Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

The fact that this faker is integumentary and that one is academic is false.

¬({B}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: That this adducer is a kyphosis and is a haggling does not hold. fact2: Something is a kind of academic thing that is amphitheatrical if it does not reprise zoology. fact3: Something does not reprise zoology if that thing is not a theocracy. fact4: This faker is not amphitheatrical if the fact that this adducer is a kind of a kyphosis and is not a haggling is wrong. fact5: This faker is not amphitheatrical if this adducer is a haggling. fact6: There exists no one such that the person is a kyphosis and the person is a haggling. fact7: That cumin is not a tinting. fact8: This faker is integumentary if that cumin is integumentary. fact9: There is nothing that is a kyphosis that is not a haggling. fact10: If that cumin is not a tinting that cumin is greensick or he/she is integumentary or both. fact11: If that cumin is greensick that this faker is integumentary hold.

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

This faker is integumentary one that is academic.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this adducer is a kyphosis and is a haggling does not hold. fact2: Something is a kind of academic thing that is amphitheatrical if it does not reprise zoology. fact3: Something does not reprise zoology if that thing is not a theocracy. fact4: This faker is not amphitheatrical if the fact that this adducer is a kind of a kyphosis and is not a haggling is wrong. fact5: This faker is not amphitheatrical if this adducer is a haggling. fact6: There exists no one such that the person is a kyphosis and the person is a haggling. fact7: That cumin is not a tinting. fact8: This faker is integumentary if that cumin is integumentary. fact9: There is nothing that is a kyphosis that is not a haggling. fact10: If that cumin is not a tinting that cumin is greensick or he/she is integumentary or both. fact11: If that cumin is greensick that this faker is integumentary hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this faker is integumentary and that one is academic is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That tovarisch does not honied Anthoceros and is not a Toscana.

(¬{C}{c} & ¬{A}{c})

fact1: If the fact that this cither does not sensibilize leukocytosis and does not unfold Sarcodina is wrong then this southpaw is not a Triassic. fact2: If this southpaw is not handmade that that tovarisch does not honied Anthoceros and is not a Toscana does not hold. fact3: This southpaw is not handmade if that autogiro is a pheochromocytoma. fact4: If something is not a Triassic then that thing does not untie pugnacity and is not unlipped. fact5: That that that autogiro does not petrify and it is not a pheochromocytoma is wrong hold. fact6: The fact that something does not sensibilize leukocytosis and it does not unfold Sarcodina is wrong if that it is a kind of a Yukawa does not hold. fact7: Everyone is not a Yukawa. fact8: That that tovarisch honieds Anthoceros but the thing is not a Toscana is wrong if this southpaw is not handmade. fact9: That autogiro is autogenetic and/or handmade if there exists someone such that it does not untie pugnacity. fact10: That that autogiro does not petrify and is a pheochromocytoma is incorrect. fact11: If that autogiro is autogenetic then that tovarisch is handmade.

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

That tovarisch does not honied Anthoceros and is not a Toscana.

(¬{C}{c} & ¬{A}{c})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this cither does not sensibilize leukocytosis and does not unfold Sarcodina is wrong then this southpaw is not a Triassic. fact2: If this southpaw is not handmade that that tovarisch does not honied Anthoceros and is not a Toscana does not hold. fact3: This southpaw is not handmade if that autogiro is a pheochromocytoma. fact4: If something is not a Triassic then that thing does not untie pugnacity and is not unlipped. fact5: That that that autogiro does not petrify and it is not a pheochromocytoma is wrong hold. fact6: The fact that something does not sensibilize leukocytosis and it does not unfold Sarcodina is wrong if that it is a kind of a Yukawa does not hold. fact7: Everyone is not a Yukawa. fact8: That that tovarisch honieds Anthoceros but the thing is not a Toscana is wrong if this southpaw is not handmade. fact9: That autogiro is autogenetic and/or handmade if there exists someone such that it does not untie pugnacity. fact10: That that autogiro does not petrify and is a pheochromocytoma is incorrect. fact11: If that autogiro is autogenetic then that tovarisch is handmade. ; $hypothesis$ = That tovarisch does not honied Anthoceros and is not a Toscana. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That regurgitating neurophysiology does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: Both this witching and this vegetativeness occurs. fact2: The fact that if that radiance does not occurs the fact that either this unloosening or that enrolling lockjaw or both happens is false is true. fact3: That this vegetativeness occurs is correct. fact4: If that fundamental does not occurs then this vegetativeness happens but this impress does not occurs. fact5: If that this unloosening and/or that enrolling lockjaw occurs is false this squealing does not happens. fact6: If this beheading transcendentalism does not occurs and that fundamental does not happens this impress does not happens. fact7: That steadying Pokomo happens. fact8: Both this knowing and that tessellation happens. fact9: That this vibrationalness and this witching occurs is brought about by this non-vegetativeness. fact10: The antimoniousness is triggered by that malodorousness. fact11: The rectalness yields that that manufacturing happens. fact12: That that malodorousness happens is brought about by this leap. fact13: The billed happens. fact14: If this impress does not happens this vegetativeness does not occurs and that regurgitating neurophysiology does not happens. fact15: That this squealing does not occurs results in that this leap and that manufacturing happens. fact16: This witching brings about that that regurgitating neurophysiology happens. fact17: If that the antimoniousness occurs is right then this beheading transcendentalism does not occurs and that fundamental does not occurs.

fact1: ({A} & {B}) fact2: ¬{N} -> ¬({L} v {M}) fact3: {B} fact4: ¬{E} -> ({B} & ¬{D}) fact5: ¬({L} v {M}) -> ¬{K} fact6: (¬{F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} fact7: {FP} fact8: ({IO} & {DT}) fact9: ¬{B} -> ({HB} & {A}) fact10: {H} -> {G} fact11: {FU} -> {J} fact12: {I} -> {H} fact13: {JJ} fact14: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) fact15: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) fact16: {A} -> {C} fact17: {G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{E})

This vibrationalness happens.

{HB}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both this witching and this vegetativeness occurs. fact2: The fact that if that radiance does not occurs the fact that either this unloosening or that enrolling lockjaw or both happens is false is true. fact3: That this vegetativeness occurs is correct. fact4: If that fundamental does not occurs then this vegetativeness happens but this impress does not occurs. fact5: If that this unloosening and/or that enrolling lockjaw occurs is false this squealing does not happens. fact6: If this beheading transcendentalism does not occurs and that fundamental does not happens this impress does not happens. fact7: That steadying Pokomo happens. fact8: Both this knowing and that tessellation happens. fact9: That this vibrationalness and this witching occurs is brought about by this non-vegetativeness. fact10: The antimoniousness is triggered by that malodorousness. fact11: The rectalness yields that that manufacturing happens. fact12: That that malodorousness happens is brought about by this leap. fact13: The billed happens. fact14: If this impress does not happens this vegetativeness does not occurs and that regurgitating neurophysiology does not happens. fact15: That this squealing does not occurs results in that this leap and that manufacturing happens. fact16: This witching brings about that that regurgitating neurophysiology happens. fact17: If that the antimoniousness occurs is right then this beheading transcendentalism does not occurs and that fundamental does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That regurgitating neurophysiology does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: This witching occurs.; int1 & fact16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that appetiser is slight and the person is a kind of a Myaceae is wrong.

¬({B}{a} & {A}{a})

fact1: If that aberration is both not craniometrical and not a fiddling then the fact that this bailee is craniometrical hold. fact2: That aberration is not craniometrical and that thing is not a fiddling if this caspase seizes. fact3: The fact that that appetiser is a Myaceae is right if it is a headcount. fact4: The fact that that that appetiser is cuneal person that does overbear is not true is true. fact5: If some man is not perinatal but she/he is craniometrical then she/he does not sediment sawtooth. fact6: That some person is a headcount and does not smoke Muztagh does not hold if this one does not sediment sawtooth. fact7: That appetiser is a headcount. fact8: If the fact that this bailee is a headcount but this thing does not smoke Muztagh does not hold then that appetiser is not a headcount. fact9: That the fact that that appetiser is cuneal but it does not overbear is right is false. fact10: The ubiquinone overbears. fact11: Somebody does overbear if that she is both a Myaceae and not slight is false. fact12: The philter is not non-perinatal but this person is not a Genista. fact13: This Poinciana overbears if that appetiser overbears. fact14: The fact that something is a Myaceae but it is not slight does not hold if the fact that it is not a headcount is right. fact15: This caspase seizes if the fact that this caspase does not dab M2 and it does not seizes does not hold. fact16: If that that appetiser is not non-cuneal and does not overbear does not hold then it is slight. fact17: If something is perinatal and is not a Genista this bailee is not perinatal. fact18: That appetiser twins Dacrydium if that does stack Xiphosura.

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

This Poinciana overbears.

{AB}{bg}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that aberration is both not craniometrical and not a fiddling then the fact that this bailee is craniometrical hold. fact2: That aberration is not craniometrical and that thing is not a fiddling if this caspase seizes. fact3: The fact that that appetiser is a Myaceae is right if it is a headcount. fact4: The fact that that that appetiser is cuneal person that does overbear is not true is true. fact5: If some man is not perinatal but she/he is craniometrical then she/he does not sediment sawtooth. fact6: That some person is a headcount and does not smoke Muztagh does not hold if this one does not sediment sawtooth. fact7: That appetiser is a headcount. fact8: If the fact that this bailee is a headcount but this thing does not smoke Muztagh does not hold then that appetiser is not a headcount. fact9: That the fact that that appetiser is cuneal but it does not overbear is right is false. fact10: The ubiquinone overbears. fact11: Somebody does overbear if that she is both a Myaceae and not slight is false. fact12: The philter is not non-perinatal but this person is not a Genista. fact13: This Poinciana overbears if that appetiser overbears. fact14: The fact that something is a Myaceae but it is not slight does not hold if the fact that it is not a headcount is right. fact15: This caspase seizes if the fact that this caspase does not dab M2 and it does not seizes does not hold. fact16: If that that appetiser is not non-cuneal and does not overbear does not hold then it is slight. fact17: If something is perinatal and is not a Genista this bailee is not perinatal. fact18: That appetiser twins Dacrydium if that does stack Xiphosura. ; $hypothesis$ = That that appetiser is slight and the person is a kind of a Myaceae is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact9 -> int1: That appetiser is slight.; fact3 & fact7 -> int2: That appetiser is a kind of a Myaceae.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that arsehole peoples dishonored and does not pit Characeae is wrong.

¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: The waterbuck does not pit Characeae. fact2: This opossum peoples dishonored but she/he does not indemnify. fact3: That arsehole is not a immoderation. fact4: The trichion does not people dishonored. fact5: That arsehole misdelivers Taichung but it is not a Aditi. fact6: The microeconomist intends Schefflera but it does not misdeliver Taichung. fact7: That arsehole peoples dishonored and does not consign exchanged. fact8: That arsehole peoples dishonored and does not pit Characeae. fact9: That arsehole is a Triturus but this one is not a reconditeness. fact10: That arsehole does not paganize. fact11: That arsehole is a AFRL and is not a ophthalmoplegia. fact12: Gianna is a kind of a glutinousness but it does not people dishonored.

fact1: ¬{AB}{k} fact2: ({AA}{gs} & ¬{GN}{gs}) fact3: ¬{GR}{a} fact4: ¬{AA}{gq} fact5: ({GT}{a} & ¬{AN}{a}) fact6: ({I}{ga} & ¬{GT}{ga}) fact7: ({AA}{a} & ¬{CG}{a}) fact8: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact9: ({C}{a} & ¬{AI}{a}) fact10: ¬{FD}{a} fact11: ({L}{a} & ¬{EN}{a}) fact12: ({GA}{ft} & ¬{AA}{ft})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The waterbuck does not pit Characeae. fact2: This opossum peoples dishonored but she/he does not indemnify. fact3: That arsehole is not a immoderation. fact4: The trichion does not people dishonored. fact5: That arsehole misdelivers Taichung but it is not a Aditi. fact6: The microeconomist intends Schefflera but it does not misdeliver Taichung. fact7: That arsehole peoples dishonored and does not consign exchanged. fact8: That arsehole peoples dishonored and does not pit Characeae. fact9: That arsehole is a Triturus but this one is not a reconditeness. fact10: That arsehole does not paganize. fact11: That arsehole is a AFRL and is not a ophthalmoplegia. fact12: Gianna is a kind of a glutinousness but it does not people dishonored. ; $hypothesis$ = That that arsehole peoples dishonored and does not pit Characeae is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That icicle is both not maxillofacial and loopy.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: That icicle is loopy. fact2: If that Oscan is not a Treponemataceae then that that icicle is non-maxillofacial and not non-loopy does not hold. fact3: If that icicle is not a Treponemataceae then the fact that that icicle is not maxillofacial but that person is loopy hold. fact4: That smeltery is short and/or a Treponemataceae if this property is not a Houyhnhnm.

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

That that icicle is both not maxillofacial and loopy is false.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That icicle is loopy. fact2: If that Oscan is not a Treponemataceae then that that icicle is non-maxillofacial and not non-loopy does not hold. fact3: If that icicle is not a Treponemataceae then the fact that that icicle is not maxillofacial but that person is loopy hold. fact4: That smeltery is short and/or a Treponemataceae if this property is not a Houyhnhnm. ; $hypothesis$ = That icicle is both not maxillofacial and loopy. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This logicalness does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: That this idealizing magnanimousness does not occurs causes that this logicalness occurs and this gnomicness happens. fact2: The fact that this regretfulness occurs is true if the fact that that anthropocentricness occurs hold. fact3: That both that rbi and this Westness occurs prevents that this idealizing magnanimousness occurs. fact4: If this gnomicness happens then this spectralness happens. fact5: That rbi happens. fact6: That this logicalness happens is prevented by that both this regretfulness and this spectralness occurs. fact7: That anthropocentricness occurs. fact8: This gnomicness occurs.

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

The compacting Crotophaga happens.

{AU}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this idealizing magnanimousness does not occurs causes that this logicalness occurs and this gnomicness happens. fact2: The fact that this regretfulness occurs is true if the fact that that anthropocentricness occurs hold. fact3: That both that rbi and this Westness occurs prevents that this idealizing magnanimousness occurs. fact4: If this gnomicness happens then this spectralness happens. fact5: That rbi happens. fact6: That this logicalness happens is prevented by that both this regretfulness and this spectralness occurs. fact7: That anthropocentricness occurs. fact8: This gnomicness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This logicalness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact7 -> int1: This regretfulness occurs.; fact8 & fact4 -> int2: This spectralness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This regretfulness occurs and this spectralness happens.; int3 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this gassing is a kind of a prismoid and it confuses is false.

¬({B}{aa} & {A}{aa})

fact1: This phacelia is a dependence. fact2: The fact that this gassing is a Fallot hold if this gassing waxes and does not patronize Rypticus. fact3: The offstage is not a kind of a secretiveness if the fact that that Glaswegian defiles sneering and is cupric is false. fact4: If the fact that some man is not volcanic but he is accessible is incorrect then he is not accessible. fact5: That saki confuses. fact6: That this gassing is not unshrinkable hold. fact7: Somebody that is an affection and does not stucco Mideast is a kind of a caulked. fact8: That that Glaswegian defiles sneering and it is cupric is wrong. fact9: If the fact that that charger does not supervise Chongqing and is a kind of a Dodecanese is not right this cardiograph does not supervise Chongqing. fact10: This gassing confuses. fact11: This gassing is a kind of a Eucarya but it is not unshrinkable. fact12: If the hogchoker does confuse and is not Moldovan then it lights Holarrhena. fact13: This gassing is a Dodecanese but it is not a Carlsbad. fact14: A Eucarya that is unshrinkable is a prismoid. fact15: If this cardiograph does not supervise Chongqing then that this gassing is a prismoid and it confuses does not hold. fact16: The crustacean transfixes indicative if a jaggedness is not accessible. fact17: If this phacelia is a dependence then it is unclassified. fact18: Something is centrosomic if it is not a Carlsbad and it does not drive logion. fact19: If the offstage is not a secretiveness then the fact that this phacelia is not volcanic but it is accessible does not hold. fact20: If somebody is a Eucarya but this one is not unshrinkable then this one is a kind of a prismoid. fact21: If something is unclassified it is not a Carlsbad and it does not drive logion. fact22: That pants is a Talbot if that pants is a kind of a Eucarya and this person dismisses Calderon. fact23: If some man is centrosomic then that it is a jaggedness is true.

fact1: {N}{d} fact2: ({DC}{aa} & ¬{CU}{aa}) -> {GM}{aa} fact3: ¬({O}{f} & {P}{f}) -> ¬{J}{e} fact4: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{G}x fact5: {A}{dd} fact6: ¬{AB}{aa} fact7: (x): ({JD}x & ¬{GT}x) -> {CQ}x fact8: ¬({O}{f} & {P}{f}) fact9: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact10: {A}{aa} fact11: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact12: ({A}{ag} & ¬{GS}{ag}) -> {AQ}{ag} fact13: ({D}{aa} & ¬{K}{aa}) fact14: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact15: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬({B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact16: (x): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> {E}{c} fact17: {N}{d} -> {M}{d} fact18: (x): (¬{K}x & ¬{L}x) -> {I}x fact19: ¬{J}{e} -> ¬(¬{H}{d} & {G}{d}) fact20: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact21: (x): {M}x -> (¬{K}x & ¬{L}x) fact22: ({AA}{fc} & {CC}{fc}) -> {HI}{fc} fact23: (x): {I}x -> {F}x

That this gassing is a kind of a prismoid and it confuses is false.

¬({B}{aa} & {A}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This phacelia is a dependence. fact2: The fact that this gassing is a Fallot hold if this gassing waxes and does not patronize Rypticus. fact3: The offstage is not a kind of a secretiveness if the fact that that Glaswegian defiles sneering and is cupric is false. fact4: If the fact that some man is not volcanic but he is accessible is incorrect then he is not accessible. fact5: That saki confuses. fact6: That this gassing is not unshrinkable hold. fact7: Somebody that is an affection and does not stucco Mideast is a kind of a caulked. fact8: That that Glaswegian defiles sneering and it is cupric is wrong. fact9: If the fact that that charger does not supervise Chongqing and is a kind of a Dodecanese is not right this cardiograph does not supervise Chongqing. fact10: This gassing confuses. fact11: This gassing is a kind of a Eucarya but it is not unshrinkable. fact12: If the hogchoker does confuse and is not Moldovan then it lights Holarrhena. fact13: This gassing is a Dodecanese but it is not a Carlsbad. fact14: A Eucarya that is unshrinkable is a prismoid. fact15: If this cardiograph does not supervise Chongqing then that this gassing is a prismoid and it confuses does not hold. fact16: The crustacean transfixes indicative if a jaggedness is not accessible. fact17: If this phacelia is a dependence then it is unclassified. fact18: Something is centrosomic if it is not a Carlsbad and it does not drive logion. fact19: If the offstage is not a secretiveness then the fact that this phacelia is not volcanic but it is accessible does not hold. fact20: If somebody is a Eucarya but this one is not unshrinkable then this one is a kind of a prismoid. fact21: If something is unclassified it is not a Carlsbad and it does not drive logion. fact22: That pants is a Talbot if that pants is a kind of a Eucarya and this person dismisses Calderon. fact23: If some man is centrosomic then that it is a jaggedness is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That this gassing is a kind of a prismoid and it confuses is false. ; $proof$ =

fact20 -> int1: This gassing is a kind of a prismoid if this gassing is a Eucarya that is not unshrinkable.; int1 & fact11 -> int2: This gassing is a prismoid.; int2 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This alligatorfish undulates bewitchment and is a Tarbell.

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

fact1: This alligatorfish undulates bewitchment. fact2: This alligatorfish does speak and rouges Bethune. fact3: The fact that something undulates bewitchment and is a Tarbell does not hold if it is not a NASA. fact4: this bewitchment undulates alligatorfish. fact5: If that gnomon is not a Tarbell then this alligatorfish profanes changefulness and undulates bewitchment. fact6: The cornfield mercerises Aswan and is cormose. fact7: If some man is unhealthy and is a hogwash then it is not a NASA. fact8: If that gnomon is anacoluthic this alligatorfish is unhealthy. fact9: The fibrinase undulates bewitchment and is strategic. fact10: This alligatorfish is a kind of thenar thing that is a Belemnoidea.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: ({Q}{a} & {EP}{a}) fact3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) fact4: {AA}{aa} fact5: ¬{B}{b} -> ({AS}{a} & {A}{a}) fact6: ({DC}{bn} & {EJ}{bn}) fact7: (x): ({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact8: {F}{b} -> {D}{a} fact9: ({A}{bc} & {BD}{bc}) fact10: ({AR}{a} & {HT}{a})

This alligatorfish profanes changefulness and it is a Gallup.

({AS}{a} & {HH}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This alligatorfish undulates bewitchment. fact2: This alligatorfish does speak and rouges Bethune. fact3: The fact that something undulates bewitchment and is a Tarbell does not hold if it is not a NASA. fact4: this bewitchment undulates alligatorfish. fact5: If that gnomon is not a Tarbell then this alligatorfish profanes changefulness and undulates bewitchment. fact6: The cornfield mercerises Aswan and is cormose. fact7: If some man is unhealthy and is a hogwash then it is not a NASA. fact8: If that gnomon is anacoluthic this alligatorfish is unhealthy. fact9: The fibrinase undulates bewitchment and is strategic. fact10: This alligatorfish is a kind of thenar thing that is a Belemnoidea. ; $hypothesis$ = This alligatorfish undulates bewitchment and is a Tarbell. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This gore occurs.

{C}

fact1: If that exchange occurs that formalising reasonableness but notthe painting monograph occurs. fact2: If this despite does not happens that that ignobleness happens and that shoeshine happens hold. fact3: If that that scrum happens and/or the perceiving Chinchillidae does not happens is false then this echolalia does not occurs. fact4: If that ignobleness does not happens that grouping but notthat exchange occurs. fact5: That this gore happens if that exchange does not happens is right. fact6: That that exchange does not occurs leads to that this gore does not happens. fact7: That exchange occurs. fact8: That that grouping occurs but that exchange does not occurs prevents that this gore does not occurs. fact9: The organizing malarky happens. fact10: If this echolalia does not happens both this despite and this flat happens. fact11: That this despite does not occurs leads to that both the non-ignobleness and that shoeshine happens. fact12: That either that grouping does not happens or that ignobleness does not occurs or both does not hold if that shoeshine occurs. fact13: That coarsening timorousness does not occurs. fact14: That grouping happens. fact15: If the fact that that exchange but notthat grouping occurs is wrong this gore does not happens.

fact1: {A} -> ({FF} & ¬{GF}) fact2: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact3: ¬({J} v ¬{I}) -> ¬{H} fact4: ¬{D} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) fact5: ¬{A} -> {C} fact6: ¬{A} -> ¬{C} fact7: {A} fact8: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> {C} fact9: {ED} fact10: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) fact11: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact12: {E} -> ¬(¬{B} v ¬{D}) fact13: ¬{HT} fact14: {B} fact15: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{C}

This gore occurs.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that exchange occurs that formalising reasonableness but notthe painting monograph occurs. fact2: If this despite does not happens that that ignobleness happens and that shoeshine happens hold. fact3: If that that scrum happens and/or the perceiving Chinchillidae does not happens is false then this echolalia does not occurs. fact4: If that ignobleness does not happens that grouping but notthat exchange occurs. fact5: That this gore happens if that exchange does not happens is right. fact6: That that exchange does not occurs leads to that this gore does not happens. fact7: That exchange occurs. fact8: That that grouping occurs but that exchange does not occurs prevents that this gore does not occurs. fact9: The organizing malarky happens. fact10: If this echolalia does not happens both this despite and this flat happens. fact11: That this despite does not occurs leads to that both the non-ignobleness and that shoeshine happens. fact12: That either that grouping does not happens or that ignobleness does not occurs or both does not hold if that shoeshine occurs. fact13: That coarsening timorousness does not occurs. fact14: That grouping happens. fact15: If the fact that that exchange but notthat grouping occurs is wrong this gore does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This gore occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that exchange happens and that grouping does not occurs.; assump1 -> int1: That grouping does not happens.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: The fact that that exchange occurs and that grouping does not occurs is false.; int3 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that both that stuccoing acclaim and this politics occurs is false.

¬({D} & {C})

fact1: That this ambages does not occurs prevents that this conjunction does not occurs. fact2: This ambages does not happens. fact3: The seeperson Lacertidae occurs. fact4: That Nonconformistness and that biodefense occurs. fact5: That this ambages does not happens yields that that stuccoing acclaim happens and this conjunction occurs. fact6: That this politics does not happens is prevented by that that Nonconformistness occurs. fact7: This ambages prevents that this conjunction does not occurs. fact8: If that biodefense does not occurs this atmosphericalness occurs and that Nonconformistness happens. fact9: That airmailing occurs and this ambages occurs if that debauching Mekong does not occurs. fact10: That the dysphoricness does not happens causes that this reallotment does not happens and this jabbing does not occurs. fact11: The Service happens. fact12: This clasping happens and the convexness occurs. fact13: The unwomanliness occurs. fact14: This creaking happens. fact15: That that debauching Mekong does not happens is caused by that this reallotment does not occurs and this jabbing does not occurs. fact16: The maladroitness occurs. fact17: The fact that that stuccoing acclaim and this politics happens is false if that Nonconformistness does not happens.

fact1: ¬{F} -> {E} fact2: ¬{F} fact3: {GU} fact4: ({A} & {B}) fact5: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) fact6: {A} -> {C} fact7: {F} -> {E} fact8: ¬{B} -> ({CJ} & {A}) fact9: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) fact10: ¬{K} -> (¬{I} & ¬{J}) fact11: {EQ} fact12: ({HJ} & {AO}) fact13: {HT} fact14: {CA} fact15: (¬{I} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} fact16: {DB} fact17: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} & {C})

The fact that both that stuccoing acclaim and this politics occurs is false.

¬({D} & {C})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this ambages does not occurs prevents that this conjunction does not occurs. fact2: This ambages does not happens. fact3: The seeperson Lacertidae occurs. fact4: That Nonconformistness and that biodefense occurs. fact5: That this ambages does not happens yields that that stuccoing acclaim happens and this conjunction occurs. fact6: That this politics does not happens is prevented by that that Nonconformistness occurs. fact7: This ambages prevents that this conjunction does not occurs. fact8: If that biodefense does not occurs this atmosphericalness occurs and that Nonconformistness happens. fact9: That airmailing occurs and this ambages occurs if that debauching Mekong does not occurs. fact10: That the dysphoricness does not happens causes that this reallotment does not happens and this jabbing does not occurs. fact11: The Service happens. fact12: This clasping happens and the convexness occurs. fact13: The unwomanliness occurs. fact14: This creaking happens. fact15: That that debauching Mekong does not happens is caused by that this reallotment does not occurs and this jabbing does not occurs. fact16: The maladroitness occurs. fact17: The fact that that stuccoing acclaim and this politics happens is false if that Nonconformistness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that both that stuccoing acclaim and this politics occurs is false. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: That Nonconformistness happens.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: This politics occurs.; fact5 & fact2 -> int3: That stuccoing acclaim occurs and this conjunction happens.; int3 -> int4: That stuccoing acclaim occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That accompaniment adheres thoughtlessness.

{A}{a}

fact1: That that galantine adheres thoughtlessness is true. fact2: That accompaniment adheres thoughtlessness. fact3: this thoughtlessness adheres accompaniment. fact4: The peristome adheres thoughtlessness. fact5: The fact that someone adheres thoughtlessness if either it is not a polypus or it adheres thoughtlessness or both is right. fact6: That accompaniment is a kind of a naturalism. fact7: Something is not a polypus or it adheres thoughtlessness or both if it does tangle signpost. fact8: If that accompaniment is unorganised then that weigela tangles signpost. fact9: If someone is not sporadic then the fact that it is not organized and it is not a polypus is incorrect. fact10: That that accompaniment does not adhere thoughtlessness if this peel does not tangle signpost is correct. fact11: That accompaniment is formalistic. fact12: If that accompaniment is sporadic that accompaniment is unorganised.

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

That accompaniment does not adhere thoughtlessness.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that galantine adheres thoughtlessness is true. fact2: That accompaniment adheres thoughtlessness. fact3: this thoughtlessness adheres accompaniment. fact4: The peristome adheres thoughtlessness. fact5: The fact that someone adheres thoughtlessness if either it is not a polypus or it adheres thoughtlessness or both is right. fact6: That accompaniment is a kind of a naturalism. fact7: Something is not a polypus or it adheres thoughtlessness or both if it does tangle signpost. fact8: If that accompaniment is unorganised then that weigela tangles signpost. fact9: If someone is not sporadic then the fact that it is not organized and it is not a polypus is incorrect. fact10: That that accompaniment does not adhere thoughtlessness if this peel does not tangle signpost is correct. fact11: That accompaniment is formalistic. fact12: If that accompaniment is sporadic that accompaniment is unorganised. ; $hypothesis$ = That accompaniment adheres thoughtlessness. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Both that onsideness and this ontogeneticness happens.

({C} & {A})

fact1: The indent happens if that upturn does not occurs. fact2: That exoergicness does not happens. fact3: That that plopping does not happens is brought about by that both the comeuppance and that miaou occurs. fact4: Both that humoring and this callithumpianness occurs if this ontogeneticness does not occurs. fact5: That Hitlerianness occurs. fact6: This crawling happens. fact7: This cryptogamicness and that modelling happens. fact8: This nanocephalicness does not happens if both this cryptogamicness and that modelling occurs. fact9: This ontogeneticness occurs if this nanocephalicness does not happens. fact10: This crawling occurs if that exoergicness does not occurs. fact11: That modelling happens. fact12: That toping Kyd happens. fact13: Both that onsideness and this crawling happens if that exoergicness does not occurs.

fact1: ¬{HG} -> {GK} fact2: ¬{E} fact3: ({DM} & {CC}) -> ¬{BJ} fact4: ¬{A} -> ({DN} & {GJ}) fact5: {DB} fact6: {D} fact7: ({AA} & {AB}) fact8: ({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact9: ¬{B} -> {A} fact10: ¬{E} -> {D} fact11: {AB} fact12: {FE} fact13: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D})

Both that humoring and this callithumpianness happens.

({DN} & {GJ})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The indent happens if that upturn does not occurs. fact2: That exoergicness does not happens. fact3: That that plopping does not happens is brought about by that both the comeuppance and that miaou occurs. fact4: Both that humoring and this callithumpianness occurs if this ontogeneticness does not occurs. fact5: That Hitlerianness occurs. fact6: This crawling happens. fact7: This cryptogamicness and that modelling happens. fact8: This nanocephalicness does not happens if both this cryptogamicness and that modelling occurs. fact9: This ontogeneticness occurs if this nanocephalicness does not happens. fact10: This crawling occurs if that exoergicness does not occurs. fact11: That modelling happens. fact12: That toping Kyd happens. fact13: Both that onsideness and this crawling happens if that exoergicness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Both that onsideness and this ontogeneticness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact7 -> int1: This nanocephalicness does not occurs.; int1 & fact9 -> int2: This ontogeneticness occurs.; fact13 & fact2 -> int3: That onsideness and this crawling occurs.; int3 -> int4: That onsideness happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that sensitization is both a disreputableness and not a Changtzu is wrong.

¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

fact1: That sensitization is a disreputableness. fact2: The fact that that sensitization is cognizable one that is not a Changtzu if this heartseed is a disreputableness hold. fact3: The oligoclase is a disreputableness. fact4: If this heartseed is cognizable that sensitization is a kind of a disreputableness. fact5: The fact that something is a disreputableness and is not a Changtzu does not hold if this thing is cognizable. fact6: That sensitization is cognizable if this heartseed is both not cognizable and not a Cagney. fact7: This heartseed is cognizable. fact8: If that sensitization is cognizable then this heartseed is not a Changtzu. fact9: That sensitization is unwelcome. fact10: That sensitization is a disreputableness but it is not a kind of a Changtzu if that this heartseed is cognizable hold. fact11: That diestock is a fielding but this is not a kind of a Miocene.

fact1: {AA}{b} fact2: {AA}{a} -> ({A}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact3: {AA}{em} fact4: {A}{a} -> {AA}{b} fact5: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact6: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{b} fact7: {A}{a} fact8: {A}{b} -> ¬{AB}{a} fact9: {DM}{b} fact10: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact11: ({ET}{en} & ¬{D}{en})

That diestock is both a fielding and not a Changtzu.

({ET}{en} & ¬{AB}{en})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That sensitization is a disreputableness. fact2: The fact that that sensitization is cognizable one that is not a Changtzu if this heartseed is a disreputableness hold. fact3: The oligoclase is a disreputableness. fact4: If this heartseed is cognizable that sensitization is a kind of a disreputableness. fact5: The fact that something is a disreputableness and is not a Changtzu does not hold if this thing is cognizable. fact6: That sensitization is cognizable if this heartseed is both not cognizable and not a Cagney. fact7: This heartseed is cognizable. fact8: If that sensitization is cognizable then this heartseed is not a Changtzu. fact9: That sensitization is unwelcome. fact10: That sensitization is a disreputableness but it is not a kind of a Changtzu if that this heartseed is cognizable hold. fact11: That diestock is a fielding but this is not a kind of a Miocene. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that sensitization is both a disreputableness and not a Changtzu is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That retrovirus is haemolytic or is not Albigensian or both.

({D}{a} v ¬{C}{a})

fact1: If this hanging is not a frozen this hanging mixes ophthalmoplegia. fact2: If the fact that the widower is not a Amphicarpa is right the fact that the widower is a Brachychiton or the thing is not a kind of a simultaneousness or both does not hold. fact3: Somebody is etiologic if the fact that it is not a snore is true. fact4: If something is not a settle then it is a kW. fact5: If that retrovirus is not consolable it is amenorrheic. fact6: If the fact that that retrovirus mixes ophthalmoplegia or it is not amenorrheic or both does not hold then that retrovirus is not a kind of a Britten. fact7: The magnet mixes ophthalmoplegia if the person is non-telemetered. fact8: That that retrovirus does not overrefine McKinley or is not unwoven or both is wrong. fact9: That retrovirus is not a squash. fact10: The digitalin is haemolytic. fact11: That retrovirus does compromise mammalogy if that retrovirus is not a settle. fact12: If the fact that some person does not mix ophthalmoplegia and/or is not non-amenorrheic is wrong he/she is not a kind of a Britten. fact13: If that retrovirus is not a military the thing does grub poundal. fact14: The fact that Sterling is a Brachychiton and/or it is not a kind of a Britten does not hold. fact15: If the fact that some man does not mix ophthalmoplegia and/or it is not amenorrheic is false then it is not a Britten. fact16: That Datril is a kind of a fogsignal if that Datril is not nonvoluntary. fact17: The fact that that retrovirus does not mix ophthalmoplegia or it is not amenorrheic or both is wrong if that retrovirus is not a squash. fact18: That retrovirus is a lightlessness. fact19: The fact that some person is haemolytic or is not Albigensian or both does not hold if the person is not a kind of a Britten.

fact1: ¬{BT}{hq} -> {AA}{hq} fact2: ¬{BJ}{df} -> ¬({JH}{df} v ¬{CE}{df}) fact3: (x): ¬{S}x -> {ES}x fact4: (x): ¬{DC}x -> {IU}x fact5: ¬{DT}{a} -> {AB}{a} fact6: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact7: ¬{FP}{eb} -> {AA}{eb} fact8: ¬(¬{BS}{a} v ¬{CM}{a}) fact9: ¬{A}{a} fact10: {D}{fm} fact11: ¬{DC}{a} -> {DG}{a} fact12: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact13: ¬{IC}{a} -> {EL}{a} fact14: ¬({JH}{cj} v ¬{B}{cj}) fact15: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact16: ¬{AK}{fq} -> {EK}{fq} fact17: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact18: {H}{a} fact19: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({D}x v ¬{C}x)

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this hanging is not a frozen this hanging mixes ophthalmoplegia. fact2: If the fact that the widower is not a Amphicarpa is right the fact that the widower is a Brachychiton or the thing is not a kind of a simultaneousness or both does not hold. fact3: Somebody is etiologic if the fact that it is not a snore is true. fact4: If something is not a settle then it is a kW. fact5: If that retrovirus is not consolable it is amenorrheic. fact6: If the fact that that retrovirus mixes ophthalmoplegia or it is not amenorrheic or both does not hold then that retrovirus is not a kind of a Britten. fact7: The magnet mixes ophthalmoplegia if the person is non-telemetered. fact8: That that retrovirus does not overrefine McKinley or is not unwoven or both is wrong. fact9: That retrovirus is not a squash. fact10: The digitalin is haemolytic. fact11: That retrovirus does compromise mammalogy if that retrovirus is not a settle. fact12: If the fact that some person does not mix ophthalmoplegia and/or is not non-amenorrheic is wrong he/she is not a kind of a Britten. fact13: If that retrovirus is not a military the thing does grub poundal. fact14: The fact that Sterling is a Brachychiton and/or it is not a kind of a Britten does not hold. fact15: If the fact that some man does not mix ophthalmoplegia and/or it is not amenorrheic is false then it is not a Britten. fact16: That Datril is a kind of a fogsignal if that Datril is not nonvoluntary. fact17: The fact that that retrovirus does not mix ophthalmoplegia or it is not amenorrheic or both is wrong if that retrovirus is not a squash. fact18: That retrovirus is a lightlessness. fact19: The fact that some person is haemolytic or is not Albigensian or both does not hold if the person is not a kind of a Britten. ; $hypothesis$ = That retrovirus is haemolytic or is not Albigensian or both. ; $proof$ =

fact17 & fact9 -> int1: The fact that that retrovirus either does not mix ophthalmoplegia or is not amenorrheic or both does not hold.; fact15 -> int2: If the fact that that retrovirus does not mix ophthalmoplegia and/or this is not amenorrheic does not hold that retrovirus is not a Britten.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That that retrovirus is not a kind of a Britten is true.; fact19 -> int4: If that retrovirus is not a Britten that that retrovirus is haemolytic or this person is not Albigensian or both is wrong.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This housepaint is not a kind of a forethought.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: Something does Abies minutes and is ungulated if the fact that it is not a forethought is not wrong. fact2: This housepaint is a forethought if that that streptomycin does Abies minutes but this person is not ungulated does not hold. fact3: That streptomycin is ungulated. fact4: Someone does not embark sacked if the fact that that one is not transcultural and that one embark sacked does not hold. fact5: This anther is not a forethought if the fact that that streptomycin is not unscrupulous and she is a forethought does not hold. fact6: Some man embarks sacked if that person is not nonflowering. fact7: This housepaint is propitious. fact8: The fact that something is scrupulous and is a forethought is not right if the fact that it does not embark sacked is correct. fact9: Somebody does not Abies minutes but this person is ungulated if this person is scrupulous. fact10: If someone is nonflowering then the fact that that it is not transcultural and embarks sacked hold is incorrect. fact11: The fact that that that streptomycin Abieses minutes and it is not non-ungulated does not hold hold. fact12: That streptomycin is a kind of a forethought if that this housepaint Abieses minutes and is not ungulated is false. fact13: If someone Abieses minutes that he is a Orestes and he is not a luging is incorrect. fact14: If this housepaint does not Abies minutes and is ungulated it is not a forethought. fact15: This charger does not Abies minutes. fact16: This housepaint is scrupulous if that streptomycin embarks sacked. fact17: If this housepaint is propitious then that streptomycin is nonflowering.

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

That this anther is a Orestes but it is not a kind of a luging is false.

¬({HS}{do} & ¬{FU}{do})

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Something does Abies minutes and is ungulated if the fact that it is not a forethought is not wrong. fact2: This housepaint is a forethought if that that streptomycin does Abies minutes but this person is not ungulated does not hold. fact3: That streptomycin is ungulated. fact4: Someone does not embark sacked if the fact that that one is not transcultural and that one embark sacked does not hold. fact5: This anther is not a forethought if the fact that that streptomycin is not unscrupulous and she is a forethought does not hold. fact6: Some man embarks sacked if that person is not nonflowering. fact7: This housepaint is propitious. fact8: The fact that something is scrupulous and is a forethought is not right if the fact that it does not embark sacked is correct. fact9: Somebody does not Abies minutes but this person is ungulated if this person is scrupulous. fact10: If someone is nonflowering then the fact that that it is not transcultural and embarks sacked hold is incorrect. fact11: The fact that that that streptomycin Abieses minutes and it is not non-ungulated does not hold hold. fact12: That streptomycin is a kind of a forethought if that this housepaint Abieses minutes and is not ungulated is false. fact13: If someone Abieses minutes that he is a Orestes and he is not a luging is incorrect. fact14: If this housepaint does not Abies minutes and is ungulated it is not a forethought. fact15: This charger does not Abies minutes. fact16: This housepaint is scrupulous if that streptomycin embarks sacked. fact17: If this housepaint is propitious then that streptomycin is nonflowering. ; $hypothesis$ = This housepaint is not a kind of a forethought. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that streptomycin Abieses minutes and is not ungulated.; assump1 -> int1: The fact that that streptomycin is not ungulated hold.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: That that that streptomycin Abieses minutes but it is not ungulated is correct is wrong.; int3 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that COD is not a kind of a Ea but it does short anestrus is not right.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: That the turbulency is a kind of chylifactive thing that shorts anestrus is wrong. fact2: The castaway is not a schmear or it is a Ellul or both. fact3: The fact that that COD is not a kind of a Ea if the castaway is not a schmear or is a Ellul or both is right. fact4: The fact that something is not alphanumerical but it yachts does not hold if it is not avocational. fact5: That COD is not a kind of a companionship and it is not alphanumerical. fact6: If someone is both not collegial and tops he shorts anestrus. fact7: If that COD is not a companionship but that thing is alphanumerical that COD does not yacht. fact8: That COD does not yacht if that COD is both not a companionship and not alphanumerical.

fact1: ¬({J}{is} & {AB}{is}) fact2: (¬{E}{b} v {D}{b}) fact3: (¬{E}{b} v {D}{b}) -> ¬{AA}{a} fact4: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) fact5: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact6: (x): (¬{FT}x & {JJ}x) -> {AB}x fact7: (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact8: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}

Let's assume that that COD is not a Ea and shorts anestrus.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the turbulency is a kind of chylifactive thing that shorts anestrus is wrong. fact2: The castaway is not a schmear or it is a Ellul or both. fact3: The fact that that COD is not a kind of a Ea if the castaway is not a schmear or is a Ellul or both is right. fact4: The fact that something is not alphanumerical but it yachts does not hold if it is not avocational. fact5: That COD is not a kind of a companionship and it is not alphanumerical. fact6: If someone is both not collegial and tops he shorts anestrus. fact7: If that COD is not a companionship but that thing is alphanumerical that COD does not yacht. fact8: That COD does not yacht if that COD is both not a companionship and not alphanumerical. ; $hypothesis$ = That that COD is not a kind of a Ea but it does short anestrus is not right. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That acrocentricness does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: Both that crusading and that radioactiveness happens. fact2: If this sublingualness happens that acrocentricness does not occurs. fact3: If that pretence happens then the subordinate does not happens. fact4: The fact that this Churchillianness occurs hold. fact5: The ruminating happens. fact6: That that ctenoidness and this unpopularness occurs causes that this suffering bedtime does not occurs. fact7: This hearts or the viziership or both happens. fact8: That acrocentricness is prevented by either that this sublingualness happens or that radioactiveness or both. fact9: If this suffering bedtime does not occurs that radioactiveness does not happens and this sublingualness does not happens. fact10: If this multinucleateness happens then this ravaging does not occurs. fact11: That acrocentricness occurs and that crusading happens if that radioactiveness does not occurs. fact12: If that meretriciousness happens and/or that collateral happens the atrophying does not happens. fact13: The reacting occurs and this feminist happens. fact14: The imperviousness happens. fact15: That sousing does not occurs.

fact1: ({A} & {B}) fact2: {C} -> ¬{D} fact3: {BT} -> ¬{EN} fact4: {GB} fact5: {AS} fact6: ({G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} fact7: ({AC} v {AA}) fact8: ({C} v {B}) -> ¬{D} fact9: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) fact10: {ER} -> ¬{DL} fact11: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) fact12: ({AI} v {CJ}) -> ¬{IU} fact13: ({GT} & {HQ}) fact14: {CQ} fact15: ¬{EQ}

That acrocentricness happens.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both that crusading and that radioactiveness happens. fact2: If this sublingualness happens that acrocentricness does not occurs. fact3: If that pretence happens then the subordinate does not happens. fact4: The fact that this Churchillianness occurs hold. fact5: The ruminating happens. fact6: That that ctenoidness and this unpopularness occurs causes that this suffering bedtime does not occurs. fact7: This hearts or the viziership or both happens. fact8: That acrocentricness is prevented by either that this sublingualness happens or that radioactiveness or both. fact9: If this suffering bedtime does not occurs that radioactiveness does not happens and this sublingualness does not happens. fact10: If this multinucleateness happens then this ravaging does not occurs. fact11: That acrocentricness occurs and that crusading happens if that radioactiveness does not occurs. fact12: If that meretriciousness happens and/or that collateral happens the atrophying does not happens. fact13: The reacting occurs and this feminist happens. fact14: The imperviousness happens. fact15: That sousing does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That acrocentricness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That radioactiveness happens.; int1 -> int2: This sublingualness occurs and/or that radioactiveness occurs.; int2 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that this vulvectomy does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: If that symbolizing kroon does not occurs this trespassing cerebromeningitis and the overexertion occurs. fact2: If the fooling does not occurs then that the progestationalness does not happens and this decathlon does not occurs is wrong. fact3: That centerness does not occurs if that that IVP does not happens and that centerness happens is not true. fact4: This trespassing cerebromeningitis does not occurs. fact5: That IVP does not happens. fact6: That the corrupting Ochotona does not occurs is not incorrect. fact7: If that permeating does not happens then that notthat IVP but that centerness happens is wrong. fact8: The fact that that symbolizing kroon does not occurs if that the suiting verboseness and this duster occurs is incorrect is correct. fact9: If the unattractiveness does not happens or that uncial occurs or both that permeating does not occurs.

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

That downtown does not happens and that centerness does not happens.

(¬{GO} & ¬{EG})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that symbolizing kroon does not occurs this trespassing cerebromeningitis and the overexertion occurs. fact2: If the fooling does not occurs then that the progestationalness does not happens and this decathlon does not occurs is wrong. fact3: That centerness does not occurs if that that IVP does not happens and that centerness happens is not true. fact4: This trespassing cerebromeningitis does not occurs. fact5: That IVP does not happens. fact6: That the corrupting Ochotona does not occurs is not incorrect. fact7: If that permeating does not happens then that notthat IVP but that centerness happens is wrong. fact8: The fact that that symbolizing kroon does not occurs if that the suiting verboseness and this duster occurs is incorrect is correct. fact9: If the unattractiveness does not happens or that uncial occurs or both that permeating does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this vulvectomy does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That silents does joke.

{C}{b}

fact1: This convector is not a Tenerife. fact2: Someone is a kind of a clearing if the fact that it is a soaked and is not a clearing does not hold. fact3: If that silents is a kind of a clearing then this convector does not joke. fact4: This convector is a clearing. fact5: If that slugger is not incompressible then the fact that the fact that it is a soaked and is not a kind of a clearing is correct is not true. fact6: If the fact that this convector is not a clearing and it is not a kind of a Brockhouse is incorrect then that silents does not joke. fact7: That silents is non-masculine. fact8: That silents is not a Brockhouse.

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

That silents does joke.

{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This convector is not a Tenerife. fact2: Someone is a kind of a clearing if the fact that it is a soaked and is not a clearing does not hold. fact3: If that silents is a kind of a clearing then this convector does not joke. fact4: This convector is a clearing. fact5: If that slugger is not incompressible then the fact that the fact that it is a soaked and is not a kind of a clearing is correct is not true. fact6: If the fact that this convector is not a clearing and it is not a kind of a Brockhouse is incorrect then that silents does not joke. fact7: That silents is non-masculine. fact8: That silents is not a Brockhouse. ; $hypothesis$ = That silents does joke. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this convector is not a clearing and not a Brockhouse.; assump1 -> int1: This convector is not a kind of a clearing.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: That this convector is not a clearing and not a Brockhouse is incorrect.; int3 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that tetramethyldiarsine is a centrism but it is not a Vaisnavism is incorrect.

¬({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

fact1: That if that tetramethyldiarsine does not hydrogenate Nehru this thallus does hydrogenate Nehru is correct. fact2: That that tetramethyldiarsine hydrogenates Nehru hold. fact3: That tetramethyldiarsine is a kind of a partisanship and/or it hydrogenates Nehru. fact4: That tetramethyldiarsine hydrogenates Nehru and/or this is a kind of a centrism. fact5: This thallus is a centrism or is a kind of a Vaisnavism or both. fact6: If this thallus is a Plectania and/or it hydrogenates Nehru then it is not a centrism. fact7: The fact that some man is a kind of a centrism that is not a Vaisnavism does not hold if he is a unbelief. fact8: This thallus is a centrism but it is not a Vaisnavism if that tetramethyldiarsine is not a centrism. fact9: This thallus is a Plectania and/or she hydrogenates Nehru. fact10: This thallus is a Vaisnavism that is not a Plectania. fact11: The fact that that tetramethyldiarsine does hydrogenate Nehru and is not a Plectania hold if this thallus does not hydrogenate Nehru. fact12: If this thallus is not a centrism that tetramethyldiarsine is a centrism but that one is not a Plectania.

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

The fact that that tetramethyldiarsine is a centrism but it is not a Vaisnavism is incorrect.

¬({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That if that tetramethyldiarsine does not hydrogenate Nehru this thallus does hydrogenate Nehru is correct. fact2: That that tetramethyldiarsine hydrogenates Nehru hold. fact3: That tetramethyldiarsine is a kind of a partisanship and/or it hydrogenates Nehru. fact4: That tetramethyldiarsine hydrogenates Nehru and/or this is a kind of a centrism. fact5: This thallus is a centrism or is a kind of a Vaisnavism or both. fact6: If this thallus is a Plectania and/or it hydrogenates Nehru then it is not a centrism. fact7: The fact that some man is a kind of a centrism that is not a Vaisnavism does not hold if he is a unbelief. fact8: This thallus is a centrism but it is not a Vaisnavism if that tetramethyldiarsine is not a centrism. fact9: This thallus is a Plectania and/or she hydrogenates Nehru. fact10: This thallus is a Vaisnavism that is not a Plectania. fact11: The fact that that tetramethyldiarsine does hydrogenate Nehru and is not a Plectania hold if this thallus does not hydrogenate Nehru. fact12: If this thallus is not a centrism that tetramethyldiarsine is a centrism but that one is not a Plectania. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that tetramethyldiarsine is a centrism but it is not a Vaisnavism is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That toolhouse is a kind of a mastitis.

{C}{aa}

fact1: If something is not many then the fact that the thing is a volubility and/or the thing is not parametric is wrong. fact2: If something is a kind of a botheration the fact that that electrifies Strobilomyces is correct. fact3: If somebody does not stifle Han and is not a kind of a marvel then it is not many. fact4: This sophomore is a mastitis if that daredevil is not biogenic and remilitarises Aphasmidia. fact5: Something is not biogenic and remilitarises Aphasmidia if it is elegiac. fact6: Some person is not a mastitis if it remilitarises Aphasmidia. fact7: That daredevil is not a marvel. fact8: That toolhouse remilitarises Aphasmidia if that toolhouse is biogenic. fact9: That toolhouse is biogenic. fact10: If somebody electrifies Strobilomyces it is elegiac. fact11: Something is a botheration if that this does not berth Lemuroidea is right. fact12: The fact that that toolhouse is not a kind of a mastitis but he is biogenic is incorrect if the fact that this sophomore remilitarises Aphasmidia is true. fact13: That the gyrocompass is a mastitis is not wrong if this sophomore is a kind of a mastitis. fact14: That daredevil does not stifle Han. fact15: That daredevil does not berth Lemuroidea if the fact that that daredevil either is a volubility or is not parametric or both is wrong.

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

That toolhouse is a kind of a mastitis.

{C}{aa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something is not many then the fact that the thing is a volubility and/or the thing is not parametric is wrong. fact2: If something is a kind of a botheration the fact that that electrifies Strobilomyces is correct. fact3: If somebody does not stifle Han and is not a kind of a marvel then it is not many. fact4: This sophomore is a mastitis if that daredevil is not biogenic and remilitarises Aphasmidia. fact5: Something is not biogenic and remilitarises Aphasmidia if it is elegiac. fact6: Some person is not a mastitis if it remilitarises Aphasmidia. fact7: That daredevil is not a marvel. fact8: That toolhouse remilitarises Aphasmidia if that toolhouse is biogenic. fact9: That toolhouse is biogenic. fact10: If somebody electrifies Strobilomyces it is elegiac. fact11: Something is a botheration if that this does not berth Lemuroidea is right. fact12: The fact that that toolhouse is not a kind of a mastitis but he is biogenic is incorrect if the fact that this sophomore remilitarises Aphasmidia is true. fact13: That the gyrocompass is a mastitis is not wrong if this sophomore is a kind of a mastitis. fact14: That daredevil does not stifle Han. fact15: That daredevil does not berth Lemuroidea if the fact that that daredevil either is a volubility or is not parametric or both is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That toolhouse is a kind of a mastitis. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: If that toolhouse remilitarises Aphasmidia the person is not a mastitis.; fact9 & fact8 -> int2: That toolhouse remilitarises Aphasmidia.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that there is something such that if it is a mumble that is a fuller it is not a graduality is wrong.

¬((Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)

fact1: There exists some person such that if it thrusts griping and it does summon least then it is not a neophobia. fact2: There exists somebody such that if this one changes beastliness and this one is a smothering then this one chatters Camelus. fact3: If something is a Ophiurida and is a Steinmetz then that thing is not a kind of a West. fact4: Jan is a paling if Jan is a immovableness and a fuller. fact5: If a mumble is a kind of a fuller then it is a graduality. fact6: There is someone such that if she/he changes beastliness and is a Cimicidae she/he does not sow Oestrus. fact7: The fact that if somebody is a mumble and is a fuller then it is not a kind of a graduality is correct. fact8: There exists somebody such that if she/he is a apologetics and she/he is a kind of a cast she/he is not undulant. fact9: There exists something such that if this is a mumble and this is a fuller that this is a graduality hold. fact10: That Jan is a graduality hold if Jan is a mumble that is a fuller. fact11: There is someone such that if that person is a snowball that is a Thessalia then that that person is not adductive is right. fact12: There exists something such that if that is elocutionary and a Bacillaceae then that does jolt soubriquet. fact13: There is some man such that if it whizzes and it is a kind of a promptitude then it is not a demographic. fact14: Jan does not replace Adenium if Jan is a Cynara and it is a graduality. fact15: If something that is phosphoric is a Bacillaceae it is indecorous. fact16: The propylene is not ineffectual if the thing is a boot and a mumble. fact17: If some person that is a Yamoussukro is a pyorrhea that person is not undulant. fact18: If Jan is a swop and it is a graduality then it does not symmetrize sentiency. fact19: There is somebody such that if it is architectural and it is a kind of a demographic then it is not a kind of a incredibleness. fact20: If Jan is a Schutzstaffel and it is a rancour then Jan is not a kind of a graduality.

fact1: (Ex): ({CL}x & {I}x) -> ¬{DR}x fact2: (Ex): ({HK}x & {DJ}x) -> {IA}x fact3: (x): ({HM}x & {AK}x) -> ¬{BU}x fact4: ({CI}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {AH}{aa} fact5: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact6: (Ex): ({HK}x & {HU}x) -> ¬{GQ}x fact7: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact8: (Ex): ({BM}x & {FK}x) -> ¬{DN}x fact9: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact10: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact11: (Ex): ({DH}x & {FQ}x) -> ¬{BD}x fact12: (Ex): ({GH}x & {AR}x) -> {IU}x fact13: (Ex): ({CR}x & {AI}x) -> ¬{BP}x fact14: ({GO}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{ES}{aa} fact15: (x): ({HQ}x & {AR}x) -> {JK}x fact16: ({S}{bd} & {AA}{bd}) -> ¬{JF}{bd} fact17: (x): ({GJ}x & {EH}x) -> ¬{DN}x fact18: ({IO}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{EP}{aa} fact19: (Ex): ({IK}x & {BP}x) -> ¬{CC}x fact20: ({FI}{aa} & {CA}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}

There exists something such that if it is a Yamoussukro and it is a pyorrhea then it is not undulant.

(Ex): ({GJ}x & {EH}x) -> ¬{DN}x

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There exists some person such that if it thrusts griping and it does summon least then it is not a neophobia. fact2: There exists somebody such that if this one changes beastliness and this one is a smothering then this one chatters Camelus. fact3: If something is a Ophiurida and is a Steinmetz then that thing is not a kind of a West. fact4: Jan is a paling if Jan is a immovableness and a fuller. fact5: If a mumble is a kind of a fuller then it is a graduality. fact6: There is someone such that if she/he changes beastliness and is a Cimicidae she/he does not sow Oestrus. fact7: The fact that if somebody is a mumble and is a fuller then it is not a kind of a graduality is correct. fact8: There exists somebody such that if she/he is a apologetics and she/he is a kind of a cast she/he is not undulant. fact9: There exists something such that if this is a mumble and this is a fuller that this is a graduality hold. fact10: That Jan is a graduality hold if Jan is a mumble that is a fuller. fact11: There is someone such that if that person is a snowball that is a Thessalia then that that person is not adductive is right. fact12: There exists something such that if that is elocutionary and a Bacillaceae then that does jolt soubriquet. fact13: There is some man such that if it whizzes and it is a kind of a promptitude then it is not a demographic. fact14: Jan does not replace Adenium if Jan is a Cynara and it is a graduality. fact15: If something that is phosphoric is a Bacillaceae it is indecorous. fact16: The propylene is not ineffectual if the thing is a boot and a mumble. fact17: If some person that is a Yamoussukro is a pyorrhea that person is not undulant. fact18: If Jan is a swop and it is a graduality then it does not symmetrize sentiency. fact19: There is somebody such that if it is architectural and it is a kind of a demographic then it is not a kind of a incredibleness. fact20: If Jan is a Schutzstaffel and it is a rancour then Jan is not a kind of a graduality. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there is something such that if it is a mumble that is a fuller it is not a graduality is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: Jan is not a kind of a graduality if Jan is a kind of a mumble and is a fuller.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That mincemeat is a countermine.

{B}{a}

fact1: If something overprotects epanalepsis the fact that it is a kind of a countermine hold. fact2: If someone is not a trafficator the person does overprotect epanalepsis and is a Hugueninia. fact3: That mincemeat does not overprotect epanalepsis and is not a countermine. fact4: That mincemeat does not overprotect epanalepsis.

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

That mincemeat is a countermine.

{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something overprotects epanalepsis the fact that it is a kind of a countermine hold. fact2: If someone is not a trafficator the person does overprotect epanalepsis and is a Hugueninia. fact3: That mincemeat does not overprotect epanalepsis and is not a countermine. fact4: That mincemeat does not overprotect epanalepsis. ; $hypothesis$ = That mincemeat is a countermine. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists something such that if this thing squincheds then that this thing is not a glossolalia and this thing is not spaced is not correct.

(Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

fact1: There exists something such that if it is a kind of a Bairiki then it is non-actinomycetal thing that is a curb. fact2: That someone is not a kind of a Morrison but this person daydreams Crateva is false if this person is a Xyris. fact3: There is something such that if it squincheds then the fact that it is a glossolalia and is unspaced is wrong. fact4: That someone is not a mil but it is a slang is false if it is unsteady. fact5: If this inoculant is unhealthful the fact that this inoculant is both not unspaced and a Pilosella does not hold. fact6: There is some man such that if she is a kind of a Wodan the fact that she does not braid counterargument and she is Austronesian is incorrect. fact7: That this inoculant is not a glossolalia but that thing is unspaced does not hold if this inoculant squincheds. fact8: There exists some person such that if he squincheds then he is not a glossolalia and he is unspaced. fact9: There is something such that if it spirits hemothorax then that it is not a kind of an extraterrestrial and it is nonbearing does not hold. fact10: If this inoculant is palpatory then the fact that it is spaced and not insurmountable does not hold. fact11: There is something such that if it is nonvolatile then that it does not tauten aridity and it does patronise impuissance does not hold. fact12: If this inoculant squincheds then that the fact that it is a kind of a glossolalia that is unspaced hold does not hold. fact13: If this inoculant does squinched then this inoculant is not a glossolalia and is unspaced. fact14: If this inoculant ravishes that this inoculant is not factorial but she is periodic does not hold. fact15: That this inoculant is not a Rubens but an ebb is incorrect if she/he is unspaced.

fact1: (Ex): {FC}x -> (¬{CU}x & {AQ}x) fact2: (x): {BS}x -> ¬(¬{FD}x & {H}x) fact3: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact4: (x): {FB}x -> ¬(¬{IH}x & {JE}x) fact5: {CL}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & {HP}{aa}) fact6: (Ex): {EA}x -> ¬(¬{CG}x & {JH}x) fact7: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact8: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact9: (Ex): {BE}x -> ¬(¬{GC}x & {GR}x) fact10: {IO}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & {GO}{aa}) fact11: (Ex): {BQ}x -> ¬(¬{CT}x & {EL}x) fact12: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact13: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact14: {FK}{aa} -> ¬(¬{E}{aa} & {G}{aa}) fact15: {AB}{aa} -> ¬(¬{Q}{aa} & {EF}{aa})

There is something such that if that thing is unsteady the fact that that thing is not a mil but a slang does not hold.

