Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

That this musette is both not a mouse and a Foeniculum is wrong.

¬(¬{A}{b} & {D}{b})

fact1: If this regur is a kind of a Foeniculum this musette is a mouse. fact2: This musette is not a mouse but that thing is a kind of a Foeniculum if this regur is a mouse. fact3: Emilio is a mouse. fact4: That coffeecake does not immingle paternalism and forks.

fact1: {D}{a} -> {A}{b} fact2: {A}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & {D}{b}) fact3: {A}{hb} fact4: (¬{C}{fr} & {CL}{fr})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this regur is a kind of a Foeniculum this musette is a mouse. fact2: This musette is not a mouse but that thing is a kind of a Foeniculum if this regur is a mouse. fact3: Emilio is a mouse. fact4: That coffeecake does not immingle paternalism and forks. ; $hypothesis$ = That this musette is both not a mouse and a Foeniculum is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this Depression does not happens hold.

¬{D}

fact1: The fact that the fact that that godsend happens is right does not hold. fact2: Both that Hejira and this suctorialness occurs if this buildup does not occurs. fact3: That coinage results in that this buildup does not happens and that allotropicalness does not occurs. fact4: The fact that the elastic happens is right. fact5: That Hejira happens. fact6: If that this howling Muncie does not occurs does not hold then that coinage occurs. fact7: The Islamicness occurs. fact8: This Depression occurs if that that allotropicalness does not occurs is true. fact9: That coinage does not happens and this Depression does not happens if this howling Muncie occurs. fact10: This buildup happens. fact11: That the muting throe happens and the polemoniaceousness occurs results in that this syndication does not happens. fact12: That this Depression does not occurs but that Hejira happens is brought about by that this buildup does not occurs. fact13: That allotropicalness does not happens if that Hejira and this buildup happens. fact14: The gelting Pilsen happens. fact15: That this performing Isolde does not occurs triggers that this howling Muncie happens and that attracting colpocystitis happens.

fact1: ¬{HG} fact2: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {EM}) fact3: {E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) fact4: {EH} fact5: {A} fact6: {F} -> {E} fact7: {EU} fact8: ¬{C} -> {D} fact9: {F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{D}) fact10: {B} fact11: ({GG} & {BR}) -> ¬{GB} fact12: ¬{B} -> (¬{D} & {A}) fact13: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact14: {GL} fact15: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G})

The fact that this suctorialness occurs hold.

{EM}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the fact that that godsend happens is right does not hold. fact2: Both that Hejira and this suctorialness occurs if this buildup does not occurs. fact3: That coinage results in that this buildup does not happens and that allotropicalness does not occurs. fact4: The fact that the elastic happens is right. fact5: That Hejira happens. fact6: If that this howling Muncie does not occurs does not hold then that coinage occurs. fact7: The Islamicness occurs. fact8: This Depression occurs if that that allotropicalness does not occurs is true. fact9: That coinage does not happens and this Depression does not happens if this howling Muncie occurs. fact10: This buildup happens. fact11: That the muting throe happens and the polemoniaceousness occurs results in that this syndication does not happens. fact12: That this Depression does not occurs but that Hejira happens is brought about by that this buildup does not occurs. fact13: That allotropicalness does not happens if that Hejira and this buildup happens. fact14: The gelting Pilsen happens. fact15: That this performing Isolde does not occurs triggers that this howling Muncie happens and that attracting colpocystitis happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this Depression does not happens hold. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact10 -> int1: That Hejira and this buildup occurs.; int1 & fact13 -> int2: That allotropicalness does not occurs.; int2 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that rollmops is an academic is right.

{C}{c}

fact1: This cad is not marmoreal but that one is mucose. fact2: If this graniteware is a Californian then that rollmops is an academic. fact3: This graniteware is a Californian if this cad is not carinated. fact4: This cad is not carinated if it is not marmoreal and is mucose.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This cad is not marmoreal but that one is mucose. fact2: If this graniteware is a Californian then that rollmops is an academic. fact3: This graniteware is a Californian if this cad is not carinated. fact4: This cad is not carinated if it is not marmoreal and is mucose. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that rollmops is an academic is right. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact1 -> int1: This cad is non-carinated.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: This graniteware is a Californian.; int2 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Superior does not happens and that decolourizing happens.

(¬{A} & {D})

fact1: If the fact that that plausibleness happens and this smoothness occurs is false this sway does not occurs. fact2: That that Superior does not occurs yields that that Superior does not occurs and that decolourizing happens. fact3: That Superior is prevented by that this sway does not occurs. fact4: That extenuating dependence does not happens.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that that plausibleness happens and this smoothness occurs is false this sway does not occurs. fact2: That that Superior does not occurs yields that that Superior does not occurs and that decolourizing happens. fact3: That Superior is prevented by that this sway does not occurs. fact4: That extenuating dependence does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That Superior does not happens and that decolourizing happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That brickbat is headless.

{A}{a}

fact1: If that that slowcoach cottons fecklessness and it is playable is not true that slowcoach is not a testimony. fact2: Something is headless and is a kind of a Momos if it is inorganic. fact3: This earplug is not moonlit and not fat. fact4: The fact that something cottons fecklessness and it is playable does not hold if it is not inextensible. fact5: If this salmwood cottons fecklessness then that Heller is not a testimony or playable or both. fact6: If that Heller is not a testimony and/or it is playable then that slowcoach is not a kind of a testimony. fact7: That brickbat is not immoral and it does not spud appropriateness. fact8: If this Aleve does cotton fecklessness this salmwood cotton fecklessness. fact9: That brickbat is not a kind of a Momos. fact10: The waft is not headless. fact11: That brickbat is a kind of non-apocrine one that is not unaffixed. fact12: Something is headed if the thing is a Momos. fact13: If someone is not a testimony then that brickbat is not unimportant. fact14: That somebody is headless and the one is organic does not hold if the one is not a kind of a avo. fact15: The fact that someone is a avo and/or that one is organic is incorrect if that that one is not a testimony hold. fact16: Some man is not a Momos if that it is headless and it is not inorganic does not hold. fact17: That brickbat is headed and this one is not a kind of a Momos.

fact1: ¬({G}{b} & {F}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact3: (¬{HK}{ht} & ¬{HM}{ht}) fact4: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}x & {F}x) fact5: {G}{d} -> (¬{E}{c} v {F}{c}) fact6: (¬{E}{c} v {F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact7: (¬{AI}{a} & ¬{FJ}{a}) fact8: {G}{e} -> {G}{d} fact9: ¬{B}{a} fact10: ¬{A}{at} fact11: (¬{GF}{a} & ¬{BL}{a}) fact12: (x): {B}x -> ¬{A}x fact13: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬{GQ}{a} fact14: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) fact15: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({D}x v {C}x) fact16: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact17: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

That Crane is not headless.

¬{A}{fp}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that that slowcoach cottons fecklessness and it is playable is not true that slowcoach is not a testimony. fact2: Something is headless and is a kind of a Momos if it is inorganic. fact3: This earplug is not moonlit and not fat. fact4: The fact that something cottons fecklessness and it is playable does not hold if it is not inextensible. fact5: If this salmwood cottons fecklessness then that Heller is not a testimony or playable or both. fact6: If that Heller is not a testimony and/or it is playable then that slowcoach is not a kind of a testimony. fact7: That brickbat is not immoral and it does not spud appropriateness. fact8: If this Aleve does cotton fecklessness this salmwood cotton fecklessness. fact9: That brickbat is not a kind of a Momos. fact10: The waft is not headless. fact11: That brickbat is a kind of non-apocrine one that is not unaffixed. fact12: Something is headed if the thing is a Momos. fact13: If someone is not a testimony then that brickbat is not unimportant. fact14: That somebody is headless and the one is organic does not hold if the one is not a kind of a avo. fact15: The fact that someone is a avo and/or that one is organic is incorrect if that that one is not a testimony hold. fact16: Some man is not a Momos if that it is headless and it is not inorganic does not hold. fact17: That brickbat is headed and this one is not a kind of a Momos. ; $hypothesis$ = That brickbat is headless. ; $proof$ =

fact17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this chalaza does not chondrify is true.

¬{F}{d}

fact1: That histaminase is a kind of palatable person that chondrifies. fact2: That akaryocyte squirts smothered and the thing is a articulateness if there are Baptistic things. fact3: That histaminase is Baptistic if this accentor does not squirt smothered. fact4: That histaminase is a 1530s. fact5: This chalaza chondrifies if that akaryocyte is not raptorial but the thing is a 1530s. fact6: If this accentor is Baptistic that akaryocyte is not a kind of a 1530s. fact7: If that histaminase is not Baptistic this accentor squirts smothered. fact8: That that akaryocyte is not a 1530s is correct. fact9: If that akaryocyte is not raptorial and it is not a kind of a 1530s this chalaza chondrifies. fact10: If this accentor is Baptistic that akaryocyte is non-raptorial thing that is not a kind of a 1530s. fact11: That the clary does chondrify is right. fact12: This accentor does squirt smothered. fact13: If that histaminase does not squirt smothered this accentor is Baptistic. fact14: That akaryocyte squirts smothered if that histaminase is not raptorial. fact15: If that histaminase is not a articulateness this accentor is Baptistic. fact16: This chalaza does not chondrify or is not a kind of a articulateness or both. fact17: This accentor is not philatelic and is not a kind of a Pygopus. fact18: This chalaza does not chondrify and is a articulateness if that histaminase does not squirt smothered. fact19: Someone that is a articulateness either is non-recessionary or is not raptorial or both. fact20: If that akaryocyte chondrifies this accentor is not a 1530s and is not Baptistic. fact21: That akaryocyte is a articulateness if that histaminase is non-raptorial. fact22: Some man that is a 1530s is Baptistic. fact23: If somebody chondrifies then she/he is a 1530s. fact24: That histaminase is not a articulateness or it does not squirt smothered or both.

fact1: ({G}{a} & {F}{a}) fact2: (x): {C}x -> ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) fact3: ¬{B}{c} -> {C}{a} fact4: {D}{a} fact5: (¬{E}{b} & {D}{b}) -> {F}{d} fact6: {C}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} fact7: ¬{C}{a} -> {B}{c} fact8: ¬{D}{b} fact9: (¬{E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> {F}{d} fact10: {C}{c} -> (¬{E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact11: {F}{fl} fact12: {B}{c} fact13: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{c} fact14: ¬{E}{a} -> {B}{b} fact15: ¬{A}{a} -> {C}{c} fact16: (¬{F}{d} v ¬{A}{d}) fact17: (¬{GA}{c} & ¬{IB}{c}) fact18: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{F}{d} & {A}{d}) fact19: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AG}x v ¬{E}x) fact20: {F}{b} -> (¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) fact21: ¬{E}{a} -> {A}{b} fact22: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact23: (x): {F}x -> {D}x fact24: (¬{A}{a} v ¬{B}{a})

The fact that this chalaza does not chondrify is true.

¬{F}{d}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That histaminase is a kind of palatable person that chondrifies. fact2: That akaryocyte squirts smothered and the thing is a articulateness if there are Baptistic things. fact3: That histaminase is Baptistic if this accentor does not squirt smothered. fact4: That histaminase is a 1530s. fact5: This chalaza chondrifies if that akaryocyte is not raptorial but the thing is a 1530s. fact6: If this accentor is Baptistic that akaryocyte is not a kind of a 1530s. fact7: If that histaminase is not Baptistic this accentor squirts smothered. fact8: That that akaryocyte is not a 1530s is correct. fact9: If that akaryocyte is not raptorial and it is not a kind of a 1530s this chalaza chondrifies. fact10: If this accentor is Baptistic that akaryocyte is non-raptorial thing that is not a kind of a 1530s. fact11: That the clary does chondrify is right. fact12: This accentor does squirt smothered. fact13: If that histaminase does not squirt smothered this accentor is Baptistic. fact14: That akaryocyte squirts smothered if that histaminase is not raptorial. fact15: If that histaminase is not a articulateness this accentor is Baptistic. fact16: This chalaza does not chondrify or is not a kind of a articulateness or both. fact17: This accentor is not philatelic and is not a kind of a Pygopus. fact18: This chalaza does not chondrify and is a articulateness if that histaminase does not squirt smothered. fact19: Someone that is a articulateness either is non-recessionary or is not raptorial or both. fact20: If that akaryocyte chondrifies this accentor is not a 1530s and is not Baptistic. fact21: That akaryocyte is a articulateness if that histaminase is non-raptorial. fact22: Some man that is a 1530s is Baptistic. fact23: If somebody chondrifies then she/he is a 1530s. fact24: That histaminase is not a articulateness or it does not squirt smothered or both. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this chalaza does not chondrify is true. ; $proof$ =

fact24 & fact15 & fact13 -> int1: This accentor is Baptistic.; int1 & fact10 -> int2: That akaryocyte is not raptorial and it is not a 1530s.; int2 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists some man such that if that one is not a baseline then the fact that the fact that that one is not a Laminariales and that one is Neanderthalian is right does not hold.

(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

fact1: If something is not a baseline then the fact that that thing is not a Laminariales and that thing is Neanderthalian does not hold. fact2: That that somebody is not a Laminariales but that one adulterates is false if the fact that that one is not breathless hold is correct.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact2: (x): ¬{DU}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AK}x)

If this Omaha is not breathless the fact that this Omaha is not a Laminariales but it adulterates is false.

¬{DU}{bi} -> ¬(¬{AA}{bi} & {AK}{bi})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If something is not a baseline then the fact that that thing is not a Laminariales and that thing is Neanderthalian does not hold. fact2: That that somebody is not a Laminariales but that one adulterates is false if the fact that that one is not breathless hold is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists some man such that if that one is not a baseline then the fact that the fact that that one is not a Laminariales and that one is Neanderthalian is right does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: If the scour is not a kind of a baseline then the fact that he is not a Laminariales and is Neanderthalian does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That bestrewing Pokomo does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: The fact that that bestrewing Pokomo occurs is not incorrect.

fact1: {A}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that bestrewing Pokomo occurs is not incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That bestrewing Pokomo does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Mooning happens and this Mancunian happens.

({B} & {A})

fact1: That both this equitableness and the terpsichore happens hold. fact2: That Berit does not occurs and that Mooning does not happens if that this freeing happens is right. fact3: This free does not occurs and/or that hampering Murillo occurs. fact4: The fact that that Mooning occurs and this Mancunian happens is false if that Berit does not occurs. fact5: The treatment occurs. fact6: The fact that this free does not happens and/or that hampering Murillo does not happens is right. fact7: That Mooning occurs if this free does not happens and/or that hampering Murillo does not happens. fact8: That that Mooning does not occurs brings about that this internalness and this Mancunian happens. fact9: Both this Mancunian and that Berit occurs.

fact1: ({AG} & {BF}) fact2: {D} -> (¬{C} & ¬{B}) fact3: (¬{AA} v {AB}) fact4: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & {A}) fact5: {GE} fact6: (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) fact7: (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact8: ¬{B} -> ({EG} & {A}) fact9: ({A} & {C})

That that Mooning and this Mancunian happens is wrong.

¬({B} & {A})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That both this equitableness and the terpsichore happens hold. fact2: That Berit does not occurs and that Mooning does not happens if that this freeing happens is right. fact3: This free does not occurs and/or that hampering Murillo occurs. fact4: The fact that that Mooning occurs and this Mancunian happens is false if that Berit does not occurs. fact5: The treatment occurs. fact6: The fact that this free does not happens and/or that hampering Murillo does not happens is right. fact7: That Mooning occurs if this free does not happens and/or that hampering Murillo does not happens. fact8: That that Mooning does not occurs brings about that this internalness and this Mancunian happens. fact9: Both this Mancunian and that Berit occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That Mooning happens and this Mancunian happens. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact6 -> int1: That Mooning happens.; fact9 -> int2: This Mancunian happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This protohemin is not empiric.

¬{B}{c}

fact1: This ferret is a Utopianism. fact2: If something that is not a Crex hops umpirage the fact that it is not empiric hold. fact3: The moneran is not empiric if that trailhead is not a Crex and it is not empiric. fact4: The fact that that trailhead is not a kind of a Monrovia is not right. fact5: If this protohemin is not a Monrovia then this steel is empiric person that is a kind of a Utopianism. fact6: That trailhead does not hop umpirage. fact7: this umpirage does not hop trailhead. fact8: That trailhead is non-empiric. fact9: If that trailhead hops umpirage this protohemin either is non-empiric or is a kind of a Crex or both. fact10: If some man is a Crex then it is non-empiric and it hops umpirage. fact11: If that trailhead does not hop umpirage this steel is a Utopianism and it is a Monrovia. fact12: That this protohemin is not a kind of a Utopianism is true. fact13: This steel is a kind of a Utopianism if that trailhead does not hop umpirage. fact14: If either something is not empiric or that thing is a Crex or both then that thing is not empiric. fact15: This steel is a Utopianism.

fact1: {AA}{n} fact2: (x): (¬{C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{eb} fact4: {AB}{a} fact5: ¬{AB}{c} -> ({B}{b} & {AA}{b}) fact6: ¬{A}{a} fact7: ¬{AC}{aa} fact8: ¬{B}{a} fact9: {A}{a} -> (¬{B}{c} v {C}{c}) fact10: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) fact11: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact12: ¬{AA}{c} fact13: ¬{A}{a} -> {AA}{b} fact14: (x): (¬{B}x v {C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact15: {AA}{b}

This protohemin is not empiric.

¬{B}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This ferret is a Utopianism. fact2: If something that is not a Crex hops umpirage the fact that it is not empiric hold. fact3: The moneran is not empiric if that trailhead is not a Crex and it is not empiric. fact4: The fact that that trailhead is not a kind of a Monrovia is not right. fact5: If this protohemin is not a Monrovia then this steel is empiric person that is a kind of a Utopianism. fact6: That trailhead does not hop umpirage. fact7: this umpirage does not hop trailhead. fact8: That trailhead is non-empiric. fact9: If that trailhead hops umpirage this protohemin either is non-empiric or is a kind of a Crex or both. fact10: If some man is a Crex then it is non-empiric and it hops umpirage. fact11: If that trailhead does not hop umpirage this steel is a Utopianism and it is a Monrovia. fact12: That this protohemin is not a kind of a Utopianism is true. fact13: This steel is a kind of a Utopianism if that trailhead does not hop umpirage. fact14: If either something is not empiric or that thing is a Crex or both then that thing is not empiric. fact15: This steel is a Utopianism. ; $hypothesis$ = This protohemin is not empiric. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That jihad does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: Both this docking and this debasing reality happens. fact2: This docking happens. fact3: The sizzling and that subtropicalness occurs. fact4: If the fact that that ascesis does not happens is true then the fact that both that jihad and that anthropometry occurs is wrong. fact5: If that that ascesis and this debasing reality happens does not hold then this debasing reality does not happens. fact6: If that jamboree does not happens this embodying and that mixture occurs. fact7: If that jamboree does not occurs and that mixture does not occurs then this embodying does not occurs. fact8: That anthropometry does not occurs if the fact that both this expostulation and the non-postmodernistness happens does not hold. fact9: Both that jihad and this docking occurs if this debasing reality does not happens. fact10: If this embodying happens then that that this expostulation and the non-postmodernistness happens is incorrect hold. fact11: The fact that that ascesis occurs hold. fact12: That ascesis occurs and that anthropometry occurs. fact13: If that anthropometry does not occurs then either this debasing reality happens or this docking happens or both. fact14: That ascesis does not occurs and that postmodernistness does not happens if this expostulation does not occurs.

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

That jihad happens.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both this docking and this debasing reality happens. fact2: This docking happens. fact3: The sizzling and that subtropicalness occurs. fact4: If the fact that that ascesis does not happens is true then the fact that both that jihad and that anthropometry occurs is wrong. fact5: If that that ascesis and this debasing reality happens does not hold then this debasing reality does not happens. fact6: If that jamboree does not happens this embodying and that mixture occurs. fact7: If that jamboree does not occurs and that mixture does not occurs then this embodying does not occurs. fact8: That anthropometry does not occurs if the fact that both this expostulation and the non-postmodernistness happens does not hold. fact9: Both that jihad and this docking occurs if this debasing reality does not happens. fact10: If this embodying happens then that that this expostulation and the non-postmodernistness happens is incorrect hold. fact11: The fact that that ascesis occurs hold. fact12: That ascesis occurs and that anthropometry occurs. fact13: If that anthropometry does not occurs then either this debasing reality happens or this docking happens or both. fact14: That ascesis does not occurs and that postmodernistness does not happens if this expostulation does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That jihad does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This cinder is thinning.

{C}{c}

fact1: Something is not thinning if it does surmount Magnoliidae and/or it does not sock Gulo. fact2: If the fact that this foldout darkens Heyse and she/he likens aloha does not hold then this shadblow does not surmount Magnoliidae. fact3: If this shadblow does not surmount Magnoliidae this cinder surmount Magnoliidae and/or it socks Gulo. fact4: That if this cinder does not sock Gulo this cinder is not thinning is right. fact5: This cinder surmounts Magnoliidae or does not sock Gulo or both if this shadblow does not surmounts Magnoliidae. fact6: That this foldout darkens Heyse and it does liken aloha does not hold. fact7: If someone does not sock Gulo that one is not thinning. fact8: This shadblow does not surmount Magnoliidae if this foldout does not darken Heyse.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not thinning if it does surmount Magnoliidae and/or it does not sock Gulo. fact2: If the fact that this foldout darkens Heyse and she/he likens aloha does not hold then this shadblow does not surmount Magnoliidae. fact3: If this shadblow does not surmount Magnoliidae this cinder surmount Magnoliidae and/or it socks Gulo. fact4: That if this cinder does not sock Gulo this cinder is not thinning is right. fact5: This cinder surmounts Magnoliidae or does not sock Gulo or both if this shadblow does not surmounts Magnoliidae. fact6: That this foldout darkens Heyse and it does liken aloha does not hold. fact7: If someone does not sock Gulo that one is not thinning. fact8: This shadblow does not surmount Magnoliidae if this foldout does not darken Heyse. ; $hypothesis$ = This cinder is thinning. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact6 -> int1: This shadblow does not surmount Magnoliidae.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: Either this cinder surmounts Magnoliidae or that thing does not sock Gulo or both.; fact1 -> int3: If this cinder does surmount Magnoliidae and/or does not sock Gulo then it is not thinning.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This murkiness does not occurs.

¬{E}

fact1: The sighting Kadikoy happens if the rating Sarcoptidae occurs. fact2: That this buyout does not occurs is prevented by that that polymorphism and the lamentedness occurs. fact3: That both the spectacle and the howl happens results in that this wrong does not happens. fact4: If this unlamentedness occurs then that amnesic happens. fact5: If both that amnesic and this anthropometricness happens this murkiness does not happens. fact6: Both this anthropometricness and this nonmigratoriness occurs. fact7: That that amnesic does not occurs is prevented by that polymorphism. fact8: The Rousseauanness happens. fact9: If this skit happens then the bocci occurs. fact10: The fact that the cropped does not occurs is not wrong. fact11: Either this unlamentedness or that polymorphism or both happens. fact12: If the genitourinariness occurs that shivering occurs.

fact1: {CH} -> {ER} fact2: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> {CK} fact3: ({BS} & {FH}) -> ¬{O} fact4: {A} -> {C} fact5: ({C} & {D}) -> ¬{E} fact6: ({D} & {F}) fact7: {B} -> {C} fact8: {K} fact9: {AG} -> {FG} fact10: ¬{FU} fact11: ({A} v {B}) fact12: {DC} -> {EM}

This buyout happens.

{CK}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The sighting Kadikoy happens if the rating Sarcoptidae occurs. fact2: That this buyout does not occurs is prevented by that that polymorphism and the lamentedness occurs. fact3: That both the spectacle and the howl happens results in that this wrong does not happens. fact4: If this unlamentedness occurs then that amnesic happens. fact5: If both that amnesic and this anthropometricness happens this murkiness does not happens. fact6: Both this anthropometricness and this nonmigratoriness occurs. fact7: That that amnesic does not occurs is prevented by that polymorphism. fact8: The Rousseauanness happens. fact9: If this skit happens then the bocci occurs. fact10: The fact that the cropped does not occurs is not wrong. fact11: Either this unlamentedness or that polymorphism or both happens. fact12: If the genitourinariness occurs that shivering occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This murkiness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact4 & fact7 -> int1: That amnesic occurs.; fact6 -> int2: This anthropometricness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That amnesic happens and this anthropometricness occurs.; int3 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that the fact that this nosocomialness happens but this beating does not occurs is correct is wrong.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: If this bailiffship does not occurs then that this partitive happens but this junketinging dependableness does not happens is false. fact2: That this nosocomialness occurs and this beating occurs does not hold. fact3: The fact that the fact that this nosocomialness happens but this beating does not occurs is correct is wrong. fact4: If that unashamedness does not happens both this bailiffship and this debunking Hirundo happens. fact5: If the cartage happens that psychiatricalness does not happens and that rigging occurs. fact6: That this duplicate happens but that flapping does not happens is not true if this bailiffship does not occurs. fact7: If that unashamedness does not occurs and this debunking Hirundoes not happens then this bailiffship does not happens. fact8: This forking Solanaceae does not happens if this non-judgmentalness and that spatter occurs. fact9: If this crystallisation does not occurs then either this screen occurs or this ergotropicness happens or both. fact10: The fact that the housebreaking glisten happens and the upstaging stardust does not occurs is incorrect. fact11: That this nosocomialness but notthis beating occurs is brought about by this bailiffship. fact12: That the MOT happens and the etymologizing winter occurs does not hold. fact13: That this debunking Hirundoes not occurs but that unashamedness occurs brings about that this bailiffship does not happens. fact14: The cartage happens. fact15: That powwowing happens and/or this forking Solanaceae does not happens if that spatter does not occurs. fact16: Notthis crystallisation but this closed happens if that psychiatricalness does not occurs. fact17: The fact that this debunking Hirundo happens but that deflating does not happens is false. fact18: That spatter does not occurs if the fact that this screen happens is right. fact19: That notthat unashamedness but that powwowing occurs is triggered by that this forking Solanaceae does not occurs. fact20: The fact that this interpellating bowed occurs but the faltering does not occurs is wrong.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬({DS} & ¬{DA}) fact2: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact3: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact4: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact5: {O} -> (¬{M} & {N}) fact6: ¬{A} -> ¬({BK} & ¬{HE}) fact7: (¬{C} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} fact8: (¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} fact9: ¬{K} -> ({I} v {J}) fact10: ¬({GH} & ¬{FC}) fact11: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact12: ¬({CR} & {ET}) fact13: (¬{B} & {C}) -> ¬{A} fact14: {O} fact15: ¬{F} -> ({D} v ¬{E}) fact16: ¬{M} -> (¬{K} & {L}) fact17: ¬({B} & ¬{GO}) fact18: {I} -> ¬{F} fact19: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) fact20: ¬({IK} & ¬{DU})

This nosocomialness but notthis beating happens.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this bailiffship does not occurs then that this partitive happens but this junketinging dependableness does not happens is false. fact2: That this nosocomialness occurs and this beating occurs does not hold. fact3: The fact that the fact that this nosocomialness happens but this beating does not occurs is correct is wrong. fact4: If that unashamedness does not happens both this bailiffship and this debunking Hirundo happens. fact5: If the cartage happens that psychiatricalness does not happens and that rigging occurs. fact6: That this duplicate happens but that flapping does not happens is not true if this bailiffship does not occurs. fact7: If that unashamedness does not occurs and this debunking Hirundoes not happens then this bailiffship does not happens. fact8: This forking Solanaceae does not happens if this non-judgmentalness and that spatter occurs. fact9: If this crystallisation does not occurs then either this screen occurs or this ergotropicness happens or both. fact10: The fact that the housebreaking glisten happens and the upstaging stardust does not occurs is incorrect. fact11: That this nosocomialness but notthis beating occurs is brought about by this bailiffship. fact12: That the MOT happens and the etymologizing winter occurs does not hold. fact13: That this debunking Hirundoes not occurs but that unashamedness occurs brings about that this bailiffship does not happens. fact14: The cartage happens. fact15: That powwowing happens and/or this forking Solanaceae does not happens if that spatter does not occurs. fact16: Notthis crystallisation but this closed happens if that psychiatricalness does not occurs. fact17: The fact that this debunking Hirundo happens but that deflating does not happens is false. fact18: That spatter does not occurs if the fact that this screen happens is right. fact19: That notthat unashamedness but that powwowing occurs is triggered by that this forking Solanaceae does not occurs. fact20: The fact that this interpellating bowed occurs but the faltering does not occurs is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that this nosocomialness happens but this beating does not occurs is correct is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That settler is a Decius.

{C}{b}

fact1: That settler is a bugbear and an ineffectiveness. fact2: This butty is a bugbear and it is finer. fact3: Everything does not pod magenta. fact4: The fact that something is biographical and it is a Decius is wrong if it does not pod magenta. fact5: That settler is a kind of a bugbear. fact6: This butty is a Decius if Tess is a Decius. fact7: This butty is not non-finer. fact8: This butty is a kind of a Decius if that settler is a bugbear. fact9: This butty is a Decius. fact10: If this butty is a bugbear that settler is a Decius.

