Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

The fact that this novillero does not tranquillising atrophedema and she does not chunk does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: If the kitul does not vitrified the fact that the kitul is not a bloodiness but non-dogmatic is incorrect. fact2: This novillero is not dogmatic but that demoralises diplegia. fact3: That this novillero does not tranquillising atrophedema but the thing chunks does not hold. fact4: This novillero is not a float but it squeaks FTP. fact5: That somebody does not tranquillising atrophedema and it does not chunk is not correct if it is not dogmatic. fact6: The fact that something does not tranquillising atrophedema and it does not chunk is not wrong if it is dogmatic. fact7: That this novillero is not undimmed and the person is non-dogmatic is wrong if the person is not a NRA.

fact1: ¬{CL}{iu} -> ¬(¬{FD}{iu} & ¬{A}{iu}) fact2: (¬{A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) fact3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact4: (¬{FH}{aa} & {E}{aa}) fact5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact6: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact7: ¬{JE}{aa} -> ¬(¬{IG}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa})

This novillero does not tranquillising atrophedema and it does not chunk.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the kitul does not vitrified the fact that the kitul is not a bloodiness but non-dogmatic is incorrect. fact2: This novillero is not dogmatic but that demoralises diplegia. fact3: That this novillero does not tranquillising atrophedema but the thing chunks does not hold. fact4: This novillero is not a float but it squeaks FTP. fact5: That somebody does not tranquillising atrophedema and it does not chunk is not correct if it is not dogmatic. fact6: The fact that something does not tranquillising atrophedema and it does not chunk is not wrong if it is dogmatic. fact7: That this novillero is not undimmed and the person is non-dogmatic is wrong if the person is not a NRA. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this novillero does not tranquillising atrophedema and she does not chunk does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: That this novillero does not tranquillising atrophedema and does not chunk is false if this novillero is not dogmatic.; fact2 -> int2: This novillero is not dogmatic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This branchialness happens.

{C}

fact1: That bending occurs. fact2: If this persuasiveness occurs and the piezoelectricity happens then that doublesness does not happens. fact3: This sound does not happens. fact4: That bopping happens and that kiboshing pudginess occurs. fact5: This nerving unpopularity happens. fact6: That bending does not occurs if this representing does not occurs. fact7: That this loom does not happens is brought about by that the smiting Ruanda and the ineffectualness happens. fact8: If the fact that both this thematicness and this persuasiveness occurs is not true then this thematicness does not occurs. fact9: The fact that this bibliothecalness happens hold. fact10: The industrialisation and the lactealness happens. fact11: If that ludo and that cenobiticness happens then that desquamation does not happens. fact12: If that scabbing Wesleyism occurs and this fortunateness happens then that sphericalness does not happens. fact13: That this branchialness occurs is prevented by that both that waging decilitre and that bending happens. fact14: If both the overwriting Brahmanism and the Aleutian happens that unawakenedness does not happens. fact15: That billow does not occurs. fact16: The fact that that handling happens is correct. fact17: That spelling Dhaulagiri happens and that scabbing Wesleyism occurs. fact18: That this thematicness does not happens leads to that this representing but notthat bending occurs. fact19: That waging decilitre happens.

fact1: {B} fact2: ({G} & {ID}) -> ¬{FK} fact3: ¬{T} fact4: ({EM} & {HF}) fact5: {JI} fact6: ¬{D} -> ¬{B} fact7: ({DD} & {EF}) -> ¬{J} fact8: ¬({E} & {G}) -> ¬{E} fact9: {P} fact10: ({FU} & {CE}) fact11: ({AE} & {EU}) -> ¬{DF} fact12: ({FT} & {AR}) -> ¬{JJ} fact13: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact14: ({CT} & {GK}) -> ¬{F} fact15: ¬{K} fact16: {FJ} fact17: ({FA} & {FT}) fact18: ¬{E} -> ({D} & ¬{B}) fact19: {A}

This branchialness happens.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That bending occurs. fact2: If this persuasiveness occurs and the piezoelectricity happens then that doublesness does not happens. fact3: This sound does not happens. fact4: That bopping happens and that kiboshing pudginess occurs. fact5: This nerving unpopularity happens. fact6: That bending does not occurs if this representing does not occurs. fact7: That this loom does not happens is brought about by that the smiting Ruanda and the ineffectualness happens. fact8: If the fact that both this thematicness and this persuasiveness occurs is not true then this thematicness does not occurs. fact9: The fact that this bibliothecalness happens hold. fact10: The industrialisation and the lactealness happens. fact11: If that ludo and that cenobiticness happens then that desquamation does not happens. fact12: If that scabbing Wesleyism occurs and this fortunateness happens then that sphericalness does not happens. fact13: That this branchialness occurs is prevented by that both that waging decilitre and that bending happens. fact14: If both the overwriting Brahmanism and the Aleutian happens that unawakenedness does not happens. fact15: That billow does not occurs. fact16: The fact that that handling happens is correct. fact17: That spelling Dhaulagiri happens and that scabbing Wesleyism occurs. fact18: That this thematicness does not happens leads to that this representing but notthat bending occurs. fact19: That waging decilitre happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This branchialness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact19 & fact1 -> int1: That waging decilitre occurs and that bending occurs.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That littleneck is not a surfacing.

¬{E}{b}

fact1: This paraplegic is not a exoticness. fact2: This putamen is lactic if that this putamen is a Rama hold. fact3: If this putamen is a kind of a conduct then this paraplegic is lactic. fact4: If that littleneck is a kind of a surfacing but it is not a guesswork this paraplegic is not lactic. fact5: This paraplegic is lactic if this putamen is a guesswork. fact6: That littleneck is a guesswork and this thing is a kind of a surfacing if that that littleneck is not a conduct is correct. fact7: This putamen is a guesswork and/or the one is a conduct. fact8: This putamen is a guesswork but it is not a kind of a surfacing if it is a guesswork. fact9: If this putamen is a kind of a guesswork this putamen is a guesswork but not fresh. fact10: This snooze is a Xenopodidae and does not diphthongise intentionality. fact11: This paraplegic is a guesswork if this putamen is fresh. fact12: That functioning is both an earnings and not a conduct if that functioning is an earnings. fact13: That that littleneck is not a surfacing hold if this paraplegic is both not non-lactic and non-fresh. fact14: This paraplegic is a conduct. fact15: If this paraplegic is lactic this paraplegic is lactic but it is non-fresh. fact16: If this paraplegic is a surfacing but it is not a conduct then this putamen is not lactic. fact17: This paraplegic is a surfacing. fact18: The fact that this paraplegic is a kind of a conduct is right if this putamen is lactic. fact19: If this paraplegic is a guesswork then this putamen is lactic. fact20: This putamen is a surfacing if that littleneck is a conduct.

fact1: ¬{FT}{c} fact2: {G}{a} -> {C}{a} fact3: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact4: ({E}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} fact5: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} fact6: ¬{B}{b} -> ({A}{b} & {E}{b}) fact7: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact8: {A}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) fact9: {A}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact10: ({EA}{dj} & ¬{IE}{dj}) fact11: {D}{a} -> {A}{c} fact12: {HU}{ch} -> ({HU}{ch} & ¬{B}{ch}) fact13: ({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact14: {B}{c} fact15: {C}{c} -> ({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) fact16: ({E}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact17: {E}{c} fact18: {C}{a} -> {B}{c} fact19: {A}{c} -> {C}{a} fact20: {B}{b} -> {E}{a}

That littleneck is a surfacing.

{E}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This paraplegic is not a exoticness. fact2: This putamen is lactic if that this putamen is a Rama hold. fact3: If this putamen is a kind of a conduct then this paraplegic is lactic. fact4: If that littleneck is a kind of a surfacing but it is not a guesswork this paraplegic is not lactic. fact5: This paraplegic is lactic if this putamen is a guesswork. fact6: That littleneck is a guesswork and this thing is a kind of a surfacing if that that littleneck is not a conduct is correct. fact7: This putamen is a guesswork and/or the one is a conduct. fact8: This putamen is a guesswork but it is not a kind of a surfacing if it is a guesswork. fact9: If this putamen is a kind of a guesswork this putamen is a guesswork but not fresh. fact10: This snooze is a Xenopodidae and does not diphthongise intentionality. fact11: This paraplegic is a guesswork if this putamen is fresh. fact12: That functioning is both an earnings and not a conduct if that functioning is an earnings. fact13: That that littleneck is not a surfacing hold if this paraplegic is both not non-lactic and non-fresh. fact14: This paraplegic is a conduct. fact15: If this paraplegic is lactic this paraplegic is lactic but it is non-fresh. fact16: If this paraplegic is a surfacing but it is not a conduct then this putamen is not lactic. fact17: This paraplegic is a surfacing. fact18: The fact that this paraplegic is a kind of a conduct is right if this putamen is lactic. fact19: If this paraplegic is a guesswork then this putamen is lactic. fact20: This putamen is a surfacing if that littleneck is a conduct. ; $hypothesis$ = That littleneck is not a surfacing. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact5 & fact3 -> int1: This paraplegic is lactic.; int1 & fact15 -> int2: This paraplegic is lactic but it is not fresh.; int2 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this falangist is choreographic and/or browns Dendrocolaptidae is wrong.

¬({B}{a} v {C}{a})

fact1: This falangist is heterogenous. fact2: The fact that if this falangist is not indissoluble then the fact that that camshaft cowleds Akan but he is not a kind of a Navarino is incorrect is right. fact3: If this Paranthropus is not unemotional then that the thing is a Pleurobrachiidae and the thing is a Calvino is not right. fact4: If this Paranthropus is not a Calvino that mote is a kind of a self that is punctureless. fact5: If something is a kind of a self then this thing is not indissoluble. fact6: Somebody is not a Calvino if the fact that this one is both a Pleurobrachiidae and a Calvino is false. fact7: That if someone does not cowled Akan then the fact that it is a kind of non-choreographic one that browns Dendrocolaptidae is incorrect is right. fact8: Something is heterogenous if the fact that it is non-choreographic thing that browns Dendrocolaptidae is false. fact9: This Paranthropus is emotional. fact10: If the fact that some man does cowled Akan but it is not a Navarino is false it does not cowled Akan. fact11: This falangist is a self if that mote is a self. fact12: That this falangist is choreographic and/or the person browns Dendrocolaptidae is incorrect if that mote is not heterogenous.

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

That camshaft is heterogenous.

{A}{ji}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This falangist is heterogenous. fact2: The fact that if this falangist is not indissoluble then the fact that that camshaft cowleds Akan but he is not a kind of a Navarino is incorrect is right. fact3: If this Paranthropus is not unemotional then that the thing is a Pleurobrachiidae and the thing is a Calvino is not right. fact4: If this Paranthropus is not a Calvino that mote is a kind of a self that is punctureless. fact5: If something is a kind of a self then this thing is not indissoluble. fact6: Somebody is not a Calvino if the fact that this one is both a Pleurobrachiidae and a Calvino is false. fact7: That if someone does not cowled Akan then the fact that it is a kind of non-choreographic one that browns Dendrocolaptidae is incorrect is right. fact8: Something is heterogenous if the fact that it is non-choreographic thing that browns Dendrocolaptidae is false. fact9: This Paranthropus is emotional. fact10: If the fact that some man does cowled Akan but it is not a Navarino is false it does not cowled Akan. fact11: This falangist is a self if that mote is a self. fact12: That this falangist is choreographic and/or the person browns Dendrocolaptidae is incorrect if that mote is not heterogenous. ; $hypothesis$ = That this falangist is choreographic and/or browns Dendrocolaptidae is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That everything is not non-sympathomimetic does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Every man holes coupon. fact2: Something is sympathomimetic if it is an octagon. fact3: Every person is a kind of a kick.

fact1: (x): {HT}x fact2: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact3: (x): {G}x

Everybody fiddles.

(x): {AD}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Every man holes coupon. fact2: Something is sympathomimetic if it is an octagon. fact3: Every person is a kind of a kick. ; $hypothesis$ = That everything is not non-sympathomimetic does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This cerumen does not harden.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That freak is a kind of a Dutch and/or that is not a perspicaciousness if this woodruff is a unguiculate. fact2: This cerumen is a kind of a Crangon if Logan is a Crangon. fact3: Somebody that is non-neritic is a log and is not a asexuality. fact4: If Logan is a asexuality it is not unresponsive and it is not a sonorousness. fact5: If this cerumen is a kind of a Crangon it is non-neritic. fact6: If that freak is not a perspicaciousness Logan is a Crangon. fact7: If something that is a kind of a log is not a asexuality then that fixing is a kind of a asexuality. fact8: That Logan is a kind of a Crangon is correct if that freak is a Dutch. fact9: Some person does not burden if either it does not burden or it is a buss or both. fact10: If something does not burden then it is moraceous a unguiculate. fact11: Everyone does not burden or the person is a kind of a buss or both. fact12: The fact that that freak is both neritic and not a log does not hold if it is not a Crangon. fact13: The ranch does not harden. fact14: That freak is not a Crangon. fact15: This cerumen does not harden.

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

This cerumen hardens.

{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That freak is a kind of a Dutch and/or that is not a perspicaciousness if this woodruff is a unguiculate. fact2: This cerumen is a kind of a Crangon if Logan is a Crangon. fact3: Somebody that is non-neritic is a log and is not a asexuality. fact4: If Logan is a asexuality it is not unresponsive and it is not a sonorousness. fact5: If this cerumen is a kind of a Crangon it is non-neritic. fact6: If that freak is not a perspicaciousness Logan is a Crangon. fact7: If something that is a kind of a log is not a asexuality then that fixing is a kind of a asexuality. fact8: That Logan is a kind of a Crangon is correct if that freak is a Dutch. fact9: Some person does not burden if either it does not burden or it is a buss or both. fact10: If something does not burden then it is moraceous a unguiculate. fact11: Everyone does not burden or the person is a kind of a buss or both. fact12: The fact that that freak is both neritic and not a log does not hold if it is not a Crangon. fact13: The ranch does not harden. fact14: That freak is not a Crangon. fact15: This cerumen does not harden. ; $hypothesis$ = This cerumen does not harden. ; $proof$ =

fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that ovulation is a kind of a woodgraining and does not keep mystifier is incorrect.

¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That someone is a woodgraining that does not keep mystifier is incorrect if this person is not a unfitness. fact2: That ovulation is a woodgraining and does not keep mystifier if she/he is a kind of a unfitness. fact3: If that Templar does subcontract Coraciiformes and labours Orestes then that ovulation does not subcontract Coraciiformes. fact4: If the fact that that catastrophe is not Boolean but it subcontracts Coraciiformes does not hold then that Templar subcontracts Coraciiformes. fact5: If the fact that the algarobilla is bibliolatrous hold the fact that the fact that that catastrophe is not Boolean but it subcontracts Coraciiformes is true does not hold. fact6: If something does not subcontract Coraciiformes it is non-indiscriminate and is prosthetic. fact7: If the fact that some man is not a kind of a poor hold that she is not a unfitness is true. fact8: A non-indiscriminate and prosthetic one is not a poor. fact9: If the fact that something is not a kind of a poor is right this thing keeps mystifier and this thing is a unfitness. fact10: The fleawort is a woodgraining. fact11: Some man is both prosthetic and indiscriminate if the fact that it does not subcontract Coraciiformes is right.

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

The fact that that ovulation is a kind of a woodgraining and does not keep mystifier is incorrect.

¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That someone is a woodgraining that does not keep mystifier is incorrect if this person is not a unfitness. fact2: That ovulation is a woodgraining and does not keep mystifier if she/he is a kind of a unfitness. fact3: If that Templar does subcontract Coraciiformes and labours Orestes then that ovulation does not subcontract Coraciiformes. fact4: If the fact that that catastrophe is not Boolean but it subcontracts Coraciiformes does not hold then that Templar subcontracts Coraciiformes. fact5: If the fact that the algarobilla is bibliolatrous hold the fact that the fact that that catastrophe is not Boolean but it subcontracts Coraciiformes is true does not hold. fact6: If something does not subcontract Coraciiformes it is non-indiscriminate and is prosthetic. fact7: If the fact that some man is not a kind of a poor hold that she is not a unfitness is true. fact8: A non-indiscriminate and prosthetic one is not a poor. fact9: If the fact that something is not a kind of a poor is right this thing keeps mystifier and this thing is a unfitness. fact10: The fleawort is a woodgraining. fact11: Some man is both prosthetic and indiscriminate if the fact that it does not subcontract Coraciiformes is right. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that ovulation is a kind of a woodgraining and does not keep mystifier is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That handwork is unmanly or overbears ketoaciduria or both.

(¬{D}{c} v {C}{c})

fact1: That handwork is not manly and/or overbears ketoaciduria if this roneo does not overbears ketoaciduria. fact2: This occupant monkeys. fact3: This occupant ancyloses debt. fact4: If this occupant does not beak oenology the fact that that handwork is not manly and/or overbears ketoaciduria does not hold. fact5: This occupant does beak oenology. fact6: That handwork monkeys. fact7: This occupant either does not beak oenology or overbears ketoaciduria or both. fact8: If this occupant beaks oenology and it monkeys then this roneo does not overbear ketoaciduria. fact9: the oenology does beak occupant.

fact1: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{D}{c} v {C}{c}) fact2: {B}{a} fact3: {IL}{a} fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} v {C}{c}) fact5: {A}{a} fact6: {B}{c} fact7: (¬{A}{a} v {C}{a}) fact8: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact9: {AA}{aa}

The fact that that handwork is not manly and/or it overbears ketoaciduria is incorrect.

¬(¬{D}{c} v {C}{c})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That handwork is not manly and/or overbears ketoaciduria if this roneo does not overbears ketoaciduria. fact2: This occupant monkeys. fact3: This occupant ancyloses debt. fact4: If this occupant does not beak oenology the fact that that handwork is not manly and/or overbears ketoaciduria does not hold. fact5: This occupant does beak oenology. fact6: That handwork monkeys. fact7: This occupant either does not beak oenology or overbears ketoaciduria or both. fact8: If this occupant beaks oenology and it monkeys then this roneo does not overbear ketoaciduria. fact9: the oenology does beak occupant. ; $hypothesis$ = That handwork is unmanly or overbears ketoaciduria or both. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact2 -> int1: This occupant beaks oenology and it monkeys.; int1 & fact8 -> int2: This roneo does not overbear ketoaciduria.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This slat realizes.

{A}{a}

fact1: This slat does not stage Bangalore. fact2: This nidation does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact3: This slat does not cure and does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact4: This slat is not a acromikria and the person does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact5: This slat does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact6: This slat is not embolic. fact7: This slat does not compound Iran and is not expressible. fact8: This slat is not a Chirocephalus. fact9: The four does not realize. fact10: The alleviator does not raft wondering and does not realize. fact11: This slat does not busy Hypocreaceae and that one does not curse. fact12: This slat is not euphonical. fact13: That this slat is not a Judaica hold. fact14: This slat is a kind of non-Buddhist thing that is not a riel. fact15: This mesentery does not busy Hypocreaceae and that is not embolic. fact16: This slat realizes if that sweetbreads realizes. fact17: This slat does not realize and does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact18: Something that does busy Hypocreaceae realizes. fact19: That the hummingbird does not realize is true. fact20: This slat is secure man that is not endoergic.

fact1: ¬{H}{a} fact2: ¬{B}{dr} fact3: (¬{DC}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact4: (¬{FH}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact5: ¬{B}{a} fact6: ¬{F}{a} fact7: (¬{DI}{a} & ¬{IU}{a}) fact8: ¬{CP}{a} fact9: ¬{A}{il} fact10: (¬{AP}{ii} & ¬{A}{ii}) fact11: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{AT}{a}) fact12: ¬{AL}{a} fact13: ¬{FK}{a} fact14: (¬{JE}{a} & ¬{IF}{a}) fact15: (¬{B}{ef} & ¬{F}{ef}) fact16: {A}{b} -> {A}{a} fact17: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact18: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact19: ¬{A}{ci} fact20: (¬{IH}{a} & ¬{JD}{a})

This slat realizes.

{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This slat does not stage Bangalore. fact2: This nidation does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact3: This slat does not cure and does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact4: This slat is not a acromikria and the person does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact5: This slat does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact6: This slat is not embolic. fact7: This slat does not compound Iran and is not expressible. fact8: This slat is not a Chirocephalus. fact9: The four does not realize. fact10: The alleviator does not raft wondering and does not realize. fact11: This slat does not busy Hypocreaceae and that one does not curse. fact12: This slat is not euphonical. fact13: That this slat is not a Judaica hold. fact14: This slat is a kind of non-Buddhist thing that is not a riel. fact15: This mesentery does not busy Hypocreaceae and that is not embolic. fact16: This slat realizes if that sweetbreads realizes. fact17: This slat does not realize and does not busy Hypocreaceae. fact18: Something that does busy Hypocreaceae realizes. fact19: That the hummingbird does not realize is true. fact20: This slat is secure man that is not endoergic. ; $hypothesis$ = This slat realizes. ; $proof$ =

fact17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this goony is not a kind of a Desmidiaceae and hoofeds congeniality is not right.

¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: If the currier is not rhetorical this vulcaniser is a kind of a deformity that stables leprosy. fact2: The gynophore is not a Desmidiaceae. fact3: If the fact that this subnormal juxtaposes cull is right the fact that this Croat is not a kind of a cupful but it is a sept is false. fact4: Something does not hoofed congeniality if that that is not a cupful and that is a kind of a sept does not hold. fact5: If someone is not a kind of a testimony that this one juxtaposes cull and is a Lunt is false. fact6: If the fact that this subnormal does not juxtapose cull but it is a Desmidiaceae does not hold then it is not a sept. fact7: This phototropism does not oxidate sense and is not Pharaonic if this vulcaniser is a deformity. fact8: This goony is not a Desmidiaceae and hoofeds congeniality if this subnormal does not juxtapose cull. fact9: The antineutrino is rhetorical and it slacks. fact10: This goony is not a kind of a sept if this goony is a kind of a Desmidiaceae. fact11: Something is not a testimony if the thing does not impoverish Bittacidae and/or does chisel hatful. fact12: that cull juxtaposes subnormal. fact13: If this Croat does not hoofed congeniality the fact that this goony is not a Desmidiaceae and hoofed congeniality does not hold. fact14: If the antineutrino is rhetorical and it does slack then that the currier is not rhetorical hold. fact15: If some person is not Pharaonic then it does not impoverish Bittacidae or it chisels hatful or both. fact16: The fact that this goony is a Desmidiaceae and hoofeds congeniality is false. fact17: This subnormal is not a Desmidiaceae. fact18: That this Croat does not hoofed congeniality but the thing is a cupful is incorrect if this goony is not a cupful. fact19: Some person is a cupful if it does not juxtapose cull or it is a cupful or both. fact20: Something does not hoofed congeniality if it is a cupful. fact21: This subnormal juxtaposes cull. fact22: The fact that this goony does not hoofed congeniality and juxtaposes cull is false. fact23: If the fact that something juxtaposes cull and is a Lunt is false it does not juxtaposes cull.

fact1: ¬{L}{e} -> ({J}{d} & {K}{d}) fact2: ¬{C}{ac} fact3: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact5: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x & {E}x) fact6: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{AB}{b} fact7: {J}{d} -> (¬{I}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) fact8: ¬{A}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) fact9: ({L}{f} & {M}{f}) fact10: {C}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} fact11: (x): (¬{G}x v {F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact12: {AD}{ad} fact13: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) fact14: ({L}{f} & {M}{f}) -> ¬{L}{e} fact15: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{G}x v {F}x) fact16: ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) fact17: ¬{C}{b} fact18: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) fact19: (x): (¬{A}x v {AA}x) -> {AA}x fact20: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x fact21: {A}{b} fact22: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact23: (x): ¬({A}x & {E}x) -> ¬{A}x

This goony is not a Desmidiaceae and does hoofed congeniality.

(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the currier is not rhetorical this vulcaniser is a kind of a deformity that stables leprosy. fact2: The gynophore is not a Desmidiaceae. fact3: If the fact that this subnormal juxtaposes cull is right the fact that this Croat is not a kind of a cupful but it is a sept is false. fact4: Something does not hoofed congeniality if that that is not a cupful and that is a kind of a sept does not hold. fact5: If someone is not a kind of a testimony that this one juxtaposes cull and is a Lunt is false. fact6: If the fact that this subnormal does not juxtapose cull but it is a Desmidiaceae does not hold then it is not a sept. fact7: This phototropism does not oxidate sense and is not Pharaonic if this vulcaniser is a deformity. fact8: This goony is not a Desmidiaceae and hoofeds congeniality if this subnormal does not juxtapose cull. fact9: The antineutrino is rhetorical and it slacks. fact10: This goony is not a kind of a sept if this goony is a kind of a Desmidiaceae. fact11: Something is not a testimony if the thing does not impoverish Bittacidae and/or does chisel hatful. fact12: that cull juxtaposes subnormal. fact13: If this Croat does not hoofed congeniality the fact that this goony is not a Desmidiaceae and hoofed congeniality does not hold. fact14: If the antineutrino is rhetorical and it does slack then that the currier is not rhetorical hold. fact15: If some person is not Pharaonic then it does not impoverish Bittacidae or it chisels hatful or both. fact16: The fact that this goony is a Desmidiaceae and hoofeds congeniality is false. fact17: This subnormal is not a Desmidiaceae. fact18: That this Croat does not hoofed congeniality but the thing is a cupful is incorrect if this goony is not a cupful. fact19: Some person is a cupful if it does not juxtapose cull or it is a cupful or both. fact20: Something does not hoofed congeniality if it is a cupful. fact21: This subnormal juxtaposes cull. fact22: The fact that this goony does not hoofed congeniality and juxtaposes cull is false. fact23: If the fact that something juxtaposes cull and is a Lunt is false it does not juxtaposes cull. ; $hypothesis$ = That this goony is not a kind of a Desmidiaceae and hoofeds congeniality is not right. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: This Croat does not hoofed congeniality if that this thing is not a cupful and this thing is a sept is wrong.; fact3 & fact21 -> int2: The fact that this Croat is not a kind of a cupful but it is a sept does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This Croat does not hoofed congeniality.; int3 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That hymnary is not a kind of a Nopalea and that is not meiotic.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: There is no one that does not plagiarise Suidae and is a Eranthis. fact2: That that crampoon Baths dispassionateness and is not a kind of a Nopalea is not correct. fact3: There is nothing such that it is not a kind of a Nopalea and is not meiotic. fact4: That the filtration is hexagonal but not a Spartium is wrong. fact5: The fact that the cumfrey is not a Balaenicipitidae and is not invitational does not hold. fact6: The fact that that hymnary does not devastate and she/he is not meiotic is not true. fact7: The fact that the fact that this defamer is not auroral and the thing is non-meiotic does not hold is not false. fact8: There is nothing that does vex fogsignal and does not whipsaw toccata. fact9: The fact that there is no person such that it is a kind of a Machiavellianism that is not a Balaenicipitidae hold. fact10: There exists nothing that is not eolithic and is a manana. fact11: Some man is not a Nopalea and she/he is non-meiotic if she/he is not plagioclastic. fact12: There exists none such that this one is a glassed and this one is not a Ochotona. fact13: There is nobody such that that one is not a kind of a Nopalea and that one is not non-meiotic. fact14: The fact that that hymnary is a telescoped and is not a Gilgamish is incorrect. fact15: There exists nobody that is a technicolor and is not a noble. fact16: The fact that that hymnary is a technicolor but she is not meiotic is not right. fact17: The fact that some man is not unholy and it is not a winnowing is wrong if it is plagioclastic.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{FU}x & {CN}x) fact2: ¬({FL}{dh} & ¬{AA}{dh}) fact3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact4: ¬({CG}{ar} & ¬{IG}{ar}) fact5: ¬(¬{IJ}{fo} & ¬{BN}{fo}) fact6: ¬(¬{HQ}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact7: ¬(¬{FC}{aq} & ¬{AB}{aq}) fact8: (x): ¬({N}x & ¬{HB}x) fact9: (x): ¬({CJ}x & ¬{IJ}x) fact10: (x): ¬(¬{FE}x & {FP}x) fact11: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact12: (x): ¬({AN}x & ¬{EI}x) fact13: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact14: ¬({DF}{aa} & ¬{DC}{aa}) fact15: (x): ¬({BK}x & ¬{FG}x) fact16: ¬({BK}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact17: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{U}x & ¬{DR}x)

There exists no man such that the person is not unholy and is not a kind of a winnowing.

(x): ¬(¬{U}x & ¬{DR}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There is no one that does not plagiarise Suidae and is a Eranthis. fact2: That that crampoon Baths dispassionateness and is not a kind of a Nopalea is not correct. fact3: There is nothing such that it is not a kind of a Nopalea and is not meiotic. fact4: That the filtration is hexagonal but not a Spartium is wrong. fact5: The fact that the cumfrey is not a Balaenicipitidae and is not invitational does not hold. fact6: The fact that that hymnary does not devastate and she/he is not meiotic is not true. fact7: The fact that the fact that this defamer is not auroral and the thing is non-meiotic does not hold is not false. fact8: There is nothing that does vex fogsignal and does not whipsaw toccata. fact9: The fact that there is no person such that it is a kind of a Machiavellianism that is not a Balaenicipitidae hold. fact10: There exists nothing that is not eolithic and is a manana. fact11: Some man is not a Nopalea and she/he is non-meiotic if she/he is not plagioclastic. fact12: There exists none such that this one is a glassed and this one is not a Ochotona. fact13: There is nobody such that that one is not a kind of a Nopalea and that one is not non-meiotic. fact14: The fact that that hymnary is a telescoped and is not a Gilgamish is incorrect. fact15: There exists nobody that is a technicolor and is not a noble. fact16: The fact that that hymnary is a technicolor but she is not meiotic is not right. fact17: The fact that some man is not unholy and it is not a winnowing is wrong if it is plagioclastic. ; $hypothesis$ = That hymnary is not a kind of a Nopalea and that is not meiotic. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Narcissus does not abrade lawlessness and is not etiologic if she/he does not aspirate Adiantaceae.

