4: {B}{gb} fact5: {C}{ga} fact6: {BF}{aa} fact7: (x): ¬({C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x fact8: (x): {A}x fact9: {J}{gd} fact10: {I}{b} -> {G}{b} fact11: (x): {HH}x fact12: ¬{AB}{ac} fact13: {I}{b} fact14: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact15: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({GA}x & {A}x) fact16: {K}{gd} fact17: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) fact18: ¬{C}{a} -> {B}{aa} fact19: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{F}x) fact20: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {CU}{gd} fact21: ({K}{gd} & {J}{gd}) -> ¬{H}{gd} fact22: ¬(¬{E}{b} & {G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} | [
"fact8 -> int1: That nook screws xerophthalmia.;"
] | [
"fact8 -> int1: {A}{aa};"
] | The fact that that nook screws xerophthalmia and offs does not hold. | ¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) | [
"fact23 -> int2: The fact that the fact that that nook screws xerophthalmia and it offs is true is incorrect if that nook does not marbleize 20.; fact24 -> int3: If the fact that that nook marbleizes 20 and is expendable is incorrect it does not marbleizes 20.;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This drumstick is not non-harsh but a razz. fact2: Everybody signalises. fact3: If this drumstick is not unpowered the fact that that nook marbleizes 20 and is expendable is wrong. fact4: This succinylcholine offs. fact5: The sleepyhead marbleizes 20. fact6: That nook is a kind of a yelled. fact7: The fact that something does not marbleize 20 is right if the fact that it marbleize 20 and is expendable is incorrect. fact8: Everything does screw xerophthalmia. fact9: That southeaster is a yottabit. fact10: That memorizer treads Patellidae if that memorizer survives symbol. fact11: Everything subluxates. fact12: that 20 does not marbleize drumstick. fact13: That memorizer survives symbol. fact14: Something is not expendable if that it is unpowered and it is not a heave is not right. fact15: If something is not expendable it is a lunchtime and screws xerophthalmia. fact16: That southeaster does metabolise. fact17: The fact that some person does screw xerophthalmia and it offs is wrong if it does not marbleize 20. fact18: That nook offs if this drumstick does not marbleize 20. fact19: That somebody is both unpowered and not a heave does not hold if he is not estrous. fact20: If that this drumstick does not marbleize 20 and she does not off is false that southeaster is a kind of a rat. fact21: If that southeaster metabolises and is a yottabit this thing is not estrous. fact22: That this drumstick is unpowered does not hold if that that memorizer is not unpowered and treads Patellidae does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That nook screws xerophthalmia and that thing offs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That the safari does not happens and this occupationalness does not happens does not hold. | ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) | fact1: This pyrography is prevented by that both that patronising protoarcheology and this filarness happens. fact2: This decreasing does not happens. fact3: That scorbuticness occurs. fact4: That that coquette does not occurs is caused by that the idiopathicness occurs and the tasting happens. fact5: That that upright does not occurs is triggered by that notthe murmuration but the delimitating happens. fact6: That warring does not occurs if both this non-mortuaryness and this amphitheatricness happens. fact7: This non-paperyness and this amphitheatricness occurs. fact8: That the safari does not happens and this occupationalness does not happens does not hold if this compensation happens. fact9: That Post does not occurs. fact10: The fact that the Nipponeseness does not occurs hold if both this non-isthmianness and this toothsomeness happens. fact11: That that seismologicness happens is prevented by that the shiatsu and the landslide happens. fact12: The comb does not happens if the snuggling Peirce does not happens but that warring happens. fact13: If that the unexploratoriness does not happens is right then that centering alchemy and this compensation occurs. fact14: This shrouding enzymology does not happens and this focalness does not occurs. fact15: This myringoplasty does not occurs and the grilling does not occurs. fact16: The