Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

This farrier is sulfurized.

{A}{a}

fact1: This farrier is not a golfing if it is not a Eiffel and it is a kind of a unsimilarity. fact2: The fact that that shot does not overlie Caloocan and Foxes Doppler is not correct if that person is not a kind of a Catostomus. fact3: If that reenactor is not a Upsala but the one is a anopia that reenactor is not monecious. fact4: If that some person is not volumetrical hold that the one is not a Gasterosteidae is correct. fact5: This farrier is a kind of a unsimilarity. fact6: This farrier is non-lumbosacral if this farrier is not a kind of a Strepsirhini and is bismuthal. fact7: If this farrier does not seethe and connects terce it is not a patness. fact8: Some person bestows spinelessness but he is not ulnar if that he improves is correct. fact9: Somebody is sulfurized if that he/she is a kind of a golfing is true. fact10: Somebody is not sulfurized if it is not a golfing. fact11: The fact that that shot is a Catostomus but it does not obey allure does not hold. fact12: If that that shot is a Catostomus but it does not obey allure is wrong the fact that that shot is not a Catostomus is right. fact13: If some man is a Orontium this person demoralises or this person does not pull Catoptrophorus or both. fact14: If something that bestows spinelessness is not ulnar the thing is a kind of a Orontium. fact15: The tore is not a unsimilarity but it is monecious. fact16: If that that shot does not overlie Caloocan and Foxes Doppler does not hold that shot improves. fact17: Somebody that does not pull Catoptrophorus is a golfing.

fact1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: ¬{K}{b} -> ¬(¬{J}{b} & {I}{b}) fact3: (¬{DQ}{cf} & {CJ}{cf}) -> ¬{FA}{cf} fact4: (x): ¬{CL}x -> ¬{AU}x fact5: {AB}{a} fact6: (¬{IM}{a} & {DA}{a}) -> ¬{CR}{a} fact7: (¬{IK}{a} & {HK}{a}) -> ¬{GN}{a} fact8: (x): {H}x -> ({F}x & ¬{G}x) fact9: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x fact11: ¬({K}{b} & ¬{L}{b}) fact12: ¬({K}{b} & ¬{L}{b}) -> ¬{K}{b} fact13: (x): {D}x -> ({E}x v ¬{C}x) fact14: (x): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> {D}x fact15: (¬{AB}{hr} & {FA}{hr}) fact16: ¬(¬{J}{b} & {I}{b}) -> {H}{b} fact17: (x): ¬{C}x -> {B}x

This farrier is sulfurized.

{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This farrier is not a golfing if it is not a Eiffel and it is a kind of a unsimilarity. fact2: The fact that that shot does not overlie Caloocan and Foxes Doppler is not correct if that person is not a kind of a Catostomus. fact3: If that reenactor is not a Upsala but the one is a anopia that reenactor is not monecious. fact4: If that some person is not volumetrical hold that the one is not a Gasterosteidae is correct. fact5: This farrier is a kind of a unsimilarity. fact6: This farrier is non-lumbosacral if this farrier is not a kind of a Strepsirhini and is bismuthal. fact7: If this farrier does not seethe and connects terce it is not a patness. fact8: Some person bestows spinelessness but he is not ulnar if that he improves is correct. fact9: Somebody is sulfurized if that he/she is a kind of a golfing is true. fact10: Somebody is not sulfurized if it is not a golfing. fact11: The fact that that shot is a Catostomus but it does not obey allure does not hold. fact12: If that that shot is a Catostomus but it does not obey allure is wrong the fact that that shot is not a Catostomus is right. fact13: If some man is a Orontium this person demoralises or this person does not pull Catoptrophorus or both. fact14: If something that bestows spinelessness is not ulnar the thing is a kind of a Orontium. fact15: The tore is not a unsimilarity but it is monecious. fact16: If that that shot does not overlie Caloocan and Foxes Doppler does not hold that shot improves. fact17: Somebody that does not pull Catoptrophorus is a golfing. ; $hypothesis$ = This farrier is sulfurized. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This lecher is a allelomorph and is not a mealtime.

({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

fact1: Someone that does not engross Halcyon is a kind of a probable and underquotes. fact2: That archaist does underquote but that thing is not a allelomorph. fact3: The Bisayan does not underquote. fact4: The fact that that archaist underquotes and engrosses Halcyon is false if something is a probable. fact5: The fact that something explodes and is unstylish is false if this thing is not a kind of a probable. fact6: There exists some man such that the fact that it is a probable is not wrong. fact7: If something is a kind of a probable that it is a allelomorph and it is not a mealtime is not correct. fact8: This whisky underquotes but the thing is not paleocortical. fact9: If that that archaist underquotes and does engross Halcyon is not true the fact that this lecher is not a kind of a mealtime hold. fact10: There is someone such that it does engross Halcyon.

fact1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact2: ({B}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) fact3: ¬{B}{er} fact4: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) fact5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({JJ}x & {I}x) fact6: (Ex): {A}x fact7: (x): {A}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{D}x) fact8: ({B}{ef} & ¬{DI}{ef}) fact9: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact10: (Ex): {C}x

The fact that that this lecher is a allelomorph but this person is not a mealtime hold does not hold.

¬({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone that does not engross Halcyon is a kind of a probable and underquotes. fact2: That archaist does underquote but that thing is not a allelomorph. fact3: The Bisayan does not underquote. fact4: The fact that that archaist underquotes and engrosses Halcyon is false if something is a probable. fact5: The fact that something explodes and is unstylish is false if this thing is not a kind of a probable. fact6: There exists some man such that the fact that it is a probable is not wrong. fact7: If something is a kind of a probable that it is a allelomorph and it is not a mealtime is not correct. fact8: This whisky underquotes but the thing is not paleocortical. fact9: If that that archaist underquotes and does engross Halcyon is not true the fact that this lecher is not a kind of a mealtime hold. fact10: There is someone such that it does engross Halcyon. ; $hypothesis$ = This lecher is a allelomorph and is not a mealtime. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This impress does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: That teratogenicness occurs. fact2: That katharsis occurs. fact3: That this racism and that ringing occurs is brought about by that that bankrolling decibel does not occurs. fact4: If that handball does not happens this impress happens and this racism happens. fact5: That prenominalness and that killing occurs. fact6: This constipation occurs if that katharsis happens. fact7: That that uncriticalness does not occurs hold. fact8: The gratefulness happens if that precession does not occurs. fact9: If that this racism happens is right then that that handball does not happens but that holler occurs is false. fact10: This impress does not occurs if that holler happens and this constipation occurs. fact11: The earliness occurs if the deadening Helvetica happens. fact12: That this dermalness does not happens is triggered by that the colloquium and the grammaticalness occurs. fact13: This racism does not happens. fact14: That holler occurs if this racism does not happens. fact15: This porting weighted occurs. fact16: That that that katharsis does not happens and this constipation occurs hold is false if that holler does not happens. fact17: The novena does not occurs. fact18: That ontologicalness happens. fact19: That intolerantness happens. fact20: That the casting does not happens is not wrong.

fact1: {EH} fact2: {A} fact3: ¬{H} -> ({E} & {G}) fact4: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact5: ({FO} & {IF}) fact6: {A} -> {B} fact7: ¬{GP} fact8: ¬{FG} -> {HO} fact9: {E} -> ¬(¬{F} & {C}) fact10: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{D} fact11: {CJ} -> {DJ} fact12: ({FP} & {DP}) -> ¬{BS} fact13: ¬{E} fact14: ¬{E} -> {C} fact15: {FJ} fact16: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & {B}) fact17: ¬{FS} fact18: {AL} fact19: {BN} fact20: ¬{BO}

That unification happens.

{GT}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That teratogenicness occurs. fact2: That katharsis occurs. fact3: That this racism and that ringing occurs is brought about by that that bankrolling decibel does not occurs. fact4: If that handball does not happens this impress happens and this racism happens. fact5: That prenominalness and that killing occurs. fact6: This constipation occurs if that katharsis happens. fact7: That that uncriticalness does not occurs hold. fact8: The gratefulness happens if that precession does not occurs. fact9: If that this racism happens is right then that that handball does not happens but that holler occurs is false. fact10: This impress does not occurs if that holler happens and this constipation occurs. fact11: The earliness occurs if the deadening Helvetica happens. fact12: That this dermalness does not happens is triggered by that the colloquium and the grammaticalness occurs. fact13: This racism does not happens. fact14: That holler occurs if this racism does not happens. fact15: This porting weighted occurs. fact16: That that that katharsis does not happens and this constipation occurs hold is false if that holler does not happens. fact17: The novena does not occurs. fact18: That ontologicalness happens. fact19: That intolerantness happens. fact20: That the casting does not happens is not wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This impress does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact2 -> int1: The fact that this constipation happens hold.; fact13 & fact14 -> int2: That holler happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That holler and this constipation occurs.; int3 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Judas is not a Chang.

¬{A}{b}

fact1: That this Judas is not judgmental is right if that at is not a kind of a Canaanitic and/or is not a treat. fact2: This Judas hoops Tegu if this Judas is not a Canaanitic but it is a Chang. fact3: That at is not a Canaanitic and/or it is not a kind of a treat. fact4: Some man that is not judgmental does not hoop Tegu and is not judgmental. fact5: If something that is not judgmental is a treat then it hoops Tegu. fact6: Something is a Chang if it does not hoop Tegu and is not judgmental. fact7: Some man that is not judgmental and does hoop Tegu is a treat.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That this Judas is not judgmental is right if that at is not a kind of a Canaanitic and/or is not a treat. fact2: This Judas hoops Tegu if this Judas is not a Canaanitic but it is a Chang. fact3: That at is not a Canaanitic and/or it is not a kind of a treat. fact4: Some man that is not judgmental does not hoop Tegu and is not judgmental. fact5: If something that is not judgmental is a treat then it hoops Tegu. fact6: Something is a Chang if it does not hoop Tegu and is not judgmental. fact7: Some man that is not judgmental and does hoop Tegu is a treat. ; $hypothesis$ = This Judas is not a Chang. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> int1: This Judas is not judgmental.; fact4 -> int2: If this Judas is not judgmental then it does not hoop Tegu and is not judgmental.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This Judas does not hoop Tegu and is not judgmental.; fact6 -> int4: If this Judas does not hoop Tegu and the thing is not judgmental then the thing is a Chang.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This auspex is not a Honduras.

¬{D}{a}

fact1: Someone that does not prickle Agrostis does not blacklist and does not prickle Agrostis. fact2: That if something does not blacklist and does not prickle Agrostis then it is not a Honduras is right. fact3: This auspex is not muscular. fact4: If this auspex does not blacklist and prickles Agrostis then it is not a Honduras. fact5: A non-muscular man that is not a Honduras does not blacklist.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone that does not prickle Agrostis does not blacklist and does not prickle Agrostis. fact2: That if something does not blacklist and does not prickle Agrostis then it is not a Honduras is right. fact3: This auspex is not muscular. fact4: If this auspex does not blacklist and prickles Agrostis then it is not a Honduras. fact5: A non-muscular man that is not a Honduras does not blacklist. ; $hypothesis$ = This auspex is not a Honduras. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That cuticula is actinometrical.

{B}{a}

fact1: This leek hacks if this settler hacks. fact2: If that cuticula is not a kind of a Maffia this person either does not westernise Amblyrhynchus or is a Mendelsohn or both. fact3: The calcimine is either actinometrical or orderly or both. fact4: If either some person does not westernise Amblyrhynchus or this one is a kind of a Mendelsohn or both then this one is actinometrical. fact5: That that impresario is a Martian is right if that this intrenchment is both not a Martian and a tweak is incorrect. fact6: If some person is both a barreled and not a Maffia that he is non-actinometrical hold. fact7: This settler hacks if that impresario is a Martian. fact8: If this leek does hack then that cuticula is a barreled and not a Maffia. fact9: If that that cuticula is a barreled is not incorrect that this pointillist is not actinometrical is true.

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

That this pointillist westernises Amblyrhynchus is correct.

{AA}{cd}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This leek hacks if this settler hacks. fact2: If that cuticula is not a kind of a Maffia this person either does not westernise Amblyrhynchus or is a Mendelsohn or both. fact3: The calcimine is either actinometrical or orderly or both. fact4: If either some person does not westernise Amblyrhynchus or this one is a kind of a Mendelsohn or both then this one is actinometrical. fact5: That that impresario is a Martian is right if that this intrenchment is both not a Martian and a tweak is incorrect. fact6: If some person is both a barreled and not a Maffia that he is non-actinometrical hold. fact7: This settler hacks if that impresario is a Martian. fact8: If this leek does hack then that cuticula is a barreled and not a Maffia. fact9: If that that cuticula is a barreled is not incorrect that this pointillist is not actinometrical is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That cuticula is actinometrical. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That takeover does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: That nailing Casper happens. fact2: The fact that if the fact that the non-diastolicness and that nailing Casper happens is not incorrect that takeover does not occurs is correct. fact3: That that eisteddfod occurs is triggered by that that swing does not occurs and that earliness does not occurs. fact4: The fact that the imbibing ravaged but notthat swing happens hold if the wrong happens. fact5: If the fact that that floating Crataegus but notthis connubialness happens is false that nailing Casper does not occurs. fact6: That leaning Feb happens but that endogamicness does not happens. fact7: That that earliness and that hyperalimentation happens is false if that endogamicness does not happens. fact8: This incumbency does not happens if that that austeniticness and that appreciation happens is false. fact9: If that that earliness and that hyperalimentation occurs does not hold that earliness does not happens. fact10: That takeover occurs if that that takeover does not happens and this diastolicness does not occurs does not hold. fact11: The fact that that takeover does not happens and this diastolicness does not happens is not true if that nailing Casper does not happens. fact12: The non-tidalness is triggered by this diastolicness and/or that that nailing Casper does not occurs. fact13: That that eliciting hushed does not happens yields that this hiccupping and the slithering happens. fact14: The fact that that floating Crataegus occurs but this connubialness does not occurs does not hold if this hiccupping occurs. fact15: The wrong happens. fact16: That that eliciting hushed happens is prevented by that that eisteddfod happens and that adhesion occurs. fact17: This diastolicness does not happens. fact18: If this incumbency does not happens the uncensoredness occurs and/or this imprisoning Sideritis occurs.

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

This tidalness does not occurs.

¬{DE}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That nailing Casper happens. fact2: The fact that if the fact that the non-diastolicness and that nailing Casper happens is not incorrect that takeover does not occurs is correct. fact3: That that eisteddfod occurs is triggered by that that swing does not occurs and that earliness does not occurs. fact4: The fact that the imbibing ravaged but notthat swing happens hold if the wrong happens. fact5: If the fact that that floating Crataegus but notthis connubialness happens is false that nailing Casper does not occurs. fact6: That leaning Feb happens but that endogamicness does not happens. fact7: That that earliness and that hyperalimentation happens is false if that endogamicness does not happens. fact8: This incumbency does not happens if that that austeniticness and that appreciation happens is false. fact9: If that that earliness and that hyperalimentation occurs does not hold that earliness does not happens. fact10: That takeover occurs if that that takeover does not happens and this diastolicness does not occurs does not hold. fact11: The fact that that takeover does not happens and this diastolicness does not happens is not true if that nailing Casper does not happens. fact12: The non-tidalness is triggered by this diastolicness and/or that that nailing Casper does not occurs. fact13: That that eliciting hushed does not happens yields that this hiccupping and the slithering happens. fact14: The fact that that floating Crataegus occurs but this connubialness does not occurs does not hold if this hiccupping occurs. fact15: The wrong happens. fact16: That that eliciting hushed happens is prevented by that that eisteddfod happens and that adhesion occurs. fact17: This diastolicness does not happens. fact18: If this incumbency does not happens the uncensoredness occurs and/or this imprisoning Sideritis occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That takeover does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact17 & fact1 -> int1: The fact that the non-diastolicness and that nailing Casper occurs hold.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This griddling Mycoplasmatales does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: The fact that either this Berit does not occurs or the Baling everydayness occurs or both is not right. fact2: The synonymousness does not happens if the fact that that the whoredom happens and this embellishing occurs does not hold hold. fact3: If that obliging alinement happens this griddling Mycoplasmatales happens. fact4: If the fact that both that obliging alinement and this striating occurs is false this griddling Mycoplasmatales does not occurs. fact5: That that legitimation does not happens and this unfocussedness does not occurs is brought about by this reorganisation. fact6: If the synonymousness does not occurs the fact that that obliging alinement happens and this striating occurs does not hold. fact7: If the fact that this Berit does not occurs or the Baling everydayness occurs or both is false then this striating occurs. fact8: That that obliging alinement does not occurs is prevented by this striating. fact9: If this mucoidness does not occurs then that the fact that both the whoredom and this embellishing happens is not true hold. fact10: That feminizing Tabernaemontana is brought about by the elongating contiguousness. fact11: That suffocating Veda does not happens and this mucoidness does not occurs if that legitimation does not occurs. fact12: That the Baling everydayness does not happens is not false.

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

This griddling Mycoplasmatales does not happens.

¬{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that either this Berit does not occurs or the Baling everydayness occurs or both is not right. fact2: The synonymousness does not happens if the fact that that the whoredom happens and this embellishing occurs does not hold hold. fact3: If that obliging alinement happens this griddling Mycoplasmatales happens. fact4: If the fact that both that obliging alinement and this striating occurs is false this griddling Mycoplasmatales does not occurs. fact5: That that legitimation does not happens and this unfocussedness does not occurs is brought about by this reorganisation. fact6: If the synonymousness does not occurs the fact that that obliging alinement happens and this striating occurs does not hold. fact7: If the fact that this Berit does not occurs or the Baling everydayness occurs or both is false then this striating occurs. fact8: That that obliging alinement does not occurs is prevented by this striating. fact9: If this mucoidness does not occurs then that the fact that both the whoredom and this embellishing happens is not true hold. fact10: That feminizing Tabernaemontana is brought about by the elongating contiguousness. fact11: That suffocating Veda does not happens and this mucoidness does not occurs if that legitimation does not occurs. fact12: That the Baling everydayness does not happens is not false. ; $hypothesis$ = This griddling Mycoplasmatales does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact1 -> int1: This striating occurs.; int1 & fact8 -> int2: That obliging alinement happens.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That aminotransferase is not usual.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: The fact that the mallard substitutes Faraday and is not cyclothymic does not hold. fact2: Someone that does not act inevitableness is a kind of anacoluthic a Setaria. fact3: Someone is usual if she is a kind of a Setaria. fact4: That aminotransferase is usual if that the mallard substitutes Faraday and is not cyclothymic is false.

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

This cardamum is usual.

{B}{ga}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the mallard substitutes Faraday and is not cyclothymic does not hold. fact2: Someone that does not act inevitableness is a kind of anacoluthic a Setaria. fact3: Someone is usual if she is a kind of a Setaria. fact4: That aminotransferase is usual if that the mallard substitutes Faraday and is not cyclothymic is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That aminotransferase is not usual. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists some person such that if the one is a kind of a pan then the one does not feather and the one is a osteology.

(Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

fact1: Some person that tempers apnea does not Ward Oligochaeta and is a USPS. fact2: That if that vehicle is a pan then that vehicle is a osteology is not wrong. fact3: There exists something such that if it is a kind of a pan then it feathers and is a osteology. fact4: There is some person such that if the one is a kind of a pan then the one is a osteology. fact5: There is something such that if it is a pan it does not feather. fact6: Someone does not reap Microsporum and is incorrupt if that one is a local. fact7: That vehicle feathers and it is a osteology if it is a pan. fact8: The aragonite does not boat psychopharmacology but that one crisscrosses Capparis if the aragonite is a kind of a osteology.

fact1: (x): {AI}x -> (¬{CL}x & {DH}x) fact2: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} fact3: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact4: (Ex): {A}x -> {AB}x fact5: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x fact6: (x): {BK}x -> (¬{GU}x & {IA}x) fact7: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact8: {AB}{je} -> (¬{C}{je} & {BF}{je})

That there is something such that if it tempers apnea it does not Ward Oligochaeta and it is a USPS is correct.

(Ex): {AI}x -> (¬{CL}x & {DH}x)

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Some person that tempers apnea does not Ward Oligochaeta and is a USPS. fact2: That if that vehicle is a pan then that vehicle is a osteology is not wrong. fact3: There exists something such that if it is a kind of a pan then it feathers and is a osteology. fact4: There is some person such that if the one is a kind of a pan then the one is a osteology. fact5: There is something such that if it is a pan it does not feather. fact6: Someone does not reap Microsporum and is incorrupt if that one is a local. fact7: That vehicle feathers and it is a osteology if it is a pan. fact8: The aragonite does not boat psychopharmacology but that one crisscrosses Capparis if the aragonite is a kind of a osteology. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists some person such that if the one is a kind of a pan then the one does not feather and the one is a osteology. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This cherry is not graphical.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: The fact that the Cook is uric person that is not non-heathlike does not hold. fact2: If that this cherry is a Vaisakha and it is graphical is incorrect then this cherry is not a rocketry. fact3: The pahautea does not situate rhinolaryngology. fact4: That this cherry is a stained and it is a foraging is false. fact5: If some person that is a taxability is not a Avalokitesvara then the one is not graphical. fact6: That this cherry is not non-affixial and situates rhinolaryngology does not hold. fact7: This cherry is not a foraging. fact8: This cherry is not a Avalokitesvara if the fact that that thing situates rhinolaryngology and is a Garcinia is wrong. fact9: This cherry is not graphical if this cherry does not situate rhinolaryngology. fact10: This cherry is not a kind of a Lasiocampidae if the fact that the fact that this cherry emphasizes and the person is a telecasting is incorrect hold. fact11: If the fact that this cherry is affixial and it situates rhinolaryngology is incorrect then this cherry is not graphical. fact12: The wolfram does not cox Dubyuh if that this thing is a Dicksonia and is empirical is wrong. fact13: That this cherry is not a multifariousness is right. fact14: Something that is not a kind of a Avalokitesvara is graphical.

fact1: ¬({FC}{hp} & {CH}{hp}) fact2: ¬({DQ}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{EP}{a} fact3: ¬{AB}{cq} fact4: ¬({L}{a} & {BA}{a}) fact5: (x): ({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact6: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact7: ¬{BA}{a} fact8: ¬({AB}{a} & {CN}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact9: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact10: ¬({IK}{a} & {EK}{a}) -> ¬{IF}{a} fact11: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact12: ¬({GG}{gn} & {FB}{gn}) -> ¬{BK}{gn} fact13: ¬{AO}{a} fact14: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}x

That Haida is not graphical.

¬{B}{bo}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the Cook is uric person that is not non-heathlike does not hold. fact2: If that this cherry is a Vaisakha and it is graphical is incorrect then this cherry is not a rocketry. fact3: The pahautea does not situate rhinolaryngology. fact4: That this cherry is a stained and it is a foraging is false. fact5: If some person that is a taxability is not a Avalokitesvara then the one is not graphical. fact6: That this cherry is not non-affixial and situates rhinolaryngology does not hold. fact7: This cherry is not a foraging. fact8: This cherry is not a Avalokitesvara if the fact that that thing situates rhinolaryngology and is a Garcinia is wrong. fact9: This cherry is not graphical if this cherry does not situate rhinolaryngology. fact10: This cherry is not a kind of a Lasiocampidae if the fact that the fact that this cherry emphasizes and the person is a telecasting is incorrect hold. fact11: If the fact that this cherry is affixial and it situates rhinolaryngology is incorrect then this cherry is not graphical. fact12: The wolfram does not cox Dubyuh if that this thing is a Dicksonia and is empirical is wrong. fact13: That this cherry is not a multifariousness is right. fact14: Something that is not a kind of a Avalokitesvara is graphical. ; $hypothesis$ = This cherry is not graphical. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that loofah is not psychogenic but the thing is a Erse.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: The sunglasses is a Lambertia and it does warn. fact2: If that loofah is not psychogenic but it is a Erse the sunglasses is not a Lambertia. fact3: That loofah is not a kind of a Lambertia.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The sunglasses is a Lambertia and it does warn. fact2: If that loofah is not psychogenic but it is a Erse the sunglasses is not a Lambertia. fact3: That loofah is not a kind of a Lambertia. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that loofah is not psychogenic but the thing is a Erse. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that loofah is not psychogenic but the thing is a Erse.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: The sunglasses is not a Lambertia.; fact1 -> int2: The sunglasses is a Lambertia.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This undueness occurs but that evaluation does not happens.

({A} & ¬{B})

fact1: The fact that that diploid and that backhander occurs is wrong if that vendition does not happens. fact2: That diploid does not occurs if that both that diploid and that backhander occurs is wrong. fact3: That this segmentation does not happens and that nonintellectualness does not happens is incorrect if that apprehending does not occurs. fact4: That non-urogenitalness yields that that platyrrhine happens and this devaluing occurs. fact5: The fact that that both this stabbing legality and that urogenitalness occurs is not false is wrong if this peeping does not happens. fact6: The fact that this crackling occurs and/or this firebombing secureness happens does not hold. fact7: If this marauding happens then that fazing playlist does not occurs and that pinochle does not happens. fact8: That urogenitalness does not happens if the fact that that this stabbing legality happens and that urogenitalness happens does not hold hold. fact9: The Land happens. fact10: That this feverishness occurs brings about that that apprehending does not occurs. fact11: If that diploid does not occurs the fact that either that pandemic occurs or this completeness does not happens or both does not hold. fact12: This peeping does not occurs if that this segmentation does not occurs and that nonintellectualness does not happens is false. fact13: That that fazing playlist does not occurs brings about that that evaluation and that non-undueness happens. fact14: That fazing playlist and this undueness happens. fact15: If that platyrrhine happens then that vendition does not occurs and the libelling Uredinales does not occurs. fact16: That geologicness happens if that evaluation happens and this undueness does not happens. fact17: If the fact that that that pandemic occurs and/or this completeness does not happens is wrong is right that this marauding occurs is true.

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

That geologicness occurs.

{IQ}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that diploid and that backhander occurs is wrong if that vendition does not happens. fact2: That diploid does not occurs if that both that diploid and that backhander occurs is wrong. fact3: That this segmentation does not happens and that nonintellectualness does not happens is incorrect if that apprehending does not occurs. fact4: That non-urogenitalness yields that that platyrrhine happens and this devaluing occurs. fact5: The fact that that both this stabbing legality and that urogenitalness occurs is not false is wrong if this peeping does not happens. fact6: The fact that this crackling occurs and/or this firebombing secureness happens does not hold. fact7: If this marauding happens then that fazing playlist does not occurs and that pinochle does not happens. fact8: That urogenitalness does not happens if the fact that that this stabbing legality happens and that urogenitalness happens does not hold hold. fact9: The Land happens. fact10: That this feverishness occurs brings about that that apprehending does not occurs. fact11: If that diploid does not occurs the fact that either that pandemic occurs or this completeness does not happens or both does not hold. fact12: This peeping does not occurs if that this segmentation does not occurs and that nonintellectualness does not happens is false. fact13: That that fazing playlist does not occurs brings about that that evaluation and that non-undueness happens. fact14: That fazing playlist and this undueness happens. fact15: If that platyrrhine happens then that vendition does not occurs and the libelling Uredinales does not occurs. fact16: That geologicness happens if that evaluation happens and this undueness does not happens. fact17: If the fact that that that pandemic occurs and/or this completeness does not happens is wrong is right that this marauding occurs is true. ; $hypothesis$ = This undueness occurs but that evaluation does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

There is something such that if it is a kind of a illogicalness the fact that it either scrubs patriotism or does not pock terseness or both is wrong.

(Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)

fact1: There is somebody such that if that person rings jinnee then the fact that that person is a tempered and/or not intraspecific does not hold. fact2: That that Sid is either animatistic or not a Persoonia or both does not hold hold if the fact that this thing enlists is true. fact3: The fact that that aftershaft demands Genyonemus or he/she does not pock terseness or both is wrong if he/she is topographic. fact4: There is some person such that if it is a illogicalness then it scrubs patriotism and/or it does not pock terseness. fact5: There exists some person such that if it is a illogicalness the fact that it either scrubs patriotism or pocks terseness or both is false. fact6: There is someone such that if that person is lowborn then the fact that that person is rural and/or that person is not a kind of an overthrow does not hold. fact7: If the fact that that aftershaft is a kind of a illogicalness hold that aftershaft does pock terseness. fact8: There is someone such that if it is a illogicalness it does pock terseness. fact9: There exists something such that if it is a Momordica that it chances xix and/or is not a kind of a tubeless is false. fact10: There exists some man such that if she/he coils that she/he bowls hypercalcaemia and/or she/he is not pragmatical is incorrect. fact11: There exists some person such that if the fact that he is a kind of a guesstimate hold the fact that he is a zinger or is not a Limpopo or both does not hold. fact12: There exists someone such that if he is a kind of a illogicalness he does not scrub patriotism. fact13: If something is a gap then that the thing either kiboshes Citlaltepetl or does not scrub patriotism or both is false. fact14: There is some person such that if it is heterological that it is either stemmatic or not a herd or both is incorrect. fact15: If that aftershaft is a illogicalness then it scrubs patriotism and/or does not pock terseness.

fact1: (Ex): {AO}x -> ¬({DC}x v ¬{II}x) fact2: {I}{bs} -> ¬({DO}{bs} v ¬{EC}{bs}) fact3: {AM}{aa} -> ¬({CA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) fact4: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) fact5: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) fact6: (Ex): {FO}x -> ¬({DA}x v ¬{IN}x) fact7: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} fact8: (Ex): {A}x -> {AB}x fact9: (Ex): {DL}x -> ¬({HO}x v ¬{CO}x) fact10: (Ex): {DI}x -> ¬({FC}x v ¬{J}x) fact11: (Ex): {BM}x -> ¬({FR}x v ¬{EI}x) fact12: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x fact13: (x): {JF}x -> ¬({JC}x v ¬{AA}x) fact14: (Ex): {L}x -> ¬({GK}x v ¬{G}x) fact15: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa})

If that aftershaft is a kind of a gap the fact that she kiboshes Citlaltepetl and/or she does not scrub patriotism is wrong.

{JF}{aa} -> ¬({JC}{aa} v ¬{AA}{aa})

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There is somebody such that if that person rings jinnee then the fact that that person is a tempered and/or not intraspecific does not hold. fact2: That that Sid is either animatistic or not a Persoonia or both does not hold hold if the fact that this thing enlists is true. fact3: The fact that that aftershaft demands Genyonemus or he/she does not pock terseness or both is wrong if he/she is topographic. fact4: There is some person such that if it is a illogicalness then it scrubs patriotism and/or it does not pock terseness. fact5: There exists some person such that if it is a illogicalness the fact that it either scrubs patriotism or pocks terseness or both is false. fact6: There is someone such that if that person is lowborn then the fact that that person is rural and/or that person is not a kind of an overthrow does not hold. fact7: If the fact that that aftershaft is a kind of a illogicalness hold that aftershaft does pock terseness. fact8: There is someone such that if it is a illogicalness it does pock terseness. fact9: There exists something such that if it is a Momordica that it chances xix and/or is not a kind of a tubeless is false. fact10: There exists some man such that if she/he coils that she/he bowls hypercalcaemia and/or she/he is not pragmatical is incorrect. fact11: There exists some person such that if the fact that he is a kind of a guesstimate hold the fact that he is a zinger or is not a Limpopo or both does not hold. fact12: There exists someone such that if he is a kind of a illogicalness he does not scrub patriotism. fact13: If something is a gap then that the thing either kiboshes Citlaltepetl or does not scrub patriotism or both is false. fact14: There is some person such that if it is heterological that it is either stemmatic or not a herd or both is incorrect. fact15: If that aftershaft is a illogicalness then it scrubs patriotism and/or does not pock terseness. ; $hypothesis$ = There is something such that if it is a kind of a illogicalness the fact that it either scrubs patriotism or does not pock terseness or both is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That ploughman is polymorphous.

{C}{a}

fact1: Some man is polymorphous if the person bobbles copyhold. fact2: That ploughman is an ok and bobbles copyhold. fact3: If something is not a cachexy that that is a kind of an ok and that is not Bayesian is incorrect. fact4: If that ploughman bobbles copyhold but it is not Bayesian then that adamant does not bobbles copyhold. fact5: The fact that that ploughman is a kind of an ok hold. fact6: This guardhouse is Bayesian and she is a cachexy. fact7: Some person bobbles copyhold or this one is not polymorphous or both if this one is not an ok. fact8: Somebody is not an ok if that she/he is an ok and she/he is not Bayesian is false.

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

That adamant is polymorphous.

{C}{fd}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some man is polymorphous if the person bobbles copyhold. fact2: That ploughman is an ok and bobbles copyhold. fact3: If something is not a cachexy that that is a kind of an ok and that is not Bayesian is incorrect. fact4: If that ploughman bobbles copyhold but it is not Bayesian then that adamant does not bobbles copyhold. fact5: The fact that that ploughman is a kind of an ok hold. fact6: This guardhouse is Bayesian and she is a cachexy. fact7: Some person bobbles copyhold or this one is not polymorphous or both if this one is not an ok. fact8: Somebody is not an ok if that she/he is an ok and she/he is not Bayesian is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That ploughman is polymorphous. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: That ploughman bobbles copyhold.; fact1 -> int2: That ploughman is polymorphous if that ploughman bobbles copyhold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Reginald is not a kind of a Neandertal but it is a kind of a Pascha hold.

(¬{A}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: The feel is not a Pascha but this one is rupestral. fact2: Reginald is a Pascha.

fact1: (¬{B}{cf} & {EQ}{cf}) fact2: {B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The feel is not a Pascha but this one is rupestral. fact2: Reginald is a Pascha. ; $hypothesis$ = That Reginald is not a kind of a Neandertal but it is a kind of a Pascha hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That leukorrhea does not underlie.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: This refresher does not underlie. fact2: The epicranium underlies. fact3: That leukorrhea is not a torture. fact4: That leukorrhea is non-atheistical. fact5: If that leukorrhea is a Romanesque and is a cropped then that leukorrhea underlies. fact6: That leukorrhea is not a sexlessness. fact7: That leukorrhea is autogamous. fact8: That leukorrhea is not unemotional. fact9: The Hereford is a cropped. fact10: If something that does not interrogate epenthesis is geometric this does vivify shouting. fact11: The fact that that leukorrhea is not alphabetic is right. fact12: That leukorrhea is not a Romanesque. fact13: The orient is a Avestan if it does not underlie and is Vedic. fact14: That leukorrhea is a Midgard. fact15: That leukorrhea is a Romanesque if this person is not a harmonics and this person is not edifying. fact16: If something that is not a Romanesque is a cropped then the fact that the thing underlies is correct. fact17: This positive is both not atheistical and a Bryum. fact18: That leukorrhea is both not a Romanesque and a cropped if that that leukorrhea is not atheistical is right. fact19: This hematinic is a cropped if this hematinic is not a despair.

fact1: ¬{B}{cf} fact2: {B}{d} fact3: ¬{BC}{aa} fact4: ¬{A}{aa} fact5: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact6: ¬{HA}{aa} fact7: {DI}{aa} fact8: ¬{BB}{aa} fact9: {AB}{cn} fact10: (x): (¬{AM}x & {EL}x) -> {DJ}x fact11: ¬{EE}{aa} fact12: ¬{AA}{aa} fact13: (¬{B}{eq} & {BP}{eq}) -> {DB}{eq} fact14: {FO}{aa} fact15: (¬{HG}{aa} & {HB}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} fact16: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact17: (¬{A}{fi} & {IM}{fi}) fact18: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact19: ¬{CS}{hk} -> {AB}{hk}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This refresher does not underlie. fact2: The epicranium underlies. fact3: That leukorrhea is not a torture. fact4: That leukorrhea is non-atheistical. fact5: If that leukorrhea is a Romanesque and is a cropped then that leukorrhea underlies. fact6: That leukorrhea is not a sexlessness. fact7: That leukorrhea is autogamous. fact8: That leukorrhea is not unemotional. fact9: The Hereford is a cropped. fact10: If something that does not interrogate epenthesis is geometric this does vivify shouting. fact11: The fact that that leukorrhea is not alphabetic is right. fact12: That leukorrhea is not a Romanesque. fact13: The orient is a Avestan if it does not underlie and is Vedic. fact14: That leukorrhea is a Midgard. fact15: That leukorrhea is a Romanesque if this person is not a harmonics and this person is not edifying. fact16: If something that is not a Romanesque is a cropped then the fact that the thing underlies is correct. fact17: This positive is both not atheistical and a Bryum. fact18: That leukorrhea is both not a Romanesque and a cropped if that that leukorrhea is not atheistical is right. fact19: This hematinic is a cropped if this hematinic is not a despair. ; $hypothesis$ = That leukorrhea does not underlie. ; $proof$ =

fact16 -> int1: If that that leukorrhea is not a kind of a Romanesque but that thing is a cropped hold that leukorrhea underlies.; fact18 & fact4 -> int2: That leukorrhea is not a kind of a Romanesque but the person is a cropped.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This LGB is not a kind of a netted.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: This milo is a mutant. fact2: That intrusion fetters. fact3: This LGB is a kind of a netted if the fact that this milo flatters skywriting is true. fact4: Either this milo flatters skywriting or that one is arenaceous or both. fact5: This LGB is arenaceous and/or it is a netted. fact6: If something is undeciphered that it is not a exorcism and it does not hurt is wrong. fact7: If this milo is arenaceous this LGB is a kind of a netted. fact8: If this milo is arenaceous then this LGB is not a netted. fact9: This milo is a poor. fact10: Something is undeciphered but it is non-bacterial if the fact that it fetters is right. fact11: Either some person is unscrupulous or this one vulcanizes interconnectedness or both if the fact that this one is not a exorcism hold. fact12: This LGB flatters skywriting if this milo is a netted. fact13: The fact that if that retsina is unscrupulous then this sandlot is a kind of a Purkinje is right. fact14: This doorway is not acarpelous if the fact that this sandlot minifies and is not acarpelous is incorrect. fact15: Something is arenaceous and/or does not flatter skywriting if it is non-atypical. fact16: This LGB flatters skywriting if this milo is arenaceous. fact17: If that that intrusion is not a exorcism and does not hurt does not hold that retsina is not a exorcism. fact18: The fact that the fact that somebody minifies but it is not acarpelous hold does not hold if it is a Purkinje. fact19: If this doorway is a kind of atypical a Ancohuma this milo is not atypical. fact20: If this LGB is arenaceous this milo is a netted. fact21: Something is atypical and that thing is a Ancohuma if that thing is not acarpelous.

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

This LGB is not a kind of a netted.

¬{C}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This milo is a mutant. fact2: That intrusion fetters. fact3: This LGB is a kind of a netted if the fact that this milo flatters skywriting is true. fact4: Either this milo flatters skywriting or that one is arenaceous or both. fact5: This LGB is arenaceous and/or it is a netted. fact6: If something is undeciphered that it is not a exorcism and it does not hurt is wrong. fact7: If this milo is arenaceous this LGB is a kind of a netted. fact8: If this milo is arenaceous then this LGB is not a netted. fact9: This milo is a poor. fact10: Something is undeciphered but it is non-bacterial if the fact that it fetters is right. fact11: Either some person is unscrupulous or this one vulcanizes interconnectedness or both if the fact that this one is not a exorcism hold. fact12: This LGB flatters skywriting if this milo is a netted. fact13: The fact that if that retsina is unscrupulous then this sandlot is a kind of a Purkinje is right. fact14: This doorway is not acarpelous if the fact that this sandlot minifies and is not acarpelous is incorrect. fact15: Something is arenaceous and/or does not flatter skywriting if it is non-atypical. fact16: This LGB flatters skywriting if this milo is arenaceous. fact17: If that that intrusion is not a exorcism and does not hurt does not hold that retsina is not a exorcism. fact18: The fact that the fact that somebody minifies but it is not acarpelous hold does not hold if it is a Purkinje. fact19: If this doorway is a kind of atypical a Ancohuma this milo is not atypical. fact20: If this LGB is arenaceous this milo is a netted. fact21: Something is atypical and that thing is a Ancohuma if that thing is not acarpelous. ; $hypothesis$ = This LGB is not a kind of a netted. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact3 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That crammer heeds Amphiprion.

{A}{a}

fact1: Some person is not mecopterous and it is not mercurial if it is not gracious. fact2: If that fanatic does not like this meatus is not a snake and/or this thing obliterates shamelessness. fact3: If some man is not a prosperity then it is not a Phocoena. fact4: This meatus is an infirmity if this meatus is not a snake and/or obliterates shamelessness. fact5: The Europeanization heeds Amphiprion and this is skinless. fact6: That crammer heeds Amphiprion and remains. fact7: This doorstep is not an infirmity. fact8: If that some man does not remain and/or it is a kind of a thanatophobia is false it does not heed Amphiprion. fact9: That crammer is intimal. fact10: If something is an infirmity then it is not gracious. fact11: This doorstep is a thanatophobia if that crammer is a thanatophobia. fact12: This doorstep does not remain if this doorstep is a Phocoena and is a thanatophobia. fact13: The lugworm heeds Amphiprion. fact14: Some man does powderise and it heeds Amphiprion if it does not remain. fact15: If that this doorstep is a kind of an infirmity does not hold this doorstep is a Phocoena that is gracious. fact16: The fact that that crammer does not remain and/or is a thanatophobia is wrong if the fact that that spelter is not a Phocoena hold. fact17: If this meatus is a kind of non-mecopterous thing that is not mercurial that spelter is not a prosperity.

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

This doorstep powderises and it heeds Amphiprion.

({DH}{bj} & {A}{bj})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person is not mecopterous and it is not mercurial if it is not gracious. fact2: If that fanatic does not like this meatus is not a snake and/or this thing obliterates shamelessness. fact3: If some man is not a prosperity then it is not a Phocoena. fact4: This meatus is an infirmity if this meatus is not a snake and/or obliterates shamelessness. fact5: The Europeanization heeds Amphiprion and this is skinless. fact6: That crammer heeds Amphiprion and remains. fact7: This doorstep is not an infirmity. fact8: If that some man does not remain and/or it is a kind of a thanatophobia is false it does not heed Amphiprion. fact9: That crammer is intimal. fact10: If something is an infirmity then it is not gracious. fact11: This doorstep is a thanatophobia if that crammer is a thanatophobia. fact12: This doorstep does not remain if this doorstep is a Phocoena and is a thanatophobia. fact13: The lugworm heeds Amphiprion. fact14: Some man does powderise and it heeds Amphiprion if it does not remain. fact15: If that this doorstep is a kind of an infirmity does not hold this doorstep is a Phocoena that is gracious. fact16: The fact that that crammer does not remain and/or is a thanatophobia is wrong if the fact that that spelter is not a Phocoena hold. fact17: If this meatus is a kind of non-mecopterous thing that is not mercurial that spelter is not a prosperity. ; $hypothesis$ = That crammer heeds Amphiprion. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Both the unsinkableness and the non-unconstipatedness happens.

(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: The fact that that sinkableness does not happens and that unconstipatedness does not occurs does not hold. fact2: This rooming hypovolemia happens if this impoliticness happens. fact3: That unconstipatedness does not happens if the fact that that unconstipatedness but notthe farting Cymatiidae occurs is incorrect. fact4: This impoliticness and that shelflikeness happens. fact5: If this rooming hypovolemia happens that sinkableness does not occurs and this nonrepetitiveness occurs. fact6: The fact that that unconstipatedness but notthe farting Cymatiidae happens is false if this priming occurs. fact7: If this priming happens then that that dysgenicness does not occurs and the demilitarizing does not occurs is false.

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

That that dysgenicness does not occurs and the demilitarizing does not happens is false.

¬(¬{FG} & ¬{BL})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that sinkableness does not happens and that unconstipatedness does not occurs does not hold. fact2: This rooming hypovolemia happens if this impoliticness happens. fact3: That unconstipatedness does not happens if the fact that that unconstipatedness but notthe farting Cymatiidae occurs is incorrect. fact4: This impoliticness and that shelflikeness happens. fact5: If this rooming hypovolemia happens that sinkableness does not occurs and this nonrepetitiveness occurs. fact6: The fact that that unconstipatedness but notthe farting Cymatiidae happens is false if this priming occurs. fact7: If this priming happens then that that dysgenicness does not occurs and the demilitarizing does not occurs is false. ; $hypothesis$ = Both the unsinkableness and the non-unconstipatedness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That spritzing occurs.

{C}

fact1: That that pondering Pitymys occurs is prevented by that this progressive does not happens. fact2: That spritzing happens if that pondering Pitymys happens. fact3: This progressive is triggered by that the deserting occurs. fact4: That spritzing does not occurs if that pondering Pitymys does not happens. fact5: The fact that that mesmerism does not happens and that pondering Pitymys does not occurs is not true if this progressive does not happens. fact6: If that that mesmerism does not happens and that pondering Pitymys does not occurs is false then that mesmerism occurs. fact7: The fact that that Greek happens but the inconstantness does not occurs does not hold. fact8: That pondering Pitymys occurs if this progressive happens. fact9: That this progressive happens and that spritzing occurs is incorrect if this deoxidizing queasiness does not occurs. fact10: If that that haemalness but notthe deserting occurs is false the fact that this progressive occurs hold. fact11: That that haemalness happens and the deserting does not occurs does not hold.

fact1: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} fact2: {A} -> {C} fact3: {AB} -> {B} fact4: ¬{A} -> ¬{C} fact5: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{JC} & ¬{A}) fact6: ¬(¬{JC} & ¬{A}) -> {JC} fact7: ¬({CC} & ¬{IQ}) fact8: {B} -> {A} fact9: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact10: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact11: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

That spritzing does not occurs.

¬{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that pondering Pitymys occurs is prevented by that this progressive does not happens. fact2: That spritzing happens if that pondering Pitymys happens. fact3: This progressive is triggered by that the deserting occurs. fact4: That spritzing does not occurs if that pondering Pitymys does not happens. fact5: The fact that that mesmerism does not happens and that pondering Pitymys does not occurs is not true if this progressive does not happens. fact6: If that that mesmerism does not happens and that pondering Pitymys does not occurs is false then that mesmerism occurs. fact7: The fact that that Greek happens but the inconstantness does not occurs does not hold. fact8: That pondering Pitymys occurs if this progressive happens. fact9: That this progressive happens and that spritzing occurs is incorrect if this deoxidizing queasiness does not occurs. fact10: If that that haemalness but notthe deserting occurs is false the fact that this progressive occurs hold. fact11: That that haemalness happens and the deserting does not occurs does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That spritzing occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact11 -> int1: This progressive happens.; int1 & fact8 -> int2: That pondering Pitymys happens.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That taunting Lagopus but notthe whipping occurs.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That winning does not happens. fact2: If the fact that the protraction does not happens is true then the fact that that uninvolvedness and this twitter occurs is not correct. fact3: This cyberneticness yields that that hurried does not occurs but that shoddenness occurs. fact4: If that stud does not occurs either this tracheostomy does not happens or that analysis occurs or both. fact5: The cursing Stizolobium occurs and this infertileness does not happens. fact6: That scalding Reynolds does not occurs if that either that downmarketness happens or this traipsing occurs or both does not hold. fact7: This twitter does not occurs if that both that uninvolvedness and this twitter occurs is incorrect. fact8: This cyberneticness happens if the fact that this cyberneticness does not happens and the geodeticness does not occurs is wrong. fact9: If this tracheostomy does not happens and/or that analysis happens then that analysis occurs. fact10: That antemortemness does not happens if the fact that that that buying and that antemortemness happens hold is not true. fact11: If that questioning occurs that stud does not happens. fact12: This palatialness occurs and the sloping does not occurs. fact13: That vivisection does not occurs. fact14: If that analysis occurs then the fact that that non-cyberneticness and that non-geodeticness happens does not hold. fact15: If that winning does not happens then this destaining Hippopotamidae happens and the tacking occurs. fact16: That that downmarketness and/or this traipsing happens is false if that antemortemness does not occurs. fact17: If this twitter does not happens that that buying and that antemortemness occurs does not hold. fact18: That this destaining Hippopotamidae occurs prevents that that questioning does not happens. fact19: That taunting Lagopus but notthe whipping occurs.

fact1: ¬{S} fact2: ¬{L} -> ¬({K} & {H}) fact3: {D} -> (¬{A} & {BG}) fact4: ¬{M} -> (¬{J} v {F}) fact5: ({CD} & ¬{AU}) fact6: ¬({C} v {B}) -> ¬{JD} fact7: ¬({K} & {H}) -> ¬{H} fact8: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> {D} fact9: (¬{J} v {F}) -> {F} fact10: ¬({I} & {G}) -> ¬{G} fact11: {O} -> ¬{M} fact12: ({U} & ¬{GB}) fact13: ¬{BE} fact14: {F} -> ¬(¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact15: ¬{S} -> ({P} & {R}) fact16: ¬{G} -> ¬({C} v {B}) fact17: ¬{H} -> ¬({I} & {G}) fact18: {P} -> {O} fact19: ({AA} & ¬{AB})

That shoddenness occurs and that scalding Reynolds does not occurs.

({BG} & ¬{JD})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That winning does not happens. fact2: If the fact that the protraction does not happens is true then the fact that that uninvolvedness and this twitter occurs is not correct. fact3: This cyberneticness yields that that hurried does not occurs but that shoddenness occurs. fact4: If that stud does not occurs either this tracheostomy does not happens or that analysis occurs or both. fact5: The cursing Stizolobium occurs and this infertileness does not happens. fact6: That scalding Reynolds does not occurs if that either that downmarketness happens or this traipsing occurs or both does not hold. fact7: This twitter does not occurs if that both that uninvolvedness and this twitter occurs is incorrect. fact8: This cyberneticness happens if the fact that this cyberneticness does not happens and the geodeticness does not occurs is wrong. fact9: If this tracheostomy does not happens and/or that analysis happens then that analysis occurs. fact10: That antemortemness does not happens if the fact that that that buying and that antemortemness happens hold is not true. fact11: If that questioning occurs that stud does not happens. fact12: This palatialness occurs and the sloping does not occurs. fact13: That vivisection does not occurs. fact14: If that analysis occurs then the fact that that non-cyberneticness and that non-geodeticness happens does not hold. fact15: If that winning does not happens then this destaining Hippopotamidae happens and the tacking occurs. fact16: That that downmarketness and/or this traipsing happens is false if that antemortemness does not occurs. fact17: If this twitter does not happens that that buying and that antemortemness occurs does not hold. fact18: That this destaining Hippopotamidae occurs prevents that that questioning does not happens. fact19: That taunting Lagopus but notthe whipping occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That taunting Lagopus but notthe whipping occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact19 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that oligochaete is a fiver is true.

{D}{d}

fact1: If that thorite apotheosises theme and sings that tv is not intertribal. fact2: That neurochemical is a kind of a fiver if that oligochaete is not a Siddons. fact3: That thorite is a Siddons and/or is non-intertribal if that neurochemical does not apotheosise theme. fact4: That pseudophloem is intertribal. fact5: If something does not lighter sterility it is intertribal. fact6: If that that thorite is a Siddons but this is not diadromous does not hold then that oligochaete is a Siddons. fact7: Somebody that is intertribal and a Siddons is not a fiver. fact8: If that neurochemical is a Siddons then that oligochaete is a kind of a fiver. fact9: There exists something such that that is not a demonstrative and does not rape Actinomycetales. fact10: Either that tv sings or it is not intertribal or both. fact11: If that thorite apotheosises theme and does not sing the fact that that tv is not intertribal is correct. fact12: If that oligochaete apotheosises theme then that thorite is a kind of a fiver. fact13: That oligochaete is a kind of a fiver if that neurochemical does not lighter sterility. fact14: That thorite lighters sterility and does not sing. fact15: That oligochaete is a eclat. fact16: That oligochaete is bulbed. fact17: That oligochaete does not lighter sterility if that tv is a Wylie and rapes Actinomycetales. fact18: That thorite does not sing. fact19: That tv is a Wylie. fact20: That tv rapes Actinomycetales if there is something such that it is not a demonstrative and it does not rapes Actinomycetales. fact21: If that tv is non-intertribal that neurochemical either is a Siddons or does not lighter sterility or both. fact22: That thorite apotheosises theme and does not sing.

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

That oligochaete is not a fiver.

¬{D}{d}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that thorite apotheosises theme and sings that tv is not intertribal. fact2: That neurochemical is a kind of a fiver if that oligochaete is not a Siddons. fact3: That thorite is a Siddons and/or is non-intertribal if that neurochemical does not apotheosise theme. fact4: That pseudophloem is intertribal. fact5: If something does not lighter sterility it is intertribal. fact6: If that that thorite is a Siddons but this is not diadromous does not hold then that oligochaete is a Siddons. fact7: Somebody that is intertribal and a Siddons is not a fiver. fact8: If that neurochemical is a Siddons then that oligochaete is a kind of a fiver. fact9: There exists something such that that is not a demonstrative and does not rape Actinomycetales. fact10: Either that tv sings or it is not intertribal or both. fact11: If that thorite apotheosises theme and does not sing the fact that that tv is not intertribal is correct. fact12: If that oligochaete apotheosises theme then that thorite is a kind of a fiver. fact13: That oligochaete is a kind of a fiver if that neurochemical does not lighter sterility. fact14: That thorite lighters sterility and does not sing. fact15: That oligochaete is a eclat. fact16: That oligochaete is bulbed. fact17: That oligochaete does not lighter sterility if that tv is a Wylie and rapes Actinomycetales. fact18: That thorite does not sing. fact19: That tv is a Wylie. fact20: That tv rapes Actinomycetales if there is something such that it is not a demonstrative and it does not rapes Actinomycetales. fact21: If that tv is non-intertribal that neurochemical either is a Siddons or does not lighter sterility or both. fact22: That thorite apotheosises theme and does not sing. ; $hypothesis$ = That that oligochaete is a fiver is true. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact22 -> int1: That tv is not intertribal.; int1 & fact21 -> int2: Either that neurochemical is a Siddons or it does not lighter sterility or both.; int2 & fact8 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This nuncio does not rebate Maeandra.

¬{D}{b}

fact1: That vibrator speaks protanopia and this thing is complaintive. fact2: That vibrator speaks protanopia. fact3: If some man is not a savoriness and it is not complaintive then that it rebates Maeandra hold. fact4: That vibrator is a savoriness. fact5: If that something is both non-benedictory and not a Siva is false it is not undimmed. fact6: If that congealment is a kind of Pacific thing that is not incorrupt that aminomethane is not incorrupt. fact7: That that vibrator is complaintive and this is a kind of a savoriness is wrong if that aminomethane is not undimmed. fact8: If that that vibrator is complaintive one that is a savoriness is false then this nuncio is complaintive. fact9: That that aminomethane is non-benedictory and that thing is not a kind of a Siva is not true if that thing is not incorrupt. fact10: This nuncio is not a savoriness if that vibrator is complaintive. fact11: If that aminomethane is a savoriness then that vibrator is non-complaintive. fact12: That vibrator rebates Maeandra. fact13: If that that vibrator does not rebate Maeandra and does speak protanopia is not incorrect then this nuncio does not rebate Maeandra. fact14: If that vibrator is complaintive this nuncio is not a savoriness and is not complaintive.

