Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

This faience is a Tamias.

{F}{d}

fact1: That palpebration is a Western and/or this thing is a seriousness if this spokesperson does not curve thinness. fact2: If that palpebration is a kind of a seriousness then this faience is a kind of a Tamias. fact3: This spokesperson does not curve thinness if that kisser is allochthonous. fact4: If the fact that that kisser is a Western hold then the fact that that palpebration refines Sitsang is right. fact5: That this spokesperson does not curve thinness is not wrong if that kisser refines Sitsang. fact6: If that palpebration refines Sitsang then that kisser is not a kind of a Western. fact7: If that palpebration is a Western this faience is a kind of a Tamias. fact8: Either that kisser is allochthonous or it refines Sitsang or both. fact9: If that kisser is allochthonous this spokesperson does curve thinness.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That palpebration is a Western and/or this thing is a seriousness if this spokesperson does not curve thinness. fact2: If that palpebration is a kind of a seriousness then this faience is a kind of a Tamias. fact3: This spokesperson does not curve thinness if that kisser is allochthonous. fact4: If the fact that that kisser is a Western hold then the fact that that palpebration refines Sitsang is right. fact5: That this spokesperson does not curve thinness is not wrong if that kisser refines Sitsang. fact6: If that palpebration refines Sitsang then that kisser is not a kind of a Western. fact7: If that palpebration is a Western this faience is a kind of a Tamias. fact8: Either that kisser is allochthonous or it refines Sitsang or both. fact9: If that kisser is allochthonous this spokesperson does curve thinness. ; $hypothesis$ = This faience is a Tamias. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact3 & fact5 -> int1: This spokesperson does not curve thinness.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: That palpebration is either a Western or a seriousness or both.; int2 & fact7 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Desyrel is a Ecclesiastes.

{D}{b}

fact1: If this Desyrel is a Ecclesiastes that disenfranchises crudeness that effluence is not hirsute. fact2: This Desyrel is not a Ecclesiastes if that effluence is hirsute thing that disenfranchises crudeness. fact3: That effluence sups egalitarianism and disenfranchises crudeness. fact4: If this takeaway is not a kind of a Moldova and this thing is not greensick then this opsonisation does not strike title. fact5: This enterobacteria does not sing Cebus if the fact that this opsonisation does sing Cebus and is not unsure does not hold. fact6: This Desyrel is not hirsute if that effluence does not disenfranchise crudeness but that thing is hirsute. fact7: If this Desyrel does not build that effluence is a kind of an absorbent that is a Taegu. fact8: Some man that is a buxomness is not a Moldova and not greensick. fact9: If that effluence agitates then it is hirsute. fact10: If something does not sing Cebus then that it does equivocate serenity and/or is not a clobber is wrong. fact11: If the cytol is unipolar then the thing is a symphony. fact12: That effluence does agitate. fact13: That effluence sups egalitarianism. fact14: If that either this enterobacteria equivocates serenity or it is not a clobber or both is false then the fact that this Desyrel does not build is correct. fact15: Some person does not disenfranchise crudeness if that it is not a kind of a Ecclesiastes and/or sups egalitarianism does not hold. fact16: If that effluence does not disenfranchise crudeness then that piccalilli agitates and that person is hirsute. fact17: That something sings Cebus but it is not unsure does not hold if the fact that it does not strike title hold. fact18: That lunchroom disenfranchises crudeness. fact19: The fact that somebody is not a Ecclesiastes and/or it sups egalitarianism does not hold if it is a Taegu.

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

This Desyrel is a Ecclesiastes.

{D}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Desyrel is a Ecclesiastes that disenfranchises crudeness that effluence is not hirsute. fact2: This Desyrel is not a Ecclesiastes if that effluence is hirsute thing that disenfranchises crudeness. fact3: That effluence sups egalitarianism and disenfranchises crudeness. fact4: If this takeaway is not a kind of a Moldova and this thing is not greensick then this opsonisation does not strike title. fact5: This enterobacteria does not sing Cebus if the fact that this opsonisation does sing Cebus and is not unsure does not hold. fact6: This Desyrel is not hirsute if that effluence does not disenfranchise crudeness but that thing is hirsute. fact7: If this Desyrel does not build that effluence is a kind of an absorbent that is a Taegu. fact8: Some man that is a buxomness is not a Moldova and not greensick. fact9: If that effluence agitates then it is hirsute. fact10: If something does not sing Cebus then that it does equivocate serenity and/or is not a clobber is wrong. fact11: If the cytol is unipolar then the thing is a symphony. fact12: That effluence does agitate. fact13: That effluence sups egalitarianism. fact14: If that either this enterobacteria equivocates serenity or it is not a clobber or both is false then the fact that this Desyrel does not build is correct. fact15: Some person does not disenfranchise crudeness if that it is not a kind of a Ecclesiastes and/or sups egalitarianism does not hold. fact16: If that effluence does not disenfranchise crudeness then that piccalilli agitates and that person is hirsute. fact17: That something sings Cebus but it is not unsure does not hold if the fact that it does not strike title hold. fact18: That lunchroom disenfranchises crudeness. fact19: The fact that somebody is not a Ecclesiastes and/or it sups egalitarianism does not hold if it is a Taegu. ; $hypothesis$ = This Desyrel is a Ecclesiastes. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact12 -> int1: That effluence is hirsute.; fact3 -> int2: That effluence disenfranchises crudeness.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That effluence is hirsute and disenfranchises crudeness.; int3 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Faustianness does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: Either that this renting does not occurs or that this stratification happens or both prevents that the passado occurs. fact2: The daciticness occurs. fact3: The fact that the bovine happens hold. fact4: The participation happens. fact5: The repossession happens. fact6: The postexilicness happens. fact7: This squat happens. fact8: The transeuntness occurs. fact9: If that passadoes not happens then both the sententialness and this Faustianness happens.

fact1: (¬{D} v {C}) -> ¬{B} fact2: {BN} fact3: {HA} fact4: {JF} fact5: {T} fact6: {M} fact7: {DB} fact8: {FU} fact9: ¬{B} -> ({Q} & {A})

The sententialness happens.

{Q}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Either that this renting does not occurs or that this stratification happens or both prevents that the passado occurs. fact2: The daciticness occurs. fact3: The fact that the bovine happens hold. fact4: The participation happens. fact5: The repossession happens. fact6: The postexilicness happens. fact7: This squat happens. fact8: The transeuntness occurs. fact9: If that passadoes not happens then both the sententialness and this Faustianness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This Faustianness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That overindulging Gesner does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: This smuggling paleozoology occurs. fact2: The fact that that viewing happens if notthe wallop but this smuggling paleozoology happens hold. fact3: The googly occurs. fact4: If that viewing happens that overindulging Gesner occurs. fact5: If that viewing occurs and that overindulging Gesner does not happens that this disturbing Prokofiev occurs is correct. fact6: That that viewing does not happens and that cropping does not occurs does not hold if that headmastership happens. fact7: Notthe wallop but this smuggling paleozoology happens.

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

This disturbing Prokofiev happens.

{GT}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This smuggling paleozoology occurs. fact2: The fact that that viewing happens if notthe wallop but this smuggling paleozoology happens hold. fact3: The googly occurs. fact4: If that viewing happens that overindulging Gesner occurs. fact5: If that viewing occurs and that overindulging Gesner does not happens that this disturbing Prokofiev occurs is correct. fact6: That that viewing does not happens and that cropping does not occurs does not hold if that headmastership happens. fact7: Notthe wallop but this smuggling paleozoology happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That overindulging Gesner does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact7 -> int1: That viewing happens.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This dimethylglyoxime does not shed Erebus.

¬{D}{a}

fact1: Some person is a kind of a Viverrinae if the person does not stave shemozzle. fact2: That basilica does not alloy Waite if that that confect does not starve corkage and it does not alloy Waite is incorrect. fact3: Something does not aviate and is inhabited if it does not interrupt. fact4: This dimethylglyoxime is a OED but it does not figure Jabalpur. fact5: If this dimethylglyoxime does not aviate and it is inhabited this dimethylglyoxime sheds Erebus. fact6: That that confect does not starve corkage and it does not alloy Waite is incorrect if the fact that that grandmaster is a kind of a Viverrinae hold. fact7: Some man that does not alloy Waite does aviate. fact8: If this dimethylglyoxime is a kind of a OED that does not figure Jabalpur it does not interrupt. fact9: If that basilica aviates then that this dimethylglyoxime does not interrupt but this thing is uninhabited does not hold.

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

This dimethylglyoxime does not shed Erebus.

¬{D}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person is a kind of a Viverrinae if the person does not stave shemozzle. fact2: That basilica does not alloy Waite if that that confect does not starve corkage and it does not alloy Waite is incorrect. fact3: Something does not aviate and is inhabited if it does not interrupt. fact4: This dimethylglyoxime is a OED but it does not figure Jabalpur. fact5: If this dimethylglyoxime does not aviate and it is inhabited this dimethylglyoxime sheds Erebus. fact6: That that confect does not starve corkage and it does not alloy Waite is incorrect if the fact that that grandmaster is a kind of a Viverrinae hold. fact7: Some man that does not alloy Waite does aviate. fact8: If this dimethylglyoxime is a kind of a OED that does not figure Jabalpur it does not interrupt. fact9: If that basilica aviates then that this dimethylglyoxime does not interrupt but this thing is uninhabited does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This dimethylglyoxime does not shed Erebus. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact4 -> int1: The fact that this dimethylglyoxime does not interrupt is right.; fact3 -> int2: This dimethylglyoxime does not aviate and is not uninhabited if this dimethylglyoxime does not interrupt.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This dimethylglyoxime does not aviate and it is not uninhabited.; int3 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this cellulosidness and this ordering happens is wrong.

¬({A} & {B})

fact1: The finalization happens. fact2: Both the professing garbed and that salient occurs. fact3: The corrupting happens and this track occurs. fact4: This alkaloticness happens. fact5: The whiteouting occurs and the aqueousness occurs. fact6: That spideriness happens. fact7: The confiding and this nonmodernness occurs. fact8: This Haling Strix occurs. fact9: That polish happens. fact10: This difference happens. fact11: The radio occurs. fact12: This anticlockwiseness happens. fact13: This witchinging shamefacedness occurs. fact14: The fact that this cellulosidness happens hold. fact15: This ordering does not occurs if that statuariness does not happens and that autosexing does not happens. fact16: The Continent happens. fact17: The planographicness happens. fact18: This ordering occurs. fact19: Both this conductivity and this collegiateness happens. fact20: That phonologicalness happens. fact21: This plonk occurs.

fact1: {CU} fact2: ({GU} & {GT}) fact3: ({EE} & {FO}) fact4: {EO} fact5: ({CL} & {IM}) fact6: {BO} fact7: ({HN} & {IK}) fact8: {I} fact9: {AS} fact10: {GK} fact11: {GN} fact12: {JD} fact13: {IS} fact14: {A} fact15: (¬{C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact16: {JK} fact17: {CR} fact18: {B} fact19: ({EA} & {CF}) fact20: {FQ} fact21: {JE}

This alkaloticness occurs and this requisitioning happens.

({EO} & {DG})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The finalization happens. fact2: Both the professing garbed and that salient occurs. fact3: The corrupting happens and this track occurs. fact4: This alkaloticness happens. fact5: The whiteouting occurs and the aqueousness occurs. fact6: That spideriness happens. fact7: The confiding and this nonmodernness occurs. fact8: This Haling Strix occurs. fact9: That polish happens. fact10: This difference happens. fact11: The radio occurs. fact12: This anticlockwiseness happens. fact13: This witchinging shamefacedness occurs. fact14: The fact that this cellulosidness happens hold. fact15: This ordering does not occurs if that statuariness does not happens and that autosexing does not happens. fact16: The Continent happens. fact17: The planographicness happens. fact18: This ordering occurs. fact19: Both this conductivity and this collegiateness happens. fact20: That phonologicalness happens. fact21: This plonk occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That this cellulosidness and this ordering happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact18 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This perithelium is a Amaterasu.

{C}{a}

fact1: If something does rabbet acres then it is not a scorching. fact2: Some person is not a Micheas and is a Amaterasu if that the one is not a kind of a founding is true. fact3: This perithelium is a Micheas.

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

This perithelium is a Amaterasu.

{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something does rabbet acres then it is not a scorching. fact2: Some person is not a Micheas and is a Amaterasu if that the one is not a kind of a founding is true. fact3: This perithelium is a Micheas. ; $hypothesis$ = This perithelium is a Amaterasu. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that that this chin is subartesian but that does not actuate xerostomia is incorrect.

¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That megasporophyll does not company Congregationalism if that the person is deistic and is not a particularity is false. fact2: This chin is not non-intralobular. fact3: That that venthole is a Danton and is aerophilic hold. fact4: Something that is a Vanern is not monovalent. fact5: Some man is not lathery if it is a Danton that is a kind of a Vanern. fact6: Something is a Danton and/or that thing is lathery if that thing is non-monovalent. fact7: If the fact that this chin is not subartesian hold this chin is not monovalent. fact8: If the fact that that megasporophyll does actuate xerostomia but this is not lathery is wrong then this is not subartesian. fact9: That megasporophyll is lathery. fact10: This chin is monovalent if that that megasporophyll is lathery is correct. fact11: This chin is subartesian. fact12: Some man that is not lathery is non-monovalent.

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

Let's assume that that this chin is subartesian but that does not actuate xerostomia is incorrect.

¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That megasporophyll does not company Congregationalism if that the person is deistic and is not a particularity is false. fact2: This chin is not non-intralobular. fact3: That that venthole is a Danton and is aerophilic hold. fact4: Something that is a Vanern is not monovalent. fact5: Some man is not lathery if it is a Danton that is a kind of a Vanern. fact6: Something is a Danton and/or that thing is lathery if that thing is non-monovalent. fact7: If the fact that this chin is not subartesian hold this chin is not monovalent. fact8: If the fact that that megasporophyll does actuate xerostomia but this is not lathery is wrong then this is not subartesian. fact9: That megasporophyll is lathery. fact10: This chin is monovalent if that that megasporophyll is lathery is correct. fact11: This chin is subartesian. fact12: Some man that is not lathery is non-monovalent. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that this chin is subartesian but that does not actuate xerostomia is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That if this unperceptiveness does not occurs the fact that that this skunk occurs and/or this decalcomania happens is false is correct is incorrect.

¬(¬{A} -> ¬({C} v {D}))

fact1: If this unperceptiveness does not occurs then this Djiboutian does not happens.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this unperceptiveness does not occurs then this Djiboutian does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That if this unperceptiveness does not occurs the fact that that this skunk occurs and/or this decalcomania happens is false is correct is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Braulio compels Petronius and that thing is unconquerable.

({D}{c} & {C}{c})

fact1: If this amphitheatre is conquerable then the fact that Braulio compels Petronius and is conquerable is wrong. fact2: This amphitheatre is not unconquerable if Amado is a sinuousness. fact3: This amphitheatre is not unconquerable if Amado is a sinuousness and/or is a kind of a Ketubim.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this amphitheatre is conquerable then the fact that Braulio compels Petronius and is conquerable is wrong. fact2: This amphitheatre is not unconquerable if Amado is a sinuousness. fact3: This amphitheatre is not unconquerable if Amado is a sinuousness and/or is a kind of a Ketubim. ; $hypothesis$ = Braulio compels Petronius and that thing is unconquerable. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That circumscription happens.

{C}

fact1: That that shuddering Saipan happens and that circumscription occurs is triggered by that that Algerianness does not occurs. fact2: That circumscription does not happens if that shuddering Saipan and that Algerianness happens. fact3: That Algerianness does not occurs if that either that referencing lightlessness does not happens or this umpiring Bonaire does not happens or both does not hold. fact4: This inside does not occurs. fact5: That shuddering Saipan occurs. fact6: That Algerianness occurs.

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

That circumscription happens.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that shuddering Saipan happens and that circumscription occurs is triggered by that that Algerianness does not occurs. fact2: That circumscription does not happens if that shuddering Saipan and that Algerianness happens. fact3: That Algerianness does not occurs if that either that referencing lightlessness does not happens or this umpiring Bonaire does not happens or both does not hold. fact4: This inside does not occurs. fact5: That shuddering Saipan occurs. fact6: That Algerianness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That circumscription happens. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact6 -> int1: Both that shuddering Saipan and that Algerianness occurs.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This vesicularness occurs.

{C}

fact1: The fact that that disingenuousness occurs is right. fact2: This entailing does not happens if this drizzling electrosleep does not happens and this vesicularness does not occurs. fact3: That this vesicularness does not happens is prevented by that this entailing occurs. fact4: This futuristness does not happens if this piling valiance happens. fact5: That this crossbreeding does not happens and this coggling lm does not happens is not true. fact6: This drizzling electrosleep happens. fact7: That the fact that that libration does not occurs and that periodonticness does not occurs does not hold is right if this entailing does not happens. fact8: That the chore occurs is correct. fact9: This vesicularness does not occurs if the fact that that the fact that this entailing does not happens and this drizzling electrosleep does not happens hold is incorrect hold. fact10: That this bromicness does not happens if the Leibnizianness happens hold.

fact1: {CL} fact2: (¬{B} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{A} fact3: {A} -> {C} fact4: {F} -> ¬{FI} fact5: ¬(¬{CD} & ¬{DI}) fact6: {B} fact7: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{K} & ¬{GI}) fact8: {EN} fact9: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{C} fact10: {GP} -> ¬{FU}

This vesicularness occurs.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that disingenuousness occurs is right. fact2: This entailing does not happens if this drizzling electrosleep does not happens and this vesicularness does not occurs. fact3: That this vesicularness does not happens is prevented by that this entailing occurs. fact4: This futuristness does not happens if this piling valiance happens. fact5: That this crossbreeding does not happens and this coggling lm does not happens is not true. fact6: This drizzling electrosleep happens. fact7: That the fact that that libration does not occurs and that periodonticness does not occurs does not hold is right if this entailing does not happens. fact8: That the chore occurs is correct. fact9: This vesicularness does not occurs if the fact that that the fact that this entailing does not happens and this drizzling electrosleep does not happens hold is incorrect hold. fact10: That this bromicness does not happens if the Leibnizianness happens hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This vesicularness occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this entailing does not happens and this drizzling electrosleep does not occurs.; assump1 -> int1: This drizzling electrosleep does not happens.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: That the fact that this entailing does not occurs and this drizzling electrosleep does not happens does not hold is correct.; int3 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this titty does kindle and is reparable is incorrect.

¬({C}{b} & {D}{b})

fact1: This titty is not a kind of a heedlessness if that this lambda is either a spiritism or a Pelecaniformes or both is false. fact2: This vintager does democratize triumvirate and/or this ransacks. fact3: This lambda is not a kind of a heedlessness if this freedman is not a heedlessness and it does not bestow. fact4: This vintager is shoreward. fact5: The fact that this stable is not reparable is not false if this lambda is both not a meagerness and not a heedlessness. fact6: The fact that this lambda either is a spiritism or does not kindle or both does not hold if this lambda is not reparable. fact7: That this lambda is not a sadhe and this does not bestow is incorrect if this titty is not shoreward. fact8: This lambda is not a kind of a meagerness. fact9: If this lambda is not a heedlessness the fact that she/he is not reparable and/or is a sadhe does not hold. fact10: If the fact that this lambda is a spiritism or it is not a Pelecaniformes or both does not hold this titty is not a heedlessness. fact11: If something is a kind of a cursed the thing does idealise Acanthopterygii and is not noncombustible. fact12: If this lambda is not a meagerness then the fact that this lambda is a kind of a spiritism and/or she is not a kind of a Pelecaniformes is incorrect. fact13: If something is not a heedlessness that this thing kindles and is reparable is wrong. fact14: If the fact that something is not a kind of a sadhe and it does not bestow is not right then it does not kindle. fact15: Somebody that idealises Acanthopterygii and is not noncombustible is not shoreward. fact16: If this vintager is shoreward this freedman is not a heedlessness and does not bestow. fact17: If this freedman is successful then this titty is a cursed.

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

This stable is not reparable.

¬{D}{dr}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This titty is not a kind of a heedlessness if that this lambda is either a spiritism or a Pelecaniformes or both is false. fact2: This vintager does democratize triumvirate and/or this ransacks. fact3: This lambda is not a kind of a heedlessness if this freedman is not a heedlessness and it does not bestow. fact4: This vintager is shoreward. fact5: The fact that this stable is not reparable is not false if this lambda is both not a meagerness and not a heedlessness. fact6: The fact that this lambda either is a spiritism or does not kindle or both does not hold if this lambda is not reparable. fact7: That this lambda is not a sadhe and this does not bestow is incorrect if this titty is not shoreward. fact8: This lambda is not a kind of a meagerness. fact9: If this lambda is not a heedlessness the fact that she/he is not reparable and/or is a sadhe does not hold. fact10: If the fact that this lambda is a spiritism or it is not a Pelecaniformes or both does not hold this titty is not a heedlessness. fact11: If something is a kind of a cursed the thing does idealise Acanthopterygii and is not noncombustible. fact12: If this lambda is not a meagerness then the fact that this lambda is a kind of a spiritism and/or she is not a kind of a Pelecaniformes is incorrect. fact13: If something is not a heedlessness that this thing kindles and is reparable is wrong. fact14: If the fact that something is not a kind of a sadhe and it does not bestow is not right then it does not kindle. fact15: Somebody that idealises Acanthopterygii and is not noncombustible is not shoreward. fact16: If this vintager is shoreward this freedman is not a heedlessness and does not bestow. fact17: If this freedman is successful then this titty is a cursed. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this titty does kindle and is reparable is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact8 -> int1: That this lambda is a kind of a spiritism or it is not a Pelecaniformes or both is not true.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: This titty is not a kind of a heedlessness.; fact13 -> int3: That this titty kindles and it is reparable is wrong if this titty is not a heedlessness.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That cybercafe does not blue Meropidae and is olfactive.

(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

fact1: That somebody does not mask but it is a kind of a trauma is wrong if it is not a kind of a Solenichthyes. fact2: Some person does not blue Meropidae but he/she is a trauma if he/she masks. fact3: Something does not mask if that it mask and does sulfuretted is incorrect. fact4: If that that bollocks is not a kind of a Solenichthyes and is non-diffusing does not hold then that cybercafe is not a Solenichthyes. fact5: This stopwatch is a trauma. fact6: That doob is both not a eV and diffusing if the fact that that doob is olfactive is right. fact7: If that that kaoline finishes epiplexis is true it is not a Italic. fact8: Some man does not blue Meropidae and is olfactive if it is a trauma. fact9: That cybercafe does not blue Meropidae. fact10: Something does not blue Meropidae but this thing is a kind of a Manduca if this thing is a trauma. fact11: That cybercafe does not blue Meropidae and is a Castro if it is a tactics. fact12: If somebody blues Meropidae he does not mask and is a trauma. fact13: That plain is olfactive. fact14: Something that blues Meropidae is non-olfactive thing that masks. fact15: That cybercafe is a inaptitude and sulfuretteds. fact16: The fact that something does not blue Meropidae and is olfactive is wrong if it is not a trauma.

fact1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) fact2: (x): {B}x -> (¬{AA}x & {A}x) fact3: (x): ¬({B}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{aa} fact5: {A}{fj} fact6: {AB}{au} -> (¬{EL}{au} & {E}{au}) fact7: {JA}{eu} -> ¬{AF}{eu} fact8: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact9: ¬{AA}{aa} fact10: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {CF}x) fact11: {JB}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {DF}{aa}) fact12: (x): {AA}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) fact13: {AB}{cq} fact14: (x): {AA}x -> (¬{AB}x & {B}x) fact15: ({GG}{aa} & {D}{aa}) fact16: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

This mestiza does not blue Meropidae but it is a Manduca.

(¬{AA}{dq} & {CF}{dq})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That somebody does not mask but it is a kind of a trauma is wrong if it is not a kind of a Solenichthyes. fact2: Some person does not blue Meropidae but he/she is a trauma if he/she masks. fact3: Something does not mask if that it mask and does sulfuretted is incorrect. fact4: If that that bollocks is not a kind of a Solenichthyes and is non-diffusing does not hold then that cybercafe is not a Solenichthyes. fact5: This stopwatch is a trauma. fact6: That doob is both not a eV and diffusing if the fact that that doob is olfactive is right. fact7: If that that kaoline finishes epiplexis is true it is not a Italic. fact8: Some man does not blue Meropidae and is olfactive if it is a trauma. fact9: That cybercafe does not blue Meropidae. fact10: Something does not blue Meropidae but this thing is a kind of a Manduca if this thing is a trauma. fact11: That cybercafe does not blue Meropidae and is a Castro if it is a tactics. fact12: If somebody blues Meropidae he does not mask and is a trauma. fact13: That plain is olfactive. fact14: Something that blues Meropidae is non-olfactive thing that masks. fact15: That cybercafe is a inaptitude and sulfuretteds. fact16: The fact that something does not blue Meropidae and is olfactive is wrong if it is not a trauma. ; $hypothesis$ = That cybercafe does not blue Meropidae and is olfactive. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That disguise telecasts agnosia.

{B}{b}

fact1: Either something telecasts agnosia or it does suggest or both if it does not assure. fact2: If this milord is a analgesia then the fact that it is not a kind of a catachresis and is nidicolous is incorrect. fact3: Iliana does not telecast agnosia. fact4: That disguise does not telecast agnosia if this milord suggests. fact5: If that disguise suggests then this milord does not telecast agnosia. fact6: This fencesitter telecasts agnosia. fact7: This milord suggests. fact8: If that something is not a catachresis but it is nidicolous is incorrect then the fact that it does not assure is right.

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

That disguise telecasts agnosia.

{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Either something telecasts agnosia or it does suggest or both if it does not assure. fact2: If this milord is a analgesia then the fact that it is not a kind of a catachresis and is nidicolous is incorrect. fact3: Iliana does not telecast agnosia. fact4: That disguise does not telecast agnosia if this milord suggests. fact5: If that disguise suggests then this milord does not telecast agnosia. fact6: This fencesitter telecasts agnosia. fact7: This milord suggests. fact8: If that something is not a catachresis but it is nidicolous is incorrect then the fact that it does not assure is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That disguise telecasts agnosia. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This goring Vespertilio occurs.

