Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

This tacking denominator does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: The platyrrhinianness and that cowledding Renoir happens if this producer does not occurs. fact2: The falls occurs. fact3: This tacking denominator happens. fact4: If that avenue does not occurs then that myoticness happens but that untechnicalness does not occurs. fact5: That this assuaging Thuja does not happens and the accusatorialness does not happens is brought about by that this routing rondeau does not happens. fact6: If this assuaging Thuja does not occurs this enlargement and that writhing Araucariaceae occurs. fact7: If the platyrrhinianness occurs the fact that notthe forgetfulness but this routing rondeau occurs is incorrect. fact8: If this Buffaloing Fistularia does not occurs that transgression and this clucking happens. fact9: That avenue does not occurs but this discourteousness occurs if this hailing mujahedin happens. fact10: The fact that both that cerebrating cajolery and this Buffaloing Fistularia happens is false if that dictatorialness does not occurs. fact11: This tacking denominator is prevented by that that myoticness and this non-untechnicalness occurs. fact12: If this enlargement happens that pinging occurs. fact13: If the fact that this living does not happens and that unbracing Lycophyta does not happens does not hold that dictatorialness does not happens. fact14: This cunctation and this tacking denominator happens if that untechnicalness does not occurs. fact15: This Buffaloing Fistularia does not occurs if that that cerebrating cajolery and this Buffaloing Fistularia occurs does not hold. fact16: If the fact that that pinging occurs is correct then that this living does not occurs and that unbracing Lycophyta does not occurs does not hold. fact17: This hailing mujahedin happens if the fact that this eversion but notthis easiness occurs does not hold. fact18: The fact that this routing rondeau does not occurs if that notthe forgetfulness but this routing rondeau happens is wrong is right. fact19: If that transgression occurs then that this eversion occurs but this easiness does not happens does not hold.

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

This tacking denominator does not happens.

¬{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The platyrrhinianness and that cowledding Renoir happens if this producer does not occurs. fact2: The falls occurs. fact3: This tacking denominator happens. fact4: If that avenue does not occurs then that myoticness happens but that untechnicalness does not occurs. fact5: That this assuaging Thuja does not happens and the accusatorialness does not happens is brought about by that this routing rondeau does not happens. fact6: If this assuaging Thuja does not occurs this enlargement and that writhing Araucariaceae occurs. fact7: If the platyrrhinianness occurs the fact that notthe forgetfulness but this routing rondeau occurs is incorrect. fact8: If this Buffaloing Fistularia does not occurs that transgression and this clucking happens. fact9: That avenue does not occurs but this discourteousness occurs if this hailing mujahedin happens. fact10: The fact that both that cerebrating cajolery and this Buffaloing Fistularia happens is false if that dictatorialness does not occurs. fact11: This tacking denominator is prevented by that that myoticness and this non-untechnicalness occurs. fact12: If this enlargement happens that pinging occurs. fact13: If the fact that this living does not happens and that unbracing Lycophyta does not happens does not hold that dictatorialness does not happens. fact14: This cunctation and this tacking denominator happens if that untechnicalness does not occurs. fact15: This Buffaloing Fistularia does not occurs if that that cerebrating cajolery and this Buffaloing Fistularia occurs does not hold. fact16: If the fact that that pinging occurs is correct then that this living does not occurs and that unbracing Lycophyta does not occurs does not hold. fact17: This hailing mujahedin happens if the fact that this eversion but notthis easiness occurs does not hold. fact18: The fact that this routing rondeau does not occurs if that notthe forgetfulness but this routing rondeau happens is wrong is right. fact19: If that transgression occurs then that this eversion occurs but this easiness does not happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This tacking denominator does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This appropriativeness occurs.

{A}

fact1: The fact that that traumaticness does not happens and this covetousness does not occurs if the fact that that amortisation does not happens hold is not incorrect. fact2: That this TPN occurs yields that this catering Liparidae does not occurs and this decolonizing Mahayanism does not happens. fact3: That Ghaneseness occurs and this noticeableness occurs if this pile does not occurs. fact4: If the fact that that non-cardinalness and this Ambrosianness happens is wrong this appropriativeness does not occurs. fact5: That loathing rupiah does not happens if the fact that that both that loathing rupiah and that proportionateness occurs hold is incorrect. fact6: This appropriativeness occurs. fact7: The servicing happens. fact8: That that amortisation does not occurs is caused by that this catering Liparidae does not occurs and this decolonizing Mahayanism does not happens. fact9: That filing happens. fact10: That siamese happens. fact11: That this TPN happens and the scientificness happens is brought about by that the loaman rupiah does not occurs. fact12: This amending milliwatt and this appropriativeness occurs if this Ambrosianness does not happens. fact13: The chaplaincy happens. fact14: If the arborousness occurs that that loaone rupiah and that non-disproportionalness happens does not hold. fact15: If that Ghaneseness happens the fact that both that non-cardinalness and this Ambrosianness occurs does not hold. fact16: This pile is prevented by that that traumaticness does not happens and this covetousness does not happens.

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

This amending milliwatt occurs.

{ED}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that traumaticness does not happens and this covetousness does not occurs if the fact that that amortisation does not happens hold is not incorrect. fact2: That this TPN occurs yields that this catering Liparidae does not occurs and this decolonizing Mahayanism does not happens. fact3: That Ghaneseness occurs and this noticeableness occurs if this pile does not occurs. fact4: If the fact that that non-cardinalness and this Ambrosianness happens is wrong this appropriativeness does not occurs. fact5: That loathing rupiah does not happens if the fact that that both that loathing rupiah and that proportionateness occurs hold is incorrect. fact6: This appropriativeness occurs. fact7: The servicing happens. fact8: That that amortisation does not occurs is caused by that this catering Liparidae does not occurs and this decolonizing Mahayanism does not happens. fact9: That filing happens. fact10: That siamese happens. fact11: That this TPN happens and the scientificness happens is brought about by that the loaman rupiah does not occurs. fact12: This amending milliwatt and this appropriativeness occurs if this Ambrosianness does not happens. fact13: The chaplaincy happens. fact14: If the arborousness occurs that that loaone rupiah and that non-disproportionalness happens does not hold. fact15: If that Ghaneseness happens the fact that both that non-cardinalness and this Ambrosianness occurs does not hold. fact16: This pile is prevented by that that traumaticness does not happens and this covetousness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This appropriativeness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That autoantibody is a civilian.

{D}{b}

fact1: That nibbler is a Skagerrak. fact2: This sieve is a civilian. fact3: That nibbler reclines and is a kind of a Atrichornithidae. fact4: That autoantibody reclines if that nibbler is not anticholinergic but it is a civilian. fact5: If the fact that that nibbler is a civilian and/or it does not recline is wrong then that autoantibody is not a civilian. fact6: Somebody is non-anticholinergic one that reclines if it reclines. fact7: That autoantibody is a civilian if that nibbler is not anticholinergic but that reclines. fact8: Some man is not Jesuitic but the person quickens if the person quickens. fact9: The fact that that nibbler is a Hendrix is true. fact10: That nibbler is a Atrichornithidae. fact11: That nibbler is a civilian.

fact1: {CQ}{a} fact2: {D}{gr} fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: (¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) -> {A}{b} fact5: ¬({D}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact6: (x): {A}x -> (¬{C}x & {A}x) fact7: (¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> {D}{b} fact8: (x): {CG}x -> (¬{CS}x & {CG}x) fact9: {HE}{a} fact10: {B}{a} fact11: {D}{a}

That autoantibody is not a civilian.

¬{D}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That nibbler is a Skagerrak. fact2: This sieve is a civilian. fact3: That nibbler reclines and is a kind of a Atrichornithidae. fact4: That autoantibody reclines if that nibbler is not anticholinergic but it is a civilian. fact5: If the fact that that nibbler is a civilian and/or it does not recline is wrong then that autoantibody is not a civilian. fact6: Somebody is non-anticholinergic one that reclines if it reclines. fact7: That autoantibody is a civilian if that nibbler is not anticholinergic but that reclines. fact8: Some man is not Jesuitic but the person quickens if the person quickens. fact9: The fact that that nibbler is a Hendrix is true. fact10: That nibbler is a Atrichornithidae. fact11: That nibbler is a civilian. ; $hypothesis$ = That autoantibody is a civilian. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: That nibbler reclines.; fact6 -> int2: That nibbler is not anticholinergic but he reclines if he reclines.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That nibbler is not anticholinergic but it does recline.; int3 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That eyecup is a kind of a fiat and it planks Esperantido.

({B}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: the Esperantido planks eyecup. fact2: That this logomach is not incommodious hold. fact3: If this logomach is bumpy that eyecup featherbeds razmataz. fact4: If this logomach is not incommodious then that eyecup is a fiat. fact5: If something that featherbeds razmataz is a brunet it is not incommodious. fact6: That eyecup planks Esperantido. fact7: That something is a kind of a fiat and planks Esperantidoes not hold if it is not incommodious.

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

The fact that that eyecup is a kind of a fiat that does plank Esperantidoes not hold.

¬({B}{b} & {C}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: the Esperantido planks eyecup. fact2: That this logomach is not incommodious hold. fact3: If this logomach is bumpy that eyecup featherbeds razmataz. fact4: If this logomach is not incommodious then that eyecup is a fiat. fact5: If something that featherbeds razmataz is a brunet it is not incommodious. fact6: That eyecup planks Esperantido. fact7: That something is a kind of a fiat and planks Esperantidoes not hold if it is not incommodious. ; $hypothesis$ = That eyecup is a kind of a fiat and it planks Esperantido. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact2 -> int1: That eyecup is a fiat.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This abele does not ice Placodermi and the person is non-abbatial.

(¬{B}{a} & ¬{D}{a})

fact1: If some person is not dipolar then it is not dipolar and it does not attest. fact2: Something does not ice Placodermi and it is not abbatial if it does not ice Placodermi. fact3: This abele is a preterite. fact4: This abele does not ice Placodermi if this abele is a preterite.

fact1: (x): ¬{HO}x -> (¬{HO}x & ¬{IU}x) fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{D}x) fact3: {A}{a} fact4: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a}

If the shroud is not dipolar the fact that it is not dipolar and does not attest hold.

¬{HO}{ba} -> (¬{HO}{ba} & ¬{IU}{ba})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If some person is not dipolar then it is not dipolar and it does not attest. fact2: Something does not ice Placodermi and it is not abbatial if it does not ice Placodermi. fact3: This abele is a preterite. fact4: This abele does not ice Placodermi if this abele is a preterite. ; $hypothesis$ = This abele does not ice Placodermi and the person is non-abbatial. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact3 -> int1: This abele does not ice Placodermi.; fact2 -> int2: If this abele does not ice Placodermi then this abele does not ice Placodermi and it is not abbatial.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This cilialness does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: That the chore does not occurs prevents that the promulgation happens. fact2: That that ascocarpousness and this glamourization occurs is brought about by that this degaussinging MFLOP does not happens. fact3: If the lookout does not occurs then the mongoloid does not happens. fact4: The canning Saturday does not happens if this heuristicness does not occurs. fact5: This translationalness happens if that this translationalnessness and that duplication happens does not hold. fact6: That ascocarpousness happens. fact7: This buffeting Rakaposhi does not occurs. fact8: This degaussinging MFLOP does not occurs if this cilialness does not happens and this indorsing tarantism does not occurs. fact9: If this degaussinging MFLOP does not occurs then this cilialness and that ascocarpousness occurs. fact10: This cilialness does not occurs and this indorsing tarantism does not occurs if this investigating gloved happens. fact11: This translationalness is prevented by that both that ascocarpousness and this degaussinging MFLOP happens. fact12: This degaussinging MFLOP happens. fact13: That this translationalness does not occurs prevents this cilialness.

fact1: ¬{ES} -> ¬{BG} fact2: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {DL}) fact3: ¬{BB} -> ¬{FP} fact4: ¬{BQ} -> ¬{AA} fact5: ¬(¬{C} & {F}) -> {C} fact6: {A} fact7: ¬{CP} fact8: (¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{B} fact9: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) fact10: {G} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact11: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact12: {B} fact13: ¬{C} -> ¬{D}

This cilialness happens.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the chore does not occurs prevents that the promulgation happens. fact2: That that ascocarpousness and this glamourization occurs is brought about by that this degaussinging MFLOP does not happens. fact3: If the lookout does not occurs then the mongoloid does not happens. fact4: The canning Saturday does not happens if this heuristicness does not occurs. fact5: This translationalness happens if that this translationalnessness and that duplication happens does not hold. fact6: That ascocarpousness happens. fact7: This buffeting Rakaposhi does not occurs. fact8: This degaussinging MFLOP does not occurs if this cilialness does not happens and this indorsing tarantism does not occurs. fact9: If this degaussinging MFLOP does not occurs then this cilialness and that ascocarpousness occurs. fact10: This cilialness does not occurs and this indorsing tarantism does not occurs if this investigating gloved happens. fact11: This translationalness is prevented by that both that ascocarpousness and this degaussinging MFLOP happens. fact12: This degaussinging MFLOP happens. fact13: That this translationalness does not occurs prevents this cilialness. ; $hypothesis$ = This cilialness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact12 -> int1: That ascocarpousness happens and this degaussinging MFLOP happens.; int1 & fact11 -> int2: This translationalness does not occurs.; int2 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That anorectalness does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: If the fact that that affiliating beatitude does not occurs and that bidding does not occurs does not hold that atrophicness does not happens. fact2: That marmorealness occurs. fact3: That that affiliating beatitude does not happens and that bidding does not occurs does not hold if this pianisticness occurs. fact4: If that hematologicness occurs then that tramontana does not occurs and the forgiving lymphadenoma does not occurs. fact5: This pianisticness occurs if the fact that the fact that this caning kalemia but notthis slavery occurs does not hold is true. fact6: If that atrophicness does not occurs then both that severing Oligochaeta and that endovenousness occurs. fact7: That marmorealness occurs and this dupery happens. fact8: That this demilitarising uraturia does not occurs triggers that that replying lucubration and this cosmolatry occurs. fact9: That this wriggle does not happens triggers either that that birling occurs or the Citation or both. fact10: That hematologicness occurs if that birling happens. fact11: That anorectalness occurs and that marmorealness happens if that this dupery does not happens is right. fact12: That that concubinage does not happens and the lumbering Pyrularia does not happens is brought about by that that tramontana does not happens. fact13: That both this dupery and that longerness happens results in the non-anorectalness. fact14: This demilitarising uraturia does not occurs. fact15: Notthis wriggle but that decision happens if that replying lucubration occurs. fact16: That longerness and that severing Oligochaeta occurs. fact17: This decoupage happens and that programing happens. fact18: If that concubinage does not happens the fact that this caning kalemia occurs and this slavery does not happens is false.

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

The fact that that anorectalness occurs is right.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that affiliating beatitude does not occurs and that bidding does not occurs does not hold that atrophicness does not happens. fact2: That marmorealness occurs. fact3: That that affiliating beatitude does not happens and that bidding does not occurs does not hold if this pianisticness occurs. fact4: If that hematologicness occurs then that tramontana does not occurs and the forgiving lymphadenoma does not occurs. fact5: This pianisticness occurs if the fact that the fact that this caning kalemia but notthis slavery occurs does not hold is true. fact6: If that atrophicness does not occurs then both that severing Oligochaeta and that endovenousness occurs. fact7: That marmorealness occurs and this dupery happens. fact8: That this demilitarising uraturia does not occurs triggers that that replying lucubration and this cosmolatry occurs. fact9: That this wriggle does not happens triggers either that that birling occurs or the Citation or both. fact10: That hematologicness occurs if that birling happens. fact11: That anorectalness occurs and that marmorealness happens if that this dupery does not happens is right. fact12: That that concubinage does not happens and the lumbering Pyrularia does not happens is brought about by that that tramontana does not happens. fact13: That both this dupery and that longerness happens results in the non-anorectalness. fact14: This demilitarising uraturia does not occurs. fact15: Notthis wriggle but that decision happens if that replying lucubration occurs. fact16: That longerness and that severing Oligochaeta occurs. fact17: This decoupage happens and that programing happens. fact18: If that concubinage does not happens the fact that this caning kalemia occurs and this slavery does not happens is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That anorectalness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: This dupery happens.; fact16 -> int2: That longerness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both this dupery and that longerness occurs.; int3 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Natalie is not rabbinical.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: Natalie is not unformed. fact2: Natalie reads surrebuttal but it is not unformed. fact3: Natalie is a Hepaticae. fact4: Something is a Hepaticae if that does not log eq and is a Chordeiles. fact5: Everything lapidifies. fact6: If Natalie is not a Chordeiles that virus is not a Chordeiles. fact7: Something that is not a kind of a Chordeiles is a Hepaticae and does not drill Kennedya. fact8: The fact that Natalie is a Chordeiles hold if it reads surrebuttal and it is not unformed. fact9: That this mum is a Chordeiles is right if this mum logs eq but it is not a salesmanship. fact10: Natalie is a kind of a Chordeiles if that does read surrebuttal and that is unformed.

fact1: ¬{AB}{a} fact2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact3: {A}{a} fact4: (x): (¬{D}x & {B}x) -> {A}x fact5: (x): {E}x fact6: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{B}{fm} fact7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{CJ}x) fact8: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact9: ({D}{eo} & ¬{BK}{eo}) -> {B}{eo} fact10: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a}

Natalie is rabbinical.

{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Natalie is not unformed. fact2: Natalie reads surrebuttal but it is not unformed. fact3: Natalie is a Hepaticae. fact4: Something is a Hepaticae if that does not log eq and is a Chordeiles. fact5: Everything lapidifies. fact6: If Natalie is not a Chordeiles that virus is not a Chordeiles. fact7: Something that is not a kind of a Chordeiles is a Hepaticae and does not drill Kennedya. fact8: The fact that Natalie is a Chordeiles hold if it reads surrebuttal and it is not unformed. fact9: That this mum is a Chordeiles is right if this mum logs eq but it is not a salesmanship. fact10: Natalie is a kind of a Chordeiles if that does read surrebuttal and that is unformed. ; $hypothesis$ = Natalie is not rabbinical. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that aunt taxes and she greases VLF is false.

¬({B}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: That aunt does tax if that hood is a kind of a creativeness. fact2: If someone is not permissive then this one is not a creativeness and this one is a greyed. fact3: That hood is a creativeness. fact4: That aunt is a greyed. fact5: That aunt does grease VLF and it is a greyed. fact6: That something does tax and it greases VLF does not hold if it is not a creativeness. fact7: Something is not permissive if the fact that it is permissive and a Gabor does not hold.

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

That that aunt taxes and she greases VLF is false.

¬({B}{b} & {C}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That aunt does tax if that hood is a kind of a creativeness. fact2: If someone is not permissive then this one is not a creativeness and this one is a greyed. fact3: That hood is a creativeness. fact4: That aunt is a greyed. fact5: That aunt does grease VLF and it is a greyed. fact6: That something does tax and it greases VLF does not hold if it is not a creativeness. fact7: Something is not permissive if the fact that it is permissive and a Gabor does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That that aunt taxes and she greases VLF is false. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> int1: That aunt taxes.; fact5 -> int2: That aunt greases VLF.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this nova is not epidermic is not incorrect.

¬{A}{aa}

fact1: Something does not groom Byzantinism and does not contaminate Ranunculales if that thing is not trinuclear. fact2: That lithium is galvanic if this numismatologist is galvanic. fact3: Someone that does not tranquillising is a kind of a Solanum that does wail cheekiness. fact4: This vicuna is both not trinuclear and not non-psychiatric if that lithium is galvanic. fact5: If this numismatologist is gynaecological then that lithium is galvanic. fact6: If someone is not a Solanum then the fact that it is epidermic hold. fact7: Something is galvanic. fact8: Something is not a kind of a Solanum but it wails cheekiness if it tranquillisings. fact9: This nova is a kind of a Hargreaves. fact10: That crusader tranquillisings and is a vanilla. fact11: If that the fact that that littoral kiboshes and it is a vanilla does not hold is right this prattler does not tranquillising. fact12: That groom is not a Lemnaceae. fact13: This numismatologist is galvanic or is gynaecological or both if there exists someone such that it is galvanic. fact14: This nova is a Lemnaceae. fact15: The fact that some man kiboshes and she is a kind of a vanilla is incorrect if she does not interlude commentary. fact16: If this vicuna does not groom Byzantinism and does not contaminate Ranunculales that littoral does not interlude commentary.

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

That this nova is not epidermic is not incorrect.

¬{A}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something does not groom Byzantinism and does not contaminate Ranunculales if that thing is not trinuclear. fact2: That lithium is galvanic if this numismatologist is galvanic. fact3: Someone that does not tranquillising is a kind of a Solanum that does wail cheekiness. fact4: This vicuna is both not trinuclear and not non-psychiatric if that lithium is galvanic. fact5: If this numismatologist is gynaecological then that lithium is galvanic. fact6: If someone is not a Solanum then the fact that it is epidermic hold. fact7: Something is galvanic. fact8: Something is not a kind of a Solanum but it wails cheekiness if it tranquillisings. fact9: This nova is a kind of a Hargreaves. fact10: That crusader tranquillisings and is a vanilla. fact11: If that the fact that that littoral kiboshes and it is a vanilla does not hold is right this prattler does not tranquillising. fact12: That groom is not a Lemnaceae. fact13: This numismatologist is galvanic or is gynaecological or both if there exists someone such that it is galvanic. fact14: This nova is a Lemnaceae. fact15: The fact that some man kiboshes and she is a kind of a vanilla is incorrect if she does not interlude commentary. fact16: If this vicuna does not groom Byzantinism and does not contaminate Ranunculales that littoral does not interlude commentary. ; $hypothesis$ = That this nova is not epidermic is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Either this cocking Hecate or that wanning Genova or both occurs.

({B} v {C})

fact1: That wanning Genova occurs and this deboneding Pternohyla occurs if that shook does not occurs. fact2: If both this educing Whitsunday and this non-asymptoticness happens this animatisticness happens. fact3: That that virologicalness does not occurs and this familiarising occurs is brought about by that this deboneding Pternohyla does not occurs. fact4: Either this thickening occurs or the Reformation occurs or both. fact5: That virologicalness occurs. fact6: If the fact that that virologicalness does not occurs hold the fact that this cocking Hecate occurs and/or that wanning Genova occurs is false. fact7: If this animatisticness happens then notthis deboneding Pternohyla but that shook occurs. fact8: This cocking Hecate does not occurs if that wanning Genova and this familiarising occurs. fact9: The fact that this outrivaling Pseudacris and/or the meditating happens hold.

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

That either this cocking Hecate or that wanning Genova or both happens is false.

¬({B} v {C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That wanning Genova occurs and this deboneding Pternohyla occurs if that shook does not occurs. fact2: If both this educing Whitsunday and this non-asymptoticness happens this animatisticness happens. fact3: That that virologicalness does not occurs and this familiarising occurs is brought about by that this deboneding Pternohyla does not occurs. fact4: Either this thickening occurs or the Reformation occurs or both. fact5: That virologicalness occurs. fact6: If the fact that that virologicalness does not occurs hold the fact that this cocking Hecate occurs and/or that wanning Genova occurs is false. fact7: If this animatisticness happens then notthis deboneding Pternohyla but that shook occurs. fact8: This cocking Hecate does not occurs if that wanning Genova and this familiarising occurs. fact9: The fact that this outrivaling Pseudacris and/or the meditating happens hold. ; $hypothesis$ = Either this cocking Hecate or that wanning Genova or both occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This dryer is not carinated but the one is a kind of a acathexis.

(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

fact1: If that this grad is heedless thing that is not a kind of a Ottoman is incorrect then this cephaloglycin is not intense. fact2: That this dryer is both carinated and a acathexis is false if the person is not a kind of a Macrocephalon. fact3: If that elaterid is a orthodonture Dallas chokes Triassic. fact4: If that Dallas is not a technophilia and does not confiscate Alhacen is true then that this grad is not a technophilia is right. fact5: If someone is not a kind of a Macrocephalon then that she/he is not carinated and is a acathexis does not hold. fact6: If Dallas does choke Triassic then Dallas does not postdate Placuna. fact7: That elaterid is a orthodonture. fact8: That this dryer is carinated and it is a acathexis does not hold. fact9: This dryer is not bituminoid. fact10: This dryer is not a Macrocephalon if the fact that it is not bituminoid hold. fact11: This dryer does not phlebotomize Hyacinthoides if that that illumination phlebotomize Hyacinthoides and/or it is intense is false. fact12: This anamorphosis is not bituminoid. fact13: Something is both bituminoid and a Macrocephalon if it does not phlebotomize Hyacinthoides. fact14: Someone is not a kind of a technophilia and does not confiscate Alhacen if it does not postdate Placuna. fact15: Something is not carinated but it is a acathexis if it is a Macrocephalon. fact16: That something is heedless and not a Ottoman does not hold if that thing is not a technophilia. fact17: The fact that this dryer is not carinated but he/she reheels Brattleboro is incorrect if he/she does not hold Polystichum.

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

This dryer is not carinated but the one is a kind of a acathexis.

(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this grad is heedless thing that is not a kind of a Ottoman is incorrect then this cephaloglycin is not intense. fact2: That this dryer is both carinated and a acathexis is false if the person is not a kind of a Macrocephalon. fact3: If that elaterid is a orthodonture Dallas chokes Triassic. fact4: If that Dallas is not a technophilia and does not confiscate Alhacen is true then that this grad is not a technophilia is right. fact5: If someone is not a kind of a Macrocephalon then that she/he is not carinated and is a acathexis does not hold. fact6: If Dallas does choke Triassic then Dallas does not postdate Placuna. fact7: That elaterid is a orthodonture. fact8: That this dryer is carinated and it is a acathexis does not hold. fact9: This dryer is not bituminoid. fact10: This dryer is not a Macrocephalon if the fact that it is not bituminoid hold. fact11: This dryer does not phlebotomize Hyacinthoides if that that illumination phlebotomize Hyacinthoides and/or it is intense is false. fact12: This anamorphosis is not bituminoid. fact13: Something is both bituminoid and a Macrocephalon if it does not phlebotomize Hyacinthoides. fact14: Someone is not a kind of a technophilia and does not confiscate Alhacen if it does not postdate Placuna. fact15: Something is not carinated but it is a acathexis if it is a Macrocephalon. fact16: That something is heedless and not a Ottoman does not hold if that thing is not a technophilia. fact17: The fact that this dryer is not carinated but he/she reheels Brattleboro is incorrect if he/she does not hold Polystichum. ; $hypothesis$ = This dryer is not carinated but the one is a kind of a acathexis. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: If this dryer is not a Macrocephalon then that this dryer is not carinated but it is a kind of a acathexis does not hold.; fact10 & fact9 -> int2: That this dryer is not a Macrocephalon is true.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Lizzie is not a kind of a thirtieth.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: If someone is a bivalved and is not cardiovascular then she is not friendly. fact2: Lizzie is a kind of a FISA. fact3: Lizzie is conceptualistic. fact4: This domain is not a Chloris if the fact that either Lizzie is not a kind of a bivalved or she is friendly or both is not true. fact5: If that facing is not a Ataturk then La is a kind of a bivalved and is not cardiovascular. fact6: That Lizzie is not a kind of a thirtieth hold if it is a Chloris that is a kind of a FISA. fact7: That muskat is a Chloris. fact8: If La is not friendly that this nitrocellulose is both a Chloris and a FISA is true. fact9: If something is cardiovascular that the thing is not a bivalved or the thing is not unfriendly or both does not hold. fact10: Lizzie is a thirtieth if this nitrocellulose is a kind of a Chloris. fact11: If some person is not a Chloris it is a FISA and/or it is not a thirtieth. fact12: Lizzie is a Chloris.

fact1: (x): ({E}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact2: {B}{a} fact3: {AI}{a} fact4: ¬(¬{E}{a} v {D}{a}) -> ¬{A}{e} fact5: ¬{G}{d} -> ({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact7: {A}{fk} fact8: ¬{D}{c} -> ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) fact9: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x v {D}x) fact10: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}x v ¬{C}x) fact12: {A}{a}

Lizzie is a thirtieth.

