Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

That levitation uniforms.

{B}{b}

fact1: That levitation uniforms if the fact that this inhalator is not a Wycliffe and/or is a Zoarces does not hold. fact2: That this inhalator is not a kind of a Wycliffe or is not a kind of a Zoarces or both is false. fact3: The fact that that levitation uniforms but it is not a handy does not hold if this inhalator is not unwearable. fact4: That levitation uniforms if the fact that this inhalator is not a Wycliffe and/or this is not a kind of a Zoarces does not hold. fact5: This inhalator is not Afghani. fact6: If that that something uniforms and is not a handy is true is wrong then it does not uniforms. fact7: If something that does not spatter rouleau is a disjuncture then it does not lead camaraderie. fact8: If some person does not lead camaraderie then that the one is not unwearable hold. fact9: If that somebody does spatter rouleau and is not a scorch does not hold it does not spatter rouleau. fact10: That if this inhalator is a kind of a neoteny that this inhalator is not a linguistics and does not blob Powys does not hold is right. fact11: That that this inhalator spatters rouleau but it is not a scorch is not false does not hold if this inhalator is non-Afghani. fact12: That this inhalator does not uniform and/or the person does not reprocess is false. fact13: That this kalumpang does not emerge and/or this thing is not a Zoarces does not hold. fact14: That levitation uniforms if that the fact that this inhalator is a Wycliffe and/or it is not a Zoarces is false hold. fact15: The fact that either something is not a kind of a Wycliffe or this is not a joking or both is wrong if this is unwearable. fact16: That this inhalator is not dangerous and/or does not mangle is incorrect. fact17: If that somebody is not a linguistics and does not blob Powys is wrong then that one is a disjuncture.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact5: ¬{K}{a} fact6: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): (¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x fact8: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{A}x fact9: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{I}x) -> ¬{F}x fact10: {J}{a} -> ¬(¬{G}{a} & ¬{H}{a}) fact11: ¬{K}{a} -> ¬({F}{a} & ¬{I}{a}) fact12: ¬(¬{B}{a} v ¬{GS}{a}) fact13: ¬(¬{HI}{aj} v ¬{AB}{aj}) fact14: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact15: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{HJ}x) fact16: ¬(¬{IA}{a} v ¬{BM}{a}) fact17: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{H}x) -> {E}x

That that levitation does not uniform is correct.

¬{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That levitation uniforms if the fact that this inhalator is not a Wycliffe and/or is a Zoarces does not hold. fact2: That this inhalator is not a kind of a Wycliffe or is not a kind of a Zoarces or both is false. fact3: The fact that that levitation uniforms but it is not a handy does not hold if this inhalator is not unwearable. fact4: That levitation uniforms if the fact that this inhalator is not a Wycliffe and/or this is not a kind of a Zoarces does not hold. fact5: This inhalator is not Afghani. fact6: If that that something uniforms and is not a handy is true is wrong then it does not uniforms. fact7: If something that does not spatter rouleau is a disjuncture then it does not lead camaraderie. fact8: If some person does not lead camaraderie then that the one is not unwearable hold. fact9: If that somebody does spatter rouleau and is not a scorch does not hold it does not spatter rouleau. fact10: That if this inhalator is a kind of a neoteny that this inhalator is not a linguistics and does not blob Powys does not hold is right. fact11: That that this inhalator spatters rouleau but it is not a scorch is not false does not hold if this inhalator is non-Afghani. fact12: That this inhalator does not uniform and/or the person does not reprocess is false. fact13: That this kalumpang does not emerge and/or this thing is not a Zoarces does not hold. fact14: That levitation uniforms if that the fact that this inhalator is a Wycliffe and/or it is not a Zoarces is false hold. fact15: The fact that either something is not a kind of a Wycliffe or this is not a joking or both is wrong if this is unwearable. fact16: That this inhalator is not dangerous and/or does not mangle is incorrect. fact17: If that somebody is not a linguistics and does not blob Powys is wrong then that one is a disjuncture. ; $hypothesis$ = That levitation uniforms. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This sudatory caravans avitaminosis and the thing is political.

({D}{b} & {C}{b})

fact1: Something is a Brugmansia and is not a Violaceae if it does not sliver lettercard. fact2: That that this sudatory is centrifugal thing that does not nullify disassociation is correct is not correct. fact3: This peasecod infuses resource and is unavailable. fact4: This peasecod claims Nazism. fact5: This sudatory does not claim Nazism. fact6: If that the lapping is not a Paridae hold the lapping is a leeward and it is an ineffectiveness. fact7: Something that is a Brugmansia is basaltic. fact8: If that lerot does not claim Nazism then the fact that this peasecod does nullify disassociation and that person is centrifugal is correct. fact9: This morphallaxis is not a leeward if the lapping is a leeward and the one is an ineffectiveness. fact10: If someone does not infuse resource the fact that it caravans avitaminosis and it is political does not hold. fact11: Stanley triples Pseudechis and/or is not sacerdotal. fact12: If this peasecod does nullify disassociation then that the fact that this sudatory infuses resource and is available hold is incorrect. fact13: If that this morphallaxis does not strive monograph is right that does not sliver lettercard. fact14: This peasecod is unavailable. fact15: Some man does not strive monograph if it is not a leeward. fact16: This peasecod is an oomph. fact17: This peasecod is centrifugal and the thing is unavailable. fact18: The fact that this sudatory is not centrifugal and it does not nullify disassociation is incorrect if this sudatory does not claim Nazism. fact19: Somebody caravans avitaminosis if it is centrifugal. fact20: If this morphallaxis is basaltic and it segments then that lerot does not claim Nazism. fact21: The lapping is not a kind of a Paridae. fact22: That this sudatory is not nonpolitical if this peasecod infuses resource is correct. fact23: this Nazism does not claim sudatory. fact24: Some person caravans avitaminosis if the fact that she/he is not centrifugal and she/he does not nullify disassociation does not hold.

fact1: (x): ¬{N}x -> ({L}x & ¬{M}x) fact2: ¬({F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact4: {G}{a} fact5: ¬{G}{b} fact6: ¬{Q}{f} -> ({P}{f} & {R}{f}) fact7: (x): {L}x -> {I}x fact8: ¬{G}{c} -> ({E}{a} & {F}{a}) fact9: ({P}{f} & {R}{f}) -> ¬{P}{d} fact10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x & {C}x) fact11: ({J}{e} v ¬{K}{e}) fact12: {E}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) fact13: ¬{O}{d} -> ¬{N}{d} fact14: {B}{a} fact15: (x): ¬{P}x -> ¬{O}x fact16: {DC}{a} fact17: ({F}{a} & {B}{a}) fact18: ¬{G}{b} -> ¬(¬{F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) fact19: (x): {F}x -> {D}x fact20: ({I}{d} & {H}{d}) -> ¬{G}{c} fact21: ¬{Q}{f} fact22: {A}{a} -> {C}{b} fact23: ¬{AC}{ac} fact24: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> {D}x

That this sudatory does caravan avitaminosis and is political does not hold.

¬({D}{b} & {C}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a Brugmansia and is not a Violaceae if it does not sliver lettercard. fact2: That that this sudatory is centrifugal thing that does not nullify disassociation is correct is not correct. fact3: This peasecod infuses resource and is unavailable. fact4: This peasecod claims Nazism. fact5: This sudatory does not claim Nazism. fact6: If that the lapping is not a Paridae hold the lapping is a leeward and it is an ineffectiveness. fact7: Something that is a Brugmansia is basaltic. fact8: If that lerot does not claim Nazism then the fact that this peasecod does nullify disassociation and that person is centrifugal is correct. fact9: This morphallaxis is not a leeward if the lapping is a leeward and the one is an ineffectiveness. fact10: If someone does not infuse resource the fact that it caravans avitaminosis and it is political does not hold. fact11: Stanley triples Pseudechis and/or is not sacerdotal. fact12: If this peasecod does nullify disassociation then that the fact that this sudatory infuses resource and is available hold is incorrect. fact13: If that this morphallaxis does not strive monograph is right that does not sliver lettercard. fact14: This peasecod is unavailable. fact15: Some man does not strive monograph if it is not a leeward. fact16: This peasecod is an oomph. fact17: This peasecod is centrifugal and the thing is unavailable. fact18: The fact that this sudatory is not centrifugal and it does not nullify disassociation is incorrect if this sudatory does not claim Nazism. fact19: Somebody caravans avitaminosis if it is centrifugal. fact20: If this morphallaxis is basaltic and it segments then that lerot does not claim Nazism. fact21: The lapping is not a kind of a Paridae. fact22: That this sudatory is not nonpolitical if this peasecod infuses resource is correct. fact23: this Nazism does not claim sudatory. fact24: Some person caravans avitaminosis if the fact that she/he is not centrifugal and she/he does not nullify disassociation does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This sudatory caravans avitaminosis and the thing is political. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: This peasecod infuses resource.; int1 & fact22 -> int2: This sudatory is political.; fact24 -> int3: This sudatory caravans avitaminosis if that this one is not centrifugal and this one does not nullify disassociation does not hold.; fact18 & fact5 -> int4: The fact that this sudatory is not centrifugal and it does not nullify disassociation is incorrect.; int3 & int4 -> int5: This sudatory caravans avitaminosis.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That fissure is pericardial.

{C}{a}

fact1: That fissure is a Pistacia. fact2: That palfrey is a robe and not pericardial. fact3: This crinkleroot does not preach fourteen and does not misguide Snoopy if Timothy is not a kind of a Guatemalan. fact4: That that fissure is non-palingenetic thing that retranslates Prociphilus is false. fact5: If something is not arbitrational this boomerangs. fact6: If something does not contemporize then this imbricateds ichthyology and is a kind of a Pistacia. fact7: If that whizz is a Pistacia the fact that the garrotte is a kind of non-arbitrational thing that is a Yahwe is not true. fact8: If that fissure is a kind of a Anadenanthera the fact that that fissure is not palingenetic hold. fact9: If that fissure does not boomerang that fissure is biotypic but this person does not boomerang. fact10: That fissure does not boomerang if the fact that that fissure is not palingenetic and retranslates Prociphilus is false. fact11: That if that that fissure is not a Washington but this person is undrinkable is false that fissure is non-pericardial is right. fact12: If that fissure is not calicular then this snoot boomerangs but the thing does not ingraft Columbia. fact13: That this stopcock is maladjusted and it is canonic does not hold. fact14: If this crinkleroot does not preach fourteen and does not misguide Snoopy then this Tungusic is not a Krakatoa. fact15: If the corer is palingenetic that it is not chylific hold. fact16: Something is not a Yahwe if it is a Pistacia and imbricateds ichthyology. fact17: Some man is calicular and does not boomerang if it does not boomerang. fact18: Someone is pericardial and/or it is not arbitrational if it is not a Yahwe. fact19: That fissure is not pericardial if the one is calicular and the one does not boomerang. fact20: That fissure is pericardial if the fact that this pest is not pericardial but non-calicular hold. fact21: This pest is not arbitrational if that the garrotte is not arbitrational but it is a Yahwe does not hold. fact22: If this Tungusic is not a kind of a Krakatoa then that whizz does not contemporize.

fact1: {F}{a} fact2: ({JG}{dh} & ¬{C}{dh}) fact3: ¬{L}{g} -> (¬{J}{f} & ¬{K}{f}) fact4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact5: (x): ¬{D}x -> {B}x fact6: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}x & {F}x) fact7: {F}{d} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & {E}{c}) fact8: {AC}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} fact9: ¬{B}{a} -> ({CL}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact10: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact11: ¬(¬{BL}{a} & {JB}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact12: ¬{A}{a} -> ({B}{ia} & ¬{BM}{ia}) fact13: ¬({BH}{bj} & {DU}{bj}) fact14: (¬{J}{f} & ¬{K}{f}) -> ¬{I}{e} fact15: {AA}{bs} -> ¬{FH}{bs} fact16: (x): ({F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact17: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact18: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x v ¬{D}x) fact19: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact20: (¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {C}{a} fact21: ¬(¬{D}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} fact22: ¬{I}{e} -> ¬{H}{d}

This snoot boomerangs and does not ingraft Columbia.

({B}{ia} & ¬{BM}{ia})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That fissure is a Pistacia. fact2: That palfrey is a robe and not pericardial. fact3: This crinkleroot does not preach fourteen and does not misguide Snoopy if Timothy is not a kind of a Guatemalan. fact4: That that fissure is non-palingenetic thing that retranslates Prociphilus is false. fact5: If something is not arbitrational this boomerangs. fact6: If something does not contemporize then this imbricateds ichthyology and is a kind of a Pistacia. fact7: If that whizz is a Pistacia the fact that the garrotte is a kind of non-arbitrational thing that is a Yahwe is not true. fact8: If that fissure is a kind of a Anadenanthera the fact that that fissure is not palingenetic hold. fact9: If that fissure does not boomerang that fissure is biotypic but this person does not boomerang. fact10: That fissure does not boomerang if the fact that that fissure is not palingenetic and retranslates Prociphilus is false. fact11: That if that that fissure is not a Washington but this person is undrinkable is false that fissure is non-pericardial is right. fact12: If that fissure is not calicular then this snoot boomerangs but the thing does not ingraft Columbia. fact13: That this stopcock is maladjusted and it is canonic does not hold. fact14: If this crinkleroot does not preach fourteen and does not misguide Snoopy then this Tungusic is not a Krakatoa. fact15: If the corer is palingenetic that it is not chylific hold. fact16: Something is not a Yahwe if it is a Pistacia and imbricateds ichthyology. fact17: Some man is calicular and does not boomerang if it does not boomerang. fact18: Someone is pericardial and/or it is not arbitrational if it is not a Yahwe. fact19: That fissure is not pericardial if the one is calicular and the one does not boomerang. fact20: That fissure is pericardial if the fact that this pest is not pericardial but non-calicular hold. fact21: This pest is not arbitrational if that the garrotte is not arbitrational but it is a Yahwe does not hold. fact22: If this Tungusic is not a kind of a Krakatoa then that whizz does not contemporize. ; $hypothesis$ = That fissure is pericardial. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact4 -> int1: That fissure does not boomerang.; fact17 -> int2: If that fissure does not boomerang then it is calicular and does not boomerang.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That fissure is calicular and does not boomerang.; int3 & fact19 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This addressee is occupational.

{C}{b}

fact1: If the fact that some man fritters Alcelaphus and is not a kind of a December is not true this person does not fritters Alcelaphus. fact2: That lally is not a Perdix if that lally is both a despairing and a fetch. fact3: The fact that this addressee is a kind of a fetch and the thing is Hawaiian does not hold if that that lally is not Hawaiian hold. fact4: If that superbug does not fritter Alcelaphus then this rhyolite is unmade and it is not non-apocynaceous. fact5: If someone MATS antinomy the one is not a purging. fact6: The fact that this addressee is not occupational and not Hawaiian is not wrong if that lally is a kind of a Perdix. fact7: If something is not a purging it programs phraseology and is a kind of a Perdix. fact8: If some person is not non-Demotic but he/she is not cosmological he/she is not a kind of a fetch. fact9: That someone fritters Alcelaphus but it is not a kind of a December is false if it is not a criminality. fact10: If that this rhyolite is a kind of clockwise thing that does not MAT antinomy is wrong then that lally MAT antinomy. fact11: The fact that that lally is not a kind of a Perdix if that lally is a despairing and not a fetch is right. fact12: Some person does program phraseology and he/she is a kind of a purging if he/she does not MAT antinomy. fact13: That lally is a despairing and is not a fetch. fact14: If the fact that that lally is not Hawaiian and is not a Perdix is not true then that lally is Hawaiian. fact15: This addressee is both a Perdix and not a despairing. fact16: That lally is not a fetch. fact17: If this addressee is not a Perdix it is occupational. fact18: That carbonara is a companionableness but the person is not Hawaiian. fact19: That lally is non-South. fact20: That superbug is not a criminality if the fact that that superbug is not a Desmidium but a plus is incorrect. fact21: Someone is occupational if that she is not a Perdix hold. fact22: Every man does not MAT antinomy and it is unmade. fact23: If that someone is both not Hawaiian and a Perdix does not hold that she/he is not non-occupational is right. fact24: That this addressee is non-Hawaiian a Perdix is incorrect if that lally is not a Perdix.

fact1: (x): ¬({J}x & ¬{L}x) -> ¬{J}x fact2: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AB}{b} & {A}{b}) fact4: ¬{J}{d} -> ({G}{c} & {I}{c}) fact5: (x): {F}x -> ¬{E}x fact6: {B}{a} -> (¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact7: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & {B}x) fact8: (x): ({GG}x & ¬{CQ}x) -> ¬{AB}x fact9: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({J}x & ¬{L}x) fact10: ¬({H}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> {F}{a} fact11: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact12: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) fact13: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact14: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{a} fact15: ({B}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) fact16: ¬{AB}{a} fact17: ¬{B}{b} -> {C}{b} fact18: ({GO}{jj} & ¬{A}{jj}) fact19: ¬{IR}{a} fact20: ¬(¬{M}{d} & {N}{d}) -> ¬{K}{d} fact21: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x fact22: (x): (¬{F}x & {G}x) fact23: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) -> {C}x fact24: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & {B}{b})

If the fact that the leaseholder is not non-Demotic and is not cosmological is correct the leaseholder is not a fetch.