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

That settler is not a Decius.

¬{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That settler is a bugbear and an ineffectiveness. fact2: This butty is a bugbear and it is finer. fact3: Everything does not pod magenta. fact4: The fact that something is biographical and it is a Decius is wrong if it does not pod magenta. fact5: That settler is a kind of a bugbear. fact6: This butty is a Decius if Tess is a Decius. fact7: This butty is not non-finer. fact8: This butty is a kind of a Decius if that settler is a bugbear. fact9: This butty is a Decius. fact10: If this butty is a bugbear that settler is a Decius. ; $hypothesis$ = That settler is a Decius. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This butty is a kind of a bugbear.; int1 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This eatage is hypovolemic.

{D}{b}

fact1: If Azucena is a kind of a Nemertina this eatage is not a Nemertina. fact2: Azucena does not demasculinize Egyptology if this eatage is a ectasia and demasculinize Egyptology. fact3: If something is not a Nemertina and it is not a Colombo then it is not hypovolemic. fact4: If the fact that that phosphate does not misconduct Fresno and is not a Haloragaceae is incorrect that glia is a kind of a Haloragaceae. fact5: Something demasculinizes Egyptology if that is a Colombo. fact6: Azucena is a Nemertina and is a Colombo. fact7: If that glia is a Haloragaceae then that archaeopteryx demasculinizes Egyptology. fact8: If that that archaeopteryx scouts Tipulidae and is not a Nemertina is wrong the fact that Azucena is a Nemertina is true. fact9: Azucena is a Nemertina. fact10: If something demasculinizes Egyptology then the fact that it does scout Tipulidae and it is not a kind of a Nemertina does not hold. fact11: Something is a kind of a Colombo or it is hypovolemic or both if it does not demasculinize Egyptology.

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

That this eatage is not hypovolemic hold.

¬{D}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If Azucena is a kind of a Nemertina this eatage is not a Nemertina. fact2: Azucena does not demasculinize Egyptology if this eatage is a ectasia and demasculinize Egyptology. fact3: If something is not a Nemertina and it is not a Colombo then it is not hypovolemic. fact4: If the fact that that phosphate does not misconduct Fresno and is not a Haloragaceae is incorrect that glia is a kind of a Haloragaceae. fact5: Something demasculinizes Egyptology if that is a Colombo. fact6: Azucena is a Nemertina and is a Colombo. fact7: If that glia is a Haloragaceae then that archaeopteryx demasculinizes Egyptology. fact8: If that that archaeopteryx scouts Tipulidae and is not a Nemertina is wrong the fact that Azucena is a Nemertina is true. fact9: Azucena is a Nemertina. fact10: If something demasculinizes Egyptology then the fact that it does scout Tipulidae and it is not a kind of a Nemertina does not hold. fact11: Something is a kind of a Colombo or it is hypovolemic or both if it does not demasculinize Egyptology. ; $hypothesis$ = This eatage is hypovolemic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Either that lacteal is untypical or that person is a kind of a Arawn or both.

({B}{b} v {C}{b})

fact1: That gummite does not misplace Burlington and is a Qiang if it is not a digram. fact2: That wickup is not a Sinhalese and is subsonic if this tail is unstressed. fact3: If that gummite is not a IA and not unkind that gummite is not a digram. fact4: If this tail is a Chelifer then that lacteal does not wheel panoply and that is non-parous. fact5: This liquid rounds and is not subsonic if that anaglyphy is a Sinhalese. fact6: If the fact that the fact that something busts Bhadrapada or that does not round or both is correct is incorrect then that is not a Arawn. fact7: If something is not unvigilant then it is a Sinhalese and it is unstressed. fact8: If that wickup is not non-subsonic that that wickup busts Bhadrapada and/or it does not round is not correct. fact9: That anaglyphy is not unvigilant if that that gummite is unvigilant and this is catechetical does not hold. fact10: That some man is unvigilant and it is not non-catechetical does not hold if it does not misplace Burlington. fact11: If that this ectoplasm is both artiodactyl and not incomparable is incorrect then this ectoplasm is not a kind of a assuagement. fact12: If some man busts Bhadrapada then the fact that that one is not a kind of a Arawn and that one is a kind of a Chelifer is false. fact13: That gummite is not a IA and this one is not unkind if that this ectoplasm is not a kind of a assuagement is right. fact14: This tail is a Chelifer. fact15: If this liquid busts Bhadrapada then this tail busts Bhadrapada. fact16: That lacteal is a Arawn if that this tail is not a Arawn but that one is a kind of a Chelifer does not hold. fact17: Something is not a Arawn if it is not parous. fact18: Somebody busts Bhadrapada if the one rounds. fact19: If this tail is a Chelifer then that lacteal does not wheel panoply. fact20: That that peninsula is a kind of a Arawn hold.

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

That wickup is a Chelifer.

{A}{be}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That gummite does not misplace Burlington and is a Qiang if it is not a digram. fact2: That wickup is not a Sinhalese and is subsonic if this tail is unstressed. fact3: If that gummite is not a IA and not unkind that gummite is not a digram. fact4: If this tail is a Chelifer then that lacteal does not wheel panoply and that is non-parous. fact5: This liquid rounds and is not subsonic if that anaglyphy is a Sinhalese. fact6: If the fact that the fact that something busts Bhadrapada or that does not round or both is correct is incorrect then that is not a Arawn. fact7: If something is not unvigilant then it is a Sinhalese and it is unstressed. fact8: If that wickup is not non-subsonic that that wickup busts Bhadrapada and/or it does not round is not correct. fact9: That anaglyphy is not unvigilant if that that gummite is unvigilant and this is catechetical does not hold. fact10: That some man is unvigilant and it is not non-catechetical does not hold if it does not misplace Burlington. fact11: If that this ectoplasm is both artiodactyl and not incomparable is incorrect then this ectoplasm is not a kind of a assuagement. fact12: If some man busts Bhadrapada then the fact that that one is not a kind of a Arawn and that one is a kind of a Chelifer is false. fact13: That gummite is not a IA and this one is not unkind if that this ectoplasm is not a kind of a assuagement is right. fact14: This tail is a Chelifer. fact15: If this liquid busts Bhadrapada then this tail busts Bhadrapada. fact16: That lacteal is a Arawn if that this tail is not a Arawn but that one is a kind of a Chelifer does not hold. fact17: Something is not a Arawn if it is not parous. fact18: Somebody busts Bhadrapada if the one rounds. fact19: If this tail is a Chelifer then that lacteal does not wheel panoply. fact20: That that peninsula is a kind of a Arawn hold. ; $hypothesis$ = Either that lacteal is untypical or that person is a kind of a Arawn or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That intromission happens.

{D}

fact1: That burst is triggered by that avascularness. fact2: This amortisation occurs if this interception happens. fact3: The unprotectedness occurs. fact4: If the CPI and the undilutedness occurs then that melting levirate does not occurs. fact5: That the blowback happens brings about that the shrinking occurs. fact6: That this denial occurs is prevented by that the slashing Dali and the euthanasia occurs. fact7: That wearing Staffa prevents that this amortisation does not happens. fact8: Either this interception or that wearing Staffa or both happens. fact9: This shortening happens if this pancreaticness happens. fact10: The unprotectedness occurs and this tibialness occurs. fact11: If this amortisation and this tibialness occurs then that intromission does not occurs.

fact1: {JC} -> {GN} fact2: {F} -> {C} fact3: {A} fact4: ({N} & {EU}) -> ¬{DT} fact5: {AD} -> {EG} fact6: ({FT} & {T}) -> ¬{HM} fact7: {E} -> {C} fact8: ({F} v {E}) fact9: {JB} -> {EN} fact10: ({A} & {B}) fact11: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{D}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That burst is triggered by that avascularness. fact2: This amortisation occurs if this interception happens. fact3: The unprotectedness occurs. fact4: If the CPI and the undilutedness occurs then that melting levirate does not occurs. fact5: That the blowback happens brings about that the shrinking occurs. fact6: That this denial occurs is prevented by that the slashing Dali and the euthanasia occurs. fact7: That wearing Staffa prevents that this amortisation does not happens. fact8: Either this interception or that wearing Staffa or both happens. fact9: This shortening happens if this pancreaticness happens. fact10: The unprotectedness occurs and this tibialness occurs. fact11: If this amortisation and this tibialness occurs then that intromission does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That intromission happens. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: This tibialness occurs.; fact7 & fact8 & fact2 -> int2: This amortisation occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This amortisation and this tibialness occurs.; int3 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There is nothing such that it cools Sorbus and it does not Crick.

(x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: There is nothing that cools Sorbus and does Crick. fact2: There exists no person that is loopy and is not distrustful. fact3: There exists nothing that is a Strindberg and does not annoy Yuman. fact4: There is nothing such that it cools Sorbus and it does not Crick. fact5: The fact that something lades Vombatidae and is not a kind of a iambic is not true if it does not crave. fact6: Something does analyze Thripidae if this is a Pinguicula. fact7: There exists nothing that encourages and does not overhear. fact8: Some man does not crave if that it is a transcript and it is non-calcitic does not hold. fact9: Something Lights Galleria and does not betray hush if the thing analyzes Thripidae. fact10: If something does not betray hush that this is a transcript and this is not calcitic does not hold. fact11: Every man is a Pinguicula.

fact1: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact2: (x): ¬({BO}x & ¬{GK}x) fact3: (x): ¬({GR}x & ¬{O}x) fact4: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({CN}x & ¬{I}x) fact6: (x): {G}x -> {F}x fact7: (x): ¬({DL}x & ¬{HE}x) fact8: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact9: (x): {F}x -> ({E}x & ¬{D}x) fact10: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact11: (x): {G}x

There is nothing such that it lades Vombatidae and it is not a iambic.

(x): ¬({CN}x & ¬{I}x)

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There is nothing that cools Sorbus and does Crick. fact2: There exists no person that is loopy and is not distrustful. fact3: There exists nothing that is a Strindberg and does not annoy Yuman. fact4: There is nothing such that it cools Sorbus and it does not Crick. fact5: The fact that something lades Vombatidae and is not a kind of a iambic is not true if it does not crave. fact6: Something does analyze Thripidae if this is a Pinguicula. fact7: There exists nothing that encourages and does not overhear. fact8: Some man does not crave if that it is a transcript and it is non-calcitic does not hold. fact9: Something Lights Galleria and does not betray hush if the thing analyzes Thripidae. fact10: If something does not betray hush that this is a transcript and this is not calcitic does not hold. fact11: Every man is a Pinguicula. ; $hypothesis$ = There is nothing such that it cools Sorbus and it does not Crick. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That trudging does not happens and that dental occurs.

(¬{C} & {D})

fact1: That wickedness does not occurs. fact2: That trudging does not happens if this whapping dysthymia happens and/or this biogeographicalness happens. fact3: If the fact that that obligating Karachi and this whapping dysthymia occurs is incorrect that obligating Karachi does not occurs. fact4: If this whapping dysthymia occurs then that trudging does not occurs. fact5: This Marathon does not happens. fact6: That wickedness does not happens if this Marathon does not happens. fact7: Notthe pulverization but this installing malleability happens. fact8: This biogeographicalness occurs.

fact1: ¬{E} fact2: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact3: ¬({BH} & {A}) -> ¬{BH} fact4: {A} -> ¬{C} fact5: ¬{F} fact6: ¬{F} -> ¬{E} fact7: (¬{FA} & {GT}) fact8: {B}

Notthat obligating Karachi but this cussing Caryocaraceae occurs.

(¬{BH} & {EU})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That wickedness does not occurs. fact2: That trudging does not happens if this whapping dysthymia happens and/or this biogeographicalness happens. fact3: If the fact that that obligating Karachi and this whapping dysthymia occurs is incorrect that obligating Karachi does not occurs. fact4: If this whapping dysthymia occurs then that trudging does not occurs. fact5: This Marathon does not happens. fact6: That wickedness does not happens if this Marathon does not happens. fact7: Notthe pulverization but this installing malleability happens. fact8: This biogeographicalness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That trudging does not happens and that dental occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This penne is antiapartheid but it is not a bungling.

({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: This penne is not an increasing if this warlord is a kind of an increasing or it is a kind of a bungling or both. fact2: This warlord is a Chlorura but this thing does not roll Arafat. fact3: If this warlord is a bungling or an increasing or both this penne is not a bungling. fact4: This penne hulkings and is not an increasing. fact5: This penne is a broken but it is not a kind of an increasing. fact6: This penne is forehanded and it is extrinsic. fact7: The theoriser is not antiapartheid. fact8: This warlord is not insincere. fact9: If that pharmacist is not sincere that pharmacist is an increasing and is antiapartheid. fact10: Either this warlord is a kind of a bungling or it is an increasing or both. fact11: This birthwort is both sincere and a Ziphiidae. fact12: This warlord is not an increasing if either this penne is a kind of an increasing or it is a bungling or both. fact13: This penne is not an intermediate. fact14: This penne is sincere. fact15: That if the fact that this warlord is a kind of an increasing is right this penne is not a bungling is right. fact16: The Lamarckian is a bungling. fact17: If something is not an increasing and is not a marbled then it is not insincere. fact18: Either this warlord is a bungling or it is antiapartheid or both. fact19: The isoniazid is not an increasing. fact20: This warlord is both paroxysmal and smoothed. fact21: If something is a emolument then it is not an increasing and is not a marbled.

fact1: ({E}{b} v {C}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact2: ({GD}{b} & ¬{DQ}{b}) fact3: ({C}{b} v {E}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact4: ({DP}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) fact5: ({CK}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) fact6: ({CS}{a} & {I}{a}) fact7: ¬{A}{ca} fact8: {B}{b} fact9: ¬{B}{ep} -> ({E}{ep} & {A}{ep}) fact10: ({C}{b} v {E}{b}) fact11: ({B}{aq} & {FM}{aq}) fact12: ({E}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact13: ¬{GM}{a} fact14: {B}{a} fact15: {E}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} fact16: {C}{bm} fact17: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> {B}x fact18: ({C}{b} v {A}{b}) fact19: ¬{E}{eq} fact20: ({CH}{b} & {EK}{b}) fact21: (x): {F}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x)

That the fact that this penne is antiapartheid but this is not a bungling does not hold hold.

¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This penne is not an increasing if this warlord is a kind of an increasing or it is a kind of a bungling or both. fact2: This warlord is a Chlorura but this thing does not roll Arafat. fact3: If this warlord is a bungling or an increasing or both this penne is not a bungling. fact4: This penne hulkings and is not an increasing. fact5: This penne is a broken but it is not a kind of an increasing. fact6: This penne is forehanded and it is extrinsic. fact7: The theoriser is not antiapartheid. fact8: This warlord is not insincere. fact9: If that pharmacist is not sincere that pharmacist is an increasing and is antiapartheid. fact10: Either this warlord is a kind of a bungling or it is an increasing or both. fact11: This birthwort is both sincere and a Ziphiidae. fact12: This warlord is not an increasing if either this penne is a kind of an increasing or it is a bungling or both. fact13: This penne is not an intermediate. fact14: This penne is sincere. fact15: That if the fact that this warlord is a kind of an increasing is right this penne is not a bungling is right. fact16: The Lamarckian is a bungling. fact17: If something is not an increasing and is not a marbled then it is not insincere. fact18: Either this warlord is a bungling or it is antiapartheid or both. fact19: The isoniazid is not an increasing. fact20: This warlord is both paroxysmal and smoothed. fact21: If something is a emolument then it is not an increasing and is not a marbled. ; $hypothesis$ = This penne is antiapartheid but it is not a bungling. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this zakat and/or this uniovulateness occurs is not right.

¬({B} v {A})

fact1: That pupping Verbenaceae does not happens and this decrease occurs. fact2: If this scintillation and this megalithicness occurs then this packaging fact happens. fact3: That that bloom does not happens but that calming happens results in the mopping Naucrates. fact4: That this zakat does not occurs is prevented by that both that internationalizing Caledonia and that rhythmicness occurs. fact5: That enjoyment happens. fact6: That notthis zakat but the fertilisation occurs is triggered by that bloom. fact7: If that internationalizing Caledonia does not occurs and that rhythmicness occurs then this zakat occurs. fact8: The jolting does not occurs and that unlacing occurs. fact9: This haunting tangled occurs. fact10: That that either this zakat occurs or this uniovulateness occurs or both does not hold is true if the fertilisation does not happens. fact11: That that bloom happens is true if that that bloom does not happens and this forked does not happens is not true. fact12: That calming does not occurs. fact13: Notthe insuring but the unpleasantness occurs. fact14: The plague does not occurs and the treating happens. fact15: Notthat internationalizing Caledonia but that rhythmicness occurs. fact16: This estimating Malaconotinae does not happens but the invertibleness occurs. fact17: That internationalizing Caledonia does not occurs. fact18: If the captainship does not happens and the Caesareanness happens the perpetration occurs. fact19: If the scholastic occurs and that enthroning occurs then the rearing occurs. fact20: The elucidating conference does not occurs.

fact1: (¬{M} & {AP}) fact2: ({AK} & {GT}) -> {HH} fact3: (¬{D} & {CC}) -> {BJ} fact4: ({AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact5: {GM} fact6: {D} -> (¬{B} & {C}) fact7: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact8: (¬{AG} & {GU}) fact9: {GL} fact10: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} v {A}) fact11: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> {D} fact12: ¬{CC} fact13: (¬{DG} & {HC}) fact14: (¬{EI} & {FN}) fact15: (¬{AA} & {AB}) fact16: (¬{CF} & {CM}) fact17: ¬{AA} fact18: (¬{EU} & {IE}) -> {CE} fact19: ({GB} & {IS}) -> {IA} fact20: ¬{HP}

This deceiving Myxine occurs or the deletion happens or both.

({GO} v {BL})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That pupping Verbenaceae does not happens and this decrease occurs. fact2: If this scintillation and this megalithicness occurs then this packaging fact happens. fact3: That that bloom does not happens but that calming happens results in the mopping Naucrates. fact4: That this zakat does not occurs is prevented by that both that internationalizing Caledonia and that rhythmicness occurs. fact5: That enjoyment happens. fact6: That notthis zakat but the fertilisation occurs is triggered by that bloom. fact7: If that internationalizing Caledonia does not occurs and that rhythmicness occurs then this zakat occurs. fact8: The jolting does not occurs and that unlacing occurs. fact9: This haunting tangled occurs. fact10: That that either this zakat occurs or this uniovulateness occurs or both does not hold is true if the fertilisation does not happens. fact11: That that bloom happens is true if that that bloom does not happens and this forked does not happens is not true. fact12: That calming does not occurs. fact13: Notthe insuring but the unpleasantness occurs. fact14: The plague does not occurs and the treating happens. fact15: Notthat internationalizing Caledonia but that rhythmicness occurs. fact16: This estimating Malaconotinae does not happens but the invertibleness occurs. fact17: That internationalizing Caledonia does not occurs. fact18: If the captainship does not happens and the Caesareanness happens the perpetration occurs. fact19: If the scholastic occurs and that enthroning occurs then the rearing occurs. fact20: The elucidating conference does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this zakat and/or this uniovulateness occurs is not right. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact15 -> int1: This zakat happens.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This fort is not unplayful and is a Puppis.

(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b})

fact1: If that butterfat blunders coinsurance this fort is a kind of non-unplayful a Puppis. fact2: Something that is a kind of unpolished thing that is not a Pterodactylidae is not unplayful. fact3: The fact that the guereza is not parented but it is a Rappahannock if that butterfat is a Puppis is not wrong. fact4: If that butterfat is astrological but that thing is not a Portulacaceae that thing does blunder coinsurance. fact5: That that butterfat is a Puppis is correct if this fort is a kind of a Puppis. fact6: That butterfat is astrological and is not a Portulacaceae.

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

The guereza is not parented but this thing is a kind of a Rappahannock.

(¬{AQ}{hp} & {HB}{hp})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that butterfat blunders coinsurance this fort is a kind of non-unplayful a Puppis. fact2: Something that is a kind of unpolished thing that is not a Pterodactylidae is not unplayful. fact3: The fact that the guereza is not parented but it is a Rappahannock if that butterfat is a Puppis is not wrong. fact4: If that butterfat is astrological but that thing is not a Portulacaceae that thing does blunder coinsurance. fact5: That that butterfat is a Puppis is correct if this fort is a kind of a Puppis. fact6: That butterfat is astrological and is not a Portulacaceae. ; $hypothesis$ = This fort is not unplayful and is a Puppis. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact6 -> int1: That butterfat blunders coinsurance.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that urceole is a wonder but it is not a Oakley does not hold if it is not trinuclear.

¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: The fact that something is both a wonder and not a Oakley is not correct if it is not trinuclear. fact2: That the thyrotrophin fixates censure but that is not Hugoesque is incorrect if the thyrotrophin is a Oakley. fact3: If the parachute is not polarographic then the fact that that the parachute is a Vigna that is not trinuclear is false hold. fact4: That something is anesthetic thing that is not unparented is not true if this is a kind of a Sabbath. fact5: The fact that that urceole is trinuclear and flavors agio is false if that urceole is not polarographic. fact6: If somebody does not laze Uca the fact that it gravels minuend and does not derive is incorrect. fact7: That that urceole is a kind of anesthetic thing that is not synoptic does not hold if it is a Oakley. fact8: The fact that that urceole is a twentieth but it is not Augustan does not hold if it dashes dogged. fact9: If that urceole is not a kind of a harelip then it is a shortcoming and does not embarrass positiveness. fact10: If that urceole is not a pubescence the fact that the thing is a Limnos and a wonder is not correct. fact11: If something is a trimness then the fact that it is a closer but not lobate does not hold. fact12: If that urceole is non-trinuclear that it is rounded thing that deceives suggestibility is not correct.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact2: {AB}{jk} -> ¬({HN}{jk} & ¬{EC}{jk}) fact3: ¬{HM}{ef} -> ¬({JI}{ef} & ¬{A}{ef}) fact4: (x): {GS}x -> ¬({M}x & ¬{CM}x) fact5: ¬{HM}{aa} -> ¬({A}{aa} & {HC}{aa}) fact6: (x): ¬{IR}x -> ¬({FN}x & ¬{IS}x) fact7: {AB}{aa} -> ¬({M}{aa} & ¬{ER}{aa}) fact8: {GN}{aa} -> ¬({GT}{aa} & ¬{IP}{aa}) fact9: ¬{T}{aa} -> ({AP}{aa} & ¬{JA}{aa}) fact10: ¬{JJ}{aa} -> ¬({IA}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) fact11: (x): {BK}x -> ¬({DE}x & ¬{AQ}x) fact12: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({EP}{aa} & {EO}{aa})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that something is both a wonder and not a Oakley is not correct if it is not trinuclear. fact2: That the thyrotrophin fixates censure but that is not Hugoesque is incorrect if the thyrotrophin is a Oakley. fact3: If the parachute is not polarographic then the fact that that the parachute is a Vigna that is not trinuclear is false hold. fact4: That something is anesthetic thing that is not unparented is not true if this is a kind of a Sabbath. fact5: The fact that that urceole is trinuclear and flavors agio is false if that urceole is not polarographic. fact6: If somebody does not laze Uca the fact that it gravels minuend and does not derive is incorrect. fact7: That that urceole is a kind of anesthetic thing that is not synoptic does not hold if it is a Oakley. fact8: The fact that that urceole is a twentieth but it is not Augustan does not hold if it dashes dogged. fact9: If that urceole is not a kind of a harelip then it is a shortcoming and does not embarrass positiveness. fact10: If that urceole is not a pubescence the fact that the thing is a Limnos and a wonder is not correct. fact11: If something is a trimness then the fact that it is a closer but not lobate does not hold. fact12: If that urceole is non-trinuclear that it is rounded thing that deceives suggestibility is not correct. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that urceole is a wonder but it is not a Oakley does not hold if it is not trinuclear. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Every man is not a natural.

(x): ¬{A}x

fact1: Everything does not gladden ophidism. fact2: Everyone is not discriminatory. fact3: Someone is a Sichuan if he is rupestral. fact4: Every man is not a natural. fact5: Everything is a natural and/or is not a skimmed. fact6: If somebody does not gladden ophidism that it is fibrocalcific and is not a Shaw does not hold. fact7: That everything does not sever hold. fact8: That some person is not a Sichuan but the one excepts Marmota is false if the one is a natural. fact9: Every person is not a kind of a Shakespearian. fact10: Every man does not mortify. fact11: Everything does not except Marmota. fact12: Some person that is not fibrocalcific is both rupestral and a natural. fact13: Some man that is a kind of a Sichuan and is a natural is not alkalotic. fact14: Everything is not a disagreeableness. fact15: If the fact that that some person is not non-fibrocalcific but it is not a kind of a Shaw is true does not hold it is rupestral. fact16: Every man is not basaltic.

fact1: (x): ¬{F}x fact2: (x): ¬{BP}x fact3: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact4: (x): ¬{A}x fact5: (x): ({A}x v ¬{G}x) fact6: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) fact7: (x): ¬{BJ}x fact8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {FM}x) fact9: (x): ¬{IJ}x fact10: (x): ¬{FU}x fact11: (x): ¬{FM}x fact12: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & {A}x) fact13: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{JA}x fact14: (x): ¬{AG}x fact15: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> {C}x fact16: (x): ¬{DK}x

Everything is not alkalotic.

(x): ¬{JA}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Everything does not gladden ophidism. fact2: Everyone is not discriminatory. fact3: Someone is a Sichuan if he is rupestral. fact4: Every man is not a natural. fact5: Everything is a natural and/or is not a skimmed. fact6: If somebody does not gladden ophidism that it is fibrocalcific and is not a Shaw does not hold. fact7: That everything does not sever hold. fact8: That some person is not a Sichuan but the one excepts Marmota is false if the one is a natural. fact9: Every person is not a kind of a Shakespearian. fact10: Every man does not mortify. fact11: Everything does not except Marmota. fact12: Some person that is not fibrocalcific is both rupestral and a natural. fact13: Some man that is a kind of a Sichuan and is a natural is not alkalotic. fact14: Everything is not a disagreeableness. fact15: If the fact that that some person is not non-fibrocalcific but it is not a kind of a Shaw is true does not hold it is rupestral. fact16: Every man is not basaltic. ; $hypothesis$ = Every man is not a natural. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That appalling Cincinnati occurs.

{D}

fact1: If that anaesthetic does not occurs then that that stumble does not happens and that appalling Cincinnati does not occurs does not hold. fact2: This pelter occurs. fact3: That anaesthetic happens. fact4: That that appalling Cincinnati occurs is prevented by this laboring. fact5: If the sting combustibleness happens then that southernness happens. fact6: That that stumble occurs is triggered by that that anaesthetic occurs.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{D}) fact2: {AN} fact3: {A} fact4: {C} -> ¬{D} fact5: {CS} -> {CI} fact6: {A} -> {B}

That appalling Cincinnati occurs.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that anaesthetic does not occurs then that that stumble does not happens and that appalling Cincinnati does not occurs does not hold. fact2: This pelter occurs. fact3: That anaesthetic happens. fact4: That that appalling Cincinnati occurs is prevented by this laboring. fact5: If the sting combustibleness happens then that southernness happens. fact6: That that stumble occurs is triggered by that that anaesthetic occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That appalling Cincinnati occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that there is some person such that if she/he does not polish womankind then the fact that she/he is thermodynamical or is not a kind of an ideal or both is incorrect is wrong.

¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x))

fact1: That this isoclinal is a status and/or this thing does not proceed songfulness does not hold if this isoclinal is not thermodynamical. fact2: There exists something such that if that is not zymoid then that is not non-amenorrheal or is not nomothetic or both. fact3: That either this tomtit is thermodynamical or she is not a kind of a coextension or both is wrong if this tomtit is not nonadsorptive. fact4: There exists something such that if that is not exhaustible then that that suburbanizes holloa or that is non-putrid or both is false. fact5: There is something such that if the fact that it does not polish womankind is right then that it is thermodynamical or an ideal or both does not hold. fact6: If this tomtit does not polish womankind that this tomtit is thermodynamical and/or that is not an ideal is not correct. fact7: If something is not existential the fact that it deoxidises turgor and/or it does not tranquillising Pisum does not hold. fact8: There is someone such that if the person does not polish womankind then the person is an ideal. fact9: If this tomtit does not polish womankind this tomtit is thermodynamical or is not an ideal or both. fact10: If that this tomtit does not polish womankind hold then this tomtit is not thermodynamical. fact11: There exists something such that if it polishes womankind that it is thermodynamical or it is not an ideal or both does not hold. fact12: The fact that this tomtit is thermodynamical or is a kind of an ideal or both is not right if this tomtit does not polish womankind. fact13: If something is not a kind of a waggishness then the fact that it is thermodynamical and/or it is not lymphatic does not hold. fact14: There exists someone such that if that one is not a Zalophus then that one is a kind of a cosiness. fact15: The fact that something is not non-hard and/or this thing is not mithraic is false if that this thing is a Utrillo is not true. fact16: There is someone such that if it does not polish womankind then it is thermodynamical and/or not an ideal. fact17: There exists somebody such that if it does not polish womankind it is not thermodynamical. fact18: There exists something such that if this thing is not a kind of an adaptability then the fact that either this thing is an opus or this thing is non-amenorrheal or both is incorrect. fact19: The fact that there exists someone such that if it does not sink Shrovetide that it is a paracosm and/or not a kina is not correct is right. fact20: If this tomtit polishes womankind then the fact that this tomtit is thermodynamical and/or is not an ideal is false.

fact1: ¬{AA}{ge} -> ¬({JB}{ge} v ¬{HB}{ge}) fact2: (Ex): ¬{CC}x -> ({GT}x v ¬{CM}x) fact3: ¬{JD}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{DQ}{aa}) fact4: (Ex): ¬{HN}x -> ¬({FF}x v ¬{AO}x) fact5: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) fact6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) fact7: (x): ¬{FD}x -> ¬({GN}x v ¬{DI}x) fact8: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x fact9: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) fact10: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} fact11: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) fact12: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) fact13: (x): ¬{BK}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{HJ}x) fact14: (Ex): ¬{IJ}x -> {HP}x fact15: (x): ¬{GU}x -> ¬({ED}x v ¬{EP}x) fact16: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) fact17: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x fact18: (Ex): ¬{AC}x -> ¬({DS}x v ¬{GT}x) fact19: (Ex): ¬{IB}x -> ¬({IR}x v ¬{JJ}x) fact20: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa})

The fact that the fact that this tomtit is hard or it is not mithraic or both is incorrect is right if it is not a kind of a Utrillo.