{C}

fact1: This epilation occurs. fact2: Either this goring Vespertilio does not happens or this burglarizing Apium occurs or both if this epilation does not occurs. fact3: That this burglarizing Apium occurs results in this goring Vespertilio. fact4: This goring Vespertilio does not occurs if the fact that both this goring Vespertilio and this epilation occurs does not hold. fact5: The egression occurs. fact6: This epilation occurs and this burglarizing Apium happens. fact7: This masculineness occurs. fact8: That this succinicness occurs and this masculineness happens prevents the pricking aphorism. fact9: The escape happens if this unfastening numbering happens. fact10: That that miscarriage but notthis snipping happens is wrong if the pricking aphorism does not occurs. fact11: If the fact that that miscarriage but notthis snipping occurs is incorrect then that miscarriage does not happens. fact12: That that that miscarriage does not happens brings about that notthis actinomorphousness but this ancestralness occurs is correct. fact13: The fact that the transforming Acoraceae occurs is true. fact14: That tramming Testudinata occurs. fact15: This burglarizing Apium does not happens and this actinomorphousness does not occurs if this ancestralness does not happens. fact16: This aggravating happens. fact17: The lunging Mutawa'een occurs. fact18: The fact that this goring Vespertilio happens and this epilation occurs is false if this burglarizing Apium does not occurs. fact19: If this actinomorphousness does not occurs this epilation does not occurs. fact20: The premenstrualness happens.

fact1: {A} fact2: ¬{A} -> (¬{C} v {B}) fact3: {B} -> {C} fact4: ¬({C} & {A}) -> ¬{C} fact5: {FN} fact6: ({A} & {B}) fact7: {J} fact8: ({I} & {J}) -> ¬{G} fact9: {CU} -> {JC} fact10: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & ¬{H}) fact11: ¬({F} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} fact12: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact13: {HC} fact14: {FR} fact15: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{D}) fact16: {IK} fact17: {AM} fact18: ¬{B} -> ¬({C} & {A}) fact19: ¬{D} -> ¬{A} fact20: {CP}

This goring Vespertilio does not occurs.

¬{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This epilation occurs. fact2: Either this goring Vespertilio does not happens or this burglarizing Apium occurs or both if this epilation does not occurs. fact3: That this burglarizing Apium occurs results in this goring Vespertilio. fact4: This goring Vespertilio does not occurs if the fact that both this goring Vespertilio and this epilation occurs does not hold. fact5: The egression occurs. fact6: This epilation occurs and this burglarizing Apium happens. fact7: This masculineness occurs. fact8: That this succinicness occurs and this masculineness happens prevents the pricking aphorism. fact9: The escape happens if this unfastening numbering happens. fact10: That that miscarriage but notthis snipping happens is wrong if the pricking aphorism does not occurs. fact11: If the fact that that miscarriage but notthis snipping occurs is incorrect then that miscarriage does not happens. fact12: That that that miscarriage does not happens brings about that notthis actinomorphousness but this ancestralness occurs is correct. fact13: The fact that the transforming Acoraceae occurs is true. fact14: That tramming Testudinata occurs. fact15: This burglarizing Apium does not happens and this actinomorphousness does not occurs if this ancestralness does not happens. fact16: This aggravating happens. fact17: The lunging Mutawa'een occurs. fact18: The fact that this goring Vespertilio happens and this epilation occurs is false if this burglarizing Apium does not occurs. fact19: If this actinomorphousness does not occurs this epilation does not occurs. fact20: The premenstrualness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This goring Vespertilio occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: This burglarizing Apium occurs.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This harbourage is a kind of a slimness.

{C}{a}

fact1: If this Tetrazzini clamors then this Tetrazzini is syncretical but it is not a invaluableness. fact2: That inion clamors and the one is syncretical if that inion is not an ascendancy. fact3: If this harbourage is both Adonic and shrinkable then the fact that this harbourage is not a invaluableness is not false. fact4: That hilus is not a cold. fact5: This Tetrazzini does clamor and is an r. fact6: If this urbanisation is not a sunburn and is not a kind of an ascendancy that inion is not an ascendancy. fact7: The fact that this harbourage is not a kind of a cold is right if this harbourage is a Sarawakian and indemnifies. fact8: If that inion is syncretical and activates then that Plimsoll is not a invaluableness. fact9: Something is a cold and braces Sinhala if it is not a invaluableness. fact10: Somebody is not a slimness if it is a cold and is a invaluableness. fact11: If this stonechat is not corporate that odonate does not dehisce and does not brace Sinhala. fact12: This harbourage is a invaluableness. fact13: If that odonate activates that inion activates. fact14: This urbanisation is not a sunburn and it is not an ascendancy. fact15: If something does not brace Sinhala then it activates and it is an r. fact16: This harbourage is a Sarawakian. fact17: This harbourage is a kind of a slimness that is a cold if the fact that that Plimsoll is not a kind of a invaluableness is correct. fact18: Something is a kind of a slimness if it activates.

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

This Tetrazzini braces Sinhala and is a kind of a slimness.

({I}{as} & {C}{as})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Tetrazzini clamors then this Tetrazzini is syncretical but it is not a invaluableness. fact2: That inion clamors and the one is syncretical if that inion is not an ascendancy. fact3: If this harbourage is both Adonic and shrinkable then the fact that this harbourage is not a invaluableness is not false. fact4: That hilus is not a cold. fact5: This Tetrazzini does clamor and is an r. fact6: If this urbanisation is not a sunburn and is not a kind of an ascendancy that inion is not an ascendancy. fact7: The fact that this harbourage is not a kind of a cold is right if this harbourage is a Sarawakian and indemnifies. fact8: If that inion is syncretical and activates then that Plimsoll is not a invaluableness. fact9: Something is a cold and braces Sinhala if it is not a invaluableness. fact10: Somebody is not a slimness if it is a cold and is a invaluableness. fact11: If this stonechat is not corporate that odonate does not dehisce and does not brace Sinhala. fact12: This harbourage is a invaluableness. fact13: If that odonate activates that inion activates. fact14: This urbanisation is not a sunburn and it is not an ascendancy. fact15: If something does not brace Sinhala then it activates and it is an r. fact16: This harbourage is a Sarawakian. fact17: This harbourage is a kind of a slimness that is a cold if the fact that that Plimsoll is not a kind of a invaluableness is correct. fact18: Something is a kind of a slimness if it activates. ; $hypothesis$ = This harbourage is a kind of a slimness. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This arbitralness happens if that engorging lempira happens.

{A} -> {B}

fact1: That impoliticness is triggered by that engorging lempira. fact2: This unmownness occurs. fact3: That if this interstateness happens then this embrace occurs but the disapproval does not happens is correct. fact4: If that snooker but notthe Chinaman occurs that fosterage occurs. fact5: If the eluding stash happens then this overrun and the non-apposableness occurs. fact6: If that fartlek occurs both the perirhinalness and the non-beneficiaryness occurs. fact7: That that blocked and the non-presbyopicness happens brings about that synestheticness. fact8: That impoliticness happens. fact9: That impoliticness but notthe disjointing happens if that engorging lempira happens. fact10: That focalization happens. fact11: The hanging happens if that palatalizeding NEC occurs. fact12: That prokaryoticness happens. fact13: The exhausting razmataz happens. fact14: The allelicness but notthe napping Monodon happens. fact15: The inefficientness happens. fact16: If the retort occurs then the fact that that committing Archilochus happens is right. fact17: This arbitralness is caused by that that impoliticness but notthe disjointing happens. fact18: This uninflectedness occurs but the leaving hawkishness does not occurs.

fact1: {A} -> {AA} fact2: {EB} fact3: {CN} -> ({DS} & ¬{GM}) fact4: ({FR} & ¬{GS}) -> {FT} fact5: {BD} -> ({BO} & ¬{GK}) fact6: {CL} -> ({GC} & ¬{M}) fact7: ({AF} & ¬{R}) -> {HE} fact8: {AA} fact9: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact10: {GQ} fact11: {DA} -> {CO} fact12: {CR} fact13: {CE} fact14: ({HL} & ¬{BJ}) fact15: {DH} fact16: {ER} -> {EG} fact17: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact18: ({FU} & ¬{CJ})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That impoliticness is triggered by that engorging lempira. fact2: This unmownness occurs. fact3: That if this interstateness happens then this embrace occurs but the disapproval does not happens is correct. fact4: If that snooker but notthe Chinaman occurs that fosterage occurs. fact5: If the eluding stash happens then this overrun and the non-apposableness occurs. fact6: If that fartlek occurs both the perirhinalness and the non-beneficiaryness occurs. fact7: That that blocked and the non-presbyopicness happens brings about that synestheticness. fact8: That impoliticness happens. fact9: That impoliticness but notthe disjointing happens if that engorging lempira happens. fact10: That focalization happens. fact11: The hanging happens if that palatalizeding NEC occurs. fact12: That prokaryoticness happens. fact13: The exhausting razmataz happens. fact14: The allelicness but notthe napping Monodon happens. fact15: The inefficientness happens. fact16: If the retort occurs then the fact that that committing Archilochus happens is right. fact17: This arbitralness is caused by that that impoliticness but notthe disjointing happens. fact18: This uninflectedness occurs but the leaving hawkishness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This arbitralness happens if that engorging lempira happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that engorging lempira happens.; fact9 & assump1 -> int1: That impoliticness but notthe disjointing occurs.; int1 & fact17 -> int2: This arbitralness occurs.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This spadefoot is non-doubled.

¬{A}{c}

fact1: If the fact that this pinstripe is both a Malosma and not a S/N hold this departer is barytic. fact2: This pinstripe is heterotrophic. fact3: That this pinstripe is a Malosma is right if this spadefoot is a S/N that is not doubled. fact4: This pinstripe is doubled if that this departer is a Malosma that is not barytic hold. fact5: This pinstripe is a Malosma and not a S/N. fact6: If this spadefoot is a kind of doubled thing that is not a Malosma this pinstripe is a S/N. fact7: The fact that this spadefoot is doubled is true if this departer is barytic. fact8: This pinstripe is not a S/N. fact9: This spadefoot is barytic if this departer is doubled. fact10: This departer is barytic if this pinstripe is a kind of a Malosma and is a S/N. fact11: The inductance is a S/N but it is non-antiseptic. fact12: This spadefoot is barytic. fact13: Lu is a Malosma.

fact1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact2: {FH}{a} fact3: ({AB}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> {AA}{a} fact4: ({AA}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {A}{a} fact5: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact6: ({A}{c} & ¬{AA}{c}) -> {AB}{a} fact7: {B}{b} -> {A}{c} fact8: ¬{AB}{a} fact9: {A}{b} -> {B}{c} fact10: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact11: ({AB}{ib} & ¬{FC}{ib}) fact12: {B}{c} fact13: {AA}{dg}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this pinstripe is both a Malosma and not a S/N hold this departer is barytic. fact2: This pinstripe is heterotrophic. fact3: That this pinstripe is a Malosma is right if this spadefoot is a S/N that is not doubled. fact4: This pinstripe is doubled if that this departer is a Malosma that is not barytic hold. fact5: This pinstripe is a Malosma and not a S/N. fact6: If this spadefoot is a kind of doubled thing that is not a Malosma this pinstripe is a S/N. fact7: The fact that this spadefoot is doubled is true if this departer is barytic. fact8: This pinstripe is not a S/N. fact9: This spadefoot is barytic if this departer is doubled. fact10: This departer is barytic if this pinstripe is a kind of a Malosma and is a S/N. fact11: The inductance is a S/N but it is non-antiseptic. fact12: This spadefoot is barytic. fact13: Lu is a Malosma. ; $hypothesis$ = This spadefoot is non-doubled. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact5 -> int1: This departer is barytic.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Everything hymns sensitiveness.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Everything is a Leonidas. fact2: Everything is a kind of a forthcomingness. fact3: If the fact that some man is not a Brittanic but it is a kind of a anabiosis is not correct then it is a Brittanic. fact4: Everything hymns sensitiveness. fact5: If that some person hymns sensitiveness and is not unperceiving does not hold then the fact that it is not unperceiving is false. fact6: Everything maculates Indianapolis. fact7: Some person that is a Leonidas is a Maracaibo and is not a kind of a motto. fact8: Everybody is a kind of a intactness. fact9: The fact that some man hymns sensitiveness and is not unperceiving does not hold if the person is not a anabiosis.

fact1: (x): {E}x fact2: (x): {BF}x fact3: (x): ¬(¬{CK}x & {B}x) -> {CK}x fact4: (x): {A}x fact5: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{EM}x) -> {EM}x fact6: (x): {EE}x fact7: (x): {E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{D}x) fact8: (x): {AC}x fact9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{EM}x)

Everybody is unperceiving.

(x): {EM}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is a Leonidas. fact2: Everything is a kind of a forthcomingness. fact3: If the fact that some man is not a Brittanic but it is a kind of a anabiosis is not correct then it is a Brittanic. fact4: Everything hymns sensitiveness. fact5: If that some person hymns sensitiveness and is not unperceiving does not hold then the fact that it is not unperceiving is false. fact6: Everything maculates Indianapolis. fact7: Some person that is a Leonidas is a Maracaibo and is not a kind of a motto. fact8: Everybody is a kind of a intactness. fact9: The fact that some man hymns sensitiveness and is not unperceiving does not hold if the person is not a anabiosis. ; $hypothesis$ = Everything hymns sensitiveness. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That heliotherapy happens or that conservancy does not happens or both.

({AA} v ¬{AB})

fact1: This superannuating phantasma occurs and/or the animalisation does not happens. fact2: That that polarography does not happens causes that this superannuating phantasma and/or that informedness occurs. fact3: This retinal occurs or the rubbering vigilance does not happens or both. fact4: That this conditioning sou does not happens results in that that ambrosianness happens and/or this balefire does not happens. fact5: Either the congenerousness occurs or this showing Panthera does not happens or both. fact6: That heliotherapy happens or that conservancy does not happens or both. fact7: The fact that that heliotherapy occurs and/or that conservancy does not occurs does not hold if that polarography does not occurs. fact8: This conditioning sou does not happens if that conjuring Pomatomus does not occurs and that palpatoriness does not happens. fact9: Either the pathologicness or that non-bentoniticness or both happens. fact10: If that this juice does not happens is right that conjuring Pomatomus does not occurs and that palpatoriness does not happens. fact11: This unattributableness triggers that this anginalness does not happens and this juice does not occurs. fact12: That heliotherapy occurs and/or that conservancy happens. fact13: If that both this balefire and that polarography happens is false that polarography does not happens. fact14: The fact that this balefire happens and that polarography happens is false if that ambrosianness does not occurs.

fact1: ({IP} v ¬{EK}) fact2: ¬{A} -> ({IP} v ¬{DD}) fact3: ({FU} v ¬{DB}) fact4: ¬{D} -> ({C} v ¬{B}) fact5: ({AL} v ¬{GC}) fact6: ({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact7: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact8: (¬{F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} fact9: ({K} v ¬{DN}) fact10: ¬{G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{E}) fact11: {I} -> (¬{H} & ¬{G}) fact12: ({AA} v {AB}) fact13: ¬({B} & {A}) -> ¬{A} fact14: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & {A})

That that heliotherapy happens or that conservancy does not happens or both does not hold.

¬({AA} v ¬{AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This superannuating phantasma occurs and/or the animalisation does not happens. fact2: That that polarography does not happens causes that this superannuating phantasma and/or that informedness occurs. fact3: This retinal occurs or the rubbering vigilance does not happens or both. fact4: That this conditioning sou does not happens results in that that ambrosianness happens and/or this balefire does not happens. fact5: Either the congenerousness occurs or this showing Panthera does not happens or both. fact6: That heliotherapy happens or that conservancy does not happens or both. fact7: The fact that that heliotherapy occurs and/or that conservancy does not occurs does not hold if that polarography does not occurs. fact8: This conditioning sou does not happens if that conjuring Pomatomus does not occurs and that palpatoriness does not happens. fact9: Either the pathologicness or that non-bentoniticness or both happens. fact10: If that this juice does not happens is right that conjuring Pomatomus does not occurs and that palpatoriness does not happens. fact11: This unattributableness triggers that this anginalness does not happens and this juice does not occurs. fact12: That heliotherapy occurs and/or that conservancy happens. fact13: If that both this balefire and that polarography happens is false that polarography does not happens. fact14: The fact that this balefire happens and that polarography happens is false if that ambrosianness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That heliotherapy happens or that conservancy does not happens or both. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That salientian is a anastrophe.

{B}{aa}

fact1: If that washhouse does not scale Gargantua but this person is a kind of a Coccidia then this theorizer scale Gargantua. fact2: This theorizer is a Boehme if this theorizer is a anastrophe. fact3: Something is a anastrophe if the fact that that thing is not sarcolemmal and does not twinkle chariness is incorrect. fact4: If some man is unimpressionable and is a kind of a tearfulness she is not architectural. fact5: That salientian is a Boehme. fact6: This theorizer is a painfulness if this theorizer scales Gargantua. fact7: If a Shintoistic thing is a kind of a Boehme then it is not a anastrophe. fact8: That salientian is Shintoistic. fact9: If somebody cybernates prevue then that it is not sarcolemmal and it does not twinkle chariness does not hold. fact10: If this theorizer is a painfulness then this theorizer cybernates prevue.

fact1: (¬{H}{a} & {J}{a}) -> {H}{ft} fact2: {B}{ft} -> {AB}{ft} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) -> {B}x fact4: (x): ({BM}x & {GR}x) -> ¬{DO}x fact5: {AB}{aa} fact6: {H}{ft} -> {G}{ft} fact7: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact8: {AA}{aa} fact9: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) fact10: {G}{ft} -> {E}{ft}

This theorizer is a Boehme and the thing is a forester.

({AB}{ft} & {EN}{ft})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that washhouse does not scale Gargantua but this person is a kind of a Coccidia then this theorizer scale Gargantua. fact2: This theorizer is a Boehme if this theorizer is a anastrophe. fact3: Something is a anastrophe if the fact that that thing is not sarcolemmal and does not twinkle chariness is incorrect. fact4: If some man is unimpressionable and is a kind of a tearfulness she is not architectural. fact5: That salientian is a Boehme. fact6: This theorizer is a painfulness if this theorizer scales Gargantua. fact7: If a Shintoistic thing is a kind of a Boehme then it is not a anastrophe. fact8: That salientian is Shintoistic. fact9: If somebody cybernates prevue then that it is not sarcolemmal and it does not twinkle chariness does not hold. fact10: If this theorizer is a painfulness then this theorizer cybernates prevue. ; $hypothesis$ = That salientian is a anastrophe. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: If that salientian is not non-Shintoistic but a Boehme then that salientian is not a anastrophe.; fact8 & fact5 -> int2: That salientian is Shintoistic thing that is a kind of a Boehme.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that rounders occurs.

{A}

fact1: That both the diamagnetism and that millennialness happens does not hold if that attesting argot does not happens. fact2: That rounders happens and that WYSIWYGness happens if that tattling does not occurs. fact3: The extrication happens. fact4: That WYSIWYGness leads to that the pelting Kansu does not happens and this acatalecticness occurs. fact5: The fact that that both this non-biflagellateness and this conferring Theraphosidae occurs is false is correct if the frolicking occurs. fact6: If this albuminousness happens then that combining Fremont does not happens. fact7: That that stalk and this preconditioning Lipotyphla happens is wrong if that rates happens. fact8: If that rounders happens the fact that notthe pelting Kansu but this acatalecticness happens is false. fact9: The fact that the Sameness and this planning semitransparency happens is false if the parochialness occurs. fact10: That this fibbing does not happens hold. fact11: The Markovianness happens. fact12: This appeal occurs. fact13: This acatalecticness happens. fact14: If that the diamagnetism happens and that millennialness occurs does not hold that tattling does not occurs. fact15: This non-acatalecticness is prevented by that that WYSIWYGness occurs. fact16: If this foundering happens then the fact that this shoulder and the opener occurs does not hold. fact17: That WYSIWYGness occurs.

fact1: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & {D}) fact2: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact3: {EG} fact4: {B} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact5: {EP} -> ¬(¬{IQ} & {GO}) fact6: {I} -> ¬{JB} fact7: {CT} -> ¬({L} & {FO}) fact8: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact9: {FT} -> ¬({HE} & {DL}) fact10: ¬{GF} fact11: {FR} fact12: {CM} fact13: {AB} fact14: ¬({E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} fact15: {B} -> {AB} fact16: {EE} -> ¬({GD} & {BI}) fact17: {B}

Let's assume that that rounders occurs.

{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That both the diamagnetism and that millennialness happens does not hold if that attesting argot does not happens. fact2: That rounders happens and that WYSIWYGness happens if that tattling does not occurs. fact3: The extrication happens. fact4: That WYSIWYGness leads to that the pelting Kansu does not happens and this acatalecticness occurs. fact5: The fact that that both this non-biflagellateness and this conferring Theraphosidae occurs is false is correct if the frolicking occurs. fact6: If this albuminousness happens then that combining Fremont does not happens. fact7: That that stalk and this preconditioning Lipotyphla happens is wrong if that rates happens. fact8: If that rounders happens the fact that notthe pelting Kansu but this acatalecticness happens is false. fact9: The fact that the Sameness and this planning semitransparency happens is false if the parochialness occurs. fact10: That this fibbing does not happens hold. fact11: The Markovianness happens. fact12: This appeal occurs. fact13: This acatalecticness happens. fact14: If that the diamagnetism happens and that millennialness occurs does not hold that tattling does not occurs. fact15: This non-acatalecticness is prevented by that that WYSIWYGness occurs. fact16: If this foundering happens then the fact that this shoulder and the opener occurs does not hold. fact17: That WYSIWYGness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that rounders occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that rounders occurs.; fact8 & assump1 -> int1: That that the pelting Kansu does not occurs but this acatalecticness happens is not correct is true.; fact17 & fact4 -> int2: Notthe pelting Kansu but this acatalecticness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That carinate is not unoccupied.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That carinate is not a tango and lowers if that recuperation is a section. fact2: That that some man is not a kind of a Alca and/or that person is a section is not wrong is false if that person is synclinal. fact3: That recuperation is a kind of a section if that this stein is not a Alca or a section or both does not hold. fact4: If that needleworker is not non-nasty this stein is not azotemic. fact5: That carinate is unoccupied. fact6: Some man is synclinal and this person is a Kyrgyzstan if this person is not azotemic. fact7: If somebody is not a kind of a tango but it lowers it is occupied. fact8: The trotter is not occupied.

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

That carinate is not unoccupied.

¬{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That carinate is not a tango and lowers if that recuperation is a section. fact2: That that some man is not a kind of a Alca and/or that person is a section is not wrong is false if that person is synclinal. fact3: That recuperation is a kind of a section if that this stein is not a Alca or a section or both does not hold. fact4: If that needleworker is not non-nasty this stein is not azotemic. fact5: That carinate is unoccupied. fact6: Some man is synclinal and this person is a Kyrgyzstan if this person is not azotemic. fact7: If somebody is not a kind of a tango but it lowers it is occupied. fact8: The trotter is not occupied. ; $hypothesis$ = That carinate is not unoccupied. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That stiffening brachydactyly occurs.

{C}

fact1: The stocktaking does not happens. fact2: This demagnetizing philhellenism occurs. fact3: That unfitting Styphelia happens.

fact1: ¬{II} fact2: {B} fact3: {A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The stocktaking does not happens. fact2: This demagnetizing philhellenism occurs. fact3: That unfitting Styphelia happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That stiffening brachydactyly occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That orthopaedist does not gibe Isolde.

¬{AB}{b}

fact1: Modesto is a coo. fact2: Modesto gibes Isolde. fact3: If that somebody gibes Isolde and is not agronomic is not true then the one does not gibes Isolde. fact4: The yardman is not unlamented but that thing is a kind of a coo. fact5: If Modesto is meatless then that orthopaedist is not a coo. fact6: The statistician is not a kind of a coo. fact7: If the fact that that orthopaedist is a coo hold then Modesto is not meatless and gibes Isolde. fact8: That that orthopaedist is not a coo but meatless is true. fact9: A meaty man is not covert and gibes Isolde. fact10: Modesto does not differentiate Webster. fact11: The Prostigmin gibes Isolde. fact12: If Modesto is meatless then that orthopaedist is not a coo but it does gibe Isolde. fact13: This scyphus is not meatless.

fact1: {AA}{a} fact2: {AB}{a} fact3: (x): ¬({AB}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{AB}x fact4: (¬{EE}{bk} & {AA}{bk}) fact5: {A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} fact6: ¬{AA}{gq} fact7: {AA}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact8: (¬{AA}{b} & {A}{b}) fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{GN}x & {AB}x) fact10: ¬{DB}{a} fact11: {AB}{im} fact12: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact13: ¬{A}{aq}

That orthopaedist does not gibe Isolde.

¬{AB}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Modesto is a coo. fact2: Modesto gibes Isolde. fact3: If that somebody gibes Isolde and is not agronomic is not true then the one does not gibes Isolde. fact4: The yardman is not unlamented but that thing is a kind of a coo. fact5: If Modesto is meatless then that orthopaedist is not a coo. fact6: The statistician is not a kind of a coo. fact7: If the fact that that orthopaedist is a coo hold then Modesto is not meatless and gibes Isolde. fact8: That that orthopaedist is not a coo but meatless is true. fact9: A meaty man is not covert and gibes Isolde. fact10: Modesto does not differentiate Webster. fact11: The Prostigmin gibes Isolde. fact12: If Modesto is meatless then that orthopaedist is not a coo but it does gibe Isolde. fact13: This scyphus is not meatless. ; $hypothesis$ = That orthopaedist does not gibe Isolde. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this diplomate demists thudding is false.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: That this diplomate babbles Ebit and ensnares Mindanao is wrong. fact2: Some man does not demist thudding if that one is a Pibit. fact3: If this diplomate is a Pibit then this diplomate does not demist thudding. fact4: If that somebody is both a tipped and not a Pibit is not correct this one does not demist thudding. fact5: This levodopa is not a kind of a polygamy. fact6: The fact that this diplomate is a tipped and it is a Pibit is incorrect if it is not a monogram. fact7: That annulus is not an extent and not a transit if the fact that that windbreak abduces thalassemia hold. fact8: That this diplomate is a subroutine and does not demist thudding is false. fact9: The fact that this citron is a kind of a Poecilogale that does overplay bilaterality does not hold if the fact that this citron is not a kind of a Pibit is correct. fact10: If the fact that this dimity abduces thalassemia is not wrong that windbreak does abduces thalassemia. fact11: This diplomate is not uninstructive if that this diplomate is a greenhouse but the thing is not a monogram does not hold. fact12: Something is not a Pibit if the fact that that is a monogram and that is not a kind of a tipped does not hold. fact13: This diplomate is not a monogram. fact14: If this diplomate is not a monogram then the fact that this diplomate is both a tipped and not a Pibit does not hold. fact15: This Pravachol is not a Pibit. fact16: If that that annulus is not an extent is correct then this puttyroot is a Acanthocereus that braces aggressiveness. fact17: The fact that this attendant is both not bacchantic and a monogram is wrong if this puttyroot is a Acanthocereus. fact18: If something brisks umbra and is not uninterrupted it is non-armorial. fact19: If this levodopa is not armorial this dimity abduces thalassemia and is a Saussure. fact20: This levodopa brisks umbra but the thing is discontinuous if this levodopa is not a kind of a polygamy. fact21: The fact that this diplomate maculates and is nonrenewable is incorrect.

fact1: ¬({GS}{aa} & {EE}{aa}) fact2: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x fact3: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} fact4: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact5: ¬{M}{f} fact6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact7: {H}{d} -> (¬{F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) fact8: ¬({Q}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) fact9: ¬{AB}{eh} -> ¬({IG}{eh} & {CQ}{eh}) fact10: {H}{e} -> {H}{d} fact11: ¬({GC}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) -> ¬{JF}{aa} fact12: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{AA}x) -> ¬{AB}x fact13: ¬{A}{aa} fact14: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact15: ¬{AB}{dg} fact16: ¬{F}{c} -> ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) fact17: {D}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) fact18: (x): ({L}x & ¬{K}x) -> ¬{J}x fact19: ¬{J}{f} -> ({H}{e} & {I}{e}) fact20: ¬{M}{f} -> ({L}{f} & ¬{K}{f}) fact21: ¬({BS}{aa} & {JA}{aa})

The fact that this diplomate demists thudding hold.

{B}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this diplomate babbles Ebit and ensnares Mindanao is wrong. fact2: Some man does not demist thudding if that one is a Pibit. fact3: If this diplomate is a Pibit then this diplomate does not demist thudding. fact4: If that somebody is both a tipped and not a Pibit is not correct this one does not demist thudding. fact5: This levodopa is not a kind of a polygamy. fact6: The fact that this diplomate is a tipped and it is a Pibit is incorrect if it is not a monogram. fact7: That annulus is not an extent and not a transit if the fact that that windbreak abduces thalassemia hold. fact8: That this diplomate is a subroutine and does not demist thudding is false. fact9: The fact that this citron is a kind of a Poecilogale that does overplay bilaterality does not hold if the fact that this citron is not a kind of a Pibit is correct. fact10: If the fact that this dimity abduces thalassemia is not wrong that windbreak does abduces thalassemia. fact11: This diplomate is not uninstructive if that this diplomate is a greenhouse but the thing is not a monogram does not hold. fact12: Something is not a Pibit if the fact that that is a monogram and that is not a kind of a tipped does not hold. fact13: This diplomate is not a monogram. fact14: If this diplomate is not a monogram then the fact that this diplomate is both a tipped and not a Pibit does not hold. fact15: This Pravachol is not a Pibit. fact16: If that that annulus is not an extent is correct then this puttyroot is a Acanthocereus that braces aggressiveness. fact17: The fact that this attendant is both not bacchantic and a monogram is wrong if this puttyroot is a Acanthocereus. fact18: If something brisks umbra and is not uninterrupted it is non-armorial. fact19: If this levodopa is not armorial this dimity abduces thalassemia and is a Saussure. fact20: This levodopa brisks umbra but the thing is discontinuous if this levodopa is not a kind of a polygamy. fact21: The fact that this diplomate maculates and is nonrenewable is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this diplomate demists thudding is false. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: This diplomate does not demist thudding if the fact that this diplomate is a tipped and is not a Pibit is incorrect.; fact14 & fact13 -> int2: The fact that that this diplomate is a tipped but this thing is not a Pibit hold is false.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That defenestrating Cordova occurs.

{D}

fact1: If that this coining does not occurs but this tzaristness occurs is incorrect then that this tzaristness does not happens is not incorrect. fact2: That scouring Haphtorah happens but this coining does not occurs. fact3: If the fact that that warfare and the inunction occurs is wrong that scouring Haphtorah does not happens. fact4: This coining does not happens. fact5: This pottery occurs. fact6: That this tzaristness occurs and this coining happens is false if that scouring Haphtorah does not happens. fact7: This catapulticness happens. fact8: That hooking occurs. fact9: This pottery results in this tzaristness. fact10: This departing happens but the bathyalness does not occurs. fact11: That notthat defenestrating Cordova but this pottery occurs is incorrect if this tzaristness does not occurs. fact12: That the inunction does not occurs and that scouring Haphtorah does not happens is brought about by that that warfare does not happens. fact13: If the fact that that defenestrating Cordova does not occurs but this pottery happens is not right that defenestrating Cordova happens.

fact1: ¬(¬{E} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact2: ({C} & ¬{E}) fact3: ¬({G} & {F}) -> ¬{C} fact4: ¬{E} fact5: {A} fact6: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & {E}) fact7: {GO} fact8: {AP} fact9: {A} -> {B} fact10: ({DO} & ¬{HK}) fact11: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{D} & {A}) fact12: ¬{G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{C}) fact13: ¬(¬{D} & {A}) -> {D}

That defenestrating Cordova occurs.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this coining does not occurs but this tzaristness occurs is incorrect then that this tzaristness does not happens is not incorrect. fact2: That scouring Haphtorah happens but this coining does not occurs. fact3: If the fact that that warfare and the inunction occurs is wrong that scouring Haphtorah does not happens. fact4: This coining does not happens. fact5: This pottery occurs. fact6: That this tzaristness occurs and this coining happens is false if that scouring Haphtorah does not happens. fact7: This catapulticness happens. fact8: That hooking occurs. fact9: This pottery results in this tzaristness. fact10: This departing happens but the bathyalness does not occurs. fact11: That notthat defenestrating Cordova but this pottery occurs is incorrect if this tzaristness does not occurs. fact12: That the inunction does not occurs and that scouring Haphtorah does not happens is brought about by that that warfare does not happens. fact13: If the fact that that defenestrating Cordova does not occurs but this pottery happens is not right that defenestrating Cordova happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That defenestrating Cordova occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Either this larboard is a paddle or it kneels realism or both.

({B}{a} v {C}{a})

fact1: if the hotfoot does not happens then that fostering does not happens and/or that divergentness occurs.

fact1: fake_formula

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: if the hotfoot does not happens then that fostering does not happens and/or that divergentness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Either this larboard is a paddle or it kneels realism or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The delivery and this disobedientness occurs.

({C} & {B})

fact1: That that lambasting Stradivarius happens is caused by that this immunodeficientness occurs. fact2: If this uglifying Amaryllidaceae does not happens and this nonwashableness occurs the bronchiolarness happens. fact3: That misdemeanour does not happens but that daunting directorate happens. fact4: If the endeavouring theosophy happens the biosyntheticness happens. fact5: That remonstration happens. fact6: That that relieving vinegarishness does not occurs is prevented by that notthe fuming but this countercurrent occurs. fact7: That attributableness happens. fact8: If notthat misdemeanour but that daunting directorate happens the delivery happens. fact9: That that relieving vinegarishness happens is true if notthe encircling but the idlingness happens. fact10: The spiriting and this belongingsing occurs. fact11: This disobedientness happens if that attributableness happens. fact12: That intemperateness occurs if notthis hawking but that explicating happens. fact13: The fact that both the delivery and this disobedientness happens is false if that attributableness does not occurs. fact14: The patronaging Cellini does not occurs if that that birdying Strasberg does not happens and that comparableness does not occurs is false. fact15: That the inquisition does not happens but the beseeching Vanern happens prevents that the hajj does not occurs. fact16: This chlamydialness occurs. fact17: That bite does not happens but the lunisolarness occurs. fact18: If this anabaticness does not happens but the bespattering occurs this seismologicness happens. fact19: This systolicness does not happens. fact20: That oath happens. fact21: That daunting directorate happens. fact22: If the patronaging Cellini does not occurs then that daunting directorate does not occurs and/or that misdemeanour does not occurs. fact23: This hawking occurs if this relativeness happens.

fact1: {BQ} -> {IN} fact2: (¬{HB} & {IQ}) -> {FI} fact3: (¬{E} & {D}) fact4: {FR} -> {S} fact5: {DS} fact6: (¬{EE} & {GQ}) -> {GU} fact7: {A} fact8: (¬{E} & {D}) -> {C} fact9: (¬{AS} & {BB}) -> {GU} fact10: ({ES} & {EA}) fact11: {A} -> {B} fact12: (¬{AC} & {EQ}) -> {FB} fact13: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {B}) fact14: ¬(¬{H} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} fact15: (¬{BI} & {BS}) -> {FG} fact16: {IK} fact17: (¬{HL} & {EG}) fact18: (¬{Q} & {BJ}) -> {IC} fact19: ¬{DL} fact20: {IP} fact21: {D} fact22: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} v ¬{E}) fact23: {HT} -> {AC}

That both the delivery and this disobedientness happens does not hold.

¬({C} & {B})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that lambasting Stradivarius happens is caused by that this immunodeficientness occurs. fact2: If this uglifying Amaryllidaceae does not happens and this nonwashableness occurs the bronchiolarness happens. fact3: That misdemeanour does not happens but that daunting directorate happens. fact4: If the endeavouring theosophy happens the biosyntheticness happens. fact5: That remonstration happens. fact6: That that relieving vinegarishness does not occurs is prevented by that notthe fuming but this countercurrent occurs. fact7: That attributableness happens. fact8: If notthat misdemeanour but that daunting directorate happens the delivery happens. fact9: That that relieving vinegarishness happens is true if notthe encircling but the idlingness happens. fact10: The spiriting and this belongingsing occurs. fact11: This disobedientness happens if that attributableness happens. fact12: That intemperateness occurs if notthis hawking but that explicating happens. fact13: The fact that both the delivery and this disobedientness happens is false if that attributableness does not occurs. fact14: The patronaging Cellini does not occurs if that that birdying Strasberg does not happens and that comparableness does not occurs is false. fact15: That the inquisition does not happens but the beseeching Vanern happens prevents that the hajj does not occurs. fact16: This chlamydialness occurs. fact17: That bite does not happens but the lunisolarness occurs. fact18: If this anabaticness does not happens but the bespattering occurs this seismologicness happens. fact19: This systolicness does not happens. fact20: That oath happens. fact21: That daunting directorate happens. fact22: If the patronaging Cellini does not occurs then that daunting directorate does not occurs and/or that misdemeanour does not occurs. fact23: This hawking occurs if this relativeness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The delivery and this disobedientness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact7 -> int1: This disobedientness occurs.; fact8 & fact3 -> int2: The delivery happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This receivership happens and this intracranialness happens.

({A} & {B})

fact1: If that propitiousness does not happens then that this receivership occurs and this intracranialness happens does not hold. fact2: This gastroduodenalness happens. fact3: This intracranialness happens. fact4: The figure happens. fact5: This ebbing occurs and that Marching occurs. fact6: The entertainment occurs. fact7: This pulverisation happens. fact8: The fact that both that bedamning Myacidae and that cyphering happens hold.

fact1: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & {B}) fact2: {DM} fact3: {B} fact4: {L} fact5: ({I} & {CS}) fact6: {GF} fact7: {FA} fact8: ({BJ} & {DD})

That this receivership occurs and this intracranialness happens is false.

¬({A} & {B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that propitiousness does not happens then that this receivership occurs and this intracranialness happens does not hold. fact2: This gastroduodenalness happens. fact3: This intracranialness happens. fact4: The figure happens. fact5: This ebbing occurs and that Marching occurs. fact6: The entertainment occurs. fact7: This pulverisation happens. fact8: The fact that both that bedamning Myacidae and that cyphering happens hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This receivership happens and this intracranialness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That peacekeeper does not fault myogram.

¬{A}{aa}

fact1: That peacekeeper does not fault myogram if that peacekeeper does not pullulate. fact2: That peacekeeper is not phenomenal if the fact that that peacekeeper is a kind of non-tongueless one that is a kind of a rehash is incorrect. fact3: The fact that that peacekeeper is not a sunk but convenient is wrong. fact4: If some person is not tongueless the fact that she/he does not fault myogram hold. fact5: Something is not tongueless if it is not disciplinary. fact6: This phototropism does not fault myogram if he/she is not unsusceptible. fact7: That that peacekeeper is not disciplinary hold if that person is not convenient.

fact1: ¬{DM}{aa} -> ¬{A}{aa} fact2: ¬(¬{C}{aa} & {AS}{aa}) -> ¬{JI}{aa} fact3: ¬(¬{D}{aa} & {E}{aa}) fact4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{A}x fact5: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x fact6: ¬{GR}{df} -> ¬{A}{df} fact7: ¬{E}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That peacekeeper does not fault myogram if that peacekeeper does not pullulate. fact2: That peacekeeper is not phenomenal if the fact that that peacekeeper is a kind of non-tongueless one that is a kind of a rehash is incorrect. fact3: The fact that that peacekeeper is not a sunk but convenient is wrong. fact4: If some person is not tongueless the fact that she/he does not fault myogram hold. fact5: Something is not tongueless if it is not disciplinary. fact6: This phototropism does not fault myogram if he/she is not unsusceptible. fact7: That that peacekeeper is not disciplinary hold if that person is not convenient. ; $hypothesis$ = That peacekeeper does not fault myogram. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this condenser is a Newburgh but not a Pica if this condenser is a Newburgh does not hold.

¬({A}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}))

fact1: If this condenser is a Newburgh this condenser is a kind of a Newburgh and it is a Pica. fact2: This condenser does not julienne Mokulu. fact3: If this condenser is not inscriptive or this is a Pica or both then this kosher is not a Newburgh. fact4: If this glyoxaline is not inscriptive then this condenser is not inscriptive. fact5: This dragnet is manageable but it is not a kind of an exchequer. fact6: This glyoxaline is not manageable if the one does concern cattiness. fact7: This condenser does stab Riksmaal and is non-Mozartian. fact8: Something is not inscriptive but it is dictatorial if it is not manageable. fact9: Somebody is not intellectual and not cancroid if it is not a kind of a Newburgh. fact10: This condenser is not a Pica. fact11: That trepang is a Newburgh.

fact1: {A}{a} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact2: ¬{IB}{a} fact3: (¬{C}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{di} fact4: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} fact5: ({E}{dh} & ¬{HS}{dh}) fact6: {F}{b} -> ¬{E}{b} fact7: ({EL}{a} & ¬{CR}{a}) fact8: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{C}x & {D}x) fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({CQ}x & ¬{AF}x) fact10: ¬{B}{a} fact11: {A}{it}

This kosher is nonintellectual but it is not cancroid.

({CQ}{di} & ¬{AF}{di})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this condenser is a Newburgh this condenser is a kind of a Newburgh and it is a Pica. fact2: This condenser does not julienne Mokulu. fact3: If this condenser is not inscriptive or this is a Pica or both then this kosher is not a Newburgh. fact4: If this glyoxaline is not inscriptive then this condenser is not inscriptive. fact5: This dragnet is manageable but it is not a kind of an exchequer. fact6: This glyoxaline is not manageable if the one does concern cattiness. fact7: This condenser does stab Riksmaal and is non-Mozartian. fact8: Something is not inscriptive but it is dictatorial if it is not manageable. fact9: Somebody is not intellectual and not cancroid if it is not a kind of a Newburgh. fact10: This condenser is not a Pica. fact11: That trepang is a Newburgh. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this condenser is a Newburgh but not a Pica if this condenser is a Newburgh does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this condenser is a Newburgh.; assump1 & fact10 -> int1: This condenser is a Newburgh but this person is not a kind of a Pica.; [assump1] & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The clegg is follicular.

{B}{a}

fact1: If something shutters then the fact that this does not exercise underevaluation and motleys ardour is not true. fact2: This bryanthus shutters. fact3: The clegg is follicular if that this bryanthus does not exercise underevaluation and motleys ardour is not right.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If something shutters then the fact that this does not exercise underevaluation and motleys ardour is not true. fact2: This bryanthus shutters. fact3: The clegg is follicular if that this bryanthus does not exercise underevaluation and motleys ardour is not right. ; $hypothesis$ = The clegg is follicular. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That this bryanthus does not exercise underevaluation and motleys ardour does not hold if this bryanthus does shutter.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: That this bryanthus does not exercise underevaluation but it motleys ardour is not true.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The shopwindow is not a kind of a Hippoglossus.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That stippler is a kind of a Hippoglossus. fact2: The shopwindow is a Hippoglossus.

fact1: {A}{hr} fact2: {A}{a}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That stippler is a kind of a Hippoglossus. fact2: The shopwindow is a Hippoglossus. ; $hypothesis$ = The shopwindow is not a kind of a Hippoglossus. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This amnesty occurs.

{C}

fact1: This thrusting Cistaceae happens. fact2: This landscaping occurs and that attenuating Schoenberg does not happens if this sway occurs. fact3: That either this enjoyment happens or this thrusting Cistaceae does not happens or both does not hold. fact4: That this bunfight does not happens and that overeating does not happens prevents that this embodying priestcraft occurs. fact5: This ossifying Sphingidae happens. fact6: That that recurring Wotan and that non-tenseness occurs leads to this electing Plataleidae. fact7: That that method happens and this wettingness happens does not hold. fact8: If that this inquiring Mulloidichthys and the eagerness occurs is false then this inquiring Mulloidichthys does not occurs. fact9: If that this enjoyment occurs or this thrusting Cistaceae happens or both is incorrect this reaching studied occurs. fact10: If this reaching studied does not happens and this wettingness does not occurs this amnesty does not happens. fact11: That this reaching studied happens and this wettingness does not occurs prevents that this amnesty does not happens. fact12: If this inquiring Mulloidichthys does not happens this sway and the minimization happens. fact13: If that that notthe rushing but that method occurs is true is wrong that method does not happens. fact14: If that this enjoyment happens or this thrusting Cistaceae does not occurs or both is wrong then this reaching studied occurs. fact15: That the stockingeding obstreperousness does not happens is correct. fact16: That this landscaping but notthat attenuating Schoenberg happens brings about that that mat happens. fact17: That mat results in that this bunfight does not happens and that overeating does not happens. fact18: If the fact that that method and this wettingness occurs does not hold this wettingness does not happens. fact19: That notthe rushing but that method happens is incorrect if this embodying priestcraft does not occurs. fact20: That attenuating Schoenberg occurs. fact21: That both this inquiring Mulloidichthys and the eagerness happens does not hold if that uncutness does not occurs.

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

This amnesty does not occurs.

¬{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This thrusting Cistaceae happens. fact2: This landscaping occurs and that attenuating Schoenberg does not happens if this sway occurs. fact3: That either this enjoyment happens or this thrusting Cistaceae does not happens or both does not hold. fact4: That this bunfight does not happens and that overeating does not happens prevents that this embodying priestcraft occurs. fact5: This ossifying Sphingidae happens. fact6: That that recurring Wotan and that non-tenseness occurs leads to this electing Plataleidae. fact7: That that method happens and this wettingness happens does not hold. fact8: If that this inquiring Mulloidichthys and the eagerness occurs is false then this inquiring Mulloidichthys does not occurs. fact9: If that this enjoyment occurs or this thrusting Cistaceae happens or both is incorrect this reaching studied occurs. fact10: If this reaching studied does not happens and this wettingness does not occurs this amnesty does not happens. fact11: That this reaching studied happens and this wettingness does not occurs prevents that this amnesty does not happens. fact12: If this inquiring Mulloidichthys does not happens this sway and the minimization happens. fact13: If that that notthe rushing but that method occurs is true is wrong that method does not happens. fact14: If that this enjoyment happens or this thrusting Cistaceae does not occurs or both is wrong then this reaching studied occurs. fact15: That the stockingeding obstreperousness does not happens is correct. fact16: That this landscaping but notthat attenuating Schoenberg happens brings about that that mat happens. fact17: That mat results in that this bunfight does not happens and that overeating does not happens. fact18: If the fact that that method and this wettingness occurs does not hold this wettingness does not happens. fact19: That notthe rushing but that method happens is incorrect if this embodying priestcraft does not occurs. fact20: That attenuating Schoenberg occurs. fact21: That both this inquiring Mulloidichthys and the eagerness happens does not hold if that uncutness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This amnesty occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact3 -> int1: This reaching studied occurs.; fact18 & fact7 -> int2: This wettingness does not happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This reaching studied and that non-wettingness occurs.; int3 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that this babbler is a millime.

{A}{a}

fact1: The fact that everything is a plight and is postmodernist is right. fact2: Someone is not electrostatic and it is not a kind of a plight if it is not postmodernist. fact3: If that that childbearing is a Hypocreales but the thing is not a kind of a millime is incorrect this babbler is a kind of a millime. fact4: This collard is semiotical. fact5: That this strategist does not tease Rochambeau and is not non-astronomical does not hold if that dunker is not electrostatic. fact6: That some person is semiotical but it is not a millime is incorrect if it is not superlunary. fact7: That something is not a Cakile and/or it is not astronomical does not hold if it does not tease Rochambeau. fact8: If this babbler is a millime that childbearing is semiotical. fact9: If this junior is not angiocarpous the fact that that dunker is a hello but it is not tenacious does not hold. fact10: If this freckle is not semiotical then that that childbearing is a Hypocreales and not a millime is false. fact11: That childbearing does not tease Rochambeau if the fact that this freckle does tease Rochambeau and is not electrostatic does not hold. fact12: That childbearing is not superlunary. fact13: That astrodome is not a Hypocreales if the fact that this babbler is not non-semiotical but it is not a kind of a millime is false. fact14: If this strategist is non-astronomical this freckle is non-superlunary and it is not a Cakile. fact15: Something is not semiotical if it is non-superlunary and it is not a Cakile. fact16: If some man is a plight that that one teases Rochambeau and is not electrostatic does not hold. fact17: That childbearing does not decapitate friendliness. fact18: If the fact that that childbearing is not a Hypocreales and/or it is superlunary does not hold then it is not semiotical. fact19: If that something is a hello and is not tenacious is not correct then this is not postmodernist. fact20: If that that childbearing is not a Cakile and/or the person is not astronomical is false then this babbler is not superlunary. fact21: The fact that that childbearing is not a Hypocreales and/or she is superlunary does not hold. fact22: Something is not astronomical if the fact that it does not tease Rochambeau and is astronomical is not right.

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

That astrodome is not a kind of a Hypocreales.

¬{C}{an}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that everything is a plight and is postmodernist is right. fact2: Someone is not electrostatic and it is not a kind of a plight if it is not postmodernist. fact3: If that that childbearing is a Hypocreales but the thing is not a kind of a millime is incorrect this babbler is a kind of a millime. fact4: This collard is semiotical. fact5: That this strategist does not tease Rochambeau and is not non-astronomical does not hold if that dunker is not electrostatic. fact6: That some person is semiotical but it is not a millime is incorrect if it is not superlunary. fact7: That something is not a Cakile and/or it is not astronomical does not hold if it does not tease Rochambeau. fact8: If this babbler is a millime that childbearing is semiotical. fact9: If this junior is not angiocarpous the fact that that dunker is a hello but it is not tenacious does not hold. fact10: If this freckle is not semiotical then that that childbearing is a Hypocreales and not a millime is false. fact11: That childbearing does not tease Rochambeau if the fact that this freckle does tease Rochambeau and is not electrostatic does not hold. fact12: That childbearing is not superlunary. fact13: That astrodome is not a Hypocreales if the fact that this babbler is not non-semiotical but it is not a kind of a millime is false. fact14: If this strategist is non-astronomical this freckle is non-superlunary and it is not a Cakile. fact15: Something is not semiotical if it is non-superlunary and it is not a Cakile. fact16: If some man is a plight that that one teases Rochambeau and is not electrostatic does not hold. fact17: That childbearing does not decapitate friendliness. fact18: If the fact that that childbearing is not a Hypocreales and/or it is superlunary does not hold then it is not semiotical. fact19: If that something is a hello and is not tenacious is not correct then this is not postmodernist. fact20: If that that childbearing is not a Cakile and/or the person is not astronomical is false then this babbler is not superlunary. fact21: The fact that that childbearing is not a Hypocreales and/or she is superlunary does not hold. fact22: Something is not astronomical if the fact that it does not tease Rochambeau and is astronomical is not right. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this babbler is a millime. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this babbler is a millime.; fact8 & assump1 -> int1: That childbearing is semiotical.; fact18 & fact21 -> int2: That childbearing is not semiotical.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That endomorph is a zest.

{C}{aa}

fact1: If the fact that something is a kind of a Rhynchocephalia and it is a zest is wrong it is not a kind of a zest. fact2: Everything is a Rheiformes and is a kind of a Rhynchocephalia. fact3: If something is a Rheiformes then it is a zest.

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

That endomorph is not a kind of a zest.

¬{C}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that something is a kind of a Rhynchocephalia and it is a zest is wrong it is not a kind of a zest. fact2: Everything is a Rheiformes and is a kind of a Rhynchocephalia. fact3: If something is a Rheiformes then it is a zest. ; $hypothesis$ = That endomorph is a zest. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: That that endomorph is a Rheiformes and this thing is a kind of a Rhynchocephalia is right.; int1 -> int2: That endomorph is a Rheiformes.; fact3 -> int3: If the fact that that endomorph is a kind of a Rheiformes hold then that endomorph is a kind of a zest.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That reciter is not a Callitris and is not a Bangladeshi.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: If that reciter is a kind of a Texas then that reciter is not a Callitris and not a Bangladeshi. fact2: That reciter is a Texas. fact3: That reciter is not a kind of a Callitris if this thing is a kind of a Texas. fact4: That reciter is not a Callitris.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that reciter is a kind of a Texas then that reciter is not a Callitris and not a Bangladeshi. fact2: That reciter is a Texas. fact3: That reciter is not a kind of a Callitris if this thing is a kind of a Texas. fact4: That reciter is not a Callitris. ; $hypothesis$ = That reciter is not a Callitris and is not a Bangladeshi. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That bruiser is not non-chiliastic and this is a occlusive.

({C}{c} & {D}{c})

fact1: This fixative is a kind of a nonmetal if that telamon is not a Turkmen. fact2: That telamon is not a Turkmen. fact3: If this fixative is not unshockable that bruiser is a nonmetal. fact4: The fact that that bruiser is rhinal thing that is not a occlusive is false if this is not shockable. fact5: This fixative is a occlusive. fact6: The fact that this fixative is a kind of chiliastic a nonmetal is not true. fact7: If the fact that something is rhinal and not a occlusive does not hold it is a occlusive. fact8: The craftsman is chiliastic. fact9: That bruiser is not shockable. fact10: Someone is a Turkmen if that she is chiliastic and she is not a Turkmen is wrong. fact11: That telamon is a kind of a ketosis and that person disquiets. fact12: That bruiser is chiliastic if this fixative is a nonmetal. fact13: If the fact that this fixative is a nonmetal but it is not shockable is incorrect this fixative is shockable.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: {E}{b} -> {B}{c} fact4: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬({F}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) fact5: {D}{b} fact6: ¬({C}{b} & {B}{b}) fact7: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{D}x) -> {D}x fact8: {C}{hi} fact9: ¬{E}{c} fact10: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> {A}x fact11: ({FJ}{a} & {FS}{a}) fact12: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} fact13: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> {E}{b}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This fixative is a kind of a nonmetal if that telamon is not a Turkmen. fact2: That telamon is not a Turkmen. fact3: If this fixative is not unshockable that bruiser is a nonmetal. fact4: The fact that that bruiser is rhinal thing that is not a occlusive is false if this is not shockable. fact5: This fixative is a occlusive. fact6: The fact that this fixative is a kind of chiliastic a nonmetal is not true. fact7: If the fact that something is rhinal and not a occlusive does not hold it is a occlusive. fact8: The craftsman is chiliastic. fact9: That bruiser is not shockable. fact10: Someone is a Turkmen if that she is chiliastic and she is not a Turkmen is wrong. fact11: That telamon is a kind of a ketosis and that person disquiets. fact12: That bruiser is chiliastic if this fixative is a nonmetal. fact13: If the fact that this fixative is a nonmetal but it is not shockable is incorrect this fixative is shockable. ; $hypothesis$ = That bruiser is not non-chiliastic and this is a occlusive. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> int1: The fact that this fixative is a kind of a nonmetal is correct.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: That bruiser is chiliastic.; fact9 & fact4 -> int3: That that bruiser is not non-rhinal and is not a kind of a occlusive is false.; fact7 -> int4: If that that bruiser is rhinal but this person is not a kind of a occlusive is not right then this person is a occlusive.; int3 & int4 -> int5: That bruiser is a occlusive.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This poker but notthe depriving postcode occurs.

({A} & ¬{B})

fact1: This poker happens. fact2: That this Sanding ruled occurs and this endorsement happens is caused by that that dedicating Mephistopheles does not happens. fact3: That the depriving postcode does not occurs hold. fact4: If this Sanding ruled occurs then that this poker happens and the depriving postcode does not happens does not hold.

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

The fact that that this poker but notthe depriving postcode happens does not hold is not wrong.

¬({A} & ¬{B})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This poker happens. fact2: That this Sanding ruled occurs and this endorsement happens is caused by that that dedicating Mephistopheles does not happens. fact3: That the depriving postcode does not occurs hold. fact4: If this Sanding ruled occurs then that this poker happens and the depriving postcode does not happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This poker but notthe depriving postcode occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That everyone is not a betting and it is not Jesuit does not hold.

¬((x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: Everybody is both not a verge and not nonmeaningful. fact2: Some man that does not horn Lanthanotidae is not a lacteal and not defervescent. fact3: Everything does not sink Reichstein. fact4: Every person does not fulfill. fact5: Everybody is not dirty and the one does not greet. fact6: Something is non-defervescent thing that is not a lacteal if that thing does not horn Lanthanotidae. fact7: Everything does not ingraining Avon and that thing is not a slack. fact8: If the fact that something horns Lanthanotidae and this thing laicises diam is false then this thing does not horns Lanthanotidae. fact9: Something is not a baldness and not a wester if it is not defervescent. fact10: Everything is not Jesuit. fact11: Something that is not defervescent is not Slovakian and does not ingraining Avon. fact12: Everyone is both not a betting and non-Jesuit.

fact1: (x): (¬{HC}x & ¬{DK}x) fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact3: (x): ¬{AJ}x fact4: (x): ¬{GR}x fact5: (x): (¬{GD}x & ¬{HN}x) fact6: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact7: (x): (¬{JK}x & ¬{JI}x) fact8: (x): ¬({C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{CC}x & ¬{EI}x) fact10: (x): ¬{AB}x fact11: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{FL}x & ¬{JK}x) fact12: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

That everything is not Slovakian and does not ingraining Avon hold.

(x): (¬{FL}x & ¬{JK}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everybody is both not a verge and not nonmeaningful. fact2: Some man that does not horn Lanthanotidae is not a lacteal and not defervescent. fact3: Everything does not sink Reichstein. fact4: Every person does not fulfill. fact5: Everybody is not dirty and the one does not greet. fact6: Something is non-defervescent thing that is not a lacteal if that thing does not horn Lanthanotidae. fact7: Everything does not ingraining Avon and that thing is not a slack. fact8: If the fact that something horns Lanthanotidae and this thing laicises diam is false then this thing does not horns Lanthanotidae. fact9: Something is not a baldness and not a wester if it is not defervescent. fact10: Everything is not Jesuit. fact11: Something that is not defervescent is not Slovakian and does not ingraining Avon. fact12: Everyone is both not a betting and non-Jesuit. ; $hypothesis$ = That everyone is not a betting and it is not Jesuit does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Darla is not ovular but it is rotatory does not hold.

¬(¬{D}{b} & {A}{b})

fact1: This dominoes ousts Ginkgopsida. fact2: Some person opens Manzoni if it is noncausal. fact3: The fact that this dominoes is rotatory and it opens Manzoni hold. fact4: If some man does not open Manzoni that the person is not ovular but rotatory does not hold. fact5: This dominoes is an ecology and is a otolaryngology. fact6: If this dominoes is rotatory Darla is not ovular but this is rotatory. fact7: That Elsie is ovular is true. fact8: This dominoes is noncausal but it does not jellify if that it is not archaeologic hold. fact9: If this dominoes is isotropic and opens Manzoni then Darla does not opens Manzoni. fact10: Some man is non-archaeologic if the one is not a kind of an ill and/or the one is not a Richmondena. fact11: The fact that this dominoes is not non-isotropic is right if that bodywork clambers Pterocnemia. fact12: Darla is non-rotatory thing that is ovular if this dominoes is ovular.

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

That Darla is not ovular but it is rotatory does not hold.

¬(¬{D}{b} & {A}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This dominoes ousts Ginkgopsida. fact2: Some person opens Manzoni if it is noncausal. fact3: The fact that this dominoes is rotatory and it opens Manzoni hold. fact4: If some man does not open Manzoni that the person is not ovular but rotatory does not hold. fact5: This dominoes is an ecology and is a otolaryngology. fact6: If this dominoes is rotatory Darla is not ovular but this is rotatory. fact7: That Elsie is ovular is true. fact8: This dominoes is noncausal but it does not jellify if that it is not archaeologic hold. fact9: If this dominoes is isotropic and opens Manzoni then Darla does not opens Manzoni. fact10: Some man is non-archaeologic if the one is not a kind of an ill and/or the one is not a Richmondena. fact11: The fact that this dominoes is not non-isotropic is right if that bodywork clambers Pterocnemia. fact12: Darla is non-rotatory thing that is ovular if this dominoes is ovular. ; $hypothesis$ = That Darla is not ovular but it is rotatory does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: This dominoes is rotatory.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This jaywalker is sensational.

{A}{b}

fact1: Some person that is not a kind of a Mongolian is a kind of a Oviedo. fact2: If the fact that that respiration is not a Oviedo and/or it is a Mongolian does not hold this jaywalker is not sensational. fact3: If that that respiration is a Oviedo and/or is sensational is wrong that this jaywalker is not a Mongolian hold. fact4: This rind is sensational. fact5: That this jaywalker is a kind of a 1000000 is true. fact6: That Trimox is a 1000000. fact7: The fact that this jaywalker does not field byname is right if that that respiration does not field byname but it convulses lipaemia does not hold. fact8: This jaywalker is a leaner. fact9: Something is sensational if that is not a kind of a Mongolian. fact10: That that respiration is a Mongolian is right. fact11: If the fact that that respiration is a Oviedo and/or it is a 1000000 is false then this jaywalker is not a Mongolian. fact12: The fact that that respiration is not a Mongolian or it is a kind of a 1000000 or both is wrong. fact13: Someone is not unsensational if it is not a Oviedo. fact14: That that respiration does not salaam tetany and/or is a kind of a unctuousness does not hold. fact15: That respiration is not a kind of a Oviedo if that this jaywalker is a 1000000 and/or it is a Mongolian is not right. fact16: That that respiration is not a kind of a Mongolian and/or it is sensational does not hold. fact17: If some man does not field byname that it is not indelicate and it is a kind of a Oviedo is incorrect. fact18: If this jaywalker is not sensational then he/she is a 1000000. fact19: The cordierite is sensational. fact20: This jaywalker is not a kind of a Oviedo if the fact that the fact that that respiration is not a kind of a Mongolian and/or the one is a 1000000 is not incorrect is not true. fact21: This jaywalker does redact Gleditsia. fact22: The diphenhydramine is not a 1000000.

fact1: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {B}x fact2: ¬(¬{B}{a} v {AA}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact3: ¬({B}{a} v {A}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact4: {A}{ar} fact5: {AB}{b} fact6: {AB}{bt} fact7: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact8: {JF}{b} fact9: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {A}x fact10: {AA}{a} fact11: ¬({B}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact12: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) fact13: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x fact14: ¬(¬{IR}{a} v {JC}{a}) fact15: ¬({AB}{b} v {AA}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact16: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {A}{a}) fact17: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) fact18: ¬{A}{b} -> {AB}{b} fact19: {A}{ft} fact20: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact21: {BS}{b} fact22: ¬{AB}{en}

The fact that this jaywalker is not sensational is true.

¬{A}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person that is not a kind of a Mongolian is a kind of a Oviedo. fact2: If the fact that that respiration is not a Oviedo and/or it is a Mongolian does not hold this jaywalker is not sensational. fact3: If that that respiration is a Oviedo and/or is sensational is wrong that this jaywalker is not a Mongolian hold. fact4: This rind is sensational. fact5: That this jaywalker is a kind of a 1000000 is true. fact6: That Trimox is a 1000000. fact7: The fact that this jaywalker does not field byname is right if that that respiration does not field byname but it convulses lipaemia does not hold. fact8: This jaywalker is a leaner. fact9: Something is sensational if that is not a kind of a Mongolian. fact10: That that respiration is a Mongolian is right. fact11: If the fact that that respiration is a Oviedo and/or it is a 1000000 is false then this jaywalker is not a Mongolian. fact12: The fact that that respiration is not a Mongolian or it is a kind of a 1000000 or both is wrong. fact13: Someone is not unsensational if it is not a Oviedo. fact14: That that respiration does not salaam tetany and/or is a kind of a unctuousness does not hold. fact15: That respiration is not a kind of a Oviedo if that this jaywalker is a 1000000 and/or it is a Mongolian is not right. fact16: That that respiration is not a kind of a Mongolian and/or it is sensational does not hold. fact17: If some man does not field byname that it is not indelicate and it is a kind of a Oviedo is incorrect. fact18: If this jaywalker is not sensational then he/she is a 1000000. fact19: The cordierite is sensational. fact20: This jaywalker is not a kind of a Oviedo if the fact that the fact that that respiration is not a kind of a Mongolian and/or the one is a 1000000 is not incorrect is not true. fact21: This jaywalker does redact Gleditsia. fact22: The diphenhydramine is not a 1000000. ; $hypothesis$ = This jaywalker is sensational. ; $proof$ =

fact20 & fact12 -> int1: This jaywalker is not a Oviedo.; fact13 -> int2: This jaywalker is sensational if that the thing is not a Oviedo is not false.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That honesty is a kind of a confidentiality.

{C}{b}

fact1: Something that is not a Phoradendron is a Cucurbitaceae and is a confidentiality. fact2: If Kiki is not a Cucurbitaceae then Kiki is not cuneiform. fact3: Kiki is not a kind of a Cucurbitaceae. fact4: If Kiki is non-cuneiform then that honesty is not a confidentiality. fact5: Kiki is not a kind of a confidentiality if Kiki is not cuneiform. fact6: Kiki does not incline ablative and/or familiarizes Procyon if this one is irreparable. fact7: If something does not incline ablative or it familiarizes Procyon or both that it is not a Phoradendron hold. fact8: The fact that this casualty is not a Cucurbitaceae is not incorrect. fact9: Kiki is not civil. fact10: If that Formica is not a Cucurbitaceae then that Formica is not thalloid. fact11: If someone is a Cucurbitaceae then that honesty is not a kind of a Cucurbitaceae and it is not cuneiform. fact12: The fact that Kiki is not credulous hold. fact13: Something that does not incline ablative is a Phoradendron or is non-cuneiform or both.

fact1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & {C}x) fact2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact3: ¬{A}{a} fact4: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact5: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} fact6: {G}{a} -> (¬{E}{a} v {F}{a}) fact7: (x): (¬{E}x v {F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact8: ¬{A}{f} fact9: ¬{FF}{a} fact10: ¬{A}{c} -> ¬{AQ}{c} fact11: (x): {A}x -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact12: ¬{BE}{a} fact13: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x v ¬{B}x)

That honesty is not cuneiform.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that is not a Phoradendron is a Cucurbitaceae and is a confidentiality. fact2: If Kiki is not a Cucurbitaceae then Kiki is not cuneiform. fact3: Kiki is not a kind of a Cucurbitaceae. fact4: If Kiki is non-cuneiform then that honesty is not a confidentiality. fact5: Kiki is not a kind of a confidentiality if Kiki is not cuneiform. fact6: Kiki does not incline ablative and/or familiarizes Procyon if this one is irreparable. fact7: If something does not incline ablative or it familiarizes Procyon or both that it is not a Phoradendron hold. fact8: The fact that this casualty is not a Cucurbitaceae is not incorrect. fact9: Kiki is not civil. fact10: If that Formica is not a Cucurbitaceae then that Formica is not thalloid. fact11: If someone is a Cucurbitaceae then that honesty is not a kind of a Cucurbitaceae and it is not cuneiform. fact12: The fact that Kiki is not credulous hold. fact13: Something that does not incline ablative is a Phoradendron or is non-cuneiform or both. ; $hypothesis$ = That honesty is a kind of a confidentiality. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact3 -> int1: Kiki is not cuneiform.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That purveying J occurs.

{D}

fact1: If that extrospectiveness does not occurs then this uncomfortableness happens and/or that unsympatheticness occurs. fact2: The slinging does not occurs. fact3: If the fact that the fact that this golfing does not happens and this faint occurs does not hold hold then this faint does not happens. fact4: This unmeritedness triggers that that chemotherapeuticness does not occurs and that giving does not occurs. fact5: That that unsympatheticness does not happens and this poor does not happens prevents that that purveying J happens. fact6: If that chemotherapeuticness does not happens the fact that this bimetallisticness but notthis shaming occurs is false. fact7: That stocking does not occurs if that unsympatheticness happens. fact8: That this drill does not occurs and/or that that centesis does not occurs brings about that this unforgettableness does not happens. fact9: This forgettableness leads to that both that Arminian and the closeness occurs. fact10: This adjectiveness results in that this drill does not happens and/or that that centesis does not happens. fact11: If the fact that this bimetallisticness occurs and this shaming does not happens is incorrect then this bimetallisticness does not occurs. fact12: This unmeritedness happens if the fact that that Arminian occurs is correct. fact13: The profanation does not happens. fact14: That unsympatheticness occurs and that extrospectiveness occurs if this bimetallisticness does not occurs. fact15: That extrospectiveness does not occurs if that that extrospectiveness happens but that silencing Midas does not occurs is not right. fact16: If this bimetallisticness does not occurs that the fact that that extrospectiveness but notthat silencing Midas occurs is true is wrong. fact17: This claiming does not happens and the redoubling does not occurs. fact18: This golfing does not happens. fact19: The non-uncomfortableness prevents that unsympatheticness. fact20: This uncomfortableness does not occurs. fact21: If that chemotherapeuticness does not happens then that purveying J happens and this uncomfortableness occurs. fact22: If this poor occurs the fact that this golfing does not occurs but this faint happens is wrong.

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

That purveying J occurs.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that extrospectiveness does not occurs then this uncomfortableness happens and/or that unsympatheticness occurs. fact2: The slinging does not occurs. fact3: If the fact that the fact that this golfing does not happens and this faint occurs does not hold hold then this faint does not happens. fact4: This unmeritedness triggers that that chemotherapeuticness does not occurs and that giving does not occurs. fact5: That that unsympatheticness does not happens and this poor does not happens prevents that that purveying J happens. fact6: If that chemotherapeuticness does not happens the fact that this bimetallisticness but notthis shaming occurs is false. fact7: That stocking does not occurs if that unsympatheticness happens. fact8: That this drill does not occurs and/or that that centesis does not occurs brings about that this unforgettableness does not happens. fact9: This forgettableness leads to that both that Arminian and the closeness occurs. fact10: This adjectiveness results in that this drill does not happens and/or that that centesis does not happens. fact11: If the fact that this bimetallisticness occurs and this shaming does not happens is incorrect then this bimetallisticness does not occurs. fact12: This unmeritedness happens if the fact that that Arminian occurs is correct. fact13: The profanation does not happens. fact14: That unsympatheticness occurs and that extrospectiveness occurs if this bimetallisticness does not occurs. fact15: That extrospectiveness does not occurs if that that extrospectiveness happens but that silencing Midas does not occurs is not right. fact16: If this bimetallisticness does not occurs that the fact that that extrospectiveness but notthat silencing Midas occurs is true is wrong. fact17: This claiming does not happens and the redoubling does not occurs. fact18: This golfing does not happens. fact19: The non-uncomfortableness prevents that unsympatheticness. fact20: This uncomfortableness does not occurs. fact21: If that chemotherapeuticness does not happens then that purveying J happens and this uncomfortableness occurs. fact22: If this poor occurs the fact that this golfing does not occurs but this faint happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That purveying J occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That praetorium does not rarefy.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: If that thane is a brokenheartedness that fop is a Najadaceae but not a suffragism. fact2: That thane is a brokenheartedness. fact3: That praetorium does rarefy if that fop demolishes Afrocarpus. fact4: If something is a Najadaceae and is not a suffragism then it demolishes Afrocarpus. fact5: That fop is both a Najadaceae and not a brokenheartedness.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that thane is a brokenheartedness that fop is a Najadaceae but not a suffragism. fact2: That thane is a brokenheartedness. fact3: That praetorium does rarefy if that fop demolishes Afrocarpus. fact4: If something is a Najadaceae and is not a suffragism then it demolishes Afrocarpus. fact5: That fop is both a Najadaceae and not a brokenheartedness. ; $hypothesis$ = That praetorium does not rarefy. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> int1: That fop is a Najadaceae but not a suffragism.; fact4 -> int2: That fop demolishes Afrocarpus if that fop is a Najadaceae and is not a suffragism.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That fop demolishes Afrocarpus.; int3 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that that furnishing does not happens and this revivifying anhidrosis occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: The fact that this nomotheticness happens is true if this bacterioidalness occurs. fact2: That this Crusading infidelity does not occurs and this sunrise does not occurs is not correct if that inflectionalness does not occurs. fact3: If this racketing does not happens then the fact that that furnishing does not occurs but this revivifying anhidrosis occurs is false. fact4: This Song does not happens and that dissilience does not happens if this nomotheticness happens. fact5: This revivifying anhidrosis happens. fact6: This sunrise does not happens if that both that non-inflectionalness and the Tahitianness happens does not hold. fact7: If this tacking does not happens both that non-inflectionalness and that non-Tahitianness happens. fact8: That kayaking does not happens if that the fact that notthe degradation but that kayaking happens is true does not hold. fact9: This Song happens if this nomotheticness occurs. fact10: This nomotheticness and this bacterioidalness happens if that kayaking does not occurs. fact11: Notthis tacking but that dissilience happens if this Song happens. fact12: If this tacking does not occurs the fact that both that non-inflectionalness and the Tahitianness happens does not hold. fact13: This Crusading infidelity occurs. fact14: If this revivifying anhidrosis does not happens this Crusading infidelity does not happens. fact15: That bomb does not occurs. fact16: That both this racketing and this Crusading infidelity occurs is triggered by that this sunrise does not occurs. fact17: This Crusading infidelity does not happens if the fact that that furnishing does not occurs and this revivifying anhidrosis occurs does not hold. fact18: If this Song does not occurs and that dissilience does not occurs then this tacking does not happens.

fact1: {J} -> {I} fact2: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact4: {I} -> (¬{H} & ¬{G}) fact5: {AB} fact6: ¬(¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{C} fact7: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact8: ¬(¬{M} & {K}) -> ¬{K} fact9: {I} -> {H} fact10: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) fact11: {H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) fact12: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{D} & {E}) fact13: {B} fact14: ¬{AB} -> ¬{B} fact15: ¬{EL} fact16: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact17: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact18: (¬{H} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F}

Let's assume that that that furnishing does not happens and this revivifying anhidrosis occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this nomotheticness happens is true if this bacterioidalness occurs. fact2: That this Crusading infidelity does not occurs and this sunrise does not occurs is not correct if that inflectionalness does not occurs. fact3: If this racketing does not happens then the fact that that furnishing does not occurs but this revivifying anhidrosis occurs is false. fact4: This Song does not happens and that dissilience does not happens if this nomotheticness happens. fact5: This revivifying anhidrosis happens. fact6: This sunrise does not happens if that both that non-inflectionalness and the Tahitianness happens does not hold. fact7: If this tacking does not happens both that non-inflectionalness and that non-Tahitianness happens. fact8: That kayaking does not happens if that the fact that notthe degradation but that kayaking happens is true does not hold. fact9: This Song happens if this nomotheticness occurs. fact10: This nomotheticness and this bacterioidalness happens if that kayaking does not occurs. fact11: Notthis tacking but that dissilience happens if this Song happens. fact12: If this tacking does not occurs the fact that both that non-inflectionalness and the Tahitianness happens does not hold. fact13: This Crusading infidelity occurs. fact14: If this revivifying anhidrosis does not happens this Crusading infidelity does not happens. fact15: That bomb does not occurs. fact16: That both this racketing and this Crusading infidelity occurs is triggered by that this sunrise does not occurs. fact17: This Crusading infidelity does not happens if the fact that that furnishing does not occurs and this revivifying anhidrosis occurs does not hold. fact18: If this Song does not occurs and that dissilience does not occurs then this tacking does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that that furnishing does not happens and this revivifying anhidrosis occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that furnishing does not happens and this revivifying anhidrosis occurs does not hold.; fact17 & assump1 -> int1: This Crusading infidelity does not happens.; int1 & fact13 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This tuxedo is not a trafficator and it is not a mishmash.

(¬{C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

fact1: If that informant is not associational then this pederast is not a mishmash. fact2: That informant is Gi. fact3: That informant pads daybreak and it is Gi. fact4: The wedge is a trafficator and it is glomerular. fact5: That this tuxedo is a trafficator but it is not a mishmash is false. fact6: That informant taps. fact7: If something is not Gi and pads daybreak it is not a trafficator. fact8: This tuxedo is associational. fact9: The fact that this tuxedo is both a trafficator and not a mishmash does not hold if that informant pads daybreak. fact10: Something is a kind of non-Gi thing that pads daybreak if it is associational. fact11: If something that does win Passeridae is not subsequent then it is non-associational. fact12: If this tuxedo is Gi then the fact that that informant pads daybreak but the thing is not a mishmash is false. fact13: That if this tuxedo is fewer this pederast employs naupathia and is not a trafficator is right. fact14: This tuxedo is fewer.

fact1: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬{D}{he} fact2: {B}{a} fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: ({C}{ea} & {IN}{ea}) fact5: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact6: {O}{a} fact7: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}x fact8: {E}{b} fact9: {A}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact10: (x): {E}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) fact11: (x): ({G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{E}x fact12: {B}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact13: {H}{b} -> ({FR}{he} & ¬{C}{he}) fact14: {H}{b}

This pederast employs naupathia and it is Gi.

({FR}{he} & {B}{he})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that informant is not associational then this pederast is not a mishmash. fact2: That informant is Gi. fact3: That informant pads daybreak and it is Gi. fact4: The wedge is a trafficator and it is glomerular. fact5: That this tuxedo is a trafficator but it is not a mishmash is false. fact6: That informant taps. fact7: If something is not Gi and pads daybreak it is not a trafficator. fact8: This tuxedo is associational. fact9: The fact that this tuxedo is both a trafficator and not a mishmash does not hold if that informant pads daybreak. fact10: Something is a kind of non-Gi thing that pads daybreak if it is associational. fact11: If something that does win Passeridae is not subsequent then it is non-associational. fact12: If this tuxedo is Gi then the fact that that informant pads daybreak but the thing is not a mishmash is false. fact13: That if this tuxedo is fewer this pederast employs naupathia and is not a trafficator is right. fact14: This tuxedo is fewer. ; $hypothesis$ = This tuxedo is not a trafficator and it is not a mishmash. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This torsion is a kind of a pyramiding.

{D}{a}

fact1: Karan is not a Ischigualastia if that that eriogonum is a Ischigualastia hold. fact2: If something does not whimper Salvadoraceae then it is not a Gnetales and chokes millimetre. fact3: If someone is not a Ischigualastia he/she is not a kind of a pyramiding and is not dendritic. fact4: The sherlock chokes millimetre. fact5: This torsion is ideographic. fact6: This torsion is a ban. fact7: This torsion is a kind of a Gnetales. fact8: That headset chokes millimetre. fact9: That this torsion is a kind of a downtown that chokes millimetre is right. fact10: This torsion diminishes gawkiness and the thing does consecrate. fact11: The fact that Karan whimpers Salvadoraceae or is not a kind of a Gnetales or both does not hold if that thing is not a pyramiding. fact12: This torsion chokes millimetre. fact13: If that stableboy is masochistic then that that eriogonum is a Ischigualastia is right. fact14: A Philistine that is unreasonable is not a kind of a Nijmegen. fact15: If some man does not choke millimetre the one is not a downtown. fact16: This torsion is not a Gnetales if the fact that Karan either whimpers Salvadoraceae or is not a kind of a Gnetales or both does not hold. fact17: If this torsion is not a downtown and does choke millimetre then this mousepad choke millimetre. fact18: That ejaculation is a Gnetales. fact19: If that tambac whimpers Salvadoraceae then that that tambac is a Gnetales and/or not a pyramiding is wrong. fact20: If something is a kind of a downtown that is a Gnetales that thing is not a pyramiding. fact21: Someone is a kind of a pyramiding and the one is a downtown if the one does not choke millimetre. fact22: This torsion is a whispered and is diluvial. fact23: If Karan is not a Gnetales but the thing chokes millimetre then this torsion does not chokes millimetre.

fact1: {G}{c} -> ¬{G}{b} fact2: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{C}x & {B}x) fact3: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{F}x) fact4: {B}{ic} fact5: {DI}{a} fact6: {BC}{a} fact7: {C}{a} fact8: {B}{cp} fact9: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact10: ({AC}{a} & {EO}{a}) fact11: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬({E}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) fact12: {B}{a} fact13: {H}{d} -> {G}{c} fact14: (x): ({FU}x & {AJ}x) -> ¬{CI}x fact15: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x fact16: ¬({E}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact17: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> {B}{f} fact18: {C}{eb} fact19: {E}{bu} -> ¬({C}{bu} v ¬{D}{bu}) fact20: (x): ({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x fact21: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({D}x & {A}x) fact22: ({IS}{a} & {AM}{a}) fact23: (¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a}

This torsion is a kind of a pyramiding.

{D}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Karan is not a Ischigualastia if that that eriogonum is a Ischigualastia hold. fact2: If something does not whimper Salvadoraceae then it is not a Gnetales and chokes millimetre. fact3: If someone is not a Ischigualastia he/she is not a kind of a pyramiding and is not dendritic. fact4: The sherlock chokes millimetre. fact5: This torsion is ideographic. fact6: This torsion is a ban. fact7: This torsion is a kind of a Gnetales. fact8: That headset chokes millimetre. fact9: That this torsion is a kind of a downtown that chokes millimetre is right. fact10: This torsion diminishes gawkiness and the thing does consecrate. fact11: The fact that Karan whimpers Salvadoraceae or is not a kind of a Gnetales or both does not hold if that thing is not a pyramiding. fact12: This torsion chokes millimetre. fact13: If that stableboy is masochistic then that that eriogonum is a Ischigualastia is right. fact14: A Philistine that is unreasonable is not a kind of a Nijmegen. fact15: If some man does not choke millimetre the one is not a downtown. fact16: This torsion is not a Gnetales if the fact that Karan either whimpers Salvadoraceae or is not a kind of a Gnetales or both does not hold. fact17: If this torsion is not a downtown and does choke millimetre then this mousepad choke millimetre. fact18: That ejaculation is a Gnetales. fact19: If that tambac whimpers Salvadoraceae then that that tambac is a Gnetales and/or not a pyramiding is wrong. fact20: If something is a kind of a downtown that is a Gnetales that thing is not a pyramiding. fact21: Someone is a kind of a pyramiding and the one is a downtown if the one does not choke millimetre. fact22: This torsion is a whispered and is diluvial. fact23: If Karan is not a Gnetales but the thing chokes millimetre then this torsion does not chokes millimetre. ; $hypothesis$ = This torsion is a kind of a pyramiding. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: This torsion is a downtown.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: This torsion is a kind of a downtown and is a kind of a Gnetales.; fact20 -> int3: This torsion is not a pyramiding if that is both a downtown and a Gnetales.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That spherocyte is not an insanity and it does not enchained yeti.

(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: Something does not enchained yeti if that the thing is postwar and is not a kind of an insanity is false. fact2: That spherocyte does not enchained yeti if the one is onshore. fact3: Somebody that does not enchained yeti is both not non-onshore and an offer. fact4: That spherocyte is a kind of an offer. fact5: That spherocyte is onshore and it is an offer. fact6: That that spherocyte is not an insanity and this does not enchained yeti is wrong if this hydroxytetracycline is onshore. fact7: That spherocyte is not an insanity and does not enchained yeti if that spherocyte is not non-onshore.

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

That bassinet is onshore.

{A}{fq}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something does not enchained yeti if that the thing is postwar and is not a kind of an insanity is false. fact2: That spherocyte does not enchained yeti if the one is onshore. fact3: Somebody that does not enchained yeti is both not non-onshore and an offer. fact4: That spherocyte is a kind of an offer. fact5: That spherocyte is onshore and it is an offer. fact6: That that spherocyte is not an insanity and this does not enchained yeti is wrong if this hydroxytetracycline is onshore. fact7: That spherocyte is not an insanity and does not enchained yeti if that spherocyte is not non-onshore. ; $hypothesis$ = That spherocyte is not an insanity and it does not enchained yeti. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: That spherocyte is onshore.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That myelinisation does not Pyramid skiffle.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: The wreckage does Pyramid skiffle. fact2: If that flyswat is a kind of a Khrushchev then that myelinisation hates stridor. fact3: If the fact that that myelinisation is a Khrushchev is correct then it hates stridor. fact4: This Parmesan does Pyramid skiffle. fact5: Some man that hates stridor Pyramids skiffle. fact6: If that myelinisation is a kind of a Khrushchev that flyswat Pyramids skiffle. fact7: That flyswat is catapultic. fact8: That flyswat is backward. fact9: That silkwood Pyramids skiffle. fact10: That myelinisation corrects USCB. fact11: That flyswat does hate stridor. fact12: That myelinisation is a kind of a Dodonaea. fact13: Someone hates stridor if the person is a Khrushchev. fact14: That squirter is a Khrushchev. fact15: That flyswat is a Khrushchev. fact16: Something Pyramids skiffle if it is a Khrushchev. fact17: The exhaust hates stridor. fact18: If something is cacodylic then it is a alkaptonuria. fact19: This Oxonian hates stridor. fact20: That flyswat Pyramids skiffle.

fact1: {C}{gs} fact2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact3: {A}{b} -> {B}{b} fact4: {C}{ec} fact5: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact6: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact7: {JG}{a} fact8: {GN}{a} fact9: {C}{dm} fact10: {CP}{b} fact11: {B}{a} fact12: {AD}{b} fact13: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact14: {A}{gb} fact15: {A}{a} fact16: (x): {A}x -> {C}x fact17: {B}{j} fact18: (x): {N}x -> {FC}x fact19: {B}{ch} fact20: {C}{a}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The wreckage does Pyramid skiffle. fact2: If that flyswat is a kind of a Khrushchev then that myelinisation hates stridor. fact3: If the fact that that myelinisation is a Khrushchev is correct then it hates stridor. fact4: This Parmesan does Pyramid skiffle. fact5: Some man that hates stridor Pyramids skiffle. fact6: If that myelinisation is a kind of a Khrushchev that flyswat Pyramids skiffle. fact7: That flyswat is catapultic. fact8: That flyswat is backward. fact9: That silkwood Pyramids skiffle. fact10: That myelinisation corrects USCB. fact11: That flyswat does hate stridor. fact12: That myelinisation is a kind of a Dodonaea. fact13: Someone hates stridor if the person is a Khrushchev. fact14: That squirter is a Khrushchev. fact15: That flyswat is a Khrushchev. fact16: Something Pyramids skiffle if it is a Khrushchev. fact17: The exhaust hates stridor. fact18: If something is cacodylic then it is a alkaptonuria. fact19: This Oxonian hates stridor. fact20: That flyswat Pyramids skiffle. ; $hypothesis$ = That myelinisation does not Pyramid skiffle. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact15 -> int1: That myelinisation hates stridor.; fact5 -> int2: That myelinisation Pyramids skiffle if that one hates stridor.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that cowrie is not sociobiologic and the thing is not psycholinguistic does not hold.

¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{A}{c})

fact1: If that sheikhdom is psycholinguistic then that that cowrie is not a newsletter and it is not a Palatine does not hold. fact2: If some person is astrophysical then it retrogresses twelvemonth and it is not antemeridian. fact3: If that sheikhdom is a kind of a newsletter the fact that that buttocks is not a Palatine and it does not retrogress twelvemonth is incorrect. fact4: That buttocks is psycholinguistic if that cowrie does not retrogress twelvemonth but she/he is sociobiologic. fact5: This kaon is Dostoevskian. fact6: If that sheikhdom is not psycholinguistic that cowrie is not psycholinguistic. fact7: The fact that that cowrie is a Palatine hold. fact8: That sheikhdom is not a newsletter. fact9: That sheikhdom is not a newsletter but it is a Palatine. fact10: If that sheikhdom retrogresses twelvemonth the fact that that buttocks is not a newsletter and not a Palatine is wrong. fact11: That that maven retrogresses twelvemonth and does not secure Ardea does not hold. fact12: That that sheikhdom is not a Palatine and does not retrogress twelvemonth is false. fact13: The fact that that sheikhdom is not a Palatine and is not psycholinguistic does not hold if that buttocks does retrogress twelvemonth. fact14: The fact that that sheikhdom is not marmoreal and that person is not sociobiologic is not correct. fact15: If that buttocks does retrogress twelvemonth then that that cowrie is not sociobiologic and is not psycholinguistic is wrong. fact16: That buttocks retrogresses twelvemonth if that sheikhdom is both not a newsletter and a Palatine. fact17: That sheikhdom is not psycholinguistic if that buttocks is non-downtown one that is non-classic. fact18: This kaon is astrophysical if this thing is Dostoevskian. fact19: That sheikhdom is not a newsletter and not non-psycholinguistic. fact20: Somebody that does amalgamate is both not downtown and not classic. fact21: If somebody retrogresses twelvemonth and is not antemeridian then that cowrie is not sociobiologic. fact22: If that buttocks retrogresses twelvemonth that that sheikhdom is not psycholinguistic and it is not a newsletter is incorrect.

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

That cowrie is not sociobiologic and the thing is non-psycholinguistic.

(¬{C}{c} & ¬{A}{c})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that sheikhdom is psycholinguistic then that that cowrie is not a newsletter and it is not a Palatine does not hold. fact2: If some person is astrophysical then it retrogresses twelvemonth and it is not antemeridian. fact3: If that sheikhdom is a kind of a newsletter the fact that that buttocks is not a Palatine and it does not retrogress twelvemonth is incorrect. fact4: That buttocks is psycholinguistic if that cowrie does not retrogress twelvemonth but she/he is sociobiologic. fact5: This kaon is Dostoevskian. fact6: If that sheikhdom is not psycholinguistic that cowrie is not psycholinguistic. fact7: The fact that that cowrie is a Palatine hold. fact8: That sheikhdom is not a newsletter. fact9: That sheikhdom is not a newsletter but it is a Palatine. fact10: If that sheikhdom retrogresses twelvemonth the fact that that buttocks is not a newsletter and not a Palatine is wrong. fact11: That that maven retrogresses twelvemonth and does not secure Ardea does not hold. fact12: That that sheikhdom is not a Palatine and does not retrogress twelvemonth is false. fact13: The fact that that sheikhdom is not a Palatine and is not psycholinguistic does not hold if that buttocks does retrogress twelvemonth. fact14: The fact that that sheikhdom is not marmoreal and that person is not sociobiologic is not correct. fact15: If that buttocks does retrogress twelvemonth then that that cowrie is not sociobiologic and is not psycholinguistic is wrong. fact16: That buttocks retrogresses twelvemonth if that sheikhdom is both not a newsletter and a Palatine. fact17: That sheikhdom is not psycholinguistic if that buttocks is non-downtown one that is non-classic. fact18: This kaon is astrophysical if this thing is Dostoevskian. fact19: That sheikhdom is not a newsletter and not non-psycholinguistic. fact20: Somebody that does amalgamate is both not downtown and not classic. fact21: If somebody retrogresses twelvemonth and is not antemeridian then that cowrie is not sociobiologic. fact22: If that buttocks retrogresses twelvemonth that that sheikhdom is not psycholinguistic and it is not a newsletter is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that cowrie is not sociobiologic and the thing is not psycholinguistic does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact9 -> int1: That buttocks does retrogress twelvemonth.; int1 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That astronomer is a II.

{A}{a}

fact1: Someone lobbies if he is not a kind of a pontificate or he does lobbies or both. fact2: This head does not execute compliments. fact3: That astronomer is not a kind of a II if this head is not a kind of a typo but it is a II. fact4: If this head does not execute compliments then this head does not brachiate and does purge budge. fact5: This head is not a typo but a II if this couturier is non-fruticose. fact6: Something is not a kind of a Claytonia if it lobbies. fact7: Something is a typo if it is not non-fruticose. fact8: If this head does not unwind then this head does not adumbrate. fact9: If someone is not a Claytonia then this person is fruticose and this person is an inclined. fact10: That astronomer lobbies if this head does lobbies but this is not a paleopathology. fact11: If some person does not brachiate and does purge budge the person is not a paleopathology. fact12: That astronomer is a II. fact13: If someone does not adumbrate then the person is not a pontificate or lobbies or both. fact14: This telescope is a kind of a II if that astronomer is a typo. fact15: This head does not unwind.

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

That astronomer is not a II.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone lobbies if he is not a kind of a pontificate or he does lobbies or both. fact2: This head does not execute compliments. fact3: That astronomer is not a kind of a II if this head is not a kind of a typo but it is a II. fact4: If this head does not execute compliments then this head does not brachiate and does purge budge. fact5: This head is not a typo but a II if this couturier is non-fruticose. fact6: Something is not a kind of a Claytonia if it lobbies. fact7: Something is a typo if it is not non-fruticose. fact8: If this head does not unwind then this head does not adumbrate. fact9: If someone is not a Claytonia then this person is fruticose and this person is an inclined. fact10: That astronomer lobbies if this head does lobbies but this is not a paleopathology. fact11: If some person does not brachiate and does purge budge the person is not a paleopathology. fact12: That astronomer is a II. fact13: If someone does not adumbrate then the person is not a pontificate or lobbies or both. fact14: This telescope is a kind of a II if that astronomer is a typo. fact15: This head does not unwind. ; $hypothesis$ = That astronomer is a II. ; $proof$ =

fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that pekan does not oblige is incorrect.

{A}{b}

fact1: This amberfish is a stretchiness if this amberfish is a lowercase. fact2: This amberfish obliges. fact3: This amberfish does oblige if that pekan is a lowercase. fact4: That censor is a kind of a lowercase. fact5: That pekan obliges if this amberfish is a kind of a stretchiness. fact6: That pekan is subjunctive if the fact that that pekan does not oblige and is not a stretchiness is wrong. fact7: This amberfish obliges if that pekan is subjunctive. fact8: If that somebody obliges and it is not patriotic does not hold then it does not obliges. fact9: This amberfish is a stretchiness if the fact that it is not a lowercase and it is not subjunctive is wrong. fact10: That pekan obliges if that it is not subjunctive and not a stretchiness is incorrect. fact11: The fact that that pekan obliges and it is unpatriotic is wrong if it is not a stretchiness. fact12: That this amberfish is both not a lowercase and not subjunctive is incorrect.

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

That pekan does not oblige.

¬{A}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This amberfish is a stretchiness if this amberfish is a lowercase. fact2: This amberfish obliges. fact3: This amberfish does oblige if that pekan is a lowercase. fact4: That censor is a kind of a lowercase. fact5: That pekan obliges if this amberfish is a kind of a stretchiness. fact6: That pekan is subjunctive if the fact that that pekan does not oblige and is not a stretchiness is wrong. fact7: This amberfish obliges if that pekan is subjunctive. fact8: If that somebody obliges and it is not patriotic does not hold then it does not obliges. fact9: This amberfish is a stretchiness if the fact that it is not a lowercase and it is not subjunctive is wrong. fact10: That pekan obliges if that it is not subjunctive and not a stretchiness is incorrect. fact11: The fact that that pekan obliges and it is unpatriotic is wrong if it is not a stretchiness. fact12: That this amberfish is both not a lowercase and not subjunctive is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that pekan does not oblige is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact12 -> int1: This amberfish is a stretchiness.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That non-geodesicness and that non-secondariness happens.

(¬{D} & ¬{C})

fact1: If both that non-annunciatoriness and that non-cognisableness occurs that hopefulness occurs. fact2: That this afforestation does not happens and this secondariness does not occurs is triggered by that this tracheotomy happens. fact3: That that geodesicness does not happens and this secondariness does not occurs is false if this afforestation does not happens. fact4: Both that non-annunciatoriness and that non-cognisableness happens. fact5: This afforestation does not happens if that hopefulness occurs.

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

That non-geodesicness and that non-secondariness happens.

(¬{D} & ¬{C})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If both that non-annunciatoriness and that non-cognisableness occurs that hopefulness occurs. fact2: That this afforestation does not happens and this secondariness does not occurs is triggered by that this tracheotomy happens. fact3: That that geodesicness does not happens and this secondariness does not occurs is false if this afforestation does not happens. fact4: Both that non-annunciatoriness and that non-cognisableness happens. fact5: This afforestation does not happens if that hopefulness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That non-geodesicness and that non-secondariness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact4 -> int1: That hopefulness happens.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: This afforestation does not happens.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This threadworm does not filet Goering and does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae.

(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: That this Somali tusks Musa and does not widen futurity is false if that carnivore is an audiovisual. fact2: The fact that this threadworm does not filet Goering and it does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae is false if it is non-geographical. fact3: The fact that this threadworm does not disturb is right. fact4: If Efren is not paschal that scrotum lambs and is an audiovisual. fact5: The fact that that mariposa is not unable is not false if this oar is not a Helxine. fact6: That carnivore is an audiovisual if that scrotum is an audiovisual. fact7: If this threadworm is not geographical then that this threadworm does not filet Goering but it hypophysectomises Phaethontidae does not hold. fact8: This oar is not a Helxine if the fact that the fact that this Somali does tusk Musa and does not widen futurity is correct is wrong. fact9: The fact that this threadworm does filet Goering and does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae is wrong. fact10: If the fact that this threadworm disturbs and/or it is not non-interlocutory does not hold this threadworm is non-geographical. fact11: Some man is geographical if it is injectable. fact12: If there is some man such that it filets Goering the fact that that vitality does not anneal nonsensicality and it does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae is incorrect. fact13: That this threadworm disturbs and/or is interlocutory is wrong. fact14: This threadworm does not filet Goering and does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae if that mariposa is not geographical. fact15: This threadworm filets Goering if that mariposa is geographical. fact16: If some man is not unable and/or it stagnates then it is injectable.

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

The fact that that vitality does not anneal nonsensicality and does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae does not hold.

¬(¬{GJ}{jh} & ¬{C}{jh})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this Somali tusks Musa and does not widen futurity is false if that carnivore is an audiovisual. fact2: The fact that this threadworm does not filet Goering and it does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae is false if it is non-geographical. fact3: The fact that this threadworm does not disturb is right. fact4: If Efren is not paschal that scrotum lambs and is an audiovisual. fact5: The fact that that mariposa is not unable is not false if this oar is not a Helxine. fact6: That carnivore is an audiovisual if that scrotum is an audiovisual. fact7: If this threadworm is not geographical then that this threadworm does not filet Goering but it hypophysectomises Phaethontidae does not hold. fact8: This oar is not a Helxine if the fact that the fact that this Somali does tusk Musa and does not widen futurity is correct is wrong. fact9: The fact that this threadworm does filet Goering and does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae is wrong. fact10: If the fact that this threadworm disturbs and/or it is not non-interlocutory does not hold this threadworm is non-geographical. fact11: Some man is geographical if it is injectable. fact12: If there is some man such that it filets Goering the fact that that vitality does not anneal nonsensicality and it does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae is incorrect. fact13: That this threadworm disturbs and/or is interlocutory is wrong. fact14: This threadworm does not filet Goering and does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae if that mariposa is not geographical. fact15: This threadworm filets Goering if that mariposa is geographical. fact16: If some man is not unable and/or it stagnates then it is injectable. ; $hypothesis$ = This threadworm does not filet Goering and does not hypophysectomise Phaethontidae. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact13 -> int1: This threadworm is not geographical.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That animator is a Phoenix.

{C}{a}

fact1: That kava is a mistiness. fact2: That animator dazzles if that animator is a circular. fact3: That animator is a circular if that animator is legal. fact4: This stoker is a Plymouth if that one is a kind of a circular. fact5: Something is not a Phoenix if that this thing is a circular and this thing is a Phoenix is wrong. fact6: That animator is a kind of a mistiness. fact7: The monument is a Phoenix. fact8: The sailplane is a kind of a Phoenix. fact9: That animator is a Phoenix if that animator premieres Nemea. fact10: If something is non-alabastrine it is not a mistiness and it is a Phoenix. fact11: If some person that is not a mistiness is a Phoenix it is a circular. fact12: If something is a kind of a Godiva it is a steepness. fact13: If something is a Phoenix it is a mistiness. fact14: Someone that is a circular is a kind of a mistiness. fact15: If something is a spots this thing is canicular. fact16: That anatoxin is a kind of a circular. fact17: That animator does vaunt if that animator is a acidemia. fact18: A centrifugal man is humbling. fact19: The whatchamacallum is a Phoenix. fact20: Someone beads if it completes. fact21: That animator courses secretariate. fact22: If that animator is a mistiness then that animator is a kind of a circular.

fact1: {A}{fu} fact2: {B}{a} -> {GI}{a} fact3: {EG}{a} -> {B}{a} fact4: {B}{hi} -> {IN}{hi} fact5: (x): ¬({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x fact6: {A}{a} fact7: {C}{j} fact8: {C}{je} fact9: {JB}{a} -> {C}{a} fact10: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{A}x & {C}x) fact11: (x): (¬{A}x & {C}x) -> {B}x fact12: (x): {CG}x -> {G}x fact13: (x): {C}x -> {A}x fact14: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact15: (x): {ID}x -> {FL}x fact16: {B}{af} fact17: {E}{a} -> {HG}{a} fact18: (x): {DM}x -> {HK}x fact19: {C}{ea} fact20: (x): {BC}x -> {GN}x fact21: {IK}{a} fact22: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}

That god is a kind of a circular.

{B}{if}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That kava is a mistiness. fact2: That animator dazzles if that animator is a circular. fact3: That animator is a circular if that animator is legal. fact4: This stoker is a Plymouth if that one is a kind of a circular. fact5: Something is not a Phoenix if that this thing is a circular and this thing is a Phoenix is wrong. fact6: That animator is a kind of a mistiness. fact7: The monument is a Phoenix. fact8: The sailplane is a kind of a Phoenix. fact9: That animator is a Phoenix if that animator premieres Nemea. fact10: If something is non-alabastrine it is not a mistiness and it is a Phoenix. fact11: If some person that is not a mistiness is a Phoenix it is a circular. fact12: If something is a kind of a Godiva it is a steepness. fact13: If something is a Phoenix it is a mistiness. fact14: Someone that is a circular is a kind of a mistiness. fact15: If something is a spots this thing is canicular. fact16: That anatoxin is a kind of a circular. fact17: That animator does vaunt if that animator is a acidemia. fact18: A centrifugal man is humbling. fact19: The whatchamacallum is a Phoenix. fact20: Someone beads if it completes. fact21: That animator courses secretariate. fact22: If that animator is a mistiness then that animator is a kind of a circular. ; $hypothesis$ = That animator is a Phoenix. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Zoe is not a acquisitiveness.

¬{C}{aa}

fact1: Some person is not a kind of a malarkey if this person is both a acquisitiveness and uncollected. fact2: Zoe is uncollected but it is not a malarkey. fact3: The fact that if somebody is not a kind of a malarkey then it is not a acquisitiveness is correct.

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

That brunch is not a malarkey.

¬{B}{ip}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person is not a kind of a malarkey if this person is both a acquisitiveness and uncollected. fact2: Zoe is uncollected but it is not a malarkey. fact3: The fact that if somebody is not a kind of a malarkey then it is not a acquisitiveness is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = Zoe is not a acquisitiveness. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: If Zoe is not a malarkey then Zoe is not a acquisitiveness.; fact2 -> int2: Zoe is not a malarkey.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The proverbialness occurs.

{A}

fact1: This quaking occurs. fact2: The proverbialness occurs. fact3: That this handicapping Euascomycetes occurs is correct.

fact1: {DR} fact2: {A} fact3: {EG}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This quaking occurs. fact2: The proverbialness occurs. fact3: That this handicapping Euascomycetes occurs is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = The proverbialness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This alcoholic conforms catalepsy.

{B}{b}

fact1: If something does not pickings it is a kind of a memorization and it is narial. fact2: If this herbal is narial then this alcoholic conforms catalepsy. fact3: If that this herbal does not brain doggedness is right then that it is non-carbonous one that firms hypersomnia is wrong. fact4: If this herbal overindulges misconception this alcoholic does not conform catalepsy. fact5: If some person does not firm hypersomnia then the fact that she/he is not a kind of a tenability and is prismatic is wrong. fact6: Someone does not brain doggedness if that it does not express Asanga and brain doggedness does not hold. fact7: Something does not pickings if that the thing is not a tenability and the thing is prismatic does not hold. fact8: That this herbal does not overindulge misconception and that person is not an uptown is incorrect. fact9: Some man does not firm hypersomnia if that it is not carbonous and it firm hypersomnia does not hold.

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

This alcoholic conforms catalepsy.

{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something does not pickings it is a kind of a memorization and it is narial. fact2: If this herbal is narial then this alcoholic conforms catalepsy. fact3: If that this herbal does not brain doggedness is right then that it is non-carbonous one that firms hypersomnia is wrong. fact4: If this herbal overindulges misconception this alcoholic does not conform catalepsy. fact5: If some person does not firm hypersomnia then the fact that she/he is not a kind of a tenability and is prismatic is wrong. fact6: Someone does not brain doggedness if that it does not express Asanga and brain doggedness does not hold. fact7: Something does not pickings if that the thing is not a tenability and the thing is prismatic does not hold. fact8: That this herbal does not overindulge misconception and that person is not an uptown is incorrect. fact9: Some man does not firm hypersomnia if that it is not carbonous and it firm hypersomnia does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This alcoholic conforms catalepsy. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this doge is larval is right.

{B}{b}

fact1: That hawse is not non-larval. fact2: If something is larval then the fact that it dislodges Caulophyllum is correct. fact3: That magnifico is a Atherinidae. fact4: This doge is a gutsiness. fact5: If that magnifico is not extensile then either that magnifico is not a Rosidae or it is not inheritable or both. fact6: The eglantine is larval. fact7: That magnifico guesstimates Aplacophora. fact8: Someone frets clamour and dislodges Caulophyllum if it is not a Rosidae. fact9: The fact that that magnifico dislodges Caulophyllum is correct. fact10: If something is inheritable this is not extensile and is not a kind of a Rosidae. fact11: If the lake is inheritable then that this doge is not extensile does not hold. fact12: If that magnifico does dislodge Caulophyllum this doge is not non-larval. fact13: Someone frets clamour if he is extensile. fact14: That that some man is not non-larval and frets clamour is not correct if that one does not dislodge Caulophyllum is true. fact15: This doge does not dislodge Caulophyllum if that magnifico is not extensile and that thing is not a Rosidae. fact16: If the fact that something is larval and it frets clamour does not hold it is not larval. fact17: That magnifico is a Rosidae and/or that thing is not larval if this doge frets clamour. fact18: That magnifico is larval if this doge does dislodge Caulophyllum. fact19: the fact that the Caulophyllum dislodges magnifico is correct.

fact1: {B}{dn} fact2: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact3: {HU}{a} fact4: {IE}{b} fact5: ¬{E}{a} -> (¬{D}{a} v ¬{F}{a}) fact6: {B}{gp} fact7: {H}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & {A}x) fact9: {A}{a} fact10: (x): {F}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) fact11: {F}{c} -> {E}{b} fact12: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact13: (x): {E}x -> {C}x fact14: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & {C}x) fact15: (¬{E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact16: (x): ¬({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact17: {C}{b} -> ({D}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) fact18: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact19: {AA}{aa}

This doge is not larval.

¬{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That hawse is not non-larval. fact2: If something is larval then the fact that it dislodges Caulophyllum is correct. fact3: That magnifico is a Atherinidae. fact4: This doge is a gutsiness. fact5: If that magnifico is not extensile then either that magnifico is not a Rosidae or it is not inheritable or both. fact6: The eglantine is larval. fact7: That magnifico guesstimates Aplacophora. fact8: Someone frets clamour and dislodges Caulophyllum if it is not a Rosidae. fact9: The fact that that magnifico dislodges Caulophyllum is correct. fact10: If something is inheritable this is not extensile and is not a kind of a Rosidae. fact11: If the lake is inheritable then that this doge is not extensile does not hold. fact12: If that magnifico does dislodge Caulophyllum this doge is not non-larval. fact13: Someone frets clamour if he is extensile. fact14: That that some man is not non-larval and frets clamour is not correct if that one does not dislodge Caulophyllum is true. fact15: This doge does not dislodge Caulophyllum if that magnifico is not extensile and that thing is not a Rosidae. fact16: If the fact that something is larval and it frets clamour does not hold it is not larval. fact17: That magnifico is a Rosidae and/or that thing is not larval if this doge frets clamour. fact18: That magnifico is larval if this doge does dislodge Caulophyllum. fact19: the fact that the Caulophyllum dislodges magnifico is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That this doge is larval is right. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That tutsan is not anagrammatic.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If this Juneberry does not district Ashe then this ottar is a kind of anagrammatic one that is collateral. fact2: If the fact that something is bibliographical is true the thing is not a Monophysite but a Stalingrad. fact3: This permafrost is collateral if that this ottar is both not collateral and a muckhill does not hold. fact4: That tutsan is not anagrammatic if this ottar is anagrammatic and collateral. fact5: If that the fact that Alvin is a Soviet but it does not interbreed is wrong hold it does not transude. fact6: This ottar districts Ashe. fact7: This Juneberry is a Monophysite if that wreck is not a Monophysite but that is a kind of a Stalingrad. fact8: If some man is a Monophysite then that she/he either is not Manx or is a muckhill or both does not hold. fact9: The fact that Alvin is a Soviet but it does not interbreed is incorrect if that drain ousts Umbellularia. fact10: This goshawk is collateral. fact11: If that something is not Manx or is a muckhill or both is wrong it does not district Ashe. fact12: That drain ousts Umbellularia. fact13: If the fact that something districts Ashe but this is not anagrammatic does not hold the fact that this is anagrammatic is correct. fact14: If some man does not transude then he/she is not faster and he/she is a kind of a corporatist. fact15: That tutsan is anagrammatic if that this ottar is collateral is true.

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

That this permafrost is anagrammatic is not wrong.

{C}{k}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Juneberry does not district Ashe then this ottar is a kind of anagrammatic one that is collateral. fact2: If the fact that something is bibliographical is true the thing is not a Monophysite but a Stalingrad. fact3: This permafrost is collateral if that this ottar is both not collateral and a muckhill does not hold. fact4: That tutsan is not anagrammatic if this ottar is anagrammatic and collateral. fact5: If that the fact that Alvin is a Soviet but it does not interbreed is wrong hold it does not transude. fact6: This ottar districts Ashe. fact7: This Juneberry is a Monophysite if that wreck is not a Monophysite but that is a kind of a Stalingrad. fact8: If some man is a Monophysite then that she/he either is not Manx or is a muckhill or both does not hold. fact9: The fact that Alvin is a Soviet but it does not interbreed is incorrect if that drain ousts Umbellularia. fact10: This goshawk is collateral. fact11: If that something is not Manx or is a muckhill or both is wrong it does not district Ashe. fact12: That drain ousts Umbellularia. fact13: If the fact that something districts Ashe but this is not anagrammatic does not hold the fact that this is anagrammatic is correct. fact14: If some man does not transude then he/she is not faster and he/she is a kind of a corporatist. fact15: That tutsan is anagrammatic if that this ottar is collateral is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That tutsan is not anagrammatic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Damascene is a Leadbelly.

{A}{a}

fact1: That Damascene is not a kind of a tendinitis. fact2: That somebody does not grizzle Oceanic and grosses is incorrect if it is a kind of a Moorish. fact3: Owen is not a Leadbelly. fact4: That Damascene is not distinct. fact5: That Damascene is not a Tertiary. fact6: That hoopoe is not a stoplight if that that Damascene is not a kind of a Temujin or this one is a stoplight or both does not hold. fact7: If something is not a stoplight then it is both a Leadbelly and a Parnell. fact8: That Damascene does not liaise. fact9: That Damascene is not a stoplight if this toiler is both a Numida and a stoplight. fact10: This combretum is not a Leadbelly. fact11: That Damascene is not a kind of a Leadbelly. fact12: This revetement is not a Leadbelly. fact13: If Idalia does not grizzle Oceanic Idalia grosses. fact14: The footer is not a Leadbelly. fact15: Idalia does not grizzle Oceanic. fact16: If Idalia grosses Idalia is a kind of a Temujin. fact17: That Damascene is not higher. fact18: That Damascene is not a kind of a Numida if that that Damascene does not grizzle Oceanic but this thing does gross is false. fact19: If there is something such that it is a Temujin then this toiler is both a Temujin and a Numida. fact20: The determinant is not a Leadbelly. fact21: That that something is not a kind of a Temujin and/or it is a stoplight is true is not correct if it is not a Numida.

fact1: ¬{FB}{a} fact2: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {F}x) fact3: ¬{A}{et} fact4: ¬{J}{a} fact5: ¬{HU}{a} fact6: ¬(¬{E}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{hp} fact7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact8: ¬{EE}{a} fact9: ({D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact10: ¬{A}{k} fact11: ¬{A}{a} fact12: ¬{A}{ep} fact13: ¬{G}{d} -> {F}{d} fact14: ¬{A}{cb} fact15: ¬{G}{d} fact16: {F}{d} -> {E}{d} fact17: ¬{BU}{a} fact18: ¬(¬{G}{a} & {F}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact19: (x): {E}x -> ({E}{b} & {D}{b}) fact20: ¬{A}{ai} fact21: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{E}x v {C}x)

That hoopoe is not a kind of a Leadbelly.

¬{A}{hp}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Damascene is not a kind of a tendinitis. fact2: That somebody does not grizzle Oceanic and grosses is incorrect if it is a kind of a Moorish. fact3: Owen is not a Leadbelly. fact4: That Damascene is not distinct. fact5: That Damascene is not a Tertiary. fact6: That hoopoe is not a stoplight if that that Damascene is not a kind of a Temujin or this one is a stoplight or both does not hold. fact7: If something is not a stoplight then it is both a Leadbelly and a Parnell. fact8: That Damascene does not liaise. fact9: That Damascene is not a stoplight if this toiler is both a Numida and a stoplight. fact10: This combretum is not a Leadbelly. fact11: That Damascene is not a kind of a Leadbelly. fact12: This revetement is not a Leadbelly. fact13: If Idalia does not grizzle Oceanic Idalia grosses. fact14: The footer is not a Leadbelly. fact15: Idalia does not grizzle Oceanic. fact16: If Idalia grosses Idalia is a kind of a Temujin. fact17: That Damascene is not higher. fact18: That Damascene is not a kind of a Numida if that that Damascene does not grizzle Oceanic but this thing does gross is false. fact19: If there is something such that it is a Temujin then this toiler is both a Temujin and a Numida. fact20: The determinant is not a Leadbelly. fact21: That that something is not a kind of a Temujin and/or it is a stoplight is true is not correct if it is not a Numida. ; $hypothesis$ = That Damascene is a Leadbelly. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this easing Matricaria but notthat Stranding occurs is false.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: This easing Matricaria happens and that Stranding does not happens if that exportableness does not happens. fact2: If this easing Matricaria but notthat Stranding happens this concretizing Day does not occurs. fact3: If that sweeping happens then that profiting Jesuitism happens. fact4: This uncial does not happens if that this uncial happens and this insertion does not happens is wrong. fact5: If the fact that that the non-Saudiness and this honeyeding happens does not hold hold then that twiddling Versailles does not happens. fact6: That Stranding does not occurs. fact7: That the commissioning Mohria does not occurs is right. fact8: Both that exportableness and this concretizing Day occurs if this uncial does not happens. fact9: If that that papalness happens is correct the fact that this completingness happens hold. fact10: If that eating occurs then the fact that this uncial but notthis insertion happens is false. fact11: That that Saudiness does not happens and this honeyeding occurs is wrong if this completingness happens. fact12: This concretizing Day occurs. fact13: If this stocktaking does not happens then that eating and this Bolshevisticness happens. fact14: That that the unclotheding but notthis Termes occurs hold is not correct if that exportableness happens. fact15: This stocktaking does not occurs if the fact that that both this stocktaking and this kneel occurs does not hold is true. fact16: If that twiddling Versailles does not occurs that that this stocktaking and this kneel occurs hold is not correct. fact17: If that profiting Jesuitism happens that papalness happens.

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

Let's assume that this easing Matricaria occurs and that Stranding does not happens.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This easing Matricaria happens and that Stranding does not happens if that exportableness does not happens. fact2: If this easing Matricaria but notthat Stranding happens this concretizing Day does not occurs. fact3: If that sweeping happens then that profiting Jesuitism happens. fact4: This uncial does not happens if that this uncial happens and this insertion does not happens is wrong. fact5: If the fact that that the non-Saudiness and this honeyeding happens does not hold hold then that twiddling Versailles does not happens. fact6: That Stranding does not occurs. fact7: That the commissioning Mohria does not occurs is right. fact8: Both that exportableness and this concretizing Day occurs if this uncial does not happens. fact9: If that that papalness happens is correct the fact that this completingness happens hold. fact10: If that eating occurs then the fact that this uncial but notthis insertion happens is false. fact11: That that Saudiness does not happens and this honeyeding occurs is wrong if this completingness happens. fact12: This concretizing Day occurs. fact13: If this stocktaking does not happens then that eating and this Bolshevisticness happens. fact14: That that the unclotheding but notthis Termes occurs hold is not correct if that exportableness happens. fact15: This stocktaking does not occurs if the fact that that both this stocktaking and this kneel occurs does not hold is true. fact16: If that twiddling Versailles does not occurs that that this stocktaking and this kneel occurs hold is not correct. fact17: If that profiting Jesuitism happens that papalness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this easing Matricaria but notthat Stranding occurs is false. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this easing Matricaria occurs and that Stranding does not happens.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: This concretizing Day does not happens.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This prison is not a kind of a eyedness and the one is not stemless.

(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

fact1: That this prison is not a eyedness and is a kind of a hemidemisemiquaver is wrong. fact2: That that militant is not stemless and is unarbitrary does not hold. fact3: The fact that that militant is not a eyedness and this one is not unarbitrary does not hold if this prison is stemless. fact4: The fact that this prison is not unarbitrary but it is a kind of a eyedness does not hold. fact5: That this prison is not stemless but she is not arbitrary is wrong if that militant is a eyedness. fact6: That that militant is not a eyedness and it is not unarbitrary does not hold. fact7: The smock is unarbitrary. fact8: The fact that this prison is not a kind of a eyedness but it is unarbitrary is incorrect. fact9: The fact that this prison is not stemless but the person is unarbitrary is incorrect. fact10: That that militant is arbitrary one that is not stemless is wrong. fact11: If this prison is a eyedness then that that militant is a kind of non-unarbitrary thing that is stemless is incorrect. fact12: That that militant is unarbitrary and is stemmed does not hold if this prison is a eyedness. fact13: That this prison is not a kind of a eyedness and the one is not stemless is false if that militant is not arbitrary. fact14: That that militant is not stemless and that is not unarbitrary is wrong. fact15: If this prison is unarbitrary then that that militant is stemless but this person is not a eyedness is wrong.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {K}{b}) fact2: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) fact3: {AB}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact4: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {AA}{b}) fact5: {AA}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {A}{b}) fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact7: {A}{fg} fact8: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {A}{b}) fact9: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {A}{b}) fact10: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact11: {AA}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact12: {AA}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact13: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact14: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact15: {A}{b} -> ¬({AB}{a} & ¬{AA}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this prison is not a eyedness and is a kind of a hemidemisemiquaver is wrong. fact2: That that militant is not stemless and is unarbitrary does not hold. fact3: The fact that that militant is not a eyedness and this one is not unarbitrary does not hold if this prison is stemless. fact4: The fact that this prison is not unarbitrary but it is a kind of a eyedness does not hold. fact5: That this prison is not stemless but she is not arbitrary is wrong if that militant is a eyedness. fact6: That that militant is not a eyedness and it is not unarbitrary does not hold. fact7: The smock is unarbitrary. fact8: The fact that this prison is not a kind of a eyedness but it is unarbitrary is incorrect. fact9: The fact that this prison is not stemless but the person is unarbitrary is incorrect. fact10: That that militant is arbitrary one that is not stemless is wrong. fact11: If this prison is a eyedness then that that militant is a kind of non-unarbitrary thing that is stemless is incorrect. fact12: That that militant is unarbitrary and is stemmed does not hold if this prison is a eyedness. fact13: That this prison is not a kind of a eyedness and the one is not stemless is false if that militant is not arbitrary. fact14: That that militant is not stemless and that is not unarbitrary is wrong. fact15: If this prison is unarbitrary then that that militant is stemless but this person is not a eyedness is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This prison is not a kind of a eyedness and the one is not stemless. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That pyrolyticness occurs.

{C}

fact1: If the fact that this chaoticness occurs does not hold then this marbling does not happens. fact2: The ostentatiousness and the incompleteness happens. fact3: The palatialness does not occurs. fact4: That both this staccatoness and that chalkiness happens is triggered by that that selling does not happens. fact5: That notthat selling but the replying Myrcia occurs if that monoploidness occurs hold. fact6: If this marbling does not occurs then that monoploidness occurs and the firmamentalness happens. fact7: The fact that the outgeneraling Zimbalist happens is right. fact8: If this strangulation does not happens then this sulfuricness occurs and this strangulation does not occurs. fact9: If the stroking does not happens then the boracicness but notthe stroking occurs. fact10: If this staccatoness happens then the fact that notthis adjoining but that ottomanness occurs is false. fact11: This rale does not happens. fact12: This responding happens. fact13: That this humbling Anaxagoras does not happens is triggered by that this bregmaticness happens. fact14: That selling happens. fact15: That this heaving Ceratitis does not happens is right. fact16: If this adjoining happens then that ottomanness does not happens. fact17: That that ottomanness does not occurs yields that both that pyrolyticness and that non-ottomanness happens. fact18: If this overcapitalization does not happens the fact that the sarcasticness but notthis overcapitalization occurs hold. fact19: That the bewitching Rhinoptera happens results in that that non-chaoticness and the animating occurs.

fact1: ¬{K} -> ¬{J} fact2: ({BB} & ¬{IG}) fact3: ¬{AB} fact4: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact5: {H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) fact6: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact7: {BS} fact8: ¬{GS} -> ({FC} & ¬{GS}) fact9: ¬{AQ} -> ({CT} & ¬{AQ}) fact10: {D} -> ¬(¬{A} & {B}) fact11: ¬{JJ} fact12: {IO} fact13: {EK} -> ¬{DH} fact14: {F} fact15: ¬{EF} fact16: {A} -> ¬{B} fact17: ¬{B} -> ({C} & ¬{B}) fact18: ¬{JE} -> ({CQ} & ¬{JE}) fact19: {M} -> (¬{K} & {L})

That pyrolyticness does not happens.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this chaoticness occurs does not hold then this marbling does not happens. fact2: The ostentatiousness and the incompleteness happens. fact3: The palatialness does not occurs. fact4: That both this staccatoness and that chalkiness happens is triggered by that that selling does not happens. fact5: That notthat selling but the replying Myrcia occurs if that monoploidness occurs hold. fact6: If this marbling does not occurs then that monoploidness occurs and the firmamentalness happens. fact7: The fact that the outgeneraling Zimbalist happens is right. fact8: If this strangulation does not happens then this sulfuricness occurs and this strangulation does not occurs. fact9: If the stroking does not happens then the boracicness but notthe stroking occurs. fact10: If this staccatoness happens then the fact that notthis adjoining but that ottomanness occurs is false. fact11: This rale does not happens. fact12: This responding happens. fact13: That this humbling Anaxagoras does not happens is triggered by that this bregmaticness happens. fact14: That selling happens. fact15: That this heaving Ceratitis does not happens is right. fact16: If this adjoining happens then that ottomanness does not happens. fact17: That that ottomanness does not occurs yields that both that pyrolyticness and that non-ottomanness happens. fact18: If this overcapitalization does not happens the fact that the sarcasticness but notthis overcapitalization occurs hold. fact19: That the bewitching Rhinoptera happens results in that that non-chaoticness and the animating occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That pyrolyticness occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this tattinging happens is right.

{A}

fact1: If that NMR does not occurs then that astragalarness and this humbling Tabuk occurs. fact2: The fact that this tattinging and that astragalarness happens is true.

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

The likableness occurs.

{GF}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that NMR does not occurs then that astragalarness and this humbling Tabuk occurs. fact2: The fact that this tattinging and that astragalarness happens is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That this tattinging happens is right. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This gemmiferousness happens.

{D}

fact1: The Secession leads to that this baboonishness happens and the expedient does not happens. fact2: That both that crustaceousness and that spurning attacking happens prevents that this gemmiferousness occurs. fact3: This scores does not occurs if that that interpretation does not happens and this contenting does not occurs is incorrect. fact4: That this micropylarness does not happens yields that that crustaceousness happens and this gemmiferousness occurs. fact5: That that pompousness does not happens causes that this travail and that spurning attacking occurs. fact6: Both this mucinousness and the piddling Bodhisattva occurs. fact7: That pompousness does not occurs if that this instillation and that pompousness happens is false. fact8: That this micropylarness does not happens is caused by that both this travail and that spurning attacking happens. fact9: If this baboonishness happens then the fact that the fact that that interpretation does not occurs and this contenting does not happens is false hold. fact10: If that this scores does not occurs is true that this instillation occurs and that pompousness happens is wrong. fact11: If that stealth happens the Secession happens. fact12: That spurning attacking occurs.

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

This gemmiferousness happens.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The Secession leads to that this baboonishness happens and the expedient does not happens. fact2: That both that crustaceousness and that spurning attacking happens prevents that this gemmiferousness occurs. fact3: This scores does not occurs if that that interpretation does not happens and this contenting does not occurs is incorrect. fact4: That this micropylarness does not happens yields that that crustaceousness happens and this gemmiferousness occurs. fact5: That that pompousness does not happens causes that this travail and that spurning attacking occurs. fact6: Both this mucinousness and the piddling Bodhisattva occurs. fact7: That pompousness does not occurs if that this instillation and that pompousness happens is false. fact8: That this micropylarness does not happens is caused by that both this travail and that spurning attacking happens. fact9: If this baboonishness happens then the fact that the fact that that interpretation does not occurs and this contenting does not happens is false hold. fact10: If that this scores does not occurs is true that this instillation occurs and that pompousness happens is wrong. fact11: If that stealth happens the Secession happens. fact12: That spurning attacking occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This gemmiferousness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This crow is not psychological.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: If this crow is packable then this famulus is psychological. fact2: This famulus is not a kind of a Tridacnidae if the fact that this famulus is archangelical and a Tridacnidae is wrong. fact3: That this crow is psychological if this famulus is electrolytic hold. fact4: If this famulus is not non-packable then this crow is psychological. fact5: If this famulus is not a Tridacnidae that this crow is packable and is not electrolytic is wrong. fact6: This crow is not psychological if that this crow is both packable and not electrolytic is false.

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

This crow is not psychological.

¬{C}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this crow is packable then this famulus is psychological. fact2: This famulus is not a kind of a Tridacnidae if the fact that this famulus is archangelical and a Tridacnidae is wrong. fact3: That this crow is psychological if this famulus is electrolytic hold. fact4: If this famulus is not non-packable then this crow is psychological. fact5: If this famulus is not a Tridacnidae that this crow is packable and is not electrolytic is wrong. fact6: This crow is not psychological if that this crow is both packable and not electrolytic is false. ; $hypothesis$ = This crow is not psychological. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That nonsubmersibleness does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: That that sliding blatancy does not occurs triggers that both this antitumourness and that nonsubmersibleness happens. fact2: If that smattering Carroll occurs then that nonsubmersibleness does not occurs and that sliding blatancy does not happens. fact3: If that unenlightenedness does not occurs then that demonetizing Velazquez occurs and that smattering Carroll occurs. fact4: That organismalness occurs. fact5: That nonsubmersibleness occurs.

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

This antitumourness happens.

{BJ}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that sliding blatancy does not occurs triggers that both this antitumourness and that nonsubmersibleness happens. fact2: If that smattering Carroll occurs then that nonsubmersibleness does not occurs and that sliding blatancy does not happens. fact3: If that unenlightenedness does not occurs then that demonetizing Velazquez occurs and that smattering Carroll occurs. fact4: That organismalness occurs. fact5: That nonsubmersibleness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That nonsubmersibleness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This dubbing fagots neurosis.

{D}{b}

fact1: If that pensionary rejoins that insurgent rejoins. fact2: Something is not a hyperacusia if the fact that this thing is a hyperacusia and this thing does not seem Mimamsa does not hold. fact3: That carnauba does not closet Lilliput if the fact that that chyle does revise advantage and does not closet Lilliput is wrong. fact4: If this dubbing does not closet Lilliput then that congresswoman is fossiliferous but not non-saccadic. fact5: That congresswoman does not fagot neurosis. fact6: If that somebody is non-Dionysian but this person is fossiliferous is false this person is fossiliferous. fact7: If the fact that that carnauba does not closet Lilliput and it is not inefficient is not correct then this dubbing does not closet Lilliput. fact8: That this dubbing fagots neurosis hold if that congresswoman is untalented and it is fossiliferous. fact9: If that insurgent rejoins then that that hierarch is a kind of a hyperacusia and does not seem Mimamsa is not true. fact10: This dubbing does not fagot neurosis if that that congresswoman is not saccadic but talented does not hold. fact11: That truant is not inefficient if it is both not a search and a Boehm. fact12: Something is saccadic. fact13: If there is someone such that that person is saccadic then that congresswoman is not untalented. fact14: If this backplate is a Dinornithiformes this rejoins. fact15: That truant is not a search but a Boehm if the fact that that hierarch is not a hyperacusia is true. fact16: If there exists someone such that it is saccadic that congresswoman is not untalented and is fossiliferous. fact17: That that chyle revises advantage and does not closet Lilliput does not hold if that truant is not inefficient. fact18: That congresswoman is untalented if this dubbing does not fagot neurosis but it is fossiliferous. fact19: If this backplate rejoins the fact that that pensionary rejoins hold. fact20: That congresswoman is not untalented. fact21: Someone is untalented if it is non-Dionysian one that does revise advantage.

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

This dubbing does not fagot neurosis.

¬{D}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that pensionary rejoins that insurgent rejoins. fact2: Something is not a hyperacusia if the fact that this thing is a hyperacusia and this thing does not seem Mimamsa does not hold. fact3: That carnauba does not closet Lilliput if the fact that that chyle does revise advantage and does not closet Lilliput is wrong. fact4: If this dubbing does not closet Lilliput then that congresswoman is fossiliferous but not non-saccadic. fact5: That congresswoman does not fagot neurosis. fact6: If that somebody is non-Dionysian but this person is fossiliferous is false this person is fossiliferous. fact7: If the fact that that carnauba does not closet Lilliput and it is not inefficient is not correct then this dubbing does not closet Lilliput. fact8: That this dubbing fagots neurosis hold if that congresswoman is untalented and it is fossiliferous. fact9: If that insurgent rejoins then that that hierarch is a kind of a hyperacusia and does not seem Mimamsa is not true. fact10: This dubbing does not fagot neurosis if that that congresswoman is not saccadic but talented does not hold. fact11: That truant is not inefficient if it is both not a search and a Boehm. fact12: Something is saccadic. fact13: If there is someone such that that person is saccadic then that congresswoman is not untalented. fact14: If this backplate is a Dinornithiformes this rejoins. fact15: That truant is not a search but a Boehm if the fact that that hierarch is not a hyperacusia is true. fact16: If there exists someone such that it is saccadic that congresswoman is not untalented and is fossiliferous. fact17: That that chyle revises advantage and does not closet Lilliput does not hold if that truant is not inefficient. fact18: That congresswoman is untalented if this dubbing does not fagot neurosis but it is fossiliferous. fact19: If this backplate rejoins the fact that that pensionary rejoins hold. fact20: That congresswoman is not untalented. fact21: Someone is untalented if it is non-Dionysian one that does revise advantage. ; $hypothesis$ = This dubbing fagots neurosis. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this cucumber is not a Indriidae is true.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This cucumber is a punctured. fact2: The lecanora decolourizes and is not a punctured. fact3: This cucumber unsettles Chagall. fact4: The recognition is legato and not a Indriidae. fact5: This cucumber is a kind of a slovenliness. fact6: The telltale is a Indriidae but it is not a kind of a recall. fact7: This saquinavir is a kind of a endemism and is not a kind of a Indriidae. fact8: This cucumber is not immature and is not a NJ. fact9: This cucumber is an extent but it is not a signing. fact10: That shot is both a stanza and not a signing. fact11: That sackbut is lumbar one that does not beeswax kor. fact12: This cucumber does not decolourize. fact13: This cucumber Moons Didion and is not broadnosed. fact14: This cucumber leans Alcyone and is not a kind of a Erythronium. fact15: The Clydesdale decolourizes. fact16: This cucumber is actual.

fact1: {FN}{a} fact2: ({B}{ha} & ¬{FN}{ha}) fact3: {CL}{a} fact4: ({DN}{fe} & ¬{A}{fe}) fact5: {IG}{a} fact6: ({A}{bf} & ¬{HR}{bf}) fact7: ({HQ}{bm} & ¬{A}{bm}) fact8: ({E}{a} & ¬{DU}{a}) fact9: ({Q}{a} & ¬{GN}{a}) fact10: ({P}{hm} & ¬{GN}{hm}) fact11: ({HP}{ej} & ¬{DH}{ej}) fact12: ¬{B}{a} fact13: ({GC}{a} & ¬{IL}{a}) fact14: ({EI}{a} & ¬{HH}{a}) fact15: {B}{ct} fact16: {FD}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This cucumber is a punctured. fact2: The lecanora decolourizes and is not a punctured. fact3: This cucumber unsettles Chagall. fact4: The recognition is legato and not a Indriidae. fact5: This cucumber is a kind of a slovenliness. fact6: The telltale is a Indriidae but it is not a kind of a recall. fact7: This saquinavir is a kind of a endemism and is not a kind of a Indriidae. fact8: This cucumber is not immature and is not a NJ. fact9: This cucumber is an extent but it is not a signing. fact10: That shot is both a stanza and not a signing. fact11: That sackbut is lumbar one that does not beeswax kor. fact12: This cucumber does not decolourize. fact13: This cucumber Moons Didion and is not broadnosed. fact14: This cucumber leans Alcyone and is not a kind of a Erythronium. fact15: The Clydesdale decolourizes. fact16: This cucumber is actual. ; $hypothesis$ = That this cucumber is not a Indriidae is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This pumping peoples happens.

{A}

fact1: This pumping peoples happens.

fact1: {A}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This pumping peoples happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This pumping peoples happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that both this pushing and this overturning imbalance occurs is false.

¬({D} & {E})

fact1: The stellarness happens and this athletics occurs. fact2: If that albinisticness does not occurs both this pushing and this overturning imbalance occurs. fact3: The muzzling nosed happens. fact4: If the fact that this gathering fluting occurs and the muzzling nosed occurs is true then that that albinisticness does not occurs hold.

fact1: ({AT} & {IP}) fact2: ¬{C} -> ({D} & {E}) fact3: {B} fact4: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The stellarness happens and this athletics occurs. fact2: If that albinisticness does not occurs both this pushing and this overturning imbalance occurs. fact3: The muzzling nosed happens. fact4: If the fact that this gathering fluting occurs and the muzzling nosed occurs is true then that that albinisticness does not occurs hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that both this pushing and this overturning imbalance occurs is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this captaincy occurs if that Hispanicness occurs is incorrect.

¬({B} -> {C})

fact1: The unrhythmicness or that Hispanicness or both occurs. fact2: The unrhythmicness does not happens.

fact1: ({A} v {B}) fact2: ¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The unrhythmicness or that Hispanicness or both occurs. fact2: The unrhythmicness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this captaincy occurs if that Hispanicness occurs is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that offense does not occurs hold.

¬{C}

fact1: The photoelectricity happens. fact2: This inveigling results in that the vaporizing does not happens. fact3: That offense does not occurs if either the fetometry or this calycularness or both happens. fact4: That non-calycularness is caused by that both that encrusting and that offense occurs. fact5: The fetometry occurs. fact6: This disadvantaging landscaped does not happens if this miaow occurs. fact7: This commixture does not occurs. fact8: The submerging disinterestedness occurs. fact9: This precession does not happens. fact10: That annoying does not happens. fact11: Either this calycularness does not happens or that encrusting happens or both if that alabaster occurs. fact12: Either the oxidising happens or the teleporting Sphenopsida occurs or both. fact13: If this calycularness does not happens and/or that encrusting occurs then this calycularness does not happens. fact14: The fiddling parallelepiped and/or the qualification happens.

fact1: {FF} fact2: {JK} -> ¬{AG} fact3: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact4: ({D} & {C}) -> ¬{B} fact5: {A} fact6: {CR} -> ¬{IB} fact7: ¬{DU} fact8: {GD} fact9: ¬{CT} fact10: ¬{DA} fact11: {E} -> (¬{B} v {D}) fact12: ({IA} v {U}) fact13: (¬{B} v {D}) -> ¬{B} fact14: ({CG} v {FI})

Either this unfueledness occurs or that rooflessness occurs or both.

({IS} v {FQ})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The photoelectricity happens. fact2: This inveigling results in that the vaporizing does not happens. fact3: That offense does not occurs if either the fetometry or this calycularness or both happens. fact4: That non-calycularness is caused by that both that encrusting and that offense occurs. fact5: The fetometry occurs. fact6: This disadvantaging landscaped does not happens if this miaow occurs. fact7: This commixture does not occurs. fact8: The submerging disinterestedness occurs. fact9: This precession does not happens. fact10: That annoying does not happens. fact11: Either this calycularness does not happens or that encrusting happens or both if that alabaster occurs. fact12: Either the oxidising happens or the teleporting Sphenopsida occurs or both. fact13: If this calycularness does not happens and/or that encrusting occurs then this calycularness does not happens. fact14: The fiddling parallelepiped and/or the qualification happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that offense does not occurs hold. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: Either the fetometry occurs or this calycularness occurs or both.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That both this non-antiferromagneticness and that nerve happens is wrong.

¬(¬{B} & {C})

fact1: If that derision happens then this muttering and/or this antecedent occurs. fact2: The organismalness brings about that the scrawl occurs and/or this tubinging squalidness occurs. fact3: That antiferromagneticness does not occurs if this muttering does not occurs and/or this antecedent occurs. fact4: This muttering or this antecedent or both occurs. fact5: That farm or the teratogenicness or both happens. fact6: This muttering does not occurs and/or this antecedent occurs if that derision happens. fact7: That derision happens. fact8: The fact that both that mnemonics and that derision occurs is incorrect if that nerve does not happens. fact9: That that unwearableness occurs is prevented by that the mononuclearness does not happens or the araneidalness or both. fact10: The fact that that eluding occurs hold. fact11: That mnemonics does not occurs if that that mnemonics and that derision happens does not hold. fact12: If the fact that this muttering does not happens hold then that that antiferromagneticness occurs is incorrect. fact13: That nerve happens.

fact1: {A} -> ({AA} v {AB}) fact2: {FT} -> ({FC} v {L}) fact3: (¬{AA} v {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact4: ({AA} v {AB}) fact5: ({HA} v {CM}) fact6: {A} -> (¬{AA} v {AB}) fact7: {A} fact8: ¬{C} -> ¬({CG} & {A}) fact9: (¬{GP} v {BH}) -> ¬{AF} fact10: {ER} fact11: ¬({CG} & {A}) -> ¬{CG} fact12: ¬{AA} -> ¬{B} fact13: {C}

Notthat mnemonics but this arthrosporicness happens.

(¬{CG} & {Q})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that derision happens then this muttering and/or this antecedent occurs. fact2: The organismalness brings about that the scrawl occurs and/or this tubinging squalidness occurs. fact3: That antiferromagneticness does not occurs if this muttering does not occurs and/or this antecedent occurs. fact4: This muttering or this antecedent or both occurs. fact5: That farm or the teratogenicness or both happens. fact6: This muttering does not occurs and/or this antecedent occurs if that derision happens. fact7: That derision happens. fact8: The fact that both that mnemonics and that derision occurs is incorrect if that nerve does not happens. fact9: That that unwearableness occurs is prevented by that the mononuclearness does not happens or the araneidalness or both. fact10: The fact that that eluding occurs hold. fact11: That mnemonics does not occurs if that that mnemonics and that derision happens does not hold. fact12: If the fact that this muttering does not happens hold then that that antiferromagneticness occurs is incorrect. fact13: That nerve happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That both this non-antiferromagneticness and that nerve happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact7 -> int1: This muttering does not happens and/or this antecedent happens.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: That antiferromagneticness does not happens.; int2 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This hamate does not reduce Macbeth.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: That ketch is a Cetorhinidae. fact2: The intermixture is both a Cetorhinidae and irremovable. fact3: The fact that someone reduces Macbeth and he is a magnanimity is correct if the fact that he is not a kind of a Cetorhinidae is right. fact4: If that ketch is not a kind of a magnanimity and is not a Cetorhinidae then that poll is a kind of a magnanimity. fact5: If this hamate reduces Macbeth and is a kind of a magnanimity that ketch is not a Cetorhinidae. fact6: This steward is a Cetorhinidae. fact7: This hamate does not reduce Macbeth if that ketch is a magnanimity and a Cetorhinidae. fact8: That minah does reduce Macbeth. fact9: This hamate is not a magnanimity if that ketch is a Cetorhinidae and that thing reduces Macbeth. fact10: That ketch is a kind of a magnanimity. fact11: Something is not a Cetorhinidae if this thing does not posit invincibility or this thing does not moot frosted or both. fact12: Something does reduce Macbeth if that is not a kind of a magnanimity. fact13: That ketch blesses Hirudinea.

fact1: {B}{a} fact2: ({B}{as} & {CO}{as}) fact3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}x & {A}x) fact4: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{dn} fact5: ({C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact6: {B}{an} fact7: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact8: {C}{ih} fact9: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact10: {A}{a} fact11: (x): (¬{E}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact12: (x): ¬{A}x -> {C}x fact13: {AF}{a}

That ketch reduces Macbeth.

{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That ketch is a Cetorhinidae. fact2: The intermixture is both a Cetorhinidae and irremovable. fact3: The fact that someone reduces Macbeth and he is a magnanimity is correct if the fact that he is not a kind of a Cetorhinidae is right. fact4: If that ketch is not a kind of a magnanimity and is not a Cetorhinidae then that poll is a kind of a magnanimity. fact5: If this hamate reduces Macbeth and is a kind of a magnanimity that ketch is not a Cetorhinidae. fact6: This steward is a Cetorhinidae. fact7: This hamate does not reduce Macbeth if that ketch is a magnanimity and a Cetorhinidae. fact8: That minah does reduce Macbeth. fact9: This hamate is not a magnanimity if that ketch is a Cetorhinidae and that thing reduces Macbeth. fact10: That ketch is a kind of a magnanimity. fact11: Something is not a Cetorhinidae if this thing does not posit invincibility or this thing does not moot frosted or both. fact12: Something does reduce Macbeth if that is not a kind of a magnanimity. fact13: That ketch blesses Hirudinea. ; $hypothesis$ = This hamate does not reduce Macbeth. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact1 -> int1: That ketch is a magnanimity and this thing is a kind of a Cetorhinidae.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this peal happens and that exasperating Helicidae does not happens is incorrect.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That both this peal and that exasperating Helicidae happens is wrong. fact2: If this redetermination occurs then this peal but notthat exasperating Helicidae happens. fact3: That the astronomicalness happens but that geeing does not happens does not hold. fact4: That that territorializing smoked happens but this clyster does not occurs does not hold. fact5: The fact that both this prenatalness and that non-aerobicness happens is false. fact6: If this redetermination does not occurs that that the superfecta and that non-mithraicness occurs does not hold is true. fact7: This redetermination happens if that mechanism does not happens. fact8: The fact that this informationalness happens but the Masonry does not happens does not hold. fact9: That this peal happens and that exasperating Helicidae does not happens is incorrect. fact10: The fact that the unrestrictedness but notthe Monegasque happens is false. fact11: That this patching occurs and the animalisation does not occurs is false. fact12: That the cantonalness and that transcendentalness happens does not hold. fact13: That the animalisation and this bolometricness occurs does not hold. fact14: The fact that both that aerobicness and that non-pudendalness happens does not hold. fact15: If the fact that this impreciseness and that mechanism happens does not hold that mechanism does not happens. fact16: The fact that the conducting theogony and that docking occurs is false.

fact1: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact2: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact3: ¬({CN} & ¬{BC}) fact4: ¬({DM} & ¬{R}) fact5: ¬({HA} & ¬{IN}) fact6: ¬{A} -> ¬({DB} & ¬{GM}) fact7: ¬{B} -> {A} fact8: ¬({IK} & ¬{BQ}) fact9: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact10: ¬({DA} & ¬{BJ}) fact11: ¬({AK} & ¬{FD}) fact12: ¬({BH} & {CP}) fact13: ¬({FD} & {U}) fact14: ¬({IN} & ¬{FK}) fact15: ¬({C} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact16: ¬({HN} & {GC})

That the superfecta and that non-mithraicness occurs is incorrect.

¬({DB} & ¬{GM})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That both this peal and that exasperating Helicidae happens is wrong. fact2: If this redetermination occurs then this peal but notthat exasperating Helicidae happens. fact3: That the astronomicalness happens but that geeing does not happens does not hold. fact4: That that territorializing smoked happens but this clyster does not occurs does not hold. fact5: The fact that both this prenatalness and that non-aerobicness happens is false. fact6: If this redetermination does not occurs that that the superfecta and that non-mithraicness occurs does not hold is true. fact7: This redetermination happens if that mechanism does not happens. fact8: The fact that this informationalness happens but the Masonry does not happens does not hold. fact9: That this peal happens and that exasperating Helicidae does not happens is incorrect. fact10: The fact that the unrestrictedness but notthe Monegasque happens is false. fact11: That this patching occurs and the animalisation does not occurs is false. fact12: That the cantonalness and that transcendentalness happens does not hold. fact13: That the animalisation and this bolometricness occurs does not hold. fact14: The fact that both that aerobicness and that non-pudendalness happens does not hold. fact15: If the fact that this impreciseness and that mechanism happens does not hold that mechanism does not happens. fact16: The fact that the conducting theogony and that docking occurs is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That this peal happens and that exasperating Helicidae does not happens is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That the fact that that ruffle cores Riparia and is not a kind of a surliness is incorrect hold.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

fact1: That vesiculation chokes stasis and crowns Logania. fact2: Somebody that cores Riparia cores Riparia and is not a kind of a surliness. fact3: The loader chokes stasis and uncoils. fact4: That ruffle chokes stasis.

fact1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact2: (x): {C}x -> ({C}x & ¬{E}x) fact3: ({A}{cd} & {FI}{cd}) fact4: {A}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That vesiculation chokes stasis and crowns Logania. fact2: Somebody that cores Riparia cores Riparia and is not a kind of a surliness. fact3: The loader chokes stasis and uncoils. fact4: That ruffle chokes stasis. ; $hypothesis$ = That the fact that that ruffle cores Riparia and is not a kind of a surliness is incorrect hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That the bugbane is a kind of a stalking and is not a Tucana is not correct.

¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: If the bugbane is a stalking and not a Tucana then that NE does not probe indefiniteness.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the bugbane is a stalking and not a Tucana then that NE does not probe indefiniteness. ; $hypothesis$ = That the bugbane is a kind of a stalking and is not a Tucana is not correct. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this spout does not occurs but this mussitating haemoptysis happens is false.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: That this shucking netted does not happens and/or that this unsightedness does not occurs prevents this shucking netted. fact2: If that huddling perceptivity happens this shucking netted does not happens or this unsightedness does not happens or both. fact3: Both that huddling perceptivity and that untidiness occurs if that acaudateness does not happens. fact4: If this shucking netted does not occurs this spout does not occurs and this mussitating haemoptysis occurs. fact5: That that untidiness does not happens and this archivalness occurs is incorrect. fact6: That acaudateness does not happens if that both that dairying and that acaudateness happens is wrong. fact7: If either this Sunning Caruso does not occurs or that wad occurs or both that gutsiness does not happens. fact8: That that dairying happens and that acaudateness happens is false if that gutsiness does not happens. fact9: If this shucking netted happens the fact that this spout does not happens and this mussitating haemoptysis occurs is not true. fact10: That the fact that the fact that both this spout and this mussitating haemoptysis happens is not incorrect is false hold if this shucking netted occurs. fact11: That preparing miliaria results in that that liquidizing cuckoldom does not happens but that auxeticness happens. fact12: If the Bellowing happens the fact that the adventitialness does not happens and the unresolvedness occurs does not hold. fact13: That this shucking netted occurs hold. fact14: The fact that this spout happens and this mussitating haemoptysis happens does not hold. fact15: Either that this Sunning Caruso does not occurs or that wad or both is brought about by that that liquidizing cuckoldom does not occurs.

fact1: (¬{A} v ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} fact2: {C} -> (¬{A} v ¬{B}) fact3: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) fact4: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact5: ¬(¬{D} & {CC}) fact6: ¬({G} & {E}) -> ¬{E} fact7: (¬{I} v {H}) -> ¬{F} fact8: ¬{F} -> ¬({G} & {E}) fact9: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact10: {A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact11: {L} -> (¬{J} & {K}) fact12: {GG} -> ¬(¬{BS} & {CI}) fact13: {A} fact14: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact15: ¬{J} -> (¬{I} v {H})

This spout does not occurs and this mussitating haemoptysis occurs.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this shucking netted does not happens and/or that this unsightedness does not occurs prevents this shucking netted. fact2: If that huddling perceptivity happens this shucking netted does not happens or this unsightedness does not happens or both. fact3: Both that huddling perceptivity and that untidiness occurs if that acaudateness does not happens. fact4: If this shucking netted does not occurs this spout does not occurs and this mussitating haemoptysis occurs. fact5: That that untidiness does not happens and this archivalness occurs is incorrect. fact6: That acaudateness does not happens if that both that dairying and that acaudateness happens is wrong. fact7: If either this Sunning Caruso does not occurs or that wad occurs or both that gutsiness does not happens. fact8: That that dairying happens and that acaudateness happens is false if that gutsiness does not happens. fact9: If this shucking netted happens the fact that this spout does not happens and this mussitating haemoptysis occurs is not true. fact10: That the fact that the fact that both this spout and this mussitating haemoptysis happens is not incorrect is false hold if this shucking netted occurs. fact11: That preparing miliaria results in that that liquidizing cuckoldom does not happens but that auxeticness happens. fact12: If the Bellowing happens the fact that the adventitialness does not happens and the unresolvedness occurs does not hold. fact13: That this shucking netted occurs hold. fact14: The fact that this spout happens and this mussitating haemoptysis happens does not hold. fact15: Either that this Sunning Caruso does not occurs or that wad or both is brought about by that that liquidizing cuckoldom does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this spout does not occurs but this mussitating haemoptysis happens is false. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this indorser is not a pipeful is not false.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: That pokeweed is not non-subordinative but it is not unexciting if that cranberry is not a kind of a Sarcodina. fact2: The fact that this wormcast condoles but it is not a pipeful does not hold. fact3: This wormcast is a Vesta. fact4: That zymolysis is not a semidiameter if this currawong is a Pogonophora. fact5: Some man is not preventative and is matrimonial if it is not a kind of a semidiameter. fact6: The fact that some man is a kind of a Sarcodina or it does not perform or both is wrong if it is not a uselessness. fact7: If this naranjilla is not a kind of a vagabond and it does not stare chafe this girlfriend is not a globularness. fact8: The fact that this indorser is a Vesta that is not a pipeful does not hold. fact9: If that this girlfriend is a Sarcodina and/or does not perform is false then that cranberry is not a Sarcodina. fact10: If that the fact that this wormcast does not condole and this thing is not a Vesta is incorrect hold this indorser is not a pipeful. fact11: If that this wormcast is a pipeful hold the fact that this indorser is a pipeful hold. fact12: This naranjilla is not a kind of a vagabond and does not stare chafe. fact13: That this girlfriend is cytoplasmic and this person is a uselessness is not correct if this girlfriend is not a globularness. fact14: This indorser is not a pipeful if this wormcast condoles. fact15: If that pokeweed is subordinative but this is not unexciting this currawong is a Pogonophora. fact16: If that zymolysis is a Vesta then this computer is a pipeful. fact17: The fact that this girlfriend is not a uselessness is true if that this girlfriend is cytoplasmic and this is a uselessness does not hold. fact18: The fact that something is a Vesta hold if the thing is non-preventative thing that is matrimonial.

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

This indorser is a pipeful.

{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That pokeweed is not non-subordinative but it is not unexciting if that cranberry is not a kind of a Sarcodina. fact2: The fact that this wormcast condoles but it is not a pipeful does not hold. fact3: This wormcast is a Vesta. fact4: That zymolysis is not a semidiameter if this currawong is a Pogonophora. fact5: Some man is not preventative and is matrimonial if it is not a kind of a semidiameter. fact6: The fact that some man is a kind of a Sarcodina or it does not perform or both is wrong if it is not a uselessness. fact7: If this naranjilla is not a kind of a vagabond and it does not stare chafe this girlfriend is not a globularness. fact8: The fact that this indorser is a Vesta that is not a pipeful does not hold. fact9: If that this girlfriend is a Sarcodina and/or does not perform is false then that cranberry is not a Sarcodina. fact10: If that the fact that this wormcast does not condole and this thing is not a Vesta is incorrect hold this indorser is not a pipeful. fact11: If that this wormcast is a pipeful hold the fact that this indorser is a pipeful hold. fact12: This naranjilla is not a kind of a vagabond and does not stare chafe. fact13: That this girlfriend is cytoplasmic and this person is a uselessness is not correct if this girlfriend is not a globularness. fact14: This indorser is not a pipeful if this wormcast condoles. fact15: If that pokeweed is subordinative but this is not unexciting this currawong is a Pogonophora. fact16: If that zymolysis is a Vesta then this computer is a pipeful. fact17: The fact that this girlfriend is not a uselessness is true if that this girlfriend is cytoplasmic and this is a uselessness does not hold. fact18: The fact that something is a Vesta hold if the thing is non-preventative thing that is matrimonial. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this indorser is not a pipeful is not false. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this wormcast does not condole and is not a Vesta.; assump1 -> int1: This wormcast is not a Vesta.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: The fact that this wormcast does not condole and that is not a Vesta is wrong.; int3 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this halm is non-hydrometric a stained if this halm is a uniqueness does not hold.

¬({A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}))

fact1: Somebody is both not a Reichstein and a pitilessness if that person outfaces bizarreness. fact2: Something is not hydrometric if it is a kind of a uniqueness. fact3: If that breadroot is a kind of a stained then that breadroot does not relinquish Cephalotaceae and is Numidian. fact4: If the transparency does bifurcate Musci then it is not onside and it is immunological. fact5: This halm is not a Scandinavian but it is hydrometric if this halm is foliate. fact6: If this halm is a uniqueness then this person is not hydrometric. fact7: If some person does surtax might then this one is not a kind of a Zaria and is biographical. fact8: If something is a lift then that thing is not a giro but a Praetorian. fact9: Some person that is a uniqueness is non-hydrometric and a stained. fact10: The fact that someone does not dishearten devotedness but the one is articular hold if the one is inelastic. fact11: Something is not a Navarino but the thing surtaxes might if the thing is mucous.

fact1: (x): {BP}x -> (¬{K}x & {HD}x) fact2: (x): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x fact3: {AB}{ba} -> (¬{BD}{ba} & {JD}{ba}) fact4: {CT}{bh} -> (¬{DB}{bh} & {BG}{bh}) fact5: {DJ}{aa} -> (¬{GD}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) fact6: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} fact7: (x): {GH}x -> (¬{EI}x & {IO}x) fact8: (x): {IU}x -> (¬{HT}x & {BF}x) fact9: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact10: (x): {Q}x -> (¬{BA}x & {CO}x) fact11: (x): {FJ}x -> (¬{GK}x & {GH}x)

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is both not a Reichstein and a pitilessness if that person outfaces bizarreness. fact2: Something is not hydrometric if it is a kind of a uniqueness. fact3: If that breadroot is a kind of a stained then that breadroot does not relinquish Cephalotaceae and is Numidian. fact4: If the transparency does bifurcate Musci then it is not onside and it is immunological. fact5: This halm is not a Scandinavian but it is hydrometric if this halm is foliate. fact6: If this halm is a uniqueness then this person is not hydrometric. fact7: If some person does surtax might then this one is not a kind of a Zaria and is biographical. fact8: If something is a lift then that thing is not a giro but a Praetorian. fact9: Some person that is a uniqueness is non-hydrometric and a stained. fact10: The fact that someone does not dishearten devotedness but the one is articular hold if the one is inelastic. fact11: Something is not a Navarino but the thing surtaxes might if the thing is mucous. ; $hypothesis$ = That this halm is non-hydrometric a stained if this halm is a uniqueness does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that electroplater is not non-healthier and/or the thing resubmits mania does not hold.

¬({A}{aa} v {B}{aa})

fact1: Something is a priming if it is healthier. fact2: Something resubmits mania if this thing is a Leacock and a priming. fact3: The fact that if that electroplater is a Leacock and it is a kind of a priming that electroplater resubmits mania is true. fact4: If this Pediapred is either not a handbreadth or not a Confucian or both then it is not a Confucian. fact5: Somebody does resubmit mania if the one is not a kind of a Leacock and is a priming. fact6: This Pediapred is a kind of a thaw. fact7: The fact that that electroplater is not a kind of a Leacock is correct. fact8: There is something such that the fact that this thing is not a handbreadth is right. fact9: If this Pediapred is not a Confucian and it does not invalid Mercouri then that mudslinger is a kind of a Cynomys. fact10: If this Pediapred is a kind of a thaw that electroplater is not a kind of a Leacock. fact11: If this Pediapred is a thaw that electroplater is not a Leacock and is a priming. fact12: The fact that something is not a thaw but it does resubmit mania is wrong if it is a Cynomys.

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

That mudslinger is a kind of a priming.

{AB}{gl}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a priming if it is healthier. fact2: Something resubmits mania if this thing is a Leacock and a priming. fact3: The fact that if that electroplater is a Leacock and it is a kind of a priming that electroplater resubmits mania is true. fact4: If this Pediapred is either not a handbreadth or not a Confucian or both then it is not a Confucian. fact5: Somebody does resubmit mania if the one is not a kind of a Leacock and is a priming. fact6: This Pediapred is a kind of a thaw. fact7: The fact that that electroplater is not a kind of a Leacock is correct. fact8: There is something such that the fact that this thing is not a handbreadth is right. fact9: If this Pediapred is not a Confucian and it does not invalid Mercouri then that mudslinger is a kind of a Cynomys. fact10: If this Pediapred is a kind of a thaw that electroplater is not a kind of a Leacock. fact11: If this Pediapred is a thaw that electroplater is not a Leacock and is a priming. fact12: The fact that something is not a thaw but it does resubmit mania is wrong if it is a Cynomys. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that electroplater is not non-healthier and/or the thing resubmits mania does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: That electroplater resubmits mania if it is not a Leacock and it is a priming.; fact11 & fact6 -> int2: That electroplater is not a Leacock but this one is a priming.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That that electroplater resubmits mania hold.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists something such that this thing does not conform Joffrey and is bichromated.

(Ex): (¬{A}x & {B}x)

fact1: That palate is bichromated. fact2: Something does not overbid Quaoar. fact3: There exists some man such that it is not a kind of a Lagenaria and it is a kind of a choriomeningitis. fact4: There exists some person such that the person is millennian. fact5: Some person is not a Armadillidiidae but a greening. fact6: Some man unties and is an underwood. fact7: There is some person such that it conforms Joffrey and it is bichromated. fact8: There exists something such that it does not conform Joffrey. fact9: That palate does not conform Joffrey but it is bichromated. fact10: There exists someone such that the one is not a kind of an insanity. fact11: Chance is bichromated. fact12: Something is both not a Kingston and a herbarium if it conforms Joffrey.

fact1: {B}{aa} fact2: (Ex): ¬{T}x fact3: (Ex): (¬{BN}x & {DC}x) fact4: (Ex): {BF}x fact5: (Ex): (¬{FA}x & {CR}x) fact6: (Ex): ({HJ}x & {CL}x) fact7: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) fact8: (Ex): ¬{A}x fact9: (¬{A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) fact10: (Ex): ¬{HE}x fact11: {B}{fk} fact12: (x): {A}x -> (¬{HI}x & {F}x)

There exists something such that that thing is not a Kingston and that thing is a herbarium.

(Ex): (¬{HI}x & {F}x)

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That palate is bichromated. fact2: Something does not overbid Quaoar. fact3: There exists some man such that it is not a kind of a Lagenaria and it is a kind of a choriomeningitis. fact4: There exists some person such that the person is millennian. fact5: Some person is not a Armadillidiidae but a greening. fact6: Some man unties and is an underwood. fact7: There is some person such that it conforms Joffrey and it is bichromated. fact8: There exists something such that it does not conform Joffrey. fact9: That palate does not conform Joffrey but it is bichromated. fact10: There exists someone such that the one is not a kind of an insanity. fact11: Chance is bichromated. fact12: Something is both not a Kingston and a herbarium if it conforms Joffrey. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists something such that this thing does not conform Joffrey and is bichromated. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that if this clinch occurs that polyphaseness does not occurs is incorrect.

¬({B} -> ¬{C})

fact1: That this clinch occurs results in that polyphaseness. fact2: That that polyphaseness occurs and this clinch does not happens is incorrect if that maximalness happens. fact3: If this interconnecting Noctuidae and this clinch occurs then that that polyphaseness happens is correct. fact4: This scrimping does not occurs. fact5: This intonation and that colourizing Husserl happens. fact6: This anathemising Tangier does not occurs if this portfolio happens and/or this anathemising Tangier does not happens. fact7: If this fog does not happens that maximalness and this counterblow occurs. fact8: That this intonation occurs results in that that this portfolio occurs and/or that this anathemising Tangier does not happens is not false. fact9: If the fact that that polyphaseness but notthis clinch occurs does not hold then this luminescence happens. fact10: If this drama does not happens then this bestowment and this interconnecting Noctuidae happens. fact11: That either this fog does not occurs or that hypsometry occurs or both is caused by that this anathemising Tangier does not occurs. fact12: This interconnecting Noctuidae happens. fact13: This fog does not occurs if either this fog does not occurs or that hypsometry happens or both. fact14: That polyphaseness does not happens if this interconnecting Noctuidae occurs and this clinch happens. fact15: The unturnedness does not occurs if both the crediting and this agroundness occurs.

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

This luminescence occurs and this bestowment occurs.

({EQ} & {F})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this clinch occurs results in that polyphaseness. fact2: That that polyphaseness occurs and this clinch does not happens is incorrect if that maximalness happens. fact3: If this interconnecting Noctuidae and this clinch occurs then that that polyphaseness happens is correct. fact4: This scrimping does not occurs. fact5: This intonation and that colourizing Husserl happens. fact6: This anathemising Tangier does not occurs if this portfolio happens and/or this anathemising Tangier does not happens. fact7: If this fog does not happens that maximalness and this counterblow occurs. fact8: That this intonation occurs results in that that this portfolio occurs and/or that this anathemising Tangier does not happens is not false. fact9: If the fact that that polyphaseness but notthis clinch occurs does not hold then this luminescence happens. fact10: If this drama does not happens then this bestowment and this interconnecting Noctuidae happens. fact11: That either this fog does not occurs or that hypsometry occurs or both is caused by that this anathemising Tangier does not occurs. fact12: This interconnecting Noctuidae happens. fact13: This fog does not occurs if either this fog does not occurs or that hypsometry happens or both. fact14: That polyphaseness does not happens if this interconnecting Noctuidae occurs and this clinch happens. fact15: The unturnedness does not occurs if both the crediting and this agroundness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that if this clinch occurs that polyphaseness does not occurs is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this clinch happens.; fact12 & assump1 -> int1: Both this interconnecting Noctuidae and this clinch occurs.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: That polyphaseness does not happens.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That missive does smooch settled and/or is a kind of a microgauss.

({A}{a} v {C}{a})

fact1: If this Galilean is not amnic then that summerhouse does not clown Cleanthes. fact2: The fag does seat varnished and it flaps Eretmochelys. fact3: If something is a heft the fact that it is both not a Sudbury and amnic is wrong. fact4: If that missive does not flap Eretmochelys that thalmencephalon smooches settled and is skeletal. fact5: That missive flaps Eretmochelys. fact6: That missive is a Carpinaceae. fact7: That missive disturbs. fact8: That the pediatrician is not non-macrobiotic and smooches settled is not false. fact9: That missive is a kind of a hypovitaminosis. fact10: This Galilean is a heft if the fact that that that procrastinator is not Bismarckian and/or it is basidiosporous is wrong is true. fact11: If that someone is not a Sudbury and is amnic does not hold then she/he is not amnic. fact12: The fact that the fact that somebody does clown Cleanthes and is not a microgauss is correct is not correct if it tempts Fischer. fact13: That that missive smooches settled and/or is a microgauss is incorrect if that summerhouse does not flap Eretmochelys. fact14: The fact that some man flaps Eretmochelys and it does tempt Fischer is false if it does not clown Cleanthes. fact15: That missive frays Durant. fact16: That missive is a kind of plausible a Ornithogalum. fact17: If that somebody clowns Cleanthes but it is not a microgauss is false then it does not flap Eretmochelys. fact18: That allantois flaps Eretmochelys. fact19: The buckthorn is a microgauss. fact20: If that procrastinator is bibliolatrous that that procrastinator is not Bismarckian or is basidiosporous or both is incorrect.

fact1: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} fact2: ({AP}{ct} & {B}{ct}) fact3: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & {F}x) fact4: ¬{B}{a} -> ({A}{fe} & {JB}{fe}) fact5: {B}{a} fact6: {AA}{a} fact7: {EN}{a} fact8: ({CQ}{ck} & {A}{ck}) fact9: {JH}{a} fact10: ¬(¬{J}{d} v {I}{d}) -> {G}{c} fact11: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {F}x) -> ¬{F}x fact12: (x): {E}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) fact13: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} v {C}{a}) fact14: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({B}x & {E}x) fact15: {GM}{a} fact16: ({FK}{a} & {JC}{a}) fact17: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact18: {B}{ir} fact19: {C}{bb} fact20: {K}{d} -> ¬(¬{J}{d} v {I}{d})

That either that missive smooches settled or it is a kind of a microgauss or both is false.

¬({A}{a} v {C}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Galilean is not amnic then that summerhouse does not clown Cleanthes. fact2: The fag does seat varnished and it flaps Eretmochelys. fact3: If something is a heft the fact that it is both not a Sudbury and amnic is wrong. fact4: If that missive does not flap Eretmochelys that thalmencephalon smooches settled and is skeletal. fact5: That missive flaps Eretmochelys. fact6: That missive is a Carpinaceae. fact7: That missive disturbs. fact8: That the pediatrician is not non-macrobiotic and smooches settled is not false. fact9: That missive is a kind of a hypovitaminosis. fact10: This Galilean is a heft if the fact that that that procrastinator is not Bismarckian and/or it is basidiosporous is wrong is true. fact11: If that someone is not a Sudbury and is amnic does not hold then she/he is not amnic. fact12: The fact that the fact that somebody does clown Cleanthes and is not a microgauss is correct is not correct if it tempts Fischer. fact13: That that missive smooches settled and/or is a microgauss is incorrect if that summerhouse does not flap Eretmochelys. fact14: The fact that some man flaps Eretmochelys and it does tempt Fischer is false if it does not clown Cleanthes. fact15: That missive frays Durant. fact16: That missive is a kind of plausible a Ornithogalum. fact17: If that somebody clowns Cleanthes but it is not a microgauss is false then it does not flap Eretmochelys. fact18: That allantois flaps Eretmochelys. fact19: The buckthorn is a microgauss. fact20: If that procrastinator is bibliolatrous that that procrastinator is not Bismarckian or is basidiosporous or both is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That missive does smooch settled and/or is a kind of a microgauss. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this vest is both not diametral and lotic is incorrect.

¬(¬{C}{b} & {D}{b})

fact1: A non-heterodactyl one is not a kind of a bit and/or is a Centunculus. fact2: That bike is a criminalism. fact3: This vest does not buffet annuity if that that bike does not fascinate and buffet annuity hold. fact4: that annuity does buffet bike. fact5: That this vest is not a criminalism is true. fact6: If that bike is a stinting and this person is a criminalism then this person is not a kind of a Centunculus. fact7: That bike is not a criminalism if either that flatmate is not a bit or it is a Centunculus or both. fact8: That this vest is not diametral and buffets annuity is false if that bike is diametral. fact9: Something is not diametral if it buffets annuity and is a criminalism. fact10: That bike does buffet annuity.

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

This vest is both not diametral and not non-lotic.

(¬{C}{b} & {D}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: A non-heterodactyl one is not a kind of a bit and/or is a Centunculus. fact2: That bike is a criminalism. fact3: This vest does not buffet annuity if that that bike does not fascinate and buffet annuity hold. fact4: that annuity does buffet bike. fact5: That this vest is not a criminalism is true. fact6: If that bike is a stinting and this person is a criminalism then this person is not a kind of a Centunculus. fact7: That bike is not a criminalism if either that flatmate is not a bit or it is a Centunculus or both. fact8: That this vest is not diametral and buffets annuity is false if that bike is diametral. fact9: Something is not diametral if it buffets annuity and is a criminalism. fact10: That bike does buffet annuity. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this vest is both not diametral and lotic is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this leukorrhea affirms CNPZ and/or is a kind of an above is wrong.

¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

fact1: If somebody does not displease newton then that it is a kind of a Notonectidae and it is a Nefertiti is not right. fact2: The fact that that percolator does not bear and is not a kind of an econometrics does not hold. fact3: This leukorrhea is not vulvar and/or is a kind of a Notonectidae. fact4: That percolator does not renovate Oligochaeta. fact5: If that Malawian affirms CNPZ then this leukorrhea affirms CNPZ. fact6: If the fact that this chlamyphore does renovate Oligochaeta is correct then that Malawian affirms CNPZ. fact7: That that Malawian is not a kind of a FPS is true. fact8: This leukorrhea is a platyrrhinian and/or non-rough. fact9: This leukorrhea is not an above. fact10: If that that Malawian is not a kind of a FPS is right then that this leukorrhea does not displease newton and is a kind of a Nefertiti does not hold. fact11: If that that percolator does not bear and it is not an econometrics does not hold that percolator is a kind of an econometrics. fact12: If that percolator is a FPS the fact that that percolator does not close and displeases newton is not right. fact13: The laggard is not hatted if that that one is not a Notonectidae or is not a kind of a chemical or both is right. fact14: If that percolator is an econometrics then it is a kind of a FPS. fact15: Something does not displease newton if that that it does not close and displease newton hold is false. fact16: If that some person is a kind of a Notonectidae that is a Nefertiti is incorrect that one is not vulvar. fact17: This leukorrhea does not renovate Oligochaeta if it is not vulvar or it is not a kind of a Notonectidae or both. fact18: This leukorrhea is not vulvar and/or that one is not a Notonectidae.

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

This leukorrhea affirms CNPZ or it is an above or both.

({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody does not displease newton then that it is a kind of a Notonectidae and it is a Nefertiti is not right. fact2: The fact that that percolator does not bear and is not a kind of an econometrics does not hold. fact3: This leukorrhea is not vulvar and/or is a kind of a Notonectidae. fact4: That percolator does not renovate Oligochaeta. fact5: If that Malawian affirms CNPZ then this leukorrhea affirms CNPZ. fact6: If the fact that this chlamyphore does renovate Oligochaeta is correct then that Malawian affirms CNPZ. fact7: That that Malawian is not a kind of a FPS is true. fact8: This leukorrhea is a platyrrhinian and/or non-rough. fact9: This leukorrhea is not an above. fact10: If that that Malawian is not a kind of a FPS is right then that this leukorrhea does not displease newton and is a kind of a Nefertiti does not hold. fact11: If that that percolator does not bear and it is not an econometrics does not hold that percolator is a kind of an econometrics. fact12: If that percolator is a FPS the fact that that percolator does not close and displeases newton is not right. fact13: The laggard is not hatted if that that one is not a Notonectidae or is not a kind of a chemical or both is right. fact14: If that percolator is an econometrics then it is a kind of a FPS. fact15: Something does not displease newton if that that it does not close and displease newton hold is false. fact16: If that some person is a kind of a Notonectidae that is a Nefertiti is incorrect that one is not vulvar. fact17: This leukorrhea does not renovate Oligochaeta if it is not vulvar or it is not a kind of a Notonectidae or both. fact18: This leukorrhea is not vulvar and/or that one is not a Notonectidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That this leukorrhea affirms CNPZ and/or is a kind of an above is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This searching Dendrocalamus and that publication occurs.

({A} & {B})

fact1: That traumaticness does not occurs if the fact that the contentsness happens hold. fact2: If that traumaticness does not occurs that this searching Dendrocalamus happens and that publication occurs is not true. fact3: The contentsness but notthat Buffaloing brilliance occurs if the revamping happens. fact4: That publication happens. fact5: That both the revamping and this tsaristicness occurs is brought about by that this chairmaning cgs does not happens. fact6: This searching Dendrocalamus happens.

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

The fact that this searching Dendrocalamus happens and that publication happens is not right.

¬({A} & {B})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That traumaticness does not occurs if the fact that the contentsness happens hold. fact2: If that traumaticness does not occurs that this searching Dendrocalamus happens and that publication occurs is not true. fact3: The contentsness but notthat Buffaloing brilliance occurs if the revamping happens. fact4: That publication happens. fact5: That both the revamping and this tsaristicness occurs is brought about by that this chairmaning cgs does not happens. fact6: This searching Dendrocalamus happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This searching Dendrocalamus and that publication occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That geophyte is a abampere.

{C}{a}

fact1: That geophyte is a rhapsody. fact2: That geophyte is a kind of a cablegram. fact3: That that dodger is not a cablegram or is not a abampere or both is wrong if Nicole is a kind of a rhapsody. fact4: Something is not a medley and is a Myrsine if it is not aeronautic. fact5: This hemosiderin is a kind of a cablegram. fact6: If the fact that something is not an alternate and is a kind of a whim is incorrect it is a rhapsody. fact7: If someone is not a medley then that it is not an alternate but a whim is wrong. fact8: If that that dodger is either not a cablegram or not a abampere or both is false that geophyte is a abampere. fact9: Somebody that is a cablegram and is a rhapsody is not a kind of a abampere.

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

That geophyte is a abampere.

{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That geophyte is a rhapsody. fact2: That geophyte is a kind of a cablegram. fact3: That that dodger is not a cablegram or is not a abampere or both is wrong if Nicole is a kind of a rhapsody. fact4: Something is not a medley and is a Myrsine if it is not aeronautic. fact5: This hemosiderin is a kind of a cablegram. fact6: If the fact that something is not an alternate and is a kind of a whim is incorrect it is a rhapsody. fact7: If someone is not a medley then that it is not an alternate but a whim is wrong. fact8: If that that dodger is either not a cablegram or not a abampere or both is false that geophyte is a abampere. fact9: Somebody that is a cablegram and is a rhapsody is not a kind of a abampere. ; $hypothesis$ = That geophyte is a abampere. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> int1: That geophyte is a cablegram and that one is a rhapsody.; fact9 -> int2: If that geophyte is both a cablegram and a rhapsody then the fact that that geophyte is not a abampere is true.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This aardwolf is albuminuric and it is uncharitable.

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

fact1: If this Vaisya is not a Higginson then that Lulu is not archducal and is not a kind of an amphibian is incorrect. fact2: If this librettist is not a kind of an imperfect then this librettist is uncharitable and a Myopus. fact3: That the evaporation bleeds and is not indecent is false if Toño is not a kind of a deadlocked. fact4: That this Vaisya is not a TIA but it immobilises Equidae is incorrect. fact5: That this Vaisya is not a kind of a Higginson is correct if that this Vaisya is not a kind of a TIA and immobilises Equidae is wrong. fact6: Some person is not indecent if the fact that the person is a kind of a deadlocked and the person is indecent is wrong. fact7: The fact that the barrelfish is a leitmotiv and this one is uncharitable is right. fact8: This aardwolf is albuminuric. fact9: The fact that this aardwolf is albuminuric and it is uncharitable is false if the evaporation does not bleed. fact10: Something is hexed if either it is not albuminuric or it bleeds or both. fact11: That something is both a deadlocked and indecent is incorrect if it is not an amphibian. fact12: Some man is not albuminuric and/or it bleeds if it is not indecent. fact13: This aardwolf is uncharitable. fact14: This librettist is not a kind of an imperfect if that he is not unimodal and is not a kind of a stoichiometry does not hold. fact15: That if that suppression is unimodal then that that schematic is not an imperfect and is not a stoichiometry is incorrect hold. fact16: Something does not bleed if the fact that the thing does bleed and is not indecent is false. fact17: If that something is not archducal and it is not an amphibian is incorrect it is an amphibian. fact18: If that something is not a kind of an imperfect and it is not a stoichiometry does not hold then it is not a Myopus. fact19: If Lulu is a kind of an amphibian that suppression is unimodal. fact20: The fact that this librettist is both not unimodal and not a stoichiometry is wrong.

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

This librettist is uncharitable and is hexed.

({B}{db} & {DO}{db})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this Vaisya is not a Higginson then that Lulu is not archducal and is not a kind of an amphibian is incorrect. fact2: If this librettist is not a kind of an imperfect then this librettist is uncharitable and a Myopus. fact3: That the evaporation bleeds and is not indecent is false if Toño is not a kind of a deadlocked. fact4: That this Vaisya is not a TIA but it immobilises Equidae is incorrect. fact5: That this Vaisya is not a kind of a Higginson is correct if that this Vaisya is not a kind of a TIA and immobilises Equidae is wrong. fact6: Some person is not indecent if the fact that the person is a kind of a deadlocked and the person is indecent is wrong. fact7: The fact that the barrelfish is a leitmotiv and this one is uncharitable is right. fact8: This aardwolf is albuminuric. fact9: The fact that this aardwolf is albuminuric and it is uncharitable is false if the evaporation does not bleed. fact10: Something is hexed if either it is not albuminuric or it bleeds or both. fact11: That something is both a deadlocked and indecent is incorrect if it is not an amphibian. fact12: Some man is not albuminuric and/or it bleeds if it is not indecent. fact13: This aardwolf is uncharitable. fact14: This librettist is not a kind of an imperfect if that he is not unimodal and is not a kind of a stoichiometry does not hold. fact15: That if that suppression is unimodal then that that schematic is not an imperfect and is not a stoichiometry is incorrect hold. fact16: Something does not bleed if the fact that the thing does bleed and is not indecent is false. fact17: If that something is not archducal and it is not an amphibian is incorrect it is an amphibian. fact18: If that something is not a kind of an imperfect and it is not a stoichiometry does not hold then it is not a Myopus. fact19: If Lulu is a kind of an amphibian that suppression is unimodal. fact20: The fact that this librettist is both not unimodal and not a stoichiometry is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This aardwolf is albuminuric and it is uncharitable. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That conidium does not parlay Mishna.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: That some person is a triskaidekaphobia but the person is not reptilian is false if the person does not Trot Siwan. fact2: The caries does not parlay Mishna if that conidium is reptilian. fact3: Somebody is reptilian and is a kind of a triskaidekaphobia if it does not Trot Siwan. fact4: If the caries parlays Mishna that conidium is not a triskaidekaphobia. fact5: That that conidium is not a triskaidekaphobia is right if the caries either does parlay Mishna or is reptilian or both. fact6: That conidium is not a service. fact7: The midden is not a triskaidekaphobia. fact8: There exists nothing that is not a Tanzanian and Trots Siwan. fact9: That conidium is reptilian. fact10: That conidium does not parlay Mishna if either the caries is reptilian or this thing is a triskaidekaphobia or both. fact11: That conidium is a triskaidekaphobia. fact12: The caries is a triskaidekaphobia.

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

That conidium parlays Mishna.

{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That some person is a triskaidekaphobia but the person is not reptilian is false if the person does not Trot Siwan. fact2: The caries does not parlay Mishna if that conidium is reptilian. fact3: Somebody is reptilian and is a kind of a triskaidekaphobia if it does not Trot Siwan. fact4: If the caries parlays Mishna that conidium is not a triskaidekaphobia. fact5: That that conidium is not a triskaidekaphobia is right if the caries either does parlay Mishna or is reptilian or both. fact6: That conidium is not a service. fact7: The midden is not a triskaidekaphobia. fact8: There exists nothing that is not a Tanzanian and Trots Siwan. fact9: That conidium is reptilian. fact10: That conidium does not parlay Mishna if either the caries is reptilian or this thing is a triskaidekaphobia or both. fact11: That conidium is a triskaidekaphobia. fact12: The caries is a triskaidekaphobia. ; $hypothesis$ = That conidium does not parlay Mishna. ; $proof$ =

fact12 -> int1: The caries either is not non-reptilian or is a kind of a triskaidekaphobia or both.; int1 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this Aldactone is not a reason and/or is not a Whirlaway is false.

¬(¬{E}{b} v ¬{D}{b})

fact1: If something does not undercoat the fact that either it is not a reason or it is not a Whirlaway or both does not hold. fact2: This Aldactone does not undercoat if this Gore trices Arctiidae and it is unowned. fact3: If something does not undercoat this is a Whirlaway. fact4: this Arctiidae does trice Gore. fact5: If someone espies stylemark then the fact that it is both not a reason and a Whirlaway does not hold. fact6: That nappy is a reason. fact7: This Gore is unowned. fact8: Everything is not a Dracaenaceae. fact9: This Gore does trice Arctiidae. fact10: This Gore is a reason. fact11: If this Aldactone does not undercoat the person is a Whirlaway. fact12: This Aldactone is a Whirlaway. fact13: If this Gore is not a kind of a Whirlaway then that either she/he does not undercoat or she/he is not unowned or both is incorrect. fact14: That either this Aldactone is not unowned or it is not a reason or both is not right if it does not trice Arctiidae. fact15: If something does not trice Arctiidae then it is not a reason and/or is not a Whirlaway. fact16: That this Gore undercoats does not hold if that this officiant is not a reason and is a kind of a Whirlaway does not hold. fact17: If this Gore trices Arctiidae and undercoats then this Aldactone does not trices Arctiidae.

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

This Aldactone is not a reason or not a Whirlaway or both.

(¬{E}{b} v ¬{D}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something does not undercoat the fact that either it is not a reason or it is not a Whirlaway or both does not hold. fact2: This Aldactone does not undercoat if this Gore trices Arctiidae and it is unowned. fact3: If something does not undercoat this is a Whirlaway. fact4: this Arctiidae does trice Gore. fact5: If someone espies stylemark then the fact that it is both not a reason and a Whirlaway does not hold. fact6: That nappy is a reason. fact7: This Gore is unowned. fact8: Everything is not a Dracaenaceae. fact9: This Gore does trice Arctiidae. fact10: This Gore is a reason. fact11: If this Aldactone does not undercoat the person is a Whirlaway. fact12: This Aldactone is a Whirlaway. fact13: If this Gore is not a kind of a Whirlaway then that either she/he does not undercoat or she/he is not unowned or both is incorrect. fact14: That either this Aldactone is not unowned or it is not a reason or both is not right if it does not trice Arctiidae. fact15: If something does not trice Arctiidae then it is not a reason and/or is not a Whirlaway. fact16: That this Gore undercoats does not hold if that this officiant is not a reason and is a kind of a Whirlaway does not hold. fact17: If this Gore trices Arctiidae and undercoats then this Aldactone does not trices Arctiidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That this Aldactone is not a reason and/or is not a Whirlaway is false. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact7 -> int1: This Gore does trice Arctiidae and that is unowned.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: The fact that this Aldactone does not undercoat is true.; fact1 -> int3: That this Aldactone is not a reason or is not a Whirlaway or both is wrong if this Aldactone does not undercoat.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that Blake uses Ives and is a battalion is false.

¬({C}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: The fact that something is not Jovian if that is a Shikoku is right. fact2: the Ives uses Blake. fact3: Blake is not climatical if that worthy does not stave Phacochoerus. fact4: This fixation is a Shikoku if that post is a Hypnos. fact5: Blake uses Ives. fact6: That post is osteal if it rears grubbiness. fact7: That post rears grubbiness. fact8: Someone is both diatomic and not a zero if the person is not climatical. fact9: If this fixation is a Shikoku then this irridenta is a kind of a Shikoku. fact10: The fact that Blake is a zero that is a battalion is correct. fact11: That post is a kind of a senate. fact12: If something is not a zero then that it uses Ives and it is a battalion does not hold. fact13: If the fact that some person is non-diatomic and this one is not a battalion is correct then this one is a kind of a zero. fact14: Blake is a zero. fact15: The fact that this irridenta is not existent but it staves Phacochoerus hold if this irridenta is not Jovian. fact16: If that post is a Shikoku this fixation is a Shikoku. fact17: Either something is a Shikoku or that thing is a kind of a Hypnos or both if that thing is not a kind of a nudeness. fact18: If that post is both a senate and osteal the fact that it is not a nudeness is right.

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

The fact that Blake uses Ives and is a battalion is false.

¬({C}{a} & {B}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that something is not Jovian if that is a Shikoku is right. fact2: the Ives uses Blake. fact3: Blake is not climatical if that worthy does not stave Phacochoerus. fact4: This fixation is a Shikoku if that post is a Hypnos. fact5: Blake uses Ives. fact6: That post is osteal if it rears grubbiness. fact7: That post rears grubbiness. fact8: Someone is both diatomic and not a zero if the person is not climatical. fact9: If this fixation is a Shikoku then this irridenta is a kind of a Shikoku. fact10: The fact that Blake is a zero that is a battalion is correct. fact11: That post is a kind of a senate. fact12: If something is not a zero then that it uses Ives and it is a battalion does not hold. fact13: If the fact that some person is non-diatomic and this one is not a battalion is correct then this one is a kind of a zero. fact14: Blake is a zero. fact15: The fact that this irridenta is not existent but it staves Phacochoerus hold if this irridenta is not Jovian. fact16: If that post is a Shikoku this fixation is a Shikoku. fact17: Either something is a Shikoku or that thing is a kind of a Hypnos or both if that thing is not a kind of a nudeness. fact18: If that post is both a senate and osteal the fact that it is not a nudeness is right. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that Blake uses Ives and is a battalion is false. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: Blake is a battalion.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that there is something such that if the fact that the thing is a misery is not wrong then the thing does not lunge pa'anga and the thing is not a dysomia does not hold.

¬((Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: If that Tartar does shade that Tartar is not a Arisarum and it is not a pentagon. fact2: The fact that this parkland does not lunge pa'anga and this thing is not a dysomia hold if this thing is a misery. fact3: Something does not Romanise and is not Texan if this thing is a kind of a defensibility.

fact1: {GL}{ch} -> (¬{O}{ch} & ¬{CS}{ch}) fact2: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact3: (x): {BD}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{AE}x)

There is something such that if the thing is a defensibility the thing does not Romanise and is not Texan.

(Ex): {BD}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{AE}x)

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that Tartar does shade that Tartar is not a Arisarum and it is not a pentagon. fact2: The fact that this parkland does not lunge pa'anga and this thing is not a dysomia hold if this thing is a misery. fact3: Something does not Romanise and is not Texan if this thing is a kind of a defensibility. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there is something such that if the fact that the thing is a misery is not wrong then the thing does not lunge pa'anga and the thing is not a dysomia does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Stacey is not a Alcea.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: This amblygonite is a Dominica. fact2: Stacey is daisylike. fact3: If Stacey is scriptural then that that wellhead is a Bartlesville and does not wander does not hold. fact4: If this amblygonite is a Frankenstein then Stacey is a Alcea. fact5: If the fact that something is a Bartlesville that does not wander is incorrect that is a Frankenstein. fact6: Somebody that prophesies holla is a Frankenstein. fact7: If some person is a Frankenstein it prophesies holla. fact8: The fact that if some man is a kind of a Alcea then the fact that it is a Frankenstein is true is correct. fact9: If this amblygonite is a Alcea Stacey prophesies holla.

fact1: {JC}{aa} fact2: {HO}{a} fact3: {F}{a} -> ¬({E}{gk} & ¬{D}{gk}) fact4: {B}{aa} -> {C}{a} fact5: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{D}x) -> {B}x fact6: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact7: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact8: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact9: {C}{aa} -> {A}{a}

That wellhead is a Alcea.

{C}{gk}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This amblygonite is a Dominica. fact2: Stacey is daisylike. fact3: If Stacey is scriptural then that that wellhead is a Bartlesville and does not wander does not hold. fact4: If this amblygonite is a Frankenstein then Stacey is a Alcea. fact5: If the fact that something is a Bartlesville that does not wander is incorrect that is a Frankenstein. fact6: Somebody that prophesies holla is a Frankenstein. fact7: If some person is a Frankenstein it prophesies holla. fact8: The fact that if some man is a kind of a Alcea then the fact that it is a Frankenstein is true is correct. fact9: If this amblygonite is a Alcea Stacey prophesies holla. ; $hypothesis$ = Stacey is not a Alcea. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That noncaloricness does not occurs and this luau does not occurs.

(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That that otoplasty occurs is prevented by that this disapproving iota does not happens or that that otoplasty does not happens or both. fact2: If that proficientness does not happens then this mucocutaneousness but notthis intimalness occurs. fact3: Both this squaring Joffre and that non-proficientness happens if that speculating Phasianidae does not happens. fact4: That this symbolising happens and that strutting hydrocephaly occurs is not correct if that otoplasty does not occurs. fact5: That speculating Phasianidae does not occurs if the fact that both this symbolising and that strutting hydrocephaly occurs does not hold. fact6: That that noncaloricness does not happens and this luau does not occurs is wrong if this intimalness does not happens.

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

The fact that that noncaloricness does not happens and this luau does not occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that otoplasty occurs is prevented by that this disapproving iota does not happens or that that otoplasty does not happens or both. fact2: If that proficientness does not happens then this mucocutaneousness but notthis intimalness occurs. fact3: Both this squaring Joffre and that non-proficientness happens if that speculating Phasianidae does not happens. fact4: That this symbolising happens and that strutting hydrocephaly occurs is not correct if that otoplasty does not occurs. fact5: That speculating Phasianidae does not occurs if the fact that both this symbolising and that strutting hydrocephaly occurs does not hold. fact6: That that noncaloricness does not happens and this luau does not occurs is wrong if this intimalness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That noncaloricness does not occurs and this luau does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__