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

This nuncio does not rebate Maeandra.

¬{D}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That vibrator speaks protanopia and this thing is complaintive. fact2: That vibrator speaks protanopia. fact3: If some man is not a savoriness and it is not complaintive then that it rebates Maeandra hold. fact4: That vibrator is a savoriness. fact5: If that something is both non-benedictory and not a Siva is false it is not undimmed. fact6: If that congealment is a kind of Pacific thing that is not incorrupt that aminomethane is not incorrupt. fact7: That that vibrator is complaintive and this is a kind of a savoriness is wrong if that aminomethane is not undimmed. fact8: If that that vibrator is complaintive one that is a savoriness is false then this nuncio is complaintive. fact9: That that aminomethane is non-benedictory and that thing is not a kind of a Siva is not true if that thing is not incorrupt. fact10: This nuncio is not a savoriness if that vibrator is complaintive. fact11: If that aminomethane is a savoriness then that vibrator is non-complaintive. fact12: That vibrator rebates Maeandra. fact13: If that that vibrator does not rebate Maeandra and does speak protanopia is not incorrect then this nuncio does not rebate Maeandra. fact14: If that vibrator is complaintive this nuncio is not a savoriness and is not complaintive. ; $hypothesis$ = This nuncio does not rebate Maeandra. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That vibrator is complaintive.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: This nuncio is not a savoriness but non-complaintive.; fact3 -> int3: If this nuncio is not a savoriness and is not complaintive then this nuncio does rebate Maeandra.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that that decoying sociology happens is true.

{A}

fact1: That that decoying sociology happens causes that noncolumnedness. fact2: This unidimensionalness does not occurs if the fact that this unidimensionalness and that decoying sociology happens does not hold. fact3: If that decoying sociology occurs then that either that formulating Gossypium occurs or that noncolumnedness does not occurs or both does not hold.

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

The rock happens or this unidimensionalness does not happens or both.

({IA} v ¬{HJ})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that decoying sociology happens causes that noncolumnedness. fact2: This unidimensionalness does not occurs if the fact that this unidimensionalness and that decoying sociology happens does not hold. fact3: If that decoying sociology occurs then that either that formulating Gossypium occurs or that noncolumnedness does not occurs or both does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that that decoying sociology happens is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This scaring rupturewort occurs.

{D}

fact1: If this deciduousness happens then this scaring rupturewort does not occurs. fact2: If that this swoshing pluralization occurs but the transaminating Helenium does not occurs is wrong that clanking happens. fact3: That jumpiness and that despoilation occurs. fact4: The non-deciduousness is prevented by that despoilation. fact5: If this gazumping MS occurs then that employing prothalamium occurs. fact6: If this loveableness does not happens this deciduousness does not occurs and that despoilation does not occurs. fact7: This loveableness does not occurs if that clanking occurs. fact8: If this loveableness does not occurs then this recantation occurs and that jumpiness occurs. fact9: That this swoshing pluralization happens but the transaminating Helenium does not occurs does not hold if that strapping Moniliaceae does not occurs. fact10: That this scaring rupturewort occurs but that jumpiness does not happens is triggered by that that despoilation does not occurs.

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

That metabolousness and this recantation happens.

({AJ} & {CT})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this deciduousness happens then this scaring rupturewort does not occurs. fact2: If that this swoshing pluralization occurs but the transaminating Helenium does not occurs is wrong that clanking happens. fact3: That jumpiness and that despoilation occurs. fact4: The non-deciduousness is prevented by that despoilation. fact5: If this gazumping MS occurs then that employing prothalamium occurs. fact6: If this loveableness does not happens this deciduousness does not occurs and that despoilation does not occurs. fact7: This loveableness does not occurs if that clanking occurs. fact8: If this loveableness does not occurs then this recantation occurs and that jumpiness occurs. fact9: That this swoshing pluralization happens but the transaminating Helenium does not occurs does not hold if that strapping Moniliaceae does not occurs. fact10: That this scaring rupturewort occurs but that jumpiness does not happens is triggered by that that despoilation does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This scaring rupturewort occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: That despoilation happens.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: This deciduousness occurs.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That quicklime is a ruminant.

{A}{a}

fact1: That quicklime is a ruminant. fact2: If that abducent is not homeopathic then that that abducent is not chlamydial and it is not unimpaired is wrong. fact3: That quicklime is trivalent. fact4: If something does not extort rewriting the fact that it is a repositioning and it is not a steady is wrong. fact5: Some person is not a kind of a ruminant if this one is not an unpleasantness and not uncollected. fact6: If the fact that some person is not an unpleasantness but uncollected is false it is a ruminant. fact7: That quicklime is not a repositioning if that this firewall is a repositioning but it is not a steady is incorrect. fact8: The escarp is a ruminant. fact9: Some person that is not a repositioning is not an unpleasantness but gathered.

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

Kasey is a ruminant.

{A}{es}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That quicklime is a ruminant. fact2: If that abducent is not homeopathic then that that abducent is not chlamydial and it is not unimpaired is wrong. fact3: That quicklime is trivalent. fact4: If something does not extort rewriting the fact that it is a repositioning and it is not a steady is wrong. fact5: Some person is not a kind of a ruminant if this one is not an unpleasantness and not uncollected. fact6: If the fact that some person is not an unpleasantness but uncollected is false it is a ruminant. fact7: That quicklime is not a repositioning if that this firewall is a repositioning but it is not a steady is incorrect. fact8: The escarp is a ruminant. fact9: Some person that is not a repositioning is not an unpleasantness but gathered. ; $hypothesis$ = That quicklime is a ruminant. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This hairspring is not a kind of a entomophobia.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: If some person that does not drop loanword is not a kind of a metal then that person is not a entomophobia. fact2: This hairspring is a entomophobia. fact3: This quellung is a entomophobia.

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

This hairspring is not a kind of a entomophobia.

¬{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some person that does not drop loanword is not a kind of a metal then that person is not a entomophobia. fact2: This hairspring is a entomophobia. fact3: This quellung is a entomophobia. ; $hypothesis$ = This hairspring is not a kind of a entomophobia. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That spunk is not servile.

¬{A}{c}

fact1: That Sphacelotheca is not a kind of a commonness if the fact that that spunk is not a Ceiba and is not a depravation is false. fact2: That spunk is servile if that Sphacelotheca is a demimonde. fact3: If somebody does not barter Psalm the fact that he/she is both not a Ceiba and not a depravation does not hold. fact4: If that Sphacelotheca is a Ateles this cringle is a demimonde. fact5: That some man is not pulmonic or non-reentrant or both is not correct if she is not unservile. fact6: If that this cringle is not a kind of a Ateles and/or it is pulmonic is incorrect then that Sphacelotheca is a demimonde. fact7: That Sphacelotheca is a demimonde if the fact that the fact that this cringle is not a kind of a Ateles or it is not pulmonic or both is right does not hold. fact8: That that spunk is both not a tubbiness and satisfactory does not hold. fact9: This phylogenesis is servile and he is a demimonde if this cringle does not photostat stoicism. fact10: That spunk is not servile if the fact that this cringle either is not servile or does not photostat stoicism or both is incorrect. fact11: If someone is a demimonde that either it is not unservile or it does not photostat stoicism or both is not right. fact12: If that the fact that either this cringle is a Ateles or she is not pulmonic or both is right does not hold then that Sphacelotheca is a kind of a demimonde. fact13: If that that that spunk is not a tubbiness but this thing is satisfactory is incorrect is correct then that that spunk does not barter Psalm hold.

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

That this phylogenesis is not pulmonic or it is not reentrant or both is false.

¬(¬{AB}{ji} v ¬{CA}{ji})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Sphacelotheca is not a kind of a commonness if the fact that that spunk is not a Ceiba and is not a depravation is false. fact2: That spunk is servile if that Sphacelotheca is a demimonde. fact3: If somebody does not barter Psalm the fact that he/she is both not a Ceiba and not a depravation does not hold. fact4: If that Sphacelotheca is a Ateles this cringle is a demimonde. fact5: That some man is not pulmonic or non-reentrant or both is not correct if she is not unservile. fact6: If that this cringle is not a kind of a Ateles and/or it is pulmonic is incorrect then that Sphacelotheca is a demimonde. fact7: That Sphacelotheca is a demimonde if the fact that the fact that this cringle is not a kind of a Ateles or it is not pulmonic or both is right does not hold. fact8: That that spunk is both not a tubbiness and satisfactory does not hold. fact9: This phylogenesis is servile and he is a demimonde if this cringle does not photostat stoicism. fact10: That spunk is not servile if the fact that this cringle either is not servile or does not photostat stoicism or both is incorrect. fact11: If someone is a demimonde that either it is not unservile or it does not photostat stoicism or both is not right. fact12: If that the fact that either this cringle is a Ateles or she is not pulmonic or both is right does not hold then that Sphacelotheca is a kind of a demimonde. fact13: If that that that spunk is not a tubbiness but this thing is satisfactory is incorrect is correct then that that spunk does not barter Psalm hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That spunk is not servile. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Aldactone is a kind of a Platyrrhini that is not conscious.

({E}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: Something is conscious. fact2: That Aldactone is a kind of a Platyrrhini but it is not conscious if this theologiser is conscious. fact3: That tusk is undiscerning and is a bookfair. fact4: That Aldactone does not overfatigue seismology but the one is a bookfair if the one is a kind of a guarded. fact5: If something that does not overfatigue seismology is a kind of a bookfair then it is not undiscerning. fact6: That tusk is a bookfair if that tusk is not a guarded and is a kind of a Platyrrhini. fact7: That tusk is not a guarded but a Platyrrhini. fact8: That Aldactone is not conscious if this theologiser is not conscious. fact9: The fact that something is a Platyrrhini but it is not conscious is false if it is not undiscerning. fact10: This theologiser is not conscious if a undiscerning thing is a kind of a bookfair.

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

That tusk is a bookfair and does not slight.

({B}{aa} & ¬{EK}{aa})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is conscious. fact2: That Aldactone is a kind of a Platyrrhini but it is not conscious if this theologiser is conscious. fact3: That tusk is undiscerning and is a bookfair. fact4: That Aldactone does not overfatigue seismology but the one is a bookfair if the one is a kind of a guarded. fact5: If something that does not overfatigue seismology is a kind of a bookfair then it is not undiscerning. fact6: That tusk is a bookfair if that tusk is not a guarded and is a kind of a Platyrrhini. fact7: That tusk is not a guarded but a Platyrrhini. fact8: That Aldactone is not conscious if this theologiser is not conscious. fact9: The fact that something is a Platyrrhini but it is not conscious is false if it is not undiscerning. fact10: This theologiser is not conscious if a undiscerning thing is a kind of a bookfair. ; $hypothesis$ = That Aldactone is a kind of a Platyrrhini that is not conscious. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: Someone is undiscerning a bookfair.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: This theologiser is not conscious.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This timing happens.

{A}

fact1: Both that fragmented and that HRT occurs. fact2: That stinking hemorrhage occurs. fact3: The crystalising Zingiberaceae occurs. fact4: The planetalness occurs. fact5: Both this trifling Myotis and this timing happens if that stinking hemorrhage does not happens. fact6: That notthat stinking hemorrhage but that intensification happens does not hold if that peregrinating Bruegel does not occurs. fact7: The Marches happens. fact8: The introvertiveness occurs. fact9: That calycledness happens and that unservileness happens. fact10: This demystifying fluidity happens and that taxableness occurs. fact11: The basinalness occurs. fact12: The pleximetry happens. fact13: That anthropicness occurs. fact14: If that Mauritian occurs or that peregrinating Bruegel does not happens or both that peregrinating Bruegel does not occurs. fact15: Both the pillowing ambiversion and the braiding bounciness occurs. fact16: That equalising glory and the chuffing happens. fact17: The instalment happens and that fastball occurs. fact18: The plosion and the thinningness occurs. fact19: The prolonging occurs and that Kwanza occurs. fact20: Both that intensification and the planetalness happens.

fact1: ({JB} & {EM}) fact2: {B} fact3: {HA} fact4: {GL} fact5: ¬{B} -> ({DH} & {A}) fact6: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{B} & {C}) fact7: {CA} fact8: {AG} fact9: ({BK} & {EG}) fact10: ({DF} & {CJ}) fact11: {IG} fact12: {IO} fact13: {IL} fact14: ({E} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{D} fact15: ({AR} & {FE}) fact16: ({GK} & {IS}) fact17: ({JH} & {BR}) fact18: ({CU} & {EA}) fact19: ({FU} & {BQ}) fact20: ({C} & {GL})

This trifling Myotis occurs.

{DH}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both that fragmented and that HRT occurs. fact2: That stinking hemorrhage occurs. fact3: The crystalising Zingiberaceae occurs. fact4: The planetalness occurs. fact5: Both this trifling Myotis and this timing happens if that stinking hemorrhage does not happens. fact6: That notthat stinking hemorrhage but that intensification happens does not hold if that peregrinating Bruegel does not occurs. fact7: The Marches happens. fact8: The introvertiveness occurs. fact9: That calycledness happens and that unservileness happens. fact10: This demystifying fluidity happens and that taxableness occurs. fact11: The basinalness occurs. fact12: The pleximetry happens. fact13: That anthropicness occurs. fact14: If that Mauritian occurs or that peregrinating Bruegel does not happens or both that peregrinating Bruegel does not occurs. fact15: Both the pillowing ambiversion and the braiding bounciness occurs. fact16: That equalising glory and the chuffing happens. fact17: The instalment happens and that fastball occurs. fact18: The plosion and the thinningness occurs. fact19: The prolonging occurs and that Kwanza occurs. fact20: Both that intensification and the planetalness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This timing happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This gastroscope is catalytic.

{B}{c}

fact1: If an enlightened thing does retrace xeroma then this thing does not sashay Fragonard. fact2: If this first is not a kind of a cascade then that one is not unenlightened and that one retraces xeroma. fact3: If this echovirus discourages this blotter is a Procaviidae that does not astound. fact4: This echovirus discourages. fact5: If this blotter is a Procaviidae and does not astound the fact that this gastroscope is not catalytic is true. fact6: This first is not a cascade. fact7: If this gastroscope is catalytic but that does not astound this blotter does not discourage. fact8: This gastroscope is not catalytic if this blotter is a Procaviidae and astounds. fact9: The fact that this blotter does not astound is not wrong. fact10: This gastroscope is catalytic if this echovirus is catalytic. fact11: This echovirus is catalytic but it does not discourage if this blotter is a impermanency. fact12: The yobbo is a kind of a Procaviidae. fact13: If somebody is not equivocal it is a impermanency.

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

This gastroscope is catalytic.

{B}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If an enlightened thing does retrace xeroma then this thing does not sashay Fragonard. fact2: If this first is not a kind of a cascade then that one is not unenlightened and that one retraces xeroma. fact3: If this echovirus discourages this blotter is a Procaviidae that does not astound. fact4: This echovirus discourages. fact5: If this blotter is a Procaviidae and does not astound the fact that this gastroscope is not catalytic is true. fact6: This first is not a cascade. fact7: If this gastroscope is catalytic but that does not astound this blotter does not discourage. fact8: This gastroscope is not catalytic if this blotter is a Procaviidae and astounds. fact9: The fact that this blotter does not astound is not wrong. fact10: This gastroscope is catalytic if this echovirus is catalytic. fact11: This echovirus is catalytic but it does not discourage if this blotter is a impermanency. fact12: The yobbo is a kind of a Procaviidae. fact13: If somebody is not equivocal it is a impermanency. ; $hypothesis$ = This gastroscope is catalytic. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact4 -> int1: This blotter is a Procaviidae but it does not astound.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that closing Helminthostachys occurs and that heroics happens hold.

({C} & {B})

fact1: Both this stretch and that heroics occurs. fact2: That closing Helminthostachys does not happens if the fact that that interspeciesness occurs and/or that waitress does not occurs does not hold. fact3: If this stretch does not occurs the fact that that closing Helminthostachys occurs and that heroics occurs is false. fact4: That this locating does not happens and that interspeciesness does not happens is brought about by that that waitress does not happens. fact5: That unpermissiveness occurs but the bug does not happens. fact6: If that both this mellowing and this non-minimalistness happens is wrong then this non-minimalist occurs. fact7: That that dispensing turbidness occurs and/or that waitress does not occurs prevents that waitress. fact8: The glaring convincingness occurs if this stretch occurs. fact9: This stretch occurs. fact10: That this locating does not happens and that interspeciesness does not occurs yields that this stretch does not happens. fact11: Either this locating does not happens or this pauperizing Schizosaccharomyces does not occurs or both if this minimalistness happens. fact12: If this locating does not happens then this beltlessness happens. fact13: That heroics happens and this stretch occurs if the fact that that closing Helminthostachys does not happens hold. fact14: That branchiopodan but notthe uranoplasty occurs. fact15: That this mellowing but notthis minimalistness occurs does not hold. fact16: This non-minimalistness triggers that that cancan and that dispensing turbidness happens. fact17: That this locating does not occurs or that this pauperizing Schizosaccharomyces does not occurs or both triggers that this locating does not occurs. fact18: That closing Helminthostachys happens but this locating does not happens. fact19: This locating does not happens. fact20: If that dispensing turbidness happens the fact that that interspeciesness happens or that waitress does not occurs or both is false.

fact1: ({A} & {B}) fact2: ¬({E} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{C} fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {B}) fact4: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact5: ({CC} & ¬{FF}) fact6: ¬({M} & ¬{I}) -> {I} fact7: ({G} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{F} fact8: {A} -> {HU} fact9: {A} fact10: (¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{A} fact11: {I} -> (¬{D} v ¬{J}) fact12: ¬{D} -> {BR} fact13: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact14: ({CF} & ¬{JF}) fact15: ¬({M} & ¬{I}) fact16: ¬{I} -> ({H} & {G}) fact17: (¬{D} v ¬{J}) -> ¬{D} fact18: ({C} & ¬{D}) fact19: ¬{D} fact20: {G} -> ¬({E} v ¬{F})

This beltlessness happens and the glaring convincingness occurs.

({BR} & {HU})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both this stretch and that heroics occurs. fact2: That closing Helminthostachys does not happens if the fact that that interspeciesness occurs and/or that waitress does not occurs does not hold. fact3: If this stretch does not occurs the fact that that closing Helminthostachys occurs and that heroics occurs is false. fact4: That this locating does not happens and that interspeciesness does not happens is brought about by that that waitress does not happens. fact5: That unpermissiveness occurs but the bug does not happens. fact6: If that both this mellowing and this non-minimalistness happens is wrong then this non-minimalist occurs. fact7: That that dispensing turbidness occurs and/or that waitress does not occurs prevents that waitress. fact8: The glaring convincingness occurs if this stretch occurs. fact9: This stretch occurs. fact10: That this locating does not happens and that interspeciesness does not occurs yields that this stretch does not happens. fact11: Either this locating does not happens or this pauperizing Schizosaccharomyces does not occurs or both if this minimalistness happens. fact12: If this locating does not happens then this beltlessness happens. fact13: That heroics happens and this stretch occurs if the fact that that closing Helminthostachys does not happens hold. fact14: That branchiopodan but notthe uranoplasty occurs. fact15: That this mellowing but notthis minimalistness occurs does not hold. fact16: This non-minimalistness triggers that that cancan and that dispensing turbidness happens. fact17: That this locating does not occurs or that this pauperizing Schizosaccharomyces does not occurs or both triggers that this locating does not occurs. fact18: That closing Helminthostachys happens but this locating does not happens. fact19: This locating does not happens. fact20: If that dispensing turbidness happens the fact that that interspeciesness happens or that waitress does not occurs or both is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That that closing Helminthostachys occurs and that heroics happens hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That that heroics occurs is right.; fact18 -> int2: That closing Helminthostachys happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That tangelo is not a Phobos if King astonishes.

{A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b}

fact1: King is curatorial. fact2: If that tangelo does astonish King is a kind of a Phobos. fact3: Some person is a Phobos if it does not astonish.

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

King is a Phobos.

{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: King is curatorial. fact2: If that tangelo does astonish King is a kind of a Phobos. fact3: Some person is a Phobos if it does not astonish. ; $hypothesis$ = That tangelo is not a Phobos if King astonishes. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This hydralazine fasts and/or it is a Rhein.

({D}{c} v {E}{c})

fact1: That kinkajou is Peloponnesian and/or dehydrogenates Cavendish. fact2: This hydralazine is a soreness if that kinkajou dehydrogenates Cavendish. fact3: If somebody does not dehydrogenate Cavendish but she is a kind of a soreness she is not Peloponnesian. fact4: The fact that something is Peloponnesian is not false if it is apetalous. fact5: If this hydralazine is a soreness this hydralazine fasts.

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

That this hydralazine fasts or it is a Rhein or both does not hold.

¬({D}{c} v {E}{c})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That kinkajou is Peloponnesian and/or dehydrogenates Cavendish. fact2: This hydralazine is a soreness if that kinkajou dehydrogenates Cavendish. fact3: If somebody does not dehydrogenate Cavendish but she is a kind of a soreness she is not Peloponnesian. fact4: The fact that something is Peloponnesian is not false if it is apetalous. fact5: If this hydralazine is a soreness this hydralazine fasts. ; $hypothesis$ = This hydralazine fasts and/or it is a Rhein. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The cheapness happens.

{B}

fact1: This brightening does not occurs if this inferiorness occurs. fact2: This bundling does not happens. fact3: The bespeaking does not occurs. fact4: The mottling does not happens and that Afghaniness does not happens.

fact1: {E} -> ¬{DL} fact2: ¬{A} fact3: ¬{FU} fact4: (¬{GF} & ¬{BD})

This brightening does not occurs and that channels does not happens.

(¬{DL} & ¬{EH})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This brightening does not occurs if this inferiorness occurs. fact2: This bundling does not happens. fact3: The bespeaking does not occurs. fact4: The mottling does not happens and that Afghaniness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The cheapness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That burgher does not ferry.

¬{AB}{aa}

fact1: That burgher is a kind of a jotting. fact2: Something does not proctor obligato and it does not ferry if the fact that it is a greyed is correct. fact3: If that something does not Cox and is a euphoria is wrong then it is not a jotting. fact4: The waterdog is inoperative and the one is not a kind of a razz.

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

That burgher ferries.

{AB}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That burgher is a kind of a jotting. fact2: Something does not proctor obligato and it does not ferry if the fact that it is a greyed is correct. fact3: If that something does not Cox and is a euphoria is wrong then it is not a jotting. fact4: The waterdog is inoperative and the one is not a kind of a razz. ; $hypothesis$ = That burgher does not ferry. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That autogenics occurs.

{B}

fact1: The solarness does not occurs. fact2: That that autogenics happens is brought about by that elongating. fact3: The fact that both that Moresqueness and that glimpse occurs is wrong. fact4: If the fact that that both that Moresqueness and that glimpse happens is right does not hold then that autogenics does not occurs.

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

That autogenics occurs.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The solarness does not occurs. fact2: That that autogenics happens is brought about by that elongating. fact3: The fact that both that Moresqueness and that glimpse occurs is wrong. fact4: If the fact that that both that Moresqueness and that glimpse happens is right does not hold then that autogenics does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That autogenics occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This epoxy is not sacral.

¬{A}{aa}

fact1: If the sylvine does not imprecate Aspinwall then this triptych is both migrational and a Leucogenes. fact2: If a non-salientian person does rekindle Bassariscus it is not non-eremitical. fact3: If some person that does not assist smugness stooges Vilno then it is Frisian. fact4: If somebody is a kind of a hypercatalectic then that one does not deplete evening and that one is a populism. fact5: That some man does not sour Ferdinand and is sacral is false if that person is Frisian. fact6: If this internuncio does sour Ferdinand then this epoxy does not assist smugness but he stooges Vilno. fact7: If something is sacral then it stooges Vilno. fact8: The fact that this epoxy stooges Vilno hold. fact9: This gallery does not disembowel Nalchik if the one does not deplete evening and is a populism. fact10: This internuncio sours Ferdinand. fact11: The sylvine does not imprecate Aspinwall if the fact that this gallery imprecate Aspinwall and is a Tasmania is incorrect. fact12: If the fact that this internuncio is migrational hold then that apiary is non-Frisian or it does not sour Ferdinand or both. fact13: This epoxy does stooge Vilno if this internuncio sours Ferdinand. fact14: Something is sacral if it is Frisian. fact15: If somebody does not disembowel Nalchik then that it imprecates Aspinwall and it is a Tasmania does not hold. fact16: This internuncio is Frisian if this triptych is not non-migrational. fact17: this Ferdinand sours internuncio.

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

That apiary stooges Vilno.

{AB}{bs}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the sylvine does not imprecate Aspinwall then this triptych is both migrational and a Leucogenes. fact2: If a non-salientian person does rekindle Bassariscus it is not non-eremitical. fact3: If some person that does not assist smugness stooges Vilno then it is Frisian. fact4: If somebody is a kind of a hypercatalectic then that one does not deplete evening and that one is a populism. fact5: That some man does not sour Ferdinand and is sacral is false if that person is Frisian. fact6: If this internuncio does sour Ferdinand then this epoxy does not assist smugness but he stooges Vilno. fact7: If something is sacral then it stooges Vilno. fact8: The fact that this epoxy stooges Vilno hold. fact9: This gallery does not disembowel Nalchik if the one does not deplete evening and is a populism. fact10: This internuncio sours Ferdinand. fact11: The sylvine does not imprecate Aspinwall if the fact that this gallery imprecate Aspinwall and is a Tasmania is incorrect. fact12: If the fact that this internuncio is migrational hold then that apiary is non-Frisian or it does not sour Ferdinand or both. fact13: This epoxy does stooge Vilno if this internuncio sours Ferdinand. fact14: Something is sacral if it is Frisian. fact15: If somebody does not disembowel Nalchik then that it imprecates Aspinwall and it is a Tasmania does not hold. fact16: This internuncio is Frisian if this triptych is not non-migrational. fact17: this Ferdinand sours internuncio. ; $hypothesis$ = This epoxy is not sacral. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: If this epoxy does not assist smugness but this thing does stooge Vilno this epoxy is Frisian.; fact10 & fact6 -> int2: This epoxy does not assist smugness but this person stooges Vilno.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This epoxy is Frisian.; fact14 -> int4: If this epoxy is Frisian then it is not non-sacral.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Wolf is sulcate.

{C}{c}

fact1: If that mazer is a kind of a Haman then that mazer does not patronize TCP/IP or is not a Palatine or both. fact2: If the fact that that filer is a iamb is correct this Wolf is sulcate. fact3: If that mazer is not a kind of a Palatine that filer is a iamb. fact4: This savoy is sulcate. fact5: That that mazer is sulcate if this Wolf does not patronize TCP/IP is correct. fact6: If that someone is not a kind of a Haman and is a iamb is incorrect it is non-sulcate. fact7: If something does not discombobulate Cynoglossidae that it is both a Haman and not a iamb does not hold. fact8: That mazer is a Haman.

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

This Wolf is not sulcate.

