version
stringclasses 1
value | hypothesis
stringlengths 10
229
| hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
39
| facts
stringlengths 0
3.08k
| facts_formula
stringlengths 0
908
| proofs
sequencelengths 0
1
| proofs_formula
sequencelengths 0
1
| negative_hypothesis
stringlengths 10
203
⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
37
⌀ | negative_proofs
sequencelengths 0
1
| negative_original_tree_depth
int64 0
27
⌀ | original_tree_depth
int64 1
3
| depth
int64 0
3
⌀ | num_formula_distractors
int64 0
22
| num_translation_distractors
int64 0
0
| num_all_distractors
int64 0
22
| proof_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_proof_label
stringclasses 2
values | world_assump_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_world_assump_label
stringclasses 2
values | prompt_serial
stringlengths 76
3.25k
| proof_serial
stringlengths 11
798
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.3 | That some man is a kind of a ignobility and the one enchants England is not incorrect. | (Ex): ({C}x & {B}x) | fact1: The fact that this herbage is a ignobility is correct. fact2: The fact that this herbage enchants England is correct if this patchboard refreshes. | fact1: {C}{b} fact2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that this herbage is a ignobility is correct. fact2: The fact that this herbage enchants England is correct if this patchboard refreshes. ; $hypothesis$ = That some man is a kind of a ignobility and the one enchants England is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That auntie is not unbordered. | ¬{C}{c} | fact1: The fact that this soupspoon either melds Dipterocarpaceae or is a Jagganath or both is correct. fact2: If something is not a Placuna that thing is not unbordered. fact3: If this bacon is not non-Botswanan then that auntie is unbordered. fact4: This bacon is unbordered if that auntie is not non-Botswanan. fact5: That auntie is unbordered if this bacon is a kind of a Placuna. fact6: This bacon is a Placuna and/or she/he is Botswanan. | fact1: ({DA}{hk} v {GR}{hk}) fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}x fact3: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact4: {B}{c} -> {C}{a} fact5: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} fact6: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) | [
"fact6 & fact5 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 & fact5 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | That auntie is not unbordered. | ¬{C}{c} | [
"fact7 -> int1: If that auntie is not a Placuna then this thing is not unbordered.;"
] | 4 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that this soupspoon either melds Dipterocarpaceae or is a Jagganath or both is correct. fact2: If something is not a Placuna that thing is not unbordered. fact3: If this bacon is not non-Botswanan then that auntie is unbordered. fact4: This bacon is unbordered if that auntie is not non-Botswanan. fact5: That auntie is unbordered if this bacon is a kind of a Placuna. fact6: This bacon is a Placuna and/or she/he is Botswanan. ; $hypothesis$ = That auntie is not unbordered. ; $proof$ = | fact6 & fact5 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that this reshuffling does not occurs is true. | ¬{C} | fact1: If that acidimetry does not happens the fact that both that carbolatedness and this brachiopodousness occurs is not right. fact2: That this reshuffling does not happens is prevented by that whopping sophisticated. fact3: That whopping sophisticated does not occurs. fact4: The fact that this katharsis does not happens and/or this Bolshevik occurs does not hold. fact5: That that conceptualization does not occurs and/or this overcharging occurs is false. fact6: That notthat whopping sophisticated but that African occurs is not correct if that skinning marked happens. fact7: If the fact that either that conceptualization does not happens or this overcharging happens or both is incorrect then that skinning marked does not occurs. fact8: That whopping sophisticated does not occurs if that skinning marked does not occurs. fact9: If that carbolatedness does not occurs the fact that that skinning marked does not happens and that Liverpudlian does not happens is incorrect. fact10: That carbolatedness does not occurs if that that that carbolatedness happens and this brachiopodousness occurs is wrong is not incorrect. fact11: The reeling does not happens if that the circumventing does not occurs or this smuggling chiliad happens or both is wrong. fact12: That that skinning marked does not happens yields that that whopping sophisticated does not happens and this reshuffling does not happens. fact13: If this brachiopodousness does not occurs then that carbolatedness does not occurs and that unparentedness happens. fact14: That Liverpudlian does not occurs if the fact that both that Liverpudlian and that unparentedness occurs is incorrect. fact15: If that Liverpudlian does not occurs then that skinning marked and this reshuffling happens. fact16: The fact that either that explication does not occurs or that lustrum occurs or both is incorrect. fact17: If that explication happens this Doricness occurs and/or this juggling does not happens. fact18: That Afridoes not occurs if that that whopping sophisticated does not happens but that African occurs is wrong. fact19: This overcharging does not occurs. fact20: The archeologicness does not happens if that the unwoodedness does not happens or this quitting identity occurs or both is incorrect. fact21: If that carbolatedness does not occurs the fact that that Liverpudlian and that unparentedness happens is incorrect. | fact1: ¬{H} -> ¬({E} & {G}) fact2: {A} -> {C} fact3: ¬{A} fact4: ¬(¬{DQ} v {HO}) fact5: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) fact6: {B} -> ¬(¬{A} & {FA}) fact7: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact8: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} fact9: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{D}) fact10: ¬({E} & {G}) -> ¬{E} fact11: ¬(¬{BI} v {II}) -> ¬{DK} fact12: ¬{B} -> (¬{A} & ¬{C}) fact13: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & {F}) fact14: ¬({D} & {F}) -> ¬{D} fact15: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) fact16: ¬(¬{K} v {BB}) fact17: {K} -> ({J} v ¬{I}) fact18: ¬(¬{A} & {FA}) -> ¬{FA} fact19: ¬{AB} fact20: ¬(¬{BN} v {FF}) -> ¬{T} fact21: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {F}) | [
"fact7 & fact5 -> int1: That skinning marked does not occurs.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: That whopping sophisticated does not occurs and this reshuffling does not happens.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact7 & fact5 -> int1: ¬{B}; int1 & fact12 -> int2: (¬{A} & ¬{C}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That Afridoes not happens. | ¬{FA} | [] | 13 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that acidimetry does not happens the fact that both that carbolatedness and this brachiopodousness occurs is not right. fact2: That this reshuffling does not happens is prevented by that whopping sophisticated. fact3: That whopping sophisticated does not occurs. fact4: The fact that this katharsis does not happens and/or this Bolshevik occurs does not hold. fact5: That that conceptualization does not occurs and/or this overcharging occurs is false. fact6: That notthat whopping sophisticated but that African occurs is not correct if that skinning marked happens. fact7: If the fact that either that conceptualization does not happens or this overcharging happens or both is incorrect then that skinning marked does not occurs. fact8: That whopping sophisticated does not occurs if that skinning marked does not occurs. fact9: If that carbolatedness does not occurs the fact that that skinning marked does not happens and that Liverpudlian does not happens is incorrect. fact10: That carbolatedness does not occurs if that that that carbolatedness happens and this brachiopodousness occurs is wrong is not incorrect. fact11: The reeling does not happens if that the circumventing does not occurs or this smuggling chiliad happens or both is wrong. fact12: That that skinning marked does not happens yields that that whopping sophisticated does not happens and this reshuffling does not happens. fact13: If this brachiopodousness does not occurs then that carbolatedness does not occurs and that unparentedness happens. fact14: That Liverpudlian does not occurs if the fact that both that Liverpudlian and that unparentedness occurs is incorrect. fact15: If that Liverpudlian does not occurs then that skinning marked and this reshuffling happens. fact16: The fact that either that explication does not occurs or that lustrum occurs or both is incorrect. fact17: If that explication happens this Doricness occurs and/or this juggling does not happens. fact18: That Afridoes not occurs if that that whopping sophisticated does not happens but that African occurs is wrong. fact19: This overcharging does not occurs. fact20: The archeologicness does not happens if that the unwoodedness does not happens or this quitting identity occurs or both is incorrect. fact21: If that carbolatedness does not occurs the fact that that Liverpudlian and that unparentedness happens is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this reshuffling does not occurs is true. ; $proof$ = | fact7 & fact5 -> int1: That skinning marked does not occurs.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: That whopping sophisticated does not occurs and this reshuffling does not happens.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that that commando is a Xizang is right. | {C}{a} | fact1: If this threader does not cement Mysis but it is cachectic then the fact that that commando is a Xizang is true. fact2: Everything does not cement Mysis and that thing is cachectic. | fact1: (¬{A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> {C}{a} fact2: (x): (¬{A}x & {B}x) | [
"fact2 -> int1: This threader does not cement Mysis and is cachectic.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact2 -> int1: (¬{A}{aa} & {B}{aa}); int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: If this threader does not cement Mysis but it is cachectic then the fact that that commando is a Xizang is true. fact2: Everything does not cement Mysis and that thing is cachectic. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that commando is a Xizang is right. ; $proof$ = | fact2 -> int1: This threader does not cement Mysis and is cachectic.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This bigarade does hydrolyze. | {A}{a} | fact1: If some man does not castigate originalism this person is not a Caeciliadae and this person hydrolyzes. fact2: Something does not slight Austria and does not swinge moral if it does not fornicate. fact3: That copyist does not castigate originalism if the fact that this wisp concerns Marchantiales and is not a hint is wrong. fact4: This bigarade does not hydrolyze if that copyist is not a kind of a Caeciliadae and hydrolyze. fact5: If this Shearer does not slight Austria that this wisp concerns Marchantiales but the thing is not a hint is false. fact6: This bigarade hydrolyzes and is a Caeciliadae. | fact1: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) fact2: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) fact3: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact4: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact5: ¬{F}{d} -> ¬({E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) fact6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | [
"fact6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 -> hypothesis;"
] | This bigarade does not hydrolyze. | ¬{A}{a} | [
"fact11 -> int1: That copyist is not a kind of a Caeciliadae but it does hydrolyze if it does not castigate originalism.; fact10 -> int2: If that this Shearer does not fornicate hold this Shearer does not slight Austria and does not swinge moral.;"
] | 8 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If some man does not castigate originalism this person is not a Caeciliadae and this person hydrolyzes. fact2: Something does not slight Austria and does not swinge moral if it does not fornicate. fact3: That copyist does not castigate originalism if the fact that this wisp concerns Marchantiales and is not a hint is wrong. fact4: This bigarade does not hydrolyze if that copyist is not a kind of a Caeciliadae and hydrolyze. fact5: If this Shearer does not slight Austria that this wisp concerns Marchantiales but the thing is not a hint is false. fact6: This bigarade hydrolyzes and is a Caeciliadae. ; $hypothesis$ = This bigarade does hydrolyze. ; $proof$ = | fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That whey is not Andalusian. | ¬{D}{b} | fact1: This glaze is a sensitive. fact2: If this glaze is a kind of a sensitive then the fact that this glaze is a kind of a wheel is true. fact3: If this glaze uglifies Micrococcaceae that whey is not Andalusian. fact4: That whey does uglify Micrococcaceae if this thing is Andalusian. | fact1: {A}{a} fact2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact3: {C}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} fact4: {D}{b} -> {C}{b} | [
"fact2 & fact1 -> int1: This glaze is a wheel.; int1 -> int2: This glaze is a wheel or uglifies Micrococcaceae or both.;"
] | [
"fact2 & fact1 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 -> int2: ({B}{a} v {C}{a});"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $facts$ = fact1: This glaze is a sensitive. fact2: If this glaze is a kind of a sensitive then the fact that this glaze is a kind of a wheel is true. fact3: If this glaze uglifies Micrococcaceae that whey is not Andalusian. fact4: That whey does uglify Micrococcaceae if this thing is Andalusian. ; $hypothesis$ = That whey is not Andalusian. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This strappado occurs. | {D} | fact1: The fact that notthat repetition but this nonfeasance occurs is wrong if this outpouring does not happens. fact2: That this strappado and that soldererness occurs is triggered by that this differentiating Pulsatilla does not happens. fact3: That the bonding occurs and this thermicness occurs prevents that this shake occurs. fact4: That fast occurs. fact5: This outpouring does not happens and this singling numbering does not happens if that toying occurs. fact6: The paracentesis occurs and the publicizing occurs. fact7: The terminalness occurs and that toying occurs if that awnlessness does not happens. fact8: That discriminatoriness occurs and that fast occurs. fact9: This clashing does not happens. fact10: This strappadoes not occurs if both that discriminatoriness and that soldererness happens. fact11: This differentiating Pulsatilla occurs. fact12: That fast occurs if the fact that that repetition does not occurs and this nonfeasance happens is wrong. | fact1: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{G} & {F}) fact2: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) fact3: ({DA} & {AE}) -> ¬{CH} fact4: {E} fact5: {J} -> (¬{H} & ¬{I}) fact6: ({BH} & {IG}) fact7: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {J}) fact8: ({C} & {E}) fact9: ¬{FH} fact10: ({C} & {A}) -> ¬{D} fact11: {B} fact12: ¬(¬{G} & {F}) -> {E} | [
"fact8 -> int1: That discriminatoriness happens.;"
] | [
"fact8 -> int1: {C};"
] | This strappado occurs. | {D} | [] | 10 | 3 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that notthat repetition but this nonfeasance occurs is wrong if this outpouring does not happens. fact2: That this strappado and that soldererness occurs is triggered by that this differentiating Pulsatilla does not happens. fact3: That the bonding occurs and this thermicness occurs prevents that this shake occurs. fact4: That fast occurs. fact5: This outpouring does not happens and this singling numbering does not happens if that toying occurs. fact6: The paracentesis occurs and the publicizing occurs. fact7: The terminalness occurs and that toying occurs if that awnlessness does not happens. fact8: That discriminatoriness occurs and that fast occurs. fact9: This clashing does not happens. fact10: This strappadoes not occurs if both that discriminatoriness and that soldererness happens. fact11: This differentiating Pulsatilla occurs. fact12: That fast occurs if the fact that that repetition does not occurs and this nonfeasance happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This strappado occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That this hypsometer is a lambert is correct. | {B}{a} | fact1: If somebody clabbers Eranthis the fact that that one is not a Whitmonday and is myelic does not hold. fact2: That this hypsometer is a lambert hold if this stockyard is a inactiveness. fact3: Something is a Namtaru and/or that thing is a kind of a inactiveness if that thing is not quadriphonic. fact4: If something is a kind of a Namtaru it is a kind of a inactiveness. fact5: If the fact that this hypsometer is not a Whitmonday but he/she is myelic does not hold this hypsometer is not myelic. fact6: This hypsometer clabbers Eranthis. fact7: Something that tattles ambit is non-quadriphonic and not a Muroidea. fact8: This stockyard is a Namtaru that is not quadriphonic. fact9: This hypsometer does tattle ambit but this person is not mesoblastic if this person is not myelic. | fact1: (x): {I}x -> ¬(¬{J}x & {H}x) fact2: {C}{aa} -> {B}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x v {C}x) fact4: (x): {A}x -> {C}x fact5: ¬(¬{J}{a} & {H}{a}) -> ¬{H}{a} fact6: {I}{a} fact7: (x): {F}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) fact8: ({A}{aa} & ¬{D}{aa}) fact9: ¬{H}{a} -> ({F}{a} & ¬{G}{a}) | [
"fact4 -> int1: If that this stockyard is a Namtaru is right this stockyard is a kind of a inactiveness.; fact8 -> int2: This stockyard is a Namtaru.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This stockyard is a inactiveness.; int3 & fact2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact4 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; fact8 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{aa}; int3 & fact2 -> hypothesis;"
] | Kiana is a lambert. | {B}{hi} | [
"fact12 -> int4: This hypsometer either is a Namtaru or is a inactiveness or both if it is not quadriphonic.; fact10 -> int5: This hypsometer is not quadriphonic and the thing is not a kind of a Muroidea if the thing tattles ambit.; fact11 -> int6: The fact that this hypsometer is not a Whitmonday and is myelic does not hold if it clabbers Eranthis.; int6 & fact13 -> int7: The fact that this hypsometer is not a kind of a Whitmonday and is myelic is incorrect.; fact14 & int7 -> int8: This hypsometer is not myelic.; fact15 & int8 -> int9: This hypsometer tattles ambit and is non-mesoblastic.; int9 -> int10: This hypsometer tattles ambit.; int5 & int10 -> int11: This hypsometer is not quadriphonic and not a Muroidea.; int11 -> int12: This hypsometer is not quadriphonic.; int4 & int12 -> int13: Either this hypsometer is a Namtaru or that person is a inactiveness or both.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If somebody clabbers Eranthis the fact that that one is not a Whitmonday and is myelic does not hold. fact2: That this hypsometer is a lambert hold if this stockyard is a inactiveness. fact3: Something is a Namtaru and/or that thing is a kind of a inactiveness if that thing is not quadriphonic. fact4: If something is a kind of a Namtaru it is a kind of a inactiveness. fact5: If the fact that this hypsometer is not a Whitmonday but he/she is myelic does not hold this hypsometer is not myelic. fact6: This hypsometer clabbers Eranthis. fact7: Something that tattles ambit is non-quadriphonic and not a Muroidea. fact8: This stockyard is a Namtaru that is not quadriphonic. fact9: This hypsometer does tattle ambit but this person is not mesoblastic if this person is not myelic. ; $hypothesis$ = That this hypsometer is a lambert is correct. ; $proof$ = | fact4 -> int1: If that this stockyard is a Namtaru is right this stockyard is a kind of a inactiveness.; fact8 -> int2: This stockyard is a Namtaru.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This stockyard is a inactiveness.; int3 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that that effacement wriggles Satureia hold. | {B}{b} | fact1: If that effacement does wink this exploiter wriggles Satureia. fact2: Something is not a mess if that this is a mess and this is not longest is incorrect. fact3: If this exploiter wriggles Satureia that effacement winks. fact4: If this exploiter winks then the cowhand wriggles Satureia. fact5: This exploiter winks. fact6: That effacement does not wriggle Satureia if this exploiter is not a mess and does not wriggle Satureia. fact7: That effacement wriggles Satureia if this exploiter winks. | fact1: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact2: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact3: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact4: {A}{a} -> {B}{hh} fact5: {A}{a} fact6: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact7: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} | [
"fact7 & fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact7 & fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | That effacement does not wriggle Satureia. | ¬{B}{b} | [
"fact8 -> int1: If the fact that this exploiter is a mess but the one is not longest is false this exploiter is not a mess.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that effacement does wink this exploiter wriggles Satureia. fact2: Something is not a mess if that this is a mess and this is not longest is incorrect. fact3: If this exploiter wriggles Satureia that effacement winks. fact4: If this exploiter winks then the cowhand wriggles Satureia. fact5: This exploiter winks. fact6: That effacement does not wriggle Satureia if this exploiter is not a mess and does not wriggle Satureia. fact7: That effacement wriggles Satureia if this exploiter winks. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that effacement wriggles Satureia hold. ; $proof$ = | fact7 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That Buffalo does revive preconception. | {C}{a} | fact1: That Buffalo is branchiate. fact2: If something is varicelliform that revives preconception. fact3: That that Buffalo is non-varicelliform but it is branchiate if this plenipotentiary does revive preconception is correct. fact4: If the byre is a skewness then it is branchiate. fact5: If that Buffalo is branchiate then this one is varicelliform. fact6: Something instigates Ferrara and it does revive preconception if it does not intrigue Sapindaceae. | fact1: {A}{a} fact2: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact3: {C}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact4: {FI}{ia} -> {A}{ia} fact5: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & {C}x) | [
"fact5 & fact1 -> int1: The fact that that Buffalo is varicelliform is correct.; fact2 -> int2: If that Buffalo is varicelliform then that it revives preconception is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact5 & fact1 -> int1: {B}{a}; fact2 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | The Keflin is branchiate. | {A}{fe} | [
"fact7 -> int3: If the fact that this plenipotentiary does not intrigue Sapindaceae hold then the person instigates Ferrara and the person revives preconception.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That Buffalo is branchiate. fact2: If something is varicelliform that revives preconception. fact3: That that Buffalo is non-varicelliform but it is branchiate if this plenipotentiary does revive preconception is correct. fact4: If the byre is a skewness then it is branchiate. fact5: If that Buffalo is branchiate then this one is varicelliform. fact6: Something instigates Ferrara and it does revive preconception if it does not intrigue Sapindaceae. ; $hypothesis$ = That Buffalo does revive preconception. ; $proof$ = | fact5 & fact1 -> int1: The fact that that Buffalo is varicelliform is correct.; fact2 -> int2: If that Buffalo is varicelliform then that it revives preconception is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This manufacturer is a Marine. | {B}{b} | fact1: If that tom is a revolutionism and/or this thing is axonal that taximan is not polite. fact2: This pol is a forecast that does not air BPH. fact3: If that taximan is a Marine but it does not air BPH this manufacturer is not extraordinary. fact4: If someone does not famish money she is both a Marine and autophytic. fact5: If that taximan is both not a Ursidae and an oblate then this chachalaca does not famish money. fact6: That tom is a revolutionism if that tom is a Saprolegniales. fact7: That taximan is not a Marine. fact8: If that taximan is extraordinary but it does not air BPH then this manufacturer is not a kind of a Marine. fact9: If some person is not polite the fact that she is not a Ursidae and she is an oblate hold. fact10: This manufacturer is not a Marine if that taximan is extraordinary and it does air BPH. fact11: If that taximan is not a Saprolegniales that one is axonal and that one is a kind of a revolutionism. fact12: That taximan is not a kind of a Macrodactylus. fact13: That taximan is not a Saprolegniales. fact14: If someone is a revolutionism she/he is polite. fact15: This manufacturer is a Marine if that taximan is a Marine. fact16: If somebody is not a Ursidae but it is a kind of an oblate then it does not famish money. fact17: Some man is not a Marine but it is not non-autophytic if it does not famish money. fact18: The allies is not a Marine. | fact1: ({G}{c} v {H}{c}) -> ¬{F}{a} fact2: ({CU}{bd} & ¬{AB}{bd}) fact3: ({B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) fact5: (¬{D}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{i} fact6: {I}{c} -> {G}{c} fact7: ¬{B}{a} fact8: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact9: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x & {E}x) fact10: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact11: ¬{I}{a} -> ({H}{a} & {G}{a}) fact12: ¬{BT}{a} fact13: ¬{I}{a} fact14: (x): {G}x -> {F}x fact15: {B}{a} -> {B}{b} fact16: (x): (¬{D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact17: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) fact18: ¬{B}{cn} | [] | [] | This chachalaca is not a Marine. | ¬{B}{i} | [
"fact19 -> int1: This chachalaca is not a Marine but that person is autophytic if that person does not famish money.; fact23 -> int2: If that taximan is a kind of a revolutionism that taximan is polite.; fact21 & fact22 -> int3: That taximan is axonal and the person is a kind of a revolutionism.; int3 -> int4: That taximan is a revolutionism.; int2 & int4 -> int5: That taximan is polite.;"
] | 7 | 1 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that tom is a revolutionism and/or this thing is axonal that taximan is not polite. fact2: This pol is a forecast that does not air BPH. fact3: If that taximan is a Marine but it does not air BPH this manufacturer is not extraordinary. fact4: If someone does not famish money she is both a Marine and autophytic. fact5: If that taximan is both not a Ursidae and an oblate then this chachalaca does not famish money. fact6: That tom is a revolutionism if that tom is a Saprolegniales. fact7: That taximan is not a Marine. fact8: If that taximan is extraordinary but it does not air BPH then this manufacturer is not a kind of a Marine. fact9: If some person is not polite the fact that she is not a Ursidae and she is an oblate hold. fact10: This manufacturer is not a Marine if that taximan is extraordinary and it does air BPH. fact11: If that taximan is not a Saprolegniales that one is axonal and that one is a kind of a revolutionism. fact12: That taximan is not a kind of a Macrodactylus. fact13: That taximan is not a Saprolegniales. fact14: If someone is a revolutionism she/he is polite. fact15: This manufacturer is a Marine if that taximan is a Marine. fact16: If somebody is not a Ursidae but it is a kind of an oblate then it does not famish money. fact17: Some man is not a Marine but it is not non-autophytic if it does not famish money. fact18: The allies is not a Marine. ; $hypothesis$ = This manufacturer is a Marine. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This smocking is not a Chirico. | ¬{C}{b} | fact1: That bladder is a kind of a droop. fact2: If this smocking is a droop and is a discontentment then that bladder is not a Chirico. fact3: This smocking is a kind of a droop. fact4: If that bladder is both a Chirico and a droop this smocking is not a discontentment. fact5: That bladder is a kind of a discontentment. fact6: If that bladder is a discontentment and this thing is a Chirico this smocking is not a kind of a droop. fact7: If something does not ICE Linnaea the fact that this thing longs implausibleness and is not a kind of a discontentment does not hold. fact8: The niobium is not a discontentment. fact9: This smocking is not a discontentment if the fact that that bladder does long implausibleness and is not a discontentment is wrong. fact10: This smocking is not a kind of a Chirico if that bladder is a droop that is a discontentment. | fact1: {A}{a} fact2: ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact3: {A}{b} fact4: ({C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact5: {B}{a} fact6: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{B}x) fact8: ¬{B}{ja} fact9: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} | [
"fact1 & fact5 -> int1: That bladder is a kind of a droop and it is a discontentment.; int1 & fact10 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 & fact5 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 & fact10 -> hypothesis;"
] | This smocking is a kind of a Chirico. | {C}{b} | [
"fact11 -> int2: If that swab does not ICE Linnaea then the fact that that swab does long implausibleness but he/she is not a kind of a discontentment is false.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That bladder is a kind of a droop. fact2: If this smocking is a droop and is a discontentment then that bladder is not a Chirico. fact3: This smocking is a kind of a droop. fact4: If that bladder is both a Chirico and a droop this smocking is not a discontentment. fact5: That bladder is a kind of a discontentment. fact6: If that bladder is a discontentment and this thing is a Chirico this smocking is not a kind of a droop. fact7: If something does not ICE Linnaea the fact that this thing longs implausibleness and is not a kind of a discontentment does not hold. fact8: The niobium is not a discontentment. fact9: This smocking is not a discontentment if the fact that that bladder does long implausibleness and is not a discontentment is wrong. fact10: This smocking is not a kind of a Chirico if that bladder is a droop that is a discontentment. ; $hypothesis$ = This smocking is not a Chirico. ; $proof$ = | fact1 & fact5 -> int1: That bladder is a kind of a droop and it is a discontentment.; int1 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that there exists some person such that if this one is a kind of non-embolic person that is not non-communicative this one is not toxicologic does not hold. | ¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | fact1: A non-communicative thing that twinkles does not drubbing malevolency. fact2: There exists something such that if that is augitic and that jaunts anoxemia then that is not a kind of a Oceanus. fact3: If something is not a kind of a acrophobia and is an airing it is not a nubble. fact4: There is something such that if that thing rafts foetology and that thing misgoverns pollinosis that thing is not subjacent. fact5: There is something such that if the thing is not a kind of a Agdistis and does consternate Galatia the thing does not slog. fact6: There exists someone such that if he does not ruin Alismataceae and he starves then the fact that he relays Sittidae is true. fact7: There is something such that if it is not a hypertrophy and it is a assailability then it is Riemannian. fact8: There is someone such that if it is cubital and it is forwarding then it is not a Agdistis. fact9: If that parkland is not embolic and is communicative that parkland is not toxicologic. fact10: There is something such that if it is not a steaming and it drubbings malevolency it is apsidal. fact11: There exists someone such that if the one does not twinkle and the one is a Temuco then the one is not a Nephthys. fact12: There exists some man such that if it does not reconcile tenonitis and is mild it is a acrophobia. fact13: There exists some man such that if she/he swelters Assur and she/he is autochthonous she/he does not image Pliny. fact14: The ramjet is non-Downing if it is not toxicologic but a shaved. fact15: If that parkland does not shepherd miscellanea and broadcasts SSPE it is communicative. fact16: There exists something such that if this is embolic and not non-communicative this is non-toxicologic. fact17: There exists somebody such that if it is a milepost and it is cryptographical it is not a kind of a ruminant. fact18: That parkland is embolic if that parkland is not a requisiteness but it is not non-legato. fact19: That there exists somebody such that if he is translunary and he is a kind of a milepost then he is not an oncogene hold. | fact1: (x): (¬{AB}x & {DD}x) -> ¬{JF}x fact2: (Ex): ({HI}x & {IF}x) -> ¬{CR}x fact3: (x): (¬{O}x & {ET}x) -> ¬{AO}x fact4: (Ex): ({DO}x & {BF}x) -> ¬{AL}x fact5: (Ex): (¬{EH}x & {J}x) -> ¬{HC}x fact6: (Ex): (¬{HP}x & {CD}x) -> {IE}x fact7: (Ex): (¬{BA}x & {BI}x) -> {CA}x fact8: (Ex): ({CJ}x & {BT}x) -> ¬{EH}x fact9: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact10: (Ex): (¬{DJ}x & {JF}x) -> {HJ}x fact11: (Ex): (¬{DD}x & {K}x) -> ¬{CQ}x fact12: (Ex): (¬{FI}x & {BJ}x) -> {O}x fact13: (Ex): ({FU}x & {GM}x) -> ¬{GD}x fact14: (¬{B}{cn} & {GN}{cn}) -> ¬{FM}{cn} fact15: (¬{I}{aa} & {DM}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} fact16: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact17: (Ex): ({AI}x & {DP}x) -> ¬{DI}x fact18: (¬{CT}{aa} & {HG}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} fact19: (Ex): ({BQ}x & {AI}x) -> ¬{JJ}x | [
"fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | If that parkland is non-communicative but the thing twinkles the thing does not drubbing malevolency. | (¬{AB}{aa} & {DD}{aa}) -> ¬{JF}{aa} | [
"fact20 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $facts$ = fact1: A non-communicative thing that twinkles does not drubbing malevolency. fact2: There exists something such that if that is augitic and that jaunts anoxemia then that is not a kind of a Oceanus. fact3: If something is not a kind of a acrophobia and is an airing it is not a nubble. fact4: There is something such that if that thing rafts foetology and that thing misgoverns pollinosis that thing is not subjacent. fact5: There is something such that if the thing is not a kind of a Agdistis and does consternate Galatia the thing does not slog. fact6: There exists someone such that if he does not ruin Alismataceae and he starves then the fact that he relays Sittidae is true. fact7: There is something such that if it is not a hypertrophy and it is a assailability then it is Riemannian. fact8: There is someone such that if it is cubital and it is forwarding then it is not a Agdistis. fact9: If that parkland is not embolic and is communicative that parkland is not toxicologic. fact10: There is something such that if it is not a steaming and it drubbings malevolency it is apsidal. fact11: There exists someone such that if the one does not twinkle and the one is a Temuco then the one is not a Nephthys. fact12: There exists some man such that if it does not reconcile tenonitis and is mild it is a acrophobia. fact13: There exists some man such that if she/he swelters Assur and she/he is autochthonous she/he does not image Pliny. fact14: The ramjet is non-Downing if it is not toxicologic but a shaved. fact15: If that parkland does not shepherd miscellanea and broadcasts SSPE it is communicative. fact16: There exists something such that if this is embolic and not non-communicative this is non-toxicologic. fact17: There exists somebody such that if it is a milepost and it is cryptographical it is not a kind of a ruminant. fact18: That parkland is embolic if that parkland is not a requisiteness but it is not non-legato. fact19: That there exists somebody such that if he is translunary and he is a kind of a milepost then he is not an oncogene hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there exists some person such that if this one is a kind of non-embolic person that is not non-communicative this one is not toxicologic does not hold. ; $proof$ = | fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This charlatanism does not happens. | ¬{C} | fact1: Either that constitution or the reshuffling or both occurs. fact2: That telefilm does not occurs. fact3: If that inoperableness occurs then this charlatanism does not occurs. fact4: This rig does not occurs if that this rig and that murmuring happens does not hold. fact5: If the fact that this hieroglyphicalness happens and that expatriation happens does not hold that expatriation does not happens. fact6: The fact that the spattering Appalachia occurs is right. fact7: That masking meanness does not happens if either that commanding Podalyria or this battling or both happens. fact8: The alcoholicness happens and/or this mongoloid occurs. fact9: Either that that murkiness occurs or that inoperableness or both prevents that this charlatanism happens. fact10: The tomentoseness happens. fact11: The fact that the fact that that villainy occurs and that pan happens is false if this rig does not occurs is not wrong. fact12: This memorialisation does not occurs. fact13: That this yawing or the roentgenography or both happens causes that that meteorologicalness does not occurs. fact14: That murkiness occurs. fact15: This fraternalness occurs. fact16: That villainy does not occurs. fact17: That the oversleeping does not occurs is brought about by either this celiocentesis or that that cyclone occurs or both. fact18: If the fact that that villainy and that pan happens is incorrect then that inoperableness does not occurs. fact19: That inoperableness leads to that this slightness does not occurs and that murkiness does not happens. fact20: This hieroglyphicalness happens and/or that crossing occurs. fact21: If that expatriation does not happens then that this rig happens and that murmuring occurs does not hold. fact22: That the crabs and/or this vestibularness happens causes that this memorialisation does not occurs. | fact1: ({JB} v {GU}) fact2: ¬{AL} fact3: {B} -> ¬{C} fact4: ¬({F} & {G}) -> ¬{F} fact5: ¬({I} & {H}) -> ¬{H} fact6: {HL} fact7: ({EL} v {DK}) -> ¬{HS} fact8: ({DE} v {EA}) fact9: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact10: {AR} fact11: ¬{F} -> ¬({D} & {E}) fact12: ¬{IR} fact13: ({EB} v {FP}) -> ¬{GS} fact14: {A} fact15: {GJ} fact16: ¬{D} fact17: ({DQ} v {GC}) -> ¬{AQ} fact18: ¬({D} & {E}) -> ¬{B} fact19: {B} -> (¬{HO} & ¬{A}) fact20: ({I} v {DG}) fact21: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & {G}) fact22: ({ET} v {DA}) -> ¬{IR} | [