(Ex): {FB}x -> ¬(¬{IH}x & {JE}x)

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There exists something such that if it is a kind of a Bairiki then it is non-actinomycetal thing that is a curb. fact2: That someone is not a kind of a Morrison but this person daydreams Crateva is false if this person is a Xyris. fact3: There is something such that if it squincheds then the fact that it is a glossolalia and is unspaced is wrong. fact4: That someone is not a mil but it is a slang is false if it is unsteady. fact5: If this inoculant is unhealthful the fact that this inoculant is both not unspaced and a Pilosella does not hold. fact6: There is some man such that if she is a kind of a Wodan the fact that she does not braid counterargument and she is Austronesian is incorrect. fact7: That this inoculant is not a glossolalia but that thing is unspaced does not hold if this inoculant squincheds. fact8: There exists some person such that if he squincheds then he is not a glossolalia and he is unspaced. fact9: There is something such that if it spirits hemothorax then that it is not a kind of an extraterrestrial and it is nonbearing does not hold. fact10: If this inoculant is palpatory then the fact that it is spaced and not insurmountable does not hold. fact11: There is something such that if it is nonvolatile then that it does not tauten aridity and it does patronise impuissance does not hold. fact12: If this inoculant squincheds then that the fact that it is a kind of a glossolalia that is unspaced hold does not hold. fact13: If this inoculant does squinched then this inoculant is not a glossolalia and is unspaced. fact14: If this inoculant ravishes that this inoculant is not factorial but she is periodic does not hold. fact15: That this inoculant is not a Rubens but an ebb is incorrect if she/he is unspaced. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists something such that if this thing squincheds then that this thing is not a glossolalia and this thing is not spaced is not correct. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This integument does not woo invaluableness.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: If Genesis is not a ASEAN then this integument does not woo invaluableness. fact2: If Genesis is not a kind of a google then this integument does woo invaluableness. fact3: This integument does not purge Hagerstown if Genesis is not a ASEAN. fact4: Genesis is not a rhythmicity. fact5: The fact that Jack does not purge Hagerstown hold. fact6: If Genesis does not purge Hagerstown Genesis either is not a ASEAN or is not a google or both. fact7: If some person does not purge Hagerstown then it does not Christianize wee and/or it does not sink moistness. fact8: This integument is not a ASEAN if Genesis does not woo invaluableness. fact9: the Hagerstown does not purge Genesis. fact10: Genesis does not purge Hagerstown.

fact1: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact2: ¬{AB}{a} -> {B}{b} fact3: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact4: ¬{DE}{a} fact5: ¬{A}{fs} fact6: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{DK}x v ¬{CR}x) fact8: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} fact9: ¬{AC}{aa} fact10: ¬{A}{a}

If this Cewa does not purge Hagerstown then either this Cewa does not Christianize wee or it does not sink moistness or both.

¬{A}{bt} -> (¬{DK}{bt} v ¬{CR}{bt})

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If Genesis is not a ASEAN then this integument does not woo invaluableness. fact2: If Genesis is not a kind of a google then this integument does woo invaluableness. fact3: This integument does not purge Hagerstown if Genesis is not a ASEAN. fact4: Genesis is not a rhythmicity. fact5: The fact that Jack does not purge Hagerstown hold. fact6: If Genesis does not purge Hagerstown Genesis either is not a ASEAN or is not a google or both. fact7: If some person does not purge Hagerstown then it does not Christianize wee and/or it does not sink moistness. fact8: This integument is not a ASEAN if Genesis does not woo invaluableness. fact9: the Hagerstown does not purge Genesis. fact10: Genesis does not purge Hagerstown. ; $hypothesis$ = This integument does not woo invaluableness. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this meal is a masted and that one is a electrosleep does not hold.

¬({A}{a} & {B}{a})

fact1: This meal is a kind of a masted. fact2: The fact that this meal is a kind of a electrosleep is true.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This meal is a kind of a masted. fact2: The fact that this meal is a kind of a electrosleep is true. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this meal is a masted and that one is a electrosleep does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That undershirt does not madden sixer.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: That this national does not madden sixer is true if this intercom is a amphigory. fact2: That either this national is not a prosaicness or that person is not immunosuppressed or both is not right. fact3: This national does not madden sixer if this intercom does madden sixer. fact4: That Ryukyuan is not noneffervescent. fact5: If that either this national is not a prosaicness or that is non-immunosuppressed or both does not hold then this intercom is umbelliform. fact6: That undershirt is harsh but it is not a Klaproth if this stinger swears. fact7: This national is a prosaicness. fact8: The fact that something is umbelliform but it is not a plaint does not hold if it is not a amphigory. fact9: That this intercom is not a flaring and/or does not tergiversate opaqueness is incorrect. fact10: This intercom is umbelliform if the fact that this national is a prosaicness and/or it is not immunosuppressed is incorrect. fact11: If some person is umbelliform then that it is a plaint is true. fact12: If this intercom is a plaint that undershirt does not madden sixer. fact13: If that undershirt is harsh but it is not a Klaproth then this intercom is a filling. fact14: This national is umbelliform. fact15: If that Ryukyuan is not noneffervescent this stinger is a canvassing and it does swear. fact16: If something is a prosaicness or a plaint or both then Katelyn is a prosaicness. fact17: If some man does not fleece either he maddens sixer or he is a amphigory or both. fact18: If something that is a filling is not a Essene that thing does not fleece. fact19: If the fact that somebody is a Essene and a Abuja is false then it is not a Essene. fact20: If this national is a kind of non-umbelliform thing that does not madden sixer then that undershirt madden sixer. fact21: If this national does not madden sixer then this national is both umbelliform and a prosaicness. fact22: There exists nothing such that that thing is a kind of a Essene and that thing is a kind of a Abuja.

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

Katelyn is a kind of a prosaicness.

{AA}{dg}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That this national does not madden sixer is true if this intercom is a amphigory. fact2: That either this national is not a prosaicness or that person is not immunosuppressed or both is not right. fact3: This national does not madden sixer if this intercom does madden sixer. fact4: That Ryukyuan is not noneffervescent. fact5: If that either this national is not a prosaicness or that is non-immunosuppressed or both does not hold then this intercom is umbelliform. fact6: That undershirt is harsh but it is not a Klaproth if this stinger swears. fact7: This national is a prosaicness. fact8: The fact that something is umbelliform but it is not a plaint does not hold if it is not a amphigory. fact9: That this intercom is not a flaring and/or does not tergiversate opaqueness is incorrect. fact10: This intercom is umbelliform if the fact that this national is a prosaicness and/or it is not immunosuppressed is incorrect. fact11: If some person is umbelliform then that it is a plaint is true. fact12: If this intercom is a plaint that undershirt does not madden sixer. fact13: If that undershirt is harsh but it is not a Klaproth then this intercom is a filling. fact14: This national is umbelliform. fact15: If that Ryukyuan is not noneffervescent this stinger is a canvassing and it does swear. fact16: If something is a prosaicness or a plaint or both then Katelyn is a prosaicness. fact17: If some man does not fleece either he maddens sixer or he is a amphigory or both. fact18: If something that is a filling is not a Essene that thing does not fleece. fact19: If the fact that somebody is a Essene and a Abuja is false then it is not a Essene. fact20: If this national is a kind of non-umbelliform thing that does not madden sixer then that undershirt madden sixer. fact21: If this national does not madden sixer then this national is both umbelliform and a prosaicness. fact22: There exists nothing such that that thing is a kind of a Essene and that thing is a kind of a Abuja. ; $hypothesis$ = That undershirt does not madden sixer. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact2 -> int1: This intercom is umbelliform.; fact11 -> int2: If the fact that this intercom is umbelliform is true then this intercom is a plaint.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This intercom is a plaint.; int3 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Some man does irrigate Camden and is alkylic.

(Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x)

fact1: If this shoebird is not a Cyprinodontidae that GP irrigates Camden and is alkylic. fact2: This shoebird is not a Cyprinodontidae. fact3: There exists some man such that she/he is phocine. fact4: That multiprocessing is alkylic. fact5: There exists someone such that that she barrels Paliurus is true. fact6: Something is not non-alkylic. fact7: That GP is not gross. fact8: There is something such that that that is a kind of a Cyprinodontidae is right. fact9: If this shoebird is not calligraphic then that symbolist is a Cyprinodontidae and/or that one is conspicuous. fact10: Some man irrigates Camden. fact11: That GP is alkylic. fact12: If that GP is non-gross that the fact that the fact that that GP does not rate fuzzed and/or this thing is a Laffer is correct is false is true. fact13: Some person is a geodesic if that it does not rate fuzzed and/or it is a Laffer does not hold. fact14: If this shoebird is not a Cyprinodontidae then that GP is alkylic. fact15: If that GP is a geodesic then this shoebird is a geodesic. fact16: That GP juggles consanguinity. fact17: If that some man is not a totalism but a feed does not hold then it is not calligraphic. fact18: The fact that somebody is not a totalism but this person is a feed does not hold if the fact that this person is a geodesic is true.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: (Ex): {CC}x fact4: {AB}{cb} fact5: (Ex): {DR}x fact6: (Ex): {AB}x fact7: ¬{I}{b} fact8: (Ex): {A}x fact9: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{br} v {B}{br}) fact10: (Ex): {AA}x fact11: {AB}{b} fact12: ¬{I}{b} -> ¬(¬{H}{b} v {G}{b}) fact13: (x): ¬(¬{H}x v {G}x) -> {F}x fact14: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{b} fact15: {F}{b} -> {F}{a} fact16: {AH}{b} fact17: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact18: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x)

That symbolist does not irrigate Camden.

¬{AA}{br}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this shoebird is not a Cyprinodontidae that GP irrigates Camden and is alkylic. fact2: This shoebird is not a Cyprinodontidae. fact3: There exists some man such that she/he is phocine. fact4: That multiprocessing is alkylic. fact5: There exists someone such that that she barrels Paliurus is true. fact6: Something is not non-alkylic. fact7: That GP is not gross. fact8: There is something such that that that is a kind of a Cyprinodontidae is right. fact9: If this shoebird is not calligraphic then that symbolist is a Cyprinodontidae and/or that one is conspicuous. fact10: Some man irrigates Camden. fact11: That GP is alkylic. fact12: If that GP is non-gross that the fact that the fact that that GP does not rate fuzzed and/or this thing is a Laffer is correct is false is true. fact13: Some person is a geodesic if that it does not rate fuzzed and/or it is a Laffer does not hold. fact14: If this shoebird is not a Cyprinodontidae then that GP is alkylic. fact15: If that GP is a geodesic then this shoebird is a geodesic. fact16: That GP juggles consanguinity. fact17: If that some man is not a totalism but a feed does not hold then it is not calligraphic. fact18: The fact that somebody is not a totalism but this person is a feed does not hold if the fact that this person is a geodesic is true. ; $hypothesis$ = Some man does irrigate Camden and is alkylic. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> int1: That GP irrigates Camden and is alkylic.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That monozygoticness does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: If this derailment happens then either this concentrating controlled does not occurs or that launching does not occurs or both. fact2: Both that abidance and this derailment happens if this mintage does not happens. fact3: That this concentrating controlled does not happens and/or that that launching does not occurs results in that that launching does not happens. fact4: That focusing does not happens. fact5: That this autosomalness happens triggers that cautioning. fact6: That non-autosomalness is brought about by that non-juicyness. fact7: That monozygoticness is caused by that that fraternization occurs. fact8: If this mintage does not happens then either that abidance occurs or this derailment does not happens or both. fact9: That this particulate happens and this paging does not occurs is triggered by that that thanking Rota does not happens. fact10: The fact that that cautioning does not happens but that fraternization occurs is false if this autosomalness does not happens. fact11: That this aptitudinalness does not occurs and this mintage does not happens is triggered by this wriggling. fact12: This juiciness does not occurs if the fact that that both that prowl and that launching occurs hold is not right. fact13: That that both this biologicalness and the outvying Frisia happens is incorrect is true if that incorporating does not occurs. fact14: If this juiciness happens this autosomalness occurs. fact15: If that focusing does not happens then that that tonsorialness and that pleasantness occurs is wrong. fact16: The fact that that prowl happens and that launching happens does not hold if this concentrating controlled does not occurs. fact17: If the fact that notthat cautioning but that fraternization happens is wrong that that fraternization does not occurs is true. fact18: If that launching does not occurs then both this juiciness and that prowl occurs. fact19: That that monozygoticness does not happens is not false if that tonsorialness does not happens. fact20: If that cautioning occurs that that fraternization happens is true. fact21: This particulate causes that this wriggling happens but this aptitudinalness does not occurs. fact22: That this wriggling but notthis aptitudinalness happens brings about that this mintage does not happens.

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

That monozygoticness occurs.

{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this derailment happens then either this concentrating controlled does not occurs or that launching does not occurs or both. fact2: Both that abidance and this derailment happens if this mintage does not happens. fact3: That this concentrating controlled does not happens and/or that that launching does not occurs results in that that launching does not happens. fact4: That focusing does not happens. fact5: That this autosomalness happens triggers that cautioning. fact6: That non-autosomalness is brought about by that non-juicyness. fact7: That monozygoticness is caused by that that fraternization occurs. fact8: If this mintage does not happens then either that abidance occurs or this derailment does not happens or both. fact9: That this particulate happens and this paging does not occurs is triggered by that that thanking Rota does not happens. fact10: The fact that that cautioning does not happens but that fraternization occurs is false if this autosomalness does not happens. fact11: That this aptitudinalness does not occurs and this mintage does not happens is triggered by this wriggling. fact12: This juiciness does not occurs if the fact that that both that prowl and that launching occurs hold is not right. fact13: That that both this biologicalness and the outvying Frisia happens is incorrect is true if that incorporating does not occurs. fact14: If this juiciness happens this autosomalness occurs. fact15: If that focusing does not happens then that that tonsorialness and that pleasantness occurs is wrong. fact16: The fact that that prowl happens and that launching happens does not hold if this concentrating controlled does not occurs. fact17: If the fact that notthat cautioning but that fraternization happens is wrong that that fraternization does not occurs is true. fact18: If that launching does not occurs then both this juiciness and that prowl occurs. fact19: That that monozygoticness does not happens is not false if that tonsorialness does not happens. fact20: If that cautioning occurs that that fraternization happens is true. fact21: This particulate causes that this wriggling happens but this aptitudinalness does not occurs. fact22: That this wriggling but notthis aptitudinalness happens brings about that this mintage does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That monozygoticness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This photovoltaicness does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: This prickling floodlit happens. fact2: The fact that this reducing Lycopersicum occurs is true if this photovoltaicness does not happens. fact3: The venipuncture occurs. fact4: The fact that that disdainfulness occurs is not incorrect. fact5: The calculating occurs.

fact1: {IP} fact2: ¬{A} -> {EF} fact3: {DL} fact4: {EQ} fact5: {IG}

This reducing Lycopersicum occurs.

{EF}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This prickling floodlit happens. fact2: The fact that this reducing Lycopersicum occurs is true if this photovoltaicness does not happens. fact3: The venipuncture occurs. fact4: The fact that that disdainfulness occurs is not incorrect. fact5: The calculating occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This photovoltaicness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That receipting occurs.

{D}

fact1: If this materialisation does not occurs then both the unknotting and the hardship occurs. fact2: This shaving occurs. fact3: The appreciating happens. fact4: If this mosaicness does not happens the fact that this Babylonian occurs and this friction does not happens is incorrect. fact5: This undressing does not occurs. fact6: That both this non-poorness and this mosaicness occurs is wrong if this helpfulness does not happens. fact7: If that notthe poorness but this mosaicness occurs does not hold this mosaicness does not occurs. fact8: If that this shaving does not occurs is true the fact that that receipting does not happens and this rigamarole does not happens is false. fact9: That till does not happens. fact10: That that the unknotting happens leads to that this helpfulness does not happens and/or that this untrimmedness happens is true. fact11: This undressing does not happens if the fact that this Babylonian occurs and this friction does not occurs is not true. fact12: This shaving prevents that this rigamarole does not occurs. fact13: This unhelpfulness is triggered by that the unhelpful does not happens and/or this untrimmedness happens. fact14: That melanising does not happens. fact15: This legs does not occurs. fact16: This non-dueness yields that this materialisation does not happens and this numbering scleritis does not occurs. fact17: That that bandaging Serra does not happens is prevented by that the enthronization occurs. fact18: That that till does not occurs and/or that forswearing Themistocles does not occurs is caused by that this undressing does not occurs. fact19: If that till does not occurs that forswearing Themistocles occurs. fact20: That dismantling excogitation does not occurs. fact21: That the oviparousness does not happens is triggered by that both this relocating and this glittering happens. fact22: The cycling happens.

fact1: ¬{O} -> ({M} & {N}) fact2: {A} fact3: {AH} fact4: ¬{I} -> ¬({H} & ¬{G}) fact5: ¬{F} fact6: ¬{K} -> ¬(¬{J} & {I}) fact7: ¬(¬{J} & {I}) -> ¬{I} fact8: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{D} & ¬{B}) fact9: ¬{E} fact10: {M} -> (¬{K} v {L}) fact11: ¬({H} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} fact12: {A} -> {B} fact13: (¬{K} v {L}) -> ¬{K} fact14: ¬{FO} fact15: ¬{JA} fact16: ¬{Q} -> (¬{O} & ¬{P}) fact17: {GK} -> {HM} fact18: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} v ¬{C}) fact19: ¬{E} -> {C} fact20: ¬{IA} fact21: ({HO} & {DD}) -> ¬{IK} fact22: {GD}

That receipting occurs.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this materialisation does not occurs then both the unknotting and the hardship occurs. fact2: This shaving occurs. fact3: The appreciating happens. fact4: If this mosaicness does not happens the fact that this Babylonian occurs and this friction does not happens is incorrect. fact5: This undressing does not occurs. fact6: That both this non-poorness and this mosaicness occurs is wrong if this helpfulness does not happens. fact7: If that notthe poorness but this mosaicness occurs does not hold this mosaicness does not occurs. fact8: If that this shaving does not occurs is true the fact that that receipting does not happens and this rigamarole does not happens is false. fact9: That till does not happens. fact10: That that the unknotting happens leads to that this helpfulness does not happens and/or that this untrimmedness happens is true. fact11: This undressing does not happens if the fact that this Babylonian occurs and this friction does not occurs is not true. fact12: This shaving prevents that this rigamarole does not occurs. fact13: This unhelpfulness is triggered by that the unhelpful does not happens and/or this untrimmedness happens. fact14: That melanising does not happens. fact15: This legs does not occurs. fact16: This non-dueness yields that this materialisation does not happens and this numbering scleritis does not occurs. fact17: That that bandaging Serra does not happens is prevented by that the enthronization occurs. fact18: That that till does not occurs and/or that forswearing Themistocles does not occurs is caused by that this undressing does not occurs. fact19: If that till does not occurs that forswearing Themistocles occurs. fact20: That dismantling excogitation does not occurs. fact21: That the oviparousness does not happens is triggered by that both this relocating and this glittering happens. fact22: The cycling happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That receipting occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That veiling is a ARDS.

{C}{a}

fact1: Some man is a prescription and it belches if it is not a ARDS. fact2: The fact that this petiole is not a kind of a ARDS hold if that veiling is a kind of a ARDS but this one does not loot. fact3: Something belches or it is a ARDS or both if it is not a prescription. fact4: That veiling belches. fact5: That veiling is a prescription. fact6: If something is a prescription and does belch then that it is not a ARDS hold.

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

That veiling is a ARDS.

{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some man is a prescription and it belches if it is not a ARDS. fact2: The fact that this petiole is not a kind of a ARDS hold if that veiling is a kind of a ARDS but this one does not loot. fact3: Something belches or it is a ARDS or both if it is not a prescription. fact4: That veiling belches. fact5: That veiling is a prescription. fact6: If something is a prescription and does belch then that it is not a ARDS hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That veiling is a ARDS. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact4 -> int1: That veiling is a prescription and it belches.; fact6 -> int2: If that veiling is a prescription that belches it is not a ARDS.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that Theresa is neurologic is correct.

{C}{a}

fact1: Theresa is neurologic if it pegs excursus. fact2: Theresa pegs excursus if Theresa is a Suidae. fact3: Theresa does not relax. fact4: That Theresa is not a Suidae and words is false if Theresa does not relax. fact5: Something that does relax is not neurologic. fact6: If that Theresa does not peg excursus and is not neurologic is false then this ringway does not relax. fact7: If that span is not a Potorous then the fact that Theresa does not peg excursus and is a solstice is incorrect. fact8: Someone is a latest if it is capacitive. fact9: That the fact that Theresa does not peg excursus and is not neurologic does not hold is correct if that span is a solstice. fact10: If something does not elaborate then it is a solstice and it is a Potorous. fact11: If that some person is not clement but a weatherliness does not hold it is a latest. fact12: Something pegs excursus if that that it is not a Suidae and words is correct is false. fact13: The oilseed pegs excursus.

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

Theresa is non-neurologic.

¬{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Theresa is neurologic if it pegs excursus. fact2: Theresa pegs excursus if Theresa is a Suidae. fact3: Theresa does not relax. fact4: That Theresa is not a Suidae and words is false if Theresa does not relax. fact5: Something that does relax is not neurologic. fact6: If that Theresa does not peg excursus and is not neurologic is false then this ringway does not relax. fact7: If that span is not a Potorous then the fact that Theresa does not peg excursus and is a solstice is incorrect. fact8: Someone is a latest if it is capacitive. fact9: That the fact that Theresa does not peg excursus and is not neurologic does not hold is correct if that span is a solstice. fact10: If something does not elaborate then it is a solstice and it is a Potorous. fact11: If that some person is not clement but a weatherliness does not hold it is a latest. fact12: Something pegs excursus if that that it is not a Suidae and words is correct is false. fact13: The oilseed pegs excursus. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that Theresa is neurologic is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact3 -> int1: The fact that Theresa is not a Suidae but it words does not hold.; fact12 -> int2: If the fact that Theresa is not a Suidae but it words does not hold it pegs excursus.; int1 & int2 -> int3: Theresa pegs excursus.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This dermatomycosis does not stroke and does arrange Anser.

(¬{B}{c} & {C}{c})

fact1: That that tickweed does not arrange Anser and does underrate Fredericksburg is wrong if this dermatomycosis does not arrange Anser. fact2: If that some person strokes but that one does not arrange Anser does not hold then that one is not scarce. fact3: If that tickweed does not stroke then that this dermatomycosis does not stroke but it arranges Anser does not hold. fact4: That this dermatomycosis does stroke and it arranges Anser does not hold. fact5: If that some person is a kind of elysian person that is not apheretic does not hold then that one does not digitize Hottentot. fact6: If that that tape does not arrange Anser hold the fact that the fact that that tickweed is scarce but it is indecisive is wrong is right. fact7: The fact that this dermatomycosis underrates Fredericksburg and it does stroke is incorrect if that tickweed does not underrates Fredericksburg. fact8: The fact that some person does not insinuate explicitness but it is a shielding is incorrect if it is not a crossheading. fact9: If this dermatomycosis does not underrate Fredericksburg the fact that that tickweed underrate Fredericksburg and it strokes is not true. fact10: The fact that that tickweed is decisive and scarce does not hold. fact11: If some person is decisive then the fact that it does not stroke hold. fact12: The fact that if that tickweed is not scarce that that tape is not scarce but it is decisive is wrong hold. fact13: That that tickweed does not stroke but this one is congestive is false. fact14: That that tape is not scarce is true. fact15: This dermatomycosis is not scarce if that the fact that that tape does not insinuate explicitness but she/he is a shielding is wrong hold. fact16: That that tickweed underrates Fredericksburg but it is indecisive does not hold if that tape is not scarce. fact17: If this dermatomycosis does not stroke the fact that that tape does not stroke and is scarce is incorrect. fact18: Some person is not a kind of a crossheading if he is not a kind of a grating. fact19: Some person does not stroke if the fact that she underrates Fredericksburg and she is not decisive is incorrect.

fact1: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {AA}{b}) fact2: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact3: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{c} & {C}{c}) fact4: ¬({B}{c} & {C}{c}) fact5: (x): ¬({IB}x & ¬{HS}x) -> ¬{IO}x fact6: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact7: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬({AA}{c} & {B}{c}) fact8: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) fact9: ¬{AA}{c} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {B}{b}) fact10: ¬({AB}{b} & {A}{b}) fact11: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x fact12: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact13: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {EQ}{b}) fact14: ¬{A}{a} fact15: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{A}{c} fact16: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) fact17: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact18: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}x fact19: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

This dermatomycosis does not stroke and does arrange Anser.

(¬{B}{c} & {C}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that tickweed does not arrange Anser and does underrate Fredericksburg is wrong if this dermatomycosis does not arrange Anser. fact2: If that some person strokes but that one does not arrange Anser does not hold then that one is not scarce. fact3: If that tickweed does not stroke then that this dermatomycosis does not stroke but it arranges Anser does not hold. fact4: That this dermatomycosis does stroke and it arranges Anser does not hold. fact5: If that some person is a kind of elysian person that is not apheretic does not hold then that one does not digitize Hottentot. fact6: If that that tape does not arrange Anser hold the fact that the fact that that tickweed is scarce but it is indecisive is wrong is right. fact7: The fact that this dermatomycosis underrates Fredericksburg and it does stroke is incorrect if that tickweed does not underrates Fredericksburg. fact8: The fact that some person does not insinuate explicitness but it is a shielding is incorrect if it is not a crossheading. fact9: If this dermatomycosis does not underrate Fredericksburg the fact that that tickweed underrate Fredericksburg and it strokes is not true. fact10: The fact that that tickweed is decisive and scarce does not hold. fact11: If some person is decisive then the fact that it does not stroke hold. fact12: The fact that if that tickweed is not scarce that that tape is not scarce but it is decisive is wrong hold. fact13: That that tickweed does not stroke but this one is congestive is false. fact14: That that tape is not scarce is true. fact15: This dermatomycosis is not scarce if that the fact that that tape does not insinuate explicitness but she/he is a shielding is wrong hold. fact16: That that tickweed underrates Fredericksburg but it is indecisive does not hold if that tape is not scarce. fact17: If this dermatomycosis does not stroke the fact that that tape does not stroke and is scarce is incorrect. fact18: Some person is not a kind of a crossheading if he is not a kind of a grating. fact19: Some person does not stroke if the fact that she underrates Fredericksburg and she is not decisive is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = This dermatomycosis does not stroke and does arrange Anser. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact14 -> int1: The fact that that tickweed underrates Fredericksburg but that person is not decisive is false.; fact19 -> int2: If that that tickweed underrates Fredericksburg and is not decisive is not correct this one does not stroke.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That tickweed does not stroke.; int3 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that cysteine is not a Vesey is true.

¬{AB}{a}

fact1: That cysteine is a behaviorism.

fact1: {A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That cysteine is a behaviorism. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that cysteine is not a Vesey is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this hemipode does begrime accusative and she/he is a kwashiorkor is incorrect.

¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

fact1: If this emblem does not brown Fuego then the fact that the fact that this hemipode begrimes accusative and is a kwashiorkor does not hold is right. fact2: This hemipode is not a kind of a kwashiorkor if it is a Agee. fact3: This hemipode is mandibulate. fact4: That this decidua browns Fuego hold. fact5: If this hemipode is mandibulate this hemipode does not brown Fuego. fact6: There exists somebody such that that it is a kind of unenclosed one that is not a Hulsea does not hold. fact7: If some person does not brown Fuego then she/he begrimes accusative. fact8: This emblem is not attributable. fact9: This hemipode begrimes accusative if this hemipode does not brown Fuego. fact10: This hemipode does begrime accusative. fact11: If the fact that something engraves salubriousness and browns Fuego does not hold then that thing does not browns Fuego. fact12: If somebody is a Aquitania this person is not ultramicroscopic. fact13: If the fact that something is not thankful hold it packages factorization and it falters Bangladesh. fact14: This hemipode is lexical and is episcopal. fact15: If some person is non-ultramicroscopic the fact that this person is mandibulate and this person is not a Nebuchadrezzar is wrong. fact16: If this hemipode browns Fuego then this thing does not miffed. fact17: Some man begrimes accusative and is archangelic if that one is not a kind of a eyrir. fact18: If there exists someone such that the fact that she/he is unenclosed one that is not a Hulsea does not hold then that couchette is a kind of a Aquitania.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact2: {AE}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} fact3: {B}{aa} fact4: {A}{dk} fact5: {B}{aa} -> ¬{A}{aa} fact6: (Ex): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) fact7: (x): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x fact8: ¬{EO}{a} fact9: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} fact10: {AA}{aa} fact11: (x): ¬({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x fact12: (x): {F}x -> ¬{D}x fact13: (x): ¬{BQ}x -> ({BM}x & {FI}x) fact14: ({GS}{aa} & {FE}{aa}) fact15: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{E}x) fact16: {A}{aa} -> ¬{HA}{aa} fact17: (x): ¬{EF}x -> ({AA}x & {EE}x) fact18: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> {F}{b}

The fact that this hemipode does begrime accusative and she/he is a kwashiorkor is incorrect.

¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this emblem does not brown Fuego then the fact that the fact that this hemipode begrimes accusative and is a kwashiorkor does not hold is right. fact2: This hemipode is not a kind of a kwashiorkor if it is a Agee. fact3: This hemipode is mandibulate. fact4: That this decidua browns Fuego hold. fact5: If this hemipode is mandibulate this hemipode does not brown Fuego. fact6: There exists somebody such that that it is a kind of unenclosed one that is not a Hulsea does not hold. fact7: If some person does not brown Fuego then she/he begrimes accusative. fact8: This emblem is not attributable. fact9: This hemipode begrimes accusative if this hemipode does not brown Fuego. fact10: This hemipode does begrime accusative. fact11: If the fact that something engraves salubriousness and browns Fuego does not hold then that thing does not browns Fuego. fact12: If somebody is a Aquitania this person is not ultramicroscopic. fact13: If the fact that something is not thankful hold it packages factorization and it falters Bangladesh. fact14: This hemipode is lexical and is episcopal. fact15: If some person is non-ultramicroscopic the fact that this person is mandibulate and this person is not a Nebuchadrezzar is wrong. fact16: If this hemipode browns Fuego then this thing does not miffed. fact17: Some man begrimes accusative and is archangelic if that one is not a kind of a eyrir. fact18: If there exists someone such that the fact that she/he is unenclosed one that is not a Hulsea does not hold then that couchette is a kind of a Aquitania. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this hemipode does begrime accusative and she/he is a kwashiorkor is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That microgliacyte untwists and is a kind of a Uruguay.

({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

fact1: If somebody is not a abducent and not a impermanency that person is not aesthetical. fact2: If something is Rousseauan it is bold. fact3: That cowrie is a kind of a rottenness and it is phonic if that that booze is a edibility is incorrect. fact4: If some person does not preclude M2 then that person is not a abducent and is not a impermanency. fact5: Someone is a totipotence but he is not a Naziism if he currycombs Serranus. fact6: That microgliacyte is not a abducent if that that microgliacyte is a abducent and it is Chaldean does not hold. fact7: If there is something such that that that thing is not a kind of a Funka and that thing is a dimness is incorrect that cowrie is a Funka. fact8: That that xerophile is not aesthetical if that silk is not aesthetical hold. fact9: If some man is not aesthetical then that the fact that that one is Chaldean man that illuminates is true does not hold. fact10: If that that microgliacyte is aesthetical man that is a kind of a abducent does not hold it is aesthetical. fact11: That booze is not a edibility. fact12: That that microgliacyte is a kind of a Uruguay that is a haploid does not hold. fact13: The fact that this redshank is nonconducting and this untwists is not right. fact14: Some man is Rousseauan if it is not a rottenness. fact15: The fact that someone untwists and is a kind of a Uruguay does not hold if that one is not aesthetical. fact16: If that cowrie is a Funka and is a rottenness that soprano is not a rottenness. fact17: There is somebody such that that this one is not a Funka and this one is a dimness is false. fact18: A bold person currycombs Serranus. fact19: That silk does not preclude M2 if that soprano is a totipotence and is not a Naziism.

fact1: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact2: (x): {I}x -> {H}x fact3: ¬{N}{d} -> ({J}{c} & {L}{c}) fact4: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) fact5: (x): {G}x -> ({F}x & ¬{E}x) fact6: ¬({B}{aa} & {AL}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact7: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & {M}x) -> {K}{c} fact8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{A}{cs} fact9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AL}x & {DQ}x) fact10: ¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} fact11: ¬{N}{d} fact12: ¬({AB}{aa} & {BB}{aa}) fact13: ¬({BE}{it} & {AA}{it}) fact14: (x): ¬{J}x -> {I}x fact15: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact16: ({K}{c} & {J}{c}) -> ¬{J}{b} fact17: (Ex): ¬(¬{K}x & {M}x) fact18: (x): {H}x -> {G}x fact19: ({F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a}

The fact that that xerophile is Chaldean and it illuminates does not hold.

¬({AL}{cs} & {DQ}{cs})

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If somebody is not a abducent and not a impermanency that person is not aesthetical. fact2: If something is Rousseauan it is bold. fact3: That cowrie is a kind of a rottenness and it is phonic if that that booze is a edibility is incorrect. fact4: If some person does not preclude M2 then that person is not a abducent and is not a impermanency. fact5: Someone is a totipotence but he is not a Naziism if he currycombs Serranus. fact6: That microgliacyte is not a abducent if that that microgliacyte is a abducent and it is Chaldean does not hold. fact7: If there is something such that that that thing is not a kind of a Funka and that thing is a dimness is incorrect that cowrie is a Funka. fact8: That that xerophile is not aesthetical if that silk is not aesthetical hold. fact9: If some man is not aesthetical then that the fact that that one is Chaldean man that illuminates is true does not hold. fact10: If that that microgliacyte is aesthetical man that is a kind of a abducent does not hold it is aesthetical. fact11: That booze is not a edibility. fact12: That that microgliacyte is a kind of a Uruguay that is a haploid does not hold. fact13: The fact that this redshank is nonconducting and this untwists is not right. fact14: Some man is Rousseauan if it is not a rottenness. fact15: The fact that someone untwists and is a kind of a Uruguay does not hold if that one is not aesthetical. fact16: If that cowrie is a Funka and is a rottenness that soprano is not a rottenness. fact17: There is somebody such that that this one is not a Funka and this one is a dimness is false. fact18: A bold person currycombs Serranus. fact19: That silk does not preclude M2 if that soprano is a totipotence and is not a Naziism. ; $hypothesis$ = That microgliacyte untwists and is a kind of a Uruguay. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This Phosphorus is a Merrimac.

{B}{b}

fact1: A cormose man is pictural. fact2: That catamenia is a Merrimac if this Phosphorus is a Hamamelis. fact3: that Duchamp houses catamenia. fact4: This Phosphorus houses Duchamp. fact5: Something is not a Merrimac and does not house Duchamp if it is pictural. fact6: If the fact that that arbitrator houses Duchamp is right the polony is a Merrimac. fact7: This Phosphorus is a kind of a Merrimac if the fact that that catamenia houses Duchamp is correct. fact8: This Phosphorus is lucifugous. fact9: If the pogge houses Duchamp this agglomerator is a Merrimac. fact10: If that this Phosphorus houses Duchamp hold that catamenia is a Merrimac. fact11: If that catamenia is a Merrimac this Phosphorus does house Duchamp.

fact1: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact2: {BA}{b} -> {B}{a} fact3: {AA}{aa} fact4: {A}{b} fact5: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact6: {A}{n} -> {B}{p} fact7: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact8: {GK}{b} fact9: {A}{bi} -> {B}{ij} fact10: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact11: {B}{a} -> {A}{b}

This Phosphorus is not a kind of a Merrimac.

¬{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: A cormose man is pictural. fact2: That catamenia is a Merrimac if this Phosphorus is a Hamamelis. fact3: that Duchamp houses catamenia. fact4: This Phosphorus houses Duchamp. fact5: Something is not a Merrimac and does not house Duchamp if it is pictural. fact6: If the fact that that arbitrator houses Duchamp is right the polony is a Merrimac. fact7: This Phosphorus is a kind of a Merrimac if the fact that that catamenia houses Duchamp is correct. fact8: This Phosphorus is lucifugous. fact9: If the pogge houses Duchamp this agglomerator is a Merrimac. fact10: If that this Phosphorus houses Duchamp hold that catamenia is a Merrimac. fact11: If that catamenia is a Merrimac this Phosphorus does house Duchamp. ; $hypothesis$ = This Phosphorus is a Merrimac. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that if this stake mouses this stake is a Guthrie does not hold.

¬({A}{a} -> {C}{a})

fact1: That this stake is inexplicit is not wrong if the one garments Liberia. fact2: If that eradicator is shodden then that eradicator is a kind of a melody. fact3: This stake maturates if this is a secpar. fact4: If this stake mouses then it is cardiographic. fact5: This stake mouses if this stake is a barye. fact6: This stake is a pinealoma. fact7: That gendarme is a Guthrie if that that gendarme is apogamic hold. fact8: This stake is hypovolaemic. fact9: If this stake is a kind of a valued then this stake is a Guthrie. fact10: If this stake is a Hanoverian then it is a kind of a secpar. fact11: If the fact that this stake is a secpar hold then this stake is a Guthrie. fact12: This Epicurean does pillory Thessaly if it is a Plymouth. fact13: The fact that this stake is a Montaigne hold. fact14: If this stake is incommunicative then this stake is a kind of a Guthrie. fact15: If this stake is a prurience this stake is a Guthrie. fact16: Somebody is a secpar that is a Guthrie if this one is not a Guadalajara. fact17: This conjunctiva grosses if the person is a Guadalajara. fact18: This stake is a litas. fact19: This cortisol is a secpar. fact20: This stake is a secpar if that person does mouse. fact21: If some person is a secpar the person mouses. fact22: If this stake disregards overdraft then it is not non-serological.

fact1: {JC}{a} -> {HU}{a} fact2: {EB}{gp} -> {JK}{gp} fact3: {B}{a} -> {P}{a} fact4: {A}{a} -> {CQ}{a} fact5: {FC}{a} -> {A}{a} fact6: {GJ}{a} fact7: {JG}{fi} -> {C}{fi} fact8: {DD}{a} fact9: {HC}{a} -> {C}{a} fact10: {GB}{a} -> {B}{a} fact11: {B}{a} -> {C}{a} fact12: {Q}{ip} -> {DT}{ip} fact13: {CD}{a} fact14: {AJ}{a} -> {C}{a} fact15: {GF}{a} -> {C}{a} fact16: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) fact17: {D}{bd} -> {BL}{bd} fact18: {EF}{a} fact19: {B}{cl} fact20: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact21: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact22: {FA}{a} -> {BN}{a}

This waxflower mouses.

{A}{je}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this stake is inexplicit is not wrong if the one garments Liberia. fact2: If that eradicator is shodden then that eradicator is a kind of a melody. fact3: This stake maturates if this is a secpar. fact4: If this stake mouses then it is cardiographic. fact5: This stake mouses if this stake is a barye. fact6: This stake is a pinealoma. fact7: That gendarme is a Guthrie if that that gendarme is apogamic hold. fact8: This stake is hypovolaemic. fact9: If this stake is a kind of a valued then this stake is a Guthrie. fact10: If this stake is a Hanoverian then it is a kind of a secpar. fact11: If the fact that this stake is a secpar hold then this stake is a Guthrie. fact12: This Epicurean does pillory Thessaly if it is a Plymouth. fact13: The fact that this stake is a Montaigne hold. fact14: If this stake is incommunicative then this stake is a kind of a Guthrie. fact15: If this stake is a prurience this stake is a Guthrie. fact16: Somebody is a secpar that is a Guthrie if this one is not a Guadalajara. fact17: This conjunctiva grosses if the person is a Guadalajara. fact18: This stake is a litas. fact19: This cortisol is a secpar. fact20: This stake is a secpar if that person does mouse. fact21: If some person is a secpar the person mouses. fact22: If this stake disregards overdraft then it is not non-serological. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that if this stake mouses this stake is a Guthrie does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this stake mouses.; fact20 & assump1 -> int1: This stake is a kind of a secpar.; int1 & fact11 -> int2: This stake is a Guthrie.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This shimmering happens.

{B}

fact1: That this marbleizinging hypoproteinemia happens and this unsusceptibleness does not occurs is wrong. fact2: This shimmering occurs if that this marbleizinging hypoproteinemia does not happens and this unsusceptibleness does not happens is incorrect. fact3: That this marbleizinging hypoproteinemia does not happens and this unsusceptibleness happens is not right. fact4: That this marbleizinging hypoproteinemia does not happens and this unsusceptibleness does not occurs is wrong if the noncrystallineness does not happens. fact5: The noncrystallineness does not occurs.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That this marbleizinging hypoproteinemia happens and this unsusceptibleness does not occurs is wrong. fact2: This shimmering occurs if that this marbleizinging hypoproteinemia does not happens and this unsusceptibleness does not happens is incorrect. fact3: That this marbleizinging hypoproteinemia does not happens and this unsusceptibleness happens is not right. fact4: That this marbleizinging hypoproteinemia does not happens and this unsusceptibleness does not occurs is wrong if the noncrystallineness does not happens. fact5: The noncrystallineness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This shimmering happens. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact5 -> int1: The fact that this marbleizinging hypoproteinemia does not happens and this unsusceptibleness does not occurs is not right.; int1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This cantala is a Traubel.

{B}{aa}

fact1: Something is a kind of a Traubel if that it is not a Grossulariaceae and transplants canard is incorrect. fact2: This cantala is a Heraclitus if this cantala is a kind of a nominal. fact3: That something is not a kind of a Grossulariaceae but it transplants canard is false if it is a Heraclitus. fact4: This fiefdom is a Grossulariaceae. fact5: If this cantala is not a kind of a nominal then this is a copartnership. fact6: If the fact that somebody is not electrostatic but it is a kind of a pass is false it is a ricketiness. fact7: This cantala is a kind of a nominal.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact2: {C}{aa} -> {A}{aa} fact3: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact4: {AA}{gg} fact5: ¬{C}{aa} -> {BK}{aa} fact6: (x): ¬(¬{IT}x & {CO}x) -> {CL}x fact7: {C}{aa}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a kind of a Traubel if that it is not a Grossulariaceae and transplants canard is incorrect. fact2: This cantala is a Heraclitus if this cantala is a kind of a nominal. fact3: That something is not a kind of a Grossulariaceae but it transplants canard is false if it is a Heraclitus. fact4: This fiefdom is a Grossulariaceae. fact5: If this cantala is not a kind of a nominal then this is a copartnership. fact6: If the fact that somebody is not electrostatic but it is a kind of a pass is false it is a ricketiness. fact7: This cantala is a kind of a nominal. ; $hypothesis$ = This cantala is a Traubel. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: If this cantala is a Heraclitus that this cantala is not a Grossulariaceae but she transplants canard does not hold.; fact2 & fact7 -> int2: This cantala is a Heraclitus.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that this cantala is not a kind of a Grossulariaceae and does transplant canard is incorrect.; fact1 -> int4: If the fact that this cantala is not a Grossulariaceae and transplants canard does not hold then this cantala is a Traubel.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this mariposa is not Tyrolese hold.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: This mariposa is not a might. fact2: The gravedigger is not Tyrolese. fact3: This mariposa is not Tyrolese if this infrared assists Malopterurus. fact4: This infrared is non-acaulescent if there is something such that that the thing surprises Aphyllanthaceae and is not a Thlaspi is false. fact5: Either this groundfish assists Malopterurus or he/she is a Myrmecophagidae or both. fact6: If this nonpartizan is not toeless then either this infrared assists Malopterurus or it is Tyrolese or both. fact7: Something is toeless and assists Malopterurus if the thing is not Tyrolese. fact8: This infrared is toeless. fact9: That diastrophism is not toeless. fact10: If this mariposa does not shade colligation that it surprises Aphyllanthaceae and it is not a Thlaspi does not hold. fact11: The fact that this mariposa is not Tyrolese hold if this infrared assists Malopterurus or it is toeless or both. fact12: If the fact that this mariposa is either not non-toeless or Tyrolese or both is true this infrared does not assist Malopterurus. fact13: This systematizer is toeless. fact14: This infrared is Tyrolese and/or it is toeless. fact15: The fact that something does resent longevity and this is a crinoid is wrong if this is not acaulescent. fact16: This mariposa does not shade colligation.

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

This mariposa is Tyrolese.

{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This mariposa is not a might. fact2: The gravedigger is not Tyrolese. fact3: This mariposa is not Tyrolese if this infrared assists Malopterurus. fact4: This infrared is non-acaulescent if there is something such that that the thing surprises Aphyllanthaceae and is not a Thlaspi is false. fact5: Either this groundfish assists Malopterurus or he/she is a Myrmecophagidae or both. fact6: If this nonpartizan is not toeless then either this infrared assists Malopterurus or it is Tyrolese or both. fact7: Something is toeless and assists Malopterurus if the thing is not Tyrolese. fact8: This infrared is toeless. fact9: That diastrophism is not toeless. fact10: If this mariposa does not shade colligation that it surprises Aphyllanthaceae and it is not a Thlaspi does not hold. fact11: The fact that this mariposa is not Tyrolese hold if this infrared assists Malopterurus or it is toeless or both. fact12: If the fact that this mariposa is either not non-toeless or Tyrolese or both is true this infrared does not assist Malopterurus. fact13: This systematizer is toeless. fact14: This infrared is Tyrolese and/or it is toeless. fact15: The fact that something does resent longevity and this is a crinoid is wrong if this is not acaulescent. fact16: This mariposa does not shade colligation. ; $hypothesis$ = That this mariposa is not Tyrolese hold. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: This infrared assists Malopterurus and/or is toeless.; int1 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That clearance happens.

{D}

fact1: Both that bisteredness and that moderating occurs. fact2: That clearance happens and that bisteredness occurs if that moderating does not happens. fact3: That clearance happens if that scratching puerperium happens. fact4: That debuting happens. fact5: That both that debuting and that emission occurs is correct. fact6: That that scratching puerperium happens or that that debuting occurs or both is triggered by that that lambasting dishonor does not occurs. fact7: Both the non-bisteredness and this invitation happens if that moderating does not occurs. fact8: That lambasting dishonor does not occurs. fact9: That moderating occurs.

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

That clearance happens.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both that bisteredness and that moderating occurs. fact2: That clearance happens and that bisteredness occurs if that moderating does not happens. fact3: That clearance happens if that scratching puerperium happens. fact4: That debuting happens. fact5: That both that debuting and that emission occurs is correct. fact6: That that scratching puerperium happens or that that debuting occurs or both is triggered by that that lambasting dishonor does not occurs. fact7: Both the non-bisteredness and this invitation happens if that moderating does not occurs. fact8: That lambasting dishonor does not occurs. fact9: That moderating occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That clearance happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this twister does not happens and this nonsurgicalness does not occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That this twister and this non-nonsurgicalness happens is wrong if this luging does not occurs. fact2: The fact that this agglutinating Cetoniidae does not happens but the charitableness happens does not hold. fact3: If that the feathering does not happens is right then the fact that the nipping does not happens and that patterning activism does not happens is incorrect. fact4: The fact that that approach does not occurs and that expressionisticness does not occurs does not hold. fact5: The fact that that wheellessness occurs but this confecting does not occurs does not hold. fact6: The inducement does not happens. fact7: If the displeasing does not occurs that that electromyography happens and the overawing dishonour does not occurs is wrong. fact8: If this drumming wordiness does not happens then that both this non-allopatricness and that cybercrime occurs is false. fact9: The fact that the frescoing does not occurs and that electromyography does not happens does not hold. fact10: If that wheellessness does not occurs then the fact that that electromyography does not occurs and this creaking does not happens is incorrect. fact11: The fact that the scolloping microfarad does not happens and that unchangeableness does not occurs is false. fact12: If that this luging occurs and/or this nonwashableness does not happens does not hold then this twister does not happens. fact13: The fact that the feathering does not occurs and the humoring apparentness does not occurs is incorrect if this adducting ragtag does not occurs. fact14: That this twister happens but this nonsurgicalness does not happens is wrong. fact15: This luging does not happens. fact16: The fact that this twister does not occurs and this nonsurgicalness does not occurs is incorrect if this luging does not happens. fact17: If this luging occurs then the fact that the skunk does not occurs and this prolixness does not occurs is false. fact18: The tilling Tetrao does not occurs. fact19: If this luging does not occurs that the fact that notthis twister but this nonsurgicalness occurs is false is right. fact20: That notthis twister but this nonsurgicalness occurs is wrong.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact2: ¬(¬{FN} & {AO}) fact3: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{IN} & ¬{EQ}) fact4: ¬(¬{JE} & ¬{ET}) fact5: ¬({CI} & ¬{ER}) fact6: ¬{BI} fact7: ¬{HA} -> ¬({CL} & ¬{HM}) fact8: ¬{DU} -> ¬(¬{HO} & {AI}) fact9: ¬(¬{GM} & ¬{CL}) fact10: ¬{CI} -> ¬(¬{CL} & ¬{N}) fact11: ¬(¬{BB} & ¬{HB}) fact12: ¬({A} v ¬{B}) -> ¬{AA} fact13: ¬{HL} -> ¬(¬{H} & ¬{BF}) fact14: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact15: ¬{A} fact16: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact17: {A} -> ¬(¬{JF} & ¬{GF}) fact18: ¬{GP} fact19: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact20: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

This twister does not occurs and this nonsurgicalness does not happens.

(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this twister and this non-nonsurgicalness happens is wrong if this luging does not occurs. fact2: The fact that this agglutinating Cetoniidae does not happens but the charitableness happens does not hold. fact3: If that the feathering does not happens is right then the fact that the nipping does not happens and that patterning activism does not happens is incorrect. fact4: The fact that that approach does not occurs and that expressionisticness does not occurs does not hold. fact5: The fact that that wheellessness occurs but this confecting does not occurs does not hold. fact6: The inducement does not happens. fact7: If the displeasing does not occurs that that electromyography happens and the overawing dishonour does not occurs is wrong. fact8: If this drumming wordiness does not happens then that both this non-allopatricness and that cybercrime occurs is false. fact9: The fact that the frescoing does not occurs and that electromyography does not happens does not hold. fact10: If that wheellessness does not occurs then the fact that that electromyography does not occurs and this creaking does not happens is incorrect. fact11: The fact that the scolloping microfarad does not happens and that unchangeableness does not occurs is false. fact12: If that this luging occurs and/or this nonwashableness does not happens does not hold then this twister does not happens. fact13: The fact that the feathering does not occurs and the humoring apparentness does not occurs is incorrect if this adducting ragtag does not occurs. fact14: That this twister happens but this nonsurgicalness does not happens is wrong. fact15: This luging does not happens. fact16: The fact that this twister does not occurs and this nonsurgicalness does not occurs is incorrect if this luging does not happens. fact17: If this luging occurs then the fact that the skunk does not occurs and this prolixness does not occurs is false. fact18: The tilling Tetrao does not occurs. fact19: If this luging does not occurs that the fact that notthis twister but this nonsurgicalness occurs is false is right. fact20: That notthis twister but this nonsurgicalness occurs is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That this twister does not happens and this nonsurgicalness does not occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That devastation does not happens and that beetling guise does not occurs.

(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That screaking does not occurs and that avalanche does not occurs. fact2: If the embossing bevy occurs then the unpretendingness does not occurs. fact3: If that proctoplasty does not happens then that non-lithophyticness and that non-tentacledness occurs. fact4: That proctoplasty occurs. fact5: This skirmishing brings about that this fuming molluscum does not occurs. fact6: This equiptness does not happens and this epitomising Kenyapithecus does not occurs. fact7: If that the epitaxy does not happens does not hold the banking does not occurs. fact8: That maddening Goma does not occurs and the remittal does not happens if that prepossessing quart happens. fact9: That beetling guise does not occurs. fact10: That ichthyolatry occurs. fact11: The resorting alinement does not occurs. fact12: The fact that that devastation does not occurs and that beetling guise does not happens is false if that proctoplasty does not occurs. fact13: The pound does not happens and the sinewiness does not occurs. fact14: That the audition happens triggers that this skirmishing does not happens. fact15: The leadenness does not occurs if this prefacing Huambo happens. fact16: The refund does not occurs and that renting does not happens. fact17: That this broaching forename occurs is prevented by that the presence happens. fact18: That beetling guise does not occurs if that proctoplasty occurs.

fact1: (¬{FR} & ¬{FQ}) fact2: {BO} -> ¬{HS} fact3: ¬{A} -> (¬{CU} & ¬{FL}) fact4: {A} fact5: {BE} -> ¬{GR} fact6: (¬{HK} & ¬{AJ}) fact7: {EG} -> ¬{CH} fact8: {FN} -> (¬{BG} & ¬{CM}) fact9: ¬{AB} fact10: {FU} fact11: ¬{HH} fact12: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact13: (¬{U} & ¬{JE}) fact14: {FP} -> ¬{BE} fact15: {IT} -> ¬{GP} fact16: (¬{EU} & ¬{DM}) fact17: {EH} -> ¬{E} fact18: {A} -> ¬{AB}

That non-lithophyticness and that non-tentacledness happens.

(¬{CU} & ¬{FL})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That screaking does not occurs and that avalanche does not occurs. fact2: If the embossing bevy occurs then the unpretendingness does not occurs. fact3: If that proctoplasty does not happens then that non-lithophyticness and that non-tentacledness occurs. fact4: That proctoplasty occurs. fact5: This skirmishing brings about that this fuming molluscum does not occurs. fact6: This equiptness does not happens and this epitomising Kenyapithecus does not occurs. fact7: If that the epitaxy does not happens does not hold the banking does not occurs. fact8: That maddening Goma does not occurs and the remittal does not happens if that prepossessing quart happens. fact9: That beetling guise does not occurs. fact10: That ichthyolatry occurs. fact11: The resorting alinement does not occurs. fact12: The fact that that devastation does not occurs and that beetling guise does not happens is false if that proctoplasty does not occurs. fact13: The pound does not happens and the sinewiness does not occurs. fact14: That the audition happens triggers that this skirmishing does not happens. fact15: The leadenness does not occurs if this prefacing Huambo happens. fact16: The refund does not occurs and that renting does not happens. fact17: That this broaching forename occurs is prevented by that the presence happens. fact18: That beetling guise does not occurs if that proctoplasty occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That devastation does not happens and that beetling guise does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This roots is not a kind of a tumultuousness and it does not awaken.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That the Pablum is not an excellence and the one does not medicine exabyte does not hold. fact2: The fact that this roots does not awaken and the person is not carbocyclic does not hold. fact3: That this roots is a tumultuousness but it does not awaken does not hold. fact4: That that triceps is not a grinding and he is not a kind of a quietness is wrong. fact5: That the gunner is not acidotic and that thing is not a tumultuousness is incorrect. fact6: That this roots is not a kind of a tumultuousness but it awakens does not hold. fact7: That this roots does not ripen and it is not a tumultuousness does not hold. fact8: The fact that this roots is not a kind of a hypothermia and it does not awaken does not hold. fact9: The fact that this roots does not awaken and is not iliac is false. fact10: That this roots does not grouse jiao and is not azidoes not hold. fact11: That the benzine does not sonnet fated and is not a Taxodiaceae is false. fact12: That that sink does not awaken and the person does not astonish Loxoma is incorrect. fact13: That this roots is not a Sousse and is not a Lublin is incorrect. fact14: The fact that this locale is not avirulent and does not awaken is not true. fact15: The fact that this roots is not a tumultuousness and it does not awaken does not hold. fact16: That this roots is not a kind of a dowdiness and it does not awaken is incorrect. fact17: That this roots is not a chiasmus and does not marshal compatibility is incorrect. fact18: That this roots is both not polar and not a GOP is incorrect. fact19: The fact that this roots does not awaken and she/he is not unready is false. fact20: The fact that this roots is not a Huxley and it does not awaken is wrong.

fact1: ¬(¬{GI}{ac} & ¬{FR}{ac}) fact2: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{BA}{a}) fact3: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact4: ¬(¬{HM}{ap} & ¬{CU}{ap}) fact5: ¬(¬{DF}{ha} & ¬{AA}{ha}) fact6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact7: ¬(¬{EM}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) fact8: ¬(¬{FM}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact9: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{CD}{a}) fact10: ¬(¬{JI}{a} & ¬{BR}{a}) fact11: ¬(¬{DL}{bc} & ¬{K}{bc}) fact12: ¬(¬{AB}{au} & ¬{AH}{au}) fact13: ¬(¬{F}{a} & ¬{CF}{a}) fact14: ¬(¬{BD}{el} & ¬{AB}{el}) fact15: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact16: ¬(¬{DK}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact17: ¬(¬{P}{a} & ¬{FU}{a}) fact18: ¬(¬{CO}{a} & ¬{DQ}{a}) fact19: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{IQ}{a}) fact20: ¬(¬{T}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That the Pablum is not an excellence and the one does not medicine exabyte does not hold. fact2: The fact that this roots does not awaken and the person is not carbocyclic does not hold. fact3: That this roots is a tumultuousness but it does not awaken does not hold. fact4: That that triceps is not a grinding and he is not a kind of a quietness is wrong. fact5: That the gunner is not acidotic and that thing is not a tumultuousness is incorrect. fact6: That this roots is not a kind of a tumultuousness but it awakens does not hold. fact7: That this roots does not ripen and it is not a tumultuousness does not hold. fact8: The fact that this roots is not a kind of a hypothermia and it does not awaken does not hold. fact9: The fact that this roots does not awaken and is not iliac is false. fact10: That this roots does not grouse jiao and is not azidoes not hold. fact11: That the benzine does not sonnet fated and is not a Taxodiaceae is false. fact12: That that sink does not awaken and the person does not astonish Loxoma is incorrect. fact13: That this roots is not a Sousse and is not a Lublin is incorrect. fact14: The fact that this locale is not avirulent and does not awaken is not true. fact15: The fact that this roots is not a tumultuousness and it does not awaken does not hold. fact16: That this roots is not a kind of a dowdiness and it does not awaken is incorrect. fact17: That this roots is not a chiasmus and does not marshal compatibility is incorrect. fact18: That this roots is both not polar and not a GOP is incorrect. fact19: The fact that this roots does not awaken and she/he is not unready is false. fact20: The fact that this roots is not a Huxley and it does not awaken is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This roots is not a kind of a tumultuousness and it does not awaken. ; $proof$ =

fact15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That suppressor does not scupper Germanic.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: That qibla is nonradioactive. fact2: That qibla is a santims. fact3: this memorisation guns qibla. fact4: If that suppressor does gun memorisation but the person is not a santims then that qibla does not scupper Germanic. fact5: If that qibla is a thawing but it does not gun memorisation that suppressor is not a kind of a santims. fact6: That gallus scuppers Germanic. fact7: That qibla is a santims and does not scupper Germanic. fact8: That suppressor corrects dichromacy and is not a santims. fact9: That qibla is a santims and is not a kind of a thawing if that qibla guns memorisation. fact10: That suppressor is not a santims if that qibla scuppers Germanic but it is not a thawing. fact11: If that suppressor does gun memorisation and is not a thawing that qibla is not a santims. fact12: That suppressor is not a thawing if that qibla is a santims and does not scupper Germanic. fact13: If that qibla guns memorisation then it is a santims. fact14: If that qibla is a santims but it is not a kind of a thawing then that suppressor does not scupper Germanic. fact15: That electrotherapist does not gun memorisation. fact16: If that qibla does scupper Germanic that this thing does gun memorisation and is not a thawing is not false. fact17: That qibla guns memorisation. fact18: If that qibla scuppers Germanic that qibla is a santims and is not a thawing. fact19: The gigolo is cloze and not a Usumbura. fact20: If some person that recharges Orthilia does not gun memorisation then this one scuppers Germanic. fact21: The conceiver is a thawing. fact22: That suppressor moulds Aquifoliaceae and does not gun memorisation if that suppressor plows Gerreidae. fact23: That qibla does not scupper Germanic if that suppressor does gun memorisation but it is not a kind of a thawing.

fact1: {CM}{a} fact2: {AA}{a} fact3: {AC}{aa} fact4: ({A}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact5: ({AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact6: {B}{d} fact7: ({AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact8: ({GS}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) fact9: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact10: ({B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact11: ({A}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{AA}{a} fact12: ({AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} fact13: {A}{a} -> {AA}{a} fact14: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact15: ¬{A}{fj} fact16: {B}{a} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact17: {A}{a} fact18: {B}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact19: ({CT}{hp} & ¬{BB}{hp}) fact20: (x): ({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> {B}x fact21: {AB}{bt} fact22: {AT}{b} -> ({HM}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact23: ({A}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a}

That suppressor scuppers Germanic.

{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That qibla is nonradioactive. fact2: That qibla is a santims. fact3: this memorisation guns qibla. fact4: If that suppressor does gun memorisation but the person is not a santims then that qibla does not scupper Germanic. fact5: If that qibla is a thawing but it does not gun memorisation that suppressor is not a kind of a santims. fact6: That gallus scuppers Germanic. fact7: That qibla is a santims and does not scupper Germanic. fact8: That suppressor corrects dichromacy and is not a santims. fact9: That qibla is a santims and is not a kind of a thawing if that qibla guns memorisation. fact10: That suppressor is not a santims if that qibla scuppers Germanic but it is not a thawing. fact11: If that suppressor does gun memorisation and is not a thawing that qibla is not a santims. fact12: That suppressor is not a thawing if that qibla is a santims and does not scupper Germanic. fact13: If that qibla guns memorisation then it is a santims. fact14: If that qibla is a santims but it is not a kind of a thawing then that suppressor does not scupper Germanic. fact15: That electrotherapist does not gun memorisation. fact16: If that qibla does scupper Germanic that this thing does gun memorisation and is not a thawing is not false. fact17: That qibla guns memorisation. fact18: If that qibla scuppers Germanic that qibla is a santims and is not a thawing. fact19: The gigolo is cloze and not a Usumbura. fact20: If some person that recharges Orthilia does not gun memorisation then this one scuppers Germanic. fact21: The conceiver is a thawing. fact22: That suppressor moulds Aquifoliaceae and does not gun memorisation if that suppressor plows Gerreidae. fact23: That qibla does not scupper Germanic if that suppressor does gun memorisation but it is not a kind of a thawing. ; $hypothesis$ = That suppressor does not scupper Germanic. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact17 -> int1: That qibla is a kind of a santims that is not a thawing.; int1 & fact14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This wrestling Bismarck does not occurs and that psychomotorness does not occurs.

(¬{C} & ¬{AB})

fact1: The fact that if that psychomotorness does not occurs then this wrestling Bismarck does not happens and that psychomotorness does not happens hold. fact2: That that Tyroleseness does not occurs and that objectifying Chimaeridae does not occurs is not correct if this cirrus occurs. fact3: If that this footrace happens is true then that transcendentalness does not happens. fact4: This footrace occurs. fact5: This albinisticness does not occurs. fact6: If that that unveiling schmeer occurs is right this cirrus occurs. fact7: That transcendentalness does not occurs. fact8: That this footrace happens leads to that that transcendentalness does not occurs and that psychomotorness does not occurs. fact9: If this footrace does not occurs then the fact that this wrestling Bismarck does not occurs and that psychomotorness does not occurs is not correct. fact10: That Tyroleseness does not occurs and this footrace does not occurs if that objectifying Chimaeridae does not occurs. fact11: If that unveiling schmeer occurs that objectifying Chimaeridae does not occurs and this cirrus does not happens.

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

The fact that the fact that this wrestling Bismarck does not occurs and that psychomotorness does not occurs is right is false.

¬(¬{C} & ¬{AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that if that psychomotorness does not occurs then this wrestling Bismarck does not happens and that psychomotorness does not happens hold. fact2: That that Tyroleseness does not occurs and that objectifying Chimaeridae does not occurs is not correct if this cirrus occurs. fact3: If that this footrace happens is true then that transcendentalness does not happens. fact4: This footrace occurs. fact5: This albinisticness does not occurs. fact6: If that that unveiling schmeer occurs is right this cirrus occurs. fact7: That transcendentalness does not occurs. fact8: That this footrace happens leads to that that transcendentalness does not occurs and that psychomotorness does not occurs. fact9: If this footrace does not occurs then the fact that this wrestling Bismarck does not occurs and that psychomotorness does not occurs is not correct. fact10: That Tyroleseness does not occurs and this footrace does not occurs if that objectifying Chimaeridae does not occurs. fact11: If that unveiling schmeer occurs that objectifying Chimaeridae does not occurs and this cirrus does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This wrestling Bismarck does not occurs and that psychomotorness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact4 -> int1: Both this non-transcendentalness and this non-psychomotorness occurs.; int1 -> int2: That psychomotorness does not happens.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That cutting is politic.

{A}{a}

fact1: Something is unpredictable a antipyretic if this thing is not monoploid. fact2: The fact that something is unpredictable but it is not a Ciconiiformes is false if it is a lugubriousness. fact3: That that heating is not liturgical but it is empyreal is wrong. fact4: That cutting is politic one that is a kind of a Ciconiiformes. fact5: If that that heating does not contract muchness hold it is not monoploid and it is arthropodal. fact6: That cutting does not O.K. abscessed. fact7: That cutting unfreezes velleity. fact8: Somebody that is not a kind of a completeness is a kind of a Ciconiiformes that is not politic. fact9: The fact that that heating is not a completeness is not incorrect if that that that cutting is unconfirmed and this one is a lugubriousness is true is wrong. fact10: That heating is not empyreal if that that heating is not liturgical but empyreal is wrong. fact11: If that cutting is a hyperlipoproteinemia and it is a kind of a FAA that cutting is not a Actias. fact12: That that cutting is a hyperlipoproteinemia and it is a FAA is true if it does not O.K. abscessed. fact13: That limpet is a Ciconiiformes. fact14: If something is unpredictable then that thing is whiplike. fact15: If someone is not empyreal it does not contract muchness. fact16: The fact that that cutting is a kind of unconfirmed person that is a lugubriousness is incorrect if this person is not a Actias.

fact1: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({C}x & {G}x) fact2: (x): {F}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact3: ¬(¬{Q}{bh} & {L}{bh}) fact4: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact5: ¬{K}{bh} -> (¬{H}{bh} & {I}{bh}) fact6: ¬{O}{a} fact7: {EU}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact9: ¬({E}{a} & {F}{a}) -> ¬{D}{bh} fact10: ¬(¬{Q}{bh} & {L}{bh}) -> ¬{L}{bh} fact11: ({N}{a} & {M}{a}) -> ¬{J}{a} fact12: ¬{O}{a} -> ({N}{a} & {M}{a}) fact13: {B}{ff} fact14: (x): {C}x -> {EN}x fact15: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬{K}x fact16: ¬{J}{a} -> ¬({E}{a} & {F}{a})

That cutting is not politic.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is unpredictable a antipyretic if this thing is not monoploid. fact2: The fact that something is unpredictable but it is not a Ciconiiformes is false if it is a lugubriousness. fact3: That that heating is not liturgical but it is empyreal is wrong. fact4: That cutting is politic one that is a kind of a Ciconiiformes. fact5: If that that heating does not contract muchness hold it is not monoploid and it is arthropodal. fact6: That cutting does not O.K. abscessed. fact7: That cutting unfreezes velleity. fact8: Somebody that is not a kind of a completeness is a kind of a Ciconiiformes that is not politic. fact9: The fact that that heating is not a completeness is not incorrect if that that that cutting is unconfirmed and this one is a lugubriousness is true is wrong. fact10: That heating is not empyreal if that that heating is not liturgical but empyreal is wrong. fact11: If that cutting is a hyperlipoproteinemia and it is a kind of a FAA that cutting is not a Actias. fact12: That that cutting is a hyperlipoproteinemia and it is a FAA is true if it does not O.K. abscessed. fact13: That limpet is a Ciconiiformes. fact14: If something is unpredictable then that thing is whiplike. fact15: If someone is not empyreal it does not contract muchness. fact16: The fact that that cutting is a kind of unconfirmed person that is a lugubriousness is incorrect if this person is not a Actias. ; $hypothesis$ = That cutting is politic. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this depreciation does not happens is true.

¬{D}

fact1: That lagging ardour happens and this exaction does not happens if this Genoveseness occurs. fact2: The fact that that harmonizing Protura occurs and this canceling jejuneness happens is false if that sabbaticness does not occurs. fact3: That excerpting dropping happens and this smouldering happens. fact4: That sabbaticness does not occurs if the fact that that sabbaticness occurs and the stagging Selma does not happens is false. fact5: Both this lobeding panchayat and this falsehood happens. fact6: If this throttling cacography does not happens and this smouldering does not happens then that excerpting dropping occurs. fact7: That this smouldering happens is prevented by that this drain does not occurs and this throttling cacography happens. fact8: The unbolting liabilities is prevented by that this parochialness does not happens. fact9: Notthis drain but that harmonizing Protura occurs. fact10: This throttling cacography does not happens. fact11: This scission occurs if the fact that that excerpting dropping occurs hold. fact12: If that that harmonizing Protura and this canceling jejuneness occurs does not hold then this parochialness does not happens. fact13: This sketching occurs. fact14: That the filarness but notthe halting happens is brought about by that the treachery occurs. fact15: That the unbolting liabilities does not happens brings about that notthis depreciation but this drain happens. fact16: If this smouldering happens then this throttling cacography does not happens. fact17: If this finalizing deserted occurs then that parachuting occurs and the fixing does not happens. fact18: That excerpting dropping happens. fact19: If that the vagileness happens hold that that sabbaticness happens and the stagging Selma does not happens is wrong. fact20: If this smouldering happens this depreciation occurs but this throttling cacography does not happens.

fact1: {IA} -> ({IS} & ¬{AS}) fact2: ¬{J} -> ¬({H} & {I}) fact3: ({A} & {B}) fact4: ¬({J} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{J} fact5: ({EM} & {GB}) fact6: (¬{C} & ¬{B}) -> {A} fact7: (¬{E} & {C}) -> ¬{B} fact8: ¬{G} -> ¬{F} fact9: (¬{E} & {H}) fact10: ¬{C} fact11: {A} -> {DD} fact12: ¬({H} & {I}) -> ¬{G} fact13: {JH} fact14: {DC} -> ({EC} & ¬{FD}) fact15: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact16: {B} -> ¬{C} fact17: {DH} -> ({GQ} & ¬{FR}) fact18: {A} fact19: {L} -> ¬({J} & ¬{K}) fact20: {B} -> ({D} & ¬{C})

That this depreciation does not happens is true.

¬{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That lagging ardour happens and this exaction does not happens if this Genoveseness occurs. fact2: The fact that that harmonizing Protura occurs and this canceling jejuneness happens is false if that sabbaticness does not occurs. fact3: That excerpting dropping happens and this smouldering happens. fact4: That sabbaticness does not occurs if the fact that that sabbaticness occurs and the stagging Selma does not happens is false. fact5: Both this lobeding panchayat and this falsehood happens. fact6: If this throttling cacography does not happens and this smouldering does not happens then that excerpting dropping occurs. fact7: That this smouldering happens is prevented by that this drain does not occurs and this throttling cacography happens. fact8: The unbolting liabilities is prevented by that this parochialness does not happens. fact9: Notthis drain but that harmonizing Protura occurs. fact10: This throttling cacography does not happens. fact11: This scission occurs if the fact that that excerpting dropping occurs hold. fact12: If that that harmonizing Protura and this canceling jejuneness occurs does not hold then this parochialness does not happens. fact13: This sketching occurs. fact14: That the filarness but notthe halting happens is brought about by that the treachery occurs. fact15: That the unbolting liabilities does not happens brings about that notthis depreciation but this drain happens. fact16: If this smouldering happens then this throttling cacography does not happens. fact17: If this finalizing deserted occurs then that parachuting occurs and the fixing does not happens. fact18: That excerpting dropping happens. fact19: If that the vagileness happens hold that that sabbaticness happens and the stagging Selma does not happens is wrong. fact20: If this smouldering happens this depreciation occurs but this throttling cacography does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this depreciation does not happens is true. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: This smouldering happens.; int1 & fact20 -> int2: This depreciation happens but this throttling cacography does not happens.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That togging Buceros does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: If the fact that both this non-blindingness and that handing cheering happens is wrong that handing cheering does not happens. fact2: That either that grooving or this decorating ukase or both occurs prevents that that biaxalness happens. fact3: If that unshapeliness occurs or this manduction happens or both that togging Buceros does not occurs. fact4: This manduction happens. fact5: This rushing does not happens. fact6: That this non-biaxalness and this non-valvularness happens is incorrect if this blindingness does not occurs. fact7: That handing cheering and this incendiary occurs if the resounding does not happens. fact8: That this raw does not occurs is prevented by that notthat unshapeliness but this manduction happens. fact9: The chastisement happens. fact10: The fact that this computation does not happens and that grooving occurs is incorrect if that handing cheering occurs. fact11: Both that grooving and this computation happens if that handing cheering does not happens. fact12: This vaulting ecumenicalism happens. fact13: If this decorating ukase does not occurs then this wings and this punishing Atakapan occurs. fact14: The resounding does not occurs. fact15: This manduction does not occurs if this wings occurs and this valvularness occurs. fact16: If that this wings does not occurs is right that togging Buceros and this valvularness occurs. fact17: If that this computation does not happens and that grooving happens is incorrect this decorating ukase does not happens. fact18: That this blindingness does not occurs hold if the fact that that ambassadorship and this blindingness happens is incorrect. fact19: This punishing Atakapan but notthis wings happens if that biaxalness does not occurs. fact20: That unshapeliness triggers that that togging Buceros does not happens. fact21: The performance occurs and/or that leaping occurs.

fact1: ¬(¬{M} & {K}) -> ¬{K} fact2: ({I} v {H}) -> ¬{G} fact3: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} fact4: {B} fact5: ¬{IC} fact6: ¬{M} -> ¬(¬{G} & ¬{D}) fact7: ¬{O} -> ({K} & {L}) fact8: (¬{A} & {B}) -> {AA} fact9: {FP} fact10: {K} -> ¬(¬{J} & {I}) fact11: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) fact12: {AS} fact13: ¬{H} -> ({E} & {F}) fact14: ¬{O} fact15: ({E} & {D}) -> ¬{B} fact16: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) fact17: ¬(¬{J} & {I}) -> ¬{H} fact18: ¬({N} & {M}) -> ¬{M} fact19: ¬{G} -> ({F} & ¬{E}) fact20: {A} -> ¬{C} fact21: ({EH} v {HI})

This raw happens.

{AA}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that both this non-blindingness and that handing cheering happens is wrong that handing cheering does not happens. fact2: That either that grooving or this decorating ukase or both occurs prevents that that biaxalness happens. fact3: If that unshapeliness occurs or this manduction happens or both that togging Buceros does not occurs. fact4: This manduction happens. fact5: This rushing does not happens. fact6: That this non-biaxalness and this non-valvularness happens is incorrect if this blindingness does not occurs. fact7: That handing cheering and this incendiary occurs if the resounding does not happens. fact8: That this raw does not occurs is prevented by that notthat unshapeliness but this manduction happens. fact9: The chastisement happens. fact10: The fact that this computation does not happens and that grooving occurs is incorrect if that handing cheering occurs. fact11: Both that grooving and this computation happens if that handing cheering does not happens. fact12: This vaulting ecumenicalism happens. fact13: If this decorating ukase does not occurs then this wings and this punishing Atakapan occurs. fact14: The resounding does not occurs. fact15: This manduction does not occurs if this wings occurs and this valvularness occurs. fact16: If that this wings does not occurs is right that togging Buceros and this valvularness occurs. fact17: If that this computation does not happens and that grooving happens is incorrect this decorating ukase does not happens. fact18: That this blindingness does not occurs hold if the fact that that ambassadorship and this blindingness happens is incorrect. fact19: This punishing Atakapan but notthis wings happens if that biaxalness does not occurs. fact20: That unshapeliness triggers that that togging Buceros does not happens. fact21: The performance occurs and/or that leaping occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That togging Buceros does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> int1: Either that unshapeliness or this manduction or both happens.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That chaulmugra is not a Latimeria.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: The fact that someone is a Windhoek and the one misses Charadriidae does not hold if the one does not jerk nil. fact2: If that something does not unstrain Empedocles and it is not a kind of a Chionanthus does not hold then it is a Latimeria. fact3: If the fact that that sharksucker is a Windhoek and it misses Charadriidae does not hold the fact that that chaulmugra is not a Latimeria hold. fact4: If that sharksucker is a Chionanthus then that that chaulmugra does not miss Charadriidae and it is not a Latimeria is wrong. fact5: If that sharksucker misses Charadriidae then the fact that that chaulmugra does not unstrain Empedocles and is not a Chionanthus is incorrect. fact6: The fact that something is not a plenteousness and does not miss Charadriidae does not hold if it is a kind of a Latimeria. fact7: that Charadriidae misses sharksucker. fact8: That sharksucker misses Charadriidae.

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

The fact that that timolol is not a kind of a plenteousness and does not miss Charadriidae is incorrect.

¬(¬{EJ}{io} & ¬{A}{io})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that someone is a Windhoek and the one misses Charadriidae does not hold if the one does not jerk nil. fact2: If that something does not unstrain Empedocles and it is not a kind of a Chionanthus does not hold then it is a Latimeria. fact3: If the fact that that sharksucker is a Windhoek and it misses Charadriidae does not hold the fact that that chaulmugra is not a Latimeria hold. fact4: If that sharksucker is a Chionanthus then that that chaulmugra does not miss Charadriidae and it is not a Latimeria is wrong. fact5: If that sharksucker misses Charadriidae then the fact that that chaulmugra does not unstrain Empedocles and is not a Chionanthus is incorrect. fact6: The fact that something is not a plenteousness and does not miss Charadriidae does not hold if it is a kind of a Latimeria. fact7: that Charadriidae misses sharksucker. fact8: That sharksucker misses Charadriidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That chaulmugra is not a Latimeria. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact8 -> int1: That that chaulmugra does not unstrain Empedocles and it is not a kind of a Chionanthus is not correct.; fact2 -> int2: That chaulmugra is a Latimeria if that that thing does not unstrain Empedocles and is not a Chionanthus is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that actinozoan blooms acantha and this haggles Micheas is incorrect.

¬({C}{a} & {A}{a})

fact1: If this harpist is a Nuffield that is a nobleness then that actinozoan is not a kind of a Nuffield. fact2: The fact that this harpist does bloom acantha is not wrong. fact3: That somebody blooms acantha and haggles Micheas is incorrect if it is not a Nuffield. fact4: This veal is not an illegitimate if this lacertid adventures. fact5: Something haggles Micheas if this thing is a Nuffield. fact6: This harpist is not a demeanour and blooms acantha. fact7: This veal is not an opened and it is not a demeanour if it is not an illegitimate. fact8: That actinozoan haggles Micheas and that person is a Nuffield.

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

That journalist blooms acantha.

{C}{jf}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this harpist is a Nuffield that is a nobleness then that actinozoan is not a kind of a Nuffield. fact2: The fact that this harpist does bloom acantha is not wrong. fact3: That somebody blooms acantha and haggles Micheas is incorrect if it is not a Nuffield. fact4: This veal is not an illegitimate if this lacertid adventures. fact5: Something haggles Micheas if this thing is a Nuffield. fact6: This harpist is not a demeanour and blooms acantha. fact7: This veal is not an opened and it is not a demeanour if it is not an illegitimate. fact8: That actinozoan haggles Micheas and that person is a Nuffield. ; $hypothesis$ = That that actinozoan blooms acantha and this haggles Micheas is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This unfixedness happens.

{D}

fact1: If this arousal does not occurs then the fact that notthis plosion but that mantling AAVE happens is wrong. fact2: That the Lancastrianness does not occurs and that centerfield does not happens prevents this arousal. fact3: That this arousal happens is prevented by that this arousal does not happens and/or this plosion. fact4: That that overawing squinting and that livingness happens is caused by that that mantling AAVE does not happens. fact5: That mantling AAVE does not happens if this arousal does not occurs. fact6: If either this unimpairedness or that conchology or both happens then the windlessness does not happens. fact7: That that livingness happens and that overawing squinting occurs is caused by that that mantling AAVE does not happens. fact8: If that narrating does not happens and this unfixedness does not happens that piscineness does not happens. fact9: If that that narrating occurs is correct then this unfixedness does not occurs. fact10: If that overawing squinting happens then that narrating does not happens and that piscineness does not occurs. fact11: The macrocosmicness does not occurs if that tantalizing Mensa occurs. fact12: If the fact that this plosion does not happens but that mantling AAVE happens is false that mantling AAVE does not occurs. fact13: That livingness occurs. fact14: The smoothbore occurs. fact15: That that narrating happens and/or that piscineness prevents this unfixedness. fact16: That narrating does not happens and this unfixedness does not happens if that overawing squinting happens. fact17: The smoothbore triggers that that piscineness occurs.

fact1: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{I} & {G}) fact2: (¬{K} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} fact3: (¬{H} v {I}) -> ¬{H} fact4: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact5: ¬{H} -> ¬{G} fact6: ({HU} v {FQ}) -> ¬{IQ} fact7: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) fact8: (¬{C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} fact9: {C} -> ¬{D} fact10: {E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{B}) fact11: {AF} -> ¬{IA} fact12: ¬(¬{I} & {G}) -> ¬{G} fact13: {F} fact14: {A} fact15: ({C} v {B}) -> ¬{D} fact16: {E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact17: {A} -> {B}

This extrinsicness happens.

{CM}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this arousal does not occurs then the fact that notthis plosion but that mantling AAVE happens is wrong. fact2: That the Lancastrianness does not occurs and that centerfield does not happens prevents this arousal. fact3: That this arousal happens is prevented by that this arousal does not happens and/or this plosion. fact4: That that overawing squinting and that livingness happens is caused by that that mantling AAVE does not happens. fact5: That mantling AAVE does not happens if this arousal does not occurs. fact6: If either this unimpairedness or that conchology or both happens then the windlessness does not happens. fact7: That that livingness happens and that overawing squinting occurs is caused by that that mantling AAVE does not happens. fact8: If that narrating does not happens and this unfixedness does not happens that piscineness does not happens. fact9: If that that narrating occurs is correct then this unfixedness does not occurs. fact10: If that overawing squinting happens then that narrating does not happens and that piscineness does not occurs. fact11: The macrocosmicness does not occurs if that tantalizing Mensa occurs. fact12: If the fact that this plosion does not happens but that mantling AAVE happens is false that mantling AAVE does not occurs. fact13: That livingness occurs. fact14: The smoothbore occurs. fact15: That that narrating happens and/or that piscineness prevents this unfixedness. fact16: That narrating does not happens and this unfixedness does not happens if that overawing squinting happens. fact17: The smoothbore triggers that that piscineness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This unfixedness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact17 & fact14 -> int1: That piscineness happens.; int1 -> int2: That narrating happens or that piscineness happens or both.; int2 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That meshugaas happens.

{D}

fact1: Both that sopping Piperaceae and this wrongdoing occurs. fact2: The saving does not occurs if the exposure and that igniting occurs. fact3: That veering tanned occurs. fact4: The reconstructing occurs. fact5: That chromatinicness occurs. fact6: The chemotherapeuticalness happens. fact7: That camphorating tardiness occurs. fact8: That valvularness does not happens if the Palaeolithicness and the spelldown occurs. fact9: If that snookering realty does not occurs this wrongdoing and that sopping Piperaceae happens. fact10: That sopping Piperaceae happens. fact11: That softball happens. fact12: This conniving combed does not happens. fact13: This romanticisation happens. fact14: Both the demineralizing paratyphoid and this multinucleateness happens. fact15: This pancreaticness happens. fact16: Both that snookering realty and that spieling Cnossos occurs. fact17: Both the writing Libreville and this monocarpicness happens. fact18: The metier occurs. fact19: That burrlikeness occurs.

fact1: ({A} & {B}) fact2: ({GC} & {FG}) -> ¬{CE} fact3: {HR} fact4: {FD} fact5: {AL} fact6: {CN} fact7: {CM} fact8: ({FT} & {HB}) -> ¬{EN} fact9: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact10: {A} fact11: {HC} fact12: ¬{DD} fact13: {IN} fact14: ({O} & {CA}) fact15: {JK} fact16: ({C} & {E}) fact17: ({IT} & {F}) fact18: {IS} fact19: {GE}

That meshugaas happens.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both that sopping Piperaceae and this wrongdoing occurs. fact2: The saving does not occurs if the exposure and that igniting occurs. fact3: That veering tanned occurs. fact4: The reconstructing occurs. fact5: That chromatinicness occurs. fact6: The chemotherapeuticalness happens. fact7: That camphorating tardiness occurs. fact8: That valvularness does not happens if the Palaeolithicness and the spelldown occurs. fact9: If that snookering realty does not occurs this wrongdoing and that sopping Piperaceae happens. fact10: That sopping Piperaceae happens. fact11: That softball happens. fact12: This conniving combed does not happens. fact13: This romanticisation happens. fact14: Both the demineralizing paratyphoid and this multinucleateness happens. fact15: This pancreaticness happens. fact16: Both that snookering realty and that spieling Cnossos occurs. fact17: Both the writing Libreville and this monocarpicness happens. fact18: The metier occurs. fact19: That burrlikeness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That meshugaas happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Nikita untangles and/or this person is not apetalous is false.

¬({C}{b} v ¬{D}{b})

fact1: Nikita either untangles or is apetalous or both if this calliper is viatical. fact2: This calliper is a paralysis. fact3: If this calliper is a paralysis this calliper is viatical. fact4: This calliper untangles and/or it is a paralysis. fact5: Nikita untangles or it is apetalous or both. fact6: If this calliper is not non-viatical then Nikita untangles and/or that is not apetalous.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Nikita either untangles or is apetalous or both if this calliper is viatical. fact2: This calliper is a paralysis. fact3: If this calliper is a paralysis this calliper is viatical. fact4: This calliper untangles and/or it is a paralysis. fact5: Nikita untangles or it is apetalous or both. fact6: If this calliper is not non-viatical then Nikita untangles and/or that is not apetalous. ; $hypothesis$ = That Nikita untangles and/or this person is not apetalous is false. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact2 -> int1: That this calliper is viatical is right.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Rey is not a kind of a Caspian.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: Rey is a gift. fact2: If something does not chill asininity it does not safeguard Monet and it is varied. fact3: Somebody that is a Aarhus is a Caspian. fact4: That Rey does bundle Qatar hold. fact5: That drag is a Aarhus. fact6: Rey is conciliatory. fact7: If some person does not overtire Hydromantes but she flags Lemmus then she is a Ephedraceae. fact8: If that this journal overtires Hydromantes and it flags Lemmus is not right this constraint is not a kind of a Ephedraceae. fact9: If something is non-penumbral then the fact that it is not unvarying and it chills asininity does not hold. fact10: Some person is a kind of a Aarhus if this one is a Ephedraceae. fact11: The propoxyphene is a Aarhus. fact12: This troubler is a Aarhus. fact13: This erythromycin is not penumbral. fact14: If the fact that something is not unvarying and chills asininity is incorrect then the thing does safeguard Monet. fact15: Rey is a Caspian and it is a Aarhus. fact16: The cantilever is a Aarhus. fact17: Something does not overtire Hydromantes but it flags Lemmus if that it safeguards Monet is right.

fact1: {EB}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) fact3: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact4: {EH}{a} fact5: {B}{ab} fact6: {CD}{a} fact7: (x): (¬{E}x & {D}x) -> {C}x fact8: ¬({E}{c} & {D}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact9: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {H}x) fact10: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact11: {B}{ar} fact12: {B}{et} fact13: ¬{I}{i} fact14: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {H}x) -> {F}x fact15: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact16: {B}{cn} fact17: (x): {F}x -> (¬{E}x & {D}x)

The fact that this erythromycin is a Caspian hold.

{A}{i}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Rey is a gift. fact2: If something does not chill asininity it does not safeguard Monet and it is varied. fact3: Somebody that is a Aarhus is a Caspian. fact4: That Rey does bundle Qatar hold. fact5: That drag is a Aarhus. fact6: Rey is conciliatory. fact7: If some person does not overtire Hydromantes but she flags Lemmus then she is a Ephedraceae. fact8: If that this journal overtires Hydromantes and it flags Lemmus is not right this constraint is not a kind of a Ephedraceae. fact9: If something is non-penumbral then the fact that it is not unvarying and it chills asininity does not hold. fact10: Some person is a kind of a Aarhus if this one is a Ephedraceae. fact11: The propoxyphene is a Aarhus. fact12: This troubler is a Aarhus. fact13: This erythromycin is not penumbral. fact14: If the fact that something is not unvarying and chills asininity is incorrect then the thing does safeguard Monet. fact15: Rey is a Caspian and it is a Aarhus. fact16: The cantilever is a Aarhus. fact17: Something does not overtire Hydromantes but it flags Lemmus if that it safeguards Monet is right. ; $hypothesis$ = Rey is not a kind of a Caspian. ; $proof$ =

fact15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this formula asphyxiates and is not non-repetitive is false.

¬({C}{b} & {B}{b})

fact1: This formula is not a kind of a nativeness if that mariposa is a kind of a Sulidae that is not a kind of a nativeness. fact2: If that that parvis is not microbial and she/he does not embargo Bigfoot does not hold then that that mariposa embargo Bigfoot is true. fact3: That mariposa is a childbearing but it is not a Verbascum if it is a kind of a nativeness. fact4: Something is a Sulidae but it is not a kind of a nativeness if the fact that it embargoes Bigfoot is not false. fact5: That mariposa is not a Verbascum. fact6: If someone is not a nativeness then the fact that this person asphyxiates and is repetitive is not true. fact7: The fact that this formula is a Sulidae that does not asphyxiate is wrong. fact8: Somebody is a kind of repetitive a nativeness if it does not asphyxiate. fact9: Something does asphyxiate if that it is a kind of a Sulidae that does not asphyxiate is wrong. fact10: That this formula is a Sulidae that asphyxiates is incorrect. fact11: If that mariposa is both a childbearing and a Verbascum then this formula is repetitive. fact12: If that mariposa is a childbearing but it is not a kind of a Verbascum this formula is repetitive.

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

This formula is a nativeness.

{A}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This formula is not a kind of a nativeness if that mariposa is a kind of a Sulidae that is not a kind of a nativeness. fact2: If that that parvis is not microbial and she/he does not embargo Bigfoot does not hold then that that mariposa embargo Bigfoot is true. fact3: That mariposa is a childbearing but it is not a Verbascum if it is a kind of a nativeness. fact4: Something is a Sulidae but it is not a kind of a nativeness if the fact that it embargoes Bigfoot is not false. fact5: That mariposa is not a Verbascum. fact6: If someone is not a nativeness then the fact that this person asphyxiates and is repetitive is not true. fact7: The fact that this formula is a Sulidae that does not asphyxiate is wrong. fact8: Somebody is a kind of repetitive a nativeness if it does not asphyxiate. fact9: Something does asphyxiate if that it is a kind of a Sulidae that does not asphyxiate is wrong. fact10: That this formula is a Sulidae that asphyxiates is incorrect. fact11: If that mariposa is both a childbearing and a Verbascum then this formula is repetitive. fact12: If that mariposa is a childbearing but it is not a kind of a Verbascum this formula is repetitive. ; $hypothesis$ = That this formula asphyxiates and is not non-repetitive is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Both that luxuria and this econometricness occurs.

({C} & {D})

fact1: The perk occurs. fact2: That that budding posteriority happens hold. fact3: This anemographicness happens. fact4: That anisogamicness happens. fact5: That Peloponnesianness happens. fact6: The transactinide occurs if the Sovietness does not occurs. fact7: This incurableness happens and this sexploitation occurs. fact8: If the meteoriticness happens that the monovularness happens is right. fact9: The tinting happens. fact10: This caesarian occurs. fact11: The rimlessness happens. fact12: If that anticoagulativeness happens that luxuria occurs. fact13: That ludoes not occurs. fact14: That both the meagreness and that hydrokineticness occurs is caused by that the terminating Woodhull does not happens. fact15: Both that annotating aorist and this nonrandomness occurs. fact16: The whacking occurs and the seiche occurs. fact17: This puking Cakile occurs. fact18: That this econometricness and that proverbialness occurs is caused by that that ludoes not occurs.

fact1: {CJ} fact2: {JB} fact3: {CK} fact4: {B} fact5: {AF} fact6: ¬{FR} -> {JC} fact7: ({DE} & {ER}) fact8: {J} -> {EF} fact9: {BJ} fact10: {BE} fact11: {FA} fact12: {A} -> {C} fact13: ¬{F} fact14: ¬{HR} -> ({DC} & {ES}) fact15: ({Q} & {GJ}) fact16: ({GK} & {BL}) fact17: {EH} fact18: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The perk occurs. fact2: That that budding posteriority happens hold. fact3: This anemographicness happens. fact4: That anisogamicness happens. fact5: That Peloponnesianness happens. fact6: The transactinide occurs if the Sovietness does not occurs. fact7: This incurableness happens and this sexploitation occurs. fact8: If the meteoriticness happens that the monovularness happens is right. fact9: The tinting happens. fact10: This caesarian occurs. fact11: The rimlessness happens. fact12: If that anticoagulativeness happens that luxuria occurs. fact13: That ludoes not occurs. fact14: That both the meagreness and that hydrokineticness occurs is caused by that the terminating Woodhull does not happens. fact15: Both that annotating aorist and this nonrandomness occurs. fact16: The whacking occurs and the seiche occurs. fact17: This puking Cakile occurs. fact18: That this econometricness and that proverbialness occurs is caused by that that ludoes not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Both that luxuria and this econometricness occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that this cytoplast is a kind of sublingual one that does not fudge doomed.

({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: The fact that this cytoplast is sublingual and it fudges doomed is wrong. fact2: This cytoplast is a jibe that is not a Pomoxis. fact3: This cytoplast impeaches if this cytoplast is a knowingness. fact4: If this cytoplast is sublingual and does not fudge doomed then this cytoplast does not impeach. fact5: The fact that this newsreader is sublingual and that thing is a untypicality is false. fact6: The asafoetida does impeach. fact7: This cytoplast is a knowingness. fact8: Some person is not a knowingness if it is socialistic and it is a lilliputian. fact9: This cytoplast is a kind of clinical thing that does not scrawl. fact10: This boxershorts is a kind of an upland but it is not a scotch. fact11: That if an upland is not a scotch it is not non-socialistic hold. fact12: This cytoplast does not impeach if this cytoplast is sublingual and it fudges doomed. fact13: The spawner is not non-sublingual. fact14: That the fact that this boxershorts is a kind of a Phasianus that does not impeach is wrong is correct if the fact that this boxershorts is not a kind of a knowingness is right.

fact1: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact2: ({AU}{a} & ¬{EN}{a}) fact3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact4: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact5: ¬({AA}{bn} & {EH}{bn}) fact6: {B}{hd} fact7: {A}{a} fact8: (x): ({C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{A}x fact9: ({GP}{a} & ¬{GA}{a}) fact10: ({E}{bt} & ¬{F}{bt}) fact11: (x): ({E}x & ¬{F}x) -> {C}x fact12: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact13: {AA}{da} fact14: ¬{A}{bt} -> ¬({FU}{bt} & ¬{B}{bt})

The fact that this boxershorts is a kind of a Phasianus that does not impeach does not hold.

¬({FU}{bt} & ¬{B}{bt})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this cytoplast is sublingual and it fudges doomed is wrong. fact2: This cytoplast is a jibe that is not a Pomoxis. fact3: This cytoplast impeaches if this cytoplast is a knowingness. fact4: If this cytoplast is sublingual and does not fudge doomed then this cytoplast does not impeach. fact5: The fact that this newsreader is sublingual and that thing is a untypicality is false. fact6: The asafoetida does impeach. fact7: This cytoplast is a knowingness. fact8: Some person is not a knowingness if it is socialistic and it is a lilliputian. fact9: This cytoplast is a kind of clinical thing that does not scrawl. fact10: This boxershorts is a kind of an upland but it is not a scotch. fact11: That if an upland is not a scotch it is not non-socialistic hold. fact12: This cytoplast does not impeach if this cytoplast is sublingual and it fudges doomed. fact13: The spawner is not non-sublingual. fact14: That the fact that this boxershorts is a kind of a Phasianus that does not impeach is wrong is correct if the fact that this boxershorts is not a kind of a knowingness is right. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this cytoplast is a kind of sublingual one that does not fudge doomed. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this cytoplast is a kind of sublingual one that does not fudge doomed.; fact4 & assump1 -> int1: This cytoplast does not impeach.; fact3 & fact7 -> int2: This cytoplast does impeach.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That compiling happens.

{B}

fact1: That notthat profanation but this moviemaking occurs does not hold if that that unprocessedness does not happens is correct. fact2: That that scrubbed does not occurs yields that this gnosticness and this reducing Laplace happens. fact3: If this reducing Laplace happens then that compiling does not occurs and this gnosticness occurs. fact4: If this gnosticness happens then that unprocessedness does not occurs and that compiling does not occurs. fact5: That the humanist occurs and this unimpressionableness happens does not hold if this regeneratingness does not occurs. fact6: If that notthat profanation but this moviemaking happens does not hold then that that compiling occurs is correct. fact7: This compression happens.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) fact2: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) fact3: {D} -> (¬{B} & {C}) fact4: {C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact5: ¬{F} -> ¬({CH} & {HT}) fact6: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact7: {CI}

The fact that this shearing Susanna happens is true.

{EN}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That notthat profanation but this moviemaking occurs does not hold if that that unprocessedness does not happens is correct. fact2: That that scrubbed does not occurs yields that this gnosticness and this reducing Laplace happens. fact3: If this reducing Laplace happens then that compiling does not occurs and this gnosticness occurs. fact4: If this gnosticness happens then that unprocessedness does not occurs and that compiling does not occurs. fact5: That the humanist occurs and this unimpressionableness happens does not hold if this regeneratingness does not occurs. fact6: If that notthat profanation but this moviemaking happens does not hold then that that compiling occurs is correct. fact7: This compression happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That compiling happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this power is unscientific is true.

{AA}{b}

fact1: This betatron is not unscientific. fact2: This betatron is not a gendarmery. fact3: This betatron is not a ridge and it is not a gendarmery if the fact that this power is not unscientific is right. fact4: This power is a kind of non-unscientific man that is not a ridge if this betatron is not a gendarmery. fact5: Either something is not a kind of a penchant or the thing is not a theatrical or both if the thing is a Electrophoridae. fact6: This power is not a ridge. fact7: This power is not a gendarmery. fact8: That benni is Keynesian. fact9: If that that benni is Keynesian is not wrong that person is a Electrophoridae. fact10: This power is not a ridge if this betatron is not a gendarmery. fact11: The fact that if this betatron is not unscientific then this power is not a ridge is true. fact12: Someone that iodinates gregariousness is both a Willard and not a salability. fact13: Something that is not a kind of a stockpile is staccato and/or does iodinate gregariousness. fact14: If that valise is not a salability then this betatron is both unscientific and a gendarmery. fact15: This betatron is not a ridge and that is not unscientific if this power is not a gendarmery. fact16: This betatron is not unscientific if this power is not a gendarmery. fact17: That areaway is not a stockpile if that benni is not a penchant. fact18: This power is not a ridge and not a gendarmery. fact19: This power is unscientific if this betatron is not unscientific.

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

The fact that this power is unscientific is true.

{AA}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This betatron is not unscientific. fact2: This betatron is not a gendarmery. fact3: This betatron is not a ridge and it is not a gendarmery if the fact that this power is not unscientific is right. fact4: This power is a kind of non-unscientific man that is not a ridge if this betatron is not a gendarmery. fact5: Either something is not a kind of a penchant or the thing is not a theatrical or both if the thing is a Electrophoridae. fact6: This power is not a ridge. fact7: This power is not a gendarmery. fact8: That benni is Keynesian. fact9: If that that benni is Keynesian is not wrong that person is a Electrophoridae. fact10: This power is not a ridge if this betatron is not a gendarmery. fact11: The fact that if this betatron is not unscientific then this power is not a ridge is true. fact12: Someone that iodinates gregariousness is both a Willard and not a salability. fact13: Something that is not a kind of a stockpile is staccato and/or does iodinate gregariousness. fact14: If that valise is not a salability then this betatron is both unscientific and a gendarmery. fact15: This betatron is not a ridge and that is not unscientific if this power is not a gendarmery. fact16: This betatron is not unscientific if this power is not a gendarmery. fact17: That areaway is not a stockpile if that benni is not a penchant. fact18: This power is not a ridge and not a gendarmery. fact19: This power is unscientific if this betatron is not unscientific. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this power is unscientific is true. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact2 -> int1: This power is not unscientific and it is not a kind of a ridge.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Every person is a dal.

(x): {A}x

fact1: Somebody is a blether if she/he is a actinoid. fact2: If something is a kind of a dal that gratifies wilfulness. fact3: Every person curves. fact4: If someone is not orthotropous then she does not apprehend and she is a kind of a operationalism. fact5: Some man is a dal if she/he matures. fact6: Every person is a kind of a glibness. fact7: Everything is Jacobinic. fact8: Every person is a dal. fact9: Something matures if this thing does pullulate prime. fact10: If some man is a blether then he/she does pullulate prime. fact11: Everything demystifies airfare. fact12: Every person is unbelted. fact13: Every person is not orthotropous. fact14: Everyone is a swob.

fact1: (x): {E}x -> {D}x fact2: (x): {A}x -> {DP}x fact3: (x): {EP}x fact4: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{G}x & {H}x) fact5: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact6: (x): {BU}x fact7: (x): {N}x fact8: (x): {A}x fact9: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact10: (x): {D}x -> {C}x fact11: (x): {HN}x fact12: (x): {JA}x fact13: (x): ¬{I}x fact14: (x): {O}x

Everyone gratifies wilfulness.

(x): {DP}x

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody is a blether if she/he is a actinoid. fact2: If something is a kind of a dal that gratifies wilfulness. fact3: Every person curves. fact4: If someone is not orthotropous then she does not apprehend and she is a kind of a operationalism. fact5: Some man is a dal if she/he matures. fact6: Every person is a kind of a glibness. fact7: Everything is Jacobinic. fact8: Every person is a dal. fact9: Something matures if this thing does pullulate prime. fact10: If some man is a blether then he/she does pullulate prime. fact11: Everything demystifies airfare. fact12: Every person is unbelted. fact13: Every person is not orthotropous. fact14: Everyone is a swob. ; $hypothesis$ = Every person is a dal. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That mangler is not basidiomycetous but it is a Tepic if that mangler is not basidiomycetous.

¬{C}{a} -> (¬{C}{a} & {A}{a})

fact1: That mangler is a Tepic and is wary. fact2: If that doodia is nonresonant then the fact that that doodia is wary is true. fact3: If that goatee is not a inaudibleness and does not wax splenitis the fact that that goatee is not ethereal hold. fact4: That that mangler is wary hold. fact5: A non-ethereal thing is not wary but nonresonant. fact6: If that mangler performs herniation then that mangler does not performs herniation but she/he is a impendency. fact7: Some person is a Tepic and it is basidiomycetous if it is not wary. fact8: That mangler is not basidiomycetous and he/she is not a kind of a Tepic if that doodia is wary. fact9: This protirelin is a kind of non-rectal a Tepic if it is not non-rectal. fact10: If that some person is ethereal and it waxes splenitis is incorrect it is not ethereal. fact11: If that Alnico is not a kind of a inaudibleness then the fact that that Alnico is not non-ethereal and waxes splenitis does not hold.

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

That Alnico is basidiomycetous.

{C}{el}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That mangler is a Tepic and is wary. fact2: If that doodia is nonresonant then the fact that that doodia is wary is true. fact3: If that goatee is not a inaudibleness and does not wax splenitis the fact that that goatee is not ethereal hold. fact4: That that mangler is wary hold. fact5: A non-ethereal thing is not wary but nonresonant. fact6: If that mangler performs herniation then that mangler does not performs herniation but she/he is a impendency. fact7: Some person is a Tepic and it is basidiomycetous if it is not wary. fact8: That mangler is not basidiomycetous and he/she is not a kind of a Tepic if that doodia is wary. fact9: This protirelin is a kind of non-rectal a Tepic if it is not non-rectal. fact10: If that some person is ethereal and it waxes splenitis is incorrect it is not ethereal. fact11: If that Alnico is not a kind of a inaudibleness then the fact that that Alnico is not non-ethereal and waxes splenitis does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That mangler is not basidiomycetous but it is a Tepic if that mangler is not basidiomycetous. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That mangler is a Tepic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that mangler is not basidiomycetous.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: That mangler is a kind of non-basidiomycetous thing that is a kind of a Tepic.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This cubby is not inexperienced.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This rubefacient is a mint if that adduct is a kind of a mint. fact2: That the Darjeeling is spinous but it does not decamp logotype is incorrect if that aquarium does not synchronize. fact3: If the fact that this rhodanthe does not affront and sites Najadaceae is wrong this pasturage affront. fact4: That adduct is a mint if that awn is a mint. fact5: This cubby is inexperienced. fact6: If that something is not a quaternion or it is endodontic or both is incorrect it is not a taped. fact7: That aquarium does not synchronize. fact8: The fact that some person does not affront but the one sites Najadaceae is incorrect if the one is not a kind of a taped. fact9: If this pasturage affronts this cubby affronts. fact10: If this rubefacient is a mint then the fact that this rhodanthe either is not a kind of a quaternion or is endodontic or both is wrong. fact11: This chacma is inexperienced if this cubby affronts. fact12: If the fact that the Darjeeling is spinous and does not decamp logotype does not hold that that 3D is not spinous is right.

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

This chacma is inexperienced.

{A}{eh}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This rubefacient is a mint if that adduct is a kind of a mint. fact2: That the Darjeeling is spinous but it does not decamp logotype is incorrect if that aquarium does not synchronize. fact3: If the fact that this rhodanthe does not affront and sites Najadaceae is wrong this pasturage affront. fact4: That adduct is a mint if that awn is a mint. fact5: This cubby is inexperienced. fact6: If that something is not a quaternion or it is endodontic or both is incorrect it is not a taped. fact7: That aquarium does not synchronize. fact8: The fact that some person does not affront but the one sites Najadaceae is incorrect if the one is not a kind of a taped. fact9: If this pasturage affronts this cubby affronts. fact10: If this rubefacient is a mint then the fact that this rhodanthe either is not a kind of a quaternion or is endodontic or both is wrong. fact11: This chacma is inexperienced if this cubby affronts. fact12: If the fact that the Darjeeling is spinous and does not decamp logotype does not hold that that 3D is not spinous is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This cubby is not inexperienced. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that proprietor is myelic but it is not topologic is not correct.

¬({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

fact1: If something is topologic it is talented. fact2: This kitten is not a kind of a winnowing and it is non-myelic. fact3: If this kitten is not a winnowing and does not rattle postage that cotoneaster is untalented. fact4: If that cotoneaster is not talented that that proprietor is myelic but it is not topologic does not hold. fact5: If this kitten is a winnowing but this person does not rattle postage that cotoneaster is not talented. fact6: If that proprietor is not topologic that this kitten rattles postage and she/he is myelic is not right. fact7: That that proprietor does not circumscribe paycheck and it is not a Ardea does not hold if that proprietor is a thriller. fact8: That cotoneaster is not myelic. fact9: If that proprietor is non-myelic thing that is not a kind of a winnowing this kitten is non-topologic. fact10: If that cotoneaster is not talented then that that proprietor is myelic and is topologic does not hold. fact11: That this kitten is both talented and not a winnowing is false. fact12: If something is a Ardea then it is talented. fact13: If someone is talented that it bugs racking and is not myelic is incorrect. fact14: If the fact that something does not circumscribe paycheck and is not a Ardea is false this is a Ardea. fact15: That that proprietor is not non-myelic and it is topologic does not hold. fact16: This kitten is not a winnowing. fact17: This kitten is not a winnowing and the one does not rattle postage.

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

That proprietor is myelic but it is not topologic.

({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something is topologic it is talented. fact2: This kitten is not a kind of a winnowing and it is non-myelic. fact3: If this kitten is not a winnowing and does not rattle postage that cotoneaster is untalented. fact4: If that cotoneaster is not talented that that proprietor is myelic but it is not topologic does not hold. fact5: If this kitten is a winnowing but this person does not rattle postage that cotoneaster is not talented. fact6: If that proprietor is not topologic that this kitten rattles postage and she/he is myelic is not right. fact7: That that proprietor does not circumscribe paycheck and it is not a Ardea does not hold if that proprietor is a thriller. fact8: That cotoneaster is not myelic. fact9: If that proprietor is non-myelic thing that is not a kind of a winnowing this kitten is non-topologic. fact10: If that cotoneaster is not talented then that that proprietor is myelic and is topologic does not hold. fact11: That this kitten is both talented and not a winnowing is false. fact12: If something is a Ardea then it is talented. fact13: If someone is talented that it bugs racking and is not myelic is incorrect. fact14: If the fact that something does not circumscribe paycheck and is not a Ardea is false this is a Ardea. fact15: That that proprietor is not non-myelic and it is topologic does not hold. fact16: This kitten is not a winnowing. fact17: This kitten is not a winnowing and the one does not rattle postage. ; $hypothesis$ = That that proprietor is myelic but it is not topologic is not correct. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact17 -> int1: That cotoneaster is not talented.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Kampuchean is not a kind of a Fulmarus.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: There is something such that that it is both wigless and not a Chloris is not true. fact2: If this milfoil is untruthful then this milfoil does not outlaw uncus. fact3: There exists someone such that the fact that this person does ration Bragi and is a kind of a kerfuffle does not hold. fact4: That Kampuchean does not change Bovinae if there is somebody such that the fact that it rations Bragi and it is not a kind of a kerfuffle is incorrect. fact5: This Cleome does not agitate Kalotermes. fact6: That Kampuchean does not express. fact7: That Kampuchean does not change Bovinae if there exists something such that that it is a kerfuffle is right. fact8: That Kampuchean is a Fulmarus if this geometrician is a kind of a Fulmarus. fact9: There is somebody such that the fact that she is epitheliod and not aeromechanic does not hold. fact10: The reflector is not a Fulmarus. fact11: Something that does not notice interdependence is not a consent. fact12: Some man is not a smouldering if that one does not add Secotiaceae. fact13: There is something such that this rations Bragi and is not a kind of a kerfuffle. fact14: There is somebody such that the fact that she is a counterfeit but not metallic is incorrect. fact15: The philhellene does not mute ecphonesis. fact16: If some man changes Bovinae he is a Fulmarus. fact17: That Kampuchean does not recover. fact18: If that Hereford is non-old this does not ration Bragi. fact19: If something does not change Bovinae this thing is not a Fulmarus. fact20: This cruller does not ration Bragi if it is non-vegetal.

fact1: (Ex): ¬({IO}x & ¬{IB}x) fact2: ¬{K}{ho} -> ¬{DT}{ho} fact3: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact4: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} fact5: ¬{AU}{aj} fact6: ¬{BJ}{a} fact7: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{A}{a} fact8: {B}{b} -> {B}{a} fact9: (Ex): ¬({FS}x & ¬{BS}x) fact10: ¬{B}{jf} fact11: (x): ¬{IP}x -> ¬{BE}x fact12: (x): ¬{EP}x -> ¬{AN}x fact13: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact14: (Ex): ¬({CM}x & ¬{DI}x) fact15: ¬{DE}{ea} fact16: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact17: ¬{GI}{a} fact18: ¬{DJ}{af} -> ¬{AA}{af} fact19: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x fact20: ¬{HE}{fl} -> ¬{AA}{fl}

That Kampuchean is a kind of a Fulmarus.

{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There is something such that that it is both wigless and not a Chloris is not true. fact2: If this milfoil is untruthful then this milfoil does not outlaw uncus. fact3: There exists someone such that the fact that this person does ration Bragi and is a kind of a kerfuffle does not hold. fact4: That Kampuchean does not change Bovinae if there is somebody such that the fact that it rations Bragi and it is not a kind of a kerfuffle is incorrect. fact5: This Cleome does not agitate Kalotermes. fact6: That Kampuchean does not express. fact7: That Kampuchean does not change Bovinae if there exists something such that that it is a kerfuffle is right. fact8: That Kampuchean is a Fulmarus if this geometrician is a kind of a Fulmarus. fact9: There is somebody such that the fact that she is epitheliod and not aeromechanic does not hold. fact10: The reflector is not a Fulmarus. fact11: Something that does not notice interdependence is not a consent. fact12: Some man is not a smouldering if that one does not add Secotiaceae. fact13: There is something such that this rations Bragi and is not a kind of a kerfuffle. fact14: There is somebody such that the fact that she is a counterfeit but not metallic is incorrect. fact15: The philhellene does not mute ecphonesis. fact16: If some man changes Bovinae he is a Fulmarus. fact17: That Kampuchean does not recover. fact18: If that Hereford is non-old this does not ration Bragi. fact19: If something does not change Bovinae this thing is not a Fulmarus. fact20: This cruller does not ration Bragi if it is non-vegetal. ; $hypothesis$ = That Kampuchean is not a kind of a Fulmarus. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This benedict does nitrogenise arachnophobia.

{D}{b}

fact1: That Azactam cheers dalasi. fact2: Someone is not stannic if it does cheer dalasi and it does mill Haemulidae. fact3: If either this benedict is a kind of a acephalism or it is stannic or both then it does not mill Haemulidae. fact4: That Azactam mills Haemulidae. fact5: this dalasi cheers Azactam. fact6: This benedict amalgamates. fact7: If that this benedict is stannic or it is a acephalism or both hold that Azactam does not mill Haemulidae. fact8: That double is diplomatical or is a kind of a acephalism or both if that double is not phrenological. fact9: the Haemulidae mills Azactam. fact10: Somebody does cheer dalasi and she/he nitrogenises arachnophobia if she/he does not mill Haemulidae. fact11: If that Azactam is not stannic then this benedict does not nitrogenise arachnophobia. fact12: That purgative is flaky and this does mill Haemulidae.

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

This benedict does nitrogenise arachnophobia.

{D}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Azactam cheers dalasi. fact2: Someone is not stannic if it does cheer dalasi and it does mill Haemulidae. fact3: If either this benedict is a kind of a acephalism or it is stannic or both then it does not mill Haemulidae. fact4: That Azactam mills Haemulidae. fact5: this dalasi cheers Azactam. fact6: This benedict amalgamates. fact7: If that this benedict is stannic or it is a acephalism or both hold that Azactam does not mill Haemulidae. fact8: That double is diplomatical or is a kind of a acephalism or both if that double is not phrenological. fact9: the Haemulidae mills Azactam. fact10: Somebody does cheer dalasi and she/he nitrogenises arachnophobia if she/he does not mill Haemulidae. fact11: If that Azactam is not stannic then this benedict does not nitrogenise arachnophobia. fact12: That purgative is flaky and this does mill Haemulidae. ; $hypothesis$ = This benedict does nitrogenise arachnophobia. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact4 -> int1: That Azactam cheers dalasi and does mill Haemulidae.; fact2 -> int2: That Azactam is not stannic if that Azactam cheers dalasi and mills Haemulidae.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That Azactam is non-stannic.; int3 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That lacertid is ignoble.

{C}{b}

fact1: That lacertid is ignoble if the sword is not spondaic and/or does not pound.

fact1: (¬{A}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> {C}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That lacertid is ignoble if the sword is not spondaic and/or does not pound. ; $hypothesis$ = That lacertid is ignoble. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that gas occurs and that inception does not happens is not true.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That that that gas and that inception occurs is correct is incorrect. fact2: That filariidness does not happens if the fact that both that filariidness and that chilling Petauristidae occurs does not hold. fact3: If this gala happens the fact that that gas occurs but that inception does not happens is false. fact4: The incapacitating pastorale occurs. fact5: This gala occurs. fact6: That that gas and that inception occurs does not hold if this gala occurs. fact7: That non-secretarialness yields that that squealing does not occurs. fact8: That that filariidness does not occurs leads to that this sterilisation happens and that misusing occurs. fact9: If that misusing happens that rectorate occurs. fact10: This outweighing brings about that notthis festinating Onsager but that haploidicness happens. fact11: That aphasicness happens. fact12: That that squealing does not occurs leads to this CMBR and/or that unpremeditatedness. fact13: If this spillikins occurs this gala does not happens but that stomatalness occurs. fact14: That both this spillikins and that distantness happens is brought about by that this foreshadowing Cetoniidae does not happens. fact15: The duplication does not happens and this foreshadowing Cetoniidae does not occurs if that rectorate occurs. fact16: If that this festinating Onsager does not happens is correct the fact that that filariidness occurs and that chilling Petauristidae happens is wrong. fact17: This secretarialness does not occurs if the incapacitating pastorale occurs and that aphasicness occurs. fact18: That gas but notthat inception occurs if this gala does not happens. fact19: The fact that the compartmentalization happens but the miscounting does not occurs is false.

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

That gas but notthat inception occurs.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that that gas and that inception occurs is correct is incorrect. fact2: That filariidness does not happens if the fact that both that filariidness and that chilling Petauristidae occurs does not hold. fact3: If this gala happens the fact that that gas occurs but that inception does not happens is false. fact4: The incapacitating pastorale occurs. fact5: This gala occurs. fact6: That that gas and that inception occurs does not hold if this gala occurs. fact7: That non-secretarialness yields that that squealing does not occurs. fact8: That that filariidness does not occurs leads to that this sterilisation happens and that misusing occurs. fact9: If that misusing happens that rectorate occurs. fact10: This outweighing brings about that notthis festinating Onsager but that haploidicness happens. fact11: That aphasicness happens. fact12: That that squealing does not occurs leads to this CMBR and/or that unpremeditatedness. fact13: If this spillikins occurs this gala does not happens but that stomatalness occurs. fact14: That both this spillikins and that distantness happens is brought about by that this foreshadowing Cetoniidae does not happens. fact15: The duplication does not happens and this foreshadowing Cetoniidae does not occurs if that rectorate occurs. fact16: If that this festinating Onsager does not happens is correct the fact that that filariidness occurs and that chilling Petauristidae happens is wrong. fact17: This secretarialness does not occurs if the incapacitating pastorale occurs and that aphasicness occurs. fact18: That gas but notthat inception occurs if this gala does not happens. fact19: The fact that the compartmentalization happens but the miscounting does not occurs is false. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that gas occurs and that inception does not happens is not true. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This angiotensin is a schedule.

{C}{b}

fact1: The allies does not overweary. fact2: That cytogeneticist does not exult Tubulidentata. fact3: That cytogeneticist is a kind of a schedule. fact4: That cytogeneticist does not exult Tubulidentata if this angiotensin is not a schedule and overwearies. fact5: that Tubulidentata does not exult cytogeneticist. fact6: If that cytogeneticist does not overweary but this person is a schedule then this angiotensin does not exult Tubulidentata. fact7: If the fact that that cytogeneticist does not overweary and exults Tubulidentata is not true the fact that this doggy exults Tubulidentata is wrong. fact8: That cockloft does not magnetise Viborg but this thing is a kind of a schedule. fact9: This angiotensin does not exult Tubulidentata. fact10: This angiotensin ices Novosibirsk. fact11: The fact that if either that cytogeneticist does not overweary or it is not a schedule or both this angiotensin is a schedule is true. fact12: That that cytogeneticist overwearies hold. fact13: This angiotensin does not exult Tubulidentata but it colonises Mazzini. fact14: That cytogeneticist is not a schedule if this angiotensin does not exult Tubulidentata but it does overweary. fact15: If that normalizer is a Ney then that cytogeneticist is not a Abruzzi but this exults Tubulidentata. fact16: That windbag does not exult Tubulidentata. fact17: If that cytogeneticist does not exult Tubulidentata but it overwearies then this angiotensin is not a schedule. fact18: This angiotensin does not overweary if that cytogeneticist does not exult Tubulidentata and is a kind of a schedule. fact19: Some man that is not a Abruzzi and exults Tubulidentata is not a schedule.

fact1: ¬{B}{db} fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: {C}{a} fact4: (¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact5: ¬{AA}{aa} fact6: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} fact7: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{fs} fact8: (¬{IP}{cj} & {C}{cj}) fact9: ¬{A}{b} fact10: {DD}{b} fact11: (¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> {C}{b} fact12: {B}{a} fact13: (¬{A}{b} & {GH}{b}) fact14: (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact15: {E}{c} -> (¬{D}{a} & {A}{a}) fact16: ¬{A}{iu} fact17: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact18: (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact19: (x): (¬{D}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}x

This angiotensin is a schedule.

{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The allies does not overweary. fact2: That cytogeneticist does not exult Tubulidentata. fact3: That cytogeneticist is a kind of a schedule. fact4: That cytogeneticist does not exult Tubulidentata if this angiotensin is not a schedule and overwearies. fact5: that Tubulidentata does not exult cytogeneticist. fact6: If that cytogeneticist does not overweary but this person is a schedule then this angiotensin does not exult Tubulidentata. fact7: If the fact that that cytogeneticist does not overweary and exults Tubulidentata is not true the fact that this doggy exults Tubulidentata is wrong. fact8: That cockloft does not magnetise Viborg but this thing is a kind of a schedule. fact9: This angiotensin does not exult Tubulidentata. fact10: This angiotensin ices Novosibirsk. fact11: The fact that if either that cytogeneticist does not overweary or it is not a schedule or both this angiotensin is a schedule is true. fact12: That that cytogeneticist overwearies hold. fact13: This angiotensin does not exult Tubulidentata but it colonises Mazzini. fact14: That cytogeneticist is not a schedule if this angiotensin does not exult Tubulidentata but it does overweary. fact15: If that normalizer is a Ney then that cytogeneticist is not a Abruzzi but this exults Tubulidentata. fact16: That windbag does not exult Tubulidentata. fact17: If that cytogeneticist does not exult Tubulidentata but it overwearies then this angiotensin is not a schedule. fact18: This angiotensin does not overweary if that cytogeneticist does not exult Tubulidentata and is a kind of a schedule. fact19: Some man that is not a Abruzzi and exults Tubulidentata is not a schedule. ; $hypothesis$ = This angiotensin is a schedule. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact12 -> int1: That cytogeneticist does not exult Tubulidentata but it overwearies.; int1 & fact17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This sniffing does not occurs.

¬{B}

fact1: If that succinicness happens the fact that the bimetallicness happens hold. fact2: That dying taped does not occurs if the sucking occurs but this elongation does not happens. fact3: The sucking happens if the fact that that interrupting squad does not occurs or this appalling does not occurs or both does not hold. fact4: This support happens. fact5: If this Guatemalanness does not happens then both this joying and that non-accessionalness happens. fact6: This honeyeding Vespidae happens if that crustacean happens. fact7: The procurement happens if that this tendering posturing happens hold. fact8: That this Guatemalanness does not happens is brought about by that the illogicalness happens and the bimetallicness occurs. fact9: If this support does not occurs this sniffing does not occurs. fact10: If that that dying taped does not happens hold then that dribbling and this indiscriminatingness occurs. fact11: That succinicness happens. fact12: That that interrupting squad does not happens or this appalling does not occurs or both does not hold if this joying happens. fact13: Both the illogicalness and that chasteness happens. fact14: That dribbling results in either that that ambitionlessness does not happens or that this mediateness occurs or both. fact15: This sniffing occurs if this support occurs. fact16: If this contented occurs the breeze occurs. fact17: That non-ambitionlessness or this mediateness or both leads to that this support does not happens.

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

This sniffing does not occurs.

¬{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that succinicness happens the fact that the bimetallicness happens hold. fact2: That dying taped does not occurs if the sucking occurs but this elongation does not happens. fact3: The sucking happens if the fact that that interrupting squad does not occurs or this appalling does not occurs or both does not hold. fact4: This support happens. fact5: If this Guatemalanness does not happens then both this joying and that non-accessionalness happens. fact6: This honeyeding Vespidae happens if that crustacean happens. fact7: The procurement happens if that this tendering posturing happens hold. fact8: That this Guatemalanness does not happens is brought about by that the illogicalness happens and the bimetallicness occurs. fact9: If this support does not occurs this sniffing does not occurs. fact10: If that that dying taped does not happens hold then that dribbling and this indiscriminatingness occurs. fact11: That succinicness happens. fact12: That that interrupting squad does not happens or this appalling does not occurs or both does not hold if this joying happens. fact13: Both the illogicalness and that chasteness happens. fact14: That dribbling results in either that that ambitionlessness does not happens or that this mediateness occurs or both. fact15: This sniffing occurs if this support occurs. fact16: If this contented occurs the breeze occurs. fact17: That non-ambitionlessness or this mediateness or both leads to that this support does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This sniffing does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Rousseauanness does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: This religious occurs and this Rousseauanness occurs if that everting does not occurs. fact2: The rumpusing happens. fact3: That everting occurs. fact4: If this allotment does not occurs then this relegating Flinders does not happens and/or that everting does not happens.

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

This Rousseauanness does not happens.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This religious occurs and this Rousseauanness occurs if that everting does not occurs. fact2: The rumpusing happens. fact3: That everting occurs. fact4: If this allotment does not occurs then this relegating Flinders does not happens and/or that everting does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This Rousseauanness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This piperazine is ambulacral.

{A}{a}

fact1: If this mound is not ambulacral and is a Haman this piperazine is not ambulacral. fact2: This piperazine is unanalyzed. fact3: This piperazine is a kind of agrobiological man that is a Haman. fact4: This osier is a Haman. fact5: The wagtail is a Haman. fact6: That dodder is ambulacral. fact7: The fold is ambulacral. fact8: This mound is not ambulacral but a Haman if it is not unshod. fact9: This piperazine refocuses and it is a kind of a nickname.

fact1: (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact2: {DK}{a} fact3: ({DN}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: {B}{ar} fact5: {B}{hf} fact6: {A}{ip} fact7: {A}{fd} fact8: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) fact9: ({GO}{a} & {CI}{a})

This piperazine is not ambulacral.

¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this mound is not ambulacral and is a Haman this piperazine is not ambulacral. fact2: This piperazine is unanalyzed. fact3: This piperazine is a kind of agrobiological man that is a Haman. fact4: This osier is a Haman. fact5: The wagtail is a Haman. fact6: That dodder is ambulacral. fact7: The fold is ambulacral. fact8: This mound is not ambulacral but a Haman if it is not unshod. fact9: This piperazine refocuses and it is a kind of a nickname. ; $hypothesis$ = This piperazine is ambulacral. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That weed is usufructuary.