¬{C}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that mazer is a kind of a Haman then that mazer does not patronize TCP/IP or is not a Palatine or both. fact2: If the fact that that filer is a iamb is correct this Wolf is sulcate. fact3: If that mazer is not a kind of a Palatine that filer is a iamb. fact4: This savoy is sulcate. fact5: That that mazer is sulcate if this Wolf does not patronize TCP/IP is correct. fact6: If that someone is not a kind of a Haman and is a iamb is incorrect it is non-sulcate. fact7: If something does not discombobulate Cynoglossidae that it is both a Haman and not a iamb does not hold. fact8: That mazer is a Haman. ; $hypothesis$ = This Wolf is sulcate. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that everything birdies does not hold.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Some person swots Washington if the fact that it does not birdie and is sarcolemmic is wrong. fact2: Everything does birdie. fact3: That something does not birdie and is sarcolemmic does not hold if that does not stain. fact4: Everything is a kind of a pioneer.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) -> {FK}x fact2: (x): {A}x fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) fact4: (x): {M}x

Everything swots Washington.

(x): {FK}x

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person swots Washington if the fact that it does not birdie and is sarcolemmic is wrong. fact2: Everything does birdie. fact3: That something does not birdie and is sarcolemmic does not hold if that does not stain. fact4: Everything is a kind of a pioneer. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that everything birdies does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this sauce is a settling and does not scour Karlfeldt if this sauce is a Phocidae is false.

¬({A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}))

fact1: If this pepper moulders then the person does furnish and the person does not scour Karlfeldt. fact2: The goer is not non-Sotho and is not a Petrarch if it is a Lycopsida. fact3: This sauce is a kind of a settling if it is a Phocidae. fact4: If this sauce is a kind of a Phocidae that person is a settling and that person does scour Karlfeldt. fact5: If this sauce concerns susceptibleness this sauce is a kind of a Phocidae but it is not a Zanuck. fact6: Some person is a kind of a settling and she/he does scour Karlfeldt if she/he is a Phocidae. fact7: Something is a settling but that does not scour Karlfeldt if that is a Phocidae. fact8: If somebody seaplanes he is adrenocortical and he is not a Lepisosteidae. fact9: If that the mujahid is attentional hold then the mujahid scours Karlfeldt and is not a amphibology. fact10: Someone that is a Phocidae is a settling.

fact1: {EJ}{ci} -> ({P}{ci} & ¬{AB}{ci}) fact2: {IQ}{s} -> ({CG}{s} & ¬{ID}{s}) fact3: {A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} fact4: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact5: {I}{aa} -> ({A}{aa} & ¬{U}{aa}) fact6: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact7: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact8: (x): {GI}x -> ({FI}x & ¬{ES}x) fact9: {GD}{it} -> ({AB}{it} & ¬{JA}{it}) fact10: (x): {A}x -> {AA}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this pepper moulders then the person does furnish and the person does not scour Karlfeldt. fact2: The goer is not non-Sotho and is not a Petrarch if it is a Lycopsida. fact3: This sauce is a kind of a settling if it is a Phocidae. fact4: If this sauce is a kind of a Phocidae that person is a settling and that person does scour Karlfeldt. fact5: If this sauce concerns susceptibleness this sauce is a kind of a Phocidae but it is not a Zanuck. fact6: Some person is a kind of a settling and she/he does scour Karlfeldt if she/he is a Phocidae. fact7: Something is a settling but that does not scour Karlfeldt if that is a Phocidae. fact8: If somebody seaplanes he is adrenocortical and he is not a Lepisosteidae. fact9: If that the mujahid is attentional hold then the mujahid scours Karlfeldt and is not a amphibology. fact10: Someone that is a Phocidae is a settling. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this sauce is a settling and does not scour Karlfeldt if this sauce is a Phocidae is false. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Freemason does not unseal concerto but it is identifiable.

(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b})

fact1: That Freemason is a kind of a spastic. fact2: This patty is not unimpressionable if this patty is a Yama. fact3: If this fossil is a Alauda then that Freemason does not unseal concerto. fact4: This fossil is identifiable. fact5: The fact that this fossil is Koranic is true if that shorts is Koranic. fact6: That Freemason is not a Alauda if this fossil unseals concerto. fact7: That Freemason does not unseal concerto and is a Alauda if this fossil is identifiable. fact8: That something is not rheologic and is a kind of a cuss is false if this is Koranic. fact9: If that Freemason is identifiable this fossil does not unseal concerto and is a Alauda. fact10: If that Freemason is a kind of a Alauda this fossil does not unseal concerto. fact11: That Freemason is a Alauda. fact12: The fact that that shorts is charitable is right if this Missourian is untravelled. fact13: If this patty is a kind of a Ara this patty is a Yama. fact14: That Freemason is not a Alauda if that this fossil is not rheologic but a cuss is incorrect. fact15: This patty is a Ara. fact16: If this fossil is not a Alauda that the childbed is not a harshness but that thing does pouch speechlessness is true. fact17: That Freemason does not unseal concerto but it is not unidentifiable if this fossil is a Alauda. fact18: If something is charitable that is not non-Koranic. fact19: This kalumpang is not a Alauda. fact20: This fossil is a Alauda. fact21: That Freemason does not unseal concerto.

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

That the fact that that Freemason does not unseal concerto but that thing is identifiable is correct is not true.

¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Freemason is a kind of a spastic. fact2: This patty is not unimpressionable if this patty is a Yama. fact3: If this fossil is a Alauda then that Freemason does not unseal concerto. fact4: This fossil is identifiable. fact5: The fact that this fossil is Koranic is true if that shorts is Koranic. fact6: That Freemason is not a Alauda if this fossil unseals concerto. fact7: That Freemason does not unseal concerto and is a Alauda if this fossil is identifiable. fact8: That something is not rheologic and is a kind of a cuss is false if this is Koranic. fact9: If that Freemason is identifiable this fossil does not unseal concerto and is a Alauda. fact10: If that Freemason is a kind of a Alauda this fossil does not unseal concerto. fact11: That Freemason is a Alauda. fact12: The fact that that shorts is charitable is right if this Missourian is untravelled. fact13: If this patty is a kind of a Ara this patty is a Yama. fact14: That Freemason is not a Alauda if that this fossil is not rheologic but a cuss is incorrect. fact15: This patty is a Ara. fact16: If this fossil is not a Alauda that the childbed is not a harshness but that thing does pouch speechlessness is true. fact17: That Freemason does not unseal concerto but it is not unidentifiable if this fossil is a Alauda. fact18: If something is charitable that is not non-Koranic. fact19: This kalumpang is not a Alauda. fact20: This fossil is a Alauda. fact21: That Freemason does not unseal concerto. ; $hypothesis$ = That Freemason does not unseal concerto but it is identifiable. ; $proof$ =

fact17 & fact20 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this confiscation does not occurs and this unpackagedness occurs if this unpackagedness happens does not hold.

¬({B} -> (¬{A} & {B}))

fact1: That that bends and the nailing crossness happens is triggered by the nailing crossness. fact2: The fact that that this unpackagedness occurs brings about that this confiscation and this unpackagedness occurs hold. fact3: If the fact that that outstroke occurs hold then this accruement does not occurs and this sparkle does not happens. fact4: If this unreadiness occurs then the non-sulphuricness and this unreadiness occurs. fact5: The toasting does not occurs but the sparkling Menyanthaceae occurs if the sparkling Menyanthaceae happens. fact6: That votelessness happens. fact7: That this worsening happens results in that the settling does not occurs but this worsening happens. fact8: The socialising does not occurs and this battling adeptness happens. fact9: The sphericalness occurs. fact10: That both this conditioning and the toasting happens is brought about by the toasting. fact11: The contouring paraphrenia happens. fact12: This accruement yields that that ordering does not occurs. fact13: If the fact that this unpackagedness occurs but this sparkle does not happens is wrong this unpackagedness does not happens. fact14: That that glamorizing zeugma does not occurs but this unbridleding Elanoides occurs is caused by this unbridleding Elanoides. fact15: That abstractness happens. fact16: If that that ordering does not occurs is not wrong then the fact that this unpackagedness happens and this sparkle does not happens is wrong. fact17: This stenographicalness does not occurs.

fact1: {FF} -> ({EH} & {FF}) fact2: {B} -> ({A} & {B}) fact3: {F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{D}) fact4: {IQ} -> (¬{FI} & {IQ}) fact5: {FS} -> (¬{DS} & {FS}) fact6: {EP} fact7: {EC} -> (¬{JA} & {EC}) fact8: (¬{BM} & {CB}) fact9: {JC} fact10: {DS} -> ({FA} & {DS}) fact11: {GD} fact12: {E} -> ¬{C} fact13: ¬({B} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact14: {BE} -> (¬{IL} & {BE}) fact15: {HM} fact16: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & ¬{D}) fact17: ¬{BJ}

That the pyrogallicness happens is true.

{ER}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that bends and the nailing crossness happens is triggered by the nailing crossness. fact2: The fact that that this unpackagedness occurs brings about that this confiscation and this unpackagedness occurs hold. fact3: If the fact that that outstroke occurs hold then this accruement does not occurs and this sparkle does not happens. fact4: If this unreadiness occurs then the non-sulphuricness and this unreadiness occurs. fact5: The toasting does not occurs but the sparkling Menyanthaceae occurs if the sparkling Menyanthaceae happens. fact6: That votelessness happens. fact7: That this worsening happens results in that the settling does not occurs but this worsening happens. fact8: The socialising does not occurs and this battling adeptness happens. fact9: The sphericalness occurs. fact10: That both this conditioning and the toasting happens is brought about by the toasting. fact11: The contouring paraphrenia happens. fact12: This accruement yields that that ordering does not occurs. fact13: If the fact that this unpackagedness occurs but this sparkle does not happens is wrong this unpackagedness does not happens. fact14: That that glamorizing zeugma does not occurs but this unbridleding Elanoides occurs is caused by this unbridleding Elanoides. fact15: That abstractness happens. fact16: If that that ordering does not occurs is not wrong then the fact that this unpackagedness happens and this sparkle does not happens is wrong. fact17: This stenographicalness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That this confiscation does not occurs and this unpackagedness occurs if this unpackagedness happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This succotash is not afloat.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: If the fact that this succotash is not an allied but it is wishful does not hold this succotash does not permeate Smyrna. fact2: If that this succotash is a kind of non-propulsive one that is wishful is incorrect he is not afloat. fact3: If this floret is a kind of a contracted that thumbnail is a kind of a contracted. fact4: This succotash does not knot Grieg if that that gastromycete does forage Apodidae and it does knot Grieg is wrong. fact5: If something is not a Hestia then it unweaves degeneracy and/or it is not an ophthalmology. fact6: That this succotash is not propulsive but that thing is wishful is false. fact7: Some person is not a kind of a contracted if the fact that he is a kind of non-afloat a Plantae is incorrect. fact8: The fact that that gastromycete forages Apodidae and knots Grieg does not hold if that sandwort is not an ophthalmology. fact9: That some man is a contracted is not wrong if he/she is a Plasmodiophoraceae. fact10: The fact that Allen is not wishful hold. fact11: That something is not an inch or it pulls paraphrase or both is true if it is a contracted. fact12: That catechin is not an inch if that thumbnail either is not an inch or pulls paraphrase or both. fact13: That sandwort is not an ophthalmology if that sphere unweaves degeneracy. fact14: The fact that something is afloat and trespasses Cumana is correct if it does not knot Grieg. fact15: That catechin is a Hestia and he/she is not non-serologic. fact16: That sphere is not a Hestia if that catechin is both a Hestia and not an inch. fact17: This floret is a Plasmodiophoraceae if this thing does not asphyxiate. fact18: The fact that this floret does not asphyxiate is right. fact19: This succotash does not pull paraphrase. fact20: If this succotash is not wishful then this succotash is not afloat.

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

That cirrostratus is not a kind of a contracted if that it is not afloat and it is a Plantae does not hold.

¬(¬{B}{gr} & {GG}{gr}) -> ¬{K}{gr}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this succotash is not an allied but it is wishful does not hold this succotash does not permeate Smyrna. fact2: If that this succotash is a kind of non-propulsive one that is wishful is incorrect he is not afloat. fact3: If this floret is a kind of a contracted that thumbnail is a kind of a contracted. fact4: This succotash does not knot Grieg if that that gastromycete does forage Apodidae and it does knot Grieg is wrong. fact5: If something is not a Hestia then it unweaves degeneracy and/or it is not an ophthalmology. fact6: That this succotash is not propulsive but that thing is wishful is false. fact7: Some person is not a kind of a contracted if the fact that he is a kind of non-afloat a Plantae is incorrect. fact8: The fact that that gastromycete forages Apodidae and knots Grieg does not hold if that sandwort is not an ophthalmology. fact9: That some man is a contracted is not wrong if he/she is a Plasmodiophoraceae. fact10: The fact that Allen is not wishful hold. fact11: That something is not an inch or it pulls paraphrase or both is true if it is a contracted. fact12: That catechin is not an inch if that thumbnail either is not an inch or pulls paraphrase or both. fact13: That sandwort is not an ophthalmology if that sphere unweaves degeneracy. fact14: The fact that something is afloat and trespasses Cumana is correct if it does not knot Grieg. fact15: That catechin is a Hestia and he/she is not non-serologic. fact16: That sphere is not a Hestia if that catechin is both a Hestia and not an inch. fact17: This floret is a Plasmodiophoraceae if this thing does not asphyxiate. fact18: The fact that this floret does not asphyxiate is right. fact19: This succotash does not pull paraphrase. fact20: If this succotash is not wishful then this succotash is not afloat. ; $hypothesis$ = This succotash is not afloat. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That electrocautery occurs.

{D}

fact1: The tiddlywinks does not occurs if that both this Scotching millibar and that shielding gulden occurs is incorrect. fact2: That view occurs but that sowing I.Q. does not happens. fact3: That that view but notthat sowing I.Q. occurs causes that this repainting Rudra occurs. fact4: Both this job and this follies happens. fact5: If this follies does not happens then that that electrocautery occurs and this job happens hold. fact6: That sowing I.Q. does not occurs. fact7: The fact that this follies happens hold. fact8: That sowing I.Q. does not occurs if that this non-monisticness and that sowing I.Q. happens is false. fact9: That repeat occurs. fact10: This jurisprudentialness and this non-individualness happens. fact11: If that sowing I.Q. does not happens then the fact that that Arabianness and this follies occurs is right. fact12: If this repainting Rudra happens and this job occurs that electrocautery does not happens. fact13: If the tiddlywinks does not happens then the fact that both this non-monisticness and that sowing I.Q. happens is wrong. fact14: The fact that this Scotching millibar and that shielding gulden occurs is wrong if that personifying Kolkata does not occurs.

fact1: ¬({I} & {J}) -> ¬{G} fact2: ({E} & ¬{F}) fact3: ({E} & ¬{F}) -> {C} fact4: ({A} & {B}) fact5: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) fact6: ¬{F} fact7: {B} fact8: ¬(¬{H} & {F}) -> ¬{F} fact9: {HH} fact10: ({FS} & ¬{EJ}) fact11: ¬{F} -> ({GN} & {B}) fact12: ({C} & {A}) -> ¬{D} fact13: ¬{G} -> ¬(¬{H} & {F}) fact14: ¬{K} -> ¬({I} & {J})

That Arabianness and that overrunning happens.

({GN} & {GG})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The tiddlywinks does not occurs if that both this Scotching millibar and that shielding gulden occurs is incorrect. fact2: That view occurs but that sowing I.Q. does not happens. fact3: That that view but notthat sowing I.Q. occurs causes that this repainting Rudra occurs. fact4: Both this job and this follies happens. fact5: If this follies does not happens then that that electrocautery occurs and this job happens hold. fact6: That sowing I.Q. does not occurs. fact7: The fact that this follies happens hold. fact8: That sowing I.Q. does not occurs if that this non-monisticness and that sowing I.Q. happens is false. fact9: That repeat occurs. fact10: This jurisprudentialness and this non-individualness happens. fact11: If that sowing I.Q. does not happens then the fact that that Arabianness and this follies occurs is right. fact12: If this repainting Rudra happens and this job occurs that electrocautery does not happens. fact13: If the tiddlywinks does not happens then the fact that both this non-monisticness and that sowing I.Q. happens is wrong. fact14: The fact that this Scotching millibar and that shielding gulden occurs is wrong if that personifying Kolkata does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That electrocautery occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: This job occurs.; fact3 & fact2 -> int2: This repainting Rudra happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both this repainting Rudra and this job occurs.; int3 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This finch concurs.

{C}{c}

fact1: Something is a kind of a Frisch if it does pulverize. fact2: The fact that this Luba does not nictate is right if the fact that that is both not heterodactyl and not a dichotomy is false. fact3: This Luba is a Frisch if the fact that this Velveeta is not non-eschatological hold. fact4: If this Velveeta is not indusial then she is a Camptosorus or she is eschatological or both. fact5: If some man is a kind of a Frisch it concurs and it is not indusial. fact6: This finch does not concur if this Luba is a kind of a Frisch. fact7: If something is not a Hanoverian either it is archival or it pulverizes or both. fact8: This finch pulverizes if this Velveeta is archival. fact9: If something does not nictate then the fact that it discolourises and it is not a kind of a Gerbillus is incorrect. fact10: If this Velveeta is a Camptosorus that this Luba is a Frisch is right. fact11: The biriani does not concur. fact12: This Velveeta is not indusial. fact13: This Velveeta is a Belloc if there is someone such that that he does discolourise and he is not a Gerbillus does not hold. fact14: The fact that this Luba is not heterodactyl and that is not a kind of a dichotomy does not hold. fact15: If some man is a Belloc then it is not a Hanoverian.

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

This finch concurs.

{C}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a kind of a Frisch if it does pulverize. fact2: The fact that this Luba does not nictate is right if the fact that that is both not heterodactyl and not a dichotomy is false. fact3: This Luba is a Frisch if the fact that this Velveeta is not non-eschatological hold. fact4: If this Velveeta is not indusial then she is a Camptosorus or she is eschatological or both. fact5: If some man is a kind of a Frisch it concurs and it is not indusial. fact6: This finch does not concur if this Luba is a kind of a Frisch. fact7: If something is not a Hanoverian either it is archival or it pulverizes or both. fact8: This finch pulverizes if this Velveeta is archival. fact9: If something does not nictate then the fact that it discolourises and it is not a kind of a Gerbillus is incorrect. fact10: If this Velveeta is a Camptosorus that this Luba is a Frisch is right. fact11: The biriani does not concur. fact12: This Velveeta is not indusial. fact13: This Velveeta is a Belloc if there is someone such that that he does discolourise and he is not a Gerbillus does not hold. fact14: The fact that this Luba is not heterodactyl and that is not a kind of a dichotomy does not hold. fact15: If some man is a Belloc then it is not a Hanoverian. ; $hypothesis$ = This finch concurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact12 -> int1: Either this Velveeta is a Camptosorus or she is not non-eschatological or both.; int1 & fact10 & fact3 -> int2: This Luba is a Frisch.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that non-Midiness and this satiation happens.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: That notthis Midiness but this satiation occurs prevents that presentationalness. fact2: That this Midiness does not occurs is correct if the fact that this debauch does not happens hold. fact3: If that impreciseness does not happens then this debauch does not occurs or that presentationalness does not happens or both. fact4: Both that touristry and the smelling happens. fact5: If the fact that that refueling cgs occurs but this azotemicness does not happens is wrong this satiation occurs. fact6: If that scumble occurs then that that delineatedness happens but this catering Satyridae does not occurs does not hold. fact7: That delineatedness does not happens if that that delineatedness but notthis catering Satyridae occurs does not hold. fact8: If that presentationalness does not occurs then this Midiness does not happens. fact9: If this Midiness occurs and this satiation occurs that presentationalness does not happens. fact10: The fact that this cycling explicandum happens is true. fact11: That both that non-impreciseness and that non-delineatedness occurs is caused by that scumble. fact12: This Midiness does not occurs. fact13: The fact that this Midiness and this satiation happens does not hold. fact14: This debauch occurs. fact15: That refueling cgs and that impreciseness happens if that delineatedness does not occurs. fact16: This debauch does not happens but that presentationalness occurs if this azotemicness happens. fact17: The triggering happens. fact18: That both that scumble and that carpellariness happens is caused by that this filtration does not occurs. fact19: That non-Midiness and this satiation happens if this debauch does not happens. fact20: That presentationalness and this debauch occurs. fact21: This racism does not occurs and the racketing occurs. fact22: That that non-campanularness and this inedibleness happens is wrong.

fact1: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact2: ¬{A} -> ¬{AA} fact3: ¬{E} -> (¬{A} v ¬{B}) fact4: ({IE} & {GH}) fact5: ¬({D} & ¬{C}) -> {AB} fact6: {H} -> ¬({F} & ¬{G}) fact7: ¬({F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} fact8: ¬{B} -> ¬{AA} fact9: ({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact10: {BA} fact11: {H} -> (¬{E} & ¬{F}) fact12: ¬{AA} fact13: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact14: {A} fact15: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact16: {C} -> (¬{A} & {B}) fact17: {FI} fact18: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact19: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact20: ({B} & {A}) fact21: (¬{JB} & {HK}) fact22: ¬(¬{CU} & {R})

Let's assume that that non-Midiness and this satiation happens.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That notthis Midiness but this satiation occurs prevents that presentationalness. fact2: That this Midiness does not occurs is correct if the fact that this debauch does not happens hold. fact3: If that impreciseness does not happens then this debauch does not occurs or that presentationalness does not happens or both. fact4: Both that touristry and the smelling happens. fact5: If the fact that that refueling cgs occurs but this azotemicness does not happens is wrong this satiation occurs. fact6: If that scumble occurs then that that delineatedness happens but this catering Satyridae does not occurs does not hold. fact7: That delineatedness does not happens if that that delineatedness but notthis catering Satyridae occurs does not hold. fact8: If that presentationalness does not occurs then this Midiness does not happens. fact9: If this Midiness occurs and this satiation occurs that presentationalness does not happens. fact10: The fact that this cycling explicandum happens is true. fact11: That both that non-impreciseness and that non-delineatedness occurs is caused by that scumble. fact12: This Midiness does not occurs. fact13: The fact that this Midiness and this satiation happens does not hold. fact14: This debauch occurs. fact15: That refueling cgs and that impreciseness happens if that delineatedness does not occurs. fact16: This debauch does not happens but that presentationalness occurs if this azotemicness happens. fact17: The triggering happens. fact18: That both that scumble and that carpellariness happens is caused by that this filtration does not occurs. fact19: That non-Midiness and this satiation happens if this debauch does not happens. fact20: That presentationalness and this debauch occurs. fact21: This racism does not occurs and the racketing occurs. fact22: That that non-campanularness and this inedibleness happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that non-Midiness and this satiation happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that non-Midiness and this satiation happens.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: That presentationalness does not happens.; fact20 -> int2: That presentationalness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This prompt does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: That this prompt does not occurs is brought about by that this distalness does not occurs. fact2: The evitableness occurs. fact3: This prompt happens.

fact1: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} fact2: {CL} fact3: {A}

This prompt does not occurs.

¬{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this prompt does not occurs is brought about by that this distalness does not occurs. fact2: The evitableness occurs. fact3: This prompt happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This prompt does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This swabbing occurs.

{D}

fact1: The fact that the kerygma occurs and that alluviation occurs is wrong if that holozoicness does not occurs. fact2: That this daubing Aporocactus and/or that exaltation happens is not false. fact3: This nonalcoholicness occurs. fact4: This mortal and/or the unbridleding Sciaenidae happens. fact5: This scouring or the dickering or both happens. fact6: This attaining occurs. fact7: The calmness happens. fact8: That rouging Platichthys happens. fact9: That ratifying occurs if this savoring objurgation occurs. fact10: That this haircut happens is triggered by that that exaltation occurs. fact11: If that knuckling uptime happens the bionicness happens. fact12: If that the kerygma and that alluviation happens does not hold this haircut does not occurs. fact13: That that sonneting shandy does not happens and the acupressure happens prevents that that holozoicness occurs. fact14: That tailing occurs. fact15: If this daubing Aporocactus occurs then this haircut occurs. fact16: This cobble and/or the handicapping sticking occurs. fact17: That this daubing Aporocactus does not happens results in that this swabbing does not happens. fact18: That sonneting shandy does not happens if the fact that both this enteralness and that demanding occurs is not correct. fact19: The electoralness occurs if that unfundedness happens.

fact1: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & {E}) fact2: ({A} v {B}) fact3: {GC} fact4: ({FU} v {DN}) fact5: ({DG} v {O}) fact6: {EF} fact7: {BU} fact8: {CS} fact9: {AK} -> {CM} fact10: {B} -> {C} fact11: {EN} -> {HN} fact12: ¬({F} & {E}) -> ¬{C} fact13: (¬{I} & {H}) -> ¬{G} fact14: {U} fact15: {A} -> {C} fact16: ({HM} v {GM}) fact17: ¬{A} -> ¬{D} fact18: ¬({L} & {K}) -> ¬{I} fact19: {EQ} -> {CA}

This swabbing does not occurs.

¬{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the kerygma occurs and that alluviation occurs is wrong if that holozoicness does not occurs. fact2: That this daubing Aporocactus and/or that exaltation happens is not false. fact3: This nonalcoholicness occurs. fact4: This mortal and/or the unbridleding Sciaenidae happens. fact5: This scouring or the dickering or both happens. fact6: This attaining occurs. fact7: The calmness happens. fact8: That rouging Platichthys happens. fact9: That ratifying occurs if this savoring objurgation occurs. fact10: That this haircut happens is triggered by that that exaltation occurs. fact11: If that knuckling uptime happens the bionicness happens. fact12: If that the kerygma and that alluviation happens does not hold this haircut does not occurs. fact13: That that sonneting shandy does not happens and the acupressure happens prevents that that holozoicness occurs. fact14: That tailing occurs. fact15: If this daubing Aporocactus occurs then this haircut occurs. fact16: This cobble and/or the handicapping sticking occurs. fact17: That this daubing Aporocactus does not happens results in that this swabbing does not happens. fact18: That sonneting shandy does not happens if the fact that both this enteralness and that demanding occurs is not correct. fact19: The electoralness occurs if that unfundedness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This swabbing occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That mandibulofacialness does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: That that tootle does not occurs is triggered by that both that Congregationalist and this atheromaticness occurs. fact2: That this tessellation does not happens and/or that diving tetrad happens triggers that that prejudicing mickle does not happens. fact3: That Congregationalist occurs and that mandibulofacialness happens if this training does not occurs. fact4: That this shooting Romneya does not happens and that stifling smouldering does not happens is incorrect if that arrogation does not occurs. fact5: If that binding does not happens and that fatiguing does not happens this shooting Romneya happens. fact6: If that trochaicness does not occurs that stifling smouldering does not occurs. fact7: That the meshing groupware and this unforgettableness happens is false if this covertness does not happens. fact8: That mandibulofacialness occurs if that that Congregationalist does not occurs and this atheromaticness does not occurs is not wrong. fact9: If that both the meshing groupware and this unforgettableness happens is wrong that arrogation does not occurs. fact10: That that prejudicing mickle does not happens triggers that both this atheromaticness and that trochaicness occurs. fact11: This training does not happens if that this shooting Romneya does not happens and that stifling smouldering does not happens does not hold. fact12: If the deafing or this accenting or both happens the fact that this covertness does not happens is correct. fact13: This tessellation does not occurs if that newness but notthe bacteriologicalness occurs. fact14: The weightlift happens. fact15: This atheromaticness does not occurs. fact16: If that the highjacking occurs and this slopping Clupeidae does not occurs is incorrect then that that baptismalness does not occurs is true. fact17: The fact that that mandibulofacialness happens is not true if that Congregationalist and this atheromaticness occurs. fact18: That newness but notthe bacteriologicalness occurs if that baptismalness does not occurs.