"fact14 -> int1: That murkiness and/or that inoperableness happens.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact14 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | This slightness does not happens. | ¬{HO} | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Either that constitution or the reshuffling or both occurs. fact2: That telefilm does not occurs. fact3: If that inoperableness occurs then this charlatanism does not occurs. fact4: This rig does not occurs if that this rig and that murmuring happens does not hold. fact5: If the fact that this hieroglyphicalness happens and that expatriation happens does not hold that expatriation does not happens. fact6: The fact that the spattering Appalachia occurs is right. fact7: That masking meanness does not happens if either that commanding Podalyria or this battling or both happens. fact8: The alcoholicness happens and/or this mongoloid occurs. fact9: Either that that murkiness occurs or that inoperableness or both prevents that this charlatanism happens. fact10: The tomentoseness happens. fact11: The fact that the fact that that villainy occurs and that pan happens is false if this rig does not occurs is not wrong. fact12: This memorialisation does not occurs. fact13: That this yawing or the roentgenography or both happens causes that that meteorologicalness does not occurs. fact14: That murkiness occurs. fact15: This fraternalness occurs. fact16: That villainy does not occurs. fact17: That the oversleeping does not occurs is brought about by either this celiocentesis or that that cyclone occurs or both. fact18: If the fact that that villainy and that pan happens is incorrect then that inoperableness does not occurs. fact19: That inoperableness leads to that this slightness does not occurs and that murkiness does not happens. fact20: This hieroglyphicalness happens and/or that crossing occurs. fact21: If that expatriation does not happens then that this rig happens and that murmuring occurs does not hold. fact22: That the crabs and/or this vestibularness happens causes that this memorialisation does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This charlatanism does not happens. ; $proof$ = | fact14 -> int1: That murkiness and/or that inoperableness happens.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This lepton does pioneer and is not a kind of a damn. | ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) | fact1: If this lepton is not a Hapsburg but it vomits then that Nestorian is a Hapsburg. fact2: The fact that this lepton is not a Hapsburg and vomits is correct if the fact that it is not heterologous is right. fact3: Something is a kind of a bang and is not a damn if it pioneers. fact4: That Nestorian does not madden. fact5: This lepton is not a damn. fact6: Some person pioneers and he/she is not non-redemptory if he/she is not a Antedon. fact7: This lepton is a Sion. fact8: If that Nestorian is a kind of a damn that does not pioneer then that Nestorian does madden. fact9: If that Nestorian pioneers this lepton is not a damn. fact10: If that Nestorian dissipates Melbourne but it does not madden then it pioneers. fact11: That Nestorian dissipates Melbourne and does not madden. fact12: That Nestorian does pioneer if that Nestorian does dissipate Melbourne and it maddens. fact13: Some man that is not a Algerie or not a Antedon or both is not a kind of a Antedon. fact14: This lepton maddens. fact15: If some person is not a Sloanea then she/he is not a Algerie and/or she/he is not a Antedon. fact16: If the fact that that Nestorian is a kind of a Hapsburg hold that sort is not a Sloanea. fact17: That Nestorian is a damn that does not dissipate Melbourne if this lepton is a kind of a damn. fact18: That Nestorian resents indomitability. fact19: The handrail displaces Nast but the thing does not pioneer. | fact1: (¬{G}{b} & {H}{b}) -> {G}{a} fact2: ¬{I}{b} -> (¬{G}{b} & {H}{b}) fact3: (x): {B}x -> ({HL}x & ¬{A}x) fact4: ¬{AB}{a} fact5: ¬{A}{b} fact6: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) fact7: {IF}{b} fact8: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {AB}{a} fact9: {B}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact10: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact11: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact12: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact13: (x): (¬{F}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{D}x fact14: {AB}{b} fact15: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{F}x v ¬{D}x) fact16: {G}{a} -> ¬{E}{id} fact17: {A}{b} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) fact18: {HT}{a} fact19: ({DJ}{jj} & ¬{B}{jj}) | [
"fact10 & fact11 -> int1: That Nestorian does pioneer.;"
] | [
"fact10 & fact11 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] | That sort is a kind of a bang but the thing is not a damn. | ({HL}{id} & ¬{A}{id}) | [
"fact21 -> int2: If that sort pioneers this thing is a bang and this thing is not a damn.; fact20 -> int3: If that sort is not a Antedon then that it pioneers and is not non-redemptory hold.; fact25 -> int4: That sort is not a Antedon if it is not a kind of a Algerie or it is not a Antedon or both.; fact22 -> int5: If that sort is not a Sloanea then it is not a Algerie or it is not a Antedon or both.;"
] | 8 | 2 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If this lepton is not a Hapsburg but it vomits then that Nestorian is a Hapsburg. fact2: The fact that this lepton is not a Hapsburg and vomits is correct if the fact that it is not heterologous is right. fact3: Something is a kind of a bang and is not a damn if it pioneers. fact4: That Nestorian does not madden. fact5: This lepton is not a damn. fact6: Some person pioneers and he/she is not non-redemptory if he/she is not a Antedon. fact7: This lepton is a Sion. fact8: If that Nestorian is a kind of a damn that does not pioneer then that Nestorian does madden. fact9: If that Nestorian pioneers this lepton is not a damn. fact10: If that Nestorian dissipates Melbourne but it does not madden then it pioneers. fact11: That Nestorian dissipates Melbourne and does not madden. fact12: That Nestorian does pioneer if that Nestorian does dissipate Melbourne and it maddens. fact13: Some man that is not a Algerie or not a Antedon or both is not a kind of a Antedon. fact14: This lepton maddens. fact15: If some person is not a Sloanea then she/he is not a Algerie and/or she/he is not a Antedon. fact16: If the fact that that Nestorian is a kind of a Hapsburg hold that sort is not a Sloanea. fact17: That Nestorian is a damn that does not dissipate Melbourne if this lepton is a kind of a damn. fact18: That Nestorian resents indomitability. fact19: The handrail displaces Nast but the thing does not pioneer. ; $hypothesis$ = This lepton does pioneer and is not a kind of a damn. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That uncarpetedness happens. | {A} | fact1: That uncarpetedness happens. fact2: The inalienableness happens. | fact1: {A} fact2: {HM} | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That uncarpetedness happens. fact2: The inalienableness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That uncarpetedness happens. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That tourmaline is not scorbutic and is not an unconscious. | (¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) | fact1: The fact that that tourmaline does not hypophysectomise demonstrability and is not scorbutic does not hold. fact2: That that tourmaline is scorbutic and is not a kind of an unconscious is not true. fact3: The fact that someone is non-scorbutic but not an unconscious does not hold if the fact that this one is not a Trablous is true. fact4: The fact that something is not scorbutic but this is an unconscious is wrong if this is not a Trablous. fact5: If the fact that that tourmaline is not a Trablous is right then the fact that that tourmaline is a kind of non-scorbutic thing that is an unconscious does not hold. fact6: That the fact that that tourmaline is both non-scorbutic and an unconscious is right is wrong. fact7: If Imelda is a Trablous then that tourmaline is non-scorbutic thing that is not an unconscious. fact8: If that tourmaline does not imbricate but it pens Cotacachi that tourmaline is not a Trablous. fact9: If Imelda is not a kind of a paleontology it is substantival and/or it caponizes Reiter. fact10: That some person is both not a Berzelius and not nonvoluntary is wrong if it does not last Rhamnales. fact11: This margrave does not pen Cotacachi. fact12: That tourmaline is not a Trablous if the fact that it imbricates and pens Cotacachi is right. fact13: Something is not a kind of a unprofitableness but that thing is a Trablous if that thing is a Nimrod. fact14: Imelda is a grinning that is not a paleontology. fact15: That tourmaline does not imbricate but it pens Cotacachi. fact16: That tourmaline does not imbricate. fact17: If some man is not a kind of a Trablous then the fact that that one is not non-scorbutic and that one is not an unconscious is false. fact18: If that that tourmaline is not a Trablous hold then the fact that this person is scorbutic but not an unconscious is incorrect. | fact1: ¬(¬{BU}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact2: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) fact4: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) fact5: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) fact6: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) fact7: {B}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact8: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact9: ¬{H}{b} -> ({G}{b} v {F}{b}) fact10: (x): ¬{DG}x -> ¬(¬{GM}x & ¬{FF}x) fact11: ¬{AB}{c} fact12: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact13: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & {B}x) fact14: ({I}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) fact15: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact16: ¬{AA}{a} fact17: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) fact18: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) | [
"fact8 & fact15 -> int1: That tourmaline is not a Trablous.; fact3 -> int2: The fact that that tourmaline is not scorbutic and this is not an unconscious is false if that tourmaline is not a Trablous.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact8 & fact15 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; fact3 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That tourmaline is not scorbutic and is not an unconscious. | (¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) | [
"fact21 -> int3: Imelda is not a unprofitableness but that one is a Trablous if Imelda is a Nimrod.; fact19 -> int4: Imelda is not a paleontology.; fact22 & int4 -> int5: Imelda is substantival and/or does caponize Reiter.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that that tourmaline does not hypophysectomise demonstrability and is not scorbutic does not hold. fact2: That that tourmaline is scorbutic and is not a kind of an unconscious is not true. fact3: The fact that someone is non-scorbutic but not an unconscious does not hold if the fact that this one is not a Trablous is true. fact4: The fact that something is not scorbutic but this is an unconscious is wrong if this is not a Trablous. fact5: If the fact that that tourmaline is not a Trablous is right then the fact that that tourmaline is a kind of non-scorbutic thing that is an unconscious does not hold. fact6: That the fact that that tourmaline is both non-scorbutic and an unconscious is right is wrong. fact7: If Imelda is a Trablous then that tourmaline is non-scorbutic thing that is not an unconscious. fact8: If that tourmaline does not imbricate but it pens Cotacachi that tourmaline is not a Trablous. fact9: If Imelda is not a kind of a paleontology it is substantival and/or it caponizes Reiter. fact10: That some person is both not a Berzelius and not nonvoluntary is wrong if it does not last Rhamnales. fact11: This margrave does not pen Cotacachi. fact12: That tourmaline is not a Trablous if the fact that it imbricates and pens Cotacachi is right. fact13: Something is not a kind of a unprofitableness but that thing is a Trablous if that thing is a Nimrod. fact14: Imelda is a grinning that is not a paleontology. fact15: That tourmaline does not imbricate but it pens Cotacachi. fact16: That tourmaline does not imbricate. fact17: If some man is not a kind of a Trablous then the fact that that one is not non-scorbutic and that one is not an unconscious is false. fact18: If that that tourmaline is not a Trablous hold then the fact that this person is scorbutic but not an unconscious is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That tourmaline is not scorbutic and is not an unconscious. ; $proof$ = | fact8 & fact15 -> int1: That tourmaline is not a Trablous.; fact3 -> int2: The fact that that tourmaline is not scorbutic and this is not an unconscious is false if that tourmaline is not a Trablous.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | Either this buckminsterfullerene Burrs verve or she/he remunerates Bowiea or both. | ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) | fact1: This buckminsterfullerene does Burr verve or he/she is a Lipscomb or both. fact2: This buckminsterfullerene remunerates Bowiea and/or is an ode. fact3: If that somebody does not recur shaded is right the fact that either it Burrs verve or it remunerates Bowiea or both does not hold. fact4: This buckminsterfullerene either does remunerate Bowiea or quails dekaliter or both. fact5: This buckminsterfullerene is relevant. fact6: This buckminsterfullerene renews. fact7: This obstructer Burrs verve and remunerates Bowiea if this obstructer does not recur shaded. fact8: This buckminsterfullerene remunerates Bowiea. fact9: this Bowiea remunerates buckminsterfullerene. fact10: This obstructer does not recur shaded if that either this buckminsterfullerene is not cultural or this thing is not a kind of a Wilde or both is wrong. fact11: Some person is not a Wilde if it is not a clangor. fact12: The whoremonger does remunerate Bowiea. fact13: This buckminsterfullerene remunerates Bowiea and/or weights Spica. fact14: Some man is not a clangor but this one is an ode if this one is a kind of a Surya. fact15: If something is not a Wilde either it recurs shaded or it is cultural or both. fact16: That phragmocone is a Streptopelia and/or it does Burr verve. fact17: This incontinence is a Surya. | fact1: ({A}{a} v {CE}{a}) fact2: ({B}{a} v {G}{a}) fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v {B}x) fact4: ({B}{a} v {EL}{a}) fact5: {DT}{a} fact6: {CJ}{a} fact7: ¬{C}{ie} -> ({A}{ie} & {B}{ie}) fact8: {B}{a} fact9: {AA}{aa} fact10: ¬(¬{D}{a} v ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{ie} fact11: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{E}x fact12: {B}{fu} fact13: ({B}{a} v {EF}{a}) fact14: (x): {H}x -> (¬{F}x & {G}x) fact15: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x v {D}x) fact16: ({S}{bm} v {A}{bm}) fact17: {H}{b} | [
"fact8 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact8 -> hypothesis;"
] | That this buckminsterfullerene Burrs verve and/or it does remunerate Bowiea is wrong. | ¬({A}{a} v {B}{a}) | [
"fact21 -> int1: If this buckminsterfullerene does not recur shaded then that it Burrs verve and/or remunerates Bowiea is not true.; fact19 -> int2: This incontinence recurs shaded and/or this is cultural if this incontinence is not a Wilde.; fact18 -> int3: This incontinence is not a Wilde if the one is not a clangor.; fact20 -> int4: This incontinence is both not a clangor and an ode if this incontinence is a kind of a Surya.; int4 & fact22 -> int5: This incontinence is both not a clangor and an ode.; int5 -> int6: This incontinence is not a clangor.; int3 & int6 -> int7: This incontinence is not a Wilde.; int2 & int7 -> int8: This incontinence recurs shaded or is cultural or both.;"
] | 7 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This buckminsterfullerene does Burr verve or he/she is a Lipscomb or both. fact2: This buckminsterfullerene remunerates Bowiea and/or is an ode. fact3: If that somebody does not recur shaded is right the fact that either it Burrs verve or it remunerates Bowiea or both does not hold. fact4: This buckminsterfullerene either does remunerate Bowiea or quails dekaliter or both. fact5: This buckminsterfullerene is relevant. fact6: This buckminsterfullerene renews. fact7: This obstructer Burrs verve and remunerates Bowiea if this obstructer does not recur shaded. fact8: This buckminsterfullerene remunerates Bowiea. fact9: this Bowiea remunerates buckminsterfullerene. fact10: This obstructer does not recur shaded if that either this buckminsterfullerene is not cultural or this thing is not a kind of a Wilde or both is wrong. fact11: Some person is not a Wilde if it is not a clangor. fact12: The whoremonger does remunerate Bowiea. fact13: This buckminsterfullerene remunerates Bowiea and/or weights Spica. fact14: Some man is not a clangor but this one is an ode if this one is a kind of a Surya. fact15: If something is not a Wilde either it recurs shaded or it is cultural or both. fact16: That phragmocone is a Streptopelia and/or it does Burr verve. fact17: This incontinence is a Surya. ; $hypothesis$ = Either this buckminsterfullerene Burrs verve or she/he remunerates Bowiea or both. ; $proof$ = | fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This afterglow does not occurs. | ¬{B} | fact1: If the fact that that absolution occurs and that unsnarling EEC occurs does not hold then that absolution does not occurs. fact2: That the bowling does not occurs is prevented by that that toxicologicness happens. fact3: If that this terrorization does not happens but the superfecta occurs is false this anaclinalness does not happens. fact4: This afterglow is brought about by this interpenetration. fact5: The folding Villard occurs. fact6: Both this hurdling and that corresponding boldness occurs if this traveling does not happens. fact7: If this babel happens the fact that this blocking does not happens but that beautifulness happens is not correct. fact8: This baking Goodyear or this handling lymphadenitis or both occurs if this dimorphicness does not happens. fact9: The laurelledness happens and/or the untrustiness occurs. fact10: If this anaclinalness does not occurs then the fact that both that absolution and that unsnarling EEC occurs is wrong. fact11: That that Briton occurs and this babel happens if that absolution does not occurs is true. fact12: That beautifulness does not happens. fact13: This traveling does not occurs if both that bearding Corydalidae and this Scythianness occurs. fact14: The fact that this pyramiding Kattegatt does not happens is correct. fact15: This afterglow occurs if this itemization occurs. fact16: This shuffle happens if that unorientedness happens. fact17: The fact that that notthis terrorization but the superfecta occurs is not wrong does not hold if this unpredictableness occurs. fact18: This non-beautifulness leads to that either this itemization or this interpenetration or both occurs. fact19: If that corresponding boldness happens then this dimorphicness does not occurs. | fact1: ¬({F} & {H}) -> ¬{F} fact2: {DU} -> {ET} fact3: ¬(¬{I} & {J}) -> ¬{G} fact4: {AB} -> {B} fact5: {JB} fact6: ¬{Q} -> ({P} & {O}) fact7: {D} -> ¬(¬{C} & {A}) fact8: ¬{N} -> ({M} v {L}) fact9: ({HF} v {AS}) fact10: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & {H}) fact11: ¬{F} -> ({E} & {D}) fact12: ¬{A} fact13: ({R} & {S}) -> ¬{Q} fact14: ¬{ED} fact15: {AA} -> {B} fact16: {AH} -> {GI} fact17: {K} -> ¬(¬{I} & {J}) fact18: ¬{A} -> ({AA} v {AB}) fact19: {O} -> ¬{N} | [
"fact18 & fact12 -> int1: This itemization or this interpenetration or both happens.; int1 & fact15 & fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact18 & fact12 -> int1: ({AA} v {AB}); int1 & fact15 & fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | This afterglow does not occurs. | ¬{B} | [] | 15 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that absolution occurs and that unsnarling EEC occurs does not hold then that absolution does not occurs. fact2: That the bowling does not occurs is prevented by that that toxicologicness happens. fact3: If that this terrorization does not happens but the superfecta occurs is false this anaclinalness does not happens. fact4: This afterglow is brought about by this interpenetration. fact5: The folding Villard occurs. fact6: Both this hurdling and that corresponding boldness occurs if this traveling does not happens. fact7: If this babel happens the fact that this blocking does not happens but that beautifulness happens is not correct. fact8: This baking Goodyear or this handling lymphadenitis or both occurs if this dimorphicness does not happens. fact9: The laurelledness happens and/or the untrustiness occurs. fact10: If this anaclinalness does not occurs then the fact that both that absolution and that unsnarling EEC occurs is wrong. fact11: That that Briton occurs and this babel happens if that absolution does not occurs is true. fact12: That beautifulness does not happens. fact13: This traveling does not occurs if both that bearding Corydalidae and this Scythianness occurs. fact14: The fact that this pyramiding Kattegatt does not happens is correct. fact15: This afterglow occurs if this itemization occurs. fact16: This shuffle happens if that unorientedness happens. fact17: The fact that that notthis terrorization but the superfecta occurs is not wrong does not hold if this unpredictableness occurs. fact18: This non-beautifulness leads to that either this itemization or this interpenetration or both occurs. fact19: If that corresponding boldness happens then this dimorphicness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This afterglow does not occurs. ; $proof$ = | fact18 & fact12 -> int1: This itemization or this interpenetration or both happens.; int1 & fact15 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This yardgrass undercharges Anostraca. | {C}{a} | fact1: This apadana engrosses Heyse if that this is not unconscientious is true. fact2: That dacha does not undercharge Anostraca. fact3: Some person that is centenary is not a cryptobiosis and not relativistic. fact4: This yardgrass is non-ambulatory and it is not a kind of a metamathematics. fact5: This apadana is a hydromancy if that framework is a kind of a hydromancy. fact6: A precancerous one that is not a pimple is a kind of a Balinese. fact7: This yardgrass does undercharge Anostraca if this yardgrass is centenary and does not engross Heyse. fact8: This yardgrass is not centenary and not ambulatory. fact9: Something is not ambulatory if that thing engrosses Heyse. fact10: That framework is a kind of a hydromancy. fact11: This yardgrass is not ambulatory. fact12: If some man is not centenary and does not engross Heyse it does undercharge Anostraca. fact13: If this apadana does not undercharge Anostraca then this yardgrass does not undercharge Anostraca. fact14: If some person is not centenary then it is not centenary and does not engross Heyse. fact15: This yardgrass is non-plantigrade and not a Ophioglossum. fact16: This embankment is centenary. fact17: This yardgrass does not utilise and is not a kind of a trichomoniasis. fact18: Something is not centenary if it is a sociality and it is a hydromancy. fact19: If a centenary thing does not engross Heyse it does undercharge Anostraca. fact20: This apadana is a sociality. | fact1: ¬{E}{b} -> {D}{b} fact2: ¬{C}{al} fact3: (x): {A}x -> (¬{EI}x & ¬{JD}x) fact4: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{CQ}{a}) fact5: {F}{c} -> {F}{b} fact6: (x): ({BF}x & ¬{JK}x) -> {IJ}x fact7: ({A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> {C}{a} fact8: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact9: (x): {D}x -> ¬{B}x fact10: {F}{c} fact11: ¬{B}{a} fact12: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{D}x) -> {C}x fact13: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} fact14: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{D}x) fact15: (¬{ES}{a} & ¬{EU}{a}) fact16: {A}{em} fact17: (¬{FE}{a} & ¬{CH}{a}) fact18: (x): ({H}x & {F}x) -> ¬{A}x fact19: (x): ({A}x & ¬{D}x) -> {C}x fact20: {H}{b} | [
"fact8 -> int1: This yardgrass is not centenary.; fact14 -> int2: This yardgrass is not centenary and it does not engross Heyse if it is not centenary.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This yardgrass is non-centenary thing that does not engross Heyse.; fact12 -> int4: This yardgrass undercharges Anostraca if it is not centenary and it does not engross Heyse.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact8 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; fact14 -> int2: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}); fact12 -> int4: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> {C}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | This yardgrass does not undercharge Anostraca. | ¬{C}{a} | [
"fact27 -> int5: If this apadana is a sociality and it is a hydromancy this apadana is not centenary.; fact23 & fact21 -> int6: This apadana is a hydromancy.; fact25 & int6 -> int7: This apadana is a sociality and it is a hydromancy.; int5 & int7 -> int8: This apadana is not centenary.; fact22 -> int9: If this apadana engrosses Heyse this apadana is not ambulatory.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This apadana engrosses Heyse if that this is not unconscientious is true. fact2: That dacha does not undercharge Anostraca. fact3: Some person that is centenary is not a cryptobiosis and not relativistic. fact4: This yardgrass is non-ambulatory and it is not a kind of a metamathematics. fact5: This apadana is a hydromancy if that framework is a kind of a hydromancy. fact6: A precancerous one that is not a pimple is a kind of a Balinese. fact7: This yardgrass does undercharge Anostraca if this yardgrass is centenary and does not engross Heyse. fact8: This yardgrass is not centenary and not ambulatory. fact9: Something is not ambulatory if that thing engrosses Heyse. fact10: That framework is a kind of a hydromancy. fact11: This yardgrass is not ambulatory. fact12: If some man is not centenary and does not engross Heyse it does undercharge Anostraca. fact13: If this apadana does not undercharge Anostraca then this yardgrass does not undercharge Anostraca. fact14: If some person is not centenary then it is not centenary and does not engross Heyse. fact15: This yardgrass is non-plantigrade and not a Ophioglossum. fact16: This embankment is centenary. fact17: This yardgrass does not utilise and is not a kind of a trichomoniasis. fact18: Something is not centenary if it is a sociality and it is a hydromancy. fact19: If a centenary thing does not engross Heyse it does undercharge Anostraca. fact20: This apadana is a sociality. ; $hypothesis$ = This yardgrass undercharges Anostraca. ; $proof$ = | fact8 -> int1: This yardgrass is not centenary.; fact14 -> int2: This yardgrass is not centenary and it does not engross Heyse if it is not centenary.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This yardgrass is non-centenary thing that does not engross Heyse.; fact12 -> int4: This yardgrass undercharges Anostraca if it is not centenary and it does not engross Heyse.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | Both that unexpendableness and that rigmarole occurs. | ({AA} & {AB}) | fact1: That barrage does not happens. fact2: That that unexpendableness and that rigmarole occurs does not hold if that barrage does not occurs. | fact1: ¬{A} fact2: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) | [
"fact2 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact2 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That barrage does not happens. fact2: That that unexpendableness and that rigmarole occurs does not hold if that barrage does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Both that unexpendableness and that rigmarole occurs. ; $proof$ = | fact2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This devilising Geothlypis happens. | {C} | fact1: That carefulness occurs if the fact that that carefulness does not occurs and this disinfesting opportunism does not happens is incorrect. fact2: That carefulness and this disinfesting opportunism occurs. fact3: If that dating Eriosoma occurs both that non-laniaryness and that Marxist happens. fact4: If this clasp does not occurs then the fact that this thyroid and that LETTING happens does not hold. fact5: If this devilising Geothlypis does not occurs the fact that that carefulness does not occurs and this disinfesting opportunism does not happens is wrong. fact6: That LETTING does not happens if that this thyroid happens and that LETTING occurs is wrong. fact7: That that pleochroicness but notthis Latinising happens is incorrect if that this laniariness happens does not hold. fact8: If that carefulness happens that editorship occurs. fact9: The vibration happens. fact10: That that LETTING does not occurs and this disinfesting opportunism does not occurs leads to that that carefulness happens. fact11: Notthis thyroid but that apnoeicness happens if this Latinising occurs. fact12: If this shoring does not happens and/or the breathlessness happens that dating Eriosoma happens. fact13: That carefulness occurs. fact14: If the fact that that pleochroicness but notthis Latinising occurs is false this Latinising happens. fact15: If this countermarch occurs this devilising Geothlypis does not happens and that LETTING does not occurs. fact16: That this thyroid does not occurs yields that that both this countermarch and this clasp occurs is not false. fact17: If that apnoeicness occurs or this clasp does not happens or both this clasp does not occurs. | fact1: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {A} fact2: ({A} & {B}) fact3: {M} -> (¬{K} & {L}) fact4: ¬{F} -> ¬({G} & {D}) fact5: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact6: ¬({G} & {D}) -> ¬{D} fact7: ¬{K} -> ¬({J} & ¬{I}) fact8: {A} -> {CH} fact9: {CB} fact10: (¬{D} & ¬{B}) -> {A} fact11: {I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) fact12: (¬{O} v {N}) -> {M} fact13: {A} fact14: ¬({J} & ¬{I}) -> {I} fact15: {E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact16: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact17: ({H} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{F} | [
"fact2 -> int1: This disinfesting opportunism happens.;"
] | [
"fact2 -> int1: {B};"
] | The fact that that editorship occurs is true. | {CH} | [] | 15 | 2 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That carefulness occurs if the fact that that carefulness does not occurs and this disinfesting opportunism does not happens is incorrect. fact2: That carefulness and this disinfesting opportunism occurs. fact3: If that dating Eriosoma occurs both that non-laniaryness and that Marxist happens. fact4: If this clasp does not occurs then the fact that this thyroid and that LETTING happens does not hold. fact5: If this devilising Geothlypis does not occurs the fact that that carefulness does not occurs and this disinfesting opportunism does not happens is wrong. fact6: That LETTING does not happens if that this thyroid happens and that LETTING occurs is wrong. fact7: That that pleochroicness but notthis Latinising happens is incorrect if that this laniariness happens does not hold. fact8: If that carefulness happens that editorship occurs. fact9: The vibration happens. fact10: That that LETTING does not occurs and this disinfesting opportunism does not occurs leads to that that carefulness happens. fact11: Notthis thyroid but that apnoeicness happens if this Latinising occurs. fact12: If this shoring does not happens and/or the breathlessness happens that dating Eriosoma happens. fact13: That carefulness occurs. fact14: If the fact that that pleochroicness but notthis Latinising occurs is false this Latinising happens. fact15: If this countermarch occurs this devilising Geothlypis does not happens and that LETTING does not occurs. fact16: That this thyroid does not occurs yields that that both this countermarch and this clasp occurs is not false. fact17: If that apnoeicness occurs or this clasp does not happens or both this clasp does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This devilising Geothlypis happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That ravel does not happens. | ¬{B} | fact1: That undesirousness does not happens. fact2: That ravel happens if that humanization happens. fact3: That that undesirousness does not occurs and/or that ravel does not occurs prevents that that inboardness occurs. fact4: That ravel does not happens if the fact that notthat undesirousness but that ravel happens is wrong. fact5: The non-katabolicness is prevented by that the columnedness happens. | fact1: ¬{A} fact2: {AA} -> {B} fact3: (¬{A} v ¬{B}) -> ¬{CI} fact4: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact5: {JI} -> {FJ} | [] | [] | That ravel does not happens. | ¬{B} | [] | 6 | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That undesirousness does not happens. fact2: That ravel happens if that humanization happens. fact3: That that undesirousness does not occurs and/or that ravel does not occurs prevents that that inboardness occurs. fact4: That ravel does not happens if the fact that notthat undesirousness but that ravel happens is wrong. fact5: The non-katabolicness is prevented by that the columnedness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That ravel does not happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That gaseousness does not happens. | ¬{B} | fact1: That gaseousness occurs if that belittling happens. fact2: Either this steeping or that belittling or both happens if that pulverising repeated does not occurs. fact3: That non-gaseousness and that pulverising repeated occurs if that soiling Amoebida does not happens. fact4: That pulverising repeated does not occurs. fact5: That gaseousness happens if this steeping occurs. | fact1: {AB} -> {B} fact2: ¬{A} -> ({AA} v {AB}) fact3: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} & {A}) fact4: ¬{A} fact5: {AA} -> {B} | [
"fact2 & fact4 -> int1: This steeping occurs or that belittling occurs or both.; int1 & fact5 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact2 & fact4 -> int1: ({AA} v {AB}); int1 & fact5 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | That gaseousness does not happens. | ¬{B} | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That gaseousness occurs if that belittling happens. fact2: Either this steeping or that belittling or both happens if that pulverising repeated does not occurs. fact3: That non-gaseousness and that pulverising repeated occurs if that soiling Amoebida does not happens. fact4: That pulverising repeated does not occurs. fact5: That gaseousness happens if this steeping occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That gaseousness does not happens. ; $proof$ = | fact2 & fact4 -> int1: This steeping occurs or that belittling occurs or both.; int1 & fact5 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | Let's assume that this saprophyticness occurs. | {A} | fact1: Both this saprophyticness and that pull occurs if this inoperativeness does not happens. fact2: Both that postmeridianness and this inoperativeness happens. fact3: If this inoperativeness does not happens then this saprophyticness and that postmeridianness happens. fact4: That that that postmeridianness occurs is prevented by that this saprophyticness occurs is correct. | fact1: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {L}) fact2: ({B} & {C}) fact3: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact4: {A} -> ¬{B} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that this saprophyticness occurs.; fact4 & assump1 -> int1: That postmeridianness does not happens.; fact2 -> int2: That postmeridianness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}; fact4 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; fact2 -> int2: {B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | Let's assume that this saprophyticness occurs. | {A} | [] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Both this saprophyticness and that pull occurs if this inoperativeness does not happens. fact2: Both that postmeridianness and this inoperativeness happens. fact3: If this inoperativeness does not happens then this saprophyticness and that postmeridianness happens. fact4: That that that postmeridianness occurs is prevented by that this saprophyticness occurs is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this saprophyticness occurs. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that this saprophyticness occurs.; fact4 & assump1 -> int1: That postmeridianness does not happens.; fact2 -> int2: That postmeridianness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That brooch depresses. | {A}{a} | fact1: That brooch Aideses SWbW and is a Opisthocomidae. fact2: This taguan depresses. fact3: That brooch is a kind of a eightpence. fact4: That brooch respects Weimar and this is a eightpence. fact5: This husky does depress. fact6: The empire depresses. fact7: That brooch depresses and is a eightpence. fact8: That brooch does delineate preciosity and is a eightpence. fact9: That brooch lades arthralgia and is meridional. fact10: This SACEUR depresses. fact11: That brooch is a eightpence and it liberalizes. | fact1: ({DG}{a} & {EN}{a}) fact2: {A}{hl} fact3: {B}{a} fact4: ({GL}{a} & {B}{a}) fact5: {A}{gq} fact6: {A}{fm} fact7: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact8: ({ES}{a} & {B}{a}) fact9: ({HB}{a} & {HS}{a}) fact10: {A}{ei} fact11: ({B}{a} & {IA}{a}) | [
"fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | This SACEUR depresses and is a kind of a crepuscle. | ({A}{ei} & {ET}{ei}) | [] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That brooch Aideses SWbW and is a Opisthocomidae. fact2: This taguan depresses. fact3: That brooch is a kind of a eightpence. fact4: That brooch respects Weimar and this is a eightpence. fact5: This husky does depress. fact6: The empire depresses. fact7: That brooch depresses and is a eightpence. fact8: That brooch does delineate preciosity and is a eightpence. fact9: That brooch lades arthralgia and is meridional. fact10: This SACEUR depresses. fact11: That brooch is a eightpence and it liberalizes. ; $hypothesis$ = That brooch depresses. ; $proof$ = | fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This greylag stalks Lycopodiales. | {D}{a} | fact1: This greylag does neuter if this greylag is not non-Haitian. fact2: This greylag is a eponym. fact3: If someone is gynecological and/or the one neuters the one does not stalk Lycopodiales. fact4: This greylag is not non-gynecological and/or is a kind of a Boston. fact5: If this greylag is not Haitian then that the fact that this greylag does not neuter and does not stalk Lycopodiales is true is incorrect. fact6: This greylag is Haitian. | fact1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact2: {IB}{a} fact3: (x): ({C}x v {B}x) -> ¬{D}x fact4: ({C}{a} v {EL}{a}) fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact6: {A}{a} | [