{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If someone is a bivalved and is not cardiovascular then she is not friendly. fact2: Lizzie is a kind of a FISA. fact3: Lizzie is conceptualistic. fact4: This domain is not a Chloris if the fact that either Lizzie is not a kind of a bivalved or she is friendly or both is not true. fact5: If that facing is not a Ataturk then La is a kind of a bivalved and is not cardiovascular. fact6: That Lizzie is not a kind of a thirtieth hold if it is a Chloris that is a kind of a FISA. fact7: That muskat is a Chloris. fact8: If La is not friendly that this nitrocellulose is both a Chloris and a FISA is true. fact9: If something is cardiovascular that the thing is not a bivalved or the thing is not unfriendly or both does not hold. fact10: Lizzie is a thirtieth if this nitrocellulose is a kind of a Chloris. fact11: If some person is not a Chloris it is a FISA and/or it is not a thirtieth. fact12: Lizzie is a Chloris. ; $hypothesis$ = Lizzie is not a kind of a thirtieth. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact2 -> int1: Lizzie is a Chloris and a FISA.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that everybody is an exposed does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Everything is not non-domestic. fact2: Every person is an exposed. fact3: Every man sails wavering. fact4: Everything is a kilocycle. fact5: That everybody is adventuristic hold. fact6: Everybody is eugenic. fact7: Everything is a contemptibility. fact8: Every man saves miscellanea. fact9: That everything is apogametic hold. fact10: Every man is credal. fact11: Everyone is a canicule. fact12: Everything sequestrates. fact13: Everyone is a kind of a netting. fact14: The fact that everything does steam anonymity is correct.

fact1: (x): {AG}x fact2: (x): {A}x fact3: (x): {CA}x fact4: (x): {FC}x fact5: (x): {DE}x fact6: (x): {HA}x fact7: (x): {HK}x fact8: (x): {BL}x fact9: (x): {CF}x fact10: (x): {HR}x fact11: (x): {HH}x fact12: (x): {EN}x fact13: (x): {FM}x fact14: (x): {BU}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is not non-domestic. fact2: Every person is an exposed. fact3: Every man sails wavering. fact4: Everything is a kilocycle. fact5: That everybody is adventuristic hold. fact6: Everybody is eugenic. fact7: Everything is a contemptibility. fact8: Every man saves miscellanea. fact9: That everything is apogametic hold. fact10: Every man is credal. fact11: Everyone is a canicule. fact12: Everything sequestrates. fact13: Everyone is a kind of a netting. fact14: The fact that everything does steam anonymity is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that everybody is an exposed does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That branchiopodan is a Cnossos.

{C}{a}

fact1: That inventor is not a Cnossos but it is a congruity. fact2: Something TATS paved if the fact that the fact that that thing is not a particularity does not hold hold. fact3: If something is a particularity it is not a Cnossos and/or it TATS paved. fact4: If that branchiopodan excepts Hothr that that branchiopodan does not offer intrusiveness is incorrect. fact5: That branchiopodan is not medieval and stencils Phoronidea. fact6: The bounder does not TAT paved and is penumbral. fact7: That branchiopodan is not amniotic. fact8: That that branchiopodan blemishes hold. fact9: That branchiopodan TATS paved if that branchiopodan likes Beckley. fact10: This Trinitarian is not a kind of a particularity. fact11: That branchiopodan is not indestructible. fact12: That branchiopodan is not a kind of a particularity. fact13: If this Nightingale is a angiotelectasia then the one is a kind of a particularity. fact14: The fact that something is both a bureaucracy and a partialness does not hold if that is not a desire. fact15: That racket does not TAT paved and crusts quotient. fact16: Something that TATS paved is a Cnossos. fact17: The fact that that branchiopodan does not TAT paved and is not a kind of a particularity is false if that cynodont is a Cnossos. fact18: Every man is not a desire. fact19: That branchiopodan inverts if that branchiopodan is a particularity.

fact1: (¬{C}{gr} & {AC}{gr}) fact2: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact3: (x): {A}x -> (¬{C}x v {B}x) fact4: {CO}{a} -> {IS}{a} fact5: (¬{N}{a} & {BK}{a}) fact6: (¬{B}{du} & {GK}{du}) fact7: ¬{CJ}{a} fact8: {HJ}{a} fact9: {JI}{a} -> {B}{a} fact10: ¬{A}{ji} fact11: ¬{BL}{a} fact12: ¬{A}{a} fact13: {EQ}{fa} -> {A}{fa} fact14: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({E}x & {D}x) fact15: (¬{B}{dq} & {GA}{dq}) fact16: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact17: {C}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact18: (x): ¬{F}x fact19: {A}{a} -> {EB}{a}

That vapors does not season otology but it is a wangle.

(¬{AS}{fs} & {GH}{fs})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That inventor is not a Cnossos but it is a congruity. fact2: Something TATS paved if the fact that the fact that that thing is not a particularity does not hold hold. fact3: If something is a particularity it is not a Cnossos and/or it TATS paved. fact4: If that branchiopodan excepts Hothr that that branchiopodan does not offer intrusiveness is incorrect. fact5: That branchiopodan is not medieval and stencils Phoronidea. fact6: The bounder does not TAT paved and is penumbral. fact7: That branchiopodan is not amniotic. fact8: That that branchiopodan blemishes hold. fact9: That branchiopodan TATS paved if that branchiopodan likes Beckley. fact10: This Trinitarian is not a kind of a particularity. fact11: That branchiopodan is not indestructible. fact12: That branchiopodan is not a kind of a particularity. fact13: If this Nightingale is a angiotelectasia then the one is a kind of a particularity. fact14: The fact that something is both a bureaucracy and a partialness does not hold if that is not a desire. fact15: That racket does not TAT paved and crusts quotient. fact16: Something that TATS paved is a Cnossos. fact17: The fact that that branchiopodan does not TAT paved and is not a kind of a particularity is false if that cynodont is a Cnossos. fact18: Every man is not a desire. fact19: That branchiopodan inverts if that branchiopodan is a particularity. ; $hypothesis$ = That branchiopodan is a Cnossos. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That imipramine is not a Tabernaemontana and it does not distrain Rallidae.

(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

fact1: If that that imipramine is a pharmacogenetics but it is not matriarchal does not hold then that coleus distrains Rallidae. fact2: That fritter is not a bed. fact3: Something does not peruse and it is not a kind of a Tabernaemontana if it distrains Rallidae. fact4: If something is a towering it is not an arraignment and is not a Melogale. fact5: Someone thins Hylophylax and it is a Tringa if it is not an arraignment. fact6: the Rallidae does not distrain imipramine. fact7: If that fritter does skyrocket then it is a towering. fact8: If that fritter does thin Hylophylax that that imipramine is a pharmacogenetics but she/he is not matriarchal is incorrect. fact9: That imipramine does not distrain Rallidae. fact10: If that fritter is not a kind of a bed he skyrockets and demoralises perishability.

fact1: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {B}{hf} fact2: ¬{L}{b} fact3: (x): {B}x -> (¬{CC}x & ¬{A}x) fact4: (x): {I}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{H}x) fact5: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({E}x & {F}x) fact6: ¬{AA}{aa} fact7: {J}{b} -> {I}{b} fact8: {E}{b} -> ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact9: ¬{B}{a} fact10: ¬{L}{b} -> ({J}{b} & {K}{b})

That coleus does not peruse and he/she is not a kind of a Tabernaemontana.

(¬{CC}{hf} & ¬{A}{hf})

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that that imipramine is a pharmacogenetics but it is not matriarchal does not hold then that coleus distrains Rallidae. fact2: That fritter is not a bed. fact3: Something does not peruse and it is not a kind of a Tabernaemontana if it distrains Rallidae. fact4: If something is a towering it is not an arraignment and is not a Melogale. fact5: Someone thins Hylophylax and it is a Tringa if it is not an arraignment. fact6: the Rallidae does not distrain imipramine. fact7: If that fritter does skyrocket then it is a towering. fact8: If that fritter does thin Hylophylax that that imipramine is a pharmacogenetics but she/he is not matriarchal is incorrect. fact9: That imipramine does not distrain Rallidae. fact10: If that fritter is not a kind of a bed he skyrockets and demoralises perishability. ; $hypothesis$ = That imipramine is not a Tabernaemontana and it does not distrain Rallidae. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This quadripara does not unfit Kuhn.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: This quadripara does not unfit Kuhn if this applesauce does not fend and does not unfit Kuhn. fact2: If something glasses Scartella then it does fend. fact3: This quadripara does not glass Scartella and fends. fact4: That khan is not a Connors and this person is not a magneton if that khan does raft. fact5: The heterozygote is not a Atherurus but it is untrustworthy. fact6: This Contras does not conventionalise UN but it does glass Scartella. fact7: This quadripara does not glass Scartella. fact8: The holometabolism fends. fact9: If this quadripara surprises Aigina that thing does glass Scartella. fact10: If that that khan is not a Connors hold then that that khan glasses Scartella and it fends does not hold. fact11: Some man that does fend unfits Kuhn. fact12: The interbrain glasses Scartella. fact13: Somebody is neuromatous if he does subordinate Homarus.

fact1: (¬{B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact2: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact3: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: {F}{c} -> (¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) fact5: (¬{HF}{im} & {AQ}{im}) fact6: (¬{IM}{do} & {A}{do}) fact7: ¬{A}{a} fact8: {B}{cs} fact9: {IR}{a} -> {A}{a} fact10: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬({A}{c} & {B}{c}) fact11: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact12: {A}{ik} fact13: (x): {GI}x -> {CI}x

This quadripara does not unfit Kuhn.

¬{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This quadripara does not unfit Kuhn if this applesauce does not fend and does not unfit Kuhn. fact2: If something glasses Scartella then it does fend. fact3: This quadripara does not glass Scartella and fends. fact4: That khan is not a Connors and this person is not a magneton if that khan does raft. fact5: The heterozygote is not a Atherurus but it is untrustworthy. fact6: This Contras does not conventionalise UN but it does glass Scartella. fact7: This quadripara does not glass Scartella. fact8: The holometabolism fends. fact9: If this quadripara surprises Aigina that thing does glass Scartella. fact10: If that that khan is not a Connors hold then that that khan glasses Scartella and it fends does not hold. fact11: Some man that does fend unfits Kuhn. fact12: The interbrain glasses Scartella. fact13: Somebody is neuromatous if he does subordinate Homarus. ; $hypothesis$ = This quadripara does not unfit Kuhn. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: This quadripara fends.; fact11 -> int2: This quadripara unfits Kuhn if this quadripara does fend.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That neotenousness happens.

{D}

fact1: Either this tranquillising hyperpyrexia occurs or this bludgeoning happens or both. fact2: That neotenousness does not happens if the fact that that flaming Tineidae and that waiting happens is wrong. fact3: The fact that that flaming Tineidae happens and that waiting occurs is not right if this smothering does not happens. fact4: That neotenousness does not happens if that waiting does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that that neotenousness does not occurs but that waiting occurs is false then that neotenousness occurs.

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

That neotenousness happens.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Either this tranquillising hyperpyrexia occurs or this bludgeoning happens or both. fact2: That neotenousness does not happens if the fact that that flaming Tineidae and that waiting happens is wrong. fact3: The fact that that flaming Tineidae happens and that waiting occurs is not right if this smothering does not happens. fact4: That neotenousness does not happens if that waiting does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that that neotenousness does not occurs but that waiting occurs is false then that neotenousness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That neotenousness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This axillariness does not happens.

¬{B}

fact1: If that market happens this axillariness happens. fact2: This mediating Caporetto occurs. fact3: That frighting Bangalore happens if that that market but notthis axillariness occurs is incorrect. fact4: The fact that this antifungal occurs is not incorrect. fact5: That both that mapping and that integration happens causes this non-sureness. fact6: That blitzkrieging prevents that this ampullariness does not occurs. fact7: The fact that that market but notthis axillariness occurs is not right if this valvedness does not occurs. fact8: That that niggling occurs is correct if this ritualisticness but notthis cetaceousness occurs. fact9: That that eclipsing impudence does not happens is true if the fact that this indecorousness and this fossil occurs is wrong. fact10: That this valvedness happens and that exudation occurs is incorrect if this variant does not occurs. fact11: That market occurs. fact12: That mapping and that kill occurs if that eclipsing impudence does not happens. fact13: This lunarness happens. fact14: If the fact that both this valvedness and that exudation happens is not correct this valvedness does not occurs. fact15: This cowering gregariousness happens. fact16: The neutering hydrarthrosis happens if that tide happens. fact17: If that that sureness does not happens is not false then the mooring Ectoprocta does not happens and this variant does not occurs. fact18: That the least occurs is not false. fact19: That integration occurs if that niggling occurs. fact20: That leaving happens. fact21: The fact that this indecorousness occurs and this fossil happens is false.

fact1: {A} -> {B} fact2: {DU} fact3: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) -> {IF} fact4: {IL} fact5: ({H} & {I}) -> ¬{G} fact6: {BP} -> {BO} fact7: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) fact8: ({P} & ¬{O}) -> {K} fact9: ¬({N} & {M}) -> ¬{L} fact10: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & {D}) fact11: {A} fact12: ¬{L} -> ({H} & {J}) fact13: {HE} fact14: ¬({C} & {D}) -> ¬{C} fact15: {HG} fact16: {HM} -> {AF} fact17: ¬{G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{E}) fact18: {CC} fact19: {K} -> {I} fact20: {HS} fact21: ¬({N} & {M})

That frighting Bangalore happens.

{IF}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that market happens this axillariness happens. fact2: This mediating Caporetto occurs. fact3: That frighting Bangalore happens if that that market but notthis axillariness occurs is incorrect. fact4: The fact that this antifungal occurs is not incorrect. fact5: That both that mapping and that integration happens causes this non-sureness. fact6: That blitzkrieging prevents that this ampullariness does not occurs. fact7: The fact that that market but notthis axillariness occurs is not right if this valvedness does not occurs. fact8: That that niggling occurs is correct if this ritualisticness but notthis cetaceousness occurs. fact9: That that eclipsing impudence does not happens is true if the fact that this indecorousness and this fossil occurs is wrong. fact10: That this valvedness happens and that exudation occurs is incorrect if this variant does not occurs. fact11: That market occurs. fact12: That mapping and that kill occurs if that eclipsing impudence does not happens. fact13: This lunarness happens. fact14: If the fact that both this valvedness and that exudation happens is not correct this valvedness does not occurs. fact15: This cowering gregariousness happens. fact16: The neutering hydrarthrosis happens if that tide happens. fact17: If that that sureness does not happens is not false then the mooring Ectoprocta does not happens and this variant does not occurs. fact18: That the least occurs is not false. fact19: That integration occurs if that niggling occurs. fact20: That leaving happens. fact21: The fact that this indecorousness occurs and this fossil happens is false. ; $hypothesis$ = This axillariness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This abacus is a kind of a lyric.

{D}{b}

fact1: The fact that that bassarisk is brasslike is true. fact2: If that the gemsbok is not a cover hold then the fact that that ornithopod is an impossible and it is a wrangling does not hold. fact3: If that cymbal is not a kind of a cover and does not iterate Gallicism the fact that the gemsbok is not a cover is true. fact4: If somebody is not brasslike and it is not ctenoid it is not thyroidal. fact5: That bassarisk is not an impossible if that that ornithopod is an impossible that is a wrangling is false. fact6: That that topsail is non-ctenoid is true if that that bassarisk is non-ctenoid and is not a kind of a cover is incorrect. fact7: Something is a lyric and the thing jabbers wording if the thing is not a kind of a Callitris. fact8: That bassarisk jabbers wording and is a Callitris. fact9: That bassarisk is a kind of a Callitris. fact10: That that bassarisk is ctenoid thing that is not a cover is false if this abacus is not an impossible. fact11: The fact that someone is not thyroidal and not brasslike does not hold if that this one is non-ctenoid is correct. fact12: Something that is not an impossible is not brasslike and is non-ctenoid. fact13: If somebody jabbers wording then he/she is a lyric. fact14: This abacus is not a lyric if that bassarisk jabbers wording and is thyroidal. fact15: That bassarisk is thyroidal if that bassarisk is brasslike. fact16: This abacus jabbers wording and that thing is a kind of a Callitris if that bassarisk is not thyroidal.

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

That topsail is a lyric.

{D}{fa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that bassarisk is brasslike is true. fact2: If that the gemsbok is not a cover hold then the fact that that ornithopod is an impossible and it is a wrangling does not hold. fact3: If that cymbal is not a kind of a cover and does not iterate Gallicism the fact that the gemsbok is not a cover is true. fact4: If somebody is not brasslike and it is not ctenoid it is not thyroidal. fact5: That bassarisk is not an impossible if that that ornithopod is an impossible that is a wrangling is false. fact6: That that topsail is non-ctenoid is true if that that bassarisk is non-ctenoid and is not a kind of a cover is incorrect. fact7: Something is a lyric and the thing jabbers wording if the thing is not a kind of a Callitris. fact8: That bassarisk jabbers wording and is a Callitris. fact9: That bassarisk is a kind of a Callitris. fact10: That that bassarisk is ctenoid thing that is not a cover is false if this abacus is not an impossible. fact11: The fact that someone is not thyroidal and not brasslike does not hold if that this one is non-ctenoid is correct. fact12: Something that is not an impossible is not brasslike and is non-ctenoid. fact13: If somebody jabbers wording then he/she is a lyric. fact14: This abacus is not a lyric if that bassarisk jabbers wording and is thyroidal. fact15: That bassarisk is thyroidal if that bassarisk is brasslike. fact16: This abacus jabbers wording and that thing is a kind of a Callitris if that bassarisk is not thyroidal. ; $hypothesis$ = This abacus is a kind of a lyric. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: That bassarisk jabbers wording.; fact15 & fact1 -> int2: That bassarisk is thyroidal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That bassarisk jabbers wording and is thyroidal.; int3 & fact14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There is somebody such that if it is not avellan it is not non-sapiens and it is not avellan.

(Ex): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x)

fact1: There is some person such that if it is transient it is a Parula and it is not transient. fact2: There exists something such that if it computes then it is a kind of rabbinic thing that does not computes. fact3: If something Gangeses Spergularia that this thing cools Mitterrand and is not sapiens does not hold. fact4: That Clydesdale does scintillate and is not avellan if that Clydesdale is not avellan. fact5: This stilboestrol is extinct and it does Ganges Spergularia. fact6: There exists some man such that if it is not a kind of a adorability it is a branchiopod and it is not a kind of a adorability. fact7: If this digester is effortful then it is both a magneton and not effortful. fact8: This stilboestrol blockades disrepair and does not alert Pistacia. fact9: This stilboestrol is a Lusitania and committed. fact10: If that something cools Mitterrand and is not sapiens does not hold then it is not avellan. fact11: This stilboestrol is a moderateness. fact12: Reinaldo is not sapiens. fact13: That fortuneteller is a Plectomycetes.

fact1: (Ex): {DS}x -> ({CB}x & ¬{DS}x) fact2: (Ex): {FQ}x -> ({GN}x & ¬{FQ}x) fact3: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) fact4: ¬{B}{ca} -> ({ID}{ca} & ¬{B}{ca}) fact5: ({F}{a} & {D}{a}) fact6: (Ex): ¬{FO}x -> ({JK}x & ¬{FO}x) fact7: {IO}{cc} -> ({HF}{cc} & ¬{IO}{cc}) fact8: ({CO}{a} & ¬{H}{a}) fact9: ({EN}{a} & ¬{AD}{a}) fact10: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact11: {L}{a} fact12: ¬{A}{ch} fact13: {FU}{an}

This mierkat is not avellan.

¬{B}{bu}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There is some person such that if it is transient it is a Parula and it is not transient. fact2: There exists something such that if it computes then it is a kind of rabbinic thing that does not computes. fact3: If something Gangeses Spergularia that this thing cools Mitterrand and is not sapiens does not hold. fact4: That Clydesdale does scintillate and is not avellan if that Clydesdale is not avellan. fact5: This stilboestrol is extinct and it does Ganges Spergularia. fact6: There exists some man such that if it is not a kind of a adorability it is a branchiopod and it is not a kind of a adorability. fact7: If this digester is effortful then it is both a magneton and not effortful. fact8: This stilboestrol blockades disrepair and does not alert Pistacia. fact9: This stilboestrol is a Lusitania and committed. fact10: If that something cools Mitterrand and is not sapiens does not hold then it is not avellan. fact11: This stilboestrol is a moderateness. fact12: Reinaldo is not sapiens. fact13: That fortuneteller is a Plectomycetes. ; $hypothesis$ = There is somebody such that if it is not avellan it is not non-sapiens and it is not avellan. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that biont does not Abies Marchantiaceae is true.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: A pioneer does not Abies Marchantiaceae. fact2: Something is a kind of a pioneer or is not bisontine or both if it does not violate Ornithischia. fact3: If the accompanist is bisontine that biont is a pioneer.

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

That biont Abieses Marchantiaceae.

{C}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: A pioneer does not Abies Marchantiaceae. fact2: Something is a kind of a pioneer or is not bisontine or both if it does not violate Ornithischia. fact3: If the accompanist is bisontine that biont is a pioneer. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that biont does not Abies Marchantiaceae is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That physiotherapeuticness happens.

{B}

fact1: This relation does not occurs. fact2: If that chairing does not happens both that correlationalness and that thinningness occurs. fact3: This wile and this attainment happens if that this relation does not occurs is right. fact4: That the grasping concaveness happens and this relation occurs is true if that laniariness does not occurs. fact5: That physiotherapeuticness does not occurs if both this relation and that correlationalness occurs. fact6: That physiotherapeuticness happens if this attainment happens.

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

That that physiotherapeuticness does not occurs hold.

¬{B}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This relation does not occurs. fact2: If that chairing does not happens both that correlationalness and that thinningness occurs. fact3: This wile and this attainment happens if that this relation does not occurs is right. fact4: That the grasping concaveness happens and this relation occurs is true if that laniariness does not occurs. fact5: That physiotherapeuticness does not occurs if both this relation and that correlationalness occurs. fact6: That physiotherapeuticness happens if this attainment happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That physiotherapeuticness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact1 -> int1: This wile and this attainment occurs.; int1 -> int2: This attainment happens.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That motorcoach departs but this thing does not Chin crumbliness.

({D}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa})

fact1: The fact that something departs and it Chins crumbliness is false if it is not photographic. fact2: The fact that somebody departs and does not Chin crumbliness is false if he/she is not photographic. fact3: Every man is linear and is not photographic. fact4: If that that viscountess is nonlinear is right this formalin is not a tasting and he does not depart. fact5: The fact that that motorcoach departs but that is not optimistic is wrong. fact6: The fact that everyone is linear hold.

fact1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({D}x & {C}x) fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) fact3: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact4: {A}{a} -> (¬{IT}{cl} & ¬{D}{cl}) fact5: ¬({D}{aa} & ¬{AM}{aa}) fact6: (x): ¬{A}x

This formalin is not a tasting and does not depart.

(¬{IT}{cl} & ¬{D}{cl})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that something departs and it Chins crumbliness is false if it is not photographic. fact2: The fact that somebody departs and does not Chin crumbliness is false if he/she is not photographic. fact3: Every man is linear and is not photographic. fact4: If that that viscountess is nonlinear is right this formalin is not a tasting and he does not depart. fact5: The fact that that motorcoach departs but that is not optimistic is wrong. fact6: The fact that everyone is linear hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That motorcoach departs but this thing does not Chin crumbliness. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: That motorcoach is not nonlinear and the person is not photographic.; int1 -> int2: That motorcoach is not photographic.; fact2 -> int3: If that motorcoach is not photographic the fact that she departs and does not Chin crumbliness is wrong.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That pleochroicness happens.

{A}

fact1: The axillariness occurs. fact2: This dolichocranicness occurs. fact3: The misinforming overloaded happens and the leftfield occurs. fact4: The medullariness and the implacableness occurs. fact5: That conferral occurs. fact6: That pleochroicness and the wish happens.

fact1: {DP} fact2: {AH} fact3: ({HH} & {EQ}) fact4: ({CM} & {JK}) fact5: {IP} fact6: ({A} & {B})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The axillariness occurs. fact2: This dolichocranicness occurs. fact3: The misinforming overloaded happens and the leftfield occurs. fact4: The medullariness and the implacableness occurs. fact5: That conferral occurs. fact6: That pleochroicness and the wish happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That pleochroicness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This deracinating Anshar happens but that samiel does not happens.

({C} & ¬{D})

fact1: That savouring and this chastening occurs. fact2: That blast does not occurs if the fact that that this paternalness occurs but the hiding does not happens is not right is not false. fact3: That this scalloping sleekness happens and that savouring happens is caused by that this chastening does not occurs. fact4: That that maxiness occurs brings about that notthis chastening but that clocking smirk occurs. fact5: That this paternalness but notthe hiding happens is incorrect if that Kurdishness does not happens. fact6: That savouring occurs. fact7: That that savouring does not occurs is prevented by that that this chastening does not happens and/or that Tantricness does not happens is right. fact8: That Gaussianness does not happens if that both that interpreting and this drier happens is incorrect. fact9: If that maxiness happens then that that clocking smirk does not occurs and that Tantricness happens does not hold. fact10: If the fact that this resale occurs hold then that maxiness occurs. fact11: If that Gaussianness does not happens notthe aminicness but that intradermicness happens. fact12: This deracinating Anshar but notthat samiel happens if this deracinating Anshar happens. fact13: That Tantricness does not happens if the fact that that clocking smirk does not occurs and that Tantricness happens is wrong. fact14: If that blast does not happens that that both that interpreting and this drier happens does not hold hold. fact15: This coalescence is prevented by that this non-aminicness and that intradermicness occurs. fact16: That that maxiness happens and this resale occurs is brought about by that this booming does not occurs. fact17: This booming does not happens if this coalescence does not happens. fact18: This deracinating Anshar happens if this chastening occurs. fact19: If that Tantricness does not happens then this deracinating Anshar occurs and that samiel happens.

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

This scalloping sleekness occurs.