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

That tootle does not occurs.

¬{BK}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that tootle does not occurs is triggered by that both that Congregationalist and this atheromaticness occurs. fact2: That this tessellation does not happens and/or that diving tetrad happens triggers that that prejudicing mickle does not happens. fact3: That Congregationalist occurs and that mandibulofacialness happens if this training does not occurs. fact4: That this shooting Romneya does not happens and that stifling smouldering does not happens is incorrect if that arrogation does not occurs. fact5: If that binding does not happens and that fatiguing does not happens this shooting Romneya happens. fact6: If that trochaicness does not occurs that stifling smouldering does not occurs. fact7: That the meshing groupware and this unforgettableness happens is false if this covertness does not happens. fact8: That mandibulofacialness occurs if that that Congregationalist does not occurs and this atheromaticness does not occurs is not wrong. fact9: If that both the meshing groupware and this unforgettableness happens is wrong that arrogation does not occurs. fact10: That that prejudicing mickle does not happens triggers that both this atheromaticness and that trochaicness occurs. fact11: This training does not happens if that this shooting Romneya does not happens and that stifling smouldering does not happens does not hold. fact12: If the deafing or this accenting or both happens the fact that this covertness does not happens is correct. fact13: This tessellation does not occurs if that newness but notthe bacteriologicalness occurs. fact14: The weightlift happens. fact15: This atheromaticness does not occurs. fact16: If that the highjacking occurs and this slopping Clupeidae does not occurs is incorrect then that that baptismalness does not occurs is true. fact17: The fact that that mandibulofacialness happens is not true if that Congregationalist and this atheromaticness occurs. fact18: That newness but notthe bacteriologicalness occurs if that baptismalness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That mandibulofacialness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That boom does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: The indeterminateness happens. fact2: That euthanasia occurs and that boom happens if this arousing does not happens. fact3: The fact that if this papilloseness does not happens then that that uninvitingness does not happens and this arousing occurs does not hold hold. fact4: That that boom occurs is true. fact5: The conveyancing occurs. fact6: That that vasotomy and this instilment occurs is triggered by the non-sudsiness. fact7: This directing adhesiveness occurs. fact8: This arousing does not occurs if that that uninvitingness and this arousing occurs is false. fact9: The fact that that Nepaliness happens is true. fact10: This fibrinousness occurs. fact11: That the non-papilloseness and this incomprehensibleness occurs is brought about by that that vasotomy occurs.

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

That boom does not happens.

¬{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The indeterminateness happens. fact2: That euthanasia occurs and that boom happens if this arousing does not happens. fact3: The fact that if this papilloseness does not happens then that that uninvitingness does not happens and this arousing occurs does not hold hold. fact4: That that boom occurs is true. fact5: The conveyancing occurs. fact6: That that vasotomy and this instilment occurs is triggered by the non-sudsiness. fact7: This directing adhesiveness occurs. fact8: This arousing does not occurs if that that uninvitingness and this arousing occurs is false. fact9: The fact that that Nepaliness happens is true. fact10: This fibrinousness occurs. fact11: That the non-papilloseness and this incomprehensibleness occurs is brought about by that that vasotomy occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That boom does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This dry is not a majuscule.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: If this investigator concludes that this dry does shape Grewia and she concludes does not hold. fact2: If this trepan is awestruck this aggressor is infelicitous. fact3: Some man is a kind of a majuscule if that he/she does not shape Grewia and concludes is false. fact4: If the fact that this trepan does not pay Philistia but this person is a kind of a bulge is true this trepan is awestruck. fact5: This investigator is not a Bioko if that this tracing is not empirical but she is a Bioko hold. fact6: If Katy is a Hindustani then this tracing is not empirical and is a Bioko. fact7: This terebinth is not distinguishable. fact8: That either this terebinth does not conclude or that is not a majuscule or both is incorrect if that this investigator is distinguishable hold. fact9: If the fact that this terebinth does not conclude or is not a majuscule or both is false this dry is not a kind of a majuscule. fact10: If this aggressor is a Olfersia and/or that thing is infelicitous then Katy is not infelicitous. fact11: Some person is unlisted and it is a Hindustani if it is not infelicitous. fact12: This dry is a majuscule if this dry does shape Grewia. fact13: That this dry shapes Grewia and it concludes does not hold. fact14: If something is not a Bioko it is distinguishable and shapes Grewia. fact15: If this investigator concludes that this dry does not shape Grewia but he concludes is wrong. fact16: If something shapes Grewia this is a majuscule. fact17: The fact that this investigator concludes is true if this terebinth is not distinguishable.

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

This dry is not a majuscule.

¬{C}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this investigator concludes that this dry does shape Grewia and she concludes does not hold. fact2: If this trepan is awestruck this aggressor is infelicitous. fact3: Some man is a kind of a majuscule if that he/she does not shape Grewia and concludes is false. fact4: If the fact that this trepan does not pay Philistia but this person is a kind of a bulge is true this trepan is awestruck. fact5: This investigator is not a Bioko if that this tracing is not empirical but she is a Bioko hold. fact6: If Katy is a Hindustani then this tracing is not empirical and is a Bioko. fact7: This terebinth is not distinguishable. fact8: That either this terebinth does not conclude or that is not a majuscule or both is incorrect if that this investigator is distinguishable hold. fact9: If the fact that this terebinth does not conclude or is not a majuscule or both is false this dry is not a kind of a majuscule. fact10: If this aggressor is a Olfersia and/or that thing is infelicitous then Katy is not infelicitous. fact11: Some person is unlisted and it is a Hindustani if it is not infelicitous. fact12: This dry is a majuscule if this dry does shape Grewia. fact13: That this dry shapes Grewia and it concludes does not hold. fact14: If something is not a Bioko it is distinguishable and shapes Grewia. fact15: If this investigator concludes that this dry does not shape Grewia but he concludes is wrong. fact16: If something shapes Grewia this is a majuscule. fact17: The fact that this investigator concludes is true if this terebinth is not distinguishable. ; $hypothesis$ = This dry is not a majuscule. ; $proof$ =

fact17 & fact7 -> int1: This investigator concludes.; int1 & fact15 -> int2: The fact that this dry does not shape Grewia and concludes is false.; fact3 -> int3: If the fact that this dry does not shape Grewia and concludes is wrong then this dry is a majuscule.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that whortleberry needlesses gonorrhea and is a Slavic is wrong.

¬({C}{a} & {A}{a})

fact1: That whortleberry does befoul Paleocene if the thing is an inferiority that does not sneak boogeyman. fact2: If someone is not cataphatic then that it needlesses gonorrhea and is not a kind of a Athenian is false. fact3: That that whortleberry is not Aramaean and/or he/she is not cataphatic is false. fact4: That materialist is not a Ptilonorhynchus if the fact that this dipteron is not a Lysichiton and that thing does not fray is incorrect. fact5: A non-cataphatic man does not befoul Paleocene and is a Athenian. fact6: the fact that that gonorrhea needlesses whortleberry hold. fact7: That something needlesses gonorrhea and is a Slavic is incorrect if it does not befoul Paleocene. fact8: The fact that this heelbone is both cataphatic and not Aramaean is wrong if this coolwart is a kind of a Ptilonorhynchus. fact9: If that materialist is not a Ptilonorhynchus this coolwart is a Ptilonorhynchus. fact10: That whortleberry is not cataphatic if the fact that this heelbone is cataphatic but he is non-Aramaean does not hold. fact11: That that bluefin is not cataphatic is true if there is something such that the fact that that thing is either not Aramaean or not cataphatic or both does not hold. fact12: The fact that that whortleberry is a Slavic hold if that whortleberry befouls Paleocene. fact13: The fact that that whortleberry needlesses gonorrhea hold. fact14: That whortleberry is an inferiority and does not sneak boogeyman.

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

That that whortleberry needlesses gonorrhea and is a Slavic is wrong.

¬({C}{a} & {A}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That whortleberry does befoul Paleocene if the thing is an inferiority that does not sneak boogeyman. fact2: If someone is not cataphatic then that it needlesses gonorrhea and is not a kind of a Athenian is false. fact3: That that whortleberry is not Aramaean and/or he/she is not cataphatic is false. fact4: That materialist is not a Ptilonorhynchus if the fact that this dipteron is not a Lysichiton and that thing does not fray is incorrect. fact5: A non-cataphatic man does not befoul Paleocene and is a Athenian. fact6: the fact that that gonorrhea needlesses whortleberry hold. fact7: That something needlesses gonorrhea and is a Slavic is incorrect if it does not befoul Paleocene. fact8: The fact that this heelbone is both cataphatic and not Aramaean is wrong if this coolwart is a kind of a Ptilonorhynchus. fact9: If that materialist is not a Ptilonorhynchus this coolwart is a Ptilonorhynchus. fact10: That whortleberry is not cataphatic if the fact that this heelbone is cataphatic but he is non-Aramaean does not hold. fact11: That that bluefin is not cataphatic is true if there is something such that the fact that that thing is either not Aramaean or not cataphatic or both does not hold. fact12: The fact that that whortleberry is a Slavic hold if that whortleberry befouls Paleocene. fact13: The fact that that whortleberry needlesses gonorrhea hold. fact14: That whortleberry is an inferiority and does not sneak boogeyman. ; $hypothesis$ = That that whortleberry needlesses gonorrhea and is a Slavic is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact14 -> int1: That whortleberry befouls Paleocene.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: That whortleberry is a Slavic.; int2 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This necktie is not a kind of a Cromwell.

¬{E}{c}

fact1: The fact that this necktie is dysgenic and is a Cromwell if this socket is not a guarded hold. fact2: If this socket is a Uredinales and a atrociousness then this socket is not greater. fact3: This socket is dysgenic and/or it is a guarded. fact4: This tenia is a guarded. fact5: Something is not a Cromwell if it is greater. fact6: If this socket is a guarded then this necktie refines. fact7: This necktie does refine if this socket is dysgenic.

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

That this necktie is a Cromwell hold.

{E}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this necktie is dysgenic and is a Cromwell if this socket is not a guarded hold. fact2: If this socket is a Uredinales and a atrociousness then this socket is not greater. fact3: This socket is dysgenic and/or it is a guarded. fact4: This tenia is a guarded. fact5: Something is not a Cromwell if it is greater. fact6: If this socket is a guarded then this necktie refines. fact7: This necktie does refine if this socket is dysgenic. ; $hypothesis$ = This necktie is not a kind of a Cromwell. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

There is no person that is not perithelial and not unexhausted.

(x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: If something whips intractability then the fact that it is non-agrypnotic thing that is a colourlessness does not hold. fact2: There exists no person such that it is a kind of non-perithelial person that is unexhausted. fact3: If something does not incriminate it does whip intractability and is a dodge. fact4: Something is not a colourlessness if the fact that it is not agrypnotic and is a colourlessness does not hold. fact5: If something is not nihilistic it is a kind of non-multilevel thing that does not adorn. fact6: Every man is a jillion and it is a kind of an airing. fact7: Everyone is not multilevel. fact8: There exists no one such that the one is not a pointedness and the one habilitates. fact9: Some person that is a jillion does not incriminate and is not erythroid. fact10: Somebody is not nihilistic if that it does not launder and is not geomorphologic is not true. fact11: There exists no man such that he does not coincide and is not comparative. fact12: If something that is not multilevel does not adorn that thing is a sounder. fact13: The fact that somebody is not a Apocynum and the one is not sericultural does not hold if the one is a sounder. fact14: There is nothing that does not clad and does not honor Crambe. fact15: The fact that someone does not launder and is non-geomorphologic does not hold if the one is not a colourlessness. fact16: There is no person that is not perithelial and not unexhausted. fact17: There exists nothing such that the thing does not tunnel talentlessness and the thing is not a kind of a frustum.

fact1: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{I}x & {G}x) fact2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact3: (x): ¬{K}x -> ({H}x & {J}x) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & {G}x) -> ¬{G}x fact5: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) fact6: (x): ({M}x & {N}x) fact7: (x): ¬{C}x fact8: (x): ¬(¬{AD}x & {CM}x) fact9: (x): {M}x -> (¬{K}x & ¬{L}x) fact10: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact11: (x): ¬(¬{EU}x & ¬{II}x) fact12: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x fact13: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{GD}x & ¬{CA}x) fact14: (x): ¬(¬{GJ}x & ¬{CT}x) fact15: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) fact16: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact17: (x): ¬(¬{ED}x & ¬{CH}x)

There is nothing that is not a Apocynum but non-sericultural.

(x): ¬(¬{GD}x & ¬{CA}x)

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If something whips intractability then the fact that it is non-agrypnotic thing that is a colourlessness does not hold. fact2: There exists no person such that it is a kind of non-perithelial person that is unexhausted. fact3: If something does not incriminate it does whip intractability and is a dodge. fact4: Something is not a colourlessness if the fact that it is not agrypnotic and is a colourlessness does not hold. fact5: If something is not nihilistic it is a kind of non-multilevel thing that does not adorn. fact6: Every man is a jillion and it is a kind of an airing. fact7: Everyone is not multilevel. fact8: There exists no one such that the one is not a pointedness and the one habilitates. fact9: Some person that is a jillion does not incriminate and is not erythroid. fact10: Somebody is not nihilistic if that it does not launder and is not geomorphologic is not true. fact11: There exists no man such that he does not coincide and is not comparative. fact12: If something that is not multilevel does not adorn that thing is a sounder. fact13: The fact that somebody is not a Apocynum and the one is not sericultural does not hold if the one is a sounder. fact14: There is nothing that does not clad and does not honor Crambe. fact15: The fact that someone does not launder and is non-geomorphologic does not hold if the one is not a colourlessness. fact16: There is no person that is not perithelial and not unexhausted. fact17: There exists nothing such that the thing does not tunnel talentlessness and the thing is not a kind of a frustum. ; $hypothesis$ = There is no person that is not perithelial and not unexhausted. ; $proof$ =

fact16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Some man cheeps milieu and cuts exemplification.

(Ex): ({A}x & {B}x)

fact1: There is something such that this thing catabolizes Hrolf and lights Asahikawa. fact2: The hummus cheeps milieu. fact3: Something devises neurilemoma. fact4: that exemplification cuts troika. fact5: That mimeograph cheeps milieu. fact6: This troika is a brachium. fact7: This troika cheeps milieu. fact8: There is somebody such that this person is a baroque and this person serenades tenantry. fact9: That Pastor cheeps milieu. fact10: The souse is a baroque that cuts exemplification. fact11: There is something such that it is a kind of a Rundstedt. fact12: this milieu cheeps troika. fact13: The Orasone does cut exemplification and is sarcolemmal. fact14: This troika cuts exemplification. fact15: This troika is a Fermat. fact16: This Berber does cut exemplification. fact17: Something is ammoniated. fact18: Something is sarcosomal.

fact1: (Ex): ({AS}x & {R}x) fact2: {A}{cn} fact3: (Ex): {GR}x fact4: {AB}{ab} fact5: {A}{hk} fact6: {FJ}{a} fact7: {A}{a} fact8: (Ex): ({I}x & {CR}x) fact9: {A}{hs} fact10: ({I}{jd} & {B}{jd}) fact11: (Ex): {IO}x fact12: {AA}{aa} fact13: ({B}{ad} & {GM}{ad}) fact14: {B}{a} fact15: {AD}{a} fact16: {B}{iu} fact17: (Ex): {GA}x fact18: (Ex): {IA}x

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There is something such that this thing catabolizes Hrolf and lights Asahikawa. fact2: The hummus cheeps milieu. fact3: Something devises neurilemoma. fact4: that exemplification cuts troika. fact5: That mimeograph cheeps milieu. fact6: This troika is a brachium. fact7: This troika cheeps milieu. fact8: There is somebody such that this person is a baroque and this person serenades tenantry. fact9: That Pastor cheeps milieu. fact10: The souse is a baroque that cuts exemplification. fact11: There is something such that it is a kind of a Rundstedt. fact12: this milieu cheeps troika. fact13: The Orasone does cut exemplification and is sarcolemmal. fact14: This troika cuts exemplification. fact15: This troika is a Fermat. fact16: This Berber does cut exemplification. fact17: Something is ammoniated. fact18: Something is sarcosomal. ; $hypothesis$ = Some man cheeps milieu and cuts exemplification. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact14 -> int1: This troika cheeps milieu and she/he cuts exemplification.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that if that diary does not stink Tagore but that person is moderate then that diary is not pianistic does not hold.

¬((¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})

fact1: If the fact that that diary is not incoherent and does stink Tagore hold that diary is not uncut. fact2: Some man that is non-handheld and impounds gout is not inaccessible. fact3: Somebody is not a Lufengpithecus if it is not a kind of a IDDM and does swagger refractivity. fact4: If the greisen is not a Marquette and stinks Tagore that it is theatrical hold. fact5: If some man is both not a terms and a gaggle then it does not claver Parashurama. fact6: Somebody is not a Handel if she is not typographic and she is ovoviviparous. fact7: That diary is pianistic if the thing does not stink Tagore and the thing is moderate. fact8: Some person is not unseeded if this one does not tip Amman and this one is a fetidness. fact9: That diary is not a superclass if it is not moderate and it exhales Forficula. fact10: Something is not a kind of a Euler if the thing is crystallized but not non-mucoid. fact11: That Versed is not a kind of a gaudy if it is immoderate and it is disproportionate. fact12: If something that is not a bottomed subtilizes then it is not a Gascony. fact13: This survivalist does not swagger refractivity if this survivalist is both not involuntary and sciatic. fact14: If that diary is both not a superclass and carinate that diary does not stink Tagore. fact15: If something stinks Tagore and is moderate then this is not pianistic. fact16: If that diary stinks Tagore and is moderate it is not pianistic. fact17: That diary does not stink Tagore if it is not sandy and confers. fact18: If someone that does not stink Tagore is moderate then it is pianistic. fact19: If that diary is not a Gascony and is a EHF that diary does not melt. fact20: If that diary is not moderate but that thing is a Calluna then that diary is not an inning.

fact1: (¬{FO}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{CE}{aa} fact2: (x): (¬{HE}x & {FL}x) -> ¬{AO}x fact3: (x): (¬{EQ}x & {GL}x) -> ¬{BD}x fact4: (¬{DI}{ga} & {AA}{ga}) -> ¬{AP}{ga} fact5: (x): (¬{HT}x & {GI}x) -> ¬{BH}x fact6: (x): (¬{HF}x & {E}x) -> ¬{EP}x fact7: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact8: (x): (¬{ES}x & {JE}x) -> ¬{AE}x fact9: (¬{AB}{aa} & {HP}{aa}) -> ¬{AN}{aa} fact10: (x): (¬{HL}x & {EF}x) -> ¬{DD}x fact11: (¬{AB}{j} & {GS}{j}) -> ¬{DU}{j} fact12: (x): (¬{JK}x & {FQ}x) -> ¬{BN}x fact13: (¬{DF}{ea} & {HA}{ea}) -> ¬{GL}{ea} fact14: (¬{AN}{aa} & {FT}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} fact15: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact16: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact17: (¬{JC}{aa} & {GM}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} fact18: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact19: (¬{BN}{aa} & {CD}{aa}) -> ¬{FR}{aa} fact20: (¬{AB}{aa} & {BI}{aa}) -> ¬{M}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that diary is not incoherent and does stink Tagore hold that diary is not uncut. fact2: Some man that is non-handheld and impounds gout is not inaccessible. fact3: Somebody is not a Lufengpithecus if it is not a kind of a IDDM and does swagger refractivity. fact4: If the greisen is not a Marquette and stinks Tagore that it is theatrical hold. fact5: If some man is both not a terms and a gaggle then it does not claver Parashurama. fact6: Somebody is not a Handel if she is not typographic and she is ovoviviparous. fact7: That diary is pianistic if the thing does not stink Tagore and the thing is moderate. fact8: Some person is not unseeded if this one does not tip Amman and this one is a fetidness. fact9: That diary is not a superclass if it is not moderate and it exhales Forficula. fact10: Something is not a kind of a Euler if the thing is crystallized but not non-mucoid. fact11: That Versed is not a kind of a gaudy if it is immoderate and it is disproportionate. fact12: If something that is not a bottomed subtilizes then it is not a Gascony. fact13: This survivalist does not swagger refractivity if this survivalist is both not involuntary and sciatic. fact14: If that diary is both not a superclass and carinate that diary does not stink Tagore. fact15: If something stinks Tagore and is moderate then this is not pianistic. fact16: If that diary stinks Tagore and is moderate it is not pianistic. fact17: That diary does not stink Tagore if it is not sandy and confers. fact18: If someone that does not stink Tagore is moderate then it is pianistic. fact19: If that diary is not a Gascony and is a EHF that diary does not melt. fact20: If that diary is not moderate but that thing is a Calluna then that diary is not an inning. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that if that diary does not stink Tagore but that person is moderate then that diary is not pianistic does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This fall is a Paphiopedilum.

{D}{b}

fact1: That rainfly is not a Paphiopedilum if this waterskin is a Maintenon but the one is not immaterial. fact2: If this waterskin is not endocentric this fall is facial and endocentric. fact3: Something is facial and is not a Agaricaceae if the fact that that is endocentric is right. fact4: This waterskin is non-endocentric and non-arenaceous. fact5: Somebody is not a Paphiopedilum if the one is facial and is not endocentric.

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

That rainfly is not non-facial and not a Agaricaceae.

({C}{hr} & ¬{HO}{hr})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That rainfly is not a Paphiopedilum if this waterskin is a Maintenon but the one is not immaterial. fact2: If this waterskin is not endocentric this fall is facial and endocentric. fact3: Something is facial and is not a Agaricaceae if the fact that that is endocentric is right. fact4: This waterskin is non-endocentric and non-arenaceous. fact5: Somebody is not a Paphiopedilum if the one is facial and is not endocentric. ; $hypothesis$ = This fall is a Paphiopedilum. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: This waterskin is not endocentric.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This fall is facial but it is not endocentric.; fact5 -> int3: If this fall is facial thing that is not endocentric this thing is not a kind of a Paphiopedilum.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That both this corner and that hypertrophieding occurs is wrong.

¬({A} & {B})

fact1: This retraining liberality happens if the fact that that hypertrophieding but notthis corner occurs does not hold. fact2: That hypertrophieding happens. fact3: The episode happens. fact4: The fact that both this corner and that hypertrophieding occurs does not hold if this unauthorizedness does not occurs. fact5: If this unauthorizedness does not happens that that that hypertrophieding happens and this corner does not occurs hold is false. fact6: This corner happens.

fact1: ¬({B} & ¬{A}) -> {F} fact2: {B} fact3: {CM} fact4: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & {B}) fact5: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & ¬{A}) fact6: {A}

That both this corner and that hypertrophieding occurs is wrong.

¬({A} & {B})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This retraining liberality happens if the fact that that hypertrophieding but notthis corner occurs does not hold. fact2: That hypertrophieding happens. fact3: The episode happens. fact4: The fact that both this corner and that hypertrophieding occurs does not hold if this unauthorizedness does not occurs. fact5: If this unauthorizedness does not happens that that that hypertrophieding happens and this corner does not occurs hold is false. fact6: This corner happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That both this corner and that hypertrophieding occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This annexe does not astonish poliomyelitis.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That fellah is not a Bethune and this person is not a foulness. fact2: This fireguard does not transpire Sukkoth. fact3: This annexe transpires Sukkoth. fact4: That skirmisher is Italian. fact5: That skirmisher transpires Sukkoth. fact6: If something is not a flushed it is angular and it does transpire Sukkoth. fact7: That skirmisher is angular if this annexe astonishes poliomyelitis. fact8: That skirmisher does not astonish poliomyelitis if this annexe is angular. fact9: If that somebody does not revolve Rockford hold this person is not a flushed and this person does not disseminate. fact10: This biter does not transpire Sukkoth. fact11: That skirmisher does not astonish poliomyelitis. fact12: If that skirmisher does astonish poliomyelitis then this annexe is angular. fact13: That extrovert does not fragmentise and astonishes poliomyelitis. fact14: This annexe does not revolve Rockford if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a lymphopenia and/or it does not colonize does not hold. fact15: The fact that this choreography is not a lymphopenia and/or does not colonize is false if that fellah is not a Bethune. fact16: That skirmisher seesaws. fact17: If the fact that some person does not astonish poliomyelitis and does transpire Sukkoth is false then this person astonish poliomyelitis.

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

Let's assume that that that this annexe does not astonish poliomyelitis is not true is true.

{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That fellah is not a Bethune and this person is not a foulness. fact2: This fireguard does not transpire Sukkoth. fact3: This annexe transpires Sukkoth. fact4: That skirmisher is Italian. fact5: That skirmisher transpires Sukkoth. fact6: If something is not a flushed it is angular and it does transpire Sukkoth. fact7: That skirmisher is angular if this annexe astonishes poliomyelitis. fact8: That skirmisher does not astonish poliomyelitis if this annexe is angular. fact9: If that somebody does not revolve Rockford hold this person is not a flushed and this person does not disseminate. fact10: This biter does not transpire Sukkoth. fact11: That skirmisher does not astonish poliomyelitis. fact12: If that skirmisher does astonish poliomyelitis then this annexe is angular. fact13: That extrovert does not fragmentise and astonishes poliomyelitis. fact14: This annexe does not revolve Rockford if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a lymphopenia and/or it does not colonize does not hold. fact15: The fact that this choreography is not a lymphopenia and/or does not colonize is false if that fellah is not a Bethune. fact16: That skirmisher seesaws. fact17: If the fact that some person does not astonish poliomyelitis and does transpire Sukkoth is false then this person astonish poliomyelitis. ; $hypothesis$ = This annexe does not astonish poliomyelitis. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Gabby is unprofitable and is a processed.

({C}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: That Gabby is a kind of a parked but that thing is not unprofitable is wrong. fact2: Something is a parked and is not a kind of a Diatomophyceae if it is a shielded. fact3: That landmass is a Orpheus and is a kind of a funnies. fact4: That Gabby is intentional is correct. fact5: The snipefish is a parked. fact6: This primidone is a kind of a processed. fact7: If the fact that this Mullah is eremitic but this is not unprofitable does not hold the fact that this Mullah is not unprofitable does not hold. fact8: That somebody is both a processed and not unscheduled is not right if it is a Orpheus. fact9: Gabby is a Orpheus. fact10: Someone that is not a Isoetes is not a shielded and is not a kind of a Diatomophyceae. fact11: Gabby is a Antichrist and it is a Orpheus. fact12: Gabby is unprofitable if the fact that this thing is a kind of a parked and this thing is not unprofitable is false. fact13: That Gabby is unprofitable and the person is a processed is wrong if Nathaniel is not a Orpheus. fact14: Gabby is both a Ardeidae and a frolicsomeness. fact15: Somebody that is not a shielded and not a Diatomophyceae is not a kind of a parked. fact16: The fact that Gabby shews and is not a gnarled is false. fact17: That Gabby is a parked and unprofitable does not hold. fact18: If the fact that Nathaniel does not glow or is not a Alberta or both is wrong then Gabby is not a Isoetes. fact19: Gabby is a kind of a Diatomophyceae and is a kind of a Orpheus. fact20: If some person that is a parked is not a Diatomophyceae this one is not a Orpheus.

fact1: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact2: (x): {F}x -> ({D}x & ¬{E}x) fact3: ({A}{cb} & {IS}{cb}) fact4: {IB}{a} fact5: {D}{ai} fact6: {B}{fa} fact7: ¬({EM}{il} & ¬{C}{il}) -> {C}{il} fact8: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{G}x) fact9: {A}{a} fact10: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) fact11: ({DU}{a} & {A}{a}) fact12: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {C}{a} fact13: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) fact14: ({Q}{a} & {HH}{a}) fact15: (x): (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact16: ¬({GN}{a} & ¬{CH}{a}) fact17: ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}) fact18: ¬(¬{J}{b} v ¬{I}{b}) -> ¬{H}{a} fact19: ({E}{a} & {A}{a}) fact20: (x): ({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{A}x

The fact that Gabby is both a processed and not unscheduled is wrong.

¬({B}{a} & ¬{G}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Gabby is a kind of a parked but that thing is not unprofitable is wrong. fact2: Something is a parked and is not a kind of a Diatomophyceae if it is a shielded. fact3: That landmass is a Orpheus and is a kind of a funnies. fact4: That Gabby is intentional is correct. fact5: The snipefish is a parked. fact6: This primidone is a kind of a processed. fact7: If the fact that this Mullah is eremitic but this is not unprofitable does not hold the fact that this Mullah is not unprofitable does not hold. fact8: That somebody is both a processed and not unscheduled is not right if it is a Orpheus. fact9: Gabby is a Orpheus. fact10: Someone that is not a Isoetes is not a shielded and is not a kind of a Diatomophyceae. fact11: Gabby is a Antichrist and it is a Orpheus. fact12: Gabby is unprofitable if the fact that this thing is a kind of a parked and this thing is not unprofitable is false. fact13: That Gabby is unprofitable and the person is a processed is wrong if Nathaniel is not a Orpheus. fact14: Gabby is both a Ardeidae and a frolicsomeness. fact15: Somebody that is not a shielded and not a Diatomophyceae is not a kind of a parked. fact16: The fact that Gabby shews and is not a gnarled is false. fact17: That Gabby is a parked and unprofitable does not hold. fact18: If the fact that Nathaniel does not glow or is not a Alberta or both is wrong then Gabby is not a Isoetes. fact19: Gabby is a kind of a Diatomophyceae and is a kind of a Orpheus. fact20: If some person that is a parked is not a Diatomophyceae this one is not a Orpheus. ; $hypothesis$ = Gabby is unprofitable and is a processed. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this grant does not occurs does not hold.

{B}

fact1: If the fact that that enforcing Snoopy does not happens and this lingualness does not happens is wrong then this grant does not happens. fact2: If the fact that that sparring Cockcroft does not occurs is incorrect then this denudating does not occurs. fact3: The insolation does not occurs if the victimization occurs. fact4: That this dropping does not occurs and this coloursness does not happens is false. fact5: That this grant happens and that caressing happens is caused by the non-gnosticness.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact2: {HD} -> ¬{CN} fact3: {BM} -> ¬{GJ} fact4: ¬(¬{E} & ¬{EP}) fact5: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A})

The fact that this grant does not occurs does not hold.

{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that enforcing Snoopy does not happens and this lingualness does not happens is wrong then this grant does not happens. fact2: If the fact that that sparring Cockcroft does not occurs is incorrect then this denudating does not occurs. fact3: The insolation does not occurs if the victimization occurs. fact4: That this dropping does not occurs and this coloursness does not happens is false. fact5: That this grant happens and that caressing happens is caused by the non-gnosticness. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this grant does not occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That sulfonamide humanizes and she/he rafts.

({AB}{b} & {B}{b})

fact1: That sulfonamide is not polyatomic. fact2: The petcock humanizes. fact3: That meerkat is unstable. fact4: If something is not unstable the fact that the thing does humanize and the thing rafts does not hold. fact5: Something is polyatomic if the fact that that is not unstable hold. fact6: That sulfonamide rafts. fact7: If that meerkat is unstable then that sulfonamide is not polyatomic but it humanizes. fact8: That sulfonamide is not polyatomic if that meerkat is unstable.

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

The fact that that sulfonamide humanizes and it rafts does not hold.

¬({AB}{b} & {B}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That sulfonamide is not polyatomic. fact2: The petcock humanizes. fact3: That meerkat is unstable. fact4: If something is not unstable the fact that the thing does humanize and the thing rafts does not hold. fact5: Something is polyatomic if the fact that that is not unstable hold. fact6: That sulfonamide rafts. fact7: If that meerkat is unstable then that sulfonamide is not polyatomic but it humanizes. fact8: That sulfonamide is not polyatomic if that meerkat is unstable. ; $hypothesis$ = That sulfonamide humanizes and she/he rafts. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact3 -> int1: That sulfonamide is not polyatomic and humanizes.; int1 -> int2: That sulfonamide humanizes.; int2 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that petfood is a Turin but it is non-vulval.

({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That petfood does not inform. fact2: That petfood informs if that petfood is a Turin that is not vulval. fact3: If that alsatian does not inform but it is a antilog then that petfood is a kind of a Turin.

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

Let's assume that that petfood is a Turin but it is non-vulval.

({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That petfood does not inform. fact2: That petfood informs if that petfood is a Turin that is not vulval. fact3: If that alsatian does not inform but it is a antilog then that petfood is a kind of a Turin. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that petfood is a Turin but it is non-vulval. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that petfood is a Turin but it is non-vulval.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: That petfood does inform.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That bourguignon does not penetrate persuasiveness and that is not a pine.

(¬{D}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

fact1: That leafage does wax Dipnoi. fact2: That leafage does not familiarise Blastocladia if that one is a pine. fact3: Some man is not unserviceable if either the one does wax Dipnoi or the one is a MI or both. fact4: The fact that that bourguignon does not penetrate persuasiveness and is not a pine is incorrect if that leafage is not unserviceable. fact5: If that that leafage does not penetrate persuasiveness is true then that that bourguignon is not a MI and does not wax Dipnoi is incorrect. fact6: That something does not vacuum lexicology and it is not a MI is incorrect if it does not wax Dipnoi. fact7: If that leafage is not unserviceable then that that bourguignon penetrates persuasiveness and is not a pine is incorrect. fact8: The fact that that bourguignon penetrates persuasiveness and is not a pine does not hold. fact9: A MI is not unserviceable. fact10: the Dipnoi does wax leafage. fact11: That that bourguignon does not penetrate persuasiveness and is a pine is false. fact12: That leafage is not unserviceable if that leafage is a MI.

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

The fact that that bourguignon does not vacuum lexicology and is not a MI is not correct.

¬(¬{BM}{b} & ¬{B}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That leafage does wax Dipnoi. fact2: That leafage does not familiarise Blastocladia if that one is a pine. fact3: Some man is not unserviceable if either the one does wax Dipnoi or the one is a MI or both. fact4: The fact that that bourguignon does not penetrate persuasiveness and is not a pine is incorrect if that leafage is not unserviceable. fact5: If that that leafage does not penetrate persuasiveness is true then that that bourguignon is not a MI and does not wax Dipnoi is incorrect. fact6: That something does not vacuum lexicology and it is not a MI is incorrect if it does not wax Dipnoi. fact7: If that leafage is not unserviceable then that that bourguignon penetrates persuasiveness and is not a pine is incorrect. fact8: The fact that that bourguignon penetrates persuasiveness and is not a pine does not hold. fact9: A MI is not unserviceable. fact10: the Dipnoi does wax leafage. fact11: That that bourguignon does not penetrate persuasiveness and is a pine is false. fact12: That leafage is not unserviceable if that leafage is a MI. ; $hypothesis$ = That bourguignon does not penetrate persuasiveness and that is not a pine. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That leafage waxes Dipnoi or it is a MI or both.; fact3 -> int2: If that that leafage does wax Dipnoi and/or the thing is a MI is correct then that leafage is not unserviceable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That leafage is not unserviceable.; int3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There is something such that if that it is a Sokoro and a Hermann is wrong it does not confound outrageousness.

(Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

fact1: Francisco is a Cicindelidae if the fact that Francisco is benevolent and it is a retreat is not correct.

fact1: fake_formula

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Francisco is a Cicindelidae if the fact that Francisco is benevolent and it is a retreat is not correct. ; $hypothesis$ = There is something such that if that it is a Sokoro and a Hermann is wrong it does not confound outrageousness. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This observer is a rounder.

{B}{a}

fact1: That this observer is not a kind of a compline and is a kind of a rounder does not hold. fact2: If the fact that this observer does not reduce Silenus but the thing is not turned does not hold then the thing is not a splutter. fact3: If that this observer is not a kind of a Delphi and is a flinders does not hold then it is not a rounder. fact4: That blackwash does not comminute and he does not maculate phantasma if he does not skimp Elam. fact5: The cesium is not a kind of a flinders. fact6: If some man does not maculate phantasma and he/she does not comminute that he/she is a rounder is true. fact7: This observer is not uncomparable. fact8: The fact that this observer is a kind of a Delphi and he/she is a flinders is wrong. fact9: If that blackwash does not comminute this observer bivouacs Pennatula and is a rounder. fact10: If this observer is a Delphi this thing is not a rounder. fact11: The tachistoscope is not prandial if this thing does not seize Dendrocolaptes. fact12: That this observer is not a Delphi but the one is a kind of a flinders is false. fact13: The fact that that unguent is not a Delphi is not incorrect if that this observer is not a kind of a Delphi and/or bivouacs Pennatula is correct. fact14: If this observer is not mithraic then it does not react Cercopithecus. fact15: The fact that the poeciliid is not a flinders but that person is a tertiary is wrong.

fact1: ¬(¬{FD}{a} & {B}{a}) fact2: ¬(¬{AL}{a} & {AU}{a}) -> ¬{GB}{a} fact3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact4: ¬{E}{b} -> (¬{C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact5: ¬{AB}{bk} fact6: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}x fact7: ¬{CM}{a} fact8: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact9: ¬{C}{b} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact10: {AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact11: ¬{IE}{hu} -> ¬{JD}{hu} fact12: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact13: (¬{AA}{a} v {A}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{bi} fact14: ¬{GT}{a} -> ¬{GO}{a} fact15: ¬(¬{AB}{ck} & {JH}{ck})

That unguent is not a Delphi.

¬{AA}{bi}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this observer is not a kind of a compline and is a kind of a rounder does not hold. fact2: If the fact that this observer does not reduce Silenus but the thing is not turned does not hold then the thing is not a splutter. fact3: If that this observer is not a kind of a Delphi and is a flinders does not hold then it is not a rounder. fact4: That blackwash does not comminute and he does not maculate phantasma if he does not skimp Elam. fact5: The cesium is not a kind of a flinders. fact6: If some man does not maculate phantasma and he/she does not comminute that he/she is a rounder is true. fact7: This observer is not uncomparable. fact8: The fact that this observer is a kind of a Delphi and he/she is a flinders is wrong. fact9: If that blackwash does not comminute this observer bivouacs Pennatula and is a rounder. fact10: If this observer is a Delphi this thing is not a rounder. fact11: The tachistoscope is not prandial if this thing does not seize Dendrocolaptes. fact12: That this observer is not a Delphi but the one is a kind of a flinders is false. fact13: The fact that that unguent is not a Delphi is not incorrect if that this observer is not a kind of a Delphi and/or bivouacs Pennatula is correct. fact14: If this observer is not mithraic then it does not react Cercopithecus. fact15: The fact that the poeciliid is not a flinders but that person is a tertiary is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This observer is a rounder. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This bubalineness does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: If that autogenousness does not happens this situation does not occurs but this bioterrorism occurs. fact2: This shove happens. fact3: That that curb does not happens is caused by that notthis situation but this bioterrorism occurs. fact4: The fact that that curb occurs hold. fact5: That the baone occurs and this effeminizing Molnar happens is triggered by that this shove does not happens. fact6: This bubalineness and this shove happens if that curb does not happens.

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

The fact that this bubalineness happens hold.

{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that autogenousness does not happens this situation does not occurs but this bioterrorism occurs. fact2: This shove happens. fact3: That that curb does not happens is caused by that notthis situation but this bioterrorism occurs. fact4: The fact that that curb occurs hold. fact5: That the baone occurs and this effeminizing Molnar happens is triggered by that this shove does not happens. fact6: This bubalineness and this shove happens if that curb does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This bubalineness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That sharper happens and/or that minuscule occurs.

({C} v {B})

fact1: That boycotting passion occurs. fact2: That watchfulness yields that this cetaceousness does not occurs and the scurfiness does not occurs. fact3: Either this graining Congridae or the Olympicness or both happens. fact4: That that minuscule does not happens triggers that this displeasing anastrophe and that boycotting passion occurs. fact5: Both that boycotting passion and that minuscule happens. fact6: If this cetaceousness does not occurs then that sharper happens and/or the apprisal occurs.

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

That unaggressiveness occurs or this displeasing anastrophe occurs or both.

({EE} v {P})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That boycotting passion occurs. fact2: That watchfulness yields that this cetaceousness does not occurs and the scurfiness does not occurs. fact3: Either this graining Congridae or the Olympicness or both happens. fact4: That that minuscule does not happens triggers that this displeasing anastrophe and that boycotting passion occurs. fact5: Both that boycotting passion and that minuscule happens. fact6: If this cetaceousness does not occurs then that sharper happens and/or the apprisal occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That sharper happens and/or that minuscule occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: That minuscule occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This intersection does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: If the coast occurs then that unmeltedness occurs. fact2: That devolvement occurs. fact3: If that that formalising Pluteaceae and this noninheritableness happens does not hold then this intersection does not occurs. fact4: If the free happens the fact that this fixing happens is right. fact5: That formalising Pluteaceae and this noninheritableness occurs. fact6: This disconsolateness occurs. fact7: If that that interlock happens and the expiry does not occurs is false that interlock does not happens. fact8: That this intersection does not happens is prevented by that that interlock happens. fact9: If that formalising Pluteaceae occurs then that interlock occurs. fact10: The Midiness occurs.

fact1: {HF} -> {GJ} fact2: {HI} fact3: ¬({A} & {B}) -> ¬{D} fact4: {DH} -> {DJ} fact5: ({A} & {B}) fact6: {JH} fact7: ¬({C} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} fact8: {C} -> {D} fact9: {A} -> {C} fact10: {JC}

This intersection does not occurs.

¬{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the coast occurs then that unmeltedness occurs. fact2: That devolvement occurs. fact3: If that that formalising Pluteaceae and this noninheritableness happens does not hold then this intersection does not occurs. fact4: If the free happens the fact that this fixing happens is right. fact5: That formalising Pluteaceae and this noninheritableness occurs. fact6: This disconsolateness occurs. fact7: If that that interlock happens and the expiry does not occurs is false that interlock does not happens. fact8: That this intersection does not happens is prevented by that that interlock happens. fact9: If that formalising Pluteaceae occurs then that interlock occurs. fact10: The Midiness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This intersection does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: That formalising Pluteaceae occurs.; int1 & fact9 -> int2: That interlock occurs.; int2 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Everything hears sculptured.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Everything is a kind of a enteritis. fact2: Something is a Afroasiatic if the fact that it does not hear sculptured and it is not a hypotonus does not hold. fact3: That that someone does not hear sculptured and is not a hypotonus does not hold if this person does drowse Aalborg is not false. fact4: Every person is not a Chamaecyparis or this one depraves Tarkovsky or both. fact5: Something that is not a Chamaecyparis and/or depraves Tarkovsky is not coherent. fact6: Everything hears sculptured. fact7: Everything Fishes. fact8: Every person deems dextrality. fact9: Everything is a tamer. fact10: Every person is a kind of a Ugandan. fact11: Something drowses Aalborg and is not a sown if that thing is not coherent.

fact1: (x): {BR}x fact2: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {JK}x fact3: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact4: (x): (¬{G}x v {F}x) fact5: (x): (¬{G}x v {F}x) -> ¬{E}x fact6: (x): {A}x fact7: (x): {HR}x fact8: (x): {DU}x fact9: (x): {O}x fact10: (x): {DM}x fact11: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{D}x)

Every person is a Afroasiatic.

(x): {JK}x

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Everything is a kind of a enteritis. fact2: Something is a Afroasiatic if the fact that it does not hear sculptured and it is not a hypotonus does not hold. fact3: That that someone does not hear sculptured and is not a hypotonus does not hold if this person does drowse Aalborg is not false. fact4: Every person is not a Chamaecyparis or this one depraves Tarkovsky or both. fact5: Something that is not a Chamaecyparis and/or depraves Tarkovsky is not coherent. fact6: Everything hears sculptured. fact7: Everything Fishes. fact8: Every person deems dextrality. fact9: Everything is a tamer. fact10: Every person is a kind of a Ugandan. fact11: Something drowses Aalborg and is not a sown if that thing is not coherent. ; $hypothesis$ = Everything hears sculptured. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That flugelhorn is not a Everest.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If that flugelhorn is not a Mosaic then that that flugelhorn is theistic and/or it is not unreasonable does not hold. fact2: That zooplankton is a parallelopipedon. fact3: That that zooplankton is a kind of a Prussia that is a Scaridae is right. fact4: If that zooplankton is a Scaridae that flugelhorn is a Everest. fact5: If that something is a Everest that diverts seriocomedy is incorrect then that thing is not a kind of a Everest. fact6: That something is a Scaridae and it is a Prussia if it is not a Everest is right. fact7: That flugelhorn is not a kind of a Everest if that zooplankton is not a Scaridae and is not a kind of a Everest. fact8: That this grindle is a kind of a Everest and he diverts seriocomedy does not hold if that zooplankton is not theistic. fact9: That hematinic is a Everest. fact10: That zooplankton is a Prussia. fact11: That zooplankton convolutes. fact12: That zooplankton is not theistic if that that flugelhorn is theistic or it is reasonable or both does not hold. fact13: That flugelhorn is a Prussia. fact14: That zooplankton is a Everest. fact15: That zooplankton is a Everest if that flugelhorn is a kind of a Prussia. fact16: That zooplankton does contemplate.

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

This grindle is a Scaridae.

{B}{br}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that flugelhorn is not a Mosaic then that that flugelhorn is theistic and/or it is not unreasonable does not hold. fact2: That zooplankton is a parallelopipedon. fact3: That that zooplankton is a kind of a Prussia that is a Scaridae is right. fact4: If that zooplankton is a Scaridae that flugelhorn is a Everest. fact5: If that something is a Everest that diverts seriocomedy is incorrect then that thing is not a kind of a Everest. fact6: That something is a Scaridae and it is a Prussia if it is not a Everest is right. fact7: That flugelhorn is not a kind of a Everest if that zooplankton is not a Scaridae and is not a kind of a Everest. fact8: That this grindle is a kind of a Everest and he diverts seriocomedy does not hold if that zooplankton is not theistic. fact9: That hematinic is a Everest. fact10: That zooplankton is a Prussia. fact11: That zooplankton convolutes. fact12: That zooplankton is not theistic if that that flugelhorn is theistic or it is reasonable or both does not hold. fact13: That flugelhorn is a Prussia. fact14: That zooplankton is a Everest. fact15: That zooplankton is a Everest if that flugelhorn is a kind of a Prussia. fact16: That zooplankton does contemplate. ; $hypothesis$ = That flugelhorn is not a Everest. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: That zooplankton is a kind of a Scaridae.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Yvonne is not a Ephesian and it is not priming.

(¬{B}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

fact1: Somebody is a clawed and/or it is not theatrical if the fact that it does not pity Crispin is correct. fact2: This footwall retrogrades Plotinus. fact3: If the fact that this supermarket is untheatrical hold Yvonne is not legless and the thing is not a kind of a siamese. fact4: If the fact that this supermarket does not cow biostatistics but that lobbies Darsana is wrong Kayla is not a kind of a Ephesian. fact5: The fact that Yvonne is not a Ephesian but non-priming is wrong if Kayla is not a Ephesian. fact6: If some person does not disincarnate Cichlidae then she/he is a kind of a weeds. fact7: If this footwall is a weeds then Kayla does not pity Crispin. fact8: If someone is not a frozen she/he is not a Ephesian and she/he is not priming. fact9: If some man is not legless and it is not a kind of a siamese then it is not a frozen. fact10: This footwall does not disincarnate Cichlidae and communalises Catostomidae if this footwall retrogrades Plotinus. fact11: That this supermarket does not cow biostatistics and lobbies Darsana is wrong.

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

Yvonne is not a Ephesian and it is not priming.

(¬{B}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is a clawed and/or it is not theatrical if the fact that it does not pity Crispin is correct. fact2: This footwall retrogrades Plotinus. fact3: If the fact that this supermarket is untheatrical hold Yvonne is not legless and the thing is not a kind of a siamese. fact4: If the fact that this supermarket does not cow biostatistics but that lobbies Darsana is wrong Kayla is not a kind of a Ephesian. fact5: The fact that Yvonne is not a Ephesian but non-priming is wrong if Kayla is not a Ephesian. fact6: If some person does not disincarnate Cichlidae then she/he is a kind of a weeds. fact7: If this footwall is a weeds then Kayla does not pity Crispin. fact8: If someone is not a frozen she/he is not a Ephesian and she/he is not priming. fact9: If some man is not legless and it is not a kind of a siamese then it is not a frozen. fact10: This footwall does not disincarnate Cichlidae and communalises Catostomidae if this footwall retrogrades Plotinus. fact11: That this supermarket does not cow biostatistics and lobbies Darsana is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = Yvonne is not a Ephesian and it is not priming. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact11 -> int1: Kayla is not a Ephesian.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This tetrachloride is a Helwingia.

{C}{a}

fact1: If the fact that this tetrachloride rationalizes alienage but it is not defiant does not hold it is not a unrealism. fact2: If that this tetrachloride is prodromic one that is not a kind of a Crookes does not hold this tetrachloride does not summarize ablative. fact3: The fact that this tetrachloride is prodromic is right. fact4: Someone is a Helwingia if the fact that this person is not a Helwingia and does not berry is incorrect. fact5: Someone is not a Helwingia if the person does not berry.

fact1: ¬({N}{a} & ¬{CQ}{a}) -> ¬{BI}{a} fact2: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{HP}{a}) -> ¬{EH}{a} fact3: {B}{a} fact4: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) -> {C}x fact5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}x

This tetrachloride is a Helwingia.

{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this tetrachloride rationalizes alienage but it is not defiant does not hold it is not a unrealism. fact2: If that this tetrachloride is prodromic one that is not a kind of a Crookes does not hold this tetrachloride does not summarize ablative. fact3: The fact that this tetrachloride is prodromic is right. fact4: Someone is a Helwingia if the fact that this person is not a Helwingia and does not berry is incorrect. fact5: Someone is not a Helwingia if the person does not berry. ; $hypothesis$ = This tetrachloride is a Helwingia. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This shoreline is esoteric.

{C}{b}

fact1: If that soundbox is a kind of an indie then this shoreline bounces heed and is not esoteric. fact2: Something is not noncollapsible if it is not esoteric. fact3: If that dupe is noncollapsible then this shoreline is not unstressed. fact4: This shoreline is not noncollapsible and not unstressed. fact5: The fact that that dupe is esoteric is true. fact6: Fermin is not a ingratitude and it is not a kind of a Lomogramma. fact7: If something is not unstressed then the fact that the thing bounces heed and the thing is not collapsible is false. fact8: Something is not nonindulgent if the fact that this thing is not unstressed and is nonindulgent is false. fact9: This shoreline is not esoteric and does not misremember diuresis if that dupe is unstressed. fact10: That dupe is noncollapsible and the thing misremembers diuresis. fact11: That soundbox is an indie if this Volunteer is a kind of a Tadorna. fact12: This torchbearer is not unstressed. fact13: That something is not unstressed but it is nonindulgent is not true if it is suppurative. fact14: That dupe is innocuous. fact15: Either this convict restrains meaninglessness or it is not a Peterburg or both. fact16: This shoreline is stressed and it is not esoteric if that dupe is noncollapsible. fact17: Everything is not unstressed. fact18: This Volunteer is a kind of a Tadorna if the enterolith concentrates. fact19: This convict does not curse dissimilitude if the fact that that dupe curse dissimilitude and/or misremembers diuresis is wrong. fact20: If this convict does restrain meaninglessness then this convict is not nonsuppurative. fact21: If this shoreline does bounce heed and is not esoteric then that dupe is not esoteric. fact22: That something either does curse dissimilitude or misremembers diuresis or both is not true if this thing is not noncollapsible.

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

This convict does not curse dissimilitude and it is not nonindulgent.

(¬{CN}{d} & ¬{DF}{d})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that soundbox is a kind of an indie then this shoreline bounces heed and is not esoteric. fact2: Something is not noncollapsible if it is not esoteric. fact3: If that dupe is noncollapsible then this shoreline is not unstressed. fact4: This shoreline is not noncollapsible and not unstressed. fact5: The fact that that dupe is esoteric is true. fact6: Fermin is not a ingratitude and it is not a kind of a Lomogramma. fact7: If something is not unstressed then the fact that the thing bounces heed and the thing is not collapsible is false. fact8: Something is not nonindulgent if the fact that this thing is not unstressed and is nonindulgent is false. fact9: This shoreline is not esoteric and does not misremember diuresis if that dupe is unstressed. fact10: That dupe is noncollapsible and the thing misremembers diuresis. fact11: That soundbox is an indie if this Volunteer is a kind of a Tadorna. fact12: This torchbearer is not unstressed. fact13: That something is not unstressed but it is nonindulgent is not true if it is suppurative. fact14: That dupe is innocuous. fact15: Either this convict restrains meaninglessness or it is not a Peterburg or both. fact16: This shoreline is stressed and it is not esoteric if that dupe is noncollapsible. fact17: Everything is not unstressed. fact18: This Volunteer is a kind of a Tadorna if the enterolith concentrates. fact19: This convict does not curse dissimilitude if the fact that that dupe curse dissimilitude and/or misremembers diuresis is wrong. fact20: If this convict does restrain meaninglessness then this convict is not nonsuppurative. fact21: If this shoreline does bounce heed and is not esoteric then that dupe is not esoteric. fact22: That something either does curse dissimilitude or misremembers diuresis or both is not true if this thing is not noncollapsible. ; $hypothesis$ = This shoreline is esoteric. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: That that dupe is noncollapsible is correct.; int1 & fact16 -> int2: This shoreline is both stressed and not esoteric.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this vacuole does exercise is not wrong.

{A}{a}

fact1: This vacuole is subjunctive.

fact1: {B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This vacuole is subjunctive. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this vacuole does exercise is not wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This poisoner does not thrum Ukrainian and does not Google Giacometti if this poisoner is not a gimp.

¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: This poisoner is not a spastic and it is non-Ionian if the fact that it is a kind of a gimp hold. fact2: If someone is a kind of a cereal then it does not decompress and is not a acquittance. fact3: If this poisoner does not amend Actinomycetaceae then it is not a Gerbera. fact4: If this poisoner is not a gimp that person is not a Chaldee. fact5: If this hairball does not thrum Ukrainian it does not outline monotony and does not aurify. fact6: If some man is not a gimp then it does not thrum Ukrainian. fact7: Something is not a kind of a Cactaceae and it does not tender ethnocentrism if it does not subtract browned. fact8: If this poisoner is not a gimp then it does not thrum Ukrainian.

fact1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{U}{aa} & ¬{FF}{aa}) fact2: (x): {IF}x -> (¬{HE}x & ¬{JE}x) fact3: ¬{HN}{aa} -> ¬{JJ}{aa} fact4: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{R}{aa} fact5: ¬{AA}{m} -> (¬{EB}{m} & ¬{BD}{m}) fact6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x fact7: (x): ¬{BL}x -> (¬{HR}x & ¬{HU}x) fact8: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This poisoner is not a spastic and it is non-Ionian if the fact that it is a kind of a gimp hold. fact2: If someone is a kind of a cereal then it does not decompress and is not a acquittance. fact3: If this poisoner does not amend Actinomycetaceae then it is not a Gerbera. fact4: If this poisoner is not a gimp that person is not a Chaldee. fact5: If this hairball does not thrum Ukrainian it does not outline monotony and does not aurify. fact6: If some man is not a gimp then it does not thrum Ukrainian. fact7: Something is not a kind of a Cactaceae and it does not tender ethnocentrism if it does not subtract browned. fact8: If this poisoner is not a gimp then it does not thrum Ukrainian. ; $hypothesis$ = This poisoner does not thrum Ukrainian and does not Google Giacometti if this poisoner is not a gimp. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this enthronization occurs is not correct.

¬{A}

fact1: This enthronization occurs. fact2: That this enthronization does not occurs is caused by that both that communications and that spirits happens. fact3: That murmur happens if that that spirits does not happens and this enthronization does not occurs does not hold. fact4: The fact that that that spirits does not happens and this enthronization does not occurs is false hold if that communications does not occurs.

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

That murmur occurs.

{GN}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This enthronization occurs. fact2: That this enthronization does not occurs is caused by that both that communications and that spirits happens. fact3: That murmur happens if that that spirits does not happens and this enthronization does not occurs does not hold. fact4: The fact that that that spirits does not happens and this enthronization does not occurs is false hold if that communications does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That this enthronization occurs is not correct. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This wulfenite is not a kind of a Piciformes.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: Some man is a reasoned if it is a sterileness and/or it does not inhale qepiq. fact2: That loganberry offsaddles reassessment if that thing is not a introjection. fact3: If this wulfenite is not vibrionic this wulfenite is a kind of a UDA. fact4: The gesneriad is a kind of a UDA if that it is not a Crusade hold. fact5: If that interoceptor does not tangle Montenegro that interoceptor is not a Gallicism and is a Aristotle. fact6: This wulfenite either evertings or is not a introjection or both. fact7: The coupe is hardhearted and/or it is not a trusted. fact8: That this wulfenite is a UDA is correct if this wulfenite is not a frowning. fact9: Something is not a Kukenaam if it is not a kind of a Gallicism and it is a Aristotle. fact10: This wulfenite shoals malaprop. fact11: This wulfenite is a introjection. fact12: Something that is a introjection and/or is not a UDA is a kind of a Piciformes. fact13: Some person is a introjection and he is a UDA if he is not a Kukenaam.

fact1: (x): ({DJ}x v ¬{S}x) -> {DG}x fact2: ¬{A}{ei} -> {CB}{ei} fact3: ¬{JF}{a} -> {B}{a} fact4: ¬{AO}{ip} -> {B}{ip} fact5: ¬{G}{cg} -> (¬{F}{cg} & {E}{cg}) fact6: ({P}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) fact7: ({IB}{dd} v ¬{IO}{dd}) fact8: ¬{FP}{a} -> {B}{a} fact9: (x): (¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact10: {CS}{a} fact11: {A}{a} fact12: (x): ({A}x v ¬{B}x) -> {C}x fact13: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & {B}x)

That interoceptor is a Piciformes.

{C}{cg}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some man is a reasoned if it is a sterileness and/or it does not inhale qepiq. fact2: That loganberry offsaddles reassessment if that thing is not a introjection. fact3: If this wulfenite is not vibrionic this wulfenite is a kind of a UDA. fact4: The gesneriad is a kind of a UDA if that it is not a Crusade hold. fact5: If that interoceptor does not tangle Montenegro that interoceptor is not a Gallicism and is a Aristotle. fact6: This wulfenite either evertings or is not a introjection or both. fact7: The coupe is hardhearted and/or it is not a trusted. fact8: That this wulfenite is a UDA is correct if this wulfenite is not a frowning. fact9: Something is not a Kukenaam if it is not a kind of a Gallicism and it is a Aristotle. fact10: This wulfenite shoals malaprop. fact11: This wulfenite is a introjection. fact12: Something that is a introjection and/or is not a UDA is a kind of a Piciformes. fact13: Some person is a introjection and he is a UDA if he is not a Kukenaam. ; $hypothesis$ = This wulfenite is not a kind of a Piciformes. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> int1: This wulfenite is a introjection or that one is not a UDA or both.; fact12 -> int2: This wulfenite is a Piciformes if she/he is a introjection or not a UDA or both.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That brickfield is a Romaic.

{C}{c}

fact1: The fact that this negotiant is a kind of a Phasmatidae is not true if that Jada is a Artemis and does not despoil Eindhoven is false. fact2: If Jada is suborbital that this person is a Artemis and does not despoil Eindhoven is incorrect. fact3: This negotiant is a Artemis. fact4: If this negotiant is not a Phasmatidae that brickfield is a kind of a Romaic. fact5: That that brickfield despoils Eindhoven hold. fact6: This negotiant is a preciousness. fact7: If this negotiant does not despoil Eindhoven Jada is not a kind of a Phasmatidae. fact8: The fact that this negotiant is a kind of suborbital thing that is not a Phasmatidae does not hold. fact9: Some person that is both a Arcellidae and not a preciousness is not a Phasmatidae. fact10: If Jada is not a Romaic that brickfield is suborbital. fact11: Jada is suborbital. fact12: That shortstop is a Phasmatidae. fact13: That that brickfield is not suborbital hold.

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

That brickfield is not a Romaic.

¬{C}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this negotiant is a kind of a Phasmatidae is not true if that Jada is a Artemis and does not despoil Eindhoven is false. fact2: If Jada is suborbital that this person is a Artemis and does not despoil Eindhoven is incorrect. fact3: This negotiant is a Artemis. fact4: If this negotiant is not a Phasmatidae that brickfield is a kind of a Romaic. fact5: That that brickfield despoils Eindhoven hold. fact6: This negotiant is a preciousness. fact7: If this negotiant does not despoil Eindhoven Jada is not a kind of a Phasmatidae. fact8: The fact that this negotiant is a kind of suborbital thing that is not a Phasmatidae does not hold. fact9: Some person that is both a Arcellidae and not a preciousness is not a Phasmatidae. fact10: If Jada is not a Romaic that brickfield is suborbital. fact11: Jada is suborbital. fact12: That shortstop is a Phasmatidae. fact13: That that brickfield is not suborbital hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That brickfield is a Romaic. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact11 -> int1: The fact that Jada is a kind of a Artemis and does not despoil Eindhoven does not hold.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: This negotiant is not a Phasmatidae.; int2 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That nanus is not gastroesophageal.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If somebody that is animated regorges electronics then that that nanus is gastroesophageal is correct. fact2: Something is not gastroesophageal if that it does not regorge electronics and it is not gastroesophageal is wrong. fact3: That this Hoosier does mill suitableness and is nonprehensile is false if that does not confab Ruskin. fact4: Someone that is not a poetry and not a laced does not instill acquittance. fact5: If something is dramaturgical then the fact that this is not animated and/or this is not a sodding does not hold. fact6: That the fact that something does not regorge electronics but it is gastroesophageal hold does not hold if it is animated. fact7: This transmission does elevate revolting. fact8: If Richie instils acquittance that this transmission does not slag stephead and it is not dramaturgical does not hold. fact9: Something is dramaturgical if that it does not slag stephead and is not dramaturgical is false. fact10: The awol accentuates and it regorges electronics. fact11: If that this Hoosier does mill suitableness and she/he is nonprehensile does not hold then the fact that this Hoosier is not a Father hold. fact12: Something does regorge electronics. fact13: Richie is both not a poetry and not a laced if this Hoosier is not a kind of a Father. fact14: There exists some man such that she/he is Pavlovian and is a monorail. fact15: The fact that that nanus is animated hold if that the fact that this transmission is not animated or is not a sodding or both is correct is false. fact16: This transmission is animated. fact17: this electronics does regorge transmission. fact18: This transmission does regorge electronics. fact19: There exists something such that it is animated.

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

That nanus is not gastroesophageal.

¬{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody that is animated regorges electronics then that that nanus is gastroesophageal is correct. fact2: Something is not gastroesophageal if that it does not regorge electronics and it is not gastroesophageal is wrong. fact3: That this Hoosier does mill suitableness and is nonprehensile is false if that does not confab Ruskin. fact4: Someone that is not a poetry and not a laced does not instill acquittance. fact5: If something is dramaturgical then the fact that this is not animated and/or this is not a sodding does not hold. fact6: That the fact that something does not regorge electronics but it is gastroesophageal hold does not hold if it is animated. fact7: This transmission does elevate revolting. fact8: If Richie instils acquittance that this transmission does not slag stephead and it is not dramaturgical does not hold. fact9: Something is dramaturgical if that it does not slag stephead and is not dramaturgical is false. fact10: The awol accentuates and it regorges electronics. fact11: If that this Hoosier does mill suitableness and she/he is nonprehensile does not hold then the fact that this Hoosier is not a Father hold. fact12: Something does regorge electronics. fact13: Richie is both not a poetry and not a laced if this Hoosier is not a kind of a Father. fact14: There exists some man such that she/he is Pavlovian and is a monorail. fact15: The fact that that nanus is animated hold if that the fact that this transmission is not animated or is not a sodding or both is correct is false. fact16: This transmission is animated. fact17: this electronics does regorge transmission. fact18: This transmission does regorge electronics. fact19: There exists something such that it is animated. ; $hypothesis$ = That nanus is not gastroesophageal. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact18 -> int1: This transmission is animated thing that regorges electronics.; int1 -> int2: Something is animated thing that regorges electronics.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That conductance does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: The fact that the fact that that unsubdividedness does not occurs and this generalcy happens is wrong hold if this Besting does not happens. fact2: If this spitting does not happens then this Besting does not happens but this Downing occurs. fact3: That if this dicotyledonousness does not happens the fact that this cryogenicness and this non-salientianness occurs is not true is right. fact4: That this spiriting occurs is brought about by the tellurianness. fact5: That both that dying harmonic and the tellurianness occurs is triggered by that this specialising does not occurs. fact6: This specialising does not occurs if the fact that this non-unsubdividedness and this generalcy occurs is wrong. fact7: The fact that that this shearing reinsurance happens and this spitting happens hold is incorrect if this cryogenicness does not occurs. fact8: That celebrating happens but that conductance does not occurs if this spiriting happens. fact9: If that this cryogenicness but notthe salientianness happens is wrong then this cryogenicness does not happens. fact10: If the fact that this shearing reinsurance occurs and this spitting occurs is wrong this spitting does not happens. fact11: If the fact that that celebrating happens but this spiriting does not occurs is wrong that conductance happens. fact12: If either this dockage does not happens or this Sudanese occurs or both then this dicotyledonousness does not occurs.

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

That conductance does not occurs.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the fact that that unsubdividedness does not occurs and this generalcy happens is wrong hold if this Besting does not happens. fact2: If this spitting does not happens then this Besting does not happens but this Downing occurs. fact3: That if this dicotyledonousness does not happens the fact that this cryogenicness and this non-salientianness occurs is not true is right. fact4: That this spiriting occurs is brought about by the tellurianness. fact5: That both that dying harmonic and the tellurianness occurs is triggered by that this specialising does not occurs. fact6: This specialising does not occurs if the fact that this non-unsubdividedness and this generalcy occurs is wrong. fact7: The fact that that this shearing reinsurance happens and this spitting happens hold is incorrect if this cryogenicness does not occurs. fact8: That celebrating happens but that conductance does not occurs if this spiriting happens. fact9: If that this cryogenicness but notthe salientianness happens is wrong then this cryogenicness does not happens. fact10: If the fact that this shearing reinsurance occurs and this spitting occurs is wrong this spitting does not happens. fact11: If the fact that that celebrating happens but this spiriting does not occurs is wrong that conductance happens. fact12: If either this dockage does not happens or this Sudanese occurs or both then this dicotyledonousness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That conductance does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That either that antimicrobic does not invest atypicality or the person is a bugginess or both does not hold.

¬(¬{A}{a} v {C}{a})

fact1: That antimicrobic is not a Menotyphla if that that antimicrobic is a ululation and he/she prunes trauma does not hold. fact2: That that antimicrobic is a ululation and he/she prunes trauma is false. fact3: Some man is not non-lithic if she dock epicureanism. fact4: Something is a Serratula if it is lithic. fact5: If that freighter is not a Menotyphla that that antimicrobic does not invest atypicality and/or it is a kind of a bugginess does not hold. fact6: If that antimicrobic is not a generic it does not prune trauma. fact7: Something that does not prune trauma is not a Menotyphla. fact8: The fact that that antimicrobic is a latest and it prunes trauma does not hold. fact9: That antimicrobic does not invest atypicality if that antimicrobic does not save. fact10: The fact that that antimicrobic prunes trauma and this person is a Vasarely does not hold. fact11: If that this motortruck is a Menotyphla is not incorrect then that freighter is not a Menotyphla. fact12: If that antimicrobic does not prune trauma this person is not a Menotyphla. fact13: That antimicrobic does invest atypicality and/or it is a bugginess. fact14: A Serratula is a Menotyphla. fact15: That that antimicrobic is a infarct and it is a Esperanto is not correct.

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

That either that antimicrobic does not invest atypicality or the person is a bugginess or both does not hold.

¬(¬{A}{a} v {C}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That antimicrobic is not a Menotyphla if that that antimicrobic is a ululation and he/she prunes trauma does not hold. fact2: That that antimicrobic is a ululation and he/she prunes trauma is false. fact3: Some man is not non-lithic if she dock epicureanism. fact4: Something is a Serratula if it is lithic. fact5: If that freighter is not a Menotyphla that that antimicrobic does not invest atypicality and/or it is a kind of a bugginess does not hold. fact6: If that antimicrobic is not a generic it does not prune trauma. fact7: Something that does not prune trauma is not a Menotyphla. fact8: The fact that that antimicrobic is a latest and it prunes trauma does not hold. fact9: That antimicrobic does not invest atypicality if that antimicrobic does not save. fact10: The fact that that antimicrobic prunes trauma and this person is a Vasarely does not hold. fact11: If that this motortruck is a Menotyphla is not incorrect then that freighter is not a Menotyphla. fact12: If that antimicrobic does not prune trauma this person is not a Menotyphla. fact13: That antimicrobic does invest atypicality and/or it is a bugginess. fact14: A Serratula is a Menotyphla. fact15: That that antimicrobic is a infarct and it is a Esperanto is not correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That either that antimicrobic does not invest atypicality or the person is a bugginess or both does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That unbalconiedness occurs.

{E}

fact1: Either this uncriticalness or that that decayed happens or both yields the non-unbalconiedness. fact2: That if that unification happens then that decayed happens is right. fact3: Either that unification occurs or that subleasing Baku does not happens or both. fact4: That decayed occurs if that that subleasing Baku does not occurs is true.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Either this uncriticalness or that that decayed happens or both yields the non-unbalconiedness. fact2: That if that unification happens then that decayed happens is right. fact3: Either that unification occurs or that subleasing Baku does not happens or both. fact4: That decayed occurs if that that subleasing Baku does not occurs is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That unbalconiedness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact2 & fact4 -> int1: That decayed occurs.; int1 -> int2: This uncriticalness occurs and/or that decayed occurs.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This hirer does displease Vichy.

{A}{a}

fact1: That ply is not pyroelectrical and/or it is a kind of a flashiness. fact2: If some man does displease Vichy it is not a flashiness. fact3: If that ply is a flashiness then the person does not mutate. fact4: If somebody is not pyroelectrical and/or it is a flashiness it does not mutate.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That ply is not pyroelectrical and/or it is a kind of a flashiness. fact2: If some man does displease Vichy it is not a flashiness. fact3: If that ply is a flashiness then the person does not mutate. fact4: If somebody is not pyroelectrical and/or it is a flashiness it does not mutate. ; $hypothesis$ = This hirer does displease Vichy. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That stairs is microsomal.

{C}{c}

fact1: If this counterpoison does tear sliding this counterpoison is not non-ambiversive. fact2: That stairs is not microsomal if this adaptation is not a kind of a Noctuidae and is not ambiversive. fact3: that sliding tears counterpoison. fact4: This counterpoison tears sliding. fact5: This adaptation is not a kind of a Noctuidae and this person is not ambiversive if this counterpoison is ambiversive. fact6: The fact that Freddie is a Noctuidae hold if this counterpoison tears sliding and is not a Noctuidae.

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

That Freddie is a Noctuidae is true.

{D}{bn}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this counterpoison does tear sliding this counterpoison is not non-ambiversive. fact2: That stairs is not microsomal if this adaptation is not a kind of a Noctuidae and is not ambiversive. fact3: that sliding tears counterpoison. fact4: This counterpoison tears sliding. fact5: This adaptation is not a kind of a Noctuidae and this person is not ambiversive if this counterpoison is ambiversive. fact6: The fact that Freddie is a Noctuidae hold if this counterpoison tears sliding and is not a Noctuidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That stairs is microsomal. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact4 -> int1: This counterpoison is ambiversive.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: This adaptation is not a Noctuidae and it is not ambiversive.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That levant is tasteful and is a audaciousness.

({B}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: This sniffle hibernates. fact2: The fact that that levant is a partnership hold. fact3: If Nicki does not tot Teleostei then this is not a kind of a Caloocan and does not sight Rappahannock. fact4: The fact that this contents remunerates prevue but he/she does not dawn dalasi is correct. fact5: That the pompon is tasteful is correct. fact6: The fact that if that levant is a partnership that levant is tasteful is true. fact7: That levant is a inhospitality and is not a neutered. fact8: That sacrificer is a partnership. fact9: If something is a piastre this does not hulking and this does not despair. fact10: That clerestory is not a audaciousness if that that levant hibernates is true. fact11: If Mandy does not hulking that either this enchiridion does demoralise or it hibernates or both is true. fact12: Someone is a Cousteau if it is not a kind of a Caloocan and it does not sight Rappahannock. fact13: That levant is a audaciousness but it does not hibernate. fact14: That levant is a defensibility. fact15: Some person that is not a kind of a audaciousness is a partnership and is not non-tasteful. fact16: If Nicki is a Cousteau then Mandy is a piastre. fact17: That levant is a kind of a melancholia but it is non-sabbatical. fact18: That levant does bug riskiness and this thing assures. fact19: Nicki does not tot Teleostei.

fact1: {D}{gf} fact2: {A}{a} fact3: ¬{L}{d} -> (¬{J}{d} & ¬{K}{d}) fact4: ({HR}{je} & ¬{HS}{je}) fact5: {B}{gp} fact6: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact7: ({IJ}{a} & ¬{EL}{a}) fact8: {A}{ci} fact9: (x): {H}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{G}x) fact10: {D}{a} -> ¬{C}{jd} fact11: ¬{E}{c} -> ({F}{b} v {D}{b}) fact12: (x): (¬{J}x & ¬{K}x) -> {I}x fact13: ({C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact14: {IC}{a} fact15: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact16: {I}{d} -> {H}{c} fact17: ({DD}{a} & ¬{ES}{a}) fact18: ({CH}{a} & {JE}{a}) fact19: ¬{L}{d}

That clerestory is tasteful.

{B}{jd}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This sniffle hibernates. fact2: The fact that that levant is a partnership hold. fact3: If Nicki does not tot Teleostei then this is not a kind of a Caloocan and does not sight Rappahannock. fact4: The fact that this contents remunerates prevue but he/she does not dawn dalasi is correct. fact5: That the pompon is tasteful is correct. fact6: The fact that if that levant is a partnership that levant is tasteful is true. fact7: That levant is a inhospitality and is not a neutered. fact8: That sacrificer is a partnership. fact9: If something is a piastre this does not hulking and this does not despair. fact10: That clerestory is not a audaciousness if that that levant hibernates is true. fact11: If Mandy does not hulking that either this enchiridion does demoralise or it hibernates or both is true. fact12: Someone is a Cousteau if it is not a kind of a Caloocan and it does not sight Rappahannock. fact13: That levant is a audaciousness but it does not hibernate. fact14: That levant is a defensibility. fact15: Some person that is not a kind of a audaciousness is a partnership and is not non-tasteful. fact16: If Nicki is a Cousteau then Mandy is a piastre. fact17: That levant is a kind of a melancholia but it is non-sabbatical. fact18: That levant does bug riskiness and this thing assures. fact19: Nicki does not tot Teleostei. ; $hypothesis$ = That levant is tasteful and is a audaciousness. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact2 -> int1: That levant is tasteful.; fact13 -> int2: That levant is a audaciousness.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This animatisticness happens.

{A}

fact1: This animatisticness does not happens if the fact that this bruise does not happens and that drawn happens does not hold. fact2: The pouring M3 occurs if the fact that the pouring M3 does not occurs and that drawn occurs is incorrect. fact3: That that actuation happens leads to that that indistinctness happens but that teetotaling prodding does not occurs. fact4: This binding occurs. fact5: That this non-placentalness and that peronealness happens is wrong if this heterozygousness does not happens. fact6: The fact that if that this amending Wisconsin does not happens and/or this occult does not happens does not hold then that mercerizing technicolor does not happens hold. fact7: That that the superintendence but notthis heterozygousness occurs is caused by that this scald does not occurs is not false. fact8: That either this amending Wisconsin occurs or that mercerizing technicolor does not happens or both results in that this Arthurianness does not occurs. fact9: That both that nullification and this Arthurianness happens is brought about by that that mercerizing technicolor does not occurs. fact10: That this amending Wisconsin does not occurs is prevented by that this occult occurs. fact11: If the fact that the placentalness does not happens but that peronealness happens does not hold that reddening hedged does not occurs. fact12: If this animatisticness does not occurs then that the pouring M3 does not happens but that drawn happens does not hold. fact13: That indistinctness yields that that apery occurs and that telling does not happens. fact14: This animatisticness happens. fact15: This animatisticness does not happens and this bruise occurs if that nullification happens. fact16: That that reddening hedged does not happens leads to that this occult happens and this recalcitrating Fagus happens. fact17: If that apery but notthat telling happens then this scald does not occurs. fact18: That that nullification happens is prevented by that this Arthurianness does not happens.

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

The pouring M3 happens.

{JC}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This animatisticness does not happens if the fact that this bruise does not happens and that drawn happens does not hold. fact2: The pouring M3 occurs if the fact that the pouring M3 does not occurs and that drawn occurs is incorrect. fact3: That that actuation happens leads to that that indistinctness happens but that teetotaling prodding does not occurs. fact4: This binding occurs. fact5: That this non-placentalness and that peronealness happens is wrong if this heterozygousness does not happens. fact6: The fact that if that this amending Wisconsin does not happens and/or this occult does not happens does not hold then that mercerizing technicolor does not happens hold. fact7: That that the superintendence but notthis heterozygousness occurs is caused by that this scald does not occurs is not false. fact8: That either this amending Wisconsin occurs or that mercerizing technicolor does not happens or both results in that this Arthurianness does not occurs. fact9: That both that nullification and this Arthurianness happens is brought about by that that mercerizing technicolor does not occurs. fact10: That this amending Wisconsin does not occurs is prevented by that this occult occurs. fact11: If the fact that the placentalness does not happens but that peronealness happens does not hold that reddening hedged does not occurs. fact12: If this animatisticness does not occurs then that the pouring M3 does not happens but that drawn happens does not hold. fact13: That indistinctness yields that that apery occurs and that telling does not happens. fact14: This animatisticness happens. fact15: This animatisticness does not happens and this bruise occurs if that nullification happens. fact16: That that reddening hedged does not happens leads to that this occult happens and this recalcitrating Fagus happens. fact17: If that apery but notthat telling happens then this scald does not occurs. fact18: That that nullification happens is prevented by that this Arthurianness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This animatisticness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This stipendiary is a perspicaciousness.

{D}{b}

fact1: That something ingeminates XXVI and is a perspicaciousness is not correct if it does not deprecate pentagram. fact2: Something does not stem Day if that that is not a kind of a Bessera and that stem Day does not hold. fact3: This stipendiary deprecates pentagram. fact4: That roue overpowers exclusive if it is a kind of a zoology. fact5: that XXVI does not ingeminate plover. fact6: Someone is a kind of a perspicaciousness if it ingeminates XXVI. fact7: If Quentin does not overpower exclusive that this molar is not a Bessera but this one stems Day is wrong. fact8: This plover does not deprecate pentagram and prods Acanthocereus if this molar does not stem Day. fact9: If that roue overpowers exclusive then Quentin does not overpowers exclusive. fact10: This plover does not ingeminate XXVI. fact11: This gawker ingeminates XXVI if this plover ingeminates XXVI. fact12: Some person is a perspicaciousness if he prods Acanthocereus. fact13: This plover is a kind of a perspicaciousness. fact14: This stipendiary prods Acanthocereus if this plover does not ingeminate XXVI and deprecates pentagram. fact15: this pentagram deprecates plover.

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

This gawker is a kind of a perspicaciousness.

{D}{ib}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That something ingeminates XXVI and is a perspicaciousness is not correct if it does not deprecate pentagram. fact2: Something does not stem Day if that that is not a kind of a Bessera and that stem Day does not hold. fact3: This stipendiary deprecates pentagram. fact4: That roue overpowers exclusive if it is a kind of a zoology. fact5: that XXVI does not ingeminate plover. fact6: Someone is a kind of a perspicaciousness if it ingeminates XXVI. fact7: If Quentin does not overpower exclusive that this molar is not a Bessera but this one stems Day is wrong. fact8: This plover does not deprecate pentagram and prods Acanthocereus if this molar does not stem Day. fact9: If that roue overpowers exclusive then Quentin does not overpowers exclusive. fact10: This plover does not ingeminate XXVI. fact11: This gawker ingeminates XXVI if this plover ingeminates XXVI. fact12: Some person is a perspicaciousness if he prods Acanthocereus. fact13: This plover is a kind of a perspicaciousness. fact14: This stipendiary prods Acanthocereus if this plover does not ingeminate XXVI and deprecates pentagram. fact15: this pentagram deprecates plover. ; $hypothesis$ = This stipendiary is a perspicaciousness. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That nonmusicalness does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: If this unstratifiedness occurs then this stewardship occurs. fact2: That nonmusicalness and this typhoon happens if this underprivilegedness does not happens. fact3: This typhoon occurs and this underprivilegedness happens. fact4: That nonmusicalness does not occurs if this underprivilegedness happens and this inboardness occurs. fact5: That that abscission occurs causes that this underprivilegedness does not occurs and this inboardness happens. fact6: If this stewardship happens then that abscission happens.

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

That nonmusicalness occurs.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this unstratifiedness occurs then this stewardship occurs. fact2: That nonmusicalness and this typhoon happens if this underprivilegedness does not happens. fact3: This typhoon occurs and this underprivilegedness happens. fact4: That nonmusicalness does not occurs if this underprivilegedness happens and this inboardness occurs. fact5: That that abscission occurs causes that this underprivilegedness does not occurs and this inboardness happens. fact6: If this stewardship happens then that abscission happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That nonmusicalness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that mayoralty occurs but that steady does not occurs hold.

({C} & ¬{D})

fact1: That this ducalness does not occurs or that ensnaring Plath does not occurs or both is triggered by this regorging seventeenth. fact2: If that Iranian does not happens then that notthis prelature but this melting Thripidae occurs is not right. fact3: If this melting Thripidae does not happens this rollover occurs and this ravelling Atherinopsis happens. fact4: If that nauch happens that mayoralty occurs. fact5: This ravelling Atherinopsis happens. fact6: If that this prelature does not happens but this melting Thripidae occurs is wrong this melting Thripidae does not occurs. fact7: If the inauspiciousness does not happens then that jugging occurs and that steady does not occurs. fact8: This ravelling Atherinopsis occurs and that nauch happens. fact9: This regorging seventeenth occurs. fact10: The fact that that Iranian does not happens is correct if either this ducalness does not occurs or that ensnaring Plath does not occurs or both. fact11: That jugging happens.

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

This canalization does not happens but this rollover occurs.

(¬{AP} & {IA})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this ducalness does not occurs or that ensnaring Plath does not occurs or both is triggered by this regorging seventeenth. fact2: If that Iranian does not happens then that notthis prelature but this melting Thripidae occurs is not right. fact3: If this melting Thripidae does not happens this rollover occurs and this ravelling Atherinopsis happens. fact4: If that nauch happens that mayoralty occurs. fact5: This ravelling Atherinopsis happens. fact6: If that this prelature does not happens but this melting Thripidae occurs is wrong this melting Thripidae does not occurs. fact7: If the inauspiciousness does not happens then that jugging occurs and that steady does not occurs. fact8: This ravelling Atherinopsis occurs and that nauch happens. fact9: This regorging seventeenth occurs. fact10: The fact that that Iranian does not happens is correct if either this ducalness does not occurs or that ensnaring Plath does not occurs or both. fact11: That jugging happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that mayoralty occurs but that steady does not occurs hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That there exists something such that it is not a national is wrong.

¬((Ex): ¬{D}x)

fact1: That the satin is not a Gnetophytina or it is not a Zonotrichia or both is incorrect if there exists something such that it sears. fact2: Something does not acquit. fact3: That LGB is not a grandeur. fact4: Something does not encrypt. fact5: That LGB draughts Parkinsonia. fact6: That that ninepins does not draught Parkinsonia and/or is not a Barnum does not hold if there exists some person such that that person is a kind of a Gnetophytina. fact7: If that someone is non-carinate and/or it is not a kind of a asynclitism is wrong then it does not proclaim exophthalmos. fact8: The fact that if there are unprejudiced things then the fact that either that LGB does not jaw or that does not investigate tittle or both is wrong hold. fact9: This saddlecloth is not terrestrial. fact10: If the fact that something is not a metritis or not basilar or both is false it is not a Dionysus. fact11: If there exists somebody such that that one is unloving then the fact that either that toxoid does not draught Parkinsonia or that one is not an absolute or both is wrong. fact12: If the fact that either something draughts Parkinsonia or this thing is not unlikable or both does not hold this thing is not a kind of a national. fact13: There is some man such that it is a hobbit. fact14: Someone is not a kind of a national if that that one does not draught Parkinsonia or that one is not unlikable or both is wrong. fact15: Something jabs glottochronology. fact16: The fact that that LGB does not draught Parkinsonia or is not a gist or both does not hold. fact17: The fact that that LGB does not draught Parkinsonia and/or is not unlikable does not hold if there is some person such that he is a hobbit. fact18: That LGB is not unlikable if that that LGB is a kind of a Meleagris or it is not a Gnetophytina or both is not right. fact19: There exists something such that that this thing is not unregulated hold. fact20: Something is a theogony. fact21: The fact that that LGB is not a kind of a bobble or it is not a discontented or both is incorrect.

fact1: (x): {CE}x -> ¬(¬{IN}{fj} v ¬{IE}{fj}) fact2: (Ex): ¬{E}x fact3: ¬{AU}{a} fact4: (Ex): ¬{R}x fact5: {B}{a} fact6: (x): {IN}x -> ¬(¬{B}{je} v ¬{FJ}{je}) fact7: (x): ¬(¬{IP}x v ¬{FF}x) -> ¬{ED}x fact8: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{HC}{a} v ¬{EQ}{a}) fact9: ¬{FH}{bm} fact10: (x): ¬(¬{AL}x v ¬{AO}x) -> ¬{N}x fact11: (x): {FS}x -> ¬(¬{B}{bj} v ¬{EM}{bj}) fact12: (x): ¬({B}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{D}x fact13: (Ex): {A}x fact14: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{D}x fact15: (Ex): {GJ}x fact16: ¬(¬{B}{a} v ¬{GK}{a}) fact17: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) fact18: ¬({CF}{a} v ¬{IN}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact19: (Ex): ¬{GU}x fact20: (Ex): {HQ}x fact21: ¬(¬{EH}{a} v ¬{DS}{a})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That the satin is not a Gnetophytina or it is not a Zonotrichia or both is incorrect if there exists something such that it sears. fact2: Something does not acquit. fact3: That LGB is not a grandeur. fact4: Something does not encrypt. fact5: That LGB draughts Parkinsonia. fact6: That that ninepins does not draught Parkinsonia and/or is not a Barnum does not hold if there exists some person such that that person is a kind of a Gnetophytina. fact7: If that someone is non-carinate and/or it is not a kind of a asynclitism is wrong then it does not proclaim exophthalmos. fact8: The fact that if there are unprejudiced things then the fact that either that LGB does not jaw or that does not investigate tittle or both is wrong hold. fact9: This saddlecloth is not terrestrial. fact10: If the fact that something is not a metritis or not basilar or both is false it is not a Dionysus. fact11: If there exists somebody such that that one is unloving then the fact that either that toxoid does not draught Parkinsonia or that one is not an absolute or both is wrong. fact12: If the fact that either something draughts Parkinsonia or this thing is not unlikable or both does not hold this thing is not a kind of a national. fact13: There is some man such that it is a hobbit. fact14: Someone is not a kind of a national if that that one does not draught Parkinsonia or that one is not unlikable or both is wrong. fact15: Something jabs glottochronology. fact16: The fact that that LGB does not draught Parkinsonia or is not a gist or both does not hold. fact17: The fact that that LGB does not draught Parkinsonia and/or is not unlikable does not hold if there is some person such that he is a hobbit. fact18: That LGB is not unlikable if that that LGB is a kind of a Meleagris or it is not a Gnetophytina or both is not right. fact19: There exists something such that that this thing is not unregulated hold. fact20: Something is a theogony. fact21: The fact that that LGB is not a kind of a bobble or it is not a discontented or both is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That there exists something such that it is not a national is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact13 & fact17 -> int1: The fact that that LGB does not draught Parkinsonia and/or it is not unlikable does not hold.; fact14 -> int2: If that that LGB either does not draught Parkinsonia or is not unlikable or both is incorrect then it is not a national.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That LGB is not a national.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That paviour is Leibnitzian.

{D}{b}

fact1: That the arborist is a horizontal hold if the arborist is a Friday. fact2: If this Hualapai does not wring discant and is online that it is not an inevitable hold. fact3: If that EDP is both not a Orchestia and non-Leibnitzian this cookware broods Livistona. fact4: Something disambiguates vapidity if this broods Livistona. fact5: This Hualapai does brood Livistona and peals maladjustment if he is not a kind of an inevitable. fact6: The fact that someone is not a Orchestia if it is a kind of an incentive and it naturalizes Indonesia is correct. fact7: The fact that that paviour is not Leibnitzian is right if that EDP broods Livistona and the one is a Orchestia. fact8: Something disambiguates vapidity if the fact that this does not disambiguates vapidity and is a kind of a Orchestia is wrong. fact9: The fact that that paviour does not peal maladjustment is correct if the fact that this Hualapai wrings discant but he/she is non-online does not hold. fact10: That EDP does peal maladjustment. fact11: That EDP disambiguates vapidity and it broods Livistona. fact12: If some man is not a kind of a Friulian then he does light cheque and is not dysplastic. fact13: This Hualapai does not are Bunyan if the fact that the lense does are Bunyan and does not devaluate is incorrect. fact14: That the lense are Bunyan and does not devaluate does not hold. fact15: If that that paviour is a kind of an inevitable and is not Leibnitzian is false that EDP is not Leibnitzian. fact16: If that EDP does peal maladjustment then this thing is a Orchestia. fact17: If that endocrinologist is not a kind of a biotype then that EDP is an incentive and tents. fact18: Something naturalizes Indonesia if the thing does light cheque and the thing is not dysplastic. fact19: If something does not peal maladjustment the fact that it is an inevitable but not Leibnitzian does not hold. fact20: That endocrinologist is a Townsendia but it is not a biotype. fact21: That something wrings discant but it is not online is wrong if it does not are Bunyan. fact22: this maladjustment does peal EDP.

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

That paviour is Leibnitzian.

{D}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the arborist is a horizontal hold if the arborist is a Friday. fact2: If this Hualapai does not wring discant and is online that it is not an inevitable hold. fact3: If that EDP is both not a Orchestia and non-Leibnitzian this cookware broods Livistona. fact4: Something disambiguates vapidity if this broods Livistona. fact5: This Hualapai does brood Livistona and peals maladjustment if he is not a kind of an inevitable. fact6: The fact that someone is not a Orchestia if it is a kind of an incentive and it naturalizes Indonesia is correct. fact7: The fact that that paviour is not Leibnitzian is right if that EDP broods Livistona and the one is a Orchestia. fact8: Something disambiguates vapidity if the fact that this does not disambiguates vapidity and is a kind of a Orchestia is wrong. fact9: The fact that that paviour does not peal maladjustment is correct if the fact that this Hualapai wrings discant but he/she is non-online does not hold. fact10: That EDP does peal maladjustment. fact11: That EDP disambiguates vapidity and it broods Livistona. fact12: If some man is not a kind of a Friulian then he does light cheque and is not dysplastic. fact13: This Hualapai does not are Bunyan if the fact that the lense does are Bunyan and does not devaluate is incorrect. fact14: That the lense are Bunyan and does not devaluate does not hold. fact15: If that that paviour is a kind of an inevitable and is not Leibnitzian is false that EDP is not Leibnitzian. fact16: If that EDP does peal maladjustment then this thing is a Orchestia. fact17: If that endocrinologist is not a kind of a biotype then that EDP is an incentive and tents. fact18: Something naturalizes Indonesia if the thing does light cheque and the thing is not dysplastic. fact19: If something does not peal maladjustment the fact that it is an inevitable but not Leibnitzian does not hold. fact20: That endocrinologist is a Townsendia but it is not a biotype. fact21: That something wrings discant but it is not online is wrong if it does not are Bunyan. fact22: this maladjustment does peal EDP. ; $hypothesis$ = That paviour is Leibnitzian. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> int1: That EDP does brood Livistona.; fact16 & fact10 -> int2: That EDP is a Orchestia.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that that EDP broods Livistona and is a Orchestia hold.; int3 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that waterfinder is a spavin and it is a last is false.

¬({A}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: That waterfinder is a spavin. fact2: Someone that does not gain Carcharhinus and is a nazi is not a kind of a quixotism. fact3: This militiaman does not gain Carcharhinus but it is a nazi if that urbanisation is not a worst. fact4: That urbanisation is not a kind of a IWW but it gains Carcharhinus if it is a kind of a nazi. fact5: The fact that that waterfinder is both a spavin and a last does not hold if this militiaman is not a kind of a Cestida. fact6: That waterfinder does brace trustingness and that thing is a kind of a Indic. fact7: This Sooner is a exocrine and that one is a kind of a last. fact8: If that waterfinder is not a kind of a Cestida then the sapote is a last and it is a kind of a spavin. fact9: That waterfinder is a tracing. fact10: The evaporite is a last. fact11: This militiaman is a quixotism and/or it is a kind of a Cestida if somebody is not a IWW. fact12: That somebody is a kind of a Cestida and is a IWW is wrong if it is not a quixotism. fact13: If this gibberellin is not a Rodolia and this is not a Mytilidae then that pneumoencephalogram is a kind of a Mytilidae. fact14: The xenolith is bituminous and it is not non-satyric. fact15: That urbanisation is not a worst if either that pneumoencephalogram is a Mytilidae or that is a kind of a worst or both. fact16: Something is not a Cestida if the fact that the thing is a Cestida that is a IWW is false.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: (x): (¬{F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{D}x fact3: ¬{H}{c} -> (¬{F}{b} & {G}{b}) fact4: {G}{c} -> (¬{E}{c} & {F}{c}) fact5: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact6: ({DP}{a} & {EL}{a}) fact7: ({HJ}{ij} & {B}{ij}) fact8: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{bt} & {A}{bt}) fact9: {FK}{a} fact10: {B}{ej} fact11: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}{b} v {C}{b}) fact12: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & {E}x) fact13: (¬{J}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) -> {I}{d} fact14: ({FB}{k} & {IG}{k}) fact15: ({I}{d} v {H}{d}) -> ¬{H}{c} fact16: (x): ¬({C}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x

That the sapote is a last is correct.

{B}{bt}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That waterfinder is a spavin. fact2: Someone that does not gain Carcharhinus and is a nazi is not a kind of a quixotism. fact3: This militiaman does not gain Carcharhinus but it is a nazi if that urbanisation is not a worst. fact4: That urbanisation is not a kind of a IWW but it gains Carcharhinus if it is a kind of a nazi. fact5: The fact that that waterfinder is both a spavin and a last does not hold if this militiaman is not a kind of a Cestida. fact6: That waterfinder does brace trustingness and that thing is a kind of a Indic. fact7: This Sooner is a exocrine and that one is a kind of a last. fact8: If that waterfinder is not a kind of a Cestida then the sapote is a last and it is a kind of a spavin. fact9: That waterfinder is a tracing. fact10: The evaporite is a last. fact11: This militiaman is a quixotism and/or it is a kind of a Cestida if somebody is not a IWW. fact12: That somebody is a kind of a Cestida and is a IWW is wrong if it is not a quixotism. fact13: If this gibberellin is not a Rodolia and this is not a Mytilidae then that pneumoencephalogram is a kind of a Mytilidae. fact14: The xenolith is bituminous and it is not non-satyric. fact15: That urbanisation is not a worst if either that pneumoencephalogram is a Mytilidae or that is a kind of a worst or both. fact16: Something is not a Cestida if the fact that the thing is a Cestida that is a IWW is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That that waterfinder is a spavin and it is a last is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that the encroaching instinct does not happens and this metricness does not occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{B} & ¬{A})

fact1: The exaction happens and this metricness does not occurs. fact2: The fact that the espousing Telosporidia does not occurs and the upraising odontology does not occurs is not incorrect. fact3: The unadoptableness does not occurs and the scalloping unkindness does not happens. fact4: If that this tacking happens but that mocking does not happens does not hold the encroaching instinct does not occurs. fact5: The halma occurs but that slewsing indigestibleness does not happens. fact6: That welter happens but that manduction does not happens. fact7: The fact that this tacking happens but that mocking does not occurs does not hold.

fact1: ({C} & ¬{A}) fact2: (¬{FB} & ¬{FU}) fact3: (¬{CB} & ¬{CC}) fact4: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ({DI} & ¬{GB}) fact6: ({GD} & ¬{DF}) fact7: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The exaction happens and this metricness does not occurs. fact2: The fact that the espousing Telosporidia does not occurs and the upraising odontology does not occurs is not incorrect. fact3: The unadoptableness does not occurs and the scalloping unkindness does not happens. fact4: If that this tacking happens but that mocking does not happens does not hold the encroaching instinct does not occurs. fact5: The halma occurs but that slewsing indigestibleness does not happens. fact6: That welter happens but that manduction does not happens. fact7: The fact that this tacking happens but that mocking does not occurs does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the encroaching instinct does not happens and this metricness does not occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact7 -> int1: The encroaching instinct does not occurs.; fact1 -> int2: This metricness does not occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This grit stanches paygrade.

{A}{a}

fact1: This grit plasters Astronium. fact2: This coelom is not a Tayassu if something is a kind of a Tayassu and it is diamantine. fact3: The fact that the ultraconservative is not a kind of a Johnston and that is not a fume if that virusoid is a kind of a xc hold. fact4: This petter is a Tayassu. fact5: This grit is a fume if the ultraconservative is both not a Johnston and not a fume. fact6: Some person that is not a phantom overlooks shmooze and stanches paygrade. fact7: That something is not a kind of a transposability and is a phantom is incorrect if the fact that it is a fume is true. fact8: This grit middles. fact9: That virusoid is a xc if this bunting rollickings. fact10: Adan plasters Astronium and it peruses Kirkuk. fact11: That this petter is not antitypical and does Park Notoryctus does not hold. fact12: Some man that is antitypical is not non-diamantine. fact13: If that this petter is not antitypical but the person Parks Notoryctus does not hold the person is antitypical. fact14: This grit stanches paygrade and does plaster Astronium. fact15: If this coelom is not a kind of a Tayassu this grit plasters Astronium and institutionalizes Corse. fact16: If that something is not a transposability and is a phantom is false then it is not a phantom.

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

This grit plasters Astronium and the one overlooks shmooze.

({B}{a} & {AQ}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This grit plasters Astronium. fact2: This coelom is not a Tayassu if something is a kind of a Tayassu and it is diamantine. fact3: The fact that the ultraconservative is not a kind of a Johnston and that is not a fume if that virusoid is a kind of a xc hold. fact4: This petter is a Tayassu. fact5: This grit is a fume if the ultraconservative is both not a Johnston and not a fume. fact6: Some person that is not a phantom overlooks shmooze and stanches paygrade. fact7: That something is not a kind of a transposability and is a phantom is incorrect if the fact that it is a fume is true. fact8: This grit middles. fact9: That virusoid is a xc if this bunting rollickings. fact10: Adan plasters Astronium and it peruses Kirkuk. fact11: That this petter is not antitypical and does Park Notoryctus does not hold. fact12: Some man that is antitypical is not non-diamantine. fact13: If that this petter is not antitypical but the person Parks Notoryctus does not hold the person is antitypical. fact14: This grit stanches paygrade and does plaster Astronium. fact15: If this coelom is not a kind of a Tayassu this grit plasters Astronium and institutionalizes Corse. fact16: If that something is not a transposability and is a phantom is false then it is not a phantom. ; $hypothesis$ = This grit stanches paygrade. ; $proof$ =

fact14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This ballplayer does not clone Nanking but it is a kind of a Cryptomeria.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: The urochesia cajoles. fact2: Something does not clone Nanking and is a Cryptomeria if it does not cajole. fact3: The fact that this ballplayer clones Nanking and the person is a Cryptomeria does not hold. fact4: That this ballplayer is not a kind of a Wilder but it is not exportable is not true. fact5: This ballplayer is a balletomania. fact6: If something is not Ruritanian it does cajole and it is marmoreal. fact7: Some person that is not a kind of a Gizeh is not Ruritanian. fact8: If this ballplayer does cajole then the fact that this ballplayer is both a Charleroi and aerophilous is false. fact9: If this ballplayer cajoles then that that it does not clone Nanking and is a kind of a Cryptomeria is right is incorrect. fact10: If that towelling is a Omomyid that that towelling animates and that thing cajoles is not correct. fact11: The fact that this ballplayer does not cajole and disembarrasses Pieridae does not hold. fact12: That this ballplayer clones Nanking and is a Cryptomeria is wrong if she/he cajoles. fact13: If that the fact that that crap is not terminal and is a kind of a closed hold is wrong then that crap is not a kind of a Gizeh. fact14: The fact that this ballplayer cajoles is true.

fact1: {A}{fa} fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact3: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact4: ¬(¬{IF}{a} & {M}{a}) fact5: {CL}{a} fact6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}x fact8: {A}{a} -> ¬({IO}{a} & {IH}{a}) fact9: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact10: {HU}{eo} -> ¬({HP}{eo} & {A}{eo}) fact11: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {HH}{a}) fact12: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact13: ¬(¬{E}{hl} & {F}{hl}) -> ¬{D}{hl} fact14: {A}{a}

This ballplayer does not clone Nanking but it is a kind of a Cryptomeria.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The urochesia cajoles. fact2: Something does not clone Nanking and is a Cryptomeria if it does not cajole. fact3: The fact that this ballplayer clones Nanking and the person is a Cryptomeria does not hold. fact4: That this ballplayer is not a kind of a Wilder but it is not exportable is not true. fact5: This ballplayer is a balletomania. fact6: If something is not Ruritanian it does cajole and it is marmoreal. fact7: Some person that is not a kind of a Gizeh is not Ruritanian. fact8: If this ballplayer does cajole then the fact that this ballplayer is both a Charleroi and aerophilous is false. fact9: If this ballplayer cajoles then that that it does not clone Nanking and is a kind of a Cryptomeria is right is incorrect. fact10: If that towelling is a Omomyid that that towelling animates and that thing cajoles is not correct. fact11: The fact that this ballplayer does not cajole and disembarrasses Pieridae does not hold. fact12: That this ballplayer clones Nanking and is a Cryptomeria is wrong if she/he cajoles. fact13: If that the fact that that crap is not terminal and is a kind of a closed hold is wrong then that crap is not a kind of a Gizeh. fact14: The fact that this ballplayer cajoles is true. ; $hypothesis$ = This ballplayer does not clone Nanking but it is a kind of a Cryptomeria. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That extinguisher is strategic but this one is not a Dolby.

({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

fact1: That syncarp does not spirit Proxima. fact2: That syncarp is not immanent. fact3: this Proxima does not spirit syncarp. fact4: This clostridium does not spirit Proxima. fact5: That syncarp is not a Dolby. fact6: That syncarp does spirit Proxima and is not a Binghamton if Celina does not congratulate Zeppo. fact7: That extinguisher is not a Binghamton. fact8: If that syncarp is not a Binghamton then that extinguisher is not a Dolby. fact9: The fact that that extinguisher is strategic but it is not a Dolby is incorrect if that syncarp spirits Proxima. fact10: That driftwood is not strategic. fact11: That extinguisher is a Masora and is not a Dolby. fact12: The fact that that syncarp is not a Binghamton is correct if she/he does not spirit Proxima. fact13: That syncarp is a sentiment but it is not strategic.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} fact2: ¬{CA}{a} fact3: ¬{AA}{aa} fact4: ¬{A}{ii} fact5: ¬{D}{a} fact6: ¬{E}{c} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact7: ¬{B}{b} fact8: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} fact9: {A}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact10: ¬{C}{du} fact11: ({DA}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact12: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact13: ({IG}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

The fact that that extinguisher is strategic but not a Dolby does not hold.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That syncarp does not spirit Proxima. fact2: That syncarp is not immanent. fact3: this Proxima does not spirit syncarp. fact4: This clostridium does not spirit Proxima. fact5: That syncarp is not a Dolby. fact6: That syncarp does spirit Proxima and is not a Binghamton if Celina does not congratulate Zeppo. fact7: That extinguisher is not a Binghamton. fact8: If that syncarp is not a Binghamton then that extinguisher is not a Dolby. fact9: The fact that that extinguisher is strategic but it is not a Dolby is incorrect if that syncarp spirits Proxima. fact10: That driftwood is not strategic. fact11: That extinguisher is a Masora and is not a Dolby. fact12: The fact that that syncarp is not a Binghamton is correct if she/he does not spirit Proxima. fact13: That syncarp is a sentiment but it is not strategic. ; $hypothesis$ = That extinguisher is strategic but this one is not a Dolby. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That editing retinitis does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: This fleeing paean happens. fact2: That that conducing Medicago occurs brings about that that Iraki happens. fact3: The fact that that that expatriation occurs and this gurgling happens is right is brought about by that that disassociating freethinking does not occurs. fact4: If that declaring occurs that disassociating freethinking does not happens. fact5: The fact that that expatriation happens if that that declaring happens but that expatriation does not happens does not hold hold. fact6: The fact that this journeying happens is right. fact7: The chanting does not occurs and the stabilization does not occurs. fact8: If this biffing Verlaine occurs the fact that that declaring occurs but that expatriation does not happens is wrong. fact9: That this gurgling but notthat conducing Medicago occurs is false. fact10: The fact that that Iraki does not happens and that conducing Medicago happens is false if this gurgling does not happens. fact11: This foul occurs. fact12: This biffing Verlaine occurs if this completing occurs. fact13: If the fact that this quadrisonicness does not happens and that readjustment occurs is not true then that disassociating freethinking happens. fact14: That the climacticness occurs and this monsoon does not happens is false if this fleeing paean does not happens. fact15: This gula happens if the fact that this fleeing paean occurs is true. fact16: If both this anathemising and the Afghaniness happens the butterfly does not occurs. fact17: The fact that this gurgling and that conducing Medicago happens does not hold. fact18: That that editing retinitis occurs is prevented by that this gula occurs and that Iraki occurs. fact19: That editing retinitis is brought about by that conducing Medicago. fact20: That declaring occurs if this biffing Verlaine does not happens and that readjustment occurs. fact21: This completing occurs if the chanting does not occurs and the stabilization does not happens. fact22: If that this gurgling but notthat conducing Medicago occurs does not hold then that Iraki occurs. fact23: The fact that this gurgling does not happens is right if that expatriation happens and that disassociating freethinking occurs.

fact1: {A} fact2: {E} -> {C} fact3: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) fact4: {I} -> ¬{H} fact5: ¬({I} & ¬{G}) -> {G} fact6: {HR} fact7: (¬{Q} & ¬{R}) fact8: {J} -> ¬({I} & ¬{G}) fact9: ¬({F} & ¬{E}) fact10: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{C} & {E}) fact11: {HB} fact12: {P} -> {J} fact13: ¬(¬{L} & {K}) -> {H} fact14: ¬{A} -> ¬({CT} & ¬{FG}) fact15: {A} -> {B} fact16: ({EC} & {HM}) -> ¬{JF} fact17: ¬({F} & {E}) fact18: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact19: {E} -> {D} fact20: (¬{J} & {K}) -> {I} fact21: (¬{Q} & ¬{R}) -> {P} fact22: ¬({F} & ¬{E}) -> {C} fact23: ({G} & {H}) -> ¬{F}

That editing retinitis occurs.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This fleeing paean happens. fact2: That that conducing Medicago occurs brings about that that Iraki happens. fact3: The fact that that that expatriation occurs and this gurgling happens is right is brought about by that that disassociating freethinking does not occurs. fact4: If that declaring occurs that disassociating freethinking does not happens. fact5: The fact that that expatriation happens if that that declaring happens but that expatriation does not happens does not hold hold. fact6: The fact that this journeying happens is right. fact7: The chanting does not occurs and the stabilization does not occurs. fact8: If this biffing Verlaine occurs the fact that that declaring occurs but that expatriation does not happens is wrong. fact9: That this gurgling but notthat conducing Medicago occurs is false. fact10: The fact that that Iraki does not happens and that conducing Medicago happens is false if this gurgling does not happens. fact11: This foul occurs. fact12: This biffing Verlaine occurs if this completing occurs. fact13: If the fact that this quadrisonicness does not happens and that readjustment occurs is not true then that disassociating freethinking happens. fact14: That the climacticness occurs and this monsoon does not happens is false if this fleeing paean does not happens. fact15: This gula happens if the fact that this fleeing paean occurs is true. fact16: If both this anathemising and the Afghaniness happens the butterfly does not occurs. fact17: The fact that this gurgling and that conducing Medicago happens does not hold. fact18: That that editing retinitis occurs is prevented by that this gula occurs and that Iraki occurs. fact19: That editing retinitis is brought about by that conducing Medicago. fact20: That declaring occurs if this biffing Verlaine does not happens and that readjustment occurs. fact21: This completing occurs if the chanting does not occurs and the stabilization does not happens. fact22: If that this gurgling but notthat conducing Medicago occurs does not hold then that Iraki occurs. fact23: The fact that this gurgling does not happens is right if that expatriation happens and that disassociating freethinking occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That editing retinitis does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact1 -> int1: This gula occurs.; fact22 & fact9 -> int2: That Iraki occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both this gula and that Iraki occurs.; int3 & fact18 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__