¬{A}{a} -> (¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

fact1: A non-etiologic person does not abrade lawlessness and is not etiologic. fact2: If that somebody does not abrade lawlessness hold then he/she is not a kind of an obstinacy. fact3: If the fact that this waver is not a counterexample and does not reforge overabundance is not correct then it is metamorphic. fact4: That that Narcissus is not a psychopomp is right. fact5: That Narcissus is non-etiologic if that Narcissus does not aspirate Adiantaceae. fact6: If that Narcissus is not etiologic then that Narcissus abrades lawlessness but it is not etiologic. fact7: If something is not a Rapateaceae this thing is a kind of non-ichorous thing that is not a Rapateaceae. fact8: Something abrades lawlessness and does not aspirate Adiantaceae if that does not aspirate Adiantaceae. fact9: Something is etiologic and is uneven if the fact that this thing is not nonmetamorphic is right. fact10: This blolly does not aspirate Adiantaceae and it does not etch codswallop if this blolly does not shroud briskness. fact11: If that that Narcissus is not nephritic is right then that Narcissus is not redemptive. fact12: If that Narcissus is not leaded he is not a fray and he is not leaded. fact13: If somebody is non-etiologic it abrades lawlessness and it is not non-etiologic.

fact1: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{DC}x fact3: ¬(¬{G}{cu} & ¬{F}{cu}) -> ¬{E}{cu} fact4: ¬{AR}{a} fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact6: ¬{B}{a} -> ({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact7: (x): ¬{AH}x -> (¬{EO}x & ¬{AH}x) fact8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({C}x & ¬{A}x) fact9: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({B}x & {D}x) fact10: ¬{HH}{m} -> (¬{A}{m} & ¬{JG}{m}) fact11: ¬{DU}{a} -> ¬{JJ}{a} fact12: ¬{FK}{a} -> (¬{FS}{a} & ¬{FK}{a}) fact13: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x)

That Narcissus is not an obstinacy if this one does not abrade lawlessness.

¬{C}{a} -> ¬{DC}{a}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: A non-etiologic person does not abrade lawlessness and is not etiologic. fact2: If that somebody does not abrade lawlessness hold then he/she is not a kind of an obstinacy. fact3: If the fact that this waver is not a counterexample and does not reforge overabundance is not correct then it is metamorphic. fact4: That that Narcissus is not a psychopomp is right. fact5: That Narcissus is non-etiologic if that Narcissus does not aspirate Adiantaceae. fact6: If that Narcissus is not etiologic then that Narcissus abrades lawlessness but it is not etiologic. fact7: If something is not a Rapateaceae this thing is a kind of non-ichorous thing that is not a Rapateaceae. fact8: Something abrades lawlessness and does not aspirate Adiantaceae if that does not aspirate Adiantaceae. fact9: Something is etiologic and is uneven if the fact that this thing is not nonmetamorphic is right. fact10: This blolly does not aspirate Adiantaceae and it does not etch codswallop if this blolly does not shroud briskness. fact11: If that that Narcissus is not nephritic is right then that Narcissus is not redemptive. fact12: If that Narcissus is not leaded he is not a fray and he is not leaded. fact13: If somebody is non-etiologic it abrades lawlessness and it is not non-etiologic. ; $hypothesis$ = That Narcissus does not abrade lawlessness and is not etiologic if she/he does not aspirate Adiantaceae. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that Narcissus does not aspirate Adiantaceae.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: That Narcissus is not etiologic.; fact1 -> int2: That Narcissus does not abrade lawlessness and is not etiologic if the one is etiologic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That Narcissus does not abrade lawlessness and it is not etiologic.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That everything is intervertebral is wrong.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Everybody gabbles. fact2: Every man is inquisitorial. fact3: Every man does not foliated. fact4: Everything dissuades Lippi. fact5: Everything is a 1850s. fact6: If something is not intervertebral and it is not ictal then it flies historicalness. fact7: If the fact that someone is unadjusted and is a Heterotrichales is false then it is not a Heterotrichales. fact8: Everything polishes. fact9: Every man sears wrecked. fact10: That everything is apocrine is right. fact11: Everything memorialises Incheon. fact12: Every person is a Verne. fact13: Everything does prioritise. fact14: Everybody is informatory. fact15: Every person is a beaut. fact16: Every person is Peripatetic. fact17: Every man is a Solvay. fact18: That someone is a kind of unadjusted one that is a Heterotrichales does not hold if it does not foliated.

fact1: (x): {DJ}x fact2: (x): {EJ}x fact3: (x): ¬{D}x fact4: (x): {JD}x fact5: (x): {Q}x fact6: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {HB}x fact7: (x): ¬({E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x fact8: (x): {BN}x fact9: (x): {AT}x fact10: (x): {IB}x fact11: (x): {FM}x fact12: (x): {HD}x fact13: (x): {FI}x fact14: (x): {GH}x fact15: (x): {K}x fact16: (x): {GB}x fact17: (x): {IS}x fact18: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({E}x & {C}x)

Every man flies historicalness.

(x): {HB}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everybody gabbles. fact2: Every man is inquisitorial. fact3: Every man does not foliated. fact4: Everything dissuades Lippi. fact5: Everything is a 1850s. fact6: If something is not intervertebral and it is not ictal then it flies historicalness. fact7: If the fact that someone is unadjusted and is a Heterotrichales is false then it is not a Heterotrichales. fact8: Everything polishes. fact9: Every man sears wrecked. fact10: That everything is apocrine is right. fact11: Everything memorialises Incheon. fact12: Every person is a Verne. fact13: Everything does prioritise. fact14: Everybody is informatory. fact15: Every person is a beaut. fact16: Every person is Peripatetic. fact17: Every man is a Solvay. fact18: That someone is a kind of unadjusted one that is a Heterotrichales does not hold if it does not foliated. ; $hypothesis$ = That everything is intervertebral is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This integument scares parallelepipedon.

{C}{a}

fact1: If the fact that someone does not enclothe but the one does scare parallelepipedon is not true then the one does not scare parallelepipedon. fact2: If some man is butyraceous and the one enclothes then the one is not a kind of a Cotula. fact3: Somebody is a kind of a Cotula if that that one does not advertize unhurriedness or is not aphetic or both is false. fact4: That if something that buffalos macrocytosis is a kind of a ametropia then it is non-butyraceous hold. fact5: If that this Abkhazian is a dawning and non-egoistical is false that apparel does not glow picul. fact6: Something scares parallelepipedon if it is a Cotula. fact7: If that aery is not egoistical then that aery is uveous. fact8: Everybody buffalos macrocytosis. fact9: If this integument is not a Cotula that libertarian advertizes unhurriedness and it is a graft. fact10: The fact that that cutin is a Cyclopteridae hold. fact11: If the fact that something asphyxiates or this thing is a hypochondriasis or both is wrong then that this thing is not a kind of a centrality hold. fact12: If that guncotton does not unbolt Ceratopsia that that Moro asphyxiates or that one is a kind of a hypochondriasis or both is false. fact13: If that cutin is a Cyclopteridae the fact that that that cutin is not a Bombay and/or is interspecies hold is incorrect. fact14: This integument is not a graft. fact15: That guncotton does not unbolt Ceratopsia and is lexicostatistic if that apparel does not glow picul. fact16: The fact that that malmsey enclothes is not wrong. fact17: Everything is a ametropia. fact18: If this integument is not a kind of a graft then that this integument either does not advertize unhurriedness or is not aphetic or both does not hold. fact19: If somebody is not interspecies the fact that it is a kind of a dawning and is not egoistical is not right. fact20: If that Moro is not a centrality the fact that that malmsey does not enclothe and does scare parallelepipedon does not hold. fact21: This integument does not scare parallelepipedon if that malmsey is a graft but that does not scare parallelepipedon. fact22: If that that cutin is not a kind of a Bombay and/or is not non-interspecies is wrong that this Abkhazian is not non-interspecies hold.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x fact2: (x): ({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact4: (x): ({J}x & {K}x) -> ¬{D}x fact5: ¬({O}{g} & ¬{N}{g}) -> ¬{M}{f} fact6: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact7: ¬{N}{do} -> {ED}{do} fact8: (x): {J}x fact9: ¬{B}{a} -> ({AA}{eb} & {A}{eb}) fact10: {Q}{h} fact11: (x): ¬({G}x v {H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact12: ¬{I}{e} -> ¬({G}{c} v {H}{c}) fact13: {Q}{h} -> ¬(¬{R}{h} v {P}{h}) fact14: ¬{A}{a} fact15: ¬{M}{f} -> (¬{I}{e} & {L}{e}) fact16: {E}{b} fact17: (x): {K}x fact18: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact19: (x): ¬{P}x -> ¬({O}x & ¬{N}x) fact20: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬(¬{E}{b} & {C}{b}) fact21: ({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact22: ¬(¬{R}{h} v {P}{h}) -> ¬{P}{g}

That libertarian advertizes unhurriedness.

{AA}{eb}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that someone does not enclothe but the one does scare parallelepipedon is not true then the one does not scare parallelepipedon. fact2: If some man is butyraceous and the one enclothes then the one is not a kind of a Cotula. fact3: Somebody is a kind of a Cotula if that that one does not advertize unhurriedness or is not aphetic or both is false. fact4: That if something that buffalos macrocytosis is a kind of a ametropia then it is non-butyraceous hold. fact5: If that this Abkhazian is a dawning and non-egoistical is false that apparel does not glow picul. fact6: Something scares parallelepipedon if it is a Cotula. fact7: If that aery is not egoistical then that aery is uveous. fact8: Everybody buffalos macrocytosis. fact9: If this integument is not a Cotula that libertarian advertizes unhurriedness and it is a graft. fact10: The fact that that cutin is a Cyclopteridae hold. fact11: If the fact that something asphyxiates or this thing is a hypochondriasis or both is wrong then that this thing is not a kind of a centrality hold. fact12: If that guncotton does not unbolt Ceratopsia that that Moro asphyxiates or that one is a kind of a hypochondriasis or both is false. fact13: If that cutin is a Cyclopteridae the fact that that that cutin is not a Bombay and/or is interspecies hold is incorrect. fact14: This integument is not a graft. fact15: That guncotton does not unbolt Ceratopsia and is lexicostatistic if that apparel does not glow picul. fact16: The fact that that malmsey enclothes is not wrong. fact17: Everything is a ametropia. fact18: If this integument is not a kind of a graft then that this integument either does not advertize unhurriedness or is not aphetic or both does not hold. fact19: If somebody is not interspecies the fact that it is a kind of a dawning and is not egoistical is not right. fact20: If that Moro is not a centrality the fact that that malmsey does not enclothe and does scare parallelepipedon does not hold. fact21: This integument does not scare parallelepipedon if that malmsey is a graft but that does not scare parallelepipedon. fact22: If that that cutin is not a kind of a Bombay and/or is not non-interspecies is wrong that this Abkhazian is not non-interspecies hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This integument scares parallelepipedon. ; $proof$ =

fact18 & fact14 -> int1: The fact that the fact that either this integument does not advertize unhurriedness or it is non-aphetic or both is not false is false.; fact3 -> int2: This integument is a Cotula if the fact that it does not advertize unhurriedness or is not aphetic or both does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This integument is a Cotula.; fact6 -> int4: This integument does scare parallelepipedon if this integument is a Cotula.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that the fact that that this organic does not happens and that presuming seismology does not happens is not wrong is false.

¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: If this organic occurs this thinking does not happens. fact2: That both that elective and this mouthing occurs is caused by this non-editorialness. fact3: If that rearing Romanticism does not occurs that this organic does not happens and that presuming seismology does not happens is wrong. fact4: That this organic but notthat presuming seismology occurs does not hold. fact5: This organic does not occurs. fact6: The fact that that rearing Romanticism happens is correct. fact7: Both this thinking and that rearing Romanticism occurs. fact8: Both that toplessness and that flighteding turgor occurs if that willing does not happens. fact9: That that rearing Romanticism does not happens and this thinking does not occurs is caused by that this renting happens. fact10: This renting occurs if this felicitation occurs. fact11: That willing does not occurs if that elective happens. fact12: If that both the cucurbitaceousness and this remaking Nuptse occurs is incorrect then that editorialness does not occurs. fact13: That that toplessness occurs triggers this felicitation.

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

Let's assume that the fact that that this organic does not happens and that presuming seismology does not happens is not wrong is false.

¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this organic occurs this thinking does not happens. fact2: That both that elective and this mouthing occurs is caused by this non-editorialness. fact3: If that rearing Romanticism does not occurs that this organic does not happens and that presuming seismology does not happens is wrong. fact4: That this organic but notthat presuming seismology occurs does not hold. fact5: This organic does not occurs. fact6: The fact that that rearing Romanticism happens is correct. fact7: Both this thinking and that rearing Romanticism occurs. fact8: Both that toplessness and that flighteding turgor occurs if that willing does not happens. fact9: That that rearing Romanticism does not happens and this thinking does not occurs is caused by that this renting happens. fact10: This renting occurs if this felicitation occurs. fact11: That willing does not occurs if that elective happens. fact12: If that both the cucurbitaceousness and this remaking Nuptse occurs is incorrect then that editorialness does not occurs. fact13: That that toplessness occurs triggers this felicitation. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that the fact that that this organic does not happens and that presuming seismology does not happens is not wrong is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That thingummy is a narcoleptic.

{C}{a}

fact1: That pitahaya is a Gentianaceae. fact2: That thingummy is a lightlessness that is a Gentianaceae. fact3: If some man is not a Gentianaceae and is a lightlessness it is not a narcoleptic. fact4: The personummy is a kind of a Basidiomycota. fact5: If some person is not warmhearted then it is not a kind of a Gentianaceae and it is a kind of a lightlessness.

fact1: {B}{fe} fact2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact3: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}x fact4: {GE}{a} fact5: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x)

That manummy is not a narcoleptic.

¬{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That pitahaya is a Gentianaceae. fact2: That thingummy is a lightlessness that is a Gentianaceae. fact3: If some man is not a Gentianaceae and is a lightlessness it is not a narcoleptic. fact4: The personummy is a kind of a Basidiomycota. fact5: If some person is not warmhearted then it is not a kind of a Gentianaceae and it is a kind of a lightlessness. ; $hypothesis$ = That thingummy is a narcoleptic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That carbocyclicness does not occurs.

¬{AB}

fact1: That this combine does not happens but this metricalness happens is incorrect if that elusion does not occurs. fact2: The atacticness occurs. fact3: The cementitiousness does not occurs but that charging happens. fact4: That bioelectricity occurs. fact5: That carbocyclicness does not happens if that that this metricalness does not happens and/or that elusion does not happens is incorrect is correct. fact6: That elusion occurs. fact7: That intracranialness occurs. fact8: This combine happens if the fact that notthis combine but this metricalness happens does not hold.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{JK} & {B}) fact2: {DP} fact3: (¬{DA} & {P}) fact4: {IJ} fact5: ¬(¬{B} v ¬{A}) -> ¬{AB} fact6: {A} fact7: {HC} fact8: ¬(¬{JK} & {B}) -> {JK}

This combine happens.

{JK}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this combine does not happens but this metricalness happens is incorrect if that elusion does not occurs. fact2: The atacticness occurs. fact3: The cementitiousness does not occurs but that charging happens. fact4: That bioelectricity occurs. fact5: That carbocyclicness does not happens if that that this metricalness does not happens and/or that elusion does not happens is incorrect is correct. fact6: That elusion occurs. fact7: That intracranialness occurs. fact8: This combine happens if the fact that notthis combine but this metricalness happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That carbocyclicness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That non-polishingness or the disinvestment or both occurs.

(¬{D} v {C})

fact1: That imponderableness occurs but this garbling Giraudoux does not occurs if the fact that that humorlessness happens is correct. fact2: That this repair does not happens is triggered by that notthe mesentericness but that electronicness occurs. fact3: That dilution does not happens if that that desolation happens and this admiring iambic happens is false. fact4: If this discussing does not happens that that desolation and this admiring iambic occurs is incorrect. fact5: If the fact that this discussing happens is true then the fact that either this polishingness does not occurs or the disinvestment occurs or both is wrong. fact6: If that imponderableness occurs then this uploading Blechnaceae occurs. fact7: If this repair does not occurs then either that deepening or the vaulting cliche or both occurs. fact8: That non-polishingness or the disinvestment or both happens if that dilution does not occurs. fact9: This discussing does not happens. fact10: If that directing occurs that humorlessness occurs. fact11: If this uploading Blechnaceae occurs then the fact that that notthat dilution but the hypnotherapy happens is not incorrect is incorrect.

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

That that this polishingness does not occurs and/or the disinvestment happens is correct is not true.

¬(¬{D} v {C})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That imponderableness occurs but this garbling Giraudoux does not occurs if the fact that that humorlessness happens is correct. fact2: That this repair does not happens is triggered by that notthe mesentericness but that electronicness occurs. fact3: That dilution does not happens if that that desolation happens and this admiring iambic happens is false. fact4: If this discussing does not happens that that desolation and this admiring iambic occurs is incorrect. fact5: If the fact that this discussing happens is true then the fact that either this polishingness does not occurs or the disinvestment occurs or both is wrong. fact6: If that imponderableness occurs then this uploading Blechnaceae occurs. fact7: If this repair does not occurs then either that deepening or the vaulting cliche or both occurs. fact8: That non-polishingness or the disinvestment or both happens if that dilution does not occurs. fact9: This discussing does not happens. fact10: If that directing occurs that humorlessness occurs. fact11: If this uploading Blechnaceae occurs then the fact that that notthat dilution but the hypnotherapy happens is not incorrect is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That non-polishingness or the disinvestment or both occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact9 -> int1: The fact that that desolation happens and this admiring iambic occurs is incorrect.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: That dilution does not happens.; int2 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That chiffon is not Balzacian.

¬{D}{b}

fact1: If this nostoc is a kind of a Fujiyama that does excogitate crotchetiness that chiffon does not excogitate crotchetiness. fact2: The fact that that radiomicrometer projects and does not excogitate crotchetiness does not hold. fact3: If that radiomicrometer is a kind of a Fujiyama and is not a kind of a Guatemalan then that chiffon is not a Guatemalan. fact4: That this nostoc excogitates crotchetiness but this is not Balzacian is not true if that chiffon is not a Guatemalan. fact5: This nostoc does excogitate crotchetiness. fact6: This nostoc is a epiplexis if the fact that that radiomicrometer projects and does not excogitate crotchetiness is false. fact7: That this nostoc is a parsec and it is brachiopodous hold. fact8: If that chiffon does not excogitate crotchetiness then it does not project and/or it is not a epiplexis. fact9: Somebody is Balzacian and that one is a parsec if that one is not brachiopodous. fact10: If something is not brachiopodous the fact that it projects and it is a parsec is right. fact11: The fact that that chiffon greases parisology and excogitates crotchetiness hold. fact12: This nostoc is brachiopodous. fact13: Some person is Balzacian if that it excogitates crotchetiness and it is not Balzacian does not hold. fact14: That that radiomicrometer projects and does excogitate crotchetiness is not correct. fact15: Terrance is not a epiplexis and that is not brachiopodous if the fact that this nostoc is Balzacian is right. fact16: If that radiomicrometer does excogitate crotchetiness then this nostoc is a epiplexis.

fact1: ({H}{a} & {F}{a}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact2: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact3: ({H}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{G}{b} fact4: ¬{G}{b} -> ¬({F}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact5: {F}{a} fact6: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> {C}{a} fact7: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact8: ¬{F}{b} -> (¬{E}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) fact9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({D}x & {A}x) fact10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({E}x & {A}x) fact11: ({BS}{b} & {F}{b}) fact12: {B}{a} fact13: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{D}x) -> {D}x fact14: ¬({E}{c} & {F}{c}) fact15: {D}{a} -> (¬{C}{ap} & ¬{B}{ap}) fact16: {F}{c} -> {C}{a}

That chiffon is Balzacian.

{D}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this nostoc is a kind of a Fujiyama that does excogitate crotchetiness that chiffon does not excogitate crotchetiness. fact2: The fact that that radiomicrometer projects and does not excogitate crotchetiness does not hold. fact3: If that radiomicrometer is a kind of a Fujiyama and is not a kind of a Guatemalan then that chiffon is not a Guatemalan. fact4: That this nostoc excogitates crotchetiness but this is not Balzacian is not true if that chiffon is not a Guatemalan. fact5: This nostoc does excogitate crotchetiness. fact6: This nostoc is a epiplexis if the fact that that radiomicrometer projects and does not excogitate crotchetiness is false. fact7: That this nostoc is a parsec and it is brachiopodous hold. fact8: If that chiffon does not excogitate crotchetiness then it does not project and/or it is not a epiplexis. fact9: Somebody is Balzacian and that one is a parsec if that one is not brachiopodous. fact10: If something is not brachiopodous the fact that it projects and it is a parsec is right. fact11: The fact that that chiffon greases parisology and excogitates crotchetiness hold. fact12: This nostoc is brachiopodous. fact13: Some person is Balzacian if that it excogitates crotchetiness and it is not Balzacian does not hold. fact14: That that radiomicrometer projects and does excogitate crotchetiness is not correct. fact15: Terrance is not a epiplexis and that is not brachiopodous if the fact that this nostoc is Balzacian is right. fact16: If that radiomicrometer does excogitate crotchetiness then this nostoc is a epiplexis. ; $hypothesis$ = That chiffon is not Balzacian. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That pisser does not predestinate clinched but this thing is nonabsorptive.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: That pisser is not a CIM. fact2: If that pisser is not a CIM it is not bracteolate. fact3: There is something such that it becalms necromancy. fact4: That pisser is not bracteolate and/or it is caudated if that consigner is not a CIM. fact5: That pisser is not a Geisel. fact6: If some man becalms necromancy then the fact that it is not integumental and is not a myoma is incorrect. fact7: That consigner is a CIM if this Welshman is bracteolate. fact8: If that that pisser does not predestinate clinched but it is nonabsorptive is wrong then it is bracteolate. fact9: Nelly is not a kind of a myoma if that this afterglow is not integumental and is not a myoma is wrong. fact10: Reina is not bracteolate if that pisser is not bracteolate or is caudated or both. fact11: That something is shaven and/or non-dogmatic is false if it is a Centaurium. fact12: If that consigner is a kind of a CIM then the fact that that pisser does not predestinate clinched but it is nonabsorptive does not hold. fact13: That the helper is Chassidic and predestinates clinched does not hold. fact14: That pisser is bracteolate if it is not nonabsorptive. fact15: If the fact that Nelly is not a Centaurium and is not a religionism does not hold then this cristal is not unshaven. fact16: This cristal is a Centaurium that does becalm necromancy if there is something such that it becalm necromancy. fact17: This Welshman is bracteolate person that is not non-caudated if the fact that this cristal is not a polished is not wrong. fact18: If this cristal is not unshaven it is not a polished and it is dogmatic. fact19: The fact that if that this cristal is not unshaven and/or it is not dogmatic is false this Welshman is not a CIM is not wrong. fact20: The fact that something is not a Centaurium and not a religionism does not hold if it is not a myoma.

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

Reina is not bracteolate.

¬{B}{al}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That pisser is not a CIM. fact2: If that pisser is not a CIM it is not bracteolate. fact3: There is something such that it becalms necromancy. fact4: That pisser is not bracteolate and/or it is caudated if that consigner is not a CIM. fact5: That pisser is not a Geisel. fact6: If some man becalms necromancy then the fact that it is not integumental and is not a myoma is incorrect. fact7: That consigner is a CIM if this Welshman is bracteolate. fact8: If that that pisser does not predestinate clinched but it is nonabsorptive is wrong then it is bracteolate. fact9: Nelly is not a kind of a myoma if that this afterglow is not integumental and is not a myoma is wrong. fact10: Reina is not bracteolate if that pisser is not bracteolate or is caudated or both. fact11: That something is shaven and/or non-dogmatic is false if it is a Centaurium. fact12: If that consigner is a kind of a CIM then the fact that that pisser does not predestinate clinched but it is nonabsorptive does not hold. fact13: That the helper is Chassidic and predestinates clinched does not hold. fact14: That pisser is bracteolate if it is not nonabsorptive. fact15: If the fact that Nelly is not a Centaurium and is not a religionism does not hold then this cristal is not unshaven. fact16: This cristal is a Centaurium that does becalm necromancy if there is something such that it becalm necromancy. fact17: This Welshman is bracteolate person that is not non-caudated if the fact that this cristal is not a polished is not wrong. fact18: If this cristal is not unshaven it is not a polished and it is dogmatic. fact19: The fact that if that this cristal is not unshaven and/or it is not dogmatic is false this Welshman is not a CIM is not wrong. fact20: The fact that something is not a Centaurium and not a religionism does not hold if it is not a myoma. ; $hypothesis$ = That pisser does not predestinate clinched but this thing is nonabsorptive. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that pisser does not predestinate clinched but it is nonabsorptive does not hold.; fact8 & assump1 -> int1: That pisser is bracteolate.; fact2 & fact1 -> int2: That that pisser is non-bracteolate hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That dangling bungling happens.

{AA}

fact1: That non-dishonourableness triggers that both that highlighting allure and the ergonomicness happens. fact2: That certification does not happens. fact3: That that serial does not occurs is caused by that manslaughter or that that Aristotelianness occurs or both. fact4: This dishonourableness does not occurs if the fact that this dishonourableness occurs but this volatilizing egality does not happens is false. fact5: If the equation does not happens both that precondition and that manslaughter occurs. fact6: That if the fact that this aurifying happens and that universalisticness happens is wrong then this corpuscularness does not happens hold. fact7: The fact that the fact that this dishonourableness but notthis volatilizing egality happens hold is not right if this travelog occurs. fact8: That that Aristotelianness does not happens results in that that dangling bungling does not happens and that certification does not occurs. fact9: This sweating does not occurs. fact10: The unposedness does not happens. fact11: Both this urceolateness and this travelog occurs if this corpuscularness does not occurs. fact12: The snort does not occurs and this volatilizing egality does not happens. fact13: The equation does not happens if this bregmaticness happens. fact14: The fact that this Diaspora does not occurs is true. fact15: If that highlighting allure happens that this freeing but notthe thromboseding clamminess happens is wrong. fact16: If that the fact that this freeing happens and the thromboseding clamminess does not occurs is wrong is right that limping does not happens. fact17: That certification does not occurs if that Aristotelianness does not happens. fact18: That universalisticness does not occurs. fact19: That Aristotelianness does not happens. fact20: That that limping does not happens causes that this bregmaticness and the noctambulation occurs.

fact1: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) fact2: ¬{AB} fact3: ({B} v {A}) -> ¬{HJ} fact4: ¬({L} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} fact5: ¬{D} -> ({C} & {B}) fact6: ¬({R} & {Q}) -> ¬{P} fact7: {N} -> ¬({L} & ¬{M}) fact8: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact9: ¬{DO} fact10: ¬{EE} fact11: ¬{P} -> ({O} & {N}) fact12: (¬{HT} & ¬{M}) fact13: {E} -> ¬{D} fact14: ¬{AQ} fact15: {J} -> ¬({H} & ¬{I}) fact16: ¬({H} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{G} fact17: ¬{A} -> ¬{AB} fact18: ¬{Q} fact19: ¬{A} fact20: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F})

That serial does not happens.

¬{HJ}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That non-dishonourableness triggers that both that highlighting allure and the ergonomicness happens. fact2: That certification does not happens. fact3: That that serial does not occurs is caused by that manslaughter or that that Aristotelianness occurs or both. fact4: This dishonourableness does not occurs if the fact that this dishonourableness occurs but this volatilizing egality does not happens is false. fact5: If the equation does not happens both that precondition and that manslaughter occurs. fact6: That if the fact that this aurifying happens and that universalisticness happens is wrong then this corpuscularness does not happens hold. fact7: The fact that the fact that this dishonourableness but notthis volatilizing egality happens hold is not right if this travelog occurs. fact8: That that Aristotelianness does not happens results in that that dangling bungling does not happens and that certification does not occurs. fact9: This sweating does not occurs. fact10: The unposedness does not happens. fact11: Both this urceolateness and this travelog occurs if this corpuscularness does not occurs. fact12: The snort does not occurs and this volatilizing egality does not happens. fact13: The equation does not happens if this bregmaticness happens. fact14: The fact that this Diaspora does not occurs is true. fact15: If that highlighting allure happens that this freeing but notthe thromboseding clamminess happens is wrong. fact16: If that the fact that this freeing happens and the thromboseding clamminess does not occurs is wrong is right that limping does not happens. fact17: That certification does not occurs if that Aristotelianness does not happens. fact18: That universalisticness does not occurs. fact19: That Aristotelianness does not happens. fact20: That that limping does not happens causes that this bregmaticness and the noctambulation occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That dangling bungling happens. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact19 -> int1: That dangling bungling does not happens and that certification does not occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That predestinationist is monied or it is not a stung or both.

({A}{a} v ¬{B}{a})

fact1: That predestinationist is monied or not a basinful or both. fact2: If some man does not ret Shikoku then it is not a stung and it is a kind of a Samia. fact3: Kirk is a kind of a stung if that predestinationist is both not a stung and a Samia. fact4: That predestinationist is socialistic. fact5: Either that predestinationist is monied or it is a stung or both. fact6: The Gruyere is a kind of a stung. fact7: This soaking is monied. fact8: That predestinationist is a Saarinen or a stung or both. fact9: The fact that some man is monied and/or the one is not a stung is incorrect if the one is a kind of a Samia. fact10: If something is not a quincentennial and/or is not baric then that does not ret Shikoku. fact11: That predestinationist bituminises Blattodea and/or it is a stung.

fact1: ({A}{a} v ¬{GD}{a}) fact2: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x & {C}x) fact3: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {B}{g} fact4: {EM}{a} fact5: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact6: {B}{gf} fact7: {A}{ba} fact8: ({BK}{a} v {B}{a}) fact9: (x): {C}x -> ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) fact10: (x): (¬{E}x v ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact11: ({HU}{a} v {B}{a})

That that predestinationist is monied or that thing is not a kind of a stung or both is wrong.

¬({A}{a} v ¬{B}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That predestinationist is monied or not a basinful or both. fact2: If some man does not ret Shikoku then it is not a stung and it is a kind of a Samia. fact3: Kirk is a kind of a stung if that predestinationist is both not a stung and a Samia. fact4: That predestinationist is socialistic. fact5: Either that predestinationist is monied or it is a stung or both. fact6: The Gruyere is a kind of a stung. fact7: This soaking is monied. fact8: That predestinationist is a Saarinen or a stung or both. fact9: The fact that some man is monied and/or the one is not a stung is incorrect if the one is a kind of a Samia. fact10: If something is not a quincentennial and/or is not baric then that does not ret Shikoku. fact11: That predestinationist bituminises Blattodea and/or it is a stung. ; $hypothesis$ = That predestinationist is monied or it is not a stung or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That moment is not a blocked.

¬{D}{c}

fact1: Somebody is not a blocked if the fact that it is a blocked and it is stannous is false. fact2: If this chief is stannous then that shirtsleeve is a Hebei. fact3: That moment is a blocked if that shirtsleeve is a kind of a Hebei. fact4: This chief is both stannous and a digestibility. fact5: The Mulla is stannous. fact6: This chief is a starkness. fact7: This chief is a digestibility.

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

That moment is not a blocked.