¬{GU}{aa} -> ¬({ED}{aa} v ¬{EP}{aa})

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That this isoclinal is a status and/or this thing does not proceed songfulness does not hold if this isoclinal is not thermodynamical. fact2: There exists something such that if that is not zymoid then that is not non-amenorrheal or is not nomothetic or both. fact3: That either this tomtit is thermodynamical or she is not a kind of a coextension or both is wrong if this tomtit is not nonadsorptive. fact4: There exists something such that if that is not exhaustible then that that suburbanizes holloa or that is non-putrid or both is false. fact5: There is something such that if the fact that it does not polish womankind is right then that it is thermodynamical or an ideal or both does not hold. fact6: If this tomtit does not polish womankind that this tomtit is thermodynamical and/or that is not an ideal is not correct. fact7: If something is not existential the fact that it deoxidises turgor and/or it does not tranquillising Pisum does not hold. fact8: There is someone such that if the person does not polish womankind then the person is an ideal. fact9: If this tomtit does not polish womankind this tomtit is thermodynamical or is not an ideal or both. fact10: If that this tomtit does not polish womankind hold then this tomtit is not thermodynamical. fact11: There exists something such that if it polishes womankind that it is thermodynamical or it is not an ideal or both does not hold. fact12: The fact that this tomtit is thermodynamical or is a kind of an ideal or both is not right if this tomtit does not polish womankind. fact13: If something is not a kind of a waggishness then the fact that it is thermodynamical and/or it is not lymphatic does not hold. fact14: There exists someone such that if that one is not a Zalophus then that one is a kind of a cosiness. fact15: The fact that something is not non-hard and/or this thing is not mithraic is false if that this thing is a Utrillo is not true. fact16: There is someone such that if it does not polish womankind then it is thermodynamical and/or not an ideal. fact17: There exists somebody such that if it does not polish womankind it is not thermodynamical. fact18: There exists something such that if this thing is not a kind of an adaptability then the fact that either this thing is an opus or this thing is non-amenorrheal or both is incorrect. fact19: The fact that there exists someone such that if it does not sink Shrovetide that it is a paracosm and/or not a kina is not correct is right. fact20: If this tomtit polishes womankind then the fact that this tomtit is thermodynamical and/or is not an ideal is false. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there is some person such that if she/he does not polish womankind then the fact that she/he is thermodynamical or is not a kind of an ideal or both is incorrect is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That dipole is a prolegomenon but she is not prehistoric.

({D}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

fact1: That if the fact that something is not airworthy is true that that thing is a prolegomenon and not prehistoric is false is not wrong. fact2: The editorial is not airworthy if that this corporatist is not airworthy but it is a shamble is wrong. fact3: That dipole is not prehistoric if this hypnotizer is not a shamble. fact4: If someone is not a nodding then this person does not hypophysectomized shrieked. fact5: This corporatist is not airworthy. fact6: If this corporatist is not airworthy this hypnotizer is not a shamble. fact7: If this hypnotizer is not a shamble then that dipole is a prolegomenon but that is not prehistoric. fact8: Something is not non-prehistoric and the thing is a prolegomenon if the thing does not hypophysectomized shrieked. fact9: If that this corporatist does not hypophysectomized shrieked and is airworthy hold that dipole is not airworthy. fact10: The fact that if that dipole disinherits Achaea then the fact that this hypnotizer does not disinherits Achaea is correct is right. fact11: If that something is not a Cestidae but a nodding is incorrect then it is not a nodding. fact12: If somebody does not disinherit Achaea then the fact that this person is not a Cestidae and this person is a nodding is incorrect. fact13: If this hypnotizer is prehistoric that this corporatist is unairworthy and a shamble does not hold.

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

That that dipole is a prolegomenon and is not prehistoric does not hold.

¬({D}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That if the fact that something is not airworthy is true that that thing is a prolegomenon and not prehistoric is false is not wrong. fact2: The editorial is not airworthy if that this corporatist is not airworthy but it is a shamble is wrong. fact3: That dipole is not prehistoric if this hypnotizer is not a shamble. fact4: If someone is not a nodding then this person does not hypophysectomized shrieked. fact5: This corporatist is not airworthy. fact6: If this corporatist is not airworthy this hypnotizer is not a shamble. fact7: If this hypnotizer is not a shamble then that dipole is a prolegomenon but that is not prehistoric. fact8: Something is not non-prehistoric and the thing is a prolegomenon if the thing does not hypophysectomized shrieked. fact9: If that this corporatist does not hypophysectomized shrieked and is airworthy hold that dipole is not airworthy. fact10: The fact that if that dipole disinherits Achaea then the fact that this hypnotizer does not disinherits Achaea is correct is right. fact11: If that something is not a Cestidae but a nodding is incorrect then it is not a nodding. fact12: If somebody does not disinherit Achaea then the fact that this person is not a Cestidae and this person is a nodding is incorrect. fact13: If this hypnotizer is prehistoric that this corporatist is unairworthy and a shamble does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That dipole is a prolegomenon but she is not prehistoric. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact5 -> int1: This hypnotizer is not a shamble.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that potential does not happens is true.

¬{B}

fact1: That potential does not occurs and this enticement does not occurs if this chomping Vulgate occurs. fact2: That that potential happens is caused by this enticement. fact3: This drumfire occurs. fact4: This enticement happens.

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

That that potential does not happens is true.

¬{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That potential does not occurs and this enticement does not occurs if this chomping Vulgate occurs. fact2: That that potential happens is caused by this enticement. fact3: This drumfire occurs. fact4: This enticement happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that potential does not happens is true. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That simulacrum does moderate throes.

{D}{b}

fact1: That platen is postexilic. fact2: That simulacrum is postexilic or it is a prestigiousness or both. fact3: If that that platen is not a Chechenia is false that simulacrum is not a kind of a Trichys. fact4: That simulacrum is not a kind of a Chechenia if that platen is a Trichys. fact5: That simulacrum is not postexilic. fact6: That simulacrum is a kind of a Chechenia. fact7: Either that platen is a nimiety or it is postexilic or both. fact8: If this infusion is not postexilic the fact that that platen is a Chechenia but it is not a Trichys is wrong. fact9: That simulacrum is a kind of a Chechenia if that that platen is a Chechenia and is not a Trichys does not hold. fact10: That platen is a Chechenia and this one is postexilic. fact11: That platen is a Cheever and it is a Chordospartium. fact12: That that platen is climatical hold. fact13: If that platen is a Chechenia and/or it is a Trichys the fact that that simulacrum does not moderate throes is correct.

fact1: {B}{a} fact2: ({B}{b} v {I}{b}) fact3: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact4: {C}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact5: ¬{B}{b} fact6: {A}{b} fact7: ({FK}{a} v {B}{a}) fact8: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact9: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {A}{b} fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: ({S}{a} & {CA}{a}) fact12: {FB}{a} fact13: ({A}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b}

That simulacrum does moderate throes.

{D}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That platen is postexilic. fact2: That simulacrum is postexilic or it is a prestigiousness or both. fact3: If that that platen is not a Chechenia is false that simulacrum is not a kind of a Trichys. fact4: That simulacrum is not a kind of a Chechenia if that platen is a Trichys. fact5: That simulacrum is not postexilic. fact6: That simulacrum is a kind of a Chechenia. fact7: Either that platen is a nimiety or it is postexilic or both. fact8: If this infusion is not postexilic the fact that that platen is a Chechenia but it is not a Trichys is wrong. fact9: That simulacrum is a kind of a Chechenia if that that platen is a Chechenia and is not a Trichys does not hold. fact10: That platen is a Chechenia and this one is postexilic. fact11: That platen is a Cheever and it is a Chordospartium. fact12: That that platen is climatical hold. fact13: If that platen is a Chechenia and/or it is a Trichys the fact that that simulacrum does not moderate throes is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = That simulacrum does moderate throes. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: That platen is a Chechenia.; int1 -> int2: That platen is a Chechenia and/or is a Trichys.; int2 & fact13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that this violoncello is a Myrmeleontidae that is not a dependent is wrong.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

fact1: That that standardiser does not consider Fistularia and this is not a kind of a molded is incorrect. fact2: If the fact that that standardiser does not consider Fistularia and is not a molded is wrong that standardiser is not a measured. fact3: The fact that that standardiser considers Fistularia and is not a kind of a molded does not hold. fact4: This violoncello is not nonvolatile if that standardiser is not a kind of a measured. fact5: That every man is lunisolar is true. fact6: The fact that someone is a Dodecanese and is not a measured is incorrect if it is lunisolar. fact7: This violoncello is not a molded if the fact that it is not nonvolatile and is not a dependent does not hold.

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

The fact that this violoncello is a Myrmeleontidae that is not a dependent is wrong.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that standardiser does not consider Fistularia and this is not a kind of a molded is incorrect. fact2: If the fact that that standardiser does not consider Fistularia and is not a molded is wrong that standardiser is not a measured. fact3: The fact that that standardiser considers Fistularia and is not a kind of a molded does not hold. fact4: This violoncello is not nonvolatile if that standardiser is not a kind of a measured. fact5: That every man is lunisolar is true. fact6: The fact that someone is a Dodecanese and is not a measured is incorrect if it is lunisolar. fact7: This violoncello is not a molded if the fact that it is not nonvolatile and is not a dependent does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this violoncello is a Myrmeleontidae that is not a dependent is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this witch is not anserine or is a kind of a Gikuyu or both is not true.

¬(¬{A}{aa} v {B}{aa})

fact1: Something is not a kind of a Gikuyu and is a crayon if it do notuse. fact2: If some person that is not a wangle is a nuance then this placebo is a wangle. fact3: This witch is a wangle and unclothed. fact4: This witch douses if that sycophant douses. fact5: That glycoprotein is a syncategorem and is not unclothed if it is a Johnston. fact6: Some person is not humorless if it is not a kind of a Gikuyu. fact7: That sycophant is a syncategorem if that glycoprotein is both a syncategorem and not unclothed. fact8: Everything does not displume saliency and/or it excises agalactosis. fact9: That Lovely do notuse if that sycophant douse and the thing is a syncategorem is right. fact10: That that sycophant douses hold if this placebo is a wangle. fact11: That glycoprotein is a Johnston if this seidel needles meromelia. fact12: That cristobalite is not a kind of a wangle but it is a kind of a nuance. fact13: If that sycophant is not a Johnston the fact that it douses and is a syncategorem is true. fact14: If some man is not a kind of a crayon the fact that the one is not anserine or is a Gikuyu or both is incorrect. fact15: Everything is anserine or this thing is a Gikuyu or both. fact16: This compass is a doric and/or it needles meromelia. fact17: This witch either is not non-anserine or is a Gikuyu or both.

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

Either Lovely is humorous or this thing is not non-anserine or both.

(¬{AC}{jf} v {A}{jf})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not a kind of a Gikuyu and is a crayon if it do notuse. fact2: If some person that is not a wangle is a nuance then this placebo is a wangle. fact3: This witch is a wangle and unclothed. fact4: This witch douses if that sycophant douses. fact5: That glycoprotein is a syncategorem and is not unclothed if it is a Johnston. fact6: Some person is not humorless if it is not a kind of a Gikuyu. fact7: That sycophant is a syncategorem if that glycoprotein is both a syncategorem and not unclothed. fact8: Everything does not displume saliency and/or it excises agalactosis. fact9: That Lovely do notuse if that sycophant douse and the thing is a syncategorem is right. fact10: That that sycophant douses hold if this placebo is a wangle. fact11: That glycoprotein is a Johnston if this seidel needles meromelia. fact12: That cristobalite is not a kind of a wangle but it is a kind of a nuance. fact13: If that sycophant is not a Johnston the fact that it douses and is a syncategorem is true. fact14: If some man is not a kind of a crayon the fact that the one is not anserine or is a Gikuyu or both is incorrect. fact15: Everything is anserine or this thing is a Gikuyu or both. fact16: This compass is a doric and/or it needles meromelia. fact17: This witch either is not non-anserine or is a Gikuyu or both. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this witch is not anserine or is a kind of a Gikuyu or both is not true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Genet is heterologous.

{B}{aa}

fact1: Something is not heterologous if the fact that it is not alphanumerical and is heterologous is false. fact2: If that that Genet is not unspecialised and it does not Begin is false that Genet is heterologous. fact3: Someone is not non-catarrhal and this person branches theodicy. fact4: That Genet is not catarrhal if something is catarrhal thing that branches theodicy. fact5: That Genet is heterologous if that Genet does Begin.

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

That Genet is not heterologous.

¬{B}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not heterologous if the fact that it is not alphanumerical and is heterologous is false. fact2: If that that Genet is not unspecialised and it does not Begin is false that Genet is heterologous. fact3: Someone is not non-catarrhal and this person branches theodicy. fact4: That Genet is not catarrhal if something is catarrhal thing that branches theodicy. fact5: That Genet is heterologous if that Genet does Begin. ; $hypothesis$ = That Genet is heterologous. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that if this indigo is not a nicety then that this coralwood is not a Tertullian and does not enwrap Gujarat does not hold is false.

¬(¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}))

fact1: If that some person is a Tertullian but that one does not faze Elops does not hold then that one is not a kind of a Tertullian. fact2: If this indigo is a nicety and not a alexic that midshipman is not a nicety. fact3: If this indigo is not a kind of a nicety then that this coralwood is not a Tertullian but this enwraps Gujarat is wrong. fact4: If this indigo is not a nicety then this bristlegrass is not a kind of a alexic. fact5: If this coralwood is not a alexic this bristlegrass does not enwrap Gujarat. fact6: If this indigo is not a mythologization then this indigo enwraps Gujarat and it is a MacGuffin. fact7: The fact that someone does not misrepresent Arctiidae and does not prank is wrong if it is not a nicety. fact8: Something is a kind of a nicety and is not a alexic if this thing is not a Tertullian. fact9: This coralwood is not a Tertullian and does not enwrap Gujarat if this indigo is not a kind of a nicety. fact10: The fact that this coralwood is not a kind of a Tertullian and enwraps Gujarat is false. fact11: The fact that this coralwood is a Tertullian and does not enwrap Gujarat is false. fact12: That the fact that something is a kind of a Tertullian but this thing does not faze Elops is not incorrect is false if this thing enwraps Gujarat.

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

The fact that that midshipman does not misrepresent Arctiidae and does not prank is incorrect.

¬(¬{AL}{ik} & ¬{AO}{ik})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that some person is a Tertullian but that one does not faze Elops does not hold then that one is not a kind of a Tertullian. fact2: If this indigo is a nicety and not a alexic that midshipman is not a nicety. fact3: If this indigo is not a kind of a nicety then that this coralwood is not a Tertullian but this enwraps Gujarat is wrong. fact4: If this indigo is not a nicety then this bristlegrass is not a kind of a alexic. fact5: If this coralwood is not a alexic this bristlegrass does not enwrap Gujarat. fact6: If this indigo is not a mythologization then this indigo enwraps Gujarat and it is a MacGuffin. fact7: The fact that someone does not misrepresent Arctiidae and does not prank is wrong if it is not a nicety. fact8: Something is a kind of a nicety and is not a alexic if this thing is not a Tertullian. fact9: This coralwood is not a Tertullian and does not enwrap Gujarat if this indigo is not a kind of a nicety. fact10: The fact that this coralwood is not a kind of a Tertullian and enwraps Gujarat is false. fact11: The fact that this coralwood is a Tertullian and does not enwrap Gujarat is false. fact12: That the fact that something is a kind of a Tertullian but this thing does not faze Elops is not incorrect is false if this thing enwraps Gujarat. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that if this indigo is not a nicety then that this coralwood is not a Tertullian and does not enwrap Gujarat does not hold is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that that XX is a kind of a Hondo.

{A}{a}

fact1: The fact that this handbook is both acentric and lingual is wrong. fact2: There exists none such that it does not titillate and it toes pagination. fact3: There exists nothing such that this thing is not a Hondo but a tough. fact4: If somebody is not a Hondo then the fact that it is not a tough and animadverts littered is wrong. fact5: This balsa is not a Hondo. fact6: There exists nothing such that that thing is not a kind of a tough and that thing is acentric. fact7: The fact that this balsa is a kind of a Hondo and it is a tough does not hold. fact8: This paleface is not a Hondo. fact9: That XX is not acentric. fact10: If that XX is a Hondo this balsa is not a tough but the thing is acentric. fact11: The fact that this balsa is acentric and this one is a Hondo is false. fact12: This balsa is not circulative. fact13: This balsa is not a Hondo but it flounces Jaffar. fact14: That XX is not a tough.

fact1: ¬({AB}{en} & {CS}{en}) fact2: (x): ¬(¬{IE}x & {BS}x) fact3: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {AA}x) fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {FT}x) fact5: ¬{A}{b} fact6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact7: ¬({A}{b} & {AA}{b}) fact8: ¬{A}{ao} fact9: ¬{AB}{a} fact10: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact11: ¬({AB}{b} & {A}{b}) fact12: ¬{GA}{b} fact13: (¬{A}{b} & {DE}{b}) fact14: ¬{AA}{a}

That this balsa is not a kind of a tough but it animadverts littered does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{b} & {FT}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this handbook is both acentric and lingual is wrong. fact2: There exists none such that it does not titillate and it toes pagination. fact3: There exists nothing such that this thing is not a Hondo but a tough. fact4: If somebody is not a Hondo then the fact that it is not a tough and animadverts littered is wrong. fact5: This balsa is not a Hondo. fact6: There exists nothing such that that thing is not a kind of a tough and that thing is acentric. fact7: The fact that this balsa is a kind of a Hondo and it is a tough does not hold. fact8: This paleface is not a Hondo. fact9: That XX is not acentric. fact10: If that XX is a Hondo this balsa is not a tough but the thing is acentric. fact11: The fact that this balsa is acentric and this one is a Hondo is false. fact12: This balsa is not circulative. fact13: This balsa is not a Hondo but it flounces Jaffar. fact14: That XX is not a tough. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that XX is a kind of a Hondo. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that XX is a kind of a Hondo.; fact10 & assump1 -> int1: This balsa is not a tough but it is acentric.; fact6 -> int2: That the fact that this balsa is not a tough but it is acentric does not hold is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The howling vocable does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: If this canalicularness happens that the non-pessimisticness and that agonisticness occurs is false. fact2: If that this pessimisticness does not happens and that agonisticness occurs is not correct the howling vocable occurs. fact3: The howling vocable does not occurs and this canalicularness does not happens if that splicing textured happens. fact4: That splicing textured occurs if that unidentifiableness happens. fact5: This canalicularness occurs.

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

The howling vocable does not occurs.

¬{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this canalicularness happens that the non-pessimisticness and that agonisticness occurs is false. fact2: If that this pessimisticness does not happens and that agonisticness occurs is not correct the howling vocable occurs. fact3: The howling vocable does not occurs and this canalicularness does not happens if that splicing textured happens. fact4: That splicing textured occurs if that unidentifiableness happens. fact5: This canalicularness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The howling vocable does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact5 -> int1: The fact that this pessimisticness does not happens but that agonisticness occurs is incorrect.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This compote does ICE rapture and it is autolytic.

({A}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: The minesweeper ICES rapture and is unsmooth. fact2: This compote addresses Rabelais. fact3: That this compote ICES rapture and this thing is autolytic does not hold if that velveteen is not a kind of a barrack. fact4: The fact that the signaler is autolytic is right. fact5: If some person is not rectosigmoid then that he does not aver marriageability and he is not a Ophiuchus does not hold. fact6: The scour is a barrack. fact7: Gillian ICES rapture. fact8: If that some person does not aver marriageability and it is not a kind of a Ophiuchus does not hold it is not a barrack. fact9: Something is a kind of a barrack and ICES rapture if this is not autolytic. fact10: This compote cards ESP. fact11: This compote is anoperineal. fact12: This compote is a monosyllable and it is heartless. fact13: The torsk ICES rapture. fact14: This compote ICES rapture and this is a barrack.

fact1: ({A}{ht} & {CQ}{ht}) fact2: {FF}{a} fact3: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {C}{a}) fact4: {C}{bc} fact5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) fact6: {B}{ce} fact7: {A}{ae} fact8: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{B}x fact9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) fact10: {BE}{a} fact11: {IN}{a} fact12: ({FN}{a} & {CK}{a}) fact13: {A}{bn} fact14: ({A}{a} & {B}{a})

The fact that this compote ICES rapture and is autolytic is wrong.

¬({A}{a} & {C}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The minesweeper ICES rapture and is unsmooth. fact2: This compote addresses Rabelais. fact3: That this compote ICES rapture and this thing is autolytic does not hold if that velveteen is not a kind of a barrack. fact4: The fact that the signaler is autolytic is right. fact5: If some person is not rectosigmoid then that he does not aver marriageability and he is not a Ophiuchus does not hold. fact6: The scour is a barrack. fact7: Gillian ICES rapture. fact8: If that some person does not aver marriageability and it is not a kind of a Ophiuchus does not hold it is not a barrack. fact9: Something is a kind of a barrack and ICES rapture if this is not autolytic. fact10: This compote cards ESP. fact11: This compote is anoperineal. fact12: This compote is a monosyllable and it is heartless. fact13: The torsk ICES rapture. fact14: This compote ICES rapture and this is a barrack. ; $hypothesis$ = This compote does ICE rapture and it is autolytic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that everything is not a Galium does not hold.

¬((x): ¬{A}x)

fact1: Everyone does not mother. fact2: Everything is not a ALT. fact3: Some person gives Nero if it thumps shamanism. fact4: The fact that something thumps shamanism hold if the fact that that does not thumps shamanism and do notwnsize angled is not right. fact5: Everything is not pretentious. fact6: Everything is not a Vila. fact7: A jerkiness that is union is not a kind of a Cladorhyncus. fact8: Everything is a jerkiness and it is not nonunion. fact9: Everybody is not a morgen. fact10: Everything is not a holla. fact11: Everything does not satisfy diathesis. fact12: The fact that someone is not a cryoanesthesia and is a kind of a Galium is incorrect if this one gives Nero. fact13: The fact that everyone does not falter Asclepiadaceae is not wrong. fact14: If the fact that some person is not a cryoanesthesia but she is a kind of a Galium is incorrect she is not corporeal. fact15: If something is not a Cladorhyncus then that the fact that that thing does not thump shamanism and do notwnsize angled is true does not hold. fact16: Every person is not a kind of a Montessori. fact17: Everything is not a kind of a Tsouic. fact18: The fact that the fact that everyone is not a Steuben is correct is not wrong. fact19: Everything does not sublimate Himmler.

fact1: (x): ¬{FP}x fact2: (x): ¬{BM}x fact3: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact4: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> {D}x fact5: (x): ¬{CN}x fact6: (x): ¬{EE}x fact7: (x): ({G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x fact8: (x): ({G}x & {H}x) fact9: (x): ¬{EJ}x fact10: (x): ¬{FN}x fact11: (x): ¬{FB}x fact12: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) fact13: (x): ¬{IP}x fact14: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{FE}x fact15: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) fact16: (x): ¬{IS}x fact17: (x): ¬{DH}x fact18: (x): ¬{DU}x fact19: (x): ¬{BB}x

Everything is not corporeal.

(x): ¬{FE}x

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Everyone does not mother. fact2: Everything is not a ALT. fact3: Some person gives Nero if it thumps shamanism. fact4: The fact that something thumps shamanism hold if the fact that that does not thumps shamanism and do notwnsize angled is not right. fact5: Everything is not pretentious. fact6: Everything is not a Vila. fact7: A jerkiness that is union is not a kind of a Cladorhyncus. fact8: Everything is a jerkiness and it is not nonunion. fact9: Everybody is not a morgen. fact10: Everything is not a holla. fact11: Everything does not satisfy diathesis. fact12: The fact that someone is not a cryoanesthesia and is a kind of a Galium is incorrect if this one gives Nero. fact13: The fact that everyone does not falter Asclepiadaceae is not wrong. fact14: If the fact that some person is not a cryoanesthesia but she is a kind of a Galium is incorrect she is not corporeal. fact15: If something is not a Cladorhyncus then that the fact that that thing does not thump shamanism and do notwnsize angled is true does not hold. fact16: Every person is not a kind of a Montessori. fact17: Everything is not a kind of a Tsouic. fact18: The fact that the fact that everyone is not a Steuben is correct is not wrong. fact19: Everything does not sublimate Himmler. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that everything is not a Galium does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this atole is a Locustidae is true.

{C}{c}

fact1: This atole purloins Selma if this affiliate is a kind of a Locustidae. fact2: Some person does not purloin Selma if the fact that it is not humorous or it is not a Nostradamus or both is incorrect. fact3: If that pacemaker is not a juvenility then that pacemaker is non-humorous one that is not a Nostradamus. fact4: This affiliate deforms predestinarianism. fact5: This affiliate is a Agonidae. fact6: If something that is not humorous is not a kind of a Nostradamus then it does not purloin Selma. fact7: That Congo does deform predestinarianism. fact8: This atole is not a Locustidae and does not deform predestinarianism if it does not purloin Selma. fact9: If this affiliate purloins Selma then this atole is a kind of a Locustidae. fact10: This bulbul is a Locustidae. fact11: This atole deforms predestinarianism. fact12: This affiliate purloins Selma if that pacemaker deforms predestinarianism. fact13: If the fact that this affiliate is not epenthetic but it is a juvenility does not hold that pacemaker is not a Nostradamus. fact14: That pacemaker is a kind of a Locustidae. fact15: This atole is diluvial. fact16: That pacemaker purloins Selma. fact17: If that pacemaker purloins Selma then this affiliate deforms predestinarianism. fact18: If this atole does deform predestinarianism that pacemaker is a kind of a Locustidae. fact19: That pacemaker deforms predestinarianism. fact20: that predestinarianism deforms pacemaker. fact21: That pacemaker is a Selenarctos. fact22: This atole deforms predestinarianism if that that pacemaker is a kind of a Locustidae is not false.

fact1: {C}{b} -> {B}{c} fact2: (x): ¬(¬{E}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: ¬{F}{a} -> (¬{E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact4: {A}{b} fact5: {CC}{b} fact6: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: {A}{d} fact8: ¬{B}{c} -> (¬{C}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) fact9: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} fact10: {C}{gs} fact11: {A}{c} fact12: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact13: ¬(¬{G}{b} & {F}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact14: {C}{a} fact15: {HL}{c} fact16: {B}{a} fact17: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact18: {A}{c} -> {C}{a} fact19: {A}{a} fact20: {AA}{aa} fact21: {EA}{a} fact22: {C}{a} -> {A}{c}

The fact that this atole is not a Locustidae hold.

¬{C}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This atole purloins Selma if this affiliate is a kind of a Locustidae. fact2: Some person does not purloin Selma if the fact that it is not humorous or it is not a Nostradamus or both is incorrect. fact3: If that pacemaker is not a juvenility then that pacemaker is non-humorous one that is not a Nostradamus. fact4: This affiliate deforms predestinarianism. fact5: This affiliate is a Agonidae. fact6: If something that is not humorous is not a kind of a Nostradamus then it does not purloin Selma. fact7: That Congo does deform predestinarianism. fact8: This atole is not a Locustidae and does not deform predestinarianism if it does not purloin Selma. fact9: If this affiliate purloins Selma then this atole is a kind of a Locustidae. fact10: This bulbul is a Locustidae. fact11: This atole deforms predestinarianism. fact12: This affiliate purloins Selma if that pacemaker deforms predestinarianism. fact13: If the fact that this affiliate is not epenthetic but it is a juvenility does not hold that pacemaker is not a Nostradamus. fact14: That pacemaker is a kind of a Locustidae. fact15: This atole is diluvial. fact16: That pacemaker purloins Selma. fact17: If that pacemaker purloins Selma then this affiliate deforms predestinarianism. fact18: If this atole does deform predestinarianism that pacemaker is a kind of a Locustidae. fact19: That pacemaker deforms predestinarianism. fact20: that predestinarianism deforms pacemaker. fact21: That pacemaker is a Selenarctos. fact22: This atole deforms predestinarianism if that that pacemaker is a kind of a Locustidae is not false. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this atole is a Locustidae is true. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact19 -> int1: This affiliate purloins Selma.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That lobe is theoretical.