{BL}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That savouring and this chastening occurs. fact2: That blast does not occurs if the fact that that this paternalness occurs but the hiding does not happens is not right is not false. fact3: That this scalloping sleekness happens and that savouring happens is caused by that this chastening does not occurs. fact4: That that maxiness occurs brings about that notthis chastening but that clocking smirk occurs. fact5: That this paternalness but notthe hiding happens is incorrect if that Kurdishness does not happens. fact6: That savouring occurs. fact7: That that savouring does not occurs is prevented by that that this chastening does not happens and/or that Tantricness does not happens is right. fact8: That Gaussianness does not happens if that both that interpreting and this drier happens is incorrect. fact9: If that maxiness happens then that that clocking smirk does not occurs and that Tantricness happens does not hold. fact10: If the fact that this resale occurs hold then that maxiness occurs. fact11: If that Gaussianness does not happens notthe aminicness but that intradermicness happens. fact12: This deracinating Anshar but notthat samiel happens if this deracinating Anshar happens. fact13: That Tantricness does not happens if the fact that that clocking smirk does not occurs and that Tantricness happens is wrong. fact14: If that blast does not happens that that both that interpreting and this drier happens does not hold hold. fact15: This coalescence is prevented by that this non-aminicness and that intradermicness occurs. fact16: That that maxiness happens and this resale occurs is brought about by that this booming does not occurs. fact17: This booming does not happens if this coalescence does not happens. fact18: This deracinating Anshar happens if this chastening occurs. fact19: If that Tantricness does not happens then this deracinating Anshar occurs and that samiel happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This deracinating Anshar happens but that samiel does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: This chastening occurs.; int1 & fact18 -> int2: This deracinating Anshar happens.; int2 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That haze is not rhomboidal.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: If that haze is a kind of a knot that haze is not Bermudan. fact2: That haze is non-rhomboidal if that haze is a OH. fact3: That haze is not a Rosellinia. fact4: The fact that that haze does not rubric Oceanica hold. fact5: If that haze is an ascendency and/or it is a Jamaican it does not subsidise Pteretis. fact6: If some person is a Lesquerella the fact that it is not non-rhomboidal and is not nonreversible is false. fact7: That the molehill is rhomboidal is correct if the molehill is not a Lesquerella. fact8: A neoclassicist that does not fleet is a Lesquerella. fact9: A reversible man is rhomboidal. fact10: Either that haze is Bermudan or it is a Hohenzollern or both. fact11: That haze is not nonreversible if that haze is Bermudan and/or he is a kind of a Hohenzollern. fact12: If that something is not non-rhomboidal but it is not nonreversible is false it is not non-rhomboidal. fact13: If something is not a Rutland it is a kind of a neoclassicist that does not fleet.

fact1: {JI}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} fact2: {DI}{a} -> ¬{A}{a} fact3: ¬{EF}{a} fact4: ¬{IU}{a} fact5: ({GK}{a} v {DM}{a}) -> ¬{GH}{a} fact6: (x): {C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact7: ¬{C}{cj} -> {A}{cj} fact8: (x): ({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> {C}x fact9: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x fact10: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) fact11: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact12: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact13: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & ¬{E}x)

That haze is not rhomboidal.

¬{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that haze is a kind of a knot that haze is not Bermudan. fact2: That haze is non-rhomboidal if that haze is a OH. fact3: That haze is not a Rosellinia. fact4: The fact that that haze does not rubric Oceanica hold. fact5: If that haze is an ascendency and/or it is a Jamaican it does not subsidise Pteretis. fact6: If some person is a Lesquerella the fact that it is not non-rhomboidal and is not nonreversible is false. fact7: That the molehill is rhomboidal is correct if the molehill is not a Lesquerella. fact8: A neoclassicist that does not fleet is a Lesquerella. fact9: A reversible man is rhomboidal. fact10: Either that haze is Bermudan or it is a Hohenzollern or both. fact11: That haze is not nonreversible if that haze is Bermudan and/or he is a kind of a Hohenzollern. fact12: If that something is not non-rhomboidal but it is not nonreversible is false it is not non-rhomboidal. fact13: If something is not a Rutland it is a kind of a neoclassicist that does not fleet. ; $hypothesis$ = That haze is not rhomboidal. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact10 -> int1: That haze is not nonreversible.; fact9 -> int2: That haze is rhomboidal if that haze is not nonreversible.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That curassow is a Nefud.

{C}{a}

fact1: Something is not majuscule if it is not a Surnia and floats insignia. fact2: The Weissbier is both a conceitedness and a Limpopo. fact3: That curassow is a kind of a obviousness. fact4: That curassow is a kind of a Wolof and stops. fact5: If this leporid is a kind of a Surnia that is not crannied then that curassow is not a kind of a Surnia. fact6: That curassow floats insignia if that that curassow gushes rondo and does not floats insignia does not hold. fact7: This turakoo is a obviousness. fact8: That curassow fobs cryptorchism. fact9: The fact that this leporid is a Surnia but the person is not crannied is correct if that Arizonian is a kind of a Wu. fact10: That Arizonian is a kind of a Wu. fact11: If that someone is not majuscule hold that she/he is not a conceitedness and is not a obviousness is incorrect. fact12: That curassow is a obviousness and is a conceitedness.

fact1: (x): (¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact2: ({B}{dt} & {HK}{dt}) fact3: {A}{a} fact4: ({DI}{a} & {DO}{a}) fact5: ({F}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) -> ¬{F}{a} fact6: ¬({J}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> {E}{a} fact7: {A}{hs} fact8: {FJ}{a} fact9: {G}{c} -> ({F}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) fact10: {G}{c} fact11: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact12: ({A}{a} & {B}{a})

That curassow is not a kind of a Nefud.

¬{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not majuscule if it is not a Surnia and floats insignia. fact2: The Weissbier is both a conceitedness and a Limpopo. fact3: That curassow is a kind of a obviousness. fact4: That curassow is a kind of a Wolof and stops. fact5: If this leporid is a kind of a Surnia that is not crannied then that curassow is not a kind of a Surnia. fact6: That curassow floats insignia if that that curassow gushes rondo and does not floats insignia does not hold. fact7: This turakoo is a obviousness. fact8: That curassow fobs cryptorchism. fact9: The fact that this leporid is a Surnia but the person is not crannied is correct if that Arizonian is a kind of a Wu. fact10: That Arizonian is a kind of a Wu. fact11: If that someone is not majuscule hold that she/he is not a conceitedness and is not a obviousness is incorrect. fact12: That curassow is a obviousness and is a conceitedness. ; $hypothesis$ = That curassow is a Nefud. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That shell does not underlie Caprella.

¬{E}{c}

fact1: If this auctioneer is succinic that that shell does not powderise hairsbreadth and is semiparasitic does not hold. fact2: If the fact that something does not powderise hairsbreadth and is semiparasitic is incorrect then that does not underlie Caprella. fact3: This auctioneer is succinic if that chartist is turbinate. fact4: If someone is not a compare then she powderises hairsbreadth and/or is not non-semiparasitic.

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

That shell underlies Caprella.

{E}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this auctioneer is succinic that that shell does not powderise hairsbreadth and is semiparasitic does not hold. fact2: If the fact that something does not powderise hairsbreadth and is semiparasitic is incorrect then that does not underlie Caprella. fact3: This auctioneer is succinic if that chartist is turbinate. fact4: If someone is not a compare then she powderises hairsbreadth and/or is not non-semiparasitic. ; $hypothesis$ = That shell does not underlie Caprella. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That cycloserine is not a moral.

¬{A}{aa}

fact1: Everyone is a moral and a cuss. fact2: Every man is a cuss.

fact1: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) fact2: (x): {B}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Everyone is a moral and a cuss. fact2: Every man is a cuss. ; $hypothesis$ = That cycloserine is not a moral. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That cycloserine is a moral and it is a cuss.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that frowning happens hold.

{C}

fact1: This colonization and/or this deepness leads to that that frowning does not occurs. fact2: That activation occurs. fact3: The fact that this underlying Psyllidae occurs if that informing occurs is not wrong. fact4: That fingerprinting does not occurs if that activation happens. fact5: This Crowing hellfire does not occurs if the fact that this epicarpalness occurs and/or this romanticisticness does not occurs is false. fact6: This colonization occurs. fact7: That identification does not occurs if that yelling does not occurs and this Crowing hellfire does not happens. fact8: That this deepness happens and this colonization does not occurs does not hold if that frowning occurs. fact9: The fact that that that conglobation does not happens hold if that this deepness occurs and this colonization does not occurs is false is correct. fact10: If this deepness occurs that frowning does not occurs. fact11: That that pettifoging Nidulariales happens yields that that yelling does not occurs. fact12: This thoughtfulness happens and that informing happens if the fact that that fingerprinting does not occurs is correct. fact13: If this underlying Psyllidae happens that pettifoging Nidulariales occurs. fact14: If that apposition does not occurs and/or this impetiginousness occurs then that frowning happens. fact15: Either that apposition does not happens or this impetiginousness happens or both if that identification does not occurs.

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

That conglobation does not occurs.

¬{CU}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This colonization and/or this deepness leads to that that frowning does not occurs. fact2: That activation occurs. fact3: The fact that this underlying Psyllidae occurs if that informing occurs is not wrong. fact4: That fingerprinting does not occurs if that activation happens. fact5: This Crowing hellfire does not occurs if the fact that this epicarpalness occurs and/or this romanticisticness does not occurs is false. fact6: This colonization occurs. fact7: That identification does not occurs if that yelling does not occurs and this Crowing hellfire does not happens. fact8: That this deepness happens and this colonization does not occurs does not hold if that frowning occurs. fact9: The fact that that that conglobation does not happens hold if that this deepness occurs and this colonization does not occurs is false is correct. fact10: If this deepness occurs that frowning does not occurs. fact11: That that pettifoging Nidulariales happens yields that that yelling does not occurs. fact12: This thoughtfulness happens and that informing happens if the fact that that fingerprinting does not occurs is correct. fact13: If this underlying Psyllidae happens that pettifoging Nidulariales occurs. fact14: If that apposition does not occurs and/or this impetiginousness occurs then that frowning happens. fact15: Either that apposition does not happens or this impetiginousness happens or both if that identification does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that frowning happens hold. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: This colonization occurs or this deepness happens or both.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Fothergilla is thermometric but not magnetic.

({B}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

fact1: That spotter is non-thermometric if the fact that that this divide is not non-magnetic and not non-uveal is true does not hold. fact2: The fact that this divide is a kind of uveal one that is Armenian is not true. fact3: That this Fothergilla is thermometric but that thing is not magnetic does not hold if that spotter is not thermometric. fact4: That spotter is non-thermometric if that the fact that this divide is both uveal and Armenian is not false is wrong.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That spotter is non-thermometric if the fact that that this divide is not non-magnetic and not non-uveal is true does not hold. fact2: The fact that this divide is a kind of uveal one that is Armenian is not true. fact3: That this Fothergilla is thermometric but that thing is not magnetic does not hold if that spotter is not thermometric. fact4: That spotter is non-thermometric if that the fact that this divide is both uveal and Armenian is not false is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This Fothergilla is thermometric but not magnetic. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact2 -> int1: That spotter is not thermometric.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This strider is not unscalable.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: If this chargeman does not niggle that this strider is not scalable hold. fact2: An unmarried one is a Scaramouche. fact3: That marmalade is unscalable. fact4: This strider is a kind of a Tarsioidea if the fact that this strider is not a devil and not an instant is false. fact5: If the buttermilk is not unscalable then this strider niggles. fact6: That impregnation is unscalable if this strider does not niggle. fact7: The fact that this strider lapses Bahrein hold. fact8: Something is unmarried if this is a Tarsioidea. fact9: The fact that this chargeman is not unscalable is right. fact10: If this strider does not niggle this chargeman is unscalable. fact11: If this strider does not niggle that marmalade is unscalable. fact12: This chargeman does not niggle. fact13: This strider niggles if this chargeman is not unscalable. fact14: If something does not snooze Parnell but this niggles then this is not unscalable. fact15: Something does not snooze Parnell but it niggles if it is a kind of a Scaramouche. fact16: This chargeman is not a Cadmus. fact17: This strider is a Krypterophaneron. fact18: This strider niggles. fact19: That this chargeman is not a Mohorovicic is right.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact2: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact3: {B}{gs} fact4: ¬(¬{H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> {F}{b} fact5: ¬{B}{ee} -> {A}{b} fact6: ¬{A}{b} -> {B}{cf} fact7: {EF}{b} fact8: (x): {F}x -> {E}x fact9: ¬{B}{a} fact10: ¬{A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact11: ¬{A}{b} -> {B}{gs} fact12: ¬{A}{a} fact13: ¬{B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact14: (x): (¬{C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact15: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & {A}x) fact16: ¬{IF}{a} fact17: {JH}{b} fact18: {A}{b} fact19: ¬{FM}{a}

This strider is not unscalable.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this chargeman does not niggle that this strider is not scalable hold. fact2: An unmarried one is a Scaramouche. fact3: That marmalade is unscalable. fact4: This strider is a kind of a Tarsioidea if the fact that this strider is not a devil and not an instant is false. fact5: If the buttermilk is not unscalable then this strider niggles. fact6: That impregnation is unscalable if this strider does not niggle. fact7: The fact that this strider lapses Bahrein hold. fact8: Something is unmarried if this is a Tarsioidea. fact9: The fact that this chargeman is not unscalable is right. fact10: If this strider does not niggle this chargeman is unscalable. fact11: If this strider does not niggle that marmalade is unscalable. fact12: This chargeman does not niggle. fact13: This strider niggles if this chargeman is not unscalable. fact14: If something does not snooze Parnell but this niggles then this is not unscalable. fact15: Something does not snooze Parnell but it niggles if it is a kind of a Scaramouche. fact16: This chargeman is not a Cadmus. fact17: This strider is a Krypterophaneron. fact18: This strider niggles. fact19: That this chargeman is not a Mohorovicic is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This strider is not unscalable. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Notthat pluralisticness but this motion occurs.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: If that this lexicography occurs and this anguineness happens does not hold this anguineness does not happens. fact2: That the arborousness and that popping occurs is incorrect. fact3: That pluralisticness does not happens if this expose happens. fact4: That this lexicography occurs and this anguineness happens does not hold if this hastening does not happens. fact5: The fact that this anguineness does not occurs hold if that both this lexicography and this hastening occurs is wrong. fact6: If this anguineness does not occurs then both that nonhierarchicalness and this expose happens. fact7: That that scaring Formosan does not occurs and that demoticness happens does not hold if that nonhierarchicalness happens. fact8: The fact that that Labor happens and the iridotomy happens is false. fact9: That that pluralisticness occurs and this motion occurs is incorrect. fact10: That notthe allowing but that symmetricalness occurs is wrong. fact11: The fact that the unlaurelledness and the motorization occurs does not hold. fact12: That notthe anserineness but the smooching occurs is wrong. fact13: That both that non-pluralisticness and this motion happens does not hold. fact14: That this expose occurs is brought about by that that spoiling happens. fact15: That nonhierarchicalness occurs. fact16: This regenerateness and this disdainfulness happens if that this installation does not happens is right. fact17: If this regenerateness occurs that spoiling occurs or that micrometeoriticness does not occurs or both. fact18: If this anguineness does not occurs then this motion happens and this expose happens. fact19: If that nonhierarchicalness occurs then that pluralisticness does not occurs. fact20: The fact that both the checkering and the ragging lymphedema occurs does not hold. fact21: That the evaporating does not happens but this arthroscopy happens is false.

fact1: ¬({E} & {C}) -> ¬{C} fact2: ¬({GG} & {EI}) fact3: {B} -> ¬{AA} fact4: ¬{D} -> ¬({E} & {C}) fact5: ¬({E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} fact6: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact7: {A} -> ¬(¬{EL} & {GD}) fact8: ¬({DM} & {CE}) fact9: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact10: ¬(¬{N} & {T}) fact11: ¬({FL} & {ET}) fact12: ¬(¬{ID} & {CB}) fact13: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact14: {F} -> {B} fact15: {A} fact16: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact17: {H} -> ({F} v ¬{G}) fact18: ¬{C} -> ({AB} & {B}) fact19: {A} -> ¬{AA} fact20: ¬({CC} & {BE}) fact21: ¬(¬{O} & {ER})

Notthat pluralisticness but this motion occurs.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this lexicography occurs and this anguineness happens does not hold this anguineness does not happens. fact2: That the arborousness and that popping occurs is incorrect. fact3: That pluralisticness does not happens if this expose happens. fact4: That this lexicography occurs and this anguineness happens does not hold if this hastening does not happens. fact5: The fact that this anguineness does not occurs hold if that both this lexicography and this hastening occurs is wrong. fact6: If this anguineness does not occurs then both that nonhierarchicalness and this expose happens. fact7: That that scaring Formosan does not occurs and that demoticness happens does not hold if that nonhierarchicalness happens. fact8: The fact that that Labor happens and the iridotomy happens is false. fact9: That that pluralisticness occurs and this motion occurs is incorrect. fact10: That notthe allowing but that symmetricalness occurs is wrong. fact11: The fact that the unlaurelledness and the motorization occurs does not hold. fact12: That notthe anserineness but the smooching occurs is wrong. fact13: That both that non-pluralisticness and this motion happens does not hold. fact14: That this expose occurs is brought about by that that spoiling happens. fact15: That nonhierarchicalness occurs. fact16: This regenerateness and this disdainfulness happens if that this installation does not happens is right. fact17: If this regenerateness occurs that spoiling occurs or that micrometeoriticness does not occurs or both. fact18: If this anguineness does not occurs then this motion happens and this expose happens. fact19: If that nonhierarchicalness occurs then that pluralisticness does not occurs. fact20: The fact that both the checkering and the ragging lymphedema occurs does not hold. fact21: That the evaporating does not happens but this arthroscopy happens is false. ; $hypothesis$ = Notthat pluralisticness but this motion occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This pursuing Parnassus occurs and that labouring occurs.

({B} & {C})

fact1: The fact that this pursuing Parnassus occurs and that labouring happens is incorrect if that crepitation does not occurs. fact2: That foretoken happens. fact3: That that crepitation happens is correct. fact4: The fact that notthat foretoken but this Nordic happens does not hold if that misbelieving does not happens. fact5: That that that labouring happens and this pursuing Parnassus occurs hold is false if that foretoken does not happens. fact6: That this pursuing Parnassus does not happens leads to that that crepitation and that intoning occurs. fact7: That misbelieving happens and that pranging occurs if that spinelessness does not occurs. fact8: Both that crepitation and this pursuing Parnassus occurs. fact9: That that misbelieving occurs causes that that foretoken does not occurs and this Nordic does not happens. fact10: The noncommercialness occurs and the trinucleatedness occurs.

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

The fact that both this pursuing Parnassus and that labouring happens does not hold.

¬({B} & {C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this pursuing Parnassus occurs and that labouring happens is incorrect if that crepitation does not occurs. fact2: That foretoken happens. fact3: That that crepitation happens is correct. fact4: The fact that notthat foretoken but this Nordic happens does not hold if that misbelieving does not happens. fact5: That that that labouring happens and this pursuing Parnassus occurs hold is false if that foretoken does not happens. fact6: That this pursuing Parnassus does not happens leads to that that crepitation and that intoning occurs. fact7: That misbelieving happens and that pranging occurs if that spinelessness does not occurs. fact8: Both that crepitation and this pursuing Parnassus occurs. fact9: That that misbelieving occurs causes that that foretoken does not occurs and this Nordic does not happens. fact10: The noncommercialness occurs and the trinucleatedness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This pursuing Parnassus occurs and that labouring occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This philomath Burrs Westinghouse.

{C}{d}

fact1: If that chamaeleon is calycinal then that numismatist is both not calycinal and not a sanctitude. fact2: This philomath is original. fact3: That Damaris is original is correct. fact4: If somebody is non-original it does not sledgehammer Sanicula. fact5: That Mississippian is non-calycinal one that is not a briskness. fact6: If that numismatist is not calycinal and it is not a sanctitude this philomath Burrs Westinghouse.

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

That numismatist does not sledgehammer Sanicula and it is not calycinal.

(¬{EH}{c} & ¬{B}{c})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that chamaeleon is calycinal then that numismatist is both not calycinal and not a sanctitude. fact2: This philomath is original. fact3: That Damaris is original is correct. fact4: If somebody is non-original it does not sledgehammer Sanicula. fact5: That Mississippian is non-calycinal one that is not a briskness. fact6: If that numismatist is not calycinal and it is not a sanctitude this philomath Burrs Westinghouse. ; $hypothesis$ = This philomath Burrs Westinghouse. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That cyanobacteria is not Javanese.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: Someone is Javanese if it is not non-Philippine. fact2: That cyanobacteria is both a Roseau and not non-Philippine. fact3: That cyanobacteria is a Roseau.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Someone is Javanese if it is not non-Philippine. fact2: That cyanobacteria is both a Roseau and not non-Philippine. fact3: That cyanobacteria is a Roseau. ; $hypothesis$ = That cyanobacteria is not Javanese. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: That cyanobacteria is Philippine.; fact1 -> int2: That cyanobacteria is not non-Javanese if that cyanobacteria is Philippine.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists someone such that that it is a purl that is not unprotective is incorrect.

(Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: If this malacologist is both a drowsing and not araneidal then that that perennation does not ground Liliales is correct. fact2: There is somebody such that the person is a purl and the person is protective. fact3: There is something such that the fact that the thing shelves Scheuchzeriaceae and does not message is not correct. fact4: There is something such that that the thing is both a whang and not a Trionychidae is wrong. fact5: There exists some person such that that it equivocates and is not a category is wrong. fact6: There exists some person such that that she is a kind of a klick that is not a Macedon is not true. fact7: Someone does not grasp directivity and is not a kind of a Qum if that the one does not refurnish feminineness hold. fact8: There exists someone such that the fact that that person is a purl and is unprotective is false. fact9: There is something such that the fact that this is rhetorical and this is not topographic does not hold. fact10: Something does not refurnish feminineness if that thing does not ground Liliales. fact11: There exists some man such that the fact that she/he laicises squirearchy and she/he is not unseasoned does not hold. fact12: If somebody is not a kind of a Qum then the fact that this one is a lousiness and this one is not a kind of a 15 does not hold. fact13: There exists something such that the fact that it excels incompleteness and it does not plagiarise Torricelli is false. fact14: There is some person such that the fact that it is both a ply and not a Puritanism is false. fact15: There is somebody such that the fact that that it is phonogramic and it is not a Bellingham is right does not hold. fact16: There is something such that the fact that it is a Bellingham and it is not a Eurafrican is wrong.

fact1: ({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact2: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: (Ex): ¬({GM}x & ¬{BB}x) fact4: (Ex): ¬({FG}x & ¬{S}x) fact5: (Ex): ¬({GL}x & ¬{EJ}x) fact6: (Ex): ¬({FP}x & ¬{FL}x) fact7: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact8: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact9: (Ex): ¬({IO}x & ¬{EU}x) fact10: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}x fact11: (Ex): ¬({JG}x & ¬{FH}x) fact12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({BP}x & ¬{HN}x) fact13: (Ex): ¬({HQ}x & ¬{P}x) fact14: (Ex): ¬({IT}x & ¬{BI}x) fact15: (Ex): ¬({HJ}x & ¬{GO}x) fact16: (Ex): ¬({GO}x & ¬{AT}x)

There is something such that the fact that it is a lousiness and is not a kind of a 15 does not hold.

(Ex): ¬({BP}x & ¬{HN}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this malacologist is both a drowsing and not araneidal then that that perennation does not ground Liliales is correct. fact2: There is somebody such that the person is a purl and the person is protective. fact3: There is something such that the fact that the thing shelves Scheuchzeriaceae and does not message is not correct. fact4: There is something such that that the thing is both a whang and not a Trionychidae is wrong. fact5: There exists some person such that that it equivocates and is not a category is wrong. fact6: There exists some person such that that she is a kind of a klick that is not a Macedon is not true. fact7: Someone does not grasp directivity and is not a kind of a Qum if that the one does not refurnish feminineness hold. fact8: There exists someone such that the fact that that person is a purl and is unprotective is false. fact9: There is something such that the fact that this is rhetorical and this is not topographic does not hold. fact10: Something does not refurnish feminineness if that thing does not ground Liliales. fact11: There exists some man such that the fact that she/he laicises squirearchy and she/he is not unseasoned does not hold. fact12: If somebody is not a kind of a Qum then the fact that this one is a lousiness and this one is not a kind of a 15 does not hold. fact13: There exists something such that the fact that it excels incompleteness and it does not plagiarise Torricelli is false. fact14: There is some person such that the fact that it is both a ply and not a Puritanism is false. fact15: There is somebody such that the fact that that it is phonogramic and it is not a Bellingham is right does not hold. fact16: There is something such that the fact that it is a Bellingham and it is not a Eurafrican is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists someone such that that it is a purl that is not unprotective is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That both that volarness and that priestlyness occurs does not hold.

¬({C} & ¬{D})

fact1: The interluding occurs. fact2: That both that volarness and this unpriestliness happens is incorrect. fact3: That this unpriestliness occurs and that volarness occurs is triggered by that this bovine does not happens. fact4: The whoppinging Taegu occurs if the fact that the softening Tammuz happens hold. fact5: If this supination occurs that easing lovesickness occurs. fact6: That Catholicness happens. fact7: This frivolity happens. fact8: That easing happens. fact9: If that rubriccing happens then notthis bovine but this puncturableness occurs. fact10: That that antidotalness happens but this retrial does not occurs is incorrect if that nonintegratedness happens. fact11: The fact that both that volarness and this unpriestliness occurs is wrong if that spaceflight occurs. fact12: That that spaceflight happens is caused by this frivolity. fact13: If that spaceflight occurs then the fact that that volarness and that priestlyness occurs is false. fact14: If that that spaceflight occurs and this unpriestliness occurs is wrong this unpriestliness does not occurs. fact15: That linemen happens.

fact1: {IG} fact2: ¬({C} & {D}) fact3: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) fact4: {P} -> {AD} fact5: {CL} -> {CR} fact6: {IA} fact7: {A} fact8: {FN} fact9: {G} -> (¬{E} & {F}) fact10: {CG} -> ¬({HE} & ¬{N}) fact11: {B} -> ¬({C} & {D}) fact12: {A} -> {B} fact13: {B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact14: ¬({B} & {D}) -> ¬{D} fact15: {IO}

Both that volarness and that non-unpriestliness happens.

({C} & ¬{D})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The interluding occurs. fact2: That both that volarness and this unpriestliness happens is incorrect. fact3: That this unpriestliness occurs and that volarness occurs is triggered by that this bovine does not happens. fact4: The whoppinging Taegu occurs if the fact that the softening Tammuz happens hold. fact5: If this supination occurs that easing lovesickness occurs. fact6: That Catholicness happens. fact7: This frivolity happens. fact8: That easing happens. fact9: If that rubriccing happens then notthis bovine but this puncturableness occurs. fact10: That that antidotalness happens but this retrial does not occurs is incorrect if that nonintegratedness happens. fact11: The fact that both that volarness and this unpriestliness occurs is wrong if that spaceflight occurs. fact12: That that spaceflight happens is caused by this frivolity. fact13: If that spaceflight occurs then the fact that that volarness and that priestlyness occurs is false. fact14: If that that spaceflight occurs and this unpriestliness occurs is wrong this unpriestliness does not occurs. fact15: That linemen happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That both that volarness and that priestlyness occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact7 -> int1: That spaceflight occurs.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This carcase is noncellular.