"fact1 & fact6 -> int1: This greylag neuters.; int1 -> int2: This greylag is not non-gynecological and/or neuters.; fact3 -> int3: If this greylag either is gynecological or neuters or both that thing does not stalk Lycopodiales.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 & fact6 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 -> int2: ({C}{a} v {B}{a}); fact3 -> int3: ({C}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | This greylag stalks Lycopodiales. | {D}{a} | [] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This greylag does neuter if this greylag is not non-Haitian. fact2: This greylag is a eponym. fact3: If someone is gynecological and/or the one neuters the one does not stalk Lycopodiales. fact4: This greylag is not non-gynecological and/or is a kind of a Boston. fact5: If this greylag is not Haitian then that the fact that this greylag does not neuter and does not stalk Lycopodiales is true is incorrect. fact6: This greylag is Haitian. ; $hypothesis$ = This greylag stalks Lycopodiales. ; $proof$ = | fact1 & fact6 -> int1: This greylag neuters.; int1 -> int2: This greylag is not non-gynecological and/or neuters.; fact3 -> int3: If this greylag either is gynecological or neuters or both that thing does not stalk Lycopodiales.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That that XXY is not a bioclimatology and is a risibility is false. | ¬(¬{E}{b} & {C}{b}) | fact1: This junction is not a brachycephalic if it does happen. fact2: The fact that that XXY is a kind of a bioclimatology and she/he is a risibility does not hold. fact3: If this mildness is not a Ptilonorhynchidae that XXY is not a bioclimatology and is a kind of a risibility. fact4: This junction happens. fact5: This mildness is a Ptilonorhynchidae that is a Actinomycetales. fact6: The fact that somebody is a kind of non-laxative one that is not a Ptilonorhynchidae is incorrect if that person is a Actinomycetales. fact7: If something is a kind of a Actinomycetales it is a risibility. fact8: This junction does not altercate if the fact that this junction is not a kind of a Hawkyns but the person altercate does not hold. fact9: If some person is a bioclimatology then it is a kind of a risibility. fact10: Something that is non-earliest does express Afrocarpus and is a kind of a Megapodius. fact11: This mildness is not a Ptilonorhynchidae if that this suppresser is non-laxative thing that is not a Ptilonorhynchidae is false. fact12: That this junction is not a Hawkyns and does altercate is not correct if that person is not a brachycephalic. fact13: If that this mildness is a risibility is true then that the fact that that XXY is both a bioclimatology and a risibility does not hold is true. fact14: Some man is a Actinomycetales if that person does express Afrocarpus. fact15: The symmetry is a kind of a Actinomycetales. fact16: This mildness is a kind of a Ptilonorhynchidae. fact17: Something is non-earliest if the fact that it is not lossy and it is not a kind of a correlation does not hold. | fact1: {N}{d} -> ¬{M}{d} fact2: ¬({E}{b} & {C}{b}) fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{E}{b} & {C}{b}) fact4: {N}{d} fact5: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact6: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{A}x) fact7: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact8: ¬(¬{L}{d} & {K}{d}) -> ¬{K}{d} fact9: (x): {E}x -> {C}x fact10: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x & {G}x) fact11: ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact12: ¬{M}{d} -> ¬(¬{L}{d} & {K}{d}) fact13: {C}{a} -> ¬({E}{b} & {C}{b}) fact14: (x): {F}x -> {B}x fact15: {B}{ed} fact16: {A}{a} fact17: (x): ¬(¬{J}x & ¬{I}x) -> ¬{H}x | [
"fact5 -> int1: This mildness is a Actinomycetales.; fact7 -> int2: This mildness is a risibility if this mildness is a Actinomycetales.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that this mildness is not a risibility does not hold.;"
] | [
"fact5 -> int1: {B}{a}; fact7 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a};"
] | That XXY is not a bioclimatology but it is a risibility. | (¬{E}{b} & {C}{b}) | [
"fact26 -> int4: That this suppresser is non-laxative but not a Ptilonorhynchidae is incorrect if the fact that this suppresser is a kind of a Actinomycetales is true.; fact25 -> int5: If this suppresser expresses Afrocarpus then it is a Actinomycetales.; fact20 -> int6: This suppresser expresses Afrocarpus and is a Megapodius if this suppresser is not earliest.; fact22 -> int7: This suppresser is not earliest if the fact that this suppresser is not lossy and is not a kind of a correlation does not hold.; fact23 & fact24 -> int8: This junction is not a brachycephalic.; fact19 & int8 -> int9: The fact that this junction is not a Hawkyns but he/she altercates is false.; fact21 & int9 -> int10: That this junction does not altercate is true.; int10 -> int11: There is something such that this thing does not altercate.;"
] | 12 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This junction is not a brachycephalic if it does happen. fact2: The fact that that XXY is a kind of a bioclimatology and she/he is a risibility does not hold. fact3: If this mildness is not a Ptilonorhynchidae that XXY is not a bioclimatology and is a kind of a risibility. fact4: This junction happens. fact5: This mildness is a Ptilonorhynchidae that is a Actinomycetales. fact6: The fact that somebody is a kind of non-laxative one that is not a Ptilonorhynchidae is incorrect if that person is a Actinomycetales. fact7: If something is a kind of a Actinomycetales it is a risibility. fact8: This junction does not altercate if the fact that this junction is not a kind of a Hawkyns but the person altercate does not hold. fact9: If some person is a bioclimatology then it is a kind of a risibility. fact10: Something that is non-earliest does express Afrocarpus and is a kind of a Megapodius. fact11: This mildness is not a Ptilonorhynchidae if that this suppresser is non-laxative thing that is not a Ptilonorhynchidae is false. fact12: That this junction is not a Hawkyns and does altercate is not correct if that person is not a brachycephalic. fact13: If that this mildness is a risibility is true then that the fact that that XXY is both a bioclimatology and a risibility does not hold is true. fact14: Some man is a Actinomycetales if that person does express Afrocarpus. fact15: The symmetry is a kind of a Actinomycetales. fact16: This mildness is a kind of a Ptilonorhynchidae. fact17: Something is non-earliest if the fact that it is not lossy and it is not a kind of a correlation does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That that XXY is not a bioclimatology and is a risibility is false. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That highway does not purloin decasyllable. | ¬{B}{b} | fact1: This breaker is basophilic. fact2: If this breaker is not a Gbit then that highway does not purloin decasyllable. fact3: If the fact that this breaker is not haemal but it is a Gbit does not hold that highway does not purloin decasyllable. fact4: If the fact that some man does not confiscate rhomb and/or does not shlep Untermeyer does not hold then the fact that it does purloin decasyllable is true. | fact1: {A}{a} fact2: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact4: (x): ¬(¬{D}x v ¬{C}x) -> {B}x | [] | [] | That highway is not basophilic. | ¬{A}{b} | [
"fact5 -> int1: That this breaker purloins decasyllable is correct if that that either this breaker does not confiscate rhomb or the person does not shlep Untermeyer or both hold is wrong.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This breaker is basophilic. fact2: If this breaker is not a Gbit then that highway does not purloin decasyllable. fact3: If the fact that this breaker is not haemal but it is a Gbit does not hold that highway does not purloin decasyllable. fact4: If the fact that some man does not confiscate rhomb and/or does not shlep Untermeyer does not hold then the fact that it does purloin decasyllable is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That highway does not purloin decasyllable. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That either that waltzing hobbit does not happens or that Numidian does not happens or both is incorrect. | ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) | fact1: That either that waltzing hobbit does not happens or that Numidian does not happens or both is incorrect. fact2: That that Trot does not happens and/or the vagileness does not happens is incorrect. fact3: If that cardiacness occurs that the fact that either this sainthood does not happens or this backing freebee does not happens or both is correct is incorrect. fact4: The besieging Pleurobrachia occurs. fact5: That this discovery does not occurs and that confecting does not happens is caused by that this normalisation does not happens. fact6: That that waltzing hobbit happens hold. fact7: This roller happens. fact8: That waltzing hobbit does not occurs and/or that Numidian does not happens if that cardiacness occurs. fact9: If this discovery does not happens then that cardiacness occurs and that Trot occurs. | fact1: ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) fact2: ¬(¬{B} v ¬{DF}) fact3: {A} -> ¬(¬{BL} v ¬{DL}) fact4: {EJ} fact5: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact6: {AA} fact7: {DS} fact8: {A} -> (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) fact9: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | That this sainthood does not occurs or this backing freebee does not occurs or both is not true. | ¬(¬{BL} v ¬{DL}) | [] | 6 | 1 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That either that waltzing hobbit does not happens or that Numidian does not happens or both is incorrect. fact2: That that Trot does not happens and/or the vagileness does not happens is incorrect. fact3: If that cardiacness occurs that the fact that either this sainthood does not happens or this backing freebee does not happens or both is correct is incorrect. fact4: The besieging Pleurobrachia occurs. fact5: That this discovery does not occurs and that confecting does not happens is caused by that this normalisation does not happens. fact6: That that waltzing hobbit happens hold. fact7: This roller happens. fact8: That waltzing hobbit does not occurs and/or that Numidian does not happens if that cardiacness occurs. fact9: If this discovery does not happens then that cardiacness occurs and that Trot occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That either that waltzing hobbit does not happens or that Numidian does not happens or both is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that this obtainment does not happens and that debasing does not occurs is incorrect. | ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | fact1: That the ruddlesing stemmatology happens and this panto does not happens does not hold. fact2: If this cobbling does not happens that that glomming scurrility does not happens and this smuggling Selaginellaceae does not happens is wrong. fact3: The fact that this panto does not happens and the concomitant does not happens is false. fact4: This obtainment does not happens and that debasing does not occurs if this cobbling occurs. fact5: That this obtainment but notthat debasing occurs is false. fact6: The fact that the trashing does not occurs but this loticness happens does not hold. fact7: The fact that this refacing cardiomegaly occurs and the rewording does not happens does not hold. fact8: That the atoning does not happens and that unauthorisedness does not happens is wrong. fact9: The fact that this leafing Mannheim does not occurs and this fluoridising sterileness does not occurs is false. fact10: The fact that the outpouring does not happens and that puncturelessness does not occurs is false. fact11: That notthe Sun but the synonymousness happens does not hold. | fact1: ¬({JB} & ¬{HC}) fact2: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{BM} & ¬{EB}) fact3: ¬(¬{HC} & ¬{CQ}) fact4: {A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact5: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact6: ¬(¬{FG} & {T}) fact7: ¬({CO} & ¬{DK}) fact8: ¬(¬{DC} & ¬{IG}) fact9: ¬(¬{BF} & ¬{DJ}) fact10: ¬(¬{GK} & ¬{FK}) fact11: ¬(¬{BJ} & {AU}) | [] | [] | That that glomming scurrility does not happens and this smuggling Selaginellaceae does not happens is false. | ¬(¬{BM} & ¬{EB}) | [] | 6 | 1 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That the ruddlesing stemmatology happens and this panto does not happens does not hold. fact2: If this cobbling does not happens that that glomming scurrility does not happens and this smuggling Selaginellaceae does not happens is wrong. fact3: The fact that this panto does not happens and the concomitant does not happens is false. fact4: This obtainment does not happens and that debasing does not occurs if this cobbling occurs. fact5: That this obtainment but notthat debasing occurs is false. fact6: The fact that the trashing does not occurs but this loticness happens does not hold. fact7: The fact that this refacing cardiomegaly occurs and the rewording does not happens does not hold. fact8: That the atoning does not happens and that unauthorisedness does not happens is wrong. fact9: The fact that this leafing Mannheim does not occurs and this fluoridising sterileness does not occurs is false. fact10: The fact that the outpouring does not happens and that puncturelessness does not occurs is false. fact11: That notthe Sun but the synonymousness happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this obtainment does not happens and that debasing does not occurs is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This maranta is a Ariomma but that is not incompatible. | ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | fact1: Either that endoparasite is conciliative or that thing is not a Montserratian or both. fact2: That endoparasite is not nonsubmergible. fact3: Some man is a kind of a Ariomma that does not limit gonorrhoea if the one is not a Lagenaria. fact4: If someone is conciliative then that person is not bromidic. fact5: This maranta is a kind of bromidic thing that is not Romansh. fact6: If that endoparasite is not bromidic either that endoparasite is nonsubmergible or it is a Ursus or both. fact7: This maranta is a Ariomma but that is not incompatible. fact8: This maranta is a Ariomma. fact9: Some man that is not Maltese is a Branchiura and sears flamboyance. fact10: That endoparasite is not a Branchiura or that thing is not Maltese or both if that thing is not nonsubmergible. fact11: This maranta is a kind of a zeugma but this person is not audiometric. fact12: If something is not a Lagenaria that this thing is a Ariomma and this thing is not incompatible is incorrect. fact13: This maranta is not Maltese if it is nonsubmergible. fact14: If the fact that someone is not an encephalitis and not non-centenary is wrong then she/he is not a Lagenaria. fact15: If something is not a Branchiura the fact that it is not a kind of an encephalitis and/or sears flamboyance does not hold. fact16: That endoparasite is not bromidic if that endoparasite is not a kind of a Montserratian. fact17: The fact that someone is both not an encephalitis and not non-centenary does not hold if it sears flamboyance. fact18: If that the fact that this maranta is not an encephalitis or this person sears flamboyance or both is not false does not hold then this baldpate is not an encephalitis. | fact1: ({K}{b} v ¬{J}{b}) fact2: ¬{G}{b} fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{JA}x) fact4: (x): {K}x -> ¬{H}x fact5: ({H}{a} & ¬{FI}{a}) fact6: ¬{H}{b} -> ({G}{b} v {I}{b}) fact7: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact8: {AA}{a} fact9: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) fact10: ¬{G}{b} -> (¬{E}{b} v ¬{F}{b}) fact11: ({AS}{a} & ¬{GE}{a}) fact12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact13: {G}{a} -> ¬{F}{a} fact14: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact15: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x v {D}x) fact16: ¬{J}{b} -> ¬{H}{b} fact17: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) fact18: ¬(¬{C}{a} v {D}{a}) -> ¬{C}{hj} | [
"fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | That this maranta is a Ariomma but it is not incompatible is not right. | ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"fact19 -> int1: The fact that this maranta is a kind of a Ariomma but it is not incompatible does not hold if this maranta is not a Lagenaria.; fact27 -> int2: If the fact that this maranta is not an encephalitis and is centenary is false that one is not a Lagenaria.; fact25 -> int3: The fact that this maranta is not an encephalitis but centenary is incorrect if this maranta sears flamboyance.; fact26 -> int4: If this maranta is not Maltese it is a Branchiura and it sears flamboyance.; fact20 -> int5: That endoparasite is not bromidic if the thing is conciliative.; fact21 & int5 & fact23 -> int6: That endoparasite is not bromidic.; fact22 & int6 -> int7: That endoparasite is nonsubmergible and/or is a Ursus.;"
] | 10 | 1 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Either that endoparasite is conciliative or that thing is not a Montserratian or both. fact2: That endoparasite is not nonsubmergible. fact3: Some man is a kind of a Ariomma that does not limit gonorrhoea if the one is not a Lagenaria. fact4: If someone is conciliative then that person is not bromidic. fact5: This maranta is a kind of bromidic thing that is not Romansh. fact6: If that endoparasite is not bromidic either that endoparasite is nonsubmergible or it is a Ursus or both. fact7: This maranta is a Ariomma but that is not incompatible. fact8: This maranta is a Ariomma. fact9: Some man that is not Maltese is a Branchiura and sears flamboyance. fact10: That endoparasite is not a Branchiura or that thing is not Maltese or both if that thing is not nonsubmergible. fact11: This maranta is a kind of a zeugma but this person is not audiometric. fact12: If something is not a Lagenaria that this thing is a Ariomma and this thing is not incompatible is incorrect. fact13: This maranta is not Maltese if it is nonsubmergible. fact14: If the fact that someone is not an encephalitis and not non-centenary is wrong then she/he is not a Lagenaria. fact15: If something is not a Branchiura the fact that it is not a kind of an encephalitis and/or sears flamboyance does not hold. fact16: That endoparasite is not bromidic if that endoparasite is not a kind of a Montserratian. fact17: The fact that someone is both not an encephalitis and not non-centenary does not hold if it sears flamboyance. fact18: If that the fact that this maranta is not an encephalitis or this person sears flamboyance or both is not false does not hold then this baldpate is not an encephalitis. ; $hypothesis$ = This maranta is a Ariomma but that is not incompatible. ; $proof$ = | fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That every person is a human does not hold. | ¬((x): {A}x) | fact1: Everything is sclerotic. fact2: If that something enhances but the thing is not mutational is incorrect the thing does not enhances. fact3: If some man is not a Kentucky and does not craft marauding it is not armillary. fact4: If something is not a kind of a scrapie the fact that it enhances and is not mutational is not right. fact5: If that some man is a inadvertency and drills Hipparchus is not right it does not drills Hipparchus. fact6: Everything is unrenewable. fact7: The fact that every person is a kind of a human hold. fact8: Everything is a kind of a castle. fact9: Everything does defy dative. fact10: If someone does not drill Hipparchus then she/he is not a scrapie. fact11: Everything is curious. fact12: Everyone is a scores. fact13: If some man is not a inanimateness but she is a human she is a Paderewski. fact14: If something is not armillary then it is not a inanimateness but a human. fact15: Everybody is a photochemistry. fact16: Something portrays Omiya if it is a kind of a human. fact17: The fact that every man is a kind of a Ascomycota is right. fact18: There is nothing such that that thing is a kind of a inadvertency and drills Hipparchus. fact19: Everybody is indivisible. fact20: Everyone unsexes Geothlypis. fact21: Everything does kit Dietrich. | fact1: (x): {DH}x fact2: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact3: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact4: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}x & ¬{H}x) fact5: (x): ¬({K}x & {I}x) -> ¬{I}x fact6: (x): {IH}x fact7: (x): {A}x fact8: (x): {JF}x fact9: (x): {AQ}x fact10: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬{G}x fact11: (x): {AA}x fact12: (x): {EN}x fact13: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> {AL}x fact14: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) fact15: (x): {BI}x fact16: (x): {A}x -> {HU}x fact17: (x): {BH}x fact18: (x): ¬({K}x & {I}x) fact19: (x): {FA}x fact20: (x): {GB}x fact21: (x): {JD}x | [
"fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | That everyone is a Paderewski hold. | (x): {AL}x | [
"fact22 -> int1: If that watershed is not armillary that watershed is both not a inanimateness and a human.; fact29 -> int2: If that watershed is not a Kentucky and does not craft marauding then that thing is not armillary.; fact24 -> int3: That watershed does not enhance if the fact that that watershed enhance and is not mutational does not hold.; fact27 -> int4: If the fact that that watershed is a inadvertency and it does drill Hipparchus is wrong that watershed does not drill Hipparchus.; fact23 -> int5: That that watershed is a inadvertency and drills Hipparchus is wrong.; int4 & int5 -> int6: That watershed does not drill Hipparchus.; fact26 -> int7: If that watershed does not drill Hipparchus then it is not a scrapie.; int6 & int7 -> int8: That watershed is not a scrapie.; fact25 -> int9: The fact that that watershed enhances and is not mutational is wrong if it is not a scrapie.; int8 & int9 -> int10: The fact that that watershed enhances but it is not mutational does not hold.; int3 & int10 -> int11: The fact that that watershed does not enhance is correct.; fact28 -> int12: That watershed is a Paderewski if that is not a kind of a inanimateness and is a human.;"
] | 10 | 1 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 20 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Everything is sclerotic. fact2: If that something enhances but the thing is not mutational is incorrect the thing does not enhances. fact3: If some man is not a Kentucky and does not craft marauding it is not armillary. fact4: If something is not a kind of a scrapie the fact that it enhances and is not mutational is not right. fact5: If that some man is a inadvertency and drills Hipparchus is not right it does not drills Hipparchus. fact6: Everything is unrenewable. fact7: The fact that every person is a kind of a human hold. fact8: Everything is a kind of a castle. fact9: Everything does defy dative. fact10: If someone does not drill Hipparchus then she/he is not a scrapie. fact11: Everything is curious. fact12: Everyone is a scores. fact13: If some man is not a inanimateness but she is a human she is a Paderewski. fact14: If something is not armillary then it is not a inanimateness but a human. fact15: Everybody is a photochemistry. fact16: Something portrays Omiya if it is a kind of a human. fact17: The fact that every man is a kind of a Ascomycota is right. fact18: There is nothing such that that thing is a kind of a inadvertency and drills Hipparchus. fact19: Everybody is indivisible. fact20: Everyone unsexes Geothlypis. fact21: Everything does kit Dietrich. ; $hypothesis$ = That every person is a human does not hold. ; $proof$ = | fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This dyslectic is parabolical. | {C}{c} | fact1: That this dyslectic is aerophilatelic hold if that hagiographist is non-parabolical. fact2: If this dyslectic is not aerophilatelic then that hagiographist is not non-parabolical. fact3: That diarthrosis is both aerophilatelic and not presocratic if that hagiographist is not presocratic. fact4: That hagiographist does not combine secrecy. fact5: The fact that the mechanics is aerophilatelic is not false. fact6: If that diarthrosis is not non-awake but it is not presocratic then this dyslectic is not non-parabolical. fact7: If that the spermicide is not a Cromwell and not creaseproof is false then that diarthrosis does not open immunochemistry. fact8: The fact that the spermicide is not a Cromwell and the thing is non-creaseproof is wrong if this rim is a short. fact9: Lucero is a short. fact10: This rim is a short if Lucero is a short. fact11: The fact that that hagiographist is not non-presocratic if this dyslectic is aerophilatelic but it is not parabolical is correct. fact12: This dyslectic is parabolical if that diarthrosis is both awake and presocratic. fact13: Something is aerophilatelic and it is awake if it is not pressor. fact14: That diarthrosis is both awake and not presocratic if that hagiographist is presocratic. fact15: If that hagiographist is not non-aerophilatelic and that one is presocratic this dyslectic is not parabolical. fact16: That diarthrosis is not non-aerophilatelic and not presocratic. fact17: Someone is non-pressor if it is a beetling and it is a fair. fact18: Someone that does not open immunochemistry soothes Balsamorhiza and/or is a kind of a Brunei. fact19: That diarthrosis is not presocratic if that hagiographist is not presocratic. fact20: This dyslectic is awake if that diarthrosis is parabolical but it is not presocratic. fact21: That pharos is not aerophilatelic. fact22: That hagiographist is not aerophilatelic and is not presocratic. | fact1: ¬{C}{a} -> {A}{c} fact2: ¬{A}{c} -> {C}{a} fact3: ¬{B}{a} -> ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact4: ¬{T}{a} fact5: {A}{ei} fact6: ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {C}{c} fact7: ¬(¬{I}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) -> ¬{G}{b} fact8: {K}{e} -> ¬(¬{I}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) fact9: {K}{f} fact10: {K}{f} -> {K}{e} fact11: ({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> {B}{a} fact12: ({D}{b} & {B}{b}) -> {C}{c} fact13: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({A}x & {D}x) fact14: ¬{B}{a} -> ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact15: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{c} fact16: ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact17: (x): ({M}x & {L}x) -> ¬{J}x fact18: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({F}x v {E}x) fact19: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact20: ({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {D}{c} fact21: ¬{A}{fr} fact22: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | [
"fact22 -> int1: That hagiographist is not presocratic.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: That diarthrosis is awake but it is not presocratic.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact22 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & fact14 -> int2: ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}); int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis;"
] | This dyslectic is not parabolical. | ¬{C}{c} | [
"fact28 -> int3: That hagiographist is aerophilatelic and awake if she is not pressor.; fact26 -> int4: If that hagiographist is a beetling and he/she is a fair then he/she is not pressor.; fact24 -> int5: If that diarthrosis does not open immunochemistry then that person does soothe Balsamorhiza or that person is a kind of a Brunei or both.; fact25 & fact23 -> int6: This rim is a short.; fact27 & int6 -> int7: The fact that the spermicide is both not a Cromwell and not creaseproof is false.; fact30 & int7 -> int8: The fact that that diarthrosis does not open immunochemistry is correct.; int5 & int8 -> int9: That diarthrosis soothes Balsamorhiza or that thing is a Brunei or both.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That this dyslectic is aerophilatelic hold if that hagiographist is non-parabolical. fact2: If this dyslectic is not aerophilatelic then that hagiographist is not non-parabolical. fact3: That diarthrosis is both aerophilatelic and not presocratic if that hagiographist is not presocratic. fact4: That hagiographist does not combine secrecy. fact5: The fact that the mechanics is aerophilatelic is not false. fact6: If that diarthrosis is not non-awake but it is not presocratic then this dyslectic is not non-parabolical. fact7: If that the spermicide is not a Cromwell and not creaseproof is false then that diarthrosis does not open immunochemistry. fact8: The fact that the spermicide is not a Cromwell and the thing is non-creaseproof is wrong if this rim is a short. fact9: Lucero is a short. fact10: This rim is a short if Lucero is a short. fact11: The fact that that hagiographist is not non-presocratic if this dyslectic is aerophilatelic but it is not parabolical is correct. fact12: This dyslectic is parabolical if that diarthrosis is both awake and presocratic. fact13: Something is aerophilatelic and it is awake if it is not pressor. fact14: That diarthrosis is both awake and not presocratic if that hagiographist is presocratic. fact15: If that hagiographist is not non-aerophilatelic and that one is presocratic this dyslectic is not parabolical. fact16: That diarthrosis is not non-aerophilatelic and not presocratic. fact17: Someone is non-pressor if it is a beetling and it is a fair. fact18: Someone that does not open immunochemistry soothes Balsamorhiza and/or is a kind of a Brunei. fact19: That diarthrosis is not presocratic if that hagiographist is not presocratic. fact20: This dyslectic is awake if that diarthrosis is parabolical but it is not presocratic. fact21: That pharos is not aerophilatelic. fact22: That hagiographist is not aerophilatelic and is not presocratic. ; $hypothesis$ = This dyslectic is parabolical. ; $proof$ = | fact22 -> int1: That hagiographist is not presocratic.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: That diarthrosis is awake but it is not presocratic.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That that muskwood does not roll shocking and does emulsify isomorphism does not hold. | ¬(¬{C}{b} & {D}{b}) | fact1: The fact that that muskwood rolls shocking and that thing emulsifies isomorphism is false. fact2: The fact that that that muskwood rolls shocking and emulsifies isomorphism hold is wrong if there is someone such that the one dilapidateds Agassiz. fact3: The bathyscape is a ranting. fact4: If that cinder is a ranting then that cinder dilapidateds Agassiz. fact5: If someone dilapidateds Agassiz then that that muskwood does not roll shocking but it emulsifies isomorphism does not hold. fact6: If something is a horsemanship then this does not plump Bankhead and is not Prussian. fact7: That muskwood is not a ranting but this person dilapidateds Agassiz if that cinder does not drip antonym. fact8: If there exists someone such that it rolls shocking then the fact that that cinder is not a ranting but it does dilapidated Agassiz is false. fact9: The fact that this flindosy does not recover is correct if this mastoid does not plump Bankhead and it is non-Prussian. fact10: Some person does not roll shocking but he/she does emulsify isomorphism if he/she is not a ranting. fact11: The vandal is both not a crabbed and not a Pipturus if this flindosy does not recover. fact12: That that cinder does not emulsify isomorphism but this person does dilapidated Agassiz is incorrect if somebody is a ranting. fact13: The fact that that muskwood does not dilapidated Agassiz but this is a kind of a ranting is false if something emulsifies isomorphism. fact14: That that cinder does not drip antonym is true if the vandal is not a crabbed and not a Pipturus. | fact1: ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b}) fact2: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b}) fact3: {A}{jb} fact4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact5: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {D}{b}) fact6: (x): {K}x -> (¬{J}x & ¬{I}x) fact7: ¬{E}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) fact8: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact9: (¬{J}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d} fact10: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}x & {D}x) fact11: ¬{H}{d} -> (¬{G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) fact12: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {B}{a}) fact13: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) fact14: (¬{G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{a} | [] | [] | That muskwood does not roll shocking but it emulsifies isomorphism. | (¬{C}{b} & {D}{b}) | [
"fact19 -> int1: That muskwood does not roll shocking and emulsifies isomorphism if that muskwood is not a kind of a ranting.; fact20 -> int2: This mastoid does not plump Bankhead and it is not Prussian if the fact that this mastoid is a horsemanship is right.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that that muskwood rolls shocking and that thing emulsifies isomorphism is false. fact2: The fact that that that muskwood rolls shocking and emulsifies isomorphism hold is wrong if there is someone such that the one dilapidateds Agassiz. fact3: The bathyscape is a ranting. fact4: If that cinder is a ranting then that cinder dilapidateds Agassiz. fact5: If someone dilapidateds Agassiz then that that muskwood does not roll shocking but it emulsifies isomorphism does not hold. fact6: If something is a horsemanship then this does not plump Bankhead and is not Prussian. fact7: That muskwood is not a ranting but this person dilapidateds Agassiz if that cinder does not drip antonym. fact8: If there exists someone such that it rolls shocking then the fact that that cinder is not a ranting but it does dilapidated Agassiz is false. fact9: The fact that this flindosy does not recover is correct if this mastoid does not plump Bankhead and it is non-Prussian. fact10: Some person does not roll shocking but he/she does emulsify isomorphism if he/she is not a ranting. fact11: The vandal is both not a crabbed and not a Pipturus if this flindosy does not recover. fact12: That that cinder does not emulsify isomorphism but this person does dilapidated Agassiz is incorrect if somebody is a ranting. fact13: The fact that that muskwood does not dilapidated Agassiz but this is a kind of a ranting is false if something emulsifies isomorphism. fact14: That that cinder does not drip antonym is true if the vandal is not a crabbed and not a Pipturus. ; $hypothesis$ = That that muskwood does not roll shocking and does emulsify isomorphism does not hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That this burl is non-Martian man that is aground is not correct. | ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) | fact1: Something does not award if the thing does discombobulate Agrippa and is not hieroglyphical. fact2: If this ethernet does not award then the fact that this burl is both not Martian and aground is incorrect. fact3: If this burl does not award this burl is not Martian and is aground. fact4: This burl does not award. | fact1: (x): ({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact2: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact4: ¬{A}{a} | [
"fact3 & fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact3 & fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | That this burl is non-Martian man that is aground is not correct. | ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) | [
"fact6 -> int1: If this ethernet discombobulates Agrippa and is not hieroglyphical then this ethernet does not award.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Something does not award if the thing does discombobulate Agrippa and is not hieroglyphical. fact2: If this ethernet does not award then the fact that this burl is both not Martian and aground is incorrect. fact3: If this burl does not award this burl is not Martian and is aground. fact4: This burl does not award. ; $hypothesis$ = That this burl is non-Martian man that is aground is not correct. ; $proof$ = | fact3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This gangliocyte does not better. | ¬{D}{b} | fact1: The fact that this gangliocyte does not better is true if this gangliocyte does elevate Noguchi. fact2: This ranger does blur soliloquy. fact3: That this ranger is not irreducible or does not blur soliloquy or both is false. fact4: The fact that this gangliocyte is forceless and it elevates Noguchi does not hold if it is reducible. fact5: This disposable blurs soliloquy. fact6: The fact that something is forceless but this does not elevate Noguchi does not hold if this is reducible. fact7: That either this ranger is a kind of a puzzler or it does not blur soliloquy or both does not hold. fact8: This gangliocyte is reducible if that this ranger is a puzzler and/or does not blur soliloquy does not hold. fact9: Something is forceless and/or reducible if it does not elevate Noguchi. fact10: If that something is forceless and does not elevate Noguchi is false then this does not better. fact11: The fact that this gangliocyte is forceless and it does elevate Noguchi does not hold. | fact1: {C}{b} -> ¬{D}{b} fact2: {AB}{a} fact3: ¬({B}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact4: {B}{b} -> ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) fact5: {AB}{ed} fact6: (x): {B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) fact7: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact8: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x v {B}x) fact10: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{D}x fact11: ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) | [
"fact8 & fact7 -> int1: This gangliocyte is reducible.; fact6 -> int2: If this gangliocyte is reducible then the fact that that one is forceless and that one does not elevate Noguchi is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that this gangliocyte is forceless and does not elevate Noguchi is wrong.; fact10 -> int4: If the fact that this gangliocyte is forceless and does not elevate Noguchi is not correct that the thing does not better is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact8 & fact7 -> int1: {B}{b}; fact6 -> int2: {B}{b} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}); fact10 -> int4: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | This gangliocyte betters. | {D}{b} | [
"fact12 -> int5: This ranger is forceless and/or it is reducible if it does not elevate Noguchi.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that this gangliocyte does not better is true if this gangliocyte does elevate Noguchi. fact2: This ranger does blur soliloquy. fact3: That this ranger is not irreducible or does not blur soliloquy or both is false. fact4: The fact that this gangliocyte is forceless and it elevates Noguchi does not hold if it is reducible. fact5: This disposable blurs soliloquy. fact6: The fact that something is forceless but this does not elevate Noguchi does not hold if this is reducible. fact7: That either this ranger is a kind of a puzzler or it does not blur soliloquy or both does not hold. fact8: This gangliocyte is reducible if that this ranger is a puzzler and/or does not blur soliloquy does not hold. fact9: Something is forceless and/or reducible if it does not elevate Noguchi. fact10: If that something is forceless and does not elevate Noguchi is false then this does not better. fact11: The fact that this gangliocyte is forceless and it does elevate Noguchi does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This gangliocyte does not better. ; $proof$ = | fact8 & fact7 -> int1: This gangliocyte is reducible.; fact6 -> int2: If this gangliocyte is reducible then the fact that that one is forceless and that one does not elevate Noguchi is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that this gangliocyte is forceless and does not elevate Noguchi is wrong.; fact10 -> int4: If the fact that this gangliocyte is forceless and does not elevate Noguchi is not correct that the thing does not better is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That comforts is a timed that does not keratinize Sarcoptidae. | ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | fact1: If someone regains the fact that it is kinesthetic is not wrong. fact2: The fact that something keratinizes Sarcoptidae but this does not list does not hold if this does not dwell Woodward. fact3: Something that does border eudemon is kinesthetic. fact4: that Woodward does dwell hypoblast. fact5: Something is apologetic if that thing is a prematurity. fact6: Somebody is apologetic if she/he is an ovation. fact7: That hypoblast is not apologetic if that attractor either briefs eosinophilia or is apologetic or both. fact8: This Zimbabwean does keratinize Sarcoptidae. fact9: Somebody is a prematurity and/or that one is a kind of an ovation if that one is not a covered. fact10: If somebody does not dwell Woodward then it is a timed and it does not keratinize Sarcoptidae. fact11: That attractor is nonparametric. fact12: That that comforts is a kind of a timed and it keratinizes Sarcoptidae does not hold if that hypoblast dwells Woodward. fact13: That hypoblast does dwell Woodward. fact14: If that hypoblast is not apologetic then that hypoblast regains and/or borders eudemon. fact15: That attractor is not a covered if it is nonparametric. | fact1: (x): {D}x -> {B}x fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AB}x & ¬{JF}x) fact3: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact4: {AC}{aa} fact5: (x): {F}x -> {E}x fact6: (x): {H}x -> {E}x fact7: ({G}{c} v {E}{c}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact8: {AB}{ab} fact9: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({F}x v {H}x) fact10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact11: {J}{c} fact12: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact13: {A}{a} fact14: ¬{E}{a} -> ({D}{a} v {C}{a}) fact15: {J}{c} -> ¬{I}{c} | [] | [] | That comforts is a timed that does not keratinize Sarcoptidae. | ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | [
"fact16 -> int1: That that comforts is a timed that does not keratinize Sarcoptidae if that comforts does not dwell Woodward hold.; fact22 -> int2: That attractor is a prematurity and/or it is an ovation if it is not a covered.; fact17 & fact18 -> int3: That attractor is not a covered.; int2 & int3 -> int4: That attractor is a prematurity and/or an ovation.; fact25 -> int5: That attractor is apologetic if she is a prematurity.; fact20 -> int6: If the fact that that attractor is an ovation hold that attractor is apologetic.; int4 & int5 & int6 -> int7: That attractor is apologetic.; int7 -> int8: That attractor briefs eosinophilia or is apologetic or both.; fact23 & int8 -> int9: That hypoblast is not apologetic.; fact19 & int9 -> int10: That hypoblast regains and/or that thing borders eudemon.; fact21 -> int11: If that hypoblast regains then it is kinesthetic.; fact24 -> int12: That hypoblast is kinesthetic if it borders eudemon.; int10 & int11 & int12 -> int13: That hypoblast is kinesthetic.; int13 -> int14: There exists something such that it is kinesthetic.;"
] | 10 | 1 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If someone regains the fact that it is kinesthetic is not wrong. fact2: The fact that something keratinizes Sarcoptidae but this does not list does not hold if this does not dwell Woodward. fact3: Something that does border eudemon is kinesthetic. fact4: that Woodward does dwell hypoblast. fact5: Something is apologetic if that thing is a prematurity. fact6: Somebody is apologetic if she/he is an ovation. fact7: That hypoblast is not apologetic if that attractor either briefs eosinophilia or is apologetic or both. fact8: This Zimbabwean does keratinize Sarcoptidae. fact9: Somebody is a prematurity and/or that one is a kind of an ovation if that one is not a covered. fact10: If somebody does not dwell Woodward then it is a timed and it does not keratinize Sarcoptidae. fact11: That attractor is nonparametric. fact12: That that comforts is a kind of a timed and it keratinizes Sarcoptidae does not hold if that hypoblast dwells Woodward. fact13: That hypoblast does dwell Woodward. fact14: If that hypoblast is not apologetic then that hypoblast regains and/or borders eudemon. fact15: That attractor is not a covered if it is nonparametric. ; $hypothesis$ = That comforts is a timed that does not keratinize Sarcoptidae. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That peregrine do notubt. | ¬{B}{aa} | fact1: That peregrine doubts if this thing is pyrogenic. fact2: This whipstitch incurs Spirillaceae. fact3: If that this whipstitch incurs Spirillaceae hold then that that peregrine is both non-pyrogenic and unmilitary does not hold. fact4: If the fact that someone whites Centropus and does not hobble ninety is false it does not whites Centropus. fact5: Lili hobbles ninety and fascinates gratefulness. fact6: Some person stalls Anarhichas if it hobbles ninety and/or it is not amaranthine. fact7: Something that stalls Anarhichas do notubt and does not white Centropus. fact8: Something incurs Spirillaceae if the fact that the thing do notubt and the thing does not white Centropus hold. fact9: Somebody doubt if it is pyrogenic. fact10: Something do notubt if it does not incur Spirillaceae. fact11: If this whipstitch does incur Spirillaceae then the fact that that peregrine is pyrogenic and it is unmilitary does not hold. fact12: The fact that the fact that that peregrine is a kind of pyrogenic one that is unmilitary is incorrect is true. fact13: this Spirillaceae incurs whipstitch. fact14: If this whipstitch does not white Centropus this whipstitch incurs Spirillaceae and it stalls Anarhichas. fact15: The fact that something is not pyrogenic but this gormandises Chermidae does not hold if this incurs Spirillaceae. | fact1: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} fact2: {A}{a} fact3: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact4: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{C}x fact5: ({F}{it} & {G}{it}) fact6: (x): ({F}x v ¬{E}x) -> {D}x fact7: (x): {D}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) fact8: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}x fact9: (x): {AA}x -> {B}x fact10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x fact11: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact12: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact13: {AC}{ab} fact14: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{a} & {D}{a}) fact15: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {HB}x) | [
"fact2 & fact3 -> int1: That that peregrine is not pyrogenic and is unmilitary is incorrect.;"
] | [
"fact2 & fact3 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa});"
] | The fact that Lili is non-pyrogenic thing that does gormandise Chermidae does not hold. | ¬(¬{AA}{it} & {HB}{it}) | [
"fact17 -> int2: If Lili incurs Spirillaceae then that Lili is non-pyrogenic thing that gormandises Chermidae is not right.; fact19 -> int3: If Lili do notubt and it does not white Centropus then Lili incurs Spirillaceae.; fact18 -> int4: If Lili stalls Anarhichas that Lili do notubt and does not white Centropus hold.; fact16 -> int5: Lili stalls Anarhichas if either Lili hobbles ninety or that person is not amaranthine or both.; fact20 -> int6: Lili hobbles ninety.; int6 -> int7: Lili hobbles ninety or it is not amaranthine or both.; int5 & int7 -> int8: Lili stalls Anarhichas.; int4 & int8 -> int9: Lili do notubt and does not white Centropus.; int3 & int9 -> int10: Lili incurs Spirillaceae.; int2 & int10 -> hypothesis;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $facts$ = fact1: That peregrine doubts if this thing is pyrogenic. fact2: This whipstitch incurs Spirillaceae. fact3: If that this whipstitch incurs Spirillaceae hold then that that peregrine is both non-pyrogenic and unmilitary does not hold. fact4: If the fact that someone whites Centropus and does not hobble ninety is false it does not whites Centropus. fact5: Lili hobbles ninety and fascinates gratefulness. fact6: Some person stalls Anarhichas if it hobbles ninety and/or it is not amaranthine. fact7: Something that stalls Anarhichas do notubt and does not white Centropus. fact8: Something incurs Spirillaceae if the fact that the thing do notubt and the thing does not white Centropus hold. fact9: Somebody doubt if it is pyrogenic. fact10: Something do notubt if it does not incur Spirillaceae. fact11: If this whipstitch does incur Spirillaceae then the fact that that peregrine is pyrogenic and it is unmilitary does not hold. fact12: The fact that the fact that that peregrine is a kind of pyrogenic one that is unmilitary is incorrect is true. fact13: this Spirillaceae incurs whipstitch. fact14: If this whipstitch does not white Centropus this whipstitch incurs Spirillaceae and it stalls Anarhichas. fact15: The fact that something is not pyrogenic but this gormandises Chermidae does not hold if this incurs Spirillaceae. ; $hypothesis$ = That peregrine do notubt. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That there exists nothing such that the thing does not outgo rutherford and the thing is not a kind of a maffia is false. | ¬((x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)) | fact1: that if that vomitus values bruise that everything is not a kind of a buncombe or that thing is a bagascosis or both hold is false. | fact1: fake_formula | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $facts$ = fact1: that if that vomitus values bruise that everything is not a kind of a buncombe or that thing is a bagascosis or both hold is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That there exists nothing such that the thing does not outgo rutherford and the thing is not a kind of a maffia is false. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | Either that honouring or that instructing or both occurs. | ({D} v {E}) | fact1: That that holding happens hold. fact2: That honouring does not happens if the shying Boole does not happens. fact3: If the shying Boole does not occurs then that that honouring and/or that instructing occurs is wrong. fact4: If that holding occurs and/or this motioning occurs the shying Boole does not happens. fact5: Either this daisylikeness or this magistrature or both prevents this animisticness. | fact1: {A} fact2: ¬{C} -> ¬{D} fact3: ¬{C} -> ¬({D} v {E}) fact4: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact5: ({GS} v {II}) -> ¬{AO} | [
"fact1 -> int1: That holding occurs and/or this motioning occurs.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: The shying Boole does not happens.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); int1 & fact4 -> int2: ¬{C}; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That that holding happens hold. fact2: That honouring does not happens if the shying Boole does not happens. fact3: If the shying Boole does not occurs then that that honouring and/or that instructing occurs is wrong. fact4: If that holding occurs and/or this motioning occurs the shying Boole does not happens. fact5: Either this daisylikeness or this magistrature or both prevents this animisticness. ; $hypothesis$ = Either that honouring or that instructing or both occurs. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> int1: That holding occurs and/or this motioning occurs.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: The shying Boole does not happens.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | Let's assume that that auxiliary is artistic. | {A}{a} | fact1: If that that auxiliary is not artistic is incorrect then that that scarecrow is a kind of non-polynomial man that is a pagination is incorrect. | fact1: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that auxiliary is artistic.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: That that scarecrow is not polynomial but it is a pagination does not hold.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b});"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $facts$ = fact1: If that that auxiliary is not artistic is incorrect then that that scarecrow is a kind of non-polynomial man that is a pagination is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that auxiliary is artistic. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | If that that calabazilla is calycine but she/he does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea is not right then she/he is not a Varanus. | ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} | fact1: That calabazilla does not letter entirety if the fact that that calabazilla is a kind of a Polydactylus but it is not calycine is false. fact2: If that that calabazilla is a kind of calycine person that apotheosises Mantophasmatodea is wrong that calabazilla is not a Varanus. fact3: Some person is not a Varanus if that it is calycine person that apotheosises Mantophasmatodea is wrong. fact4: If that the gasfield does profess Dictamnus but it is not a Velazquez does not hold it is not a kind of a Varanus. fact5: If that somebody precedes angriness but it does not debauch is false then it is not a Venezuelan. fact6: That calabazilla is not a Varanus if it is not calycine. fact7: If that something is calycine but it does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea is wrong it is not a Varanus. fact8: If that calabazilla is calycine but that does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea that that is not a Varanus is not false. fact9: If the fact that some man is a kind of political man that is not a Hubble is wrong it is not a Glareola. fact10: If that somebody is calycine and does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea does not hold it is a Varanus. fact11: If that something is Ibsenian but it does not enter Aesculus does not hold then it is not a disquietude. fact12: If something that is calycine does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea then that it is not a Varanus is not wrong. fact13: If the fact that something is hypophysectomized but that is not monocarboxylic is not right that is not a scatter. fact14: That that calabazilla is a Varanus is correct if the fact that that calabazilla is calycine thing that does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea is false. fact15: Somebody is not a kind of a Varanus if the fact that this one is not calycine is true. | fact1: ¬({EN}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) -> ¬{FR}{aa} fact2: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact3: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: ¬({GI}{it} & ¬{IA}{it}) -> ¬{B}{it} fact5: (x): ¬({DS}x & ¬{GH}x) -> ¬{IE}x fact6: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} fact7: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact8: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact9: (x): ¬({BB}x & ¬{AM}x) -> ¬{FC}x fact10: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact11: (x): ¬({FP}x & ¬{JB}x) -> ¬{IT}x fact12: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact13: (x): ¬({GL}x & ¬{K}x) -> ¬{IJ}x fact14: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact15: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x | [
"fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 14 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That calabazilla does not letter entirety if the fact that that calabazilla is a kind of a Polydactylus but it is not calycine is false. fact2: If that that calabazilla is a kind of calycine person that apotheosises Mantophasmatodea is wrong that calabazilla is not a Varanus. fact3: Some person is not a Varanus if that it is calycine person that apotheosises Mantophasmatodea is wrong. fact4: If that the gasfield does profess Dictamnus but it is not a Velazquez does not hold it is not a kind of a Varanus. fact5: If that somebody precedes angriness but it does not debauch is false then it is not a Venezuelan. fact6: That calabazilla is not a Varanus if it is not calycine. fact7: If that something is calycine but it does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea is wrong it is not a Varanus. fact8: If that calabazilla is calycine but that does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea that that is not a Varanus is not false. fact9: If the fact that some man is a kind of political man that is not a Hubble is wrong it is not a Glareola. fact10: If that somebody is calycine and does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea does not hold it is a Varanus. fact11: If that something is Ibsenian but it does not enter Aesculus does not hold then it is not a disquietude. fact12: If something that is calycine does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea then that it is not a Varanus is not wrong. fact13: If the fact that something is hypophysectomized but that is not monocarboxylic is not right that is not a scatter. fact14: That that calabazilla is a Varanus is correct if the fact that that calabazilla is calycine thing that does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea is false. fact15: Somebody is not a kind of a Varanus if the fact that this one is not calycine is true. ; $hypothesis$ = If that that calabazilla is calycine but she/he does not apotheosise Mantophasmatodea is not right then she/he is not a Varanus. ; $proof$ = | fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That that landler happens and that verbalness occurs does not hold. | ¬({B} & {A}) | fact1: That the trihydroxiness does not happens is correct. fact2: That the flanking Macruridae but notthe jumping conto happens prevents that the suasion does not happens. fact3: That the shearing happens is correct. fact4: That verbalness happens. fact5: The fact that both this sustenance and this uremicness happens hold. fact6: If this misusing uncloudedness does not occurs and the blooming superinfection does not happens then that landler happens. fact7: This underdressing Nile does not happens. fact8: That oncoming occurs. fact9: The illativeness happens and this naturalizing doxology occurs. fact10: This schooling does not happens but this caruncularness occurs if this cohabitation does not happens. fact11: That timid does not occurs and this culturing qindarka does not occurs if this schooling does not occurs. fact12: This insult does not occurs and the interactiveness does not occurs. fact13: That that landler and that verbalness occurs does not hold if that timid does not happens. fact14: The combat is triggered by that the sparing determinism does not occurs and the hairdressing does not happens. fact15: The ruckling Bata does not occurs and that selenolatry does not happens. fact16: That variegation and this naturalizing doxology occurs. fact17: This misusing uncloudedness does not occurs. fact18: That landler happens if this misusing uncloudedness occurs but the blooming superinfection does not occurs. fact19: The accommodating Democritus does not occurs. fact20: Both the effortfulness and that handicraft happens. fact21: This misusing uncloudedness does not happens and the blooming superinfection does not happens. | fact1: ¬{IF} fact2: ({GD} & ¬{FS}) -> {M} fact3: {FJ} fact4: {A} fact5: ({GK} & {AE}) fact6: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact7: ¬{EK} fact8: {CI} fact9: ({FA} & {IB}) fact10: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & {F}) fact11: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact12: (¬{HQ} & ¬{FN}) fact13: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & {A}) fact14: (¬{ES} & ¬{HK}) -> {CL} fact15: (¬{FL} & ¬{DK}) fact16: ({HT} & {IB}) fact17: ¬{AA} fact18: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact19: ¬{EG} fact20: ({AD} & {CS}) fact21: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | [
"fact6 & fact21 -> int1: That landler happens.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 & fact21 -> int1: {B}; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | That that landler happens and that verbalness occurs does not hold. | ¬({B} & {A}) | [] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That the trihydroxiness does not happens is correct. fact2: That the flanking Macruridae but notthe jumping conto happens prevents that the suasion does not happens. fact3: That the shearing happens is correct. fact4: That verbalness happens. fact5: The fact that both this sustenance and this uremicness happens hold. fact6: If this misusing uncloudedness does not occurs and the blooming superinfection does not happens then that landler happens. fact7: This underdressing Nile does not happens. fact8: That oncoming occurs. fact9: The illativeness happens and this naturalizing doxology occurs. fact10: This schooling does not happens but this caruncularness occurs if this cohabitation does not happens. fact11: That timid does not occurs and this culturing qindarka does not occurs if this schooling does not occurs. fact12: This insult does not occurs and the interactiveness does not occurs. fact13: That that landler and that verbalness occurs does not hold if that timid does not happens. fact14: The combat is triggered by that the sparing determinism does not occurs and the hairdressing does not happens. fact15: The ruckling Bata does not occurs and that selenolatry does not happens. fact16: That variegation and this naturalizing doxology occurs. fact17: This misusing uncloudedness does not occurs. fact18: That landler happens if this misusing uncloudedness occurs but the blooming superinfection does not occurs. fact19: The accommodating Democritus does not occurs. fact20: Both the effortfulness and that handicraft happens. fact21: This misusing uncloudedness does not happens and the blooming superinfection does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that landler happens and that verbalness occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ = | fact6 & fact21 -> int1: That landler happens.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | Either that adder is morbilliform or that thing is dishonorable or both. | ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) | fact1: The chub is morbilliform. fact2: This wellspring is dishonorable. fact3: That adder is dishonorable. fact4: A morbilliform person is dishonorable. fact5: That adder either contracts Valois or is dishonorable or both. fact6: That shape is not non-morbilliform. fact7: If something is dissuasive thing that does not record Dibranchiata that thing is morbilliform. fact8: That adder is a Housatonic. fact9: That adder is a kind of a swob and/or that one is a kind of a everlastingness. fact10: That adder is a Eurylaimidae. | fact1: {A}{cp} fact2: {B}{im} fact3: {B}{a} fact4: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact5: ({FB}{a} v {B}{a}) fact6: {A}{en} fact7: (x): ({C}x & ¬{D}x) -> {A}x fact8: {GE}{a} fact9: ({GN}{a} v {CR}{a}) fact10: {IP}{a} | [
"fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | This Ag is a SVR and/or is not honest. | ({CM}{i} v {B}{i}) | [
"fact12 -> int1: If this Ag is morbilliform the person is dishonorable.; fact11 -> int2: This Ag is morbilliform if that one is dissuasive and does not record Dibranchiata.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The chub is morbilliform. fact2: This wellspring is dishonorable. fact3: That adder is dishonorable. fact4: A morbilliform person is dishonorable. fact5: That adder either contracts Valois or is dishonorable or both. fact6: That shape is not non-morbilliform. fact7: If something is dissuasive thing that does not record Dibranchiata that thing is morbilliform. fact8: That adder is a Housatonic. fact9: That adder is a kind of a swob and/or that one is a kind of a everlastingness. fact10: That adder is a Eurylaimidae. ; $hypothesis$ = Either that adder is morbilliform or that thing is dishonorable or both. ; $proof$ = | fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That garrotter is not a kind of a philosophy. | ¬{B}{a} | fact1: The fact that that garrotter contuses is right if that person is not a dazed. fact2: If that either something is sound or it contuses or both is false then it is not a kind of a philosophy. fact3: That garrotter is not a dazed. fact4: That if that garrotter is not a dazed that that garrotter either is sound or does not contuse or both is false hold. fact5: That garrotter is not a kind of a philosophy if that that garrotter is sound or it contuses or both is false. fact6: If that something is sound and/or does not contuse is incorrect this thing is not a philosophy. | fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{a} fact2: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: ¬{A}{a} fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact5: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact6: (x): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"fact4 & fact3 -> int1: That that garrotter is sound and/or does not contuse does not hold.; fact6 -> int2: If the fact that that garrotter either is sound or does not contuse or both is false then she is not a philosophy.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact4 & fact3 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); fact6 -> int2: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that that garrotter contuses is right if that person is not a dazed. fact2: If that either something is sound or it contuses or both is false then it is not a kind of a philosophy. fact3: That garrotter is not a dazed. fact4: That if that garrotter is not a dazed that that garrotter either is sound or does not contuse or both is false hold. fact5: That garrotter is not a kind of a philosophy if that that garrotter is sound or it contuses or both is false. fact6: If that something is sound and/or does not contuse is incorrect this thing is not a philosophy. ; $hypothesis$ = That garrotter is not a kind of a philosophy. ; $proof$ = | fact4 & fact3 -> int1: That that garrotter is sound and/or does not contuse does not hold.; fact6 -> int2: If the fact that that garrotter either is sound or does not contuse or both is false then she is not a philosophy.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That enchilada does not spoil Fawkes. | ¬{B}{b} | fact1: If the fact that this touchwood is not deliverable hold then that that enchilada spoils Fawkes but this thing is not a vigor is wrong. fact2: If this touchwood relinquishes astrometry then that that person does spoil Fawkes hold. fact3: Something relinquishes astrometry and is a Jirrbal if this thing is not a kind of a lighter. fact4: If that this touchwood is not a kind of a vigor hold that enchilada does not relinquish astrometry and is a vigor. fact5: This touchwood slights. fact6: If somebody spoils Fawkes that person is not deliverable but a vigor. fact7: This touchwood is not a vigor and does not spoil Fawkes. fact8: This touchwood is not an easterner. fact9: That enchilada does not relinquish astrometry. fact10: If this touchwood does not spoil Fawkes that enchilada does not relinquish astrometry and does spoil Fawkes. fact11: The fact that this touchwood does not relinquish astrometry hold. fact12: This chutzpanik is not a kind of a vigor if this touchwood is both not deliverable and a vigor. fact13: The fact that that enchilada does not relinquish astrometry if this touchwood does not spoil Fawkes is right. | fact1: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact2: {D}{a} -> {B}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) fact4: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{D}{b} & {A}{b}) fact5: {BH}{a} fact6: (x): {B}x -> (¬{C}x & {A}x) fact7: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact8: ¬{EB}{a} fact9: ¬{D}{b} fact10: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) fact11: ¬{D}{a} fact12: (¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{jk} fact13: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} | [
"fact7 -> int1: That this touchwood does not spoil Fawkes is correct.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: That enchilada does not relinquish astrometry but it spoils Fawkes.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact7 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & fact10 -> int2: (¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That enchilada does not spoil Fawkes. | ¬{B}{b} | [] | 4 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this touchwood is not deliverable hold then that that enchilada spoils Fawkes but this thing is not a vigor is wrong. fact2: If this touchwood relinquishes astrometry then that that person does spoil Fawkes hold. fact3: Something relinquishes astrometry and is a Jirrbal if this thing is not a kind of a lighter. fact4: If that this touchwood is not a kind of a vigor hold that enchilada does not relinquish astrometry and is a vigor. fact5: This touchwood slights. fact6: If somebody spoils Fawkes that person is not deliverable but a vigor. fact7: This touchwood is not a vigor and does not spoil Fawkes. fact8: This touchwood is not an easterner. fact9: That enchilada does not relinquish astrometry. fact10: If this touchwood does not spoil Fawkes that enchilada does not relinquish astrometry and does spoil Fawkes. fact11: The fact that this touchwood does not relinquish astrometry hold. fact12: This chutzpanik is not a kind of a vigor if this touchwood is both not deliverable and a vigor. fact13: The fact that that enchilada does not relinquish astrometry if this touchwood does not spoil Fawkes is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That enchilada does not spoil Fawkes. ; $proof$ = | fact7 -> int1: That this touchwood does not spoil Fawkes is correct.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: That enchilada does not relinquish astrometry but it spoils Fawkes.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | If that anaphylacticness occurs that catcher happens. | {A} -> {B} | fact1: That eurythmy or this non-competitiveness or both occurs. fact2: That catcher happens if this wedding and/or this non-cytoplasmicness occurs. fact3: Either this wedding happens or this cytoplasmicness happens or both. | fact1: ({U} v ¬{AR}) fact2: ({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact3: ({AA} v {AB}) | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $facts$ = fact1: That eurythmy or this non-competitiveness or both occurs. fact2: That catcher happens if this wedding and/or this non-cytoplasmicness occurs. fact3: Either this wedding happens or this cytoplasmicness happens or both. ; $hypothesis$ = If that anaphylacticness occurs that catcher happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | Let's assume that this habitant does not flex Loeb. | ¬{B}{a} | fact1: If the fact that this rectum straddles Titanosaurus hold that the fact that this habitant does not sorcerize Bourgogne and she/he does not flex Loeb hold is incorrect. fact2: This habitant is not a kind of a chancre and it does not agitate midnight. fact3: That this rectum is both not micrometeoric and not pyrogenous is correct. fact4: If this bailiwick is not illative and it is not a spondylarthritis that repulsion is not illative. fact5: That someone is not a hurt and is not a Angolan is incorrect if it is not illative. fact6: The fizz does not sorcerize Bourgogne. fact7: The fact that this rectum sorcerizes Bourgogne and that does flex Loeb does not hold if this jurywoman does not straddle Titanosaurus. fact8: A non-semiautobiographical thing is not illative. fact9: If that this rectum sorcerizes Bourgogne and it flexes Loeb does not hold this habitant does not flexes Loeb. fact10: If the fact that this habitant is not a kind of a thyroid and it does not straddle Titanosaurus is wrong the bortsch does not straddle Titanosaurus. fact11: that Bourgogne does not sorcerize habitant. fact12: This rectum is a kind of non-basipetal thing that does not underdress coreference. fact13: That Brett is Bavarian and/or that is a kind of a Monotropaceae does not hold if Brett is non-oleophobic. fact14: That Lens is not shoreward and that does not sorcerize Bourgogne. fact15: If this infection is not a thyroid then this amylum is a Tupaiidae and it straddles Titanosaurus. fact16: that this Titanosaurus straddles rectum is true. fact17: This jurywoman does not straddle Titanosaurus if this amylum is a kind of a Tupaiidae and it straddle Titanosaurus. fact18: Someone that does not straddle Titanosaurus does not flex Loeb and sorcerizes Bourgogne. fact19: If that that repulsion is not a kind of a hurt and is not a Angolan does not hold this infection is not a thyroid. fact20: This habitant does not sorcerize Bourgogne. fact21: Brett is not a kind of a Kirkuk if the fact that Brett is not non-Bavarian and/or it is a kind of a Monotropaceae is incorrect. fact22: The fact that that lovastatin does not sorcerize Bourgogne hold. fact23: That this rectum straddles Titanosaurus is true. fact24: This floe does not flex Loeb. fact25: If Brett is not a Kirkuk then this bailiwick is not semiautobiographical. | fact1: {C}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact2: (¬{DF}{a} & ¬{EJ}{a}) fact3: (¬{AL}{b} & ¬{AP}{b}) fact4: (¬{H}{g} & ¬{I}{g}) -> ¬{H}{f} fact5: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) fact6: ¬{A}{hf} fact7: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬({A}{b} & {B}{b}) fact8: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬{H}x fact9: ¬({A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact10: ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{ab} fact11: ¬{AA}{aa} fact12: (¬{DK}{b} & ¬{EU}{b}) fact13: ¬{Q}{h} -> ¬({O}{h} v {N}{h}) fact14: (¬{BK}{ec} & ¬{A}{ec}) fact15: ¬{D}{e} -> ({E}{d} & {C}{d}) fact16: {AD}{ae} fact17: ({E}{d} & {C}{d}) -> ¬{C}{c} fact18: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) fact19: ¬(¬{G}{f} & ¬{F}{f}) -> ¬{D}{e} fact20: ¬{A}{a} fact21: ¬({O}{h} v {N}{h}) -> ¬{K}{h} fact22: ¬{A}{at} fact23: {C}{b} fact24: ¬{B}{gu} fact25: ¬{K}{h} -> ¬{J}{g} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that this habitant does not flex Loeb.; fact20 & assump1 -> int1: This habitant does not sorcerize Bourgogne and does not flex Loeb.; fact23 & fact1 -> int2: That this habitant does not sorcerize Bourgogne and does not flex Loeb is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{B}{a}; fact20 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); fact23 & fact1 -> int2: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | The bortsch does not flex Loeb. | ¬{B}{ab} | [
"fact27 -> int4: The bortsch does not flex Loeb but it sorcerizes Bourgogne if that it does not straddle Titanosaurus is right.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 22 | 0 | 22 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this rectum straddles Titanosaurus hold that the fact that this habitant does not sorcerize Bourgogne and she/he does not flex Loeb hold is incorrect. fact2: This habitant is not a kind of a chancre and it does not agitate midnight. fact3: That this rectum is both not micrometeoric and not pyrogenous is correct. fact4: If this bailiwick is not illative and it is not a spondylarthritis that repulsion is not illative. fact5: That someone is not a hurt and is not a Angolan is incorrect if it is not illative. fact6: The fizz does not sorcerize Bourgogne. fact7: The fact that this rectum sorcerizes Bourgogne and that does flex Loeb does not hold if this jurywoman does not straddle Titanosaurus. fact8: A non-semiautobiographical thing is not illative. fact9: If that this rectum sorcerizes Bourgogne and it flexes Loeb does not hold this habitant does not flexes Loeb. fact10: If the fact that this habitant is not a kind of a thyroid and it does not straddle Titanosaurus is wrong the bortsch does not straddle Titanosaurus. fact11: that Bourgogne does not sorcerize habitant. fact12: This rectum is a kind of non-basipetal thing that does not underdress coreference. fact13: That Brett is Bavarian and/or that is a kind of a Monotropaceae does not hold if Brett is non-oleophobic. fact14: That Lens is not shoreward and that does not sorcerize Bourgogne. fact15: If this infection is not a thyroid then this amylum is a Tupaiidae and it straddles Titanosaurus. fact16: that this Titanosaurus straddles rectum is true. fact17: This jurywoman does not straddle Titanosaurus if this amylum is a kind of a Tupaiidae and it straddle Titanosaurus. fact18: Someone that does not straddle Titanosaurus does not flex Loeb and sorcerizes Bourgogne. fact19: If that that repulsion is not a kind of a hurt and is not a Angolan does not hold this infection is not a thyroid. fact20: This habitant does not sorcerize Bourgogne. fact21: Brett is not a kind of a Kirkuk if the fact that Brett is not non-Bavarian and/or it is a kind of a Monotropaceae is incorrect. fact22: The fact that that lovastatin does not sorcerize Bourgogne hold. fact23: That this rectum straddles Titanosaurus is true. fact24: This floe does not flex Loeb. fact25: If Brett is not a Kirkuk then this bailiwick is not semiautobiographical. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this habitant does not flex Loeb. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that this habitant does not flex Loeb.; fact20 & assump1 -> int1: This habitant does not sorcerize Bourgogne and does not flex Loeb.; fact23 & fact1 -> int2: That this habitant does not sorcerize Bourgogne and does not flex Loeb is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This toller is a Keller. | {C}{a} | fact1: This toller is a Tocantins and that does recommend Pica. fact2: This toller is nonslippery. fact3: This lascar recommends Pica. fact4: If something does recommend Pica the fact that the thing is a kind of a Tocantins hold. fact5: This toller is a Tocantins. | fact1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact2: {S}{a} fact3: {B}{r} fact4: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact5: {A}{a} | [
"fact1 -> int1: This toller recommends Pica.;"
] | [
"fact1 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] | This coronet is a Tocantins. | {A}{fs} | [
"fact6 -> int2: If this coronet recommends Pica then that it is a Tocantins hold.;"
] | 4 | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This toller is a Tocantins and that does recommend Pica. fact2: This toller is nonslippery. fact3: This lascar recommends Pica. fact4: If something does recommend Pica the fact that the thing is a kind of a Tocantins hold. fact5: This toller is a Tocantins. ; $hypothesis$ = This toller is a Keller. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That pauperization happens. | {B} | fact1: This programing exanthema occurs and that pauperization happens. fact2: This programing exanthema happens. | fact1: ({A} & {B}) fact2: {A} | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: This programing exanthema occurs and that pauperization happens. fact2: This programing exanthema happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That pauperization happens. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This LOX guesses Heyrovsky and/or it does pinpoint Asclepias. | ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) | fact1: The fact that this watercolorist is a NIDDM if this wog surfs demonstrative hold. fact2: That Primates pinpoints Asclepias if this watercolorist bothers MBD. fact3: If that Primates surfs demonstrative then this LOX is a kind of a NIDDM. fact4: This LOX does not guess Heyrovsky. fact5: Something bothers MBD if it is a NIDDM. fact6: this MBD does not bother LOX. fact7: If the route is not a INR that she is not a kind of a Bolshevik is true. fact8: If this LOX does not bother MBD then this LOX does not guess Heyrovsky. fact9: This LOX does not bother MBD. fact10: If this LOX does not bother MBD then the fact that that person guesses Heyrovsky and/or that person pinpoints Asclepias is false. | fact1: {C}{d} -> {B}{c} fact2: {A}{c} -> {AB}{b} fact3: {C}{b} -> {B}{a} fact4: ¬{AA}{a} fact5: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact6: ¬{AC}{aa} fact7: ¬{DF}{br} -> ¬{BP}{br} fact8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} fact9: ¬{A}{a} fact10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) | [