safari does not occurs and this occupationalness does not happens if this compensation does not occurs. fact17: If that scrotalness does not happens this schematising does not occurs and that fumigation does not occurs. fact18: If the ringing does not happens then the mutagenesis does not occurs. fact19: The fact that this ungratefulness and that scorbuticness occurs is correct. fact20: This spillover does not occurs. | fact1: ({HB} & {IU}) -> ¬{HP} fact2: ¬{AT} fact3: {AB} fact4: ({HI} & {JA}) -> ¬{FF} fact5: (¬{CC} & {IT}) -> ¬{HA} fact6: (¬{BI} & {GU}) -> ¬{DJ} fact7: (¬{R} & {GU}) fact8: {B} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) fact9: ¬{EB} fact10: (¬{T} & {GN}) -> ¬{EA} fact11: ({DM} & {GQ}) -> ¬{CH} fact12: (¬{IB} & {DJ}) -> ¬{IE} fact13: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {B}) fact14: (¬{IN} & ¬{GS}) fact15: (¬{BT} & ¬{CB}) fact16: ¬{B} -> (¬{A} & ¬{C}) fact17: ¬{AO} -> (¬{EL} & ¬{IP}) fact18: ¬{CQ} -> ¬{FJ} fact19: (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact20: ¬{BC} | [] | [] | That the safari does not happens and this occupationalness does not happens does not hold. | ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) | [] | 7 | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This pyrography is prevented by that both that patronising protoarcheology and this filarness happens. fact2: This decreasing does not happens. fact3: That scorbuticness occurs. fact4: That that coquette does not occurs is caused by that the idiopathicness occurs and the tasting happens. fact5: That that upright does not occurs is triggered by that notthe murmuration but the delimitating happens. fact6: That warring does not occurs if both this non-mortuaryness and this amphitheatricness happens. fact7: This non-paperyness and this amphitheatricness occurs. fact8: That the safari does not happens and this occupationalness does not happens does not hold if this compensation happens. fact9: That Post does not occurs. fact10: The fact that the Nipponeseness does not occurs hold if both this non-isthmianness and this toothsomeness happens. fact11: That that seismologicness happens is prevented by that the shiatsu and the landslide happens. fact12: The comb does not happens if the snuggling Peirce does not happens but that warring happens. fact13: If that the unexploratoriness does not happens is right then that centering alchemy and this compensation occurs. fact14: This shrouding enzymology does not happens and this focalness does not occurs. fact15: This myringoplasty does not occurs and the grilling does not occurs. fact16: The safari does not occurs and this occupationalness does not happens if this compensation does not occurs. fact17: If that scrotalness does not happens this schematising does not occurs and that fumigation does not occurs. fact18: If the ringing does not happens then the mutagenesis does not occurs. fact19: The fact that this ungratefulness and that scorbuticness occurs is correct. fact20: This spillover does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That the safari does not happens and this occupationalness does not happens does not hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That catoptricalness occurs. | {B} | fact1: If that both that myrmecophyticness and this ontogeneticness happens is incorrect that catoptricalness does not occurs. fact2: If that voyeuristicalness does not happens then that both this urinalysis and this Charlestoning occurs does not hold. fact3: If that that mouldering teratoma does not occurs is true the fact that that this preventative occurs and this mastication occurs is incorrect hold. fact4: Both that mouldering teratoma and that catoptricalness occurs if this urinalysis does not happens. fact5: This urinalysis does not happens if that both this urinalysis and this Charlestoning happens does not hold. | fact1: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact2: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {E}) fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬({BH} & {HD}) fact4: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact5: ¬({C} & {E}) -> ¬{C} | [] | [] | That catoptricalness occurs. | {B} | [] | 8 | 1 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that both that myrmecophyticness and this ontogeneticness happens is incorrect that catoptricalness does not occurs. fact2: If that voyeuristicalness does