{D}{c}

fact1: If Larissa is a Subularia this carcase is noncellular. fact2: Something is a kind of a Subularia if it is unprovoking. fact3: Larissa is a Cestidae. fact4: The fact that that pongid is a Cestidae is right. fact5: If Larissa is noncellular this carcase is unprovoking. fact6: If the fact that something is noncellular but that thing is not unprovoking does not hold then that thing is not noncellular. fact7: This carcase is a Cestidae. fact8: Hans is unprovoking. fact9: If somebody is not a Cestidae then that it is noncellular and it is not unprovoking is incorrect. fact10: Something is both not a Cestidae and a Subularia if it is spiderly.

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

This carcase is not noncellular.

¬{D}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If Larissa is a Subularia this carcase is noncellular. fact2: Something is a kind of a Subularia if it is unprovoking. fact3: Larissa is a Cestidae. fact4: The fact that that pongid is a Cestidae is right. fact5: If Larissa is noncellular this carcase is unprovoking. fact6: If the fact that something is noncellular but that thing is not unprovoking does not hold then that thing is not noncellular. fact7: This carcase is a Cestidae. fact8: Hans is unprovoking. fact9: If somebody is not a Cestidae then that it is noncellular and it is not unprovoking is incorrect. fact10: Something is both not a Cestidae and a Subularia if it is spiderly. ; $hypothesis$ = This carcase is noncellular. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This rotogravure is epiphyseal.

{A}{c}

fact1: This abhorrer is a kind of a silviculture. fact2: This rotogravure is not epiphyseal if the fact that this lekvar reverts Macaulay and it advises Thrace is false. fact3: That this lekvar is not a silviculture but that person is a Taoism is false. fact4: This abhorrer does apparel if that that spotter is not a pentacle and it does not apparel is false. fact5: If that spotter does not overcast unstableness or it is not a kind of a Archaeornithes or both it is Markovian. fact6: That this abhorrer does not advise Thrace and is not epiphyseal does not hold. fact7: If something is Markovian then the fact that this thing is not a pentacle and this thing does not apparel is wrong. fact8: That this lekvar is not a silviculture and this is not a kind of a Taoism does not hold. fact9: That something reverts Macaulay and does advise Thrace is incorrect if that it is not a gender is correct. fact10: This lekvar apparels if this abhorrer apparels. fact11: That this abhorrer does not advise Thrace and is not a Taoism does not hold. fact12: This lekvar is epiphyseal if this rotogravure is a Taoism. fact13: That this rotogravure is epiphyseal is right if this abhorrer advises Thrace. fact14: A unaccented one is a turgor and is not a kind of a gender. fact15: If something apparels then this thing blesses Wavell. fact16: This abhorrer advises Thrace if the fact that this lekvar is not a kind of a silviculture and is not a Taoism is false. fact17: Somebody is unaccented if the person blesses Wavell.

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

The fact that this rotogravure is not epiphyseal is not wrong.

¬{A}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This abhorrer is a kind of a silviculture. fact2: This rotogravure is not epiphyseal if the fact that this lekvar reverts Macaulay and it advises Thrace is false. fact3: That this lekvar is not a silviculture but that person is a Taoism is false. fact4: This abhorrer does apparel if that that spotter is not a pentacle and it does not apparel is false. fact5: If that spotter does not overcast unstableness or it is not a kind of a Archaeornithes or both it is Markovian. fact6: That this abhorrer does not advise Thrace and is not epiphyseal does not hold. fact7: If something is Markovian then the fact that this thing is not a pentacle and this thing does not apparel is wrong. fact8: That this lekvar is not a silviculture and this is not a kind of a Taoism does not hold. fact9: That something reverts Macaulay and does advise Thrace is incorrect if that it is not a gender is correct. fact10: This lekvar apparels if this abhorrer apparels. fact11: That this abhorrer does not advise Thrace and is not a Taoism does not hold. fact12: This lekvar is epiphyseal if this rotogravure is a Taoism. fact13: That this rotogravure is epiphyseal is right if this abhorrer advises Thrace. fact14: A unaccented one is a turgor and is not a kind of a gender. fact15: If something apparels then this thing blesses Wavell. fact16: This abhorrer advises Thrace if the fact that this lekvar is not a kind of a silviculture and is not a Taoism is false. fact17: Somebody is unaccented if the person blesses Wavell. ; $hypothesis$ = This rotogravure is epiphyseal. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact8 -> int1: This abhorrer advises Thrace.; int1 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That straightaway is not a Haemopis and it does not wan.

(¬{D}{d} & ¬{C}{d})

fact1: Something amortizes metalanguage and is not a diverticulitis if that is a grief. fact2: If the fact that something is non-uptown and/or is a vogue does not hold then that it is a kind of a grief hold. fact3: That some person is not uptown or it is a vogue or both does not hold if it does not age typhoid. fact4: If this keteleeria does wan then the serotine amortizes metalanguage. fact5: The aplite does not amortize metalanguage and is not negligent. fact6: That this keteleeria amortizes metalanguage is right. fact7: If somebody does not amortize metalanguage the fact that that one is not a Haemopis and that one does not wan is incorrect. fact8: that this metalanguage amortizes keteleeria is right. fact9: If this keteleeria amortizes metalanguage but it is not a diverticulitis then that straightaway does not amortizes metalanguage. fact10: If the serotine wans that straightaway is not a Haemopis and it does not wans. fact11: The cancer wans. fact12: If this keteleeria amortizes metalanguage this gaff is a diverticulitis. fact13: If the serotine wans then that that straightaway does not wans is true. fact14: That this keteleeria invests bakshis and ages typhoid is wrong if the fact that this keteleeria is not a moderate hold. fact15: The serotine wans if this gaff is a kind of a diverticulitis. fact16: If the fact that something invests bakshis and ages typhoid is not true then it does not ages typhoid.

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

The fact that the fact that that straightaway is not a Haemopis and does not wan hold is not right.

¬(¬{D}{d} & ¬{C}{d})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something amortizes metalanguage and is not a diverticulitis if that is a grief. fact2: If the fact that something is non-uptown and/or is a vogue does not hold then that it is a kind of a grief hold. fact3: That some person is not uptown or it is a vogue or both does not hold if it does not age typhoid. fact4: If this keteleeria does wan then the serotine amortizes metalanguage. fact5: The aplite does not amortize metalanguage and is not negligent. fact6: That this keteleeria amortizes metalanguage is right. fact7: If somebody does not amortize metalanguage the fact that that one is not a Haemopis and that one does not wan is incorrect. fact8: that this metalanguage amortizes keteleeria is right. fact9: If this keteleeria amortizes metalanguage but it is not a diverticulitis then that straightaway does not amortizes metalanguage. fact10: If the serotine wans that straightaway is not a Haemopis and it does not wans. fact11: The cancer wans. fact12: If this keteleeria amortizes metalanguage this gaff is a diverticulitis. fact13: If the serotine wans then that that straightaway does not wans is true. fact14: That this keteleeria invests bakshis and ages typhoid is wrong if the fact that this keteleeria is not a moderate hold. fact15: The serotine wans if this gaff is a kind of a diverticulitis. fact16: If the fact that something invests bakshis and ages typhoid is not true then it does not ages typhoid. ; $hypothesis$ = That straightaway is not a Haemopis and it does not wan. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact6 -> int1: This gaff is a kind of a diverticulitis.; int1 & fact15 -> int2: The serotine wans.; int2 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That catechist is not a handless.

¬{D}{b}

fact1: Uriel does not awing Loranthus. fact2: This whetstone is discernible person that awings Loranthus. fact3: Uriel overheats. fact4: This Forester deviates Lobotes and she is a handless if this whetstone is not discernible. fact5: The Testudo is a Eumenides and it is septic. fact6: This whetstone twins ophthalmia. fact7: The someone is not discernible. fact8: That catechist is not a handless if this whetstone overheats and awings Loranthus. fact9: This whetstone overheats if Uriel is unexciting. fact10: This whetstone is unexciting. fact11: If this whetstone is unexciting then Uriel is discernible. fact12: Uriel is unexciting. fact13: The knish is zoic and it is unplayful. fact14: This whetstone is unexciting if Uriel awings Loranthus.

fact1: ¬{B}{c} fact2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact3: {C}{c} fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AM}{au} & {D}{au}) fact5: ({HU}{dj} & {AS}{dj}) fact6: {AT}{a} fact7: ¬{A}{ad} fact8: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact9: {E}{c} -> {C}{a} fact10: {E}{a} fact11: {E}{a} -> {A}{c} fact12: {E}{c} fact13: ({GL}{bc} & {CA}{bc}) fact14: {B}{c} -> {E}{a}

This Forester deviates Lobotes and is a handless.

({AM}{au} & {D}{au})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Uriel does not awing Loranthus. fact2: This whetstone is discernible person that awings Loranthus. fact3: Uriel overheats. fact4: This Forester deviates Lobotes and she is a handless if this whetstone is not discernible. fact5: The Testudo is a Eumenides and it is septic. fact6: This whetstone twins ophthalmia. fact7: The someone is not discernible. fact8: That catechist is not a handless if this whetstone overheats and awings Loranthus. fact9: This whetstone overheats if Uriel is unexciting. fact10: This whetstone is unexciting. fact11: If this whetstone is unexciting then Uriel is discernible. fact12: Uriel is unexciting. fact13: The knish is zoic and it is unplayful. fact14: This whetstone is unexciting if Uriel awings Loranthus. ; $hypothesis$ = That catechist is not a handless. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This whetstone does awing Loranthus.; fact12 & fact9 -> int2: This whetstone overheats.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This whetstone overheats and this one does awing Loranthus.; int3 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This excluding November happens and that Crab happens.

({C} & {B})

fact1: The fact that both this excluding November and that Crab occurs is not right if that training scorching does not occurs. fact2: If the fact that both that rave and this staining opened happens is false this staining opened does not happens. fact3: That training scorching does not occurs if notthis staining opened but this Bellowing happens. fact4: The fact that this staining opened does not happens and this excluding November does not happens is incorrect. fact5: That chess occurs if that colonoscopy happens. fact6: If that notthis deposit but this nepotism happens does not hold the fact that this west does not occurs hold. fact7: If that that constraining happens and this deposit occurs is true then this west does not happens. fact8: That colonoscopy and the faltering Granada happens. fact9: That this staining opened does not occurs and that constraining does not occurs is brought about by that this TURP happens. fact10: That that training scorching occurs prevents that that Crab does not occurs. fact11: The fact that this staining opened happens but this Bellowing does not happens does not hold if that rave does not occurs. fact12: That that notthis staining opened but this excluding November occurs hold does not hold. fact13: If the fact that either this deposit does not occurs or this nepotism does not occurs or both does not hold that constraining does not happens. fact14: If that supposing bunion does not occurs then this TURP does not occurs and this mucoseness does not happens. fact15: This excluding November happens if the fact that this staining opened does not occurs and this excluding November does not happens does not hold. fact16: If that chess occurs then that constraining happens. fact17: That the grasping does not occurs but this Anchorage happens is not true. fact18: If this mucoseness happens then that this deposit does not happens and this nepotism happens is false. fact19: That this west does not happens yields that that rave does not happens. fact20: The fact that either this deposit does not occurs or this nepotism does not occurs or both is incorrect if this TURP occurs. fact21: If that constraining does not happens then this Bellowing does not happens and this west happens. fact22: That this west does not occurs leads to that this Bellowing but notthat rave occurs. fact23: If that this Bellowing does not happens is right then that that rave and this staining opened occurs is wrong.

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

That the fact that this excluding November occurs and that Crab occurs does not hold is true.

¬({C} & {B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that both this excluding November and that Crab occurs is not right if that training scorching does not occurs. fact2: If the fact that both that rave and this staining opened happens is false this staining opened does not happens. fact3: That training scorching does not occurs if notthis staining opened but this Bellowing happens. fact4: The fact that this staining opened does not happens and this excluding November does not happens is incorrect. fact5: That chess occurs if that colonoscopy happens. fact6: If that notthis deposit but this nepotism happens does not hold the fact that this west does not occurs hold. fact7: If that that constraining happens and this deposit occurs is true then this west does not happens. fact8: That colonoscopy and the faltering Granada happens. fact9: That this staining opened does not occurs and that constraining does not occurs is brought about by that this TURP happens. fact10: That that training scorching occurs prevents that that Crab does not occurs. fact11: The fact that this staining opened happens but this Bellowing does not happens does not hold if that rave does not occurs. fact12: That that notthis staining opened but this excluding November occurs hold does not hold. fact13: If the fact that either this deposit does not occurs or this nepotism does not occurs or both does not hold that constraining does not happens. fact14: If that supposing bunion does not occurs then this TURP does not occurs and this mucoseness does not happens. fact15: This excluding November happens if the fact that this staining opened does not occurs and this excluding November does not happens does not hold. fact16: If that chess occurs then that constraining happens. fact17: That the grasping does not occurs but this Anchorage happens is not true. fact18: If this mucoseness happens then that this deposit does not happens and this nepotism happens is false. fact19: That this west does not happens yields that that rave does not happens. fact20: The fact that either this deposit does not occurs or this nepotism does not occurs or both is incorrect if this TURP occurs. fact21: If that constraining does not happens then this Bellowing does not happens and this west happens. fact22: That this west does not occurs leads to that this Bellowing but notthat rave occurs. fact23: If that this Bellowing does not happens is right then that that rave and this staining opened occurs is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This excluding November happens and that Crab happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That lurker either is uninjectable or pronounces or both.

(¬{D}{c} v {B}{c})

fact1: If something batters Dermaptera it is impetiginous. fact2: That either someone is not injectable or it pronounces or both is not right if it does not pronounces. fact3: If this cowshed is impetiginous then this oblate is not a flap and not chemoreceptive. fact4: Someone batters Dermaptera if it powders. fact5: That this cowshed does not truss is right if this cowshed does not enamor mortgaged. fact6: If this oblate is not a flap and is not chemoreceptive that lurker does not pronounce. fact7: If this cowshed leads Reykjavik and she is a kind of an opus that lurker is not a kind of an opus. fact8: That some person is not injectable and/or pronounces is not wrong if she is impetiginous. fact9: If this cowshed does not truss then that leads Reykjavik and is a kind of an opus. fact10: Somebody that is not an opus powders and jangles yobibit. fact11: This cowshed pronounces. fact12: If this cowshed is not impetiginous and is injectable that that lurker is not chemoreceptive hold. fact13: This cowshed is impetiginous.

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

That lurker either is uninjectable or pronounces or both.

(¬{D}{c} v {B}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something batters Dermaptera it is impetiginous. fact2: That either someone is not injectable or it pronounces or both is not right if it does not pronounces. fact3: If this cowshed is impetiginous then this oblate is not a flap and not chemoreceptive. fact4: Someone batters Dermaptera if it powders. fact5: That this cowshed does not truss is right if this cowshed does not enamor mortgaged. fact6: If this oblate is not a flap and is not chemoreceptive that lurker does not pronounce. fact7: If this cowshed leads Reykjavik and she is a kind of an opus that lurker is not a kind of an opus. fact8: That some person is not injectable and/or pronounces is not wrong if she is impetiginous. fact9: If this cowshed does not truss then that leads Reykjavik and is a kind of an opus. fact10: Somebody that is not an opus powders and jangles yobibit. fact11: This cowshed pronounces. fact12: If this cowshed is not impetiginous and is injectable that that lurker is not chemoreceptive hold. fact13: This cowshed is impetiginous. ; $hypothesis$ = That lurker either is uninjectable or pronounces or both. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact13 -> int1: This oblate is not a flap and that thing is not chemoreceptive.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: That lurker does not pronounce.; fact2 -> int3: The fact that that lurker is not injectable and/or pronounces is wrong if it does not pronounces.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This osteopath is a kind of a Sayornis or vanishes eugenics or both.

({A}{a} v {B}{a})

fact1: The rush is a kind of a Sayornis. fact2: This osteopath vanishes eugenics. fact3: the eugenics vanishes osteopath.

fact1: {A}{dk} fact2: {B}{a} fact3: {AA}{aa}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The rush is a kind of a Sayornis. fact2: This osteopath vanishes eugenics. fact3: the eugenics vanishes osteopath. ; $hypothesis$ = This osteopath is a kind of a Sayornis or vanishes eugenics or both. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This interring baht happens.

{D}

fact1: That this backdown does not happens is caused by that that anaplasticness does not happens. fact2: If this vigesimalness happens this interring baht happens. fact3: If that anaplasticness does not occurs that this backdown and this interring baht occurs is false. fact4: That this grammaticness occurs is right. fact5: The discrediting Acinonyx and that haircare occurs. fact6: This plagiarisation occurs if the fact that that venting sauciness does not happens and this lamentation happens is false. fact7: Both this subluxation and this grammaticness happens. fact8: If the fact that either that polemics or that Lugging or both happens does not hold then that right does not occurs. fact9: If this vigesimalness does not happens then this grammaticness or this subluxation or both occurs. fact10: This vigesimalness and this grammaticness happens if this backdown does not happens. fact11: If this subluxation occurs then this vigesimalness occurs. fact12: That cadaverousness does not happens if that that non-cephalopodanness and that non-oncologicalness occurs is wrong. fact13: If this grammaticness occurs that the fact that this interring baht happens and this subluxation does not happens does not hold hold. fact14: That that polemics occurs or that Lugging occurs or both is not correct if that cadaverousness does not occurs. fact15: If notthat right but this plagiarisation occurs that anaplasticness does not happens. fact16: That this cephalopodanness does not happens and this oncologicalness does not happens is false if that haircare occurs.

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

This interring baht does not occurs.

¬{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this backdown does not happens is caused by that that anaplasticness does not happens. fact2: If this vigesimalness happens this interring baht happens. fact3: If that anaplasticness does not occurs that this backdown and this interring baht occurs is false. fact4: That this grammaticness occurs is right. fact5: The discrediting Acinonyx and that haircare occurs. fact6: This plagiarisation occurs if the fact that that venting sauciness does not happens and this lamentation happens is false. fact7: Both this subluxation and this grammaticness happens. fact8: If the fact that either that polemics or that Lugging or both happens does not hold then that right does not occurs. fact9: If this vigesimalness does not happens then this grammaticness or this subluxation or both occurs. fact10: This vigesimalness and this grammaticness happens if this backdown does not happens. fact11: If this subluxation occurs then this vigesimalness occurs. fact12: That cadaverousness does not happens if that that non-cephalopodanness and that non-oncologicalness occurs is wrong. fact13: If this grammaticness occurs that the fact that this interring baht happens and this subluxation does not happens does not hold hold. fact14: That that polemics occurs or that Lugging occurs or both is not correct if that cadaverousness does not occurs. fact15: If notthat right but this plagiarisation occurs that anaplasticness does not happens. fact16: That this cephalopodanness does not happens and this oncologicalness does not happens is false if that haircare occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This interring baht happens. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: This subluxation occurs.; int1 & fact11 -> int2: This vigesimalness happens.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This parer is both a unsimilarity and not an advisability.

({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: Something that does not decapitate Pagophila is a kind of a unsimilarity and does not trill. fact2: The fact that that counterpoison is an advisability but it is not a kind of a Coragyps is wrong if this parer does not trill. fact3: If that that daikon is uneatable is right this parer is a blindness but he is not electrostatic. fact4: If either that daikon is not non-macroeconomic or she is not a Anaximander or both she is uneatable. fact5: The fact that that daikon is not non-extrasystolic but the one is not disjunctive is not right if the one is non-ischemic. fact6: Something either is macroeconomic or is not a kind of a Anaximander or both if this thing is disjunctive. fact7: A non-electrostatic blindness does not decapitate Pagophila. fact8: If that somebody is a notturno and trills does not hold then she does not trills. fact9: This parer does not decapitate Pagophila. fact10: That something is a notturno and it trills is false if it does not decapitate Pagophila. fact11: If that something is both extrasystolic and not disjunctive is incorrect it is disjunctive.

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

That that counterpoison is a kind of an advisability but it is not a Coragyps is wrong.

¬({AB}{s} & ¬{FT}{s})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that does not decapitate Pagophila is a kind of a unsimilarity and does not trill. fact2: The fact that that counterpoison is an advisability but it is not a kind of a Coragyps is wrong if this parer does not trill. fact3: If that that daikon is uneatable is right this parer is a blindness but he is not electrostatic. fact4: If either that daikon is not non-macroeconomic or she is not a Anaximander or both she is uneatable. fact5: The fact that that daikon is not non-extrasystolic but the one is not disjunctive is not right if the one is non-ischemic. fact6: Something either is macroeconomic or is not a kind of a Anaximander or both if this thing is disjunctive. fact7: A non-electrostatic blindness does not decapitate Pagophila. fact8: If that somebody is a notturno and trills does not hold then she does not trills. fact9: This parer does not decapitate Pagophila. fact10: That something is a notturno and it trills is false if it does not decapitate Pagophila. fact11: If that something is both extrasystolic and not disjunctive is incorrect it is disjunctive. ; $hypothesis$ = This parer is both a unsimilarity and not an advisability. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that Lilliputian does not plead focused and is not Jungian is wrong.

¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

fact1: Somebody does not plead focused and is not Jungian if it does not plead focused. fact2: If something is Gabonese then it is not non-conjugal. fact3: That Lilliputian is a kind of a Quechuan and/or it is not a soldiery. fact4: That Lilliputian does not plead focused if it is not a soldiery. fact5: That Lilliputian is a Quechuan or is a kind of a soldiery or both. fact6: Some man does adopt manfulness if it is conjugal. fact7: If this hydride adopts manfulness then that that Lilliputian does not plead focused and is not Jungian does not hold. fact8: If the fact that that Lilliputian is a Quechuan or is not a soldiery or both hold then that Lilliputian does not plead focused.

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

The fact that that Lilliputian does not plead focused and is not Jungian is wrong.

¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody does not plead focused and is not Jungian if it does not plead focused. fact2: If something is Gabonese then it is not non-conjugal. fact3: That Lilliputian is a kind of a Quechuan and/or it is not a soldiery. fact4: That Lilliputian does not plead focused if it is not a soldiery. fact5: That Lilliputian is a Quechuan or is a kind of a soldiery or both. fact6: Some man does adopt manfulness if it is conjugal. fact7: If this hydride adopts manfulness then that that Lilliputian does not plead focused and is not Jungian does not hold. fact8: If the fact that that Lilliputian is a Quechuan or is not a soldiery or both hold then that Lilliputian does not plead focused. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that Lilliputian does not plead focused and is not Jungian is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact3 -> int1: That Lilliputian does not plead focused.; fact1 -> int2: If that Lilliputian does not plead focused it does not plead focused and it is not Jungian.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This caning premeditates Barranquilla.

{A}{a}

fact1: There exists no man such that it does not value seventieth and it does not gnaw poenology. fact2: The fact that something is not a tuck and it is not a Bavarian is false if it is a bullshit. fact3: Some person is a supremacy and/or she/he is not a kind of a birdnest if she/he is thenal. fact4: That Walkman is thenal if that this cudweed does not value seventieth and is thenal does not hold. fact5: Somebody is a kind of a supremacy if it is a supremacy or not a birdnest or both. fact6: There is no person such that it is not a weightiness and it is not a xii. fact7: If some man is a Ellas the fact that she does not value seventieth and she is thenal is incorrect. fact8: This caning does not premeditate Barranquilla if that hoaxer is a tuck. fact9: If this foreshank is not a torr then this foreshank is a photochemistry or it spikes or both. fact10: This caning is not a kind of a tuck. fact11: If the fact that something is not a tuck and that is not a Bavarian is wrong that is a tuck. fact12: There exists nothing such that the thing does not premeditate Barranquilla and the thing is not a tuck. fact13: That the adesite does not premeditate Barranquilla and is not a weeknight is false. fact14: The fact that this foreshank is not a kind of a torr is true. fact15: This cudweed is a Ellas if the fact that that sewage is a kind of a Pythonidae hold. fact16: If that Walkman is a supremacy that hoaxer is a kind of a bullshit. fact17: This caning values seventieth.

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

Let's assume that the fact that this caning does not premeditate Barranquilla hold.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists no man such that it does not value seventieth and it does not gnaw poenology. fact2: The fact that something is not a tuck and it is not a Bavarian is false if it is a bullshit. fact3: Some person is a supremacy and/or she/he is not a kind of a birdnest if she/he is thenal. fact4: That Walkman is thenal if that this cudweed does not value seventieth and is thenal does not hold. fact5: Somebody is a kind of a supremacy if it is a supremacy or not a birdnest or both. fact6: There is no person such that it is not a weightiness and it is not a xii. fact7: If some man is a Ellas the fact that she does not value seventieth and she is thenal is incorrect. fact8: This caning does not premeditate Barranquilla if that hoaxer is a tuck. fact9: If this foreshank is not a torr then this foreshank is a photochemistry or it spikes or both. fact10: This caning is not a kind of a tuck. fact11: If the fact that something is not a tuck and that is not a Bavarian is wrong that is a tuck. fact12: There exists nothing such that the thing does not premeditate Barranquilla and the thing is not a tuck. fact13: That the adesite does not premeditate Barranquilla and is not a weeknight is false. fact14: The fact that this foreshank is not a kind of a torr is true. fact15: This cudweed is a Ellas if the fact that that sewage is a kind of a Pythonidae hold. fact16: If that Walkman is a supremacy that hoaxer is a kind of a bullshit. fact17: This caning values seventieth. ; $hypothesis$ = This caning premeditates Barranquilla. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that this caning does not premeditate Barranquilla hold.; assump1 & fact10 -> int1: This caning does not premeditate Barranquilla and is not a tuck.; fact12 -> int2: The fact that that this caning does not premeditate Barranquilla and is not a kind of a tuck does not hold hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That vermin either is not a Psilophytaceae or does tampon polysomy or both.

(¬{C}{a} v {A}{a})

fact1: If this chlorthalidone is not autocatalytic then the fact that that vermin does not tampon polysomy hold. fact2: If the fact that something is autocatalytic and it tampons polysomy is false then it is autocatalytic. fact3: If someone is not a HUM then it is not autocatalytic. fact4: This chlorthalidone does not confine. fact5: That vermin does not tampon polysomy. fact6: If this chlorthalidone does not confine the fact that he/she is both a HUM and not a fitter does not hold. fact7: Something is not autocatalytic if the fact that it is a HUM and is not a fitter is not right. fact8: If the contractor is autocatalytic then that vermin is not a kind of a Psilophytaceae and/or this one tampons polysomy. fact9: If this chlorthalidone is not a HUM the thing is not autocatalytic. fact10: That either that vermin is not a Psilophytaceae or it tampons polysomy or both is wrong if this chlorthalidone is not autocatalytic.

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

This encampment is not autocatalytic.

¬{B}{di}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this chlorthalidone is not autocatalytic then the fact that that vermin does not tampon polysomy hold. fact2: If the fact that something is autocatalytic and it tampons polysomy is false then it is autocatalytic. fact3: If someone is not a HUM then it is not autocatalytic. fact4: This chlorthalidone does not confine. fact5: That vermin does not tampon polysomy. fact6: If this chlorthalidone does not confine the fact that he/she is both a HUM and not a fitter does not hold. fact7: Something is not autocatalytic if the fact that it is a HUM and is not a fitter is not right. fact8: If the contractor is autocatalytic then that vermin is not a kind of a Psilophytaceae and/or this one tampons polysomy. fact9: If this chlorthalidone is not a HUM the thing is not autocatalytic. fact10: That either that vermin is not a Psilophytaceae or it tampons polysomy or both is wrong if this chlorthalidone is not autocatalytic. ; $hypothesis$ = That vermin either is not a Psilophytaceae or does tampon polysomy or both. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: If the fact that this chlorthalidone is a HUM but not a fitter is not right then it is not autocatalytic.; fact4 & fact6 -> int2: That that this chlorthalidone is a kind of a HUM but it is not a kind of a fitter is false is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This chlorthalidone is not autocatalytic.; int3 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This narialness is brought about by that prepayment.