"fact10 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact10 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | The steel does not bother MBD. | ¬{A}{dl} | [] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that this watercolorist is a NIDDM if this wog surfs demonstrative hold. fact2: That Primates pinpoints Asclepias if this watercolorist bothers MBD. fact3: If that Primates surfs demonstrative then this LOX is a kind of a NIDDM. fact4: This LOX does not guess Heyrovsky. fact5: Something bothers MBD if it is a NIDDM. fact6: this MBD does not bother LOX. fact7: If the route is not a INR that she is not a kind of a Bolshevik is true. fact8: If this LOX does not bother MBD then this LOX does not guess Heyrovsky. fact9: This LOX does not bother MBD. fact10: If this LOX does not bother MBD then the fact that that person guesses Heyrovsky and/or that person pinpoints Asclepias is false. ; $hypothesis$ = This LOX guesses Heyrovsky and/or it does pinpoint Asclepias. ; $proof$ = | fact10 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That that Frederick is not an eye but it abduces Dorotheanthus is wrong if Frederick is a recessional is wrong. | ¬({A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})) | fact1: The fact that Frederick is a kind of an eye that abduces Dorotheanthus is wrong if Frederick is a recessional. fact2: A austenitic man is not a Mercurialis and is a sextuplet. | fact1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact2: (x): {AU}x -> (¬{GR}x & {AS}x) | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that Frederick is a kind of an eye that abduces Dorotheanthus is wrong if Frederick is a recessional. fact2: A austenitic man is not a Mercurialis and is a sextuplet. ; $hypothesis$ = That that Frederick is not an eye but it abduces Dorotheanthus is wrong if Frederick is a recessional is wrong. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That that pantsuit is a kind of non-Eritrean thing that is a Pilularia is wrong. | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | fact1: This cathouse is not ciliary but she is not nonconductive if this cathouse is not intolerant. fact2: That that pantsuit is a Pilularia and that is alphabetical does not hold. fact3: If the fact that this cathouse is not ciliary is right that pantsuit is Argentine and that is intramolecular. fact4: The fact that something is intolerant and not a quantity is false if it is not a kind of a kelvin. fact5: That tung is not a kelvin but this one earths. fact6: That tung is a pseudobulb. fact7: If someone that is not a kelvin is a mania then this houselights is not a kelvin. fact8: That tung is a hype if that tung is a kind of a pseudobulb. fact9: Someone that is not ciliary is not non-Argentine and not non-intramolecular. fact10: If the fact that this cathouse is a kind of a quantity and/or is not a kelvin does not hold then this cathouse is not intolerant. fact11: If the fact that something is conductive and it is ciliary is incorrect then it is not ciliary. fact12: This cathouse is not intolerant if that that this houselights is intolerant but it is not a quantity is wrong hold. fact13: If somebody is a hype then it is a mania. fact14: That that pantsuit is conductive and ciliary is wrong if the fact that this cathouse is not intolerant is not incorrect. fact15: There is no person such that the one is not Eritrean and the one is a Pilularia. fact16: That that the atomizer is both a Pilularia and a XL is not false does not hold. fact17: If some man is Argentine that it is not a Pilularia and it does entrap oncogene does not hold. | fact1: ¬{E}{a} -> (¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) fact2: ¬({AB}{aa} & {IO}{aa}) fact3: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) fact4: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{G}x) fact5: (¬{F}{c} & {K}{c}) fact6: {J}{c} fact7: (x): (¬{F}x & {I}x) -> ¬{F}{b} fact8: {J}{c} -> {H}{c} fact9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact10: ¬({G}{a} v ¬{F}{a}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact11: (x): ¬({D}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x fact12: ¬({E}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact13: (x): {H}x -> {I}x fact14: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬({D}{aa} & {C}{aa}) fact15: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact16: ¬({AB}{ja} & {FQ}{ja}) fact17: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & {CB}x) | [
"fact15 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact15 -> hypothesis;"
] | The fact that that pantsuit is not a Pilularia but it entraps oncogene does not hold. | ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & {CB}{aa}) | [
"fact18 -> int1: If that pantsuit is Argentine then the fact that that pantsuit is not a Pilularia and entraps oncogene does not hold.; fact21 -> int2: That pantsuit is Argentine and she/he is not non-intramolecular if that pantsuit is not ciliary.; fact23 -> int3: If the fact that that pantsuit is conductive and it is ciliary is false it is not ciliary.; fact25 -> int4: If this houselights is not a kind of a kelvin then that this houselights is intolerant but it is not a quantity does not hold.; fact19 -> int5: That tung is not a kind of a kelvin.; fact28 -> int6: If that tung is a hype the fact that that tung is a mania hold.; fact24 & fact20 -> int7: That tung is a hype.; int6 & int7 -> int8: That tung is a mania.; int5 & int8 -> int9: That tung is not a kelvin but it is a mania.; int9 -> int10: There is somebody such that this one is not a kelvin and this one is a mania.; int10 & fact26 -> int11: This houselights is not a kelvin.; int4 & int11 -> int12: The fact that this houselights is intolerant thing that is not a quantity does not hold.; fact27 & int12 -> int13: This cathouse is not intolerant.; fact22 & int13 -> int14: The fact that that pantsuit is not nonconductive and not non-ciliary does not hold.; int3 & int14 -> int15: That pantsuit is not ciliary.; int2 & int15 -> int16: That pantsuit is Argentine and it is intramolecular.; int16 -> int17: That pantsuit is Argentine.; int1 & int17 -> hypothesis;"
] | 12 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $facts$ = fact1: This cathouse is not ciliary but she is not nonconductive if this cathouse is not intolerant. fact2: That that pantsuit is a Pilularia and that is alphabetical does not hold. fact3: If the fact that this cathouse is not ciliary is right that pantsuit is Argentine and that is intramolecular. fact4: The fact that something is intolerant and not a quantity is false if it is not a kind of a kelvin. fact5: That tung is not a kelvin but this one earths. fact6: That tung is a pseudobulb. fact7: If someone that is not a kelvin is a mania then this houselights is not a kelvin. fact8: That tung is a hype if that tung is a kind of a pseudobulb. fact9: Someone that is not ciliary is not non-Argentine and not non-intramolecular. fact10: If the fact that this cathouse is a kind of a quantity and/or is not a kelvin does not hold then this cathouse is not intolerant. fact11: If the fact that something is conductive and it is ciliary is incorrect then it is not ciliary. fact12: This cathouse is not intolerant if that that this houselights is intolerant but it is not a quantity is wrong hold. fact13: If somebody is a hype then it is a mania. fact14: That that pantsuit is conductive and ciliary is wrong if the fact that this cathouse is not intolerant is not incorrect. fact15: There is no person such that the one is not Eritrean and the one is a Pilularia. fact16: That that the atomizer is both a Pilularia and a XL is not false does not hold. fact17: If some man is Argentine that it is not a Pilularia and it does entrap oncogene does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That that pantsuit is a kind of non-Eritrean thing that is a Pilularia is wrong. ; $proof$ = | fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | If this outpost is not viceregal then this outpost views synset and it does blossom irrelevance. | ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | fact1: That satinet matures and does blossom irrelevance if it is not a dictated. fact2: If this outpost is not viceregal the thing views synset. fact3: Some person that is not viceregal does view synset. fact4: Something views synset and this blossoms irrelevance if this is not viceregal. fact5: Some person that is viceregal does view synset and blossoms irrelevance. fact6: Something does shield Triga and it is a Lithophragma if it does not piddling Skanda. fact7: This outpost views synset and blossoms irrelevance if that one is viceregal. fact8: Some person that is not elementary is not non-bottomed but a Bulgarian. fact9: If that vetch is not a Araxes then it blossoms irrelevance and is modifiable. | fact1: ¬{GU}{bn} -> ({GH}{bn} & {AB}{bn}) fact2: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact5: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact6: (x): ¬{JF}x -> ({EE}x & {EA}x) fact7: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact8: (x): ¬{BS}x -> ({FO}x & {GB}x) fact9: ¬{ET}{gq} -> ({AB}{gq} & {AJ}{gq}) | [
"fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That satinet matures and does blossom irrelevance if it is not a dictated. fact2: If this outpost is not viceregal the thing views synset. fact3: Some person that is not viceregal does view synset. fact4: Something views synset and this blossoms irrelevance if this is not viceregal. fact5: Some person that is viceregal does view synset and blossoms irrelevance. fact6: Something does shield Triga and it is a Lithophragma if it does not piddling Skanda. fact7: This outpost views synset and blossoms irrelevance if that one is viceregal. fact8: Some person that is not elementary is not non-bottomed but a Bulgarian. fact9: If that vetch is not a Araxes then it blossoms irrelevance and is modifiable. ; $hypothesis$ = If this outpost is not viceregal then this outpost views synset and it does blossom irrelevance. ; $proof$ = | fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That kurta is not a kind of a geophagia. | ¬{E}{b} | fact1: The fact that this sisal is not a kind of a sadism is not wrong if this landside is not a sadism but a barbed. fact2: If something that is a Boletellus is not a sadism this sisal does not inquire Scheol. fact3: That kurta is a kind of a Boletellus if this sisal is not a Boletellus. fact4: This counterrevolutionist is not a kind of a Vitus and/or it interbreeds Whitsun if this counterrevolutionist is a Malaclemys. fact5: If some man inquires Scheol but he is not a sadism he is not a kind of a Boletellus. fact6: If some man interbreeds Whitsun that one inquires Scheol. fact7: The mahout is not a sadism. fact8: Somebody is a Boletellus but this person is not a sadism. fact9: That kurta is not a geophagia if the fact that that kurta is a barbed and that inquires Scheol does not hold. fact10: If some person is a Boletellus she/he is a geophagia. fact11: If this sisal does not inquire Scheol then the fact that that kurta is a barbed and it inquire Scheol does not hold. fact12: If this counterrevolutionist is not a Vitus or it interbreeds Whitsun or both then this sisal does interbreeds Whitsun. | fact1: (¬{B}{c} & {D}{c}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: (x): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{C}{a} fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> {A}{b} fact4: {G}{e} -> (¬{H}{e} v {F}{e}) fact5: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact6: (x): {F}x -> {C}x fact7: ¬{B}{d} fact8: (Ex): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact9: ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact10: (x): {A}x -> {E}x fact11: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) fact12: (¬{H}{e} v {F}{e}) -> {F}{a} | [
"fact8 & fact2 -> int1: This sisal does not inquire Scheol.; int1 & fact11 -> int2: That that kurta is a kind of a barbed and does inquire Scheol does not hold.; int2 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact8 & fact2 -> int1: ¬{C}{a}; int1 & fact11 -> int2: ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}); int2 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | That kurta is a geophagia. | {E}{b} | [
"fact19 -> int3: If that kurta is a Boletellus that kurta is a kind of a geophagia.; fact15 -> int4: If this sisal inquires Scheol but this thing is not a kind of a sadism then this sisal is not a kind of a Boletellus.; fact13 -> int5: This sisal inquires Scheol if this sisal interbreeds Whitsun.; fact16 -> int6: There exists someone such that it is not a sadism.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that this sisal is not a kind of a sadism is not wrong if this landside is not a sadism but a barbed. fact2: If something that is a Boletellus is not a sadism this sisal does not inquire Scheol. fact3: That kurta is a kind of a Boletellus if this sisal is not a Boletellus. fact4: This counterrevolutionist is not a kind of a Vitus and/or it interbreeds Whitsun if this counterrevolutionist is a Malaclemys. fact5: If some man inquires Scheol but he is not a sadism he is not a kind of a Boletellus. fact6: If some man interbreeds Whitsun that one inquires Scheol. fact7: The mahout is not a sadism. fact8: Somebody is a Boletellus but this person is not a sadism. fact9: That kurta is not a geophagia if the fact that that kurta is a barbed and that inquires Scheol does not hold. fact10: If some person is a Boletellus she/he is a geophagia. fact11: If this sisal does not inquire Scheol then the fact that that kurta is a barbed and it inquire Scheol does not hold. fact12: If this counterrevolutionist is not a Vitus or it interbreeds Whitsun or both then this sisal does interbreeds Whitsun. ; $hypothesis$ = That kurta is not a kind of a geophagia. ; $proof$ = | fact8 & fact2 -> int1: This sisal does not inquire Scheol.; int1 & fact11 -> int2: That that kurta is a kind of a barbed and does inquire Scheol does not hold.; int2 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This okra does interview tunnage but the person is not a kind of a Globigerinidae. | ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | fact1: If something is not humorless and/or this is a kind of a lifetime this is not a kind of a mnemonic. fact2: If that Rasta is not holographical then it does not nourish Chrysolophus and is not Bahai. fact3: If the fact that something knocks Angraecum but that thing is not holographical is incorrect that thing is holographical. fact4: That that Rasta nourishes Chrysolophus and is not a kind of a Globigerinidae is incorrect. fact5: That that Rasta does interview tunnage and is not a Globigerinidae is not right if this okra nourishes Chrysolophus. fact6: If that Rasta nourishes Chrysolophus that this okra does interview tunnage but that is not a Globigerinidae does not hold. fact7: this Chrysolophus nourishes Rasta. fact8: Either this muffin is not humorless or it is a kind of a lifetime or both. fact9: If that Rasta is Bahai and it nourishes Chrysolophus this okra does not nourishes Chrysolophus. fact10: That Rasta nourishes Chrysolophus. fact11: That something knocks Angraecum and is not holographical is incorrect if it is a cryptanalysis. fact12: If this muffin is not a mnemonic then that Cassidy is not tearless hold. fact13: That that gamine does not close hold if that that saccharase close but it does not spit is incorrect. fact14: If that Rasta nourishes Chrysolophus then that this okra interviews tunnage and that person is a Globigerinidae is incorrect. fact15: The fact that this okra interviews tunnage but it does not nourish Chrysolophus does not hold. fact16: The fact that that Rasta interviews tunnage and does not nourish Chrysolophus is false. fact17: That the fact that that saccharase closes and does not spit does not hold is true. fact18: If that Rasta is a Globigerinidae the fact that this okra nourishes Chrysolophus but it does not interview tunnage is incorrect. fact19: That Rasta is not holographical if the fact that that gamine is holographical and is a Gallicism is correct. fact20: If that Rasta is a kind of a Globigerinidae the fact that this okra interviews tunnage and does not nourish Chrysolophus does not hold. fact21: If something is not holographical the thing is Bahai and the thing does nourish Chrysolophus. fact22: The fact that this okra interviews tunnage and is a kind of a Globigerinidae is false. fact23: If some man does not close it is mutational and it is a cryptanalysis. | fact1: (x): (¬{J}x v {K}x) -> ¬{I}x fact2: ¬{C}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact3: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}x fact4: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact5: {A}{b} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact6: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact7: {AC}{aa} fact8: (¬{J}{e} v {K}{e}) fact9: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact10: {A}{a} fact11: (x): {G}x -> ¬({F}x & ¬{C}x) fact12: ¬{I}{e} -> ¬{D}{d} fact13: ¬({L}{f} & ¬{N}{f}) -> ¬{L}{c} fact14: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact15: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact16: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact17: ¬({L}{f} & ¬{N}{f}) fact18: {AB}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) fact19: ({C}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact20: {AB}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact21: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) fact22: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact23: (x): ¬{L}x -> ({H}x & {G}x) | [
"fact6 & fact10 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 & fact10 -> hypothesis;"
] | This okra does interview tunnage but the person is not a kind of a Globigerinidae. | ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | [] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 21 | 0 | 21 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If something is not humorless and/or this is a kind of a lifetime this is not a kind of a mnemonic. fact2: If that Rasta is not holographical then it does not nourish Chrysolophus and is not Bahai. fact3: If the fact that something knocks Angraecum but that thing is not holographical is incorrect that thing is holographical. fact4: That that Rasta nourishes Chrysolophus and is not a kind of a Globigerinidae is incorrect. fact5: That that Rasta does interview tunnage and is not a Globigerinidae is not right if this okra nourishes Chrysolophus. fact6: If that Rasta nourishes Chrysolophus that this okra does interview tunnage but that is not a Globigerinidae does not hold. fact7: this Chrysolophus nourishes Rasta. fact8: Either this muffin is not humorless or it is a kind of a lifetime or both. fact9: If that Rasta is Bahai and it nourishes Chrysolophus this okra does not nourishes Chrysolophus. fact10: That Rasta nourishes Chrysolophus. fact11: That something knocks Angraecum and is not holographical is incorrect if it is a cryptanalysis. fact12: If this muffin is not a mnemonic then that Cassidy is not tearless hold. fact13: That that gamine does not close hold if that that saccharase close but it does not spit is incorrect. fact14: If that Rasta nourishes Chrysolophus then that this okra interviews tunnage and that person is a Globigerinidae is incorrect. fact15: The fact that this okra interviews tunnage but it does not nourish Chrysolophus does not hold. fact16: The fact that that Rasta interviews tunnage and does not nourish Chrysolophus is false. fact17: That the fact that that saccharase closes and does not spit does not hold is true. fact18: If that Rasta is a Globigerinidae the fact that this okra nourishes Chrysolophus but it does not interview tunnage is incorrect. fact19: That Rasta is not holographical if the fact that that gamine is holographical and is a Gallicism is correct. fact20: If that Rasta is a kind of a Globigerinidae the fact that this okra interviews tunnage and does not nourish Chrysolophus does not hold. fact21: If something is not holographical the thing is Bahai and the thing does nourish Chrysolophus. fact22: The fact that this okra interviews tunnage and is a kind of a Globigerinidae is false. fact23: If some man does not close it is mutational and it is a cryptanalysis. ; $hypothesis$ = This okra does interview tunnage but the person is not a kind of a Globigerinidae. ; $proof$ = | fact6 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This ammunition does not intensify. | ¬{C}{b} | fact1: If that the fact that that Arawak is both not a tidings and not a Lasthenia is correct is wrong then this ammunition does not intensify. fact2: That Arawak is not a tidings. fact3: That Arawak is not a Naze. fact4: If the fact that some man does vulcanize oblong or it is a kind of a feminine or both is not true it does not fluoridate Sambre. fact5: Every man is not Arthurian. fact6: That Arawak is a Lasthenia. fact7: If that that Arawak is a tall or is not pompous or both does not hold then this is not a tidings. fact8: This ammunition is not a kind of a tidings and this thing does not scowl boloney. fact9: The fact that the fact that some person is not a Lasthenia and the one does not intensify is not wrong does not hold if the one is not a kind of a tidings. fact10: This ammunition does not intensify if that Arawak is a tidings. fact11: That Arawak does not intensify if that this ammunition is not a tidings and is not a kind of a Lasthenia is false. fact12: If that Arawak is not a Naze then that that Arawak is a tall or is not pompous or both is wrong. fact13: That that Arawak is a kind of a tidings but it is not a kind of a Lasthenia is wrong. fact14: If somebody is not Arthurian that it vulcanizes oblong or it is a kind of a feminine or both is incorrect. | fact1: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: ¬{I}{a} fact4: (x): ¬({H}x v {G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact5: (x): ¬{J}x fact6: {B}{a} fact7: ¬({D}{a} v ¬{F}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact8: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{AK}{b}) fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) fact10: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact11: ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact12: ¬{I}{a} -> ¬({D}{a} v ¬{F}{a}) fact13: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact14: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬({H}x v {G}x) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that Arawak is not a tidings and is not a kind of a Lasthenia.; assump1 -> int1: That Arawak is not a kind of a Lasthenia.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: That that Arawak is not a tidings and is not a kind of a Lasthenia is incorrect.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & fact6 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | Santos intensifies. | {C}{gd} | [
"fact15 -> int4: The fact that Santos is not a Lasthenia and it does not intensify does not hold if it is not a kind of a tidings.; fact16 & fact18 -> int5: That that Arawak is a tall and/or is not pompous is incorrect.; fact19 & int5 -> int6: That Arawak is not a tidings.; fact17 -> int7: The fact that this ammunition vulcanizes oblong and/or this thing is a feminine is wrong if this ammunition is not Arthurian.; fact20 -> int8: This ammunition is non-Arthurian.; int7 & int8 -> int9: The fact that this ammunition vulcanizes oblong or this thing is a feminine or both is false.; int9 -> int10: There is nobody such that the person does vulcanize oblong and/or the person is a kind of a feminine.; int10 -> int11: The fact that that Arawak does vulcanize oblong and/or is a feminine does not hold.; fact21 -> int12: That Arawak does not fluoridate Sambre if that that she vulcanizes oblong or she is a feminine or both is right is incorrect.; int11 & int12 -> int13: That Arawak does not fluoridate Sambre.; int6 & int13 -> int14: That Arawak is not a tidings and it does not fluoridate Sambre.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that the fact that that Arawak is both not a tidings and not a Lasthenia is correct is wrong then this ammunition does not intensify. fact2: That Arawak is not a tidings. fact3: That Arawak is not a Naze. fact4: If the fact that some man does vulcanize oblong or it is a kind of a feminine or both is not true it does not fluoridate Sambre. fact5: Every man is not Arthurian. fact6: That Arawak is a Lasthenia. fact7: If that that Arawak is a tall or is not pompous or both does not hold then this is not a tidings. fact8: This ammunition is not a kind of a tidings and this thing does not scowl boloney. fact9: The fact that the fact that some person is not a Lasthenia and the one does not intensify is not wrong does not hold if the one is not a kind of a tidings. fact10: This ammunition does not intensify if that Arawak is a tidings. fact11: That Arawak does not intensify if that this ammunition is not a tidings and is not a kind of a Lasthenia is false. fact12: If that Arawak is not a Naze then that that Arawak is a tall or is not pompous or both is wrong. fact13: That that Arawak is a kind of a tidings but it is not a kind of a Lasthenia is wrong. fact14: If somebody is not Arthurian that it vulcanizes oblong or it is a kind of a feminine or both is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = This ammunition does not intensify. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that Arawak is not a tidings and is not a kind of a Lasthenia.; assump1 -> int1: That Arawak is not a kind of a Lasthenia.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: That that Arawak is not a tidings and is not a kind of a Lasthenia is incorrect.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That Tractarian fumbles Sanguinaria. | {C}{c} | fact1: That that Tractarian is not unnatural hold if that that this condensate is a molality but he is not a Pasadena is incorrect hold. fact2: If something is not genetical and it is not a kind of a Genova then it is an insurer. fact3: This dominos is not a Manteidae if this condensate is not analphabetic and is not ischaemic. fact4: That Tractarian does not fumble Sanguinaria if that this dominos is not a kind of an insurer and fumble Sanguinaria is wrong. fact5: If something is an insurer then it is not unnatural and it fumbles Sanguinaria. fact6: This dominos is not an insurer. fact7: Somebody that is genetical is unnatural. fact8: That this condensate is a kind of a molality and it is a Pasadena is wrong. fact9: That Tractarian is not an insurer if that this condensate is unnatural but it is not a Pasadena is wrong. fact10: This dominos is genetical if this condensate is a Genova. fact11: Something is not a bosk and that thing does not agitate if that thing is not a Manteidae. fact12: If this condensate is not a lowland then this condensate is not analphabetic and is not ischaemic. fact13: If something does not agitate then this thing is not genetical and this thing is not a kind of a Genova. fact14: That Tractarian is not unnatural if this condensate is a kind of a Pasadena. fact15: That calypso does not fumble Sanguinaria if this dominos is not unnatural but that fumble Sanguinaria. fact16: That the fact that this condensate is both a molality and a Pasadena is not true if this dominos is not an insurer hold. fact17: If this dominos is not an insurer that this condensate is a molality but not a Pasadena is incorrect. fact18: That something is not an insurer and fumbles Sanguinaria is incorrect if it is unnatural. | fact1: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} fact2: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> {A}x fact3: (¬{J}{b} & ¬{I}{b}) -> ¬{H}{a} fact4: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{c} fact5: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}x & {C}x) fact6: ¬{A}{a} fact7: (x): {D}x -> {B}x fact8: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact9: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{A}{c} fact10: {E}{b} -> {D}{a} fact11: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) fact12: ¬{K}{b} -> (¬{J}{b} & ¬{I}{b}) fact13: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) fact14: {AB}{b} -> ¬{B}{c} fact15: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{ho} fact16: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact17: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact18: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) | [
"fact17 & fact6 -> int1: The fact that this condensate is a molality but he is not a Pasadena is false.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: That Tractarian is not unnatural.;"
] | [
"fact17 & fact6 -> int1: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); int1 & fact1 -> int2: ¬{B}{c};"
] | That calypso does not fumble Sanguinaria. | ¬{C}{ho} | [
"fact21 -> int3: This dominos is non-unnatural man that fumbles Sanguinaria if this dominos is an insurer.; fact24 -> int4: If this dominos is not genetical and that person is not a Genova this dominos is a kind of an insurer.; fact20 -> int5: This dominos is both not genetical and not a Genova if this dominos does not agitate.; fact19 -> int6: This dominos is not a bosk and does not agitate if this dominos is not a Manteidae.;"
] | 8 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That that Tractarian is not unnatural hold if that that this condensate is a molality but he is not a Pasadena is incorrect hold. fact2: If something is not genetical and it is not a kind of a Genova then it is an insurer. fact3: This dominos is not a Manteidae if this condensate is not analphabetic and is not ischaemic. fact4: That Tractarian does not fumble Sanguinaria if that this dominos is not a kind of an insurer and fumble Sanguinaria is wrong. fact5: If something is an insurer then it is not unnatural and it fumbles Sanguinaria. fact6: This dominos is not an insurer. fact7: Somebody that is genetical is unnatural. fact8: That this condensate is a kind of a molality and it is a Pasadena is wrong. fact9: That Tractarian is not an insurer if that this condensate is unnatural but it is not a Pasadena is wrong. fact10: This dominos is genetical if this condensate is a Genova. fact11: Something is not a bosk and that thing does not agitate if that thing is not a Manteidae. fact12: If this condensate is not a lowland then this condensate is not analphabetic and is not ischaemic. fact13: If something does not agitate then this thing is not genetical and this thing is not a kind of a Genova. fact14: That Tractarian is not unnatural if this condensate is a kind of a Pasadena. fact15: That calypso does not fumble Sanguinaria if this dominos is not unnatural but that fumble Sanguinaria. fact16: That the fact that this condensate is both a molality and a Pasadena is not true if this dominos is not an insurer hold. fact17: If this dominos is not an insurer that this condensate is a molality but not a Pasadena is incorrect. fact18: That something is not an insurer and fumbles Sanguinaria is incorrect if it is unnatural. ; $hypothesis$ = That Tractarian fumbles Sanguinaria. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That therapy happens. | {C} | fact1: This articulariness happens. fact2: If that narcotraffic happens that therapy occurs. fact3: The bonanza happens. fact4: The inhibiting retrospective does not happens. fact5: That that therapy does not occurs is brought about by that both that extantness and this articulariness happens. fact6: That extantness happens. fact7: If that this articulariness does not happens and that extantness does not happens does not hold then this jolting fervency does not occurs. fact8: If that paroxysm does not occurs that this unprofessionalness occurs and this diving happens does not hold. fact9: If this articulariness does not occurs then both that extantness and that therapy occurs. fact10: That that commixture does not occurs is caused by that this frequenterness does not happens. fact11: The fact that the orphaning primogeniture does not happens is not false. fact12: If this unprofessionalness does not occurs that this daydreaming noontide does not happens and this glacialness does not occurs does not hold. fact13: That that commixture does not occurs yields that that paroxysm occurs and this diving occurs. fact14: If the fact that this daydreaming noontide does not happens and this glacialness does not occurs does not hold this glacialness occurs. fact15: That this frequenterness does not occurs and that commixture does not happens prevents that that paroxysm happens. fact16: This unconditionalness occurs. fact17: That this past happens and that monovularness happens prevents that thrombosing infomercial. fact18: The fact that that non-articularyness and that non-extantness occurs is incorrect if that therapy happens. fact19: That this glacialness happens causes that this articulariness does not happens and that narcotraffic happens. fact20: The musclebuilding does not occurs. fact21: If that this unprofessionalness occurs and this diving occurs is not true this unprofessionalness does not occurs. fact22: If this unprofessionalness does not happens that narcotraffic happens and this glacialness occurs. | fact1: {B} fact2: {D} -> {C} fact3: {AA} fact4: ¬{CF} fact5: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact6: {A} fact7: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{BU} fact8: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & {I}) fact9: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) fact10: ¬{K} -> ¬{J} fact11: ¬{EO} fact12: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{G} & ¬{E}) fact13: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact14: ¬(¬{G} & ¬{E}) -> {E} fact15: (¬{K} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} fact16: {GU} fact17: ({IL} & {EP}) -> ¬{DE} fact18: {C} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) fact19: {E} -> (¬{B} & {D}) fact20: ¬{FE} fact21: ¬({F} & {I}) -> ¬{F} fact22: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) | [
"fact6 & fact1 -> int1: Both that extantness and this articulariness happens.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 & fact1 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis;"
] | That therapy happens. | {C} | [] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This articulariness happens. fact2: If that narcotraffic happens that therapy occurs. fact3: The bonanza happens. fact4: The inhibiting retrospective does not happens. fact5: That that therapy does not occurs is brought about by that both that extantness and this articulariness happens. fact6: That extantness happens. fact7: If that this articulariness does not happens and that extantness does not happens does not hold then this jolting fervency does not occurs. fact8: If that paroxysm does not occurs that this unprofessionalness occurs and this diving happens does not hold. fact9: If this articulariness does not occurs then both that extantness and that therapy occurs. fact10: That that commixture does not occurs is caused by that this frequenterness does not happens. fact11: The fact that the orphaning primogeniture does not happens is not false. fact12: If this unprofessionalness does not occurs that this daydreaming noontide does not happens and this glacialness does not occurs does not hold. fact13: That that commixture does not occurs yields that that paroxysm occurs and this diving occurs. fact14: If the fact that this daydreaming noontide does not happens and this glacialness does not occurs does not hold this glacialness occurs. fact15: That this frequenterness does not occurs and that commixture does not happens prevents that that paroxysm happens. fact16: This unconditionalness occurs. fact17: That this past happens and that monovularness happens prevents that thrombosing infomercial. fact18: The fact that that non-articularyness and that non-extantness occurs is incorrect if that therapy happens. fact19: That this glacialness happens causes that this articulariness does not happens and that narcotraffic happens. fact20: The musclebuilding does not occurs. fact21: If that this unprofessionalness occurs and this diving occurs is not true this unprofessionalness does not occurs. fact22: If this unprofessionalness does not happens that narcotraffic happens and this glacialness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That therapy happens. ; $proof$ = | fact6 & fact1 -> int1: Both that extantness and this articulariness happens.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that this minder is not a kind of a chondroma but it is topologic is incorrect. | ¬(¬{C}{b} & {D}{b}) | fact1: That brooch is offside. fact2: Something is topologic. fact3: The fact that this minder is not non-topologic and it extrapolates does not hold if there is some person such that it is not non-topologic. fact4: That this minder is topologic and he/she does extrapolate does not hold. fact5: Something is topologic if that this thing is not topologic and this thing extrapolates is not correct. fact6: If that that brooch summarises guarded is correct this minder is not a kind of a chondroma. fact7: If that brooch summarises guarded and/or it is offside this minder is not a kind of a chondroma. | fact1: {B}{a} fact2: (Ex): {D}x fact3: (x): {D}x -> ¬({D}{b} & {E}{b}) fact4: ¬({D}{b} & {E}{b}) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> {D}x fact6: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact7: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} | [
"fact1 -> int1: That brooch does summarise guarded and/or this thing is offside.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: This minder is not a chondroma.; fact5 -> int3: If the fact that this minder is not topologic and extrapolates is incorrect it is topologic.;"
] | [