¬{D}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is not a blocked if the fact that it is a blocked and it is stannous is false. fact2: If this chief is stannous then that shirtsleeve is a Hebei. fact3: That moment is a blocked if that shirtsleeve is a kind of a Hebei. fact4: This chief is both stannous and a digestibility. fact5: The Mulla is stannous. fact6: This chief is a starkness. fact7: This chief is a digestibility. ; $hypothesis$ = That moment is not a blocked. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: This chief is not non-stannous.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: That shirtsleeve is a Hebei.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This planning leathered does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: The drama does not happens. fact2: This grumbling happens. fact3: The sidingness occurs. fact4: This prevailing caseful prevents that this Ecuadorianness does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that both the restlessness and that symbolizing occurs hold this Chassidicness does not happens. fact6: The restlessness happens. fact7: That both that non-psychotropicness and that non-unidimensionalness occurs is caused by that the diverging Carcharodon happens. fact8: If the hyperbolicness occurs the apparition happens. fact9: This Ecuadorianness does not happens but this prevailing caseful occurs if this disagreement happens. fact10: That the psychotropicness does not occurs triggers that both that sanitation and that symbolizing happens. fact11: The congenerousness happens. fact12: That that leafiness and this Ecuadorianness happens prevents that this planning leathered occurs. fact13: This disagreement happens and this crabbing Agathis happens if this Chassidicness does not happens. fact14: If this grumbling occurs that leafiness happens. fact15: The bibbing Cusco does not occurs. fact16: That non-Ecuadorianness yields that this grumbling happens or that that leafiness occurs or both. fact17: This indusialness does not happens. fact18: This prevailing caseful happens.

fact1: ¬{FA} fact2: {A} fact3: {CQ} fact4: {E} -> {C} fact5: ({J} & {I}) -> ¬{H} fact6: {J} fact7: {N} -> (¬{L} & ¬{M}) fact8: {CD} -> {FD} fact9: {F} -> (¬{C} & {E}) fact10: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {I}) fact11: {GB} fact12: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact13: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact14: {A} -> {B} fact15: ¬{BR} fact16: ¬{C} -> ({A} v {B}) fact17: ¬{ET} fact18: {E}

This planning leathered happens.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The drama does not happens. fact2: This grumbling happens. fact3: The sidingness occurs. fact4: This prevailing caseful prevents that this Ecuadorianness does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that both the restlessness and that symbolizing occurs hold this Chassidicness does not happens. fact6: The restlessness happens. fact7: That both that non-psychotropicness and that non-unidimensionalness occurs is caused by that the diverging Carcharodon happens. fact8: If the hyperbolicness occurs the apparition happens. fact9: This Ecuadorianness does not happens but this prevailing caseful occurs if this disagreement happens. fact10: That the psychotropicness does not occurs triggers that both that sanitation and that symbolizing happens. fact11: The congenerousness happens. fact12: That that leafiness and this Ecuadorianness happens prevents that this planning leathered occurs. fact13: This disagreement happens and this crabbing Agathis happens if this Chassidicness does not happens. fact14: If this grumbling occurs that leafiness happens. fact15: The bibbing Cusco does not occurs. fact16: That non-Ecuadorianness yields that this grumbling happens or that that leafiness occurs or both. fact17: This indusialness does not happens. fact18: This prevailing caseful happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This planning leathered does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact2 -> int1: That leafiness occurs.; fact18 & fact4 -> int2: This Ecuadorianness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both that leafiness and this Ecuadorianness occurs.; int3 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That either this whimper happens or that denaturalizing hemorrhoid does not happens or both is wrong.

¬({AA} v ¬{AB})

fact1: If that unpasteurisedness happens this whimper occurs or that denaturalizing hemorrhoid does not happens or both. fact2: This whimper does not happens. fact3: If the polyvalentness does not occurs then that unoriginalness and that unpasteurisedness happens. fact4: If that unpasteurisedness does not occurs then the fact that that autotomy and/or this non-meioticness happens does not hold. fact5: The fact that either the flatterness occurs or this formalism does not happens or both is wrong.

fact1: {A} -> ({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact2: ¬{AA} fact3: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact4: ¬{A} -> ¬({DC} v ¬{HH}) fact5: ¬({GR} v ¬{BK})

This whimper happens and/or that denaturalizing hemorrhoid does not happens.

({AA} v ¬{AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that unpasteurisedness happens this whimper occurs or that denaturalizing hemorrhoid does not happens or both. fact2: This whimper does not happens. fact3: If the polyvalentness does not occurs then that unoriginalness and that unpasteurisedness happens. fact4: If that unpasteurisedness does not occurs then the fact that that autotomy and/or this non-meioticness happens does not hold. fact5: The fact that either the flatterness occurs or this formalism does not happens or both is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That either this whimper happens or that denaturalizing hemorrhoid does not happens or both is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this hearth is not intestinal or he is not a kind of an anesthetic or both is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: that Meade becalms hearth. fact2: This hearth does not becalm Meade if this hearth is not intestinal and/or it is not an anesthetic. fact3: Some person is not coastal but the one is a kind of a subdominant if the one is not accessible. fact4: This fagoting does not strand Camponotus and does not becalm Meade if it is not coastal. fact5: This hearth becalms Meade. fact6: If something is synovial then it does not sedate Ugaritic.

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

This hearth does not sedate Ugaritic.

¬{BM}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: that Meade becalms hearth. fact2: This hearth does not becalm Meade if this hearth is not intestinal and/or it is not an anesthetic. fact3: Some person is not coastal but the one is a kind of a subdominant if the one is not accessible. fact4: This fagoting does not strand Camponotus and does not becalm Meade if it is not coastal. fact5: This hearth becalms Meade. fact6: If something is synovial then it does not sedate Ugaritic. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this hearth is not intestinal or he is not a kind of an anesthetic or both is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this hearth is not intestinal and/or the one is not an anesthetic.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: This hearth does not becalm Meade.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That maculation and this phasing Kreisler happens.

({A} & {B})

fact1: If that squeegeeing Millikan happens that presidency occurs but that malfeasance does not happens. fact2: The visiting occurs and that lessening occurs. fact3: If this hermeneuticness does not occurs then that this fire does not occurs and this filing does not occurs is incorrect. fact4: That that ting does not happens results in that the paroxysmalness does not happens and the courageousness does not happens. fact5: That that merrymaking and the Preakness happens is caused by the non-paroxysmalness. fact6: The fact that this phasing Kreisler occurs and this ELISA happens does not hold if this inverting does not happens. fact7: That clearing occurs and this dryerness occurs. fact8: If this shuttering Mylodontidae does not occurs then this katzenjammer does not happens and/or that ting does not happens. fact9: That this calycledness does not occurs and that woodworking does not happens does not hold if that remarriage does not occurs. fact10: This phasing Kreisler does not happens if that this phasing Kreisler and this ELISA happens does not hold. fact11: This phasing Kreisler happens. fact12: The fact that the unlearning religion does not happens but this inverting occurs is wrong if that merrymaking happens. fact13: That squeegeeing Millikan and the mensalness occurs. fact14: If this phasing Kreisler does not occurs that pronounceableness and that maculation occurs. fact15: This endeavoring happens if the fact that this fire does not occurs and this filing does not occurs is incorrect. fact16: If that this calycledness does not occurs and that woodworking does not occurs does not hold that woodworking happens. fact17: If this katzenjammer does not occurs and/or that ting does not occurs then that ting does not occurs. fact18: This shuttering Mylodontidae does not occurs if this gyralness does not happens. fact19: That maculation occurs. fact20: If that the unlearning religion does not happens but this inverting occurs is incorrect then this inverting does not happens. fact21: This hermeneuticness is prevented by that that presidency occurs and that malfeasance does not happens. fact22: If that clearing occurs and that woodworking happens this gyralness does not occurs.

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

That pronounceableness and this endeavoring occurs.

({EK} & {BL})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that squeegeeing Millikan happens that presidency occurs but that malfeasance does not happens. fact2: The visiting occurs and that lessening occurs. fact3: If this hermeneuticness does not occurs then that this fire does not occurs and this filing does not occurs is incorrect. fact4: That that ting does not happens results in that the paroxysmalness does not happens and the courageousness does not happens. fact5: That that merrymaking and the Preakness happens is caused by the non-paroxysmalness. fact6: The fact that this phasing Kreisler occurs and this ELISA happens does not hold if this inverting does not happens. fact7: That clearing occurs and this dryerness occurs. fact8: If this shuttering Mylodontidae does not occurs then this katzenjammer does not happens and/or that ting does not happens. fact9: That this calycledness does not occurs and that woodworking does not happens does not hold if that remarriage does not occurs. fact10: This phasing Kreisler does not happens if that this phasing Kreisler and this ELISA happens does not hold. fact11: This phasing Kreisler happens. fact12: The fact that the unlearning religion does not happens but this inverting occurs is wrong if that merrymaking happens. fact13: That squeegeeing Millikan and the mensalness occurs. fact14: If this phasing Kreisler does not occurs that pronounceableness and that maculation occurs. fact15: This endeavoring happens if the fact that this fire does not occurs and this filing does not occurs is incorrect. fact16: If that this calycledness does not occurs and that woodworking does not occurs does not hold that woodworking happens. fact17: If this katzenjammer does not occurs and/or that ting does not occurs then that ting does not occurs. fact18: This shuttering Mylodontidae does not occurs if this gyralness does not happens. fact19: That maculation occurs. fact20: If that the unlearning religion does not happens but this inverting occurs is incorrect then this inverting does not happens. fact21: This hermeneuticness is prevented by that that presidency occurs and that malfeasance does not happens. fact22: If that clearing occurs and that woodworking happens this gyralness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That maculation and this phasing Kreisler happens. ; $proof$ =

fact19 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That subsoil is not a amphictyony.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: That subsoil is not a weathered. fact2: The fact that that subsoil is not a pucker but it is noncyclical does not hold if it is not a weathered. fact3: That subsoil is a kind of a amphictyony if that subsoil is not noncyclical. fact4: If that something is not a pucker but it is noncyclical is incorrect it is a amphictyony. fact5: The fact that the ADPS is not Ptolemaic and is apostrophic is false. fact6: If the fact that something is not a weathered but it is a amphictyony does not hold it is noncyclical.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} fact2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: ¬{AB}{a} -> {B}{a} fact4: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact5: ¬(¬{GP}{aq} & {J}{aq}) fact6: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) -> {AB}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That subsoil is not a weathered. fact2: The fact that that subsoil is not a pucker but it is noncyclical does not hold if it is not a weathered. fact3: That subsoil is a kind of a amphictyony if that subsoil is not noncyclical. fact4: If that something is not a pucker but it is noncyclical is incorrect it is a amphictyony. fact5: The fact that the ADPS is not Ptolemaic and is apostrophic is false. fact6: If the fact that something is not a weathered but it is a amphictyony does not hold it is noncyclical. ; $hypothesis$ = That subsoil is not a amphictyony. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> int1: That that subsoil is not a pucker but noncyclical is incorrect.; fact4 -> int2: That subsoil is a amphictyony if the fact that that subsoil is both not a pucker and noncyclical is false.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that everything is a Dreiser does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Someone underprices pentangle and it silences Sphenopsida if it is not a meretriciousness. fact2: Everything is not a meretriciousness. fact3: Everything is a aniseikonia. fact4: Someone gads Maoism if it is a kind of a Dreiser. fact5: The fact that that something do notmesticate Alcyonaria and is not a Dreiser is false if it underprices pentangle hold. fact6: If some man is a kind of a Dreiser that it is rural is correct.

fact1: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({B}x & {D}x) fact2: (x): ¬{E}x fact3: (x): {DJ}x fact4: (x): {A}x -> {BO}x fact5: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) fact6: (x): {A}x -> {IH}x

Every man is rural.

(x): {IH}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone underprices pentangle and it silences Sphenopsida if it is not a meretriciousness. fact2: Everything is not a meretriciousness. fact3: Everything is a aniseikonia. fact4: Someone gads Maoism if it is a kind of a Dreiser. fact5: The fact that that something do notmesticate Alcyonaria and is not a Dreiser is false if it underprices pentangle hold. fact6: If some man is a kind of a Dreiser that it is rural is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that everything is a Dreiser does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

There is something such that if it is fibrinous it is not untidy.

(Ex): {B}x -> ¬{C}x

fact1: This majolica is a kind of a Galium. fact2: If that some man is not a kind of a Galium but this person is untidy does not hold the fact that this person is a Galium is true. fact3: Either this majolica is a 7 or it is boytrose or both. fact4: This majolica is not less. fact5: This majolica rehearses or that is a Galium or both. fact6: This majolica scans Bigfoot. fact7: This majolica is a Merckx. fact8: That someone is not a Galium and is untidy is incorrect if the person is fibrinous. fact9: There exists something such that if this thing is not non-fibrinous this thing is untidy. fact10: If this majolica is a Galium and/or it is fibrinous this majolica is not untidy. fact11: This majolica is untidy if this majolica is fibrinous. fact12: This bolshy is fibrinous if this majolica oxygenates pretension. fact13: There is some person such that if this one is a Mozambican this one is not selfless.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) -> {A}x fact3: ({JD}{a} v {JA}{a}) fact4: ¬{AP}{a} fact5: ({FO}{a} v {A}{a}) fact6: {HE}{a} fact7: {DS}{a} fact8: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) fact9: (Ex): {B}x -> {C}x fact10: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact11: {B}{a} -> {C}{a} fact12: {D}{a} -> {B}{cp} fact13: (Ex): {AF}x -> ¬{EP}x

This bolshy is a Galium.

{A}{cp}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This majolica is a kind of a Galium. fact2: If that some man is not a kind of a Galium but this person is untidy does not hold the fact that this person is a Galium is true. fact3: Either this majolica is a 7 or it is boytrose or both. fact4: This majolica is not less. fact5: This majolica rehearses or that is a Galium or both. fact6: This majolica scans Bigfoot. fact7: This majolica is a Merckx. fact8: That someone is not a Galium and is untidy is incorrect if the person is fibrinous. fact9: There exists something such that if this thing is not non-fibrinous this thing is untidy. fact10: If this majolica is a Galium and/or it is fibrinous this majolica is not untidy. fact11: This majolica is untidy if this majolica is fibrinous. fact12: This bolshy is fibrinous if this majolica oxygenates pretension. fact13: There is some person such that if this one is a Mozambican this one is not selfless. ; $hypothesis$ = There is something such that if it is fibrinous it is not untidy. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this majolica is fibrinous.; assump1 -> int1: Either this majolica is a Galium or that person is fibrinous or both.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: This majolica is not untidy.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: If this majolica is fibrinous this majolica is not untidy.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this worsting does not happens but that viniculture happens is false.

¬(¬{A} & {B})

fact1: This worsting does not happens and this randomisation does not occurs. fact2: That that viniculture happens is triggered by that the scything shrug occurs but the homophonousness does not happens. fact3: Both that scyone shrug and the non-homophonousness happens.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This worsting does not happens and this randomisation does not occurs. fact2: That that viniculture happens is triggered by that the scything shrug occurs but the homophonousness does not happens. fact3: Both that scyone shrug and the non-homophonousness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this worsting does not happens but that viniculture happens is false. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact3 -> int1: That viniculture happens.; fact1 -> int2: This worsting does not occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This fingerboard does not quarrel Orthilia.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: The fact that something is an executive and it heckles Nancere is incorrect if it does not keel despicableness. fact2: Something does not sew if that thing is a Laocoon and that thing does scurry. fact3: If that hairdo is not a cereal and/or he is not a Azores that hairdo scurries. fact4: This chloroform is a top if that extinguisher is unopposable. fact5: that multitude sells moniliasis. fact6: That hairdo is not a cereal and/or is not a Azores. fact7: This actinozoan is not a Apis. fact8: That moniliasis sells multitude. fact9: That hairdo is a Laocoon if the fact that this chloroform is insignificant is correct. fact10: This fingerboard does not sew if that that hairdoes not sew is not wrong. fact11: This fingerboard is a forthrightness if that moniliasis does quarrel Orthilia. fact12: If this actinozoan is not a Apis then that extinguisher is unopposable and a Marlowe. fact13: If something is a top then the thing is insignificant. fact14: This fingerboard quarrels Orthilia if that moniliasis sells multitude. fact15: Everyone does not keel despicableness. fact16: Some man that is not procaryotic either ostracizes saying or is granuliferous or both. fact17: That this fingerboard sells multitude hold if the fact that that moniliasis quarrels Orthilia is right. fact18: Something is not procaryotic if the fact that the fact that it is an executive and it heckles Nancere is right does not hold. fact19: That prickle quarrels Orthilia if that moniliasis sells multitude. fact20: That moniliasis is a bored. fact21: If some man that sells multitude is granuliferous it does not quarrel Orthilia. fact22: If something does not sew this thing prorogues Amphisbaenidae and this thing sells multitude. fact23: That this fingerboard is granuliferous is not incorrect if that moniliasis ostracizes saying.

fact1: (x): ¬{S}x -> ¬({K}x & {J}x) fact2: (x): ({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact3: (¬{L}{c} v ¬{M}{c}) -> {G}{c} fact4: {P}{f} -> {O}{e} fact5: {AA}{aa} fact6: (¬{L}{c} v ¬{M}{c}) fact7: ¬{R}{g} fact8: {A}{a} fact9: {N}{e} -> {H}{c} fact10: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{E}{b} fact11: {B}{a} -> {EH}{b} fact12: ¬{R}{g} -> ({P}{f} & {Q}{f}) fact13: (x): {O}x -> {N}x fact14: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact15: (x): ¬{S}x fact16: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({F}x v {C}x) fact17: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact18: (x): ¬({K}x & {J}x) -> ¬{I}x fact19: {A}{a} -> {B}{eb} fact20: {BT}{a} fact21: (x): ({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact22: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & {A}x) fact23: {F}{a} -> {C}{b}

This fingerboard does not quarrel Orthilia.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that something is an executive and it heckles Nancere is incorrect if it does not keel despicableness. fact2: Something does not sew if that thing is a Laocoon and that thing does scurry. fact3: If that hairdo is not a cereal and/or he is not a Azores that hairdo scurries. fact4: This chloroform is a top if that extinguisher is unopposable. fact5: that multitude sells moniliasis. fact6: That hairdo is not a cereal and/or is not a Azores. fact7: This actinozoan is not a Apis. fact8: That moniliasis sells multitude. fact9: That hairdo is a Laocoon if the fact that this chloroform is insignificant is correct. fact10: This fingerboard does not sew if that that hairdoes not sew is not wrong. fact11: This fingerboard is a forthrightness if that moniliasis does quarrel Orthilia. fact12: If this actinozoan is not a Apis then that extinguisher is unopposable and a Marlowe. fact13: If something is a top then the thing is insignificant. fact14: This fingerboard quarrels Orthilia if that moniliasis sells multitude. fact15: Everyone does not keel despicableness. fact16: Some man that is not procaryotic either ostracizes saying or is granuliferous or both. fact17: That this fingerboard sells multitude hold if the fact that that moniliasis quarrels Orthilia is right. fact18: Something is not procaryotic if the fact that the fact that it is an executive and it heckles Nancere is right does not hold. fact19: That prickle quarrels Orthilia if that moniliasis sells multitude. fact20: That moniliasis is a bored. fact21: If some man that sells multitude is granuliferous it does not quarrel Orthilia. fact22: If something does not sew this thing prorogues Amphisbaenidae and this thing sells multitude. fact23: That this fingerboard is granuliferous is not incorrect if that moniliasis ostracizes saying. ; $hypothesis$ = This fingerboard does not quarrel Orthilia. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That vardenafil is a Mustelidae.

{C}{b}

fact1: That vardenafil is a stink. fact2: That vardenafil is a Mysticeti. fact3: The peptisation is a stink. fact4: This preserver is a Mustelidae. fact5: This preserver is myelic. fact6: This preserver is a kind of a Mustelidae if that vardenafil reinvigorates Kyphosus. fact7: This preserver is a stink. fact8: This preserver capitalizes boringness. fact9: If that this preserver is a kind of a fancy but it is not a Turnix is wrong then that vardenafil does not reinvigorate Kyphosus. fact10: Every man is not a Turnix. fact11: If the fact that this preserver does not reinvigorate Kyphosus does not hold then that vardenafil is a Mustelidae. fact12: Some man is a stink and the one is a kind of a Mustelidae if the one does not reinvigorate Kyphosus. fact13: The supplement is a Mustelidae. fact14: That vardenafil does reinvigorate Kyphosus. fact15: If that vardenafil is a stink then this preserver is a kind of a Mustelidae. fact16: This preserver purloins pianissimo. fact17: This preserver is a kind of a stink and that reinvigorates Kyphosus. fact18: That vardenafil reinvigorates Kyphosus if this preserver is a Mustelidae.

fact1: {A}{b} fact2: {IL}{b} fact3: {A}{ek} fact4: {C}{a} fact5: {DD}{a} fact6: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} fact7: {A}{a} fact8: {BF}{a} fact9: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact10: (x): ¬{E}x fact11: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} fact12: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {C}x) fact13: {C}{fn} fact14: {B}{b} fact15: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact16: {GR}{a} fact17: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact18: {C}{a} -> {B}{b}

This incumbrance is a Mustelidae.

{C}{io}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That vardenafil is a stink. fact2: That vardenafil is a Mysticeti. fact3: The peptisation is a stink. fact4: This preserver is a Mustelidae. fact5: This preserver is myelic. fact6: This preserver is a kind of a Mustelidae if that vardenafil reinvigorates Kyphosus. fact7: This preserver is a stink. fact8: This preserver capitalizes boringness. fact9: If that this preserver is a kind of a fancy but it is not a Turnix is wrong then that vardenafil does not reinvigorate Kyphosus. fact10: Every man is not a Turnix. fact11: If the fact that this preserver does not reinvigorate Kyphosus does not hold then that vardenafil is a Mustelidae. fact12: Some man is a stink and the one is a kind of a Mustelidae if the one does not reinvigorate Kyphosus. fact13: The supplement is a Mustelidae. fact14: That vardenafil does reinvigorate Kyphosus. fact15: If that vardenafil is a stink then this preserver is a kind of a Mustelidae. fact16: This preserver purloins pianissimo. fact17: This preserver is a kind of a stink and that reinvigorates Kyphosus. fact18: That vardenafil reinvigorates Kyphosus if this preserver is a Mustelidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That vardenafil is a Mustelidae. ; $proof$ =

fact17 -> int1: This preserver reinvigorates Kyphosus.; int1 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Scottie does not intussuscept and/or it is a Lyly.

(¬{B}{b} v {D}{b})

fact1: The fact that this gunslinger spends and is obvious does not hold if this one is not a first. fact2: Some man is not a Lyly if the fact that it intussuscepts and is a kind of a first is false. fact3: This gunslinger is not a first. fact4: Something is not a first if the fact that the thing does intussuscept and is obvious does not hold. fact5: If that something spends and it is obvious does not hold then it does not intussuscept. fact6: If this gunslinger does not intussuscept this Scottie does not intussuscept and/or this person is a Lyly. fact7: If someone is extrasensory then either she intussuscepts or she is not a kind of a first or both. fact8: This Scottie intussuscepts and/or it is a kind of a Lyly. fact9: If the fact that this gunslinger does not spend hold this gunslinger does not intussuscept. fact10: Some man is a Lyly if that this person is not a kind of a first and this person is not extrasensory is false.

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

That finnan is not a Lyly.

¬{D}{ic}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this gunslinger spends and is obvious does not hold if this one is not a first. fact2: Some man is not a Lyly if the fact that it intussuscepts and is a kind of a first is false. fact3: This gunslinger is not a first. fact4: Something is not a first if the fact that the thing does intussuscept and is obvious does not hold. fact5: If that something spends and it is obvious does not hold then it does not intussuscept. fact6: If this gunslinger does not intussuscept this Scottie does not intussuscept and/or this person is a Lyly. fact7: If someone is extrasensory then either she intussuscepts or she is not a kind of a first or both. fact8: This Scottie intussuscepts and/or it is a kind of a Lyly. fact9: If the fact that this gunslinger does not spend hold this gunslinger does not intussuscept. fact10: Some man is a Lyly if that this person is not a kind of a first and this person is not extrasensory is false. ; $hypothesis$ = This Scottie does not intussuscept and/or it is a Lyly. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> int1: That this gunslinger spends and is obvious is wrong.; fact5 -> int2: This gunslinger does not intussuscept if the fact that this gunslinger spends and is obvious is not right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This gunslinger does not intussuscept.; int3 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this roccella is non-carboxylic and is not a kind of a simmer is not right.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: That Uygur is not a Limnobium and not a Bamako. fact2: If some person is not a kind of a Limnobium then he is not carboxylic and he is not a simmer. fact3: If that Uygur is not a Limnobium and she is not a Bamako then this roccella is not a Limnobium. fact4: That sweetie is not carboxylic. fact5: The fact that something is both not carboxylic and not a simmer is false if the thing is a kind of a Limnobium. fact6: Something is not a Bamako and it is not a simmer if the fact that it is not a kind of a Limnobium is true. fact7: If some man is not a Limnobium then it is not a simmer. fact8: That Uygur is not a Bamako if this roccella is a kind of a Bamako but he is not a Limnobium. fact9: This roccella is not a kind of a Anisoptera.

fact1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} fact4: ¬{AA}{bu} fact5: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact6: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{AB}x) fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AB}x fact8: ({C}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact9: ¬{R}{aa}

The fact that this roccella is non-carboxylic and is not a kind of a simmer is not right.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Uygur is not a Limnobium and not a Bamako. fact2: If some person is not a kind of a Limnobium then he is not carboxylic and he is not a simmer. fact3: If that Uygur is not a Limnobium and she is not a Bamako then this roccella is not a Limnobium. fact4: That sweetie is not carboxylic. fact5: The fact that something is both not carboxylic and not a simmer is false if the thing is a kind of a Limnobium. fact6: Something is not a Bamako and it is not a simmer if the fact that it is not a kind of a Limnobium is true. fact7: If some man is not a Limnobium then it is not a simmer. fact8: That Uygur is not a Bamako if this roccella is a kind of a Bamako but he is not a Limnobium. fact9: This roccella is not a kind of a Anisoptera. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this roccella is non-carboxylic and is not a kind of a simmer is not right. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: If this roccella is not a Limnobium that thing is not carboxylic and that thing is not a simmer.; fact1 & fact3 -> int2: This roccella is not a Limnobium.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That pureblood cultures laryngitis.

{B}{aa}

fact1: Some person does not culture laryngitis if he/she is a SA and he/she does not uncouple balanitis. fact2: If that pureblood is a nation that does not wing PLF that pureblood is not a personal. fact3: That pureblood does not clean Theophrastaceae. fact4: That pureblood is a kind of a SA. fact5: That pureblood does compress defect but it is not a Belsen. fact6: The weisenheimer is a Vienne and is not a SA. fact7: That debitor does not culture laryngitis if the fact that that layman either does not drink Gramineae or does levitate isometric or both is false. fact8: That pureblood does not drink Gramineae if that layman does not drink Gramineae. fact9: Lance is not a SA. fact10: If that somebody is a varus or is a kind of a bigheartedness or both is false she/he does not drink Gramineae. fact11: The gueridon is a kind of a native but it does not culture laryngitis. fact12: That worsted is not a SA. fact13: The fact that that splasher is not astrophysical and the thing does not legitimate technobabble is wrong. fact14: The fact that that pureblood does not uncouple balanitis hold. fact15: If that something is not astrophysical and it does not legitimate technobabble is wrong it epitomizes backed. fact16: the fact that this balanitis does not uncouple pureblood hold. fact17: Something cultures laryngitis and that thing levitates isometric if that thing does not drink Gramineae.

fact1: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact2: ({IF}{aa} & ¬{IO}{aa}) -> ¬{AJ}{aa} fact3: ¬{DC}{aa} fact4: {AA}{aa} fact5: ({DL}{aa} & ¬{IP}{aa}) fact6: ({BM}{ar} & ¬{AA}{ar}) fact7: ¬(¬{C}{a} v {A}{a}) -> ¬{B}{ip} fact8: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{C}{aa} fact9: ¬{AA}{jb} fact10: (x): ¬({D}x v {E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact11: ({IG}{f} & ¬{B}{f}) fact12: ¬{AA}{je} fact13: ¬(¬{H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) fact14: ¬{AB}{aa} fact15: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) -> {F}x fact16: ¬{AD}{ac} fact17: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x)

That pureblood cultures laryngitis.

{B}{aa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person does not culture laryngitis if he/she is a SA and he/she does not uncouple balanitis. fact2: If that pureblood is a nation that does not wing PLF that pureblood is not a personal. fact3: That pureblood does not clean Theophrastaceae. fact4: That pureblood is a kind of a SA. fact5: That pureblood does compress defect but it is not a Belsen. fact6: The weisenheimer is a Vienne and is not a SA. fact7: That debitor does not culture laryngitis if the fact that that layman either does not drink Gramineae or does levitate isometric or both is false. fact8: That pureblood does not drink Gramineae if that layman does not drink Gramineae. fact9: Lance is not a SA. fact10: If that somebody is a varus or is a kind of a bigheartedness or both is false she/he does not drink Gramineae. fact11: The gueridon is a kind of a native but it does not culture laryngitis. fact12: That worsted is not a SA. fact13: The fact that that splasher is not astrophysical and the thing does not legitimate technobabble is wrong. fact14: The fact that that pureblood does not uncouple balanitis hold. fact15: If that something is not astrophysical and it does not legitimate technobabble is wrong it epitomizes backed. fact16: the fact that this balanitis does not uncouple pureblood hold. fact17: Something cultures laryngitis and that thing levitates isometric if that thing does not drink Gramineae. ; $hypothesis$ = That pureblood cultures laryngitis. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That if that pureblood is a SA and does not uncouple balanitis that pureblood does not culture laryngitis is true.; fact14 & fact4 -> int2: That pureblood is a kind of a SA that does not uncouple balanitis.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That stoep is not evidentiary.

¬{E}{a}

fact1: If that Alexanders does not raise phobophobia that that stoep is a kind of a Sunbelt and it is a tenosynovitis is false. fact2: If some person is a commonness it is a archosaurian or it is not a kind of a Sunbelt or both. fact3: That stoep is not a Sunbelt if the fact that this person is a Sunbelt that is a kind of a tenosynovitis does not hold. fact4: That Alexanders is not a kind of a commonness if that this oxaloacetate is a archosaurian or that one is not a commonness or both does not hold. fact5: Something escapes cynicism if the fact that the thing is a commonness is right. fact6: The fact that either some person is a Tibur or it is not evidentiary or both is true if it is a commonness. fact7: If that Alexanders is not non-WYSIWYG or it is a Petronius or both then it does not raise phobophobia. fact8: That stoep is a Tibur and that one is a commonness. fact9: Jose Manuel is either a commonness or a Tibur or both if that stoep is not a kind of a Sunbelt. fact10: If that Alexanders is not a kind of a commonness that stoep is non-evidentiary but she is a Tibur.

fact1: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} & {G}{a}) fact2: (x): {B}x -> ({D}x v ¬{C}x) fact3: ¬({C}{a} & {G}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact4: ¬({D}{c} v ¬{B}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact5: (x): {B}x -> {FN}x fact6: (x): {B}x -> ({A}x v ¬{E}x) fact7: ({I}{b} v {H}{b}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact8: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact9: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{gm} v {A}{gm}) fact10: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{E}{a} & {A}{a})

Jose Manuel does escape cynicism and is dolomitic.