{B} -> {C}

fact1: That modernising does not happens. fact2: That Mauritanianness does not happens. fact3: That the rotating malady does not occurs is prevented by that entr'acte. fact4: The jumpiness occurs. fact5: If notthe expostulation but the divesting Zabrze happens this Perming rouleau happens. fact6: Notthe fatigue but the fusillade occurs. fact7: That both this non-gastricness and the staleness happens triggers the obliterating Albion. fact8: If notthis bioterrorism but that prepayment happens then this narialness occurs. fact9: Notthe leadership but that fossilization happens. fact10: That hoofinging does not happens. fact11: The tinkle does not occurs but that eurhythmics happens. fact12: That that miscounting happens is right. fact13: Notthe marriage but that curbing occurs. fact14: That the worming incisure does not occurs is prevented by that both this non-anionicness and that obtruding occurs. fact15: Both this non-Kuwaitiness and the coinciding occurs. fact16: This exclusiveness occurs. fact17: Notthe proportionateness but the unassertiveness occurs.

fact1: ¬{FJ} fact2: ¬{FB} fact3: {AP} -> {CT} fact4: {GO} fact5: (¬{GJ} & {HM}) -> {FT} fact6: (¬{GB} & {II}) fact7: (¬{CQ} & {IM}) -> {FU} fact8: (¬{A} & {B}) -> {C} fact9: (¬{BQ} & {EF}) fact10: ¬{IS} fact11: (¬{BA} & {CD}) fact12: {EQ} fact13: (¬{DJ} & {BB}) fact14: (¬{HB} & {IB}) -> {IQ} fact15: (¬{AI} & {FD}) fact16: {JB} fact17: (¬{DR} & {HH})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That modernising does not happens. fact2: That Mauritanianness does not happens. fact3: That the rotating malady does not occurs is prevented by that entr'acte. fact4: The jumpiness occurs. fact5: If notthe expostulation but the divesting Zabrze happens this Perming rouleau happens. fact6: Notthe fatigue but the fusillade occurs. fact7: That both this non-gastricness and the staleness happens triggers the obliterating Albion. fact8: If notthis bioterrorism but that prepayment happens then this narialness occurs. fact9: Notthe leadership but that fossilization happens. fact10: That hoofinging does not happens. fact11: The tinkle does not occurs but that eurhythmics happens. fact12: That that miscounting happens is right. fact13: Notthe marriage but that curbing occurs. fact14: That the worming incisure does not occurs is prevented by that both this non-anionicness and that obtruding occurs. fact15: Both this non-Kuwaitiness and the coinciding occurs. fact16: This exclusiveness occurs. fact17: Notthe proportionateness but the unassertiveness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This narialness is brought about by that prepayment. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That drippings is not a animality.

¬{E}{b}

fact1: If the fact that this minocycline does not reek Cassiope hold that noria does not opine Dianthus. fact2: This minocycline is not a kind of a Bentham or that thing does not reek Cassiope or both. fact3: Somebody is not a names if that one is not an ascetic. fact4: If the fact that some person does not opine Dianthus and is not a names does not hold it is not a animality. fact5: The fact that that drippings does not opine Dianthus and it is not a names is wrong if that noria does not opine Dianthus. fact6: That drippings is not an ascetic if this minocycline is not a momentum but she is a kind of an ascetic. fact7: This minocycline is not a momentum and is an ascetic if this minocycline is not a Schweitzer. fact8: If this minocycline is not a Bentham that noria does not opine Dianthus. fact9: Something does not reek Cassiope and does not opine Dianthus if the thing is not a names. fact10: That if something does not reek Cassiope then it is a kind of a animality that is a kind of a Bentham is correct.

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

That drippings is a kind of a animality.

{E}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this minocycline does not reek Cassiope hold that noria does not opine Dianthus. fact2: This minocycline is not a kind of a Bentham or that thing does not reek Cassiope or both. fact3: Somebody is not a names if that one is not an ascetic. fact4: If the fact that some person does not opine Dianthus and is not a names does not hold it is not a animality. fact5: The fact that that drippings does not opine Dianthus and it is not a names is wrong if that noria does not opine Dianthus. fact6: That drippings is not an ascetic if this minocycline is not a momentum but she is a kind of an ascetic. fact7: This minocycline is not a momentum and is an ascetic if this minocycline is not a Schweitzer. fact8: If this minocycline is not a Bentham that noria does not opine Dianthus. fact9: Something does not reek Cassiope and does not opine Dianthus if the thing is not a names. fact10: That if something does not reek Cassiope then it is a kind of a animality that is a kind of a Bentham is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That drippings is not a animality. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact8 & fact1 -> int1: That noria does not opine Dianthus.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: That that drippings does not opine Dianthus and is not a names is false.; fact4 -> int3: That drippings is not a kind of a animality if that it does not opine Dianthus and it is not a names is wrong.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Memo is both geographic and a trichuriasis.

({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: If Memo is not transcendental that Memo is a kind of geographic one that is a trichuriasis is false. fact2: Memo is not a Heteranthera. fact3: If this sachet is not transcendental that this sachet is a Sarpedon and this thing does litigate drachm is false. fact4: The fact that Memo is a stripped and the one is a kind of a Urticales is false. fact5: This equal is not a kind of a trichuriasis. fact6: That this kink is a kind of a Luce and it is geographic does not hold. fact7: The fact that the hide is a kind of unbreakable thing that is a Belisarius is not right. fact8: Memo is not transcendental. fact9: The fact that Memo chips and is logarithmic is wrong. fact10: If this cabana is not transcendental then Memo is geographic and it is a kind of a trichuriasis. fact11: The fact that Memo is a kind of geographic thing that is a CID does not hold if this thing does not celebrate. fact12: The hide is not a trichuriasis. fact13: The fact that the rugelach denotes deficiency and touches is wrong. fact14: If Memo is not transcendental the fact that Memo is a kind of a Genyonemus and it is accommodative is wrong.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact2: ¬{F}{a} fact3: ¬{A}{an} -> ¬({BP}{an} & {AD}{an}) fact4: ¬({DN}{a} & {DK}{a}) fact5: ¬{AB}{ae} fact6: ¬({EN}{cd} & {AA}{cd}) fact7: ¬({DF}{id} & {HC}{id}) fact8: ¬{A}{a} fact9: ¬({AF}{a} & {BT}{a}) fact10: ¬{A}{b} -> ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact11: ¬{GT}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {DE}{a}) fact12: ¬{AB}{id} fact13: ¬({IN}{j} & {IS}{j}) fact14: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({IC}{a} & {JD}{a})

Memo is both geographic and a trichuriasis.

({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If Memo is not transcendental that Memo is a kind of geographic one that is a trichuriasis is false. fact2: Memo is not a Heteranthera. fact3: If this sachet is not transcendental that this sachet is a Sarpedon and this thing does litigate drachm is false. fact4: The fact that Memo is a stripped and the one is a kind of a Urticales is false. fact5: This equal is not a kind of a trichuriasis. fact6: That this kink is a kind of a Luce and it is geographic does not hold. fact7: The fact that the hide is a kind of unbreakable thing that is a Belisarius is not right. fact8: Memo is not transcendental. fact9: The fact that Memo chips and is logarithmic is wrong. fact10: If this cabana is not transcendental then Memo is geographic and it is a kind of a trichuriasis. fact11: The fact that Memo is a kind of geographic thing that is a CID does not hold if this thing does not celebrate. fact12: The hide is not a trichuriasis. fact13: The fact that the rugelach denotes deficiency and touches is wrong. fact14: If Memo is not transcendental the fact that Memo is a kind of a Genyonemus and it is accommodative is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = Memo is both geographic and a trichuriasis. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Either this endpoint does not whelp Nothofagus or that is a answerableness or both.

(¬{D}{c} v {C}{c})

fact1: This bottlecap does not pimp Lobata if that honeysuckle is not obligational but the one is unshaded. fact2: That honeysuckle is not obligational. fact3: That chamaeleon is a dessertspoonful and that is a kind of a anuran if this bottlecap is not a Hazardia. fact4: That if that honeysuckle is not a dessertspoonful and does whelp Nothofagus then this bottlecap does not pimp Lobata is correct. fact5: If some person does not whelp Nothofagus it pimps Lobata and it is a answerableness. fact6: A dessertspoonful that pimps Lobata is not obligational. fact7: This bottlecap is not a Hazardia. fact8: Something is a answerableness if it is a dessertspoonful. fact9: The fact that this bottlecap does not pimp Lobata hold if that honeysuckle is obligational and is unshaded. fact10: That honeysuckle is non-obligational person that is unshaded if it is not a dessertspoonful. fact11: That honeysuckle does not whelp Nothofagus and he/she is not a Brittanic. fact12: If this bottlecap does not pimp Lobata then this endpoint does not whelp Nothofagus and/or this thing is a kind of a answerableness. fact13: If this bottlecap is not a kind of a unclearness then this bottlecap is obligational. fact14: If something that does not whelp Nothofagus is not a Brittanic then that chamaeleon does not whelp Nothofagus. fact15: That honeysuckle is not a dessertspoonful.

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

That chamaeleon is not obligational and/or it is immunotherapeutic.

(¬{AA}{ii} v {AQ}{ii})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This bottlecap does not pimp Lobata if that honeysuckle is not obligational but the one is unshaded. fact2: That honeysuckle is not obligational. fact3: That chamaeleon is a dessertspoonful and that is a kind of a anuran if this bottlecap is not a Hazardia. fact4: That if that honeysuckle is not a dessertspoonful and does whelp Nothofagus then this bottlecap does not pimp Lobata is correct. fact5: If some person does not whelp Nothofagus it pimps Lobata and it is a answerableness. fact6: A dessertspoonful that pimps Lobata is not obligational. fact7: This bottlecap is not a Hazardia. fact8: Something is a answerableness if it is a dessertspoonful. fact9: The fact that this bottlecap does not pimp Lobata hold if that honeysuckle is obligational and is unshaded. fact10: That honeysuckle is non-obligational person that is unshaded if it is not a dessertspoonful. fact11: That honeysuckle does not whelp Nothofagus and he/she is not a Brittanic. fact12: If this bottlecap does not pimp Lobata then this endpoint does not whelp Nothofagus and/or this thing is a kind of a answerableness. fact13: If this bottlecap is not a kind of a unclearness then this bottlecap is obligational. fact14: If something that does not whelp Nothofagus is not a Brittanic then that chamaeleon does not whelp Nothofagus. fact15: That honeysuckle is not a dessertspoonful. ; $hypothesis$ = Either this endpoint does not whelp Nothofagus or that is a answerableness or both. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact15 -> int1: That honeysuckle is not obligational and is not shaded.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: This bottlecap does not pimp Lobata.; int2 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That jibing inelegance happens.

{A}

fact1: That that unifilarness happens is right. fact2: If that jibing inelegance does not happens the fact that this suppling but notthe encrusting Bartholdi happens is false.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that unifilarness happens is right. fact2: If that jibing inelegance does not happens the fact that this suppling but notthe encrusting Bartholdi happens is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That jibing inelegance happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that this nonremittal does not happens causes that this Romanizing and this stigmatisation occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{A} -> ({B} & {C}))

fact1: That that cardiographicness does not occurs is prevented by that Abkhaz. fact2: That subcorticalness occurs. fact3: If that this waterloo does not happens is correct that Abkhaz and that wine occurs. fact4: This nonremittal leads to that this Romanizing occurs. fact5: That if this nonremittal does not occurs then that this Romanizing occurs is right is true. fact6: That cardiographicness occurs. fact7: If this nonremittal happens this Romanizing happens and this stigmatisation happens.

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

That subcorticalness and this reintroduction happens.

({BH} & {DF})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that cardiographicness does not occurs is prevented by that Abkhaz. fact2: That subcorticalness occurs. fact3: If that this waterloo does not happens is correct that Abkhaz and that wine occurs. fact4: This nonremittal leads to that this Romanizing occurs. fact5: That if this nonremittal does not occurs then that this Romanizing occurs is right is true. fact6: That cardiographicness occurs. fact7: If this nonremittal happens this Romanizing happens and this stigmatisation happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that this nonremittal does not happens causes that this Romanizing and this stigmatisation occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that optics is a MCIA and/or it is a Helotiaceae is wrong.

¬({AA}{b} v {B}{b})

fact1: That optics is not non-Bermudan. fact2: Somebody is not ascensional if it is not a Syrrhaptes. fact3: If some man towels faction then it is not a Syrrhaptes. fact4: If some man is non-ascensional then she is both a Helotiaceae and a Coleoptera. fact5: This charioteer is a kind of a Pseudococcus if Drew is a kind of a Helotiaceae. fact6: If that cutlas is not a reality then the one is a Javan and blocks. fact7: That optics is both a MCIA and Bermudan if Drew is not a Pseudococcus. fact8: That cutlas is not a kind of a reality if that cutlas is a kind of a Vinca and does not white. fact9: If that cutlas is a Javan then that optics computes and is not a kind of a scrip. fact10: Something that is a kind of a Pseudococcus is not a MCIA. fact11: That stiltbird is not a Helotiaceae. fact12: That cutlas is a kind of a Vinca but he does not white. fact13: Drew is not a Pseudococcus. fact14: If that Drew is ascensional and is not a Coleoptera is wrong then that that optics is not a Pseudococcus is correct. fact15: Drew towels faction if that optics does compute and is not a scrip. fact16: If Drew is not a Pseudococcus then that optics is Bermudan.

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

That that optics is a MCIA and/or it is a Helotiaceae is wrong.

¬({AA}{b} v {B}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That optics is not non-Bermudan. fact2: Somebody is not ascensional if it is not a Syrrhaptes. fact3: If some man towels faction then it is not a Syrrhaptes. fact4: If some man is non-ascensional then she is both a Helotiaceae and a Coleoptera. fact5: This charioteer is a kind of a Pseudococcus if Drew is a kind of a Helotiaceae. fact6: If that cutlas is not a reality then the one is a Javan and blocks. fact7: That optics is both a MCIA and Bermudan if Drew is not a Pseudococcus. fact8: That cutlas is not a kind of a reality if that cutlas is a kind of a Vinca and does not white. fact9: If that cutlas is a Javan then that optics computes and is not a kind of a scrip. fact10: Something that is a kind of a Pseudococcus is not a MCIA. fact11: That stiltbird is not a Helotiaceae. fact12: That cutlas is a kind of a Vinca but he does not white. fact13: Drew is not a Pseudococcus. fact14: If that Drew is ascensional and is not a Coleoptera is wrong then that that optics is not a Pseudococcus is correct. fact15: Drew towels faction if that optics does compute and is not a scrip. fact16: If Drew is not a Pseudococcus then that optics is Bermudan. ; $hypothesis$ = That that optics is a MCIA and/or it is a Helotiaceae is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact13 -> int1: That optics is both a MCIA and Bermudan.; int1 -> int2: That optics is a MCIA.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that this teashop is non-yogistic but it is a kinaesthesia is incorrect is correct.

¬(¬{B}{c} & {C}{c})

fact1: If that that shortstop either uncrosseds invisibleness or is a kind of a antiphonal or both is wrong then that flurry does not uncrosseds invisibleness. fact2: That flurry is amebic. fact3: That shortstop is amebic. fact4: This teashop is non-yogistic but it is a kinaesthesia if that shortstop is not non-yogistic. fact5: This teashop is not amebic. fact6: If that that flurry is not a kinaesthesia is true this teashop is not a kinaesthesia and is amebic. fact7: That shortstop is not a kinaesthesia but yogistic if that this teashop is not a kinaesthesia is correct. fact8: That that shortstop uncrosseds invisibleness or is a antiphonal or both is incorrect if that Tambocor is not a kind of an eligibility. fact9: That flurry is not yogistic if this teashop is amebic. fact10: Some man contracts suffix and/or the one is a sporting if the one does not uncrossed invisibleness. fact11: If the fact that the Kurd does not scorn Hebrides and is an eligibility is correct then that Tambocor is not an eligibility. fact12: Some person is a immurement and is amebic if this one is not a Nile. fact13: That shortstop is non-diluvian. fact14: That something is not yogistic but it is a kinaesthesia is wrong if it is not non-amebic. fact15: This barbiturate is a kinaesthesia.

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

That that this teashop is non-yogistic but it is a kinaesthesia is incorrect is correct.

¬(¬{B}{c} & {C}{c})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that that shortstop either uncrosseds invisibleness or is a kind of a antiphonal or both is wrong then that flurry does not uncrosseds invisibleness. fact2: That flurry is amebic. fact3: That shortstop is amebic. fact4: This teashop is non-yogistic but it is a kinaesthesia if that shortstop is not non-yogistic. fact5: This teashop is not amebic. fact6: If that that flurry is not a kinaesthesia is true this teashop is not a kinaesthesia and is amebic. fact7: That shortstop is not a kinaesthesia but yogistic if that this teashop is not a kinaesthesia is correct. fact8: That that shortstop uncrosseds invisibleness or is a antiphonal or both is incorrect if that Tambocor is not a kind of an eligibility. fact9: That flurry is not yogistic if this teashop is amebic. fact10: Some man contracts suffix and/or the one is a sporting if the one does not uncrossed invisibleness. fact11: If the fact that the Kurd does not scorn Hebrides and is an eligibility is correct then that Tambocor is not an eligibility. fact12: Some person is a immurement and is amebic if this one is not a Nile. fact13: That shortstop is non-diluvian. fact14: That something is not yogistic but it is a kinaesthesia is wrong if it is not non-amebic. fact15: This barbiturate is a kinaesthesia. ; $hypothesis$ = That that this teashop is non-yogistic but it is a kinaesthesia is incorrect is correct. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that faience is not a Percy but a labial if that faience is a labial is wrong.

¬({A}{a} -> (¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}))

fact1: That faience is not a kind of a Percy if that faience is either not long or horticultural or both.

fact1: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That faience is not a kind of a Percy if that faience is either not long or horticultural or both. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that faience is not a Percy but a labial if that faience is a labial is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Mongol intimidates kiloliter.

{B}{a}

fact1: The fact that that tailback acts pycnodysostosis and is bauxitic is right if that neck is not a kind of a Steiner. fact2: If that tailback is a spying the Mainer is a spying. fact3: If some man is not a kind of a Liliidae that he intimidates kiloliter is true. fact4: If the fact that this corrosive is a Steiner and does joke Arulo is wrong then that neck is not a Steiner. fact5: That Mongol does not intimidate kiloliter if the Mainer is a spying. fact6: Someone is a Liliidae if that it is a Ambloplites and is not a spying does not hold. fact7: The fact that something does not loot is true if that that thing is not gubernatorial and is not non-lucifugous does not hold. fact8: That this corrosive is a Steiner that jokes Arulo is wrong if this rugelach does not loot. fact9: If that some person is not a luminosity and/or it is not a woollen is not right then it is not meritocratic. fact10: If that Wytensin is not a Vaughan then the fact that that Fulbe is either not a luminosity or not a woollen or both is wrong. fact11: That something is not gubernatorial and is lucifugous is wrong if this thing is not meritocratic. fact12: That Mongol intimidates kiloliter if that Mongol is not a Liliidae. fact13: If the fact that something acts pycnodysostosis is right that is a spying. fact14: Someone intimidates kiloliter if that it is a Liliidae and it is not a Ambloplites does not hold. fact15: This rugelach does not loot if that Fulbe does not loot. fact16: If that Mongol is a spying the fact that she/he is a Liliidae and she/he is not a Ambloplites is false. fact17: That Mongol is a spying.

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

That Mongol does not intimidate kiloliter.

¬{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that tailback acts pycnodysostosis and is bauxitic is right if that neck is not a kind of a Steiner. fact2: If that tailback is a spying the Mainer is a spying. fact3: If some man is not a kind of a Liliidae that he intimidates kiloliter is true. fact4: If the fact that this corrosive is a Steiner and does joke Arulo is wrong then that neck is not a Steiner. fact5: That Mongol does not intimidate kiloliter if the Mainer is a spying. fact6: Someone is a Liliidae if that it is a Ambloplites and is not a spying does not hold. fact7: The fact that something does not loot is true if that that thing is not gubernatorial and is not non-lucifugous does not hold. fact8: That this corrosive is a Steiner that jokes Arulo is wrong if this rugelach does not loot. fact9: If that some person is not a luminosity and/or it is not a woollen is not right then it is not meritocratic. fact10: If that Wytensin is not a Vaughan then the fact that that Fulbe is either not a luminosity or not a woollen or both is wrong. fact11: That something is not gubernatorial and is lucifugous is wrong if this thing is not meritocratic. fact12: That Mongol intimidates kiloliter if that Mongol is not a Liliidae. fact13: If the fact that something acts pycnodysostosis is right that is a spying. fact14: Someone intimidates kiloliter if that it is a Liliidae and it is not a Ambloplites does not hold. fact15: This rugelach does not loot if that Fulbe does not loot. fact16: If that Mongol is a spying the fact that she/he is a Liliidae and she/he is not a Ambloplites is false. fact17: That Mongol is a spying. ; $hypothesis$ = That Mongol intimidates kiloliter. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact17 -> int1: That that Mongol is a Liliidae but it is not a Ambloplites does not hold.; fact14 -> int2: That Mongol intimidates kiloliter if that this is a kind of a Liliidae and this is not a Ambloplites does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Chaos does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: That this blitzkrieging does not occurs causes that this rarifying Puglia does not occurs and that liturgicalness occurs. fact2: That hissing Tarquinius does not happens if this scalping Bounty and/or the pardoning praesidium happens. fact3: This linking and that mooning purism occurs if that this blitzkrieging does not occurs is correct. fact4: That that liturgicalness does not happens and that visaing exemplification does not occurs is caused by that the ravaging blur does not happens. fact5: That this incident happens and that reincarnation happens triggers that this gynaeolatry does not happens. fact6: That the fact that this conciliation and this non-naturalness occurs is false is true if this misting occurs. fact7: If that the naturalness happens but this conciliation does not occurs is incorrect this blitzkrieging does not occurs. fact8: If the fact that that that reincarnation and this Chaos occurs is true does not hold this Chaos does not happens. fact9: That this Chaos happens is triggered by that this gynaeolatry does not happens. fact10: The ravaging blur does not occurs if that hissing Tarquinius does not occurs. fact11: That this incident does not occurs and this gynaeolatry does not occurs is triggered by that that stoppage does not happens. fact12: That reincarnation happens. fact13: The moulding raindrop occurs. fact14: The fact that this rarifying Puglia happens and this overstuffing scoff does not happens is incorrect if that liturgicalness does not occurs. fact15: This Chaos does not occurs and that stoppage occurs if this overstuffing scoff does not happens. fact16: If that this rarifying Puglia but notthis overstuffing scoff occurs is wrong this overstuffing scoff occurs. fact17: If that reincarnation does not happens then this firmamentalness happens and this incident happens. fact18: This overstuffing scoff does not happens if that both this linking and that mooning purism happens does not hold. fact19: This misting and the mobilisation happens. fact20: That both this linking and that mooning purism happens is false if this rarifying Puglia does not happens. fact21: If this incident does not occurs then the fact that that reincarnation and this Chaos happens is not correct. fact22: This incident occurs.

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

This firmamentalness occurs.

{CJ}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this blitzkrieging does not occurs causes that this rarifying Puglia does not occurs and that liturgicalness occurs. fact2: That hissing Tarquinius does not happens if this scalping Bounty and/or the pardoning praesidium happens. fact3: This linking and that mooning purism occurs if that this blitzkrieging does not occurs is correct. fact4: That that liturgicalness does not happens and that visaing exemplification does not occurs is caused by that the ravaging blur does not happens. fact5: That this incident happens and that reincarnation happens triggers that this gynaeolatry does not happens. fact6: That the fact that this conciliation and this non-naturalness occurs is false is true if this misting occurs. fact7: If that the naturalness happens but this conciliation does not occurs is incorrect this blitzkrieging does not occurs. fact8: If the fact that that that reincarnation and this Chaos occurs is true does not hold this Chaos does not happens. fact9: That this Chaos happens is triggered by that this gynaeolatry does not happens. fact10: The ravaging blur does not occurs if that hissing Tarquinius does not occurs. fact11: That this incident does not occurs and this gynaeolatry does not occurs is triggered by that that stoppage does not happens. fact12: That reincarnation happens. fact13: The moulding raindrop occurs. fact14: The fact that this rarifying Puglia happens and this overstuffing scoff does not happens is incorrect if that liturgicalness does not occurs. fact15: This Chaos does not occurs and that stoppage occurs if this overstuffing scoff does not happens. fact16: If that this rarifying Puglia but notthis overstuffing scoff occurs is wrong this overstuffing scoff occurs. fact17: If that reincarnation does not happens then this firmamentalness happens and this incident happens. fact18: This overstuffing scoff does not happens if that both this linking and that mooning purism happens does not hold. fact19: This misting and the mobilisation happens. fact20: That both this linking and that mooning purism happens is false if this rarifying Puglia does not happens. fact21: If this incident does not occurs then the fact that that reincarnation and this Chaos happens is not correct. fact22: This incident occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This Chaos does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact22 & fact12 -> int1: Both this incident and that reincarnation happens.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: This gynaeolatry does not happens.; int2 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that glottalness happens is right.

{A}

fact1: The unpretendingness occurs. fact2: This glower occurs.

fact1: {FQ} fact2: {FG}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The unpretendingness occurs. fact2: This glower occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that glottalness happens is right. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This female is not a kind of a myositis.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: There exists some man such that the fact that that it is sociobiologic and it is not colorimetric is not incorrect does not hold. fact2: There exists something such that that this thing is both a Layia and not a Holbrookia does not hold. fact3: If there exists some person such that that the one is sociobiologic and the one is not colorimetric is wrong then this female is not a kind of a myositis. fact4: This female is not a kind of a myositis if there is something such that it is colorimetric. fact5: This female is a jammed and keys neuropathy if Kiki does not headquarter Enuki. fact6: Something is a kind of a myositis if this thing is a kind of a jammed.

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

This female is a myositis.

{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists some man such that the fact that that it is sociobiologic and it is not colorimetric is not incorrect does not hold. fact2: There exists something such that that this thing is both a Layia and not a Holbrookia does not hold. fact3: If there exists some person such that that the one is sociobiologic and the one is not colorimetric is wrong then this female is not a kind of a myositis. fact4: This female is not a kind of a myositis if there is something such that it is colorimetric. fact5: This female is a jammed and keys neuropathy if Kiki does not headquarter Enuki. fact6: Something is a kind of a myositis if this thing is a kind of a jammed. ; $hypothesis$ = This female is not a kind of a myositis. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That peony does not etherealize deliberateness but he/she is neuronic.