"fact1 -> int1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}); int1 & fact7 -> int2: ¬{C}{b}; fact5 -> int3: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {E}{b}) -> {D}{b};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $facts$ = fact1: That brooch is offside. fact2: Something is topologic. fact3: The fact that this minder is not non-topologic and it extrapolates does not hold if there is some person such that it is not non-topologic. fact4: That this minder is topologic and he/she does extrapolate does not hold. fact5: Something is topologic if that this thing is not topologic and this thing extrapolates is not correct. fact6: If that that brooch summarises guarded is correct this minder is not a kind of a chondroma. fact7: If that brooch summarises guarded and/or it is offside this minder is not a kind of a chondroma. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this minder is not a kind of a chondroma but it is topologic is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | Notthat indirection but this shuffling lit happens. | (¬{D} & {C}) | fact1: That that indirection does not occurs but this shuffling lit happens does not hold if this bacillariness occurs. fact2: The fact that the fact that that indirection happens and this shuffling lit happens is correct is incorrect if this bacillariness happens. | fact1: {A} -> ¬(¬{D} & {C}) fact2: {A} -> ¬({D} & {C}) | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $facts$ = fact1: That that indirection does not occurs but this shuffling lit happens does not hold if this bacillariness occurs. fact2: The fact that the fact that that indirection happens and this shuffling lit happens is correct is incorrect if this bacillariness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Notthat indirection but this shuffling lit happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | There exists something such that if the thing is uncomplaining the thing is uncomplaining and the thing does not subvent. | (Ex): {A}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) | fact1: That that Beaujolais does not subvent hold. fact2: Somebody does not satisfy predication and is a melange if it does not wander. fact3: That Beaujolais is not ununderstood if this botulismotoxin does not satisfy predication but it is a melange. fact4: This marlingspike is occipital and does not stack Delphinus. fact5: Some man that is not ununderstood is not a Theaceae and is a adenomyosis. fact6: That this botulismotoxin does not wander is true if that flask does not confederate countersignature. fact7: This Lysol subvents but it is not a Ulex if the fact that some person subvents is right. fact8: There is someone such that if he is ebracteate then he is ebracteate and is productive. fact9: There exists something such that if it is uncomplaining then it is uncomplaining and it does subvent. fact10: That Beaujolais is uncomplaining and that subvents if that Beaujolais is uncomplaining. fact11: Something that is not a Theaceae is uncomplaining thing that subvents. fact12: The fact that something is not ebracteate but a fermata is wrong if it does not sensitize NOAA. fact13: The fact that if that Beaujolais is uncomplaining that Beaujolais is uncomplaining but that thing is not a masquerade is true. fact14: If this embossment wallops mcg then it wallops mcg and does not subvent. fact15: That flask does not confederate countersignature if the fact that it is not ebracteate and it is a kind of a fermata is incorrect. fact16: That Beaujolais does not wander. fact17: If that Shelley is not a mujahedeen is true that that flask is not nonparametric and sensitizes NOAA does not hold. fact18: That flask does not sensitize NOAA if that it is not nonparametric and it sensitize NOAA does not hold. fact19: That Beaujolais disappears. fact20: That Beaujolais does not ridge microvolt. | fact1: ¬{B}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & {G}x) fact3: (¬{F}{b} & {G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact4: ({EM}{hq} & ¬{CS}{hq}) fact5: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{C}x & {D}x) fact6: ¬{I}{c} -> ¬{H}{b} fact7: (x): {B}x -> ({B}{ct} & ¬{HK}{ct}) fact8: (Ex): {J}x -> ({J}x & ¬{EI}x) fact9: (Ex): {A}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact10: {A}{a} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact12: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬(¬{J}x & {K}x) fact13: {A}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{GB}{a}) fact14: {JG}{hd} -> ({JG}{hd} & ¬{B}{hd}) fact15: ¬(¬{J}{c} & {K}{c}) -> ¬{I}{c} fact16: ¬{H}{a} fact17: ¬{M}{d} -> ¬(¬{N}{c} & {L}{c}) fact18: ¬(¬{N}{c} & {L}{c}) -> ¬{L}{c} fact19: {GL}{a} fact20: ¬{EN}{a} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that Beaujolais is uncomplaining.; assump1 & fact1 -> int1: That Beaujolais is uncomplaining and does not subvent.; [assump1] & int1 -> int2: That Beaujolais is uncomplaining and does not subvent if it is uncomplaining.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 & fact1 -> int1: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); [assump1] & int1 -> int2: {A}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That this Lysol does subvent but that one is not a Ulex is right. | ({B}{ct} & ¬{HK}{ct}) | [
"fact27 -> int3: That Beaujolais is uncomplaining and the thing subvents if the thing is not a Theaceae.; fact23 -> int4: If the fact that that Beaujolais is not ununderstood is correct that thing is not a Theaceae but a adenomyosis.; fact29 -> int5: If this botulismotoxin does not wander then it does not satisfy predication and it is a kind of a melange.; fact25 -> int6: The fact that that flask is not ebracteate but a fermata does not hold if that flask does not sensitize NOAA.;"
] | 13 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That that Beaujolais does not subvent hold. fact2: Somebody does not satisfy predication and is a melange if it does not wander. fact3: That Beaujolais is not ununderstood if this botulismotoxin does not satisfy predication but it is a melange. fact4: This marlingspike is occipital and does not stack Delphinus. fact5: Some man that is not ununderstood is not a Theaceae and is a adenomyosis. fact6: That this botulismotoxin does not wander is true if that flask does not confederate countersignature. fact7: This Lysol subvents but it is not a Ulex if the fact that some person subvents is right. fact8: There is someone such that if he is ebracteate then he is ebracteate and is productive. fact9: There exists something such that if it is uncomplaining then it is uncomplaining and it does subvent. fact10: That Beaujolais is uncomplaining and that subvents if that Beaujolais is uncomplaining. fact11: Something that is not a Theaceae is uncomplaining thing that subvents. fact12: The fact that something is not ebracteate but a fermata is wrong if it does not sensitize NOAA. fact13: The fact that if that Beaujolais is uncomplaining that Beaujolais is uncomplaining but that thing is not a masquerade is true. fact14: If this embossment wallops mcg then it wallops mcg and does not subvent. fact15: That flask does not confederate countersignature if the fact that it is not ebracteate and it is a kind of a fermata is incorrect. fact16: That Beaujolais does not wander. fact17: If that Shelley is not a mujahedeen is true that that flask is not nonparametric and sensitizes NOAA does not hold. fact18: That flask does not sensitize NOAA if that it is not nonparametric and it sensitize NOAA does not hold. fact19: That Beaujolais disappears. fact20: That Beaujolais does not ridge microvolt. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists something such that if the thing is uncomplaining the thing is uncomplaining and the thing does not subvent. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that Beaujolais is uncomplaining.; assump1 & fact1 -> int1: That Beaujolais is uncomplaining and does not subvent.; [assump1] & int1 -> int2: That Beaujolais is uncomplaining and does not subvent if it is uncomplaining.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that this Capricorn is a Swazi and is a kind of a Mozambique is false. | ¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) | fact1: that Craspedia expiates Joey. fact2: If that this Capricorn expiates Craspedia is correct then Joey is a kind of a Swazi. fact3: Everybody is a Swazi. fact4: There exists no one such that this one is both non-yeastlike and not non-useful. fact5: If Joey expiates Craspedia this Capricorn is a Mozambique. fact6: Joey is a Mozambique. fact7: This Capricorn expiates Craspedia. fact8: The fact that that plectranthus is a Swazi is true if that Joey is not a Swazi and does not expiate Craspedia does not hold. fact9: This Capricorn expiates Craspedia if Joey is a Mozambique. fact10: Someone does not expiate Craspedia and is not useful if she/he is yeastlike. fact11: Every man lines morphophysiology. fact12: Joey expiates Craspedia. | fact1: {AA}{ab} fact2: {C}{aa} -> {A}{a} fact3: (x): {A}x fact4: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) fact5: {C}{a} -> {B}{aa} fact6: {B}{a} fact7: {C}{aa} fact8: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {A}{cb} fact9: {B}{a} -> {C}{aa} fact10: (x): {E}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) fact11: (x): {IC}x fact12: {C}{a} | [
"fact3 -> int1: This Capricorn is a Swazi.; fact5 & fact12 -> int2: This Capricorn is a Mozambique.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact3 -> int1: {A}{aa}; fact5 & fact12 -> int2: {B}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That plectranthus is a Swazi. | {A}{cb} | [
"fact14 -> int3: That that sorting is non-yeastlike man that is useful does not hold.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: that Craspedia expiates Joey. fact2: If that this Capricorn expiates Craspedia is correct then Joey is a kind of a Swazi. fact3: Everybody is a Swazi. fact4: There exists no one such that this one is both non-yeastlike and not non-useful. fact5: If Joey expiates Craspedia this Capricorn is a Mozambique. fact6: Joey is a Mozambique. fact7: This Capricorn expiates Craspedia. fact8: The fact that that plectranthus is a Swazi is true if that Joey is not a Swazi and does not expiate Craspedia does not hold. fact9: This Capricorn expiates Craspedia if Joey is a Mozambique. fact10: Someone does not expiate Craspedia and is not useful if she/he is yeastlike. fact11: Every man lines morphophysiology. fact12: Joey expiates Craspedia. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this Capricorn is a Swazi and is a kind of a Mozambique is false. ; $proof$ = | fact3 -> int1: This Capricorn is a Swazi.; fact5 & fact12 -> int2: This Capricorn is a Mozambique.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That HIV is calced and a caliber. | ({C}{c} & {B}{c}) | fact1: If this lobule is pancreatic then the fact that that that HIV is calced one that is not a Funafuti is not false does not hold. fact2: If this drogue is not pancreatic then that that HIV is calced and a caliber is wrong. fact3: The fact that Alfredo is a caliber hold. fact4: The fact that that HIV is calced is right. fact5: The fact that that HIV is calced but it does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae does not hold if the fact that this lobule is a caliber is correct. fact6: This drogue is pancreatic. fact7: This lobule is alternating and is bionic if this lobule does not unplug. fact8: If this drogue is pancreatic then the fact that this lobule is a Funafuti but the thing does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae is wrong. fact9: If that HIV is calced then that that this drogue is pancreatic and this thing is a caliber hold is false. fact10: If this drogue is not calced this lobule is a caliber and pancreatic. fact11: If that this lobule is not cosmological and it is not a grilling does not hold this lobule does not unplug. fact12: If the nosebag is unwary that this lobule is not cosmological and not a grilling is wrong. fact13: The fact that that HIV does ballyrag Podocarpaceae and is a volatile is incorrect. fact14: That HIV is a Funafuti if that this lobule is calced but it is not a kind of a caliber is false. fact15: If the fact that that HIV is calced and does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae is wrong this lobule is a caliber. fact16: That HIV is a kind of a caliber if that this lobule is a Funafuti and does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae does not hold. fact17: That this lobule is a Funafuti and that thing ballyrags Podocarpaceae is incorrect if this drogue is pancreatic. fact18: If that HIV ballyrags Podocarpaceae this lobule is not discalced. | fact1: {A}{b} -> ¬({C}{c} & ¬{AA}{c}) fact2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({C}{c} & {B}{c}) fact3: {B}{hs} fact4: {C}{c} fact5: {B}{b} -> ¬({C}{c} & ¬{AB}{c}) fact6: {A}{a} fact7: ¬{F}{b} -> ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) fact8: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact9: {C}{c} -> ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact10: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) fact11: ¬(¬{I}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact12: {J}{d} -> ¬(¬{I}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) fact13: ¬({AB}{c} & {HI}{c}) fact14: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {AA}{c} fact15: ¬({C}{c} & ¬{AB}{c}) -> {B}{b} fact16: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} fact17: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact18: {AB}{c} -> {C}{b} | [
"fact8 & fact6 -> int1: The fact that that this lobule is a kind of a Funafuti and does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae is wrong is right.; int1 & fact16 -> int2: That HIV is a caliber.; int2 & fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact8 & fact6 -> int1: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); int1 & fact16 -> int2: {B}{c}; int2 & fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | The fact that that HIV is calced and the thing is a kind of a caliber is false. | ¬({C}{c} & {B}{c}) | [] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If this lobule is pancreatic then the fact that that that HIV is calced one that is not a Funafuti is not false does not hold. fact2: If this drogue is not pancreatic then that that HIV is calced and a caliber is wrong. fact3: The fact that Alfredo is a caliber hold. fact4: The fact that that HIV is calced is right. fact5: The fact that that HIV is calced but it does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae does not hold if the fact that this lobule is a caliber is correct. fact6: This drogue is pancreatic. fact7: This lobule is alternating and is bionic if this lobule does not unplug. fact8: If this drogue is pancreatic then the fact that this lobule is a Funafuti but the thing does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae is wrong. fact9: If that HIV is calced then that that this drogue is pancreatic and this thing is a caliber hold is false. fact10: If this drogue is not calced this lobule is a caliber and pancreatic. fact11: If that this lobule is not cosmological and it is not a grilling does not hold this lobule does not unplug. fact12: If the nosebag is unwary that this lobule is not cosmological and not a grilling is wrong. fact13: The fact that that HIV does ballyrag Podocarpaceae and is a volatile is incorrect. fact14: That HIV is a Funafuti if that this lobule is calced but it is not a kind of a caliber is false. fact15: If the fact that that HIV is calced and does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae is wrong this lobule is a caliber. fact16: That HIV is a kind of a caliber if that this lobule is a Funafuti and does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae does not hold. fact17: That this lobule is a Funafuti and that thing ballyrags Podocarpaceae is incorrect if this drogue is pancreatic. fact18: If that HIV ballyrags Podocarpaceae this lobule is not discalced. ; $hypothesis$ = That HIV is calced and a caliber. ; $proof$ = | fact8 & fact6 -> int1: The fact that that this lobule is a kind of a Funafuti and does not ballyrag Podocarpaceae is wrong is right.; int1 & fact16 -> int2: That HIV is a caliber.; int2 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This chloramine is unconfined and it is electromechanical. | ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) | fact1: If something that does not pelt FCC does gage clouded it is unconfined. fact2: If that something pelts FCC is correct it is not mercurous but a antonym. fact3: This chloramine gages clouded. fact4: That either this compact is not electromechanical or that is not an eigenvalue or both if this compact avoids impunity is not incorrect. fact5: If that proselyte is palpatory that proselyte is a Dictyoptera. fact6: this clouded gages chloramine. fact7: This chloramine is electromechanical if it is a antonym. fact8: Every man is a kind of a antonym and/or this one is an eigenvalue. fact9: The fact that this chloramine is both unconfined and electromechanical does not hold if this molecule does not pelt FCC. fact10: Some person that is not electromechanical and/or is not an eigenvalue is unconfined. fact11: that FCC does not pelt chloramine. fact12: Someone gages clouded if the one is unconfined. fact13: Some man is electromechanical if it is an eigenvalue. | fact1: (x): (¬{A}x & {B}x) -> {C}x fact2: (x): {A}x -> (¬{EH}x & {E}x) fact3: {B}{a} fact4: {G}{ct} -> (¬{D}{ct} v ¬{F}{ct}) fact5: {IK}{ft} -> {EG}{ft} fact6: {AB}{ab} fact7: {E}{a} -> {D}{a} fact8: (x): ({E}x v {F}x) fact9: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} & {D}{a}) fact10: (x): (¬{D}x v ¬{F}x) -> {C}x fact11: ¬{AA}{aa} fact12: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact13: (x): {F}x -> {D}x | [
"fact1 -> int1: This chloramine is unconfined if that one does not pelt FCC and gages clouded.; fact8 -> int2: This chloramine is a antonym and/or he is a kind of an eigenvalue.; fact13 -> int3: If this chloramine is a kind of an eigenvalue this chloramine is electromechanical.; fact7 & int2 & int3 -> int4: This chloramine is electromechanical.;"
] | [
"fact1 -> int1: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> {C}{a}; fact8 -> int2: ({E}{a} v {F}{a}); fact13 -> int3: {F}{a} -> {D}{a}; fact7 & int2 & int3 -> int4: {D}{a};"
] | This compact is not mercurous but that person is a antonym. | (¬{EH}{ct} & {E}{ct}) | [
"fact14 -> int5: If this compact pelts FCC this compact is non-mercurous one that is a antonym.; fact17 -> int6: The fact that this compact does gage clouded is correct if this compact is unconfined.; fact15 -> int7: This compact is unconfined if this compact is either not electromechanical or not an eigenvalue or both.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If something that does not pelt FCC does gage clouded it is unconfined. fact2: If that something pelts FCC is correct it is not mercurous but a antonym. fact3: This chloramine gages clouded. fact4: That either this compact is not electromechanical or that is not an eigenvalue or both if this compact avoids impunity is not incorrect. fact5: If that proselyte is palpatory that proselyte is a Dictyoptera. fact6: this clouded gages chloramine. fact7: This chloramine is electromechanical if it is a antonym. fact8: Every man is a kind of a antonym and/or this one is an eigenvalue. fact9: The fact that this chloramine is both unconfined and electromechanical does not hold if this molecule does not pelt FCC. fact10: Some person that is not electromechanical and/or is not an eigenvalue is unconfined. fact11: that FCC does not pelt chloramine. fact12: Someone gages clouded if the one is unconfined. fact13: Some man is electromechanical if it is an eigenvalue. ; $hypothesis$ = This chloramine is unconfined and it is electromechanical. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That membrane is not a somatesthesia and does not suspend prosthetics. | (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | fact1: If that puncher is a frisk the fact that that membrane is not a somatesthesia and suspends prosthetics is incorrect. fact2: The fact that that that puncher is a frisk but she does not suspend prosthetics is wrong is not wrong. fact3: That puncher is a kind of a frisk. fact4: That if that puncher is not a frisk and it is not a pseudovariola then that membrane is not a kind of a frisk hold. fact5: Someone is not a somatesthesia and this one does not suspend prosthetics if this one is not a frisk. fact6: If that puncher is a frisk the fact that that that membrane is not a somatesthesia and does not suspend prosthetics is false is right. | fact1: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact2: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact3: {A}{a} fact4: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact5: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact6: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | [
"fact6 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | That membrane is not a somatesthesia and does not suspend prosthetics. | (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | [
"fact7 -> int1: That membrane is not a kind of a somatesthesia and does not suspend prosthetics if that membrane is not a kind of a frisk.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that puncher is a frisk the fact that that membrane is not a somatesthesia and suspends prosthetics is incorrect. fact2: The fact that that that puncher is a frisk but she does not suspend prosthetics is wrong is not wrong. fact3: That puncher is a kind of a frisk. fact4: That if that puncher is not a frisk and it is not a pseudovariola then that membrane is not a kind of a frisk hold. fact5: Someone is not a somatesthesia and this one does not suspend prosthetics if this one is not a frisk. fact6: If that puncher is a frisk the fact that that that membrane is not a somatesthesia and does not suspend prosthetics is false is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That membrane is not a somatesthesia and does not suspend prosthetics. ; $proof$ = | fact6 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This armchair is not a scoring. | ¬{B}{a} | fact1: If something is a kind of a finiteness then it is a scoring. fact2: The fact that Irene is not a austereness but a sparsity does not hold if he/she is not a Kurdish. fact3: That this armchair does fry loved and is a inexorableness is wrong if that one is not a finiteness. fact4: If something does not climax Enid and is not Thoreauvian then it is not a melanoma. fact5: That thermosphere is not a austereness if the fact that Irene is both not a austereness and a sparsity does not hold. fact6: This armchair is not a finiteness. fact7: Irene is not a Kurdish. fact8: This tapioca is a culturati. fact9: If the fact that this armchair fries loved and it is a inexorableness is incorrect this armchair is not a kind of a scoring. fact10: If this tapioca is a culturati this tapioca is androgenetic. fact11: This sloughing is a kind of non-slowest thing that does not mush Daedal if that thermosphere is not a kind of a melanoma. fact12: Something that is not a austereness distorts contrary and is a Rickettsiaceae. fact13: That thermosphere is not Thoreauvian if a androgenetic person is unhurried. fact14: Something does not climax Enid if the fact that that is not a kind of a like and that is not a Kuiper is incorrect. fact15: That someone is not a like and it is not a Kuiper is incorrect if it distorts contrary. fact16: This armchair is not a kind of a scoring if this armchair is not a inexorableness. fact17: Something is unhurried if it Reveres unrespectability. fact18: This tapioca Reveres unrespectability if it is a Ophiuroidea. fact19: If something is not a scoring then it does not fry loved and is not a kind of a finiteness. fact20: That Mariel does not cumber fruiting if the fact that the fact that Mariel is a finiteness and it forbids does not hold hold is correct. fact21: This tapioca is a Ophiuroidea. fact22: This armchair is not a hushed. | fact1: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact2: ¬{R}{e} -> ¬(¬{N}{e} & {P}{e}) fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact4: (x): (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact5: ¬(¬{N}{e} & {P}{e}) -> ¬{N}{c} fact6: ¬{A}{a} fact7: ¬{R}{e} fact8: {Q}{d} fact9: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact10: {Q}{d} -> {H}{d} fact11: ¬{E}{c} -> (¬{C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact12: (x): ¬{N}x -> ({L}x & {M}x) fact13: (x): ({H}x & {I}x) -> ¬{G}{c} fact14: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{F}x fact15: (x): {L}x -> ¬(¬{K}x & ¬{J}x) fact16: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact17: (x): {O}x -> {I}x fact18: {S}{d} -> {O}{d} fact19: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{A}x) fact20: ¬({A}{hs} & {FS}{hs}) -> ¬{IS}{hs} fact21: {S}{d} fact22: ¬{EE}{a} | [
"fact3 & fact6 -> int1: The fact that this armchair fries loved and is a kind of a inexorableness is incorrect.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact3 & fact6 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis;"
] | This armchair is a scoring. | {B}{a} | [
"fact35 -> int2: This armchair is a scoring if the person is a kind of a finiteness.; fact37 -> int3: If that thermosphere does not climax Enid and it is not Thoreauvian then that that thermosphere is not a melanoma hold.; fact36 -> int4: If that that thermosphere is not a like and this person is not a kind of a Kuiper does not hold then this person does not climax Enid.; fact30 -> int5: If that thermosphere distorts contrary the fact that that thermosphere is not a like and is not a kind of a Kuiper does not hold.; fact26 -> int6: If that thermosphere is not a austereness then it distorts contrary and it is a Rickettsiaceae.; fact32 & fact34 -> int7: That Irene is not a austereness but he/she is a kind of a sparsity is incorrect.; fact33 & int7 -> int8: That thermosphere is not a austereness.; int6 & int8 -> int9: That thermosphere distorts contrary and is a kind of a Rickettsiaceae.; int9 -> int10: That thermosphere distorts contrary.; int5 & int10 -> int11: The fact that the fact that that thermosphere is not a like and not a Kuiper hold does not hold.; int4 & int11 -> int12: That thermosphere does not climax Enid.; fact31 & fact27 -> int13: This tapioca is androgenetic.; fact29 -> int14: This tapioca is unhurried if he Reveres unrespectability.; fact23 & fact24 -> int15: This tapioca Reveres unrespectability.; int14 & int15 -> int16: This tapioca is unhurried.; int13 & int16 -> int17: This tapioca is a kind of androgenetic thing that is unhurried.; int17 -> int18: Something is androgenetic and this is unhurried.; int18 & fact25 -> int19: That thermosphere is not Thoreauvian.; int12 & int19 -> int20: That thermosphere does not climax Enid and is not Thoreauvian.; int3 & int20 -> int21: That thermosphere is not a melanoma.; fact28 & int21 -> int22: This sloughing is not slowest and it does not mush Daedal.; int22 -> int23: Something is non-slowest and it does not mush Daedal.;"
] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If something is a kind of a finiteness then it is a scoring. fact2: The fact that Irene is not a austereness but a sparsity does not hold if he/she is not a Kurdish. fact3: That this armchair does fry loved and is a inexorableness is wrong if that one is not a finiteness. fact4: If something does not climax Enid and is not Thoreauvian then it is not a melanoma. fact5: That thermosphere is not a austereness if the fact that Irene is both not a austereness and a sparsity does not hold. fact6: This armchair is not a finiteness. fact7: Irene is not a Kurdish. fact8: This tapioca is a culturati. fact9: If the fact that this armchair fries loved and it is a inexorableness is incorrect this armchair is not a kind of a scoring. fact10: If this tapioca is a culturati this tapioca is androgenetic. fact11: This sloughing is a kind of non-slowest thing that does not mush Daedal if that thermosphere is not a kind of a melanoma. fact12: Something that is not a austereness distorts contrary and is a Rickettsiaceae. fact13: That thermosphere is not Thoreauvian if a androgenetic person is unhurried. fact14: Something does not climax Enid if the fact that that is not a kind of a like and that is not a Kuiper is incorrect. fact15: That someone is not a like and it is not a Kuiper is incorrect if it distorts contrary. fact16: This armchair is not a kind of a scoring if this armchair is not a inexorableness. fact17: Something is unhurried if it Reveres unrespectability. fact18: This tapioca Reveres unrespectability if it is a Ophiuroidea. fact19: If something is not a scoring then it does not fry loved and is not a kind of a finiteness. fact20: That Mariel does not cumber fruiting if the fact that the fact that Mariel is a finiteness and it forbids does not hold hold is correct. fact21: This tapioca is a Ophiuroidea. fact22: This armchair is not a hushed. ; $hypothesis$ = This armchair is not a scoring. ; $proof$ = | fact3 & fact6 -> int1: The fact that this armchair fries loved and is a kind of a inexorableness is incorrect.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This chimaera is a penmanship. | {AA}{a} | fact1: The linin is a kind of a penmanship. fact2: This perpetrator is both not non-planographic and a Hestia. fact3: The fact that the cherrystone is a penmanship is right. fact4: The bugleweed is a leptomeningitis. fact5: This perpetrator is a Fontanne. fact6: If this perpetrator is a Fontanne and a Hestia this perpetrator is not a craniometry. fact7: Some man is a Vesuvius and not adsorbable if it conceals. fact8: This chimaera bespangles Ziziphus and is not a kind of a leptomeningitis. fact9: This chimaera is a realness. fact10: This chimaera acuminates Agamidae. fact11: This greybeard does not interconnect Marstan if this greybeard conceals. fact12: This chimaera does not bother impacted. fact13: The snow brushes but it does not conceal. fact14: This chimaera is not a leptomeningitis if that conceals. fact15: This chimaera is not a leptomeningitis. fact16: This chimaera conceals. | fact1: {AA}{q} fact2: ({F}{b} & {E}{b}) fact3: {AA}{aa} fact4: {AB}{bn} fact5: {D}{b} fact6: ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact7: (x): {A}x -> ({JA}x & ¬{AR}x) fact8: ({HM}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact9: {FS}{a} fact10: {S}{a} fact11: {A}{ib} -> ¬{BD}{ib} fact12: ¬{CH}{a} fact13: ({L}{hi} & ¬{A}{hi}) fact14: {A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} fact15: ¬{AB}{a} fact16: {A}{a} | [] | [] | This chimaera is not a penmanship. | ¬{AA}{a} | [
"fact18 -> int1: This perpetrator is a Hestia.; fact19 & int1 -> int2: This perpetrator is a Fontanne and the thing is a Hestia.; fact17 & int2 -> int3: That this perpetrator is not a craniometry is correct.; int3 -> int4: There exists some person such that the person is not a craniometry.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The linin is a kind of a penmanship. fact2: This perpetrator is both not non-planographic and a Hestia. fact3: The fact that the cherrystone is a penmanship is right. fact4: The bugleweed is a leptomeningitis. fact5: This perpetrator is a Fontanne. fact6: If this perpetrator is a Fontanne and a Hestia this perpetrator is not a craniometry. fact7: Some man is a Vesuvius and not adsorbable if it conceals. fact8: This chimaera bespangles Ziziphus and is not a kind of a leptomeningitis. fact9: This chimaera is a realness. fact10: This chimaera acuminates Agamidae. fact11: This greybeard does not interconnect Marstan if this greybeard conceals. fact12: This chimaera does not bother impacted. fact13: The snow brushes but it does not conceal. fact14: This chimaera is not a leptomeningitis if that conceals. fact15: This chimaera is not a leptomeningitis. fact16: This chimaera conceals. ; $hypothesis$ = This chimaera is a penmanship. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That coarsening trice does not happens. | ¬{A} | fact1: That shoeing sup does not happens if the fact that that shoeing sup but notthis arsenical happens is wrong. fact2: That vasosection happens and that orthographicness happens if this beguilement does not occurs. fact3: If that vasosection occurs then the fact that the fact that that shoeing sup happens but this arsenical does not happens is correct is incorrect. fact4: Both this biovularness and that coarsening trice occurs if that shoeing sup does not happens. | fact1: ¬({B} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact2: ¬{F} -> ({C} & {E}) fact3: {C} -> ¬({B} & ¬{D}) fact4: ¬{B} -> ({IQ} & {A}) | [] | [] | This biovularness occurs. | {IQ} | [] | 9 | 1 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That shoeing sup does not happens if the fact that that shoeing sup but notthis arsenical happens is wrong. fact2: That vasosection happens and that orthographicness happens if this beguilement does not occurs. fact3: If that vasosection occurs then the fact that the fact that that shoeing sup happens but this arsenical does not happens is correct is incorrect. fact4: Both this biovularness and that coarsening trice occurs if that shoeing sup does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That coarsening trice does not happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | Let's assume that that progressing exbibyte occurs. | {B} | fact1: That this approving Vulpecula does not happens triggers that this sentimentalization and this ulnarness occurs. fact2: If that Djiboutianness happens then this patching happens. fact3: If that known occurs then that that megadeath does not occurs but that fluttering occurs does not hold. fact4: That ordeal does not happens if that the macromolecularness does not happens and this pursuing occurs is false. fact5: That that progressing exbibyte does not happens is prevented by that either that crash does not happens or that progressing exbibyte happens or both. fact6: That that megadeath does not occurs but that progressing exbibyte happens is not correct. fact7: That this sentimentalization occurs results in that that misinterpreting glamor does not occurs and that slam does not happens. fact8: The bisteredness does not happens if that megadeath does not occurs and that progressing exbibyte does not occurs. fact9: That this haematogenicness occurs but the unrhetoricalness does not occurs does not hold if that ordeal does not happens. fact10: If that that megadeath does not occurs and that fluttering happens is false then the fact that that crash does not happens is true. fact11: That this approving Vulpecula does not occurs but this foreshortening desirableness happens is caused by that this patching occurs. fact12: If that this haematogenicness and that rhetoricalness occurs does not hold then this quantification does not occurs. fact13: That ordeal happens. fact14: If that slam does not occurs that known happens. fact15: That Djiboutianness and this patristicalness occurs if this quantification does not occurs. | fact1: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact2: {M} -> {L} fact3: {E} -> ¬(¬{A} & {D}) fact4: ¬(¬{S} & {T}) -> ¬{R} fact5: (¬{C} v {B}) -> {B} fact6: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) fact7: {H} -> (¬{G} & ¬{F}) fact8: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{EM} fact9: ¬{R} -> ¬({Q} & ¬{P}) fact10: ¬(¬{A} & {D}) -> ¬{C} fact11: {L} -> (¬{J} & {K}) fact12: ¬({Q} & ¬{P}) -> ¬{O} fact13: {R} fact14: ¬{F} -> {E} fact15: ¬{O} -> ({M} & {N}) | [] | [] | Let's assume that that progressing exbibyte occurs. | {B} | [] | 17 | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That this approving Vulpecula does not happens triggers that this sentimentalization and this ulnarness occurs. fact2: If that Djiboutianness happens then this patching happens. fact3: If that known occurs then that that megadeath does not occurs but that fluttering occurs does not hold. fact4: That ordeal does not happens if that the macromolecularness does not happens and this pursuing occurs is false. fact5: That that progressing exbibyte does not happens is prevented by that either that crash does not happens or that progressing exbibyte happens or both. fact6: That that megadeath does not occurs but that progressing exbibyte happens is not correct. fact7: That this sentimentalization occurs results in that that misinterpreting glamor does not occurs and that slam does not happens. fact8: The bisteredness does not happens if that megadeath does not occurs and that progressing exbibyte does not occurs. fact9: That this haematogenicness occurs but the unrhetoricalness does not occurs does not hold if that ordeal does not happens. fact10: If that that megadeath does not occurs and that fluttering happens is false then the fact that that crash does not happens is true. fact11: That this approving Vulpecula does not occurs but this foreshortening desirableness happens is caused by that this patching occurs. fact12: If that this haematogenicness and that rhetoricalness occurs does not hold then this quantification does not occurs. fact13: That ordeal happens. fact14: If that slam does not occurs that known happens. fact15: That Djiboutianness and this patristicalness occurs if this quantification does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that progressing exbibyte occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | There is something such that if it does not fool pleonasm then it is a labouring and it does not fool pleonasm. | (Ex): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) | fact1: This Abo is a labouring. fact2: If this Abo is a palaeolithic the fact that it is a Acrocomia and it is not salable is wrong. fact3: That derivation does not fool pleonasm if the fact that this Abo is a Acrocomia but this thing is not salable is false. fact4: If this Abo fools pleonasm this Abo is a kind of a labouring but the thing does not fools pleonasm. fact5: There exists something such that if this fools pleonasm then this is a labouring and this does not fools pleonasm. | fact1: {A}{a} fact2: {E}{a} -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact3: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{B}{ja} fact4: {B}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact5: (Ex): {B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that this Abo does not fool pleonasm.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: This Abo is a labouring but it does not fool pleonasm.; [assump1] & int1 -> int2: If this Abo does not fool pleonasm this Abo is a labouring that does not fool pleonasm.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{B}{a}; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); [assump1] & int1 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That derivation is indulgent but that person is not a labouring. | ({H}{ja} & ¬{A}{ja}) | [] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This Abo is a labouring. fact2: If this Abo is a palaeolithic the fact that it is a Acrocomia and it is not salable is wrong. fact3: That derivation does not fool pleonasm if the fact that this Abo is a Acrocomia but this thing is not salable is false. fact4: If this Abo fools pleonasm this Abo is a kind of a labouring but the thing does not fools pleonasm. fact5: There exists something such that if this fools pleonasm then this is a labouring and this does not fools pleonasm. ; $hypothesis$ = There is something such that if it does not fool pleonasm then it is a labouring and it does not fool pleonasm. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that this Abo does not fool pleonasm.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: This Abo is a labouring but it does not fool pleonasm.; [assump1] & int1 -> int2: If this Abo does not fool pleonasm this Abo is a labouring that does not fool pleonasm.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That isobar is not a kind of a afterworld. | ¬{B}{a} | fact1: That isobar is noncommercial. fact2: That k is a kind of a afterworld. fact3: That isobar is both noncommercial and a afterworld. | fact1: {A}{a} fact2: {B}{bn} fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | [
"fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That isobar is noncommercial. fact2: That k is a kind of a afterworld. fact3: That isobar is both noncommercial and a afterworld. ; $hypothesis$ = That isobar is not a kind of a afterworld. ; $proof$ = | fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | The fact that this discussion does not occurs and that seeming Orchestia does not happens is not correct. | ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | fact1: The rift does not happens if that insurrectionariness happens. fact2: This discussion does not happens. fact3: That insurrectionariness does not happens. fact4: This uproar is caused by that notthat insurrectionariness but this fingerprinting occurs. fact5: If this discussion does not occurs and that seeming Orchestia does not happens then this uproar does not occurs. | fact1: {A} -> ¬{HL} fact2: ¬{AA} fact3: ¬{A} fact4: (¬{A} & {C}) -> {B} fact5: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that this discussion does not occurs and that seeming Orchestia does not happens.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: This uproar does not occurs.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); fact5 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B};"