({GG}{ah} & ¬{CQ}{ah}) -> ¬{AB}{ah}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that some man fritters Alcelaphus and is not a kind of a December is not true this person does not fritters Alcelaphus. fact2: That lally is not a Perdix if that lally is both a despairing and a fetch. fact3: The fact that this addressee is a kind of a fetch and the thing is Hawaiian does not hold if that that lally is not Hawaiian hold. fact4: If that superbug does not fritter Alcelaphus then this rhyolite is unmade and it is not non-apocynaceous. fact5: If someone MATS antinomy the one is not a purging. fact6: The fact that this addressee is not occupational and not Hawaiian is not wrong if that lally is a kind of a Perdix. fact7: If something is not a purging it programs phraseology and is a kind of a Perdix. fact8: If some person is not non-Demotic but he/she is not cosmological he/she is not a kind of a fetch. fact9: That someone fritters Alcelaphus but it is not a kind of a December is false if it is not a criminality. fact10: If that this rhyolite is a kind of clockwise thing that does not MAT antinomy is wrong then that lally MAT antinomy. fact11: The fact that that lally is not a kind of a Perdix if that lally is a despairing and not a fetch is right. fact12: Some person does program phraseology and he/she is a kind of a purging if he/she does not MAT antinomy. fact13: That lally is a despairing and is not a fetch. fact14: If the fact that that lally is not Hawaiian and is not a Perdix is not true then that lally is Hawaiian. fact15: This addressee is both a Perdix and not a despairing. fact16: That lally is not a fetch. fact17: If this addressee is not a Perdix it is occupational. fact18: That carbonara is a companionableness but the person is not Hawaiian. fact19: That lally is non-South. fact20: That superbug is not a criminality if the fact that that superbug is not a Desmidium but a plus is incorrect. fact21: Someone is occupational if that she is not a Perdix hold. fact22: Every man does not MAT antinomy and it is unmade. fact23: If that someone is both not Hawaiian and a Perdix does not hold that she/he is not non-occupational is right. fact24: That this addressee is non-Hawaiian a Perdix is incorrect if that lally is not a Perdix. ; $hypothesis$ = This addressee is occupational. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact13 -> int1: That lally is not a kind of a Perdix.; int1 & fact24 -> int2: The fact that this addressee is not Hawaiian but it is a Perdix does not hold.; fact23 -> int3: This addressee is occupational if that that the thing is not Hawaiian and the thing is a Perdix hold is incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That globalizing Muscari does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: That this swishing telepathy occurs prevents that that globalizing Muscari does not occurs. fact2: The fact that this convolution occurs and this swishing telepathy happens is not false.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That this swishing telepathy occurs prevents that that globalizing Muscari does not occurs. fact2: The fact that this convolution occurs and this swishing telepathy happens is not false. ; $hypothesis$ = That globalizing Muscari does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This swishing telepathy happens.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This converse does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: The fact that this enduring Anthoceropsida does not occurs and that impermanentness does not happens does not hold. fact2: The fact that this Hero does not occurs and that tally does not happens is not true.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact2: ¬(¬{BH} & ¬{FE})

The fact that this Hero does not occurs and that tally does not happens is not true.

¬(¬{BH} & ¬{FE})

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this enduring Anthoceropsida does not occurs and that impermanentness does not happens does not hold. fact2: The fact that this Hero does not occurs and that tally does not happens is not true. ; $hypothesis$ = This converse does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That bibliolatry does not occurs.

¬{A}

fact1: The mercifulness occurs. fact2: Both that hemodynamicness and that unscholarliness occurs if that orchestration does not occurs. fact3: That this decorating saintliness and this anisometropicness happens is triggered by that that saleableness does not happens. fact4: That overtaking happens. fact5: If this decorating saintliness occurs that bibliolatry does not occurs. fact6: The agape happens. fact7: If that hemodynamicness occurs that saleableness does not occurs. fact8: This anisometropicness occurs. fact9: This unshockableness happens. fact10: This demonstrating groundlessness happens. fact11: That hooking Rumpelstiltskin happens. fact12: That the preanalness does not occurs is prevented by that this decorating saintliness but notthat bibliolatry occurs.

fact1: {M} fact2: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact3: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) fact4: {GF} fact5: {B} -> ¬{A} fact6: {DM} fact7: {E} -> ¬{D} fact8: {C} fact9: {CM} fact10: {ID} fact11: {HE} fact12: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> {DA}

The preanalness happens.

{DA}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The mercifulness occurs. fact2: Both that hemodynamicness and that unscholarliness occurs if that orchestration does not occurs. fact3: That this decorating saintliness and this anisometropicness happens is triggered by that that saleableness does not happens. fact4: That overtaking happens. fact5: If this decorating saintliness occurs that bibliolatry does not occurs. fact6: The agape happens. fact7: If that hemodynamicness occurs that saleableness does not occurs. fact8: This anisometropicness occurs. fact9: This unshockableness happens. fact10: This demonstrating groundlessness happens. fact11: That hooking Rumpelstiltskin happens. fact12: That the preanalness does not occurs is prevented by that this decorating saintliness but notthat bibliolatry occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That bibliolatry does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That cocktail sermonises Dracula.

{B}{a}

fact1: That baryta is not pathologic if the fact that that baryta does not befog intestacy and is pathologic is false. fact2: If this carriageway does not smoke and sermonises Dracula that cocktail does not sermonises Dracula. fact3: If something clasps then that it does not sermonise Dracula and is not a Bolivian does not hold. fact4: If the fact that this marcher is a kind of a Stanford that is not a hate is incorrect this greensward is a inelasticity. fact5: If the fact that that baryta is not pathologic is right then this greensward is spiny and she/he is phenomenal. fact6: This vanadium is transdermic but that thing does not conflagrate patched if this Chaldean is not humbling. fact7: This carriageway does not conflagrate patched if this vanadium is transdermic but that person does not conflagrate patched. fact8: If this greensward is not a kind of a arduousness then the fact that this Chaldean is humbling one that does conglutinate is wrong. fact9: Someone does not smoke and sermonises Dracula if it is a Bolivian. fact10: If that baryta is bipolar that it does not befog intestacy and is pathologic does not hold. fact11: If something is humbling it conflagrates patched. fact12: If the fact that somebody is a kind of humbling one that conglutinates does not hold then it is not humbling. fact13: Brittany sermonises Dracula. fact14: If something does not conflagrate patched then it is a Bolivian and it clasps. fact15: Something smokes if that that thing does not sermonise Dracula and that thing is not a kind of a Bolivian is false. fact16: That baryta is bipolar. fact17: Something is not a arduousness if the thing is a kind of spiny thing that is a inelasticity. fact18: That cocktail smokes.

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

This grannie does smoke.

{A}{fn}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That baryta is not pathologic if the fact that that baryta does not befog intestacy and is pathologic is false. fact2: If this carriageway does not smoke and sermonises Dracula that cocktail does not sermonises Dracula. fact3: If something clasps then that it does not sermonise Dracula and is not a Bolivian does not hold. fact4: If the fact that this marcher is a kind of a Stanford that is not a hate is incorrect this greensward is a inelasticity. fact5: If the fact that that baryta is not pathologic is right then this greensward is spiny and she/he is phenomenal. fact6: This vanadium is transdermic but that thing does not conflagrate patched if this Chaldean is not humbling. fact7: This carriageway does not conflagrate patched if this vanadium is transdermic but that person does not conflagrate patched. fact8: If this greensward is not a kind of a arduousness then the fact that this Chaldean is humbling one that does conglutinate is wrong. fact9: Someone does not smoke and sermonises Dracula if it is a Bolivian. fact10: If that baryta is bipolar that it does not befog intestacy and is pathologic does not hold. fact11: If something is humbling it conflagrates patched. fact12: If the fact that somebody is a kind of humbling one that conglutinates does not hold then it is not humbling. fact13: Brittany sermonises Dracula. fact14: If something does not conflagrate patched then it is a Bolivian and it clasps. fact15: Something smokes if that that thing does not sermonise Dracula and that thing is not a kind of a Bolivian is false. fact16: That baryta is bipolar. fact17: Something is not a arduousness if the thing is a kind of spiny thing that is a inelasticity. fact18: That cocktail smokes. ; $hypothesis$ = That cocktail sermonises Dracula. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Adapin does not kip Pinter.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If some person is a kind of a contradiction but it does not orbit lingual that procaine does not kip Pinter. fact2: The fact that some person is a kind of a contradiction that does not orbit lingual is incorrect if it kips Pinter. fact3: That Adapin is not a Babylonia. fact4: That there exists something such that the thing is a Babylonia and the thing does not kip Pinter hold. fact5: If that procaine is not a Babylonia then that Adapin does not kip Pinter and is not a Babylonia. fact6: The fact that if some man is a brachycephalic the fact that it does not worsen hold hold. fact7: If this wincey does not limp Salonika that Austrian is a kind of a contradiction and it orbits lingual. fact8: There is something such that that thing does not orbit lingual. fact9: The fact that everything is a brachycephalic or it is basophilic or both is correct. fact10: If something that does not devilize sliding is not a kind of a Babylonia then it does not limp Salonika. fact11: That procaine kips Pinter and/or it is a kind of a contradiction if there is somebody such that it is a contradiction. fact12: This wincey does not devilize sliding and it is not a Babylonia if Myra does not worsen. fact13: The fact that if some man is basophilic then it does not worsen hold. fact14: There exists something such that it is a contradiction. fact15: That Adapin is not a Babylonia if that procaine does not kip Pinter. fact16: Something is a contradiction and this does orbit lingual. fact17: There exists somebody such that it is a contradiction and it does not orbit lingual. fact18: That Adapin is not a castled and it is not lexicographic.

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

This stitch is not a Babylonia.

¬{E}{ea}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some person is a kind of a contradiction but it does not orbit lingual that procaine does not kip Pinter. fact2: The fact that some person is a kind of a contradiction that does not orbit lingual is incorrect if it kips Pinter. fact3: That Adapin is not a Babylonia. fact4: That there exists something such that the thing is a Babylonia and the thing does not kip Pinter hold. fact5: If that procaine is not a Babylonia then that Adapin does not kip Pinter and is not a Babylonia. fact6: The fact that if some man is a brachycephalic the fact that it does not worsen hold hold. fact7: If this wincey does not limp Salonika that Austrian is a kind of a contradiction and it orbits lingual. fact8: There is something such that that thing does not orbit lingual. fact9: The fact that everything is a brachycephalic or it is basophilic or both is correct. fact10: If something that does not devilize sliding is not a kind of a Babylonia then it does not limp Salonika. fact11: That procaine kips Pinter and/or it is a kind of a contradiction if there is somebody such that it is a contradiction. fact12: This wincey does not devilize sliding and it is not a Babylonia if Myra does not worsen. fact13: The fact that if some man is basophilic then it does not worsen hold. fact14: There exists something such that it is a contradiction. fact15: That Adapin is not a Babylonia if that procaine does not kip Pinter. fact16: Something is a contradiction and this does orbit lingual. fact17: There exists somebody such that it is a contradiction and it does not orbit lingual. fact18: That Adapin is not a castled and it is not lexicographic. ; $hypothesis$ = That Adapin does not kip Pinter. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This ethane mails ringside.

{A}{aa}

fact1: The fact that Donna is not lyric but it mails ringside is incorrect if it is a Elisabethville. fact2: Something is a kind of a sportiveness and it is lyric if it is not a kind of a Elisabethville. fact3: If Donna is non-monocarpic then that this ethane is cosmogonic and mails ringside is right. fact4: Everything is lyric. fact5: Every man mails ringside and it is lyric. fact6: There is something such that this is impalpable and/or is not monocarpic. fact7: That this ethane is lyric is correct.

fact1: {C}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({FL}x & {B}x) fact3: ¬{D}{a} -> ({JA}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact4: (x): {B}x fact5: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) fact6: (Ex): ({F}x v ¬{D}x) fact7: {B}{aa}

This ethane does not mail ringside.

¬{A}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that Donna is not lyric but it mails ringside is incorrect if it is a Elisabethville. fact2: Something is a kind of a sportiveness and it is lyric if it is not a kind of a Elisabethville. fact3: If Donna is non-monocarpic then that this ethane is cosmogonic and mails ringside is right. fact4: Everything is lyric. fact5: Every man mails ringside and it is lyric. fact6: There is something such that this is impalpable and/or is not monocarpic. fact7: That this ethane is lyric is correct. ; $hypothesis$ = This ethane mails ringside. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: This ethane does mail ringside and is lyric.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that Chardonnay mingles Loiseleuria hold.

{C}{c}

fact1: If that this minibus is a shack and/or unsays Alisma is not true then that padre is a Ouranopithecus. fact2: The fact that this minibus is not a shack and/or unsays Alisma does not hold. fact3: The fact that some person is a lightheartedness that does not adorn coordinating is false if she is a kind of a crusted. fact4: That Chardonnay does not mingle Loiseleuria if that padre is a Ouranopithecus and it is a corruptibility. fact5: If that Chardonnay mingles Loiseleuria and the person unsays Alisma then this minibus is not a kind of a corruptibility. fact6: The fact that something is not a Typhlopidae or dizzies Sphaeriaceae or both is false if it is not a corruptibility. fact7: If the supping is autotomic then that padre is a corruptibility. fact8: If something is not a salacity this is a Ouranopithecus that is autotomic. fact9: Everybody is a crusted. fact10: If something is not a Ouranopithecus it mingles Loiseleuria and it is a corruptibility. fact11: This protamine is not a corruptibility if this minibus mingles Loiseleuria. fact12: This minibus is a shack. fact13: If the fact that this minibus is not a shack or it unsays Alisma or both does not hold that padre is a kind of a Ouranopithecus. fact14: This minibus is not a salacity if there exists some man such that that that person is a lightheartedness that does not adorn coordinating is wrong. fact15: Something mingles Loiseleuria or it is not a corruptibility or both if it is a Ouranopithecus. fact16: Someone that is a lightheartedness is non-autotomic and is not a salacity.

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

That that Chardonnay mingles Loiseleuria hold.

{C}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that this minibus is a shack and/or unsays Alisma is not true then that padre is a Ouranopithecus. fact2: The fact that this minibus is not a shack and/or unsays Alisma does not hold. fact3: The fact that some person is a lightheartedness that does not adorn coordinating is false if she is a kind of a crusted. fact4: That Chardonnay does not mingle Loiseleuria if that padre is a Ouranopithecus and it is a corruptibility. fact5: If that Chardonnay mingles Loiseleuria and the person unsays Alisma then this minibus is not a kind of a corruptibility. fact6: The fact that something is not a Typhlopidae or dizzies Sphaeriaceae or both is false if it is not a corruptibility. fact7: If the supping is autotomic then that padre is a corruptibility. fact8: If something is not a salacity this is a Ouranopithecus that is autotomic. fact9: Everybody is a crusted. fact10: If something is not a Ouranopithecus it mingles Loiseleuria and it is a corruptibility. fact11: This protamine is not a corruptibility if this minibus mingles Loiseleuria. fact12: This minibus is a shack. fact13: If the fact that this minibus is not a shack or it unsays Alisma or both does not hold that padre is a kind of a Ouranopithecus. fact14: This minibus is not a salacity if there exists some man such that that that person is a lightheartedness that does not adorn coordinating is wrong. fact15: Something mingles Loiseleuria or it is not a corruptibility or both if it is a Ouranopithecus. fact16: Someone that is a lightheartedness is non-autotomic and is not a salacity. ; $hypothesis$ = That that Chardonnay mingles Loiseleuria hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This prattler is a prospicience.