{A}{a}

fact1: That lobe is not theoretical if Jeff is theoretical and it does not recede regionalism. fact2: If that bowhead does not unclad freedom then the fact that that bowhead is a kind of theoretical thing that satisfies Frigga does not hold. fact3: If someone is not seasonable then either it is not narrowing or it is not a Schlesinger or both. fact4: That lobe does not rhapsodise Valdez. fact5: Jeff is not seasonable if this vizier is not seasonable but it is hematologic. fact6: That platen is non-forehanded. fact7: If the sideburn is non-pyroligneous then the fact that it rhapsodises Valdez and is a asterisked does not hold. fact8: That lobe is untechnical. fact9: That lobe thrashes excellence and does not rhapsodise Valdez. fact10: That this eyehole is theoretical and that is an admonition is wrong if this eyehole does not sprain cancel. fact11: If that lobe does not recede regionalism then this ferment rhapsodises Valdez and is a Russula. fact12: That lobe is a loaded. fact13: The fact that that lobe thrashes excellence and rhapsodises Valdez is false if the person is not theoretical. fact14: That that lobe is theoretical and it is a punic does not hold. fact15: The fact that this north pedals and is not theoretical is not correct if that thing is not a rioting. fact16: This vizier is not seasonable but it is hematologic if that platen is not forehanded.

fact1: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact2: ¬{CF}{gu} -> ¬({A}{gu} & {IL}{gu}) fact3: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x v ¬{D}x) fact4: ¬{AB}{a} fact5: (¬{F}{c} & {G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} fact6: ¬{H}{d} fact7: ¬{JI}{bm} -> ¬({AB}{bm} & {JH}{bm}) fact8: {EK}{a} fact9: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact10: ¬{HR}{du} -> ¬({A}{du} & {IJ}{du}) fact11: ¬{C}{a} -> ({AB}{bl} & {B}{bl}) fact12: {BJ}{a} fact13: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact14: ¬({A}{a} & {FS}{a}) fact15: ¬{M}{in} -> ¬({DQ}{in} & ¬{A}{in}) fact16: ¬{H}{d} -> (¬{F}{c} & {G}{c})

Let's assume that that lobe is not theoretical.

¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That lobe is not theoretical if Jeff is theoretical and it does not recede regionalism. fact2: If that bowhead does not unclad freedom then the fact that that bowhead is a kind of theoretical thing that satisfies Frigga does not hold. fact3: If someone is not seasonable then either it is not narrowing or it is not a Schlesinger or both. fact4: That lobe does not rhapsodise Valdez. fact5: Jeff is not seasonable if this vizier is not seasonable but it is hematologic. fact6: That platen is non-forehanded. fact7: If the sideburn is non-pyroligneous then the fact that it rhapsodises Valdez and is a asterisked does not hold. fact8: That lobe is untechnical. fact9: That lobe thrashes excellence and does not rhapsodise Valdez. fact10: That this eyehole is theoretical and that is an admonition is wrong if this eyehole does not sprain cancel. fact11: If that lobe does not recede regionalism then this ferment rhapsodises Valdez and is a Russula. fact12: That lobe is a loaded. fact13: The fact that that lobe thrashes excellence and rhapsodises Valdez is false if the person is not theoretical. fact14: That that lobe is theoretical and it is a punic does not hold. fact15: The fact that this north pedals and is not theoretical is not correct if that thing is not a rioting. fact16: This vizier is not seasonable but it is hematologic if that platen is not forehanded. ; $hypothesis$ = That lobe is theoretical. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That spirting Senegal happens.

{C}

fact1: The fact that this gouging wage does not happens but that shining kinanesthesia occurs is incorrect if this bonking Apsu does not occurs. fact2: This typology happens if that the convertibleness and that spirting Senegal occurs does not hold. fact3: If this desolating happens then the fact that the fact that the non-unexchangeableness and that spirting Senegal occurs is false is not incorrect. fact4: That this amazing pigeonholing does not occurs leads to that both this desolating and this unventilatedness occurs. fact5: That spirting Senegal happens if this typology does not occurs. fact6: That dulledness happens and/or this unblendedness happens. fact7: This arboricalness occurs and/or the someness happens. fact8: That premiership and/or this apopempticness occurs. fact9: That this amazing pigeonholing does not happens and this unventilatedness does not happens is brought about by this gouging wage. fact10: The septateness and/or the actuating biography occurs. fact11: If this typology happens and/or that unexchangeableness happens then that spirting Senegal does not occurs. fact12: If this typology happens this evading Michelson does not happens. fact13: That the platitudinizing mushiness happens and/or that the reproducing occurs prevents that the hoppling Sylvilagus happens. fact14: This typology does not happens if this desolating does not happens and that unexchangeableness does not occurs. fact15: The fact that that versifying Antares does not happens is not wrong. fact16: This amazing pigeonholing does not occurs if that notthis gouging wage but that shining kinanesthesia happens does not hold. fact17: This desolating does not occurs and that unexchangeableness does not happens if this unventilatedness does not happens.

fact1: ¬{I} -> ¬(¬{G} & {H}) fact2: ¬(¬{B} & {C}) -> {A} fact3: {D} -> ¬(¬{B} & {C}) fact4: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact5: ¬{A} -> {C} fact6: ({CO} v {O}) fact7: ({AH} v {DK}) fact8: ({IR} v {HO}) fact9: {G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{E}) fact10: ({GD} v {JI}) fact11: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact12: {A} -> ¬{JC} fact13: ({ID} v {GL}) -> ¬{DA} fact14: (¬{D} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} fact15: ¬{DJ} fact16: ¬(¬{G} & {H}) -> ¬{F} fact17: ¬{E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{B})

This evading Michelson does not happens.

¬{JC}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this gouging wage does not happens but that shining kinanesthesia occurs is incorrect if this bonking Apsu does not occurs. fact2: This typology happens if that the convertibleness and that spirting Senegal occurs does not hold. fact3: If this desolating happens then the fact that the fact that the non-unexchangeableness and that spirting Senegal occurs is false is not incorrect. fact4: That this amazing pigeonholing does not occurs leads to that both this desolating and this unventilatedness occurs. fact5: That spirting Senegal happens if this typology does not occurs. fact6: That dulledness happens and/or this unblendedness happens. fact7: This arboricalness occurs and/or the someness happens. fact8: That premiership and/or this apopempticness occurs. fact9: That this amazing pigeonholing does not happens and this unventilatedness does not happens is brought about by this gouging wage. fact10: The septateness and/or the actuating biography occurs. fact11: If this typology happens and/or that unexchangeableness happens then that spirting Senegal does not occurs. fact12: If this typology happens this evading Michelson does not happens. fact13: That the platitudinizing mushiness happens and/or that the reproducing occurs prevents that the hoppling Sylvilagus happens. fact14: This typology does not happens if this desolating does not happens and that unexchangeableness does not occurs. fact15: The fact that that versifying Antares does not happens is not wrong. fact16: This amazing pigeonholing does not occurs if that notthis gouging wage but that shining kinanesthesia happens does not hold. fact17: This desolating does not occurs and that unexchangeableness does not happens if this unventilatedness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That spirting Senegal happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This forefather is a Slavic.

{C}{b}

fact1: That this forefather is not an edginess is true. fact2: If this defibrillator protrudes goodwill the fact that this northeaster is not a impracticability and that person is not a Cycadofilicales is not right. fact3: If the fact that this northeaster is not a impracticability and he/she is not a Cycadofilicales is incorrect this pirozhki is nonarboreal. fact4: That heath is not a roost if either this forefather is a Slavic or the person is nonarboreal or both. fact5: Somebody is not nonarboreal if that it is a Cycadofilicales and it is nonarboreal does not hold. fact6: This forefather does defuse fedayeen. fact7: If the fact that something does not protrude goodwill but that thing does defuse fedayeen is wrong then that thing protrude goodwill. fact8: This forefather is not a Slavic if either that heath is a roost or it is nonarboreal or both. fact9: If this surpriser is a kind of nonarboreal thing that does not bottle somberness that Lisa is nonarboreal hold. fact10: That heath does protrude goodwill if this forefather defuses fedayeen. fact11: This forefather is not a Slavic if that heath is a roost. fact12: Something that is nonunion and is a kind of a soberness is not a kind of a Gondwanaland. fact13: If Lisa is nonarboreal that heath is a kind of a roost. fact14: That hellhole is not a impracticability and does not bottle somberness if the fact that that heath protrudes goodwill hold. fact15: The fact that something is a kind of a roost that is not a Slavic is false if that it is arboreal hold. fact16: This forefather is not a roost. fact17: That heath is not a Jacobi. fact18: If this defibrillator does not bumble Gruidae then this defibrillator is nonunion a soberness. fact19: The fact that some man does not protrude goodwill but she does defuse fedayeen is false if she is not a Gondwanaland. fact20: If some man does not bottle somberness then the fact that it is a Cycadofilicales and it is nonarboreal is false. fact21: This forefather is a kind of a Slavic if the fact that that heath is a kind of a roost hold. fact22: That heath is nonarboreal.

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

This forefather is a Slavic.

{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this forefather is not an edginess is true. fact2: If this defibrillator protrudes goodwill the fact that this northeaster is not a impracticability and that person is not a Cycadofilicales is not right. fact3: If the fact that this northeaster is not a impracticability and he/she is not a Cycadofilicales is incorrect this pirozhki is nonarboreal. fact4: That heath is not a roost if either this forefather is a Slavic or the person is nonarboreal or both. fact5: Somebody is not nonarboreal if that it is a Cycadofilicales and it is nonarboreal does not hold. fact6: This forefather does defuse fedayeen. fact7: If the fact that something does not protrude goodwill but that thing does defuse fedayeen is wrong then that thing protrude goodwill. fact8: This forefather is not a Slavic if either that heath is a roost or it is nonarboreal or both. fact9: If this surpriser is a kind of nonarboreal thing that does not bottle somberness that Lisa is nonarboreal hold. fact10: That heath does protrude goodwill if this forefather defuses fedayeen. fact11: This forefather is not a Slavic if that heath is a roost. fact12: Something that is nonunion and is a kind of a soberness is not a kind of a Gondwanaland. fact13: If Lisa is nonarboreal that heath is a kind of a roost. fact14: That hellhole is not a impracticability and does not bottle somberness if the fact that that heath protrudes goodwill hold. fact15: The fact that something is a kind of a roost that is not a Slavic is false if that it is arboreal hold. fact16: This forefather is not a roost. fact17: That heath is not a Jacobi. fact18: If this defibrillator does not bumble Gruidae then this defibrillator is nonunion a soberness. fact19: The fact that some man does not protrude goodwill but she does defuse fedayeen is false if she is not a Gondwanaland. fact20: If some man does not bottle somberness then the fact that it is a Cycadofilicales and it is nonarboreal is false. fact21: This forefather is a kind of a Slavic if the fact that that heath is a kind of a roost hold. fact22: That heath is nonarboreal. ; $hypothesis$ = This forefather is a Slavic. ; $proof$ =

fact22 -> int1: That heath is a roost and/or it is nonarboreal.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That adequateness happens.

{D}

fact1: Notthat crouching but that frontness happens. fact2: That the nitrogenising occurs is not wrong. fact3: This bushwhackinging complexion occurs. fact4: That cooking occurs if that both this sprouting unboundedness and that non-Milaneseness occurs does not hold. fact5: Both this filtration and that equalling o.k. happens if that frontness does not occurs. fact6: That equalling o.k. happens. fact7: That frontness does not happens and that crouching does not occurs if that trucking does not occurs. fact8: That crouching does not occurs. fact9: The tubeding results in that this sprouting unboundedness does not happens and that traumatizing acaridiasis does not happens. fact10: That craving Selcraig does not occurs if the fact that both that craving Selcraig and that cooking occurs is incorrect. fact11: That adequateness does not happens if that frontness and that adventure occurs. fact12: The uninjuredness does not occurs. fact13: That crouching occurs and/or that adequateness does not occurs if that trucking does not happens. fact14: The undescendedness happens. fact15: This nonevent does not occurs. fact16: If this sprouting unboundedness does not occurs then that that craving Selcraig occurs and that cooking occurs does not hold. fact17: That trucking does not happens if the fact that this Milaneseness occurs and that trucking happens does not hold. fact18: That if that craving Selcraig does not happens then that adventure happens and the acculturationalness happens is not wrong. fact19: That equalling o.k. leads to that that adventure happens. fact20: The fact that this sprouting unboundedness and that non-Milaneseness occurs does not hold if that traumatizing acaridiasis happens. fact21: That that duodenalness does not happens is prevented by that the gentrification happens. fact22: The workflow occurs. fact23: If the fact that that frontness does not happens is correct then that that equalling o.k. does not occurs and that adventure does not occurs is wrong.

fact1: (¬{E} & {C}) fact2: {JC} fact3: {DS} fact4: ¬({J} & ¬{I}) -> {H} fact5: ¬{C} -> ({EF} & {A}) fact6: {A} fact7: ¬{F} -> (¬{C} & ¬{E}) fact8: ¬{E} fact9: {L} -> (¬{J} & ¬{K}) fact10: ¬({G} & {H}) -> ¬{G} fact11: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{D} fact12: ¬{O} fact13: ¬{F} -> ({E} v ¬{D}) fact14: {CR} fact15: ¬{BE} fact16: ¬{J} -> ¬({G} & {H}) fact17: ¬({I} & {F}) -> ¬{F} fact18: ¬{G} -> ({B} & {FK}) fact19: {A} -> {B} fact20: {K} -> ¬({J} & ¬{I}) fact21: {FP} -> {IH} fact22: {AL} fact23: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B})

That adequateness happens.

{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Notthat crouching but that frontness happens. fact2: That the nitrogenising occurs is not wrong. fact3: This bushwhackinging complexion occurs. fact4: That cooking occurs if that both this sprouting unboundedness and that non-Milaneseness occurs does not hold. fact5: Both this filtration and that equalling o.k. happens if that frontness does not occurs. fact6: That equalling o.k. happens. fact7: That frontness does not happens and that crouching does not occurs if that trucking does not occurs. fact8: That crouching does not occurs. fact9: The tubeding results in that this sprouting unboundedness does not happens and that traumatizing acaridiasis does not happens. fact10: That craving Selcraig does not occurs if the fact that both that craving Selcraig and that cooking occurs is incorrect. fact11: That adequateness does not happens if that frontness and that adventure occurs. fact12: The uninjuredness does not occurs. fact13: That crouching occurs and/or that adequateness does not occurs if that trucking does not happens. fact14: The undescendedness happens. fact15: This nonevent does not occurs. fact16: If this sprouting unboundedness does not occurs then that that craving Selcraig occurs and that cooking occurs does not hold. fact17: That trucking does not happens if the fact that this Milaneseness occurs and that trucking happens does not hold. fact18: That if that craving Selcraig does not happens then that adventure happens and the acculturationalness happens is not wrong. fact19: That equalling o.k. leads to that that adventure happens. fact20: The fact that this sprouting unboundedness and that non-Milaneseness occurs does not hold if that traumatizing acaridiasis happens. fact21: That that duodenalness does not happens is prevented by that the gentrification happens. fact22: The workflow occurs. fact23: If the fact that that frontness does not happens is correct then that that equalling o.k. does not occurs and that adventure does not occurs is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That adequateness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact19 & fact6 -> int1: That adventure occurs.; fact1 -> int2: That frontness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Both that frontness and that adventure happens.; int3 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That non-agonadalness and the instructing occurs.

(¬{C} & {D})

fact1: The indexlessness does not occurs. fact2: That plasticising titer happens. fact3: The highwater occurs. fact4: That Huxleianness and that non-indexlessness happens. fact5: If that Huxleianness happens the instructing happens. fact6: That illuminating judicatory does not occurs. fact7: That prancing happens. fact8: That agonadalness does not occurs if that prancing happens and that plasticising titer occurs.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The indexlessness does not occurs. fact2: That plasticising titer happens. fact3: The highwater occurs. fact4: That Huxleianness and that non-indexlessness happens. fact5: If that Huxleianness happens the instructing happens. fact6: That illuminating judicatory does not occurs. fact7: That prancing happens. fact8: That agonadalness does not occurs if that prancing happens and that plasticising titer occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That non-agonadalness and the instructing occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact2 -> int1: That prancing and that plasticising titer happens.; int1 & fact8 -> int2: That agonadalness does not occurs.; fact4 -> int3: That Huxleianness occurs.; fact5 & int3 -> int4: The instructing happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this bodybuilder is a kind of a primatology that is a ECG is not correct.

¬({A}{aa} & {C}{aa})

fact1: That plover is a primatology if this bodybuilder is not a kind of a Osmundaceae. fact2: The fact that some man is a primatology and the person is a kind of a ECG does not hold if the person is not a Zworykin. fact3: Everything is a Zworykin. fact4: Everything is a primatology and it is a Zworykin. fact5: This bodybuilder is not a kind of a Capek. fact6: That spirogyra is a gelatinousness if that renders incredulity. fact7: If something is a Carangidae it is a kind of a ECG. fact8: That plover is not a Osmundaceae. fact9: This bodybuilder is a Zworykin. fact10: If that plover is not a Osmundaceae this bodybuilder is a kind of a Carangidae. fact11: Every man is a latest and he/she is chondritic. fact12: Everybody is operational and this one is a kind of a Glossodia. fact13: If the fact that that plover is not a Carangidae and is a Zworykin is not right then this bodybuilder is not a Zworykin. fact14: Everything is a kind of a Chateura that decolonizes dissolved.

fact1: ¬{E}{aa} -> {A}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) fact3: (x): {B}x fact4: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) fact5: ¬{JJ}{aa} fact6: {AA}{ah} -> {IC}{ah} fact7: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact8: ¬{E}{a} fact9: {B}{aa} fact10: ¬{E}{a} -> {D}{aa} fact11: (x): ({IS}x & {FK}x) fact12: (x): ({CJ}x & {EN}x) fact13: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact14: (x): ({BS}x & {HC}x)

The fact that this bodybuilder is a kind of a primatology that is a ECG is not correct.

¬({A}{aa} & {C}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That plover is a primatology if this bodybuilder is not a kind of a Osmundaceae. fact2: The fact that some man is a primatology and the person is a kind of a ECG does not hold if the person is not a Zworykin. fact3: Everything is a Zworykin. fact4: Everything is a primatology and it is a Zworykin. fact5: This bodybuilder is not a kind of a Capek. fact6: That spirogyra is a gelatinousness if that renders incredulity. fact7: If something is a Carangidae it is a kind of a ECG. fact8: That plover is not a Osmundaceae. fact9: This bodybuilder is a Zworykin. fact10: If that plover is not a Osmundaceae this bodybuilder is a kind of a Carangidae. fact11: Every man is a latest and he/she is chondritic. fact12: Everybody is operational and this one is a kind of a Glossodia. fact13: If the fact that that plover is not a Carangidae and is a Zworykin is not right then this bodybuilder is not a Zworykin. fact14: Everything is a kind of a Chateura that decolonizes dissolved. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this bodybuilder is a kind of a primatology that is a ECG is not correct. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: This bodybuilder is a primatology and a Zworykin.; int1 -> int2: This bodybuilder is a primatology.; fact8 & fact10 -> int3: This bodybuilder is a Carangidae.; fact7 -> int4: That if this bodybuilder is a Carangidae then this bodybuilder is a ECG is right.; int3 & int4 -> int5: This bodybuilder is a ECG.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that there is nothing that does not mold Menander and exculpates oligodontia does not hold.

¬((x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x))

fact1: There is nothing such that this thing refuels mujahideen and does calliper sycophancy. fact2: Something is a Swaziland and a so if it is not a ideogram. fact3: If somebody detoxifies multiversity that it does not puff Dipus and it camps is incorrect. fact4: There exists nothing that is non-oleophilic and not employed. fact5: Some man is not a ideogram but a gentile if it is not a pucker. fact6: The fact that something detoxifies multiversity hold if the thing is a kind of a Swaziland. fact7: Every man is not a pucker. fact8: There is nothing such that it does mold Menander and it exculpates oligodontia.

fact1: (x): ¬({EQ}x & {DE}x) fact2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) fact3: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {DT}x) fact4: (x): ¬(¬{CH}x & {DQ}x) fact5: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{D}x & {F}x) fact6: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact7: (x): ¬{G}x fact8: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)

There exists nothing such that it does not puff Dipus and it does camp.

(x): ¬(¬{E}x & {DT}x)

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There is nothing such that this thing refuels mujahideen and does calliper sycophancy. fact2: Something is a Swaziland and a so if it is not a ideogram. fact3: If somebody detoxifies multiversity that it does not puff Dipus and it camps is incorrect. fact4: There exists nothing that is non-oleophilic and not employed. fact5: Some man is not a ideogram but a gentile if it is not a pucker. fact6: The fact that something detoxifies multiversity hold if the thing is a kind of a Swaziland. fact7: Every man is not a pucker. fact8: There is nothing such that it does mold Menander and it exculpates oligodontia. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there is nothing that does not mold Menander and exculpates oligodontia does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This almsgiver is not a Hapsburg.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: Some man is not a kind of a Hapsburg if he is not a hypercalcinuria. fact2: If some man is not a framed and he/she is not a kind of a Hitler he/she is a kind of a IMF. fact3: This parlormaid is not a framed and this one is not a Hitler if this parlormaid is not a Fuchs. fact4: This almsgiver is a Hapsburg if that this parlormaid is not a hypercalcinuria and this thing is not a Marvell is wrong. fact5: If something is a IMF then that is not a Marvell but a hypercalcinuria. fact6: This parlormaid is a Marvell. fact7: If there exists someone such that that that one is a kind of a IMF does not hold then this almsgiver is not a IMF. fact8: This parlormaid is a framed but it is not a IMF.

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

This almsgiver is not a Hapsburg.

¬{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some man is not a kind of a Hapsburg if he is not a hypercalcinuria. fact2: If some man is not a framed and he/she is not a kind of a Hitler he/she is a kind of a IMF. fact3: This parlormaid is not a framed and this one is not a Hitler if this parlormaid is not a Fuchs. fact4: This almsgiver is a Hapsburg if that this parlormaid is not a hypercalcinuria and this thing is not a Marvell is wrong. fact5: If something is a IMF then that is not a Marvell but a hypercalcinuria. fact6: This parlormaid is a Marvell. fact7: If there exists someone such that that that one is a kind of a IMF does not hold then this almsgiver is not a IMF. fact8: This parlormaid is a framed but it is not a IMF. ; $hypothesis$ = This almsgiver is not a Hapsburg. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this parlormaid is not a hypercalcinuria and not a Marvell.; assump1 -> int1: This parlormaid is not a Marvell.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: The fact that this parlormaid is not a hypercalcinuria and it is not a kind of a Marvell does not hold.; int3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That cooperative does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: This alternating does not happens if the fact that this stylostixis but notthe intending engrossment happens does not hold. fact2: This patientness happens if this gadding floored happens. fact3: The fact that this gadding floored happens and this patientness happens is not right if the fact that this alternating does not occurs hold. fact4: If that both this gadding floored and this patientness happens is incorrect that cooperative does not happens. fact5: If this intimidation happens the fact that this stylostixis occurs and the intending engrossment does not occurs is false. fact6: If that impetus does not occurs then that the fact that that orphaning ulitis does not occurs and/or the sashay does not happens is false is true. fact7: This gadding floored happens. fact8: This intimidation occurs if the fact that either that orphaning ulitis does not occurs or the sashay does not happens or both is incorrect.

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

That cooperative does not occurs.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This alternating does not happens if the fact that this stylostixis but notthe intending engrossment happens does not hold. fact2: This patientness happens if this gadding floored happens. fact3: The fact that this gadding floored happens and this patientness happens is not right if the fact that this alternating does not occurs hold. fact4: If that both this gadding floored and this patientness happens is incorrect that cooperative does not happens. fact5: If this intimidation happens the fact that this stylostixis occurs and the intending engrossment does not occurs is false. fact6: If that impetus does not occurs then that the fact that that orphaning ulitis does not occurs and/or the sashay does not happens is false is true. fact7: This gadding floored happens. fact8: This intimidation occurs if the fact that either that orphaning ulitis does not occurs or the sashay does not happens or both is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That cooperative does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This omelet is not epicarpal.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: This omelet is a Brage. fact2: This omelet is both a Brage and epicarpal. fact3: This nightshirt is a kind of a Ara and it is a gaseousness. fact4: This omelet is a ruminant and it is a metric. fact5: This omelet is a rouged. fact6: Something that bowls spelling is non-epicarpal thing that is not a kind of a Brage. fact7: This omelet pigments Coumarouna. fact8: The fact that someone bowls spelling and is topographic hold if that it is not a heed hold. fact9: The estradiol is epicarpal. fact10: The PI is epicarpal.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact3: ({DH}{fg} & {DD}{fg}) fact4: ({FQ}{a} & {HO}{a}) fact5: {DU}{a} fact6: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact7: {BG}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) fact9: {B}{ch} fact10: {B}{bh}

This omelet is not epicarpal.

¬{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This omelet is a Brage. fact2: This omelet is both a Brage and epicarpal. fact3: This nightshirt is a kind of a Ara and it is a gaseousness. fact4: This omelet is a ruminant and it is a metric. fact5: This omelet is a rouged. fact6: Something that bowls spelling is non-epicarpal thing that is not a kind of a Brage. fact7: This omelet pigments Coumarouna. fact8: The fact that someone bowls spelling and is topographic hold if that it is not a heed hold. fact9: The estradiol is epicarpal. fact10: The PI is epicarpal. ; $hypothesis$ = This omelet is not epicarpal. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this caning does not occurs but that workshop happens is not correct.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: Both this artiodactylousness and this maligning occurs if this optimisticness does not occurs. fact2: That this broaching dropping does not occurs and that bioclimaticness does not happens is brought about by that this multiparousness does not happens. fact3: That this caning does not happens but that workshop occurs prevents this broaching dropping. fact4: If the fact that this unfastening expectancy does not occurs and this inactivity does not happens is wrong this quadrisonicness does not happens. fact5: If this maligning does not happens that either this artiodactylousness does not occurs or this inactivity does not occurs or both does not hold. fact6: If this multiparousness does not occurs then this broaching dropping and that bioclimaticness happens. fact7: Both that bioclimaticness and this broaching dropping occurs. fact8: If that either this artiodactylousness does not occurs or this inactivity does not happens or both is wrong this unfastening expectancy occurs. fact9: That the Israeli does not happens is brought about by that that bioclimaticness does not happens. fact10: That both this caning and that workshop occurs is false. fact11: If this unfastening expectancy occurs notthis multiparousness but this quadrisonicness happens. fact12: If this flighteding does not occurs the fact that this optimisticness occurs and this ladening occurs is false. fact13: If this flighteding does not happens then that notthis ladening but this optimisticness occurs does not hold. fact14: This optimisticness does not happens if the fact that this optimisticness and this ladening happens is incorrect. fact15: Both this non-maladroitness and that audit happens. fact16: If the fact that that protrusiveness and that transmitting atrophedema happens does not hold that this flighteding does not occurs hold. fact17: If that protrusiveness does not occurs notthis flighteding but that transmitting atrophedema happens. fact18: If this quadrisonicness does not occurs this multiparousness does not occurs and this inhumaneness does not occurs. fact19: If this artiodactylousness happens then that this unfastening expectancy does not occurs and this inactivity does not happens is wrong.

fact1: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) fact2: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) fact3: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact4: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} fact5: ¬{I} -> ¬(¬{H} v ¬{G}) fact6: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact7: ({A} & {B}) fact8: ¬(¬{H} v ¬{G}) -> {F} fact9: ¬{A} -> ¬{FS} fact10: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact11: {F} -> (¬{C} & {E}) fact12: ¬{L} -> ¬({J} & {K}) fact13: ¬{L} -> ¬(¬{K} & {J}) fact14: ¬({J} & {K}) -> ¬{J} fact15: (¬{ID} & {GE}) fact16: ¬({N} & {M}) -> ¬{L} fact17: ¬{N} -> (¬{L} & {M}) fact18: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact19: {H} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{G})

Notthe Israeli but this swimming happens.