(¬{B}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: If this synonymist preheats humanness but it is not unreserved then this synonymist does not etherealize deliberateness. fact2: That peony does not etherealize deliberateness and is neuronic if this synonymist does not etherealize deliberateness. fact3: This synonymist preheats humanness but this one is not unreserved.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this synonymist preheats humanness but it is not unreserved then this synonymist does not etherealize deliberateness. fact2: That peony does not etherealize deliberateness and is neuronic if this synonymist does not etherealize deliberateness. fact3: This synonymist preheats humanness but this one is not unreserved. ; $hypothesis$ = That peony does not etherealize deliberateness but he/she is neuronic. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> int1: This synonymist does not etherealize deliberateness.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That alkylicness occurs.

{A}

fact1: The fact that the disturbing does not occurs and/or the docudrama does not happens does not hold. fact2: If the fact that the disturbing does not occurs and/or the docudrama does not occurs is false then that unableness happens. fact3: That alkylicness does not occurs if that that unableness happens hold.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the disturbing does not occurs and/or the docudrama does not happens does not hold. fact2: If the fact that the disturbing does not occurs and/or the docudrama does not occurs is false then that unableness happens. fact3: That alkylicness does not occurs if that that unableness happens hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That alkylicness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> int1: That unableness occurs.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this Tungusic is a hindsight but that thing is not a kind of a squealing does not hold.

¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

fact1: If this Tungusic does not port elasticity then this combustion mourns. fact2: The fact that someone does not recommend expressed is correct if the one is insanitary and the one does mellow. fact3: This Tungusic is an eyes. fact4: That clearweed mourns. fact5: If something mourns and ports elasticity then that is not a squealing. fact6: This combustion ports elasticity. fact7: This antimacassar is both a Nigroporus and a sobriquet. fact8: Mckenzie does not port elasticity. fact9: If this Dunkers is a kind of a multitude then that the fact that this Tungusic is both a hindsight and not a squealing hold is not correct. fact10: That nook ports elasticity. fact11: If this combustion is not a squealing then this Tungusic is a hindsight. fact12: This combustion is a hindsight if this Tungusic is not a kind of a squealing. fact13: This Tungusic is a kind of a hindsight. fact14: This combustion does recommend expressed and is traumatic. fact15: This Tungusic ports elasticity and it is a kind of a hindsight. fact16: This combustion mourns but it does not port elasticity if this Tungusic does not port elasticity. fact17: This combustion does mourn. fact18: The cornetfish is diurnal but he/she is not a sisterhood. fact19: that elasticity ports combustion. fact20: This combustion does bill Aden. fact21: If this combustion is not a kind of a squealing this Tungusic is a hindsight that is not a kind of a squealing.

fact1: ¬{AB}{a} -> {AA}{aa} fact2: (x): ({JJ}x & {FS}x) -> ¬{HF}x fact3: {DO}{a} fact4: {AA}{dn} fact5: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact6: {AB}{aa} fact7: ({JD}{k} & {CM}{k}) fact8: ¬{AB}{fi} fact9: {C}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact10: {AB}{jd} fact11: ¬{B}{aa} -> {A}{a} fact12: ¬{B}{a} -> {A}{aa} fact13: {A}{a} fact14: ({HF}{aa} & {HU}{aa}) fact15: ({AB}{a} & {A}{a}) fact16: ¬{AB}{a} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact17: {AA}{aa} fact18: ({IN}{go} & ¬{HK}{go}) fact19: {AC}{ab} fact20: {GL}{aa} fact21: ¬{B}{aa} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

The fact that this Tungusic is a hindsight but that thing is not a kind of a squealing does not hold.

¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Tungusic does not port elasticity then this combustion mourns. fact2: The fact that someone does not recommend expressed is correct if the one is insanitary and the one does mellow. fact3: This Tungusic is an eyes. fact4: That clearweed mourns. fact5: If something mourns and ports elasticity then that is not a squealing. fact6: This combustion ports elasticity. fact7: This antimacassar is both a Nigroporus and a sobriquet. fact8: Mckenzie does not port elasticity. fact9: If this Dunkers is a kind of a multitude then that the fact that this Tungusic is both a hindsight and not a squealing hold is not correct. fact10: That nook ports elasticity. fact11: If this combustion is not a squealing then this Tungusic is a hindsight. fact12: This combustion is a hindsight if this Tungusic is not a kind of a squealing. fact13: This Tungusic is a kind of a hindsight. fact14: This combustion does recommend expressed and is traumatic. fact15: This Tungusic ports elasticity and it is a kind of a hindsight. fact16: This combustion mourns but it does not port elasticity if this Tungusic does not port elasticity. fact17: This combustion does mourn. fact18: The cornetfish is diurnal but he/she is not a sisterhood. fact19: that elasticity ports combustion. fact20: This combustion does bill Aden. fact21: If this combustion is not a kind of a squealing this Tungusic is a hindsight that is not a kind of a squealing. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this Tungusic is a hindsight but that thing is not a kind of a squealing does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: If this combustion mourns and he ports elasticity then this combustion is not a squealing.; fact6 & fact17 -> int2: This combustion mourns and ports elasticity.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This combustion is not a squealing.; int3 & fact21 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This stalk enamours tastelessness and it is monoatomic.

({B}{d} & {D}{d})

fact1: If that that shipwright does not interfere then and it is not thenal is incorrect this corral does not enamour tastelessness. fact2: If this corral does not enamour tastelessness then that this stalk enamour tastelessness and this is monoatomic is false. fact3: This cornetist is not a garishness. fact4: This stalk is unbalconied. fact5: Some man is monoatomic if she is monoatomic and/or she does not test Iseult. fact6: Some man is monoatomic and/or does not test Iseult if it is not a garishness. fact7: This stalk enamours tastelessness and is not non-aposiopetic if that is not balconied. fact8: The fact that that shipwright does not interfere then and that thing is not thenal is not true if this cornetist is not a garishness.

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

This stalk enamours tastelessness and it is monoatomic.

({B}{d} & {D}{d})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that that shipwright does not interfere then and it is not thenal is incorrect this corral does not enamour tastelessness. fact2: If this corral does not enamour tastelessness then that this stalk enamour tastelessness and this is monoatomic is false. fact3: This cornetist is not a garishness. fact4: This stalk is unbalconied. fact5: Some man is monoatomic if she is monoatomic and/or she does not test Iseult. fact6: Some man is monoatomic and/or does not test Iseult if it is not a garishness. fact7: This stalk enamours tastelessness and is not non-aposiopetic if that is not balconied. fact8: The fact that that shipwright does not interfere then and that thing is not thenal is not true if this cornetist is not a garishness. ; $hypothesis$ = This stalk enamours tastelessness and it is monoatomic. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact3 -> int1: The fact that that that shipwright does not interfere then and is not thenal is incorrect hold.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: This corral does not enamour tastelessness.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that spoiler is not a kind of a succedaneum is correct.

¬{C}{aa}

fact1: Something that does not nab perspicaciousness is not a succedaneum. fact2: If this treelet nerves Cambarus then that is arithmetical. fact3: The mallee does not nab perspicaciousness. fact4: That that sultana is a uppityness and it queens exposition is false. fact5: If this impressionist does not nab perspicaciousness then that commemorative is a kind of a succedaneum and/or he scales centner. fact6: If someone is not non-loamy and/or is arithmetical then it is non-anicteric. fact7: If this treelet is arithmetical that gubbins is arithmetical. fact8: Something that does not Wed facet does not nab perspicaciousness. fact9: If that dogie is not anicteric then the fact that this impressionist is not a thirty and nabs perspicaciousness does not hold. fact10: If the fact that that sultana is a Equisetales but it is not a seeing does not hold that gubbins is not commensal. fact11: If something is not a uppityness the fact that that is a Equisetales and that is not a seeing is wrong. fact12: this perspicaciousness does not nab spoiler. fact13: That a miscible one marbles dipped is right. fact14: If that commemorative is a succedaneum then that spoiler is a succedaneum. fact15: That spoiler does not nab perspicaciousness. fact16: If some person is not commensal then he is miscible. fact17: If that gubbins is not anicteric and marbles dipped that dogie is not anicteric. fact18: Something is not a kind of a uppityness if that that this thing is a uppityness and this thing queens exposition hold does not hold. fact19: This treelet nerves Cambarus. fact20: If the fact that some person is not a kind of a thirty and does nab perspicaciousness is wrong then the fact that the person does not nab perspicaciousness is right.

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

If that spoiler does not Wed facet then the thing does not nab perspicaciousness.

¬{IO}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Something that does not nab perspicaciousness is not a succedaneum. fact2: If this treelet nerves Cambarus then that is arithmetical. fact3: The mallee does not nab perspicaciousness. fact4: That that sultana is a uppityness and it queens exposition is false. fact5: If this impressionist does not nab perspicaciousness then that commemorative is a kind of a succedaneum and/or he scales centner. fact6: If someone is not non-loamy and/or is arithmetical then it is non-anicteric. fact7: If this treelet is arithmetical that gubbins is arithmetical. fact8: Something that does not Wed facet does not nab perspicaciousness. fact9: If that dogie is not anicteric then the fact that this impressionist is not a thirty and nabs perspicaciousness does not hold. fact10: If the fact that that sultana is a Equisetales but it is not a seeing does not hold that gubbins is not commensal. fact11: If something is not a uppityness the fact that that is a Equisetales and that is not a seeing is wrong. fact12: this perspicaciousness does not nab spoiler. fact13: That a miscible one marbles dipped is right. fact14: If that commemorative is a succedaneum then that spoiler is a succedaneum. fact15: That spoiler does not nab perspicaciousness. fact16: If some person is not commensal then he is miscible. fact17: If that gubbins is not anicteric and marbles dipped that dogie is not anicteric. fact18: Something is not a kind of a uppityness if that that this thing is a uppityness and this thing queens exposition hold does not hold. fact19: This treelet nerves Cambarus. fact20: If the fact that some person is not a kind of a thirty and does nab perspicaciousness is wrong then the fact that the person does not nab perspicaciousness is right. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that spoiler is not a kind of a succedaneum is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That spoiler is not a succedaneum if that spoiler does not nab perspicaciousness.; int1 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This currawong does smuggle merit and is not passive.

({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: The fact that this currawong is callithumpian and overbears is false if that this currawong ravages Aramus hold. fact2: This currawong is both a converse and a Fujiyama. fact3: The fact that this suzerainty is a kind of a tense that is not non-multiple is wrong. fact4: The amiodarone is passive. fact5: This currawong is multiple and this is callithumpian. fact6: The fact that the FO is hyaloplasmic and smuggles merit is false if he/she is a Cajanus. fact7: If something is multiple that it is both passive and callithumpian does not hold. fact8: That something is not callithumpian and not multiple does not hold if this thing does not overbear. fact9: The fact that something does smuggle merit and is not passive does not hold if that is multiple. fact10: This currawong is a lettering and callithumpian. fact11: If this currawong is callithumpian then that it does ravage Aramus and it is a sou is false. fact12: The fact that something is callithumpian and is passive does not hold if this is multiple. fact13: This currawong smuggles merit if that that cachalot is not callithumpian and it is not multiple does not hold. fact14: The fact that the menace is passive is not incorrect. fact15: Raul is callithumpian. fact16: This currawong is nebular and it is a dogshit. fact17: The visitor is callithumpian thing that is not non-acapnic.

fact1: {CR}{aa} -> ¬({B}{aa} & {C}{aa}) fact2: ({FT}{aa} & {Q}{aa}) fact3: ¬({CK}{gk} & {A}{gk}) fact4: {AB}{cn} fact5: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) fact6: {GJ}{jf} -> ¬({DN}{jf} & {AA}{jf}) fact7: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AB}x & {B}x) fact8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact9: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact10: ({CS}{aa} & {B}{aa}) fact11: {B}{aa} -> ¬({CR}{aa} & {DB}{aa}) fact12: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}x & {AB}x) fact13: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {AA}{aa} fact14: {AB}{bk} fact15: {B}{fm} fact16: ({BM}{aa} & {BQ}{aa}) fact17: ({B}{ji} & {JI}{ji})

This currawong does smuggle merit and is not passive.

({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this currawong is callithumpian and overbears is false if that this currawong ravages Aramus hold. fact2: This currawong is both a converse and a Fujiyama. fact3: The fact that this suzerainty is a kind of a tense that is not non-multiple is wrong. fact4: The amiodarone is passive. fact5: This currawong is multiple and this is callithumpian. fact6: The fact that the FO is hyaloplasmic and smuggles merit is false if he/she is a Cajanus. fact7: If something is multiple that it is both passive and callithumpian does not hold. fact8: That something is not callithumpian and not multiple does not hold if this thing does not overbear. fact9: The fact that something does smuggle merit and is not passive does not hold if that is multiple. fact10: This currawong is a lettering and callithumpian. fact11: If this currawong is callithumpian then that it does ravage Aramus and it is a sou is false. fact12: The fact that something is callithumpian and is passive does not hold if this is multiple. fact13: This currawong smuggles merit if that that cachalot is not callithumpian and it is not multiple does not hold. fact14: The fact that the menace is passive is not incorrect. fact15: Raul is callithumpian. fact16: This currawong is nebular and it is a dogshit. fact17: The visitor is callithumpian thing that is not non-acapnic. ; $hypothesis$ = This currawong does smuggle merit and is not passive. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: That this currawong does smuggle merit but it is not passive is wrong if it is multiple.; fact5 -> int2: This currawong is multiple.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that ablution does not happens is not incorrect.

¬{B}

fact1: The echoing does not happens. fact2: The pioneer does not happens if that either the blaspheming IAEA does not happens or the submersibleness happens or both does not hold. fact3: If this bombarding poundal does not happens the fact that either this campfire does not occurs or that stead occurs or both is incorrect. fact4: The ichorousness does not occurs. fact5: That combing sycophancy does not happens if that that saccade does not occurs and/or this learning occurs does not hold. fact6: This scholasticness does not happens. fact7: The fact that the accenting Muztag does not happens and/or this subdivision happens is incorrect. fact8: The fact that the fire does not happens hold. fact9: The evilness does not happens. fact10: That stead does not occurs if this bombarding poundal does not happens. fact11: This unsinkableness does not happens. fact12: If the fact that this campfire does not occurs and/or that stead occurs does not hold that that ablution does not occurs is true.

fact1: ¬{FT} fact2: ¬(¬{R} v {AL}) -> ¬{IQ} fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) fact4: ¬{J} fact5: ¬(¬{IK} v {IC}) -> ¬{ES} fact6: ¬{CH} fact7: ¬(¬{JH} v {EI}) fact8: ¬{HK} fact9: ¬{AP} fact10: ¬{A} -> ¬{AB} fact11: ¬{HD} fact12: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) -> ¬{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The echoing does not happens. fact2: The pioneer does not happens if that either the blaspheming IAEA does not happens or the submersibleness happens or both does not hold. fact3: If this bombarding poundal does not happens the fact that either this campfire does not occurs or that stead occurs or both is incorrect. fact4: The ichorousness does not occurs. fact5: That combing sycophancy does not happens if that that saccade does not occurs and/or this learning occurs does not hold. fact6: This scholasticness does not happens. fact7: The fact that the accenting Muztag does not happens and/or this subdivision happens is incorrect. fact8: The fact that the fire does not happens hold. fact9: The evilness does not happens. fact10: That stead does not occurs if this bombarding poundal does not happens. fact11: This unsinkableness does not happens. fact12: If the fact that this campfire does not occurs and/or that stead occurs does not hold that that ablution does not occurs is true. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that ablution does not happens is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Every person is a verve.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Everything churches mi. fact2: Every man is a dashed. fact3: Everything is a tip. fact4: Everybody is a DoI. fact5: If somebody is not down it is not a kind of a convertible. fact6: Everything is a adynamia. fact7: If the fact that something puns Opisthognathidae and is dispensable is false it is dispensable. fact8: Everything is a Parana. fact9: Everything is not down. fact10: Some man does not sabre Arenaria and is not dispensable if it does pun Opisthognathidae. fact11: Everything is unplanted. fact12: Everything is a kind of a contemplativeness. fact13: Somebody does not equivocate Lophius and is not a universalism if the person is not a kind of a convertible. fact14: That the fact that something puns Opisthognathidae and is not indispensable is true is not true if that does not sabre Arenaria. fact15: If something that does not equivocate Lophius is not a universalism it does not sabre Arenaria. fact16: Everything is a kind of a mugging. fact17: The fact that every person is a Funafuti is not wrong. fact18: Every person is a verve. fact19: Everything prances Isoptera.

fact1: (x): {GS}x fact2: (x): {IB}x fact3: (x): {T}x fact4: (x): {HP}x fact5: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬{G}x fact6: (x): {GQ}x fact7: (x): ¬({D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact8: (x): {GL}x fact9: (x): ¬{H}x fact10: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) fact11: (x): {HM}x fact12: (x): {DG}x fact13: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) fact14: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({D}x & {B}x) fact15: (x): (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact16: (x): {EG}x fact17: (x): {GD}x fact18: (x): {A}x fact19: (x): {EI}x

Everything is postmenopausal.

(x): {BP}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything churches mi. fact2: Every man is a dashed. fact3: Everything is a tip. fact4: Everybody is a DoI. fact5: If somebody is not down it is not a kind of a convertible. fact6: Everything is a adynamia. fact7: If the fact that something puns Opisthognathidae and is dispensable is false it is dispensable. fact8: Everything is a Parana. fact9: Everything is not down. fact10: Some man does not sabre Arenaria and is not dispensable if it does pun Opisthognathidae. fact11: Everything is unplanted. fact12: Everything is a kind of a contemplativeness. fact13: Somebody does not equivocate Lophius and is not a universalism if the person is not a kind of a convertible. fact14: That the fact that something puns Opisthognathidae and is not indispensable is true is not true if that does not sabre Arenaria. fact15: If something that does not equivocate Lophius is not a universalism it does not sabre Arenaria. fact16: Everything is a kind of a mugging. fact17: The fact that every person is a Funafuti is not wrong. fact18: Every person is a verve. fact19: Everything prances Isoptera. ; $hypothesis$ = Every person is a verve. ; $proof$ =

fact18 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that cachalot is an intoxication is not false.

{A}{aa}

fact1: If the fact that that hectograph is unsure and it is not a kind of a Didelphidae is wrong then this malahini acculturates. fact2: This nagami is not voluntary and not a Carlina if that Kafocin is a Ushas. fact3: If this pedwood is an intoxication that cachalot is an intoxication. fact4: An involuntary thing that is not a Carlina does not case microradian. fact5: That Kafocin is a kind of a Ushas if that provisioner is not a Ushas and/or that is not a agreeableness. fact6: That something is not sure and it is not a Didelphidae does not hold if it does not case microradian. fact7: That bootlegger is not a Pterospermum if the fact that he/she is a Jotunn and he/she is a Pterospermum is not right. fact8: That hectograph does not case microradian if this nagami is effervescent and does case microradian. fact9: If the fact that that seashell does not troubleshoot Kosciusko hold this nagami is effervescent thing that does unstrain arietta. fact10: That that bootlegger is both a Jotunn and a Pterospermum is wrong. fact11: Everyone does acculturate. fact12: That seashell does not troubleshoot Kosciusko if that bootlegger is not a Pterospermum. fact13: Every person is not an intoxication and acculturates. fact14: If someone is not a Didelphidae it is not sure or it does not acculturate or both. fact15: Everyone sparkles Kubrick. fact16: The fact that that Luxemburger is not an intoxication hold if this pedwood acculturates.

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

That Luxemburger is not a kind of an intoxication.

¬{A}{s}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that hectograph is unsure and it is not a kind of a Didelphidae is wrong then this malahini acculturates. fact2: This nagami is not voluntary and not a Carlina if that Kafocin is a Ushas. fact3: If this pedwood is an intoxication that cachalot is an intoxication. fact4: An involuntary thing that is not a Carlina does not case microradian. fact5: That Kafocin is a kind of a Ushas if that provisioner is not a Ushas and/or that is not a agreeableness. fact6: That something is not sure and it is not a Didelphidae does not hold if it does not case microradian. fact7: That bootlegger is not a Pterospermum if the fact that he/she is a Jotunn and he/she is a Pterospermum is not right. fact8: That hectograph does not case microradian if this nagami is effervescent and does case microradian. fact9: If the fact that that seashell does not troubleshoot Kosciusko hold this nagami is effervescent thing that does unstrain arietta. fact10: That that bootlegger is both a Jotunn and a Pterospermum is wrong. fact11: Everyone does acculturate. fact12: That seashell does not troubleshoot Kosciusko if that bootlegger is not a Pterospermum. fact13: Every person is not an intoxication and acculturates. fact14: If someone is not a Didelphidae it is not sure or it does not acculturate or both. fact15: Everyone sparkles Kubrick. fact16: The fact that that Luxemburger is not an intoxication hold if this pedwood acculturates. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that cachalot is an intoxication is not false. ; $proof$ =

fact13 -> int1: That cachalot is not an intoxication but it acculturates.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The princess is not a Debussy.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: The chloroform is both preprandial and unlit. fact2: If the chloroform is unlit the princess is a Debussy.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The chloroform is both preprandial and unlit. fact2: If the chloroform is unlit the princess is a Debussy. ; $hypothesis$ = The princess is not a Debussy. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: The chloroform is unlit.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that slugger does not beshrew dysphemism is right.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: That slugger inflects encomium and does not beshrew dysphemism if this outflow does not osculate. fact2: That slugger osculates. fact3: If this outflow does not inflect encomium that slugger osculates and is not a kind of a Lippmann. fact4: The fact that this outflow does not beshrew dysphemism is right. fact5: This outflow does not inflect encomium. fact6: That that slugger osculates is correct if this outflow does not inflect encomium. fact7: That slugger beshrews dysphemism if that slugger is a Israeli. fact8: If that slugger osculates but it is not a Lippmann then that slugger is a Israeli. fact9: the encomium does not inflect outflow.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That slugger inflects encomium and does not beshrew dysphemism if this outflow does not osculate. fact2: That slugger osculates. fact3: If this outflow does not inflect encomium that slugger osculates and is not a kind of a Lippmann. fact4: The fact that this outflow does not beshrew dysphemism is right. fact5: This outflow does not inflect encomium. fact6: That that slugger osculates is correct if this outflow does not inflect encomium. fact7: That slugger beshrews dysphemism if that slugger is a Israeli. fact8: If that slugger osculates but it is not a Lippmann then that slugger is a Israeli. fact9: the encomium does not inflect outflow. ; $hypothesis$ = That that slugger does not beshrew dysphemism is right. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact5 -> int1: That slugger osculates and is not a Lippmann.; int1 & fact8 -> int2: That slugger is a Israeli.; int2 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists nobody such that that person is not a kind of a Cornell and that person embeds Libya.

(x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

fact1: That something does not rubify and signs Tetrapturus is incorrect if that does not amend garbology. fact2: There exists nothing that is not a fence but dyadic. fact3: If something is carunculous then it is a kind of non-pachydermous thing that does not amend garbology. fact4: That somebody is not due but this person is a kind of a thudding does not hold if this person amends garbology. fact5: Everyone is not a Mauritanie. fact6: Something amends garbology if that that is not non-carunculous and that is non-pachydermous does not hold. fact7: That some person is carunculous but it is not pachydermous is false if it is a flood. fact8: There exists no one that is a kind of non-carunculous one that is a kind of a 21. fact9: There is nobody that is a kind of a Cornell and embeds Libya. fact10: The fact that something is not a admirableness and is isosmotic is false if it does not amend garbology. fact11: There exists nobody such that that person is not a kind of a Cornell and that person embeds Libya. fact12: If some person is not a Mauritanie then it is a flood and it is a kind of a Tijuana. fact13: There exists nobody that is not a Alcott and subsides Heyse. fact14: There is nothing such that that is not a parlance and that is a kind of a fence.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{DR}x & {DA}x) fact2: (x): ¬(¬{FA}x & {AI}x) fact3: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact4: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{FU}x & {GH}x) fact5: (x): ¬{F}x fact6: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x fact7: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact8: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {DI}x) fact9: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{FF}x & {EH}x) fact11: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact12: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) fact13: (x): ¬(¬{BO}x & {EB}x) fact14: (x): ¬(¬{CP}x & {FA}x)

There exists nothing that does not rubify and signs Tetrapturus.

(x): ¬(¬{DR}x & {DA}x)

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That something does not rubify and signs Tetrapturus is incorrect if that does not amend garbology. fact2: There exists nothing that is not a fence but dyadic. fact3: If something is carunculous then it is a kind of non-pachydermous thing that does not amend garbology. fact4: That somebody is not due but this person is a kind of a thudding does not hold if this person amends garbology. fact5: Everyone is not a Mauritanie. fact6: Something amends garbology if that that is not non-carunculous and that is non-pachydermous does not hold. fact7: That some person is carunculous but it is not pachydermous is false if it is a flood. fact8: There exists no one that is a kind of non-carunculous one that is a kind of a 21. fact9: There is nobody that is a kind of a Cornell and embeds Libya. fact10: The fact that something is not a admirableness and is isosmotic is false if it does not amend garbology. fact11: There exists nobody such that that person is not a kind of a Cornell and that person embeds Libya. fact12: If some person is not a Mauritanie then it is a flood and it is a kind of a Tijuana. fact13: There exists nobody that is not a Alcott and subsides Heyse. fact14: There is nothing such that that is not a parlance and that is a kind of a fence. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists nobody such that that person is not a kind of a Cornell and that person embeds Libya. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This metricness does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: If that medusoidness does not occurs that extenuation and/or this decoupling occurs. fact2: Both this subclavianness and this jetting occurs if that this responsibility does not occurs is right. fact3: The molding occurs if this vicennialness happens. fact4: That either that buncoing happens or that meliorating does not happens or both is not right if that icterogenicness does not occurs. fact5: That that improperness happens causes that that medusoidness does not occurs and that inspiring utopia does not occurs. fact6: That smudging Marmora happens if this subclavianness happens. fact7: That that nonsuppurativeness happens prevents that this stabling does not occurs. fact8: That improperness occurs. fact9: The non-metricness is prevented by that this stabling occurs. fact10: If this Atlanticness does not happens then the fact that that landing Pandora does not occurs and this vasoconstriction occurs is incorrect. fact11: If the fact that that notthat landing Pandora but this vasoconstriction happens is correct is wrong this vasoconstriction does not happens. fact12: The non-papalness results in that both this NAFTA and this cozenage happens. fact13: That both that smudging Marmora and this stabling happens yields that this metricness does not happens. fact14: That that icterogenicness happens is prevented by that that extenuation occurs. fact15: This papalness does not occurs if that either the posturing preterition or that wipeout or both occurs hold. fact16: This Atlanticness does not occurs if that disagreement and that radiologicalness occurs. fact17: That wipeout occurs and this papism occurs if this vasoconstriction does not occurs. fact18: If that smudging Marmora does not occurs then this metricness occurs. fact19: This stabling occurs or that smudging Marmora does not occurs or both. fact20: This responsibility does not occurs if that that buncoing occurs or that meliorating does not occurs or both is wrong. fact21: If this NAFTA happens that nonsuppurativeness occurs.

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

This metricness does not happens.

¬{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that medusoidness does not occurs that extenuation and/or this decoupling occurs. fact2: Both this subclavianness and this jetting occurs if that this responsibility does not occurs is right. fact3: The molding occurs if this vicennialness happens. fact4: That either that buncoing happens or that meliorating does not happens or both is not right if that icterogenicness does not occurs. fact5: That that improperness happens causes that that medusoidness does not occurs and that inspiring utopia does not occurs. fact6: That smudging Marmora happens if this subclavianness happens. fact7: That that nonsuppurativeness happens prevents that this stabling does not occurs. fact8: That improperness occurs. fact9: The non-metricness is prevented by that this stabling occurs. fact10: If this Atlanticness does not happens then the fact that that landing Pandora does not occurs and this vasoconstriction occurs is incorrect. fact11: If the fact that that notthat landing Pandora but this vasoconstriction happens is correct is wrong this vasoconstriction does not happens. fact12: The non-papalness results in that both this NAFTA and this cozenage happens. fact13: That both that smudging Marmora and this stabling happens yields that this metricness does not happens. fact14: That that icterogenicness happens is prevented by that that extenuation occurs. fact15: This papalness does not occurs if that either the posturing preterition or that wipeout or both occurs hold. fact16: This Atlanticness does not occurs if that disagreement and that radiologicalness occurs. fact17: That wipeout occurs and this papism occurs if this vasoconstriction does not occurs. fact18: If that smudging Marmora does not occurs then this metricness occurs. fact19: This stabling occurs or that smudging Marmora does not occurs or both. fact20: This responsibility does not occurs if that that buncoing occurs or that meliorating does not occurs or both is wrong. fact21: If this NAFTA happens that nonsuppurativeness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This metricness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact19 & fact9 & fact18 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That ashcan is unawed.

{C}{c}

fact1: That Fulvicin incandesces. fact2: If somebody is not a kind of a flushed the fact that it is a tanned and/or it does not incandesce is incorrect. fact3: If the fact that this handbook is a kind of a tanned hold then the fact that that ashcan is not a flushed but the thing is unawed is correct. fact4: That that ashcan is not unawed is not incorrect if the fact that that Fulvicin is a tanned and/or she does not incandesce is false. fact5: The fact that that pekoe is either not a GAAP or not myeloid or both is true. fact6: That that Fulvicin colours Cyprinodontidae and is not a kind of a flushed is false if that that Fulvicin is a tiller is correct. fact7: If this handbook is a tanned then that ashcan is not a flushed. fact8: This handbook is a flushed if that pekoe is not a GAAP. fact9: If that pekoe is not myeloid this handbook is a flushed. fact10: That ashcan is not a flushed. fact11: That Fulvicin is not a flushed if this handbook is a flushed and does colour Cyprinodontidae.

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

That ashcan is not unawed.

¬{C}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Fulvicin incandesces. fact2: If somebody is not a kind of a flushed the fact that it is a tanned and/or it does not incandesce is incorrect. fact3: If the fact that this handbook is a kind of a tanned hold then the fact that that ashcan is not a flushed but the thing is unawed is correct. fact4: That that ashcan is not unawed is not incorrect if the fact that that Fulvicin is a tanned and/or she does not incandesce is false. fact5: The fact that that pekoe is either not a GAAP or not myeloid or both is true. fact6: That that Fulvicin colours Cyprinodontidae and is not a kind of a flushed is false if that that Fulvicin is a tiller is correct. fact7: If this handbook is a tanned then that ashcan is not a flushed. fact8: This handbook is a flushed if that pekoe is not a GAAP. fact9: If that pekoe is not myeloid this handbook is a flushed. fact10: That ashcan is not a flushed. fact11: That Fulvicin is not a flushed if this handbook is a flushed and does colour Cyprinodontidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That ashcan is unawed. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This creek is not mucinous.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: The fact that something is metatarsal thing that does not lucubrate is not correct if it does not truncate shouting. fact2: If this creek is not aesculapian or does rope Heraclitus or both then this creek does not truncate shouting. fact3: This creek is not aesculapian and/or does rope Heraclitus. fact4: If the fact that Rossy is not mucinous but it does truncate shouting is incorrect this creek is not mucinous. fact5: If the fact that some man is metatarsal but this person does not lucubrate does not hold then this person is not mucinous.

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

This creek is mucinous.

{B}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that something is metatarsal thing that does not lucubrate is not correct if it does not truncate shouting. fact2: If this creek is not aesculapian or does rope Heraclitus or both then this creek does not truncate shouting. fact3: This creek is not aesculapian and/or does rope Heraclitus. fact4: If the fact that Rossy is not mucinous but it does truncate shouting is incorrect this creek is not mucinous. fact5: If the fact that some man is metatarsal but this person does not lucubrate does not hold then this person is not mucinous. ; $hypothesis$ = This creek is not mucinous. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: If this creek does not truncate shouting that it is not non-metatarsal and does not lucubrate does not hold.; fact2 & fact3 -> int2: This creek does not truncate shouting.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That this creek is metatarsal thing that does not lucubrate is wrong.; fact5 -> int4: If that this creek is metatarsal and does not lucubrate is incorrect then this creek is not mucinous.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That siding does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: That that electroplating Villard occurs triggers that exteroceptiveness. fact2: This tracing uniqueness does not occurs and that unagitatedness does not occurs if that plagiarizing does not occurs. fact3: That both that nonresidentialness and the craving occurs is brought about by that non-porcineness. fact4: The fact that if the fact that the oticness occurs is not wrong the uprooting occurs is true. fact5: That electroplating Villard happens. fact6: That that unagitatedness does not occurs is prevented by that that exteroceptiveness happens. fact7: If that electroplating Villard does not happens that that siding occurs and that exteroceptiveness happens is false. fact8: That siding does not occurs if the fact that both that siding and that exteroceptiveness happens is false. fact9: That both this soldness and that vulnerableness happens does not hold if that nonresidentialness occurs. fact10: That siding happens if that unagitatedness happens. fact11: That porcineness does not occurs if the fact that the sanitation but notthis Nordicness occurs is false. fact12: That that plagiarizing does not happens if that this soldness and that vulnerableness occurs is false is right.

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

That siding does not happens.

¬{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that electroplating Villard occurs triggers that exteroceptiveness. fact2: This tracing uniqueness does not occurs and that unagitatedness does not occurs if that plagiarizing does not occurs. fact3: That both that nonresidentialness and the craving occurs is brought about by that non-porcineness. fact4: The fact that if the fact that the oticness occurs is not wrong the uprooting occurs is true. fact5: That electroplating Villard happens. fact6: That that unagitatedness does not occurs is prevented by that that exteroceptiveness happens. fact7: If that electroplating Villard does not happens that that siding occurs and that exteroceptiveness happens is false. fact8: That siding does not occurs if the fact that both that siding and that exteroceptiveness happens is false. fact9: That both this soldness and that vulnerableness happens does not hold if that nonresidentialness occurs. fact10: That siding happens if that unagitatedness happens. fact11: That porcineness does not occurs if the fact that the sanitation but notthis Nordicness occurs is false. fact12: That that plagiarizing does not happens if that this soldness and that vulnerableness occurs is false is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That siding does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact5 -> int1: That exteroceptiveness occurs.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: That that unagitatedness does not occurs does not hold.; int2 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that this inactiveness does not occurs or that protozoalness occurs or both.

(¬{AA} v {AB})

fact1: This haymaking does not occurs if that this non-inactiveness and/or that protozoalness happens is correct. fact2: If the fact that both this haymaking and this inactiveness occurs does not hold then this inactiveness does not happens. fact3: That that protozoalness happens causes that this haymaking does not happens.

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

Let's assume that this inactiveness does not occurs or that protozoalness occurs or both.

(¬{AA} v {AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This haymaking does not occurs if that this non-inactiveness and/or that protozoalness happens is correct. fact2: If the fact that both this haymaking and this inactiveness occurs does not hold then this inactiveness does not happens. fact3: That that protozoalness happens causes that this haymaking does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this inactiveness does not occurs or that protozoalness occurs or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This clawback occurs.

{C}

fact1: That polity does not happens if the fact that this destining but notthat sparkle happens is not right. fact2: If the rhyming happens then this clawback does not happens. fact3: This effacing happens. fact4: That this effacing happens and the rhyming does not occurs leads to this clawback. fact5: This smutching happens. fact6: That this effacing but notthe rhyming occurs is caused by that that polity does not happens. fact7: That that polity does not occurs triggers that notthis effacing but this clawback occurs. fact8: This clawback does not occurs if the rhyming or this effacing or both occurs. fact9: That polity does not happens if this destining does not happens and that sparkle does not occurs.

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

This clawback occurs.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That polity does not happens if the fact that this destining but notthat sparkle happens is not right. fact2: If the rhyming happens then this clawback does not happens. fact3: This effacing happens. fact4: That this effacing happens and the rhyming does not occurs leads to this clawback. fact5: This smutching happens. fact6: That this effacing but notthe rhyming occurs is caused by that that polity does not happens. fact7: That that polity does not occurs triggers that notthis effacing but this clawback occurs. fact8: This clawback does not occurs if the rhyming or this effacing or both occurs. fact9: That polity does not happens if this destining does not happens and that sparkle does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This clawback occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: The rhyming and/or this effacing happens.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This genealogist is a weatherliness.

{D}{c}

fact1: The fact that if that tasting does not disunite scalability then that mildness coffins interim or disunite scalability or both is true. fact2: That this genealogist disunites scalability hold if the fact that that tasting does disunites scalability hold. fact3: That mildness does not coffin interim and/or it disunites scalability if that tasting does not disunites scalability. fact4: The halm does not disunite scalability. fact5: That this genealogist is not a weatherliness is false if that mildness does not coffin interim and/or disunites scalability. fact6: Something coffins interim and this disunites scalability if this does not piss Daboecia. fact7: That tasting is not a swap and that does not disunite scalability. fact8: Something that disunites scalability is both not a weatherliness and not a swap.

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

This genealogist is not a weatherliness.

¬{D}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that if that tasting does not disunite scalability then that mildness coffins interim or disunite scalability or both is true. fact2: That this genealogist disunites scalability hold if the fact that that tasting does disunites scalability hold. fact3: That mildness does not coffin interim and/or it disunites scalability if that tasting does not disunites scalability. fact4: The halm does not disunite scalability. fact5: That this genealogist is not a weatherliness is false if that mildness does not coffin interim and/or disunites scalability. fact6: Something coffins interim and this disunites scalability if this does not piss Daboecia. fact7: That tasting is not a swap and that does not disunite scalability. fact8: Something that disunites scalability is both not a weatherliness and not a swap. ; $hypothesis$ = This genealogist is a weatherliness. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: That tasting does not disunite scalability.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: Either that mildness does not coffin interim or the thing disunites scalability or both.; int2 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that scrubbing but notthis standstill occurs does not hold.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: This standstill does not occurs. fact2: That that coast does not occurs and the rapacity does not happens is triggered by this chirruping. fact3: If this lowness happens this ace does not occurs. fact4: That this ace does not happens leads to that that narrowed and that woolgatheringing shwa happens. fact5: If that puffing does not happens and/or this juggling does not occurs then that puffing does not happens. fact6: That exasperating Bivalvia happens and this chirruping occurs if the garnishing Rubicon does not happens. fact7: That puffing happens. fact8: The fact that this homage but notthe indicating absurd happens is not wrong if that puffing does not occurs. fact9: If that woolgatheringing shwa occurs then that that suctioning does not occurs and that congregation does not occurs is false. fact10: That forcefulness does not happens. fact11: The garnishing Rubicon does not occurs if the fact that that suctioning does not happens and that congregation does not occurs does not hold. fact12: If that that coast does not happens is correct either that puffing does not happens or this juggling does not happens or both. fact13: If that puffing happens that scrubbing occurs but this standstill does not happens.

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

This homage but notthe indicating absurd happens.

({HJ} & ¬{BJ})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This standstill does not occurs. fact2: That that coast does not occurs and the rapacity does not happens is triggered by this chirruping. fact3: If this lowness happens this ace does not occurs. fact4: That this ace does not happens leads to that that narrowed and that woolgatheringing shwa happens. fact5: If that puffing does not happens and/or this juggling does not occurs then that puffing does not happens. fact6: That exasperating Bivalvia happens and this chirruping occurs if the garnishing Rubicon does not happens. fact7: That puffing happens. fact8: The fact that this homage but notthe indicating absurd happens is not wrong if that puffing does not occurs. fact9: If that woolgatheringing shwa occurs then that that suctioning does not occurs and that congregation does not occurs is false. fact10: That forcefulness does not happens. fact11: The garnishing Rubicon does not occurs if the fact that that suctioning does not happens and that congregation does not occurs does not hold. fact12: If that that coast does not happens is correct either that puffing does not happens or this juggling does not happens or both. fact13: If that puffing happens that scrubbing occurs but this standstill does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that scrubbing but notthis standstill occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact13 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This propeller is a Zoroastrian.

{C}{c}

fact1: If that tintack overloads gloaming but it is not a Trinectes then that that Turkoman does not deform hold. fact2: If that Turkoman is tamed then this propeller is a Zoroastrian. fact3: That tintack overloads gloaming but this is not a kind of a Trinectes.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that tintack overloads gloaming but it is not a Trinectes then that that Turkoman does not deform hold. fact2: If that Turkoman is tamed then this propeller is a Zoroastrian. fact3: That tintack overloads gloaming but this is not a kind of a Trinectes. ; $hypothesis$ = This propeller is a Zoroastrian. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this witness is a kind of a multistage that is a kind of an intrigue is false.

¬({A}{b} & {B}{b})

fact1: If something is non-auriculoventricular then the fact that this is a multistage and this is a kind of an intrigue is incorrect. fact2: If someone is apocarpous then it remakes hairsbreadth and it is not auriculoventricular. fact3: That snug does not plead if that the fact that the wog does not transmute disdain and the one is not a Kennedia is false is true. fact4: That this u is not ulcerative but that thing is a Flanders is not true. fact5: This witness is an intrigue if this u is ulcerative. fact6: This witness is auriculoventricular. fact7: This witness is a kind of a Flanders if that this u is non-auriculoventricular thing that is an intrigue is wrong. fact8: The mara is an intrigue. fact9: This witness is a multistage if the fact that it is auriculoventricular is right. fact10: Some person is not auriculoventricular and not apocarpous if the one does not remake hairsbreadth. fact11: If the fact that this u is a kind of non-ulcerative one that is a Flanders is false then this witness is an intrigue. fact12: If this u is a Kennedia this u is a Flanders. fact13: This witness is ulcerative. fact14: If the fact that this u is not a multistage is correct then this witness is ulcerative. fact15: If some man does not plead then the person comments alopecia. fact16: This witness is a Flanders if this u is not a kind of a multistage. fact17: The fact that the wog does not transmute disdain and is not a Kennedia is false. fact18: This u does not remake hairsbreadth if that snug comments alopecia. fact19: This witness is ulcerative if this u is not an intrigue. fact20: That the fact that this u is ulcerative a Flanders does not hold is correct. fact21: This witness is avian.

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

That this witness is a kind of a multistage that is a kind of an intrigue is false.

¬({A}{b} & {B}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something is non-auriculoventricular then the fact that this is a multistage and this is a kind of an intrigue is incorrect. fact2: If someone is apocarpous then it remakes hairsbreadth and it is not auriculoventricular. fact3: That snug does not plead if that the fact that the wog does not transmute disdain and the one is not a Kennedia is false is true. fact4: That this u is not ulcerative but that thing is a Flanders is not true. fact5: This witness is an intrigue if this u is ulcerative. fact6: This witness is auriculoventricular. fact7: This witness is a kind of a Flanders if that this u is non-auriculoventricular thing that is an intrigue is wrong. fact8: The mara is an intrigue. fact9: This witness is a multistage if the fact that it is auriculoventricular is right. fact10: Some person is not auriculoventricular and not apocarpous if the one does not remake hairsbreadth. fact11: If the fact that this u is a kind of non-ulcerative one that is a Flanders is false then this witness is an intrigue. fact12: If this u is a Kennedia this u is a Flanders. fact13: This witness is ulcerative. fact14: If the fact that this u is not a multistage is correct then this witness is ulcerative. fact15: If some man does not plead then the person comments alopecia. fact16: This witness is a Flanders if this u is not a kind of a multistage. fact17: The fact that the wog does not transmute disdain and is not a Kennedia is false. fact18: This u does not remake hairsbreadth if that snug comments alopecia. fact19: This witness is ulcerative if this u is not an intrigue. fact20: That the fact that this u is ulcerative a Flanders does not hold is correct. fact21: This witness is avian. ; $hypothesis$ = That this witness is a kind of a multistage that is a kind of an intrigue is false. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact4 -> int1: This witness is an intrigue.; fact9 & fact6 -> int2: This witness is a multistage.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The plantarness does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: If that stenciling Mansfield occurs then that unloosing cautiousness does not happens and this predating trust does not occurs. fact2: This predating trust happens. fact3: This veneering ablaut does not occurs if that this oppugning BSE does not happens or this precaution occurs or both is not right. fact4: If this unneuroticness happens that the fact that that branching teemingness occurs and the combining booty does not occurs is incorrect hold. fact5: That that vaginalness happens and this freezing happens is false if this veneering ablaut does not occurs. fact6: If that that branching teemingness occurs and the combining booty does not happens is not correct then that capsizing does not happens. fact7: If the voicing does not happens this salivariness happens and this dethawing Ancistrodon occurs. fact8: That that unloosing cautiousness does not happens and this predating trust does not happens triggers that the plantarness occurs. fact9: If that caroling occurs the fact that the fact that this oppugning BSE does not occurs and/or this precaution occurs is not correct hold. fact10: If the fact that this salivariness occurs hold notthe mythicising but that punting exotropia occurs. fact11: If this predating trust occurs that this dethawing Ancistrodon does not occurs and the voicing occurs does not hold. fact12: That vaginalness does not happens if that both that vaginalness and this freezing happens is wrong. fact13: That the mythicising does not occurs yields that both this unneuroticness and this Huxleyanness happens. fact14: If the fact that this predating trust does not occurs is correct then the fact that this stimulating Asimov does not occurs and this Galilean occurs is incorrect. fact15: That that capsizing does not happens causes that both this bending and that caroling occurs. fact16: The voicing does not occurs if the fact that both that bewildering cooperative and this paralyticalness occurs does not hold. fact17: That the plantarness does not occurs is correct if the fact that that this dethawing Ancistrodon does not occurs and the voicing occurs is incorrect hold. fact18: If that vaginalness does not occurs that stoloniferousness and/or this pessimisticness happens.

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

That notthis stimulating Asimov but this Galilean occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{BN} & {FQ})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that stenciling Mansfield occurs then that unloosing cautiousness does not happens and this predating trust does not occurs. fact2: This predating trust happens. fact3: This veneering ablaut does not occurs if that this oppugning BSE does not happens or this precaution occurs or both is not right. fact4: If this unneuroticness happens that the fact that that branching teemingness occurs and the combining booty does not occurs is incorrect hold. fact5: That that vaginalness happens and this freezing happens is false if this veneering ablaut does not occurs. fact6: If that that branching teemingness occurs and the combining booty does not happens is not correct then that capsizing does not happens. fact7: If the voicing does not happens this salivariness happens and this dethawing Ancistrodon occurs. fact8: That that unloosing cautiousness does not happens and this predating trust does not happens triggers that the plantarness occurs. fact9: If that caroling occurs the fact that the fact that this oppugning BSE does not occurs and/or this precaution occurs is not correct hold. fact10: If the fact that this salivariness occurs hold notthe mythicising but that punting exotropia occurs. fact11: If this predating trust occurs that this dethawing Ancistrodon does not occurs and the voicing occurs does not hold. fact12: That vaginalness does not happens if that both that vaginalness and this freezing happens is wrong. fact13: That the mythicising does not occurs yields that both this unneuroticness and this Huxleyanness happens. fact14: If the fact that this predating trust does not occurs is correct then the fact that this stimulating Asimov does not occurs and this Galilean occurs is incorrect. fact15: That that capsizing does not happens causes that both this bending and that caroling occurs. fact16: The voicing does not occurs if the fact that both that bewildering cooperative and this paralyticalness occurs does not hold. fact17: That the plantarness does not occurs is correct if the fact that that this dethawing Ancistrodon does not occurs and the voicing occurs is incorrect hold. fact18: If that vaginalness does not occurs that stoloniferousness and/or this pessimisticness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The plantarness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact2 -> int1: That that this dethawing Ancistrodon does not happens but the voicing occurs is right is incorrect.; int1 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that there exists nothing that is both intracranial and non-canonical is false.

¬((x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: There exists no man such that it is both a dynamism and not vacuolate. fact2: There is nothing that is a bigram and does not paper Konoye. fact3: There is no man that is a kind of a lance and is not fitting. fact4: There exists nothing that arms Pseudowintera and is not a preventative.

fact1: (x): ¬({DK}x & ¬{IS}x) fact2: (x): ¬({BA}x & ¬{DH}x) fact3: (x): ¬({GE}x & ¬{FI}x) fact4: (x): ¬({FO}x & ¬{HD}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists no man such that it is both a dynamism and not vacuolate. fact2: There is nothing that is a bigram and does not paper Konoye. fact3: There is no man that is a kind of a lance and is not fitting. fact4: There exists nothing that arms Pseudowintera and is not a preventative. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there exists nothing that is both intracranial and non-canonical is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That conserve is not a Chernobyl.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: If that conserve is a Chernobyl and it is a kind of a summary then the fact that this retem is not a Pediculidae is true. fact2: If this retem is a kind of a summary and is a Pediculidae that that conserve is not a Chernobyl hold. fact3: That conserve is a Chernobyl if this retem is a Chernobyl. fact4: That conserve is a veiled and it is a BPH. fact5: This retem is a Pediculidae. fact6: The fudge is a summary and it presses anhydrosis. fact7: This retem is not a Chernobyl if that conserve is both not a Bombacaceae and not noninstitutional. fact8: This retem is a Micawber. fact9: Somebody is not theatrical but she/he burps Sphyraenidae if she/he is an aid. fact10: If someone is not theatrical but it does burp Sphyraenidae it does not obnubilate. fact11: This retem is both a summary and a Pediculidae. fact12: That conserve is a tense and is a kind of an aid if it is not a segmented. fact13: If someone is not noninstitutional it is a Bombacaceae and it is a Chernobyl. fact14: Some person is not a Bombacaceae and is not noninstitutional if it does not obnubilate. fact15: If that this retem is noninstitutional and/or not a Chernobyl does not hold that conserve is a Chernobyl. fact16: The fact that something is noninstitutional and/or it is not a Chernobyl is false if it is not a kind of a Bombacaceae.

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

That conserve is a Chernobyl.

{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that conserve is a Chernobyl and it is a kind of a summary then the fact that this retem is not a Pediculidae is true. fact2: If this retem is a kind of a summary and is a Pediculidae that that conserve is not a Chernobyl hold. fact3: That conserve is a Chernobyl if this retem is a Chernobyl. fact4: That conserve is a veiled and it is a BPH. fact5: This retem is a Pediculidae. fact6: The fudge is a summary and it presses anhydrosis. fact7: This retem is not a Chernobyl if that conserve is both not a Bombacaceae and not noninstitutional. fact8: This retem is a Micawber. fact9: Somebody is not theatrical but she/he burps Sphyraenidae if she/he is an aid. fact10: If someone is not theatrical but it does burp Sphyraenidae it does not obnubilate. fact11: This retem is both a summary and a Pediculidae. fact12: That conserve is a tense and is a kind of an aid if it is not a segmented. fact13: If someone is not noninstitutional it is a Bombacaceae and it is a Chernobyl. fact14: Some person is not a Bombacaceae and is not noninstitutional if it does not obnubilate. fact15: If that this retem is noninstitutional and/or not a Chernobyl does not hold that conserve is a Chernobyl. fact16: The fact that something is noninstitutional and/or it is not a Chernobyl is false if it is not a kind of a Bombacaceae. ; $hypothesis$ = That conserve is not a Chernobyl. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That rupture does not happens.

¬{B}

fact1: If that ready does not occurs that rupture occurs. fact2: That noticeableness happens. fact3: If the fact that this sericulturalness does not occurs and that ready happens is false that rupture occurs. fact4: This radiopacity happens if the fact that this realigning Cocus does not occurs and that supplying occurs does not hold. fact5: That that vitrifieding furlough but notthat rupture happens is brought about by this non-tensionalness. fact6: That that this proclamation does not happens and that ambitionlessness occurs is false is true if that vitrifieding furlough does not occurs. fact7: If that that tensionalness does not occurs hold then that vitrifieding furlough does not happens but that rupture happens. fact8: The aborticide occurs. fact9: That both that mediation and the tourism happens is wrong. fact10: The fact that the deceleration does not happens and that salivating occurs is incorrect. fact11: The fact that that Europeanness and that mediation occurs is incorrect.

fact1: ¬{AB} -> {B} fact2: {GA} fact3: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact4: ¬(¬{EP} & {GJ}) -> {FQ} fact5: ¬{C} -> ({A} & ¬{B}) fact6: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{GU} & {IS}) fact7: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & {B}) fact8: {GE} fact9: ¬({EN} & {IN}) fact10: ¬(¬{AS} & {HQ}) fact11: ¬({CA} & {EN})

That this proclamation does not happens but that ambitionlessness occurs is wrong.

¬(¬{GU} & {IS})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that ready does not occurs that rupture occurs. fact2: That noticeableness happens. fact3: If the fact that this sericulturalness does not occurs and that ready happens is false that rupture occurs. fact4: This radiopacity happens if the fact that this realigning Cocus does not occurs and that supplying occurs does not hold. fact5: That that vitrifieding furlough but notthat rupture happens is brought about by this non-tensionalness. fact6: That that this proclamation does not happens and that ambitionlessness occurs is false is true if that vitrifieding furlough does not occurs. fact7: If that that tensionalness does not occurs hold then that vitrifieding furlough does not happens but that rupture happens. fact8: The aborticide occurs. fact9: That both that mediation and the tourism happens is wrong. fact10: The fact that the deceleration does not happens and that salivating occurs is incorrect. fact11: The fact that that Europeanness and that mediation occurs is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That rupture does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

There is no person such that it is not a majesty and it is not unangry.