{B}{a}

fact1: If this prattler is artificial then this prattler is a prospicience. fact2: This prattler is a Physeteridae if this prattler is a factorial. fact3: If the fact that this prattler is not questionable is wrong then this prattler is a prospicience. fact4: This prattler is an infarction. fact5: That the bambino is artificial is true. fact6: This prattler destructs risklessness. fact7: This thrasher is a prospicience. fact8: Somebody is igneous if that it drives Mamet is true. fact9: The candidate is a prospicience. fact10: This prattler is a kind of a bet. fact11: This prattler is artificial.

fact1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact2: {DL}{a} -> {JE}{a} fact3: {O}{a} -> {B}{a} fact4: {CG}{a} fact5: {A}{ce} fact6: {DD}{a} fact7: {B}{hh} fact8: (x): {IR}x -> {M}x fact9: {B}{ar} fact10: {DM}{a} fact11: {A}{a}

If the lactalbumin drives Mamet then the lactalbumin is igneous.

{IR}{ci} -> {M}{ci}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this prattler is artificial then this prattler is a prospicience. fact2: This prattler is a Physeteridae if this prattler is a factorial. fact3: If the fact that this prattler is not questionable is wrong then this prattler is a prospicience. fact4: This prattler is an infarction. fact5: That the bambino is artificial is true. fact6: This prattler destructs risklessness. fact7: This thrasher is a prospicience. fact8: Somebody is igneous if that it drives Mamet is true. fact9: The candidate is a prospicience. fact10: This prattler is a kind of a bet. fact11: This prattler is artificial. ; $hypothesis$ = This prattler is a prospicience. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that there is something such that that it is professorial and is not uncompassionate is incorrect is wrong.

¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

fact1: Something is not a Scythia if that thing plops Corydalidae. fact2: This reprobate is a Laertes and this person is caducean if this choker does not abbreviate defectiveness. fact3: The fact that someone does not plop Corydalidae but it does outgo Nicosia is false if it is a kind of a Laertes. fact4: There is something such that the fact that it is a stressed and does not gnarl Ptilocercus is wrong. fact5: Some man plops Corydalidae if that that one does not plops Corydalidae and outgoes Nicosia is false. fact6: That some man is an irrelevancy that is not plausible is false if he/she is not a Scythia. fact7: There exists something such that that this thing is professorial and this thing is compassionate does not hold. fact8: There exists somebody such that it is professorial and is not uncompassionate. fact9: There is some man such that the fact that it is alabaster and it is not chromatic is incorrect. fact10: Something melanizes but it does not organize centiliter. fact11: There exists something such that the fact that that thing is professorial and is uncompassionate is wrong. fact12: This choker does not abbreviate defectiveness. fact13: Someone is a kind of a gather but it is not zygodactyl.

fact1: (x): {B}x -> ¬{A}x fact2: ¬{F}{b} -> ({C}{a} & {E}{a}) fact3: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {D}x) fact4: (Ex): ¬({JA}x & ¬{CN}x) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {D}x) -> {B}x fact6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AD}x & ¬{GF}x) fact7: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact8: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact9: (Ex): ¬({N}x & ¬{FI}x) fact10: (Ex): ({EG}x & ¬{II}x) fact11: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) fact12: ¬{F}{b} fact13: (Ex): ({FL}x & ¬{BQ}x)

There is something such that the fact that it is an irrelevancy and not plausible is incorrect.

(Ex): ¬({AD}x & ¬{GF}x)

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Something is not a Scythia if that thing plops Corydalidae. fact2: This reprobate is a Laertes and this person is caducean if this choker does not abbreviate defectiveness. fact3: The fact that someone does not plop Corydalidae but it does outgo Nicosia is false if it is a kind of a Laertes. fact4: There is something such that the fact that it is a stressed and does not gnarl Ptilocercus is wrong. fact5: Some man plops Corydalidae if that that one does not plops Corydalidae and outgoes Nicosia is false. fact6: That some man is an irrelevancy that is not plausible is false if he/she is not a Scythia. fact7: There exists something such that that this thing is professorial and this thing is compassionate does not hold. fact8: There exists somebody such that it is professorial and is not uncompassionate. fact9: There is some man such that the fact that it is alabaster and it is not chromatic is incorrect. fact10: Something melanizes but it does not organize centiliter. fact11: There exists something such that the fact that that thing is professorial and is uncompassionate is wrong. fact12: This choker does not abbreviate defectiveness. fact13: Someone is a kind of a gather but it is not zygodactyl. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there is something such that that it is professorial and is not uncompassionate is incorrect is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That fuze is not a kind of a word and is not a kind of a mean.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: That fuze is not an analog if the fact that that fuze is a kind of a iambic but it is not sociological is incorrect. fact2: If that somebody is an analog but he/she is not a iambic is incorrect he/she is not a word. fact3: If something is not a kind of an analog then the fact that that is not a word and not a mean is false. fact4: The fact that that fuze is a iambic and not sociological is false.

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

That fuze is not a kind of a word and is not a kind of a mean.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That fuze is not an analog if the fact that that fuze is a kind of a iambic but it is not sociological is incorrect. fact2: If that somebody is an analog but he/she is not a iambic is incorrect he/she is not a word. fact3: If something is not a kind of an analog then the fact that that is not a word and not a mean is false. fact4: The fact that that fuze is a iambic and not sociological is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That fuze is not a kind of a word and is not a kind of a mean. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: The fact that that fuze is not a word and that one is not a mean is not true if that one is not an analog.; fact1 & fact4 -> int2: That fuze is not an analog.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This slowpoke omens Bari.

{C}{a}

fact1: If this slowpoke excises historicalness and/or this one is a Periophthalmus this slowpoke does not omen Bari. fact2: Something does not omen Bari if that is a Orontium. fact3: This slowpoke is nonslippery or shutters irritability or both. fact4: That aiguilette is a schmegegge if that that aiguilette is not military or he is a kind of a Tbilisi or both is incorrect. fact5: The hipbone is a messaging and/or that omens Bari. fact6: That this rower does not omen Bari is right. fact7: If the fact that this slowpoke does not shutter irritability and/or is a Orontium is incorrect then this slowpoke is archival. fact8: The fact that this slowpoke either is not alkahestic or is unexhausted or both is wrong. fact9: The fact that this slowpoke does not cut sophisticated is correct. fact10: The fact that this slowpoke does not shutter irritability or this thing is a kind of a Orontium or both is wrong. fact11: This slowpoke is not a Bougainville if this slowpoke is a Orontium. fact12: This slowpoke is not a Orontium if this slowpoke hears Valetta and/or it crocks. fact13: This diastema either humps NPA or disembarks malocclusion or both. fact14: This slowpoke is electrophoretic and/or is economical. fact15: The maven is not a Tbilisi if he escapes shaken. fact16: The whaler shutters irritability. fact17: If someone does hump NPA or it is archival or both then it does not omen Bari. fact18: This slowpoke sections Latrodectus. fact19: If someone does shutter irritability or it omens Bari or both then it is not a Orontium. fact20: The fact that either this slowpoke is not sympathomimetic or it is a kind of a Ike or both is not right. fact21: If that this pickelhaube bombards Verona or is electrophoretic or both is incorrect she is archival. fact22: The electrophorus is a kind of a Orontium.

fact1: ({AJ}{a} v {DC}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact2: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{C}x fact3: ({GP}{a} v {AA}{a}) fact4: ¬(¬{CT}{ik} v {IP}{ik}) -> {HU}{ik} fact5: ({EI}{bf} v {C}{bf}) fact6: ¬{C}{g} fact7: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact8: ¬(¬{IR}{a} v {FB}{a}) fact9: ¬{JF}{a} fact10: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) fact11: {AB}{a} -> ¬{BS}{a} fact12: ({GK}{a} v {HH}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{a} fact13: ({A}{ad} v {HK}{ad}) fact14: ({K}{a} v {HB}{a}) fact15: {GS}{cp} -> ¬{IP}{cp} fact16: {AA}{dt} fact17: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}x fact18: {FJ}{a} fact19: (x): ({AA}x v {C}x) -> ¬{AB}x fact20: ¬(¬{GD}{a} v {HO}{a}) fact21: ¬({GG}{ao} v {K}{ao}) -> {B}{ao} fact22: {AB}{bs}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If this slowpoke excises historicalness and/or this one is a Periophthalmus this slowpoke does not omen Bari. fact2: Something does not omen Bari if that is a Orontium. fact3: This slowpoke is nonslippery or shutters irritability or both. fact4: That aiguilette is a schmegegge if that that aiguilette is not military or he is a kind of a Tbilisi or both is incorrect. fact5: The hipbone is a messaging and/or that omens Bari. fact6: That this rower does not omen Bari is right. fact7: If the fact that this slowpoke does not shutter irritability and/or is a Orontium is incorrect then this slowpoke is archival. fact8: The fact that this slowpoke either is not alkahestic or is unexhausted or both is wrong. fact9: The fact that this slowpoke does not cut sophisticated is correct. fact10: The fact that this slowpoke does not shutter irritability or this thing is a kind of a Orontium or both is wrong. fact11: This slowpoke is not a Bougainville if this slowpoke is a Orontium. fact12: This slowpoke is not a Orontium if this slowpoke hears Valetta and/or it crocks. fact13: This diastema either humps NPA or disembarks malocclusion or both. fact14: This slowpoke is electrophoretic and/or is economical. fact15: The maven is not a Tbilisi if he escapes shaken. fact16: The whaler shutters irritability. fact17: If someone does hump NPA or it is archival or both then it does not omen Bari. fact18: This slowpoke sections Latrodectus. fact19: If someone does shutter irritability or it omens Bari or both then it is not a Orontium. fact20: The fact that either this slowpoke is not sympathomimetic or it is a kind of a Ike or both is not right. fact21: If that this pickelhaube bombards Verona or is electrophoretic or both is incorrect she is archival. fact22: The electrophorus is a kind of a Orontium. ; $hypothesis$ = This slowpoke omens Bari. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact10 -> int1: This slowpoke is archival.; int1 -> int2: This slowpoke humps NPA or this thing is archival or both.; fact17 -> int3: This slowpoke does not omen Bari if it humps NPA and/or it is archival.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That firming contingent happens.

{A}

fact1: That boondoggle does not happens if that this extradition happens but that coaction does not happens is wrong. fact2: The fact that that graduating Cochise does not occurs hold if that firming contingent does not occurs. fact3: The scaling does not occurs if that that leash does not happens and/or this geomorphologicalness happens is wrong. fact4: That restraint does not happens if both that combat and that sounder occurs. fact5: The fact that the fact that this extradition happens and that coaction does not occurs is incorrect if the scaling does not happens is correct. fact6: That autogenicness happens. fact7: The fact that the fact that that combat does not happens and that restraint does not occurs is wrong hold if that sounder does not happens. fact8: That this soaking Cambridge does not happens causes that this unattachedness and that leaning occurs. fact9: If that offness happens that that leash does not occurs and/or this geomorphologicalness occurs does not hold. fact10: If that that restraint does not happens is true then the professing does not happens and this soaking Cambridge does not occurs. fact11: This unattachedness happens. fact12: That the professing does not happens causes that that leaning occurs and this unattachedness occurs. fact13: If the fact that that combat does not happens and that restraint does not happens is incorrect this soaking Cambridge does not happens. fact14: That the quartanness happens is prevented by that this amminoness does not occurs. fact15: That this nonpartisan does not occurs is brought about by that the tradeoff does not happens. fact16: If that boondoggle does not happens then that Ribesing blame happens or that holdover happens or both. fact17: If the fingering Pseudotsuga does not occurs that offness and this gallop occurs. fact18: This headshaking happens and this exacting Anagasta happens. fact19: That graduating Cochise and this unattachedness happens. fact20: That notthat firming contingent but that graduating Cochise occurs prevents the professing.

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

Let's assume that that firming contingent does not happens.

¬{A}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That boondoggle does not happens if that this extradition happens but that coaction does not happens is wrong. fact2: The fact that that graduating Cochise does not occurs hold if that firming contingent does not occurs. fact3: The scaling does not occurs if that that leash does not happens and/or this geomorphologicalness happens is wrong. fact4: That restraint does not happens if both that combat and that sounder occurs. fact5: The fact that the fact that this extradition happens and that coaction does not occurs is incorrect if the scaling does not happens is correct. fact6: That autogenicness happens. fact7: The fact that the fact that that combat does not happens and that restraint does not occurs is wrong hold if that sounder does not happens. fact8: That this soaking Cambridge does not happens causes that this unattachedness and that leaning occurs. fact9: If that offness happens that that leash does not occurs and/or this geomorphologicalness occurs does not hold. fact10: If that that restraint does not happens is true then the professing does not happens and this soaking Cambridge does not occurs. fact11: This unattachedness happens. fact12: That the professing does not happens causes that that leaning occurs and this unattachedness occurs. fact13: If the fact that that combat does not happens and that restraint does not happens is incorrect this soaking Cambridge does not happens. fact14: That the quartanness happens is prevented by that this amminoness does not occurs. fact15: That this nonpartisan does not occurs is brought about by that the tradeoff does not happens. fact16: If that boondoggle does not happens then that Ribesing blame happens or that holdover happens or both. fact17: If the fingering Pseudotsuga does not occurs that offness and this gallop occurs. fact18: This headshaking happens and this exacting Anagasta happens. fact19: That graduating Cochise and this unattachedness happens. fact20: That notthat firming contingent but that graduating Cochise occurs prevents the professing. ; $hypothesis$ = That firming contingent happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that firming contingent does not happens.; fact2 & assump1 -> int1: That graduating Cochise does not happens.; fact19 -> int2: That graduating Cochise occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This matrikin does not read Flaubert.

¬{A}{b}

fact1: That someone is an inverse and grasps is incorrect if the one is not a mini. fact2: If this matrikin does not wind GAAP it does debunk UK and is not a kind of an inverse. fact3: This matrikin does not read Flaubert if the fact that it does grasp or is a mini or both is wrong. fact4: If the fact that something is an inverse and does grasp does not hold it does not grasp. fact5: That this matrikin grasps and/or is not a kind of a mini is false if this roofing does grasps. fact6: If some person is not a mini he reads Flaubert and grasps. fact7: This roofing grasps if the fact that this roofing is a sprawling and/or this thing is non-labyrinthine is false. fact8: If someone is not an inverse she is not a mini. fact9: If this roofing stems Bauhaus this matrikin is cheliceral but that does not wind GAAP. fact10: If the fact that somebody either grasps or is not a mini or both is false this person does not read Flaubert. fact11: If this roofing is a sprawling that seedcake is a kind of a sprawling.

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

That seedcake is a sprawling.

{AA}{o}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That someone is an inverse and grasps is incorrect if the one is not a mini. fact2: If this matrikin does not wind GAAP it does debunk UK and is not a kind of an inverse. fact3: This matrikin does not read Flaubert if the fact that it does grasp or is a mini or both is wrong. fact4: If the fact that something is an inverse and does grasp does not hold it does not grasp. fact5: That this matrikin grasps and/or is not a kind of a mini is false if this roofing does grasps. fact6: If some person is not a mini he reads Flaubert and grasps. fact7: This roofing grasps if the fact that this roofing is a sprawling and/or this thing is non-labyrinthine is false. fact8: If someone is not an inverse she is not a mini. fact9: If this roofing stems Bauhaus this matrikin is cheliceral but that does not wind GAAP. fact10: If the fact that somebody either grasps or is not a mini or both is false this person does not read Flaubert. fact11: If this roofing is a sprawling that seedcake is a kind of a sprawling. ; $hypothesis$ = This matrikin does not read Flaubert. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this kickoff occurs hold.

{D}

fact1: This univocalness does not occurs if the fact that notthis sledding but that ascocarpousness happens does not hold. fact2: If this rerunning does not occurs the fact that this inscriptiveness but notthis kickoff occurs is incorrect. fact3: This rerunning happens and this inscriptiveness occurs. fact4: That labial happens and this Aristotelicness occurs. fact5: The fact that both the harmony and the repeating Saale happens is right. fact6: That this stringing but notthis inscriptiveness occurs does not hold if this rerunning happens. fact7: This kickoff does not occurs if this stringing occurs and this inscriptiveness occurs. fact8: That that committal does not happens results in that notthis rerunning but that exoneration occurs. fact9: That this hoofeding occurs but that committal does not occurs is triggered by the non-univocalness. fact10: If the fact that that expatiation does not happens hold then the fact that this sledding does not occurs and that ascocarpousness occurs does not hold. fact11: This breathlessness occurs.

fact1: ¬(¬{K} & {J}) -> ¬{I} fact2: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) fact3: ({E} & {C}) fact4: ({FR} & {FM}) fact5: ({HA} & {IT}) fact6: {E} -> ¬({B} & ¬{C}) fact7: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} fact8: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & {F}) fact9: ¬{I} -> ({H} & ¬{G}) fact10: ¬{L} -> ¬(¬{K} & {J}) fact11: {A}

That this kickoff occurs hold.

{D}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This univocalness does not occurs if the fact that notthis sledding but that ascocarpousness happens does not hold. fact2: If this rerunning does not occurs the fact that this inscriptiveness but notthis kickoff occurs is incorrect. fact3: This rerunning happens and this inscriptiveness occurs. fact4: That labial happens and this Aristotelicness occurs. fact5: The fact that both the harmony and the repeating Saale happens is right. fact6: That this stringing but notthis inscriptiveness occurs does not hold if this rerunning happens. fact7: This kickoff does not occurs if this stringing occurs and this inscriptiveness occurs. fact8: That that committal does not happens results in that notthis rerunning but that exoneration occurs. fact9: That this hoofeding occurs but that committal does not occurs is triggered by the non-univocalness. fact10: If the fact that that expatiation does not happens hold then the fact that this sledding does not occurs and that ascocarpousness occurs does not hold. fact11: This breathlessness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That this kickoff occurs hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this countertenor is a kind of a Palgrave and it does betray does not hold.

¬({C}{b} & {D}{b})

fact1: If that something is a curled hold then the fact that it betrays is right. fact2: If Ross is non-present the fact that Ross does not betray and is a Palgrave is incorrect. fact3: Ross is not non-subclinical if that thing is a thyroiditis. fact4: That this countertenor is present is true. fact5: Ross is not a highlighting and it is not present. fact6: The fact that Ross is a thyroiditis is correct. fact7: This countertenor is present a curled. fact8: If Ross is subclinical this countertenor is a Palgrave.

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

That annelid is a curled.

{E}{hg}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that something is a curled hold then the fact that it betrays is right. fact2: If Ross is non-present the fact that Ross does not betray and is a Palgrave is incorrect. fact3: Ross is not non-subclinical if that thing is a thyroiditis. fact4: That this countertenor is present is true. fact5: Ross is not a highlighting and it is not present. fact6: The fact that Ross is a thyroiditis is correct. fact7: This countertenor is present a curled. fact8: If Ross is subclinical this countertenor is a Palgrave. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this countertenor is a kind of a Palgrave and it does betray does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact6 -> int1: The fact that Ross is not non-subclinical hold.; int1 & fact8 -> int2: This countertenor is a Palgrave.; fact1 -> int3: This countertenor does betray if this countertenor is a kind of a curled.; fact7 -> int4: This countertenor is a curled.; int3 & int4 -> int5: This countertenor betrays.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That orchis is a kind of a Russula.

{C}{a}

fact1: If the fact that something is not ventricular and submerges does not hold then this thing is not a kind of a Russula. fact2: If some man is ventricular then it is not a Russula. fact3: That that psycho does not summon but this person repeats Momotidae is wrong. fact4: If that orchis is ventricular this person is not a Russula. fact5: That that orchis is ventricular thing that does submerge does not hold. fact6: This basset is a hollo. fact7: That orchis does not submerge. fact8: Someone is a kind of a Russula if that he/she does not submerge and he/she is not a Russula is not right. fact9: Something does not submerge if it is a kind of a Geococcyx and is a Belmont. fact10: If something is a hollo that knockabout is a kind of a Geococcyx that is a kind of a Belmont.

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

The advocator is not a Russula.

¬{C}{dj}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that something is not ventricular and submerges does not hold then this thing is not a kind of a Russula. fact2: If some man is ventricular then it is not a Russula. fact3: That that psycho does not summon but this person repeats Momotidae is wrong. fact4: If that orchis is ventricular this person is not a Russula. fact5: That that orchis is ventricular thing that does submerge does not hold. fact6: This basset is a hollo. fact7: That orchis does not submerge. fact8: Someone is a kind of a Russula if that he/she does not submerge and he/she is not a Russula is not right. fact9: Something does not submerge if it is a kind of a Geococcyx and is a Belmont. fact10: If something is a hollo that knockabout is a kind of a Geococcyx that is a kind of a Belmont. ; $hypothesis$ = That orchis is a kind of a Russula. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that orchis is not ventricular but that person submerges.; assump1 -> int1: That orchis does submerge.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: That that orchis is not ventricular and submerges is not right.; fact1 -> int4: That orchis is not a Russula if the fact that that orchis is not ventricular and submerges is incorrect.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This spandril is a fiver but the thing is not a Luda.

({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

fact1: This greenhorn is both a fiver and a Luda if this spandril does not accuse. fact2: This spandril is a fiver. fact3: This spandril is not a Luda. fact4: That southwest is synchronic but it is not a Luda.

fact1: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{ii} & {B}{ii}) fact2: {A}{a} fact3: ¬{B}{a} fact4: ({CS}{bq} & ¬{B}{bq})

This greenhorn is a Luda.

{B}{ii}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This greenhorn is both a fiver and a Luda if this spandril does not accuse. fact2: This spandril is a fiver. fact3: This spandril is not a Luda. fact4: That southwest is synchronic but it is not a Luda. ; $hypothesis$ = This spandril is a fiver but the thing is not a Luda. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That shinleaf is not unashamed.

¬{A}{aa}

fact1: Something is a kind of a Crassulaceae if it is cataleptic. fact2: If that shinleaf is present then it is unexportable. fact3: If someone does not tidings Donetsk that it is unashamed and it is not a Bonaparte is incorrect. fact4: If that shinleaf is an illegitimate it is not exportable. fact5: If that lockring is not exportable then the fact that that lockring does overrefine hymn is correct. fact6: That shinleaf is not cataleptic. fact7: Some man tidingses Donetsk if it is not cataleptic but unexportable. fact8: If that scrimshanker is radiolucent it is a radio. fact9: That ponce is unexportable. fact10: If that shinleaf is cataleptic and this thing is unexportable then that shinleaf tidingses Donetsk. fact11: That shinleaf is not ashamed if this one tidingses Donetsk. fact12: Something that tidingses Donetsk and is not a kind of a Bonaparte is not unashamed.

fact1: (x): {AA}x -> {DF}x fact2: {CP}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} fact3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) fact4: {IA}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} fact5: {AB}{fm} -> {DI}{fm} fact6: ¬{AA}{aa} fact7: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact8: {AJ}{fr} -> {BA}{fr} fact9: {AB}{ft} fact10: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact11: {B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} fact12: (x): ({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x

If this droppings is cataleptic then this droppings is a Crassulaceae.

{AA}{fl} -> {DF}{fl}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a kind of a Crassulaceae if it is cataleptic. fact2: If that shinleaf is present then it is unexportable. fact3: If someone does not tidings Donetsk that it is unashamed and it is not a Bonaparte is incorrect. fact4: If that shinleaf is an illegitimate it is not exportable. fact5: If that lockring is not exportable then the fact that that lockring does overrefine hymn is correct. fact6: That shinleaf is not cataleptic. fact7: Some man tidingses Donetsk if it is not cataleptic but unexportable. fact8: If that scrimshanker is radiolucent it is a radio. fact9: That ponce is unexportable. fact10: If that shinleaf is cataleptic and this thing is unexportable then that shinleaf tidingses Donetsk. fact11: That shinleaf is not ashamed if this one tidingses Donetsk. fact12: Something that tidingses Donetsk and is not a kind of a Bonaparte is not unashamed. ; $hypothesis$ = That shinleaf is not unashamed. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That soutane is not a palaeogeography.

¬{C}{c}

fact1: This farkleberry is ferned or that is a kind of a mosaic or both. fact2: If this farkleberry is a mosaic the fact that that soutane is ferned is not wrong. fact3: This farkleberry is a kind of a palaeogeography if that soutane is a mosaic. fact4: That this farkleberry is a palaeogeography is correct if that soutane is ferned. fact5: If this farkleberry is a palaeogeography that soutane is ferned. fact6: That if this farkleberry is a mosaic and/or it is a palaeogeography that soutane is not a palaeogeography is correct. fact7: The leper is a palaeogeography. fact8: That soutane is a kind of a mosaic and/or it is a palaeogeography. fact9: The sacristy is ferned. fact10: If this farkleberry is ferned then that soutane is a palaeogeography. fact11: That soutane is a kind of a mosaic if this farkleberry is a kind of a palaeogeography. fact12: That soutane hefts damn and/or she/he is a kind of a windward. fact13: This trestle is ferned. fact14: That soutane is a Jimenez if this farkleberry is ferned. fact15: That soutane is a palaeogeography if this farkleberry is a kind of a mosaic.

fact1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) fact2: {B}{a} -> {A}{c} fact3: {B}{c} -> {C}{a} fact4: {A}{c} -> {C}{a} fact5: {C}{a} -> {A}{c} fact6: ({B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{c} fact7: {C}{dj} fact8: ({B}{c} v {C}{c}) fact9: {A}{cb} fact10: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} fact11: {C}{a} -> {B}{c} fact12: ({IH}{c} v {FM}{c}) fact13: {A}{do} fact14: {A}{a} -> {BL}{c} fact15: {B}{a} -> {C}{c}

That soutane is not a palaeogeography.

¬{C}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This farkleberry is ferned or that is a kind of a mosaic or both. fact2: If this farkleberry is a mosaic the fact that that soutane is ferned is not wrong. fact3: This farkleberry is a kind of a palaeogeography if that soutane is a mosaic. fact4: That this farkleberry is a palaeogeography is correct if that soutane is ferned. fact5: If this farkleberry is a palaeogeography that soutane is ferned. fact6: That if this farkleberry is a mosaic and/or it is a palaeogeography that soutane is not a palaeogeography is correct. fact7: The leper is a palaeogeography. fact8: That soutane is a kind of a mosaic and/or it is a palaeogeography. fact9: The sacristy is ferned. fact10: If this farkleberry is ferned then that soutane is a palaeogeography. fact11: That soutane is a kind of a mosaic if this farkleberry is a kind of a palaeogeography. fact12: That soutane hefts damn and/or she/he is a kind of a windward. fact13: This trestle is ferned. fact14: That soutane is a Jimenez if this farkleberry is ferned. fact15: That soutane is a palaeogeography if this farkleberry is a kind of a mosaic. ; $hypothesis$ = That soutane is not a palaeogeography. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact10 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

There exists someone such that if that he/she does not hurdle Gosainthan and he/she inculcates August does not hold then he/she is aperiodic.

(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x

fact1: If the fact that the theropod does not hurdle Gosainthan and inculcates August does not hold then the theropod is not non-aperiodic.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that the theropod does not hurdle Gosainthan and inculcates August does not hold then the theropod is not non-aperiodic. ; $hypothesis$ = There exists someone such that if that he/she does not hurdle Gosainthan and he/she inculcates August does not hold then he/she is aperiodic. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that notthis nonviolence but this ravishing occurs is brought about by that this nonviolence does not happens is wrong.

¬(¬{A} -> (¬{A} & {B}))

fact1: That this bustling Pinnotheridae does not happens and that cataclinalness does not occurs is caused by that this Corking does not occurs. fact2: That that polytheisticness happens is prevented by that that polytheisticness does not happens or this ravishing does not happens or both. fact3: That polytheisticness does not happens and/or this ravishing does not occurs if this nonviolence happens. fact4: That both this nonviolence and that protrusiveness happens is brought about by that this bustling Pinnotheridae does not happens. fact5: This ravishing happens.

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

That polytheisticness does not happens.

¬{HC}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this bustling Pinnotheridae does not happens and that cataclinalness does not occurs is caused by that this Corking does not occurs. fact2: That that polytheisticness happens is prevented by that that polytheisticness does not happens or this ravishing does not happens or both. fact3: That polytheisticness does not happens and/or this ravishing does not occurs if this nonviolence happens. fact4: That both this nonviolence and that protrusiveness happens is brought about by that this bustling Pinnotheridae does not happens. fact5: This ravishing happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that notthis nonviolence but this ravishing occurs is brought about by that this nonviolence does not happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this nonviolence does not occurs.; assump1 & fact5 -> int1: Notthis nonviolence but this ravishing happens.; [assump1] & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that guts is univocal thing that is a caffeinism does not hold.

¬({C}{b} & {D}{b})

fact1: That guts is not univocal if that garpike hatteds Picoides. fact2: That garpike is not a kind of an airfare. fact3: That garpike is not univocal if the fact that that guts is not a caffeinism but it upholds Diodon does not hold. fact4: That that garpike hatteds Picoides and is an airfare is not right. fact5: That garpike is not a caffeinism if the fact that that guts is not an airfare and diagonalizes Elodea is incorrect. fact6: That guts does not uphold Diodon. fact7: The fact that that garpike is not a caffeinism but it is advisable does not hold. fact8: That garpike does not hatted Picoides and is univocal if that consolidation is a caffeinism. fact9: That that garpike upholds Diodon and does hatted Picoides is false. fact10: The fact that that garpike parses and outweighs Lyginopteridales is not true. fact11: That guts does not diagonalize Elodea if that that garpike does not hatted Picoides and is a caffeinism is false. fact12: That guts is an airfare and is univocal. fact13: If that that garpike does not uphold Diodon and diagonalizes Elodea is wrong then that guts does not hatted Picoides. fact14: That rhabdomancer is not a kind of an airfare. fact15: The fact that that guts is not a Hygrophorus but the one diagonalizes Elodea is wrong if that garpike is an airfare. fact16: If the fact that that guts does not hatted Picoides hold then the fact that it is not non-univocal and is a caffeinism is wrong. fact17: Something that does not hatted Picoides and is univocal is a kind of an airfare. fact18: That that garpike does not uphold Diodon and diagonalizes Elodea does not hold if it is not an airfare. fact19: That garpike is not a caffeinism. fact20: The fact that that guts is univocal thing that diagonalizes Elodea is incorrect if that guts does not hatted Picoides. fact21: That guts does not diagonalize Elodea. fact22: That guts does not hatted Picoides if that garpike does not diagonalize Elodea. fact23: If that garpike does indispose etymon the fact that the fact that that guts is both not an airfare and not univocal hold is wrong.

fact1: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {AA}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact4: ¬({B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact5: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} fact6: ¬{AA}{b} fact7: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {CI}{a}) fact8: {D}{c} -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) fact9: ¬({AA}{a} & {B}{a}) fact10: ¬({IN}{a} & {S}{a}) fact11: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} fact12: ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) fact13: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact14: ¬{A}{ga} fact15: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{HP}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact16: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b}) fact17: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {A}x fact18: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact19: ¬{D}{a} fact20: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({C}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact21: ¬{AB}{b} fact22: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact23: {E}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

That guts is univocal and it is a caffeinism.

({C}{b} & {D}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That guts is not univocal if that garpike hatteds Picoides. fact2: That garpike is not a kind of an airfare. fact3: That garpike is not univocal if the fact that that guts is not a caffeinism but it upholds Diodon does not hold. fact4: That that garpike hatteds Picoides and is an airfare is not right. fact5: That garpike is not a caffeinism if the fact that that guts is not an airfare and diagonalizes Elodea is incorrect. fact6: That guts does not uphold Diodon. fact7: The fact that that garpike is not a caffeinism but it is advisable does not hold. fact8: That garpike does not hatted Picoides and is univocal if that consolidation is a caffeinism. fact9: That that garpike upholds Diodon and does hatted Picoides is false. fact10: The fact that that garpike parses and outweighs Lyginopteridales is not true. fact11: That guts does not diagonalize Elodea if that that garpike does not hatted Picoides and is a caffeinism is false. fact12: That guts is an airfare and is univocal. fact13: If that that garpike does not uphold Diodon and diagonalizes Elodea is wrong then that guts does not hatted Picoides. fact14: That rhabdomancer is not a kind of an airfare. fact15: The fact that that guts is not a Hygrophorus but the one diagonalizes Elodea is wrong if that garpike is an airfare. fact16: If the fact that that guts does not hatted Picoides hold then the fact that it is not non-univocal and is a caffeinism is wrong. fact17: Something that does not hatted Picoides and is univocal is a kind of an airfare. fact18: That that garpike does not uphold Diodon and diagonalizes Elodea does not hold if it is not an airfare. fact19: That garpike is not a caffeinism. fact20: The fact that that guts is univocal thing that diagonalizes Elodea is incorrect if that guts does not hatted Picoides. fact21: That guts does not diagonalize Elodea. fact22: That guts does not hatted Picoides if that garpike does not diagonalize Elodea. fact23: If that garpike does indispose etymon the fact that the fact that that guts is both not an airfare and not univocal hold is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that guts is univocal thing that is a caffeinism does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact18 & fact2 -> int1: That that garpike does not uphold Diodon but the thing diagonalizes Elodea is not correct.; int1 & fact13 -> int2: That guts does not hatted Picoides.; int2 & fact16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This soundtrack is not a kind of a shandy.

¬{D}{c}

fact1: This vizor is a shandy if this soundtrack is unconnected. fact2: This alder pouches ambivalency. fact3: If this vizor is unconnected then Tricia pouches ambivalency. fact4: This vizor primes Godunov and it is unconnected.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This vizor is a shandy if this soundtrack is unconnected. fact2: This alder pouches ambivalency. fact3: If this vizor is unconnected then Tricia pouches ambivalency. fact4: This vizor primes Godunov and it is unconnected. ; $hypothesis$ = This soundtrack is not a kind of a shandy. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That stopcock does not soliloquize Homogyne.

¬{AA}{a}

fact1: If that Nantua is not a Mencken that Nantua complects amativeness and that thing enfeebles Northumbria. fact2: the azure does not crowd stopcock. fact3: That stopcock does not crowd azure.

fact1: ¬{AB}{ib} -> ({EL}{ib} & {EC}{ib}) fact2: ¬{AC}{aa} fact3: ¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that Nantua is not a Mencken that Nantua complects amativeness and that thing enfeebles Northumbria. fact2: the azure does not crowd stopcock. fact3: That stopcock does not crowd azure. ; $hypothesis$ = That stopcock does not soliloquize Homogyne. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This angiocarp is inheritable.

{C}{b}

fact1: This firefighter is not nominative. fact2: This firefighter is inheritable if this angiocarp is not non-comatose. fact3: This angiocarp is not comatose. fact4: The mousepad is not comatose. fact5: The lav is not comatose. fact6: That this angiocarp is not inheritable hold if this firefighter is comatose. fact7: Somebody is physicochemical and it pieces usableness if it is not a rutherford. fact8: The fact that this angiocarp is not a Ro is right. fact9: This angiocarp is not a Hirohito. fact10: If somebody is a kind of a Hirohito then it is comatose. fact11: If something pieces usableness then it is a Hirohito.

fact1: ¬{BE}{a} fact2: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} fact3: ¬{A}{b} fact4: ¬{A}{da} fact5: ¬{A}{iu} fact6: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact7: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) fact8: ¬{EQ}{b} fact9: ¬{B}{b} fact10: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact11: (x): {D}x -> {B}x

This firefighter is inheritable.

{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This firefighter is not nominative. fact2: This firefighter is inheritable if this angiocarp is not non-comatose. fact3: This angiocarp is not comatose. fact4: The mousepad is not comatose. fact5: The lav is not comatose. fact6: That this angiocarp is not inheritable hold if this firefighter is comatose. fact7: Somebody is physicochemical and it pieces usableness if it is not a rutherford. fact8: The fact that this angiocarp is not a Ro is right. fact9: This angiocarp is not a Hirohito. fact10: If somebody is a kind of a Hirohito then it is comatose. fact11: If something pieces usableness then it is a Hirohito. ; $hypothesis$ = This angiocarp is inheritable. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Let's assume that this device happens.

{A}

fact1: That that that wittingness does not happens and that Maleness does not occurs is correct is wrong. fact2: The grapelikeness happens. fact3: That that wittingness and that non-Maleness occurs is false. fact4: That that wittingness occurs is correct if the fact that that wittingnessness and that non-Maleness occurs does not hold. fact5: The ill does not occurs. fact6: That this insurgency does not happens yields that that Maleness does not happens but this inheriting Tanguy occurs. fact7: If this device occurs then that wittingness does not occurs. fact8: The fact that this antic and the effortfulness occurs is incorrect.

fact1: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) fact2: {HO} fact3: ¬({B} & ¬{C}) fact4: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) -> {B} fact5: ¬{DB} fact6: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) fact7: {A} -> ¬{B} fact8: ¬({BT} & ¬{IC})

Let's assume that this device happens.

{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that that wittingness does not happens and that Maleness does not occurs is correct is wrong. fact2: The grapelikeness happens. fact3: That that wittingness and that non-Maleness occurs is false. fact4: That that wittingness occurs is correct if the fact that that wittingnessness and that non-Maleness occurs does not hold. fact5: The ill does not occurs. fact6: That this insurgency does not happens yields that that Maleness does not happens but this inheriting Tanguy occurs. fact7: If this device occurs then that wittingness does not occurs. fact8: The fact that this antic and the effortfulness occurs is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that this device happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this device happens.; fact7 & assump1 -> int1: That wittingness does not happens.; fact1 & fact4 -> int2: That wittingness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This jackstraws is not a Carpathians and/or that one does not reassure phthisis.

(¬{A}{a} v ¬{B}{a})

fact1: The fact that someone is not a Carpathians and/or does not reassure phthisis is wrong if it is a Carpathians. fact2: This jackstraws is a kind of a Carpathians if there is something such that that this thing does proceed and is not unprofitable is not right. fact3: If some man is not a Carpathians then that the one does study scurvy and the one cries Dolichonyx does not hold. fact4: The spermatozoan is a Carpathians. fact5: That that manual proceeds and is profitable is incorrect. fact6: Something proceeds and is profitable.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) fact2: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({HC}x & {BT}x) fact4: {A}{ij} fact5: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact6: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x)

There is something such that the fact that it studies scurvy and cries Dolichonyx is not correct.

(Ex): ¬({HC}x & {BT}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that someone is not a Carpathians and/or does not reassure phthisis is wrong if it is a Carpathians. fact2: This jackstraws is a kind of a Carpathians if there is something such that that this thing does proceed and is not unprofitable is not right. fact3: If some man is not a Carpathians then that the one does study scurvy and the one cries Dolichonyx does not hold. fact4: The spermatozoan is a Carpathians. fact5: That that manual proceeds and is profitable is incorrect. fact6: Something proceeds and is profitable. ; $hypothesis$ = This jackstraws is not a Carpathians and/or that one does not reassure phthisis. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: There exists something such that the fact that this proceeds and this is profitable is incorrect.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This jackstraws is a Carpathians.; fact1 -> int3: The fact that this jackstraws is not a kind of a Carpathians or does not reassure phthisis or both does not hold if it is a kind of a Carpathians.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This accountantship happens.

{A}

fact1: The anabolicness occurs. fact2: The fact that the nativity happens hold. fact3: That this euchre occurs and/or this accountantship is triggered by that non-cesareanness. fact4: The venipuncture happens. fact5: This unilluminatingness occurs. fact6: This Grecian happens. fact7: The rehearing happens. fact8: The punch happens. fact9: The tripping happens. fact10: The algometricalness occurs. fact11: The transcription occurs. fact12: The nourishment happens. fact13: This accountantship happens. fact14: This pulverising happens. fact15: That chrysotherapy happens if that arresting does not happens. fact16: The betise happens. fact17: That chrysotherapy leads to that both that non-counterfeitness and that non-cesareanness occurs. fact18: The resurvey happens. fact19: That comparing occurs. fact20: If that this cesareanness does not happens but this euchre occurs is not right this accountantship does not happens.

fact1: {FP} fact2: {DC} fact3: ¬{C} -> ({B} v {A}) fact4: {N} fact5: {FB} fact6: {FK} fact7: {FI} fact8: {GM} fact9: {BC} fact10: {JK} fact11: {JJ} fact12: {HA} fact13: {A} fact14: {JA} fact15: ¬{F} -> {E} fact16: {AL} fact17: {E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{C}) fact18: {BF} fact19: {AR} fact20: ¬(¬{C} & {B}) -> ¬{A}

This accountantship does not happens.

¬{A}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The anabolicness occurs. fact2: The fact that the nativity happens hold. fact3: That this euchre occurs and/or this accountantship is triggered by that non-cesareanness. fact4: The venipuncture happens. fact5: This unilluminatingness occurs. fact6: This Grecian happens. fact7: The rehearing happens. fact8: The punch happens. fact9: The tripping happens. fact10: The algometricalness occurs. fact11: The transcription occurs. fact12: The nourishment happens. fact13: This accountantship happens. fact14: This pulverising happens. fact15: That chrysotherapy happens if that arresting does not happens. fact16: The betise happens. fact17: That chrysotherapy leads to that both that non-counterfeitness and that non-cesareanness occurs. fact18: The resurvey happens. fact19: That comparing occurs. fact20: If that this cesareanness does not happens but this euchre occurs is not right this accountantship does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This accountantship happens. ; $proof$ =

fact13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that effacement does recriminate and this thing is walleyed is wrong.

¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b})

fact1: The fact that that patty is a decreased and she recriminates does not hold. fact2: That patty is not a decreased. fact3: The fact that that effacement recriminates and is a decreased is not right. fact4: Giovanna does not recriminate. fact5: That that effacement recriminates and is not non-walleyed does not hold if that patty is not a decreased. fact6: That that patty is walleyed and the thing is a decreased does not hold.

fact1: ¬({A}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: ¬({AA}{b} & {A}{b}) fact4: ¬{AA}{de} fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) fact6: ¬({AB}{a} & {A}{a})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that patty is a decreased and she recriminates does not hold. fact2: That patty is not a decreased. fact3: The fact that that effacement recriminates and is a decreased is not right. fact4: Giovanna does not recriminate. fact5: That that effacement recriminates and is not non-walleyed does not hold if that patty is not a decreased. fact6: That that patty is walleyed and the thing is a decreased does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that effacement does recriminate and this thing is walleyed is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that that Inderal does not subordinate and is a kind of a folding does not hold is true.

¬(¬{A}{c} & {B}{c})

fact1: The fact that this crutch is not laryngeal and does decimalise does not hold. fact2: If this negotiator is not a folding that Inderal does not subordinate. fact3: The fact that if this negotiator is not a folding then that Inderal does not subordinate but it is a kind of a folding hold. fact4: This negotiator is not a folding if the fact that this crutch is not laryngeal but that thing decimalises does not hold. fact5: If that this negotiator does not decimalise and is laryngeal does not hold then this crutch is not a folding.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this crutch is not laryngeal and does decimalise does not hold. fact2: If this negotiator is not a folding that Inderal does not subordinate. fact3: The fact that if this negotiator is not a folding then that Inderal does not subordinate but it is a kind of a folding hold. fact4: This negotiator is not a folding if the fact that this crutch is not laryngeal but that thing decimalises does not hold. fact5: If that this negotiator does not decimalise and is laryngeal does not hold then this crutch is not a folding. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that that Inderal does not subordinate and is a kind of a folding does not hold is true. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact1 -> int1: This negotiator is not a folding.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that that xylol does not Cox Haemanthus but the thing is a pyrotechnic does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: That xylol is not a Rollo. fact2: That xylol is not a indistinctness and peels scruple if that this pocketcomb is lowborn is right. fact3: That chaddar is bottomed and it does coconspire. fact4: That xylol distinguishes Pimenta. fact5: If something is not non-bottomed and it is viscosimetric it is not preclinical. fact6: The fact that that xylol is not a kind of a indistinctness but it nullifies chequebook does not hold. fact7: Either somebody does not cork Ascomycotina or it is a kind of a couple or both if it is not preclinical. fact8: That xylol is not a indistinctness. fact9: If that chaddar is a charade then that chaddar is viscosimetric. fact10: That brittle is not a kind of a pyrotechnic but it cabins Cephalobidae. fact11: That citrine Coxes Haemanthus. fact12: That someone is not a kind of a Liberian is right if it is not a indistinctness and it peels scruple. fact13: That that xylol is a kind of a indistinctness hold if the fact that that xylol does not Cox Haemanthus and is a pyrotechnic does not hold. fact14: That xylol is a NLRB. fact15: The fact that someone does not Cox Haemanthus and is a pyrotechnic is false if the one does not peel scruple. fact16: This pocketcomb is lowborn and it sublimes if the fact that it does not cork Ascomycotina is correct. fact17: That thimerosal does not Cox Haemanthus and copyrights Canachites. fact18: This pocketcomb does not cork Ascomycotina if that chaddar does not cork Ascomycotina and/or is a couple.

fact1: ¬{GH}{a} fact2: {C}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact3: ({I}{c} & {L}{c}) fact4: {HO}{a} fact5: (x): ({I}x & {J}x) -> ¬{H}x fact6: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {ED}{a}) fact7: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{E}x v {G}x) fact8: ¬{B}{a} fact9: {K}{c} -> {J}{c} fact10: (¬{AB}{ds} & {II}{ds}) fact11: {AA}{p} fact12: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{F}x fact13: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact14: {FE}{a} fact15: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact16: ¬{E}{b} -> ({C}{b} & {D}{b}) fact17: (¬{AA}{dr} & {DB}{dr}) fact18: (¬{E}{c} v {G}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b}

Let's assume that that that xylol does not Cox Haemanthus but the thing is a pyrotechnic does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That xylol is not a Rollo. fact2: That xylol is not a indistinctness and peels scruple if that this pocketcomb is lowborn is right. fact3: That chaddar is bottomed and it does coconspire. fact4: That xylol distinguishes Pimenta. fact5: If something is not non-bottomed and it is viscosimetric it is not preclinical. fact6: The fact that that xylol is not a kind of a indistinctness but it nullifies chequebook does not hold. fact7: Either somebody does not cork Ascomycotina or it is a kind of a couple or both if it is not preclinical. fact8: That xylol is not a indistinctness. fact9: If that chaddar is a charade then that chaddar is viscosimetric. fact10: That brittle is not a kind of a pyrotechnic but it cabins Cephalobidae. fact11: That citrine Coxes Haemanthus. fact12: That someone is not a kind of a Liberian is right if it is not a indistinctness and it peels scruple. fact13: That that xylol is a kind of a indistinctness hold if the fact that that xylol does not Cox Haemanthus and is a pyrotechnic does not hold. fact14: That xylol is a NLRB. fact15: The fact that someone does not Cox Haemanthus and is a pyrotechnic is false if the one does not peel scruple. fact16: This pocketcomb is lowborn and it sublimes if the fact that it does not cork Ascomycotina is correct. fact17: That thimerosal does not Cox Haemanthus and copyrights Canachites. fact18: This pocketcomb does not cork Ascomycotina if that chaddar does not cork Ascomycotina and/or is a couple. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that that xylol does not Cox Haemanthus but the thing is a pyrotechnic does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that that xylol does not Cox Haemanthus but the thing is a pyrotechnic does not hold.; fact13 & assump1 -> int1: That xylol is a indistinctness.; int1 & fact8 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that there is something such that if it is Ionic then it is not a seeing and it is a haunting is not true.

¬((Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x))

fact1: There exists somebody such that if the fact that that person is Ionic hold then that person is a kind of a seeing and that person is a haunting. fact2: That occiput is a haunting if it is Ionic.

fact1: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) fact2: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There exists somebody such that if the fact that that person is Ionic hold then that person is a kind of a seeing and that person is a haunting. fact2: That occiput is a haunting if it is Ionic. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that there is something such that if it is Ionic then it is not a seeing and it is a haunting is not true. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That interior is not a heliograph.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: That brimstone is dolichocranic. fact2: That that brimstone is not a corporatist hold. fact3: That that interior is dolichocranic but it is not a heliograph is incorrect. fact4: If the fact that that interior is not dolichocranic and is not a Cordylidae does not hold then that brimstone is not a heliograph.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That brimstone is dolichocranic. fact2: That that brimstone is not a corporatist hold. fact3: That that interior is dolichocranic but it is not a heliograph is incorrect. fact4: If the fact that that interior is not dolichocranic and is not a Cordylidae does not hold then that brimstone is not a heliograph. ; $hypothesis$ = That interior is not a heliograph. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This hirudinean is a Hargeisa.

{B}{b}

fact1: That this regur is a kind of a Swedish but it is not a leger does not hold if this regur is non-dissimilar. fact2: The fact that this pituitary is emphysematous but not dissimilar is incorrect. fact3: This regur does not refill Aplysia. fact4: The fact that this regur is a leger and is a Hargeisa is not correct if this regur is not a Swedish. fact5: This regur is not a Hargeisa. fact6: This hirudinean is not a Swedish if the fact that that this regur is a kind of a Hargeisa but it is not a leger does not hold is right. fact7: If this regur is a leger that this hirudinean is not a Swedish is right. fact8: This regur is not a Hargeisa if this hirudinean is dissimilar. fact9: If this hirudinean is not a kind of a Hargeisa that he is a leger and he is not a Swedish is false. fact10: That this regur is a Swedish that is a kind of a leger is wrong. fact11: If the fact that this hirudinean is a Hargeisa and is not a leger does not hold this regur is not a kind of a Swedish. fact12: If that this regur is both a Swedish and not a leger is false this hirudinean is not a kind of a Hargeisa. fact13: The fact that this hirudinean is a Swedish and is not a kind of a leger is false if this hirudinean is not a Hargeisa.

fact1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact2: ¬({AJ}{bk} & ¬{A}{bk}) fact3: ¬{HU}{a} fact4: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬({AB}{a} & {B}{a}) fact5: ¬{B}{a} fact6: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact7: {AB}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} fact8: {A}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} fact9: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({AB}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) fact10: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact11: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{AA}{a} fact12: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact13: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this regur is a kind of a Swedish but it is not a leger does not hold if this regur is non-dissimilar. fact2: The fact that this pituitary is emphysematous but not dissimilar is incorrect. fact3: This regur does not refill Aplysia. fact4: The fact that this regur is a leger and is a Hargeisa is not correct if this regur is not a Swedish. fact5: This regur is not a Hargeisa. fact6: This hirudinean is not a Swedish if the fact that that this regur is a kind of a Hargeisa but it is not a leger does not hold is right. fact7: If this regur is a leger that this hirudinean is not a Swedish is right. fact8: This regur is not a Hargeisa if this hirudinean is dissimilar. fact9: If this hirudinean is not a kind of a Hargeisa that he is a leger and he is not a Swedish is false. fact10: That this regur is a Swedish that is a kind of a leger is wrong. fact11: If the fact that this hirudinean is a Hargeisa and is not a leger does not hold this regur is not a kind of a Swedish. fact12: If that this regur is both a Swedish and not a leger is false this hirudinean is not a kind of a Hargeisa. fact13: The fact that this hirudinean is a Swedish and is not a kind of a leger is false if this hirudinean is not a Hargeisa. ; $hypothesis$ = This hirudinean is a Hargeisa. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This stressing bylaw happens.

{B}

fact1: This stressing bylaw happens if this sensoriness happens. fact2: That refraction happens. fact3: This sensoriness occurs. fact4: If that that serousness does not happens hold then the fact that notthis stressing bylaw but this sensoriness occurs is incorrect. fact5: If the fact that notthis stressing bylaw but this sensoriness occurs is not right this audibleness occurs.

fact1: {A} -> {B} fact2: {DC} fact3: {A} fact4: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{B} & {A}) fact5: ¬(¬{B} & {A}) -> {JH}

This audibleness occurs.

{JH}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This stressing bylaw happens if this sensoriness happens. fact2: That refraction happens. fact3: This sensoriness occurs. fact4: If that that serousness does not happens hold then the fact that notthis stressing bylaw but this sensoriness occurs is incorrect. fact5: If the fact that notthis stressing bylaw but this sensoriness occurs is not right this audibleness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This stressing bylaw happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that that this precipitate is a Nymphalis and this one is Andean hold is wrong.

¬({A}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: This precipitate is bimetallic and is Andean. fact2: This precipitate is a Nymphalis and it is rhetorical.

fact1: ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) fact2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This precipitate is bimetallic and is Andean. fact2: This precipitate is a Nymphalis and it is rhetorical. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that this precipitate is a Nymphalis and this one is Andean hold is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This precipitate is a Nymphalis.; fact1 -> int2: This precipitate is Andean.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That either Norma is worldly or it is not non-basilary or both is not correct.

¬({B}{a} v {C}{a})

fact1: That cassiri is a chemosis and/or is prefectural. fact2: The fact that the fact that something is not unworldly and/or it is basilary is true is incorrect if it is not a negative. fact3: That hearer underdresses cravenness and comfits impatience. fact4: That crenelation is worldly if that Norma is basilary but it is not a kind of a negative is wrong. fact5: Norma is a kind of a negative and it is worldly. fact6: Norma is a negative. fact7: Norma is a Indus. fact8: The fact that the mudslinger is basilary hold. fact9: That that Norma is either worldly or basilary or both does not hold is correct if it is not a negative. fact10: If something is a chemosis and it is venous then it is not a negative.

fact1: ({D}{b} v {H}{b}) fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x v {C}x) fact3: ({HM}{ap} & {GA}{ap}) fact4: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {B}{ca} fact5: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact6: {A}{a} fact7: {DS}{a} fact8: {C}{bp} fact9: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{a} v {C}{a}) fact10: (x): ({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{A}x

The fact that that crenelation is worldly is true.

{B}{ca}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That cassiri is a chemosis and/or is prefectural. fact2: The fact that the fact that something is not unworldly and/or it is basilary is true is incorrect if it is not a negative. fact3: That hearer underdresses cravenness and comfits impatience. fact4: That crenelation is worldly if that Norma is basilary but it is not a kind of a negative is wrong. fact5: Norma is a kind of a negative and it is worldly. fact6: Norma is a negative. fact7: Norma is a Indus. fact8: The fact that the mudslinger is basilary hold. fact9: That that Norma is either worldly or basilary or both does not hold is correct if it is not a negative. fact10: If something is a chemosis and it is venous then it is not a negative. ; $hypothesis$ = That either Norma is worldly or it is not non-basilary or both is not correct. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: Norma is worldly.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This giving Aegates occurs.

{F}

fact1: If this difficultness happens then that dig happens. fact2: If that that dig happens but this preservation does not happens hold then this giving Aegates happens. fact3: That that vasoconstriction occurs prevents that this difficultness does not occurs. fact4: If this carnage occurs this difficultness happens. fact5: That dig happens and this preservation does not happens if this difficultness happens. fact6: That the celioscopy does not happens and that animalisation happens results in that that dig occurs. fact7: The state does not happens if that fraternization does not happens. fact8: That the state does not happens causes that notthe celioscopy but that animalisation occurs.

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

This giving Aegates does not occurs.

¬{F}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this difficultness happens then that dig happens. fact2: If that that dig happens but this preservation does not happens hold then this giving Aegates happens. fact3: That that vasoconstriction occurs prevents that this difficultness does not occurs. fact4: If this carnage occurs this difficultness happens. fact5: That dig happens and this preservation does not happens if this difficultness happens. fact6: That the celioscopy does not happens and that animalisation happens results in that that dig occurs. fact7: The state does not happens if that fraternization does not happens. fact8: That the state does not happens causes that notthe celioscopy but that animalisation occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This giving Aegates occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Philistineness does not occurs and/or that recapturing does not occurs.

(¬{C} v ¬{D})

fact1: If that clumping does not happens then this visualness occurs and the glaring lucidness does not happens. fact2: If that curtseying does not happens then both this exacting deshabille and this metabolizing occurs. fact3: That Philistineness occurs and/or that recapturing does not occurs. fact4: That Philistineness does not occurs if this metabolizing and that curtseying happens. fact5: The fact that that curtseying but notthat recapturing occurs is incorrect if that Philistineness happens. fact6: This Damascene does not happens and that unspacedness does not occurs if that advent does not occurs. fact7: If that that that advent and this appeasing happens is correct is wrong that advent does not occurs. fact8: That that unspacedness does not happens results in that that Philistineness and this crib happens. fact9: That trochaicness does not occurs or the incision occurs or both. fact10: If the glaring lucidness does not happens then the fact that that advent occurs and this appeasing occurs does not hold. fact11: If that this swabbing occurs and that clumping happens does not hold then that clumping does not happens. fact12: That worse occurs. fact13: This metabolizing happens.

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

This exacting deshabille happens.

{HF}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that clumping does not happens then this visualness occurs and the glaring lucidness does not happens. fact2: If that curtseying does not happens then both this exacting deshabille and this metabolizing occurs. fact3: That Philistineness occurs and/or that recapturing does not occurs. fact4: That Philistineness does not occurs if this metabolizing and that curtseying happens. fact5: The fact that that curtseying but notthat recapturing occurs is incorrect if that Philistineness happens. fact6: This Damascene does not happens and that unspacedness does not occurs if that advent does not occurs. fact7: If that that that advent and this appeasing happens is correct is wrong that advent does not occurs. fact8: That that unspacedness does not happens results in that that Philistineness and this crib happens. fact9: That trochaicness does not occurs or the incision occurs or both. fact10: If the glaring lucidness does not happens then the fact that that advent occurs and this appeasing occurs does not hold. fact11: If that this swabbing occurs and that clumping happens does not hold then that clumping does not happens. fact12: That worse occurs. fact13: This metabolizing happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That Philistineness does not occurs and/or that recapturing does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That boatswain does not appall.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: That Cd is a Lagenophera. fact2: Some man that does not inform pediatrics and is not alluvial does not appall. fact3: If that Cd is a Lagenophera then that boatswain does not inform pediatrics and is not alluvial.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That Cd is a Lagenophera. fact2: Some man that does not inform pediatrics and is not alluvial does not appall. fact3: If that Cd is a Lagenophera then that boatswain does not inform pediatrics and is not alluvial. ; $hypothesis$ = That boatswain does not appall. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact1 -> int1: That boatswain does not inform pediatrics and it is non-alluvial.; fact2 -> int2: That boatswain does not appall if that thing does not inform pediatrics and that thing is not alluvial.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Carmelo is a Ticonderoga.

{C}{aa}

fact1: Carmelo is not a Frye. fact2: Somebody is not a Ticonderoga if it does not sing garboil. fact3: the garboil does not sing Carmelo. fact4: The kylix does not whack Eurocurrency if the kylix is not a Ticonderoga. fact5: Carmelo does not sing garboil.

fact1: ¬{IN}{aa} fact2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x fact3: ¬{AA}{ab} fact4: ¬{C}{ho} -> ¬{FF}{ho} fact5: ¬{B}{aa}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Carmelo is not a Frye. fact2: Somebody is not a Ticonderoga if it does not sing garboil. fact3: the garboil does not sing Carmelo. fact4: The kylix does not whack Eurocurrency if the kylix is not a Ticonderoga. fact5: Carmelo does not sing garboil. ; $hypothesis$ = Carmelo is a Ticonderoga. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: Carmelo is not a Ticonderoga if it does not sing garboil.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That geisha charges billionth.

{B}{a}

fact1: That filbert is a Aeneid but that one does not magnify acronym if that geisha charges billionth. fact2: The correspondent is a Aeneid. fact3: The sniveller does charge billionth. fact4: That geisha is a hemophilia. fact5: That that geisha is unsaturated hold.

fact1: {B}{a} -> ({A}{cd} & ¬{EN}{cd}) fact2: {A}{cb} fact3: {B}{db} fact4: {HB}{a} fact5: {EJ}{a}

That filbert is a Aeneid and does not magnify acronym.

({A}{cd} & ¬{EN}{cd})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That filbert is a Aeneid but that one does not magnify acronym if that geisha charges billionth. fact2: The correspondent is a Aeneid. fact3: The sniveller does charge billionth. fact4: That geisha is a hemophilia. fact5: That that geisha is unsaturated hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That geisha charges billionth. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This mortgagor is not a kind of a hypnotic.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: This mortgagor is a kind of a inflexibleness that reunites Arendt. fact2: This mortgagor is not unrewarding if this earthwork is not a kind of a Uganda and it is not unrewarding. fact3: Something is a hypnotic if that it is a inflexibleness hold. fact4: If some person is rewarding then that the one is not a kind of a inflexibleness and the one reunites Arendt is incorrect.

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

This mortgagor is not a kind of a hypnotic.

¬{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This mortgagor is a kind of a inflexibleness that reunites Arendt. fact2: This mortgagor is not unrewarding if this earthwork is not a kind of a Uganda and it is not unrewarding. fact3: Something is a hypnotic if that it is a inflexibleness hold. fact4: If some person is rewarding then that the one is not a kind of a inflexibleness and the one reunites Arendt is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = This mortgagor is not a kind of a hypnotic. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: This mortgagor is a inflexibleness.; fact3 -> int2: This mortgagor is a hypnotic if this mortgagor is a inflexibleness.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Nuprin is a Sterope but the thing is not a Triglidae.

({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

fact1: This syphilitic shelves corporatism and does not demonstrate bigotry. fact2: This Nuprin is punctureless. fact3: This Nuprin is not motivational. fact4: This Nuprin is both a Cenozoic and not a Tetragonia. fact5: That outfitter is a Triglidae and it is a kind of a Sterope if the fact that that outfitter does not intone misplacement hold. fact6: The cud is a Pidlimdi but it is not a Triglidae. fact7: This Nuprin is not a Triglidae. fact8: That something is both a Sterope and not a Triglidae does not hold if that does not intone misplacement. fact9: The ovum is not a Triglidae. fact10: This Nuprin does steam 15. fact11: This Nuprin steams 15 and is not a vaginitis. fact12: This incendiary is a Sterope. fact13: This plagioclase is a embonpoint but it does not intone misplacement if the fact that it is not a kind of a Musci hold. fact14: That outfitter does not intone misplacement if this Nuprin does not intone misplacement. fact15: This eelpout is a typescript and is not a Sterope. fact16: This Nuprin is multicultural. fact17: This Nuprin is a Sterope. fact18: Ted is not a Sterope. fact19: This Nuprin is a pollinosis and does not stop UHF. fact20: Hunter is a kind of a title but it is not a Sterope.

fact1: ({CI}{cn} & ¬{EU}{cn}) fact2: {FI}{a} fact3: ¬{GR}{a} fact4: ({AP}{a} & ¬{JJ}{a}) fact5: ¬{C}{em} -> ({B}{em} & {A}{em}) fact6: ({AE}{fc} & ¬{B}{fc}) fact7: ¬{B}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) fact9: ¬{B}{ja} fact10: {DF}{a} fact11: ({DF}{a} & ¬{JE}{a}) fact12: {A}{hc} fact13: ¬{E}{b} -> ({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact14: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{C}{em} fact15: ({JH}{et} & ¬{A}{et}) fact16: {IF}{a} fact17: {A}{a} fact18: ¬{A}{he} fact19: ({DT}{a} & ¬{DR}{a}) fact20: ({IM}{iu} & ¬{A}{iu})

That this Nuprin is a Sterope that is not a Triglidae does not hold.

¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This syphilitic shelves corporatism and does not demonstrate bigotry. fact2: This Nuprin is punctureless. fact3: This Nuprin is not motivational. fact4: This Nuprin is both a Cenozoic and not a Tetragonia. fact5: That outfitter is a Triglidae and it is a kind of a Sterope if the fact that that outfitter does not intone misplacement hold. fact6: The cud is a Pidlimdi but it is not a Triglidae. fact7: This Nuprin is not a Triglidae. fact8: That something is both a Sterope and not a Triglidae does not hold if that does not intone misplacement. fact9: The ovum is not a Triglidae. fact10: This Nuprin does steam 15. fact11: This Nuprin steams 15 and is not a vaginitis. fact12: This incendiary is a Sterope. fact13: This plagioclase is a embonpoint but it does not intone misplacement if the fact that it is not a kind of a Musci hold. fact14: That outfitter does not intone misplacement if this Nuprin does not intone misplacement. fact15: This eelpout is a typescript and is not a Sterope. fact16: This Nuprin is multicultural. fact17: This Nuprin is a Sterope. fact18: Ted is not a Sterope. fact19: This Nuprin is a pollinosis and does not stop UHF. fact20: Hunter is a kind of a title but it is not a Sterope. ; $hypothesis$ = This Nuprin is a Sterope but the thing is not a Triglidae. ; $proof$ =

fact17 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Either that developing or this thermohydrometricness or both occurs.

({A} v {B})

fact1: This works happens if this works or this non-thermohydrometricness or both happens. fact2: The measurement and/or this televising Orbison occurs. fact3: This televising Orbison happens. fact4: Either the marshaling Whitehall happens or this rasping Flanders happens or both. fact5: This rasping Flanders occurs and/or the weightiness happens. fact6: Either this rumination or this sterilising Phobos or both happens. fact7: That developing occurs. fact8: If this barbarity happens then both this non-thermohydrometricness and that developing occurs. fact9: That this televangelism and this barbarity occurs is caused by that this Pricing Tolypeutes does not happens.

fact1: ({AR} v ¬{B}) -> {AR} fact2: ({GT} v {JD}) fact3: {JD} fact4: ({JC} v {DN}) fact5: ({DN} v {IO}) fact6: ({FJ} v {AT}) fact7: {A} fact8: {C} -> (¬{B} & {A}) fact9: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C})

This works happens and/or the zoologicalness happens.

({AR} v {AS})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This works happens if this works or this non-thermohydrometricness or both happens. fact2: The measurement and/or this televising Orbison occurs. fact3: This televising Orbison happens. fact4: Either the marshaling Whitehall happens or this rasping Flanders happens or both. fact5: This rasping Flanders occurs and/or the weightiness happens. fact6: Either this rumination or this sterilising Phobos or both happens. fact7: That developing occurs. fact8: If this barbarity happens then both this non-thermohydrometricness and that developing occurs. fact9: That this televangelism and this barbarity occurs is caused by that this Pricing Tolypeutes does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Either that developing or this thermohydrometricness or both occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That salvia is substantival.

{A}{a}

fact1: If the fact that this carpal is not a kind of a Robespierre and it does not huddle solferino is false then it is dextral. fact2: The fact that something is a fugaciousness and is not a tardiness is wrong if it is not a subset. fact3: That some man is ultramicroscopic but it is not a subset does not hold if the fact that it is a marking does not hold. fact4: If the fact that that beloved is a fugaciousness that is not a tardiness does not hold that salvia is not a septicaemia. fact5: That foreground is both a elaborateness and substantival if there is something such that it is dextral. fact6: The boatyard is a marking. fact7: The fact that this carpal is not a Robespierre and does not huddle solferino is wrong. fact8: If the fact that Christi is a kind of ultramicroscopic person that is not a kind of a subset does not hold then that beloved is not a subset. fact9: The planet is a fugaciousness and that is substantival. fact10: If the boatyard is a marking that touchwood is a kind of a marking. fact11: That salvia is substantival and it is curatorial. fact12: Christi is not a marking if that touchwood is a marking. fact13: Some person is curatorial person that is unregulated if the one is not a septicaemia. fact14: If that salvia is unregulated that foreground is unregulated.

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

That foreground is a elaborateness and unregulated.

({CF}{ih} & {BF}{ih})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this carpal is not a kind of a Robespierre and it does not huddle solferino is false then it is dextral. fact2: The fact that something is a fugaciousness and is not a tardiness is wrong if it is not a subset. fact3: That some man is ultramicroscopic but it is not a subset does not hold if the fact that it is a marking does not hold. fact4: If the fact that that beloved is a fugaciousness that is not a tardiness does not hold that salvia is not a septicaemia. fact5: That foreground is both a elaborateness and substantival if there is something such that it is dextral. fact6: The boatyard is a marking. fact7: The fact that this carpal is not a Robespierre and does not huddle solferino is wrong. fact8: If the fact that Christi is a kind of ultramicroscopic person that is not a kind of a subset does not hold then that beloved is not a subset. fact9: The planet is a fugaciousness and that is substantival. fact10: If the boatyard is a marking that touchwood is a kind of a marking. fact11: That salvia is substantival and it is curatorial. fact12: Christi is not a marking if that touchwood is a marking. fact13: Some person is curatorial person that is unregulated if the one is not a septicaemia. fact14: If that salvia is unregulated that foreground is unregulated. ; $hypothesis$ = That salvia is substantival. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That plagioclasticness occurs and that acetonicness does not occurs.

({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That plagioclasticness occurs and that acetonicness does not occurs.

fact1: ({AA} & ¬{AB})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That plagioclasticness occurs and that acetonicness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That plagioclasticness occurs and that acetonicness does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this longan is unmyelinated hold.

{A}{a}

fact1: That this longan is unmyelinated hold. fact2: That Piper is unmyelinated. fact3: Someone is unmyelinated if it is ventral.

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

This librarian is unmyelinated.

{A}{k}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this longan is unmyelinated hold. fact2: That Piper is unmyelinated. fact3: Someone is unmyelinated if it is ventral. ; $hypothesis$ = That this longan is unmyelinated hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That churchman is an inaugural.

{B}{a}

fact1: Some person is not an inaugural if the fact that the one is not a Nejd and/or the one is not a Mesozoic does not hold. fact2: If that churchman is not a coronary that that churchman is not a Nejd and/or he/she is not a Mesozoic is incorrect. fact3: If something is unimodal then that thing is an inaugural. fact4: That churchman is not a coronary.

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

This allomorph is not a kind of a Mesozoic.

¬{AB}{ab}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person is not an inaugural if the fact that the one is not a Nejd and/or the one is not a Mesozoic does not hold. fact2: If that churchman is not a coronary that that churchman is not a Nejd and/or he/she is not a Mesozoic is incorrect. fact3: If something is unimodal then that thing is an inaugural. fact4: That churchman is not a coronary. ; $hypothesis$ = That churchman is an inaugural. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact4 -> int1: That the fact that that that churchman is not a Nejd and/or it is not a kind of a Mesozoic is correct is incorrect is correct.; fact1 -> int2: If the fact that either that churchman is not a Nejd or it is not a kind of a Mesozoic or both does not hold then it is not an inaugural.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This CMV warns defiled.

{C}{c}

fact1: The fact that this CMV either is not Jewish or is not a kind of an irrelevance or both does not hold if that vanillin is not Jewish. fact2: Some person warns defiled if that it is not Jewish or it is not an irrelevance or both does not hold. fact3: If the picklepuss does not install stiffness and severs Termitidae then that vanillin is not Jewish.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this CMV either is not Jewish or is not a kind of an irrelevance or both does not hold if that vanillin is not Jewish. fact2: Some person warns defiled if that it is not Jewish or it is not an irrelevance or both does not hold. fact3: If the picklepuss does not install stiffness and severs Termitidae then that vanillin is not Jewish. ; $hypothesis$ = This CMV warns defiled. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this coating insightfulness does not happens but this flicker happens is false.

¬(¬{C} & {A})

fact1: The fact that that the prattling Rosmarinus does not happens and that permeating teth does not happens is wrong hold. fact2: The unacquisitiveness does not occurs if the fact that the prattling Rosmarinus does not happens and that permeating teth does not happens does not hold. fact3: That both that non-pedalness and that non-behavioristicness occurs is not true. fact4: If the grading does not happens the fact that this weathering buy happens and the whomping Leontopodium happens does not hold. fact5: The fact that both this weathering buy and this sepaloidness happens does not hold. fact6: That notthis coating insightfulness but this flicker occurs is incorrect if the unacquisitiveness does not happens. fact7: If the aciculateness does not happens the fact that this empyrealness and this pleading Quinquagesima happens is wrong.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact2: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact3: ¬(¬{GM} & ¬{IJ}) fact4: ¬{J} -> ¬({JH} & {AO}) fact5: ¬({JH} & {BN}) fact6: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{C} & {A}) fact7: ¬{CC} -> ¬({IB} & {FP})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that the prattling Rosmarinus does not happens and that permeating teth does not happens is wrong hold. fact2: The unacquisitiveness does not occurs if the fact that the prattling Rosmarinus does not happens and that permeating teth does not happens does not hold. fact3: That both that non-pedalness and that non-behavioristicness occurs is not true. fact4: If the grading does not happens the fact that this weathering buy happens and the whomping Leontopodium happens does not hold. fact5: The fact that both this weathering buy and this sepaloidness happens does not hold. fact6: That notthis coating insightfulness but this flicker occurs is incorrect if the unacquisitiveness does not happens. fact7: If the aciculateness does not happens the fact that this empyrealness and this pleading Quinquagesima happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That this coating insightfulness does not happens but this flicker happens is false. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> int1: The unacquisitiveness does not happens.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This colorness happens.

{C}

fact1: The fact that that this unshockableness happens but that ninjutsu does not occurs is not wrong is wrong if this persuasion does not happens. fact2: That this barometricness and that sousing truce happens does not hold if this pretending Silybum does not occurs. fact3: If this unshockableness does not happens that fiducialness but notthat Jeffersonianness happens. fact4: That that fiducialness happens and that jingoism does not occurs is caused by that that Jeffersonianness does not occurs. fact5: This pretending Silybum does not occurs if notthe unloading but the electroshock occurs. fact6: This persuasion does not happens if the fact that this barometricness and that sousing truce occurs is false. fact7: If that both this non-hemodynamicness and that jingoism occurs does not hold the fact that this hemodynamicness occurs is right. fact8: If that fiducialness occurs notthis devoir but this colorness happens. fact9: This non-colorness is prevented by that jingoism. fact10: This devoir occurs. fact11: If this devoir does not happens then that both this non-hemodynamicness and that jingoism happens is wrong. fact12: That affixalness occurs if that sousing truce happens. fact13: If the fact that this unshockableness occurs but that ninjutsu does not occurs does not hold this unshockableness does not happens.

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

This colorness does not happens.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that that this unshockableness happens but that ninjutsu does not occurs is not wrong is wrong if this persuasion does not happens. fact2: That this barometricness and that sousing truce happens does not hold if this pretending Silybum does not occurs. fact3: If this unshockableness does not happens that fiducialness but notthat Jeffersonianness happens. fact4: That that fiducialness happens and that jingoism does not occurs is caused by that that Jeffersonianness does not occurs. fact5: This pretending Silybum does not occurs if notthe unloading but the electroshock occurs. fact6: This persuasion does not happens if the fact that this barometricness and that sousing truce occurs is false. fact7: If that both this non-hemodynamicness and that jingoism occurs does not hold the fact that this hemodynamicness occurs is right. fact8: If that fiducialness occurs notthis devoir but this colorness happens. fact9: This non-colorness is prevented by that jingoism. fact10: This devoir occurs. fact11: If this devoir does not happens then that both this non-hemodynamicness and that jingoism happens is wrong. fact12: That affixalness occurs if that sousing truce happens. fact13: If the fact that this unshockableness occurs but that ninjutsu does not occurs does not hold this unshockableness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This colorness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This bolero is not a Khoikhoi.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: If that that breeziness is not neurogenic and it is not a kind of a Abkhazia does not hold this bolero is not a kind of a Khoikhoi. fact2: If something is not discreet the fact that it is neurogenic and not a Abkhazia is false. fact3: That breeziness is not discreet if it is invisible and is a 1770s. fact4: If this electrocutioner does not transfigure Stilwell then that either this honeycreeper is invisible or this is a 1770s or both hold. fact5: A ionized man that is a kind of a Indianapolis is not a Ypres. fact6: That breeziness is not discreet if he is a kind of non-invisible a 1770s. fact7: If that breeziness is neurogenic then this bolero is not a kind of a Khoikhoi. fact8: The formation is not discreet if the formation is both not emptying and topologic. fact9: That breeziness is not invisible and is a 1770s. fact10: That that breeziness is neurogenic but not a Abkhazia is not correct if it is not discreet. fact11: If this accessary is invisible then this bolero is a Khoikhoi but it is not discreet. fact12: This bolero is not discreet. fact13: If a non-entozoic thing is a sought it does not transfigure Stilwell. fact14: The fact that that breeziness is not invisible is true. fact15: That that breeziness is neurogenic and is not a Abkhazia does not hold. fact16: Something is not entozoic but it is a sought if it does not incur Hypodermatidae. fact17: If something is not discreet that that thing is not neurogenic and that thing is not a Abkhazia does not hold.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: ({C}{aa} & {D}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} fact4: ¬{E}{d} -> ({C}{c} v {D}{c}) fact5: (x): (¬{CS}x & {CA}x) -> ¬{EQ}x fact6: (¬{C}{aa} & {D}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} fact7: {AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{a} fact8: (¬{CQ}{fd} & {II}{fd}) -> ¬{A}{fd} fact9: (¬{C}{aa} & {D}{aa}) fact10: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact11: {C}{b} -> ({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) fact12: ¬{A}{a} fact13: (x): (¬{F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x fact14: ¬{C}{aa} fact15: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact16: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & {G}x) fact17: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

This bolero is a Khoikhoi.

{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that that breeziness is not neurogenic and it is not a kind of a Abkhazia does not hold this bolero is not a kind of a Khoikhoi. fact2: If something is not discreet the fact that it is neurogenic and not a Abkhazia is false. fact3: That breeziness is not discreet if it is invisible and is a 1770s. fact4: If this electrocutioner does not transfigure Stilwell then that either this honeycreeper is invisible or this is a 1770s or both hold. fact5: A ionized man that is a kind of a Indianapolis is not a Ypres. fact6: That breeziness is not discreet if he is a kind of non-invisible a 1770s. fact7: If that breeziness is neurogenic then this bolero is not a kind of a Khoikhoi. fact8: The formation is not discreet if the formation is both not emptying and topologic. fact9: That breeziness is not invisible and is a 1770s. fact10: That that breeziness is neurogenic but not a Abkhazia is not correct if it is not discreet. fact11: If this accessary is invisible then this bolero is a Khoikhoi but it is not discreet. fact12: This bolero is not discreet. fact13: If a non-entozoic thing is a sought it does not transfigure Stilwell. fact14: The fact that that breeziness is not invisible is true. fact15: That that breeziness is neurogenic and is not a Abkhazia does not hold. fact16: Something is not entozoic but it is a sought if it does not incur Hypodermatidae. fact17: If something is not discreet that that thing is not neurogenic and that thing is not a Abkhazia does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This bolero is not a Khoikhoi. ; $proof$ =

fact17 -> int1: If that breeziness is not discreet then that that breeziness is not neurogenic and is not a Abkhazia is false.; fact6 & fact9 -> int2: That that breeziness is discreet does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: The fact that that breeziness is not neurogenic and this is not a Abkhazia is false.; int3 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That the fact that that ammonite is not a Dovyalis but that is a FDA hold is incorrect.

¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: That something is not a Saxony and not a dip is not true if it does not flaw pentameter. fact2: Some person is not a perpendicular if the fact that she/he is not a Saxony and not a dip does not hold. fact3: If this talker is a crook that does not flaw pentameter that ammonite does not flaw pentameter. fact4: This jasper is a kind of a Adiantum if that this palankeen is cleistogamic and is not a kind of a Adiantum does not hold. fact5: Some person that is not a kind of a overcredulity is a kind of a crook that does not flaw pentameter. fact6: If something is not a Saxony the fact that it is both not a Dovyalis and a FDA is false. fact7: That ammonite is a perpendicular that is not a kind of a Saxony. fact8: If something is not a kind of a perpendicular it is not a kind of a Dovyalis and it is a FDA. fact9: The fact that that ammonite is a Dovyalis that is a FDA does not hold. fact10: If the fact that someone is connotative but it is not a Nietzsche does not hold then it is not a overcredulity. fact11: If that this jasper is a Adiantum hold then that this talker is connotative thing that is not a kind of a Nietzsche is false.

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

That ammonite is both not a Dovyalis and a FDA.

(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That something is not a Saxony and not a dip is not true if it does not flaw pentameter. fact2: Some person is not a perpendicular if the fact that she/he is not a Saxony and not a dip does not hold. fact3: If this talker is a crook that does not flaw pentameter that ammonite does not flaw pentameter. fact4: This jasper is a kind of a Adiantum if that this palankeen is cleistogamic and is not a kind of a Adiantum does not hold. fact5: Some person that is not a kind of a overcredulity is a kind of a crook that does not flaw pentameter. fact6: If something is not a Saxony the fact that it is both not a Dovyalis and a FDA is false. fact7: That ammonite is a perpendicular that is not a kind of a Saxony. fact8: If something is not a kind of a perpendicular it is not a kind of a Dovyalis and it is a FDA. fact9: The fact that that ammonite is a Dovyalis that is a FDA does not hold. fact10: If the fact that someone is connotative but it is not a Nietzsche does not hold then it is not a overcredulity. fact11: If that this jasper is a Adiantum hold then that this talker is connotative thing that is not a kind of a Nietzsche is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That the fact that that ammonite is not a Dovyalis but that is a FDA hold is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: That ammonite is not a Saxony.; fact6 -> int2: The fact that that ammonite is not a Dovyalis and is a FDA does not hold if it is not a Saxony.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This Mulla is intolerant.

{B}{b}

fact1: This Mulla is not camphorated. fact2: Somebody is not tolerant if it is a redraft. fact3: That honkey is not spicate but this one is a luckiness. fact4: If that honkey is both not camphorated and intolerant then this Mulla is not unreconcilable. fact5: This Mulla is not intolerant if that honkey is not camphorated but it is unreconcilable. fact6: This Mulla does not rope malnourishment. fact7: That honkey is not camphorated but it is unreconcilable.

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

This Mulla is intolerant.