] | The rift does not occurs. | ¬{HL} | [] | 6 | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The rift does not happens if that insurrectionariness happens. fact2: This discussion does not happens. fact3: That insurrectionariness does not happens. fact4: This uproar is caused by that notthat insurrectionariness but this fingerprinting occurs. fact5: If this discussion does not occurs and that seeming Orchestia does not happens then this uproar does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this discussion does not occurs and that seeming Orchestia does not happens is not correct. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | The fact that this fetlock does not attach is true. | ¬{A}{a} | fact1: Some man is a dispiritedness that does attach if it is not a kind of a Algerie. fact2: Something is a kind of non-unadoptable thing that demoralises fellowship if it is not macrocosmic. fact3: This fetlock is not macrocosmic if she/he is both not allomerous and spiderlike. fact4: This alveolus is anadromous if this alveolus is a Camponotus. fact5: This humin attaches. fact6: This fetlock is a sonant. fact7: If this alveolus is anadromous then that postmaster is spiderlike. fact8: If something that is not unadoptable demoralises fellowship then it is not a kind of a dispiritedness. fact9: This heliotropism does not demoralise fellowship and/or is not a Algerie if this fetlock is not unadoptable. fact10: If that postmaster is spiderlike then the fact that this fetlock is not macrocosmic but it is allomerous does not hold. fact11: If some person is not a kind of a dispiritedness the fact that it does attach and it is a kind of a Algerie is wrong. fact12: If somebody either does not demoralise fellowship or is not a kind of a Algerie or both it is not a Algerie. fact13: If the fact that somebody attaches and it is a Algerie is incorrect it does not attaches. | fact1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) fact2: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & {D}x) fact3: (¬{G}{a} & {H}{a}) -> ¬{F}{a} fact4: {J}{c} -> {I}{c} fact5: {A}{as} fact6: {HB}{a} fact7: {I}{c} -> {H}{b} fact8: (x): (¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact9: ¬{E}{a} -> (¬{D}{bo} v ¬{C}{bo}) fact10: {H}{b} -> ¬(¬{F}{a} & {G}{a}) fact11: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) fact12: (x): (¬{D}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{C}x fact13: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x | [] | [] | The fact that this fetlock does not attach is true. | ¬{A}{a} | [
"fact14 -> int1: This fetlock does not attach if the fact that this fetlock attach and is a Algerie is not true.; fact18 -> int2: That this fetlock does attach and it is a Algerie is incorrect if it is not a dispiritedness.; fact15 -> int3: This fetlock is not a kind of a dispiritedness if it is not unadoptable and it demoralises fellowship.; fact17 -> int4: This fetlock is not unadoptable but it demoralises fellowship if this fetlock is not macrocosmic.;"
] | 6 | 1 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Some man is a dispiritedness that does attach if it is not a kind of a Algerie. fact2: Something is a kind of non-unadoptable thing that demoralises fellowship if it is not macrocosmic. fact3: This fetlock is not macrocosmic if she/he is both not allomerous and spiderlike. fact4: This alveolus is anadromous if this alveolus is a Camponotus. fact5: This humin attaches. fact6: This fetlock is a sonant. fact7: If this alveolus is anadromous then that postmaster is spiderlike. fact8: If something that is not unadoptable demoralises fellowship then it is not a kind of a dispiritedness. fact9: This heliotropism does not demoralise fellowship and/or is not a Algerie if this fetlock is not unadoptable. fact10: If that postmaster is spiderlike then the fact that this fetlock is not macrocosmic but it is allomerous does not hold. fact11: If some person is not a kind of a dispiritedness the fact that it does attach and it is a kind of a Algerie is wrong. fact12: If somebody either does not demoralise fellowship or is not a kind of a Algerie or both it is not a Algerie. fact13: If the fact that somebody attaches and it is a Algerie is incorrect it does not attaches. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this fetlock does not attach is true. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This substrate is a mutant. | {C}{b} | fact1: The fact that if this substrate is an inferior then this substrate is a kind of a mutant is true. fact2: The fact that either that acetone is a kind of a Constantina or the person is not a usability or both is incorrect if the person is unworldly. fact3: If that that acetone is a Constantina and/or it is not a usability is wrong that this substrate is an inferior is correct. fact4: That acetone is unworldly. | fact1: {B}{b} -> {C}{b} fact2: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact3: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact4: {A}{a} | [
"fact2 & fact4 -> int1: That that acetone is a Constantina and/or it is not a usability does not hold.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: This substrate is a kind of an inferior.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact2 & fact4 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & fact3 -> int2: {B}{b}; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: The fact that if this substrate is an inferior then this substrate is a kind of a mutant is true. fact2: The fact that either that acetone is a kind of a Constantina or the person is not a usability or both is incorrect if the person is unworldly. fact3: If that that acetone is a Constantina and/or it is not a usability is wrong that this substrate is an inferior is correct. fact4: That acetone is unworldly. ; $hypothesis$ = This substrate is a mutant. ; $proof$ = | fact2 & fact4 -> int1: That that acetone is a Constantina and/or it is not a usability does not hold.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: This substrate is a kind of an inferior.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That temporary is baring. | {C}{a} | fact1: If that temporary does scrutinise Gironde then this thing is not non-Dionysian. fact2: That temporary is a CISC and retranslates pointed if this norgestrel does not forsake Dermochelyidae. fact3: That temporary scrutinises Gironde. fact4: Somebody scrutinises Gironde but it is non-Dionysian if it does step Genseric. fact5: If some person scrutinises Gironde but it is non-Dionysian it is baring. fact6: That temporary is not non-cooperative. fact7: If that this aalii is not non-mesodermal and it is continuous does not hold then this norgestrel does not forsake Dermochelyidae. fact8: Someone steps Genseric if that person is a funk. fact9: If the fact that that Wiccan is not a Wilder and/or the thing governs seriocomedy does not hold then that bolus does not governs seriocomedy. fact10: If some man is Dionysian then he/she is non-baring. fact11: If that temporary culls astheny that temporary does not droop bellowing. fact12: This Wicdoes not Crab glisten if the fact that this aspirant spoils but she does not Crab glisten is false. fact13: That some man is not a Wilder and/or it governs seriocomedy is false if it does not Crab glisten. fact14: That this aalii is mesodermal man that is continuous is false if that bolus does not govern seriocomedy. fact15: Some man is a kind of a funk if the one is a CISC. fact16: this Gironde scrutinises temporary. | fact1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact2: ¬{H}{b} -> ({F}{a} & {G}{a}) fact3: {A}{a} fact4: (x): {D}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact5: (x): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {C}x fact6: {IG}{a} fact7: ¬({J}{c} & {I}{c}) -> ¬{H}{b} fact8: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact9: ¬(¬{M}{e} v {K}{e}) -> ¬{K}{d} fact10: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x fact11: {FI}{a} -> ¬{IN}{a} fact12: ¬({O}{f} & ¬{L}{f}) -> ¬{L}{e} fact13: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬(¬{M}x v {K}x) fact14: ¬{K}{d} -> ¬({J}{c} & {I}{c}) fact15: (x): {F}x -> {E}x fact16: {AA}{aa} | [
"fact1 & fact3 -> int1: That temporary is Dionysian.; fact10 -> int2: That temporary is not baring if that temporary is Dionysian.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 & fact3 -> int1: {B}{a}; fact10 -> int2: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | That temporary is baring. | {C}{a} | [
"fact23 -> int3: That temporary is baring if that one scrutinises Gironde and that one is not Dionysian.; fact22 -> int4: That temporary scrutinises Gironde and is not Dionysian if that temporary steps Genseric.; fact25 -> int5: That temporary steps Genseric if that temporary is a funk.; fact26 -> int6: If that temporary is a CISC then that temporary is a funk.; fact24 -> int7: The fact that either that Wiccan is not a kind of a Wilder or it governs seriocomedy or both is false if this Wicdoes not Crab glisten.;"
] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that temporary does scrutinise Gironde then this thing is not non-Dionysian. fact2: That temporary is a CISC and retranslates pointed if this norgestrel does not forsake Dermochelyidae. fact3: That temporary scrutinises Gironde. fact4: Somebody scrutinises Gironde but it is non-Dionysian if it does step Genseric. fact5: If some person scrutinises Gironde but it is non-Dionysian it is baring. fact6: That temporary is not non-cooperative. fact7: If that this aalii is not non-mesodermal and it is continuous does not hold then this norgestrel does not forsake Dermochelyidae. fact8: Someone steps Genseric if that person is a funk. fact9: If the fact that that Wiccan is not a Wilder and/or the thing governs seriocomedy does not hold then that bolus does not governs seriocomedy. fact10: If some man is Dionysian then he/she is non-baring. fact11: If that temporary culls astheny that temporary does not droop bellowing. fact12: This Wicdoes not Crab glisten if the fact that this aspirant spoils but she does not Crab glisten is false. fact13: That some man is not a Wilder and/or it governs seriocomedy is false if it does not Crab glisten. fact14: That this aalii is mesodermal man that is continuous is false if that bolus does not govern seriocomedy. fact15: Some man is a kind of a funk if the one is a CISC. fact16: this Gironde scrutinises temporary. ; $hypothesis$ = That temporary is baring. ; $proof$ = | fact1 & fact3 -> int1: That temporary is Dionysian.; fact10 -> int2: That temporary is not baring if that temporary is Dionysian.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This neurotoxin is androgenous. | {D}{b} | fact1: If the fact that something is not androgenous and it does not Down does not hold it is androgenous. fact2: Something that is a carnality brands. fact3: If something is a unpropitiousness that it does not Snake passivism and it ammonifies steamed is wrong. fact4: The fact that if that perijove is a kind of a carnality this neurotoxin is not androgenous is right. fact5: If the fact that some man does not Snake passivism but it ammonifies steamed does not hold the fact that it is a carnality is right. fact6: If that briar brands then the fact that that perijove is a carnality is right. fact7: Either that briar is a unpropitiousness or it is unconformist or both if it is not radioactive. fact8: The fact that something is not androgenous and that does not Down is wrong if that brands. fact9: That briar is not radioactive. fact10: That briar Downs and/or brands. | fact1: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{A}x) -> {D}x fact2: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact3: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) fact4: {C}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} fact5: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) -> {C}x fact6: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact7: ¬{I}{a} -> ({G}{a} v {H}{a}) fact8: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{A}x) fact9: ¬{I}{a} fact10: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) | [] | [] | This neurotoxin is androgenous. | {D}{b} | [
"fact12 -> int1: If that the fact that this neurotoxin is not androgenous and the person does not Down is false is correct then the person is androgenous.; fact15 -> int2: If this neurotoxin brands that this neurotoxin is non-androgenous thing that does not Down does not hold.; fact14 -> int3: This neurotoxin brands if it is a carnality.; fact13 -> int4: This neurotoxin is a carnality if the fact that this neurotoxin does not Snake passivism and ammonifies steamed is false.; fact16 -> int5: If this neurotoxin is a unpropitiousness then that this neurotoxin does not Snake passivism but this thing ammonifies steamed is wrong.; fact11 & fact17 -> int6: That briar is a unpropitiousness and/or is unconformist.;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If the fact that something is not androgenous and it does not Down does not hold it is androgenous. fact2: Something that is a carnality brands. fact3: If something is a unpropitiousness that it does not Snake passivism and it ammonifies steamed is wrong. fact4: The fact that if that perijove is a kind of a carnality this neurotoxin is not androgenous is right. fact5: If the fact that some man does not Snake passivism but it ammonifies steamed does not hold the fact that it is a carnality is right. fact6: If that briar brands then the fact that that perijove is a carnality is right. fact7: Either that briar is a unpropitiousness or it is unconformist or both if it is not radioactive. fact8: The fact that something is not androgenous and that does not Down is wrong if that brands. fact9: That briar is not radioactive. fact10: That briar Downs and/or brands. ; $hypothesis$ = This neurotoxin is androgenous. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That Oscines is not a schistorrhachis. | ¬{A}{b} | fact1: Allison is both a predictability and not unoriginal. fact2: That Oscines is a octavo if Allison is a predictability and is not unoriginal. fact3: Something is a schistorrhachis if it is a octavo. | fact1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact3: (x): {B}x -> {A}x | [
"fact2 & fact1 -> int1: That Oscines is a kind of a octavo.; fact3 -> int2: If that Oscines is a octavo then that Oscines is a schistorrhachis.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact2 & fact1 -> int1: {B}{b}; fact3 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: Allison is both a predictability and not unoriginal. fact2: That Oscines is a octavo if Allison is a predictability and is not unoriginal. fact3: Something is a schistorrhachis if it is a octavo. ; $hypothesis$ = That Oscines is not a schistorrhachis. ; $proof$ = | fact2 & fact1 -> int1: That Oscines is a kind of a octavo.; fact3 -> int2: If that Oscines is a octavo then that Oscines is a schistorrhachis.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This love does not occurs. | ¬{B} | fact1: That notthat orphaning Crick but that fumigating Hutton happens is wrong if this electroshock does not happens. fact2: That jubilation happens. fact3: This love does not happens if that jubilation does not occurs. fact4: That fumigating Hutton does not happens if that notthat orphaning Crick but that fumigating Hutton happens does not hold. fact5: That jubilation prevents that this love does not happens. fact6: That that fumigating Hutton does not happens brings about that that acetylicness but notthat jubilation occurs. fact7: That that caravanning does not occurs is prevented by that this Linnaeanness happens. fact8: That frost happens. fact9: That this dysgenicness occurs prevents that this burying does not happens. | fact1: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{F} & {D}) fact2: {A} fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬{B} fact4: ¬(¬{F} & {D}) -> ¬{D} fact5: {A} -> {B} fact6: ¬{D} -> ({C} & ¬{A}) fact7: {CK} -> {BB} fact8: {ER} fact9: {JB} -> {HR} | [
"fact5 & fact2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact5 & fact2 -> hypothesis;"
] | This love does not occurs. | ¬{B} | [] | 9 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That notthat orphaning Crick but that fumigating Hutton happens is wrong if this electroshock does not happens. fact2: That jubilation happens. fact3: This love does not happens if that jubilation does not occurs. fact4: That fumigating Hutton does not happens if that notthat orphaning Crick but that fumigating Hutton happens does not hold. fact5: That jubilation prevents that this love does not happens. fact6: That that fumigating Hutton does not happens brings about that that acetylicness but notthat jubilation occurs. fact7: That that caravanning does not occurs is prevented by that this Linnaeanness happens. fact8: That frost happens. fact9: That this dysgenicness occurs prevents that this burying does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This love does not occurs. ; $proof$ = | fact5 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This callithumpianness occurs. | {D} | fact1: That this contorting happens brings about that that mumbling happens. fact2: If the stacking trine happens the rebellion occurs. fact3: The reconnoitering prevents that the degrading does not occurs. fact4: That easiness occurs. fact5: That both this offertory and that demagogicalness happens is triggered by that this uniforming legitimacy does not occurs. fact6: The fact that this counterespionage does not occurs is true. fact7: The non-callithumpianness is prevented by that that mumbling happens. fact8: The fact that if that demagogicalness happens the fact that the acidimetry does not happens and that polyphonicness happens is wrong is not false. fact9: This contorting happens if that easiness occurs. fact10: If the fact that the acidimetry does not happens but that polyphonicness occurs is wrong then that mumbling does not occurs. fact11: This uniforming legitimacy does not occurs if this counterespionage does not happens and that naming does not occurs. | fact1: {B} -> {C} fact2: {GQ} -> {IL} fact3: {CA} -> {HH} fact4: {A} fact5: ¬{I} -> ({H} & {G}) fact6: ¬{J} fact7: {C} -> {D} fact8: {G} -> ¬(¬{F} & {E}) fact9: {A} -> {B} fact10: ¬(¬{F} & {E}) -> ¬{C} fact11: (¬{J} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{I} | [
"fact9 & fact4 -> int1: This contorting occurs.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: That that mumbling occurs is correct.; int2 & fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact9 & fact4 -> int1: {B}; int1 & fact1 -> int2: {C}; int2 & fact7 -> hypothesis;"
] | This callithumpianness does not happens. | ¬{D} | [] | 10 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That this contorting happens brings about that that mumbling happens. fact2: If the stacking trine happens the rebellion occurs. fact3: The reconnoitering prevents that the degrading does not occurs. fact4: That easiness occurs. fact5: That both this offertory and that demagogicalness happens is triggered by that this uniforming legitimacy does not occurs. fact6: The fact that this counterespionage does not occurs is true. fact7: The non-callithumpianness is prevented by that that mumbling happens. fact8: The fact that if that demagogicalness happens the fact that the acidimetry does not happens and that polyphonicness happens is wrong is not false. fact9: This contorting happens if that easiness occurs. fact10: If the fact that the acidimetry does not happens but that polyphonicness occurs is wrong then that mumbling does not occurs. fact11: This uniforming legitimacy does not occurs if this counterespionage does not happens and that naming does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This callithumpianness occurs. ; $proof$ = | fact9 & fact4 -> int1: This contorting occurs.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: That that mumbling occurs is correct.; int2 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That there is some man such that he unreels SSE is false. | ¬((Ex): {A}x) | fact1: There exists some man such that this person unreels SSE. | fact1: (Ex): {A}x | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: There exists some man such that this person unreels SSE. ; $hypothesis$ = That there is some man such that he unreels SSE is false. ; $proof$ = | fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | That lugger allowances haemoglobinopathy and he/she is a eponym. | ({C}{a} & {A}{a}) | fact1: That Wolverine does not build exactness. fact2: That some man is uncultivated but it is not a eponym does not hold if that it does not amaze is true. fact3: If that this Djiboutian does not build exactness hold then the fact that that lugger allowances haemoglobinopathy and it is scriptural is not true. fact4: That lugger is not scriptural. fact5: That that lugger does allowance haemoglobinopathy and builds exactness does not hold. fact6: That this Djiboutian is scriptural and it builds exactness does not hold. fact7: If the fact that the fact that that lugger is not a eponym and does not allowance haemoglobinopathy does not hold is correct then that hearthstone is not a eponym. fact8: The fact that the mandioca is unconstipated and this person is a Wb is wrong. fact9: Some man is not a kind of a Gywn if the person is not tricentennial. fact10: This weld is a kind of an autobiography that is appellate. fact11: Somebody is not uncultivated if the fact that this person is scriptural and does build exactness is false. fact12: If the fact that this Djiboutian allowances haemoglobinopathy and is not cultivated does not hold then this Djiboutian does not build exactness. fact13: That lugger does not sex dowery. fact14: That that lugger is not a eponym and it does not allowance haemoglobinopathy does not hold if this homoiotherm is not uncultivated. fact15: That that that lugger is a eponym and this is scriptural hold is false. fact16: If that lugger is not appellate then the thing allowances haemoglobinopathy and is not non-bibliographical. fact17: If this weld is a kind of an autobiography and it is not non-appellate the fact that that lugger is non-appellate does not hold. fact18: That lugger is a eponym if the fact that this homoiotherm is both uncultivated and not a eponym does not hold. fact19: This Djiboutian is not uncultivated if that this Djiboutian is a kind of a eponym that allowances haemoglobinopathy does not hold. | fact1: ¬{AB}{jd} fact2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact3: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬({C}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact4: ¬{AA}{a} fact5: ¬({C}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact6: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact7: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{fe} fact8: ¬({DQ}{ef} & {BH}{ef}) fact9: (x): ¬{IK}x -> ¬{M}x fact10: ({I}{d} & {G}{d}) fact11: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact12: ¬({C}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} fact13: ¬{JG}{a} fact14: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact15: ¬({A}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact16: ¬{G}{a} -> ({C}{a} & {F}{a}) fact17: ({I}{d} & {G}{d}) -> ¬{G}{a} fact18: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {A}{a} fact19: ¬({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} | [
"fact11 -> int1: This Djiboutian is not uncultivated if that this thing is not non-scriptural and builds exactness is not right.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: This Djiboutian is not uncultivated.;"
] | [
"fact11 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & fact6 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa};"
] | That hearthstone is not a eponym. | ¬{A}{fe} | [] | 5 | 3 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That Wolverine does not build exactness. fact2: That some man is uncultivated but it is not a eponym does not hold if that it does not amaze is true. fact3: If that this Djiboutian does not build exactness hold then the fact that that lugger allowances haemoglobinopathy and it is scriptural is not true. fact4: That lugger is not scriptural. fact5: That that lugger does allowance haemoglobinopathy and builds exactness does not hold. fact6: That this Djiboutian is scriptural and it builds exactness does not hold. fact7: If the fact that the fact that that lugger is not a eponym and does not allowance haemoglobinopathy does not hold is correct then that hearthstone is not a eponym. fact8: The fact that the mandioca is unconstipated and this person is a Wb is wrong. fact9: Some man is not a kind of a Gywn if the person is not tricentennial. fact10: This weld is a kind of an autobiography that is appellate. fact11: Somebody is not uncultivated if the fact that this person is scriptural and does build exactness is false. fact12: If the fact that this Djiboutian allowances haemoglobinopathy and is not cultivated does not hold then this Djiboutian does not build exactness. fact13: That lugger does not sex dowery. fact14: That that lugger is not a eponym and it does not allowance haemoglobinopathy does not hold if this homoiotherm is not uncultivated. fact15: That that that lugger is a eponym and this is scriptural hold is false. fact16: If that lugger is not appellate then the thing allowances haemoglobinopathy and is not non-bibliographical. fact17: If this weld is a kind of an autobiography and it is not non-appellate the fact that that lugger is non-appellate does not hold. fact18: That lugger is a eponym if the fact that this homoiotherm is both uncultivated and not a eponym does not hold. fact19: This Djiboutian is not uncultivated if that this Djiboutian is a kind of a eponym that allowances haemoglobinopathy does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That lugger allowances haemoglobinopathy and he/she is a eponym. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | Everything is obtrusive and/or that thing is not a GI. | (x): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) | fact1: Everything is obtrusive or the thing is a GI or both. fact2: Every man either is unstudied or does not panic Hesiod or both. fact3: Everything is obtrusive and/or that thing is not a GI. fact4: Every person is a kind of a blob or he/she is not a antecedency or both. fact5: Everything yaps paleopathology or it is not constructive or both. fact6: Everyone is electrical and/or is not advisable. fact7: Every man is a blob and/or the person is non-gilled. fact8: Everything is a indisposition and/or it does not win Stowe. fact9: Everything is iconic and/or is not a Eolithic. fact10: Some person is a kind of a ozaena or it is not a kind of a pectoral or both if it is passable. fact11: Either everything is a feudatory or it is not ferric or both. fact12: Everybody is either a corruptness or not a lapsing or both. fact13: Everything is either a Endecott or not a remand or both. fact14: Everything is not a pig and not a stretchability. | fact1: (x): ({AA}x v {AB}x) fact2: (x): ({CO}x v ¬{BU}x) fact3: (x): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) fact4: (x): ({FI}x v ¬{BL}x) fact5: (x): ({FN}x v ¬{AJ}x) fact6: (x): ({CD}x v ¬{IT}x) fact7: (x): ({FI}x v ¬{EK}x) fact8: (x): ({CT}x v ¬{JE}x) fact9: (x): ({DA}x v ¬{FE}x) fact10: (x): {A}x -> ({IM}x v ¬{L}x) fact11: (x): ({BE}x v ¬{CR}x) fact12: (x): ({FK}x v ¬{HT}x) fact13: (x): ({HK}x v ¬{HP}x) fact14: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) | [
"fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | Every man is a kind of a ozaena or is not a pectoral or both. | (x): ({IM}x v ¬{L}x) | [
"fact16 -> int1: If this airdrome is passable then it is a ozaena and/or it is not a pectoral.; fact15 -> int2: This airdrome is not a pig and is not a stretchability.; int2 -> int3: This airdrome is not a kind of a pig.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Everything is obtrusive or the thing is a GI or both. fact2: Every man either is unstudied or does not panic Hesiod or both. fact3: Everything is obtrusive and/or that thing is not a GI. fact4: Every person is a kind of a blob or he/she is not a antecedency or both. fact5: Everything yaps paleopathology or it is not constructive or both. fact6: Everyone is electrical and/or is not advisable. fact7: Every man is a blob and/or the person is non-gilled. fact8: Everything is a indisposition and/or it does not win Stowe. fact9: Everything is iconic and/or is not a Eolithic. fact10: Some person is a kind of a ozaena or it is not a kind of a pectoral or both if it is passable. fact11: Either everything is a feudatory or it is not ferric or both. fact12: Everybody is either a corruptness or not a lapsing or both. fact13: Everything is either a Endecott or not a remand or both. fact14: Everything is not a pig and not a stretchability. ; $hypothesis$ = Everything is obtrusive and/or that thing is not a GI. ; $proof$ = | fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | This coccidioidomycosis is not a kind of a epanaphora. | ¬{A}{aa} | fact1: Everybody is a kind of a Telopea. fact2: This nucleus is a kind of a epanaphora. fact3: Someone is both not a disused and a reductionism if it is a Hz. fact4: Everything is a epanaphora. fact5: That every man is a Hz is true. fact6: If something is a reductionism and is a thyroid the fact that it is a epanaphora does not hold. fact7: This coccidioidomycosis is a grin. fact8: Every man is a Devonshire. fact9: If someone that is not a disused is a kind of a reductionism it is not a kind of a thyroid. fact10: If that phloem is a reductionism then this coccidioidomycosis is a kind of a reductionism. | fact1: (x): {GJ}x fact2: {A}{eo} fact3: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & {C}x) fact4: (x): {A}x fact5: (x): {E}x fact6: (x): ({C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact7: {JF}{aa} fact8: (x): {EE}x fact9: (x): (¬{D}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact10: {C}{a} -> {C}{aa} | [
"fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact4 -> hypothesis;"
] | Every person is alular. | (x): {I}x | [
"fact13 -> int1: The fact that that phloem is a kind of a Hz is correct.; fact12 -> int2: The fact that that phloem is not a disused but a reductionism is correct if it is a Hz.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that that phloem is not a disused but the person is a kind of a reductionism hold.; fact11 -> int4: That phloem is not a thyroid if that phloem is not a kind of a disused but the thing is a reductionism.; int3 & int4 -> int5: That phloem is not a thyroid.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: Everybody is a kind of a Telopea. fact2: This nucleus is a kind of a epanaphora. fact3: Someone is both not a disused and a reductionism if it is a Hz. fact4: Everything is a epanaphora. fact5: That every man is a Hz is true. fact6: If something is a reductionism and is a thyroid the fact that it is a epanaphora does not hold. fact7: This coccidioidomycosis is a grin. fact8: Every man is a Devonshire. fact9: If someone that is not a disused is a kind of a reductionism it is not a kind of a thyroid. fact10: If that phloem is a reductionism then this coccidioidomycosis is a kind of a reductionism. ; $hypothesis$ = This coccidioidomycosis is not a kind of a epanaphora. ; $proof$ = | fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This AU does not brace Hildebrand and is not purposeless. | (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) | fact1: This AU is a Myaceae. fact2: The fact that this rudderfish does not discern and this thing is not a Myaceae is right if that detent is a kind of a Spain. fact3: That pinny sexes Labanotation and is not a kind of a prey if that Arabian is not nonassociative. fact4: If the fact that that Gibraltarian is non-Norse man that is not nonassociative is wrong that Arabian is nonassociative. fact5: If the fact that something is both not a Spain and a XXI does not hold then it is a Spain. fact6: Some person does not brace Hildebrand if it is a Myaceae. fact7: If some person is a Myaceae then that he does not brace Hildebrand and is not purposeless is right. fact8: Everything is not a Smetana. fact9: If this AU is a Myaceae this AU does not brace Hildebrand. fact10: That peg is both not a academicism and not purposeless. fact11: That the fact that somebody is not a codon but lapidary is correct does not hold if it does sex Labanotation. fact12: If the ankle is not lapidary then that that detent is both not a Spain and a XXI does not hold. fact13: That something is not Norse and this thing is not nonassociative is false if this thing is not a Smetana. fact14: The ankle is not lapidary if that that pinny is not a codon and is not lapidary does not hold. fact15: This AU does not brace Hildebrand. | fact1: {A}{aa} fact2: {B}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact3: ¬{I}{e} -> ({F}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) fact4: ¬(¬{K}{f} & ¬{I}{f}) -> ¬{I}{e} fact5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {D}x) -> {B}x fact6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x fact7: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact8: (x): ¬{J}x fact9: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} fact10: (¬{EU}{cp} & ¬{AB}{cp}) fact11: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {E}x) fact12: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {D}{b}) fact13: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{K}x & ¬{I}x) fact14: ¬(¬{G}{d} & {E}{d}) -> ¬{E}{c} fact15: ¬{AA}{aa} | [
"fact7 -> int1: The fact that if this AU is a kind of a Myaceae this AU does not brace Hildebrand and is not purposeless hold.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact7 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | That this AU does not brace Hildebrand and is not purposeless does not hold. | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) | [
"fact19 -> int2: If the fact that that detent is not a Spain but it is a XXI is wrong that detent is a Spain.; fact21 -> int3: If that caliculus is not a Smetana then that this thing is not Norse and this thing is not nonassociative does not hold.; fact16 -> int4: That caliculus is not a Smetana.; int3 & int4 -> int5: That that that caliculus is a kind of non-Norse person that is not nonassociative does not hold hold.; int5 -> int6: There is nothing that is a kind of non-Norse thing that is not nonassociative.; int6 -> int7: The fact that that Gibraltarian is not Norse and she/he is not nonassociative is wrong.; fact18 & int7 -> int8: That Arabian is not nonassociative.; fact17 & int8 -> int9: That pinny does sex Labanotation and is not a prey.; int9 -> int10: The fact that that pinny sexes Labanotation hold.; fact20 -> int11: The fact that that pinny is not a codon but the person is lapidary is false if the person sexes Labanotation.; int10 & int11 -> int12: That that pinny is both not a codon and lapidary is false.; int12 & fact24 -> int13: The ankle is non-lapidary.; fact22 & int13 -> int14: That that detent is not a kind of a Spain and is a XXI is incorrect.; int2 & int14 -> int15: That detent is a Spain.; int15 & fact23 -> int16: This rudderfish does not discern and is not a Myaceae.;"
] | 14 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This AU is a Myaceae. fact2: The fact that this rudderfish does not discern and this thing is not a Myaceae is right if that detent is a kind of a Spain. fact3: That pinny sexes Labanotation and is not a kind of a prey if that Arabian is not nonassociative. fact4: If the fact that that Gibraltarian is non-Norse man that is not nonassociative is wrong that Arabian is nonassociative. fact5: If the fact that something is both not a Spain and a XXI does not hold then it is a Spain. fact6: Some person does not brace Hildebrand if it is a Myaceae. fact7: If some person is a Myaceae then that he does not brace Hildebrand and is not purposeless is right. fact8: Everything is not a Smetana. fact9: If this AU is a Myaceae this AU does not brace Hildebrand. fact10: That peg is both not a academicism and not purposeless. fact11: That the fact that somebody is not a codon but lapidary is correct does not hold if it does sex Labanotation. fact12: If the ankle is not lapidary then that that detent is both not a Spain and a XXI does not hold. fact13: That something is not Norse and this thing is not nonassociative is false if this thing is not a Smetana. fact14: The ankle is not lapidary if that that pinny is not a codon and is not lapidary does not hold. fact15: This AU does not brace Hildebrand. ; $hypothesis$ = This AU does not brace Hildebrand and is not purposeless. ; $proof$ = | fact7 -> int1: The fact that if this AU is a kind of a Myaceae this AU does not brace Hildebrand and is not purposeless hold.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That composition is not promissory. | ¬{D}{a} | fact1: That composition does offsaddle. fact2: If that composition pinks Nauclea this overload does not pinks Nauclea. fact3: If there exists some person such that she is not a wingspan and does not astound this IAA is a wingspan. fact4: This IAA is neotenous if that chatroom does pink Nauclea. fact5: That composition is a kind of a wideness and pinks Nauclea if this IAA is not a kind of a ataxy. fact6: If the fact that something either is not a Aucuba or offsaddles or both is not right it is not promissory. fact7: If that that chatroom is parheliacal a wingspan is wrong then it is not a wingspan. fact8: Vilma is angry. fact9: That that chatroom is a kind of parheliacal a wingspan is incorrect. fact10: Somebody is not a kind of a wingspan and it does not astound. fact11: That composition closes cephalalgia. fact12: If that chatroom is not a kind of a wingspan then it is not a kind of a wideness or it is not a kind of a ataxy or both. fact13: That composition is non-promissory if that composition is a Aucuba that is angry. fact14: If this IAA is a wingspan this IAA is not a ataxy. fact15: If someone is not non-neotenous he/she is not angry. fact16: That composition is not a mezuza. fact17: If that composition is a kind of a Aucuba then that composition is a anorthopia. fact18: If some man is not a wideness and/or is not a ataxy then she pinks Nauclea. fact19: That composition is angry. | fact1: {A}{a} fact2: {F}{a} -> ¬{F}{ca} fact3: (x): (¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) -> {I}{b} fact4: {F}{c} -> {E}{b} fact5: ¬{H}{b} -> ({G}{a} & {F}{a}) fact6: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v {A}x) -> ¬{D}x fact7: ¬({K}{c} & {I}{c}) -> ¬{I}{c} fact8: {C}{j} fact9: ¬({K}{c} & {I}{c}) fact10: (Ex): (¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) fact11: {AH}{a} fact12: ¬{I}{c} -> (¬{G}{c} v ¬{H}{c}) fact13: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact14: {I}{b} -> ¬{H}{b} fact15: (x): {E}x -> ¬{C}x fact16: ¬{CM}{a} fact17: {B}{a} -> {CU}{a} fact18: (x): (¬{G}x v ¬{H}x) -> {F}x fact19: {C}{a} | [] | [] | That composition is promissory. | {D}{a} | [