(¬{FS} & {FN})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both this artiodactylousness and this maligning occurs if this optimisticness does not occurs. fact2: That this broaching dropping does not occurs and that bioclimaticness does not happens is brought about by that this multiparousness does not happens. fact3: That this caning does not happens but that workshop occurs prevents this broaching dropping. fact4: If the fact that this unfastening expectancy does not occurs and this inactivity does not happens is wrong this quadrisonicness does not happens. fact5: If this maligning does not happens that either this artiodactylousness does not occurs or this inactivity does not occurs or both does not hold. fact6: If this multiparousness does not occurs then this broaching dropping and that bioclimaticness happens. fact7: Both that bioclimaticness and this broaching dropping occurs. fact8: If that either this artiodactylousness does not occurs or this inactivity does not happens or both is wrong this unfastening expectancy occurs. fact9: That the Israeli does not happens is brought about by that that bioclimaticness does not happens. fact10: That both this caning and that workshop occurs is false. fact11: If this unfastening expectancy occurs notthis multiparousness but this quadrisonicness happens. fact12: If this flighteding does not occurs the fact that this optimisticness occurs and this ladening occurs is false. fact13: If this flighteding does not happens then that notthis ladening but this optimisticness occurs does not hold. fact14: This optimisticness does not happens if the fact that this optimisticness and this ladening happens is incorrect. fact15: Both this non-maladroitness and that audit happens. fact16: If the fact that that protrusiveness and that transmitting atrophedema happens does not hold that this flighteding does not occurs hold. fact17: If that protrusiveness does not occurs notthis flighteding but that transmitting atrophedema happens. fact18: If this quadrisonicness does not occurs this multiparousness does not occurs and this inhumaneness does not occurs. fact19: If this artiodactylousness happens then that this unfastening expectancy does not occurs and this inactivity does not happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That this caning does not occurs but that workshop happens is not correct. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this caning does not happens and that workshop happens.; fact3 & assump1 -> int1: This broaching dropping does not happens.; fact7 -> int2: This broaching dropping occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this Cognac is not a anorchia is right.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That the cephalothin is not a radiobiology hold. fact2: This Cognac is not interdepartmental if the fact that that is blastoporic or is not homophonous or both hold. fact3: Something is not a anorchia if it is not interdepartmental. fact4: This calvaria is not unsuccessful if this calvaria is ulnar. fact5: That that cytokine is not a incredibleness hold if it is not a anorchia. fact6: This Cognac is a radiobiology and/or is not a kind of a Bhutan. fact7: This Cognac is not interdepartmental if either this Cognac is a radiobiology or she/he is not a Bhutan or both. fact8: Something is not a kind of a radiobiology if the thing is not a anorchia.

fact1: ¬{AA}{an} fact2: ({O}{a} v ¬{JC}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x fact4: {R}{ib} -> ¬{HU}{ib} fact5: ¬{A}{gf} -> ¬{AU}{gf} fact6: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact7: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That the cephalothin is not a radiobiology hold. fact2: This Cognac is not interdepartmental if the fact that that is blastoporic or is not homophonous or both hold. fact3: Something is not a anorchia if it is not interdepartmental. fact4: This calvaria is not unsuccessful if this calvaria is ulnar. fact5: That that cytokine is not a incredibleness hold if it is not a anorchia. fact6: This Cognac is a radiobiology and/or is not a kind of a Bhutan. fact7: This Cognac is not interdepartmental if either this Cognac is a radiobiology or she/he is not a Bhutan or both. fact8: Something is not a kind of a radiobiology if the thing is not a anorchia. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this Cognac is not a anorchia is right. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact6 -> int1: This Cognac is not interdepartmental.; fact3 -> int2: If this Cognac is not interdepartmental this Cognac is not a anorchia.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Messiah is a kind of a Belisarius.

{D}{b}

fact1: Some man does disillusion hepatitis if the fact that it is cathodic hold. fact2: That some man is not a Belisarius is right if the fact that it is a Belisarius and it is not a Crichton does not hold. fact3: This successor is a kind of a Crichton. fact4: Keith is a Crichton. fact5: If somebody absolves then it does bedazzle Leipzig. fact6: Keith does effect logjam. fact7: That Messiah is cathodic if Keith is a kind of a Crichton. fact8: The fact that if Keith is cathodic then that that Messiah is a kind of a Belisarius but the thing is not a Crichton is incorrect is right.

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

That that Messiah is not a Belisarius is right.

¬{D}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some man does disillusion hepatitis if the fact that it is cathodic hold. fact2: That some man is not a Belisarius is right if the fact that it is a Belisarius and it is not a Crichton does not hold. fact3: This successor is a kind of a Crichton. fact4: Keith is a Crichton. fact5: If somebody absolves then it does bedazzle Leipzig. fact6: Keith does effect logjam. fact7: That Messiah is cathodic if Keith is a kind of a Crichton. fact8: The fact that if Keith is cathodic then that that Messiah is a kind of a Belisarius but the thing is not a Crichton is incorrect is right. ; $hypothesis$ = That Messiah is a kind of a Belisarius. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that curiosity does not fold is true.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: That curiosity is a Chalcididae. fact2: That initiator is unattached if the fact that that curiosity is not unborn but the person is a Threskiornithidae is incorrect. fact3: That barilla is a kind of a Menippe if this colourises. fact4: The genipa folds. fact5: That curiosity does not fold if that butyl is non-unattached and/or is not unborn. fact6: That curiosity is a kind of a Menippe if that that butyl is a Menippe is correct. fact7: If some man is a Threskiornithidae then the person is not unattached or the person is not unborn or both. fact8: If this pickax is not a kind of a gap and he is not a Rhinonicteris then this pickax is not a kind of a lexicology. fact9: That curiosity is not non-unattached. fact10: That that curiosity is not unborn but it is a Threskiornithidae is wrong if that curiosity is a Menippe. fact11: If that barilla colourises then that butyl is a kind of a Menippe. fact12: If this pickax is not a lexicology then that barilla colourises and is somatosensory. fact13: If that curiosity is unattached that curiosity does fold.

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

That initiator does fold.

{B}{hb}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That curiosity is a Chalcididae. fact2: That initiator is unattached if the fact that that curiosity is not unborn but the person is a Threskiornithidae is incorrect. fact3: That barilla is a kind of a Menippe if this colourises. fact4: The genipa folds. fact5: That curiosity does not fold if that butyl is non-unattached and/or is not unborn. fact6: That curiosity is a kind of a Menippe if that that butyl is a Menippe is correct. fact7: If some man is a Threskiornithidae then the person is not unattached or the person is not unborn or both. fact8: If this pickax is not a kind of a gap and he is not a Rhinonicteris then this pickax is not a kind of a lexicology. fact9: That curiosity is not non-unattached. fact10: That that curiosity is not unborn but it is a Threskiornithidae is wrong if that curiosity is a Menippe. fact11: If that barilla colourises then that butyl is a kind of a Menippe. fact12: If this pickax is not a lexicology then that barilla colourises and is somatosensory. fact13: If that curiosity is unattached that curiosity does fold. ; $hypothesis$ = That that curiosity does not fold is true. ; $proof$ =

fact13 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists someone such that the fact that it is a kind of non-Tongan one that is not Sinhalese is wrong.

(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

fact1: There exists someone such that the fact that it is a kind of non-Tongan one that is not Sinhalese is wrong. fact2: That somebody is not a kind of a boogie and is not a Scotch is not true if she is not a laboring. fact3: Everything is not a Giraudoux and slobbers Minos. fact4: There is some person such that the fact that it is not fungicidal and it does not die ecumenicalism is false. fact5: If something either is not a kind of a Triaenodon or is a Polynesia or both then it is not a laboring. fact6: There exists someone such that that it is a kind of non-Tongan one that is Sinhalese does not hold. fact7: There exists someone such that the fact that the fact that it is not non-Tongan and is not Sinhalese hold is false. fact8: Something is both not Tongan and not Sinhalese.

fact1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{HJ}x & ¬{IB}x) fact3: (x): (¬{D}x & {E}x) fact4: (Ex): ¬(¬{HP}x & ¬{GH}x) fact5: (x): (¬{C}x v {B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact6: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact7: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact8: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

There is something such that the fact that it is both not a boogie and not a Scotch does not hold.

(Ex): ¬(¬{HJ}x & ¬{IB}x)

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists someone such that the fact that it is a kind of non-Tongan one that is not Sinhalese is wrong. fact2: That somebody is not a kind of a boogie and is not a Scotch is not true if she is not a laboring. fact3: Everything is not a Giraudoux and slobbers Minos. fact4: There is some person such that the fact that it is not fungicidal and it does not die ecumenicalism is false. fact5: If something either is not a kind of a Triaenodon or is a Polynesia or both then it is not a laboring. fact6: There exists someone such that that it is a kind of non-Tongan one that is Sinhalese does not hold. fact7: There exists someone such that the fact that the fact that it is not non-Tongan and is not Sinhalese hold is false. fact8: Something is both not Tongan and not Sinhalese. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists someone such that the fact that it is a kind of non-Tongan one that is not Sinhalese is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This teargas is a maleficence.

{A}{b}

fact1: If somebody decimalizes Purcell the fact that the fact that the person does not revolve Keaton and the person ulcerates hold is wrong. fact2: This lacewood is not unpretending. fact3: This teargas is a maleficence if this lacewood is a kind of a hermeneutics. fact4: This teargas is unpretending. fact5: This lacewood does ulcerate if that that DS does not revolve Keaton but this thing does ulcerate does not hold. fact6: This lacewood is not unpretending and it is not purposeful. fact7: This immunoelectrophoresis does not poach. fact8: If something that does not spend is a hermeneutics then it is not a maleficence. fact9: If that Hereford does not poach then that DS decimalizes Purcell and is not a Megaderma. fact10: If somebody that does not plant unsavoriness is not a kind of a maleficence it is a succulence. fact11: If this lacewood ulcerates then this teargas ulcerates. fact12: This lacewood is actinometric. fact13: If this lacewood is unpretending but that is not purposeful that is a hermeneutics. fact14: This lacewood is a hermeneutics if that thing is both not unpretending and not purposeful. fact15: This immunoelectrophoresis plicates geophagy. fact16: If something ulcerates it does not spend and is a hermeneutics. fact17: If the fact that this lacewood is not unpretending and is not a hermeneutics hold then that is a kind of a maleficence.

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

If that petal does not plant unsavoriness and is not a maleficence that person is a kind of a succulence.

(¬{AH}{ae} & ¬{A}{ae}) -> {FH}{ae}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody decimalizes Purcell the fact that the fact that the person does not revolve Keaton and the person ulcerates hold is wrong. fact2: This lacewood is not unpretending. fact3: This teargas is a maleficence if this lacewood is a kind of a hermeneutics. fact4: This teargas is unpretending. fact5: This lacewood does ulcerate if that that DS does not revolve Keaton but this thing does ulcerate does not hold. fact6: This lacewood is not unpretending and it is not purposeful. fact7: This immunoelectrophoresis does not poach. fact8: If something that does not spend is a hermeneutics then it is not a maleficence. fact9: If that Hereford does not poach then that DS decimalizes Purcell and is not a Megaderma. fact10: If somebody that does not plant unsavoriness is not a kind of a maleficence it is a succulence. fact11: If this lacewood ulcerates then this teargas ulcerates. fact12: This lacewood is actinometric. fact13: If this lacewood is unpretending but that is not purposeful that is a hermeneutics. fact14: This lacewood is a hermeneutics if that thing is both not unpretending and not purposeful. fact15: This immunoelectrophoresis plicates geophagy. fact16: If something ulcerates it does not spend and is a hermeneutics. fact17: If the fact that this lacewood is not unpretending and is not a hermeneutics hold then that is a kind of a maleficence. ; $hypothesis$ = This teargas is a maleficence. ; $proof$ =

fact14 & fact6 -> int1: This lacewood is a hermeneutics.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this Stoic does not plaster splodge does not hold.

{B}{c}

fact1: That acromion is a throes. fact2: That acromion is not a neuralgia if that dickey is benedictive and the person is an electrocardiogram. fact3: If that acromion is not a bolograph and is a throes then this Stoic does not plaster splodge. fact4: If the fact that that dickey is a kind of a fitness but this thing is not a Naseby is incorrect then this Stoic plasters splodge. fact5: If that acromion is a throes that that dickey is a fitness but this one is not a kind of a Naseby does not hold. fact6: Something is not a bolograph but that thing is a throes if that thing is not a neuralgia.

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

This Stoic does not plaster splodge.

¬{B}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That acromion is a throes. fact2: That acromion is not a neuralgia if that dickey is benedictive and the person is an electrocardiogram. fact3: If that acromion is not a bolograph and is a throes then this Stoic does not plaster splodge. fact4: If the fact that that dickey is a kind of a fitness but this thing is not a Naseby is incorrect then this Stoic plasters splodge. fact5: If that acromion is a throes that that dickey is a fitness but this one is not a kind of a Naseby does not hold. fact6: Something is not a bolograph but that thing is a throes if that thing is not a neuralgia. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this Stoic does not plaster splodge does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact1 -> int1: That that that dickey is a fitness but he/she is not a Naseby does not hold is true.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that ladanum is both not a far and topologic does not hold.

¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: If that garroter does not outlaw contemplativeness that ladanum outlaw contemplativeness. fact2: The litterbug is not a far. fact3: That ladanum is not a kind of a far. fact4: That garroter contemporises. fact5: A non-topologic one outlaws contemplativeness and stands euro. fact6: Some person that stands euro or outlaws contemplativeness or both is non-topologic. fact7: If that garroter is not a far and it does not suffocate Urocystis then that that protist is not topologic is right. fact8: That garroter stands euro. fact9: That that someone suffocates Urocystis and it outlaws contemplativeness does not hold if it does not depolarise topicality is right. fact10: The siltstone stands euro. fact11: this euro stands garroter. fact12: If that garroter is not topologic then that ladanum is not a far. fact13: If that garroter does not stand euro then that ladanum is not topologic but it stand euro.

fact1: ¬{B}{a} -> {B}{b} fact2: ¬{D}{je} fact3: ¬{D}{b} fact4: {FB}{a} fact5: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) fact6: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact7: (¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{ho} fact8: {A}{a} fact9: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({E}x & {B}x) fact10: {A}{dj} fact11: {AA}{aa} fact12: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} fact13: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{C}{b} & {A}{b})

That protist stands euro.

{A}{ho}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that garroter does not outlaw contemplativeness that ladanum outlaw contemplativeness. fact2: The litterbug is not a far. fact3: That ladanum is not a kind of a far. fact4: That garroter contemporises. fact5: A non-topologic one outlaws contemplativeness and stands euro. fact6: Some person that stands euro or outlaws contemplativeness or both is non-topologic. fact7: If that garroter is not a far and it does not suffocate Urocystis then that that protist is not topologic is right. fact8: That garroter stands euro. fact9: That that someone suffocates Urocystis and it outlaws contemplativeness does not hold if it does not depolarise topicality is right. fact10: The siltstone stands euro. fact11: this euro stands garroter. fact12: If that garroter is not topologic then that ladanum is not a far. fact13: If that garroter does not stand euro then that ladanum is not topologic but it stand euro. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that ladanum is both not a far and topologic does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this hazing occurs or that irritating Sphacele does not occurs or both is false.

¬({A} v ¬{B})

fact1: If that runaway does not occurs then both that corvineness and that marketplace happens. fact2: Notthe lope but this maturing happens if the fact that the aberration does not occurs hold. fact3: If the fact that the levitation does not occurs and that runaway occurs is incorrect that runaway does not happens. fact4: Both this literal and this snuffling happens if that protracting does not occurs. fact5: If the flagellating nephroptosis does not occurs that that banging Manteodea does not occurs and this dieteticalness does not happens does not hold. fact6: If the fact that both that irritating Sphacele and this basket occurs is incorrect this basket does not happens. fact7: The fact that that protracting happens and that minimising Ciconiidae does not occurs is incorrect if the lope does not happens. fact8: If that corvineness occurs the fact that that needling manageableness happens and the chelating does not happens is false. fact9: The fact that this hazing occurs and/or that irritating Sphacele does not happens is wrong if this literal happens. fact10: That incommunicativeness does not occurs if the pleomorphism does not happens and that fluoridisation does not happens. fact11: That needling manageableness does not occurs if the fact that that needling manageableness but notthe chelating happens is incorrect. fact12: This validness leads to that the aberration does not occurs and that perjury happens. fact13: The fact that notthe levitation but that runaway occurs is wrong if that incommunicativeness does not occurs. fact14: The pleomorphism does not occurs. fact15: That irritating Sphacele does not happens. fact16: The flagellating nephroptosis does not happens and that Fahrenheit does not occurs if the fact that that needling manageableness does not occurs is not false. fact17: That this validness occurs hold if that the fact that that banging Manteodea does not happens and this dieteticalness does not happens is true is false. fact18: If that that protracting happens and that minimising Ciconiidae does not happens is false then that protracting does not happens.

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

That this hazing occurs or that irritating Sphacele does not occurs or both is false.

¬({A} v ¬{B})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that runaway does not occurs then both that corvineness and that marketplace happens. fact2: Notthe lope but this maturing happens if the fact that the aberration does not occurs hold. fact3: If the fact that the levitation does not occurs and that runaway occurs is incorrect that runaway does not happens. fact4: Both this literal and this snuffling happens if that protracting does not occurs. fact5: If the flagellating nephroptosis does not occurs that that banging Manteodea does not occurs and this dieteticalness does not happens does not hold. fact6: If the fact that both that irritating Sphacele and this basket occurs is incorrect this basket does not happens. fact7: The fact that that protracting happens and that minimising Ciconiidae does not occurs is incorrect if the lope does not happens. fact8: If that corvineness occurs the fact that that needling manageableness happens and the chelating does not happens is false. fact9: The fact that this hazing occurs and/or that irritating Sphacele does not happens is wrong if this literal happens. fact10: That incommunicativeness does not occurs if the pleomorphism does not happens and that fluoridisation does not happens. fact11: That needling manageableness does not occurs if the fact that that needling manageableness but notthe chelating happens is incorrect. fact12: This validness leads to that the aberration does not occurs and that perjury happens. fact13: The fact that notthe levitation but that runaway occurs is wrong if that incommunicativeness does not occurs. fact14: The pleomorphism does not occurs. fact15: That irritating Sphacele does not happens. fact16: The flagellating nephroptosis does not happens and that Fahrenheit does not occurs if the fact that that needling manageableness does not occurs is not false. fact17: That this validness occurs hold if that the fact that that banging Manteodea does not happens and this dieteticalness does not happens is true is false. fact18: If that that protracting happens and that minimising Ciconiidae does not happens is false then that protracting does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this hazing occurs or that irritating Sphacele does not occurs or both is false. ; $proof$ =

fact15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that if this bod is a kind of a tons that is not Boeotian this bod is antipollution is false.

¬(({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa})

fact1: If a Boeotian person does not televise glissando the one enfilades confabulation.

fact1: (x): ({AB}x & ¬{A}x) -> {GR}x

This bod enfilades confabulation if this bod is Boeotian and does not televise glissando.

({AB}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) -> {GR}{aa}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If a Boeotian person does not televise glissando the one enfilades confabulation. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that if this bod is a kind of a tons that is not Boeotian this bod is antipollution is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This clashing happens.

{D}

fact1: This infertileness and that petallessness happens. fact2: That this backflow does not happens leads to the fact that that both that reposing secessionism and this subcorticalness occurs is correct. fact3: The neuropsychologicalness does not happens if this soured does not occurs. fact4: The infringement does not happens. fact5: The separatism does not occurs and this backflow does not happens if that curtsey occurs. fact6: If this clashing occurs that that hydrographicness does not happens and that overcompensating cynicism does not occurs is not correct. fact7: The Austrian happens. fact8: Both this soured and that overcompensating cynicism occurs. fact9: That presence does not happens if that both that non-polynomialness and that non-celiacness occurs does not hold. fact10: The demagoguery occurs. fact11: That the exploit happens and this semioticalness happens prevents that the ferniness occurs. fact12: Both that hydrographicness and that Epiphany occurs. fact13: This soured and this clashing happens if that overcompensating cynicism does not occurs. fact14: If that Epiphany and that non-hydrographicness happens that overcompensating cynicism does not occurs. fact15: If that presence does not occurs both that curtsey and this infertileness happens. fact16: That Grenadian occurs. fact17: If that reposing secessionism occurs this clashing happens and that Epiphany does not happens.

fact1: ({K} & {CG}) fact2: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬{AJ} fact4: ¬{BJ} fact5: {J} -> (¬{I} & ¬{H}) fact6: {D} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{B}) fact7: {EN} fact8: ({A} & {B}) fact9: ¬(¬{N} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} fact10: {CP} fact11: ({GD} & {JK}) -> ¬{AR} fact12: ({C} & {E}) fact13: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {D}) fact14: ({E} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{B} fact15: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) fact16: {AN} fact17: {F} -> ({D} & ¬{E})

The neuropsychologicalness does not happens.

¬{AJ}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This infertileness and that petallessness happens. fact2: That this backflow does not happens leads to the fact that that both that reposing secessionism and this subcorticalness occurs is correct. fact3: The neuropsychologicalness does not happens if this soured does not occurs. fact4: The infringement does not happens. fact5: The separatism does not occurs and this backflow does not happens if that curtsey occurs. fact6: If this clashing occurs that that hydrographicness does not happens and that overcompensating cynicism does not occurs is not correct. fact7: The Austrian happens. fact8: Both this soured and that overcompensating cynicism occurs. fact9: That presence does not happens if that both that non-polynomialness and that non-celiacness occurs does not hold. fact10: The demagoguery occurs. fact11: That the exploit happens and this semioticalness happens prevents that the ferniness occurs. fact12: Both that hydrographicness and that Epiphany occurs. fact13: This soured and this clashing happens if that overcompensating cynicism does not occurs. fact14: If that Epiphany and that non-hydrographicness happens that overcompensating cynicism does not occurs. fact15: If that presence does not occurs both that curtsey and this infertileness happens. fact16: That Grenadian occurs. fact17: If that reposing secessionism occurs this clashing happens and that Epiphany does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This clashing happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That electrifying does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: That that electrifying does not happens is caused by that this climax does not occurs but this splayfootedness happens. fact2: If this splayfootedness does not happens then that electrifying happens. fact3: That that dieting Agha does not happens but the traversal occurs is incorrect. fact4: That that naprapathy does not happens and the militarization does not happens does not hold. fact5: This climax happens if this hematalness does not happens. fact6: The fact that that originativeness but notthe apheresis happens is wrong. fact7: This splayfootedness does not happens if that the fact that the deformationalness does not occurs and that quartanness does not happens is wrong is true. fact8: The employment occurs. fact9: If that electrifying does not occurs that that dieting Agha does not occurs and this bruise does not occurs does not hold. fact10: The comp does not occurs. fact11: That this compliance but notthe sedating occurs is brought about by this non-pacificness. fact12: The fact that that unpronounceableness does not happens but this alternatingness happens is false. fact13: Notthis climax but this splayfootedness occurs if the sedating does not occurs. fact14: The fact that both this non-deformationalness and this non-quartanness occurs is false. fact15: That this repeat does not occurs but this allogeneicness happens is wrong.

fact1: (¬{C} & {B}) -> ¬{A} fact2: ¬{B} -> {A} fact3: ¬(¬{R} & {AR}) fact4: ¬(¬{HR} & ¬{BS}) fact5: ¬{HN} -> {C} fact6: ¬({ET} & ¬{BL}) fact7: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact8: {DJ} fact9: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{R} & ¬{JA}) fact10: ¬{ER} fact11: ¬{F} -> ({E} & ¬{D}) fact12: ¬(¬{IG} & {GG}) fact13: ¬{D} -> (¬{C} & {B}) fact14: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact15: ¬(¬{GQ} & {DE})

The fact that that dieting Agha does not occurs and this bruise does not occurs is incorrect.

¬(¬{R} & ¬{JA})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that electrifying does not happens is caused by that this climax does not occurs but this splayfootedness happens. fact2: If this splayfootedness does not happens then that electrifying happens. fact3: That that dieting Agha does not happens but the traversal occurs is incorrect. fact4: That that naprapathy does not happens and the militarization does not happens does not hold. fact5: This climax happens if this hematalness does not happens. fact6: The fact that that originativeness but notthe apheresis happens is wrong. fact7: This splayfootedness does not happens if that the fact that the deformationalness does not occurs and that quartanness does not happens is wrong is true. fact8: The employment occurs. fact9: If that electrifying does not occurs that that dieting Agha does not occurs and this bruise does not occurs does not hold. fact10: The comp does not occurs. fact11: That this compliance but notthe sedating occurs is brought about by this non-pacificness. fact12: The fact that that unpronounceableness does not happens but this alternatingness happens is false. fact13: Notthis climax but this splayfootedness occurs if the sedating does not occurs. fact14: The fact that both this non-deformationalness and this non-quartanness occurs is false. fact15: That this repeat does not occurs but this allogeneicness happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That electrifying does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact14 -> int1: This splayfootedness does not occurs.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This security roughens.

{C}{b}

fact1: If Dallas is a lowercase that Dallas is not a arcdegree hold. fact2: That bully is Caesarean. fact3: The fact that Dallas is a glasses and is Caesarean is right if that thing is not a arcdegree. fact4: That bully is competitive. fact5: That bully roughens.

fact1: {F}{ee} -> ¬{E}{ee} fact2: {A}{a} fact3: ¬{E}{ee} -> ({IS}{ee} & {A}{ee}) fact4: {B}{a} fact5: {C}{a}

Dallas is a kind of a glasses that roughens.

({IS}{ee} & {C}{ee})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If Dallas is a lowercase that Dallas is not a arcdegree hold. fact2: That bully is Caesarean. fact3: The fact that Dallas is a glasses and is Caesarean is right if that thing is not a arcdegree. fact4: That bully is competitive. fact5: That bully roughens. ; $hypothesis$ = This security roughens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this comprehendibleness occurs but that emaciating does not occurs does not hold.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That doping dowse happens.

fact1: {A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That doping dowse happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this comprehendibleness occurs but that emaciating does not occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This bobsleigh is a nyctalopia.

{A}{b}

fact1: If somebody is a smart then that it is a nyctalopia is true. fact2: That number is a smart. fact3: Something does not sugar and is not a paean if it is not deconstructionist. fact4: That avadavat is fossiliferous if it opines anaplasmosis. fact5: If the fact that that avadavat is fossiliferous is right that number is not flexible but this one is a tendonitis. fact6: If something is not a kind of a Crescentia the fact that that is not a kiss and that is not a smart is false. fact7: That number is not a rune and/or it is non-subartesian. fact8: If something that does not sugar is not a paean it is not a Crescentia. fact9: This bobsleigh is a kiss and a Crescentia if this bobsleigh is not a paean. fact10: This bobsleigh is not deconstructionist if that number is inflexible one that is a tendonitis.

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

This bobsleigh is not a nyctalopia.

¬{A}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody is a smart then that it is a nyctalopia is true. fact2: That number is a smart. fact3: Something does not sugar and is not a paean if it is not deconstructionist. fact4: That avadavat is fossiliferous if it opines anaplasmosis. fact5: If the fact that that avadavat is fossiliferous is right that number is not flexible but this one is a tendonitis. fact6: If something is not a kind of a Crescentia the fact that that is not a kiss and that is not a smart is false. fact7: That number is not a rune and/or it is non-subartesian. fact8: If something that does not sugar is not a paean it is not a Crescentia. fact9: This bobsleigh is a kiss and a Crescentia if this bobsleigh is not a paean. fact10: This bobsleigh is not deconstructionist if that number is inflexible one that is a tendonitis. ; $hypothesis$ = This bobsleigh is a nyctalopia. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This lidlessness occurs.

{D}

fact1: That jiggling segregated happens if this smell happens. fact2: If that stenography happens then that that felony occurs and that steeplechase does not happens does not hold. fact3: The backhandness happens. fact4: The respecting happens if the Hindustaniness occurs. fact5: This transculturalness does not occurs and that inflaming cost does not happens if that that hallelujah does not occurs is right. fact6: That jiggling segregated does not happens if that both this uterineness and that jiggling segregated occurs is not true. fact7: If this transculturalness does not occurs the fact that the fact that this uterineness happens and that jiggling segregated happens is incorrect is not wrong. fact8: If this quarterfinal occurs the sclerotomy occurs. fact9: That this smell occurs is not incorrect. fact10: If that that felony happens and that steeplechase does not happens does not hold that hallelujah does not happens.

fact1: {A} -> {B} fact2: {J} -> ¬({H} & ¬{I}) fact3: {AN} fact4: {AF} -> {IM} fact5: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & ¬{F}) fact6: ¬({C} & {B}) -> ¬{B} fact7: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & {B}) fact8: {FH} -> {EI} fact9: {A} fact10: ¬({H} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{G}

This lidlessness occurs.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That jiggling segregated happens if this smell happens. fact2: If that stenography happens then that that felony occurs and that steeplechase does not happens does not hold. fact3: The backhandness happens. fact4: The respecting happens if the Hindustaniness occurs. fact5: This transculturalness does not occurs and that inflaming cost does not happens if that that hallelujah does not occurs is right. fact6: That jiggling segregated does not happens if that both this uterineness and that jiggling segregated occurs is not true. fact7: If this transculturalness does not occurs the fact that the fact that this uterineness happens and that jiggling segregated happens is incorrect is not wrong. fact8: If this quarterfinal occurs the sclerotomy occurs. fact9: That this smell occurs is not incorrect. fact10: If that that felony happens and that steeplechase does not happens does not hold that hallelujah does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This lidlessness occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That pink is structured.

¬{B}{c}

fact1: Something is unstructured and is a Lycosidae. fact2: There exists some man such that it is unstructured. fact3: This drumhead is a Lycosidae. fact4: If someone vermilions Oedogoniales and winds then that it is not professorial hold. fact5: That scree is a Lycosidae and is not a kind of a rupture if this drumhead is presbyopic. fact6: If the fact that this drumhead is a Fischer is false then that pink is a Fischer. fact7: This drumhead is not non-presbyopic. fact8: If that scree is unstructured then that pink is a Lycosidae. fact9: Somebody is not periodontal but it vermilions Oedogoniales if that it is a kind of a Fischer hold. fact10: If that pink is not professorial it is not structured and it is presbyopic.

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

That pink is unstructured.

{B}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is unstructured and is a Lycosidae. fact2: There exists some man such that it is unstructured. fact3: This drumhead is a Lycosidae. fact4: If someone vermilions Oedogoniales and winds then that it is not professorial hold. fact5: That scree is a Lycosidae and is not a kind of a rupture if this drumhead is presbyopic. fact6: If the fact that this drumhead is a Fischer is false then that pink is a Fischer. fact7: This drumhead is not non-presbyopic. fact8: If that scree is unstructured then that pink is a Lycosidae. fact9: Somebody is not periodontal but it vermilions Oedogoniales if that it is a kind of a Fischer hold. fact10: If that pink is not professorial it is not structured and it is presbyopic. ; $hypothesis$ = That pink is structured. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this cease happens is true.

{A}

fact1: The fact that this cease happens is true.

fact1: {A}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this cease happens is true. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this cease happens is true. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that the fact that Chandler does not jiggle CIS and does not listen is incorrect is true.

¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

fact1: Chandler is not intracerebral and it does not listen. fact2: Chandler does not jiggle CIS and does not listen if this indexer does jiggle CIS.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Chandler is not intracerebral and it does not listen. fact2: Chandler does not jiggle CIS and does not listen if this indexer does jiggle CIS. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that Chandler does not jiggle CIS and does not listen is incorrect is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Troy is not tactical.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If the fact that something does not decouple or it is nonfictional or both does not hold then it is not a Ionian. fact2: The PS is not a kind of a impeccability. fact3: Troy is not tactical if the fact that Troy ribs Scolopacidae or it is curst or both is not correct. fact4: The indigen is a kind of a impeccability. fact5: If the fact that that something does not rib Scolopacidae and/or is curst is right does not hold then it is non-tactical. fact6: The fact that Troy ribs Scolopacidae hold. fact7: If that Sandril is not a kind of a impeccability then that that Troy is not tactical and ribs Scolopacidae does not hold hold. fact8: That that Silex is tactical man that is not curst is wrong if that Sandril is not nonadsorbent. fact9: Something is tactical if that it is not tactical and does rib Scolopacidae is incorrect. fact10: That the indinavir is a impeccability hold. fact11: Something does not rib Scolopacidae if the fact that that is not curst or is a impeccability or both is false. fact12: If that Sandril does gather scarlet that Sandril is a pusillanimousness. fact13: The fact that that Sandril is a impeccability is correct. fact14: If that Sandril ribs Scolopacidae then the fact that that either Troy does not ribs Scolopacidae or the thing is curst or both hold is wrong. fact15: Troy is a impeccability. fact16: That Troy does not rib Scolopacidae and/or that depresses Montreal is incorrect. fact17: If that Sandril ribs Scolopacidae Troy ribs Scolopacidae. fact18: Troy is tactical if that Sandril is tactical. fact19: This sandbox is curst. fact20: Some man is not tactical if the fact that the one ribs Scolopacidae and/or the one is curst is false. fact21: The fact that Troy is not an elitism does not hold.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{HR}x v {HM}x) -> ¬{FL}x fact2: ¬{A}{is} fact3: ¬({B}{b} v {D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact4: {A}{ga} fact5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v {D}x) -> ¬{C}x fact6: {B}{b} fact7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) fact8: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬({C}{ih} & ¬{D}{ih}) fact9: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> {C}x fact10: {A}{jk} fact11: (x): ¬(¬{D}x v {A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact12: {AM}{a} -> {IO}{a} fact13: {A}{a} fact14: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} v {D}{b}) fact15: {A}{b} fact16: ¬(¬{B}{b} v {GH}{b}) fact17: {B}{a} -> {B}{b} fact18: {C}{a} -> {C}{b} fact19: {D}{hj} fact20: (x): ¬({B}x v {D}x) -> ¬{C}x fact21: {IF}{b}

That Troy is tactical is not false.

{C}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that something does not decouple or it is nonfictional or both does not hold then it is not a Ionian. fact2: The PS is not a kind of a impeccability. fact3: Troy is not tactical if the fact that Troy ribs Scolopacidae or it is curst or both is not correct. fact4: The indigen is a kind of a impeccability. fact5: If the fact that that something does not rib Scolopacidae and/or is curst is right does not hold then it is non-tactical. fact6: The fact that Troy ribs Scolopacidae hold. fact7: If that Sandril is not a kind of a impeccability then that that Troy is not tactical and ribs Scolopacidae does not hold hold. fact8: That that Silex is tactical man that is not curst is wrong if that Sandril is not nonadsorbent. fact9: Something is tactical if that it is not tactical and does rib Scolopacidae is incorrect. fact10: That the indinavir is a impeccability hold. fact11: Something does not rib Scolopacidae if the fact that that is not curst or is a impeccability or both is false. fact12: If that Sandril does gather scarlet that Sandril is a pusillanimousness. fact13: The fact that that Sandril is a impeccability is correct. fact14: If that Sandril ribs Scolopacidae then the fact that that either Troy does not ribs Scolopacidae or the thing is curst or both hold is wrong. fact15: Troy is a impeccability. fact16: That Troy does not rib Scolopacidae and/or that depresses Montreal is incorrect. fact17: If that Sandril ribs Scolopacidae Troy ribs Scolopacidae. fact18: Troy is tactical if that Sandril is tactical. fact19: This sandbox is curst. fact20: Some man is not tactical if the fact that the one ribs Scolopacidae and/or the one is curst is false. fact21: The fact that Troy is not an elitism does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = Troy is not tactical. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that abdomen engorges and is not a operationalism is wrong.

¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: If something qualifies it engorges and it is not a kind of a operationalism. fact2: That abdomen does not disunite and is not traditional. fact3: Claudio engorges. fact4: That Kampuchean does not touch dotted but it copyrights. fact5: Claudio does not qualify and it does not disunite. fact6: That abdomen does not shorten jubilee and is not a modal. fact7: If that abdomen does qualify then that abdomen engorges. fact8: The fact that that foeman is judgmental but the thing is not Kantian is false if that Kampuchean does not touch dotted. fact9: If this Bolshevik disunites then Claudio qualifies. fact10: That abdomen does engorge. fact11: If Claudio qualifies then the fact that that abdomen engorges but this is not a kind of a operationalism does not hold. fact12: If that abdomen does not engorge and the one is not a operationalism Claudio engorge. fact13: Some person engorges if the one qualifies. fact14: Claudio is not a operationalism and it does not preheat Normandy. fact15: If Claudio does not qualify and he does not disunite then that abdomen qualify. fact16: That abdomen qualifies if Claudio qualifies but it does not disunite. fact17: This Bolshevik is not Kantian if the fact that that foeman is judgmental thing that is not Kantian does not hold. fact18: If that Claudio does not qualify and disunites hold that abdomen qualify. fact19: The fact that Claudio is a kind of a muniments that is not a kind of a operationalism hold. fact20: If something that is not Kantian is a chromaticity it disunites.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact2: (¬{B}{aa} & ¬{HN}{aa}) fact3: {AA}{a} fact4: (¬{H}{e} & {I}{e}) fact5: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact6: (¬{JG}{aa} & ¬{DG}{aa}) fact7: {A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} fact8: ¬{H}{e} -> ¬({E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) fact9: {B}{b} -> {A}{a} fact10: {AA}{aa} fact11: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact12: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {AA}{a} fact13: (x): {A}x -> {AA}x fact14: (¬{AB}{a} & ¬{DQ}{a}) fact15: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{aa} fact16: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{aa} fact17: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact18: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> {A}{aa} fact19: ({AC}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact20: (x): (¬{D}x & {C}x) -> {B}x

That that abdomen engorges and is not a operationalism is wrong.

¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something qualifies it engorges and it is not a kind of a operationalism. fact2: That abdomen does not disunite and is not traditional. fact3: Claudio engorges. fact4: That Kampuchean does not touch dotted but it copyrights. fact5: Claudio does not qualify and it does not disunite. fact6: That abdomen does not shorten jubilee and is not a modal. fact7: If that abdomen does qualify then that abdomen engorges. fact8: The fact that that foeman is judgmental but the thing is not Kantian is false if that Kampuchean does not touch dotted. fact9: If this Bolshevik disunites then Claudio qualifies. fact10: That abdomen does engorge. fact11: If Claudio qualifies then the fact that that abdomen engorges but this is not a kind of a operationalism does not hold. fact12: If that abdomen does not engorge and the one is not a operationalism Claudio engorge. fact13: Some person engorges if the one qualifies. fact14: Claudio is not a operationalism and it does not preheat Normandy. fact15: If Claudio does not qualify and he does not disunite then that abdomen qualify. fact16: That abdomen qualifies if Claudio qualifies but it does not disunite. fact17: This Bolshevik is not Kantian if the fact that that foeman is judgmental thing that is not Kantian does not hold. fact18: If that Claudio does not qualify and disunites hold that abdomen qualify. fact19: The fact that Claudio is a kind of a muniments that is not a kind of a operationalism hold. fact20: If something that is not Kantian is a chromaticity it disunites. ; $hypothesis$ = That that abdomen engorges and is not a operationalism is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: If that abdomen qualifies it engorges and it is not a kind of a operationalism.; fact15 & fact5 -> int2: That abdomen qualifies.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This polecat is a Guinean.

{A}{d}

fact1: This polecat is not a kind of a Guinean if that creamery is not immature. fact2: The fact that that creamery is immature and it is Prakritic is false if that pledgee is not Prakritic. fact3: This polecat is not a Guinean if that that creamery is immature and Prakritic is false. fact4: A non-immature one is a kind of a Guinean and is Prakritic. fact5: The fact that that guillemot outdistances impermeability and does not ban does not hold.

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

This polecat is a Guinean.

{A}{d}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This polecat is not a kind of a Guinean if that creamery is not immature. fact2: The fact that that creamery is immature and it is Prakritic is false if that pledgee is not Prakritic. fact3: This polecat is not a Guinean if that that creamery is immature and Prakritic is false. fact4: A non-immature one is a kind of a Guinean and is Prakritic. fact5: The fact that that guillemot outdistances impermeability and does not ban does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This polecat is a Guinean. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This piolet fossilizes Scheol.

{B}{aa}

fact1: If the fact that somebody is both non-adscript and not naive is wrong he/she fossilizes Scheol. fact2: If some person does not judder then that it does not practise McAllen and does not fossilize Scheol is false. fact3: If there exists something such that it is not non-naive then the fact that this piolet is non-adscript thing that is not non-naive is incorrect. fact4: If the fact that somebody judders and is a Peristedion does not hold then it does not judders.

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

That that hafnium does not practise McAllen and does not fossilize Scheol does not hold.

¬(¬{AO}{s} & ¬{B}{s})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that somebody is both non-adscript and not naive is wrong he/she fossilizes Scheol. fact2: If some person does not judder then that it does not practise McAllen and does not fossilize Scheol is false. fact3: If there exists something such that it is not non-naive then the fact that this piolet is non-adscript thing that is not non-naive is incorrect. fact4: If the fact that somebody judders and is a Peristedion does not hold then it does not judders. ; $hypothesis$ = This piolet fossilizes Scheol. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That poker is not a Nostradamus.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That poker is a kind of a Nostradamus and this is an unfamiliarity. fact2: That ribose is a Nostradamus. fact3: If somebody is a Plantago it is both not a Aethionema and not a fresher. fact4: That poker is not a kind of a Nostradamus if that this shortgrass is a kind of a Nostradamus that is an unfamiliarity is not correct. fact5: The fact that this shortgrass is a kind of a Nostradamus and is an unfamiliarity is false if that velodrome is not a kind of a fresher. fact6: The fact that some person is not a kind of a fresher and is an unfamiliarity is false if it does not shed. fact7: If the fact that something is not a fresher and is an unfamiliarity is incorrect it does incapacitate fortunetelling. fact8: That velodrome is a Plantago if the person either is a hydrophobia or does not shed or both.

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

This doyley incapacitates fortunetelling and this is a Nostradamus.

({CC}{be} & {A}{be})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That poker is a kind of a Nostradamus and this is an unfamiliarity. fact2: That ribose is a Nostradamus. fact3: If somebody is a Plantago it is both not a Aethionema and not a fresher. fact4: That poker is not a kind of a Nostradamus if that this shortgrass is a kind of a Nostradamus that is an unfamiliarity is not correct. fact5: The fact that this shortgrass is a kind of a Nostradamus and is an unfamiliarity is false if that velodrome is not a kind of a fresher. fact6: The fact that some person is not a kind of a fresher and is an unfamiliarity is false if it does not shed. fact7: If the fact that something is not a fresher and is an unfamiliarity is incorrect it does incapacitate fortunetelling. fact8: That velodrome is a Plantago if the person either is a hydrophobia or does not shed or both. ; $hypothesis$ = That poker is not a Nostradamus. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That potter does not happens.

¬{B}

fact1: If this quelling does not occurs then the fact that this aborting does not occurs and that proceeding Sakartvelo does not happens is incorrect. fact2: That potter occurs if that that proceeding Sakartvelo occurs hold. fact3: That slouching marque happens if the Gauguinesqueness happens. fact4: That bathyalness happens if the fact that both that non-bathyalness and that potter happens does not hold. fact5: That impotentness and this quelling occurs if this qualifying does not occurs. fact6: The fact that the fact that that proceeding Sakartvelo does not happens and this aborting does not happens is incorrect is correct if this quelling occurs. fact7: That proceeding Sakartvelo occurs.

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

That bathyalness happens.

{DL}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this quelling does not occurs then the fact that this aborting does not occurs and that proceeding Sakartvelo does not happens is incorrect. fact2: That potter occurs if that that proceeding Sakartvelo occurs hold. fact3: That slouching marque happens if the Gauguinesqueness happens. fact4: That bathyalness happens if the fact that both that non-bathyalness and that potter happens does not hold. fact5: That impotentness and this quelling occurs if this qualifying does not occurs. fact6: The fact that the fact that that proceeding Sakartvelo does not happens and this aborting does not happens is incorrect is correct if this quelling occurs. fact7: That proceeding Sakartvelo occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That potter does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Irishwoman is not a kind of a positive.

¬{AB}{a}

fact1: If that this Irishwoman is a kind of a Smetana is correct this Irishwoman does not unwrap and this is not a positive. fact2: Something does not unwrap if the fact that the thing does unwrap and the thing does scruple detailed is incorrect. fact3: This Irishwoman is not a Ubykh. fact4: If the fact that something scruples detailed and this thing is a Smetana is incorrect this thing is not a kind of a Smetana. fact5: This Irishwoman does not unwrap. fact6: If the fact that some person is not a disrepair but it is a Rajiformes does not hold then it is not a Rajiformes. fact7: If something is not a disrepair then that this thing does scruple detailed and this thing is a Smetana does not hold. fact8: If that Yemeni is a Smetana that Yemeni is not a kind of a ARNG. fact9: If this Irishwoman is not a kind of a Rajiformes and it does not unwrap then Danilo does not unwrap. fact10: There exists nobody that is not a disrepair and is a Rajiformes. fact11: The fact that this cero is not a disrepair hold. fact12: The towner does not unwrap. fact13: This Irishwoman is a Smetana.

fact1: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact2: (x): ¬({AA}x & {C}x) -> ¬{AA}x fact3: ¬{HH}{a} fact4: (x): ¬({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x fact5: ¬{AA}{a} fact6: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & {A}x) fact8: {A}{h} -> ¬{BK}{h} fact9: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{go} fact10: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {B}x) fact11: ¬{D}{b} fact12: ¬{AA}{ih} fact13: {A}{a}

Danilo does not unwrap.

¬{AA}{go}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this Irishwoman is a kind of a Smetana is correct this Irishwoman does not unwrap and this is not a positive. fact2: Something does not unwrap if the fact that the thing does unwrap and the thing does scruple detailed is incorrect. fact3: This Irishwoman is not a Ubykh. fact4: If the fact that something scruples detailed and this thing is a Smetana is incorrect this thing is not a kind of a Smetana. fact5: This Irishwoman does not unwrap. fact6: If the fact that some person is not a disrepair but it is a Rajiformes does not hold then it is not a Rajiformes. fact7: If something is not a disrepair then that this thing does scruple detailed and this thing is a Smetana does not hold. fact8: If that Yemeni is a Smetana that Yemeni is not a kind of a ARNG. fact9: If this Irishwoman is not a kind of a Rajiformes and it does not unwrap then Danilo does not unwrap. fact10: There exists nobody that is not a disrepair and is a Rajiformes. fact11: The fact that this cero is not a disrepair hold. fact12: The towner does not unwrap. fact13: This Irishwoman is a Smetana. ; $hypothesis$ = This Irishwoman is not a kind of a positive. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact13 -> int1: This Irishwoman does not unwrap and is not a kind of a positive.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This plowland is a Monet and does not hose Lastreopsis.

({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

fact1: That icefall hoses Lastreopsis if this plowland hoses Lastreopsis. fact2: The fact that this plowland is a kind of a Monet is right. fact3: This plowland is not an impossible if that icefall is a kind of an affiliated. fact4: Something is titulary and it is discriminatory if it does not welt cryptobiosis. fact5: That icefall is an affiliated if that icefall does not hose Lastreopsis. fact6: That that icefall is not an affiliated and it is not a sweat does not hold. fact7: Some man does disclose if it is a craps. fact8: If this torpedo is not an impossible the geoduck is an impossible. fact9: This plowland does hose Lastreopsis and/or the thing is not a Monet if the geoduck is an impossible. fact10: The fact that the javelin hoses Lastreopsis but it is not postictal is false. fact11: Something that is not an impossible is a kind of a Monet that does not hose Lastreopsis. fact12: This Bengali is not non-substantial and does not neaten Haydn if that that icefall hoses Lastreopsis is not incorrect. fact13: That icefall is a sweat if that icefall is not a Monet. fact14: Something that does not welt cryptobiosis is not discriminatory and is titulary. fact15: Someone is not an impossible if it is not discriminatory and it is titulary. fact16: If this torpedo is an age it is a craps. fact17: If that that icefall is both not an affiliated and not a sweat is wrong this plowland is not an impossible. fact18: If something discloses and that thing globalises winter that thing does not welt cryptobiosis. fact19: This torpedo is a kind of an age. fact20: If something is a kind of an impossible then the fact that it is a kind of a Monet and it does not hose Lastreopsis is not correct. fact21: If the fact that something is not a kind of an impossible hold then that thing is a Monet.

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

This Bengali is substantial and does not neaten Haydn.

({AJ}{br} & ¬{FK}{br})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That icefall hoses Lastreopsis if this plowland hoses Lastreopsis. fact2: The fact that this plowland is a kind of a Monet is right. fact3: This plowland is not an impossible if that icefall is a kind of an affiliated. fact4: Something is titulary and it is discriminatory if it does not welt cryptobiosis. fact5: That icefall is an affiliated if that icefall does not hose Lastreopsis. fact6: That that icefall is not an affiliated and it is not a sweat does not hold. fact7: Some man does disclose if it is a craps. fact8: If this torpedo is not an impossible the geoduck is an impossible. fact9: This plowland does hose Lastreopsis and/or the thing is not a Monet if the geoduck is an impossible. fact10: The fact that the javelin hoses Lastreopsis but it is not postictal is false. fact11: Something that is not an impossible is a kind of a Monet that does not hose Lastreopsis. fact12: This Bengali is not non-substantial and does not neaten Haydn if that that icefall hoses Lastreopsis is not incorrect. fact13: That icefall is a sweat if that icefall is not a Monet. fact14: Something that does not welt cryptobiosis is not discriminatory and is titulary. fact15: Someone is not an impossible if it is not discriminatory and it is titulary. fact16: If this torpedo is an age it is a craps. fact17: If that that icefall is both not an affiliated and not a sweat is wrong this plowland is not an impossible. fact18: If something discloses and that thing globalises winter that thing does not welt cryptobiosis. fact19: This torpedo is a kind of an age. fact20: If something is a kind of an impossible then the fact that it is a kind of a Monet and it does not hose Lastreopsis is not correct. fact21: If the fact that something is not a kind of an impossible hold then that thing is a Monet. ; $hypothesis$ = This plowland is a Monet and does not hose Lastreopsis. ; $proof$ =

fact17 & fact6 -> int1: The fact that this plowland is not an impossible hold.; fact11 -> int2: This plowland is a Monet but it does not hose Lastreopsis if it is not an impossible.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This coating slagheap happens but that provisions does not occurs.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: If this nonastringentness happens that muffling Arctiidae does not occurs and this chronologicalness does not occurs. fact2: This concomitant and that foraging occurs if this uncutness does not occurs. fact3: The undercutting and this flowage happens if this upsetting hello does not happens. fact4: If that Lutheranness does not happens then this non-symptomaticness and this non-bractealness occurs. fact5: That that uprightness does not occurs is triggered by that that muffling Arctiidae does not happens and this chronologicalness does not occurs. fact6: This flowage causes that that Lutheranness does not occurs and that electricity does not occurs. fact7: That this urging occurs and this LIFO does not occurs is brought about by that this concomitant does not occurs. fact8: Notthis concomitant but that foraging occurs if this uncutness does not happens. fact9: This coating slagheap happens. fact10: The scouring but notthe mushing Joliot occurs. fact11: This vulpineness does not occurs and the borrowing permed happens. fact12: That this coating slagheap happens and that provisions does not occurs is false if this concomitant happens. fact13: The chelicerateness and this non-digitigradeness happens. fact14: That this upsetting hello happens is prevented by that this non-vulpineness and this non-uprightness occurs. fact15: If that bractealness does not happens then this cometicness and/or this filibuster happens. fact16: This uncutness is prevented by that this cometicness occurs but this filibuster does not happens. fact17: This nonastringentness happens. fact18: This clannishness but notthe rush happens. fact19: That Lutheranness does not happens if that that Lutheranness but notthis flowage occurs is not right.

fact1: {Q} -> (¬{O} & ¬{P}) fact2: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact3: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {J}) fact4: ¬{H} -> (¬{G} & ¬{F}) fact5: (¬{O} & ¬{P}) -> ¬{M} fact6: {J} -> (¬{H} & ¬{I}) fact7: ¬{A} -> ({BE} & ¬{EM}) fact8: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & {B}) fact9: {AA} fact10: ({AF} & ¬{FT}) fact11: (¬{N} & {R}) fact12: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact13: ({EF} & ¬{FJ}) fact14: (¬{N} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} fact15: ¬{F} -> ({D} v {E}) fact16: ({D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} fact17: {Q} fact18: ({HH} & ¬{GQ}) fact19: ¬({H} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H}

This urging happens and this LIFO does not happens.

({BE} & ¬{EM})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this nonastringentness happens that muffling Arctiidae does not occurs and this chronologicalness does not occurs. fact2: This concomitant and that foraging occurs if this uncutness does not occurs. fact3: The undercutting and this flowage happens if this upsetting hello does not happens. fact4: If that Lutheranness does not happens then this non-symptomaticness and this non-bractealness occurs. fact5: That that uprightness does not occurs is triggered by that that muffling Arctiidae does not happens and this chronologicalness does not occurs. fact6: This flowage causes that that Lutheranness does not occurs and that electricity does not occurs. fact7: That this urging occurs and this LIFO does not occurs is brought about by that this concomitant does not occurs. fact8: Notthis concomitant but that foraging occurs if this uncutness does not happens. fact9: This coating slagheap happens. fact10: The scouring but notthe mushing Joliot occurs. fact11: This vulpineness does not occurs and the borrowing permed happens. fact12: That this coating slagheap happens and that provisions does not occurs is false if this concomitant happens. fact13: The chelicerateness and this non-digitigradeness happens. fact14: That this upsetting hello happens is prevented by that this non-vulpineness and this non-uprightness occurs. fact15: If that bractealness does not happens then this cometicness and/or this filibuster happens. fact16: This uncutness is prevented by that this cometicness occurs but this filibuster does not happens. fact17: This nonastringentness happens. fact18: This clannishness but notthe rush happens. fact19: That Lutheranness does not happens if that that Lutheranness but notthis flowage occurs is not right. ; $hypothesis$ = This coating slagheap happens but that provisions does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This tapping and this traditionalism occurs.

({C} & {D})

fact1: This operation happens. fact2: This unmaking doddering occurs. fact3: That freeingness happens. fact4: This operation and this traditionalism happens. fact5: This unmaking doddering and this discolorising Menninger happens. fact6: If this discolorising Menninger occurs this tapping occurs. fact7: The doting happens and the raising occurs. fact8: The fact that this tapping occurs and this traditionalism occurs does not hold if this unmaking doddering does not happens.

fact1: {E} fact2: {A} fact3: {ED} fact4: ({E} & {D}) fact5: ({A} & {B}) fact6: {B} -> {C} fact7: ({DC} & {FL}) fact8: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {D})

That this tapping and this traditionalism occurs does not hold.

¬({C} & {D})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This operation happens. fact2: This unmaking doddering occurs. fact3: That freeingness happens. fact4: This operation and this traditionalism happens. fact5: This unmaking doddering and this discolorising Menninger happens. fact6: If this discolorising Menninger occurs this tapping occurs. fact7: The doting happens and the raising occurs. fact8: The fact that this tapping occurs and this traditionalism occurs does not hold if this unmaking doddering does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This tapping and this traditionalism occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: This discolorising Menninger happens.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: This tapping happens.; fact4 -> int3: This traditionalism happens.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This methocarbamol is postmodern.

{C}{a}

fact1: This methocarbamol is a Sturnella. fact2: Something is a kind of a Highlander if it is headless. fact3: Something does scratch if it does desiccate Willamette. fact4: Somebody that is a Highlander is not postmodern. fact5: This methocarbamol is a Juglandaceae. fact6: Cliff is headless person that is a kind of a Rubia. fact7: The fact that the fact that this methocarbamol is a bimillenary but it is not a categorem is incorrect hold. fact8: Someone is headless if that it is not headless and it is guiltless is incorrect. fact9: That this methocarbamol is postmodern is correct if this metalwork is a Highlander. fact10: This acetylcholine is headless. fact11: This sagitta is headless if it is not postmodern and/or it is guiltless. fact12: This sagitta is not a fanned. fact13: If the fact that some person is a bimillenary but that one is not a categorem is incorrect that one does not keep. fact14: Something is not postmodern or guiltless or both if this thing does scratch. fact15: If something is not a fanned then it desiccates Willamette. fact16: If this methocarbamol does not keep then this sagitta is a more that vilipends Mysore. fact17: The canna is postmodern.

fact1: {HT}{a} fact2: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact3: (x): {G}x -> {E}x fact4: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x fact5: {DA}{a} fact6: ({B}{hi} & {GT}{hi}) fact7: ¬({K}{a} & ¬{J}{a}) fact8: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {D}x) -> {B}x fact9: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact10: {B}{ii} fact11: (¬{C}{bn} v {D}{bn}) -> {B}{bn} fact12: ¬{H}{bn} fact13: (x): ¬({K}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{I}x fact14: (x): {E}x -> (¬{C}x v {D}x) fact15: (x): ¬{H}x -> {G}x fact16: ¬{I}{a} -> ({GF}{bn} & {F}{bn}) fact17: {C}{gq}

This sagitta is a more and a Highlander.

({GF}{bn} & {A}{bn})

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This methocarbamol is a Sturnella. fact2: Something is a kind of a Highlander if it is headless. fact3: Something does scratch if it does desiccate Willamette. fact4: Somebody that is a Highlander is not postmodern. fact5: This methocarbamol is a Juglandaceae. fact6: Cliff is headless person that is a kind of a Rubia. fact7: The fact that the fact that this methocarbamol is a bimillenary but it is not a categorem is incorrect hold. fact8: Someone is headless if that it is not headless and it is guiltless is incorrect. fact9: That this methocarbamol is postmodern is correct if this metalwork is a Highlander. fact10: This acetylcholine is headless. fact11: This sagitta is headless if it is not postmodern and/or it is guiltless. fact12: This sagitta is not a fanned. fact13: If the fact that some person is a bimillenary but that one is not a categorem is incorrect that one does not keep. fact14: Something is not postmodern or guiltless or both if this thing does scratch. fact15: If something is not a fanned then it desiccates Willamette. fact16: If this methocarbamol does not keep then this sagitta is a more that vilipends Mysore. fact17: The canna is postmodern. ; $hypothesis$ = This methocarbamol is postmodern. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that proenzyme is not non-eatable and/or it is zoic does not hold.

¬({A}{a} v {B}{a})

fact1: Something is not ungulated if the fact that the thing does not narcotized quadruple and the thing is ungulated does not hold. fact2: That somebody does not narcotized quadruple but he/she is ungulated is not true if he/she is unsupervised. fact3: Something does not narcotized quadruple if that it does not overtake and does not curst does not hold. fact4: If that star does not narcotized quadruple then that seltzer is ungulated or this is unsupervised or both. fact5: That proenzyme is eatable. fact6: That jonquil is eatable. fact7: If this poxvirus is ungulated that proenzyme is not eatable and not zoic. fact8: If some man is non-alkaline that it does not overtake and it does not curst is incorrect. fact9: If that proenzyme is not eatable then this galax is eatable.

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

That that proenzyme is not non-eatable and/or it is zoic does not hold.

¬({A}{a} v {B}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not ungulated if the fact that the thing does not narcotized quadruple and the thing is ungulated does not hold. fact2: That somebody does not narcotized quadruple but he/she is ungulated is not true if he/she is unsupervised. fact3: Something does not narcotized quadruple if that it does not overtake and does not curst does not hold. fact4: If that star does not narcotized quadruple then that seltzer is ungulated or this is unsupervised or both. fact5: That proenzyme is eatable. fact6: That jonquil is eatable. fact7: If this poxvirus is ungulated that proenzyme is not eatable and not zoic. fact8: If some man is non-alkaline that it does not overtake and it does not curst is incorrect. fact9: If that proenzyme is not eatable then this galax is eatable. ; $hypothesis$ = That that proenzyme is not non-eatable and/or it is zoic does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That cartouche is not unfeathered.

¬{AA}{a}

fact1: That cartouche is not egoistic. fact2: That foryml is nidifugous and it is informative. fact3: Something that is photoemissive does not share sophisticated or is a Menander or both. fact4: That cartouche is not a rankness if the fact that that cartouche is not egoistic is correct. fact5: That cartouche is not unfeathered and he is not egoistic if that cartouche does not cloak More. fact6: If some person is a Menander then it is an abundance. fact7: The blenny does not cloak More. fact8: If that foryml is nidifugous and it is informative it is not a Humperdinck. fact9: This universe is not an abundance if this bathyscaphe is an abundance. fact10: That cartouche is unfeathered if that cartouche cloaks More. fact11: If that cartouche is not a kind of an expressionist that does not bide Odo. fact12: If this universe is not a kind of an abundance that cartouche is oblique thing that does antiquate. fact13: Something does not despoil Custer and is a stacks if it is not a kind of a Humperdinck. fact14: If something either does not share sophisticated or is a Menander or both it is a Menander. fact15: If someone powwows nibbed that person is a kind of an ng. fact16: The parroquet is not unfeathered if either something does not cloak More or this thing is not a moderating or both. fact17: that More does not cloak cartouche. fact18: That cartouche does not cloak More. fact19: If somebody that does not despoil Custer is a stacks then the person powwows nibbed. fact20: That cartouche is not a Massine. fact21: Some person that antiquates does not cloak More and/or is not a moderating. fact22: The fact that if that foryml is an ng then this bathyscaphe is photoemissive is true.

fact1: ¬{AB}{a} fact2: ({N}{d} & {O}{d}) fact3: (x): {G}x -> (¬{H}x v {F}x) fact4: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{BT}{a} fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact6: (x): {F}x -> {E}x fact7: ¬{A}{ge} fact8: ({N}{d} & {O}{d}) -> ¬{M}{d} fact9: {E}{c} -> ¬{E}{b} fact10: {A}{a} -> {AA}{a} fact11: ¬{BP}{a} -> ¬{BJ}{a} fact12: ¬{E}{b} -> ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) fact13: (x): ¬{M}x -> (¬{K}x & {L}x) fact14: (x): (¬{H}x v {F}x) -> {F}x fact15: (x): {J}x -> {I}x fact16: (x): (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{AA}{gl} fact17: ¬{AC}{aa} fact18: ¬{A}{a} fact19: (x): (¬{K}x & {L}x) -> {J}x fact20: ¬{CU}{a} fact21: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) fact22: {I}{d} -> {G}{c}

That the parroquet is not feathered is false.

¬{AA}{gl}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That cartouche is not egoistic. fact2: That foryml is nidifugous and it is informative. fact3: Something that is photoemissive does not share sophisticated or is a Menander or both. fact4: That cartouche is not a rankness if the fact that that cartouche is not egoistic is correct. fact5: That cartouche is not unfeathered and he is not egoistic if that cartouche does not cloak More. fact6: If some person is a Menander then it is an abundance. fact7: The blenny does not cloak More. fact8: If that foryml is nidifugous and it is informative it is not a Humperdinck. fact9: This universe is not an abundance if this bathyscaphe is an abundance. fact10: That cartouche is unfeathered if that cartouche cloaks More. fact11: If that cartouche is not a kind of an expressionist that does not bide Odo. fact12: If this universe is not a kind of an abundance that cartouche is oblique thing that does antiquate. fact13: Something does not despoil Custer and is a stacks if it is not a kind of a Humperdinck. fact14: If something either does not share sophisticated or is a Menander or both it is a Menander. fact15: If someone powwows nibbed that person is a kind of an ng. fact16: The parroquet is not unfeathered if either something does not cloak More or this thing is not a moderating or both. fact17: that More does not cloak cartouche. fact18: That cartouche does not cloak More. fact19: If somebody that does not despoil Custer is a stacks then the person powwows nibbed. fact20: That cartouche is not a Massine. fact21: Some person that antiquates does not cloak More and/or is not a moderating. fact22: The fact that if that foryml is an ng then this bathyscaphe is photoemissive is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That cartouche is not unfeathered. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact18 -> int1: That cartouche is not unfeathered and it is not egoistic.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this myna stargazings byte and averts does not hold.

¬({A}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: That applemint is both a pretended and laniary. fact2: If some person is a gloved then it is a leering. fact3: That Javier is not most and is a kind of a Gallirallus is incorrect. fact4: This myna is a kind of a pretended. fact5: If something is not a pretended that this stargazings byte and averts does not hold. fact6: This myna is a lysogenicity. fact7: Javier is not a Gallirallus if the fact that it is non-most and is a Gallirallus is not true. fact8: If Javier is not a Gallirallus then it is forceless and/or it is a gloved. fact9: This myna is a Dawson and it strews stotinka. fact10: This myna stargazings byte and this is a pretended. fact11: The shoveller averts. fact12: That PSA stargazings byte and mints. fact13: If that someone is a kind of a pretended but it is not a kind of a dankness does not hold it is not a pretended. fact14: If something is a nosology the fact that it is a pretended and is not a dankness is incorrect. fact15: If somebody is a leering then it is a kind of a nosology. fact16: If the fact that this myna does not stargazing byte and does not avert does not hold the gad stargazing byte.

fact1: ({B}{n} & {BF}{n}) fact2: (x): {G}x -> {F}x fact3: ¬(¬{J}{b} & {H}{b}) fact4: {B}{a} fact5: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) fact6: {FL}{a} fact7: ¬(¬{J}{b} & {H}{b}) -> ¬{H}{b} fact8: ¬{H}{b} -> ({I}{b} v {G}{b}) fact9: ({BJ}{a} & {HL}{a}) fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: {C}{hn} fact12: ({A}{gd} & {AS}{gd}) fact13: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{B}x fact14: (x): {D}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{E}x) fact15: (x): {F}x -> {D}x fact16: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {A}{jh}

The gad stargazings byte.

{A}{jh}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That applemint is both a pretended and laniary. fact2: If some person is a gloved then it is a leering. fact3: That Javier is not most and is a kind of a Gallirallus is incorrect. fact4: This myna is a kind of a pretended. fact5: If something is not a pretended that this stargazings byte and averts does not hold. fact6: This myna is a lysogenicity. fact7: Javier is not a Gallirallus if the fact that it is non-most and is a Gallirallus is not true. fact8: If Javier is not a Gallirallus then it is forceless and/or it is a gloved. fact9: This myna is a Dawson and it strews stotinka. fact10: This myna stargazings byte and this is a pretended. fact11: The shoveller averts. fact12: That PSA stargazings byte and mints. fact13: If that someone is a kind of a pretended but it is not a kind of a dankness does not hold it is not a pretended. fact14: If something is a nosology the fact that it is a pretended and is not a dankness is incorrect. fact15: If somebody is a leering then it is a kind of a nosology. fact16: If the fact that this myna does not stargazing byte and does not avert does not hold the gad stargazing byte. ; $hypothesis$ = That this myna stargazings byte and averts does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That trews is diamantine.

{B}{b}

fact1: Something is both eponymic and foetal if that it does not jolt is true. fact2: That trews is diamantine if that Etna is a kind of a Tenebrionidae and is a kind of a scent. fact3: The symbolist is both not a scent and hypovolaemic if that Etna is not a piggishness. fact4: This telegraphy is a Kalotermitidae if that pitchblende is a Kalotermitidae. fact5: If that Etna is not a Tenebrionidae but a scent that trews is diamantine. fact6: If either that Etna does not detail perviousness or it is not a piggishness or both then that trews is not diamantine. fact7: If some man is a Stengel then she/he does not jolt. fact8: That Etna is a kind of a Tenebrionidae if that trews is a scent and diamantine. fact9: That Etna is not a Tenebrionidae but the one is not non-diamantine. fact10: If somebody is a Kalotermitidae then she/he is a kind of a Stengel. fact11: That pitchblende is a Kalotermitidae if this cestode is a Kalotermitidae. fact12: That Etna is not a Tenebrionidae. fact13: If this telegraphy is eponymic either that Etna does not detail perviousness or it is not a piggishness or both. fact14: Some person that does not detail perviousness is a kind of diamantine person that is not a piggishness.

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

That trews is not diamantine.

¬{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is both eponymic and foetal if that it does not jolt is true. fact2: That trews is diamantine if that Etna is a kind of a Tenebrionidae and is a kind of a scent. fact3: The symbolist is both not a scent and hypovolaemic if that Etna is not a piggishness. fact4: This telegraphy is a Kalotermitidae if that pitchblende is a Kalotermitidae. fact5: If that Etna is not a Tenebrionidae but a scent that trews is diamantine. fact6: If either that Etna does not detail perviousness or it is not a piggishness or both then that trews is not diamantine. fact7: If some man is a Stengel then she/he does not jolt. fact8: That Etna is a kind of a Tenebrionidae if that trews is a scent and diamantine. fact9: That Etna is not a Tenebrionidae but the one is not non-diamantine. fact10: If somebody is a Kalotermitidae then she/he is a kind of a Stengel. fact11: That pitchblende is a Kalotermitidae if this cestode is a Kalotermitidae. fact12: That Etna is not a Tenebrionidae. fact13: If this telegraphy is eponymic either that Etna does not detail perviousness or it is not a piggishness or both. fact14: Some person that does not detail perviousness is a kind of diamantine person that is not a piggishness. ; $hypothesis$ = That trews is diamantine. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this bumblebee is not insentient but it does accrete parosamia if that this bumblebee is not insentient hold is not true.

¬(¬{C}{a} -> (¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}))

fact1: If that store is intrastate the fact that it stutters lustre and is not a stirring is not true. fact2: The fact that if something is not a hieroglyphic then it is not insentient and is not a dysgenesis hold. fact3: This ironmongery is not insentient if this bumblebee is not insentient and the one is not a dysgenesis. fact4: The valuator is a clutch if that is a Madagascan. fact5: This bumblebee does accrete parosamia if this bumblebee cocoons. fact6: This bumblebee cocoons. fact7: The creek is not a kind of a Freud if that that store is a kind of a pernio that is a Appalachia is incorrect. fact8: The proteome is insentient. fact9: If this bumblebee is a libido then this bumblebee is not a libido but it is a spec. fact10: The actinia cocoons. fact11: This bumblebee is a kind of a viii. fact12: That store does not stutter lustre if that that store stutter lustre and is not a stirring is false. fact13: If this bumblebee is insentient then this bumblebee is insentient and accretes parosamia. fact14: If the creek is not a Freud this bumblebee is both a crossbreeding and not a hieroglyphic. fact15: The fact that this bumblebee is not a hunger hold. fact16: That store is intrastate. fact17: That some man is a pernio that is a kind of a Appalachia is not true if this one does not stutter lustre.

fact1: {K}{c} -> ¬({J}{c} & ¬{L}{c}) fact2: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) fact3: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{gc} fact4: {S}{jk} -> {DI}{jk} fact5: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact6: {A}{a} fact7: ¬({H}{c} & {I}{c}) -> ¬{G}{b} fact8: {C}{cu} fact9: {EF}{a} -> (¬{EF}{a} & {CF}{a}) fact10: {A}{dq} fact11: {DQ}{a} fact12: ¬({J}{c} & ¬{L}{c}) -> ¬{J}{c} fact13: {C}{a} -> (¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) fact14: ¬{G}{b} -> ({F}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact15: ¬{AG}{a} fact16: {K}{c} fact17: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬({H}x & {I}x)

This ironmongery cocoons.

{A}{gc}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that store is intrastate the fact that it stutters lustre and is not a stirring is not true. fact2: The fact that if something is not a hieroglyphic then it is not insentient and is not a dysgenesis hold. fact3: This ironmongery is not insentient if this bumblebee is not insentient and the one is not a dysgenesis. fact4: The valuator is a clutch if that is a Madagascan. fact5: This bumblebee does accrete parosamia if this bumblebee cocoons. fact6: This bumblebee cocoons. fact7: The creek is not a kind of a Freud if that that store is a kind of a pernio that is a Appalachia is incorrect. fact8: The proteome is insentient. fact9: If this bumblebee is a libido then this bumblebee is not a libido but it is a spec. fact10: The actinia cocoons. fact11: This bumblebee is a kind of a viii. fact12: That store does not stutter lustre if that that store stutter lustre and is not a stirring is false. fact13: If this bumblebee is insentient then this bumblebee is insentient and accretes parosamia. fact14: If the creek is not a Freud this bumblebee is both a crossbreeding and not a hieroglyphic. fact15: The fact that this bumblebee is not a hunger hold. fact16: That store is intrastate. fact17: That some man is a pernio that is a kind of a Appalachia is not true if this one does not stutter lustre. ; $hypothesis$ = That this bumblebee is not insentient but it does accrete parosamia if that this bumblebee is not insentient hold is not true. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact6 -> int1: This bumblebee does accrete parosamia.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that this bumblebee is not insentient.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: This bumblebee is sentient and accretes parosamia.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This algebraicness occurs.

{B}

fact1: This butchering Coluber yields this algebraicness. fact2: If that worsening Embiotocidae happens then this messiahship occurs. fact3: This incautiousness occurs. fact4: This algebraicness does not happens if this incautiousness does not happens and/or that sclaff does not occurs. fact5: This incautiousness does not happens and/or that sclaff does not happens if this outness does not occurs. fact6: That this incautiousness occurs triggers that this butchering Coluber but notthe expressionist happens. fact7: That the moment does not happens is correct if that that redemptiveness occurs is right. fact8: If that strictness happens then the picturalness occurs. fact9: If the zodiacalness happens the gymnastics does not happens.

fact1: {AA} -> {B} fact2: {BT} -> {FC} fact3: {A} fact4: (¬{A} v ¬{C}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ¬{D} -> (¬{A} v ¬{C}) fact6: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact7: {EE} -> ¬{CC} fact8: {CU} -> {CQ} fact9: {IQ} -> ¬{AK}

This algebraicness does not occurs.

¬{B}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This butchering Coluber yields this algebraicness. fact2: If that worsening Embiotocidae happens then this messiahship occurs. fact3: This incautiousness occurs. fact4: This algebraicness does not happens if this incautiousness does not happens and/or that sclaff does not occurs. fact5: This incautiousness does not happens and/or that sclaff does not happens if this outness does not occurs. fact6: That this incautiousness occurs triggers that this butchering Coluber but notthe expressionist happens. fact7: That the moment does not happens is correct if that that redemptiveness occurs is right. fact8: If that strictness happens then the picturalness occurs. fact9: If the zodiacalness happens the gymnastics does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This algebraicness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact3 -> int1: This butchering Coluber but notthe expressionist happens.; int1 -> int2: This butchering Coluber occurs.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Clorox is not a flaw.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This haemophiliac is a kind of a categorem. fact2: If that that Clorox is not a general and is a moody does not hold it is a kind of a mortuary. fact3: The fact that that leaf confabulates hold. fact4: Someone is unawed if she/he confabulates. fact5: If this genoise is not non-striate then that Clorox is not a flaw and not a mortuary. fact6: If something describes Aquitaine then this thing is striate. fact7: If something is a mortuary then that is a kind of a flaw. fact8: That that Clorox is not a general but that is a kind of a moody is incorrect. fact9: That leaf is a Colaptes if that that one is autarchic and/or that one does not madden does not hold. fact10: This genoise describes Aquitaine if the pewit is a kind of a choral. fact11: The pewit is not pericardiac if that leaf is unattached and it is pericardiac. fact12: Something is a choral and/or this thing does not describe Aquitaine if this thing is non-pericardiac. fact13: If someone is a Colaptes he is pericardiac and he is not inopportune. fact14: The fact that that leaf is unattached if this haemophiliac is a categorem is right. fact15: That that leaf is autarchic and/or it does not madden does not hold if that leaf is unawed.

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

That Clorox is not a flaw.

¬{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This haemophiliac is a kind of a categorem. fact2: If that that Clorox is not a general and is a moody does not hold it is a kind of a mortuary. fact3: The fact that that leaf confabulates hold. fact4: Someone is unawed if she/he confabulates. fact5: If this genoise is not non-striate then that Clorox is not a flaw and not a mortuary. fact6: If something describes Aquitaine then this thing is striate. fact7: If something is a mortuary then that is a kind of a flaw. fact8: That that Clorox is not a general but that is a kind of a moody is incorrect. fact9: That leaf is a Colaptes if that that one is autarchic and/or that one does not madden does not hold. fact10: This genoise describes Aquitaine if the pewit is a kind of a choral. fact11: The pewit is not pericardiac if that leaf is unattached and it is pericardiac. fact12: Something is a choral and/or this thing does not describe Aquitaine if this thing is non-pericardiac. fact13: If someone is a Colaptes he is pericardiac and he is not inopportune. fact14: The fact that that leaf is unattached if this haemophiliac is a categorem is right. fact15: That that leaf is autarchic and/or it does not madden does not hold if that leaf is unawed. ; $hypothesis$ = That Clorox is not a flaw. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact8 -> int1: That Clorox is a mortuary.; fact7 -> int2: If that Clorox is a kind of a mortuary then he is a kind of a flaw.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This motorcyclist is not a Bloomfield.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: This centromere is a oligodactyly and it ascends. fact2: This vapours is not antenuptial if that this motorcyclist does awaken and it is antenuptial is wrong. fact3: Someone that is not antenuptial ordinates Anguidae and is a Bloomfield. fact4: This motorcyclist ordinates Anguidae and is a Bloomfield.

fact1: ({IT}{g} & {CR}{g}) fact2: ¬({E}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{et} fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact4: ({A}{a} & {B}{a})

This vapours does ordinate Anguidae.

{A}{et}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This centromere is a oligodactyly and it ascends. fact2: This vapours is not antenuptial if that this motorcyclist does awaken and it is antenuptial is wrong. fact3: Someone that is not antenuptial ordinates Anguidae and is a Bloomfield. fact4: This motorcyclist ordinates Anguidae and is a Bloomfield. ; $hypothesis$ = This motorcyclist is not a Bloomfield. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That blindworm is not a eulogium.

¬{D}{b}

fact1: The Pueblo does evoke. fact2: This bota is amebous or it is a Kuwaiti or both if it does not fragmentise. fact3: If this decalescence does not light Phoronida then that blindworm is not refractive and/or it does not moisten rhymed. fact4: If either something is not refractive or that thing does not moisten rhymed or both that thing is a kind of a Ramayana. fact5: That blindworm is a kind of a eulogium if this decalescence is refractive. fact6: This pacer is not anoestrous. fact7: If the fact that this pacer is a Nuytsia and this one fragmentises does not hold then this bota does not fragmentises. fact8: There exists someone such that the one evokes. fact9: The Pueblo evokes and is a Ramayana. fact10: The Kickapoo is a Hamitic if this bota is amebous. fact11: That this pacer is a Nuytsia and it fragmentises does not hold if this pacer is not anoestrous. fact12: Something does not light Phoronida but that is a fester if that does not scream Hel. fact13: This decalescence is refractive if there is something such that it does evoke and it is a Ramayana. fact14: If the Kickapoo is a Hamitic then Sharon is not a kind of a Hamitic. fact15: If Sharon is not a Hamitic then the fact that this decalescence does scream Hel does not hold. fact16: This chinchillon evokes. fact17: Someone is refractive and/or the person does not evoke if the person is a eulogium.

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

That blindworm is a kind of a Ramayana.

{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The Pueblo does evoke. fact2: This bota is amebous or it is a Kuwaiti or both if it does not fragmentise. fact3: If this decalescence does not light Phoronida then that blindworm is not refractive and/or it does not moisten rhymed. fact4: If either something is not refractive or that thing does not moisten rhymed or both that thing is a kind of a Ramayana. fact5: That blindworm is a kind of a eulogium if this decalescence is refractive. fact6: This pacer is not anoestrous. fact7: If the fact that this pacer is a Nuytsia and this one fragmentises does not hold then this bota does not fragmentises. fact8: There exists someone such that the one evokes. fact9: The Pueblo evokes and is a Ramayana. fact10: The Kickapoo is a Hamitic if this bota is amebous. fact11: That this pacer is a Nuytsia and it fragmentises does not hold if this pacer is not anoestrous. fact12: Something does not light Phoronida but that is a fester if that does not scream Hel. fact13: This decalescence is refractive if there is something such that it does evoke and it is a Ramayana. fact14: If the Kickapoo is a Hamitic then Sharon is not a kind of a Hamitic. fact15: If Sharon is not a Hamitic then the fact that this decalescence does scream Hel does not hold. fact16: This chinchillon evokes. fact17: Someone is refractive and/or the person does not evoke if the person is a eulogium. ; $hypothesis$ = That blindworm is not a eulogium. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: There exists something such that it evokes and is a Ramayana.; int1 & fact13 -> int2: This decalescence is refractive.; int2 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That sheikdom is a Hibbing but not melodious.

({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

fact1: Something that is not a Melolonthidae is melodious thing that is a Hibbing. fact2: If that this call does not hide Sorbus and is aeriferous is incorrect this specimen is aeriferous. fact3: Something is a Melolonthidae but this thing is not a Persepolis if this thing is a browning. fact4: That glans vexes Qadhafi and is not melodious. fact5: If that this specimen is not an insensitivity hold that sheikdom is not chylaceous. fact6: The fact that that sheikdom is a Persepolis but that thing is not Luxembourgian does not hold. fact7: If that sheikdom is melodious Leonardo is a Persepolis. fact8: The fact that that something is not a kind of a browning but it is a Melolonthidae hold is wrong if it is aeriferous. fact9: The fact that the underclothes is Luxembourgian person that is not a Bushnell is wrong. fact10: That sheikdom is not non-vestibular. fact11: If that sheikdom is a Persepolis then that sheikdom is a Hibbing and not melodious. fact12: If there is some person such that that the one is a kind of Luxembourgian person that is not a Bushnell is false that sheikdom is a kind of a Persepolis. fact13: Something is not a Melolonthidae if the fact that that thing is not a browning and that thing is a kind of a Melolonthidae is wrong. fact14: That sheikdom is a kind of a browning if this specimen is aeriferous. fact15: The fact that something is a Hibbing and is not melodious does not hold if that thing is not a Persepolis. fact16: If somebody is not chylaceous then that one is aeriferous and that one hides Sorbus. fact17: The fact that this specimen is not a kind of an insensitivity hold if she is a kind of a Stoic.

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

Leonardo is a Persepolis.

{A}{df}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that is not a Melolonthidae is melodious thing that is a Hibbing. fact2: If that this call does not hide Sorbus and is aeriferous is incorrect this specimen is aeriferous. fact3: Something is a Melolonthidae but this thing is not a Persepolis if this thing is a browning. fact4: That glans vexes Qadhafi and is not melodious. fact5: If that this specimen is not an insensitivity hold that sheikdom is not chylaceous. fact6: The fact that that sheikdom is a Persepolis but that thing is not Luxembourgian does not hold. fact7: If that sheikdom is melodious Leonardo is a Persepolis. fact8: The fact that that something is not a kind of a browning but it is a Melolonthidae hold is wrong if it is aeriferous. fact9: The fact that the underclothes is Luxembourgian person that is not a Bushnell is wrong. fact10: That sheikdom is not non-vestibular. fact11: If that sheikdom is a Persepolis then that sheikdom is a Hibbing and not melodious. fact12: If there is some person such that that the one is a kind of Luxembourgian person that is not a Bushnell is false that sheikdom is a kind of a Persepolis. fact13: Something is not a Melolonthidae if the fact that that thing is not a browning and that thing is a kind of a Melolonthidae is wrong. fact14: That sheikdom is a kind of a browning if this specimen is aeriferous. fact15: The fact that something is a Hibbing and is not melodious does not hold if that thing is not a Persepolis. fact16: If somebody is not chylaceous then that one is aeriferous and that one hides Sorbus. fact17: The fact that this specimen is not a kind of an insensitivity hold if she is a kind of a Stoic. ; $hypothesis$ = That sheikdom is a Hibbing but not melodious. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: There exists something such that the fact that it is Luxembourgian and it is not a Bushnell does not hold.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: That sheikdom is a Persepolis.; int2 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Teflon is not absolutistic.

¬{F}{c}

fact1: If something is a kind of a Dortmund and it is a fossilology then it is not unnoticed. fact2: That swashbuckler is a Dortmund and it is a fossilology. fact3: The fact that someone is amoeban and is a cart does not hold if this one is not nitrogenous. fact4: Something is not absolutistic if the fact that the fact that it is not non-amoeban and is a kind of a cart hold is not true. fact5: That this parsonage is comprehensive but that is a bisexual is not correct. fact6: If that swashbuckler is a cart the fact that this parsonage is not a Serratula and is not amoeban is wrong. fact7: Something is not a bisexual if the fact that this is a bisexual and is not a Thatch does not hold. fact8: If that swashbuckler is incomprehensive and is not a bisexual this Teflon is not nitrogenous. fact9: Some man is both amoeban and a cart. fact10: There is some person such that the fact that he is a cart is true. fact11: If that swashbuckler is non-unnoticed it is a plaintiveness and is not comprehensive. fact12: If that swashbuckler is not nitrogenous that this parsonage is not incomprehensive but he/she is a bisexual is incorrect. fact13: That swashbuckler is not nitrogenous if there exists somebody such that she/he is not non-amoeban and she/he is a cart. fact14: If that swashbuckler is not nitrogenous then that this parsonage is comprehensive and that thing is not a kind of a bisexual is false. fact15: The fact that that this parsonage is incomprehensive and is not a bisexual hold is incorrect. fact16: There are amoeban things. fact17: If that this parsonage is not incomprehensive and is not a bisexual is not correct then this Teflon is absolutistic. fact18: The fact that this parsonage is incomprehensive and is not a kind of a bisexual is wrong if that swashbuckler is not nitrogenous.

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

This Teflon is not absolutistic.

¬{F}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something is a kind of a Dortmund and it is a fossilology then it is not unnoticed. fact2: That swashbuckler is a Dortmund and it is a fossilology. fact3: The fact that someone is amoeban and is a cart does not hold if this one is not nitrogenous. fact4: Something is not absolutistic if the fact that the fact that it is not non-amoeban and is a kind of a cart hold is not true. fact5: That this parsonage is comprehensive but that is a bisexual is not correct. fact6: If that swashbuckler is a cart the fact that this parsonage is not a Serratula and is not amoeban is wrong. fact7: Something is not a bisexual if the fact that this is a bisexual and is not a Thatch does not hold. fact8: If that swashbuckler is incomprehensive and is not a bisexual this Teflon is not nitrogenous. fact9: Some man is both amoeban and a cart. fact10: There is some person such that the fact that he is a cart is true. fact11: If that swashbuckler is non-unnoticed it is a plaintiveness and is not comprehensive. fact12: If that swashbuckler is not nitrogenous that this parsonage is not incomprehensive but he/she is a bisexual is incorrect. fact13: That swashbuckler is not nitrogenous if there exists somebody such that she/he is not non-amoeban and she/he is a cart. fact14: If that swashbuckler is not nitrogenous then that this parsonage is comprehensive and that thing is not a kind of a bisexual is false. fact15: The fact that that this parsonage is incomprehensive and is not a bisexual hold is incorrect. fact16: There are amoeban things. fact17: If that this parsonage is not incomprehensive and is not a bisexual is not correct then this Teflon is absolutistic. fact18: The fact that this parsonage is incomprehensive and is not a kind of a bisexual is wrong if that swashbuckler is not nitrogenous. ; $hypothesis$ = This Teflon is not absolutistic. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact13 -> int1: That swashbuckler is not nitrogenous.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: The fact that this parsonage is not incomprehensive and it is not a bisexual is wrong.; int2 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This tubing is a Myrciaria.

{C}{a}

fact1: That cwm is not cataplastic. fact2: This tubing is abactinal. fact3: The fact that something is cataplastic thing that is a Myrciaria does not hold if it is not a dinge. fact4: This tubing is not cataplastic if it is a dinge. fact5: This tubing is not a Maori. fact6: That this tubing does not weaken does not hold. fact7: This glyburide does not autotomise certificated if this glyburide is a kind of a Cricetus. fact8: Something is anthropophagous if that that thing is expressionistic is true. fact9: This tubing is not autosomal if it is a Myrciaria. fact10: If something does not recount febricity it is a stopple. fact11: If somebody is non-cataplastic he/she is a Myrciaria. fact12: That archduchy is both expressionistic and a Algonkian. fact13: This tubing is non-anthropophagous and this person is not expressionistic if this chachalaca is a Algonkian. fact14: This pyinma is a Myrciaria. fact15: If this tubing is not a Myrciaria then it retracts. fact16: There is some person such that she/he is not an adieu. fact17: The woodworm is not animated if the woodworm iridesces. fact18: If the idolatress is non-perennial then this is cataplastic. fact19: This tubing does care retrospect. fact20: That this tubing is a dinge hold. fact21: The fact that this tubing is a Asin is right. fact22: Something is not a dinge if it is not anthropophagous. fact23: This tubing is not implicational.

fact1: ¬{B}{ff} fact2: {GS}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & {C}x) fact4: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact5: ¬{HK}{a} fact6: {IO}{a} fact7: {N}{ht} -> ¬{GL}{ht} fact8: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact9: {C}{a} -> ¬{BS}{a} fact10: (x): ¬{JA}x -> {IP}x fact11: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x fact12: ({E}{et} & {F}{et}) fact13: {F}{b} -> (¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) fact14: {C}{fh} fact15: ¬{C}{a} -> {DL}{a} fact16: (Ex): ¬{G}x fact17: {BM}{fp} -> ¬{BK}{fp} fact18: ¬{DO}{dr} -> {B}{dr} fact19: {BT}{a} fact20: {A}{a} fact21: {DI}{a} fact22: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{A}x fact23: ¬{DH}{a}

That archduchy is not a kind of a dinge.

¬{A}{et}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That cwm is not cataplastic. fact2: This tubing is abactinal. fact3: The fact that something is cataplastic thing that is a Myrciaria does not hold if it is not a dinge. fact4: This tubing is not cataplastic if it is a dinge. fact5: This tubing is not a Maori. fact6: That this tubing does not weaken does not hold. fact7: This glyburide does not autotomise certificated if this glyburide is a kind of a Cricetus. fact8: Something is anthropophagous if that that thing is expressionistic is true. fact9: This tubing is not autosomal if it is a Myrciaria. fact10: If something does not recount febricity it is a stopple. fact11: If somebody is non-cataplastic he/she is a Myrciaria. fact12: That archduchy is both expressionistic and a Algonkian. fact13: This tubing is non-anthropophagous and this person is not expressionistic if this chachalaca is a Algonkian. fact14: This pyinma is a Myrciaria. fact15: If this tubing is not a Myrciaria then it retracts. fact16: There is some person such that she/he is not an adieu. fact17: The woodworm is not animated if the woodworm iridesces. fact18: If the idolatress is non-perennial then this is cataplastic. fact19: This tubing does care retrospect. fact20: That this tubing is a dinge hold. fact21: The fact that this tubing is a Asin is right. fact22: Something is not a dinge if it is not anthropophagous. fact23: This tubing is not implicational. ; $hypothesis$ = This tubing is a Myrciaria. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact20 -> int1: This tubing is not cataplastic.; fact11 -> int2: If this tubing is not cataplastic then that thing is a kind of a Myrciaria.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that retardant does not rehearse hold.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: Elsa advances if Elsa does crowd immunochemistry and is not axiological. fact2: If someone that hurtles Goeteborg does not rehearse then the one crowds immunochemistry. fact3: That palace is a lethality but it is not tropical. fact4: The maltreater does crowd immunochemistry but that does not cloud. fact5: Some person that invites Coventry is a biquadrate. fact6: That berkelium is not a kuru but the one is a raft if this balker is a biquadrate. fact7: This balker is a kind of a Thorshavn. fact8: Somebody invites Coventry if that person is a kind of a Thorshavn. fact9: That that palace is not a kuru and is a raft is incorrect if that palace is a biquadrate. fact10: If the fact that something is not a kuru but this is a raft does not hold then this does not clad. fact11: If that berkelium is a raft that deal clads. fact12: Some man that is a kind of a wheeziness and is not a incorrectness is a Characeae. fact13: That deal crowds immunochemistry if it is a kind of non-sympathetic man that is not a Augustus. fact14: Every person hurtles Goeteborg and is not tropical. fact15: If something that hurtles Goeteborg is not tropical that thing crowds immunochemistry. fact16: Something that does not clad crowds immunochemistry and rehearses.

fact1: ({B}{hg} & ¬{BI}{hg}) -> {HR}{hg} fact2: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{A}x) -> {B}x fact3: ({BC}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact4: ({B}{fb} & ¬{GL}{fb}) fact5: (x): {G}x -> {F}x fact6: {F}{d} -> (¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) fact7: {J}{d} fact8: (x): {J}x -> {G}x fact9: {F}{aa} -> ¬(¬{E}{aa} & {D}{aa}) fact10: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x fact11: {D}{c} -> {C}{b} fact12: (x): ({GP}x & ¬{HP}x) -> {AG}x fact13: (¬{I}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) -> {B}{b} fact14: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact15: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact16: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x)

That that retardant does not rehearse hold.

¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Elsa advances if Elsa does crowd immunochemistry and is not axiological. fact2: If someone that hurtles Goeteborg does not rehearse then the one crowds immunochemistry. fact3: That palace is a lethality but it is not tropical. fact4: The maltreater does crowd immunochemistry but that does not cloud. fact5: Some person that invites Coventry is a biquadrate. fact6: That berkelium is not a kuru but the one is a raft if this balker is a biquadrate. fact7: This balker is a kind of a Thorshavn. fact8: Somebody invites Coventry if that person is a kind of a Thorshavn. fact9: That that palace is not a kuru and is a raft is incorrect if that palace is a biquadrate. fact10: If the fact that something is not a kuru but this is a raft does not hold then this does not clad. fact11: If that berkelium is a raft that deal clads. fact12: Some man that is a kind of a wheeziness and is not a incorrectness is a Characeae. fact13: That deal crowds immunochemistry if it is a kind of non-sympathetic man that is not a Augustus. fact14: Every person hurtles Goeteborg and is not tropical. fact15: If something that hurtles Goeteborg is not tropical that thing crowds immunochemistry. fact16: Something that does not clad crowds immunochemistry and rehearses. ; $hypothesis$ = That that retardant does not rehearse hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This seigniory occurs.

{C}

fact1: The fact that that this kneeling tickler does not occurs and/or that hagiolatry does not happens is not true hold if this stonewalling Tatahumara does not occurs. fact2: If that this kneeling tickler does not happens or that hagiolatry does not happens or both does not hold this seigniory occurs. fact3: If that that indulging kg but notthe craziness occurs is false then that indulging kg does not happens. fact4: The fact that this uncutness occurs hold. fact5: If this realigning infinitude does not occurs then the fact that that indulging kg happens and the craziness does not happens does not hold. fact6: If that blobbing Erysimum happens this seigniory does not happens. fact7: That that indulging kg does not occurs triggers that that relief but notthis stonewalling Tatahumara occurs. fact8: This seigniory leads to that that blobbing Erysimum does not happens. fact9: This pressing Cydonia prevents this realigning infinitude.

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

This worsting occurs.

{DF}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that this kneeling tickler does not occurs and/or that hagiolatry does not happens is not true hold if this stonewalling Tatahumara does not occurs. fact2: If that this kneeling tickler does not happens or that hagiolatry does not happens or both does not hold this seigniory occurs. fact3: If that that indulging kg but notthe craziness occurs is false then that indulging kg does not happens. fact4: The fact that this uncutness occurs hold. fact5: If this realigning infinitude does not occurs then the fact that that indulging kg happens and the craziness does not happens does not hold. fact6: If that blobbing Erysimum happens this seigniory does not happens. fact7: That that indulging kg does not occurs triggers that that relief but notthis stonewalling Tatahumara occurs. fact8: This seigniory leads to that that blobbing Erysimum does not happens. fact9: This pressing Cydonia prevents this realigning infinitude. ; $hypothesis$ = This seigniory occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that either that functionalness happens or this gnosticness happens or both is wrong.

¬({B} v {C})

fact1: If that consigning attribution does not occurs the fact that that idealisticness does not happens is correct. fact2: That consigning attribution does not occurs if the basinalness does not happens. fact3: That Ambrosianness occurs. fact4: If this expunging does not occurs the fact that that functionalness and/or this gnosticness occurs does not hold. fact5: The glazing Maine occurs and this flexileness happens. fact6: That backness happens and/or the fantan occurs. fact7: Either the depersonalising Trento happens or the Colombianness happens or both. fact8: This backflow happens. fact9: This detaching Donar does not happens and this expunging does not happens if that idealisticness does not happens. fact10: This fattism occurs and the exaltation occurs. fact11: That this anorectalness occurs is right. fact12: This expunging occurs.

fact1: ¬{F} -> ¬{E} fact2: ¬{G} -> ¬{F} fact3: {ER} fact4: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} v {C}) fact5: ({GU} & {BD}) fact6: ({CF} v {GM}) fact7: ({HG} v {DE}) fact8: {T} fact9: ¬{E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{A}) fact10: ({FD} & {GL}) fact11: {HC} fact12: {A}

The fact that either that functionalness happens or this gnosticness happens or both is wrong.

¬({B} v {C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that consigning attribution does not occurs the fact that that idealisticness does not happens is correct. fact2: That consigning attribution does not occurs if the basinalness does not happens. fact3: That Ambrosianness occurs. fact4: If this expunging does not occurs the fact that that functionalness and/or this gnosticness occurs does not hold. fact5: The glazing Maine occurs and this flexileness happens. fact6: That backness happens and/or the fantan occurs. fact7: Either the depersonalising Trento happens or the Colombianness happens or both. fact8: This backflow happens. fact9: This detaching Donar does not happens and this expunging does not happens if that idealisticness does not happens. fact10: This fattism occurs and the exaltation occurs. fact11: That this anorectalness occurs is right. fact12: This expunging occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that either that functionalness happens or this gnosticness happens or both is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that staccatoness happens is true.

{E}

fact1: If the adequateness does not occurs then that landslide and this invariableness occurs. fact2: If the fact that this shaping chalazion does not occurs is correct then the fact that that sleepover occurs and that speeding does not occurs is incorrect. fact3: That sleepover does not occurs if that that sleepover happens and that speeding does not happens does not hold. fact4: That that staccatoness does not occurs is caused by that that swinging does not occurs and/or that this Parking infestation does not happens. fact5: Both that landslide and the adequateness occurs. fact6: If that this relations does not occurs hold then the adjudicativeness but notthis shaping chalazion occurs. fact7: That this Parking infestation and that staccatoness happens is caused by that that sleepover does not happens. fact8: That swinging does not happens and/or this Parking infestation does not happens if that the adequateness happens is not wrong.

fact1: ¬{B} -> ({A} & ¬{FN}) fact2: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & ¬{H}) fact3: ¬({F} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} fact4: (¬{C} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{E} fact5: ({A} & {B}) fact6: ¬{J} -> ({I} & ¬{G}) fact7: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact8: {B} -> (¬{C} v ¬{D})

The fact that this variableness does not happens hold.

¬{FN}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the adequateness does not occurs then that landslide and this invariableness occurs. fact2: If the fact that this shaping chalazion does not occurs is correct then the fact that that sleepover occurs and that speeding does not occurs is incorrect. fact3: That sleepover does not occurs if that that sleepover happens and that speeding does not happens does not hold. fact4: That that staccatoness does not occurs is caused by that that swinging does not occurs and/or that this Parking infestation does not happens. fact5: Both that landslide and the adequateness occurs. fact6: If that this relations does not occurs hold then the adjudicativeness but notthis shaping chalazion occurs. fact7: That this Parking infestation and that staccatoness happens is caused by that that sleepover does not happens. fact8: That swinging does not happens and/or this Parking infestation does not happens if that the adequateness happens is not wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That that staccatoness happens is true. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: The adequateness happens.; int1 & fact8 -> int2: That swinging does not happens and/or this Parking infestation does not happens.; int2 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this Wykehamist does not limit persistency if the fact that this Wykehamist is a articulateness and is a gum is not true is wrong.

¬(¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})

fact1: If that something is a Taricha that Ushers Agathis does not hold then this is tearless. fact2: If this Wykehamist is not a Gomphotherium it is not a Blaberus. fact3: If this Wykehamist is not a articulateness this Wykehamist does not limit persistency. fact4: Someone does not limit persistency if she/he is not a articulateness. fact5: If that Yakut is not a kind of a flaw that Yakut is not a gum. fact6: Somebody does not limit persistency if the fact that she/he is a kind of a articulateness that is a gum is false. fact7: If something is not noncomprehensive then this is not a Herrenvolk. fact8: If some man is a articulateness and is a gum the one does not limit persistency. fact9: If the fact that that something is a Istiophoridae and does thrombosed hold is incorrect then that larrups wrinkle. fact10: Some man is nocturnal if the fact that the person is diametrical and the person is a Helodermatidae is false. fact11: If this Wykehamist is a kind of a articulateness and is a kind of a gum this Wykehamist does not limit persistency. fact12: The tRNA is not extrusive if the fact that that person is a slowness and is a Blaberus does not hold. fact13: This Wykehamist is not a kind of a flaw if that it is a gum and it is a doze does not hold. fact14: If this Wykehamist is a impenitency and it is a kind of a toll then it is not a kind of a gum. fact15: If the fact that this Wykehamist rings and is a articulateness does not hold then this Wykehamist does not coiffure Tetranychidae. fact16: If the fact that someone is humble and climactic is not true then he is a AHPCRC. fact17: If this Wykehamist is non-comprehendible then that it is not a gum hold. fact18: If this Wykehamist does not limit persistency it does not depreciate craniometry. fact19: The ecclesiastic is unswept if that that person is a Bruckner and a rough does not hold. fact20: If the fact that this Wykehamist is humified and the person is a syncategoreme is false the person is not taxonomical.

fact1: (x): ¬({O}x & {FI}x) -> {CB}x fact2: ¬{GE}{aa} -> ¬{GN}{aa} fact3: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} fact4: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x fact5: ¬{CO}{dn} -> ¬{AB}{dn} fact6: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): ¬{EE}x -> ¬{G}x fact8: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact9: (x): ¬({HP}x & {IB}x) -> {FQ}x fact10: (x): ¬({GU}x & {EM}x) -> {HT}x fact11: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact12: ¬({JH}{l} & {GN}{l}) -> ¬{HM}{l} fact13: ¬({AB}{aa} & {HQ}{aa}) -> ¬{CO}{aa} fact14: ({H}{aa} & {JD}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} fact15: ¬({FA}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{IL}{aa} fact16: (x): ¬({HE}x & {EC}x) -> {GM}x fact17: ¬{DO}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} fact18: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{IG}{aa} fact19: ¬({IU}{bb} & {HA}{bb}) -> {GP}{bb} fact20: ¬({JA}{aa} & {HD}{aa}) -> ¬{HC}{aa}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that something is a Taricha that Ushers Agathis does not hold then this is tearless. fact2: If this Wykehamist is not a Gomphotherium it is not a Blaberus. fact3: If this Wykehamist is not a articulateness this Wykehamist does not limit persistency. fact4: Someone does not limit persistency if she/he is not a articulateness. fact5: If that Yakut is not a kind of a flaw that Yakut is not a gum. fact6: Somebody does not limit persistency if the fact that she/he is a kind of a articulateness that is a gum is false. fact7: If something is not noncomprehensive then this is not a Herrenvolk. fact8: If some man is a articulateness and is a gum the one does not limit persistency. fact9: If the fact that that something is a Istiophoridae and does thrombosed hold is incorrect then that larrups wrinkle. fact10: Some man is nocturnal if the fact that the person is diametrical and the person is a Helodermatidae is false. fact11: If this Wykehamist is a kind of a articulateness and is a kind of a gum this Wykehamist does not limit persistency. fact12: The tRNA is not extrusive if the fact that that person is a slowness and is a Blaberus does not hold. fact13: This Wykehamist is not a kind of a flaw if that it is a gum and it is a doze does not hold. fact14: If this Wykehamist is a impenitency and it is a kind of a toll then it is not a kind of a gum. fact15: If the fact that this Wykehamist rings and is a articulateness does not hold then this Wykehamist does not coiffure Tetranychidae. fact16: If the fact that someone is humble and climactic is not true then he is a AHPCRC. fact17: If this Wykehamist is non-comprehendible then that it is not a gum hold. fact18: If this Wykehamist does not limit persistency it does not depreciate craniometry. fact19: The ecclesiastic is unswept if that that person is a Bruckner and a rough does not hold. fact20: If the fact that this Wykehamist is humified and the person is a syncategoreme is false the person is not taxonomical. ; $hypothesis$ = That this Wykehamist does not limit persistency if the fact that this Wykehamist is a articulateness and is a gum is not true is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that misgiving affectionateness does not occurs and that emersion does not happens is false.

¬(¬{C} & ¬{D})

fact1: If this spar does not occurs the fact that this branchialness does not occurs and that splitting thicket does not happens is false. fact2: The fact that that volition does not happens and the coffining evening does not occurs does not hold if this thinning does not happens. fact3: If this branchialness does not occurs that that misgiving affectionateness but notthat emersion happens is false. fact4: That that misgiving affectionateness does not happens and that emersion does not occurs is incorrect if this branchialness does not happens. fact5: The fact that both that reverencing and this non-spleneticness happens is not right. fact6: If this branchialness does not occurs then that that misgiving affectionateness does not happens but that emersion occurs does not hold. fact7: This branchialness does not happens if that rarefying Thiobacteriaceae occurs. fact8: If that unvaryingness does not happens then the fact that both that buttoning philistinism and that rarefying Thiobacteriaceae happens is false. fact9: The fact that that invertibleness does not occurs and this ultramontane does not happens is false. fact10: If that splitting thicket does not happens that unvaryingness occurs and this branchialness happens. fact11: That that notthat misgiving affectionateness but that emersion happens hold does not hold. fact12: If the fact that that buttoning philistinism but notthat rarefying Thiobacteriaceae happens does not hold then this branchialness does not happens. fact13: That that cilialness does not occurs and that reverencing does not occurs is false. fact14: That unvaryingness does not happens. fact15: The unstylishness does not happens. fact16: If the fact that that sternalness occurs but the speaking does not occurs is false then the grounder does not occurs. fact17: If that unvaryingness occurs then that that misgiving affectionateness does not occurs and that emersion does not happens is right. fact18: That reaching plumpness does not happens. fact19: That both that buttoning philistinism and that rarefying Thiobacteriaceae occurs does not hold. fact20: The fact that that misgiving affectionateness happens and that emersion does not happens does not hold. fact21: If the quivering does not occurs the fact that the perforation does not happens and the lunching Endamoebidae does not happens is wrong. fact22: If that unvaryingness does not occurs that that buttoning philistinism but notthat rarefying Thiobacteriaceae happens does not hold. fact23: That amphiproticness does not happens.

fact1: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{E}) fact2: ¬{FA} -> ¬(¬{GF} & ¬{ET}) fact3: ¬{B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact4: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact5: ¬({FF} & ¬{BB}) fact6: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) fact7: {AB} -> ¬{B} fact8: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact9: ¬(¬{G} & ¬{DG}) fact10: ¬{E} -> ({A} & {B}) fact11: ¬(¬{C} & {D}) fact12: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact13: ¬(¬{FL} & ¬{FF}) fact14: ¬{A} fact15: ¬{IP} fact16: ¬({DD} & ¬{GK}) -> ¬{AK} fact17: {A} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact18: ¬{I} fact19: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact20: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact21: ¬{ED} -> ¬(¬{JK} & ¬{IT}) fact22: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact23: ¬{BJ}

The fact that that misgiving affectionateness does not occurs and that emersion does not happens hold.

(¬{C} & ¬{D})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this spar does not occurs the fact that this branchialness does not occurs and that splitting thicket does not happens is false. fact2: The fact that that volition does not happens and the coffining evening does not occurs does not hold if this thinning does not happens. fact3: If this branchialness does not occurs that that misgiving affectionateness but notthat emersion happens is false. fact4: That that misgiving affectionateness does not happens and that emersion does not occurs is incorrect if this branchialness does not happens. fact5: The fact that both that reverencing and this non-spleneticness happens is not right. fact6: If this branchialness does not occurs then that that misgiving affectionateness does not happens but that emersion occurs does not hold. fact7: This branchialness does not happens if that rarefying Thiobacteriaceae occurs. fact8: If that unvaryingness does not happens then the fact that both that buttoning philistinism and that rarefying Thiobacteriaceae happens is false. fact9: The fact that that invertibleness does not occurs and this ultramontane does not happens is false. fact10: If that splitting thicket does not happens that unvaryingness occurs and this branchialness happens. fact11: That that notthat misgiving affectionateness but that emersion happens hold does not hold. fact12: If the fact that that buttoning philistinism but notthat rarefying Thiobacteriaceae happens does not hold then this branchialness does not happens. fact13: That that cilialness does not occurs and that reverencing does not occurs is false. fact14: That unvaryingness does not happens. fact15: The unstylishness does not happens. fact16: If the fact that that sternalness occurs but the speaking does not occurs is false then the grounder does not occurs. fact17: If that unvaryingness occurs then that that misgiving affectionateness does not occurs and that emersion does not happens is right. fact18: That reaching plumpness does not happens. fact19: That both that buttoning philistinism and that rarefying Thiobacteriaceae occurs does not hold. fact20: The fact that that misgiving affectionateness happens and that emersion does not happens does not hold. fact21: If the quivering does not occurs the fact that the perforation does not happens and the lunching Endamoebidae does not happens is wrong. fact22: If that unvaryingness does not occurs that that buttoning philistinism but notthat rarefying Thiobacteriaceae happens does not hold. fact23: That amphiproticness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that misgiving affectionateness does not occurs and that emersion does not happens is false. ; $proof$ =

fact22 & fact14 -> int1: That that buttoning philistinism occurs but that rarefying Thiobacteriaceae does not occurs does not hold.; int1 & fact12 -> int2: The fact that this branchialness does not occurs hold.; int2 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That louvar does not acuminate mesothelioma.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: If that mounter is a kind of a Union that louvar is not an old. fact2: The fact that that louvar does not acuminate mesothelioma but it is an old is false if that mounter is not a Pterosauria. fact3: If something that is a Union is an old that does not acuminate mesothelioma. fact4: If that louvar is an old then that mounter is a Union but it is not a distaste. fact5: This fleck acuminates mesothelioma and is not a kind of a Medicago. fact6: That louvar does not acuminate mesothelioma if the person is a kind of a distaste and the person is a Union. fact7: The echogram is a distaste. fact8: That mounter is an old. fact9: A meanspirited person that presses McKinley is not intercontinental. fact10: Somebody that is a distaste and is not a kind of a Union does not acuminate mesothelioma. fact11: That louvar is not a kind of a Kenyata. fact12: If something acuminates mesothelioma and is an old this thing is not a Union. fact13: If that mounter is an old then that louvar is a distaste but she/he is not a Union. fact14: That mounter does acuminate mesothelioma but this thing is not a Union if that that louvar is a kind of an old hold. fact15: That louvar is not a kind of an old. fact16: Somebody is not a Pterosauria if that she/he is not an instability and is not a silvan is wrong. fact17: If that louvar is a kind of a distaste and is not an old then it is not a kind of a Union. fact18: That louvar is not a Union if that mounter is a kind of an old. fact19: Some person is not a Union if it acuminates mesothelioma and it is not an old. fact20: A Asphodeline that is not a AUC is not a kind of a ampleness.

fact1: {AB}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact2: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) fact3: (x): ({AB}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: {A}{b} -> ({AB}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) fact5: ({B}{gf} & ¬{EM}{gf}) fact6: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact7: {AA}{bg} fact8: {A}{a} fact9: (x): ({IC}x & {HR}x) -> ¬{CF}x fact10: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact11: ¬{GD}{b} fact12: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{AB}x fact13: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact14: {A}{b} -> ({B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact15: ¬{A}{b} fact16: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact17: ({AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{AB}{b} fact18: {A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{b} fact19: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AB}x fact20: (x): ({HN}x & ¬{AD}x) -> ¬{DS}x

That louvar acuminates mesothelioma.

{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that mounter is a kind of a Union that louvar is not an old. fact2: The fact that that louvar does not acuminate mesothelioma but it is an old is false if that mounter is not a Pterosauria. fact3: If something that is a Union is an old that does not acuminate mesothelioma. fact4: If that louvar is an old then that mounter is a Union but it is not a distaste. fact5: This fleck acuminates mesothelioma and is not a kind of a Medicago. fact6: That louvar does not acuminate mesothelioma if the person is a kind of a distaste and the person is a Union. fact7: The echogram is a distaste. fact8: That mounter is an old. fact9: A meanspirited person that presses McKinley is not intercontinental. fact10: Somebody that is a distaste and is not a kind of a Union does not acuminate mesothelioma. fact11: That louvar is not a kind of a Kenyata. fact12: If something acuminates mesothelioma and is an old this thing is not a Union. fact13: If that mounter is an old then that louvar is a distaste but she/he is not a Union. fact14: That mounter does acuminate mesothelioma but this thing is not a Union if that that louvar is a kind of an old hold. fact15: That louvar is not a kind of an old. fact16: Somebody is not a Pterosauria if that she/he is not an instability and is not a silvan is wrong. fact17: If that louvar is a kind of a distaste and is not an old then it is not a kind of a Union. fact18: That louvar is not a Union if that mounter is a kind of an old. fact19: Some person is not a Union if it acuminates mesothelioma and it is not an old. fact20: A Asphodeline that is not a AUC is not a kind of a ampleness. ; $hypothesis$ = That louvar does not acuminate mesothelioma. ; $proof$ =

fact13 & fact8 -> int1: That louvar is a distaste but the person is not a Union.; fact10 -> int2: The fact that that louvar does not acuminate mesothelioma is correct if it is a distaste and it is not a kind of a Union.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That PIN happens.

{B}

fact1: The fact that the Black occurs is correct. fact2: That gyroscopicness does not happens. fact3: The fact that that gyroscopicness does not happens and that PIN does not occurs is false if the Black occurs.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the Black occurs is correct. fact2: That gyroscopicness does not happens. fact3: The fact that that gyroscopicness does not happens and that PIN does not occurs is false if the Black occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That PIN happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that PIN does not happens.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: That gyroscopicness does not occurs and that PIN does not occurs.; fact3 & fact1 -> int2: That that gyroscopicness does not happens and that PIN does not happens is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That jogging does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: The expurgation happens. fact2: If that penileness does not occurs and that Polishing muddiness does not happens then that jogging does not happens. fact3: That this bronchoscopicness happens is prevented by that this dispraise does not occurs and this annunciatoriness does not happens. fact4: If that penileness does not occurs then both this viscosimetricness and that jogging happens. fact5: That non-sociolinguisticness triggers that this voyage does not occurs and the consolidation does not occurs. fact6: If that legitimation occurs then that penileness does not occurs and that Polishing muddiness does not happens. fact7: That that legitimation does not happens is prevented by that that indissolubleness does not occurs and this chunking does not occurs. fact8: That talentlessness does not happens if the fact that that this unperceivingness happens and this northwester occurs hold does not hold. fact9: This dispraise does not happens. fact10: That indissolubleness does not happens and this chunking does not occurs if that dichotomisation occurs. fact11: That jogging happens. fact12: If this voyage does not happens that this unperceivingness occurs and this northwester occurs is false. fact13: That this unpaidness happens is true. fact14: If this bronchoscopicness does not occurs that sociolinguisticness does not occurs and this binocularness does not occurs. fact15: If that talentlessness does not happens then both that dichotomisation and the hanging occurs.

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

This viscosimetricness happens.

{AD}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The expurgation happens. fact2: If that penileness does not occurs and that Polishing muddiness does not happens then that jogging does not happens. fact3: That this bronchoscopicness happens is prevented by that this dispraise does not occurs and this annunciatoriness does not happens. fact4: If that penileness does not occurs then both this viscosimetricness and that jogging happens. fact5: That non-sociolinguisticness triggers that this voyage does not occurs and the consolidation does not occurs. fact6: If that legitimation occurs then that penileness does not occurs and that Polishing muddiness does not happens. fact7: That that legitimation does not happens is prevented by that that indissolubleness does not occurs and this chunking does not occurs. fact8: That talentlessness does not happens if the fact that that this unperceivingness happens and this northwester occurs hold does not hold. fact9: This dispraise does not happens. fact10: That indissolubleness does not happens and this chunking does not occurs if that dichotomisation occurs. fact11: That jogging happens. fact12: If this voyage does not happens that this unperceivingness occurs and this northwester occurs is false. fact13: That this unpaidness happens is true. fact14: If this bronchoscopicness does not occurs that sociolinguisticness does not occurs and this binocularness does not occurs. fact15: If that talentlessness does not happens then both that dichotomisation and the hanging occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That jogging does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__