{B}{a}

fact1: If that weed is non-lienal this is usufructuary. fact2: That weed is non-lienal. fact3: That anisogamy is not nonharmonic. fact4: Something that is not a genealogy is aground and is unidirectional. fact5: If somebody is not a genealogy then either it is not aground or it is not a matriarchy or both. fact6: That weed is non-usufructuary if that lucifer is a kind of non-usufructuary person that is lienal. fact7: That anisogamy smarts and it is a skulduggery if it is harmonic. fact8: Something that is not non-unidirectional and not non-usufructuary is not lienal. fact9: If that synchrotron is not a laxity then it is not non-usufructuary. fact10: Somebody is a syllepsis if it smarts. fact11: If that Bend is a syllepsis then that polysaccharide is not a genealogy and not a xerophthalmia. fact12: If that anisogamy smarts then that Bend smarts. fact13: That weed does not misguide oersted. fact14: If something is unidirectional that thing is not usufructuary and is lienal.

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

That weed is not usufructuary.

¬{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that weed is non-lienal this is usufructuary. fact2: That weed is non-lienal. fact3: That anisogamy is not nonharmonic. fact4: Something that is not a genealogy is aground and is unidirectional. fact5: If somebody is not a genealogy then either it is not aground or it is not a matriarchy or both. fact6: That weed is non-usufructuary if that lucifer is a kind of non-usufructuary person that is lienal. fact7: That anisogamy smarts and it is a skulduggery if it is harmonic. fact8: Something that is not non-unidirectional and not non-usufructuary is not lienal. fact9: If that synchrotron is not a laxity then it is not non-usufructuary. fact10: Somebody is a syllepsis if it smarts. fact11: If that Bend is a syllepsis then that polysaccharide is not a genealogy and not a xerophthalmia. fact12: If that anisogamy smarts then that Bend smarts. fact13: That weed does not misguide oersted. fact14: If something is unidirectional that thing is not usufructuary and is lienal. ; $hypothesis$ = That weed is usufructuary. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This logging occurs and this heartening happens.

({C} & {D})

fact1: This sanitariness occurs. fact2: This logging happens if this reference happens. fact3: The tolerantness occurs. fact4: That this logging does not happens is prevented by that the skirt occurs. fact5: The skirt and/or this reference happens.

fact1: {IN} fact2: {B} -> {C} fact3: {HE} fact4: {A} -> {C} fact5: ({A} v {B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This sanitariness occurs. fact2: This logging happens if this reference happens. fact3: The tolerantness occurs. fact4: That this logging does not happens is prevented by that the skirt occurs. fact5: The skirt and/or this reference happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This logging occurs and this heartening happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that karyoplasm is unjust and/or bells prophase is true.

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

fact1: That karyoplasm is a kind of a Archidiskidon and/or it is anthropogenic. fact2: Either the coreid is a kind of a mass or this person does reseat Tulipa or both. fact3: That some man is non-Nigerian but he/she does place fine does not hold if he/she is not an artistry. fact4: If something is a kind of an expressionist then it stops enchondroma. fact5: If this ADA places fine this Wytensin is not a kind of a Sontag but the one is a bead. fact6: That something does not shade somnolence if it is both not a Sontag and a bead is true. fact7: If that something is non-sensorimotor and is an artistry does not hold that thing is not an artistry. fact8: If there exists something such that it does not shade somnolence this ortygan does unfreeze Tues and is a kind of an expressionist. fact9: This ortygan is anthropogenic. fact10: If the fact that that pomade is a Manichaeanism and it is a kind of a microsecond does not hold then it is not a kind of a Manichaeanism. fact11: That if the fact that that pomade is a kind of non-Nigerian thing that places fine is incorrect this ADA does places fine hold. fact12: This ortygan is a Hygrotrama. fact13: That some man is unjust and/or she bells prophase is not true if she is not anthropogenic. fact14: If the fact that that pomade is not a kind of a Manichaeanism hold the fact that that pomade is both not sensorimotor and an artistry is wrong. fact15: The fact that that pomade is a Manichaeanism that is a microsecond is not right.

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

That that karyoplasm is unjust or he does bell prophase or both is wrong.

¬({C}{b} v {B}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That karyoplasm is a kind of a Archidiskidon and/or it is anthropogenic. fact2: Either the coreid is a kind of a mass or this person does reseat Tulipa or both. fact3: That some man is non-Nigerian but he/she does place fine does not hold if he/she is not an artistry. fact4: If something is a kind of an expressionist then it stops enchondroma. fact5: If this ADA places fine this Wytensin is not a kind of a Sontag but the one is a bead. fact6: That something does not shade somnolence if it is both not a Sontag and a bead is true. fact7: If that something is non-sensorimotor and is an artistry does not hold that thing is not an artistry. fact8: If there exists something such that it does not shade somnolence this ortygan does unfreeze Tues and is a kind of an expressionist. fact9: This ortygan is anthropogenic. fact10: If the fact that that pomade is a Manichaeanism and it is a kind of a microsecond does not hold then it is not a kind of a Manichaeanism. fact11: That if the fact that that pomade is a kind of non-Nigerian thing that places fine is incorrect this ADA does places fine hold. fact12: This ortygan is a Hygrotrama. fact13: That some man is unjust and/or she bells prophase is not true if she is not anthropogenic. fact14: If the fact that that pomade is not a kind of a Manichaeanism hold the fact that that pomade is both not sensorimotor and an artistry is wrong. fact15: The fact that that pomade is a Manichaeanism that is a microsecond is not right. ; $hypothesis$ = That that karyoplasm is unjust and/or bells prophase is true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This collar is classicistic.

{C}{a}

fact1: That everybody does not weaken Ricinus is right. fact2: If that this collar does not corrode poltroonery and he/she does not forage Linnaeus does not hold then he/she is astrophysical. fact3: That this collar does not corrode poltroonery but that forages Linnaeus is false. fact4: That some man is protestant and it is a Ninib does not hold if it does not daub divorced. fact5: The fact that this collar does not corrode poltroonery and does not forage Linnaeus does not hold. fact6: That tither is astrophysical. fact7: If somebody observes rigourousness and is non-astrophysical it is not classicistic. fact8: Some person is classicistic if that person observes rigourousness. fact9: This collar is astrophysical if it forages Linnaeus. fact10: If that that acorn is protestant and it is a Ninib does not hold that geezer is not anthropometrical. fact11: If that that acorn is not worrisome and does daub divorced is false then that acorn does not daub divorced. fact12: This collar observes rigourousness and is not astrophysical if there exists some person such that that person is not infrequent. fact13: Some person observes rigourousness if it is astrophysical. fact14: The fact that something is not worrisome but that thing daubs divorced is incorrect if that thing does not weaken Ricinus.

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

This collar is non-classicistic.

¬{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That everybody does not weaken Ricinus is right. fact2: If that this collar does not corrode poltroonery and he/she does not forage Linnaeus does not hold then he/she is astrophysical. fact3: That this collar does not corrode poltroonery but that forages Linnaeus is false. fact4: That some man is protestant and it is a Ninib does not hold if it does not daub divorced. fact5: The fact that this collar does not corrode poltroonery and does not forage Linnaeus does not hold. fact6: That tither is astrophysical. fact7: If somebody observes rigourousness and is non-astrophysical it is not classicistic. fact8: Some person is classicistic if that person observes rigourousness. fact9: This collar is astrophysical if it forages Linnaeus. fact10: If that that acorn is protestant and it is a Ninib does not hold that geezer is not anthropometrical. fact11: If that that acorn is not worrisome and does daub divorced is false then that acorn does not daub divorced. fact12: This collar observes rigourousness and is not astrophysical if there exists some person such that that person is not infrequent. fact13: Some person observes rigourousness if it is astrophysical. fact14: The fact that something is not worrisome but that thing daubs divorced is incorrect if that thing does not weaken Ricinus. ; $hypothesis$ = This collar is classicistic. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact5 -> int1: This collar is astrophysical.; fact13 -> int2: This collar does observe rigourousness if it is astrophysical.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This collar observes rigourousness.; fact8 -> int4: This collar is classicistic if this thing observes rigourousness.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This cabaret does not occurs.

¬{D}

fact1: That both that pressure and that congratulating Copernicus happens triggers that this cabaret does not occurs. fact2: This unconstrictedness does not occurs. fact3: If that uproar does not occurs then this cock occurs and that ministration happens. fact4: That this blastoporicness does not occurs leads to that both that pyrogeneticness and that shuddering foaming occurs. fact5: That this cock happens triggers that that bardolatry does not occurs or that the unsystematicness does not occurs or both. fact6: This professional happens. fact7: That that uproar happens is prevented by the non-nucleateness and/or that the inequitableness does not happens. fact8: This Whiting readability happens. fact9: The articulating occurs. fact10: The nucleateness does not happens and/or the inequitableness does not occurs. fact11: That congratulating Copernicus occurs but this unconstrictedness does not happens. fact12: If that that this professional occurs is wrong does not hold then that pressure occurs. fact13: That notthat congratulating Copernicus but this unconstrictedness occurs is wrong if that shuddering foaming occurs. fact14: The automatic happens. fact15: The heedfulness occurs.

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

This cabaret happens.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That both that pressure and that congratulating Copernicus happens triggers that this cabaret does not occurs. fact2: This unconstrictedness does not occurs. fact3: If that uproar does not occurs then this cock occurs and that ministration happens. fact4: That this blastoporicness does not occurs leads to that both that pyrogeneticness and that shuddering foaming occurs. fact5: That this cock happens triggers that that bardolatry does not occurs or that the unsystematicness does not occurs or both. fact6: This professional happens. fact7: That that uproar happens is prevented by the non-nucleateness and/or that the inequitableness does not happens. fact8: This Whiting readability happens. fact9: The articulating occurs. fact10: The nucleateness does not happens and/or the inequitableness does not occurs. fact11: That congratulating Copernicus occurs but this unconstrictedness does not happens. fact12: If that that this professional occurs is wrong does not hold then that pressure occurs. fact13: That notthat congratulating Copernicus but this unconstrictedness occurs is wrong if that shuddering foaming occurs. fact14: The automatic happens. fact15: The heedfulness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This cabaret does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact6 -> int1: That pressure happens.; fact11 -> int2: That congratulating Copernicus occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That pressure and that congratulating Copernicus happens.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this Carver is binucleate but that person is not an unpredictability is wrong.

¬({C}{c} & ¬{AA}{c})

fact1: This suffrutex is not non-neuropsychological. fact2: If the fact that this suffrutex overleaps impermanency is not incorrect then it is a kind of an embryology. fact3: If this suffrutex is a sternness then this teetotalist is a kind of an unpredictability and is not a kind of a perverseness. fact4: This suffrutex is binucleate. fact5: If this teetotalist is an unpredictability the fact that this Carver is both binucleate and not an unpredictability does not hold. fact6: That something is not a Bamako but binucleate does not hold if it is an embryology. fact7: If something is not a messiness then this is both an unpredictability and not a sternness. fact8: This suffrutex is a kind of a sternness. fact9: That that this teetotalist is both a sternness and an unpredictability is correct does not hold if this suffrutex is an unpredictability. fact10: If this Carver is a sternness then the fact that this suffrutex is binucleate and the person is a sternness is false. fact11: This Carver is binucleate but he/she is not a sternness.

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

This coracle is a kind of an unpredictability.

{AA}{he}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This suffrutex is not non-neuropsychological. fact2: If the fact that this suffrutex overleaps impermanency is not incorrect then it is a kind of an embryology. fact3: If this suffrutex is a sternness then this teetotalist is a kind of an unpredictability and is not a kind of a perverseness. fact4: This suffrutex is binucleate. fact5: If this teetotalist is an unpredictability the fact that this Carver is both binucleate and not an unpredictability does not hold. fact6: That something is not a Bamako but binucleate does not hold if it is an embryology. fact7: If something is not a messiness then this is both an unpredictability and not a sternness. fact8: This suffrutex is a kind of a sternness. fact9: That that this teetotalist is both a sternness and an unpredictability is correct does not hold if this suffrutex is an unpredictability. fact10: If this Carver is a sternness then the fact that this suffrutex is binucleate and the person is a sternness is false. fact11: This Carver is binucleate but he/she is not a sternness. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this Carver is binucleate but that person is not an unpredictability is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact8 -> int1: This teetotalist is a kind of an unpredictability but the thing is not a perverseness.; int1 -> int2: This teetotalist is an unpredictability.; int2 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this cleaner does not strut algebra and she/he does not marbleising does not hold.

¬(¬{B}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa})

fact1: This cleaner does not steepen tyranny and/or realines obtuseness. fact2: If Kiana is a Wabash but that person does not marbleising then this cleaner does not marbleising. fact3: That Kiana does realine obtuseness but that thing does not marbleising does not hold if that harvestman does not strut algebra. fact4: If somebody is hyaloplasmic then it is not ovoviviparous and it ICES. fact5: Kiana is a Ephedraceae. fact6: That that chaffweed does not housebreak straying and it is not hyaloplasmic is wrong if this deposit is not an external. fact7: This deposit is not an external if that the person is a kind of a Plasmodiophoraceae and the person is an external is false. fact8: Some man does not strut algebra but the one is a kind of a Ephedraceae if the one is a Wabash. fact9: If the fact that that chaffweed does not housebreak straying and is not hyaloplasmic does not hold then this paramecia is hyaloplasmic. fact10: If Kiana is a Ephedraceae that is a Wabash and does not marbleising. fact11: If this paramecia is not ovoviviparous then the fact that that harvestman is not a Wabash but it is a savory does not hold. fact12: If the fact that that Kiana realines obtuseness and does not marbleising does not hold is not incorrect then Carmela does not realines obtuseness. fact13: The fact that something is a Wabash hold if that it is not a Wabash and it is a kind of a savory is wrong.

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

Carmela does not realine obtuseness.

¬{AB}{gi}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This cleaner does not steepen tyranny and/or realines obtuseness. fact2: If Kiana is a Wabash but that person does not marbleising then this cleaner does not marbleising. fact3: That Kiana does realine obtuseness but that thing does not marbleising does not hold if that harvestman does not strut algebra. fact4: If somebody is hyaloplasmic then it is not ovoviviparous and it ICES. fact5: Kiana is a Ephedraceae. fact6: That that chaffweed does not housebreak straying and it is not hyaloplasmic is wrong if this deposit is not an external. fact7: This deposit is not an external if that the person is a kind of a Plasmodiophoraceae and the person is an external is false. fact8: Some man does not strut algebra but the one is a kind of a Ephedraceae if the one is a Wabash. fact9: If the fact that that chaffweed does not housebreak straying and is not hyaloplasmic does not hold then this paramecia is hyaloplasmic. fact10: If Kiana is a Ephedraceae that is a Wabash and does not marbleising. fact11: If this paramecia is not ovoviviparous then the fact that that harvestman is not a Wabash but it is a savory does not hold. fact12: If the fact that that Kiana realines obtuseness and does not marbleising does not hold is not incorrect then Carmela does not realines obtuseness. fact13: The fact that something is a Wabash hold if that it is not a Wabash and it is a kind of a savory is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That this cleaner does not strut algebra and she/he does not marbleising does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this incorrigibleness does not occurs is right.

¬{B}

fact1: That that pickingsing shuteye does not occurs and/or the tempering Zama brings about the Ismaili. fact2: Either this billing does not occurs or the nativeness happens or both. fact3: That this incorrigibleness does not happens is triggered by that that hazard does not occurs or that this spitball does not occurs or both. fact4: That this mesh does not happens and/or that this Kabbalism occurs results in that this Columbianness happens. fact5: Either that this renormalizing does not occurs or that that thankfulness occurs or both results in that that tramontane occurs. fact6: That this building does not occurs and/or that this spitball occurs prevents that that establishment does not happens. fact7: The foreclosure occurs if this non-annalisticness or the tirade or both occurs. fact8: The hunter happens. fact9: The unwittingness happens. fact10: That animistness happens or this protection happens or both. fact11: That notthat hazard but this incorrigibleness occurs prevents that this Damascening does not happens. fact12: This incorrigibleness occurs if this non-animistness and/or this protection occurs. fact13: If that the questioning does not happens and/or that electromagneticness happens hold this statutoriness happens. fact14: This traffic is caused by that that dialectic occurs. fact15: If this manipulation does not occurs and/or the phreaticness happens then that downsizing occurs. fact16: The nudging happens. fact17: This non-gentileness or this thirstiness or both occurs. fact18: This matureness occurs if either this zygomaticness does not happens or this courting affiliated occurs or both. fact19: This thirstiness does not happens and/or the companying enthusiasm occurs.

fact1: (¬{DR} v {JD}) -> {FC} fact2: (¬{DE} v {HC}) fact3: (¬{A} v ¬{C}) -> ¬{B} fact4: (¬{AR} v {FS}) -> {HS} fact5: (¬{BE} v {FL}) -> {HP} fact6: (¬{AO} v {C}) -> {EL} fact7: (¬{O} v {IC}) -> {CC} fact8: {S} fact9: {HT} fact10: ({AA} v {AB}) fact11: (¬{A} & {B}) -> {AG} fact12: (¬{AA} v {AB}) -> {B} fact13: (¬{BH} v {EJ}) -> {CR} fact14: {EA} -> {CO} fact15: (¬{N} v {CH}) -> {EC} fact16: {DS} fact17: (¬{AU} v {FJ}) fact18: (¬{GP} v {CD}) -> {IM} fact19: (¬{FJ} v {FB})

The comment does not happens and/or this Damascening happens.

(¬{JA} v {AG})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that pickingsing shuteye does not occurs and/or the tempering Zama brings about the Ismaili. fact2: Either this billing does not occurs or the nativeness happens or both. fact3: That this incorrigibleness does not happens is triggered by that that hazard does not occurs or that this spitball does not occurs or both. fact4: That this mesh does not happens and/or that this Kabbalism occurs results in that this Columbianness happens. fact5: Either that this renormalizing does not occurs or that that thankfulness occurs or both results in that that tramontane occurs. fact6: That this building does not occurs and/or that this spitball occurs prevents that that establishment does not happens. fact7: The foreclosure occurs if this non-annalisticness or the tirade or both occurs. fact8: The hunter happens. fact9: The unwittingness happens. fact10: That animistness happens or this protection happens or both. fact11: That notthat hazard but this incorrigibleness occurs prevents that this Damascening does not happens. fact12: This incorrigibleness occurs if this non-animistness and/or this protection occurs. fact13: If that the questioning does not happens and/or that electromagneticness happens hold this statutoriness happens. fact14: This traffic is caused by that that dialectic occurs. fact15: If this manipulation does not occurs and/or the phreaticness happens then that downsizing occurs. fact16: The nudging happens. fact17: This non-gentileness or this thirstiness or both occurs. fact18: This matureness occurs if either this zygomaticness does not happens or this courting affiliated occurs or both. fact19: This thirstiness does not happens and/or the companying enthusiasm occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this incorrigibleness does not occurs is right. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That swaggerer is a Leontodon and it is a criminology.

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

fact1: If that something builds lordship and transgresses Sibelius does not hold then the fact that this does not builds lordship hold. fact2: That that antisyphilitic is a criminology is right. fact3: The fact that something builds lordship and transgresses Sibelius does not hold if it does not abandon Pyrrhocoridae. fact4: The fact that somebody is a Leontodon and it is a criminology does not hold if it is not anecdotal. fact5: That swaggerer is a criminology. fact6: This dibranch is a criminology and is a Leontodon if this person is not anecdotal. fact7: That swaggerer gushes malice. fact8: If this mote transgresses Sibelius this tenpounder transgresses Sibelius. fact9: That swaggerer is a pH and that one is unwary. fact10: Some person is not anecdotal if it does build lordship. fact11: The vocabulary is a criminology. fact12: This tenpounder does not abandon Pyrrhocoridae if this mote is a Dirac. fact13: That swaggerer is a kind of a Leontodon. fact14: That swaggerer is not anecdotal if this tenpounder does not build lordship.

fact1: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact2: {B}{ha} fact3: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({D}x & {E}x) fact4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) fact5: {B}{a} fact6: ¬{C}{bs} -> ({B}{bs} & {A}{bs}) fact7: {CO}{a} fact8: {E}{c} -> {E}{b} fact9: ({BL}{a} & {FC}{a}) fact10: (x): {D}x -> ¬{C}x fact11: {B}{jb} fact12: {G}{c} -> ¬{F}{b} fact13: {A}{a} fact14: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬{C}{a}

That that swaggerer is both a Leontodon and a criminology is wrong.

¬({A}{a} & {B}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that something builds lordship and transgresses Sibelius does not hold then the fact that this does not builds lordship hold. fact2: That that antisyphilitic is a criminology is right. fact3: The fact that something builds lordship and transgresses Sibelius does not hold if it does not abandon Pyrrhocoridae. fact4: The fact that somebody is a Leontodon and it is a criminology does not hold if it is not anecdotal. fact5: That swaggerer is a criminology. fact6: This dibranch is a criminology and is a Leontodon if this person is not anecdotal. fact7: That swaggerer gushes malice. fact8: If this mote transgresses Sibelius this tenpounder transgresses Sibelius. fact9: That swaggerer is a pH and that one is unwary. fact10: Some person is not anecdotal if it does build lordship. fact11: The vocabulary is a criminology. fact12: This tenpounder does not abandon Pyrrhocoridae if this mote is a Dirac. fact13: That swaggerer is a kind of a Leontodon. fact14: That swaggerer is not anecdotal if this tenpounder does not build lordship. ; $hypothesis$ = That swaggerer is a Leontodon and it is a criminology. ; $proof$ =

fact13 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Piagetianness does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: Both that hyoidness and this ensiling Curie happens. fact2: That articularness occurs. fact3: That unrhythmicness occurs. fact4: That biblioticness and this revokableness happens. fact5: This calmness happens and that paling Ornithomimida happens. fact6: The imprisonment happens but that biblioticness does not happens if that indeterminableness occurs. fact7: That that truncation happens causes that extemporization. fact8: That extrospectiveness occurs. fact9: The twilight happens but the Galwegianness does not happens. fact10: The paramagneticness does not occurs. fact11: This Argentine occurs and the terrorism does not happens. fact12: That extemporization happens. fact13: If that truncation does not happens that unrhythmicness happens and this Piagetianness happens. fact14: That thawing occurs. fact15: That both that extemporization and the non-Piagetianness occurs is triggered by that truncation. fact16: This fading happens. fact17: The cavorting effeminateness occurs if either that unrhythmicness does not happens or that truncation occurs or both. fact18: The twinning brings about that this agglutinating animosity but notthe trifling happens.

fact1: ({EE} & {DU}) fact2: {HK} fact3: {A} fact4: ({GU} & {FT}) fact5: ({GE} & {EM}) fact6: {AA} -> ({FC} & ¬{GU}) fact7: {B} -> {D} fact8: {HF} fact9: ({BM} & ¬{I}) fact10: ¬{GC} fact11: ({AQ} & ¬{IO}) fact12: {D} fact13: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) fact14: {EB} fact15: {B} -> ({D} & ¬{C}) fact16: {AT} fact17: (¬{A} v {B}) -> {ES} fact18: {IG} -> ({BP} & ¬{GP})

The cavorting effeminateness occurs.

{ES}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both that hyoidness and this ensiling Curie happens. fact2: That articularness occurs. fact3: That unrhythmicness occurs. fact4: That biblioticness and this revokableness happens. fact5: This calmness happens and that paling Ornithomimida happens. fact6: The imprisonment happens but that biblioticness does not happens if that indeterminableness occurs. fact7: That that truncation happens causes that extemporization. fact8: That extrospectiveness occurs. fact9: The twilight happens but the Galwegianness does not happens. fact10: The paramagneticness does not occurs. fact11: This Argentine occurs and the terrorism does not happens. fact12: That extemporization happens. fact13: If that truncation does not happens that unrhythmicness happens and this Piagetianness happens. fact14: That thawing occurs. fact15: That both that extemporization and the non-Piagetianness occurs is triggered by that truncation. fact16: This fading happens. fact17: The cavorting effeminateness occurs if either that unrhythmicness does not happens or that truncation occurs or both. fact18: The twinning brings about that this agglutinating animosity but notthe trifling happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This Piagetianness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that curing schizoid does not happens and this bash occurs is not right.

¬(¬{D} & {C})

fact1: That this fogging does not occurs prevents that that execration occurs. fact2: This sampling Cupressus does not occurs and/or that Armenian does not happens if that uninquisitiveness does not happens. fact3: This bash does not occurs if that notthis parry but that shocking acidity occurs is not right. fact4: This bash happens if that execration happens. fact5: That arteriolarness happens if that curing schizoid does not happens and/or that arteriolarness occurs. fact6: That transposing does not occurs. fact7: That uninquisitiveness does not happens. fact8: This bash brings about that that that curing schizoid does not occurs and this bash happens hold. fact9: The fact that that execration occurs is true if that transposing does not occurs. fact10: This fogging does not happens if this sampling Cupressus does not occurs. fact11: That that curing schizoid does not happens and/or that arteriolarness is triggered by that this bash does not happens.

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

Notthis hyperextension but that arteriolarness happens.

(¬{EU} & {JI})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this fogging does not occurs prevents that that execration occurs. fact2: This sampling Cupressus does not occurs and/or that Armenian does not happens if that uninquisitiveness does not happens. fact3: This bash does not occurs if that notthis parry but that shocking acidity occurs is not right. fact4: This bash happens if that execration happens. fact5: That arteriolarness happens if that curing schizoid does not happens and/or that arteriolarness occurs. fact6: That transposing does not occurs. fact7: That uninquisitiveness does not happens. fact8: This bash brings about that that that curing schizoid does not occurs and this bash happens hold. fact9: The fact that that execration occurs is true if that transposing does not occurs. fact10: This fogging does not happens if this sampling Cupressus does not occurs. fact11: That that curing schizoid does not happens and/or that arteriolarness is triggered by that this bash does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that curing schizoid does not happens and this bash occurs is not right. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact6 -> int1: That execration occurs.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: This bash occurs.; int2 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That pointlessness happens.

{C}

fact1: That preoccupation occurs. fact2: This clamatorialness occurs. fact3: That that counterplot occurs prevents that pointedness. fact4: If this unorientedness happens then that counterplot happens.

fact1: {CM} fact2: {IS} fact3: {B} -> {C} fact4: {A} -> {B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That preoccupation occurs. fact2: This clamatorialness occurs. fact3: That that counterplot occurs prevents that pointedness. fact4: If this unorientedness happens then that counterplot happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That pointlessness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this isoflurane is not a Raoulia and is noseless is false.

¬(¬{A}{aa} & {C}{aa})

fact1: The fact that something does not remand but this thing does dump Scutigera does not hold if this thing is a Raoulia. fact2: The fact that this tailgater is not a kind of a lymphadenopathy and is unconfined is false. fact3: Something is a Comptonia if that it is not a kind of a lymphadenopathy and it is unconfined is wrong. fact4: This designer is a kind of a Raoulia that authenticates Erinyes if this metastasis is not noseless. fact5: This isoflurane is not unacquisitive. fact6: That the fact that this isoflurane is not acquisitive and/or remands is correct does not hold if there exists something such that this is not a kind of a kilometer. fact7: If this tailgater is a Comptonia that is not noseless then this metastasis is not noseless. fact8: Something is not a kilometer. fact9: The fact that some person does not authenticate Erinyes is right if that that person is not acquisitive and/or that person remands is false. fact10: This isoflurane is not unacquisitive if there exists some person such that the one is not a kilometer. fact11: If that somebody is a kilometer and noseless is wrong then it is not noseless. fact12: That something is not a Raoulia but it is noseless does not hold if it does not authenticate Erinyes. fact13: The fact that someone is a Raoulia and that one is noseless is wrong if that one does not authenticate Erinyes.

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

The fact that this designer does not remand and dumps Scutigera is false.

¬(¬{AB}{cn} & {BK}{cn})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that something does not remand but this thing does dump Scutigera does not hold if this thing is a Raoulia. fact2: The fact that this tailgater is not a kind of a lymphadenopathy and is unconfined is false. fact3: Something is a Comptonia if that it is not a kind of a lymphadenopathy and it is unconfined is wrong. fact4: This designer is a kind of a Raoulia that authenticates Erinyes if this metastasis is not noseless. fact5: This isoflurane is not unacquisitive. fact6: That the fact that this isoflurane is not acquisitive and/or remands is correct does not hold if there exists something such that this is not a kind of a kilometer. fact7: If this tailgater is a Comptonia that is not noseless then this metastasis is not noseless. fact8: Something is not a kilometer. fact9: The fact that some person does not authenticate Erinyes is right if that that person is not acquisitive and/or that person remands is false. fact10: This isoflurane is not unacquisitive if there exists some person such that the one is not a kilometer. fact11: If that somebody is a kilometer and noseless is wrong then it is not noseless. fact12: That something is not a Raoulia but it is noseless does not hold if it does not authenticate Erinyes. fact13: The fact that someone is a Raoulia and that one is noseless is wrong if that one does not authenticate Erinyes. ; $hypothesis$ = That this isoflurane is not a Raoulia and is noseless is false. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: This isoflurane does not authenticate Erinyes if that he either is unacquisitive or remands or both is wrong.; fact8 & fact6 -> int2: The fact that this isoflurane is unacquisitive or this thing remands or both does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This isoflurane does not authenticate Erinyes.; fact12 -> int4: That this isoflurane is not a Raoulia and is noseless does not hold if this isoflurane does not authenticate Erinyes.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This interstitialness occurs.

{D}

fact1: The fact that both the snuffing sparsity and the pragmaticalness happens does not hold if the preachment does not happens. fact2: That both this meaninglessness and this syncope occurs does not hold if this spurtinging does not happens. fact3: If the fact that both this meaninglessness and this syncope occurs does not hold this interstitialness does not happens. fact4: That this encircling does not occurs and this interstitialness occurs is wrong if that entombment does not occurs. fact5: That this unworldliness happens is brought about by that this hurrying happens. fact6: If this unworldliness happens that entombment does not occurs and/or this jinks occurs. fact7: That this bushing does not happens results in that both this hurrying and that contumacy happens. fact8: That audiometricness happens and the lenience happens. fact9: If either that entombment does not happens or this jinks happens or both then that entombment does not occurs. fact10: That intertidalness occurs and the standardisation happens. fact11: This bushing does not occurs if either that disingenuousness does not happens or this ampullariness does not occurs or both. fact12: The fact that that this teaching and that conciseness occurs hold is false. fact13: This browning does not happens if this meaninglessness occurs. fact14: If this meaninglessness occurs then this interstitialness occurs. fact15: The lenience happens. fact16: If both that audiometricness and the lenience happens this spurtinging does not occurs. fact17: If this syncope does not happens then this meaninglessness happens and this spurtinging happens. fact18: That the condensate occurs and that championing agnosia occurs does not hold.

fact1: ¬{BJ} -> ¬({JK} & {GU}) fact2: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) fact3: ¬({A} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact4: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{E} & {D}) fact5: {I} -> {H} fact6: {H} -> (¬{F} v {G}) fact7: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) fact8: ({AA} & {AB}) fact9: (¬{F} v {G}) -> ¬{F} fact10: ({GJ} & {DI}) fact11: (¬{M} v ¬{L}) -> ¬{K} fact12: ¬({AH} & {JB}) fact13: {A} -> ¬{EF} fact14: {A} -> {D} fact15: {AB} fact16: ({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact17: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact18: ¬({IG} & {HM})

This interstitialness occurs.

{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that both the snuffing sparsity and the pragmaticalness happens does not hold if the preachment does not happens. fact2: That both this meaninglessness and this syncope occurs does not hold if this spurtinging does not happens. fact3: If the fact that both this meaninglessness and this syncope occurs does not hold this interstitialness does not happens. fact4: That this encircling does not occurs and this interstitialness occurs is wrong if that entombment does not occurs. fact5: That this unworldliness happens is brought about by that this hurrying happens. fact6: If this unworldliness happens that entombment does not occurs and/or this jinks occurs. fact7: That this bushing does not happens results in that both this hurrying and that contumacy happens. fact8: That audiometricness happens and the lenience happens. fact9: If either that entombment does not happens or this jinks happens or both then that entombment does not occurs. fact10: That intertidalness occurs and the standardisation happens. fact11: This bushing does not occurs if either that disingenuousness does not happens or this ampullariness does not occurs or both. fact12: The fact that that this teaching and that conciseness occurs hold is false. fact13: This browning does not happens if this meaninglessness occurs. fact14: If this meaninglessness occurs then this interstitialness occurs. fact15: The lenience happens. fact16: If both that audiometricness and the lenience happens this spurtinging does not occurs. fact17: If this syncope does not happens then this meaninglessness happens and this spurtinging happens. fact18: That the condensate occurs and that championing agnosia occurs does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This interstitialness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact16 & fact8 -> int1: That this spurtinging does not occurs hold.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: The fact that this meaninglessness happens and this syncope happens does not hold.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that this Seychellois is a Schistosoma.

{A}{a}

fact1: This Seychellois does not unclasp septicemia but it does bury Boone. fact2: That radome is not luteal but it is a Schistosoma. fact3: Someone is a Schistosoma if she does not dine Donetske. fact4: That radome is a Schistosoma. fact5: That that radome is not a Schistosoma and is a balking does not hold. fact6: Everything is not a kind of a dominant and that thing is a pomology. fact7: The fact that if someone is a kind of a Schistosoma that that person is not mecopterous and is hemopoietic is not true is right. fact8: Everything is not luteal and it is a balking. fact9: Everything Blacks brightness. fact10: That the bacteria does extort Vasari is right.

fact1: (¬{ES}{a} & {J}{a}) fact2: (¬{AA}{b} & {A}{b}) fact3: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x fact4: {A}{b} fact5: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact6: (x): (¬{BM}x & {S}x) fact7: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{IO}x & {AG}x) fact8: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact9: (x): {R}x fact10: {IJ}{hl}

Let's assume that this Seychellois is a Schistosoma.

{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Seychellois does not unclasp septicemia but it does bury Boone. fact2: That radome is not luteal but it is a Schistosoma. fact3: Someone is a Schistosoma if she does not dine Donetske. fact4: That radome is a Schistosoma. fact5: That that radome is not a Schistosoma and is a balking does not hold. fact6: Everything is not a kind of a dominant and that thing is a pomology. fact7: The fact that if someone is a kind of a Schistosoma that that person is not mecopterous and is hemopoietic is not true is right. fact8: Everything is not luteal and it is a balking. fact9: Everything Blacks brightness. fact10: That the bacteria does extort Vasari is right. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this Seychellois is a Schistosoma. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That gulfweed does undulate Bernini.

{B}{b}

fact1: That gulfweed does not stabilise. fact2: The fact that something is a kind of a countlessness that is not a Houttuynia does not hold if it retires eq. fact3: The fact that this supplanter stabilises and is a Steinberg does not hold. fact4: If this supplanter does not overcapitalise Serinus the fact that the thing stabilises and the thing is not a kind of a Steinberg is false. fact5: This supplanter does not overcapitalise Serinus. fact6: If something overcapitalises Serinus that it is Kenyan and it does not stabilise is wrong. fact7: That gulfweed does not undulate Bernini if this supplanter is a Steinberg. fact8: If something bonks traveled that it overcapitalises Serinus hold. fact9: this Serinus does not overcapitalise supplanter. fact10: That gulfweed does not undulate Bernini if that the fact that this supplanter stabilises but it is not a kind of a Steinberg is false is right. fact11: If that some person is not a countlessness is true that he/she does not bonk traveled is not false. fact12: If Tucker is a Copepoda Melvin does grace acroanaesthesia. fact13: That that gaur bonks traveled and/or does undulate Bernini hold if this supplanter is not a countlessness. fact14: Something overcapitalises Serinus if it undulates Bernini. fact15: Some person retires eq if this one eliminates. fact16: There is nobody such that it either is a indefatigableness or is a Silphium or both. fact17: The fact that this supplanter is not a countlessness if that that gulfweed is a countlessness and is not a Houttuynia is false is correct. fact18: If Tucker does not flee Septuagint Tucker is a Copepoda and sputters Sardegna. fact19: If there is some man such that that it graces acroanaesthesia is true then that gulfweed eliminates and it graces acroanaesthesia. fact20: Something does not flee Septuagint if the fact that the fact that it is a indefatigableness and/or it is a Silphium is right is wrong.

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

The fact that that gaur is a kind of Kenyan thing that does not stabilise does not hold.

¬({DQ}{s} & ¬{AA}{s})

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That gulfweed does not stabilise. fact2: The fact that something is a kind of a countlessness that is not a Houttuynia does not hold if it retires eq. fact3: The fact that this supplanter stabilises and is a Steinberg does not hold. fact4: If this supplanter does not overcapitalise Serinus the fact that the thing stabilises and the thing is not a kind of a Steinberg is false. fact5: This supplanter does not overcapitalise Serinus. fact6: If something overcapitalises Serinus that it is Kenyan and it does not stabilise is wrong. fact7: That gulfweed does not undulate Bernini if this supplanter is a Steinberg. fact8: If something bonks traveled that it overcapitalises Serinus hold. fact9: this Serinus does not overcapitalise supplanter. fact10: That gulfweed does not undulate Bernini if that the fact that this supplanter stabilises but it is not a kind of a Steinberg is false is right. fact11: If that some person is not a countlessness is true that he/she does not bonk traveled is not false. fact12: If Tucker is a Copepoda Melvin does grace acroanaesthesia. fact13: That that gaur bonks traveled and/or does undulate Bernini hold if this supplanter is not a countlessness. fact14: Something overcapitalises Serinus if it undulates Bernini. fact15: Some person retires eq if this one eliminates. fact16: There is nobody such that it either is a indefatigableness or is a Silphium or both. fact17: The fact that this supplanter is not a countlessness if that that gulfweed is a countlessness and is not a Houttuynia is false is correct. fact18: If Tucker does not flee Septuagint Tucker is a Copepoda and sputters Sardegna. fact19: If there is some man such that that it graces acroanaesthesia is true then that gulfweed eliminates and it graces acroanaesthesia. fact20: Something does not flee Septuagint if the fact that the fact that it is a indefatigableness and/or it is a Silphium is right is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That gulfweed does undulate Bernini. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact5 -> int1: The fact that this supplanter stabilises and is not a Steinberg does not hold.; int1 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Republican happens.

{E}

fact1: That that remilitarisation happens and that comfort happens is caused by that that congregating does not happens. fact2: That this Republidoes not happens is prevented by that this Ravelling happens. fact3: The fact that the fruitfulness but notthe scrupling Ariocarpus occurs does not hold. fact4: If that notthat outraging but this Ravelling occurs is false then this Ravelling does not happens. fact5: That this nonexistentness does not happens and that romancing Ascomycota does not happens is wrong if this blonde does not happens. fact6: The fact that that outraging does not happens and this Ravelling occurs does not hold if that blastomycoticness does not occurs. fact7: The vibrationalness does not occurs if the learning but notthe credits occurs. fact8: If the vibrationalness does not happens that this chastenessing phenotype occurs and that diatribe occurs does not hold. fact9: If that this paranasalness happens is true the fact that this Ravelling does not happens and that blastomycoticness does not occurs does not hold. fact10: If this paranasalness occurs then that this Ravelling and this non-blastomycoticness occurs is false. fact11: That that blastomycoticness does not occurs hold if that this chastenessing phenotype and that diatribe occurs is incorrect. fact12: If this blonde happens then the fact that this paranasalness happens hold. fact13: This Republidoes not occurs if this blonde does not occurs and this paranasalness does not happens. fact14: If that this Ravelling does not happens and that blastomycoticness does not occurs is not correct then that Republican occurs. fact15: The learning but notthe credits occurs if that remilitarisation occurs. fact16: The fact that this Ravelling but notthat blastomycoticness happens does not hold. fact17: That modulating does not happens if the fact that either this exasperating occurs or this staggering occurs or both is wrong. fact18: The fact that this exasperating and/or this staggering happens does not hold if this khanate does not happens. fact19: If that modulating does not happens this creneling Samoyedic occurs and that congregating does not happens. fact20: This blonde happens.

fact1: ¬{N} -> ({L} & {M}) fact2: {C} -> {E} fact3: ¬({DR} & ¬{GE}) fact4: ¬(¬{F} & {C}) -> ¬{C} fact5: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AM} & ¬{BT}) fact6: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{F} & {C}) fact7: ({J} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{I} fact8: ¬{I} -> ¬({H} & {G}) fact9: {B} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) fact10: {B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact11: ¬({H} & {G}) -> ¬{D} fact12: {A} -> {B} fact13: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{E} fact14: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) -> {E} fact15: {L} -> ({J} & ¬{K}) fact16: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact17: ¬({R} v {Q}) -> ¬{P} fact18: ¬{S} -> ¬({R} v {Q}) fact19: ¬{P} -> ({O} & ¬{N}) fact20: {A}

This Republidoes not happens.

¬{E}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that remilitarisation happens and that comfort happens is caused by that that congregating does not happens. fact2: That this Republidoes not happens is prevented by that this Ravelling happens. fact3: The fact that the fruitfulness but notthe scrupling Ariocarpus occurs does not hold. fact4: If that notthat outraging but this Ravelling occurs is false then this Ravelling does not happens. fact5: That this nonexistentness does not happens and that romancing Ascomycota does not happens is wrong if this blonde does not happens. fact6: The fact that that outraging does not happens and this Ravelling occurs does not hold if that blastomycoticness does not occurs. fact7: The vibrationalness does not occurs if the learning but notthe credits occurs. fact8: If the vibrationalness does not happens that this chastenessing phenotype occurs and that diatribe occurs does not hold. fact9: If that this paranasalness happens is true the fact that this Ravelling does not happens and that blastomycoticness does not occurs does not hold. fact10: If this paranasalness occurs then that this Ravelling and this non-blastomycoticness occurs is false. fact11: That that blastomycoticness does not occurs hold if that this chastenessing phenotype and that diatribe occurs is incorrect. fact12: If this blonde happens then the fact that this paranasalness happens hold. fact13: This Republidoes not occurs if this blonde does not occurs and this paranasalness does not happens. fact14: If that this Ravelling does not happens and that blastomycoticness does not occurs is not correct then that Republican occurs. fact15: The learning but notthe credits occurs if that remilitarisation occurs. fact16: The fact that this Ravelling but notthat blastomycoticness happens does not hold. fact17: That modulating does not happens if the fact that either this exasperating occurs or this staggering occurs or both is wrong. fact18: The fact that this exasperating and/or this staggering happens does not hold if this khanate does not happens. fact19: If that modulating does not happens this creneling Samoyedic occurs and that congregating does not happens. fact20: This blonde happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That Republican happens. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact20 -> int1: This paranasalness occurs.; int1 & fact9 -> int2: The fact that this Ravelling does not occurs and that blastomycoticness does not occurs does not hold.; int2 & fact14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This villa is a Antlia and/or not a swill.

({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b})

fact1: If something does not swear logorrhea the fact that it is a Antlia and/or it is not a swill is false. fact2: This villa is a Antlia and/or it is a swill. fact3: that logorrhea swears waterside. fact4: This waterside swears logorrhea. fact5: If that iconoscope is a tough that this waterside does not swear logorrhea and is not hypophyseal is false. fact6: If this waterside swears logorrhea this villa is a Antlia and/or not a swill. fact7: That interaction is a swill if that interaction swears logorrhea. fact8: That Lesbian is a Antlia. fact9: If this waterside swears logorrhea this villa either is a Antlia or is a kind of a swill or both. fact10: This waterside is ferned. fact11: The fact that this villa either is a Antlia or swears logorrhea or both hold.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) fact2: ({AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) fact3: {AC}{aa} fact4: {A}{a} fact5: {B}{c} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact6: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) fact7: {A}{aq} -> {AB}{aq} fact8: {AA}{dh} fact9: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) fact10: {HJ}{a} fact11: ({AA}{b} v {A}{b})

That interaction is a swill.

{AB}{aq}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something does not swear logorrhea the fact that it is a Antlia and/or it is not a swill is false. fact2: This villa is a Antlia and/or it is a swill. fact3: that logorrhea swears waterside. fact4: This waterside swears logorrhea. fact5: If that iconoscope is a tough that this waterside does not swear logorrhea and is not hypophyseal is false. fact6: If this waterside swears logorrhea this villa is a Antlia and/or not a swill. fact7: That interaction is a swill if that interaction swears logorrhea. fact8: That Lesbian is a Antlia. fact9: If this waterside swears logorrhea this villa either is a Antlia or is a kind of a swill or both. fact10: This waterside is ferned. fact11: The fact that this villa either is a Antlia or swears logorrhea or both hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This villa is a Antlia and/or not a swill. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The saddle is not a kind of a Eisenstein and is dialectal.

(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b})

fact1: Someone is not tribal or does not encapsulate Mesopotamia or both if this one politicises Hinduism. fact2: If that pornographer is a detox that pornographer is not dialectal. fact3: If that someone is not tribal and/or she/he does not encapsulate Mesopotamia is not false that she/he is not a shroud hold. fact4: If that pornographer is not a detox then the saddle is not a Eisenstein and is dialectal. fact5: That that pornographer is both incommunicative and not a Averroes does not hold if it is not a kind of a shroud. fact6: If the fact that something is incommunicative and is not a kind of a Averroes is false this thing is not a detox. fact7: The fact that that pornographer is a detox is right. fact8: That the saddle is not a Eisenstein but that is dialectal is not true if that pornographer is not dialectal.

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

The saddle is not a kind of a Eisenstein and is dialectal.

(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Someone is not tribal or does not encapsulate Mesopotamia or both if this one politicises Hinduism. fact2: If that pornographer is a detox that pornographer is not dialectal. fact3: If that someone is not tribal and/or she/he does not encapsulate Mesopotamia is not false that she/he is not a shroud hold. fact4: If that pornographer is not a detox then the saddle is not a Eisenstein and is dialectal. fact5: That that pornographer is both incommunicative and not a Averroes does not hold if it is not a kind of a shroud. fact6: If the fact that something is incommunicative and is not a kind of a Averroes is false this thing is not a detox. fact7: The fact that that pornographer is a detox is right. fact8: That the saddle is not a Eisenstein but that is dialectal is not true if that pornographer is not dialectal. ; $hypothesis$ = The saddle is not a kind of a Eisenstein and is dialectal. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact7 -> int1: That that pornographer is non-dialectal is right.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Morgan is unsalable.

{C}{a}

fact1: Something that outwears revulsion is not unsalable. fact2: That Silex is not general. fact3: If someone outwears revulsion then the fact that that it is unsalable and it is not Leibnitzian is correct does not hold. fact4: This chitlins is not a Aztecan if that this coco is a keyed and it BARS neurasthenia is true. fact5: That Silex is a keyed if this submersible is a keyed. fact6: This submersible is a keyed. fact7: This coco does BAR neurasthenia if this vest is not isosmotic and this is not noncritical. fact8: If someone hooks Karnataka the fact that either it does not outwear revulsion or it is Leibnitzian or both is incorrect. fact9: This vest is not isosmotic and it is not noncritical if it is not a kind of an exposed. fact10: If there exists something such that it does not emerge that this paedophile does not emerge hold. fact11: If something is Leibnitzian and/or it outwears revulsion then it is not unsalable. fact12: Something is unsalable if that this thing does not outwear revulsion or this thing is Leibnitzian or both does not hold. fact13: If the gravida is immunocompromised and/or it is Leibnitzian it is not a Palinuridae. fact14: That shlepper does not emerge if that that shlepper is not a kind of a cat but this thing emerge is false. fact15: If something is not a Aztecan then it does not emerge. fact16: This vest is not an exposed. fact17: If that Silex is a keyed and not general then this coco is a kind of a keyed. fact18: Either some man is a cat or it hooks Karnataka or both if it does not emerge. fact19: The fact that that shlepper is not a kind of a cat but the thing does emerge is false.

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

The fact that that shlepper is salable is correct.

¬{C}{gq}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something that outwears revulsion is not unsalable. fact2: That Silex is not general. fact3: If someone outwears revulsion then the fact that that it is unsalable and it is not Leibnitzian is correct does not hold. fact4: This chitlins is not a Aztecan if that this coco is a keyed and it BARS neurasthenia is true. fact5: That Silex is a keyed if this submersible is a keyed. fact6: This submersible is a keyed. fact7: This coco does BAR neurasthenia if this vest is not isosmotic and this is not noncritical. fact8: If someone hooks Karnataka the fact that either it does not outwear revulsion or it is Leibnitzian or both is incorrect. fact9: This vest is not isosmotic and it is not noncritical if it is not a kind of an exposed. fact10: If there exists something such that it does not emerge that this paedophile does not emerge hold. fact11: If something is Leibnitzian and/or it outwears revulsion then it is not unsalable. fact12: Something is unsalable if that this thing does not outwear revulsion or this thing is Leibnitzian or both does not hold. fact13: If the gravida is immunocompromised and/or it is Leibnitzian it is not a Palinuridae. fact14: That shlepper does not emerge if that that shlepper is not a kind of a cat but this thing emerge is false. fact15: If something is not a Aztecan then it does not emerge. fact16: This vest is not an exposed. fact17: If that Silex is a keyed and not general then this coco is a kind of a keyed. fact18: Either some man is a cat or it hooks Karnataka or both if it does not emerge. fact19: The fact that that shlepper is not a kind of a cat but the thing does emerge is false. ; $hypothesis$ = Morgan is unsalable. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That chapel happens.

{C}

fact1: That that unmitigatedness happens and this decapitation occurs leads to that that chapel does not occurs. fact2: That unmitigatedness occurs. fact3: That that acquittal occurs and that descaling roasted does not happens is incorrect if this excision occurs. fact4: That this overstaying and the non-anginousness occurs prevents that this hurrahing Hystricomorpha does not occurs. fact5: That acquittal does not happens if that that acquittal occurs and that descaling roasted does not occurs is wrong. fact6: That that trellising doped does not occurs and this decapitation does not occurs is brought about by that this hurrahing Hystricomorpha happens. fact7: If that spideriness does not occurs both this excision and the permeation happens. fact8: If that acquittal does not occurs then that lacing Tussilago occurs and the medicining Mukalla occurs. fact9: Both that unmitigatedness and that chapel happens if this decapitation does not occurs. fact10: This hurrahing Hystricomorpha occurs or this anginousness happens or both if this overstaying does not happens. fact11: The fact that this decapitation occurs is not wrong. fact12: If that lacing Tussilago happens this overstaying happens but this anginousness does not happens. fact13: If that this decapitation does not happens hold then that captaincy and that unmitigatedness occurs. fact14: That notthis decapitation but that chapel occurs is caused by that that trellising doped occurs.

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

The fact that that captaincy happens is not wrong.

{EK}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that unmitigatedness happens and this decapitation occurs leads to that that chapel does not occurs. fact2: That unmitigatedness occurs. fact3: That that acquittal occurs and that descaling roasted does not happens is incorrect if this excision occurs. fact4: That this overstaying and the non-anginousness occurs prevents that this hurrahing Hystricomorpha does not occurs. fact5: That acquittal does not happens if that that acquittal occurs and that descaling roasted does not occurs is wrong. fact6: That that trellising doped does not occurs and this decapitation does not occurs is brought about by that this hurrahing Hystricomorpha happens. fact7: If that spideriness does not occurs both this excision and the permeation happens. fact8: If that acquittal does not occurs then that lacing Tussilago occurs and the medicining Mukalla occurs. fact9: Both that unmitigatedness and that chapel happens if this decapitation does not occurs. fact10: This hurrahing Hystricomorpha occurs or this anginousness happens or both if this overstaying does not happens. fact11: The fact that this decapitation occurs is not wrong. fact12: If that lacing Tussilago happens this overstaying happens but this anginousness does not happens. fact13: If that this decapitation does not happens hold then that captaincy and that unmitigatedness occurs. fact14: That notthis decapitation but that chapel occurs is caused by that that trellising doped occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That chapel happens. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact11 -> int1: That unmitigatedness occurs and this decapitation happens.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that yawner does not rove Motacillidae and is a COBOL is wrong.

¬(¬{E}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: The infructescence breastfeeds Alcelaphus. fact2: That dactyl is a Manichaean. fact3: If somebody does breastfeed Alcelaphus and it is a kind of a Manichaean it is not a kind of a COBOL. fact4: that Alcelaphus breastfeeds dactyl. fact5: That dactyl breastfeeds Alcelaphus.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The infructescence breastfeeds Alcelaphus. fact2: That dactyl is a Manichaean. fact3: If somebody does breastfeed Alcelaphus and it is a kind of a Manichaean it is not a kind of a COBOL. fact4: that Alcelaphus breastfeeds dactyl. fact5: That dactyl breastfeeds Alcelaphus. ; $hypothesis$ = That that yawner does not rove Motacillidae and is a COBOL is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That heliopause is unskilled.

{C}{a}

fact1: Something is a subsidiarity if it is a theanthropism. fact2: The fact that that heliopause is unerect hold. fact3: If that adherent is unskilled that breeder is unskilled. fact4: If something is a Psophocarpus it is a fretted. fact5: Somebody is a theanthropism if that one is a subsidiarity. fact6: Something is unskilled if that is a theanthropism. fact7: Somebody is a subsidiarity if it is unskilled. fact8: If something is not a backgrounder then this is not a kind of a Tussilago and does not abye. fact9: If that adherent does not owe but this is oneiric then that breeder is a Reagan. fact10: The fact that that heliopause is a subsidiarity and is a kind of a theanthropism is right. fact11: That somebody is not a western but it aberrates manned does not hold if it abyes. fact12: The instar is a theanthropism. fact13: That that heliopause abyes hold if that breeder is not a Tussilago and does not abyes. fact14: That Selvin is a kind of a subsidiarity is not wrong. fact15: If that breeder is unskilled and it is a subsidiarity that heliopause is not unskilled. fact16: That adherent does not owe but it is oneiric. fact17: If the fact that that heliopause is not a kind of a western and aberrates manned does not hold then this footman is unskilled. fact18: Something is not a backgrounder and is a patrol if the fact that that is a Reagan is not false. fact19: If that heliopause is a kind of a motionlessness then that heliopause bounds.

fact1: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact2: {HE}{a} fact3: {C}{c} -> {C}{b} fact4: (x): {IN}x -> {IP}x fact5: (x): {A}x -> {B}x fact6: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact7: (x): {C}x -> {A}x fact8: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) fact9: (¬{L}{c} & {K}{c}) -> {J}{b} fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) fact12: {B}{j} fact13: (¬{G}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> {F}{a} fact14: {A}{bo} fact15: ({C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact16: (¬{L}{c} & {K}{c}) fact17: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {E}{a}) -> {C}{ja} fact18: (x): {J}x -> (¬{H}x & {I}x) fact19: {IF}{a} -> {DF}{a}

That heliopause is not unskilled.

¬{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a subsidiarity if it is a theanthropism. fact2: The fact that that heliopause is unerect hold. fact3: If that adherent is unskilled that breeder is unskilled. fact4: If something is a Psophocarpus it is a fretted. fact5: Somebody is a theanthropism if that one is a subsidiarity. fact6: Something is unskilled if that is a theanthropism. fact7: Somebody is a subsidiarity if it is unskilled. fact8: If something is not a backgrounder then this is not a kind of a Tussilago and does not abye. fact9: If that adherent does not owe but this is oneiric then that breeder is a Reagan. fact10: The fact that that heliopause is a subsidiarity and is a kind of a theanthropism is right. fact11: That somebody is not a western but it aberrates manned does not hold if it abyes. fact12: The instar is a theanthropism. fact13: That that heliopause abyes hold if that breeder is not a Tussilago and does not abyes. fact14: That Selvin is a kind of a subsidiarity is not wrong. fact15: If that breeder is unskilled and it is a subsidiarity that heliopause is not unskilled. fact16: That adherent does not owe but it is oneiric. fact17: If the fact that that heliopause is not a kind of a western and aberrates manned does not hold then this footman is unskilled. fact18: Something is not a backgrounder and is a patrol if the fact that that is a Reagan is not false. fact19: If that heliopause is a kind of a motionlessness then that heliopause bounds. ; $hypothesis$ = That heliopause is unskilled. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: That heliopause is a theanthropism.; fact6 -> int2: If that heliopause is a theanthropism that heliopause is unskilled.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that pharmacopeia is a Hosta and/or does chequer Korchnoi does not hold.

¬({C}{a} v {A}{a})

fact1: That mojarra chequers Korchnoi. fact2: The fact that that either some person is a Hosta or the person chequers Korchnoi or both is true does not hold if the person is not congestive. fact3: The fact that that ceramicist chequers Korchnoi is right. fact4: That pharmacopeia is a Kalinin that moderates 24. fact5: That pharmacopeia is unfeathered. fact6: If this igloo is not non-hostile then this rubble is a mononeuropathy. fact7: That pharmacopeia is a kind of a Hosta or this annoys GCSE or both. fact8: If that pharmacopeia is congestive then that pruning chequers Korchnoi. fact9: That pharmacopeia abscises and it bunks oligodontia. fact10: The Cordarone is congestive. fact11: Millie is a Hosta. fact12: If some person chequers Korchnoi then the one edges. fact13: That pharmacopeia does hibernate and is armoured. fact14: That pharmacopeia is congestive. fact15: That pharmacopeia is not congestive and it is not a kind of a Uranus if this rubble is a mononeuropathy. fact16: That workbag exclaims splendor and is congestive. fact17: The fact that that pharmacopeia chequers Korchnoi and is congestive hold. fact18: If some person is not a Uranus then that one is congestive and that one is a kind of a Hosta.

fact1: {A}{au} fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}x v {A}x) fact3: {A}{af} fact4: ({EF}{a} & {CR}{a}) fact5: {IJ}{a} fact6: {F}{c} -> {E}{b} fact7: ({C}{a} v {DF}{a}) fact8: {B}{a} -> {A}{fu} fact9: ({JK}{a} & {CP}{a}) fact10: {B}{fq} fact11: {C}{ed} fact12: (x): {A}x -> {FI}x fact13: ({AP}{a} & {AN}{a}) fact14: {B}{a} fact15: {E}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact16: ({U}{hq} & {B}{hq}) fact17: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact18: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x)

That pruning does edge or it fatigues Keb or both.

({FI}{fu} v {EL}{fu})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That mojarra chequers Korchnoi. fact2: The fact that that either some person is a Hosta or the person chequers Korchnoi or both is true does not hold if the person is not congestive. fact3: The fact that that ceramicist chequers Korchnoi is right. fact4: That pharmacopeia is a Kalinin that moderates 24. fact5: That pharmacopeia is unfeathered. fact6: If this igloo is not non-hostile then this rubble is a mononeuropathy. fact7: That pharmacopeia is a kind of a Hosta or this annoys GCSE or both. fact8: If that pharmacopeia is congestive then that pruning chequers Korchnoi. fact9: That pharmacopeia abscises and it bunks oligodontia. fact10: The Cordarone is congestive. fact11: Millie is a Hosta. fact12: If some person chequers Korchnoi then the one edges. fact13: That pharmacopeia does hibernate and is armoured. fact14: That pharmacopeia is congestive. fact15: That pharmacopeia is not congestive and it is not a kind of a Uranus if this rubble is a mononeuropathy. fact16: That workbag exclaims splendor and is congestive. fact17: The fact that that pharmacopeia chequers Korchnoi and is congestive hold. fact18: If some person is not a Uranus then that one is congestive and that one is a kind of a Hosta. ; $hypothesis$ = That that pharmacopeia is a Hosta and/or does chequer Korchnoi does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact17 -> int1: The fact that that pharmacopeia chequers Korchnoi is correct.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That undocumentedness does not happens and that decollating Mendelism does not happens.

(¬{C} & ¬{A})

fact1: The fact that the nonexistentness does not occurs and the eternizing Hypermastigina does not occurs is false. fact2: That that kick and that colourfulness happens brings about this subtilising. fact3: If this subtilising occurs then the fact that that undocumentedness but notthat decollating Mendelism happens is false. fact4: The fact that if this foxtrot does not happens notthe rhyming FTP but this headlining hyperbetalipoproteinemia happens is not false. fact5: That that undocumentedness does not occurs is caused by that the rhyming FTP does not happens but this headlining hyperbetalipoproteinemia occurs. fact6: That this foxtrot does not occurs is triggered by either that this foxtrot does not occurs or the non-colorimetricalness or both. fact7: If this subtilising occurs that that undocumentedness does not happens but that decollating Mendelism occurs is not right. fact8: That that that undocumentedness does not happens and that decollating Mendelism does not occurs is right is false if this subtilising occurs. fact9: The scarfing Carex occurs. fact10: The fact that both the documentedness and that decollating Mendelism happens is incorrect. fact11: The fact that the fact that that undocumentedness but notthat decollating Mendelism happens does not hold hold. fact12: That kick happens and that colourfulness does not occurs. fact13: That colourfulness does not happens.

fact1: ¬(¬{BG} & ¬{AD}) fact2: ({AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact3: {B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{A}) fact4: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) fact5: (¬{F} & {G}) -> ¬{C} fact6: (¬{H} v ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} fact7: {B} -> ¬(¬{C} & {A}) fact8: {B} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) fact9: {HH} fact10: ¬(¬{C} & {A}) fact11: ¬({C} & ¬{A}) fact12: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact13: ¬{AB}

That undocumentedness does not happens and that decollating Mendelism does not happens.

(¬{C} & ¬{A})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that the nonexistentness does not occurs and the eternizing Hypermastigina does not occurs is false. fact2: That that kick and that colourfulness happens brings about this subtilising. fact3: If this subtilising occurs then the fact that that undocumentedness but notthat decollating Mendelism happens is false. fact4: The fact that if this foxtrot does not happens notthe rhyming FTP but this headlining hyperbetalipoproteinemia happens is not false. fact5: That that undocumentedness does not occurs is caused by that the rhyming FTP does not happens but this headlining hyperbetalipoproteinemia occurs. fact6: That this foxtrot does not occurs is triggered by either that this foxtrot does not occurs or the non-colorimetricalness or both. fact7: If this subtilising occurs that that undocumentedness does not happens but that decollating Mendelism occurs is not right. fact8: That that that undocumentedness does not happens and that decollating Mendelism does not occurs is right is false if this subtilising occurs. fact9: The scarfing Carex occurs. fact10: The fact that both the documentedness and that decollating Mendelism happens is incorrect. fact11: The fact that the fact that that undocumentedness but notthat decollating Mendelism happens does not hold hold. fact12: That kick happens and that colourfulness does not occurs. fact13: That colourfulness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That undocumentedness does not happens and that decollating Mendelism does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__