"fact20 -> int1: If this IAA is not non-neotenous then this IAA is not angry.; fact25 -> int2: That chatroom pinks Nauclea if either that thing is not a wideness or that thing is not a ataxy or both.; fact21 & fact24 -> int3: That chatroom is not a kind of a wingspan.; fact23 & int3 -> int4: Either that chatroom is not a wideness or it is not a ataxy or both.; int2 & int4 -> int5: That chatroom does pink Nauclea.; fact22 & int5 -> int6: This IAA is neotenous.; int1 & int6 -> int7: This IAA is not angry.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That composition does offsaddle. fact2: If that composition pinks Nauclea this overload does not pinks Nauclea. fact3: If there exists some person such that she is not a wingspan and does not astound this IAA is a wingspan. fact4: This IAA is neotenous if that chatroom does pink Nauclea. fact5: That composition is a kind of a wideness and pinks Nauclea if this IAA is not a kind of a ataxy. fact6: If the fact that something either is not a Aucuba or offsaddles or both is not right it is not promissory. fact7: If that that chatroom is parheliacal a wingspan is wrong then it is not a wingspan. fact8: Vilma is angry. fact9: That that chatroom is a kind of parheliacal a wingspan is incorrect. fact10: Somebody is not a kind of a wingspan and it does not astound. fact11: That composition closes cephalalgia. fact12: If that chatroom is not a kind of a wingspan then it is not a kind of a wideness or it is not a kind of a ataxy or both. fact13: That composition is non-promissory if that composition is a Aucuba that is angry. fact14: If this IAA is a wingspan this IAA is not a ataxy. fact15: If someone is not non-neotenous he/she is not angry. fact16: That composition is not a mezuza. fact17: If that composition is a kind of a Aucuba then that composition is a anorthopia. fact18: If some man is not a wideness and/or is not a ataxy then she pinks Nauclea. fact19: That composition is angry. ; $hypothesis$ = That composition is not promissory. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That that decoction is not a kind of a apercu hold. | ¬{D}{b} | fact1: This Sphacelotheca is not a apercu. fact2: This Sphacelotheca is a romance that dirties. fact3: That decoction is not a apercu if the fact that she/he is not an accusative and does not lots does not hold. fact4: The fact that the outback is unidentifiable hold. fact5: If this Sphacelotheca is a romance and the thing does dirty that decoction is unidentifiable. fact6: This Sphacelotheca is not a romance if this Sphacelotheca is a Leary. | fact1: ¬{D}{a} fact2: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact4: ¬{B}{gp} fact5: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact6: {IA}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} | [
"fact5 & fact2 -> int1: That decoction is not identifiable.;"
] | [
"fact5 & fact2 -> int1: ¬{B}{b};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $facts$ = fact1: This Sphacelotheca is not a apercu. fact2: This Sphacelotheca is a romance that dirties. fact3: That decoction is not a apercu if the fact that she/he is not an accusative and does not lots does not hold. fact4: The fact that the outback is unidentifiable hold. fact5: If this Sphacelotheca is a romance and the thing does dirty that decoction is unidentifiable. fact6: This Sphacelotheca is not a romance if this Sphacelotheca is a Leary. ; $hypothesis$ = That that decoction is not a kind of a apercu hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | The fact that this dragoon is not hipless and is regimental is wrong. | ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) | fact1: If that this jakes weaves Parji is wrong that this dragoon is both not hipless and regimental is right. fact2: If this copestone weaves Parji that this dragoon is not hipless but it is regimental does not hold. fact3: This jakes is not calciferous. fact4: Something that is non-caducous thing that is not calciferous does not weave Parji. fact5: If this jakes is not a few then this jakes is not caducous and that person is not calciferous. fact6: This dragoon is regimental. fact7: This jakes is not a few. | fact1: ¬{B}{aa} -> (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) fact2: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) fact3: ¬{AB}{aa} fact4: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact5: ¬{D}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact6: {C}{a} fact7: ¬{D}{aa} | [
"fact4 -> int1: This jakes does not weave Parji if this jakes is not caducous and is not calciferous.; fact5 & fact7 -> int2: This jakes is not caducous and it is not calciferous.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This jakes does not weave Parji.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact4 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; fact5 & fact7 -> int2: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa}; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis;"
] | The fact that this dragoon is not hipless and is regimental is wrong. | ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) | [] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: If that this jakes weaves Parji is wrong that this dragoon is both not hipless and regimental is right. fact2: If this copestone weaves Parji that this dragoon is not hipless but it is regimental does not hold. fact3: This jakes is not calciferous. fact4: Something that is non-caducous thing that is not calciferous does not weave Parji. fact5: If this jakes is not a few then this jakes is not caducous and that person is not calciferous. fact6: This dragoon is regimental. fact7: This jakes is not a few. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this dragoon is not hipless and is regimental is wrong. ; $proof$ = | fact4 -> int1: This jakes does not weave Parji if this jakes is not caducous and is not calciferous.; fact5 & fact7 -> int2: This jakes is not caducous and it is not calciferous.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This jakes does not weave Parji.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | This Arenaviridae does not sky zag. | ¬{D}{a} | fact1: That sensitizer is a kind of a Mashhad if that flagpole is a Mashhad. fact2: This Arenaviridae does not sky zag if this fortune is fleshy and/or does not sky zag. fact3: This Arenaviridae is a Pensacola. fact4: If this Arenaviridae flops Kiribati then this Arenaviridae skies zag. fact5: If some person is curable that it does not flop Kiribati and is a kind of a reincarnationism is incorrect. fact6: If the fact that that daggerboard is not a Gomphotheriidae and/or this person is not a percolate is false then that O is not ferric. fact7: That sensitizer is non-cheliferous man that is epitheliod if that precipitant is odorous. fact8: If someone is not ferric it is curable one that roosts planted. fact9: If the fact that that oxbow flops Kiribati is right it is not fleshy. fact10: This stepbrother is a kind of a Pensacola if that that O does not flop Kiribati but it is a kind of a reincarnationism is wrong. fact11: That precipitant is odorous. fact12: If that that sensitizer is a Mashhad is true then it does not recoil Villon and is not a worship. fact13: If some person is fleshy then it flops Kiribati. fact14: The fact that somebody is not a Gomphotheriidae and/or she is not a percolate does not hold if she is non-cheliferous. fact15: Something is a parotitis if this does not recoil Villon and is not a kind of a worship. fact16: If this stepbrother is a Pensacola this fortune is fleshy and/or does not sky zag. fact17: That flagpole is a Mashhad. | fact1: {Q}{h} -> {Q}{f} fact2: ({B}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact3: {A}{a} fact4: {C}{a} -> {D}{a} fact5: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {E}x) fact6: ¬(¬{J}{e} v ¬{I}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d} fact7: {N}{g} -> (¬{K}{f} & {L}{f}) fact8: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x & {G}x) fact9: {C}{fg} -> ¬{B}{fg} fact10: ¬(¬{C}{d} & {E}{d}) -> {A}{c} fact11: {N}{g} fact12: {Q}{f} -> (¬{O}{f} & ¬{P}{f}) fact13: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact14: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬(¬{J}x v ¬{I}x) fact15: (x): (¬{O}x & ¬{P}x) -> {M}x fact16: {A}{c} -> ({B}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) fact17: {Q}{h} | [
"fact13 -> int1: If this Arenaviridae is fleshy then this one flops Kiribati.;"
] | [
"fact13 -> int1: {B}{a} -> {C}{a};"
] | This Arenaviridae does not sky zag. | ¬{D}{a} | [
"fact18 -> int2: If that that O is curable hold then that this does not flop Kiribati and is a reincarnationism is wrong.; fact26 -> int3: If that O is not ferric then it is curable and it does roost planted.; fact24 -> int4: If that daggerboard is not cheliferous then that either that daggerboard is not a Gomphotheriidae or it is not a kind of a percolate or both is wrong.; fact20 & fact19 -> int5: That sensitizer is non-cheliferous but this is not non-epitheliod.; int5 -> int6: That sensitizer is not cheliferous.; fact27 -> int7: If that sensitizer does not recoil Villon and it is not a worship it is a kind of a parotitis.; fact30 & fact29 -> int8: That sensitizer is a Mashhad.; fact23 & int8 -> int9: That sensitizer does not recoil Villon and it is not a kind of a worship.; int7 & int9 -> int10: The fact that that sensitizer is a parotitis is right.; int6 & int10 -> int11: That sensitizer is not cheliferous but this one is a kind of a parotitis.; int11 -> int12: The fact that something is not cheliferous but that thing is a parotitis is correct.;"
] | 14 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That sensitizer is a kind of a Mashhad if that flagpole is a Mashhad. fact2: This Arenaviridae does not sky zag if this fortune is fleshy and/or does not sky zag. fact3: This Arenaviridae is a Pensacola. fact4: If this Arenaviridae flops Kiribati then this Arenaviridae skies zag. fact5: If some person is curable that it does not flop Kiribati and is a kind of a reincarnationism is incorrect. fact6: If the fact that that daggerboard is not a Gomphotheriidae and/or this person is not a percolate is false then that O is not ferric. fact7: That sensitizer is non-cheliferous man that is epitheliod if that precipitant is odorous. fact8: If someone is not ferric it is curable one that roosts planted. fact9: If the fact that that oxbow flops Kiribati is right it is not fleshy. fact10: This stepbrother is a kind of a Pensacola if that that O does not flop Kiribati but it is a kind of a reincarnationism is wrong. fact11: That precipitant is odorous. fact12: If that that sensitizer is a Mashhad is true then it does not recoil Villon and is not a worship. fact13: If some person is fleshy then it flops Kiribati. fact14: The fact that somebody is not a Gomphotheriidae and/or she is not a percolate does not hold if she is non-cheliferous. fact15: Something is a parotitis if this does not recoil Villon and is not a kind of a worship. fact16: If this stepbrother is a Pensacola this fortune is fleshy and/or does not sky zag. fact17: That flagpole is a Mashhad. ; $hypothesis$ = This Arenaviridae does not sky zag. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That proceduralness happens. | {A} | fact1: That that gala does not occurs is triggered by that this sniffing does not occurs. fact2: If this Nicaeanness happens then the fact that that proceduralness happens but that trajectory does not happens is wrong. fact3: If that that shrining vaulted occurs is correct that neotenousness happens. fact4: This fluctuation does not occurs if that neotenousness but notthis exilicness occurs. fact5: That both this hobby and that Exodus occurs does not hold. fact6: The fact that this hobby but notthat Exodus occurs is wrong if that trajectory occurs. fact7: Either this Hugoesqueness or this blackwashing overdraft or both happens if this fluctuation does not happens. fact8: That trajectory happens. fact9: That this hobby but notthat Exodus occurs is triggered by this non-proceduralness. | fact1: ¬{GG} -> ¬{DC} fact2: {C} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) fact3: {K} -> {H} fact4: ({H} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} fact5: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact6: {B} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact7: ¬{F} -> ({D} v {E}) fact8: {B} fact9: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that proceduralness does not happens is correct.; fact9 & assump1 -> int1: This hobby occurs and that Exodus does not occurs.; fact6 & fact8 -> int2: The fact that this hobby happens but that Exodus does not happens does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}; fact9 & assump1 -> int1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}); fact6 & fact8 -> int2: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | Let's assume that that that proceduralness does not happens is correct. | ¬{A} | [] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That that gala does not occurs is triggered by that this sniffing does not occurs. fact2: If this Nicaeanness happens then the fact that that proceduralness happens but that trajectory does not happens is wrong. fact3: If that that shrining vaulted occurs is correct that neotenousness happens. fact4: This fluctuation does not occurs if that neotenousness but notthis exilicness occurs. fact5: That both this hobby and that Exodus occurs does not hold. fact6: The fact that this hobby but notthat Exodus occurs is wrong if that trajectory occurs. fact7: Either this Hugoesqueness or this blackwashing overdraft or both happens if this fluctuation does not happens. fact8: That trajectory happens. fact9: That this hobby but notthat Exodus occurs is triggered by this non-proceduralness. ; $hypothesis$ = That proceduralness happens. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that proceduralness does not happens is correct.; fact9 & assump1 -> int1: This hobby occurs and that Exodus does not occurs.; fact6 & fact8 -> int2: The fact that this hobby happens but that Exodus does not happens does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That that non-Eritreanness and that opportuneness occurs does not hold. | ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | fact1: That that ACE does not happens results in that that opportuneness happens. fact2: That immutableness and that plumping proletariat occurs if that combusting Huggins does not occurs. fact3: The fact that notthis Eritreanness but that opportuneness happens is not correct if that that flashing Abyssinia happens is correct. fact4: This jerk does not happens if that this gangrening occurs but this rendition does not happens is not true. fact5: That the unlovingness does not occurs hold if the fact that that ACE does not happens or that flashing Abyssinia does not happens or both does not hold. fact6: That opportuneness and this showjumping occurs if this jerk does not occurs. fact7: Both that non-Eritreanness and that opportuneness occurs if the fact that that ACE does not occurs is right. fact8: The fact that that this gangrening occurs but this rendition does not occurs is wrong if that mutableness does not happens is right. | fact1: ¬{B} -> {D} fact2: ¬{K} -> (¬{I} & {J}) fact3: {A} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) fact4: ¬({G} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} fact5: ¬(¬{B} v ¬{A}) -> ¬{CE} fact6: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact7: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & {D}) fact8: ¬{I} -> ¬({G} & ¬{H}) | [] | [] | The unlovingness does not occurs. | ¬{CE} | [] | 10 | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That that ACE does not happens results in that that opportuneness happens. fact2: That immutableness and that plumping proletariat occurs if that combusting Huggins does not occurs. fact3: The fact that notthis Eritreanness but that opportuneness happens is not correct if that that flashing Abyssinia happens is correct. fact4: This jerk does not happens if that this gangrening occurs but this rendition does not happens is not true. fact5: That the unlovingness does not occurs hold if the fact that that ACE does not happens or that flashing Abyssinia does not happens or both does not hold. fact6: That opportuneness and this showjumping occurs if this jerk does not occurs. fact7: Both that non-Eritreanness and that opportuneness occurs if the fact that that ACE does not occurs is right. fact8: The fact that that this gangrening occurs but this rendition does not occurs is wrong if that mutableness does not happens is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That that non-Eritreanness and that opportuneness occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | The fact that that canvassing and that portrayal happens does not hold. | ¬({A} & {B}) | fact1: The contempt happens. fact2: That uninflectedness occurs and this predicting happens. fact3: Both that periodonticness and this moksa happens. fact4: That portrayal happens. fact5: That both that canvassing and that portrayal occurs is false if that disappearance does not happens. fact6: Both the agrologicalness and the criminating Oesterreich occurs. | fact1: {CJ} fact2: ({IT} & {AO}) fact3: ({JC} & {JB}) fact4: {B} fact5: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & {B}) fact6: ({GP} & {AT}) | [] | [] | The fact that that canvassing and that portrayal happens does not hold. | ¬({A} & {B}) | [] | 6 | 1 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The contempt happens. fact2: That uninflectedness occurs and this predicting happens. fact3: Both that periodonticness and this moksa happens. fact4: That portrayal happens. fact5: That both that canvassing and that portrayal occurs is false if that disappearance does not happens. fact6: Both the agrologicalness and the criminating Oesterreich occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that canvassing and that portrayal happens does not hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That the chokecherry does not pinch and it is not a pretermission is false. | ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) | fact1: That the chokecherry pinches and is not a pretermission is wrong. fact2: The fact that Len quarantines argumentation but he does not sputter exchanged does not hold. fact3: That if Len does not pinch then the fact that the chokecherry does not pinch and that one is not a pretermission does not hold is right. fact4: Something that sputters exchanged does not pinch. fact5: That the chokecherry does not pinch but this thing is a kind of a pretermission is false if Len does not pinch. fact6: Something does not pinch if the fact that it quarantines argumentation and it does not sputter exchanged is false. fact7: That Len quarantines argumentation and sputters exchanged does not hold. | fact1: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact2: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact3: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact4: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x fact5: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact6: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [
"fact6 -> int1: Len does not pinch if that it quarantines argumentation and does not sputter exchanged does not hold.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: Len does not pinch.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact6 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & fact2 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa}; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $facts$ = fact1: That the chokecherry pinches and is not a pretermission is wrong. fact2: The fact that Len quarantines argumentation but he does not sputter exchanged does not hold. fact3: That if Len does not pinch then the fact that the chokecherry does not pinch and that one is not a pretermission does not hold is right. fact4: Something that sputters exchanged does not pinch. fact5: That the chokecherry does not pinch but this thing is a kind of a pretermission is false if Len does not pinch. fact6: Something does not pinch if the fact that it quarantines argumentation and it does not sputter exchanged is false. fact7: That Len quarantines argumentation and sputters exchanged does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That the chokecherry does not pinch and it is not a pretermission is false. ; $proof$ = | fact6 -> int1: Len does not pinch if that it quarantines argumentation and does not sputter exchanged does not hold.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: Len does not pinch.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That inspiratoriness happens and that oversupplying Tethyidae happens. | ({A} & {B}) | fact1: That smacking amercement occurs. fact2: This goosing Cnicus occurs. fact3: If that this Mulling Humber happens but that irreverentness does not happens is not correct then this Mulling Humber does not occurs. fact4: That both that inspiratoriness and that oversupplying Tethyidae happens is incorrect if this Mulling Humber does not occurs. fact5: The fact that that inspiratoriness occurs is right. fact6: That thromboembolism does not occurs if the fact that this stomatousness does not happens but that thromboembolism happens does not hold. fact7: The spaying shadowiness does not occurs and that thromboembolism does not happens. fact8: If that thromboembolism does not happens this Mulling Humber and this kittee occurs. fact9: That this Mulling Humber occurs brings about that the bearing alloyed happens. fact10: The fact that the fact that this stomatousness does not happens but that thromboembolism happens is wrong is right if that the spaying shadowiness does not happens hold. fact11: This tidy happens. fact12: That scumble and this digging happens. fact13: If that this iontotherapy does not happens is true then that this Mulling Humber happens but that irreverentness does not occurs does not hold. | fact1: {GQ} fact2: {FT} fact3: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} fact4: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & {B}) fact5: {A} fact6: ¬(¬{I} & {G}) -> ¬{G} fact7: (¬{H} & ¬{G}) fact8: ¬{G} -> ({C} & {F}) fact9: {C} -> {L} fact10: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{I} & {G}) fact11: {AT} fact12: ({HI} & {CP}) fact13: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) | [] | [] | Both the bearing alloyed and this nearestness occurs. | ({L} & {AF}) | [
"fact14 -> int1: That thromboembolism does not occurs.; fact16 & int1 -> int2: This Mulling Humber and this kittee occurs.; int2 -> int3: This Mulling Humber occurs.; fact15 & int3 -> int4: The bearing alloyed occurs.;"
] | 5 | 1 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That smacking amercement occurs. fact2: This goosing Cnicus occurs. fact3: If that this Mulling Humber happens but that irreverentness does not happens is not correct then this Mulling Humber does not occurs. fact4: That both that inspiratoriness and that oversupplying Tethyidae happens is incorrect if this Mulling Humber does not occurs. fact5: The fact that that inspiratoriness occurs is right. fact6: That thromboembolism does not occurs if the fact that this stomatousness does not happens but that thromboembolism happens does not hold. fact7: The spaying shadowiness does not occurs and that thromboembolism does not happens. fact8: If that thromboembolism does not happens this Mulling Humber and this kittee occurs. fact9: That this Mulling Humber occurs brings about that the bearing alloyed happens. fact10: The fact that the fact that this stomatousness does not happens but that thromboembolism happens is wrong is right if that the spaying shadowiness does not happens hold. fact11: This tidy happens. fact12: That scumble and this digging happens. fact13: If that this iontotherapy does not happens is true then that this Mulling Humber happens but that irreverentness does not occurs does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That inspiratoriness happens and that oversupplying Tethyidae happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | That annelidness does not occurs. | ¬{A} | fact1: The checkering occurs if that notthat parricide but that allomerousness occurs does not hold. fact2: This segmentation does not occurs. fact3: If that both this shrieking Agricola and that localising happens is false then this shrieking Agricola does not occurs. fact4: If this viatication occurs the fact that that cambialness does not occurs and this nepotism does not happens is false. fact5: The fact that that Labour does not occurs is right if the fact that that Labour occurs and the telephonicness happens is wrong. fact6: That the olderness does not happens hold. fact7: The changefulness occurs if the unwaxedness occurs. fact8: The neandertal occurs. fact9: That the septation does not happens yields that this eonianness occurs and that localising does not happens. fact10: This shrieking Agricola occurs if that annelidness happens. fact11: This antibioticness occurs. fact12: This viatication occurs if the fact that the checkering happens is true. fact13: The fact that the wifelikeness and this segmentation occurs is wrong. fact14: Both this shrieking Agricola and that annelidness happens if that localising does not happens. fact15: If that that cambialness does not happens and this nepotism does not happens is wrong then the septation does not occurs. fact16: The fact that this shrieking Agricola happens and that localising happens does not hold. | fact1: ¬(¬{J} & {K}) -> {I} fact2: ¬{AN} fact3: ¬({B} & {C}) -> ¬{B} fact4: {H} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{G}) fact5: ¬({FM} & {AK}) -> ¬{FM} fact6: ¬{BM} fact7: {DI} -> {FL} fact8: {BI} fact9: ¬{E} -> ({D} & ¬{C}) fact10: {A} -> {B} fact11: {DL} fact12: {I} -> {H} fact13: ¬({ES} & {AN}) fact14: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact15: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} fact16: ¬({B} & {C}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that annelidness occurs.; fact10 & assump1 -> int1: This shrieking Agricola happens.; fact3 & fact16 -> int2: This shrieking Agricola does not happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}; fact10 & assump1 -> int1: {B}; fact3 & fact16 -> int2: ¬{B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | Let's assume that that annelidness occurs. | {A} | [] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The checkering occurs if that notthat parricide but that allomerousness occurs does not hold. fact2: This segmentation does not occurs. fact3: If that both this shrieking Agricola and that localising happens is false then this shrieking Agricola does not occurs. fact4: If this viatication occurs the fact that that cambialness does not occurs and this nepotism does not happens is false. fact5: The fact that that Labour does not occurs is right if the fact that that Labour occurs and the telephonicness happens is wrong. fact6: That the olderness does not happens hold. fact7: The changefulness occurs if the unwaxedness occurs. fact8: The neandertal occurs. fact9: That the septation does not happens yields that this eonianness occurs and that localising does not happens. fact10: This shrieking Agricola occurs if that annelidness happens. fact11: This antibioticness occurs. fact12: This viatication occurs if the fact that the checkering happens is true. fact13: The fact that the wifelikeness and this segmentation occurs is wrong. fact14: Both this shrieking Agricola and that annelidness happens if that localising does not happens. fact15: If that that cambialness does not happens and this nepotism does not happens is wrong then the septation does not occurs. fact16: The fact that this shrieking Agricola happens and that localising happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That annelidness does not occurs. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that annelidness occurs.; fact10 & assump1 -> int1: This shrieking Agricola happens.; fact3 & fact16 -> int2: This shrieking Agricola does not happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That there is somebody such that if this person is not polychromatic and this person does not ditch dysphagia this person does worship arcsecant is false. | ¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x) | fact1: There is some man such that if she is not a kind of a mirthfulness and she is not epical she is unconventional. fact2: If that Thracian is a kind of non-polychromatic one that does ditch dysphagia that Thracian worships arcsecant. fact3: There exists someone such that if this one is not a cockney and interlaces then this one is a kind of a krone. fact4: There is some person such that if it is a kind of non-polychromatic person that ditches dysphagia then it worships arcsecant. fact5: That Thracian is a kind of a glebe if it is not a Habacuc and it is polychromatic. fact6: The Czech benumbs if this thing ditches dysphagia and does not symphonize. fact7: There is something such that if that thing is not a browsing and that thing does not lament femaleness that thing lists Scleroderma. fact8: If that Thracian is not polychromatic and the thing does not ditch dysphagia the thing does worship arcsecant. fact9: If the Paternoster is Tyrolese and does not worship arcsecant that it unscrambles is not wrong. fact10: If some person that is not a Cladrastis is not operable then that person is a kind of a motorboat. fact11: There exists something such that if this is not a kind of a reversible and this is a kind of a Canellaceae this is a muscularity. | fact1: (Ex): (¬{IJ}x & ¬{HE}x) -> {AL}x fact2: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact3: (Ex): (¬{HK}x & {AC}x) -> {L}x fact4: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact5: (¬{FK}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> {H}{aa} fact6: ({AB}{o} & ¬{BI}{o}) -> {FH}{o} fact7: (Ex): (¬{DT}x & ¬{O}x) -> {BU}x fact8: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact9: ({CP}{eq} & ¬{B}{eq}) -> {GD}{eq} fact10: (x): (¬{JH}x & ¬{FM}x) -> {CC}x fact11: (Ex): (¬{HO}x & {IC}x) -> {GB}x | [
"fact8 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"fact8 -> hypothesis;"
] | There is something such that if that thing is not a kind of a Cladrastis and that thing is not operable then that thing is a kind of a motorboat. | (Ex): (¬{JH}x & ¬{FM}x) -> {CC}x | [
"fact12 -> int1: The rubefacient is a kind of a motorboat if the rubefacient is not a kind of a Cladrastis and is not operable.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $facts$ = fact1: There is some man such that if she is not a kind of a mirthfulness and she is not epical she is unconventional. fact2: If that Thracian is a kind of non-polychromatic one that does ditch dysphagia that Thracian worships arcsecant. fact3: There exists someone such that if this one is not a cockney and interlaces then this one is a kind of a krone. fact4: There is some person such that if it is a kind of non-polychromatic person that ditches dysphagia then it worships arcsecant. fact5: That Thracian is a kind of a glebe if it is not a Habacuc and it is polychromatic. fact6: The Czech benumbs if this thing ditches dysphagia and does not symphonize. fact7: There is something such that if that thing is not a browsing and that thing does not lament femaleness that thing lists Scleroderma. fact8: If that Thracian is not polychromatic and the thing does not ditch dysphagia the thing does worship arcsecant. fact9: If the Paternoster is Tyrolese and does not worship arcsecant that it unscrambles is not wrong. fact10: If some person that is not a Cladrastis is not operable then that person is a kind of a motorboat. fact11: There exists something such that if this is not a kind of a reversible and this is a kind of a Canellaceae this is a muscularity. ; $hypothesis$ = That there is somebody such that if this person is not polychromatic and this person does not ditch dysphagia this person does worship arcsecant is false. ; $proof$ = | fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
0.3 | If that fouling Chelifer does not happens then this fuller but notthat fouling Chelifer happens. | ¬{C} -> ({A} & ¬{C}) | fact1: The sizing Elodea happens and the mischief does not happens. fact2: If that that solelessness and this scorching insipidity happens does not hold this scorching insipidity does not occurs. fact3: That that shackling formidability does not occurs and that fouling Chelifer does not occurs prevents this fuller. fact4: This locomotion does not occurs. fact5: That shackling formidability does not happens and that fouling Chelifer does not happens if the fact that this scorching insipidity does not occurs hold. fact6: If the fact that notthat fouling Chelifer but that shackling formidability occurs does not hold then that shackling formidability does not happens. fact7: That this Rousseauanness and this fuller occurs is brought about by that that shackling formidability does not occurs. fact8: That this cognoscibleness does not occurs and the superposition does not happens is correct if that weaving occurs. fact9: That this scorching insipidity does not occurs results in that this Rousseauanness and this fuller occurs. fact10: That knitting dogged does not occurs. fact11: This recessionalness happens. fact12: That both that weaving and that execration occurs is brought about by that the beading ataxy does not happens. fact13: That shackling formidability happens. fact14: The tailing Amentiferae occurs and the dulledness occurs. fact15: If that solelessness does not happens either that fouling Chelifer or that shackling formidability or both occurs. fact16: That the fact that that solelessness happens and this scorching insipidity happens is true does not hold if this cognoscibleness does not occurs. fact17: If the shrunken does not occurs then this Concording funds but notthe shrunken happens. fact18: The upness does not happens. fact19: This fuller happens but that fouling Chelifer does not happens if that fouling Chelifer occurs. fact20: That this fuller does not occurs yields that the exhibition but notthe ununderstoodness happens. | fact1: ({GH} & ¬{GU}) fact2: ¬({E} & {D}) -> ¬{D} fact3: (¬{B} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{A} fact4: ¬{GT} fact5: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) fact6: ¬(¬{C} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact7: ¬{B} -> ({HQ} & {A}) fact8: {H} -> (¬{F} & ¬{G}) fact9: ¬{D} -> ({HQ} & {A}) fact10: ¬{IO} fact11: {BC} fact12: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact13: {B} fact14: ({P} & {HE}) fact15: ¬{E} -> ({C} v {B}) fact16: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & {D}) fact17: ¬{CI} -> ({BA} & ¬{CI}) fact18: ¬{DD} fact19: {C} -> ({A} & ¬{C}) fact20: ¬{A} -> ({CC} & ¬{FH}) | [] | [] | This Rousseauanness occurs. | {HQ} | [] | 7 | 3 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: The sizing Elodea happens and the mischief does not happens. fact2: If that that solelessness and this scorching insipidity happens does not hold this scorching insipidity does not occurs. fact3: That that shackling formidability does not occurs and that fouling Chelifer does not occurs prevents this fuller. fact4: This locomotion does not occurs. fact5: That shackling formidability does not happens and that fouling Chelifer does not happens if the fact that this scorching insipidity does not occurs hold. fact6: If the fact that notthat fouling Chelifer but that shackling formidability occurs does not hold then that shackling formidability does not happens. fact7: That this Rousseauanness and this fuller occurs is brought about by that that shackling formidability does not occurs. fact8: That this cognoscibleness does not occurs and the superposition does not happens is correct if that weaving occurs. fact9: That this scorching insipidity does not occurs results in that this Rousseauanness and this fuller occurs. fact10: That knitting dogged does not occurs. fact11: This recessionalness happens. fact12: That both that weaving and that execration occurs is brought about by that the beading ataxy does not happens. fact13: That shackling formidability happens. fact14: The tailing Amentiferae occurs and the dulledness occurs. fact15: If that solelessness does not happens either that fouling Chelifer or that shackling formidability or both occurs. fact16: That the fact that that solelessness happens and this scorching insipidity happens is true does not hold if this cognoscibleness does not occurs. fact17: If the shrunken does not occurs then this Concording funds but notthe shrunken happens. fact18: The upness does not happens. fact19: This fuller happens but that fouling Chelifer does not happens if that fouling Chelifer occurs. fact20: That this fuller does not occurs yields that the exhibition but notthe ununderstoodness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = If that fouling Chelifer does not happens then this fuller but notthat fouling Chelifer happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
0.3 | This parlay happens. | {A} | fact1: This resting does not occurs if this parlay does not happens. fact2: This resting occurs but this replacement does not happens. fact3: The realisation but notthe immunising wanderlust occurs. fact4: This replacement does not occurs. fact5: The nitrogenising cybersex does not happens. fact6: That this resting does not happens and this parlay does not happens triggers the stunting Hamitic. | fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬{B} fact2: ({B} & ¬{C}) fact3: ({ES} & ¬{IR}) fact4: ¬{C} fact5: ¬{CF} fact6: (¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {AU} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that this parlay does not happens is not incorrect.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: This resting does not occurs.; fact2 -> int2: This resting happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; fact2 -> int2: {B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | The stunting Hamitic occurs. | {AU} | [] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: This resting does not occurs if this parlay does not happens. fact2: This resting occurs but this replacement does not happens. fact3: The realisation but notthe immunising wanderlust occurs. fact4: This replacement does not occurs. fact5: The nitrogenising cybersex does not happens. fact6: That this resting does not happens and this parlay does not happens triggers the stunting Hamitic. ; $hypothesis$ = This parlay happens. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that this parlay does not happens is not incorrect.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: This resting does not occurs.; fact2 -> int2: This resting happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
0.3 | That that hitting does not happens but this gouge occurs is incorrect. | ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) | fact1: That that forgiveness does not occurs but the back occurs is wrong if this chipping occurs. fact2: If this chipping does not happens that that hitting does not occurs but this gouge occurs is wrong. fact3: This chipping occurs if that smoulder happens. fact4: That smoulder happens if that Iraki does not happens. | fact1: {A} -> ¬(¬{AQ} & {FJ}) fact2: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact3: {B} -> {A} fact4: ¬{C} -> {B} | [] | [] | That that forgiveness does not occurs but the back happens is false. | ¬(¬{AQ} & {FJ}) | [] | 8 | 1 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $facts$ = fact1: That that forgiveness does not occurs but the back occurs is wrong if this chipping occurs. fact2: If this chipping does not happens that that hitting does not occurs but this gouge occurs is wrong. fact3: This chipping occurs if that smoulder happens. fact4: That smoulder happens if that Iraki does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that hitting does not happens but this gouge occurs is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |