Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

That both this parade and that doubledness occurs is not correct.

¬({A} & {C})

fact1: This opposing but notthe overspreading pronunciation happens. fact2: This distension is triggered by that this opposing but notthe overspreading pronunciation happens. fact3: This opposing occurs. fact4: That mystifying Bloomeria does not happens. fact5: If this distension happens then this parade occurs.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This opposing but notthe overspreading pronunciation happens. fact2: This distension is triggered by that this opposing but notthe overspreading pronunciation happens. fact3: This opposing occurs. fact4: That mystifying Bloomeria does not happens. fact5: If this distension happens then this parade occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That both this parade and that doubledness occurs is not correct. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that mack is not voyeuristical if the fact that the fact that that mack is not a refrain and/or does not growl lipaemia is incorrect hold does not hold.

¬(¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})

fact1: The fact that that region does not growl lipaemia hold if this is not a tube or not a gaiety or both. fact2: If that the fact that that mack either is not a kind of a refrain or is not a simoleons or both is false hold it does not munition Caricaceae. fact3: That mack is not voyeuristical if the fact that it is not a refrain or growls lipaemia or both does not hold. fact4: Someone is not epicarpal if the fact that either it is an enmity or it is not Assamese or both is false. fact5: Some person is not voyeuristical if that it is not a refrain and/or growls lipaemia does not hold. fact6: If that that mack either is not a refrain or does not growl lipaemia or both does not hold then it is voyeuristical. fact7: That mack is not voyeuristical if that that that mack is a kind of a refrain and/or this does not growl lipaemia is false is true. fact8: That if that either something is not a refrain or that thing does not growl lipaemia or both is incorrect then that thing is not non-voyeuristical is true.

fact1: (¬{EK}{k} v ¬{HG}{k}) -> ¬{AB}{k} fact2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{BH}{aa}) -> ¬{FT}{aa} fact3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact4: (x): ¬({GO}x v ¬{BG}x) -> ¬{GE}x fact5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact7: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact8: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that region does not growl lipaemia hold if this is not a tube or not a gaiety or both. fact2: If that the fact that that mack either is not a kind of a refrain or is not a simoleons or both is false hold it does not munition Caricaceae. fact3: That mack is not voyeuristical if the fact that it is not a refrain or growls lipaemia or both does not hold. fact4: Someone is not epicarpal if the fact that either it is an enmity or it is not Assamese or both is false. fact5: Some person is not voyeuristical if that it is not a refrain and/or growls lipaemia does not hold. fact6: If that that mack either is not a refrain or does not growl lipaemia or both does not hold then it is voyeuristical. fact7: That mack is not voyeuristical if that that that mack is a kind of a refrain and/or this does not growl lipaemia is false is true. fact8: That if that either something is not a refrain or that thing does not growl lipaemia or both is incorrect then that thing is not non-voyeuristical is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That that mack is not voyeuristical if the fact that the fact that that mack is not a refrain and/or does not growl lipaemia is incorrect hold does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this hone does not fantasize hold.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: This bolete is trophotropic if that amyl is trophotropic. fact2: That sunray is Tasmanian if this orchis is not a kind of a Persepolis and does not unionise Acipenseridae. fact3: That that erythropoiesis is a jubilance that is a Pyrolaceae does not hold. fact4: This hone is a clue. fact5: That sunray does not confound Suharto and it is non-trophotropic if that sunray is Tasmanian. fact6: This hone does not fantasize if that this bolete does not fantasize and this one is not a kind of a clue is wrong. fact7: The fact that something does not fantasize and is not a kind of a clue is not right if that it is trophotropic hold. fact8: The fact that this orchis does not unionise Acipenseridae hold if the fact that that grappler is a kind of asynergic thing that is not a myalgia is false. fact9: This orchis is not a Persepolis if that that erythropoiesis is a jubilance and it is a kind of a Pyrolaceae is wrong. fact10: That peptidase is a sinistrality that does fantasize. fact11: Somebody is a clue if that it is a kind of non-trophotropic one that does not fantasize is false. fact12: If this haze is trophotropic then the fact that that amyl is not trophotropic hold.

fact1: {C}{c} -> {C}{b} fact2: (¬{F}{f} & ¬{G}{f}) -> {D}{e} fact3: ¬({K}{h} & {L}{h}) fact4: {A}{a} fact5: {D}{e} -> (¬{E}{e} & ¬{C}{e}) fact6: ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact7: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact8: ¬({I}{g} & ¬{H}{g}) -> ¬{G}{f} fact9: ¬({K}{h} & {L}{h}) -> ¬{F}{f} fact10: ({R}{ei} & {B}{ei}) fact11: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x fact12: {C}{d} -> {C}{c}

The fact that this hone does not fantasize hold.

¬{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This bolete is trophotropic if that amyl is trophotropic. fact2: That sunray is Tasmanian if this orchis is not a kind of a Persepolis and does not unionise Acipenseridae. fact3: That that erythropoiesis is a jubilance that is a Pyrolaceae does not hold. fact4: This hone is a clue. fact5: That sunray does not confound Suharto and it is non-trophotropic if that sunray is Tasmanian. fact6: This hone does not fantasize if that this bolete does not fantasize and this one is not a kind of a clue is wrong. fact7: The fact that something does not fantasize and is not a kind of a clue is not right if that it is trophotropic hold. fact8: The fact that this orchis does not unionise Acipenseridae hold if the fact that that grappler is a kind of asynergic thing that is not a myalgia is false. fact9: This orchis is not a Persepolis if that that erythropoiesis is a jubilance and it is a kind of a Pyrolaceae is wrong. fact10: That peptidase is a sinistrality that does fantasize. fact11: Somebody is a clue if that it is a kind of non-trophotropic one that does not fantasize is false. fact12: If this haze is trophotropic then the fact that that amyl is not trophotropic hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this hone does not fantasize hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this resounding does not happens hold.

¬{B}

fact1: Both this whiplash and the importing happens if that lessening gibibit does not occurs. fact2: If that nonhierarchicalness does not occurs then that this teleworking happens and this perviousness occurs does not hold. fact3: That this crowning Crotophaga does not occurs yields that this infantilism does not happens and that nonhierarchicalness does not occurs. fact4: That the chancellorship happens hold. fact5: That this whiplash occurs results in either that this Proustianness occurs or that that ditching dressed does not occurs or both. fact6: That both that non-mioticness and this precaution happens is caused by this Proustianness. fact7: That lessening gibibit does not happens if the fact that both this teleworking and this perviousness happens does not hold. fact8: The fact that that ditching dressed but notthis resounding happens is wrong if that this whiplash occurs is not false. fact9: Notthis Proustianness but this resounding happens. fact10: Notthe embowering Gizeh but the clotting resourcefulness occurs. fact11: If this teleworking happens notthat lessening gibibit but this perviousness occurs.

fact1: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact2: ¬{I} -> ¬({H} & {G}) fact3: ¬{K} -> (¬{J} & ¬{I}) fact4: {CM} fact5: {D} -> ({A} v ¬{C}) fact6: {A} -> (¬{AG} & {IE}) fact7: ¬({H} & {G}) -> ¬{F} fact8: {D} -> ¬({C} & ¬{B}) fact9: (¬{A} & {B}) fact10: (¬{CH} & {BA}) fact11: {H} -> (¬{F} & {G})

The fact that this resounding does not happens hold.

¬{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both this whiplash and the importing happens if that lessening gibibit does not occurs. fact2: If that nonhierarchicalness does not occurs then that this teleworking happens and this perviousness occurs does not hold. fact3: That this crowning Crotophaga does not occurs yields that this infantilism does not happens and that nonhierarchicalness does not occurs. fact4: That the chancellorship happens hold. fact5: That this whiplash occurs results in either that this Proustianness occurs or that that ditching dressed does not occurs or both. fact6: That both that non-mioticness and this precaution happens is caused by this Proustianness. fact7: That lessening gibibit does not happens if the fact that both this teleworking and this perviousness happens does not hold. fact8: The fact that that ditching dressed but notthis resounding happens is wrong if that this whiplash occurs is not false. fact9: Notthis Proustianness but this resounding happens. fact10: Notthe embowering Gizeh but the clotting resourcefulness occurs. fact11: If this teleworking happens notthat lessening gibibit but this perviousness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this resounding does not happens hold. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that this seasoning does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: If this seasoning does not occurs that this gumming persistency does not happens and this phyleticness happens is wrong. fact2: If that that operative happens is true that that vocation does not happens and that petting happens does not hold. fact3: The fact that that operative happens but this equilibration does not happens does not hold if this alkahesticness occurs. fact4: If that petting occurs then that vocation does not happens. fact5: If that that operative happens but this equilibration does not happens is incorrect then that petting happens. fact6: This gumming persistency does not happens and this phyleticness occurs if that vocation occurs.

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

That superfetation occurs.

{DN}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this seasoning does not occurs that this gumming persistency does not happens and this phyleticness happens is wrong. fact2: If that that operative happens is true that that vocation does not happens and that petting happens does not hold. fact3: The fact that that operative happens but this equilibration does not happens does not hold if this alkahesticness occurs. fact4: If that petting occurs then that vocation does not happens. fact5: If that that operative happens but this equilibration does not happens is incorrect then that petting happens. fact6: This gumming persistency does not happens and this phyleticness occurs if that vocation occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this seasoning does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this hangout sneaks Vedism or is a kind of a Hindostani or both is false.

¬({C}{a} v {D}{a})

fact1: There exists something such that it does not bind sectionalism. fact2: The fact that something either does sneak Vedism or is a kind of a Hindostani or both is incorrect if it does not bind sectionalism. fact3: This hangout is not a putoff but this sneaks Vedism if that something does not bind sectionalism is correct.

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

The fact that this hangout sneaks Vedism or is a kind of a Hindostani or both is false.

¬({C}{a} v {D}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists something such that it does not bind sectionalism. fact2: The fact that something either does sneak Vedism or is a kind of a Hindostani or both is incorrect if it does not bind sectionalism. fact3: This hangout is not a putoff but this sneaks Vedism if that something does not bind sectionalism is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this hangout sneaks Vedism or is a kind of a Hindostani or both is false. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> int1: This hangout is not a putoff and sneaks Vedism.; int1 -> int2: This hangout sneaks Vedism.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this noness but notthis massing happens is not right.

¬({A} & ¬{B})

fact1: If that toxicologicalness does not happens then that notthis annotation but that immigrating happens does not hold. fact2: That devisal does not occurs if the fact that that indemnifying Jeth but notthis decortication happens does not hold. fact3: The fact that this pulsation does not occurs is not incorrect if that that that dehumanisation occurs and this Caucasian happens is correct is false. fact4: That grunting happens. fact5: That this labeling colloquy does not happens is brought about by that this massing and that non-noness happens. fact6: The fact that this decortication happens but that unburdening Eucarya does not happens does not hold if that indemnifying Jeth does not occurs. fact7: If that knitting Ciliophora occurs then that this noness happens and this massing does not occurs is false. fact8: Both this categorising Lamarck and that knitting Ciliophora happens if this pulsation does not happens. fact9: This noness happens. fact10: This decortication does not occurs if that this decortication occurs and that unburdening Eucarya does not occurs is not true. fact11: The fact that that dehumanisation and this Caucasian occurs is false if that devisal does not happens. fact12: That perseveration occurs and this dropping Streptopelia does not occurs. fact13: That indemnifying Jeth does not occurs if the fact that this annotation does not happens and that immigrating happens does not hold. fact14: This noness does not happens if that that devisal happens and this noness happens is incorrect. fact15: That this massing does not occurs is true. fact16: If notthe vitality but this heterologicness happens then that dehumanisation does not occurs. fact17: This massing occurs if that knitting Ciliophora occurs. fact18: That this pulsation and this Caucasian happens is brought about by that that dehumanisation does not occurs.

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

The fact that this noness but notthis massing happens is not right.

¬({A} & ¬{B})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that toxicologicalness does not happens then that notthis annotation but that immigrating happens does not hold. fact2: That devisal does not occurs if the fact that that indemnifying Jeth but notthis decortication happens does not hold. fact3: The fact that this pulsation does not occurs is not incorrect if that that that dehumanisation occurs and this Caucasian happens is correct is false. fact4: That grunting happens. fact5: That this labeling colloquy does not happens is brought about by that this massing and that non-noness happens. fact6: The fact that this decortication happens but that unburdening Eucarya does not happens does not hold if that indemnifying Jeth does not occurs. fact7: If that knitting Ciliophora occurs then that this noness happens and this massing does not occurs is false. fact8: Both this categorising Lamarck and that knitting Ciliophora happens if this pulsation does not happens. fact9: This noness happens. fact10: This decortication does not occurs if that this decortication occurs and that unburdening Eucarya does not occurs is not true. fact11: The fact that that dehumanisation and this Caucasian occurs is false if that devisal does not happens. fact12: That perseveration occurs and this dropping Streptopelia does not occurs. fact13: That indemnifying Jeth does not occurs if the fact that this annotation does not happens and that immigrating happens does not hold. fact14: This noness does not happens if that that devisal happens and this noness happens is incorrect. fact15: That this massing does not occurs is true. fact16: If notthe vitality but this heterologicness happens then that dehumanisation does not occurs. fact17: This massing occurs if that knitting Ciliophora occurs. fact18: That this pulsation and this Caucasian happens is brought about by that that dehumanisation does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this noness but notthis massing happens is not right. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that Raymond is ammonitic is correct.

{D}{b}

fact1: Something that is not vanilla is not ammonitic. fact2: Raymond is ammonitic if Bobby is a kingship. fact3: Bobby is a kind of vanilla one that does cocoon sanctimoniousness. fact4: If that burr is a nocturne then Bobby does not cocoon sanctimoniousness and is not a kind of a kingship. fact5: If something does cocoon sanctimoniousness it is a kingship. fact6: The alphavirus cocoons sanctimoniousness and is nativistic. fact7: Raymond is not vanilla if Bobby does not cocoon sanctimoniousness and is not a kingship.

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

Raymond is not ammonitic.

¬{D}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that is not vanilla is not ammonitic. fact2: Raymond is ammonitic if Bobby is a kingship. fact3: Bobby is a kind of vanilla one that does cocoon sanctimoniousness. fact4: If that burr is a nocturne then Bobby does not cocoon sanctimoniousness and is not a kind of a kingship. fact5: If something does cocoon sanctimoniousness it is a kingship. fact6: The alphavirus cocoons sanctimoniousness and is nativistic. fact7: Raymond is not vanilla if Bobby does not cocoon sanctimoniousness and is not a kingship. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that Raymond is ammonitic is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: Bobby cocoons sanctimoniousness.; fact5 -> int2: If Bobby does cocoon sanctimoniousness then it is a kingship.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Bobby is a kingship.; int3 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This dishonestness does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: That centerfield does not happens if that the fact that this meridionalness does not occurs but this livingness happens is right does not hold. fact2: That standing happens and this dishonestness happens if that unpatrioticness does not happens. fact3: This exploratoriness does not happens. fact4: That this focusing Myxinoidea does not occurs is caused by that this ridging oversupply occurs and this canfield happens. fact5: This canfield happens if the fact that the atrialness happens but this chylousness does not happens is wrong. fact6: Both this allometricness and that drippage happens if this exploratoriness does not occurs. fact7: That that unpatrioticness and this dishonestness occurs is wrong if this focusing Myxinoidea does not occurs. fact8: If this allometricness happens that this meridionalness does not happens and this livingness occurs is false. fact9: This dishonestness does not occurs if that that unpatrioticness and this dishonestness occurs does not hold. fact10: That this ridging oversupply and that sou'easter happens is brought about by that that centerfield does not happens.

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

That that standing happens is correct.

{BQ}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That centerfield does not happens if that the fact that this meridionalness does not occurs but this livingness happens is right does not hold. fact2: That standing happens and this dishonestness happens if that unpatrioticness does not happens. fact3: This exploratoriness does not happens. fact4: That this focusing Myxinoidea does not occurs is caused by that this ridging oversupply occurs and this canfield happens. fact5: This canfield happens if the fact that the atrialness happens but this chylousness does not happens is wrong. fact6: Both this allometricness and that drippage happens if this exploratoriness does not occurs. fact7: That that unpatrioticness and this dishonestness occurs is wrong if this focusing Myxinoidea does not occurs. fact8: If this allometricness happens that this meridionalness does not happens and this livingness occurs is false. fact9: This dishonestness does not occurs if that that unpatrioticness and this dishonestness occurs does not hold. fact10: That this ridging oversupply and that sou'easter happens is brought about by that that centerfield does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This dishonestness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This psychoanalyst is a blonde.

{C}{a}

fact1: This psychoanalyst is a halloo. fact2: This psychoanalyst is psychogenetic.

fact1: {B}{a} fact2: {A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This psychoanalyst is a halloo. fact2: This psychoanalyst is psychogenetic. ; $hypothesis$ = This psychoanalyst is a blonde. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Rb does not rhapsodize charming.

¬{A}{c}

fact1: The fact that that Rb is asteriated and this rhapsodizes charming is incorrect. fact2: The fact that this savoring does not bumble Balochi and is asteriated does not hold. fact3: If this savoring is not a langsyne and is not a stalactite that iceboat is a kind of a langsyne. fact4: This savoring is not a langsyne and this thing is not a stalactite if this picot does not bespatter. fact5: That Rb does not rhapsodize charming if this picot is not a rising. fact6: Someone is not a rising and/or does not rhapsodize charming if it is a langsyne. fact7: Some man does not rhapsodize charming if she is not a rising and/or she does not rhapsodize charming. fact8: Something that is undemanding is not an effectiveness and does not bespatter. fact9: This picot is not a rising if the fact that this savoring does not bumble Balochi and is asteriated does not hold.

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

That iceboat does not rhapsodize charming.

¬{A}{en}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that Rb is asteriated and this rhapsodizes charming is incorrect. fact2: The fact that this savoring does not bumble Balochi and is asteriated does not hold. fact3: If this savoring is not a langsyne and is not a stalactite that iceboat is a kind of a langsyne. fact4: This savoring is not a langsyne and this thing is not a stalactite if this picot does not bespatter. fact5: That Rb does not rhapsodize charming if this picot is not a rising. fact6: Someone is not a rising and/or does not rhapsodize charming if it is a langsyne. fact7: Some man does not rhapsodize charming if she is not a rising and/or she does not rhapsodize charming. fact8: Something that is undemanding is not an effectiveness and does not bespatter. fact9: This picot is not a rising if the fact that this savoring does not bumble Balochi and is asteriated does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That Rb does not rhapsodize charming. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact2 -> int1: This picot is not a kind of a rising.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This tocopherol is both amygdaline and a soh.

({C}{a} & {D}{a})

fact1: If some person is emphysematous this one is amygdaline. fact2: This tocopherol does unarmed. fact3: If that prosecutor is emphysematous then the fact that this tocopherol is not amygdaline and it is not a waft is incorrect. fact4: That that adesite is not amygdaline does not hold if the fact that this tocopherol is not amygdaline and it is not a kind of a waft is false. fact5: This tocopherol is a intension if it is a Saroyan. fact6: Something is a kind of non-emphysematous thing that is leafless if it is a schizoid. fact7: If this tocopherol does not jactitate mistaken this tocopherol is a kind of a soh. fact8: If there is some man such that the fact that it is not oracular is right then the Zapotecan is not oracular. fact9: If that anion is not a schizoid then this recapitulation is a kind of a soh and that thing is not leafy. fact10: If something is a kind of non-emphysematous thing that is leafless then it is not a kind of a waft. fact11: If the Zapotecan is not oracular then that anion is not a schizoid but it is craniometrical. fact12: That this tocopherol is a soh hold. fact13: Earl is not oracular. fact14: This tocopherol is emphysematous if this tocopherol is not a waft. fact15: That prosecutor is emphysematous if that peahen is emphysematous. fact16: If that prosecutor is not a waft then that this tocopherol is amygdaline and is a soh is not correct. fact17: That monosaccharose is a kind of a soh.

fact1: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact2: {FU}{a} fact3: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact4: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {C}{do} fact5: {DJ}{a} -> {BK}{a} fact6: (x): {F}x -> (¬{B}x & {E}x) fact7: ¬{ED}{a} -> {D}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬{H}{g} fact9: ¬{F}{f} -> ({D}{e} & {E}{e}) fact10: (x): (¬{B}x & {E}x) -> ¬{A}x fact11: ¬{H}{g} -> (¬{F}{f} & {G}{f}) fact12: {D}{a} fact13: ¬{H}{h} fact14: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact15: {B}{c} -> {B}{b} fact16: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} & {D}{a}) fact17: {D}{ap}

That this tocopherol is amygdaline and is a soh does not hold.

¬({C}{a} & {D}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some person is emphysematous this one is amygdaline. fact2: This tocopherol does unarmed. fact3: If that prosecutor is emphysematous then the fact that this tocopherol is not amygdaline and it is not a waft is incorrect. fact4: That that adesite is not amygdaline does not hold if the fact that this tocopherol is not amygdaline and it is not a kind of a waft is false. fact5: This tocopherol is a intension if it is a Saroyan. fact6: Something is a kind of non-emphysematous thing that is leafless if it is a schizoid. fact7: If this tocopherol does not jactitate mistaken this tocopherol is a kind of a soh. fact8: If there is some man such that the fact that it is not oracular is right then the Zapotecan is not oracular. fact9: If that anion is not a schizoid then this recapitulation is a kind of a soh and that thing is not leafy. fact10: If something is a kind of non-emphysematous thing that is leafless then it is not a kind of a waft. fact11: If the Zapotecan is not oracular then that anion is not a schizoid but it is craniometrical. fact12: That this tocopherol is a soh hold. fact13: Earl is not oracular. fact14: This tocopherol is emphysematous if this tocopherol is not a waft. fact15: That prosecutor is emphysematous if that peahen is emphysematous. fact16: If that prosecutor is not a waft then that this tocopherol is amygdaline and is a soh is not correct. fact17: That monosaccharose is a kind of a soh. ; $hypothesis$ = This tocopherol is both amygdaline and a soh. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That everyone is lowercase does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Every man is lowercase.

fact1: (x): {A}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Every man is lowercase. ; $hypothesis$ = That everyone is lowercase does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That furrow either is a leprechaun or is not polyploid or both.

({B}{c} v ¬{A}{c})

fact1: If that seat is not a Bizet then this keypad is Wittgensteinian and it is congenerical. fact2: That furrow is a leprechaun and/or is polyploid if that seat is not a leprechaun. fact3: If that seat is not a kind of a leprechaun that furrow is a leprechaun and/or non-polyploid. fact4: If something is congenerical the fact that this thing ciphers Castroism and is not a leprechaun is not true. fact5: That seat is not a kind of a leprechaun if the fact that this keypad is not a kind of a Parrotiopsis and it is not unvigilant does not hold. fact6: The fact that that this keypad is not a Parrotiopsis and is alert is wrong is right. fact7: There is something such that the fact that either this thing is a pfennig or this thing is not a thought or both does not hold. fact8: That allograft is not a kind of a leprechaun if that the fact that this keypad ciphers Castroism and is not a leprechaun hold is not true.

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

That allograft is not a Parrotiopsis.

¬{AA}{ee}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that seat is not a Bizet then this keypad is Wittgensteinian and it is congenerical. fact2: That furrow is a leprechaun and/or is polyploid if that seat is not a leprechaun. fact3: If that seat is not a kind of a leprechaun that furrow is a leprechaun and/or non-polyploid. fact4: If something is congenerical the fact that this thing ciphers Castroism and is not a leprechaun is not true. fact5: That seat is not a kind of a leprechaun if the fact that this keypad is not a kind of a Parrotiopsis and it is not unvigilant does not hold. fact6: The fact that that this keypad is not a Parrotiopsis and is alert is wrong is right. fact7: There is something such that the fact that either this thing is a pfennig or this thing is not a thought or both does not hold. fact8: That allograft is not a kind of a leprechaun if that the fact that this keypad ciphers Castroism and is not a leprechaun hold is not true. ; $hypothesis$ = That furrow either is a leprechaun or is not polyploid or both. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact6 -> int1: That seat is not a kind of a leprechaun.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this colorfulness but notthis bosoming heavyheartedness occurs does not hold.

¬({B} & ¬{C})

fact1: Both that pyrotechnicalness and this searching happens. fact2: The unenforcedness occurs and this colorfulness happens. fact3: That that pyrotechnicalness and this searching occurs prevents that this bosoming heavyheartedness happens.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Both that pyrotechnicalness and this searching happens. fact2: The unenforcedness occurs and this colorfulness happens. fact3: That that pyrotechnicalness and this searching occurs prevents that this bosoming heavyheartedness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this colorfulness but notthis bosoming heavyheartedness occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This colorfulness occurs.; fact3 & fact1 -> int2: This bosoming heavyheartedness does not occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That engaging tetartanopia occurs.

{B}

fact1: The fact that the muddying spattered happens and this monolingual occurs is wrong. fact2: That this discovery and this equestrianness occurs is false. fact3: That engaging tetartanopia does not occurs if that that castling does not happens hold. fact4: The non-unrenewedness results in that this auricularness and the longness occurs. fact5: That that both this burglariousness and that castling occurs hold is false. fact6: That the roughening and that sheaone retinitis occurs is not right. fact7: This anathemizing malodorousness does not happens. fact8: The fact that that engaging tetartanopia does not happens but this nonreflectiveness happens does not hold if the longness happens. fact9: That both that leadlessness and the seamanlikeness occurs is incorrect. fact10: The cyprinoidness does not occurs if that both the robing and the latinising Prometheus happens is wrong. fact11: The fact that that engaging tetartanopia occurs if that the fact that that engaging tetartanopia does not occurs and this nonreflectiveness occurs is correct does not hold is not incorrect. fact12: The hydrometricness does not occurs. fact13: That that afflicting Frisia does not happens leads to that this dehumanization does not happens. fact14: That the predominating and that chicane happens does not hold. fact15: If that this burglariousness occurs and that castling occurs is wrong then that engaging tetartanopia does not happens. fact16: The pavage does not occurs if the fact that both this creaking and this aphrodisiacalness happens does not hold. fact17: If the fact that the unselfishness and this detriment occurs is incorrect then the benignness does not occurs. fact18: This winning fortuitousness does not happens if the fact that the seamanlikeness occurs and the downstairness occurs does not hold.

fact1: ¬({HK} & {AE}) fact2: ¬({GK} & {AF}) fact3: ¬{AB} -> ¬{B} fact4: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {A}) fact5: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact6: ¬({CP} & {CH}) fact7: ¬{AU} fact8: {A} -> ¬(¬{B} & {C}) fact9: ¬({GM} & {AJ}) fact10: ¬({AG} & {CK}) -> ¬{CE} fact11: ¬(¬{B} & {C}) -> {B} fact12: ¬{U} fact13: ¬{FK} -> ¬{AS} fact14: ¬({JG} & {DN}) fact15: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact16: ¬({HQ} & {BD}) -> ¬{HS} fact17: ¬({DA} & {F}) -> ¬{JJ} fact18: ¬({AJ} & {FM}) -> ¬{GO}

That engaging tetartanopia occurs.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the muddying spattered happens and this monolingual occurs is wrong. fact2: That this discovery and this equestrianness occurs is false. fact3: That engaging tetartanopia does not occurs if that that castling does not happens hold. fact4: The non-unrenewedness results in that this auricularness and the longness occurs. fact5: That that both this burglariousness and that castling occurs hold is false. fact6: That the roughening and that sheaone retinitis occurs is not right. fact7: This anathemizing malodorousness does not happens. fact8: The fact that that engaging tetartanopia does not happens but this nonreflectiveness happens does not hold if the longness happens. fact9: That both that leadlessness and the seamanlikeness occurs is incorrect. fact10: The cyprinoidness does not occurs if that both the robing and the latinising Prometheus happens is wrong. fact11: The fact that that engaging tetartanopia occurs if that the fact that that engaging tetartanopia does not occurs and this nonreflectiveness occurs is correct does not hold is not incorrect. fact12: The hydrometricness does not occurs. fact13: That that afflicting Frisia does not happens leads to that this dehumanization does not happens. fact14: That the predominating and that chicane happens does not hold. fact15: If that this burglariousness occurs and that castling occurs is wrong then that engaging tetartanopia does not happens. fact16: The pavage does not occurs if the fact that both this creaking and this aphrodisiacalness happens does not hold. fact17: If the fact that the unselfishness and this detriment occurs is incorrect then the benignness does not occurs. fact18: This winning fortuitousness does not happens if the fact that the seamanlikeness occurs and the downstairness occurs does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That engaging tetartanopia occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Benito is not unsaponified and that one does not crank Crocodylia.

(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: The simoon is not unquestionable and it is not a kind of a Psetta. fact2: The fact that Benito is not unsaponified and that does not crank Crocodylia is false if that is not non-epitheliod. fact3: The fact that Benito is not basophilic but it is a surface does not hold. fact4: If this Mulla is both not epitheliod and not unsaponified then Benito is a Molva. fact5: This Mulla is not non-pentavalent. fact6: The fact that Benito cranks Crocodylia and is not an equivalent does not hold if it is not epitheliod. fact7: This Mulla is not a Trionychidae. fact8: Benito does not crank Crocodylia if that Benito does crank Crocodylia but it is not an equivalent does not hold. fact9: The fact that that Tantrist is non-conjunct but this person is patristical is not correct. fact10: This Mulla is not patristical. fact11: If this Mulla cranks Crocodylia but it is not epitheliod then Benito is a Molva. fact12: That this Mulla is not epitheliod is not false. fact13: Benito is not unsaponified if this Mulla is either not a Trionychidae or classical or both. fact14: This Mulla is not a Molva and is not patristical. fact15: The fact that Benito is both non-patristical and not unsaponified is incorrect. fact16: That this Mulla does not crank Crocodylia but that thing is patristical does not hold. fact17: If this Mulla is a Molva that she/he is saponified and is not epitheliod is wrong. fact18: This Mulla does not carol Singapore. fact19: The fact that Benito is unsaponified but it does not crank Crocodylia is wrong. fact20: The fact that this Mulla does not crank Crocodylia and is not a kind of a Molva is false if it is patristical. fact21: If this Mulla is not a Molva but non-patristical Benito is epitheliod. fact22: That Benito is not incredible and this thing is not epitheliod is incorrect. fact23: Benito is a kind of a Molva.

fact1: (¬{EO}{e} & ¬{IO}{e}) fact2: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact3: ¬(¬{GQ}{b} & {JC}{b}) fact4: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {AA}{b} fact5: {O}{a} fact6: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact7: ¬{H}{a} fact8: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact9: ¬(¬{HH}{ia} & {AB}{ia}) fact10: ¬{AB}{a} fact11: ({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {AA}{b} fact12: ¬{B}{a} fact13: (¬{H}{a} v ¬{G}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact14: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact15: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact16: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact17: {AA}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact18: ¬{FK}{a} fact19: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact20: {AB}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) fact21: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact22: ¬(¬{JK}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact23: {AA}{b}

Benito is not unsaponified and that one does not crank Crocodylia.

(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The simoon is not unquestionable and it is not a kind of a Psetta. fact2: The fact that Benito is not unsaponified and that does not crank Crocodylia is false if that is not non-epitheliod. fact3: The fact that Benito is not basophilic but it is a surface does not hold. fact4: If this Mulla is both not epitheliod and not unsaponified then Benito is a Molva. fact5: This Mulla is not non-pentavalent. fact6: The fact that Benito cranks Crocodylia and is not an equivalent does not hold if it is not epitheliod. fact7: This Mulla is not a Trionychidae. fact8: Benito does not crank Crocodylia if that Benito does crank Crocodylia but it is not an equivalent does not hold. fact9: The fact that that Tantrist is non-conjunct but this person is patristical is not correct. fact10: This Mulla is not patristical. fact11: If this Mulla cranks Crocodylia but it is not epitheliod then Benito is a Molva. fact12: That this Mulla is not epitheliod is not false. fact13: Benito is not unsaponified if this Mulla is either not a Trionychidae or classical or both. fact14: This Mulla is not a Molva and is not patristical. fact15: The fact that Benito is both non-patristical and not unsaponified is incorrect. fact16: That this Mulla does not crank Crocodylia but that thing is patristical does not hold. fact17: If this Mulla is a Molva that she/he is saponified and is not epitheliod is wrong. fact18: This Mulla does not carol Singapore. fact19: The fact that Benito is unsaponified but it does not crank Crocodylia is wrong. fact20: The fact that this Mulla does not crank Crocodylia and is not a kind of a Molva is false if it is patristical. fact21: If this Mulla is not a Molva but non-patristical Benito is epitheliod. fact22: That Benito is not incredible and this thing is not epitheliod is incorrect. fact23: Benito is a kind of a Molva. ; $hypothesis$ = Benito is not unsaponified and that one does not crank Crocodylia. ; $proof$ =

fact21 & fact14 -> int1: Benito is epitheliod.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That both this less and this melee occurs is not true.

¬({D} & {C})

fact1: This turnabout happens. fact2: If that annihilation occurs then this scamming O.K. occurs. fact3: If the fact that this pharmacologicness occurs is true then the unknotting happens. fact4: The tumbling and the findingsing happens. fact5: That this less and this melee happens is false if that annihilation does not occurs. fact6: This melee happens if this scamming O.K. happens. fact7: That Romanizing hypertonus does not happens. fact8: That hubris does not occurs. fact9: That annihilation occurs. fact10: That this ontologicalness happens is true. fact11: Both the clotting consistency and the renovation occurs. fact12: The fostering lycanthropy occurs if this atypicalness does not happens. fact13: This disintegrating Wuerzburg occurs. fact14: This sign happens. fact15: That that hunching happens hold.

fact1: {JE} fact2: {A} -> {B} fact3: {JF} -> {FF} fact4: ({BD} & {IE}) fact5: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} & {C}) fact6: {B} -> {C} fact7: ¬{F} fact8: ¬{AJ} fact9: {A} fact10: {FD} fact11: ({AL} & {EQ}) fact12: ¬{GO} -> {GI} fact13: {CO} fact14: {S} fact15: {GK}

That both this less and this melee occurs is not true.

¬({D} & {C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This turnabout happens. fact2: If that annihilation occurs then this scamming O.K. occurs. fact3: If the fact that this pharmacologicness occurs is true then the unknotting happens. fact4: The tumbling and the findingsing happens. fact5: That this less and this melee happens is false if that annihilation does not occurs. fact6: This melee happens if this scamming O.K. happens. fact7: That Romanizing hypertonus does not happens. fact8: That hubris does not occurs. fact9: That annihilation occurs. fact10: That this ontologicalness happens is true. fact11: Both the clotting consistency and the renovation occurs. fact12: The fostering lycanthropy occurs if this atypicalness does not happens. fact13: This disintegrating Wuerzburg occurs. fact14: This sign happens. fact15: That that hunching happens hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That both this less and this melee occurs is not true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This hullabaloo happens.

{C}

fact1: Either that tying Mustelus or this decimalizing or both occurs if that soteriologicalness does not occurs. fact2: This hullabaloo happens if this questioning happens. fact3: That canceling globosity occurs. fact4: That soteriologicalness does not happens. fact5: That the diagnosticness happens or that taking Tupaiidae or both is caused by that the Rushing does not occurs. fact6: This approximating topos happens. fact7: That seraphicalness occurs and/or the unlading happens. fact8: This abstracterness prevents that this commuting does not happens. fact9: That exoergicness causes that this questioning does not occurs and/or that soteriologicalness does not occurs. fact10: Either the abiding happens or this gelatinizing fourscore happens or both. fact11: The pocket and/or that effectuation happens. fact12: That subsurfaceness happens. fact13: That exoergicness and this commuting happens if that gluttonizing does not happens. fact14: If this fating compulsiveness occurs then the inclination happens. fact15: The brahminicalness and/or the canonizing transmutability occurs. fact16: The fagging hatched causes that the gourmandizing happens. fact17: The brightness happens. fact18: That the shredding Psilotaceae does not occurs is prevented by that littering. fact19: If that tying Mustelus occurs this questioning happens. fact20: The mintage does not happens. fact21: If the wiring pleuropneumonia occurs the purchasing pyaemia occurs.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ({AA} v {AB}) fact2: {B} -> {C} fact3: {S} fact4: ¬{A} fact5: ¬{HJ} -> ({DD} v {FQ}) fact6: {ED} fact7: ({CA} v {EM}) fact8: {L} -> {E} fact9: {D} -> (¬{B} v ¬{A}) fact10: ({DT} v {DK}) fact11: ({AH} v {FR}) fact12: {FU} fact13: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact14: {AL} -> {DQ} fact15: ({FB} v {DC}) fact16: {FP} -> {JI} fact17: {BI} fact18: {HN} -> {DR} fact19: {AA} -> {B} fact20: ¬{ID} fact21: {DB} -> {DI}

This hullabaloo does not happens.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Either that tying Mustelus or this decimalizing or both occurs if that soteriologicalness does not occurs. fact2: This hullabaloo happens if this questioning happens. fact3: That canceling globosity occurs. fact4: That soteriologicalness does not happens. fact5: That the diagnosticness happens or that taking Tupaiidae or both is caused by that the Rushing does not occurs. fact6: This approximating topos happens. fact7: That seraphicalness occurs and/or the unlading happens. fact8: This abstracterness prevents that this commuting does not happens. fact9: That exoergicness causes that this questioning does not occurs and/or that soteriologicalness does not occurs. fact10: Either the abiding happens or this gelatinizing fourscore happens or both. fact11: The pocket and/or that effectuation happens. fact12: That subsurfaceness happens. fact13: That exoergicness and this commuting happens if that gluttonizing does not happens. fact14: If this fating compulsiveness occurs then the inclination happens. fact15: The brahminicalness and/or the canonizing transmutability occurs. fact16: The fagging hatched causes that the gourmandizing happens. fact17: The brightness happens. fact18: That the shredding Psilotaceae does not occurs is prevented by that littering. fact19: If that tying Mustelus occurs this questioning happens. fact20: The mintage does not happens. fact21: If the wiring pleuropneumonia occurs the purchasing pyaemia occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This hullabaloo happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This feverfew cybernates Mendelsohn.

{C}{b}

fact1: This rudderpost is a Cupressus. fact2: This shot Blacks quinsy and is not a kind of a Haemanthus if Nate is a Frisian. fact3: Nate benches Idaho. fact4: Somebody that Blacks quinsy and is not a kind of a Haemanthus does not cybernate Mendelsohn. fact5: This feverfew is a kind of a Cupressus if Nate benches Idaho. fact6: Some person slacks Sarcoptes if the person is a balkiness. fact7: Something cybernates Mendelsohn if that is a kind of a Cupressus. fact8: If this feverfew silences then Nate is a Frisian. fact9: that Idaho benches Nate. fact10: If that Northeast is not a brandish but it absolves jackpot then that this feverfew silences is true.

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

This shot is a Cupressus.

{B}{eq}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This rudderpost is a Cupressus. fact2: This shot Blacks quinsy and is not a kind of a Haemanthus if Nate is a Frisian. fact3: Nate benches Idaho. fact4: Somebody that Blacks quinsy and is not a kind of a Haemanthus does not cybernate Mendelsohn. fact5: This feverfew is a kind of a Cupressus if Nate benches Idaho. fact6: Some person slacks Sarcoptes if the person is a balkiness. fact7: Something cybernates Mendelsohn if that is a kind of a Cupressus. fact8: If this feverfew silences then Nate is a Frisian. fact9: that Idaho benches Nate. fact10: If that Northeast is not a brandish but it absolves jackpot then that this feverfew silences is true. ; $hypothesis$ = This feverfew cybernates Mendelsohn. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact3 -> int1: The fact that this feverfew is not a kind of a Cupressus is incorrect.; fact7 -> int2: If this feverfew is a Cupressus then it cybernates Mendelsohn.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that if the fact that this waterleaf is not a SOB and piques Eustachio is incorrect this waterleaf is not a Setophaga is not correct.

¬(¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})

fact1: That this waterleaf is a damp if that this waterleaf is non-anapaestic but that is a SOB is false hold. fact2: This carrageenin is not a Setophaga if the fact that this carrageenin is not a kind of a greyed but the thing hoodoos Diderot is false. fact3: The cellphone does not loathe if the fact that it is not a SOB and it does signalize manginess does not hold. fact4: Something is not a Setophaga if it does not pique Eustachio. fact5: Something is a Schistosoma if the fact that it is not a pneumogastric and marbleizes is false. fact6: If this waterleaf is not a SOB and piques Eustachio that one is not a Setophaga. fact7: If the fact that something does not retard stylishness and jerks Maitland is incorrect this thing is not maladaptive. fact8: If this waterleaf does not pique Eustachio it is not a Setophaga. fact9: If that this debitor does not pique Eustachio but this person malnourisheds torridity does not hold then that this person is non-palatoglossal is correct. fact10: If the fact that this waterleaf does not pique Eustachio but she leers is incorrect this waterleaf consecrates acrophobia. fact11: If somebody that is not a kind of a SOB piques Eustachio he/she is not a Setophaga. fact12: Something is a unctuousness if the fact that this thing does not get hereditament and is not non-mediaeval does not hold. fact13: If the fact that this waterleaf does not blaze O'Neill and is a Schistosoma is wrong then the one is not a kind of a SOB. fact14: Something is not anapaestic if that it is not taxonomic and is an estate does not hold. fact15: The sauropod is not a populace if the fact that the sauropod does not group shininess and loathes does not hold. fact16: If the fact that this waterleaf is a SOB and he/she piques Eustachio is false then he/she is not a Setophaga. fact17: That the bypass is a SOB is correct if the fact that the bypass is not a rockiness but rhombic is false. fact18: Someone does not reconvene Viverrinae if that this person does not deform and is a Pareto is wrong. fact19: The seafood is not a Funk if that she is talented is correct.

fact1: ¬(¬{AO}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> {GL}{aa} fact2: ¬(¬{GK}{et} & {HG}{et}) -> ¬{B}{et} fact3: ¬(¬{AA}{ai} & {IB}{ai}) -> ¬{GG}{ai} fact4: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x fact5: (x): ¬(¬{BT}x & {CG}x) -> {JB}x fact6: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact7: (x): ¬(¬{AG}x & {CP}x) -> ¬{BM}x fact8: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} fact9: ¬(¬{AB}{er} & {IC}{er}) -> ¬{DR}{er} fact10: ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & {J}{aa}) -> {FH}{aa} fact11: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact12: (x): ¬(¬{GE}x & {HC}x) -> {DB}x fact13: ¬(¬{FB}{aa} & {JB}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} fact14: (x): ¬(¬{HS}x & {JG}x) -> ¬{AO}x fact15: ¬(¬{JK}{s} & {GG}{s}) -> ¬{DF}{s} fact16: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact17: ¬(¬{ED}{ji} & {BH}{ji}) -> {AA}{ji} fact18: (x): ¬(¬{JH}x & {DM}x) -> ¬{CS}x fact19: {AF}{jb} -> ¬{AK}{jb}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this waterleaf is a damp if that this waterleaf is non-anapaestic but that is a SOB is false hold. fact2: This carrageenin is not a Setophaga if the fact that this carrageenin is not a kind of a greyed but the thing hoodoos Diderot is false. fact3: The cellphone does not loathe if the fact that it is not a SOB and it does signalize manginess does not hold. fact4: Something is not a Setophaga if it does not pique Eustachio. fact5: Something is a Schistosoma if the fact that it is not a pneumogastric and marbleizes is false. fact6: If this waterleaf is not a SOB and piques Eustachio that one is not a Setophaga. fact7: If the fact that something does not retard stylishness and jerks Maitland is incorrect this thing is not maladaptive. fact8: If this waterleaf does not pique Eustachio it is not a Setophaga. fact9: If that this debitor does not pique Eustachio but this person malnourisheds torridity does not hold then that this person is non-palatoglossal is correct. fact10: If the fact that this waterleaf does not pique Eustachio but she leers is incorrect this waterleaf consecrates acrophobia. fact11: If somebody that is not a kind of a SOB piques Eustachio he/she is not a Setophaga. fact12: Something is a unctuousness if the fact that this thing does not get hereditament and is not non-mediaeval does not hold. fact13: If the fact that this waterleaf does not blaze O'Neill and is a Schistosoma is wrong then the one is not a kind of a SOB. fact14: Something is not anapaestic if that it is not taxonomic and is an estate does not hold. fact15: The sauropod is not a populace if the fact that the sauropod does not group shininess and loathes does not hold. fact16: If the fact that this waterleaf is a SOB and he/she piques Eustachio is false then he/she is not a Setophaga. fact17: That the bypass is a SOB is correct if the fact that the bypass is not a rockiness but rhombic is false. fact18: Someone does not reconvene Viverrinae if that this person does not deform and is a Pareto is wrong. fact19: The seafood is not a Funk if that she is talented is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that if the fact that this waterleaf is not a SOB and piques Eustachio is incorrect this waterleaf is not a Setophaga is not correct. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That moderating does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: That representative occurs. fact2: This rising occurs. fact3: The fact that the fact that the fact that both that moderating and this providing funds happens is right is incorrect is correct if that darkening does not happens. fact4: That this rising and this footrace happens prevents that that moderating occurs. fact5: This footrace happens.

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

That roguishness does not occurs.

¬{FM}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That representative occurs. fact2: This rising occurs. fact3: The fact that the fact that the fact that both that moderating and this providing funds happens is right is incorrect is correct if that darkening does not happens. fact4: That this rising and this footrace happens prevents that that moderating occurs. fact5: This footrace happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That moderating does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact5 -> int1: This rising occurs and this footrace happens.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Electrophorus is not a Dido.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: If that something is a cadency and alloys chafed is wrong then the thing does not alloys chafed. fact2: This pointer is not unreplaceable and is Latvian. fact3: If something does not alloy chafed that it is not a kind of a Dido and it practises does not hold. fact4: Either this starveling is vestmental or it is a kind of a constancy or both if this pointer is not apsidal. fact5: If this spawl rounds groundlessness that Electrophorus is not a Dido. fact6: If that exerciser is a constancy it is a 1990s and it is not a Debussy. fact7: The fact that this spawl does round groundlessness and does constellate Winnipeg is false. fact8: If someone is not phyllodial he is not apsidal and he is not reentrant. fact9: That Electrophorus is not a Dido if that this spawl does not round groundlessness but that one constellates Winnipeg does not hold. fact10: Someone that is a kind of a 1990s and is not a Debussy does not cry sociolinguistics. fact11: If that this spawl is not a Dido and practises is incorrect then that Electrophorus is a Dido. fact12: That this spawl is a kind of a cadency that alloys chafed does not hold if that exerciser does not cry sociolinguistics. fact13: That this spawl does not round groundlessness but it constellates Winnipeg is incorrect. fact14: This pointer is non-phyllodial if he/she is both not unreplaceable and Latvian.

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

That Electrophorus is a Dido.

{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that something is a cadency and alloys chafed is wrong then the thing does not alloys chafed. fact2: This pointer is not unreplaceable and is Latvian. fact3: If something does not alloy chafed that it is not a kind of a Dido and it practises does not hold. fact4: Either this starveling is vestmental or it is a kind of a constancy or both if this pointer is not apsidal. fact5: If this spawl rounds groundlessness that Electrophorus is not a Dido. fact6: If that exerciser is a constancy it is a 1990s and it is not a Debussy. fact7: The fact that this spawl does round groundlessness and does constellate Winnipeg is false. fact8: If someone is not phyllodial he is not apsidal and he is not reentrant. fact9: That Electrophorus is not a Dido if that this spawl does not round groundlessness but that one constellates Winnipeg does not hold. fact10: Someone that is a kind of a 1990s and is not a Debussy does not cry sociolinguistics. fact11: If that this spawl is not a Dido and practises is incorrect then that Electrophorus is a Dido. fact12: That this spawl is a kind of a cadency that alloys chafed does not hold if that exerciser does not cry sociolinguistics. fact13: That this spawl does not round groundlessness but it constellates Winnipeg is incorrect. fact14: This pointer is non-phyllodial if he/she is both not unreplaceable and Latvian. ; $hypothesis$ = That Electrophorus is not a Dido. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that everything is not a Oregon and is not a kind of a Chirocephalus is right is false.

¬((x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: Everything is non-Aryan thing that is not abbatial. fact2: Everybody is not a Oregon and is not a Chirocephalus. fact3: Every person is not a leech and it does not shout palaeoethnography. fact4: Everything is both not a Nipponese and not a rook. fact5: Everybody is not a pettishness and it does not mortify Skagerrak. fact6: Everything is not a Iguassu and it is not mild. fact7: The fact that everybody is not a pettishness and not smaller is correct. fact8: Everything is not a Megaderma and it does not conclude downheartedness. fact9: Everybody does not crash Quine and is not psychopharmacological. fact10: Everything is not a Lobachevsky and this thing is not annexal. fact11: If the fact that the fact that some person is both not an arresting and not starless is right is incorrect it is not Sikh. fact12: Everyone is both not climactic and non-Aryan. fact13: The fact that everybody is not a kind of an arresting and is not sincere hold. fact14: Everything does not mail spondylarthritis and it is not a kind of a empyrean. fact15: Everybody is not a kind of a Chirocephalus. fact16: Everything is not unlikely and it is not a pronged. fact17: The fact that every man is not allelic and he is not a kind of a anxiolytic is right.

fact1: (x): (¬{BL}x & ¬{GM}x) fact2: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: (x): (¬{DP}x & ¬{GE}x) fact4: (x): (¬{FU}x & ¬{DI}x) fact5: (x): (¬{BT}x & ¬{HE}x) fact6: (x): (¬{BM}x & ¬{FH}x) fact7: (x): (¬{BT}x & ¬{JE}x) fact8: (x): (¬{CH}x & ¬{BG}x) fact9: (x): (¬{FK}x & ¬{U}x) fact10: (x): (¬{IF}x & ¬{HM}x) fact11: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact12: (x): (¬{EL}x & ¬{BL}x) fact13: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{GC}x) fact14: (x): (¬{CO}x & ¬{II}x) fact15: (x): ¬{AB}x fact16: (x): (¬{BU}x & ¬{BJ}x) fact17: (x): (¬{EA}x & ¬{IM}x)

The fact that everything is not an upsetting and is not an indicative hold.

(x): (¬{IP}x & ¬{IJ}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is non-Aryan thing that is not abbatial. fact2: Everybody is not a Oregon and is not a Chirocephalus. fact3: Every person is not a leech and it does not shout palaeoethnography. fact4: Everything is both not a Nipponese and not a rook. fact5: Everybody is not a pettishness and it does not mortify Skagerrak. fact6: Everything is not a Iguassu and it is not mild. fact7: The fact that everybody is not a pettishness and not smaller is correct. fact8: Everything is not a Megaderma and it does not conclude downheartedness. fact9: Everybody does not crash Quine and is not psychopharmacological. fact10: Everything is not a Lobachevsky and this thing is not annexal. fact11: If the fact that the fact that some person is both not an arresting and not starless is right is incorrect it is not Sikh. fact12: Everyone is both not climactic and non-Aryan. fact13: The fact that everybody is not a kind of an arresting and is not sincere hold. fact14: Everything does not mail spondylarthritis and it is not a kind of a empyrean. fact15: Everybody is not a kind of a Chirocephalus. fact16: Everything is not unlikely and it is not a pronged. fact17: The fact that every man is not allelic and he is not a kind of a anxiolytic is right. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that everything is not a Oregon and is not a kind of a Chirocephalus is right is false. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This fingerroot is non-calicular man that does bristle.

(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: That this fingerroot is calicular and bristles is wrong. fact2: If the fact that this fingerroot is not a kind of a wafture and that person is not a neutral does not hold that person is not calicular. fact3: If this fingerroot is a waste then that this thing is calicular and does bristle is false. fact4: Dena is generous and/or this one is not a kind of a suds. fact5: If the fact that this craniologist does not exculpate proprietary but it is a Arnoseris is false this fingerroot is a waste. fact6: There is nobody that exculpates proprietary and is a Arnoseris. fact7: There is nothing such that it does not exculpate proprietary and is a Arnoseris. fact8: If the fact that this craniologist does exculpate proprietary is true this fingerroot is a waste. fact9: If something is not calicular then this thing bristles and/or this thing is not a kind of a waste. fact10: The fact that something is not non-calicular and this thing bristles is incorrect if this thing is a waste. fact11: The fact that something is not a wafture and not a neutral is incorrect if this is not a suds. fact12: If this fingerroot is not a waste then the fact that the photometrician does not exculpate proprietary and is a arcsec does not hold.

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

The fact that the photometrician does not exculpate proprietary and is a kind of a arcsec does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{r} & {GJ}{r})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this fingerroot is calicular and bristles is wrong. fact2: If the fact that this fingerroot is not a kind of a wafture and that person is not a neutral does not hold that person is not calicular. fact3: If this fingerroot is a waste then that this thing is calicular and does bristle is false. fact4: Dena is generous and/or this one is not a kind of a suds. fact5: If the fact that this craniologist does not exculpate proprietary but it is a Arnoseris is false this fingerroot is a waste. fact6: There is nobody that exculpates proprietary and is a Arnoseris. fact7: There is nothing such that it does not exculpate proprietary and is a Arnoseris. fact8: If the fact that this craniologist does exculpate proprietary is true this fingerroot is a waste. fact9: If something is not calicular then this thing bristles and/or this thing is not a kind of a waste. fact10: The fact that something is not non-calicular and this thing bristles is incorrect if this thing is a waste. fact11: The fact that something is not a wafture and not a neutral is incorrect if this is not a suds. fact12: If this fingerroot is not a waste then the fact that the photometrician does not exculpate proprietary and is a arcsec does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This fingerroot is non-calicular man that does bristle. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this borstal is a Holbrookia and does not sheet moderateness does not hold.

¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: This pluralist sheets moderateness. fact2: This borstal is a Holbrookia and a papers. fact3: If some man is a Holbrookia then it is a kind of a Holbrookia and it does not sheet moderateness.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This pluralist sheets moderateness. fact2: This borstal is a Holbrookia and a papers. fact3: If some man is a Holbrookia then it is a kind of a Holbrookia and it does not sheet moderateness. ; $hypothesis$ = That this borstal is a Holbrookia and does not sheet moderateness does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This borstal is a kind of a Holbrookia.; fact3 -> int2: If that this borstal is a Holbrookia is right then the fact that he is a Holbrookia and does not sheet moderateness is correct.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This dweller is not an overturned.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That farmplace is an antic and the thing is an overturned if this dweller is not Fuller. fact2: This dweller is a kind of an overturned.

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

That farmplace is a kind of an overturned.

{A}{ca}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That farmplace is an antic and the thing is an overturned if this dweller is not Fuller. fact2: This dweller is a kind of an overturned. ; $hypothesis$ = This dweller is not an overturned. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Someone is not a kind of a sectarian and the person is not a prefiguration.

(Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: There exists some man such that it is not a kind of a chordate and is not a Horney. fact2: The hay does not hang arccos and it does not handle Hypsiprymnodon if that that nudnik is not a Saurischia is correct. fact3: If that that mesotron is not a kind of a Archilochus and does not despise dyscalculia is incorrect that boothose is a sixty. fact4: Some man does not hang arccos and he/she is not unsized. fact5: Something is not a sectarian but it is a prefiguration. fact6: There exists something such that it is rimmed and it is not Zolaesque. fact7: Something is not a kind of a balanitis and it is not acapnic. fact8: There is something such that it does not broadcast Timaliidae and it does not sweeten Schizomycetes. fact9: There is someone such that that person is not a Bozeman and does not evict declarative. fact10: Something is not a prefiguration. fact11: If someone is a sixty she/he does not volatilised and is not a fright. fact12: If the hay does not hang arccos and does not handle Hypsiprymnodon then that mesotron does not hang arccos. fact13: Someone is not a kind of a sectarian and the person is not a prefiguration. fact14: That something is not a Archilochus and it does not despise dyscalculia does not hold if it does not hang arccos. fact15: There exists some person such that it is not a kind of a sectarian. fact16: There is some person such that it is a sectarian that is not a prefiguration.

fact1: (Ex): (¬{ES}x & ¬{DU}x) fact2: ¬{E}{d} -> (¬{D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact3: ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {A}{a} fact4: (Ex): (¬{D}x & ¬{L}x) fact5: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact6: (Ex): (¬{HU}x & ¬{CQ}x) fact7: (Ex): (¬{HN}x & ¬{GF}x) fact8: (Ex): (¬{DJ}x & ¬{GH}x) fact9: (Ex): (¬{IN}x & ¬{HT}x) fact10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x fact11: (x): {A}x -> (¬{FK}x & ¬{K}x) fact12: (¬{D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact13: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact14: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) fact15: (Ex): ¬{AA}x fact16: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

The fact that there exists something such that the thing does not volatilised and is not a fright is true.

(Ex): (¬{FK}x & ¬{K}x)

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists some man such that it is not a kind of a chordate and is not a Horney. fact2: The hay does not hang arccos and it does not handle Hypsiprymnodon if that that nudnik is not a Saurischia is correct. fact3: If that that mesotron is not a kind of a Archilochus and does not despise dyscalculia is incorrect that boothose is a sixty. fact4: Some man does not hang arccos and he/she is not unsized. fact5: Something is not a sectarian but it is a prefiguration. fact6: There exists something such that it is rimmed and it is not Zolaesque. fact7: Something is not a kind of a balanitis and it is not acapnic. fact8: There is something such that it does not broadcast Timaliidae and it does not sweeten Schizomycetes. fact9: There is someone such that that person is not a Bozeman and does not evict declarative. fact10: Something is not a prefiguration. fact11: If someone is a sixty she/he does not volatilised and is not a fright. fact12: If the hay does not hang arccos and does not handle Hypsiprymnodon then that mesotron does not hang arccos. fact13: Someone is not a kind of a sectarian and the person is not a prefiguration. fact14: That something is not a Archilochus and it does not despise dyscalculia does not hold if it does not hang arccos. fact15: There exists some person such that it is not a kind of a sectarian. fact16: There is some person such that it is a sectarian that is not a prefiguration. ; $hypothesis$ = Someone is not a kind of a sectarian and the person is not a prefiguration. ; $proof$ =

fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This victor does not struggle Milne or reprieves foppishness or both.

(¬{C}{a} v {D}{a})

fact1: This arcadian points Apennines. fact2: That the ATP does not point Apennines or is a kind of a shortsightedness or both is incorrect. fact3: That this victor points Apennines and is an attic is correct. fact4: That this victor is inflationary is right. fact5: That this victor does not struggle Milne or he/she judges or both does not hold. fact6: If the fact that Claudia does reprieve foppishness but it does not struggle Milne is incorrect it struggle Milne. fact7: Some man that does not point Apennines either does not struggle Milne or reprieves foppishness or both. fact8: The fact that this victor is not soteriological or it is a coda or both does not hold. fact9: The fact that either this victor is not inflationary or that thing is a kind of a Gambia or both does not hold. fact10: Something is not a focussed if it is ballistic. fact11: The cymbal does not reprieve foppishness. fact12: The fact that the fact that this victor does not gip coated or the one struggles Milne or both is right is wrong if the one racks. fact13: If this victor is an efficacy the person is not sociocultural. fact14: The fact that either something does not struggle Milne or it reprieves foppishness or both does not hold if it points Apennines. fact15: If some man does fold coexistence it is not a Zairese. fact16: This bunghole is a phobia and reprieves foppishness. fact17: The fact that something is not a kind of a Moslem or is a Hannukah or both does not hold if that is awestricken. fact18: The fact that the haemolysis does not try Coraciiformes or points Apennines or both is wrong.

fact1: {A}{fc} fact2: ¬(¬{A}{ej} v {I}{ej}) fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: {HD}{a} fact5: ¬(¬{C}{a} v {IM}{a}) fact6: ¬({D}{cr} & ¬{C}{cr}) -> {C}{cr} fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}x v {D}x) fact8: ¬(¬{FE}{a} v {JF}{a}) fact9: ¬(¬{HD}{a} v {BT}{a}) fact10: (x): {DC}x -> ¬{GH}x fact11: ¬{D}{q} fact12: {AL}{a} -> ¬(¬{DB}{a} v {C}{a}) fact13: {HG}{a} -> ¬{BP}{a} fact14: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{C}x v {D}x) fact15: (x): {FR}x -> ¬{JA}x fact16: ({S}{fe} & {D}{fe}) fact17: (x): {IF}x -> ¬(¬{CQ}x v {IR}x) fact18: ¬(¬{AT}{cp} v {A}{cp})

This victor does not struggle Milne or reprieves foppishness or both.

(¬{C}{a} v {D}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This arcadian points Apennines. fact2: That the ATP does not point Apennines or is a kind of a shortsightedness or both is incorrect. fact3: That this victor points Apennines and is an attic is correct. fact4: That this victor is inflationary is right. fact5: That this victor does not struggle Milne or he/she judges or both does not hold. fact6: If the fact that Claudia does reprieve foppishness but it does not struggle Milne is incorrect it struggle Milne. fact7: Some man that does not point Apennines either does not struggle Milne or reprieves foppishness or both. fact8: The fact that this victor is not soteriological or it is a coda or both does not hold. fact9: The fact that either this victor is not inflationary or that thing is a kind of a Gambia or both does not hold. fact10: Something is not a focussed if it is ballistic. fact11: The cymbal does not reprieve foppishness. fact12: The fact that the fact that this victor does not gip coated or the one struggles Milne or both is right is wrong if the one racks. fact13: If this victor is an efficacy the person is not sociocultural. fact14: The fact that either something does not struggle Milne or it reprieves foppishness or both does not hold if it points Apennines. fact15: If some man does fold coexistence it is not a Zairese. fact16: This bunghole is a phobia and reprieves foppishness. fact17: The fact that something is not a kind of a Moslem or is a Hannukah or both does not hold if that is awestricken. fact18: The fact that the haemolysis does not try Coraciiformes or points Apennines or both is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This victor does not struggle Milne or reprieves foppishness or both. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: This victor points Apennines.; fact14 -> int2: If this victor does point Apennines that this does not struggle Milne and/or this does reprieve foppishness is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This cannulisation happens.

{AA}

fact1: The flowing is prevented by that this stripeding lined does not occurs. fact2: The fact that the luxuriating happens and that paving happens is wrong if that electromagneticness does not occurs. fact3: That the luxuriating does not occurs and that electromagneticness does not occurs is caused by this laryngopharyngealness. fact4: If this deconsecrating castled occurs then that calciferousness does not occurs and that phosphoricness does not occurs. fact5: That phosphoricness does not happens. fact6: This laryngopharyngealness happens if this dispatching does not happens and this neuromuscularness does not occurs. fact7: That tanning does not happens and this counterposing Antonius does not happens if that daunting UT1 does not occurs. fact8: If that paving does not happens then that both this deconsecrating castled and that phosphoricness occurs is incorrect. fact9: If that tanning does not happens then this dispatching does not occurs and this neuromuscularness does not happens. fact10: The chiasmaticness does not happens. fact11: If that electromagneticness does not occurs then this deconsecrating castled occurs and that paving occurs. fact12: If that both the luxuriating and that paving occurs is false then that paving does not occurs.

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

The fact that that calciferousness does not occurs is true.

¬{AQ}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The flowing is prevented by that this stripeding lined does not occurs. fact2: The fact that the luxuriating happens and that paving happens is wrong if that electromagneticness does not occurs. fact3: That the luxuriating does not occurs and that electromagneticness does not occurs is caused by this laryngopharyngealness. fact4: If this deconsecrating castled occurs then that calciferousness does not occurs and that phosphoricness does not occurs. fact5: That phosphoricness does not happens. fact6: This laryngopharyngealness happens if this dispatching does not happens and this neuromuscularness does not occurs. fact7: That tanning does not happens and this counterposing Antonius does not happens if that daunting UT1 does not occurs. fact8: If that paving does not happens then that both this deconsecrating castled and that phosphoricness occurs is incorrect. fact9: If that tanning does not happens then this dispatching does not occurs and this neuromuscularness does not happens. fact10: The chiasmaticness does not happens. fact11: If that electromagneticness does not occurs then this deconsecrating castled occurs and that paving occurs. fact12: If that both the luxuriating and that paving occurs is false then that paving does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This cannulisation happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this parasailing and that fatting happens is wrong.

¬({AB} & {B})

fact1: The entomologicness does not occurs. fact2: That both that fatting and that perversion happens is triggered by that this hypostatizing germinal does not occurs. fact3: That the accrediting epiphora does not happens is true. fact4: This counterbombardment does not occurs. fact5: The slide occurs. fact6: The fact that this drudgery does not happens hold if either that fatting happens or this drudgery does not happens or both. fact7: The sportfishing occurs. fact8: This rollickinging Bryaceae happens and this lacrimatoriness occurs. fact9: This agnosticalness happens. fact10: The Laws happens and the pinging Stictopelia happens. fact11: That that this hypostatizing germinal does not happens leads to that that perversion happens is correct. fact12: The appaling does not occurs. fact13: The juridicness does not happens. fact14: This hypostatizing germinal does not occurs. fact15: If that this counterbombardment does not happens hold then both this agnosticalness and this parasailing happens. fact16: If this counterbombardment does not occurs this agnosticalness happens. fact17: That perversion occurs.

fact1: ¬{BP} fact2: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) fact3: ¬{CS} fact4: ¬{A} fact5: {AU} fact6: ({B} v ¬{HM}) -> ¬{HM} fact7: {N} fact8: ({HH} & {Q}) fact9: {AA} fact10: ({AN} & {DM}) fact11: ¬{D} -> {C} fact12: ¬{FI} fact13: ¬{AP} fact14: ¬{D} fact15: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & {AB}) fact16: ¬{A} -> {AA} fact17: {C}

The fact that this drudgery does not occurs is not false.

¬{HM}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The entomologicness does not occurs. fact2: That both that fatting and that perversion happens is triggered by that this hypostatizing germinal does not occurs. fact3: That the accrediting epiphora does not happens is true. fact4: This counterbombardment does not occurs. fact5: The slide occurs. fact6: The fact that this drudgery does not happens hold if either that fatting happens or this drudgery does not happens or both. fact7: The sportfishing occurs. fact8: This rollickinging Bryaceae happens and this lacrimatoriness occurs. fact9: This agnosticalness happens. fact10: The Laws happens and the pinging Stictopelia happens. fact11: That that this hypostatizing germinal does not happens leads to that that perversion happens is correct. fact12: The appaling does not occurs. fact13: The juridicness does not happens. fact14: This hypostatizing germinal does not occurs. fact15: If that this counterbombardment does not happens hold then both this agnosticalness and this parasailing happens. fact16: If this counterbombardment does not occurs this agnosticalness happens. fact17: That perversion occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That this parasailing and that fatting happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact4 -> int1: This agnosticalness occurs and this parasailing happens.; int1 -> int2: This parasailing occurs.; fact2 & fact14 -> int3: That fatting happens and that perversion happens.; int3 -> int4: That fatting occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This fjord is not astronomical.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: This fjord is astronomical if the fact that the person protrudes indignation and the person does not light is incorrect. fact2: The fact that this fjord protrudes indignation but this thing does not light is false.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This fjord is astronomical if the fact that the person protrudes indignation and the person does not light is incorrect. fact2: The fact that this fjord protrudes indignation but this thing does not light is false. ; $hypothesis$ = This fjord is not astronomical. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that hemipteron is a junto.

{A}{a}

fact1: That hemipteron is non-aerological. fact2: If that hemipteron is a junto this Arenaviridae is chronological. fact3: That hemipteron is not dipolar if this Arenaviridae discomposes Fasciolidae and is not dipolar. fact4: The fact that this Arenaviridae is not dipolar but this one is not non-chronological does not hold. fact5: This Arenaviridae is not a scud. fact6: This telencephalon is a junto. fact7: This Arenaviridae does discompose Fasciolidae but it is not dipolar if this Major consolidates. fact8: The fact that that hemipteron is not dipolar but a junto is wrong. fact9: That that hemipteron is not a junto but it is not non-dipolar is incorrect. fact10: This Arenaviridae is not chronological if the fact that she/he is both not dipolar and chronological is not correct. fact11: If the fact that this Arenaviridae is both not a junto and chronological is false that it is not chronological is true.

fact1: ¬{CM}{a} fact2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact3: ({E}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact4: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) fact5: ¬{FJ}{b} fact6: {A}{ik} fact7: {D}{c} -> ({E}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact8: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) fact9: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) fact10: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact11: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b}

Let's assume that that hemipteron is a junto.

{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That hemipteron is non-aerological. fact2: If that hemipteron is a junto this Arenaviridae is chronological. fact3: That hemipteron is not dipolar if this Arenaviridae discomposes Fasciolidae and is not dipolar. fact4: The fact that this Arenaviridae is not dipolar but this one is not non-chronological does not hold. fact5: This Arenaviridae is not a scud. fact6: This telencephalon is a junto. fact7: This Arenaviridae does discompose Fasciolidae but it is not dipolar if this Major consolidates. fact8: The fact that that hemipteron is not dipolar but a junto is wrong. fact9: That that hemipteron is not a junto but it is not non-dipolar is incorrect. fact10: This Arenaviridae is not chronological if the fact that she/he is both not dipolar and chronological is not correct. fact11: If the fact that this Arenaviridae is both not a junto and chronological is false that it is not chronological is true. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that hemipteron is a junto. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that hemipteron is a junto.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: This Arenaviridae is not non-chronological.; fact4 & fact10 -> int2: This Arenaviridae is not chronological.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that the fact that this veldt is a ulalgia is true if this veldt is not a Freetown is incorrect.

¬(¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa})

fact1: This listener is a Freetown if it does not camp Dixieland. fact2: This veldt is a kind of a Freetown if this veldt is not a simmering. fact3: Some person that is not a surprisingness is a Harriman. fact4: Something that is a Freetown is a kind of a ulalgia. fact5: If this spectator does not whisker Macrozoarces this spectator is a kind of a lay. fact6: Some person bootlickings if this one is not orthodox. fact7: Somebody recedes if it is not a stoppered. fact8: If something is not a Freetown then it is a ulalgia. fact9: The fact that this veldt is a kind of a ulalgia is right if this veldt is a Freetown. fact10: Something yanks Caspar if the fact that this is not a lastingness is correct. fact11: If the fact that this veldt is not a ulalgia hold then it is undemonstrative. fact12: If this veldt does not knit Seurat then this veldt is a Freetown.

fact1: ¬{CH}{ht} -> {B}{ht} fact2: ¬{CG}{aa} -> {B}{aa} fact3: (x): ¬{AP}x -> {IR}x fact4: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact5: ¬{HS}{t} -> {EQ}{t} fact6: (x): ¬{EO}x -> {DI}x fact7: (x): ¬{BG}x -> {GM}x fact8: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x fact9: {B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} fact10: (x): ¬{AU}x -> {JD}x fact11: ¬{C}{aa} -> {GP}{aa} fact12: ¬{BF}{aa} -> {B}{aa}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This listener is a Freetown if it does not camp Dixieland. fact2: This veldt is a kind of a Freetown if this veldt is not a simmering. fact3: Some person that is not a surprisingness is a Harriman. fact4: Something that is a Freetown is a kind of a ulalgia. fact5: If this spectator does not whisker Macrozoarces this spectator is a kind of a lay. fact6: Some person bootlickings if this one is not orthodox. fact7: Somebody recedes if it is not a stoppered. fact8: If something is not a Freetown then it is a ulalgia. fact9: The fact that this veldt is a kind of a ulalgia is right if this veldt is a Freetown. fact10: Something yanks Caspar if the fact that this is not a lastingness is correct. fact11: If the fact that this veldt is not a ulalgia hold then it is undemonstrative. fact12: If this veldt does not knit Seurat then this veldt is a Freetown. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that this veldt is a ulalgia is true if this veldt is not a Freetown is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That volleyball is non-auditory.

¬{A}{b}

fact1: If this hyaloplasm is osmotic this acid is osmotic. fact2: Some man is a kind of osmotic man that does not wobble O'Casey if the fact that it is a Keb is true. fact3: This acid is not auditory if that volleyball is not a covered. fact4: That volleyball diagnoses Jansenism. fact5: This hyaloplasm is a Keb if this parapet is a kind of a Continent but it is not a Keb. fact6: That that volleyball is not osmotic hold. fact7: This acid is a kind of a covered that does not diagnose Jansenism. fact8: If this acid is non-osmotic that volleyball is not auditory. fact9: That volleyball is not osmotic if this acid is not auditory. fact10: The fact that some man is both a Keb and not gentile is wrong if it is anticlockwise. fact11: If some person is not a kind of a Keb then she/he wobbles O'Casey and/or she/he is osmotic. fact12: If that medulla is not commensurate or it is a completeness or both this parapet is not bladderlike. fact13: That volleyball is auditory if this acid is not non-osmotic. fact14: If that volleyball diagnoses Jansenism but it is not auditory then it is not osmotic. fact15: This acid does not diagnose Jansenism if this acid is auditory but this person is not a covered. fact16: This acid does not diagnose Jansenism. fact17: Ricky is not osmotic. fact18: Something is a kind of a Continent that is textual if it is not bladderlike. fact19: Either that medulla is not commensurate or the thing is a completeness or both. fact20: If that something is a Keb but that is not gentile does not hold that is not a kind of a Keb. fact21: If this acid is a covered and does diagnose Jansenism it is not osmotic.

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

That volleyball is auditory.

{A}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this hyaloplasm is osmotic this acid is osmotic. fact2: Some man is a kind of osmotic man that does not wobble O'Casey if the fact that it is a Keb is true. fact3: This acid is not auditory if that volleyball is not a covered. fact4: That volleyball diagnoses Jansenism. fact5: This hyaloplasm is a Keb if this parapet is a kind of a Continent but it is not a Keb. fact6: That that volleyball is not osmotic hold. fact7: This acid is a kind of a covered that does not diagnose Jansenism. fact8: If this acid is non-osmotic that volleyball is not auditory. fact9: That volleyball is not osmotic if this acid is not auditory. fact10: The fact that some man is both a Keb and not gentile is wrong if it is anticlockwise. fact11: If some person is not a kind of a Keb then she/he wobbles O'Casey and/or she/he is osmotic. fact12: If that medulla is not commensurate or it is a completeness or both this parapet is not bladderlike. fact13: That volleyball is auditory if this acid is not non-osmotic. fact14: If that volleyball diagnoses Jansenism but it is not auditory then it is not osmotic. fact15: This acid does not diagnose Jansenism if this acid is auditory but this person is not a covered. fact16: This acid does not diagnose Jansenism. fact17: Ricky is not osmotic. fact18: Something is a kind of a Continent that is textual if it is not bladderlike. fact19: Either that medulla is not commensurate or the thing is a completeness or both. fact20: If that something is a Keb but that is not gentile does not hold that is not a kind of a Keb. fact21: If this acid is a covered and does diagnose Jansenism it is not osmotic. ; $hypothesis$ = That volleyball is non-auditory. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That bluffing happens.

{C}

fact1: That energy occurs if this parotidness happens. fact2: That that untruthfulness occurs prevents that bluffing. fact3: That this parotidness occurs is brought about by that this GHRF occurs. fact4: The behavioristness does not occurs. fact5: That familialness is prevented by that this Sparking but notthat mercerising Wynette happens. fact6: That that emerging happens hold. fact7: That that mistranslating sprightliness occurs and that deciduousness occurs is brought about by that that familialness does not happens. fact8: If that emerging happens or that untruthfulness happens or both then that bluffing does not occurs. fact9: If that nilpotentness happens that untruthfulness does not happens but that isolating pyelonephritis occurs. fact10: That that selfness happens yields that this Sparking but notthat mercerising Wynette happens. fact11: The Baman happens. fact12: If that deciduousness happens then that nilpotentness occurs. fact13: If that energy happens then that selfness occurs.

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

That bluffing happens.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That energy occurs if this parotidness happens. fact2: That that untruthfulness occurs prevents that bluffing. fact3: That this parotidness occurs is brought about by that this GHRF occurs. fact4: The behavioristness does not occurs. fact5: That familialness is prevented by that this Sparking but notthat mercerising Wynette happens. fact6: That that emerging happens hold. fact7: That that mistranslating sprightliness occurs and that deciduousness occurs is brought about by that that familialness does not happens. fact8: If that emerging happens or that untruthfulness happens or both then that bluffing does not occurs. fact9: If that nilpotentness happens that untruthfulness does not happens but that isolating pyelonephritis occurs. fact10: That that selfness happens yields that this Sparking but notthat mercerising Wynette happens. fact11: The Baman happens. fact12: If that deciduousness happens then that nilpotentness occurs. fact13: If that energy happens then that selfness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That bluffing happens. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: That emerging happens and/or that untruthfulness happens.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This implantation does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: That maladjustedness does not occurs if the fact that the fact that that elysianness does not occurs and the ricing Zhou happens is right is false. fact2: If that Continentalness does not occurs then the fact that the snowing Xizang happens is right. fact3: The fact that notthat subtractiveness but this gastricness happens is incorrect. fact4: If that cytoarchitecturalness does not happens the bidding Forficulidae occurs. fact5: The fact that both this non-urinaryness and the slapping happens is wrong. fact6: If the papillariness does not occurs this atonement happens. fact7: If that cytoarchitecturalness does not happens the fact that the fact that the interpretation and this atonement occurs is right does not hold. fact8: If that the interpretation and this atonement happens is false then this improving mutableness does not occurs. fact9: The philatelicness happens. fact10: This confiding Laudoes not occurs but that containing Usnea happens if this improving mutableness does not occurs. fact11: That forbidding is prevented by that subtractiveness. fact12: The unfolding does not occurs and that cytoarchitecturalness does not happens if that boozing horseshit does not occurs. fact13: That chlorination happens. fact14: This atonement does not happens. fact15: The gassing happens. fact16: The upthrust does not occurs. fact17: This implantation happens if that forbidding does not happens. fact18: This calligraphicalness occurs. fact19: If that the catarrhinianness does not occurs and the dissolution occurs is not true then that adenocarcinomatousness does not occurs. fact20: If this confiding Laudoes not happens then that the pelting occurs and that forbidding happens is false. fact21: That that subtractiveness happens and this gastricness happens is not right.

fact1: ¬(¬{P} & {AT}) -> ¬{CB} fact2: ¬{DN} -> {DJ} fact3: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact4: ¬{I} -> {AD} fact5: ¬(¬{HB} & {BT}) fact6: ¬{IJ} -> {G} fact7: ¬{I} -> ¬({H} & {G}) fact8: ¬({H} & {G}) -> ¬{F} fact9: {BG} fact10: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact11: {AA} -> ¬{B} fact12: ¬{K} -> (¬{J} & ¬{I}) fact13: {FQ} fact14: ¬{G} fact15: {GF} fact16: ¬{EC} fact17: ¬{B} -> {A} fact18: {Q} fact19: ¬(¬{DQ} & {FI}) -> ¬{JE} fact20: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {B}) fact21: ¬({AA} & {AB})

This implantation does not happens.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That maladjustedness does not occurs if the fact that the fact that that elysianness does not occurs and the ricing Zhou happens is right is false. fact2: If that Continentalness does not occurs then the fact that the snowing Xizang happens is right. fact3: The fact that notthat subtractiveness but this gastricness happens is incorrect. fact4: If that cytoarchitecturalness does not happens the bidding Forficulidae occurs. fact5: The fact that both this non-urinaryness and the slapping happens is wrong. fact6: If the papillariness does not occurs this atonement happens. fact7: If that cytoarchitecturalness does not happens the fact that the fact that the interpretation and this atonement occurs is right does not hold. fact8: If that the interpretation and this atonement happens is false then this improving mutableness does not occurs. fact9: The philatelicness happens. fact10: This confiding Laudoes not occurs but that containing Usnea happens if this improving mutableness does not occurs. fact11: That forbidding is prevented by that subtractiveness. fact12: The unfolding does not occurs and that cytoarchitecturalness does not happens if that boozing horseshit does not occurs. fact13: That chlorination happens. fact14: This atonement does not happens. fact15: The gassing happens. fact16: The upthrust does not occurs. fact17: This implantation happens if that forbidding does not happens. fact18: This calligraphicalness occurs. fact19: If that the catarrhinianness does not occurs and the dissolution occurs is not true then that adenocarcinomatousness does not occurs. fact20: If this confiding Laudoes not happens then that the pelting occurs and that forbidding happens is false. fact21: That that subtractiveness happens and this gastricness happens is not right. ; $hypothesis$ = This implantation does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that grubstaking umpirage does not occurs hold.

¬{A}

fact1: The conciliatoriness happens. fact2: Both this scrubbing Carew and this hit happens. fact3: The fact that that the non-conciliatoriness and this hopper occurs is incorrect hold if this proselytism does not occurs. fact4: This unawedness happens. fact5: The confusing Vitus happens. fact6: The labeling reactivity happens. fact7: Both this diabolizing Taoism and the conjugalness occurs. fact8: The ambitiousness and this waxiness occurs.

fact1: {B} fact2: ({BI} & {EA}) fact3: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{B} & {C}) fact4: {BM} fact5: {GD} fact6: {GT} fact7: ({BR} & {CK}) fact8: ({AS} & {GR})

That that grubstaking umpirage does not occurs hold.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The conciliatoriness happens. fact2: Both this scrubbing Carew and this hit happens. fact3: The fact that that the non-conciliatoriness and this hopper occurs is incorrect hold if this proselytism does not occurs. fact4: This unawedness happens. fact5: The confusing Vitus happens. fact6: The labeling reactivity happens. fact7: Both this diabolizing Taoism and the conjugalness occurs. fact8: The ambitiousness and this waxiness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that grubstaking umpirage does not occurs hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That litterbin is unremorseful or it is not non-ametabolic or both.

({D}{a} v {C}{a})

fact1: If there exists something such that this thing is a facet that litterbin is a financier. fact2: That litterbin is a kind of a financier. fact3: That litterbin is a kind of a financier that is ametabolic if something is a facet. fact4: The vesicle is unremorseful one that is a thyroid.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} fact2: {B}{a} fact3: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) fact4: ({D}{gg} & {JH}{gg})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If there exists something such that this thing is a facet that litterbin is a financier. fact2: That litterbin is a kind of a financier. fact3: That litterbin is a kind of a financier that is ametabolic if something is a facet. fact4: The vesicle is unremorseful one that is a thyroid. ; $hypothesis$ = That litterbin is unremorseful or it is not non-ametabolic or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that non-Vedicness and this chirpiness occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{D} & {B})

fact1: If that that fetish happens is true the fact that notthe secretaryship but that parenteding shebang happens does not hold. fact2: If that fetish does not occurs then the fact that that Vedicness does not happens and this chirpiness occurs does not hold. fact3: That fetish happens. fact4: If this chirpiness occurs that Vedicness does not occurs and this chirpiness occurs.

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

That that non-Vedicness and this chirpiness occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{D} & {B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that that fetish happens is true the fact that notthe secretaryship but that parenteding shebang happens does not hold. fact2: If that fetish does not occurs then the fact that that Vedicness does not happens and this chirpiness occurs does not hold. fact3: That fetish happens. fact4: If this chirpiness occurs that Vedicness does not occurs and this chirpiness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that non-Vedicness and this chirpiness occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that supporting does not happens is right.

¬{B}

fact1: This disowning Bessel happens.

fact1: {A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This disowning Bessel happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that supporting does not happens is right. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That everything does signify is incorrect.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Everything is a navigability. fact2: Everything belittles. fact3: Everybody is a logograph. fact4: Everyone Crookeses. fact5: Everyone is uncontaminating. fact6: Every person is artful. fact7: Everyone is not a Kyoto. fact8: Everybody signifies.

fact1: (x): {FF}x fact2: (x): {DI}x fact3: (x): {GM}x fact4: (x): {FC}x fact5: (x): {CK}x fact6: (x): {AK}x fact7: (x): ¬{C}x fact8: (x): {A}x

Everything is sporogenous.

(x): {BR}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is a navigability. fact2: Everything belittles. fact3: Everybody is a logograph. fact4: Everyone Crookeses. fact5: Everyone is uncontaminating. fact6: Every person is artful. fact7: Everyone is not a Kyoto. fact8: Everybody signifies. ; $hypothesis$ = That everything does signify is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This particularization happens and that expectorating happens.

({B} & {C})

fact1: The fact that that destining acclaim and the non-romanticness occurs does not hold if that diurnalness occurs. fact2: That both that democratisation and that advertizing happens is triggered by that this particularization does not occurs. fact3: Notthat advertizing but that reentry occurs if that this statics happens hold. fact4: That advertizing happens. fact5: Both that benefit and the haircut occurs. fact6: This heritableness happens. fact7: That advertizing happens and this particularization occurs. fact8: The congee occurs if this insincereness happens. fact9: If that advertizing does not occurs then that both this particularization and that expectorating occurs is wrong. fact10: That destining acclaim does not occurs if the fact that that destining acclaim but notthat romanticness occurs does not hold. fact11: If that reentry happens that expectorating occurs. fact12: If that destining acclaim does not occurs this Triassic happens and this statics happens. fact13: This swindle does not occurs if the fact that that this hypodermalness occurs and this swindle occurs is true is incorrect. fact14: Both the uricosuricness and the insistence happens. fact15: If this swindle does not occurs then that diurnalness and that teeming holism occurs.

fact1: {H} -> ¬({G} & ¬{I}) fact2: ¬{B} -> ({DU} & {A}) fact3: {E} -> (¬{A} & {D}) fact4: {A} fact5: ({HQ} & {AO}) fact6: {CR} fact7: ({A} & {B}) fact8: {HR} -> {EL} fact9: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact10: ¬({G} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{G} fact11: {D} -> {C} fact12: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) fact13: ¬({M} & {K}) -> ¬{K} fact14: ({FL} & {AM}) fact15: ¬{K} -> ({H} & {J})

The fact that both this particularization and that expectorating happens does not hold.

¬({B} & {C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that destining acclaim and the non-romanticness occurs does not hold if that diurnalness occurs. fact2: That both that democratisation and that advertizing happens is triggered by that this particularization does not occurs. fact3: Notthat advertizing but that reentry occurs if that this statics happens hold. fact4: That advertizing happens. fact5: Both that benefit and the haircut occurs. fact6: This heritableness happens. fact7: That advertizing happens and this particularization occurs. fact8: The congee occurs if this insincereness happens. fact9: If that advertizing does not occurs then that both this particularization and that expectorating occurs is wrong. fact10: That destining acclaim does not occurs if the fact that that destining acclaim but notthat romanticness occurs does not hold. fact11: If that reentry happens that expectorating occurs. fact12: If that destining acclaim does not occurs this Triassic happens and this statics happens. fact13: This swindle does not occurs if the fact that that this hypodermalness occurs and this swindle occurs is true is incorrect. fact14: Both the uricosuricness and the insistence happens. fact15: If this swindle does not occurs then that diurnalness and that teeming holism occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This particularization happens and that expectorating happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this parishioner is not a Sesamum is true.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If this parishioner does exonerate Cicadellidae and is not structural this parishioner is a Sesamum. fact2: If something exonerates Cicadellidae but this is not cardiorespiratory then this is a kind of a Sesamum. fact3: This parishioner is cardiorespiratory. fact4: That lorchel does exonerate Cicadellidae if that that lorchel is cardiorespiratory and/or it is non-stenographic does not hold. fact5: That this parishioner does not race signification and/or that is not a Pogonophora does not hold. fact6: That lorchel does exonerate Cicadellidae if that it is not cardiorespiratory or stenographic or both does not hold. fact7: If that lorchel is not a Sesamum and it does not exonerate Cicadellidae this parishioner is not a Sesamum. fact8: If that that lorchel is not cardiorespiratory and/or it is not stenographic is wrong then it exonerates Cicadellidae. fact9: That pneumoencephalogram is a Ophiurida if that consoles examen. fact10: The mountebank is non-structural thing that is not a Lemmon. fact11: If that pneumoencephalogram is a Ophiurida and does not illume illustriousness that lorchel is not structural. fact12: If that Feldene is not a Ophiurida it is not a Sesamum and illumes illustriousness. fact13: That pneumoencephalogram consoles examen. fact14: That that lorchel is not cardiorespiratory and/or he is not stenographic is not right. fact15: If the fact that that that pneumoencephalogram is a Syrian but she/he is not a Annwfn is right does not hold then she/he does not illume illustriousness. fact16: This parishioner scorns IP. fact17: This parishioner is a kind of a Sesamum if the fact that it does not exonerate Cicadellidae and it is structural is true. fact18: If something that does not exonerate Cicadellidae is not cardiorespiratory it is a Sesamum. fact19: If that pneumoencephalogram is not a barrels then that that that pneumoencephalogram is a Syrian and not a Annwfn is wrong is true. fact20: Some person that does not exonerate Cicadellidae and is structural is a kind of a Sesamum. fact21: If something does not exonerate Cicadellidae and that is not structural then that is a Sesamum. fact22: This parishioner does not exonerate Cicadellidae and is not structural if that lorchel exonerate Cicadellidae. fact23: That lorchel is stenographic if that it is not a kind of a Sesamum or it is not structural or both is wrong. fact24: Someone is cardiorespiratory if it is structural.

fact1: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {C}{b} fact2: (x): ({B}x & ¬{AA}x) -> {C}x fact3: {AA}{b} fact4: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact5: ¬(¬{CT}{b} v ¬{EN}{b}) fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact7: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact8: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact9: {H}{c} -> {E}{c} fact10: (¬{A}{ia} & ¬{CO}{ia}) fact11: ({E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact12: ¬{E}{dq} -> (¬{C}{dq} & {D}{dq}) fact13: {H}{c} fact14: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact15: ¬({G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{D}{c} fact16: {BM}{b} fact17: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {C}{b} fact18: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{AA}x) -> {C}x fact19: ¬{I}{c} -> ¬({G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact20: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> {C}x fact21: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {C}x fact22: {B}{a} -> (¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact23: ¬(¬{C}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> {AB}{a} fact24: (x): {A}x -> {AA}x

That Feldene is cardiorespiratory.

{AA}{dq}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this parishioner does exonerate Cicadellidae and is not structural this parishioner is a Sesamum. fact2: If something exonerates Cicadellidae but this is not cardiorespiratory then this is a kind of a Sesamum. fact3: This parishioner is cardiorespiratory. fact4: That lorchel does exonerate Cicadellidae if that that lorchel is cardiorespiratory and/or it is non-stenographic does not hold. fact5: That this parishioner does not race signification and/or that is not a Pogonophora does not hold. fact6: That lorchel does exonerate Cicadellidae if that it is not cardiorespiratory or stenographic or both does not hold. fact7: If that lorchel is not a Sesamum and it does not exonerate Cicadellidae this parishioner is not a Sesamum. fact8: If that that lorchel is not cardiorespiratory and/or it is not stenographic is wrong then it exonerates Cicadellidae. fact9: That pneumoencephalogram is a Ophiurida if that consoles examen. fact10: The mountebank is non-structural thing that is not a Lemmon. fact11: If that pneumoencephalogram is a Ophiurida and does not illume illustriousness that lorchel is not structural. fact12: If that Feldene is not a Ophiurida it is not a Sesamum and illumes illustriousness. fact13: That pneumoencephalogram consoles examen. fact14: That that lorchel is not cardiorespiratory and/or he is not stenographic is not right. fact15: If the fact that that that pneumoencephalogram is a Syrian but she/he is not a Annwfn is right does not hold then she/he does not illume illustriousness. fact16: This parishioner scorns IP. fact17: This parishioner is a kind of a Sesamum if the fact that it does not exonerate Cicadellidae and it is structural is true. fact18: If something that does not exonerate Cicadellidae is not cardiorespiratory it is a Sesamum. fact19: If that pneumoencephalogram is not a barrels then that that that pneumoencephalogram is a Syrian and not a Annwfn is wrong is true. fact20: Some person that does not exonerate Cicadellidae and is structural is a kind of a Sesamum. fact21: If something does not exonerate Cicadellidae and that is not structural then that is a Sesamum. fact22: This parishioner does not exonerate Cicadellidae and is not structural if that lorchel exonerate Cicadellidae. fact23: That lorchel is stenographic if that it is not a kind of a Sesamum or it is not structural or both is wrong. fact24: Someone is cardiorespiratory if it is structural. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this parishioner is not a Sesamum is true. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact14 -> int1: That lorchel does exonerate Cicadellidae.; int1 & fact22 -> int2: This parishioner does not exonerate Cicadellidae and is not structural.; fact21 -> int3: This parishioner is a kind of a Sesamum if this parishioner does not exonerate Cicadellidae and is not structural.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That if Estefania is a mesothelioma and does not avenge Estefania is not dermal does not hold.

¬(({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})

fact1: that that molter is a kind of a cream if that this capercailzie is outward and/or it is a kind of a tinge is false is false.

fact1: fake_formula

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: that that molter is a kind of a cream if that this capercailzie is outward and/or it is a kind of a tinge is false is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That if Estefania is a mesothelioma and does not avenge Estefania is not dermal does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Either that misconduct does not happens or that amortization does not happens or both.

(¬{C} v ¬{D})

fact1: Either that misconduct does not happens or that amortization happens or both if this employment happens. fact2: That this expendableness happens is prevented by that this employment does not happens and this aspersion does not happens. fact3: If the goal occurs the looting does not occurs or the masking antipode does not happens or both. fact4: That this employment happens leads to that that misconduct happens or that that amortization does not happens or both. fact5: That misconduct does not happens or that amortization occurs or both. fact6: This employment and this aspersion happens. fact7: If this employment happens then that misconduct does not occurs or that amortization does not occurs or both.

fact1: {A} -> (¬{C} v {D}) fact2: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{HE} fact3: {CG} -> (¬{DO} v ¬{FR}) fact4: {A} -> ({C} v ¬{D}) fact5: (¬{C} v {D}) fact6: ({A} & {B}) fact7: {A} -> (¬{C} v ¬{D})

This expendableness does not happens or that elevating smallness does not occurs or both.

(¬{HE} v ¬{JE})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Either that misconduct does not happens or that amortization happens or both if this employment happens. fact2: That this expendableness happens is prevented by that this employment does not happens and this aspersion does not happens. fact3: If the goal occurs the looting does not occurs or the masking antipode does not happens or both. fact4: That this employment happens leads to that that misconduct happens or that that amortization does not happens or both. fact5: That misconduct does not happens or that amortization occurs or both. fact6: This employment and this aspersion happens. fact7: If this employment happens then that misconduct does not occurs or that amortization does not occurs or both. ; $hypothesis$ = Either that misconduct does not happens or that amortization does not happens or both. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: This employment happens.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Phillip is non-Homeric.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: Phillip is Homeric if this neoclassicist dadoes rinderpest. fact2: this Rhinobatidae disguises neoclassicist. fact3: This neoclassicist disguises Rhinobatidae. fact4: If this neoclassicist is a abashment this neoclassicist is Homeric. fact5: This neoclassicist is Homeric. fact6: If this neoclassicist disguises Rhinobatidae this neoclassicist dadoes rinderpest. fact7: Phillip dadoes rinderpest. fact8: That phospholipid does dado rinderpest if this neoclassicist is not an arcanum and dado rinderpest. fact9: Phillip disguises Rhinobatidae if this neoclassicist is Homeric. fact10: If Phillip dadoes rinderpest that this neoclassicist is not non-Homeric is correct. fact11: Phillip is a kind of a snowshoe. fact12: This neoclassicist is Homeric if Phillip disguises Rhinobatidae. fact13: If something dadoes rinderpest the thing disguises Rhinobatidae.

fact1: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} fact2: {AA}{aa} fact3: {A}{a} fact4: {DL}{a} -> {C}{a} fact5: {C}{a} fact6: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact7: {B}{b} fact8: (¬{D}{a} & {B}{a}) -> {B}{io} fact9: {C}{a} -> {A}{b} fact10: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} fact11: {BO}{b} fact12: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact13: (x): {B}x -> {A}x

That phospholipid disguises Rhinobatidae.

{A}{io}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Phillip is Homeric if this neoclassicist dadoes rinderpest. fact2: this Rhinobatidae disguises neoclassicist. fact3: This neoclassicist disguises Rhinobatidae. fact4: If this neoclassicist is a abashment this neoclassicist is Homeric. fact5: This neoclassicist is Homeric. fact6: If this neoclassicist disguises Rhinobatidae this neoclassicist dadoes rinderpest. fact7: Phillip dadoes rinderpest. fact8: That phospholipid does dado rinderpest if this neoclassicist is not an arcanum and dado rinderpest. fact9: Phillip disguises Rhinobatidae if this neoclassicist is Homeric. fact10: If Phillip dadoes rinderpest that this neoclassicist is not non-Homeric is correct. fact11: Phillip is a kind of a snowshoe. fact12: This neoclassicist is Homeric if Phillip disguises Rhinobatidae. fact13: If something dadoes rinderpest the thing disguises Rhinobatidae. ; $hypothesis$ = Phillip is non-Homeric. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact3 -> int1: This neoclassicist dadoes rinderpest.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that this purveyor is totipotent.

{A}{a}

fact1: If this journal is not totipotent this purveyor is not a Alger and is not legless. fact2: This journal is a Alger if this purveyor is not non-totipotent. fact3: The fact that something is a kind of non-animating thing that is not a psychosexuality is not right if it is a Psenes. fact4: If this journal is not a kind of a psychosexuality and is not inexplicable then it is not a Alger.

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

This purveyor is not a Alger and that one is legged.

(¬{B}{a} & ¬{JH}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this journal is not totipotent this purveyor is not a Alger and is not legless. fact2: This journal is a Alger if this purveyor is not non-totipotent. fact3: The fact that something is a kind of non-animating thing that is not a psychosexuality is not right if it is a Psenes. fact4: If this journal is not a kind of a psychosexuality and is not inexplicable then it is not a Alger. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this purveyor is totipotent. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That coscoroba is sturdy.

{A}{a}

fact1: Something is fistulous and this thing is benthal if this thing does not comprise. fact2: The heat is sturdy. fact3: If either something is not a lighted or it is not a kind of a stifled or both then it does not comprise. fact4: That coscoroba is sturdy. fact5: Ángel is sturdy. fact6: Somebody is sturdy if this person is fistulous. fact7: If this philomath complicates Roccus then this person is not a kind of a lighted and/or is not a kind of a stifled. fact8: That something is not sturdy hold if the fact that the fact that it is a kind of non-benthal thing that is sturdy is right does not hold. fact9: That coscoroba is a capableness.

fact1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) fact2: {A}{gn} fact3: (x): (¬{F}x v ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact4: {A}{a} fact5: {A}{en} fact6: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact7: {G}{hk} -> (¬{F}{hk} v ¬{E}{hk}) fact8: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x fact9: {EM}{a}

This philomath is sturdy.

{A}{hk}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is fistulous and this thing is benthal if this thing does not comprise. fact2: The heat is sturdy. fact3: If either something is not a lighted or it is not a kind of a stifled or both then it does not comprise. fact4: That coscoroba is sturdy. fact5: Ángel is sturdy. fact6: Somebody is sturdy if this person is fistulous. fact7: If this philomath complicates Roccus then this person is not a kind of a lighted and/or is not a kind of a stifled. fact8: That something is not sturdy hold if the fact that the fact that it is a kind of non-benthal thing that is sturdy is right does not hold. fact9: That coscoroba is a capableness. ; $hypothesis$ = That coscoroba is sturdy. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that the fact that that depleting frazzle does not happens hold is wrong.

{C}

fact1: If that that Canadianness but notthe rhythm happens is false then that adulteration does not happens. fact2: That if the rhythm happens then that adulteration does not happens is right. fact3: That architecturalness occurs if that adulteration does not occurs. fact4: The fact that that Canadianness occurs and the rhythm does not happens does not hold.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that that Canadianness but notthe rhythm happens is false then that adulteration does not happens. fact2: That if the rhythm happens then that adulteration does not happens is right. fact3: That architecturalness occurs if that adulteration does not occurs. fact4: The fact that that Canadianness occurs and the rhythm does not happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that that depleting frazzle does not happens hold is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this suede is both not rationalistic and not a Brown does not hold.

¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

fact1: This suede is a womanliness if that this eggfruit is not autobiographic and is not a womanliness is false. fact2: If there is something such that the fact that it is sublunary is right then this hearthrug is a pellucidity and/or it is probabilistic. fact3: If Sasha is a Haemoproteus that obstacle is a kind of a Haemoproteus. fact4: This apophysis is sublunary and is a Selenicereus. fact5: If that obstacle is a Haemoproteus then that this eggfruit is not autobiographic and it is not a womanliness does not hold. fact6: If there is somebody such that the person does not zigzag and the person is a narcosis then this cranny is a narcosis. fact7: This granulocyte does not zigzag. fact8: Someone is not rationalistic and it is not a Brown if it is rationalistic. fact9: That the brakeman is a Brown or it is not striate or both does not hold. fact10: If this hearthrug is a pellucidity then this cranny is a kind of a pellucidity. fact11: This suede is staged and this one does not languish Narthecium. fact12: If somebody is a womanliness then that it is not rationalistic and it is not a Brown is incorrect. fact13: Something that does not expound existentialism does convince Bahasa and is bismuthal. fact14: Some person that is rationalistic is not a Brown. fact15: If this cranny is a kind of a narcosis and it is a pellucidity Efren does not expound existentialism. fact16: This granulocyte is a narcosis. fact17: If that this suede strikes Thelypteris and/or it does not mythologize is not correct then it is not rationalistic. fact18: If this suede is not a Brown then that Hassid is not a kind of a Brown. fact19: That this suede strikes Thelypteris and/or the thing does not mythologize is incorrect. fact20: This suede does not strike Thelypteris. fact21: If Efren is bismuthal then this Levant does not jam fitness and the person does not film philogyny. fact22: If this Levant does not jam fitness Sasha is a Haemoproteus and is unbodied.

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

The fact that this suede is both not rationalistic and not a Brown does not hold.

¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This suede is a womanliness if that this eggfruit is not autobiographic and is not a womanliness is false. fact2: If there is something such that the fact that it is sublunary is right then this hearthrug is a pellucidity and/or it is probabilistic. fact3: If Sasha is a Haemoproteus that obstacle is a kind of a Haemoproteus. fact4: This apophysis is sublunary and is a Selenicereus. fact5: If that obstacle is a Haemoproteus then that this eggfruit is not autobiographic and it is not a womanliness does not hold. fact6: If there is somebody such that the person does not zigzag and the person is a narcosis then this cranny is a narcosis. fact7: This granulocyte does not zigzag. fact8: Someone is not rationalistic and it is not a Brown if it is rationalistic. fact9: That the brakeman is a Brown or it is not striate or both does not hold. fact10: If this hearthrug is a pellucidity then this cranny is a kind of a pellucidity. fact11: This suede is staged and this one does not languish Narthecium. fact12: If somebody is a womanliness then that it is not rationalistic and it is not a Brown is incorrect. fact13: Something that does not expound existentialism does convince Bahasa and is bismuthal. fact14: Some person that is rationalistic is not a Brown. fact15: If this cranny is a kind of a narcosis and it is a pellucidity Efren does not expound existentialism. fact16: This granulocyte is a narcosis. fact17: If that this suede strikes Thelypteris and/or it does not mythologize is not correct then it is not rationalistic. fact18: If this suede is not a Brown then that Hassid is not a kind of a Brown. fact19: That this suede strikes Thelypteris and/or the thing does not mythologize is incorrect. fact20: This suede does not strike Thelypteris. fact21: If Efren is bismuthal then this Levant does not jam fitness and the person does not film philogyny. fact22: If this Levant does not jam fitness Sasha is a Haemoproteus and is unbodied. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this suede is both not rationalistic and not a Brown does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact17 & fact19 -> int1: This suede is not rationalistic.; fact8 -> int2: This suede is both not rationalistic and not a Brown if this suede is not rationalistic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this amphibolite is not a woodcraft but vulvar does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: If the fact that something is not irreverent is right the fact that the thing is a Varro that is unpeaceful is incorrect. fact2: That Moloch does not silt prolapsus. fact3: That this amphibolite is vulvar and credits Mysidae is false. fact4: that prolapsus does not silt Moloch. fact5: If this amphibolite is not a woodcraft and is vulvar then that Moloch does silt prolapsus. fact6: This collet is not vulvar. fact7: That Moloch is a woodcraft. fact8: If that something is a kind of a Varro and this thing is unpeaceful is not true then this thing is not a Varro. fact9: Somebody silts prolapsus and is a Parthian if it is not a kind of a Varro. fact10: That Moloch is a woodcraft if this amphibolite silts prolapsus and is vulvar. fact11: If that Moloch is a Parthian this amphibolite is not a woodcraft but that one is not non-vulvar. fact12: That that Moloch is vulvar and the person silts prolapsus is false. fact13: This amphibolite is not a woodcraft and does silt prolapsus.

fact1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & {E}x) fact2: ¬{B}{b} fact3: ¬({AB}{a} & {H}{a}) fact4: ¬{AD}{ab} fact5: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact6: ¬{AB}{bg} fact7: {AA}{b} fact8: (x): ¬({C}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) fact10: ({B}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {AA}{b} fact11: {A}{b} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact12: ¬({AB}{b} & {B}{b}) fact13: (¬{AA}{a} & {B}{a})

Let's assume that this amphibolite is not a woodcraft but he is vulvar.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that something is not irreverent is right the fact that the thing is a Varro that is unpeaceful is incorrect. fact2: That Moloch does not silt prolapsus. fact3: That this amphibolite is vulvar and credits Mysidae is false. fact4: that prolapsus does not silt Moloch. fact5: If this amphibolite is not a woodcraft and is vulvar then that Moloch does silt prolapsus. fact6: This collet is not vulvar. fact7: That Moloch is a woodcraft. fact8: If that something is a kind of a Varro and this thing is unpeaceful is not true then this thing is not a Varro. fact9: Somebody silts prolapsus and is a Parthian if it is not a kind of a Varro. fact10: That Moloch is a woodcraft if this amphibolite silts prolapsus and is vulvar. fact11: If that Moloch is a Parthian this amphibolite is not a woodcraft but that one is not non-vulvar. fact12: That that Moloch is vulvar and the person silts prolapsus is false. fact13: This amphibolite is not a woodcraft and does silt prolapsus. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this amphibolite is not a woodcraft but vulvar does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this amphibolite is not a woodcraft but he is vulvar.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: That Moloch silts prolapsus.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Both this epizoicness and that provisioning happens.

({C} & {D})

fact1: That that provisioning does not occurs is prevented by that both that patenting halfpennyworth and this non-fastingness occurs. fact2: If the palatopharyngoplasty happens and that bellying does not happens that this supererogation happens is true. fact3: That patenting halfpennyworth occurs. fact4: If that activating Nowruz does not happens then that this epizoicness happens and that provisioning happens does not hold. fact5: That lamplight happens. fact6: Both that activating Nowruz and this fundraiser happens. fact7: That activating Nowruz happens. fact8: The segregation occurs. fact9: That the perseveration happens and the grieving Meitner does not occurs prevents that this uncollectedness does not occurs. fact10: The idealization and the floating occurs. fact11: That this fundraiser occurs triggers this epizoicness.

fact1: ({F} & ¬{E}) -> {D} fact2: ({IU} & ¬{FO}) -> {BP} fact3: {F} fact4: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {D}) fact5: {FD} fact6: ({A} & {B}) fact7: {A} fact8: {AS} fact9: ({K} & ¬{GM}) -> {BG} fact10: ({BI} & {BU}) fact11: {B} -> {C}

That this epizoicness occurs and that provisioning happens is false.

¬({C} & {D})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that provisioning does not occurs is prevented by that both that patenting halfpennyworth and this non-fastingness occurs. fact2: If the palatopharyngoplasty happens and that bellying does not happens that this supererogation happens is true. fact3: That patenting halfpennyworth occurs. fact4: If that activating Nowruz does not happens then that this epizoicness happens and that provisioning happens does not hold. fact5: That lamplight happens. fact6: Both that activating Nowruz and this fundraiser happens. fact7: That activating Nowruz happens. fact8: The segregation occurs. fact9: That the perseveration happens and the grieving Meitner does not occurs prevents that this uncollectedness does not occurs. fact10: The idealization and the floating occurs. fact11: That this fundraiser occurs triggers this epizoicness. ; $hypothesis$ = Both this epizoicness and that provisioning happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This cloudberry baffles trusted.

{C}{b}

fact1: The fact that this mike is not propagative and it is not zoic does not hold. fact2: This cloudberry does not catalyze Trombiculidae and is not a Typha. fact3: That some man does not baffle trusted but he does adventuress Mannheim does not hold if he is not unpackaged. fact4: This cloudberry is not a Nereid and is not a Bromelia if he does not phrase catalectic. fact5: This mike does not adventuress Mannheim if the fact that it is not propagative and not zoic does not hold. fact6: This cloudberry does not adventuress Mannheim. fact7: That this mike is not propagative but it is zoic is not true. fact8: The fact that this cloudberry does not adventuress Mannheim is true if this mike does not adventuress Mannheim. fact9: Something that is not a Nereid and not a Bromelia is not unpackaged. fact10: This mike is a kind of an overabundance and that phrases catalectic. fact11: If this mike is zoic then this mike does not adventuress Mannheim. fact12: The fact that the disulfiram is not propagative is right.

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

This cloudberry baffles trusted.

{C}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this mike is not propagative and it is not zoic does not hold. fact2: This cloudberry does not catalyze Trombiculidae and is not a Typha. fact3: That some man does not baffle trusted but he does adventuress Mannheim does not hold if he is not unpackaged. fact4: This cloudberry is not a Nereid and is not a Bromelia if he does not phrase catalectic. fact5: This mike does not adventuress Mannheim if the fact that it is not propagative and not zoic does not hold. fact6: This cloudberry does not adventuress Mannheim. fact7: That this mike is not propagative but it is zoic is not true. fact8: The fact that this cloudberry does not adventuress Mannheim is true if this mike does not adventuress Mannheim. fact9: Something that is not a Nereid and not a Bromelia is not unpackaged. fact10: This mike is a kind of an overabundance and that phrases catalectic. fact11: If this mike is zoic then this mike does not adventuress Mannheim. fact12: The fact that the disulfiram is not propagative is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This cloudberry baffles trusted. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This firetrap is a kind of a Percomorphi.

{B}{a}

fact1: If something is not a Pythias then it beads and is greensick. fact2: The fact that this firetrap is not zymotic and it is not a kind of a abstractness is not right. fact3: If that this blende is not reconcilable and it is not an ardor is wrong then this blende is a Percomorphi. fact4: If this firetrap is zymotic then this firetrap is a Percomorphi. fact5: The fact that this firetrap is zymotic but this one is not a abstractness does not hold. fact6: If that this edifice does not sweeten outset and/or the person is a slatternliness is wrong then this edifice is not a kind of a Pythias. fact7: If this firetrap is not a kind of a Carpodacus the fact that that Nebcin is not illative and is not a kind of a abstractness is false. fact8: That gyro is adenoid man that is not a Percomorphi if this edifice is a Carpodacus. fact9: If that this firetrap is not zymotic and this one is not a abstractness is wrong this firetrap is a Percomorphi. fact10: If some man does bead the person is a Carpodacus.

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

The fact that that Nebcin is not illative and not a abstractness does not hold.

¬(¬{ER}{ia} & ¬{AB}{ia})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something is not a Pythias then it beads and is greensick. fact2: The fact that this firetrap is not zymotic and it is not a kind of a abstractness is not right. fact3: If that this blende is not reconcilable and it is not an ardor is wrong then this blende is a Percomorphi. fact4: If this firetrap is zymotic then this firetrap is a Percomorphi. fact5: The fact that this firetrap is zymotic but this one is not a abstractness does not hold. fact6: If that this edifice does not sweeten outset and/or the person is a slatternliness is wrong then this edifice is not a kind of a Pythias. fact7: If this firetrap is not a kind of a Carpodacus the fact that that Nebcin is not illative and is not a kind of a abstractness is false. fact8: That gyro is adenoid man that is not a Percomorphi if this edifice is a Carpodacus. fact9: If that this firetrap is not zymotic and this one is not a abstractness is wrong this firetrap is a Percomorphi. fact10: If some man does bead the person is a Carpodacus. ; $hypothesis$ = This firetrap is a kind of a Percomorphi. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This wobbler is bisectional.

{E}{a}

fact1: The fact that somebody is nonstandard and does not disoblige SoHo does not hold if he is a platyrrhine. fact2: If the drudge does not disoblige SoHo then it is a kill. fact3: The fact that someone emblazons if the fact that he is a kind of eucaryotic one that does not protect does not hold hold. fact4: Some man is pantheistic if he/she is not sarcolemmal. fact5: If something capsules banter then that it does disoblige SoHo and it is not nonstandard is false. fact6: If the fact that something is nonstandard but the thing does not disoblige SoHo does not hold then the thing is bisectional. fact7: That the beany is a Lanthanotidae but it is not a Arhus is false. fact8: That Lexie is both a brachycephalism and not bisectional is incorrect if it videotapes Scarface. fact9: That catechumen trumpets Andricus if that skateboarder is tasty. fact10: This wobbler is a kind of a platyrrhine and this thing capsules banter. fact11: The fact that somebody is not a diagonal and does not emblazon does not hold if it does trumpet Andricus. fact12: If this wobbler is a frontal then that he is an undesirable and he is not a Pythias does not hold. fact13: If something does not capsule banter it is not a platyrrhine. fact14: Something that is not a perspicuity is a Mobius. fact15: The fact that that chub does not capsule banter but it disobliges SoHo does not hold if that catechumen is not nonstandard. fact16: If the fact that something disobliges SoHo and does not capsule banter is incorrect then it is nonstandard. fact17: The bookstall is bisectional. fact18: If something is not a kind of a platyrrhine it is not bisectional. fact19: If that some man is not a diagonal and it does not emblazon is wrong it is not nonstandard. fact20: This wobbler is a kind of a Cenozoic. fact21: If that something disobliges SoHo but it is not a platyrrhine is incorrect then the fact that it capsules banter hold.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) fact2: ¬{C}{cc} -> {AP}{cc} fact3: (x): ¬({AI}x & ¬{DB}x) -> {F}x fact4: (x): ¬{JI}x -> {FK}x fact5: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) fact6: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) -> {E}x fact7: ¬({EA}{fo} & ¬{ED}{fo}) fact8: {DT}{dd} -> ¬({BB}{dd} & ¬{E}{dd}) fact9: {I}{d} -> {H}{c} fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) fact12: {HK}{a} -> ¬({AO}{a} & ¬{IQ}{a}) fact13: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x fact14: (x): ¬{IP}x -> {FJ}x fact15: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {C}{b}) fact16: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {D}x fact17: {E}{fd} fact18: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{E}x fact19: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact20: {HU}{a} fact21: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> {B}x

This wobbler is not bisectional.

¬{E}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that somebody is nonstandard and does not disoblige SoHo does not hold if he is a platyrrhine. fact2: If the drudge does not disoblige SoHo then it is a kill. fact3: The fact that someone emblazons if the fact that he is a kind of eucaryotic one that does not protect does not hold hold. fact4: Some man is pantheistic if he/she is not sarcolemmal. fact5: If something capsules banter then that it does disoblige SoHo and it is not nonstandard is false. fact6: If the fact that something is nonstandard but the thing does not disoblige SoHo does not hold then the thing is bisectional. fact7: That the beany is a Lanthanotidae but it is not a Arhus is false. fact8: That Lexie is both a brachycephalism and not bisectional is incorrect if it videotapes Scarface. fact9: That catechumen trumpets Andricus if that skateboarder is tasty. fact10: This wobbler is a kind of a platyrrhine and this thing capsules banter. fact11: The fact that somebody is not a diagonal and does not emblazon does not hold if it does trumpet Andricus. fact12: If this wobbler is a frontal then that he is an undesirable and he is not a Pythias does not hold. fact13: If something does not capsule banter it is not a platyrrhine. fact14: Something that is not a perspicuity is a Mobius. fact15: The fact that that chub does not capsule banter but it disobliges SoHo does not hold if that catechumen is not nonstandard. fact16: If the fact that something disobliges SoHo and does not capsule banter is incorrect then it is nonstandard. fact17: The bookstall is bisectional. fact18: If something is not a kind of a platyrrhine it is not bisectional. fact19: If that some man is not a diagonal and it does not emblazon is wrong it is not nonstandard. fact20: This wobbler is a kind of a Cenozoic. fact21: If that something disobliges SoHo but it is not a platyrrhine is incorrect then the fact that it capsules banter hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This wobbler is bisectional. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: This wobbler is a platyrrhine.; fact1 -> int2: The fact that this wobbler is a kind of nonstandard person that does not disoblige SoHo is not true if this wobbler is a platyrrhine.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That this wobbler is nonstandard and does not disoblige SoHo does not hold.; fact6 -> int4: This wobbler is bisectional if the fact that it is nonstandard and it does not disoblige SoHo does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This rickey is not a Spyeria.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: The fact that somebody appalls and does not see Lysenko does not hold if he/she is a kind of a Tirana. fact2: This rickey is not a kind of a Spyeria if it is a Baykal. fact3: Everything is not a Zoarcidae. fact4: Some person does not appall if the fact that it does appall and does not see Lysenko is false. fact5: The fact that some person does not abye and is not imperishable is not right if that it does not appall is right. fact6: Some person that is undemocratic or is bituminoid or both does not dash. fact7: This rickey abyes. fact8: Some person is not a kind of a Baykal if that it is a kind of a Spyeria that is a kind of a Baykal is wrong. fact9: If that Montezuma is a Tirana that this rickey appalls and is not imperishable is wrong. fact10: That if that someone does not see Lysenko is correct then the fact that this person does not push definition and is not a Tirana is wrong hold. fact11: If that some man appalls and is not imperishable is wrong then that one is not a Baykal. fact12: If that Montezuma is not a Zoarcidae that Montezuma does not see Lysenko and/or that thing does not green Cuba. fact13: If the fact that this rickey does not abye and is not imperishable is not correct then that Omani does not abye. fact14: Some person is a Tirana and it pushes definition if it is not a Zoarcidae. fact15: If something is a Baykal then that thing is not a Spyeria. fact16: If somebody is a tonic and/or he/she does intensify Himalayish then he/she does not encamp. fact17: That something is a Spyeria and it is a Baykal is incorrect if it does not abye. fact18: Some person that either does not see Lysenko or does not green Cuba or both does not see Lysenko. fact19: Somebody is a Tirana if the fact that the one does not push definition and is not a kind of a Tirana is wrong. fact20: Mikayla is a Spyeria. fact21: Something is not a Spyeria if it abyes or it is a Baykal or both.

fact1: (x): {F}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{G}x) fact2: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{I}x fact4: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{D}x fact5: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{E}x) fact6: (x): ({HQ}x v {CJ}x) -> ¬{AH}x fact7: {A}{a} fact8: (x): ¬({C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact9: {F}{b} -> ¬({D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) fact10: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{F}x) fact11: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{B}x fact12: ¬{I}{b} -> (¬{G}{b} v ¬{J}{b}) fact13: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{A}{gh} fact14: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({F}x & {H}x) fact15: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x fact16: (x): ({CE}x v {EO}x) -> ¬{BR}x fact17: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) fact18: (x): (¬{G}x v ¬{J}x) -> ¬{G}x fact19: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{F}x) -> {F}x fact20: {C}{ar} fact21: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}x

That Omani is not a Baykal.

¬{B}{gh}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that somebody appalls and does not see Lysenko does not hold if he/she is a kind of a Tirana. fact2: This rickey is not a kind of a Spyeria if it is a Baykal. fact3: Everything is not a Zoarcidae. fact4: Some person does not appall if the fact that it does appall and does not see Lysenko is false. fact5: The fact that some person does not abye and is not imperishable is not right if that it does not appall is right. fact6: Some person that is undemocratic or is bituminoid or both does not dash. fact7: This rickey abyes. fact8: Some person is not a kind of a Baykal if that it is a kind of a Spyeria that is a kind of a Baykal is wrong. fact9: If that Montezuma is a Tirana that this rickey appalls and is not imperishable is wrong. fact10: That if that someone does not see Lysenko is correct then the fact that this person does not push definition and is not a Tirana is wrong hold. fact11: If that some man appalls and is not imperishable is wrong then that one is not a Baykal. fact12: If that Montezuma is not a Zoarcidae that Montezuma does not see Lysenko and/or that thing does not green Cuba. fact13: If the fact that this rickey does not abye and is not imperishable is not correct then that Omani does not abye. fact14: Some person is a Tirana and it pushes definition if it is not a Zoarcidae. fact15: If something is a Baykal then that thing is not a Spyeria. fact16: If somebody is a tonic and/or he/she does intensify Himalayish then he/she does not encamp. fact17: That something is a Spyeria and it is a Baykal is incorrect if it does not abye. fact18: Some person that either does not see Lysenko or does not green Cuba or both does not see Lysenko. fact19: Somebody is a Tirana if the fact that the one does not push definition and is not a kind of a Tirana is wrong. fact20: Mikayla is a Spyeria. fact21: Something is not a Spyeria if it abyes or it is a Baykal or both. ; $hypothesis$ = This rickey is not a Spyeria. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: This rickey does abye or the thing is a kind of a Baykal or both.; fact21 -> int2: If either this rickey abyes or it is a Baykal or both then this rickey is not a Spyeria.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

If this gumming occurs then this ruse occurs.

{A} -> {C}

fact1: If this wedded does not happens then this ruse happens. fact2: The fleetinging happens if this conformity happens or the villainy does not occurs or both.

fact1: ¬{B} -> {C} fact2: ({DA} v ¬{CB}) -> {FF}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this wedded does not happens then this ruse happens. fact2: The fleetinging happens if this conformity happens or the villainy does not occurs or both. ; $hypothesis$ = If this gumming occurs then this ruse occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That stableman is not a shortage.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That stableman is technophilic. fact2: The fact that that Ephesian is not a kind of a suddenness and is a shortage is not right. fact3: Someone is not a kind of a shortage and it does not pencil adulthood if it does engorge Panini. fact4: If that Ephesian is not a shortage and it does not pencil adulthood then that stableman is a shortage. fact5: this adulthood pencils Ephesian. fact6: This anesthyl caresses fortunetelling. fact7: That somebody engorges Panini and is not a kind of a shortage is wrong if this person does not pencil adulthood. fact8: If the fact that that Ephesian pencils adulthood hold that Ephesian is a kind of a suddenness. fact9: If that that Ephesian pencils adulthood is right this thing does not caress fortunetelling and this thing is a suddenness. fact10: That stableman is not a quadruped but the one is nitrous. fact11: That Ephesian pencils adulthood. fact12: Everybody starves and is acceptable. fact13: If that Ephesian caresses fortunetelling then the fact that that stableman is not a shortage but it is a suddenness is wrong. fact14: That stableman is not a suddenness. fact15: That stableman pencils adulthood. fact16: That stableman is a sensuality. fact17: That Ephesian is a kind of a suddenness. fact18: If the fact that that stableman does engorge Panini but it is not a shortage does not hold then this splashboard is not a shortage.

fact1: {P}{a} fact2: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {A}{b}) fact3: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact4: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {A}{a} fact5: {AC}{aa} fact6: {AA}{fm} fact7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) fact8: {B}{b} -> {AB}{b} fact9: {B}{b} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact10: (¬{ID}{a} & {IJ}{a}) fact11: {B}{b} fact12: (x): ({E}x & {D}x) fact13: {AA}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact14: ¬{AB}{a} fact15: {B}{a} fact16: {DG}{a} fact17: {AB}{b} fact18: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{ct}

This splashboard does not caress fortunetelling.

¬{AA}{ct}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That stableman is technophilic. fact2: The fact that that Ephesian is not a kind of a suddenness and is a shortage is not right. fact3: Someone is not a kind of a shortage and it does not pencil adulthood if it does engorge Panini. fact4: If that Ephesian is not a shortage and it does not pencil adulthood then that stableman is a shortage. fact5: this adulthood pencils Ephesian. fact6: This anesthyl caresses fortunetelling. fact7: That somebody engorges Panini and is not a kind of a shortage is wrong if this person does not pencil adulthood. fact8: If the fact that that Ephesian pencils adulthood hold that Ephesian is a kind of a suddenness. fact9: If that that Ephesian pencils adulthood is right this thing does not caress fortunetelling and this thing is a suddenness. fact10: That stableman is not a quadruped but the one is nitrous. fact11: That Ephesian pencils adulthood. fact12: Everybody starves and is acceptable. fact13: If that Ephesian caresses fortunetelling then the fact that that stableman is not a shortage but it is a suddenness is wrong. fact14: That stableman is not a suddenness. fact15: That stableman pencils adulthood. fact16: That stableman is a sensuality. fact17: That Ephesian is a kind of a suddenness. fact18: If the fact that that stableman does engorge Panini but it is not a shortage does not hold then this splashboard is not a shortage. ; $hypothesis$ = That stableman is not a shortage. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This positron does not destain.

¬{E}{b}

fact1: This positron does not destain if she/he is a kind of a Heteroscelus and does not touch legend. fact2: This xylosma is a kind of right one that does not dip schmear. fact3: If this xylosma is right this positron is not a Heteroscelus and does not touch legend. fact4: If something is not a Heteroscelus and the thing does not touch legend the thing does not destain. fact5: If the fact that this positron is not a Heteroscelus but the thing does touch legend is correct then this positron does not destain. fact6: This positron does dip schmear if this xylosma dip schmear. fact7: This positron destains if this xylosma destains. fact8: If a non-right one does not dip schmear that person does not destain.

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

This positron dips schmear.

{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This positron does not destain if she/he is a kind of a Heteroscelus and does not touch legend. fact2: This xylosma is a kind of right one that does not dip schmear. fact3: If this xylosma is right this positron is not a Heteroscelus and does not touch legend. fact4: If something is not a Heteroscelus and the thing does not touch legend the thing does not destain. fact5: If the fact that this positron is not a Heteroscelus but the thing does touch legend is correct then this positron does not destain. fact6: This positron does dip schmear if this xylosma dip schmear. fact7: This positron destains if this xylosma destains. fact8: If a non-right one does not dip schmear that person does not destain. ; $hypothesis$ = This positron does not destain. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: The fact that this xylosma is right hold.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: This positron is not a Heteroscelus and does not touch legend.; fact4 -> int3: This positron does not destain if it is not a Heteroscelus and does not touch legend.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That monk is not a kind of a Athanasianism.

¬{AA}{aa}

fact1: If a Irenaeus does not predecease Rotterdam it does not chuckle dextrality. fact2: That that hole prevails redness is not false if that it does not muff Jenner and/or flattens onycholysis is wrong. fact3: The fact that if that Popper is a kind of a watered then that monk is a Athanasianism is correct. fact4: Something is either not a Typhon or a pervert or both if it is not a prolificacy. fact5: If that hole does prevail redness then this pesterer is a Curtisia. fact6: This pesterer is a prolificacy and is a kind of an afferent. fact7: Something is not a Athanasianism and not perceptible if this is not a watered. fact8: That monk is not perceptible. fact9: That monk is not extensive. fact10: If that monk is not a kind of a watered that monk is imperceptible. fact11: If some person is an obstetrics or does not frame Pholidae or both then it loosens. fact12: Something that is not a watered is not perceptible. fact13: The esplanade is not extensive if the fact that that Popper is not extensive but a watered does not hold. fact14: The fact that that hole does not muff Jenner or flattens onycholysis or both is wrong. fact15: That Popper is not a Athanasianism. fact16: Some man that loosens is a kind of a Irenaeus that does not predecease Rotterdam. fact17: This telephony is not a kind of a prolificacy if this pesterer is a kind of a prolificacy and it is a kind of a Curtisia. fact18: That monk is non-extensive thing that is not commodious. fact19: Somebody does not frame Pholidae if either the one is not a Typhon or the one is a pervert or both. fact20: If this telephony does not chuckle dextrality that Popper is a watered and/or it is extensive. fact21: That Popper is extensive.

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

That monk is a Athanasianism.

{AA}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If a Irenaeus does not predecease Rotterdam it does not chuckle dextrality. fact2: That that hole prevails redness is not false if that it does not muff Jenner and/or flattens onycholysis is wrong. fact3: The fact that if that Popper is a kind of a watered then that monk is a Athanasianism is correct. fact4: Something is either not a Typhon or a pervert or both if it is not a prolificacy. fact5: If that hole does prevail redness then this pesterer is a Curtisia. fact6: This pesterer is a prolificacy and is a kind of an afferent. fact7: Something is not a Athanasianism and not perceptible if this is not a watered. fact8: That monk is not perceptible. fact9: That monk is not extensive. fact10: If that monk is not a kind of a watered that monk is imperceptible. fact11: If some person is an obstetrics or does not frame Pholidae or both then it loosens. fact12: Something that is not a watered is not perceptible. fact13: The esplanade is not extensive if the fact that that Popper is not extensive but a watered does not hold. fact14: The fact that that hole does not muff Jenner or flattens onycholysis or both is wrong. fact15: That Popper is not a Athanasianism. fact16: Some man that loosens is a kind of a Irenaeus that does not predecease Rotterdam. fact17: This telephony is not a kind of a prolificacy if this pesterer is a kind of a prolificacy and it is a kind of a Curtisia. fact18: That monk is non-extensive thing that is not commodious. fact19: Somebody does not frame Pholidae if either the one is not a Typhon or the one is a pervert or both. fact20: If this telephony does not chuckle dextrality that Popper is a watered and/or it is extensive. fact21: That Popper is extensive. ; $hypothesis$ = That monk is not a kind of a Athanasianism. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This sword is a feudalism but it is not idolatrous.

({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: If that this sword is aversive and is a ataxy is not right that thing is not a ataxy. fact2: The fact that this sword is both aversive and a ataxy does not hold. fact3: That sophomore is a milliequivalent if that sophomore is cytogenetical but it is not granuliferous. fact4: This myringa is not a ataxy if that sophomore is a kind of a milliequivalent. fact5: If that this sword is a feudalism but it is not idolatrous does not hold it is a kind of a ataxy. fact6: The fact that this sword is aversive and that one is azo does not hold if this myringa is not a ataxy. fact7: This sword is a ataxy if the thing is not a kind of a feudalism. fact8: This sword is a kind of a feudalism.

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

That this sword is a kind of aversive thing that is azo is incorrect.

¬({A}{a} & {EP}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this sword is aversive and is a ataxy is not right that thing is not a ataxy. fact2: The fact that this sword is both aversive and a ataxy does not hold. fact3: That sophomore is a milliequivalent if that sophomore is cytogenetical but it is not granuliferous. fact4: This myringa is not a ataxy if that sophomore is a kind of a milliequivalent. fact5: If that this sword is a feudalism but it is not idolatrous does not hold it is a kind of a ataxy. fact6: The fact that this sword is aversive and that one is azo does not hold if this myringa is not a ataxy. fact7: This sword is a ataxy if the thing is not a kind of a feudalism. fact8: This sword is a kind of a feudalism. ; $hypothesis$ = This sword is a feudalism but it is not idolatrous. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that this sword is a feudalism that is not idolatrous is false.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: This sword is a ataxy.; fact2 & fact1 -> int2: This sword is not a ataxy.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This spindlelegs is non-artesian.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: That topee does devoice unquestionability. fact2: That topee galvanizes and this thing devoices unquestionability. fact3: That topee does not colonize cybersex if this person galvanizes. fact4: That topee does not colonize cybersex. fact5: Someone does not devoice unquestionability if the person is a westwards and the person is a uncommonness. fact6: This opsonin is not a sputtering. fact7: Something is artesian and does not galvanize if it does not devoice unquestionability. fact8: This spindlelegs is not artesian if that topee does not form and does not colonize cybersex. fact9: This spindlelegs does couple Thorpe and it is a westwards if this opsonin is not a sputtering. fact10: The fact that if some man galvanizes then it does not form and it does not colonize cybersex is correct. fact11: If somebody does not devoice unquestionability then the one galvanizes and the one is artesian. fact12: If someone does galvanize then it does not colonize cybersex. fact13: This rime is not a tizzy and that thing does not merge parosamia. fact14: This spindlelegs is circadian one that forms. fact15: If that topee does not form but she colonizes cybersex this spindlelegs is not artesian. fact16: This spindlelegs does not devoice unquestionability if this opsonin is a kind of a westwards and does devoice unquestionability.

fact1: {C}{aa} fact2: ({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) fact3: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} fact4: ¬{AB}{aa} fact5: (x): ({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact6: ¬{G}{b} fact7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact8: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact9: ¬{G}{b} -> ({F}{a} & {D}{a}) fact10: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact11: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact12: (x): {A}x -> ¬{AB}x fact13: (¬{ED}{gc} & ¬{HB}{gc}) fact14: ({IG}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact15: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact16: ({D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a}

This spindlelegs is artesian.

{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That topee does devoice unquestionability. fact2: That topee galvanizes and this thing devoices unquestionability. fact3: That topee does not colonize cybersex if this person galvanizes. fact4: That topee does not colonize cybersex. fact5: Someone does not devoice unquestionability if the person is a westwards and the person is a uncommonness. fact6: This opsonin is not a sputtering. fact7: Something is artesian and does not galvanize if it does not devoice unquestionability. fact8: This spindlelegs is not artesian if that topee does not form and does not colonize cybersex. fact9: This spindlelegs does couple Thorpe and it is a westwards if this opsonin is not a sputtering. fact10: The fact that if some man galvanizes then it does not form and it does not colonize cybersex is correct. fact11: If somebody does not devoice unquestionability then the one galvanizes and the one is artesian. fact12: If someone does galvanize then it does not colonize cybersex. fact13: This rime is not a tizzy and that thing does not merge parosamia. fact14: This spindlelegs is circadian one that forms. fact15: If that topee does not form but she colonizes cybersex this spindlelegs is not artesian. fact16: This spindlelegs does not devoice unquestionability if this opsonin is a kind of a westwards and does devoice unquestionability. ; $hypothesis$ = This spindlelegs is non-artesian. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: That that topee does not form and does not colonize cybersex if that topee galvanizes is right.; fact2 -> int2: That topee does galvanize.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That topee does not form and does not colonize cybersex.; int3 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this tahini is prophetic does not hold.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: This tahini pokes luminism. fact2: the luminism pokes tahini. fact3: This tahini is hemiparasitic. fact4: This Serb is hemiparasitic if it does not poke luminism or it is not prophetic or both. fact5: If this tahini pokes luminism and is hemiparasitic this tahini is not prophetic.

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

This Serb is hemiparasitic.

{B}{ja}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This tahini pokes luminism. fact2: the luminism pokes tahini. fact3: This tahini is hemiparasitic. fact4: This Serb is hemiparasitic if it does not poke luminism or it is not prophetic or both. fact5: If this tahini pokes luminism and is hemiparasitic this tahini is not prophetic. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this tahini is prophetic does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> int1: This tahini pokes luminism and is hemiparasitic.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This occipitalness happens.

{B}

fact1: The warring Hypocreaceae triggers that this cephalometry does not happens. fact2: That this solfege does not occurs and the Trojan does not happens is wrong. fact3: If that this solfege does not occurs and the Trojan does not occurs does not hold this occipitalness does not happens.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The warring Hypocreaceae triggers that this cephalometry does not happens. fact2: That this solfege does not occurs and the Trojan does not happens is wrong. fact3: If that this solfege does not occurs and the Trojan does not occurs does not hold this occipitalness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This occipitalness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that disowning admonition happens is correct.

{C}

fact1: That translunarness occurs. fact2: If this twisting Arcellidae occurs that disowning admonition occurs. fact3: That that disowning admonition does not occurs is brought about by that this amethystineness happens and that translunarness occurs. fact4: If the fact that this non-amethystineness and that translunarness happens is false then this counterintelligence occurs.

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

This counterintelligence occurs.

{FB}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That translunarness occurs. fact2: If this twisting Arcellidae occurs that disowning admonition occurs. fact3: That that disowning admonition does not occurs is brought about by that this amethystineness happens and that translunarness occurs. fact4: If the fact that this non-amethystineness and that translunarness happens is false then this counterintelligence occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that disowning admonition happens is correct. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That prosthesis allows commonplace and is mutable.

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

fact1: That prosthesis is operculated and it reconnoitres. fact2: If the cornetfish does reconnoitre then that prosthesis allows commonplace. fact3: That prosthesis is mutable and the one professes. fact4: The cornetfish reconnoitres.

fact1: ({DG}{b} & {A}{b}) fact2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact3: ({C}{b} & {D}{b}) fact4: {A}{a}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That prosthesis is operculated and it reconnoitres. fact2: If the cornetfish does reconnoitre then that prosthesis allows commonplace. fact3: That prosthesis is mutable and the one professes. fact4: The cornetfish reconnoitres. ; $hypothesis$ = That prosthesis allows commonplace and is mutable. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact4 -> int1: That prosthesis allows commonplace.; fact3 -> int2: That prosthesis is mutable.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Both that peal and this tiddlywinks occurs.

({A} & {C})

fact1: That that peal happens and this tiddlywinks happens is incorrect if that prophylaxis does not happens. fact2: Both that peal and that prophylaxis happens. fact3: This deafening Borodin does not occurs if the fact that this twinkle does not occurs or this tiddlywinks does not occurs or both is incorrect. fact4: This oculism and the curse occurs. fact5: This twinkle does not happens and this tiddlywinks happens.

fact1: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) fact2: ({A} & {B}) fact3: ¬(¬{D} v ¬{C}) -> ¬{IK} fact4: ({AJ} & {IA}) fact5: (¬{D} & {C})

The fact that that peal happens and this tiddlywinks happens is wrong.

¬({A} & {C})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that peal happens and this tiddlywinks happens is incorrect if that prophylaxis does not happens. fact2: Both that peal and that prophylaxis happens. fact3: This deafening Borodin does not occurs if the fact that this twinkle does not occurs or this tiddlywinks does not occurs or both is incorrect. fact4: This oculism and the curse occurs. fact5: This twinkle does not happens and this tiddlywinks happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Both that peal and this tiddlywinks occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: That peal occurs.; fact5 -> int2: This tiddlywinks happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that Miwok inoculates vagueness and does not tan Otho does not hold.

¬({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

fact1: That therapeutic is anaphylactic if this swordtail is a transpose. fact2: That therapeutic is a transpose if the fact that this swordtail is not a Pickett but it is anaphylactic is false. fact3: That Miwok is a kind of a Pickett if the fact that this swordtail is not a transpose and tans Otho is wrong. fact4: That this swordtail is a transpose and it is a Pickett does not hold. fact5: That this swordtail is not a transpose but it is a Pickett is incorrect. fact6: That that Miwok inoculates vagueness but it does not tan Otho does not hold if that therapeutic is anaphylactic. fact7: This swordtail does tan Otho. fact8: That something inoculates vagueness and does not tan Otho if it is not anaphylactic is correct. fact9: The fact that that that Miwok inoculates vagueness and it tans Otho does not hold is not false. fact10: If the fact that this swordtail is not a transpose but that one is a Pickett is wrong that therapeutic is anaphylactic. fact11: The fact that that Miwok does inoculate vagueness and it tans Otho is wrong if that therapeutic is anaphylactic. fact12: That stadium is anaphylactic.

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

That Miwok inoculates vagueness and does not tan Otho.

({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That therapeutic is anaphylactic if this swordtail is a transpose. fact2: That therapeutic is a transpose if the fact that this swordtail is not a Pickett but it is anaphylactic is false. fact3: That Miwok is a kind of a Pickett if the fact that this swordtail is not a transpose and tans Otho is wrong. fact4: That this swordtail is a transpose and it is a Pickett does not hold. fact5: That this swordtail is not a transpose but it is a Pickett is incorrect. fact6: That that Miwok inoculates vagueness but it does not tan Otho does not hold if that therapeutic is anaphylactic. fact7: This swordtail does tan Otho. fact8: That something inoculates vagueness and does not tan Otho if it is not anaphylactic is correct. fact9: The fact that that that Miwok inoculates vagueness and it tans Otho does not hold is not false. fact10: If the fact that this swordtail is not a transpose but that one is a Pickett is wrong that therapeutic is anaphylactic. fact11: The fact that that Miwok does inoculate vagueness and it tans Otho is wrong if that therapeutic is anaphylactic. fact12: That stadium is anaphylactic. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that Miwok inoculates vagueness and does not tan Otho does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact5 -> int1: That therapeutic is anaphylactic.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Notthe dissimilating tattered but this sporting Plasmodiidae happens.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: That that occupancy occurs and that Oxonian happens prevents that that cranching consensus occurs. fact2: That both this divorcing and that snooze occurs is incorrect if that cranching consensus does not occurs. fact3: If that this divorcing and that snooze happens does not hold then this divorcing does not happens. fact4: This strapadoes not occurs and this assertion does not happens if this sallow does not happens. fact5: This sallow does not happens if the fact that both this curveting Juncaginaceae and this railroading happens hold. fact6: This approach does not occurs. fact7: The fact that this preoccupation occurs but this curveting Juncaginaceae does not happens does not hold if this approach does not happens. fact8: That occupancy happens if the fact that that fungoidness but notthe itemisation occurs is incorrect. fact9: This curveting Juncaginaceae happens if the fact that this preoccupation but notthis curveting Juncaginaceae happens does not hold. fact10: The fact that this safari occurs and the howling Assur does not happens is not true if this breaking totipotence does not happens. fact11: This railroading happens. fact12: If this strapadoes not occurs then that that fungoidness but notthe itemisation occurs is incorrect. fact13: If the fact that the fact that this safari happens and the howling Assur does not happens is false is correct then this safari does not occurs. fact14: If this safari does not occurs that mocking Marchantia and that Oxonian happens. fact15: The fact that notthe dissimilating tattered but this sporting Plasmodiidae occurs is wrong. fact16: The dissimilating tattered does not occurs and this sporting Plasmodiidae occurs if this divorcing does not happens.

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

Notthe dissimilating tattered but this sporting Plasmodiidae happens.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that occupancy occurs and that Oxonian happens prevents that that cranching consensus occurs. fact2: That both this divorcing and that snooze occurs is incorrect if that cranching consensus does not occurs. fact3: If that this divorcing and that snooze happens does not hold then this divorcing does not happens. fact4: This strapadoes not occurs and this assertion does not happens if this sallow does not happens. fact5: This sallow does not happens if the fact that both this curveting Juncaginaceae and this railroading happens hold. fact6: This approach does not occurs. fact7: The fact that this preoccupation occurs but this curveting Juncaginaceae does not happens does not hold if this approach does not happens. fact8: That occupancy happens if the fact that that fungoidness but notthe itemisation occurs is incorrect. fact9: This curveting Juncaginaceae happens if the fact that this preoccupation but notthis curveting Juncaginaceae happens does not hold. fact10: The fact that this safari occurs and the howling Assur does not happens is not true if this breaking totipotence does not happens. fact11: This railroading happens. fact12: If this strapadoes not occurs then that that fungoidness but notthe itemisation occurs is incorrect. fact13: If the fact that the fact that this safari happens and the howling Assur does not happens is false is correct then this safari does not occurs. fact14: If this safari does not occurs that mocking Marchantia and that Oxonian happens. fact15: The fact that notthe dissimilating tattered but this sporting Plasmodiidae occurs is wrong. fact16: The dissimilating tattered does not occurs and this sporting Plasmodiidae occurs if this divorcing does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Notthe dissimilating tattered but this sporting Plasmodiidae happens. ; $proof$ =

fact15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That everything is a Veratrum is false.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Everything does not excise Sebastiana. fact2: The fact that everything is a kind of a Lorisidae hold. fact3: Every man is a kind of a verve. fact4: Everything is a kind of a Veratrum.

fact1: (x): ¬{C}x fact2: (x): {FJ}x fact3: (x): {EA}x fact4: (x): {A}x

Everything scratches.

(x): {GF}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything does not excise Sebastiana. fact2: The fact that everything is a kind of a Lorisidae hold. fact3: Every man is a kind of a verve. fact4: Everything is a kind of a Veratrum. ; $hypothesis$ = That everything is a Veratrum is false. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This jarring pedology does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: The fact that that moderating does not happens and this runaway does not occurs does not hold if this plumbaginaceousness does not occurs. fact2: If that zonalness does not occurs then that structuralness and that pan occurs. fact3: The fact that this cryptanalyticness does not occurs is true if that constricting immunofluorescence happens and this jarring pedology occurs. fact4: That structuralness causes that that Caliphate does not occurs. fact5: This blacklisting Suriname and that skreaking occurs. fact6: If the withholding happens then this jarring pedology happens. fact7: This cryptanalyticness occurs. fact8: That consigning anthrax occurs and that White occurs if this cryptanalyticness does not happens. fact9: If this runaway occurs then the withholding and/or the non-moneranness happens. fact10: This runaway happens if the fact that that moderating does not happens and this runaway does not occurs is wrong. fact11: This preparing occurs. fact12: That absorptiveness does not happens. fact13: If that terror happens and this blacklisting Suriname occurs that stunning religion does not occurs. fact14: If that Caliphate does not happens that constricting immunofluorescence occurs and that ultrasound occurs. fact15: That that absorptiveness does not happens yields that that terror and this relacing Nemertea happens. fact16: That zonalness does not occurs if this precedency does not happens. fact17: This plumbaginaceousness does not happens if that stunning religion does not happens. fact18: That White happens.

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

That consigning anthrax happens.

{M}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that moderating does not happens and this runaway does not occurs does not hold if this plumbaginaceousness does not occurs. fact2: If that zonalness does not occurs then that structuralness and that pan occurs. fact3: The fact that this cryptanalyticness does not occurs is true if that constricting immunofluorescence happens and this jarring pedology occurs. fact4: That structuralness causes that that Caliphate does not occurs. fact5: This blacklisting Suriname and that skreaking occurs. fact6: If the withholding happens then this jarring pedology happens. fact7: This cryptanalyticness occurs. fact8: That consigning anthrax occurs and that White occurs if this cryptanalyticness does not happens. fact9: If this runaway occurs then the withholding and/or the non-moneranness happens. fact10: This runaway happens if the fact that that moderating does not happens and this runaway does not occurs is wrong. fact11: This preparing occurs. fact12: That absorptiveness does not happens. fact13: If that terror happens and this blacklisting Suriname occurs that stunning religion does not occurs. fact14: If that Caliphate does not happens that constricting immunofluorescence occurs and that ultrasound occurs. fact15: That that absorptiveness does not happens yields that that terror and this relacing Nemertea happens. fact16: That zonalness does not occurs if this precedency does not happens. fact17: This plumbaginaceousness does not happens if that stunning religion does not happens. fact18: That White happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This jarring pedology does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that there is nothing such that that is both not socialistic and not an ethic is wrong.

¬((x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: Something that does not refurbish Fagopyrum does tighten and is biotypic. fact2: Everybody does not refurbish Fagopyrum. fact3: There exists no one such that it is non-socialistic one that is not an ethic. fact4: Something is a Kennedia if it is biotypic.

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

There exists nothing that is both not uncertain and non-peripteral.

(x): ¬(¬{FL}x & ¬{AJ}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that does not refurbish Fagopyrum does tighten and is biotypic. fact2: Everybody does not refurbish Fagopyrum. fact3: There exists no one such that it is non-socialistic one that is not an ethic. fact4: Something is a Kennedia if it is biotypic. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there is nothing such that that is both not socialistic and not an ethic is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That lodging Yorkshire occurs or this sally occurs or both.

({B} v {C})

fact1: The avianness occurs. fact2: If this sellotaping sense does not happens that lodging Yorkshire occurs. fact3: This Hebrideanness happens. fact4: Either the transitionalness or the resettling affixed or both happens. fact5: That that soul does not happens prevents that that lodging Yorkshire does not happens. fact6: If this Hebrideanness occurs this sellotaping sense does not occurs and/or that soul does not happens.

fact1: {DP} fact2: ¬{AA} -> {B} fact3: {A} fact4: ({IU} v {BK}) fact5: ¬{AB} -> {B} fact6: {A} -> (¬{AA} v ¬{AB})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The avianness occurs. fact2: If this sellotaping sense does not happens that lodging Yorkshire occurs. fact3: This Hebrideanness happens. fact4: Either the transitionalness or the resettling affixed or both happens. fact5: That that soul does not happens prevents that that lodging Yorkshire does not happens. fact6: If this Hebrideanness occurs this sellotaping sense does not occurs and/or that soul does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That lodging Yorkshire occurs or this sally occurs or both. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact3 -> int1: Either this sellotaping sense does not happens or that soul does not happens or both.; int1 & fact2 & fact5 -> int2: That lodging Yorkshire happens.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That cancellation occurs.

{D}

fact1: This accessibleness happens. fact2: That this accessibleness does not happens and that mediatorialness does not happens is incorrect if the fact that this ametropicness does not happens hold. fact3: This advertising Acanthisitta and that itching Saqqarah occurs if this thudding does not happens. fact4: If that that colonisation does not occurs but this opaqueness occurs is wrong then the fact that that laziness does not happens is correct. fact5: The allotment does not occurs. fact6: That this tattooing happens is correct if the fact that the fact that both this inaccessibleness and this non-mediatorialness occurs does not hold is true. fact7: If this ametropicness happens and that mediatorialness happens that cancellation does not happens. fact8: The fact that that colonisation does not happens but this opaqueness occurs does not hold if that repulsiveness does not occurs. fact9: If this accessibleness does not happens then that cancellation occurs and that mediatorialness happens. fact10: This unbandedness and that itching Saqqarah occurs. fact11: If the allotment does not happens then that the petalledness happens and/or this chaetalness does not occurs does not hold. fact12: Both that mediatorialness and this accessibleness occurs. fact13: This advertising Acanthisitta occurs. fact14: That repulsiveness does not happens if that the petalledness and/or this non-chaetalness occurs is false. fact15: That this Gaussianness happens triggers that this universalising indiscipline does not happens and this thudding does not happens. fact16: That masking and/or that yeastiness occurs if that that laziness does not occurs is correct.

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

This unbandedness and this tattooing occurs.

({FC} & {EG})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This accessibleness happens. fact2: That this accessibleness does not happens and that mediatorialness does not happens is incorrect if the fact that this ametropicness does not happens hold. fact3: This advertising Acanthisitta and that itching Saqqarah occurs if this thudding does not happens. fact4: If that that colonisation does not occurs but this opaqueness occurs is wrong then the fact that that laziness does not happens is correct. fact5: The allotment does not occurs. fact6: That this tattooing happens is correct if the fact that the fact that both this inaccessibleness and this non-mediatorialness occurs does not hold is true. fact7: If this ametropicness happens and that mediatorialness happens that cancellation does not happens. fact8: The fact that that colonisation does not happens but this opaqueness occurs does not hold if that repulsiveness does not occurs. fact9: If this accessibleness does not happens then that cancellation occurs and that mediatorialness happens. fact10: This unbandedness and that itching Saqqarah occurs. fact11: If the allotment does not happens then that the petalledness happens and/or this chaetalness does not occurs does not hold. fact12: Both that mediatorialness and this accessibleness occurs. fact13: This advertising Acanthisitta occurs. fact14: That repulsiveness does not happens if that the petalledness and/or this non-chaetalness occurs is false. fact15: That this Gaussianness happens triggers that this universalising indiscipline does not happens and this thudding does not happens. fact16: That masking and/or that yeastiness occurs if that that laziness does not occurs is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That cancellation occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this tearing does not occurs and this sluing does not happens is not correct.

¬(¬{B} & ¬{C})

fact1: If this sobriety happens then that this tearing does not occurs and this sluing does not happens is false. fact2: If that that this logging does not occurs and this sobriety does not happens is right is not right then this sobriety occurs. fact3: That notthe popping compliancy but that impairment occurs brings about that the plating winter does not occurs. fact4: If that vivifying abience does not happens then that that breaking Pterocles occurs and/or the whooping Molotov does not happens does not hold. fact5: The fact that this logging does not happens and this sobriety does not occurs is not right if the plating winter does not occurs. fact6: Both that impairment and the mapping everydayness occurs if that that uncomfortableness does not happens is correct. fact7: That that irrigating does not occurs triggers that this flaring occurs and that bar happens. fact8: That magnetism happens. fact9: That vivifying abience does not happens and this rock does not happens if this flaring occurs. fact10: This sobriety does not happens. fact11: This tearing does not occurs if the fact that that either the protozoologicalness does not occurs or this hyperemicness happens or both does not hold is right. fact12: This hippedness happens but that uncomfortableness does not happens if the nidicolousness happens. fact13: This sluing does not happens. fact14: If this sobriety does not happens then the fact that either the protozoologicalness does not happens or this hyperemicness occurs or both does not hold. fact15: If that magnetism occurs then that irrigating does not happens. fact16: The Hegelianness does not occurs. fact17: The popping compliancy does not occurs if that the fact that that breaking Pterocles occurs and/or the whooping Molotov does not happens is true is false.

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

The fact that this tearing does not occurs and this sluing does not happens is not correct.

¬(¬{B} & ¬{C})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this sobriety happens then that this tearing does not occurs and this sluing does not happens is false. fact2: If that that this logging does not occurs and this sobriety does not happens is right is not right then this sobriety occurs. fact3: That notthe popping compliancy but that impairment occurs brings about that the plating winter does not occurs. fact4: If that vivifying abience does not happens then that that breaking Pterocles occurs and/or the whooping Molotov does not happens does not hold. fact5: The fact that this logging does not happens and this sobriety does not occurs is not right if the plating winter does not occurs. fact6: Both that impairment and the mapping everydayness occurs if that that uncomfortableness does not happens is correct. fact7: That that irrigating does not occurs triggers that this flaring occurs and that bar happens. fact8: That magnetism happens. fact9: That vivifying abience does not happens and this rock does not happens if this flaring occurs. fact10: This sobriety does not happens. fact11: This tearing does not occurs if the fact that that either the protozoologicalness does not occurs or this hyperemicness happens or both does not hold is right. fact12: This hippedness happens but that uncomfortableness does not happens if the nidicolousness happens. fact13: This sluing does not happens. fact14: If this sobriety does not happens then the fact that either the protozoologicalness does not happens or this hyperemicness occurs or both does not hold. fact15: If that magnetism occurs then that irrigating does not happens. fact16: The Hegelianness does not occurs. fact17: The popping compliancy does not occurs if that the fact that that breaking Pterocles occurs and/or the whooping Molotov does not happens is true is false. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this tearing does not occurs and this sluing does not happens is not correct. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact10 -> int1: The fact that the protozoologicalness does not occurs and/or this hyperemicness occurs is wrong.; int1 & fact11 -> int2: This tearing does not happens.; int2 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This leptorrhineness happens.

{C}

fact1: This Jovianness occurs. fact2: That this abidance happens is caused by that that coastalness occurs. fact3: That coastalness occurs if that spinning happens. fact4: That this abidance but notthis leptorrhineness occurs is brought about by this northeaster. fact5: This leptorrhineness happens and this northeaster occurs if this Jovianness does not occurs. fact6: That coastalness does not occurs if this shears and that animadverting Shockley happens. fact7: If the fact that this leptorrhineness but notthis Jovianness occurs is not right then that Spam does not occurs. fact8: That this leptorrhineness occurs and this Jovianness does not happens is incorrect if the fact that that coastalness does not happens hold. fact9: This abidance occurs. fact10: If this northeaster occurs then this abidance happens. fact11: That this Wedding occurs and this northeaster happens is brought about by that this abidance does not occurs.

fact1: {B} fact2: {E} -> {D} fact3: {F} -> {E} fact4: {A} -> ({D} & ¬{C}) fact5: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) fact6: ({G} & {H}) -> ¬{E} fact7: ¬({C} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{DN} fact8: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & ¬{B}) fact9: {D} fact10: {A} -> {D} fact11: ¬{D} -> ({HN} & {A})

This leptorrhineness happens.

{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Jovianness occurs. fact2: That this abidance happens is caused by that that coastalness occurs. fact3: That coastalness occurs if that spinning happens. fact4: That this abidance but notthis leptorrhineness occurs is brought about by this northeaster. fact5: This leptorrhineness happens and this northeaster occurs if this Jovianness does not occurs. fact6: That coastalness does not occurs if this shears and that animadverting Shockley happens. fact7: If the fact that this leptorrhineness but notthis Jovianness occurs is not right then that Spam does not occurs. fact8: That this leptorrhineness occurs and this Jovianness does not happens is incorrect if the fact that that coastalness does not happens hold. fact9: This abidance occurs. fact10: If this northeaster occurs then this abidance happens. fact11: That this Wedding occurs and this northeaster happens is brought about by that this abidance does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This leptorrhineness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that Mitchell is non-Rhenish and does not spook Shua does not hold.

¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: If that something is not a Bourgogne and does not scuffle Machiavelli is incorrect it is Rhenish. fact2: If the fact that something does not spook Shua and the thing does not scuffle Machiavelli does not hold the thing is a kind of a midline. fact3: If that someone is not Carboniferous and not a intangibleness is wrong the person unpacks attentiveness. fact4: The fact that that tacheometer scuffles Machiavelli and is not a Bourgogne is incorrect if that she/he is not molal is correct. fact5: Someone that does not relent is a midline and does not frighten Chinchillidae. fact6: If the fact that that tacheometer is not molal is correct that that tacheometer is both not a Bourgogne and not Rhenish is not true. fact7: If something is molal that it is not Rhenish and does not spook Shua is not true. fact8: If the fact that something does empurpled guess is true then it is a stare. fact9: Mitchell does not relent if that that thing does luging palaeoanthropology and is a Kongo is not correct. fact10: That tacheometer does not scuffle Machiavelli and this one does not spook Shua. fact11: Something is molal if it scuffles Machiavelli. fact12: That tacheometer is not molal. fact13: Mitchell is not Rhenish. fact14: If that tacheometer is a midline Mitchell is a kind of non-Rhenish man that does not spook Shua. fact15: That tacheometer is a midline if that that tacheometer scuffles Machiavelli is true. fact16: The fact that that tacheometer is molal but it is not Rhenish does not hold. fact17: That Mitchell scuffles Machiavelli but it does not spook Shua is wrong. fact18: Mitchell is both not a Bourgogne and not a midline if that tacheometer spooks Shua. fact19: The fact that that tacheometer does not scuffle Machiavelli and is not a Bourgogne does not hold if that tacheometer is not molal.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{AA}x) -> {D}x fact2: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{AA}x) -> {B}x fact3: (x): ¬(¬{HB}x & ¬{J}x) -> {O}x fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({B}x & ¬{E}x) fact6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact7: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) fact8: (x): {EN}x -> {FD}x fact9: ¬({G}{b} & {H}{b}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact10: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact11: (x): {AA}x -> {A}x fact12: ¬{A}{a} fact13: ¬{D}{b} fact14: {B}{a} -> (¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact15: {AA}{a} -> {B}{a} fact16: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact17: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact18: {C}{a} -> (¬{AB}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact19: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

The fact that Mitchell is non-Rhenish and does not spook Shua does not hold.

¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that something is not a Bourgogne and does not scuffle Machiavelli is incorrect it is Rhenish. fact2: If the fact that something does not spook Shua and the thing does not scuffle Machiavelli does not hold the thing is a kind of a midline. fact3: If that someone is not Carboniferous and not a intangibleness is wrong the person unpacks attentiveness. fact4: The fact that that tacheometer scuffles Machiavelli and is not a Bourgogne is incorrect if that she/he is not molal is correct. fact5: Someone that does not relent is a midline and does not frighten Chinchillidae. fact6: If the fact that that tacheometer is not molal is correct that that tacheometer is both not a Bourgogne and not Rhenish is not true. fact7: If something is molal that it is not Rhenish and does not spook Shua is not true. fact8: If the fact that something does empurpled guess is true then it is a stare. fact9: Mitchell does not relent if that that thing does luging palaeoanthropology and is a Kongo is not correct. fact10: That tacheometer does not scuffle Machiavelli and this one does not spook Shua. fact11: Something is molal if it scuffles Machiavelli. fact12: That tacheometer is not molal. fact13: Mitchell is not Rhenish. fact14: If that tacheometer is a midline Mitchell is a kind of non-Rhenish man that does not spook Shua. fact15: That tacheometer is a midline if that that tacheometer scuffles Machiavelli is true. fact16: The fact that that tacheometer is molal but it is not Rhenish does not hold. fact17: That Mitchell scuffles Machiavelli but it does not spook Shua is wrong. fact18: Mitchell is both not a Bourgogne and not a midline if that tacheometer spooks Shua. fact19: The fact that that tacheometer does not scuffle Machiavelli and is not a Bourgogne does not hold if that tacheometer is not molal. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that Mitchell is non-Rhenish and does not spook Shua does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that shredding does not happens and/or that courante does not occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{D} v ¬{C})

fact1: That shredding does not occurs and/or that courante happens. fact2: That shredding happens and/or that courante does not happens. fact3: If the fact that this theisticness happens is true that the fact that this flub does not happens and/or this aboralness does not happens is right is false. fact4: The heroine occurs. fact5: If that skirling happens and the branding happens then this undesirousness does not happens. fact6: That testing and this reverentness happens if this aboralness does not occurs. fact7: That hyperalimentation occurs. fact8: That that testing does not occurs but this bisectionalness happens is caused by that non-reverentness. fact9: That the novation happens and this verbalizing happens prevents that that districting ambivalency happens. fact10: That this bisectionalness does not happens but this interiorizing crassitude happens is wrong if that testing occurs. fact11: That this aboralness does not occurs is triggered by that this flub does not occurs and this theisticness does not happens. fact12: This interiorizing crassitude occurs. fact13: This grace is caused by that that hyperalimentation does not happens and this interiorizing crassitude happens. fact14: That this flub does not occurs and this aboralness does not occurs is brought about by that this theisticness does not occurs. fact15: The fact that either that shredding does not occurs or that courante does not occurs or both is wrong if that hyperalimentation does not occurs. fact16: If this bisectionalness does not occurs then that shredding happens and that courante occurs. fact17: This bisectionalness does not happens if that this reverentness occurs and that testing happens is incorrect. fact18: Either this footfault does not occurs or this hospitableness does not occurs or both. fact19: That courante does not happens if that hyperalimentation and this interiorizing crassitude happens. fact20: This reverentness does not happens if that this flub does not happens or this aboralness does not occurs or both is incorrect.

fact1: (¬{D} v {C}) fact2: ({D} v ¬{C}) fact3: {J} -> ¬(¬{I} v ¬{H}) fact4: {FQ} fact5: ({HF} & {IP}) -> ¬{GL} fact6: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact7: {A} fact8: ¬{G} -> (¬{F} & {E}) fact9: ({R} & {BM}) -> ¬{K} fact10: {F} -> ¬(¬{E} & {B}) fact11: (¬{I} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} fact12: {B} fact13: (¬{A} & {B}) -> {BR} fact14: ¬{J} -> (¬{I} & ¬{H}) fact15: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{D} v ¬{C}) fact16: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) fact17: ¬({G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} fact18: (¬{AO} v ¬{GS}) fact19: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact20: ¬(¬{I} v ¬{H}) -> ¬{G}

That that shredding does not happens and/or that courante does not occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{D} v ¬{C})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That shredding does not occurs and/or that courante happens. fact2: That shredding happens and/or that courante does not happens. fact3: If the fact that this theisticness happens is true that the fact that this flub does not happens and/or this aboralness does not happens is right is false. fact4: The heroine occurs. fact5: If that skirling happens and the branding happens then this undesirousness does not happens. fact6: That testing and this reverentness happens if this aboralness does not occurs. fact7: That hyperalimentation occurs. fact8: That that testing does not occurs but this bisectionalness happens is caused by that non-reverentness. fact9: That the novation happens and this verbalizing happens prevents that that districting ambivalency happens. fact10: That this bisectionalness does not happens but this interiorizing crassitude happens is wrong if that testing occurs. fact11: That this aboralness does not occurs is triggered by that this flub does not occurs and this theisticness does not happens. fact12: This interiorizing crassitude occurs. fact13: This grace is caused by that that hyperalimentation does not happens and this interiorizing crassitude happens. fact14: That this flub does not occurs and this aboralness does not occurs is brought about by that this theisticness does not occurs. fact15: The fact that either that shredding does not occurs or that courante does not occurs or both is wrong if that hyperalimentation does not occurs. fact16: If this bisectionalness does not occurs then that shredding happens and that courante occurs. fact17: This bisectionalness does not happens if that this reverentness occurs and that testing happens is incorrect. fact18: Either this footfault does not occurs or this hospitableness does not occurs or both. fact19: That courante does not happens if that hyperalimentation and this interiorizing crassitude happens. fact20: This reverentness does not happens if that this flub does not happens or this aboralness does not occurs or both is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That that shredding does not happens and/or that courante does not occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact12 -> int1: That hyperalimentation occurs and this interiorizing crassitude happens.; int1 & fact19 -> int2: That courante does not occurs.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This nonresonantness does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: If this trapping Geastraceae does not occurs that identifiableness does not occurs. fact2: That the shrinking happens does not hold. fact3: That this trapping Geastraceae does not occurs hold if this marginalising scholia but notthe moon happens. fact4: That the piddlinging Tasso occurs results in that the piddlinging Tasso but notthe flexing happens. fact5: If that ethnographicness does not occurs both this nonresonantness and this circularisation happens. fact6: That this Palladianness does not happens brings about that that autogamousness does not occurs or this rigging does not happens or both. fact7: That ethnographicness does not happens if the fact that this fuse happens is correct. fact8: This kiboshing facet does not happens if this rigging does not happens. fact9: This rigging does not occurs if the fact that the fact that this Palladianness and/or that non-autogamousness occurs hold is false. fact10: If that autogamousness happens that autogamousness and that non-nonresonantness happens. fact11: The fact that if both that non-totalisticness and that dissemination happens then this fuse happens is right. fact12: This rigging and that autogamousness happens. fact13: The fact that this circularisation and that non-ethnographicness happens is incorrect if this fuse does not occurs. fact14: That non-identifiableness triggers that both that non-totalisticness and that dissemination occurs. fact15: If that dissemination does not happens this fuse does not happens.

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

This kiboshing facet does not happens.

¬{GS}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this trapping Geastraceae does not occurs that identifiableness does not occurs. fact2: That the shrinking happens does not hold. fact3: That this trapping Geastraceae does not occurs hold if this marginalising scholia but notthe moon happens. fact4: That the piddlinging Tasso occurs results in that the piddlinging Tasso but notthe flexing happens. fact5: If that ethnographicness does not occurs both this nonresonantness and this circularisation happens. fact6: That this Palladianness does not happens brings about that that autogamousness does not occurs or this rigging does not happens or both. fact7: That ethnographicness does not happens if the fact that this fuse happens is correct. fact8: This kiboshing facet does not happens if this rigging does not happens. fact9: This rigging does not occurs if the fact that the fact that this Palladianness and/or that non-autogamousness occurs hold is false. fact10: If that autogamousness happens that autogamousness and that non-nonresonantness happens. fact11: The fact that if both that non-totalisticness and that dissemination happens then this fuse happens is right. fact12: This rigging and that autogamousness happens. fact13: The fact that this circularisation and that non-ethnographicness happens is incorrect if this fuse does not occurs. fact14: That non-identifiableness triggers that both that non-totalisticness and that dissemination occurs. fact15: If that dissemination does not happens this fuse does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This nonresonantness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact12 -> int1: That autogamousness happens.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: That autogamousness occurs and this nonresonantness does not happens.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This stockcar is not Jesuitical.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: The fact that that that libber is not uncontaminating and enunciates hold is not true. fact2: Some person is not Jesuitical if it is not a shame but a name. fact3: Some man that does not enunciate is infelicitous and is popliteal. fact4: If that libber hedges Laughton this quandong absents. fact5: If that libber is heteroecious then it hedges Laughton. fact6: Something is heteroecious if that is infelicitous. fact7: If this stockcar does not absent that is not a shame and is a name. fact8: That libber does not enunciate if the fact that it is not uncontaminating and it enunciate does not hold. fact9: This stockcar does not absent.

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

This stockcar is Jesuitical.

{B}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that that libber is not uncontaminating and enunciates hold is not true. fact2: Some person is not Jesuitical if it is not a shame but a name. fact3: Some man that does not enunciate is infelicitous and is popliteal. fact4: If that libber hedges Laughton this quandong absents. fact5: If that libber is heteroecious then it hedges Laughton. fact6: Something is heteroecious if that is infelicitous. fact7: If this stockcar does not absent that is not a shame and is a name. fact8: That libber does not enunciate if the fact that it is not uncontaminating and it enunciate does not hold. fact9: This stockcar does not absent. ; $hypothesis$ = This stockcar is not Jesuitical. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: If this stockcar is both not a shame and a name then this stockcar is not Jesuitical.; fact7 & fact9 -> int2: This stockcar is not a shame but it is a name.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that both this flooding and that boomeranging happens does not hold is not false.

¬({A} & {B})

fact1: If this crystaliseding crowd does not occurs then notthis mission but this overpayment happens. fact2: That this mistrial and this non-circulativeness occurs is wrong if this flooding does not occurs. fact3: If this mission does not occurs then that notthis Timorese but that boomeranging happens is wrong. fact4: That that boomeranging does not happens is prevented by that notthe tiling Urochorda but that raying occurs. fact5: This overpayment occurs and that sterileness occurs if the fact that this honouring stocked does not happens is true. fact6: If this Timorese does not occurs the fact that both this flooding and that boomeranging happens does not hold. fact7: This mission does not occurs if this overpayment but notthis crystaliseding crowd happens. fact8: That this Timorese does not occurs is brought about by that notthis mission but this overpayment occurs. fact9: The tiling Urochorda does not happens but that raying occurs. fact10: If that this crystaliseding crowd and that sterileness occurs is false this crystaliseding crowd does not occurs. fact11: This flooding occurs if that this Timorese but notthis flooding happens is false. fact12: That accepting prevents that this honouring stocked occurs.

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

That that both this flooding and that boomeranging happens does not hold is not false.

¬({A} & {B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this crystaliseding crowd does not occurs then notthis mission but this overpayment happens. fact2: That this mistrial and this non-circulativeness occurs is wrong if this flooding does not occurs. fact3: If this mission does not occurs then that notthis Timorese but that boomeranging happens is wrong. fact4: That that boomeranging does not happens is prevented by that notthe tiling Urochorda but that raying occurs. fact5: This overpayment occurs and that sterileness occurs if the fact that this honouring stocked does not happens is true. fact6: If this Timorese does not occurs the fact that both this flooding and that boomeranging happens does not hold. fact7: This mission does not occurs if this overpayment but notthis crystaliseding crowd happens. fact8: That this Timorese does not occurs is brought about by that notthis mission but this overpayment occurs. fact9: The tiling Urochorda does not happens but that raying occurs. fact10: If that this crystaliseding crowd and that sterileness occurs is false this crystaliseding crowd does not occurs. fact11: This flooding occurs if that this Timorese but notthis flooding happens is false. fact12: That accepting prevents that this honouring stocked occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That that both this flooding and that boomeranging happens does not hold is not false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This grayback jests.

{B}{a}

fact1: If this grayback is not a Gehenna then it does not jest. fact2: This grayback is a kind of classical person that jests if that this thioguanine is not thoughtless is right. fact3: If that that chill is a lamedh and this is a Rhodophyta does not hold that chill does not jest. fact4: If this grayback is not a Fabiana that it does jest and it is a kind of a Marginocephalia is incorrect. fact5: This grayback is not a Croatian. fact6: This grayback is not a Peleus. fact7: The fact that the fact that this grayback is a Gehenna and that thing sanctions is false if this grayback is not classical is right. fact8: This grayback does not jest if that this grayback is a Gehenna and sanctions is wrong. fact9: This grayback is non-organicistic. fact10: If this thioguanine is not a cerebration then the fact that this grayback is not thoughtless and does not oppress Sertularia is correct. fact11: If that this grayback is a Phasmatodea and it conceives sugared does not hold this grayback is not classical.

fact1: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: ¬{C}{b} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact3: ¬({IA}{dk} & {BG}{dk}) -> ¬{B}{dk} fact4: ¬{EM}{a} -> ¬({B}{a} & {FL}{a}) fact5: ¬{N}{a} fact6: ¬{AE}{a} fact7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact8: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact9: ¬{CA}{a} fact10: ¬{E}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact11: ¬({JA}{a} & {FG}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a}

The Actifed is not classical.

¬{A}{dd}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this grayback is not a Gehenna then it does not jest. fact2: This grayback is a kind of classical person that jests if that this thioguanine is not thoughtless is right. fact3: If that that chill is a lamedh and this is a Rhodophyta does not hold that chill does not jest. fact4: If this grayback is not a Fabiana that it does jest and it is a kind of a Marginocephalia is incorrect. fact5: This grayback is not a Croatian. fact6: This grayback is not a Peleus. fact7: The fact that the fact that this grayback is a Gehenna and that thing sanctions is false if this grayback is not classical is right. fact8: This grayback does not jest if that this grayback is a Gehenna and sanctions is wrong. fact9: This grayback is non-organicistic. fact10: If this thioguanine is not a cerebration then the fact that this grayback is not thoughtless and does not oppress Sertularia is correct. fact11: If that this grayback is a Phasmatodea and it conceives sugared does not hold this grayback is not classical. ; $hypothesis$ = This grayback jests. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Either this tristearin is a Stalinist or it packages Odin or both.

({D}{a} v {C}{a})

fact1: This tristearin vitriols megrim and wonders Evans. fact2: This tristearin vitriols megrim. fact3: If something wonders Evans then that thing packages Odin.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This tristearin vitriols megrim and wonders Evans. fact2: This tristearin vitriols megrim. fact3: If something wonders Evans then that thing packages Odin. ; $hypothesis$ = Either this tristearin is a Stalinist or it packages Odin or both. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: This tristearin wonders Evans.; fact3 -> int2: The fact that if this tristearin wonders Evans this tristearin packages Odin is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That this tristearin packages Odin is right.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This plasm is not an equal.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This plasm is coldhearted. fact2: This plasm is implacable and it is coldhearted. fact3: This plasm is a solidity and the thing is coldhearted. fact4: This plasm blacklists Laurus and caters. fact5: This plasm is both a vertebrate and a Aquitania. fact6: This plasm abuts and it Balances Attila. fact7: If somebody is not insubstantial then the fact that it is a kind of heliac one that is coldhearted is wrong. fact8: If something that does not blacklist Laurus tantalizes Ufa then the fact that that is not insubstantial is not incorrect. fact9: Some person thrills Jatropha if it is coldhearted. fact10: The guama dashes and she/he is an equal. fact11: This bogmat is coldhearted. fact12: That the Chiluba is an equal is not wrong. fact13: Edward is coldhearted and that one is pharmacologic. fact14: This plasm is unobjectionable. fact15: This cosmonaut is both an equal and a Anapsida. fact16: Some person incurvates Amaranthaceae and she/he is an equal if she/he is not heliac. fact17: That the tunicate is coldhearted hold. fact18: If the fact that some person is heliac and this one is coldhearted does not hold then this one is not a kind of an equal.

fact1: {B}{a} fact2: ({FG}{a} & {B}{a}) fact3: ({P}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: ({F}{a} & {HC}{a}) fact5: ({AH}{a} & {HJ}{a}) fact6: ({AB}{a} & {JH}{a}) fact7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) fact8: (x): (¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact9: (x): {B}x -> {GK}x fact10: ({AK}{fg} & {A}{fg}) fact11: {B}{hs} fact12: {A}{cm} fact13: ({B}{be} & {DO}{be}) fact14: {FJ}{a} fact15: ({A}{al} & {BK}{al}) fact16: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({FE}x & {A}x) fact17: {B}{eh} fact18: (x): ¬({C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x

This plasm is not an equal.

¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This plasm is coldhearted. fact2: This plasm is implacable and it is coldhearted. fact3: This plasm is a solidity and the thing is coldhearted. fact4: This plasm blacklists Laurus and caters. fact5: This plasm is both a vertebrate and a Aquitania. fact6: This plasm abuts and it Balances Attila. fact7: If somebody is not insubstantial then the fact that it is a kind of heliac one that is coldhearted is wrong. fact8: If something that does not blacklist Laurus tantalizes Ufa then the fact that that is not insubstantial is not incorrect. fact9: Some person thrills Jatropha if it is coldhearted. fact10: The guama dashes and she/he is an equal. fact11: This bogmat is coldhearted. fact12: That the Chiluba is an equal is not wrong. fact13: Edward is coldhearted and that one is pharmacologic. fact14: This plasm is unobjectionable. fact15: This cosmonaut is both an equal and a Anapsida. fact16: Some person incurvates Amaranthaceae and she/he is an equal if she/he is not heliac. fact17: That the tunicate is coldhearted hold. fact18: If the fact that some person is heliac and this one is coldhearted does not hold then this one is not a kind of an equal. ; $hypothesis$ = This plasm is not an equal. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That passementerie is romanticistic.

{B}{b}

fact1: If that axletree is not dysphoric but he/she is earthy then the fact that that passementerie is not non-romanticistic is right. fact2: That axletree is not romanticistic and is not earthy. fact3: The fact that that passementerie is dysphoric is correct. fact4: That axletree is not earthy. fact5: A Nemea is not a coccidiosis but a timidity. fact6: If that axletree is not a kind of a Newcastle then it is auditory and is a kind of a Nemea. fact7: The fact that that axletree is not non-dysphoric if that passementerie is non-romanticistic thing that is not a coccidiosis is correct. fact8: That axletree is not earthy if it is not a coccidiosis. fact9: If that axletree is not a coccidiosis that axletree is not dysphoric and is not earthy. fact10: That axletree is not earthy and this thing is not romanticistic. fact11: That axletree is not a Newcastle if the fact that this lavender is a jingling but this is not a Newcastle is incorrect. fact12: If that axletree is both not dysphoric and not earthy that passementerie is romanticistic. fact13: That axletree is not a coccidiosis.

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

That that passementerie is romanticistic is wrong.

¬{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that axletree is not dysphoric but he/she is earthy then the fact that that passementerie is not non-romanticistic is right. fact2: That axletree is not romanticistic and is not earthy. fact3: The fact that that passementerie is dysphoric is correct. fact4: That axletree is not earthy. fact5: A Nemea is not a coccidiosis but a timidity. fact6: If that axletree is not a kind of a Newcastle then it is auditory and is a kind of a Nemea. fact7: The fact that that axletree is not non-dysphoric if that passementerie is non-romanticistic thing that is not a coccidiosis is correct. fact8: That axletree is not earthy if it is not a coccidiosis. fact9: If that axletree is not a coccidiosis that axletree is not dysphoric and is not earthy. fact10: That axletree is not earthy and this thing is not romanticistic. fact11: That axletree is not a Newcastle if the fact that this lavender is a jingling but this is not a Newcastle is incorrect. fact12: If that axletree is both not dysphoric and not earthy that passementerie is romanticistic. fact13: That axletree is not a coccidiosis. ; $hypothesis$ = That passementerie is romanticistic. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact13 -> int1: That axletree is not dysphoric and it is not earthy.; int1 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this heckle can nottillate Pinnotheres is true.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: If that Alina is not a kind of a Gazella is wrong then the thing does not lean and is expiative. fact2: This heckle is totipotent and it leans. fact3: If this heckle leans that this heckle cantillates Pinnotheres hold. fact4: If this perchlorate cantillate Pinnotheres then this perchlorate is a glomerulonephritis. fact5: That that sambur is not a kind of a feebleness but this is stenographic is not true. fact6: Every man firebombs Poitier and is a Gazella. fact7: If the fact that this nonperson is a kind of non-totipotent one that cantillates Pinnotheres does not hold then this heckle can nottillates Pinnotheres. fact8: That this heckle puzzles Aristarchus is true if it firebombs Poitier. fact9: This heckle is totipotent. fact10: The fact that this heckle does unstaple polygamy is correct if this nonperson does not lean and/or it does not unstaple polygamy. fact11: If Alina is acetic Alina is not stenographic but non-expiative. fact12: The acrylate is promissory and cantillate Pinnotheres. fact13: Some man does not lean or does not unstaple polygamy or both if that person is not totipotent. fact14: This heckle is a kind of a Capromyidae. fact15: If that that sambur is not a feebleness but this is stenographic is wrong then that sambur is not stenographic. fact16: This nonperson is non-totipotent and it can nottillate Pinnotheres if Alina is not expiative. fact17: The fact that this heckle is a kind of a Alcibiades hold if it does lean. fact18: The fact that Alina is a Gazella is true if the longan is a Gazella.

fact1: {E}{c} -> (¬{B}{c} & {D}{c}) fact2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact3: {B}{a} -> {C}{a} fact4: {C}{fb} -> {AU}{fb} fact5: ¬(¬{H}{e} & {F}{e}) fact6: (x): ({FL}x & {E}x) fact7: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact8: {FL}{a} -> {ER}{a} fact9: {A}{a} fact10: (¬{B}{b} v ¬{FA}{b}) -> {FA}{a} fact11: {G}{c} -> (¬{F}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) fact12: ({BA}{di} & {C}{di}) fact13: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}x v ¬{FA}x) fact14: {HQ}{a} fact15: ¬(¬{H}{e} & {F}{e}) -> ¬{F}{e} fact16: ¬{D}{c} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact17: {B}{a} -> {GA}{a} fact18: {E}{d} -> {E}{c}

That this heckle can nottillate Pinnotheres is true.

¬{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that Alina is not a kind of a Gazella is wrong then the thing does not lean and is expiative. fact2: This heckle is totipotent and it leans. fact3: If this heckle leans that this heckle cantillates Pinnotheres hold. fact4: If this perchlorate cantillate Pinnotheres then this perchlorate is a glomerulonephritis. fact5: That that sambur is not a kind of a feebleness but this is stenographic is not true. fact6: Every man firebombs Poitier and is a Gazella. fact7: If the fact that this nonperson is a kind of non-totipotent one that cantillates Pinnotheres does not hold then this heckle can nottillates Pinnotheres. fact8: That this heckle puzzles Aristarchus is true if it firebombs Poitier. fact9: This heckle is totipotent. fact10: The fact that this heckle does unstaple polygamy is correct if this nonperson does not lean and/or it does not unstaple polygamy. fact11: If Alina is acetic Alina is not stenographic but non-expiative. fact12: The acrylate is promissory and cantillate Pinnotheres. fact13: Some man does not lean or does not unstaple polygamy or both if that person is not totipotent. fact14: This heckle is a kind of a Capromyidae. fact15: If that that sambur is not a feebleness but this is stenographic is wrong then that sambur is not stenographic. fact16: This nonperson is non-totipotent and it can nottillate Pinnotheres if Alina is not expiative. fact17: The fact that this heckle is a kind of a Alcibiades hold if it does lean. fact18: The fact that Alina is a Gazella is true if the longan is a Gazella. ; $hypothesis$ = That this heckle can nottillate Pinnotheres is true. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This heckle leans.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This xanthate is not a kind of an eroticism and does not befuddle Phocoena.

(¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c})

fact1: This Peacemaker does not befuddle Phocoena. fact2: This Peacemaker is non-sociobiological if this Peacemaker does not treat Radiigera and is not a Ollari. fact3: This xanthate is not a kind of an eroticism. fact4: If Rodriguez is not an eroticism this xanthate is not a malfunctioning and does not befuddle Phocoena. fact5: Someone is not a kind of a malfunctioning if the fact that she is a kind of an eroticism that is a malfunctioning does not hold. fact6: Someone that is not staphylococcal is not an acre and not a malfunctioning. fact7: If Rodriguez is a malfunctioning this Peacemaker is not staphylococcal. fact8: If Rodriguez does not befuddle Phocoena then this xanthate is not an eroticism and it is not an acre. fact9: If this xanthate either is an eroticism or is staphylococcal or both then Rodriguez is not an acre. fact10: If someone is not sociobiological then that the one does not befuddle Phocoena is not false. fact11: This xanthate is not an eroticism if this Peacemaker is not staphylococcal. fact12: If this Peacemaker is not staphylococcal then this xanthate is not an eroticism and does not befuddle Phocoena. fact13: If this Peacemaker does not befuddle Phocoena then the fact that Rodriguez is an eroticism and is a malfunctioning does not hold. fact14: If Rodriguez is an acre and/or a malfunctioning then this Peacemaker is not staphylococcal. fact15: Rodriguez is not a malfunctioning and is not a kind of an eroticism if this xanthate does not befuddle Phocoena. fact16: That this xanthate is not an eroticism and does not befuddle Phocoena does not hold if Rodriguez is not an acre.

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

Rodriguez is staphylococcal.

{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Peacemaker does not befuddle Phocoena. fact2: This Peacemaker is non-sociobiological if this Peacemaker does not treat Radiigera and is not a Ollari. fact3: This xanthate is not a kind of an eroticism. fact4: If Rodriguez is not an eroticism this xanthate is not a malfunctioning and does not befuddle Phocoena. fact5: Someone is not a kind of a malfunctioning if the fact that she is a kind of an eroticism that is a malfunctioning does not hold. fact6: Someone that is not staphylococcal is not an acre and not a malfunctioning. fact7: If Rodriguez is a malfunctioning this Peacemaker is not staphylococcal. fact8: If Rodriguez does not befuddle Phocoena then this xanthate is not an eroticism and it is not an acre. fact9: If this xanthate either is an eroticism or is staphylococcal or both then Rodriguez is not an acre. fact10: If someone is not sociobiological then that the one does not befuddle Phocoena is not false. fact11: This xanthate is not an eroticism if this Peacemaker is not staphylococcal. fact12: If this Peacemaker is not staphylococcal then this xanthate is not an eroticism and does not befuddle Phocoena. fact13: If this Peacemaker does not befuddle Phocoena then the fact that Rodriguez is an eroticism and is a malfunctioning does not hold. fact14: If Rodriguez is an acre and/or a malfunctioning then this Peacemaker is not staphylococcal. fact15: Rodriguez is not a malfunctioning and is not a kind of an eroticism if this xanthate does not befuddle Phocoena. fact16: That this xanthate is not an eroticism and does not befuddle Phocoena does not hold if Rodriguez is not an acre. ; $hypothesis$ = This xanthate is not a kind of an eroticism and does not befuddle Phocoena. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that both that parading and this nominal happens is incorrect.

¬({A} & {C})

fact1: That that tape does not happens results in that that defence does not happens and that cesarianness occurs. fact2: The Salvadoranness occurs and this Shavian happens. fact3: This non-widebandness is caused by that this innocuousness does not occurs and/or that that defence does not happens. fact4: That advancement does not occurs. fact5: That this nominal does not happens is prevented by that notthat shredding azymia but that widebandness occurs. fact6: That that shredding azymia occurs and that advancement does not happens is triggered by this non-widebandness. fact7: The refutation happens. fact8: That parading occurs and that advancement does not occurs. fact9: This airworthiness does not happens and this Trojan happens. fact10: That pulverisation happens and the riblessness does not occurs. fact11: Notthat shredding azymia but that widebandness happens. fact12: Both this pediatricness and that copularness occurs. fact13: That Waving Dravidic occurs. fact14: The maelstrom happens. fact15: The creole happens but that booking subgenus does not occurs. fact16: That bastardization occurs. fact17: That numbering does not happens but that Waving Dravidic happens. fact18: Notthe chanting but the coarsening virility occurs. fact19: That widebandness occurs.

fact1: ¬{I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) fact2: ({HS} & {HD}) fact3: (¬{F} v ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} fact4: ¬{B} fact5: (¬{D} & {E}) -> {C} fact6: ¬{E} -> ({D} & ¬{B}) fact7: {HB} fact8: ({A} & ¬{B}) fact9: (¬{DD} & {CT}) fact10: ({EM} & ¬{CR}) fact11: (¬{D} & {E}) fact12: ({HU} & {AT}) fact13: {BA} fact14: {DS} fact15: ({CD} & ¬{CO}) fact16: {BF} fact17: (¬{AK} & {BA}) fact18: (¬{FF} & {IQ}) fact19: {E}

The fact that both that parading and this nominal happens is incorrect.

¬({A} & {C})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that tape does not happens results in that that defence does not happens and that cesarianness occurs. fact2: The Salvadoranness occurs and this Shavian happens. fact3: This non-widebandness is caused by that this innocuousness does not occurs and/or that that defence does not happens. fact4: That advancement does not occurs. fact5: That this nominal does not happens is prevented by that notthat shredding azymia but that widebandness occurs. fact6: That that shredding azymia occurs and that advancement does not happens is triggered by this non-widebandness. fact7: The refutation happens. fact8: That parading occurs and that advancement does not occurs. fact9: This airworthiness does not happens and this Trojan happens. fact10: That pulverisation happens and the riblessness does not occurs. fact11: Notthat shredding azymia but that widebandness happens. fact12: Both this pediatricness and that copularness occurs. fact13: That Waving Dravidic occurs. fact14: The maelstrom happens. fact15: The creole happens but that booking subgenus does not occurs. fact16: That bastardization occurs. fact17: That numbering does not happens but that Waving Dravidic happens. fact18: Notthe chanting but the coarsening virility occurs. fact19: That widebandness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that both that parading and this nominal happens is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: That parading happens.; fact5 & fact11 -> int2: This nominal happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This trailhead is not a Mali and not staphylococcal.

(¬{D}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

fact1: That boatbill is a hydrocephalus if that the fact that this thing is a kind of a farad or is not a salient or both is right does not hold. fact2: Lara is staphylococcal and the one is Donnian. fact3: That Lara is sepulchral and is not Donnian does not hold if it is a XXII. fact4: This trailhead is not a kind of a Mali if Lara is staphylococcal. fact5: That someone is staphylococcal and it is sepulchral is wrong if it is not Donnian. fact6: This trailhead is not a Mali and it is not Donnian if Lara is Donnian. fact7: This trailhead is not Donnian if Lara is a Mali. fact8: If that that boatbill is a kind of staphylococcal one that is sepulchral is not true then this trailhead is not staphylococcal. fact9: Lara is neurobiological and it is vacuolate. fact10: This trailhead is not Donnian if the fact that Lara is sepulchral but it is not Donnian is wrong. fact11: This trailhead is both not a Mali and not staphylococcal if Lara is staphylococcal. fact12: If that boatbill does not dandle insularism the fact that that boatbill is a farad and/or this thing is not a salient does not hold. fact13: This trailhead is not a Mali and the thing is non-Donnian. fact14: That boatbill does not dandle insularism and is non-superhuman.

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

Lara is a Mali.

{D}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That boatbill is a hydrocephalus if that the fact that this thing is a kind of a farad or is not a salient or both is right does not hold. fact2: Lara is staphylococcal and the one is Donnian. fact3: That Lara is sepulchral and is not Donnian does not hold if it is a XXII. fact4: This trailhead is not a kind of a Mali if Lara is staphylococcal. fact5: That someone is staphylococcal and it is sepulchral is wrong if it is not Donnian. fact6: This trailhead is not a Mali and it is not Donnian if Lara is Donnian. fact7: This trailhead is not Donnian if Lara is a Mali. fact8: If that that boatbill is a kind of staphylococcal one that is sepulchral is not true then this trailhead is not staphylococcal. fact9: Lara is neurobiological and it is vacuolate. fact10: This trailhead is not Donnian if the fact that Lara is sepulchral but it is not Donnian is wrong. fact11: This trailhead is both not a Mali and not staphylococcal if Lara is staphylococcal. fact12: If that boatbill does not dandle insularism the fact that that boatbill is a farad and/or this thing is not a salient does not hold. fact13: This trailhead is not a Mali and the thing is non-Donnian. fact14: That boatbill does not dandle insularism and is non-superhuman. ; $hypothesis$ = This trailhead is not a Mali and not staphylococcal. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: Lara is staphylococcal.; int1 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Everything rets jerkiness.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Everybody detaches. fact2: Every man is a gladness. fact3: Everything is a kind of a Ginkgophytina. fact4: Everyone deepens charisma. fact5: Every person abrades. fact6: Every person is providential. fact7: Every person is a kind of a Darsana. fact8: If something rets jerkiness it restrains Hygrotrama. fact9: Everybody is scurfy. fact10: Everything rets jerkiness. fact11: Every man is a kind of a caudate.

fact1: (x): {D}x fact2: (x): {IL}x fact3: (x): {EP}x fact4: (x): {BR}x fact5: (x): {GM}x fact6: (x): {U}x fact7: (x): {FH}x fact8: (x): {A}x -> {IG}x fact9: (x): {DB}x fact10: (x): {A}x fact11: (x): {T}x

Everyone restrains Hygrotrama.

(x): {IG}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everybody detaches. fact2: Every man is a gladness. fact3: Everything is a kind of a Ginkgophytina. fact4: Everyone deepens charisma. fact5: Every person abrades. fact6: Every person is providential. fact7: Every person is a kind of a Darsana. fact8: If something rets jerkiness it restrains Hygrotrama. fact9: Everybody is scurfy. fact10: Everything rets jerkiness. fact11: Every man is a kind of a caudate. ; $hypothesis$ = Everything rets jerkiness. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That tangling but notthat reordering MacArthur occurs.

({B} & ¬{A})

fact1: That reordering MacArthur does not happens. fact2: That this saying ASEAN does not happens leads to that notthe spelling but that dysplasticness occurs. fact3: If the spelling does not occurs then that concentricalness happens and the atmosphericalness happens. fact4: That tangling occurs if the lysogenicness does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that the lysogenicness occurs but that auscultation does not happens is wrong that tangling occurs. fact6: The fact that the lysogenicness but notthat auscultation happens is incorrect. fact7: The fact that that invitationalness does not happens is not false if that notthat speckle but that invitationalness occurs is wrong. fact8: The fact that that tangling occurs but that reordering MacArthur does not happens does not hold if that invitationalness does not occurs. fact9: The fact that the fact that notthat speckle but that invitationalness happens is incorrect is right if the fact that that concentricalness happens hold. fact10: That invitationalness and that parentalness occurs if that that speckle happens does not hold.

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

That parentalness and this non-biogeneticness occurs.

({BA} & ¬{DM})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That reordering MacArthur does not happens. fact2: That this saying ASEAN does not happens leads to that notthe spelling but that dysplasticness occurs. fact3: If the spelling does not occurs then that concentricalness happens and the atmosphericalness happens. fact4: That tangling occurs if the lysogenicness does not occurs. fact5: If the fact that the lysogenicness occurs but that auscultation does not happens is wrong that tangling occurs. fact6: The fact that the lysogenicness but notthat auscultation happens is incorrect. fact7: The fact that that invitationalness does not happens is not false if that notthat speckle but that invitationalness occurs is wrong. fact8: The fact that that tangling occurs but that reordering MacArthur does not happens does not hold if that invitationalness does not occurs. fact9: The fact that the fact that notthat speckle but that invitationalness happens is incorrect is right if the fact that that concentricalness happens hold. fact10: That invitationalness and that parentalness occurs if that that speckle happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That tangling but notthat reordering MacArthur occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact6 -> int1: That tangling occurs.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That peekaboo happens.

{D}

fact1: That the timing happens is caused by that this including happens. fact2: If that Nemesis occurs that that idiomaticness but notthis micrometry happens is wrong. fact3: This sermonizing happens. fact4: That blastemalness occurs. fact5: If that unreliableness happens then that Nemesis happens. fact6: If that decriminalisation happens that this sacredness happens hold. fact7: This tarsalness does not happens. fact8: This desacralizing Atherinidae happens and this sacredness occurs. fact9: The bloomers happens. fact10: That both that spotting zig and the consecrateness happens yields that non-polyvalentness. fact11: This micrometry occurs and that Nemesis occurs. fact12: That peekaboo does not occurs if both that idiomaticness and this micrometry happens. fact13: If this sermonizing occurs then that idiomaticness occurs. fact14: That unreliableness occurs if that the chafing Burke does not happens but that baptism occurs is incorrect. fact15: That the backhanding happens is correct.

fact1: {CD} -> {EB} fact2: {E} -> ¬({B} & ¬{C}) fact3: {A} fact4: {AN} fact5: {F} -> {E} fact6: {JK} -> {FN} fact7: ¬{FB} fact8: ({HK} & {FN}) fact9: {L} fact10: ({AI} & {DE}) -> ¬{CE} fact11: ({C} & {E}) fact12: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact13: {A} -> {B} fact14: ¬(¬{H} & {G}) -> {F} fact15: {BS}

That peekaboo happens.

{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the timing happens is caused by that this including happens. fact2: If that Nemesis occurs that that idiomaticness but notthis micrometry happens is wrong. fact3: This sermonizing happens. fact4: That blastemalness occurs. fact5: If that unreliableness happens then that Nemesis happens. fact6: If that decriminalisation happens that this sacredness happens hold. fact7: This tarsalness does not happens. fact8: This desacralizing Atherinidae happens and this sacredness occurs. fact9: The bloomers happens. fact10: That both that spotting zig and the consecrateness happens yields that non-polyvalentness. fact11: This micrometry occurs and that Nemesis occurs. fact12: That peekaboo does not occurs if both that idiomaticness and this micrometry happens. fact13: If this sermonizing occurs then that idiomaticness occurs. fact14: That unreliableness occurs if that the chafing Burke does not happens but that baptism occurs is incorrect. fact15: That the backhanding happens is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That peekaboo happens. ; $proof$ =

fact13 & fact3 -> int1: That idiomaticness happens.; fact11 -> int2: This micrometry happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That idiomaticness and this micrometry occurs.; int3 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That ulceration is a jaggedness.

{D}{b}

fact1: If something does not pipe conspicuousness then the fact that that thing is a geographics and breathless is incorrect. fact2: Someone chastens Whitsuntide or is a albuminuria or both if the one is not unkept. fact3: The fact that something hydrogenates landed but this thing is not a Belgrade is false if this thing calls morsel. fact4: If the fact that that adherent is both a geographics and breathless is wrong then that ulceration is not a jaggedness. fact5: A Latvian thing calls morsel. fact6: That adherent does not pipe conspicuousness if the fact that that ulceration is both breathless and a geographics is incorrect. fact7: That adherent is a myelomeningocele if that ulceration is a albuminuria. fact8: That if that ulceration is not asexual then that ulceration concludes Alborg and/or this is not unkept is true. fact9: If something concludes Alborg and/or it is not unkept then it is not unkept. fact10: If the fact that that adherent lets Kazan and is a glaring does not hold that adherent does not pipe conspicuousness. fact11: That ulceration is not asexual. fact12: Somebody is not a geographics if the fact that she hydrogenates landed and is not a Belgrade does not hold. fact13: This batik is not non-Latvian if that adherent is a myelomeningocele. fact14: If that ulceration chastens Whitsuntide then that adherent is a myelomeningocele. fact15: Some man that does not pipe conspicuousness and/or is not breathless is not a jaggedness. fact16: If some person is not a geographics it does not pipe conspicuousness or is breaperson or both.

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

This batik is not a jaggedness.

¬{D}{he}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If something does not pipe conspicuousness then the fact that that thing is a geographics and breathless is incorrect. fact2: Someone chastens Whitsuntide or is a albuminuria or both if the one is not unkept. fact3: The fact that something hydrogenates landed but this thing is not a Belgrade is false if this thing calls morsel. fact4: If the fact that that adherent is both a geographics and breathless is wrong then that ulceration is not a jaggedness. fact5: A Latvian thing calls morsel. fact6: That adherent does not pipe conspicuousness if the fact that that ulceration is both breathless and a geographics is incorrect. fact7: That adherent is a myelomeningocele if that ulceration is a albuminuria. fact8: That if that ulceration is not asexual then that ulceration concludes Alborg and/or this is not unkept is true. fact9: If something concludes Alborg and/or it is not unkept then it is not unkept. fact10: If the fact that that adherent lets Kazan and is a glaring does not hold that adherent does not pipe conspicuousness. fact11: That ulceration is not asexual. fact12: Somebody is not a geographics if the fact that she hydrogenates landed and is not a Belgrade does not hold. fact13: This batik is not non-Latvian if that adherent is a myelomeningocele. fact14: If that ulceration chastens Whitsuntide then that adherent is a myelomeningocele. fact15: Some man that does not pipe conspicuousness and/or is not breathless is not a jaggedness. fact16: If some person is not a geographics it does not pipe conspicuousness or is breaperson or both. ; $hypothesis$ = That ulceration is a jaggedness. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This metabolizing Cnidaria occurs.

{B}

fact1: The utilising Cincinnatus occurs. fact2: This councillorship and that Latvian happens if this implantation does not happens. fact3: The pituitariness occurs if the fact that this metabolizing Cnidaria does not happens and the pituitariness does not occurs does not hold. fact4: The worthiness happens and that unreproducibleness happens. fact5: The hurting happens. fact6: That this metabolizing Cnidaria does not happens and the pituitariness does not happens is not true if that Latvian occurs. fact7: The fact that the slash occurs hold. fact8: That that Latvian but notthis councillorship happens prevents that this metabolizing Cnidaria happens. fact9: The fact that this consecrating happens is true. fact10: The Christianisation happens. fact11: The fighting occurs. fact12: This acaulescentness occurs. fact13: Both this incertainness and the featherbedding occurs. fact14: The fact that the delaying occurs and the counterblast happens is right. fact15: The spacialness occurs and that rascality occurs. fact16: That detraction happens. fact17: The parching Shiva happens. fact18: Both this incertainness and this levanter occurs. fact19: That gonioscopy occurs.

fact1: {GK} fact2: ¬{D} -> ({C} & {A}) fact3: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{CN}) -> {CN} fact4: ({AC} & {FB}) fact5: {EM} fact6: {A} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{CN}) fact7: {GP} fact8: ({A} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{B} fact9: {GU} fact10: {GS} fact11: {DI} fact12: {GB} fact13: ({BU} & {GG}) fact14: ({AQ} & {IR}) fact15: ({BB} & {DC}) fact16: {JI} fact17: {FI} fact18: ({BU} & {FS}) fact19: {HO}

This metabolizing Cnidaria does not happens.

¬{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The utilising Cincinnatus occurs. fact2: This councillorship and that Latvian happens if this implantation does not happens. fact3: The pituitariness occurs if the fact that this metabolizing Cnidaria does not happens and the pituitariness does not occurs does not hold. fact4: The worthiness happens and that unreproducibleness happens. fact5: The hurting happens. fact6: That this metabolizing Cnidaria does not happens and the pituitariness does not happens is not true if that Latvian occurs. fact7: The fact that the slash occurs hold. fact8: That that Latvian but notthis councillorship happens prevents that this metabolizing Cnidaria happens. fact9: The fact that this consecrating happens is true. fact10: The Christianisation happens. fact11: The fighting occurs. fact12: This acaulescentness occurs. fact13: Both this incertainness and the featherbedding occurs. fact14: The fact that the delaying occurs and the counterblast happens is right. fact15: The spacialness occurs and that rascality occurs. fact16: That detraction happens. fact17: The parching Shiva happens. fact18: Both this incertainness and this levanter occurs. fact19: That gonioscopy occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This metabolizing Cnidaria occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This sugarcane is not a kind of a conspectus and engrosses.

(¬{C}{a} & {A}{a})

fact1: That this sugarcane is not a kind of a conspectus but it is a marauding is false. fact2: That this sugarcane is both not a Rubia and conscientious does not hold. fact3: The fact that this sugarcane westernises Lambert and that does engross is incorrect. fact4: That this sugarcane is a Jasminum and it is plucky is false. fact5: If this sugarcane does not unbraced Thuringia then this sugarcane is not conscientious. fact6: If that the forepaw does confirm Cimicidae and this thing is a kind of a Tragopogon is wrong the forepaw does not unbraced Thuringia. fact7: That this sugarcane is a conspectus and it does engross is wrong. fact8: The fact that this sugarcane does not exit egalite and twins livedo is false. fact9: That this sugarcane is not a kind of a conspectus and does engross is false if this sugarcane is not conscientious. fact10: That that this sugarcane unbraceds Thuringia and twins livedo is false hold. fact11: The fact that the pheasant is both not a glare and a Albigensianism does not hold if the pheasant is not a conspectus. fact12: That the bibliographer is a conspectus and a hyperadrenocorticism is wrong.

fact1: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {GF}{a}) fact2: ¬(¬{EI}{a} & {B}{a}) fact3: ¬({N}{a} & {A}{a}) fact4: ¬({BP}{a} & {CC}{a}) fact5: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact6: ¬({GR}{jb} & {ER}{jb}) -> ¬{AA}{jb} fact7: ¬({C}{a} & {A}{a}) fact8: ¬(¬{HJ}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact9: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) fact10: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact11: ¬{C}{eh} -> ¬(¬{EC}{eh} & {CQ}{eh}) fact12: ¬({C}{dn} & {DA}{dn})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this sugarcane is not a kind of a conspectus but it is a marauding is false. fact2: That this sugarcane is both not a Rubia and conscientious does not hold. fact3: The fact that this sugarcane westernises Lambert and that does engross is incorrect. fact4: That this sugarcane is a Jasminum and it is plucky is false. fact5: If this sugarcane does not unbraced Thuringia then this sugarcane is not conscientious. fact6: If that the forepaw does confirm Cimicidae and this thing is a kind of a Tragopogon is wrong the forepaw does not unbraced Thuringia. fact7: That this sugarcane is a conspectus and it does engross is wrong. fact8: The fact that this sugarcane does not exit egalite and twins livedo is false. fact9: That this sugarcane is not a kind of a conspectus and does engross is false if this sugarcane is not conscientious. fact10: That that this sugarcane unbraceds Thuringia and twins livedo is false hold. fact11: The fact that the pheasant is both not a glare and a Albigensianism does not hold if the pheasant is not a conspectus. fact12: That the bibliographer is a conspectus and a hyperadrenocorticism is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This sugarcane is not a kind of a conspectus and engrosses. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This Manzanilla is a kind of a Tocqueville.

{B}{a}

fact1: this WI paroles Manzanilla. fact2: If some person does not charm Joule then it is not a Tocqueville and does not parole WI. fact3: This Manzanilla paroles WI. fact4: The esker is a Tocqueville. fact5: Someone is a trait if he is a Tocqueville. fact6: If this Manzanilla paroles WI this Manzanilla is a Tocqueville.

fact1: {AA}{aa} fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact3: {A}{a} fact4: {B}{ft} fact5: (x): {B}x -> {FG}x fact6: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}

If that caracul is a Tocqueville then the fact that that caracul is a kind of a trait is right.

{B}{ah} -> {FG}{ah}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: this WI paroles Manzanilla. fact2: If some person does not charm Joule then it is not a Tocqueville and does not parole WI. fact3: This Manzanilla paroles WI. fact4: The esker is a Tocqueville. fact5: Someone is a trait if he is a Tocqueville. fact6: If this Manzanilla paroles WI this Manzanilla is a Tocqueville. ; $hypothesis$ = This Manzanilla is a kind of a Tocqueville. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That bum does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: If this squeaking occurs and that corruption occurs that building does not occurs. fact2: This impedance does not happens. fact3: That unshavedness happens. fact4: If that disfranchisement occurs and this impedance does not happens then this wettingness does not happens. fact5: That that unshavedness occurs leads to that that disfranchisement occurs and this impedance does not occurs. fact6: That altering Devonian happens if that bum happens. fact7: If this wettingness does not happens that bum does not occurs.

fact1: ({JI} & {DT}) -> ¬{HK} fact2: ¬{AB} fact3: {A} fact4: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact5: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact6: {C} -> {AF} fact7: ¬{B} -> ¬{C}

That altering Devonian but notthis lutealness occurs.

({AF} & ¬{JE})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this squeaking occurs and that corruption occurs that building does not occurs. fact2: This impedance does not happens. fact3: That unshavedness happens. fact4: If that disfranchisement occurs and this impedance does not happens then this wettingness does not happens. fact5: That that unshavedness occurs leads to that that disfranchisement occurs and this impedance does not occurs. fact6: That altering Devonian happens if that bum happens. fact7: If this wettingness does not happens that bum does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That bum does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact3 -> int1: That disfranchisement happens and this impedance does not happens.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: This wettingness does not happens.; int2 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That either this sweatsuit demolishes marriageability or this thing is not a flecked or both is wrong.

¬({C}{aa} v ¬{A}{aa})

fact1: The fact that this sweatsuit is not a kind of a prickle and that thing does not bespangle IDA does not hold. fact2: This sweatsuit is not unseasonable. fact3: The vat is not a kind of a flecked. fact4: That the transferase masculinises moderating or it is not a broken or both is incorrect if it does not upend hypercholesteremia. fact5: That some man is not biliary if that that it is not a prickle and does not bespangle IDA is not wrong does not hold is right.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact2: ¬{EU}{aa} fact3: ¬{A}{it} fact4: ¬{HA}{gn} -> ¬({HC}{gn} v ¬{GR}{gn}) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this sweatsuit is not a kind of a prickle and that thing does not bespangle IDA does not hold. fact2: This sweatsuit is not unseasonable. fact3: The vat is not a kind of a flecked. fact4: That the transferase masculinises moderating or it is not a broken or both is incorrect if it does not upend hypercholesteremia. fact5: That some man is not biliary if that that it is not a prickle and does not bespangle IDA is not wrong does not hold is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That either this sweatsuit demolishes marriageability or this thing is not a flecked or both is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that that this consumptive recapitulates foresightedness is not false.

{A}{a}

fact1: That tapeworm is not inferential. fact2: The sitar does not billow Dobrich. fact3: That that tapeworm is not a clamour and does billow Dobrich is incorrect. fact4: That tapeworm does not recapitulate foresightedness if that this consumptive does not recapitulate foresightedness but it billows Dobrich is wrong. fact5: This consumptive is a kind of a clamour. fact6: The fact that this consumptive is a clamour if that tapeworm recapitulates foresightedness is true. fact7: This consumptive does not billow Dobrich if that tapeworm does not recapitulate foresightedness. fact8: That ropewalker recapitulates foresightedness. fact9: This consumptive is a kind of a paired. fact10: If the fact that that tapeworm is not a clamour and billows Dobrich is false then that ropewalker is not a clamour.

fact1: ¬{IE}{c} fact2: ¬{D}{hn} fact3: ¬(¬{B}{c} & {D}{c}) fact4: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{A}{c} fact5: {B}{a} fact6: {A}{c} -> {B}{a} fact7: ¬{A}{c} -> ¬{D}{a} fact8: {A}{b} fact9: {ES}{a} fact10: ¬(¬{B}{c} & {D}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That tapeworm is not inferential. fact2: The sitar does not billow Dobrich. fact3: That that tapeworm is not a clamour and does billow Dobrich is incorrect. fact4: That tapeworm does not recapitulate foresightedness if that this consumptive does not recapitulate foresightedness but it billows Dobrich is wrong. fact5: This consumptive is a kind of a clamour. fact6: The fact that this consumptive is a clamour if that tapeworm recapitulates foresightedness is true. fact7: This consumptive does not billow Dobrich if that tapeworm does not recapitulate foresightedness. fact8: That ropewalker recapitulates foresightedness. fact9: This consumptive is a kind of a paired. fact10: If the fact that that tapeworm is not a clamour and billows Dobrich is false then that ropewalker is not a clamour. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that this consumptive recapitulates foresightedness is not false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__