not happens then that both this urinalysis and this Charlestoning occurs does not hold. fact3: If that that mouldering teratoma does not occurs is true the fact that that this preventative occurs and this mastication occurs is incorrect hold. fact4: Both that mouldering teratoma and that catoptricalness occurs if this urinalysis does not happens. fact5: This urinalysis does not happens if that both this urinalysis and this Charlestoning happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That catoptricalness occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That that Colombian does not happens is right. | ¬{B} | fact1: If that legislation does not occurs the fact that that epiphenomenon occurs or that Colombian does not occurs or both is incorrect. fact2: That that hamstringing pyelitis and that barraging natality occurs is false if this humaneness does not occurs. fact3: If the fact that that epiphenomenon occurs and/or that Colombian does not occurs does not hold that diffusing Hannukah does not occurs. fact4: That the scarring potboiler happens yields that this maledicting does not occurs and that syncretisticalness does not occurs. fact5: The scarring potboiler happens if that scanting devise happens. fact6: That Colombian does not happens if that impoliticness but notthe spiriting occurs. fact7: That this maledicting does not happens and that syncretisticalness does not happens triggers that this humaneness does not occurs. fact8: That legislation does not occurs if the fact that that hamstringing pyelitis occurs and that barraging natality happens does not hold. | fact1: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} v ¬{B}) fact2: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & {D}) fact3: ¬({A} v ¬{B}) -> ¬{GT} fact4: {I} -> (¬{G} & ¬{H}) fact5: {J} -> {I} fact6: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact7: (¬{G} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} fact8: ¬({E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} | [] | [] | That diffusing Hannukah does not happens. | ¬{GT} | [] | 12 | 1 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that legislation does not occurs the fact that that epiphenomenon occurs or that Colombian does not occurs or both is incorrect. fact2: That that hamstringing pyelitis and that barraging natality occurs is false if this humaneness does not occurs. fact3: If the fact that that epiphenomenon occurs and/or that Colombian does not occurs does not hold that diffusing Hannukah does not occurs. fact4: That the scarring potboiler happens yields that this maledicting does not occurs and that syncretisticalness does not occurs. fact5: The scarring potboiler happens if that scanting devise happens. fact6: That Colombian does not happens if that impoliticness but notthe spiriting occurs. fact7: That this maledicting does not happens and that syncretisticalness does not happens triggers that this humaneness does not occurs. fact8: That legislation does not occurs if the fact that that hamstringing pyelitis occurs and that barraging natality happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That that Colombian does not happens is right. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This pretender is unscheduled but that one is not cantonal. | ({C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) | fact1: Either the whiteout does apply or it is exegetic or both if the mola does not gybe. fact2: Either that spliff is Linnaean or it is a Boraginaceae or both. fact3: If some man fakes Pythias but it is not impermanent it is a Stictopelia. fact4: If this pocket is a kind of a alinement this hydroxyl is superlunary. fact5: If that spliff is a kind of a Boraginaceae that spliff is lymphoid. fact6: If that spliff is lymphoid then this person fakes Pythias and is not impermanent. fact7: Someone is a kind of a alinement if that this person is a kind of a serenity is true. fact8: If that something is not minimal but it gybes does not hold then it does not gybes. fact9: The mola is abbatial if that spliff is abbatial. fact10: That spliff is lymphoid if it is Linnaean. fact11: This pocket is a serenity if the whiteout applies. fact12: If something is a Stictopelia the fact that it is abbatial hold. fact13: If this pocket is cantonal then that this pretender is unscheduled but it is not cantonal is wrong. fact14: Something either is non-penal or meditates