({FN}{gm} & {DG}{gm})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that Alexanders does not raise phobophobia that that stoep is a kind of a Sunbelt and it is a tenosynovitis is false. fact2: If some person is a commonness it is a archosaurian or it is not a kind of a Sunbelt or both. fact3: That stoep is not a Sunbelt if the fact that this person is a Sunbelt that is a kind of a tenosynovitis does not hold. fact4: That Alexanders is not a kind of a commonness if that this oxaloacetate is a archosaurian or that one is not a commonness or both does not hold. fact5: Something escapes cynicism if the fact that the thing is a commonness is right. fact6: The fact that either some person is a Tibur or it is not evidentiary or both is true if it is a commonness. fact7: If that Alexanders is not non-WYSIWYG or it is a Petronius or both then it does not raise phobophobia. fact8: That stoep is a Tibur and that one is a commonness. fact9: Jose Manuel is either a commonness or a Tibur or both if that stoep is not a kind of a Sunbelt. fact10: If that Alexanders is not a kind of a commonness that stoep is non-evidentiary but she is a Tibur. ; $hypothesis$ = That stoep is not evidentiary. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This vervain heals.

{A}{a}

fact1: That herrerasaur is not trinucleate. fact2: That elbow is a kind of a caffeinism that heals if this vervain is not scholastic. fact3: If some person hyphenates F.I.S.C. that it does not submerge detergency and it is exploratory does not hold. fact4: If the fact that this papyrus is not exploratory and is disobedient is wrong then this papyrus is not disobedient. fact5: If the fact that something is disobedient but this thing is not a Nanking is incorrect this thing is not scholastic. fact6: This vervain does not heal if that this papyrus is not non-scholastic or the person does not heal or both is not right. fact7: The loadstar heals. fact8: The lorica heals. fact9: This vervain heals. fact10: Some man pads and it is not non-riparian if it does not sneak prejudiced. fact11: This muzjik does submerge detergency if the fact that that herrerasaur does not submerge detergency and is exploratory is false. fact12: That something is scholastic and/or does not heal is false if this thing is not a caffeinism. fact13: If something is a kind of a Gaborone that is not a processional then it does not sneak prejudiced. fact14: If something is both not disobedient and not a Nanking the thing is not a caffeinism. fact15: If that herrerasaur is not trinucleate that herrerasaur is both a Gaborone and not a processional. fact16: If that this papyrus submerges detergency hold then that this vervain is disobedient and is not a Nanking is wrong. fact17: This papyrus does submerge detergency if this muzjik does submerge detergency. fact18: This vervain is a Manihot. fact19: If that herrerasaur pads it hyphenates F.I.S.C.

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

That elbow heals.

{A}{ba}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That herrerasaur is not trinucleate. fact2: That elbow is a kind of a caffeinism that heals if this vervain is not scholastic. fact3: If some person hyphenates F.I.S.C. that it does not submerge detergency and it is exploratory does not hold. fact4: If the fact that this papyrus is not exploratory and is disobedient is wrong then this papyrus is not disobedient. fact5: If the fact that something is disobedient but this thing is not a Nanking is incorrect this thing is not scholastic. fact6: This vervain does not heal if that this papyrus is not non-scholastic or the person does not heal or both is not right. fact7: The loadstar heals. fact8: The lorica heals. fact9: This vervain heals. fact10: Some man pads and it is not non-riparian if it does not sneak prejudiced. fact11: This muzjik does submerge detergency if the fact that that herrerasaur does not submerge detergency and is exploratory is false. fact12: That something is scholastic and/or does not heal is false if this thing is not a caffeinism. fact13: If something is a kind of a Gaborone that is not a processional then it does not sneak prejudiced. fact14: If something is both not disobedient and not a Nanking the thing is not a caffeinism. fact15: If that herrerasaur is not trinucleate that herrerasaur is both a Gaborone and not a processional. fact16: If that this papyrus submerges detergency hold then that this vervain is disobedient and is not a Nanking is wrong. fact17: This papyrus does submerge detergency if this muzjik does submerge detergency. fact18: This vervain is a Manihot. fact19: If that herrerasaur pads it hyphenates F.I.S.C. ; $hypothesis$ = This vervain heals. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This syndicator is blastocoelic and it is a Silurian.

({C}{c} & {A}{c})

fact1: This syndicator does not misprint. fact2: This syndicator is blastocoelic and is a kind of a Silurian if this sidewalk does not misprint. fact3: That menses hurts omerta if that that menses is not a kind of a riposte and it is unadoptable does not hold. fact4: If some person does not hurt omerta that she is a literate and misprints is wrong. fact5: This propoxyphene is impressible and she is irreparable. fact6: This sidewalk does not misprint if that menses is an adaptability and is bipedal. fact7: This syndicator is bipedal and is not non-blastocoelic if that menses is not a Silurian. fact8: That menses is not a kind of an adaptability but it is blastocoelic. fact9: That menses is not a kind of an adaptability but it is a Silurian. fact10: This syndicator is blastocoelic if this sidewalk does not misprint. fact11: If that menses is not an adaptability and is bipedal this sidewalk does not misprint. fact12: That menses is not a kind of an adaptability but this is bipedal. fact13: This syndicator is blastocoelic. fact14: This sidewalk is not leptorrhinic. fact15: That menses is a Tilapia. fact16: Somebody does not misprint if that the one is a literate and the one misprint is wrong. fact17: This syndicator does not hurt omerta if that menses is a kind of a Tilapia and it hurt omerta. fact18: That menses is not a kind of an adaptability.

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

The fact that this syndicator is blastocoelic and it is a Silurian does not hold.

¬({C}{c} & {A}{c})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This syndicator does not misprint. fact2: This syndicator is blastocoelic and is a kind of a Silurian if this sidewalk does not misprint. fact3: That menses hurts omerta if that that menses is not a kind of a riposte and it is unadoptable does not hold. fact4: If some person does not hurt omerta that she is a literate and misprints is wrong. fact5: This propoxyphene is impressible and she is irreparable. fact6: This sidewalk does not misprint if that menses is an adaptability and is bipedal. fact7: This syndicator is bipedal and is not non-blastocoelic if that menses is not a Silurian. fact8: That menses is not a kind of an adaptability but it is blastocoelic. fact9: That menses is not a kind of an adaptability but it is a Silurian. fact10: This syndicator is blastocoelic if this sidewalk does not misprint. fact11: If that menses is not an adaptability and is bipedal this sidewalk does not misprint. fact12: That menses is not a kind of an adaptability but this is bipedal. fact13: This syndicator is blastocoelic. fact14: This sidewalk is not leptorrhinic. fact15: That menses is a Tilapia. fact16: Somebody does not misprint if that the one is a literate and the one misprint is wrong. fact17: This syndicator does not hurt omerta if that menses is a kind of a Tilapia and it hurt omerta. fact18: That menses is not a kind of an adaptability. ; $hypothesis$ = This syndicator is blastocoelic and it is a Silurian. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact12 -> int1: This sidewalk does not misprint.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That retrenchment occurs.

{A}

fact1: This placating Chisinau occurs. fact2: If that lining leishmaniasis occurs that retrenchment does not happens and that gluttony does not occurs. fact3: That that interlacing happens brings about that that lining leishmaniasis occurs and that retrenchment does not occurs. fact4: If that interplay does not occurs both that interlacing and that defervescence occurs. fact5: If that interlacing occurs that lining leishmaniasis happens. fact6: That that interplay does not occurs is brought about by that that interplay does not happens or that this chess happens or both. fact7: This Sabahan occurs. fact8: That the Teutonicness occurs is true. fact9: The fact that that gluttony does not occurs and that cytogeneticalness does not happens is not right if that retrenchment does not happens. fact10: If the fact that that gluttony does not occurs and that cytogeneticalness does not happens does not hold that cytogeneticalness occurs. fact11: That retrenchment occurs.

fact1: {T} fact2: {C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact3: {D} -> ({C} & ¬{A}) fact4: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact5: {D} -> {C} fact6: (¬{F} v {H}) -> ¬{F} fact7: {S} fact8: {AA} fact9: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{BP}) fact10: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{BP}) -> {BP} fact11: {A}

That cytogeneticalness occurs.

{BP}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This placating Chisinau occurs. fact2: If that lining leishmaniasis occurs that retrenchment does not happens and that gluttony does not occurs. fact3: That that interlacing happens brings about that that lining leishmaniasis occurs and that retrenchment does not occurs. fact4: If that interplay does not occurs both that interlacing and that defervescence occurs. fact5: If that interlacing occurs that lining leishmaniasis happens. fact6: That that interplay does not occurs is brought about by that that interplay does not happens or that this chess happens or both. fact7: This Sabahan occurs. fact8: That the Teutonicness occurs is true. fact9: The fact that that gluttony does not occurs and that cytogeneticalness does not happens is not right if that retrenchment does not happens. fact10: If the fact that that gluttony does not occurs and that cytogeneticalness does not happens does not hold that cytogeneticalness occurs. fact11: That retrenchment occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That retrenchment occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This leapfrogging does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: That ceremony happens if the theming happens. fact2: The footing traumatology happens. fact3: This tribalisation occurs. fact4: The fact that that numeral happens is right. fact5: This ending Ismailism happens. fact6: The ballgame occurs. fact7: If the tarsalness happens the pargetting happens. fact8: The defacement occurs. fact9: This leapfrogging does not occurs if this tribalisation does not happens.

fact1: {DO} -> {S} fact2: {AE} fact3: {A} fact4: {JJ} fact5: {HM} fact6: {EJ} fact7: {GA} -> {GL} fact8: {GC} fact9: ¬{A} -> ¬{B}

This leapfrogging does not occurs.

¬{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That ceremony happens if the theming happens. fact2: The footing traumatology happens. fact3: This tribalisation occurs. fact4: The fact that that numeral happens is right. fact5: This ending Ismailism happens. fact6: The ballgame occurs. fact7: If the tarsalness happens the pargetting happens. fact8: The defacement occurs. fact9: This leapfrogging does not occurs if this tribalisation does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This leapfrogging does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Basque is not tympanitic and does not rib probity.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That nullifier does scar griffin and is a kind of a balderdash if that thing is not a kind of a diplomacy. fact2: That Basque is not a foresightfulness and does not rib probity. fact3: This buccula is a shocked. fact4: Something does not rib probity and it is not vascular if it is not a kind of a surfacing. fact5: If something is a surfacing the fact that the thing is non-tympanitic thing that does not rib probity does not hold. fact6: If that nullifier is a balderdash then the fact that the fact that either that Basque calms or the one is not a Geum or both is incorrect is true. fact7: America is not haematological and does not appease Nemea. fact8: That Basque is not tympanitic and does not rib probity. fact9: Somebody is not a kind of a surfacing if the fact that that person does calm and/or is not a Geum is wrong. fact10: The fact that if this mamey is not geodetic then that nullifier is not Polynesian and it is not a dental hold. fact11: This Lhasa is both non-scopal and not wrinkleproof. fact12: This bitewing is a shocked if the fact that this buccula is a shocked is correct. fact13: That this bitewing is not areal is not correct. fact14: If some man is a kind of non-Polynesian man that is not a dental then it is not a diplomacy. fact15: That Basque does not rib probity.

fact1: ¬{F}{b} -> ({E}{b} & {D}{b}) fact2: (¬{IT}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact3: {J}{e} fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AB}x & ¬{CL}x) fact5: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact6: {D}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) fact7: (¬{EK}{ar} & ¬{GI}{ar}) fact8: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact9: (x): ¬({C}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact10: ¬{I}{c} -> (¬{G}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) fact11: (¬{DH}{et} & ¬{CS}{et}) fact12: {J}{e} -> {J}{d} fact13: {K}{d} fact14: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact15: ¬{AB}{a}

The fact that that Basque is not tympanitic and the one does not rib probity is wrong.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That nullifier does scar griffin and is a kind of a balderdash if that thing is not a kind of a diplomacy. fact2: That Basque is not a foresightfulness and does not rib probity. fact3: This buccula is a shocked. fact4: Something does not rib probity and it is not vascular if it is not a kind of a surfacing. fact5: If something is a surfacing the fact that the thing is non-tympanitic thing that does not rib probity does not hold. fact6: If that nullifier is a balderdash then the fact that the fact that either that Basque calms or the one is not a Geum or both is incorrect is true. fact7: America is not haematological and does not appease Nemea. fact8: That Basque is not tympanitic and does not rib probity. fact9: Somebody is not a kind of a surfacing if the fact that that person does calm and/or is not a Geum is wrong. fact10: The fact that if this mamey is not geodetic then that nullifier is not Polynesian and it is not a dental hold. fact11: This Lhasa is both non-scopal and not wrinkleproof. fact12: This bitewing is a shocked if the fact that this buccula is a shocked is correct. fact13: That this bitewing is not areal is not correct. fact14: If some man is a kind of non-Polynesian man that is not a dental then it is not a diplomacy. fact15: That Basque does not rib probity. ; $hypothesis$ = That Basque is not tympanitic and does not rib probity. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that the fact that this anasarcousness happens and that recovering does not occurs does not hold.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: This enfeebling Ormandy happens and the Jesuiticalness occurs. fact2: If the fact that this anasarcousness happens and that recovering does not happens does not hold this enfeebling Ormandy does not happens.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This enfeebling Ormandy happens and the Jesuiticalness occurs. fact2: If the fact that this anasarcousness happens and that recovering does not happens does not hold this enfeebling Ormandy does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that the fact that this anasarcousness happens and that recovering does not occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that this anasarcousness happens and that recovering does not occurs does not hold.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: This enfeebling Ormandy does not happens.; fact1 -> int2: This enfeebling Ormandy happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this chemoreceptiveness or this standing or both occurs hold.

({A} v {B})

fact1: That this bungling happens is prevented by that this harmonizing does not happens and that thwarted does not occurs. fact2: Either the estimating or the acupuncture or both happens. fact3: Either the puling occurs or the programming occurs or both. fact4: This becoming occurs. fact5: The weaving occurs. fact6: The assemblage happens. fact7: That either this chemoreceptiveness or this standing or both happens is false if this bungling does not occurs. fact8: The drawing happens. fact9: The hypertrophieding occurs. fact10: The fact that this chemoreceptiveness happens hold.

fact1: (¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} fact2: ({P} v {DP}) fact3: ({AM} v {AU}) fact4: {FE} fact5: {IS} fact6: {IC} fact7: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} v {B}) fact8: {BE} fact9: {ED} fact10: {A}

The fact that this chemoreceptiveness or this standing or both occurs does not hold.

¬({A} v {B})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this bungling happens is prevented by that this harmonizing does not happens and that thwarted does not occurs. fact2: Either the estimating or the acupuncture or both happens. fact3: Either the puling occurs or the programming occurs or both. fact4: This becoming occurs. fact5: The weaving occurs. fact6: The assemblage happens. fact7: That either this chemoreceptiveness or this standing or both happens is false if this bungling does not occurs. fact8: The drawing happens. fact9: The hypertrophieding occurs. fact10: The fact that this chemoreceptiveness happens hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That this chemoreceptiveness or this standing or both occurs hold. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This ADA is not a potable but the person erases ennui.

(¬{C}{a} & {E}{a})

fact1: The fact that this silversmith is not an entity if the fact that this nitrification is not undeterminable and it is not capitalistic does not hold is true. fact2: If that grantee is cardiac that that this notch is not a sissiness and not a ternion is correct is incorrect. fact3: The fact that something is a sissiness if the fact that it is not a sissiness and is not a ternion does not hold is not wrong. fact4: Something is not a copula if it is disjunct and it is not epidermic. fact5: If this casuist is superlunary then that minx is not superlunary. fact6: That grantee is cardiac if this hexapod is differentiable. fact7: If this notch is a kind of a sissiness then this ADA is disjunct but it is not epidermic. fact8: If that minx is not superlunary then that this nitrification is a kith and a Merlangus is incorrect. fact9: That some man is determinable but not capitalistic does not hold if this person is not a kith. fact10: This casuist is superlunary and/or spits shortlist. fact11: That someone is not a potable and erases ennui does not hold if she/he is not a copula. fact12: This hexapod is both formal and differentiable if this silversmith is not a kind of an entity. fact13: If something is a kind of a copula and/or is disjunct then the thing is not a potable. fact14: This ADA is a kind of a copula. fact15: If the fact that somebody is a kith and is a kind of a Merlangus is wrong that it is not a kith is right.

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

The fact that this ADA is not a potable but it erases ennui is false.

¬(¬{C}{a} & {E}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this silversmith is not an entity if the fact that this nitrification is not undeterminable and it is not capitalistic does not hold is true. fact2: If that grantee is cardiac that that this notch is not a sissiness and not a ternion is correct is incorrect. fact3: The fact that something is a sissiness if the fact that it is not a sissiness and is not a ternion does not hold is not wrong. fact4: Something is not a copula if it is disjunct and it is not epidermic. fact5: If this casuist is superlunary then that minx is not superlunary. fact6: That grantee is cardiac if this hexapod is differentiable. fact7: If this notch is a kind of a sissiness then this ADA is disjunct but it is not epidermic. fact8: If that minx is not superlunary then that this nitrification is a kith and a Merlangus is incorrect. fact9: That some man is determinable but not capitalistic does not hold if this person is not a kith. fact10: This casuist is superlunary and/or spits shortlist. fact11: That someone is not a potable and erases ennui does not hold if she/he is not a copula. fact12: This hexapod is both formal and differentiable if this silversmith is not a kind of an entity. fact13: If something is a kind of a copula and/or is disjunct then the thing is not a potable. fact14: This ADA is a kind of a copula. fact15: If the fact that somebody is a kith and is a kind of a Merlangus is wrong that it is not a kith is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This ADA is not a potable but the person erases ennui. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This compiling occurs.

{C}

fact1: If the fact that that taxing Talien does not happens but this demythologising purport happens is incorrect then that this demythologising purport does not happens hold. fact2: That beanball happens. fact3: That that gunfight does not happens brings about that that creeping fixity does not happens and/or that this abnormalness does not occurs. fact4: That pileup does not happens. fact5: This effectualness does not occurs if the fact that this clearheadedness does not occurs and that clinched does not occurs is false. fact6: If this egressing does not occurs then both this checkup and that nurturance occurs. fact7: Both that gastricness and that curdling whiteness occurs if this archeologicalness does not happens. fact8: That this Chicago does not happens is caused by that that gastricness happens. fact9: That this archeologicalness does not happens is brought about by that that creeping fixity does not occurs. fact10: This quietness happens and the synchronizing happens if that pileup does not occurs. fact11: That burgling showtime occurs if the fact that this bristled happens is correct. fact12: That that gunfight does not happens and this dimmedness does not occurs is triggered by that that burgling showtime happens. fact13: That notthat taxing Talien but this demythologising purport occurs is false if that that moneranness does not occurs is not false. fact14: That this clearheadedness does not occurs and that clinched does not occurs is false if this demythologising purport does not occurs. fact15: This egressing does not occurs if the fact that that non-monisticness and that clanging trichromacy happens is incorrect. fact16: That the synchronizing occurs yields that this bristled occurs. fact17: Both that non-moneranness and this moniedness happens if this checkup occurs. fact18: The fact that the fact that notthe monisticness but that clanging trichromacy happens is true does not hold if this Chicago does not occurs. fact19: If the fact that that beanball does not occurs but this effectualness occurs does not hold then this compiling does not occurs. fact20: If that clinched happens then that this effectualness occurs but this compiling does not happens hold. fact21: Both this compiling and that beanball happens if this effectualness does not occurs.

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

This compiling occurs.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that taxing Talien does not happens but this demythologising purport happens is incorrect then that this demythologising purport does not happens hold. fact2: That beanball happens. fact3: That that gunfight does not happens brings about that that creeping fixity does not happens and/or that this abnormalness does not occurs. fact4: That pileup does not happens. fact5: This effectualness does not occurs if the fact that this clearheadedness does not occurs and that clinched does not occurs is false. fact6: If this egressing does not occurs then both this checkup and that nurturance occurs. fact7: Both that gastricness and that curdling whiteness occurs if this archeologicalness does not happens. fact8: That this Chicago does not happens is caused by that that gastricness happens. fact9: That this archeologicalness does not happens is brought about by that that creeping fixity does not occurs. fact10: This quietness happens and the synchronizing happens if that pileup does not occurs. fact11: That burgling showtime occurs if the fact that this bristled happens is correct. fact12: That that gunfight does not happens and this dimmedness does not occurs is triggered by that that burgling showtime happens. fact13: That notthat taxing Talien but this demythologising purport occurs is false if that that moneranness does not occurs is not false. fact14: That this clearheadedness does not occurs and that clinched does not occurs is false if this demythologising purport does not occurs. fact15: This egressing does not occurs if the fact that that non-monisticness and that clanging trichromacy happens is incorrect. fact16: That the synchronizing occurs yields that this bristled occurs. fact17: Both that non-moneranness and this moniedness happens if this checkup occurs. fact18: The fact that the fact that notthe monisticness but that clanging trichromacy happens is true does not hold if this Chicago does not occurs. fact19: If the fact that that beanball does not occurs but this effectualness occurs does not hold then this compiling does not occurs. fact20: If that clinched happens then that this effectualness occurs but this compiling does not happens hold. fact21: Both this compiling and that beanball happens if this effectualness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This compiling occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that notthat beanball but this effectualness occurs.; assump1 -> int1: That beanball does not occurs.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: The fact that notthat beanball but this effectualness occurs is incorrect.; int3 & fact19 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This possessiveness happens but that heterosporousness does not happens.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: The fact that this possessiveness but notthat heterosporousness happens does not hold if that administrivia happens. fact2: That striking and that non-pyrrhicness occurs. fact3: This possessiveness happens. fact4: If this ungregariousness does not happens then that nonsubjectiveness happens but that statuary does not happens. fact5: That this sepalineness does not happens is prevented by that that extension does not occurs. fact6: If the bovidness does not occurs that snowboarding happens. fact7: This possessiveness and that non-heterosporousness occurs if that administrivia does not occurs. fact8: The unworthiness occurs and this icosahedralness does not occurs. fact9: That czaristness does not occurs. fact10: The uninhibitedness happens but this gladdening Aspinwall does not happens.

fact1: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact2: ({GH} & ¬{EL}) fact3: {AA} fact4: ¬{J} -> ({DE} & ¬{HU}) fact5: ¬{JB} -> {CN} fact6: ¬{AM} -> {DI} fact7: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact8: ({IC} & ¬{R}) fact9: ¬{JI} fact10: ({GM} & ¬{EN})

That this possessiveness happens but that heterosporousness does not occurs is false.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this possessiveness but notthat heterosporousness happens does not hold if that administrivia happens. fact2: That striking and that non-pyrrhicness occurs. fact3: This possessiveness happens. fact4: If this ungregariousness does not happens then that nonsubjectiveness happens but that statuary does not happens. fact5: That this sepalineness does not happens is prevented by that that extension does not occurs. fact6: If the bovidness does not occurs that snowboarding happens. fact7: This possessiveness and that non-heterosporousness occurs if that administrivia does not occurs. fact8: The unworthiness occurs and this icosahedralness does not occurs. fact9: That czaristness does not occurs. fact10: The uninhibitedness happens but this gladdening Aspinwall does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This possessiveness happens but that heterosporousness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This AR is not ebracteate.

¬{AB}{aa}

fact1: That Sikh is ebracteate. fact2: Some person that does kidnap ambidexterity is non-homiletic person that stamps Oleandraceae. fact3: This AR is an argot. fact4: This AR is both not musical and inflectional. fact5: That penknife is a Karttika and that person is a gibbosity if that praetor is not a Salvadoran. fact6: This AR is not homiletic if this AR froths yellowness. fact7: The article is not homiletic. fact8: Somebody that is a kind of a Phyllodoce is not a kind of an argot and is an octillion. fact9: Some man is not homiletic if it does kidnap ambidexterity. fact10: This AR is a gibbosity and husbands decasyllable. fact11: That OD is ebracteate and it is anamorphic. fact12: The oxide is not homiletic and does uniform. fact13: This AR is not a Donatist. fact14: Something does not kidnap ambidexterity if this is homiletic. fact15: That praetor is not a puzzler. fact16: Some person kidnaps ambidexterity if this person is a kind of a enthalpy. fact17: That this puppy is not ebracteate but it stamps Oleandraceae hold if that penknife kidnaps ambidexterity. fact18: If something does stamp Oleandraceae then it is not homiletic and it is ebracteate. fact19: That praetor is not a Salvadoran if that praetor is not a puzzler.

fact1: {AB}{gc} fact2: (x): {B}x -> (¬{AA}x & {A}x) fact3: {HD}{aa} fact4: ({AJ}{aa} & {M}{aa}) fact5: ¬{F}{c} -> ({E}{b} & {D}{b}) fact6: {CF}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} fact7: ¬{AA}{dq} fact8: (x): {BG}x -> (¬{HD}x & {JI}x) fact9: (x): {B}x -> ¬{AA}x fact10: ({D}{aa} & {BO}{aa}) fact11: ({AB}{gr} & {R}{gr}) fact12: (¬{AA}{jd} & {AE}{jd}) fact13: ¬{BF}{aa} fact14: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x fact15: ¬{G}{c} fact16: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact17: {B}{b} -> (¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) fact18: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact19: ¬{G}{c} -> ¬{F}{c}

This AR is not ebracteate.

¬{AB}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Sikh is ebracteate. fact2: Some person that does kidnap ambidexterity is non-homiletic person that stamps Oleandraceae. fact3: This AR is an argot. fact4: This AR is both not musical and inflectional. fact5: That penknife is a Karttika and that person is a gibbosity if that praetor is not a Salvadoran. fact6: This AR is not homiletic if this AR froths yellowness. fact7: The article is not homiletic. fact8: Somebody that is a kind of a Phyllodoce is not a kind of an argot and is an octillion. fact9: Some man is not homiletic if it does kidnap ambidexterity. fact10: This AR is a gibbosity and husbands decasyllable. fact11: That OD is ebracteate and it is anamorphic. fact12: The oxide is not homiletic and does uniform. fact13: This AR is not a Donatist. fact14: Something does not kidnap ambidexterity if this is homiletic. fact15: That praetor is not a puzzler. fact16: Some person kidnaps ambidexterity if this person is a kind of a enthalpy. fact17: That this puppy is not ebracteate but it stamps Oleandraceae hold if that penknife kidnaps ambidexterity. fact18: If something does stamp Oleandraceae then it is not homiletic and it is ebracteate. fact19: That praetor is not a Salvadoran if that praetor is not a puzzler. ; $hypothesis$ = This AR is not ebracteate. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Sky is a Ovid and that is a Rhineland is wrong.

¬({C}{aa} & {A}{aa})

fact1: Something is not a Chordeiles if it is schismatical and is a kind of a Thespesia. fact2: This Qibla is not a Chordeiles if that tomato is a Rhineland. fact3: Either this ampul is a 22 or it deserts cuneiform or both if this ampul is not a lividness. fact4: Some man is a Rhineland and it is a Ovid if that it is not a Giraffidae hold. fact5: This Janissary is a pierced and/or this one is a Chordeiles. fact6: If Sky is not a kind of a Chordeiles then that Sky is a kind of a Ovid that is a Rhineland is not true. fact7: The fact that this sloven is not schismatical is right. fact8: This ampul is not a lividness. fact9: Sky is both schismatical and not a Thespesia. fact10: Someone is a pierced if she/he deserts cuneiform. fact11: If some person is a 22 this person is a pierced. fact12: If something that is schismatical is not a Thespesia it is not a Chordeiles. fact13: Something is an orthodoxy if that is a pierced. fact14: The fact that that tomato is a Giraffidae is not false. fact15: Sky is not a kind of a Chordeiles if Sky is schismatical one that is a Thespesia. fact16: If that this Janissary is both not an orthodoxy and a Giraffidae is right then that tomato is not a Giraffidae.

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

Sky is a Ovid and that one is a Rhineland.

({C}{aa} & {A}{aa})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not a Chordeiles if it is schismatical and is a kind of a Thespesia. fact2: This Qibla is not a Chordeiles if that tomato is a Rhineland. fact3: Either this ampul is a 22 or it deserts cuneiform or both if this ampul is not a lividness. fact4: Some man is a Rhineland and it is a Ovid if that it is not a Giraffidae hold. fact5: This Janissary is a pierced and/or this one is a Chordeiles. fact6: If Sky is not a kind of a Chordeiles then that Sky is a kind of a Ovid that is a Rhineland is not true. fact7: The fact that this sloven is not schismatical is right. fact8: This ampul is not a lividness. fact9: Sky is both schismatical and not a Thespesia. fact10: Someone is a pierced if she/he deserts cuneiform. fact11: If some person is a 22 this person is a pierced. fact12: If something that is schismatical is not a Thespesia it is not a Chordeiles. fact13: Something is an orthodoxy if that is a pierced. fact14: The fact that that tomato is a Giraffidae is not false. fact15: Sky is not a kind of a Chordeiles if Sky is schismatical one that is a Thespesia. fact16: If that this Janissary is both not an orthodoxy and a Giraffidae is right then that tomato is not a Giraffidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That Sky is a Ovid and that is a Rhineland is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact12 -> int1: If Sky is schismatical but it is not a Thespesia then Sky is not a Chordeiles.; int1 & fact9 -> int2: Sky is not a Chordeiles.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This carillonneur gobbles dah.

{B}{b}

fact1: If the fact that this carillonneur is both not chelicerous and not anadromous does not hold then this carillonneur does not gobble dah. fact2: If that cardcastle is a kind of a wine then that this carillonneur is not chelicerous and he/she is not anadromous does not hold. fact3: That cardcastle is a wine. fact4: The fact that something is not a wine and it is not an editorial is wrong if it gobbles dah.

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

The fact that that menses is not a wine and it is not an editorial does not hold.

¬(¬{A}{ab} & ¬{JB}{ab})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this carillonneur is both not chelicerous and not anadromous does not hold then this carillonneur does not gobble dah. fact2: If that cardcastle is a kind of a wine then that this carillonneur is not chelicerous and he/she is not anadromous does not hold. fact3: That cardcastle is a wine. fact4: The fact that something is not a wine and it is not an editorial is wrong if it gobbles dah. ; $hypothesis$ = This carillonneur gobbles dah. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact3 -> int1: The fact that this carillonneur is not chelicerous and it is not anadromous does not hold.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That runnel fences 1780s.

{B}{aa}

fact1: The Titan is not a lusterlessness. fact2: If either something is a bothered or this thing is not Bogartian or both then this thing is not a filiation. fact3: That that Paxil is not a lusterlessness is right. fact4: That runnel is not a kind of a Hopei. fact5: If this trollop unsexeds theocracy this trollop does not bespatter and does not fence 1780s. fact6: The limonene is not non-plucky or it does not err dermatoglyphic or both. fact7: Something that either disobliges Passeridae or does not unstrain or both does not dub orchidalgia. fact8: That runnel is a Zu and/or the person is a lusterlessness. fact9: That runnel is not Anguillan. fact10: This trollop does not fence 1780s. fact11: That runnel is not a lusterlessness. fact12: That runnel either is a Zu or procrastinates Ivanov or both. fact13: Something does not fence 1780s if it is a Zu and/or not a lusterlessness. fact14: That pentail does not disoblige Passeridae if it is unrestricted and/or it is not a lusterlessness. fact15: Something is not a ci if either the thing is a waving or the thing is not a Malevich or both. fact16: The guanabana is a lusterlessness or it is not a incalescence or both. fact17: That runnel is not a driven. fact18: That runnel is not inhumane.

fact1: ¬{AB}{eu} fact2: (x): ({CK}x v ¬{GK}x) -> ¬{FA}x fact3: ¬{AB}{go} fact4: ¬{GQ}{aa} fact5: {C}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact6: ({HB}{ag} v ¬{FC}{ag}) fact7: (x): ({DJ}x v ¬{EL}x) -> ¬{AH}x fact8: ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) fact9: ¬{IP}{aa} fact10: ¬{B}{a} fact11: ¬{AB}{aa} fact12: ({AA}{aa} v {DP}{aa}) fact13: (x): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact14: ({FJ}{ai} v ¬{AB}{ai}) -> ¬{DJ}{ai} fact15: (x): ({EI}x v ¬{FS}x) -> ¬{CB}x fact16: ({AB}{d} v ¬{AG}{d}) fact17: ¬{EF}{aa} fact18: ¬{J}{aa}

That runnel fences 1780s.

{B}{aa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The Titan is not a lusterlessness. fact2: If either something is a bothered or this thing is not Bogartian or both then this thing is not a filiation. fact3: That that Paxil is not a lusterlessness is right. fact4: That runnel is not a kind of a Hopei. fact5: If this trollop unsexeds theocracy this trollop does not bespatter and does not fence 1780s. fact6: The limonene is not non-plucky or it does not err dermatoglyphic or both. fact7: Something that either disobliges Passeridae or does not unstrain or both does not dub orchidalgia. fact8: That runnel is a Zu and/or the person is a lusterlessness. fact9: That runnel is not Anguillan. fact10: This trollop does not fence 1780s. fact11: That runnel is not a lusterlessness. fact12: That runnel either is a Zu or procrastinates Ivanov or both. fact13: Something does not fence 1780s if it is a Zu and/or not a lusterlessness. fact14: That pentail does not disoblige Passeridae if it is unrestricted and/or it is not a lusterlessness. fact15: Something is not a ci if either the thing is a waving or the thing is not a Malevich or both. fact16: The guanabana is a lusterlessness or it is not a incalescence or both. fact17: That runnel is not a driven. fact18: That runnel is not inhumane. ; $hypothesis$ = That runnel fences 1780s. ; $proof$ =

fact13 -> int1: If that runnel is a Zu and/or that thing is not a lusterlessness that thing does not fence 1780s.; fact11 -> int2: That that runnel is a Zu or it is not a lusterlessness or both hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That adrenaline is a Marengo.

{A}{d}

fact1: The fact that that woodwaxen is an overtone and is an absolute is correct. fact2: If that woodwaxen is both an overtone and an absolute that aster is not a bloodthirstiness. fact3: If that the cuckoo is not a Gambusia and/or that is a bloodthirstiness is incorrect that adrenaline is a Marengo. fact4: If that aster is not a bloodthirstiness then that either the cuckoo is not a Gambusia or it is a bloodthirstiness or both is wrong.

fact1: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact2: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact3: ¬(¬{C}{c} v {B}{c}) -> {A}{d} fact4: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} v {B}{c})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that woodwaxen is an overtone and is an absolute is correct. fact2: If that woodwaxen is both an overtone and an absolute that aster is not a bloodthirstiness. fact3: If that the cuckoo is not a Gambusia and/or that is a bloodthirstiness is incorrect that adrenaline is a Marengo. fact4: If that aster is not a bloodthirstiness then that either the cuckoo is not a Gambusia or it is a bloodthirstiness or both is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That adrenaline is a Marengo. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> int1: That aster is not a bloodthirstiness.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: That that either the cuckoo is not a kind of a Gambusia or it is a bloodthirstiness or both is wrong is true.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That cheerlessness does not happens.

¬{B}

fact1: The dichotomising crepuscule occurs. fact2: That both the unregenerateness and this chink happens is caused by that this inching 1780s does not occurs. fact3: This facilitating Porcellio happens. fact4: The moving occurs. fact5: That plosion happens. fact6: That cheerlessness happens if this facilitating Porcellio occurs. fact7: The fact that the Freudian does not happens does not hold. fact8: That the drifting ophthalmia does not happens is prevented by the telecasting DEA. fact9: The fact that the dichotomizing occurs hold. fact10: The requiring happens. fact11: This chink happens. fact12: That cheerlessness does not happens if this chink happens and this facilitating Porcellio does not occurs.

fact1: {BT} fact2: ¬{F} -> ({E} & {C}) fact3: {A} fact4: {IG} fact5: {CD} fact6: {A} -> {B} fact7: {IH} fact8: {HO} -> {BU} fact9: {GG} fact10: {ER} fact11: {C} fact12: ({C} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{B}

That cheerlessness does not happens.

¬{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The dichotomising crepuscule occurs. fact2: That both the unregenerateness and this chink happens is caused by that this inching 1780s does not occurs. fact3: This facilitating Porcellio happens. fact4: The moving occurs. fact5: That plosion happens. fact6: That cheerlessness happens if this facilitating Porcellio occurs. fact7: The fact that the Freudian does not happens does not hold. fact8: That the drifting ophthalmia does not happens is prevented by the telecasting DEA. fact9: The fact that the dichotomizing occurs hold. fact10: The requiring happens. fact11: This chink happens. fact12: That cheerlessness does not happens if this chink happens and this facilitating Porcellio does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That cheerlessness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Everything is not unsubdivided and it warehouses wrenching.

(x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

fact1: Every man is not unsubdivided. fact2: Everybody is not a kind of a Stellaria and witnesses. fact3: Every man does not garnish posted and is a kind of a Averrhoa. fact4: Everything is not a Lahore but a entelechy. fact5: Everybody does not raid tabu. fact6: Everything is not unsubdivided and it warehouses wrenching.

fact1: (x): ¬{AA}x fact2: (x): (¬{DO}x & {CJ}x) fact3: (x): (¬{DI}x & {ID}x) fact4: (x): (¬{HI}x & {JD}x) fact5: (x): ¬{C}x fact6: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

Everything is not a petiteness and it is expiratory.

(x): (¬{GA}x & {BR}x)

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Every man is not unsubdivided. fact2: Everybody is not a kind of a Stellaria and witnesses. fact3: Every man does not garnish posted and is a kind of a Averrhoa. fact4: Everything is not a Lahore but a entelechy. fact5: Everybody does not raid tabu. fact6: Everything is not unsubdivided and it warehouses wrenching. ; $hypothesis$ = Everything is not unsubdivided and it warehouses wrenching. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

There is somebody such that it is cytogenetical.

(Ex): {A}x

fact1: This bufo is not a Pabir if the fact that that pundit is not a kind of a Pabir but this one is bucolic does not hold. fact2: If some man is not a Zoroastrian and/or she/he is not a Agonus then that she/he is a Romanian is wrong. fact3: If someone is not possessive he is not a Zoroastrian or he is not a Agonus or both. fact4: If that that pundit is not a hemoglobinemia hold then that that pundit is both not a Pabir and not non-bucolic is not right. fact5: That favourite is protrusive if that favourite is cytogenetical. fact6: A non-sterile and non-transatlantic thing is not possessive. fact7: If that cane is not a Romanian this minisubmarine is cytogenetical and/or it is seminiferous. fact8: There is somebody such that it is cytogenetical. fact9: If this bufo is not a kind of a Pabir that cane is not sterile and that person is not transatlantic.

fact1: ¬(¬{I}{e} & {J}{e}) -> ¬{I}{d} fact2: (x): (¬{E}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x v ¬{D}x) fact4: ¬{K}{e} -> ¬(¬{I}{e} & {J}{e}) fact5: {A}{a} -> {IQ}{a} fact6: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact7: ¬{B}{c} -> ({A}{b} v {C}{b}) fact8: (Ex): {A}x fact9: ¬{I}{d} -> (¬{G}{c} & ¬{H}{c})

Something is protrusive.

(Ex): {IQ}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This bufo is not a Pabir if the fact that that pundit is not a kind of a Pabir but this one is bucolic does not hold. fact2: If some man is not a Zoroastrian and/or she/he is not a Agonus then that she/he is a Romanian is wrong. fact3: If someone is not possessive he is not a Zoroastrian or he is not a Agonus or both. fact4: If that that pundit is not a hemoglobinemia hold then that that pundit is both not a Pabir and not non-bucolic is not right. fact5: That favourite is protrusive if that favourite is cytogenetical. fact6: A non-sterile and non-transatlantic thing is not possessive. fact7: If that cane is not a Romanian this minisubmarine is cytogenetical and/or it is seminiferous. fact8: There is somebody such that it is cytogenetical. fact9: If this bufo is not a kind of a Pabir that cane is not sterile and that person is not transatlantic. ; $hypothesis$ = There is somebody such that it is cytogenetical. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Oxford does not brave Gaviiformes and this is not supraocular.

(¬{C}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

fact1: If the fact that somebody is unsolder is not incorrect then it does not brave Gaviiformes. fact2: If that nuclease is not unsolder this Oxford does not brave Gaviiformes and that person is not supraocular. fact3: If somebody is electrophoretic and is not a caesarian then it is not unsolder. fact4: If that nuclease does not brave Gaviiformes that this Oxford does not brave Gaviiformes and is not supraocular is false. fact5: If the fact that that nuclease does not brave Gaviiformes is right that this Oxford does brave Gaviiformes and is not supraocular is wrong. fact6: That nuclease is electrophoretic. fact7: Something does not brave Gaviiformes if it is unsolder or is electrophoretic or both. fact8: If that nuclease is unsolder then that does not brave Gaviiformes.

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

This Oxford does not brave Gaviiformes and this is not supraocular.

(¬{C}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that somebody is unsolder is not incorrect then it does not brave Gaviiformes. fact2: If that nuclease is not unsolder this Oxford does not brave Gaviiformes and that person is not supraocular. fact3: If somebody is electrophoretic and is not a caesarian then it is not unsolder. fact4: If that nuclease does not brave Gaviiformes that this Oxford does not brave Gaviiformes and is not supraocular is false. fact5: If the fact that that nuclease does not brave Gaviiformes is right that this Oxford does brave Gaviiformes and is not supraocular is wrong. fact6: That nuclease is electrophoretic. fact7: Something does not brave Gaviiformes if it is unsolder or is electrophoretic or both. fact8: If that nuclease is unsolder then that does not brave Gaviiformes. ; $hypothesis$ = This Oxford does not brave Gaviiformes and this is not supraocular. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: That nuclease is unsolder or it is electrophoretic or both.; fact7 -> int2: That nuclease does not brave Gaviiformes if he is unsolder or he is electrophoretic or both.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That nuclease does not brave Gaviiformes.; int3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that damoiselle is complaining is true.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: Something is uncomplaining if that thing does not unionize proctology and/or that thing is bimetallistic. fact2: The fact that the Sarafem is not uncomplaining hold. fact3: That damoiselle abdicates and does not prime. fact4: That damoiselle is not a kind of a fidget. fact5: If a non-popliteal man is not bimetallistic it unionizes proctology. fact6: If that damoiselle is uncomplaining then the fact that that cyberspace is not uncomplaining hold. fact7: That headgear is not uncomplaining. fact8: If that Tyrone is not Pharaonic is right Tyrone is a kind of popliteal one that is bimetallistic. fact9: If Tyrone does demonstrate Heteromeles and is not a Ahab Tyrone is not Pharaonic. fact10: If Tyrone is uncomplaining then that damoiselle is not uncomplaining. fact11: That damoiselle does submerse legend. fact12: The mosaic is not uncomplaining. fact13: This Theban does not unionize proctology. fact14: That damoiselle unionizes proctology and is not uncomplaining. fact15: That damoiselle strengthens aquaphobia. fact16: That headgear unionizes proctology. fact17: The arriver does unionize proctology and is not avirulent. fact18: That damoiselle unionizes proctology. fact19: That damoiselle does not sour.

fact1: (x): (¬{A}x v {C}x) -> {B}x fact2: ¬{B}{dt} fact3: ({DM}{a} & ¬{DP}{a}) fact4: ¬{EP}{a} fact5: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}x fact6: {B}{a} -> ¬{B}{dd} fact7: ¬{B}{ji} fact8: ¬{E}{b} -> ({D}{b} & {C}{b}) fact9: ({F}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact10: {B}{b} -> {B}{a} fact11: {CQ}{a} fact12: ¬{B}{hl} fact13: ¬{A}{jh} fact14: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact15: {HN}{a} fact16: {A}{ji} fact17: ({A}{fu} & ¬{CL}{fu}) fact18: {A}{a} fact19: ¬{Q}{a}

That damoiselle is uncomplaining.

{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is uncomplaining if that thing does not unionize proctology and/or that thing is bimetallistic. fact2: The fact that the Sarafem is not uncomplaining hold. fact3: That damoiselle abdicates and does not prime. fact4: That damoiselle is not a kind of a fidget. fact5: If a non-popliteal man is not bimetallistic it unionizes proctology. fact6: If that damoiselle is uncomplaining then the fact that that cyberspace is not uncomplaining hold. fact7: That headgear is not uncomplaining. fact8: If that Tyrone is not Pharaonic is right Tyrone is a kind of popliteal one that is bimetallistic. fact9: If Tyrone does demonstrate Heteromeles and is not a Ahab Tyrone is not Pharaonic. fact10: If Tyrone is uncomplaining then that damoiselle is not uncomplaining. fact11: That damoiselle does submerse legend. fact12: The mosaic is not uncomplaining. fact13: This Theban does not unionize proctology. fact14: That damoiselle unionizes proctology and is not uncomplaining. fact15: That damoiselle strengthens aquaphobia. fact16: That headgear unionizes proctology. fact17: The arriver does unionize proctology and is not avirulent. fact18: That damoiselle unionizes proctology. fact19: That damoiselle does not sour. ; $hypothesis$ = That that damoiselle is complaining is true. ; $proof$ =

fact14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Belorussian is unidentifiable.

{D}{a}

fact1: That Belorussian is an audience if this antiquity is unidentifiable but it is not a kind of a shimmer. fact2: That this antiquity is unidentifiable hold. fact3: That Belorussian is a shimmer if this antiquity fishtails Hodr and is not an audience. fact4: If this antiquity is not an audience and it is not unidentifiable then that Belorussian is a kind of a shimmer. fact5: This antiquity is a Blaberus. fact6: If something is a kind of a shimmer the fact that this thing is unidentifiable hold. fact7: That Belorussian is a shimmer if this antiquity does not fishtail Hodr and it is not a kind of an audience. fact8: Everything does not fishtail Hodr and it is not an audience. fact9: Every man is not a Mayakovski and it is not a settled. fact10: That Belorussian is not unidentifiable if the fact that that oarsman fishtails Hodr and is unidentifiable is right. fact11: This antiquity does not fishtail Hodr. fact12: Something is a shimmer if the fact that it is not an audience and not a shimmer is incorrect.

fact1: ({D}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) -> {B}{a} fact2: {D}{aa} fact3: ({A}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> {C}{a} fact4: (¬{B}{aa} & ¬{D}{aa}) -> {C}{a} fact5: {HJ}{aa} fact6: (x): {C}x -> {D}x fact7: (¬{A}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> {C}{a} fact8: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact9: (x): (¬{JA}x & ¬{AM}x) fact10: ({A}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact11: ¬{A}{aa} fact12: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}x

This salesgirl is a kind of a shimmer.

{C}{ab}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Belorussian is an audience if this antiquity is unidentifiable but it is not a kind of a shimmer. fact2: That this antiquity is unidentifiable hold. fact3: That Belorussian is a shimmer if this antiquity fishtails Hodr and is not an audience. fact4: If this antiquity is not an audience and it is not unidentifiable then that Belorussian is a kind of a shimmer. fact5: This antiquity is a Blaberus. fact6: If something is a kind of a shimmer the fact that this thing is unidentifiable hold. fact7: That Belorussian is a shimmer if this antiquity does not fishtail Hodr and it is not a kind of an audience. fact8: Everything does not fishtail Hodr and it is not an audience. fact9: Every man is not a Mayakovski and it is not a settled. fact10: That Belorussian is not unidentifiable if the fact that that oarsman fishtails Hodr and is unidentifiable is right. fact11: This antiquity does not fishtail Hodr. fact12: Something is a shimmer if the fact that it is not an audience and not a shimmer is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That Belorussian is unidentifiable. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: This antiquity does not fishtail Hodr and it is not an audience.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: That Belorussian is a shimmer.; fact6 -> int3: If that Belorussian is a shimmer it is unidentifiable.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That clon does not gaol oligodactyly.

¬{D}{c}

fact1: Someone that does not battle pedology is a kind of a Tolypeutes that is a saved. fact2: There exists somebody such that she is not a Enlightenment and gaols oligodactyly. fact3: Something that is a broke is a kind of a Enlightenment. fact4: A Enlightenment gaols oligodactyly. fact5: If that drowse colludes then that cathedra does not revet Amharic and ravels Graz. fact6: That acetaminophen does not revet Amharic if that cathedra does not revet Amharic and does ravel Graz. fact7: Somebody is a amenability if the fact that the one is not a amenability and the one does not bray incentive is incorrect. fact8: The fact that something is not a amenability and that does not bray incentive does not hold if that does not revet Amharic. fact9: If there is something such that the fact that it does not DO Conospermum and decides is false the fact that that acetaminophen is not a Enlightenment hold. fact10: Something does not battle pedology if this mothballs Macao. fact11: Some person that is a Tolypeutes is a kind of a broke. fact12: That that cathedra is a broke and/or is a Tolypeutes is not right if that acetaminophen is not a Enlightenment. fact13: That acetaminophen is not a Enlightenment if there is someone such that she/he does not decide. fact14: Something mothballs Macao if it is a Scotch. fact15: If that acetaminophen is a amenability that clon is a Scotch. fact16: There is something such that the fact that this thing does not DO Conospermum and this thing decides is incorrect. fact17: The fact that that drowse colludes hold if this microeconomist is azonal. fact18: If that excelsior is not a busted this microeconomist is not a Karloff or it is not phonetic or both. fact19: There exists something such that the fact that that DOES Conospermum and decides does not hold. fact20: That clon does not gaol oligodactyly if the fact that that cathedra is a kind of a broke and/or the one is a kind of a Tolypeutes is incorrect. fact21: This microeconomist is azonal or that colludes or both if that is not a Karloff. fact22: Someone is not a Karloff if the person is not a Karloff and/or the person is not phonetic. fact23: That Proventil is not a kind of a Tolypeutes if the fact that that Proventil is a kind of a Enlightenment and is a broke does not hold. fact24: That excelsior is not a busted.

fact1: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({C}x & {E}x) fact2: (Ex): (¬{A}x & {D}x) fact3: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact4: (x): {A}x -> {D}x fact5: {M}{d} -> (¬{K}{b} & {L}{b}) fact6: (¬{K}{b} & {L}{b}) -> ¬{K}{a} fact7: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) -> {I}x fact8: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) fact9: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} fact10: (x): {G}x -> ¬{F}x fact11: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact12: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} v {C}{b}) fact13: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{A}{a} fact14: (x): {H}x -> {G}x fact15: {I}{a} -> {H}{c} fact16: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact17: {N}{e} -> {M}{d} fact18: ¬{Q}{f} -> (¬{O}{e} v ¬{P}{e}) fact19: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact20: ¬({B}{b} v {C}{b}) -> ¬{D}{c} fact21: ¬{O}{e} -> ({N}{e} v {M}{e}) fact22: (x): (¬{O}x v ¬{P}x) -> ¬{O}x fact23: ¬({A}{ht} & {B}{ht}) -> ¬{C}{ht} fact24: ¬{Q}{f}

The fact that that Proventil is not a Tolypeutes hold.

¬{C}{ht}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone that does not battle pedology is a kind of a Tolypeutes that is a saved. fact2: There exists somebody such that she is not a Enlightenment and gaols oligodactyly. fact3: Something that is a broke is a kind of a Enlightenment. fact4: A Enlightenment gaols oligodactyly. fact5: If that drowse colludes then that cathedra does not revet Amharic and ravels Graz. fact6: That acetaminophen does not revet Amharic if that cathedra does not revet Amharic and does ravel Graz. fact7: Somebody is a amenability if the fact that the one is not a amenability and the one does not bray incentive is incorrect. fact8: The fact that something is not a amenability and that does not bray incentive does not hold if that does not revet Amharic. fact9: If there is something such that the fact that it does not DO Conospermum and decides is false the fact that that acetaminophen is not a Enlightenment hold. fact10: Something does not battle pedology if this mothballs Macao. fact11: Some person that is a Tolypeutes is a kind of a broke. fact12: That that cathedra is a broke and/or is a Tolypeutes is not right if that acetaminophen is not a Enlightenment. fact13: That acetaminophen is not a Enlightenment if there is someone such that she/he does not decide. fact14: Something mothballs Macao if it is a Scotch. fact15: If that acetaminophen is a amenability that clon is a Scotch. fact16: There is something such that the fact that this thing does not DO Conospermum and this thing decides is incorrect. fact17: The fact that that drowse colludes hold if this microeconomist is azonal. fact18: If that excelsior is not a busted this microeconomist is not a Karloff or it is not phonetic or both. fact19: There exists something such that the fact that that DOES Conospermum and decides does not hold. fact20: That clon does not gaol oligodactyly if the fact that that cathedra is a kind of a broke and/or the one is a kind of a Tolypeutes is incorrect. fact21: This microeconomist is azonal or that colludes or both if that is not a Karloff. fact22: Someone is not a Karloff if the person is not a Karloff and/or the person is not phonetic. fact23: That Proventil is not a kind of a Tolypeutes if the fact that that Proventil is a kind of a Enlightenment and is a broke does not hold. fact24: That excelsior is not a busted. ; $hypothesis$ = That clon does not gaol oligodactyly. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact9 -> int1: That acetaminophen is not a Enlightenment.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: The fact that that cathedra is a broke or this thing is a kind of a Tolypeutes or both is wrong.; int2 & fact20 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That unsurmountableness does not occurs.

¬{AA}

fact1: The reclaiming million occurs. fact2: The transpiring hexagram happens and the modernization does not occurs. fact3: The drift occurs. fact4: That this incapacitating Salonika but notthe radioness occurs is caused by the angling. fact5: This ebbing rooted occurs but this qualifying asynergia does not occurs. fact6: The epidemiologicalness occurs. fact7: The ablactation occurs. fact8: If this snowshoe occurs the backed does not occurs. fact9: This besieging desynchronization happens but that unsurmountableness does not happens if this interstitialness occurs. fact10: That the bulking happens and this interstitialness happens is true if the abdominovesicalness does not occurs. fact11: That the impetus happens results in that this allowancing but notthe sessileness happens. fact12: That the thinking does not occurs is brought about by that engraving Newcomb. fact13: That that endocentricness occurs but that instrumentation does not occurs prevents the abdominovesicalness. fact14: That unsurmountableness happens and the Crab does not happens if the fact that this besieging desynchronization happens hold. fact15: That instrumentation does not happens. fact16: This dispraise happens and the sugarcoating inaction does not occurs. fact17: This besieging desynchronization occurs. fact18: The stranding Cocteau occurs and this enucleation does not happens. fact19: The exilicness does not happens. fact20: That filming occurs.

fact1: {DB} fact2: ({IE} & ¬{HD}) fact3: {CR} fact4: {CL} -> ({T} & ¬{BP}) fact5: ({ER} & ¬{AJ}) fact6: {N} fact7: {FC} fact8: {J} -> ¬{BL} fact9: {B} -> ({A} & ¬{AA}) fact10: ¬{D} -> ({C} & {B}) fact11: {EQ} -> ({BC} & ¬{IP}) fact12: {CO} -> ¬{CS} fact13: ({E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact14: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact15: ¬{F} fact16: ({EJ} & ¬{AN}) fact17: {A} fact18: ({EH} & ¬{GA}) fact19: ¬{GD} fact20: {GR}

That unsurmountableness does not occurs.

¬{AA}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The reclaiming million occurs. fact2: The transpiring hexagram happens and the modernization does not occurs. fact3: The drift occurs. fact4: That this incapacitating Salonika but notthe radioness occurs is caused by the angling. fact5: This ebbing rooted occurs but this qualifying asynergia does not occurs. fact6: The epidemiologicalness occurs. fact7: The ablactation occurs. fact8: If this snowshoe occurs the backed does not occurs. fact9: This besieging desynchronization happens but that unsurmountableness does not happens if this interstitialness occurs. fact10: That the bulking happens and this interstitialness happens is true if the abdominovesicalness does not occurs. fact11: That the impetus happens results in that this allowancing but notthe sessileness happens. fact12: That the thinking does not occurs is brought about by that engraving Newcomb. fact13: That that endocentricness occurs but that instrumentation does not occurs prevents the abdominovesicalness. fact14: That unsurmountableness happens and the Crab does not happens if the fact that this besieging desynchronization happens hold. fact15: That instrumentation does not happens. fact16: This dispraise happens and the sugarcoating inaction does not occurs. fact17: This besieging desynchronization occurs. fact18: The stranding Cocteau occurs and this enucleation does not happens. fact19: The exilicness does not happens. fact20: That filming occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That unsurmountableness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact17 -> int1: That unsurmountableness happens but the Crab does not happens.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists some person such that if she does not cuss arcsine then she does not cuss arcsine and she is homeopathic.

(Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{A}x & {B}x)

fact1: There is somebody such that if it is a Pteretis then it is not a Pteretis and it hyperventilates. fact2: The fact that something is discontinuous thing that cusses arcsine does not hold if that thing does not swear. fact3: That disparager is not polygonal but it is homeopathic if the fact that it is polygonal is right. fact4: That disparager does not cuss arcsine and is homeopathic if it cuss arcsine. fact5: That herbal is both not a trash and an intermediate. fact6: There is something such that if it is metacentric it is not metacentric but a credentialled. fact7: If Juan Pablo does not cuss arcsine Juan Pablo does not cuss arcsine but it is a Gastrocybe. fact8: That disparager does not interpolate Lakeland and is homeopathic if it does not interpolate Lakeland. fact9: That disparager is not an offensive but hydrolyzable. fact10: There exists someone such that if that person is a jingling that person is not a jingling and that person stuffs. fact11: That this ingredient is not homeopathic is true if that that disparager is discontinuous thing that cusses arcsine does not hold. fact12: This Levantine is not homeopathic. fact13: That disparager is both not homeopathic and unarmoured if it is not homeopathic. fact14: There is something such that if this is not a harbinger this is not a harbinger and this is unarmoured. fact15: If that disparager is not homeopathic that person is homeopathic one that is a sextet.

fact1: (Ex): {EI}x -> (¬{EI}x & {FN}x) fact2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & {A}x) fact3: {R}{a} -> (¬{R}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: {A}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact5: (¬{IM}{m} & {FR}{m}) fact6: (Ex): {BN}x -> (¬{BN}x & {IT}x) fact7: ¬{A}{gn} -> (¬{A}{gn} & {ED}{gn}) fact8: ¬{DT}{a} -> (¬{DT}{a} & {B}{a}) fact9: (¬{EB}{a} & {JK}{a}) fact10: (Ex): {P}x -> (¬{P}x & {ET}x) fact11: ¬({C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{B}{fp} fact12: ¬{B}{cr} fact13: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{B}{a} & {BE}{a}) fact14: (Ex): ¬{EK}x -> (¬{EK}x & {BE}x) fact15: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{B}{a} & {EU}{a})

This ingredient is not homeopathic.

¬{B}{fp}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There is somebody such that if it is a Pteretis then it is not a Pteretis and it hyperventilates. fact2: The fact that something is discontinuous thing that cusses arcsine does not hold if that thing does not swear. fact3: That disparager is not polygonal but it is homeopathic if the fact that it is polygonal is right. fact4: That disparager does not cuss arcsine and is homeopathic if it cuss arcsine. fact5: That herbal is both not a trash and an intermediate. fact6: There is something such that if it is metacentric it is not metacentric but a credentialled. fact7: If Juan Pablo does not cuss arcsine Juan Pablo does not cuss arcsine but it is a Gastrocybe. fact8: That disparager does not interpolate Lakeland and is homeopathic if it does not interpolate Lakeland. fact9: That disparager is not an offensive but hydrolyzable. fact10: There exists someone such that if that person is a jingling that person is not a jingling and that person stuffs. fact11: That this ingredient is not homeopathic is true if that that disparager is discontinuous thing that cusses arcsine does not hold. fact12: This Levantine is not homeopathic. fact13: That disparager is both not homeopathic and unarmoured if it is not homeopathic. fact14: There is something such that if this is not a harbinger this is not a harbinger and this is unarmoured. fact15: If that disparager is not homeopathic that person is homeopathic one that is a sextet. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists some person such that if she does not cuss arcsine then she does not cuss arcsine and she is homeopathic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This chanoyu occurs and this Cartesian does not occurs.

({D} & ¬{E})

fact1: This bedraggling sumptuosity happens or that antisepticizing percentile does not occurs or both. fact2: If that acceptableness does not happens then the fact that both this chanoyu and this Cartesian happens does not hold. fact3: This chanoyu occurs but this Cartesian does not happens if this bedraggling sumptuosity does not happens. fact4: That that acceptableness does not happens is triggered by that that antisepticizing percentile does not occurs. fact5: The fact that this thermogravimetricness does not occurs if the fact that that neuralgicness happens is not false is true. fact6: If the Earth does not occurs then that facing does not occurs. fact7: If that acceptableness does not occurs then the fact that this chanoyu but notthis Cartesian happens is wrong. fact8: That that zygoticness and this efferentness happens is false. fact9: Either that sluing or the non-heterocercalness or both happens. fact10: If that tailspin does not happens that the harmattan occurs and the pretense happens is incorrect. fact11: That that acceptableness does not occurs is brought about by that this bedraggling sumptuosity happens. fact12: The venting frankness does not happens. fact13: If that interlocking crossbones occurs then this hunting does not happens. fact14: This ebonizing fortitude does not occurs. fact15: That the excitableness happens hold if this baroque occurs. fact16: That that scrape does not happens leads to that either this ESM happens or that unbaptisedness happens or both.

fact1: ({A} v ¬{B}) fact2: ¬{C} -> ¬({D} & {E}) fact3: ¬{A} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) fact4: ¬{B} -> ¬{C} fact5: {IO} -> ¬{JK} fact6: ¬{FA} -> ¬{CT} fact7: ¬{C} -> ¬({D} & ¬{E}) fact8: ¬({ER} & {M}) fact9: ({JJ} v ¬{CP}) fact10: ¬{FJ} -> ¬({AJ} & {AA}) fact11: {A} -> ¬{C} fact12: ¬{BJ} fact13: {DA} -> ¬{HB} fact14: ¬{EI} fact15: {BM} -> {DH} fact16: ¬{H} -> ({G} v {F})

This chanoyu occurs and this Cartesian does not occurs.

({D} & ¬{E})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This bedraggling sumptuosity happens or that antisepticizing percentile does not occurs or both. fact2: If that acceptableness does not happens then the fact that both this chanoyu and this Cartesian happens does not hold. fact3: This chanoyu occurs but this Cartesian does not happens if this bedraggling sumptuosity does not happens. fact4: That that acceptableness does not happens is triggered by that that antisepticizing percentile does not occurs. fact5: The fact that this thermogravimetricness does not occurs if the fact that that neuralgicness happens is not false is true. fact6: If the Earth does not occurs then that facing does not occurs. fact7: If that acceptableness does not occurs then the fact that this chanoyu but notthis Cartesian happens is wrong. fact8: That that zygoticness and this efferentness happens is false. fact9: Either that sluing or the non-heterocercalness or both happens. fact10: If that tailspin does not happens that the harmattan occurs and the pretense happens is incorrect. fact11: That that acceptableness does not occurs is brought about by that this bedraggling sumptuosity happens. fact12: The venting frankness does not happens. fact13: If that interlocking crossbones occurs then this hunting does not happens. fact14: This ebonizing fortitude does not occurs. fact15: That the excitableness happens hold if this baroque occurs. fact16: That that scrape does not happens leads to that either this ESM happens or that unbaptisedness happens or both. ; $hypothesis$ = This chanoyu occurs and this Cartesian does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact11 & fact4 -> int1: That acceptableness does not happens.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This emesis inspects Proverbs.

{D}{c}

fact1: Roberta is not a palmature if that eupnea is not a kind of a palmature and is a Eschrichtius. fact2: That eupnea does not captivate Bellow if that it is a kind of a Hegelian that captivate Bellow is false. fact3: If some man is not a Strongylodon the one inspects Proverbs and does wish. fact4: Someone is a kind of a Strongylodon that does not iodinating Celastraceae if it is not a Meyerbeer. fact5: If that eupnea does not captivate Bellow then the fact that that that eupnea is not matriarchal but he/she is an undertone is not wrong does not hold. fact6: That that eupnea is a Hegelian and captivates Bellow is false if she/he does not formulate Anasa. fact7: That ballpen wishes and/or it is a Strongylodon. fact8: This emesis does not inspect Proverbs if the fact that Roberta iodinatings Celastraceae hold. fact9: The fact that something irritates epicycloid and/or that is not a kind of a VFW is incorrect if that is not a palmature. fact10: If that ballpen wishes then Roberta is a kind of a Strongylodon. fact11: If that that eupnea is not matriarchal but it is an undertone is incorrect that eupnea is matriarchal. fact12: That eupnea is not photometrical but this thing is a Alsace if this thing is matriarchal. fact13: Something is not a palmature but it is a Eschrichtius if it is not photometrical. fact14: If the fact that Roberta irritates epicycloid and/or is not a VFW is incorrect then that ballpen is not a Meyerbeer. fact15: That this emesis does not inspect Proverbs is true if Roberta is a Strongylodon or iodinatings Celastraceae or both. fact16: This emesis is not a Strongylodon if that ballpen is a Strongylodon but it does not iodinating Celastraceae.

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

This emesis inspects Proverbs.

{D}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Roberta is not a palmature if that eupnea is not a kind of a palmature and is a Eschrichtius. fact2: That eupnea does not captivate Bellow if that it is a kind of a Hegelian that captivate Bellow is false. fact3: If some man is not a Strongylodon the one inspects Proverbs and does wish. fact4: Someone is a kind of a Strongylodon that does not iodinating Celastraceae if it is not a Meyerbeer. fact5: If that eupnea does not captivate Bellow then the fact that that that eupnea is not matriarchal but he/she is an undertone is not wrong does not hold. fact6: That that eupnea is a Hegelian and captivates Bellow is false if she/he does not formulate Anasa. fact7: That ballpen wishes and/or it is a Strongylodon. fact8: This emesis does not inspect Proverbs if the fact that Roberta iodinatings Celastraceae hold. fact9: The fact that something irritates epicycloid and/or that is not a kind of a VFW is incorrect if that is not a palmature. fact10: If that ballpen wishes then Roberta is a kind of a Strongylodon. fact11: If that that eupnea is not matriarchal but it is an undertone is incorrect that eupnea is matriarchal. fact12: That eupnea is not photometrical but this thing is a Alsace if this thing is matriarchal. fact13: Something is not a palmature but it is a Eschrichtius if it is not photometrical. fact14: If the fact that Roberta irritates epicycloid and/or is not a VFW is incorrect then that ballpen is not a Meyerbeer. fact15: That this emesis does not inspect Proverbs is true if Roberta is a Strongylodon or iodinatings Celastraceae or both. fact16: This emesis is not a Strongylodon if that ballpen is a Strongylodon but it does not iodinating Celastraceae. ; $hypothesis$ = This emesis inspects Proverbs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This weaving and this Mishnaicness happens.

({B} & {C})

fact1: The fact that notthe anastomosing but the Grecian occurs does not hold. fact2: That notthat startling but this hugging happens is false if that perirhinalness occurs. fact3: That this weaving occurs and this Mishnaicness occurs is incorrect if that perirhinalness does not occurs. fact4: That archegonialness happens. fact5: The aciculateness occurs. fact6: If the disrupting occurs the fact that this suffocating and the vulvalness happens is wrong. fact7: If the fact that the Mesozoicness does not occurs and that moralizing does not occurs is false then that moralizing happens. fact8: That that constituting happens and the lightingness happens is not right if this catheterization occurs. fact9: If that perirhinalness occurs then the fact that both that startling and this hugging occurs does not hold. fact10: If that reuniting euphony does not occurs then either this traveling or that relinquishing or both occurs. fact11: If that notthe timed but this inclination happens is false the watering happens. fact12: If that archegonialness happens that that relinquishing does not occurs and this Mishnaicness does not happens is false. fact13: The fact that the unjustness does not occurs but the sculling happens does not hold. fact14: If that perirhinalness does not occurs then that this experiencing does not happens and this mercerising bursitis does not occurs does not hold. fact15: That that perirhinalness happens is correct. fact16: That that relinquishing does not happens and this Mishnaicness happens is false. fact17: That the fact that the Mesozoicness does not occurs and this unoriginalness occurs is wrong is right. fact18: If that the oozing Kellogg happens is right the fact that both this suffocating and the figuring occurs does not hold. fact19: That that relinquishing does not occurs but this Mishnaicness happens is incorrect if that archegonialness occurs. fact20: This Mishnaicness occurs if that that relinquishing does not occurs and this Mishnaicness does not occurs does not hold. fact21: This weaving happens if the fact that notthat startling but this hugging occurs is incorrect.

fact1: ¬(¬{GP} & {CB}) fact2: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact4: {D} fact5: {AK} fact6: {AH} -> ¬({CG} & {DC}) fact7: ¬(¬{DM} & ¬{DB}) -> {DB} fact8: {BD} -> ¬({BG} & {HJ}) fact9: {A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact10: ¬{G} -> ({F} v {E}) fact11: ¬(¬{DE} & {FO}) -> {EE} fact12: {D} -> ¬(¬{E} & ¬{C}) fact13: ¬(¬{CF} & {JD}) fact14: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{CS} & ¬{BA}) fact15: {A} fact16: ¬(¬{E} & {C}) fact17: ¬(¬{DM} & {GG}) fact18: {IU} -> ¬({CG} & {EB}) fact19: {D} -> ¬(¬{E} & {C}) fact20: ¬(¬{E} & ¬{C}) -> {C} fact21: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B}

The fact that this experiencing does not happens and this mercerising bursitis does not happens is incorrect.

¬(¬{CS} & ¬{BA})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that notthe anastomosing but the Grecian occurs does not hold. fact2: That notthat startling but this hugging happens is false if that perirhinalness occurs. fact3: That this weaving occurs and this Mishnaicness occurs is incorrect if that perirhinalness does not occurs. fact4: That archegonialness happens. fact5: The aciculateness occurs. fact6: If the disrupting occurs the fact that this suffocating and the vulvalness happens is wrong. fact7: If the fact that the Mesozoicness does not occurs and that moralizing does not occurs is false then that moralizing happens. fact8: That that constituting happens and the lightingness happens is not right if this catheterization occurs. fact9: If that perirhinalness occurs then the fact that both that startling and this hugging occurs does not hold. fact10: If that reuniting euphony does not occurs then either this traveling or that relinquishing or both occurs. fact11: If that notthe timed but this inclination happens is false the watering happens. fact12: If that archegonialness happens that that relinquishing does not occurs and this Mishnaicness does not happens is false. fact13: The fact that the unjustness does not occurs but the sculling happens does not hold. fact14: If that perirhinalness does not occurs then that this experiencing does not happens and this mercerising bursitis does not occurs does not hold. fact15: That that perirhinalness happens is correct. fact16: That that relinquishing does not happens and this Mishnaicness happens is false. fact17: That the fact that the Mesozoicness does not occurs and this unoriginalness occurs is wrong is right. fact18: If that the oozing Kellogg happens is right the fact that both this suffocating and the figuring occurs does not hold. fact19: That that relinquishing does not occurs but this Mishnaicness happens is incorrect if that archegonialness occurs. fact20: This Mishnaicness occurs if that that relinquishing does not occurs and this Mishnaicness does not occurs does not hold. fact21: This weaving happens if the fact that notthat startling but this hugging occurs is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = This weaving and this Mishnaicness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact15 -> int1: That notthat startling but this hugging happens is not correct.; int1 & fact21 -> int2: This weaving happens.; fact12 & fact4 -> int3: The fact that the fact that that relinquishing does not occurs and this Mishnaicness does not happens is false hold.; int3 & fact20 -> int4: This Mishnaicness happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That crystal is not a Bismarck and is haired.

(¬{C}{c} & {E}{c})

fact1: If that crystal does not ridge it does not stereotype Mommsen and is not a FDIC. fact2: If the fact that something is a maths hold this is not precedented and does not ridge. fact3: This jewelry is grateful. fact4: If this jewelry is not a kind of a value Jordan ensues or it is a maths or both. fact5: The fact that if that ebb is not a Bismarck and is not haired this atmosphere is not a kind of a Bismarck hold. fact6: The fact that that ebb is a kind of a Bismarck hold if this atmosphere is a FDIC. fact7: that Mommsen does stereotype atmosphere. fact8: That crystal is not a kind of a Bismarck and is haired if that ebb is a Bismarck. fact9: That crystal is haired. fact10: This fossa stereotypes Mommsen and she/he is a kind of a FDIC if this atmosphere is not a Bismarck. fact11: Something is not a kind of a value if the fact that that is a kind of a kilter that is Mycenaean does not hold. fact12: This atmosphere does stereotype Mommsen. fact13: If that crystal is a maths then the fact that that ebb is a maths hold. fact14: Something is not a Bismarck and is not haired if this thing does not ridge. fact15: If this jewelry is not ungrateful that it is both a kilter and not non-Mycenaean does not hold. fact16: The fact that something is not a Bismarck but this thing is haired does not hold if this thing does not stereotype Mommsen. fact17: If that ebb is a Bismarck that crystal is haired.

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

That that crystal is not a kind of a Bismarck but it is haired does not hold.

¬(¬{C}{c} & {E}{c})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that crystal does not ridge it does not stereotype Mommsen and is not a FDIC. fact2: If the fact that something is a maths hold this is not precedented and does not ridge. fact3: This jewelry is grateful. fact4: If this jewelry is not a kind of a value Jordan ensues or it is a maths or both. fact5: The fact that if that ebb is not a Bismarck and is not haired this atmosphere is not a kind of a Bismarck hold. fact6: The fact that that ebb is a kind of a Bismarck hold if this atmosphere is a FDIC. fact7: that Mommsen does stereotype atmosphere. fact8: That crystal is not a kind of a Bismarck and is haired if that ebb is a Bismarck. fact9: That crystal is haired. fact10: This fossa stereotypes Mommsen and she/he is a kind of a FDIC if this atmosphere is not a Bismarck. fact11: Something is not a kind of a value if the fact that that is a kind of a kilter that is Mycenaean does not hold. fact12: This atmosphere does stereotype Mommsen. fact13: If that crystal is a maths then the fact that that ebb is a maths hold. fact14: Something is not a Bismarck and is not haired if this thing does not ridge. fact15: If this jewelry is not ungrateful that it is both a kilter and not non-Mycenaean does not hold. fact16: The fact that something is not a Bismarck but this thing is haired does not hold if this thing does not stereotype Mommsen. fact17: If that ebb is a Bismarck that crystal is haired. ; $hypothesis$ = That crystal is not a Bismarck and is haired. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

If that dooryard is not a jimmy and is a Mishna then it is not a Bolanci.

(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}

fact1: If somebody that is a kind of a jimmy is a Mishna it is not a Bolanci. fact2: If someone that is not a kind of a Bath is a kind of a love he/she is not a Carica. fact3: That dooryard is a kind of a Bolanci if that is not a jimmy and is a Mishna. fact4: That dooryard is not a kind of a Bolanci if it is a jimmy and is a Mishna. fact5: Someone that is both not a jimmy and a Mishna is a Bolanci. fact6: If something is not a XC but this is impassable then this is an aboriginal. fact7: If that dooryard is not an infallibility but that is a Klaproth then that dooryard is not morphophonemic. fact8: Something is not an invariance if it does not lend Triassic and it buccaneers fairness. fact9: If someone is not a directive but nonassociative it is not a Euler. fact10: If that dooryard is not a Bolanci but it is genealogical it is not a Carica. fact11: That dooryard does not record badness if that dooryard is not a Mishna and weakens cyan. fact12: Frankie is not a Mishna if the one is non-morphophonemic a arity. fact13: Someone is not a sumpsimus if the person does not encrust Oort and is purposeful. fact14: The fact that that dooryard does not clink Teredinidae hold if that dooryard is a kind of a Lufengpithecus that is a kind of a Bolanci. fact15: Something is not agonadal if it is not a Bolanci but a penitence. fact16: That batman is not a Mishna if that person is not an aboriginal and that person does lend Triassic. fact17: This cartwright is not a kind of a misapprehension if this cartwright does not plagiarise subpart and is familiar.

fact1: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact2: (x): (¬{AS}x & {CN}x) -> ¬{AM}x fact3: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact4: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact5: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact6: (x): (¬{GA}x & {HT}x) -> {DK}x fact7: (¬{AH}{aa} & {HD}{aa}) -> ¬{BU}{aa} fact8: (x): (¬{BB}x & {HO}x) -> ¬{BE}x fact9: (x): (¬{D}x & {AP}x) -> ¬{FD}x fact10: (¬{B}{aa} & {DM}{aa}) -> ¬{AM}{aa} fact11: (¬{AB}{aa} & {AG}{aa}) -> ¬{BI}{aa} fact12: (¬{BU}{hh} & {GO}{hh}) -> ¬{AB}{hh} fact13: (x): (¬{IA}x & {HB}x) -> ¬{HS}x fact14: ({I}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{CA}{aa} fact15: (x): (¬{B}x & {IS}x) -> ¬{BR}x fact16: (¬{DK}{hi} & {BB}{hi}) -> ¬{AB}{hi} fact17: (¬{G}{cj} & {CT}{cj}) -> ¬{IE}{cj}

Ty is non-agonadal if he/she is not a Bolanci and is a kind of a penitence.

(¬{B}{gq} & {IS}{gq}) -> ¬{BR}{gq}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody that is a kind of a jimmy is a Mishna it is not a Bolanci. fact2: If someone that is not a kind of a Bath is a kind of a love he/she is not a Carica. fact3: That dooryard is a kind of a Bolanci if that is not a jimmy and is a Mishna. fact4: That dooryard is not a kind of a Bolanci if it is a jimmy and is a Mishna. fact5: Someone that is both not a jimmy and a Mishna is a Bolanci. fact6: If something is not a XC but this is impassable then this is an aboriginal. fact7: If that dooryard is not an infallibility but that is a Klaproth then that dooryard is not morphophonemic. fact8: Something is not an invariance if it does not lend Triassic and it buccaneers fairness. fact9: If someone is not a directive but nonassociative it is not a Euler. fact10: If that dooryard is not a Bolanci but it is genealogical it is not a Carica. fact11: That dooryard does not record badness if that dooryard is not a Mishna and weakens cyan. fact12: Frankie is not a Mishna if the one is non-morphophonemic a arity. fact13: Someone is not a sumpsimus if the person does not encrust Oort and is purposeful. fact14: The fact that that dooryard does not clink Teredinidae hold if that dooryard is a kind of a Lufengpithecus that is a kind of a Bolanci. fact15: Something is not agonadal if it is not a Bolanci but a penitence. fact16: That batman is not a Mishna if that person is not an aboriginal and that person does lend Triassic. fact17: This cartwright is not a kind of a misapprehension if this cartwright does not plagiarise subpart and is familiar. ; $hypothesis$ = If that dooryard is not a jimmy and is a Mishna then it is not a Bolanci. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that shitwork but notthat damnation happens does not hold.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: This ordering but notthe intertwining Lear occurs. fact2: That that shitwork but notthat damnation happens is brought about by that that Turkicness does not happens. fact3: If that sailing does not occurs then this benignantness happens but the isthmianness does not occurs. fact4: The Armageddon does not happens. fact5: This deceasing rococo does not happens. fact6: If that Turkicness does not occurs then that damnation does not occurs. fact7: That damnation does not happens. fact8: That Turkicness does not happens. fact9: The eversion happens. fact10: If the irritation does not happens that balloting occurs. fact11: The halo happens. fact12: If that Turkicness occurs then that recessionariness does not occurs. fact13: The encryption happens if this sericulturalness does not happens.

fact1: ({BE} & ¬{IA}) fact2: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact3: ¬{FN} -> ({AT} & ¬{GB}) fact4: ¬{L} fact5: ¬{DA} fact6: ¬{A} -> ¬{AB} fact7: ¬{AB} fact8: ¬{A} fact9: {FA} fact10: ¬{BN} -> {U} fact11: {AS} fact12: {A} -> ¬{FL} fact13: ¬{IE} -> {JI}

That recessionariness does not happens.

¬{FL}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This ordering but notthe intertwining Lear occurs. fact2: That that shitwork but notthat damnation happens is brought about by that that Turkicness does not happens. fact3: If that sailing does not occurs then this benignantness happens but the isthmianness does not occurs. fact4: The Armageddon does not happens. fact5: This deceasing rococo does not happens. fact6: If that Turkicness does not occurs then that damnation does not occurs. fact7: That damnation does not happens. fact8: That Turkicness does not happens. fact9: The eversion happens. fact10: If the irritation does not happens that balloting occurs. fact11: The halo happens. fact12: If that Turkicness occurs then that recessionariness does not occurs. fact13: The encryption happens if this sericulturalness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that shitwork but notthat damnation happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That decentralisation and this boating happens.

({B} & {C})

fact1: If the fact that this anthraciticness does not happens is not false then the fact that that decentralisation and this boating occurs is wrong. fact2: This anthraciticness and that decentralisation happens. fact3: If the fact that this boating does not occurs and this outstroke does not happens does not hold this outstroke happens.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact2: ({A} & {B}) fact3: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{AQ}) -> {AQ}

The fact that both that decentralisation and this boating happens is not true.

¬({B} & {C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this anthraciticness does not happens is not false then the fact that that decentralisation and this boating occurs is wrong. fact2: This anthraciticness and that decentralisation happens. fact3: If the fact that this boating does not occurs and this outstroke does not happens does not hold this outstroke happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That decentralisation and this boating happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This foremanship does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: If this carpentry does not happens then the overpayment occurs and this metal happens. fact2: This foremanship occurs. fact3: The fact that notthe nonfinancialness but that diddering happens is incorrect if this metal occurs. fact4: This obtuseness occurs. fact5: That the vilifying Salvadora does not occurs and the Being perceptivity does not occurs prevents that that pleasantness occurs. fact6: If the fact that the non-nonfinancialness and that diddering happens is incorrect that diddering does not occurs. fact7: That justness occurs. fact8: That unbearableness happens. fact9: If that diddering does not occurs notthis foremanship but this acting midnight happens. fact10: That timid does not happens or this ruination does not happens or both if that pleasantness does not occurs.

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

This foremanship does not happens.

¬{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this carpentry does not happens then the overpayment occurs and this metal happens. fact2: This foremanship occurs. fact3: The fact that notthe nonfinancialness but that diddering happens is incorrect if this metal occurs. fact4: This obtuseness occurs. fact5: That the vilifying Salvadora does not occurs and the Being perceptivity does not occurs prevents that that pleasantness occurs. fact6: If the fact that the non-nonfinancialness and that diddering happens is incorrect that diddering does not occurs. fact7: That justness occurs. fact8: That unbearableness happens. fact9: If that diddering does not occurs notthis foremanship but this acting midnight happens. fact10: That timid does not happens or this ruination does not happens or both if that pleasantness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This foremanship does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That patrisib does not gasp Mithra.

¬{D}{b}

fact1: This cisco is a prose and/or is an affine. fact2: That spermaceti is a prose and/or it reverberates Salerno. fact3: That patrisib is an affine or she/he is a kind of a Scots or both. fact4: If something is not a kind of an affine then the fact that this reverberates Salerno and is not a kind of a prose is not right. fact5: This cisco is a kind of a prose. fact6: If that Polaroid is not streptococcal then the fact that this cisco is plutocratical and that person is a chic is false. fact7: If this cisco is an affine that patrisib does not gasp Mithra. fact8: This cisco is an affine if that spermaceti is a prose. fact9: That Polaroid is not streptococcal if this beret laughs demographic. fact10: That that spermaceti is an affine is true if this cisco reverberates Salerno. fact11: If somebody that does not scab Golgotha is not a Triga it is not a Samarcand. fact12: This cisco is a prose if that spermaceti is an affine. fact13: This beret is a Holland and/or it laughs demographic. fact14: Something does not scab Golgotha and is not a Triga if this thing is not a Sison. fact15: That rascal reverberates Salerno. fact16: This cisco does reverberate Salerno if that spermaceti is an affine. fact17: If that spermaceti reverberates Salerno this cisco is a kind of an affine. fact18: That Polaroid is not streptococcal if this beret is a Holland. fact19: If the fact that that spermaceti reverberates Salerno and is not a prose is not right that patrisib gasps Mithra. fact20: If that something is plutocratical and it is a chic is false then it is not a kind of a Sison. fact21: That patrisib does not reverberate Salerno. fact22: If this cisco gasps Mithra then that patrisib is not a kind of an affine.

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

That patrisib gasps Mithra.

{D}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This cisco is a prose and/or is an affine. fact2: That spermaceti is a prose and/or it reverberates Salerno. fact3: That patrisib is an affine or she/he is a kind of a Scots or both. fact4: If something is not a kind of an affine then the fact that this reverberates Salerno and is not a kind of a prose is not right. fact5: This cisco is a kind of a prose. fact6: If that Polaroid is not streptococcal then the fact that this cisco is plutocratical and that person is a chic is false. fact7: If this cisco is an affine that patrisib does not gasp Mithra. fact8: This cisco is an affine if that spermaceti is a prose. fact9: That Polaroid is not streptococcal if this beret laughs demographic. fact10: That that spermaceti is an affine is true if this cisco reverberates Salerno. fact11: If somebody that does not scab Golgotha is not a Triga it is not a Samarcand. fact12: This cisco is a prose if that spermaceti is an affine. fact13: This beret is a Holland and/or it laughs demographic. fact14: Something does not scab Golgotha and is not a Triga if this thing is not a Sison. fact15: That rascal reverberates Salerno. fact16: This cisco does reverberate Salerno if that spermaceti is an affine. fact17: If that spermaceti reverberates Salerno this cisco is a kind of an affine. fact18: That Polaroid is not streptococcal if this beret is a Holland. fact19: If the fact that that spermaceti reverberates Salerno and is not a prose is not right that patrisib gasps Mithra. fact20: If that something is plutocratical and it is a chic is false then it is not a kind of a Sison. fact21: That patrisib does not reverberate Salerno. fact22: If this cisco gasps Mithra then that patrisib is not a kind of an affine. ; $hypothesis$ = That patrisib does not gasp Mithra. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact8 & fact17 -> int1: This cisco is an affine.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That horsebean is not czarist.

¬{C}{aa}

fact1: That grummet headlines Mustelus if this rendezvous does not headlines Mustelus and it does not climb Satie. fact2: Somebody that owns is a hypnotic. fact3: Something does not headline Mustelus and does not climb Satie if this is not a sacerdotalism. fact4: That horsebean is not a expectedness if Jermaine is not a expectedness and the thing is not a hypnotic. fact5: Jermaine is not a expectedness if that accordion is not a kind of a expectedness and/or it does not climb Satie. fact6: If the fact that Jermaine is not a sedateness and not a expectedness is false then the recoverer is not czarist. fact7: That accordion owns if that grummet headlines Mustelus. fact8: The candyweed is czarist. fact9: If someone is a sedateness then it is not czarist. fact10: If this rendezvous is a antipyretic that is concentrical it is not a sacerdotalism. fact11: Jermaine is a kind of a sedateness. fact12: Some man is a sedateness and is not non-czarist if it is not a expectedness. fact13: If that accordion does headline Mustelus then it is not a expectedness and/or it does not climb Satie.

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

That horsebean is czarist.

{C}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That grummet headlines Mustelus if this rendezvous does not headlines Mustelus and it does not climb Satie. fact2: Somebody that owns is a hypnotic. fact3: Something does not headline Mustelus and does not climb Satie if this is not a sacerdotalism. fact4: That horsebean is not a expectedness if Jermaine is not a expectedness and the thing is not a hypnotic. fact5: Jermaine is not a expectedness if that accordion is not a kind of a expectedness and/or it does not climb Satie. fact6: If the fact that Jermaine is not a sedateness and not a expectedness is false then the recoverer is not czarist. fact7: That accordion owns if that grummet headlines Mustelus. fact8: The candyweed is czarist. fact9: If someone is a sedateness then it is not czarist. fact10: If this rendezvous is a antipyretic that is concentrical it is not a sacerdotalism. fact11: Jermaine is a kind of a sedateness. fact12: Some man is a sedateness and is not non-czarist if it is not a expectedness. fact13: If that accordion does headline Mustelus then it is not a expectedness and/or it does not climb Satie. ; $hypothesis$ = That horsebean is not czarist. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This axolemma does not solemnize countlessness.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: That the roundel is both not nonlinear and not a collect does not hold. fact2: The fact that this axolemma is not a bologram and that does not cocker lettercard is false. fact3: That this axolemma is a Bel that does not cocker lettercard is false. fact4: The fact that that this axolemma is not a Bel and cockers lettercard does not hold if this axolemma is not unreserved hold. fact5: The sternwheeler solemnizes countlessness. fact6: This liner does not solemnize countlessness. fact7: If this axolemma is not unreserved that it does not groin eighteen and it is not a biped is incorrect. fact8: Some person is not reserved and it is scentless if it is not a kind of a torment. fact9: If this axolemma is not unreserved then that that this axolemma is not a Bel and the person does not cocker lettercard is correct is incorrect. fact10: That this axolemma is not pachydermic and it is not a kind of a Bel is false. fact11: The fact that this axolemma is not a Bel but this cockers lettercard is false. fact12: If the fact that this axolemma is not unstuck hold the fact that this axolemma is not aldehydic and that does not bewail Knesset is wrong. fact13: Something is not a Okenfuss and/or does not solemnize countlessness if the fact that it is unreserved is right. fact14: If the fact that something does not solemnize countlessness and/or it is not a Okenfuss is not false then it does not solemnize countlessness. fact15: The fact that this axolemma does not outfit Robespierre is correct. fact16: Some man solemnizes countlessness if the fact that that person is not a Bel and that person does not cocker lettercard is wrong. fact17: This axolemma is not unreserved. fact18: That the fact that this axolemma is a kind of a Bel but it does not cocker lettercard is not true is correct if it is not unreserved. fact19: That pyrene tags Gascony if the fact that the fact that that is not a unmalleability and does not cocker lettercard is not false is wrong. fact20: The fact that this mag is not a toxicity and it is not a nowness does not hold. fact21: The fact that the technophobe does not parley and does not solemnize countlessness is not true.

fact1: ¬(¬{JG}{gp} & ¬{DA}{gp}) fact2: ¬(¬{CO}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact3: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact5: {B}{n} fact6: ¬{B}{b} fact7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{U}{a} & ¬{G}{a}) fact8: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({A}x & {D}x) fact9: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact10: ¬(¬{IJ}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) fact11: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact12: ¬{JK}{a} -> ¬(¬{IC}{a} & ¬{FN}{a}) fact13: (x): {A}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{B}x) fact14: (x): (¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact15: ¬{AK}{a} fact16: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact17: ¬{A}{a} fact18: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact19: ¬(¬{CQ}{ii} & ¬{AB}{ii}) -> {JE}{ii} fact20: ¬(¬{CF}{fr} & ¬{FM}{fr}) fact21: ¬(¬{IO}{an} & ¬{B}{an})

This axolemma does not solemnize countlessness.

¬{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the roundel is both not nonlinear and not a collect does not hold. fact2: The fact that this axolemma is not a bologram and that does not cocker lettercard is false. fact3: That this axolemma is a Bel that does not cocker lettercard is false. fact4: The fact that that this axolemma is not a Bel and cockers lettercard does not hold if this axolemma is not unreserved hold. fact5: The sternwheeler solemnizes countlessness. fact6: This liner does not solemnize countlessness. fact7: If this axolemma is not unreserved that it does not groin eighteen and it is not a biped is incorrect. fact8: Some person is not reserved and it is scentless if it is not a kind of a torment. fact9: If this axolemma is not unreserved then that that this axolemma is not a Bel and the person does not cocker lettercard is correct is incorrect. fact10: That this axolemma is not pachydermic and it is not a kind of a Bel is false. fact11: The fact that this axolemma is not a Bel but this cockers lettercard is false. fact12: If the fact that this axolemma is not unstuck hold the fact that this axolemma is not aldehydic and that does not bewail Knesset is wrong. fact13: Something is not a Okenfuss and/or does not solemnize countlessness if the fact that it is unreserved is right. fact14: If the fact that something does not solemnize countlessness and/or it is not a Okenfuss is not false then it does not solemnize countlessness. fact15: The fact that this axolemma does not outfit Robespierre is correct. fact16: Some man solemnizes countlessness if the fact that that person is not a Bel and that person does not cocker lettercard is wrong. fact17: This axolemma is not unreserved. fact18: That the fact that this axolemma is a kind of a Bel but it does not cocker lettercard is not true is correct if it is not unreserved. fact19: That pyrene tags Gascony if the fact that the fact that that is not a unmalleability and does not cocker lettercard is not false is wrong. fact20: The fact that this mag is not a toxicity and it is not a nowness does not hold. fact21: The fact that the technophobe does not parley and does not solemnize countlessness is not true. ; $hypothesis$ = This axolemma does not solemnize countlessness. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact17 -> int1: That this axolemma is not a Bel and does not cocker lettercard does not hold.; fact16 -> int2: If the fact that this axolemma is not a Bel and does not cocker lettercard is false this axolemma solemnizes countlessness.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this repression subtilizes and is not a Nietzsche is wrong.

¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: This repression is slower. fact2: The fact that this Hoosier freshens and is slower is wrong if that sheepfold is not hirsute. fact3: If something is not a Collembola the fact that it subtilizes and it is not a Nietzsche does not hold. fact4: The fact that something is a Nietzsche and it is a kind of a Collembola is incorrect if it is not slower. fact5: If that some person is hirsute and he is a Collembola does not hold then he is not a kind of a Collembola. fact6: Something that is a kind of a Collembola subtilizes and is not a Nietzsche. fact7: This repression is slower and is not a Collembola. fact8: That somebody is hirsute and a Collembola does not hold if it does not freshen.

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

This repression subtilizes and is not a Nietzsche.

({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This repression is slower. fact2: The fact that this Hoosier freshens and is slower is wrong if that sheepfold is not hirsute. fact3: If something is not a Collembola the fact that it subtilizes and it is not a Nietzsche does not hold. fact4: The fact that something is a Nietzsche and it is a kind of a Collembola is incorrect if it is not slower. fact5: If that some person is hirsute and he is a Collembola does not hold then he is not a kind of a Collembola. fact6: Something that is a kind of a Collembola subtilizes and is not a Nietzsche. fact7: This repression is slower and is not a Collembola. fact8: That somebody is hirsute and a Collembola does not hold if it does not freshen. ; $hypothesis$ = That this repression subtilizes and is not a Nietzsche is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: If the fact that this repression is not a kind of a Collembola hold then the fact that it subtilizes and it is not a Nietzsche is incorrect.; fact7 -> int2: This repression is not a Collembola.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This reckoning does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: If this liquidating secureness does not happens then notthat killing but that viscosimetry happens. fact2: If that killing occurs both this non-unexpiredness and this non-antimagneticness happens. fact3: This reckoning does not occurs if that that affecting Seeger happens and that pettifoggery does not happens does not hold. fact4: That this unexpiredness and this antimagneticness occurs is caused by that that killing does not happens. fact5: This reckoning occurs if the fact that that notthat outwearing but that repose occurs does not hold is right. fact6: The fact that that outwearing and that repose occurs is incorrect. fact7: If that affecting Seeger occurs that that notthat outwearing but that repose happens is true does not hold. fact8: That that killing does not happens is prevented by that that viscosimetry happens. fact9: If this unexpiredness happens then the fact that that affecting Seeger but notthat pettifoggery happens does not hold.

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

This reckoning does not occurs.

¬{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this liquidating secureness does not happens then notthat killing but that viscosimetry happens. fact2: If that killing occurs both this non-unexpiredness and this non-antimagneticness happens. fact3: This reckoning does not occurs if that that affecting Seeger happens and that pettifoggery does not happens does not hold. fact4: That this unexpiredness and this antimagneticness occurs is caused by that that killing does not happens. fact5: This reckoning occurs if the fact that that notthat outwearing but that repose occurs does not hold is right. fact6: The fact that that outwearing and that repose occurs is incorrect. fact7: If that affecting Seeger occurs that that notthat outwearing but that repose happens is true does not hold. fact8: That that killing does not happens is prevented by that that viscosimetry happens. fact9: If this unexpiredness happens then the fact that that affecting Seeger but notthat pettifoggery happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This reckoning does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This quarryman is not a procuress.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: That Aidan does not thresh and it is not a kind of a Aum is incorrect. fact2: If Aidan is a Aum that this quarryman is a procuress is right. fact3: The fact that Aidan is not a Helminthostachys and does not thresh is false. fact4: If Aidan is not biogenetic this quarryman is not a kind of a procuress. fact5: The fact that Aidan is not a Aum and not a procuress is false. fact6: The fact that this quarryman is not a Aum and is not a procuress does not hold. fact7: The fact that Aidan does not thresh and is a Aum is wrong. fact8: That this quarryman is not a procuress and the thing does not thresh is false. fact9: This quarryman is a kind of a procuress if that Aidan does not thresh and the person is not a kind of a Aum is not correct. fact10: Aidan is not biogenetic if this sandstone is biogenetic and/or it is not a Wallenstein. fact11: The fact that that this quarryman does not thresh and is not a procuress is false is right.

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

This quarryman is not a procuress.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Aidan does not thresh and it is not a kind of a Aum is incorrect. fact2: If Aidan is a Aum that this quarryman is a procuress is right. fact3: The fact that Aidan is not a Helminthostachys and does not thresh is false. fact4: If Aidan is not biogenetic this quarryman is not a kind of a procuress. fact5: The fact that Aidan is not a Aum and not a procuress is false. fact6: The fact that this quarryman is not a Aum and is not a procuress does not hold. fact7: The fact that Aidan does not thresh and is a Aum is wrong. fact8: That this quarryman is not a procuress and the thing does not thresh is false. fact9: This quarryman is a kind of a procuress if that Aidan does not thresh and the person is not a kind of a Aum is not correct. fact10: Aidan is not biogenetic if this sandstone is biogenetic and/or it is not a Wallenstein. fact11: The fact that that this quarryman does not thresh and is not a procuress is false is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This quarryman is not a procuress. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That cartouch submerges multinomial.

{C}{c}

fact1: This grison is not a quattrocento. fact2: That ridgel is not a quattrocento. fact3: If this grison is not a quattrocento that ridgel does not inspissate synchronism and is not a Aristotelian. fact4: That cartouch forks Heimdall if that ridgel does not inspissate synchronism and is not a Aristotelian. fact5: If that ridgel is not a kind of a Aristotelian and does not submerge multinomial then that cartouch inspissates synchronism. fact6: If that ridgel forks Heimdall the thing inspissates synchronism. fact7: That ridgel is not a quattrocento and does not inspissate synchronism if this grison is not a kind of a Aristotelian. fact8: That ridgel is not a kind of a quattrocento and it does not inspissate synchronism. fact9: If the fact that this grison is not a Aristotelian but it is a kind of a quattrocento is correct then that cartouch forks Heimdall.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} fact2: ¬{A}{b} fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact4: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} fact5: (¬{AB}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {AA}{c} fact6: {B}{b} -> {AA}{b} fact7: ¬{AB}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) fact8: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) fact9: (¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) -> {B}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This grison is not a quattrocento. fact2: That ridgel is not a quattrocento. fact3: If this grison is not a quattrocento that ridgel does not inspissate synchronism and is not a Aristotelian. fact4: That cartouch forks Heimdall if that ridgel does not inspissate synchronism and is not a Aristotelian. fact5: If that ridgel is not a kind of a Aristotelian and does not submerge multinomial then that cartouch inspissates synchronism. fact6: If that ridgel forks Heimdall the thing inspissates synchronism. fact7: That ridgel is not a quattrocento and does not inspissate synchronism if this grison is not a kind of a Aristotelian. fact8: That ridgel is not a kind of a quattrocento and it does not inspissate synchronism. fact9: If the fact that this grison is not a Aristotelian but it is a kind of a quattrocento is correct then that cartouch forks Heimdall. ; $hypothesis$ = That cartouch submerges multinomial. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That intussuscepting does not happens and/or this deviationism happens.

(¬{AA} v {AB})

fact1: If this honk does not occurs then that this watch happens but that hierarchalness does not happens is not true. fact2: That plopping dipped happens or that buccaneering does not happens or both if that championship occurs. fact3: That that compress occurs is prevented by that this bacchanal does not happens. fact4: That that falling does not occurs and that paving praisworthiness does not happens is caused by that that compress does not occurs. fact5: If that this watch and the non-hierarchalness occurs is wrong that drifting happens. fact6: This honk does not happens if this tie occurs. fact7: If that that extinguishing FARC does not happens is correct then that the chiseled does not happens or this schizophrenic occurs or both does not hold. fact8: That comforting vac does not occurs and that spacialness does not happens if that drifting occurs. fact9: This bacchanal does not occurs if that buccaneering does not occurs. fact10: That championship and the plumbing occurs. fact11: The fact that either that intussuscepting does not occurs or this deviationism occurs or both does not hold. fact12: That either that plopping dipped occurs or that buccaneering does not happens or both triggers that that buccaneering does not happens. fact13: If that abnormalness occurs then that excoriation does not happens. fact14: That both this deviationism and that extinguishing FARC happens is caused by that that comforting vac does not occurs. fact15: If that excoriation does not occurs both this tie and the interviewing tenantry happens. fact16: That that abnormalness happens and/or that this crisis does not happens is triggered by that that falling does not occurs.

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

The fact that the chiseled does not happens and/or this schizophrenic occurs is incorrect.

¬(¬{JA} v {HO})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this honk does not occurs then that this watch happens but that hierarchalness does not happens is not true. fact2: That plopping dipped happens or that buccaneering does not happens or both if that championship occurs. fact3: That that compress occurs is prevented by that this bacchanal does not happens. fact4: That that falling does not occurs and that paving praisworthiness does not happens is caused by that that compress does not occurs. fact5: If that this watch and the non-hierarchalness occurs is wrong that drifting happens. fact6: This honk does not happens if this tie occurs. fact7: If that that extinguishing FARC does not happens is correct then that the chiseled does not happens or this schizophrenic occurs or both does not hold. fact8: That comforting vac does not occurs and that spacialness does not happens if that drifting occurs. fact9: This bacchanal does not occurs if that buccaneering does not occurs. fact10: That championship and the plumbing occurs. fact11: The fact that either that intussuscepting does not occurs or this deviationism occurs or both does not hold. fact12: That either that plopping dipped occurs or that buccaneering does not happens or both triggers that that buccaneering does not happens. fact13: If that abnormalness occurs then that excoriation does not happens. fact14: That both this deviationism and that extinguishing FARC happens is caused by that that comforting vac does not occurs. fact15: If that excoriation does not occurs both this tie and the interviewing tenantry happens. fact16: That that abnormalness happens and/or that this crisis does not happens is triggered by that that falling does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That intussuscepting does not happens and/or this deviationism happens. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That hearts but notthat scribbling strategy happens.

({C} & ¬{D})

fact1: That carioca occurs and this sopping synaesthesia occurs. fact2: If this contradance does not happens this rupestralness does not happens and that scribbling strategy does not occurs. fact3: That that waking occurs and this inducing Anarhichadidae does not occurs is incorrect if this Naziness does not occurs. fact4: If that this massing intransitiveness occurs and this untippedness happens does not hold then that accountancy does not happens. fact5: That rhizoidalness and the lustrum happens if this dark does not occurs. fact6: This Naziness does not happens if the fact that this shallowness does not occurs and the unkeyedness occurs is incorrect. fact7: The fact that both this non-shallowness and the unkeyedness occurs is false if this rubbing does not occurs. fact8: That this dark occurs is prevented by that either this dark does not happens or this occlusion does not occurs or both. fact9: That hearts happens if this crouch occurs. fact10: If the thrashing does not happens then the fact that that Aramaean does not happens is correct. fact11: That that accountancy does not happens causes that this contradance happens and this necroticness occurs. fact12: If that both this non-rupestralness and this crouch occurs is false this diabolatry occurs. fact13: This contradance does not happens. fact14: That waking does not occurs if that that waking happens but this inducing Anarhichadidae does not happens is incorrect. fact15: If the fact that this contradance does not occurs is true then the fact that this rupestralness happens is wrong. fact16: This diabolatry happens. fact17: If that rhizoidalness occurs then this stovepipedness does not occurs and the inhumaneness does not happens. fact18: If that waking does not happens then either this dark does not occurs or this occlusion does not occurs or both. fact19: This rupestralness does not occurs. fact20: The fact that this massing intransitiveness and this untippedness occurs is incorrect if the inhumaneness does not happens. fact21: If that Aramaean does not occurs that the continuing does not happens but this heartbreaker happens is incorrect. fact22: This diabolatry happens and this crouch happens. fact23: If the fact that notthe continuing but this heartbreaker occurs does not hold then this rubbing does not happens.

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

That that hearts happens but that scribbling strategy does not happens does not hold.

¬({C} & ¬{D})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That carioca occurs and this sopping synaesthesia occurs. fact2: If this contradance does not happens this rupestralness does not happens and that scribbling strategy does not occurs. fact3: That that waking occurs and this inducing Anarhichadidae does not occurs is incorrect if this Naziness does not occurs. fact4: If that this massing intransitiveness occurs and this untippedness happens does not hold then that accountancy does not happens. fact5: That rhizoidalness and the lustrum happens if this dark does not occurs. fact6: This Naziness does not happens if the fact that this shallowness does not occurs and the unkeyedness occurs is incorrect. fact7: The fact that both this non-shallowness and the unkeyedness occurs is false if this rubbing does not occurs. fact8: That this dark occurs is prevented by that either this dark does not happens or this occlusion does not occurs or both. fact9: That hearts happens if this crouch occurs. fact10: If the thrashing does not happens then the fact that that Aramaean does not happens is correct. fact11: That that accountancy does not happens causes that this contradance happens and this necroticness occurs. fact12: If that both this non-rupestralness and this crouch occurs is false this diabolatry occurs. fact13: This contradance does not happens. fact14: That waking does not occurs if that that waking happens but this inducing Anarhichadidae does not happens is incorrect. fact15: If the fact that this contradance does not occurs is true then the fact that this rupestralness happens is wrong. fact16: This diabolatry happens. fact17: If that rhizoidalness occurs then this stovepipedness does not occurs and the inhumaneness does not happens. fact18: If that waking does not happens then either this dark does not occurs or this occlusion does not occurs or both. fact19: This rupestralness does not occurs. fact20: The fact that this massing intransitiveness and this untippedness occurs is incorrect if the inhumaneness does not happens. fact21: If that Aramaean does not occurs that the continuing does not happens but this heartbreaker happens is incorrect. fact22: This diabolatry happens and this crouch happens. fact23: If the fact that notthe continuing but this heartbreaker occurs does not hold then this rubbing does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That hearts but notthat scribbling strategy happens. ; $proof$ =

fact22 -> int1: This crouch occurs.; int1 & fact9 -> int2: That hearts occurs.; fact13 & fact2 -> int3: This rupestralness does not occurs and that scribbling strategy does not occurs.; int3 -> int4: That scribbling strategy does not occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This spyglass is a visibleness.

{B}{b}

fact1: This spyglass is a visibleness if this charity votes Shiloh. fact2: This charity is a Eckhart. fact3: That some man is not autotypic and does not vote Shiloh does not hold if it does not intersect Polemoniaceae. fact4: If this charity is a kind of a visibleness this spyglass votes Shiloh. fact5: This charity is a visibleness if this spyglass votes Shiloh. fact6: The guitarfish does vote Shiloh. fact7: This charity votes Shiloh and is a visibleness if that pyrrhuloxia is not autotypic. fact8: This unit votes Shiloh. fact9: This spyglass votes Shiloh. fact10: the Shiloh votes charity. fact11: The number votes Shiloh. fact12: This charity whelps.

fact1: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact2: {HP}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) fact4: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact5: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact6: {A}{q} fact7: ¬{C}{c} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact8: {A}{h} fact9: {A}{b} fact10: {AA}{aa} fact11: {A}{an} fact12: {GG}{a}

This spyglass is not a kind of a visibleness.

¬{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This spyglass is a visibleness if this charity votes Shiloh. fact2: This charity is a Eckhart. fact3: That some man is not autotypic and does not vote Shiloh does not hold if it does not intersect Polemoniaceae. fact4: If this charity is a kind of a visibleness this spyglass votes Shiloh. fact5: This charity is a visibleness if this spyglass votes Shiloh. fact6: The guitarfish does vote Shiloh. fact7: This charity votes Shiloh and is a visibleness if that pyrrhuloxia is not autotypic. fact8: This unit votes Shiloh. fact9: This spyglass votes Shiloh. fact10: the Shiloh votes charity. fact11: The number votes Shiloh. fact12: This charity whelps. ; $hypothesis$ = This spyglass is a visibleness. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Gwendolyn is a kind of a Cleveland.

{A}{a}

fact1: This Caucasian is a Cleveland. fact2: This bowtie is a Cleveland. fact3: Gwendolyn shoplifts NIDDM. fact4: That ruler is a kind of a Cleveland. fact5: Gwendolyn rims. fact6: This peacock is a Cleveland. fact7: Gwendolyn is fundamentalistic. fact8: Gwendolyn is a kind of a Cleveland. fact9: Gwendolyn is a crabbed. fact10: Gwendolyn is a kind of a Castilleja. fact11: The viewer is a Cleveland.

fact1: {A}{cg} fact2: {A}{fr} fact3: {IF}{a} fact4: {A}{eb} fact5: {J}{a} fact6: {A}{cb} fact7: {GG}{a} fact8: {A}{a} fact9: {FP}{a} fact10: {AE}{a} fact11: {A}{e}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This Caucasian is a Cleveland. fact2: This bowtie is a Cleveland. fact3: Gwendolyn shoplifts NIDDM. fact4: That ruler is a kind of a Cleveland. fact5: Gwendolyn rims. fact6: This peacock is a Cleveland. fact7: Gwendolyn is fundamentalistic. fact8: Gwendolyn is a kind of a Cleveland. fact9: Gwendolyn is a crabbed. fact10: Gwendolyn is a kind of a Castilleja. fact11: The viewer is a Cleveland. ; $hypothesis$ = Gwendolyn is a kind of a Cleveland. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That everything darkens is false.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Either something is not a Caporetto or this is not servomechanical or both if the fact that this is a kind of a aftersensation is correct. fact2: Something bedights forgivingness and darkens if it is not a kind of a moo. fact3: If something darkens or this is not a moo or both this darkens. fact4: Everything darkens. fact5: Every man is a Elaphe. fact6: If someone is not retroactive and/or that person is not a moo that person is not a kind of a moo. fact7: Some man that is not a Elaphe either is not retroactive or is not a moo or both. fact8: Everybody scales. fact9: Everyone ladles Krakatoa. fact10: Everything is a aftersensation and that thing is monistic. fact11: The fact that something erects if it darkens hold. fact12: Everybody is a Elaphe and is retroactive. fact13: Everyone is a mutuality. fact14: If either somebody is not a Caporetto or it is not servomechanical or both then it is not servomechanical.

fact1: (x): {F}x -> (¬{G}x v ¬{E}x) fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({EQ}x & {A}x) fact3: (x): ({A}x v ¬{B}x) -> {A}x fact4: (x): {A}x fact5: (x): {C}x fact6: (x): (¬{D}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{D}x v ¬{B}x) fact8: (x): {BO}x fact9: (x): {BN}x fact10: (x): ({F}x & {H}x) fact11: (x): {A}x -> {CR}x fact12: (x): ({C}x & {D}x) fact13: (x): {JK}x fact14: (x): (¬{G}x v ¬{E}x) -> ¬{E}x

Everything erects.

(x): {CR}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Either something is not a Caporetto or this is not servomechanical or both if the fact that this is a kind of a aftersensation is correct. fact2: Something bedights forgivingness and darkens if it is not a kind of a moo. fact3: If something darkens or this is not a moo or both this darkens. fact4: Everything darkens. fact5: Every man is a Elaphe. fact6: If someone is not retroactive and/or that person is not a moo that person is not a kind of a moo. fact7: Some man that is not a Elaphe either is not retroactive or is not a moo or both. fact8: Everybody scales. fact9: Everyone ladles Krakatoa. fact10: Everything is a aftersensation and that thing is monistic. fact11: The fact that something erects if it darkens hold. fact12: Everybody is a Elaphe and is retroactive. fact13: Everyone is a mutuality. fact14: If either somebody is not a Caporetto or it is not servomechanical or both then it is not servomechanical. ; $hypothesis$ = That everything darkens is false. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this toleration occurs is true.

{D}

fact1: That this toleration does not happens is brought about by that that matric happens or that that Downing ad happens or both. fact2: The mending and this leggedness occurs. fact3: That both this eyeing arachnophobia and that Downing ad happens is caused by that this dissembling Archilochus does not happens. fact4: That roiling fiver but notthis sapiensness occurs if that calculousness happens. fact5: If this sapiensness does not occurs then the fact that that that fellating Horney but notthis toleration occurs is incorrect hold. fact6: If that limiting Mr. occurs the fact that this dousing lean does not happens and that calculousness does not happens is false. fact7: This toleration happens if that that fellating Horney happens and this toleration does not occurs is incorrect. fact8: That this dissembling Archilochus occurs hold. fact9: That that matric occurs results in that this toleration does not occurs. fact10: Both that Downing ad and this dissembling Archilochus occurs. fact11: If that Downing ad does not happens then this toleration happens. fact12: If the fact that that this dousing lean does not occurs and that calculousness does not occurs is right is wrong then that calculousness happens.

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

That this toleration occurs is true.

{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this toleration does not happens is brought about by that that matric happens or that that Downing ad happens or both. fact2: The mending and this leggedness occurs. fact3: That both this eyeing arachnophobia and that Downing ad happens is caused by that this dissembling Archilochus does not happens. fact4: That roiling fiver but notthis sapiensness occurs if that calculousness happens. fact5: If this sapiensness does not occurs then the fact that that that fellating Horney but notthis toleration occurs is incorrect hold. fact6: If that limiting Mr. occurs the fact that this dousing lean does not happens and that calculousness does not happens is false. fact7: This toleration happens if that that fellating Horney happens and this toleration does not occurs is incorrect. fact8: That this dissembling Archilochus occurs hold. fact9: That that matric occurs results in that this toleration does not occurs. fact10: Both that Downing ad and this dissembling Archilochus occurs. fact11: If that Downing ad does not happens then this toleration happens. fact12: If the fact that that this dousing lean does not occurs and that calculousness does not occurs is right is wrong then that calculousness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this toleration occurs is true. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: That Downing ad occurs.; int1 -> int2: The fact that that matric and/or that Downing ad happens is right.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that notthe berperson payday but this spiriting EKG happens is wrong.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: The fact that this spiriting EKG occurs hold. fact2: That gemination happens. fact3: If this amalgamation does not occurs that that stoppering hirsutism does not happens but this depolarisation happens does not hold. fact4: That if this basiscopicness happens either this raging neglected does not occurs or this animatisticness occurs or both is not incorrect. fact5: This animatisticness does not occurs if that the berthing payday does not happens but this spiriting EKG happens is not correct. fact6: That aniseikonicness does not occurs if that the seeding Strepera does not occurs but this wrenching occurs is not true. fact7: If this swelling Lupinus does not occurs then that cocooning coughing does not occurs. fact8: The fact that notthe berthing payday but this spiriting EKG happens is incorrect if this amalgamation does not happens. fact9: This animatisticness occurs. fact10: That this raging neglected occurs causes that this amalgamation does not occurs and this animatisticness does not occurs. fact11: If this geocentricness does not happens then this swelling Lupinus does not occurs. fact12: This animatisticness does not happens if this spiriting EKG does not happens. fact13: The shielding does not occurs but the mesomorphicness occurs. fact14: If that cocooning coughing does not occurs this raging neglected and this basiscopicness occurs.

fact1: {AB} fact2: {IC} fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{IH} & {JF}) fact4: {D} -> (¬{C} v {B}) fact5: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact6: ¬(¬{FB} & {CO}) -> ¬{DH} fact7: ¬{F} -> ¬{E} fact8: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact9: {B} fact10: {C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact11: ¬{G} -> ¬{F} fact12: ¬{AB} -> ¬{B} fact13: (¬{GS} & {IE}) fact14: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D})

The fact that notthat stoppering hirsutism but this depolarisation happens does not hold.

¬(¬{IH} & {JF})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this spiriting EKG occurs hold. fact2: That gemination happens. fact3: If this amalgamation does not occurs that that stoppering hirsutism does not happens but this depolarisation happens does not hold. fact4: That if this basiscopicness happens either this raging neglected does not occurs or this animatisticness occurs or both is not incorrect. fact5: This animatisticness does not occurs if that the berthing payday does not happens but this spiriting EKG happens is not correct. fact6: That aniseikonicness does not occurs if that the seeding Strepera does not occurs but this wrenching occurs is not true. fact7: If this swelling Lupinus does not occurs then that cocooning coughing does not occurs. fact8: The fact that notthe berthing payday but this spiriting EKG happens is incorrect if this amalgamation does not happens. fact9: This animatisticness occurs. fact10: That this raging neglected occurs causes that this amalgamation does not occurs and this animatisticness does not occurs. fact11: If this geocentricness does not happens then this swelling Lupinus does not occurs. fact12: This animatisticness does not happens if this spiriting EKG does not happens. fact13: The shielding does not occurs but the mesomorphicness occurs. fact14: If that cocooning coughing does not occurs this raging neglected and this basiscopicness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that notthe berperson payday but this spiriting EKG happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that notthe berperson payday but this spiriting EKG happens is wrong.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: This animatisticness does not occurs.; int1 & fact9 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Oxford is a kilobyte and is incredulous.

({D}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

fact1: Some man is a kind of a kilobyte if she is biomedical. fact2: If this protectionist is a snigger and she is a Romulus then that Potyokin is incredulous. fact3: This protectionist is a snigger. fact4: That malacca is a kind of a snigger if this protectionist is not a snigger. fact5: That Potyokin is a kind of an aqua. fact6: That Oxford is a snigger if this is Epicurean. fact7: Some man is not credulous if this person is a kind of a snigger and this person is a Romulus. fact8: That that Potyokin is credulous but that thing is not a kilobyte does not hold. fact9: That Potyokin is a kind of a companionship if that that Potyokin is an aqua is right. fact10: The fact that that Oxford debases if that this protectionist is a companionship is true hold. fact11: Something is biomedical if it does debase. fact12: If somebody is not a snigger that one is a kilobyte and that one is a litter. fact13: That Oxford is a snigger. fact14: The fact that that Oxford is a kind of a snigger that is not a Aplodontia is incorrect. fact15: This protectionist is a Romulus. fact16: If that Potyokin is a companionship this protectionist is a companionship.

fact1: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact3: {A}{a} fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> {A}{gl} fact5: {I}{b} fact6: {H}{c} -> {A}{c} fact7: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact8: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact9: {I}{b} -> {G}{b} fact10: {G}{a} -> {F}{c} fact11: (x): {F}x -> {E}x fact12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({D}x & {HD}x) fact13: {A}{c} fact14: ¬({A}{c} & ¬{BS}{c}) fact15: {B}{a} fact16: {G}{b} -> {G}{a}

That malacca is not a Romulus.

¬{B}{gl}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some man is a kind of a kilobyte if she is biomedical. fact2: If this protectionist is a snigger and she is a Romulus then that Potyokin is incredulous. fact3: This protectionist is a snigger. fact4: That malacca is a kind of a snigger if this protectionist is not a snigger. fact5: That Potyokin is a kind of an aqua. fact6: That Oxford is a snigger if this is Epicurean. fact7: Some man is not credulous if this person is a kind of a snigger and this person is a Romulus. fact8: That that Potyokin is credulous but that thing is not a kilobyte does not hold. fact9: That Potyokin is a kind of a companionship if that that Potyokin is an aqua is right. fact10: The fact that that Oxford debases if that this protectionist is a companionship is true hold. fact11: Something is biomedical if it does debase. fact12: If somebody is not a snigger that one is a kilobyte and that one is a litter. fact13: That Oxford is a snigger. fact14: The fact that that Oxford is a kind of a snigger that is not a Aplodontia is incorrect. fact15: This protectionist is a Romulus. fact16: If that Potyokin is a companionship this protectionist is a companionship. ; $hypothesis$ = That Oxford is a kilobyte and is incredulous. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this tamedness occurs but the uninquisitiveness does not happens is false.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: This tamedness and that non-uninquisitiveness occurs if this denial does not happens. fact2: That that initialing Lagostomus does not happens brings about that the hailstorm does not occurs and that Afghan does not occurs. fact3: If the hailstorm does not occurs the fact that this surveying does not happens and/or that axing bigness does not happens does not hold. fact4: If this denial happens the fact that this tamedness but notthe uninquisitiveness happens does not hold. fact5: That that apoplexy does not occurs yields that this denial does not happens and that wetness happens. fact6: If the fact that either this surveying does not occurs or that axing bigness does not occurs or both is incorrect then that apoplexy does not occurs.

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

Both this tamedness and that non-uninquisitiveness occurs.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This tamedness and that non-uninquisitiveness occurs if this denial does not happens. fact2: That that initialing Lagostomus does not happens brings about that the hailstorm does not occurs and that Afghan does not occurs. fact3: If the hailstorm does not occurs the fact that this surveying does not happens and/or that axing bigness does not happens does not hold. fact4: If this denial happens the fact that this tamedness but notthe uninquisitiveness happens does not hold. fact5: That that apoplexy does not occurs yields that this denial does not happens and that wetness happens. fact6: If the fact that either this surveying does not occurs or that axing bigness does not occurs or both is incorrect then that apoplexy does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That this tamedness occurs but the uninquisitiveness does not happens is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This smudging Akmola occurs.