(x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: There is no one that is not cranial and is a Fechner. fact2: There exists nothing that is not a flawed and is a poundal. fact3: There is nothing such that it is not a Rubens and it chastenesses Kalotermes. fact4: There is nothing such that this is both not a majesty and unangry. fact5: There is nobody such that the one is not endoergic and the one is not adventuristic. fact6: There is no person such that it is not a majesty and it is not unangry. fact7: There exists nothing such that it is both non-exculpatory and not a voraciousness. fact8: There is nothing that is not exculpatory and is not a Lucknow. fact9: There exists nothing that is not a Mbabane and is a kind of a Constantine. fact10: There is no person that is not uncommitted and is not a kind of a JEM. fact11: There exists no one such that it is not a Hoffmannsthal and it is not a miliaria. fact12: There is none that is both not a Rothschild and not oracular.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{CN}x & {FK}x) fact2: (x): ¬(¬{AC}x & {HP}x) fact3: (x): ¬(¬{HJ}x & {GP}x) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{CB}x & ¬{BH}x) fact6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact7: (x): ¬(¬{EJ}x & ¬{CH}x) fact8: (x): ¬(¬{EJ}x & ¬{GA}x) fact9: (x): ¬(¬{AF}x & {BN}x) fact10: (x): ¬(¬{DU}x & ¬{AE}x) fact11: (x): ¬(¬{HA}x & ¬{AL}x) fact12: (x): ¬(¬{IQ}x & ¬{EG}x)

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There is no one that is not cranial and is a Fechner. fact2: There exists nothing that is not a flawed and is a poundal. fact3: There is nothing such that it is not a Rubens and it chastenesses Kalotermes. fact4: There is nothing such that this is both not a majesty and unangry. fact5: There is nobody such that the one is not endoergic and the one is not adventuristic. fact6: There is no person such that it is not a majesty and it is not unangry. fact7: There exists nothing such that it is both non-exculpatory and not a voraciousness. fact8: There is nothing that is not exculpatory and is not a Lucknow. fact9: There exists nothing that is not a Mbabane and is a kind of a Constantine. fact10: There is no person that is not uncommitted and is not a kind of a JEM. fact11: There exists no one such that it is not a Hoffmannsthal and it is not a miliaria. fact12: There is none that is both not a Rothschild and not oracular. ; $hypothesis$ = There is no person such that it is not a majesty and it is not unangry. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That venation is a kind of a Laffer that particularises Gesner.

({B}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: This trunkfish particularises Gesner if that venation is a kind of a Cebuano. fact2: If that venation is a Laffer this trunkfish particularises Gesner. fact3: If that this trunkfish is not a kind of a Laffer and is not a Cebuano does not hold then the expat is a Cebuano. fact4: the fact that this Gesner particularises venation is true. fact5: The zebrawood is a pedal and it is unrepeatable. fact6: This quesadilla is both a mononucleosis and a Cebuano. fact7: This trunkfish is a kind of a Laffer if that venation particularises Gesner. fact8: If the fact that this jument is not abomasal but it particularises Gesner does not hold the fact that that venation does not particularises Gesner is correct. fact9: That venation is a mononucleosis. fact10: The drawing is a kind of bibliographic man that particularises Gesner. fact11: That venation is a Laffer if this trunkfish is a Cebuano. fact12: This trunkfish is a Laffer if that that venation is a Cebuano is right. fact13: That venation is non-abomasal and it is not a Cebuano if this trunkfish does repositing Heilong. fact14: If this trunkfish particularises Gesner that venation is a kind of a Cebuano. fact15: If that venation attends this trunkfish does sexualize Chattanooga. fact16: That shortcake knots toponomy and particularises Gesner. fact17: The fact that that venation particularises Gesner is true. fact18: This trunkfish is inheritable. fact19: If that venation does not particularise Gesner then the fact that this trunkfish is not a Laffer and it is not a Cebuano is wrong. fact20: That venation is a Cebuano. fact21: This trunkfish particularises Gesner. fact22: This trunkfish is a Laffer.

fact1: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact2: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} fact3: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {A}{dt} fact4: {AA}{aa} fact5: ({HJ}{gl} & {IF}{gl}) fact6: ({BJ}{ga} & {A}{ga}) fact7: {C}{b} -> {B}{a} fact8: ¬(¬{D}{c} & {C}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact9: {BJ}{b} fact10: ({HU}{fe} & {C}{fe}) fact11: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact12: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact13: {E}{a} -> (¬{D}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact14: {C}{a} -> {A}{b} fact15: {GA}{b} -> {GP}{a} fact16: ({GN}{do} & {C}{do}) fact17: {C}{b} fact18: {IN}{a} fact19: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact20: {A}{b} fact21: {C}{a} fact22: {B}{a}

That that venation is a Laffer and particularises Gesner is not true.

¬({B}{b} & {C}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This trunkfish particularises Gesner if that venation is a kind of a Cebuano. fact2: If that venation is a Laffer this trunkfish particularises Gesner. fact3: If that this trunkfish is not a kind of a Laffer and is not a Cebuano does not hold then the expat is a Cebuano. fact4: the fact that this Gesner particularises venation is true. fact5: The zebrawood is a pedal and it is unrepeatable. fact6: This quesadilla is both a mononucleosis and a Cebuano. fact7: This trunkfish is a kind of a Laffer if that venation particularises Gesner. fact8: If the fact that this jument is not abomasal but it particularises Gesner does not hold the fact that that venation does not particularises Gesner is correct. fact9: That venation is a mononucleosis. fact10: The drawing is a kind of bibliographic man that particularises Gesner. fact11: That venation is a Laffer if this trunkfish is a Cebuano. fact12: This trunkfish is a Laffer if that that venation is a Cebuano is right. fact13: That venation is non-abomasal and it is not a Cebuano if this trunkfish does repositing Heilong. fact14: If this trunkfish particularises Gesner that venation is a kind of a Cebuano. fact15: If that venation attends this trunkfish does sexualize Chattanooga. fact16: That shortcake knots toponomy and particularises Gesner. fact17: The fact that that venation particularises Gesner is true. fact18: This trunkfish is inheritable. fact19: If that venation does not particularise Gesner then the fact that this trunkfish is not a Laffer and it is not a Cebuano is wrong. fact20: That venation is a Cebuano. fact21: This trunkfish particularises Gesner. fact22: This trunkfish is a Laffer. ; $hypothesis$ = That venation is a kind of a Laffer that particularises Gesner. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This zygomorphicness happens.

{D}

fact1: If the adversity does not occurs both that rabbinate and this speechmaking occurs. fact2: This cunctation occurs. fact3: If the fact that this ambuscading tritheism occurs and that daze does not occurs does not hold then this ambuscading tritheism does not occurs. fact4: That metastableness happens. fact5: This illegitimateness does not happens. fact6: The non-zygomorphicness is triggered by either that that daze happens or this ambuscading tritheism or both. fact7: If that daze happens this zygomorphicness does not occurs. fact8: Either the lockup happens or that disassembly happens or both. fact9: This zygomorphicness happens and this cunctation happens if this ambuscading tritheism does not happens. fact10: That this ambuscading tritheism occurs but that daze does not occurs is incorrect if that rabbinate occurs. fact11: Both this cunctation and this ambuscading tritheism occurs.

fact1: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact2: {A} fact3: ¬({B} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{B} fact4: {CQ} fact5: ¬{FU} fact6: ({C} v {B}) -> ¬{D} fact7: {C} -> ¬{D} fact8: ({FD} v {HT}) fact9: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) fact10: {E} -> ¬({B} & ¬{C}) fact11: ({A} & {B})

This zygomorphicness happens.

{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the adversity does not occurs both that rabbinate and this speechmaking occurs. fact2: This cunctation occurs. fact3: If the fact that this ambuscading tritheism occurs and that daze does not occurs does not hold then this ambuscading tritheism does not occurs. fact4: That metastableness happens. fact5: This illegitimateness does not happens. fact6: The non-zygomorphicness is triggered by either that that daze happens or this ambuscading tritheism or both. fact7: If that daze happens this zygomorphicness does not occurs. fact8: Either the lockup happens or that disassembly happens or both. fact9: This zygomorphicness happens and this cunctation happens if this ambuscading tritheism does not happens. fact10: That this ambuscading tritheism occurs but that daze does not occurs is incorrect if that rabbinate occurs. fact11: Both this cunctation and this ambuscading tritheism occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This zygomorphicness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> int1: This ambuscading tritheism happens.; int1 -> int2: That daze and/or this ambuscading tritheism happens.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This prima is subclinical.

{C}{b}

fact1: The jimmies is subclinical. fact2: That that graniteware is not unwitting and it is not anorthitic is false if it renews. fact3: That graniteware does renew. fact4: If that seller pyramidings July then that the blenny does renew and is not a kind of a Peary is wrong. fact5: If somebody is a deconstructivism it is subclinical. fact6: Something is not subclinical if that it is a kind of a deconstructivism and it is subclinical is incorrect. fact7: If the fact that that graniteware is not unwitting and is non-anorthitic is false this prima is a deconstructivism.

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

This prima is not subclinical.

¬{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The jimmies is subclinical. fact2: That that graniteware is not unwitting and it is not anorthitic is false if it renews. fact3: That graniteware does renew. fact4: If that seller pyramidings July then that the blenny does renew and is not a kind of a Peary is wrong. fact5: If somebody is a deconstructivism it is subclinical. fact6: Something is not subclinical if that it is a kind of a deconstructivism and it is subclinical is incorrect. fact7: If the fact that that graniteware is not unwitting and is non-anorthitic is false this prima is a deconstructivism. ; $hypothesis$ = This prima is subclinical. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact3 -> int1: That that graniteware is both not unwitting and non-anorthitic does not hold.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: This prima is a deconstructivism.; fact5 -> int3: If this prima is a kind of a deconstructivism that that is not non-subclinical is not wrong.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This leveler is a Wavell but it is not a kind of a sociometry.

({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: The fact that this scenario is not efficacious but it is a kind of a Myrciaria is not false. fact2: This bondholder is ungulated man that is a partisan if this bondholder does not afforest Tobey. fact3: If somebody does not Down interregnum but it is a sociometry then it is not efficacious. fact4: This bondholder is a kind of a flock and does not afforest Tobey if it does zero Acapulco. fact5: If someone is efficacious and is a Myrciaria then it does not Down interregnum. fact6: If this Datril is not a kind of a sociometry and/or is not a kind of a Wavell then this leveler is a Wavell. fact7: This leveler is not efficacious if something is not a partisan. fact8: Something that is not vagal either is not a sociometry or is not a Wavell or both. fact9: If some person is a kind of non-efficacious person that is a Myrciaria then it does not Down interregnum. fact10: Everything zeroes Acapulco. fact11: The fact that this hybridisation is not efficacious hold if this leveler is not efficacious but that thing Downs interregnum. fact12: This scenario does not adventure antigram and is diamantine. fact13: If the fact that this scenario does not Down interregnum is correct the fact that that this leveler is both a Wavell and a sociometry is true is incorrect. fact14: The protoavis is non-puerile thing that is omnivorous. fact15: Something does not Down interregnum if it does not Down interregnum and/or it is ungulated. fact16: If something is a Wavell then this Downs interregnum. fact17: That this leveler is a Wavell and is not a sociometry is not right if this scenario does not Down interregnum. fact18: This scenario is not efficacious. fact19: If this bondholder is ungulated and it is a partisan that shingle is not a partisan. fact20: This scenario does not Down interregnum if it is efficacious and it is a Myrciaria. fact21: That Ravi is both a sociometry and not legged is incorrect. fact22: If this scenario is not a kind of a Wavell but it is efficacious it is not a Myrciaria. fact23: That this leveler is a Wavell and is a sociometry does not hold.

fact1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact2: ¬{G}{d} -> ({E}{d} & {D}{d}) fact3: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{AA}x fact4: {I}{d} -> ({H}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) fact5: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact6: (¬{C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) -> {A}{a} fact7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{AA}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{A}x) fact9: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact10: (x): {I}x fact11: (¬{AA}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{am} fact12: (¬{EE}{aa} & {IH}{aa}) fact13: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬({A}{a} & {C}{a}) fact14: (¬{IO}{ip} & {GH}{ip}) fact15: (x): (¬{B}x v {E}x) -> ¬{B}x fact16: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact17: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact18: ¬{AA}{aa} fact19: ({E}{d} & {D}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} fact20: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact21: ¬({C}{bp} & ¬{HS}{bp}) fact22: (¬{A}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} fact23: ¬({A}{a} & {C}{a})

This hybridisation is not efficacious.

¬{AA}{am}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this scenario is not efficacious but it is a kind of a Myrciaria is not false. fact2: This bondholder is ungulated man that is a partisan if this bondholder does not afforest Tobey. fact3: If somebody does not Down interregnum but it is a sociometry then it is not efficacious. fact4: This bondholder is a kind of a flock and does not afforest Tobey if it does zero Acapulco. fact5: If someone is efficacious and is a Myrciaria then it does not Down interregnum. fact6: If this Datril is not a kind of a sociometry and/or is not a kind of a Wavell then this leveler is a Wavell. fact7: This leveler is not efficacious if something is not a partisan. fact8: Something that is not vagal either is not a sociometry or is not a Wavell or both. fact9: If some person is a kind of non-efficacious person that is a Myrciaria then it does not Down interregnum. fact10: Everything zeroes Acapulco. fact11: The fact that this hybridisation is not efficacious hold if this leveler is not efficacious but that thing Downs interregnum. fact12: This scenario does not adventure antigram and is diamantine. fact13: If the fact that this scenario does not Down interregnum is correct the fact that that this leveler is both a Wavell and a sociometry is true is incorrect. fact14: The protoavis is non-puerile thing that is omnivorous. fact15: Something does not Down interregnum if it does not Down interregnum and/or it is ungulated. fact16: If something is a Wavell then this Downs interregnum. fact17: That this leveler is a Wavell and is not a sociometry is not right if this scenario does not Down interregnum. fact18: This scenario is not efficacious. fact19: If this bondholder is ungulated and it is a partisan that shingle is not a partisan. fact20: This scenario does not Down interregnum if it is efficacious and it is a Myrciaria. fact21: That Ravi is both a sociometry and not legged is incorrect. fact22: If this scenario is not a kind of a Wavell but it is efficacious it is not a Myrciaria. fact23: That this leveler is a Wavell and is a sociometry does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This leveler is a Wavell but it is not a kind of a sociometry. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: This scenario does not Down interregnum if this scenario is not efficacious but it is a Myrciaria.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: This scenario does not Down interregnum.; int2 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this pappa is facultative but that thing is not Semite does not hold.

¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: Something is conspiratorial and it is a Leguminosae if it does not mediate sectioned. fact2: If the fact that that Dragunov is a kind of a futurology that does not mediate sectioned does not hold then this roadhog does not mediate sectioned. fact3: If that someone is non-sulcate and she is not a hang is wrong then she is non-sulcate. fact4: This pappa is facultative and non-Semite. fact5: If this roadhog is a Leguminosae then that that Rock is non-sulcate thing that is not a hang is false. fact6: This eradicator is not a posture if that Rock is not a posture. fact7: If a non-forwarding thing is actuarial then the fact that it is not a posture is right. fact8: This pappa is facultative. fact9: The fact that this pappa is both facultative and not Semite does not hold if this eradicator is not a posture. fact10: If some man is sulcate then it is both not forwarding and actuarial.

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

That this pappa is facultative but that thing is not Semite does not hold.

¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is conspiratorial and it is a Leguminosae if it does not mediate sectioned. fact2: If the fact that that Dragunov is a kind of a futurology that does not mediate sectioned does not hold then this roadhog does not mediate sectioned. fact3: If that someone is non-sulcate and she is not a hang is wrong then she is non-sulcate. fact4: This pappa is facultative and non-Semite. fact5: If this roadhog is a Leguminosae then that that Rock is non-sulcate thing that is not a hang is false. fact6: This eradicator is not a posture if that Rock is not a posture. fact7: If a non-forwarding thing is actuarial then the fact that it is not a posture is right. fact8: This pappa is facultative. fact9: The fact that this pappa is both facultative and not Semite does not hold if this eradicator is not a posture. fact10: If some man is sulcate then it is both not forwarding and actuarial. ; $hypothesis$ = That this pappa is facultative but that thing is not Semite does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This taunting wartime happens.

{C}

fact1: The liliaceousness does not occurs. fact2: That the hobnailing Mertensia does not occurs brings about that this rejoicing and this salaat occurs. fact3: This policing Pandanaceae occurs. fact4: If this rejoicing happens this cloning indisputability occurs. fact5: If either that denunciation occurs or that unabusedness occurs or both then this taunting wartime does not happens. fact6: If the fact that that unabusedness happens is right then this taunting wartime does not happens. fact7: If this rejoicing does not happens that unabusedness does not happens and this cloning indisputability does not occurs. fact8: That that unabusedness does not happens and this taunting wartime does not happens is caused by that this cloning indisputability happens. fact9: If the nettness occurs that pinging does not occurs. fact10: That bardolatry occurs or the alkylicness occurs or both. fact11: The restraining does not happens if that descriptiveness and/or this hidroticness happens. fact12: That flurrying Argiope happens. fact13: Either that netting Aranea or the embossing wakefulness or both occurs. fact14: That denunciation occurs. fact15: The Hebraicness happens or the Unionness occurs or both. fact16: If the fact that that generic occurs and/or the Hill does not happens does not hold the hobnailing Mertensia does not occurs. fact17: This miniaturization occurs.

fact1: ¬{ID} fact2: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact3: {ER} fact4: {E} -> {D} fact5: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact6: {B} -> ¬{C} fact7: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{D}) fact8: {D} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) fact9: {AJ} -> ¬{IB} fact10: ({DT} v {JI}) fact11: ({GG} v {CS}) -> ¬{BO} fact12: {CM} fact13: ({AI} v {EK}) fact14: {A} fact15: ({DE} v {EN}) fact16: ¬({H} v ¬{I}) -> ¬{G} fact17: {P}

This taunting wartime happens.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The liliaceousness does not occurs. fact2: That the hobnailing Mertensia does not occurs brings about that this rejoicing and this salaat occurs. fact3: This policing Pandanaceae occurs. fact4: If this rejoicing happens this cloning indisputability occurs. fact5: If either that denunciation occurs or that unabusedness occurs or both then this taunting wartime does not happens. fact6: If the fact that that unabusedness happens is right then this taunting wartime does not happens. fact7: If this rejoicing does not happens that unabusedness does not happens and this cloning indisputability does not occurs. fact8: That that unabusedness does not happens and this taunting wartime does not happens is caused by that this cloning indisputability happens. fact9: If the nettness occurs that pinging does not occurs. fact10: That bardolatry occurs or the alkylicness occurs or both. fact11: The restraining does not happens if that descriptiveness and/or this hidroticness happens. fact12: That flurrying Argiope happens. fact13: Either that netting Aranea or the embossing wakefulness or both occurs. fact14: That denunciation occurs. fact15: The Hebraicness happens or the Unionness occurs or both. fact16: If the fact that that generic occurs and/or the Hill does not happens does not hold the hobnailing Mertensia does not occurs. fact17: This miniaturization occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This taunting wartime happens. ; $proof$ =

fact14 -> int1: That denunciation happens and/or that unabusedness occurs.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this agonisticness occurs and that ramp happens is wrong.

¬({B} & {C})

fact1: That radicalizing and the somnambulation happens. fact2: This mitigation triggers that the ECT occurs. fact3: The shelflikeness occurs. fact4: If that netmailing does not happens that this agonisticness occurs and that ramp happens does not hold. fact5: That educating happens and the Balancing Medicago occurs. fact6: That notthat Judaicalness but this mitigation occurs is brought about by that that impairing neurosyphilis does not happens. fact7: That that veering occurs is triggered by that this sparging 11 happens. fact8: That flip occurs. fact9: Both that ramp and this cadetship happens. fact10: That impairing neurosyphilis does not occurs. fact11: That this agonisticness happens is triggered by that netmailing. fact12: This squeeze occurs and that spoiling Chrysophyta happens. fact13: If the fact that that Judaicalness does not happens is correct then this cadetship and that spoiling Chrysophyta occurs. fact14: That the Bolivia does not occurs is prevented by that the chop occurs. fact15: This cadetship occurs. fact16: That outburst occurs. fact17: That leaningness occurs. fact18: The cyprinidness occurs.

fact1: ({II} & {N}) fact2: {G} -> {AU} fact3: {FL} fact4: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact5: ({EH} & {HK}) fact6: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) fact7: {CD} -> {GN} fact8: {IF} fact9: ({C} & {D}) fact10: ¬{H} fact11: {A} -> {B} fact12: ({AD} & {E}) fact13: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact14: {AM} -> {BU} fact15: {D} fact16: {EC} fact17: {CL} fact18: {HS}

The fact that that Hindi occurs is correct.

{DT}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That radicalizing and the somnambulation happens. fact2: This mitigation triggers that the ECT occurs. fact3: The shelflikeness occurs. fact4: If that netmailing does not happens that this agonisticness occurs and that ramp happens does not hold. fact5: That educating happens and the Balancing Medicago occurs. fact6: That notthat Judaicalness but this mitigation occurs is brought about by that that impairing neurosyphilis does not happens. fact7: That that veering occurs is triggered by that this sparging 11 happens. fact8: That flip occurs. fact9: Both that ramp and this cadetship happens. fact10: That impairing neurosyphilis does not occurs. fact11: That this agonisticness happens is triggered by that netmailing. fact12: This squeeze occurs and that spoiling Chrysophyta happens. fact13: If the fact that that Judaicalness does not happens is correct then this cadetship and that spoiling Chrysophyta occurs. fact14: That the Bolivia does not occurs is prevented by that the chop occurs. fact15: This cadetship occurs. fact16: That outburst occurs. fact17: That leaningness occurs. fact18: The cyprinidness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this agonisticness occurs and that ramp happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That both that dirtying Matisse and this alimentativeness happens is incorrect.

¬({C} & {B})

fact1: This annealing schizoid occurs. fact2: The COD occurs. fact3: If that encore does not happens that basic happens and this squishing Ms occurs. fact4: That that rasping does not happens and the algometricalness does not happens prevents that encore. fact5: The camping happens. fact6: If this annealing schizoid does not occurs that that dirtying Matisse and this alimentativeness occurs is wrong. fact7: That this alimentativeness occurs is brought about by that this annealing schizoid happens. fact8: That dirtying Matisse happens. fact9: This annealing schizoid is prevented by that that basic occurs.

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

That both that dirtying Matisse and this alimentativeness happens is incorrect.

¬({C} & {B})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This annealing schizoid occurs. fact2: The COD occurs. fact3: If that encore does not happens that basic happens and this squishing Ms occurs. fact4: That that rasping does not happens and the algometricalness does not happens prevents that encore. fact5: The camping happens. fact6: If this annealing schizoid does not occurs that that dirtying Matisse and this alimentativeness occurs is wrong. fact7: That this alimentativeness occurs is brought about by that this annealing schizoid happens. fact8: That dirtying Matisse happens. fact9: This annealing schizoid is prevented by that that basic occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That both that dirtying Matisse and this alimentativeness happens is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact1 -> int1: This alimentativeness occurs.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists some person such that if the one is not formic and the one is apogametic then the one is not a Asin.

(Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

fact1: If somebody that is not a kind of a Asurbanipal Posts supernaturalism it is not a ruminant. fact2: Something that does not sew rand and is a Antarctica does not encircle. fact3: The fact that that stainless is not a kind of a plangency is not incorrect if it is not wetting and prioritises. fact4: Something is not a Barrie if it is not a Assamese and it is a Oenanthe. fact5: That stainless is non-apogametic if it is not a Ginsberg and is an upsetting. fact6: There exists something such that if that is formic thing that is apogametic then that is not a Asin. fact7: Someone is not a Asin if it is both not non-formic and not non-apogametic. fact8: There exists something such that if it is not formic and it is apogametic then it is a Asin. fact9: There is some person such that if she/he is both not nonarbitrary and a probe she/he is not a kind of a supernatural. fact10: There exists some man such that if it is not amenorrhoeal and it is covalent then it is not oneiric. fact11: If that stainless is both not a Hunan and a Asin then she/he is not a motored. fact12: The fact that there is something such that if that thing does not argufy Plumbaginales and is a Orcinus that thing is not a basinful is correct. fact13: That stainless does not gratify soviet if he/she is both not a Asin and calyptrate. fact14: That stainless is not untranslatable if that stainless is not a kind of a Asin but the thing is isotopic. fact15: If that stainless is not formic but it is apogametic then that stainless is a Asin. fact16: That stainless is not a kind of a Ischigualastia if this thing is not apogametic and is an admonishment. fact17: If that stainless is both not non-formic and apogametic that stainless is not a Asin. fact18: If some man is not formic but it is not non-apogametic it is not a Asin. fact19: If somebody that is not formic is apogametic she/he is a kind of a Asin. fact20: There exists something such that if this is not isotropic and is a Dior then this is not naval. fact21: A non-tonic thing that is a kind of an upsetting is non-entomologic.

fact1: (x): (¬{EJ}x & {AK}x) -> ¬{AR}x fact2: (x): (¬{S}x & {HC}x) -> ¬{FE}x fact3: (¬{R}{aa} & {AL}{aa}) -> ¬{EB}{aa} fact4: (x): (¬{HI}x & {EA}x) -> ¬{IB}x fact5: (¬{ER}{aa} & {IA}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} fact6: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact8: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact9: (Ex): (¬{II}x & {CC}x) -> ¬{DK}x fact10: (Ex): (¬{EO}x & {DQ}x) -> ¬{BI}x fact11: (¬{CA}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{GT}{aa} fact12: (Ex): (¬{F}x & {DG}x) -> ¬{C}x fact13: (¬{B}{aa} & {AC}{aa}) -> ¬{ID}{aa} fact14: (¬{B}{aa} & {JG}{aa}) -> ¬{BK}{aa} fact15: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact16: (¬{AB}{aa} & {HA}{aa}) -> ¬{HR}{aa} fact17: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact18: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact19: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact20: (Ex): (¬{AG}x & {IQ}x) -> ¬{GP}x fact21: (x): (¬{CI}x & {IA}x) -> ¬{CN}x

There is something such that if the thing is not a Asurbanipal and Posts supernaturalism then that the thing is not a ruminant is correct.

(Ex): (¬{EJ}x & {AK}x) -> ¬{AR}x

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody that is not a kind of a Asurbanipal Posts supernaturalism it is not a ruminant. fact2: Something that does not sew rand and is a Antarctica does not encircle. fact3: The fact that that stainless is not a kind of a plangency is not incorrect if it is not wetting and prioritises. fact4: Something is not a Barrie if it is not a Assamese and it is a Oenanthe. fact5: That stainless is non-apogametic if it is not a Ginsberg and is an upsetting. fact6: There exists something such that if that is formic thing that is apogametic then that is not a Asin. fact7: Someone is not a Asin if it is both not non-formic and not non-apogametic. fact8: There exists something such that if it is not formic and it is apogametic then it is a Asin. fact9: There is some person such that if she/he is both not nonarbitrary and a probe she/he is not a kind of a supernatural. fact10: There exists some man such that if it is not amenorrhoeal and it is covalent then it is not oneiric. fact11: If that stainless is both not a Hunan and a Asin then she/he is not a motored. fact12: The fact that there is something such that if that thing does not argufy Plumbaginales and is a Orcinus that thing is not a basinful is correct. fact13: That stainless does not gratify soviet if he/she is both not a Asin and calyptrate. fact14: That stainless is not untranslatable if that stainless is not a kind of a Asin but the thing is isotopic. fact15: If that stainless is not formic but it is apogametic then that stainless is a Asin. fact16: That stainless is not a kind of a Ischigualastia if this thing is not apogametic and is an admonishment. fact17: If that stainless is both not non-formic and apogametic that stainless is not a Asin. fact18: If some man is not formic but it is not non-apogametic it is not a Asin. fact19: If somebody that is not formic is apogametic she/he is a kind of a Asin. fact20: There exists something such that if this is not isotropic and is a Dior then this is not naval. fact21: A non-tonic thing that is a kind of an upsetting is non-entomologic. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists some person such that if the one is not formic and the one is apogametic then the one is not a Asin. ; $proof$ =

fact18 -> int1: That stainless is not a Asin if it is not formic and it is apogametic.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__