Gould or both if it is not non-superlunary. fact15: If this hydroxyl does not respect controlled then the fact that this pretender is unscheduled but not cantonal hold. fact16: If this hydroxyl is not a futurity and that is not a Muscardinus this pocket is cantonal. fact17: Something that is not penal and/or meditates Gould does not respect controlled. fact18: That something is not minimal and gybes is incorrect if the fact that it is abbatial hold. fact19: This hydroxyl is not a kind of a futurity and it is not a Muscardinus. | fact1: ¬{K}{e} -> ({I}{d} v {J}{d}) fact2: ({S}{f} v {R}{f}) fact3: (x): ({P}x & ¬{O}x) -> {N}x fact4: {G}{b} -> {F}{a} fact5: {R}{f} -> {Q}{f} fact6: {Q}{f} -> ({P}{f} & ¬{O}{f}) fact7: (x): {H}x -> {G}x fact8: (x): ¬(¬{L}x & {K}x) -> ¬{K}x fact9: {M}{f} -> {M}{e} fact10: {S}{f} -> {Q}{f} fact11: {I}{d} -> {H}{b} fact12: (x): {N}x -> {M}x fact13: {B}{b} -> ¬({C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) fact14: (x): {F}x -> (¬{E}x v {D}x) fact15: ¬{A}{a} -> ({C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) fact16: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact17: (x): (¬{E}x v {D}x) -> ¬{A}x fact18: (x): {M}x -> ¬(¬{L}x & {K}x) fact19: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"fact16 & fact19 -> int1: This pocket is cantonal.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact16 & fact19 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis;"
] | This pretender is unscheduled but that one is not cantonal. | ({C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) | [
"fact35 -> int2: If this hydroxyl is not penal or meditates Gould or both then this hydroxyl does not respect controlled.; fact24 -> int3: This hydroxyl is not penal and/or it meditates Gould if it is superlunary.; fact26 -> int4: If this pocket is a serenity then this pocket is a alinement.; fact34 -> int5: If the fact that the mola is not minimal but this person gybes is incorrect then this person does not gybes.; fact32 -> int6: If the mola is abbatial then the fact that the mola is not minimal but it gybes is wrong.; fact21 -> int7: If that spliff is a kind of a Stictopelia that spliff is abbatial.; fact22 -> int8: If that spliff fakes Pythias but it is not impermanent then it is a kind of a Stictopelia.; fact20 & fact29 & fact25 -> int9: That spliff is lymphoid.; fact33 & int9 -> int10: That spliff fakes Pythias and is not impermanent.; int8 & int10 -> int11: That spliff is a Stictopelia.; int7 & int11 -> int12: That spliff is abbatial.; fact23 & int12 -> int13: The mola is abbatial.; int6 & int13 -> int14: That the mola is not minimal but that person gybes is false.; int5 & int14 -> int15: The mola does not gybe.; fact28 & int15 -> int16: The whiteout applies or is exegetic or both.;"
] | 14 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Either the whiteout does apply or it is exegetic or both if the mola does not gybe. fact2: Either that spliff is Linnaean or it is a Boraginaceae or both. fact3: If some man fakes Pythias but it is not impermanent it is a Stictopelia. fact4: If this pocket is a kind of a alinement this hydroxyl is superlunary. fact5: If that spliff is a kind of a Boraginaceae that spliff is lymphoid. fact6: If that spliff is lymphoid then this person fakes Pythias and is not impermanent. fact7: Someone is a kind of a alinement if that this person is a kind of a serenity is true. fact8: If that something is not minimal but it gybes does not hold then it does not gybes. fact9: The mola is abbatial if that spliff is abbatial. fact10: That spliff is lymphoid if it is Linnaean. fact11: This pocket is a serenity if the whiteout applies. fact12: If something is a Stictopelia the fact that it is abbatial hold. fact13: If this pocket is cantonal then that this pretender is unscheduled but it is not cantonal is wrong. fact14: Something either is non-penal or meditates Gould or both if it is not non-superlunary. fact15: If this hydroxyl does not respect controlled then the fact that this pretender is unscheduled but not cantonal hold. fact16: If this hydroxyl is not a futurity and that is not a Muscardinus this pocket is cantonal. fact17: Something that is not penal and/or meditates Gould does not respect controlled. fact18: That something is not minimal and gybes is incorrect if the fact that it is abbatial hold. fact19: This hydroxyl is not a kind of a futurity and it is not a Muscardinus. ; $hypothesis$ = This pretender is unscheduled but that one is not cantonal. ; $proof$ = | fact16 & fact19 -> int1: This pocket is cantonal.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That Passamaquody skulks and is not semitropic. | ({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) | fact1: That Passamaquody skulks if this oarswoman skulks. fact2: That this oarswoman is both a Voltaire and not correct is true. fact3: That Passamaquody skulks but it is not an oceanic. fact4: If the fact that someone outlines populace but it is not mercurous does not hold it does not denitrify Byelorussia. fact5: Something does skulk if that that is a patency is correct. fact6: This oarswoman is a current. fact7: The stump is semitropic but she/he does not reanimate Hesperiphona. fact8: That Passamaquody skulks. fact9: If this oarswoman skulks then that Passamaquody skulks and is non-semitropic. fact10: This oarswoman is semitropic. fact11: If something is a suited it is semitropic. fact12: This oarswoman is a current and does not skulk if that Passamaquody is a current. fact13: That Passamaquody is a patency if it skulks. fact14: This oarswoman is a patency if this oarswoman is a kind of a current. fact15: If that Passamaquody does skulk then it is a L'Aquila. fact16: There exists no person such that that one does outline populace and that one is not mercurous. fact17: That Passamaquody is semitropic if that that Passamaquody is a current is right. fact18: That Nydrazid skulks but this person is not a kind of a Frau. | fact1: {C}{a} -> {C}{b} fact2: ({HG}{a} & ¬{FG}{a}) fact3: ({C}{b} & ¬{Q}{b}) fact4: (x): ¬({I}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{H}x fact5: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact6: {A}{a} fact7: ({E}{df} & ¬{FC}{df}) fact8: {C}{b} fact9: {C}{a} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) fact10: {E}{a} fact11: (x): {HP}x -> {E}x fact12: {A}{b} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact13: {C}{b} -> {B}{b} fact14: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact15: {C}{b} -> {JK}{b} fact16: (x): ¬({I}x & ¬{J}x) fact17: {A}{b} -> {E}{b} fact18: ({C}{cl} & ¬{CI}{cl}) | [
"fact14 & fact6 -> int1: This oarswoman is a patency.; fact5 -> int2: That if this oarswoman is a patency this oarswoman skulks hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This oarswoman does skulk.; int3 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact14 & fact6 -> int1: {B}{a}; fact5 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a}; int3 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | If the jeerer is a suited this thing is semitropic. | {HP}{cb} -> {E}{cb} | [
"fact19 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $facts$ = fact1: That Passamaquody skulks if this oarswoman skulks. fact2: That this oarswoman is both a Voltaire and not correct is true. fact3: That Passamaquody skulks but it is not an oceanic. fact4: If the fact that someone outlines populace but it is not mercurous does not hold it does not denitrify Byelorussia. fact5: Something does skulk if that that is a patency is correct. fact6: This oarswoman is a current. fact7: The stump is semitropic but she/he does not reanimate Hesperiphona. fact8: That Passamaquody skulks. fact9: If this oarswoman skulks then that Passamaquody skulks and is non-semitropic. fact10: This oarswoman is semitropic. fact11: If something is a suited it is semitropic. fact12: This oarswoman is a current and does not skulk if that Passamaquody is a current. fact13: That Passamaquody is a patency if it skulks. fact14: This oarswoman is a patency if this oarswoman is a kind of a current. fact15: If that Passamaquody does skulk then it is a L'Aquila. fact16: There exists no person such that that one does outline populace and that one is not mercurous. fact17: That Passamaquody is semitropic if that that Passamaquody is a current is right. fact18: That Nydrazid skulks but this person is not a kind of a Frau. ; $hypothesis$ = That Passamaquody skulks and is not semitropic. ; $proof$ = | fact14 & fact6 -> int1: This oarswoman is a patency.; fact5 -> int2: That if this oarswoman is a patency this oarswoman skulks hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This oarswoman does skulk.; int3 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
End of preview. Expand
in Dataset Viewer.
- Downloads last month
- 2