{C}

fact1: This smudging Akmola does not happens if that that chaetognathanness occurs is true. fact2: The araneidanness occurs. fact3: This galling Grundyism does not happens if that unsectarianness happens. fact4: That chaetognathanness does not happens if this luge occurs or this Treeing does not occurs or both. fact5: The belching occurs. fact6: If that noncombinativeness does not occurs both this luge and this resurgence occurs. fact7: That the underrating Alopius does not happens is right if that molestation happens. fact8: This fiesta happens. fact9: This puncturing happens if the Argentinian happens. fact10: The mooniness happens. fact11: This swinging happens.

fact1: {B} -> ¬{C} fact2: {HD} fact3: {FA} -> ¬{GQ} fact4: ({E} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact5: {HC} fact6: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact7: {HJ} -> ¬{GC} fact8: {IN} fact9: {DG} -> {IS} fact10: {CQ} fact11: {A}

This smudging Akmola occurs.

{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This smudging Akmola does not happens if that that chaetognathanness occurs is true. fact2: The araneidanness occurs. fact3: This galling Grundyism does not happens if that unsectarianness happens. fact4: That chaetognathanness does not happens if this luge occurs or this Treeing does not occurs or both. fact5: The belching occurs. fact6: If that noncombinativeness does not occurs both this luge and this resurgence occurs. fact7: That the underrating Alopius does not happens is right if that molestation happens. fact8: This fiesta happens. fact9: This puncturing happens if the Argentinian happens. fact10: The mooniness happens. fact11: This swinging happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This smudging Akmola occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This puncturelessness does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: This submergibleness yields that this assertiveness does not occurs and the unendowedness does not occurs. fact2: The monetizing Xinjiang does not happens. fact3: This reporting does not occurs. fact4: That the filibustering does not happens brings about this non-catapultianness. fact5: This puncturelessness happens if the fact that this reporting does not occurs and this mnemotechnicalness does not happens does not hold. fact6: The piercing figured does not occurs. fact7: The riding does not occurs and the occasioning Haemanthus does not occurs. fact8: This reporting does not happens and this mnemotechnicalness does not happens. fact9: The crystaliseding does not happens. fact10: This socialising does not happens and the tracklessness does not occurs. fact11: If this mnemotechnicalness does not happens that this puncturelessness does not happens hold. fact12: That supporting does not happens. fact13: The fact that that rhapsodising does not happens is true. fact14: This nonrenewableness does not occurs. fact15: The dieting magnanimousness does not occurs. fact16: If this assertiveness does not occurs that this reporting does not occurs and this mnemotechnicalness does not happens does not hold.

fact1: {F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact2: ¬{GL} fact3: ¬{A} fact4: ¬{HQ} -> ¬{HL} fact5: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {C} fact6: ¬{DM} fact7: (¬{DI} & ¬{BE}) fact8: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact9: ¬{CR} fact10: (¬{BU} & ¬{FN}) fact11: ¬{B} -> ¬{C} fact12: ¬{CG} fact13: ¬{ES} fact14: ¬{EF} fact15: ¬{GJ} fact16: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B})

This puncturelessness occurs.

{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This submergibleness yields that this assertiveness does not occurs and the unendowedness does not occurs. fact2: The monetizing Xinjiang does not happens. fact3: This reporting does not occurs. fact4: That the filibustering does not happens brings about this non-catapultianness. fact5: This puncturelessness happens if the fact that this reporting does not occurs and this mnemotechnicalness does not happens does not hold. fact6: The piercing figured does not occurs. fact7: The riding does not occurs and the occasioning Haemanthus does not occurs. fact8: This reporting does not happens and this mnemotechnicalness does not happens. fact9: The crystaliseding does not happens. fact10: This socialising does not happens and the tracklessness does not occurs. fact11: If this mnemotechnicalness does not happens that this puncturelessness does not happens hold. fact12: That supporting does not happens. fact13: The fact that that rhapsodising does not happens is true. fact14: This nonrenewableness does not occurs. fact15: The dieting magnanimousness does not occurs. fact16: If this assertiveness does not occurs that this reporting does not occurs and this mnemotechnicalness does not happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This puncturelessness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: This mnemotechnicalness does not happens.; int1 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This formol dissipates.

{B}{b}

fact1: This argyle does not impede judging and is not a stalked if it does not react Berberis. fact2: This argyle is not a kind of a stalked if the fact that this thing does not react Berberis is right. fact3: This argyle does not react Berberis. fact4: This formol dissipates if this argyle dissipates. fact5: If someone reacts Berberis that person dissipates. fact6: If this argyle is a ague this argyle reacts Berberis. fact7: That buzzard does not impede judging. fact8: That burp does not impede judging. fact9: If this argyle does not impede judging and is a kind of a stalked then this formol does not dissipate. fact10: This formol does not impede judging. fact11: This argyle is not a stalked. fact12: that Berberis does not react argyle. fact13: If this argyle does not impede judging and is not a stalked this formol does not dissipate. fact14: This argyle does not impede judging and does not react Berberis if it does not dissipate.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} fact3: ¬{A}{a} fact4: {B}{a} -> {B}{b} fact5: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact6: {C}{a} -> {A}{a} fact7: ¬{AA}{ck} fact8: ¬{AA}{fc} fact9: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact10: ¬{AA}{b} fact11: ¬{AB}{a} fact12: ¬{AC}{aa} fact13: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact14: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

This formol dissipates.

{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This argyle does not impede judging and is not a stalked if it does not react Berberis. fact2: This argyle is not a kind of a stalked if the fact that this thing does not react Berberis is right. fact3: This argyle does not react Berberis. fact4: This formol dissipates if this argyle dissipates. fact5: If someone reacts Berberis that person dissipates. fact6: If this argyle is a ague this argyle reacts Berberis. fact7: That buzzard does not impede judging. fact8: That burp does not impede judging. fact9: If this argyle does not impede judging and is a kind of a stalked then this formol does not dissipate. fact10: This formol does not impede judging. fact11: This argyle is not a stalked. fact12: that Berberis does not react argyle. fact13: If this argyle does not impede judging and is not a stalked this formol does not dissipate. fact14: This argyle does not impede judging and does not react Berberis if it does not dissipate. ; $hypothesis$ = This formol dissipates. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> int1: This argyle does not impede judging and is not a stalked.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That there exists something such that if that the fact that that is a parenthesis and does not smattering hold is false then that is not aurorean is not right.

¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)

fact1: This polypropenonitrile is not aurorean if that he/she is a kind of a parenthesis that does not smattering does not hold. fact2: That something is not a glottochronology hold if the fact that this syphons hyperbaton and is non-aurorean does not hold. fact3: There exists someone such that if the fact that he/she is a parenthesis and he/she does smattering is not right then he/she is not aurorean.

fact1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact2: (x): ¬({AO}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{CA}x fact3: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

If the fact that this guib syphons hyperbaton and is not aurorean is not right then this guib is not a glottochronology.

¬({AO}{er} & ¬{B}{er}) -> ¬{CA}{er}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This polypropenonitrile is not aurorean if that he/she is a kind of a parenthesis that does not smattering does not hold. fact2: That something is not a glottochronology hold if the fact that this syphons hyperbaton and is non-aurorean does not hold. fact3: There exists someone such that if the fact that he/she is a parenthesis and he/she does smattering is not right then he/she is not aurorean. ; $hypothesis$ = That there exists something such that if that the fact that that is a parenthesis and does not smattering hold is false then that is not aurorean is not right. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That anathematization occurs.

{B}

fact1: If this scollop does not occurs this plaining determinateness and that respectableness occurs. fact2: That that respectableness happens and that anathematization occurs is triggered by that this scollop does not occurs. fact3: If this widowing Cnut does not happens that yawning and this whiff happens. fact4: If this humbledness does not happens that this Haitian but notthe phacoemulsification happens is incorrect. fact5: The assignation but notthe minded occurs. fact6: If that this Haitian happens but the phacoemulsification does not occurs does not hold then this widowing Cnut does not happens. fact7: That this disengagement occurs but this appeasing Dalian does not occurs is incorrect if that yawning happens. fact8: That whitenessing Electrophoridae does not occurs if the fact that this disengagement happens but this appeasing Dalian does not occurs is false. fact9: This angioplasty happens. fact10: That this scollop does not occurs is brought about by that that mercantileness but notthat whitenessing Electrophoridae occurs. fact11: This declamation does not happens if both this angioplasty and that leukotomy occurs. fact12: If the fact that this Bam happens and this humbledness happens does not hold this humbledness does not occurs. fact13: If the fact that this disengagement but notthis appeasing Dalian occurs does not hold then that mercantileness does not happens. fact14: That both this Bam and this humbledness occurs does not hold if this declamation does not occurs. fact15: This plaining determinateness happens. fact16: The bickering but notthe rationalistness happens. fact17: If that mercantileness does not occurs then that whitenessing Electrophoridae but notthis scollop happens.

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

This forehandedness does not occurs.

¬{GN}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this scollop does not occurs this plaining determinateness and that respectableness occurs. fact2: That that respectableness happens and that anathematization occurs is triggered by that this scollop does not occurs. fact3: If this widowing Cnut does not happens that yawning and this whiff happens. fact4: If this humbledness does not happens that this Haitian but notthe phacoemulsification happens is incorrect. fact5: The assignation but notthe minded occurs. fact6: If that this Haitian happens but the phacoemulsification does not occurs does not hold then this widowing Cnut does not happens. fact7: That this disengagement occurs but this appeasing Dalian does not occurs is incorrect if that yawning happens. fact8: That whitenessing Electrophoridae does not occurs if the fact that this disengagement happens but this appeasing Dalian does not occurs is false. fact9: This angioplasty happens. fact10: That this scollop does not occurs is brought about by that that mercantileness but notthat whitenessing Electrophoridae occurs. fact11: This declamation does not happens if both this angioplasty and that leukotomy occurs. fact12: If the fact that this Bam happens and this humbledness happens does not hold this humbledness does not occurs. fact13: If the fact that this disengagement but notthis appeasing Dalian occurs does not hold then that mercantileness does not happens. fact14: That both this Bam and this humbledness occurs does not hold if this declamation does not occurs. fact15: This plaining determinateness happens. fact16: The bickering but notthe rationalistness happens. fact17: If that mercantileness does not occurs then that whitenessing Electrophoridae but notthis scollop happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That anathematization occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that logisticalness happens and/or this investigating Malva happens is false.

¬({C} v {A})

fact1: That this Funk does not occurs triggers that this comicness happens or that paralyticalness or both. fact2: If this unenrgeticness does not happens this Funk does not occurs and this unwearableness occurs. fact3: This remotion prevents this concernedness. fact4: If the informativeness does not occurs then that this reverencing but notthe spiccato happens is right. fact5: Both this investigating Malva and this catheterisation occurs. fact6: If this catheterisation does not happens that either that logisticalness occurs or this investigating Malva occurs or both does not hold. fact7: This catheterisation does not happens and this remotion does not occurs if this reverencing happens.

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

The fact that that spiderlikeness and the unconcernedness occurs is correct.

({BM} & {BT})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this Funk does not occurs triggers that this comicness happens or that paralyticalness or both. fact2: If this unenrgeticness does not happens this Funk does not occurs and this unwearableness occurs. fact3: This remotion prevents this concernedness. fact4: If the informativeness does not occurs then that this reverencing but notthe spiccato happens is right. fact5: Both this investigating Malva and this catheterisation occurs. fact6: If this catheterisation does not happens that either that logisticalness occurs or this investigating Malva occurs or both does not hold. fact7: This catheterisation does not happens and this remotion does not occurs if this reverencing happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that logisticalness happens and/or this investigating Malva happens is false. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: This investigating Malva occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this lutanist does not speak and is not a kind of a Syrian is incorrect.

¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

fact1: This lutanist does not colly if the thrower does not value. fact2: This lutanist does not colly if the thrower is non-calendrical. fact3: The thrower does not value or it is not calendrical or both. fact4: The fact that some person does not speak and is not a Syrian does not hold if it does not colly.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This lutanist does not colly if the thrower does not value. fact2: This lutanist does not colly if the thrower is non-calendrical. fact3: The thrower does not value or it is not calendrical or both. fact4: The fact that some person does not speak and is not a Syrian does not hold if it does not colly. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this lutanist does not speak and is not a kind of a Syrian is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact1 & fact2 -> int1: This lutanist does not colly.; fact4 -> int2: If this lutanist does not colly then that this lutanist does not speak and is not a Syrian is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that madwoman is not a marbled but the thing is an amino is wrong.

¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a})

fact1: That madwoman is unhumorous if it is not a kind of an upstairs. fact2: This navvy clutches. fact3: If something that is a kind of an amino unlearns stubbornness it does not fire Branchiostomidae. fact4: The trousseau does not unlearn stubbornness. fact5: this Branchiostomidae fires madwoman. fact6: That reversioner does not fire Branchiostomidae. fact7: That that madwoman is a kind of an upstairs is true. fact8: That madwoman does not reboot Thysanocarpus if it is a kind of a megaflop and it suffices chuckle. fact9: If the fact that that madwoman does not unlearn stubbornness hold that madwoman is an amino and clutches. fact10: That madwoman does fire Branchiostomidae if the fact that he/she is not a kind of a recombinant is correct. fact11: The beguiler is not an upstairs. fact12: That madwoman fires Branchiostomidae. fact13: the stubbornness does not unlearn madwoman. fact14: If the fact that something does not fire Branchiostomidae is true then it is a kind of an upstairs that is a Dryopithecus. fact15: This goose unlearns stubbornness. fact16: If someone that is an upstairs fires Branchiostomidae then the fact that he/she is not a kind of a marbled hold. fact17: This spiral is not an amity but that one unlearns stubbornness. fact18: That madwoman is not non-paranasal. fact19: If that madwoman is not a Sayanci then that madwoman fires Branchiostomidae. fact20: That madwoman does not unlearn stubbornness.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> {GQ}{a} fact2: {E}{iu} fact3: (x): ({D}x & {F}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: ¬{F}{fh} fact5: {AA}{aa} fact6: ¬{B}{ce} fact7: {A}{a} fact8: ({EG}{a} & {DT}{a}) -> ¬{HH}{a} fact9: ¬{F}{a} -> ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) fact10: ¬{DE}{a} -> {B}{a} fact11: ¬{A}{gp} fact12: {B}{a} fact13: ¬{AB}{ab} fact14: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {AJ}x) fact15: {F}{fj} fact16: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact17: (¬{GK}{gu} & {F}{gu}) fact18: {CC}{a} fact19: ¬{EU}{a} -> {B}{a} fact20: ¬{F}{a}

That reversioner is a Dryopithecus and the one is a Dalea.

({AJ}{ce} & {JJ}{ce})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That madwoman is unhumorous if it is not a kind of an upstairs. fact2: This navvy clutches. fact3: If something that is a kind of an amino unlearns stubbornness it does not fire Branchiostomidae. fact4: The trousseau does not unlearn stubbornness. fact5: this Branchiostomidae fires madwoman. fact6: That reversioner does not fire Branchiostomidae. fact7: That that madwoman is a kind of an upstairs is true. fact8: That madwoman does not reboot Thysanocarpus if it is a kind of a megaflop and it suffices chuckle. fact9: If the fact that that madwoman does not unlearn stubbornness hold that madwoman is an amino and clutches. fact10: That madwoman does fire Branchiostomidae if the fact that he/she is not a kind of a recombinant is correct. fact11: The beguiler is not an upstairs. fact12: That madwoman fires Branchiostomidae. fact13: the stubbornness does not unlearn madwoman. fact14: If the fact that something does not fire Branchiostomidae is true then it is a kind of an upstairs that is a Dryopithecus. fact15: This goose unlearns stubbornness. fact16: If someone that is an upstairs fires Branchiostomidae then the fact that he/she is not a kind of a marbled hold. fact17: This spiral is not an amity but that one unlearns stubbornness. fact18: That madwoman is not non-paranasal. fact19: If that madwoman is not a Sayanci then that madwoman fires Branchiostomidae. fact20: That madwoman does not unlearn stubbornness. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that madwoman is not a marbled but the thing is an amino is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact12 -> int1: That madwoman is an upstairs and fires Branchiostomidae.; fact16 -> int2: If the fact that that madwoman is an upstairs and fires Branchiostomidae is correct that madwoman is not a marbled.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That madwoman is not a marbled.; fact20 & fact9 -> int4: That madwoman is an amino and this clutches.; int4 -> int5: That madwoman is an amino.; int3 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this redstart is not accurate and the thing is not an androgyny is incorrect.

¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: If this stigmatist is not a Oireachtas the fact that it does not dart biotech and is not nonsubmergible is incorrect. fact2: The fact that this redstart is nonsubmergible and is not accurate is not true. fact3: The fact that the chase is nonsubmergible but it does not exudate unquestionableness does not hold. fact4: If this redstart does not cube Reggane this stigmatist is not an androgyny. fact5: If that this redstart is not submersible hold the fact that it is not accurate is correct. fact6: This redstart is not accurate and does not cube Reggane. fact7: The fact that something is not an androgyny hold if the fact that it is accurate is not wrong. fact8: This redstart does not exudate unquestionableness if it is a Oireachtas. fact9: This stigmatist is not a Oireachtas. fact10: The fact that that stirrer toes peripateticism and is not a Hizballah does not hold. fact11: This redstart is not accurate and that one is not an androgyny if that this stigmatist does not cube Reggane is true. fact12: If that something does not dart biotech and is not nonsubmergible is false then this does not cube Reggane.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this stigmatist is not a Oireachtas the fact that it does not dart biotech and is not nonsubmergible is incorrect. fact2: The fact that this redstart is nonsubmergible and is not accurate is not true. fact3: The fact that the chase is nonsubmergible but it does not exudate unquestionableness does not hold. fact4: If this redstart does not cube Reggane this stigmatist is not an androgyny. fact5: If that this redstart is not submersible hold the fact that it is not accurate is correct. fact6: This redstart is not accurate and does not cube Reggane. fact7: The fact that something is not an androgyny hold if the fact that it is accurate is not wrong. fact8: This redstart does not exudate unquestionableness if it is a Oireachtas. fact9: This stigmatist is not a Oireachtas. fact10: The fact that that stirrer toes peripateticism and is not a Hizballah does not hold. fact11: This redstart is not accurate and that one is not an androgyny if that this stigmatist does not cube Reggane is true. fact12: If that something does not dart biotech and is not nonsubmergible is false then this does not cube Reggane. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this redstart is not accurate and the thing is not an androgyny is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact9 -> int1: That this stigmatist does not dart biotech and is not nonsubmergible is wrong.; fact12 -> int2: If the fact that this stigmatist does not dart biotech and is not nonsubmergible is false this stigmatist does not cube Reggane.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This stigmatist does not cube Reggane.; int3 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That cassava is not a Pandanaceae.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: That cassava is a kind of an exhilaration and is not a Erastianism. fact2: Some man antagonises Bassariscidae if the person is not non-phyletic. fact3: Something is not a kind of a Pandanaceae if that this thing antagonises Bassariscidae and this thing is phyletic is incorrect. fact4: If that cassava is an exhilaration and is not a kind of a Erastianism that cassava is phyletic.

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

That cassava is not a Pandanaceae.

¬{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That cassava is a kind of an exhilaration and is not a Erastianism. fact2: Some man antagonises Bassariscidae if the person is not non-phyletic. fact3: Something is not a kind of a Pandanaceae if that this thing antagonises Bassariscidae and this thing is phyletic is incorrect. fact4: If that cassava is an exhilaration and is not a kind of a Erastianism that cassava is phyletic. ; $hypothesis$ = That cassava is not a Pandanaceae. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That manipulableness does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: That manipulableness does not happens if notthis horseshow but that octangularness occurs. fact2: That this scrounging occurs and that octangularness occurs is brought about by that this horseshow does not occurs. fact3: If that squirting gaudiness does not occurs that Parking and that north occurs. fact4: This smoking thrombus happens if this apprenticing homograph happens. fact5: That that shave but notthe depressantness happens does not hold if this much occurs. fact6: If this scrounging does not happens notthis horseshow but that octangularness happens. fact7: That octangularness and this horseshow occurs. fact8: If that that shave and the non-depressantness occurs is wrong then that squirting gaudiness does not happens. fact9: This much happens and this facing occurs if that blueing Tyranni does not happens. fact10: If that that unlikeness happens is not incorrect then that this scrounging happens and this smoking thrombus does not occurs does not hold. fact11: This apprenticing homograph results in that unlikeness. fact12: That this much does not occurs results in the depressantness or that shave or both. fact13: If that unlikeness happens this horseshow does not happens and that manipulableness does not happens. fact14: That blueing Tyranni does not occurs. fact15: This much does not happens if the fact that either that blueing Tyranni happens or this facing happens or both is not true. fact16: If this smoking thrombus happens then that unlikeness occurs. fact17: If that squirting gaudiness occurs then that Parking does not happens and that north does not occurs. fact18: If that Parking does not occurs this apprenticing homograph happens and this propping occurs. fact19: This scrounging does not happens if that this scrounging but notthis smoking thrombus occurs does not hold. fact20: If that octangularness occurs then that manipulableness happens.

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

That manipulableness does not happens.

¬{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That manipulableness does not happens if notthis horseshow but that octangularness occurs. fact2: That this scrounging occurs and that octangularness occurs is brought about by that this horseshow does not occurs. fact3: If that squirting gaudiness does not occurs that Parking and that north occurs. fact4: This smoking thrombus happens if this apprenticing homograph happens. fact5: That that shave but notthe depressantness happens does not hold if this much occurs. fact6: If this scrounging does not happens notthis horseshow but that octangularness happens. fact7: That octangularness and this horseshow occurs. fact8: If that that shave and the non-depressantness occurs is wrong then that squirting gaudiness does not happens. fact9: This much happens and this facing occurs if that blueing Tyranni does not happens. fact10: If that that unlikeness happens is not incorrect then that this scrounging happens and this smoking thrombus does not occurs does not hold. fact11: This apprenticing homograph results in that unlikeness. fact12: That this much does not occurs results in the depressantness or that shave or both. fact13: If that unlikeness happens this horseshow does not happens and that manipulableness does not happens. fact14: That blueing Tyranni does not occurs. fact15: This much does not happens if the fact that either that blueing Tyranni happens or this facing happens or both is not true. fact16: If this smoking thrombus happens then that unlikeness occurs. fact17: If that squirting gaudiness occurs then that Parking does not happens and that north does not occurs. fact18: If that Parking does not occurs this apprenticing homograph happens and this propping occurs. fact19: This scrounging does not happens if that this scrounging but notthis smoking thrombus occurs does not hold. fact20: If that octangularness occurs then that manipulableness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That manipulableness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: The fact that that octangularness happens hold.; int1 & fact20 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Columbianness but notthis embossing candela occurs.

({C} & ¬{D})

fact1: If this preoccupying habitus occurs that Columbianness happens. fact2: That accusing monosyllable happens. fact3: That Columbianness occurs but this embossing candela does not happens if this preoccupying habitus happens. fact4: That tilling happens. fact5: That that that Columbianness but notthis embossing candela happens is not correct is right if that Orienting does not happens. fact6: That this hardening Chimaeridae but notthe licking euphoria happens is caused by that this nonreversibleness occurs. fact7: That that unrhythmicness happens but that aquatinting does not occurs is brought about by that this Besting happens. fact8: If that winding occurs then the beakeding occurs. fact9: That Orienting happens. fact10: If the areolarness occurs that eye happens but the aneurysmaticness does not occurs. fact11: If the multiformness occurs that coloursness occurs. fact12: The coughing Ophiodontidae occurs. fact13: That this preoccupying habitus does not occurs and that Lens does not occurs is triggered by that diathermy. fact14: If the hypotonicness does not happens both that diathermy and this odourising bowed occurs. fact15: That that toothedness does not occurs is prevented by the eremiticness.

fact1: {B} -> {C} fact2: {HA} fact3: {B} -> ({C} & ¬{D}) fact4: {BI} fact5: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact6: {GH} -> ({CB} & ¬{FP}) fact7: {GJ} -> ({BJ} & ¬{EK}) fact8: {JG} -> {HM} fact9: {A} fact10: {HS} -> ({DG} & ¬{EF}) fact11: {K} -> {EH} fact12: {EI} fact13: {F} -> (¬{B} & ¬{E}) fact14: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact15: {CH} -> {AB}

The fact that that Columbianness happens and this embossing candela does not happens does not hold.

¬({C} & ¬{D})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this preoccupying habitus occurs that Columbianness happens. fact2: That accusing monosyllable happens. fact3: That Columbianness occurs but this embossing candela does not happens if this preoccupying habitus happens. fact4: That tilling happens. fact5: That that that Columbianness but notthis embossing candela happens is not correct is right if that Orienting does not happens. fact6: That this hardening Chimaeridae but notthe licking euphoria happens is caused by that this nonreversibleness occurs. fact7: That that unrhythmicness happens but that aquatinting does not occurs is brought about by that this Besting happens. fact8: If that winding occurs then the beakeding occurs. fact9: That Orienting happens. fact10: If the areolarness occurs that eye happens but the aneurysmaticness does not occurs. fact11: If the multiformness occurs that coloursness occurs. fact12: The coughing Ophiodontidae occurs. fact13: That this preoccupying habitus does not occurs and that Lens does not occurs is triggered by that diathermy. fact14: If the hypotonicness does not happens both that diathermy and this odourising bowed occurs. fact15: That that toothedness does not occurs is prevented by the eremiticness. ; $hypothesis$ = That Columbianness but notthis embossing candela occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That if the bacteriochlorophyll does not resound Fungia the bacteriochlorophyll is a kind of a scattered and that person disintegrates does not hold.

¬(¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}))

fact1: Something is a scattered and it disintegrates if it resounds Fungia. fact2: Something is a scattered that disintegrates if the fact that it does not resound Fungia hold. fact3: If some person does not resound Fungia then it disintegrates. fact4: The bacteriochlorophyll disintegrates if it does not resound Fungia. fact5: Something is a kind of boreal a eugenics if it is not a motivity. fact6: Something crystallizeds Merlangus and is a ateliosis if it is not ripe.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x fact4: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} fact5: (x): ¬{FH}x -> ({BU}x & {IQ}x) fact6: (x): ¬{AD}x -> ({CI}x & {DJ}x)

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a scattered and it disintegrates if it resounds Fungia. fact2: Something is a scattered that disintegrates if the fact that it does not resound Fungia hold. fact3: If some person does not resound Fungia then it disintegrates. fact4: The bacteriochlorophyll disintegrates if it does not resound Fungia. fact5: Something is a kind of boreal a eugenics if it is not a motivity. fact6: Something crystallizeds Merlangus and is a ateliosis if it is not ripe. ; $hypothesis$ = That if the bacteriochlorophyll does not resound Fungia the bacteriochlorophyll is a kind of a scattered and that person disintegrates does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this attentionalness happens is right.

{C}

fact1: Both the summarizing and the whirligiging Rabelais happens. fact2: The fact that this handstand occurs and that catastrophe does not happens is incorrect. fact3: If both that throb and this Nativity happens then this attentionalness does not occurs. fact4: That this Nativity does not happens and this attentionalness does not happens does not hold if that throb does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that this handstand does not happens and that catastrophe does not occurs does not hold that this Nativity occurs is true. fact6: The fact that this handstand does not occurs and that catastrophe does not occurs does not hold. fact7: That throb occurs and that amylolyticness occurs.

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

The fact that this attentionalness happens is right.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both the summarizing and the whirligiging Rabelais happens. fact2: The fact that this handstand occurs and that catastrophe does not happens is incorrect. fact3: If both that throb and this Nativity happens then this attentionalness does not occurs. fact4: That this Nativity does not happens and this attentionalness does not happens does not hold if that throb does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that this handstand does not happens and that catastrophe does not occurs does not hold that this Nativity occurs is true. fact6: The fact that this handstand does not occurs and that catastrophe does not occurs does not hold. fact7: That throb occurs and that amylolyticness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this attentionalness happens is right. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact6 -> int1: This Nativity occurs.; fact7 -> int2: That throb occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That throb occurs and this Nativity happens.; int3 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that there exists somebody such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Fucaceae and it does bespatter Barkley does not hold is incorrect.

¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x))

fact1: There exists some person such that that that it is not a Fucaceae and is ictic hold is wrong. fact2: That this bluehead is a kind of a Fucaceae that bespatters Barkley does not hold. fact3: If this bluehead is ictic that this bluehead is not a Fucaceae and bespatters Barkley is false. fact4: The fact that someone is a Mustela but it is non-ictic is incorrect if it is not a radical. fact5: There is something such that the fact that it is a Fucaceae and bespatters Barkley is not correct. fact6: The fact that this arishth is ictic and the person is a closed is wrong if this arishth threads memorandum. fact7: If something is not ictic then that this thing is not a kind of a disgustingness and is bacteroid is false. fact8: That that this bluehead is both not underhanded and a Fucaceae is false is true. fact9: Somebody is not a Fucaceae but the person bespatters Barkley. fact10: This bluehead is not non-ictic. fact11: This stogy is ictic. fact12: There is something such that that the thing is not a closed and the thing concords rosiness is incorrect.

fact1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {A}x) fact2: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact5: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact6: {CM}{gg} -> ¬({A}{gg} & {JJ}{gg}) fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{EG}x & {CT}x) fact8: ¬(¬{L}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact9: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact10: {A}{a} fact11: {A}{dh} fact12: (Ex): ¬(¬{JJ}x & {BE}x)

There is something such that that it is both not a disgustingness and bacteroid is wrong.

(Ex): ¬(¬{EG}x & {CT}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists some person such that that that it is not a Fucaceae and is ictic hold is wrong. fact2: That this bluehead is a kind of a Fucaceae that bespatters Barkley does not hold. fact3: If this bluehead is ictic that this bluehead is not a Fucaceae and bespatters Barkley is false. fact4: The fact that someone is a Mustela but it is non-ictic is incorrect if it is not a radical. fact5: There is something such that the fact that it is a Fucaceae and bespatters Barkley is not correct. fact6: The fact that this arishth is ictic and the person is a closed is wrong if this arishth threads memorandum. fact7: If something is not ictic then that this thing is not a kind of a disgustingness and is bacteroid is false. fact8: That that this bluehead is both not underhanded and a Fucaceae is false is true. fact9: Somebody is not a Fucaceae but the person bespatters Barkley. fact10: This bluehead is not non-ictic. fact11: This stogy is ictic. fact12: There is something such that that the thing is not a closed and the thing concords rosiness is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there exists somebody such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Fucaceae and it does bespatter Barkley does not hold is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact10 -> int1: The fact that this bluehead is not a Fucaceae and bespatters Barkley does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__