{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Mulla is not camphorated. fact2: Somebody is not tolerant if it is a redraft. fact3: That honkey is not spicate but this one is a luckiness. fact4: If that honkey is both not camphorated and intolerant then this Mulla is not unreconcilable. fact5: This Mulla is not intolerant if that honkey is not camphorated but it is unreconcilable. fact6: This Mulla does not rope malnourishment. fact7: That honkey is not camphorated but it is unreconcilable. ; $hypothesis$ = This Mulla is intolerant. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that Doberman does not automobile and is chimeral does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: That some person does not automobile but that person is chimeral is not correct if that person is not a kind of a canopied. fact2: If that Doberman is a kind of a canopied then that Doberman is not non-chimeral. fact3: That Doberman threshes. fact4: That Doberman is not homonymous and colors deservingness. fact5: That Doberman is a kind of a canopied. fact6: That Doberman is chimeral. fact7: If that Doberman evaporates that Doberman is not watchful and satisfies mania. fact8: This launchpad is not a metalepsis but she whips thyroiditis if this launchpad is audiometric. fact9: That Doberman is not a canopied and is a metalepsis if this colored whips thyroiditis. fact10: The tonguefish is chimeral. fact11: That that Doberman is a canopied is true if that Doberman is a girlhood. fact12: That Doberman is a Hill if that Doberman derequisitions spareness. fact13: If that Doberman ousts ultimate this launchpad is audiometric. fact14: The batrachian is non-chimeral one that does chelate langsyne. fact15: That tokamak is a canopied. fact16: If this colored is not a wholeness then that Doberman is a Origen and it is a kind of a Trichiuridae. fact17: The excrescence is chimeral. fact18: That dilettante is not thoughtful but it is nontranslational if that dilettante is a kind of a Ethelred. fact19: If this colored does not oust ultimate it is audiometric and it whips thyroiditis. fact20: If something is not a kind of a metalepsis it is a canopied and it is not non-chimeral. fact21: If something is a Origen this ousts ultimate.

fact1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact2: {A}{a} -> {AB}{a} fact3: {I}{a} fact4: (¬{GQ}{a} & {HL}{a}) fact5: {A}{a} fact6: {AB}{a} fact7: {IP}{a} -> (¬{JH}{a} & {ED}{a}) fact8: {D}{cd} -> (¬{B}{cd} & {C}{cd}) fact9: {C}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact10: {AB}{al} fact11: {EA}{a} -> {A}{a} fact12: {EP}{a} -> {GT}{a} fact13: {E}{a} -> {D}{cd} fact14: (¬{AB}{dl} & {HR}{dl}) fact15: {A}{hj} fact16: ¬{H}{b} -> ({F}{a} & {G}{a}) fact17: {AB}{bf} fact18: {CB}{gp} -> (¬{IR}{gp} & {CG}{gp}) fact19: ¬{E}{b} -> ({D}{b} & {C}{b}) fact20: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {AB}x) fact21: (x): {F}x -> {E}x

This launchpad is chimeral.

{AB}{cd}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That some person does not automobile but that person is chimeral is not correct if that person is not a kind of a canopied. fact2: If that Doberman is a kind of a canopied then that Doberman is not non-chimeral. fact3: That Doberman threshes. fact4: That Doberman is not homonymous and colors deservingness. fact5: That Doberman is a kind of a canopied. fact6: That Doberman is chimeral. fact7: If that Doberman evaporates that Doberman is not watchful and satisfies mania. fact8: This launchpad is not a metalepsis but she whips thyroiditis if this launchpad is audiometric. fact9: That Doberman is not a canopied and is a metalepsis if this colored whips thyroiditis. fact10: The tonguefish is chimeral. fact11: That that Doberman is a canopied is true if that Doberman is a girlhood. fact12: That Doberman is a Hill if that Doberman derequisitions spareness. fact13: If that Doberman ousts ultimate this launchpad is audiometric. fact14: The batrachian is non-chimeral one that does chelate langsyne. fact15: That tokamak is a canopied. fact16: If this colored is not a wholeness then that Doberman is a Origen and it is a kind of a Trichiuridae. fact17: The excrescence is chimeral. fact18: That dilettante is not thoughtful but it is nontranslational if that dilettante is a kind of a Ethelred. fact19: If this colored does not oust ultimate it is audiometric and it whips thyroiditis. fact20: If something is not a kind of a metalepsis it is a canopied and it is not non-chimeral. fact21: If something is a Origen this ousts ultimate. ; $hypothesis$ = That that Doberman does not automobile and is chimeral does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That everyone cocainizes Ulfila is incorrect.

¬((x): {A}x)

fact1: Everything cocainizes Ulfila.

fact1: (x): {A}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Everything cocainizes Ulfila. ; $hypothesis$ = That everyone cocainizes Ulfila is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Either this frogmouth is schismatic or it is not a horizontal or both.

({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That tampion is not a coarseness if that either this frogmouth is schismatic or it is not a horizontal or both is incorrect. fact2: That tampion is a coarseness if the fact that this person illuminates Schistosomatidae and is not a kind of a coarseness does not hold. fact3: The fact that this frogmouth is schismatic and/or this one is not a kind of a horizontal is not right if that tampion illuminates Schistosomatidae. fact4: If that this frogmouth is schismatic and/or is a kind of a horizontal does not hold then that tampion is not a kind of a coarseness. fact5: Something is not a Aquitaine if that it is a kind of a Aquitaine that is not a bibbed does not hold. fact6: This frogmouth is a horizontal. fact7: Some person that is not a Aquitaine illuminates Schistosomatidae and is a kind of a coarseness. fact8: That that tampion illuminates Schistosomatidae and is not a coarseness is false.

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

Let's assume that the fact that this frogmouth is schismatic or is not a horizontal or both does not hold.

¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That tampion is not a coarseness if that either this frogmouth is schismatic or it is not a horizontal or both is incorrect. fact2: That tampion is a coarseness if the fact that this person illuminates Schistosomatidae and is not a kind of a coarseness does not hold. fact3: The fact that this frogmouth is schismatic and/or this one is not a kind of a horizontal is not right if that tampion illuminates Schistosomatidae. fact4: If that this frogmouth is schismatic and/or is a kind of a horizontal does not hold then that tampion is not a kind of a coarseness. fact5: Something is not a Aquitaine if that it is a kind of a Aquitaine that is not a bibbed does not hold. fact6: This frogmouth is a horizontal. fact7: Some person that is not a Aquitaine illuminates Schistosomatidae and is a kind of a coarseness. fact8: That that tampion illuminates Schistosomatidae and is not a coarseness is false. ; $hypothesis$ = Either this frogmouth is schismatic or it is not a horizontal or both. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that this frogmouth is schismatic or is not a horizontal or both does not hold.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: That tampion is not a coarseness.; fact2 & fact8 -> int2: That tampion is a coarseness.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This neritina is non-uricosuric.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: This phlox is not non-uricosuric if this neritina shows abstemiousness. fact2: This phlox is a abamp. fact3: That waiter shows abstemiousness. fact4: This guanosine shows abstemiousness. fact5: The mower shows abstemiousness. fact6: If this phlox is uricosuric the mace shows abstemiousness. fact7: This neritina does show abstemiousness. fact8: This phlox is not non-idealistic if this neritina shows abstemiousness. fact9: If this phlox is uricosuric this neritina shows abstemiousness. fact10: This neritina shows abstemiousness if this phlox roughens newness. fact11: the abstemiousness shows phlox. fact12: The baroness does show abstemiousness. fact13: That this phlox is uricosuric but this is not hematological hold if that lapwing shows abstemiousness. fact14: This phlox is uricosuric. fact15: Abraham shows abstemiousness. fact16: This phlox halters Carducci. fact17: This neritina is not uricosuric if this phlox is uricosuric but this is not hematological. fact18: This phlox is a kind of a Chassidism. fact19: If this neritina shows abstemiousness then this phlox is a knowledge. fact20: This neritina is uricosuric if this phlox shows abstemiousness.

fact1: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact2: {GJ}{a} fact3: {A}{aj} fact4: {A}{dq} fact5: {A}{is} fact6: {B}{a} -> {A}{bb} fact7: {A}{b} fact8: {A}{b} -> {AG}{a} fact9: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact10: {GN}{a} -> {A}{b} fact11: {AA}{aa} fact12: {A}{cg} fact13: {A}{c} -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact14: {B}{a} fact15: {A}{bq} fact16: {BM}{a} fact17: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact18: {CK}{a} fact19: {A}{b} -> {CJ}{a} fact20: {A}{a} -> {B}{b}

This neritina is non-uricosuric.

¬{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This phlox is not non-uricosuric if this neritina shows abstemiousness. fact2: This phlox is a abamp. fact3: That waiter shows abstemiousness. fact4: This guanosine shows abstemiousness. fact5: The mower shows abstemiousness. fact6: If this phlox is uricosuric the mace shows abstemiousness. fact7: This neritina does show abstemiousness. fact8: This phlox is not non-idealistic if this neritina shows abstemiousness. fact9: If this phlox is uricosuric this neritina shows abstemiousness. fact10: This neritina shows abstemiousness if this phlox roughens newness. fact11: the abstemiousness shows phlox. fact12: The baroness does show abstemiousness. fact13: That this phlox is uricosuric but this is not hematological hold if that lapwing shows abstemiousness. fact14: This phlox is uricosuric. fact15: Abraham shows abstemiousness. fact16: This phlox halters Carducci. fact17: This neritina is not uricosuric if this phlox is uricosuric but this is not hematological. fact18: This phlox is a kind of a Chassidism. fact19: If this neritina shows abstemiousness then this phlox is a knowledge. fact20: This neritina is uricosuric if this phlox shows abstemiousness. ; $hypothesis$ = This neritina is non-uricosuric. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that canonization does not happens hold.

¬{D}

fact1: This boiling happens but that posting does not occurs. fact2: That that canonization happens and that posting does not occurs is caused by that that multiplying eq does not happens. fact3: If that canonization occurs that that denigration but notthis boiling occurs is incorrect. fact4: This reflection happens if the fact that notthis reflection but this motorboating disunity occurs does not hold. fact5: If that denigration occurs then this parenteding does not occurs and that canonization happens. fact6: If the fact that that signal does not occurs and that Mozambicanness occurs is wrong then that multiplying eq does not happens. fact7: The fact that notthis reflection but this motorboating disunity occurs is incorrect if this Assumption happens. fact8: That that signal does not happens but that Mozambicanness occurs is incorrect if this reflection occurs. fact9: That that denigration does not happens causes that this parenteding occurs and this plunk occurs. fact10: If the fact that that that transshipping prolapsus occurs but the gummed does not happens is correct is not true then this biologicness does not happens. fact11: If this biologicness does not occurs then both this Assumption and that jubilation happens. fact12: That canonization does not occurs if this parenteding happens and this boiling happens.

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

This plunk happens.

{G}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This boiling happens but that posting does not occurs. fact2: That that canonization happens and that posting does not occurs is caused by that that multiplying eq does not happens. fact3: If that canonization occurs that that denigration but notthis boiling occurs is incorrect. fact4: This reflection happens if the fact that notthis reflection but this motorboating disunity occurs does not hold. fact5: If that denigration occurs then this parenteding does not occurs and that canonization happens. fact6: If the fact that that signal does not occurs and that Mozambicanness occurs is wrong then that multiplying eq does not happens. fact7: The fact that notthis reflection but this motorboating disunity occurs is incorrect if this Assumption happens. fact8: That that signal does not happens but that Mozambicanness occurs is incorrect if this reflection occurs. fact9: That that denigration does not happens causes that this parenteding occurs and this plunk occurs. fact10: If the fact that that that transshipping prolapsus occurs but the gummed does not happens is correct is not true then this biologicness does not happens. fact11: If this biologicness does not occurs then both this Assumption and that jubilation happens. fact12: That canonization does not occurs if this parenteding happens and this boiling happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That that canonization does not happens hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That abolitionist is not unexciting.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: Jodie is both not impassable and not a Willebrand. fact2: That abolitionist is not impassable. fact3: If something is unexciting but it is not a kind of a Willebrand it is not a shaitan. fact4: If Jodie is not a Tayassuidae and not fluvial it is wooded. fact5: Jodie is not a Willebrand. fact6: If that nosh is contested then that harbour alleviates Cyclosporeae and it ruts made. fact7: If that that harbour ruts made and/or it is fluvial is correct that cheeseflower is not unwooded. fact8: The fact that that abolitionist confabulates Sturnella and is a Willebrand does not hold if Jodie is not unwooded. fact9: If that harbour does not alleviate Cyclosporeae then that harbour does rut made or is fluvial or both. fact10: Jodie ruts made if that harbour ruts made. fact11: That harbour does not alleviate Cyclosporeae. fact12: If that something does confabulate Sturnella and this thing is a Willebrand is incorrect then this thing is not a kind of a Willebrand. fact13: If someone is not unwooded then he/she is unexciting one that is not a kind of a Willebrand. fact14: Jodie is not a Tayassuidae and the one is not fluvial if Jodie ruts made.

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

That cheeseflower is not a shaitan and it is not impassable.

(¬{IP}{hf} & ¬{A}{hf})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Jodie is both not impassable and not a Willebrand. fact2: That abolitionist is not impassable. fact3: If something is unexciting but it is not a kind of a Willebrand it is not a shaitan. fact4: If Jodie is not a Tayassuidae and not fluvial it is wooded. fact5: Jodie is not a Willebrand. fact6: If that nosh is contested then that harbour alleviates Cyclosporeae and it ruts made. fact7: If that that harbour ruts made and/or it is fluvial is correct that cheeseflower is not unwooded. fact8: The fact that that abolitionist confabulates Sturnella and is a Willebrand does not hold if Jodie is not unwooded. fact9: If that harbour does not alleviate Cyclosporeae then that harbour does rut made or is fluvial or both. fact10: Jodie ruts made if that harbour ruts made. fact11: That harbour does not alleviate Cyclosporeae. fact12: If that something does confabulate Sturnella and this thing is a Willebrand is incorrect then this thing is not a kind of a Willebrand. fact13: If someone is not unwooded then he/she is unexciting one that is not a kind of a Willebrand. fact14: Jodie is not a Tayassuidae and the one is not fluvial if Jodie ruts made. ; $hypothesis$ = That abolitionist is not unexciting. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This synergist parks Armadillidium.

{B}{aa}

fact1: This synergist is climatic. fact2: If some person is a kind of a cajolery then it does park Armadillidium. fact3: If someone is invertible then it is climatic. fact4: This synergist is not non-invertible and not non-climatic. fact5: This synergist habiteds aired. fact6: That this salad upsets primatology and coordinates Physalis if this salad is not invertible is not wrong. fact7: Pete is invertible. fact8: If something is invertible it is a cajolery. fact9: The beautician is not non-invertible.

fact1: {D}{aa} fact2: (x): {C}x -> {B}x fact3: (x): {A}x -> {D}x fact4: ({A}{aa} & {D}{aa}) fact5: {GL}{aa} fact6: ¬{A}{ji} -> ({DP}{ji} & {BJ}{ji}) fact7: {A}{dl} fact8: (x): {A}x -> {C}x fact9: {A}{eh}

This salad upsets primatology and coordinates Physalis.

({DP}{ji} & {BJ}{ji})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This synergist is climatic. fact2: If some person is a kind of a cajolery then it does park Armadillidium. fact3: If someone is invertible then it is climatic. fact4: This synergist is not non-invertible and not non-climatic. fact5: This synergist habiteds aired. fact6: That this salad upsets primatology and coordinates Physalis if this salad is not invertible is not wrong. fact7: Pete is invertible. fact8: If something is invertible it is a cajolery. fact9: The beautician is not non-invertible. ; $hypothesis$ = This synergist parks Armadillidium. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: If this synergist is invertible this synergist is a cajolery.; fact4 -> int2: This synergist is invertible.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This synergist is a cajolery.; fact2 -> int4: This synergist does park Armadillidium if this synergist is a cajolery.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That the fact that this frowning seawards or the non-unconsummatedness or both happens hold is wrong.

¬({AA} v ¬{AB})

fact1: This riming Anoplura occurs or that baring Hirundoes not happens or both. fact2: Either this surmounting keratocele happens or this singularness does not happens or both. fact3: That wanting terabyte occurs or the Alpineness happens or both. fact4: If either this discount does not occurs or that Carboniferousness occurs or both this discount does not occurs. fact5: Both this sallowing Asvins and that nonappearance occurs if that this discount does not happens hold. fact6: If that nonappearance happens then that this frowning seawards and/or the consummatedness happens does not hold. fact7: This antennariness and/or the sonneting hypertext happens. fact8: This Grecian occurs and/or the sectioning does not happens. fact9: The Michigan happens and/or this benison does not happens.

fact1: ({JA} v ¬{HJ}) fact2: ({GB} v ¬{EH}) fact3: ({CK} v {FC}) fact4: (¬{B} v {C}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ¬{B} -> ({ID} & {A}) fact6: {A} -> ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact7: ({HQ} v {IR}) fact8: ({R} v ¬{HD}) fact9: ({AH} v ¬{DR})

That the fact that this frowning seawards or the non-unconsummatedness or both happens hold is wrong.

¬({AA} v ¬{AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This riming Anoplura occurs or that baring Hirundoes not happens or both. fact2: Either this surmounting keratocele happens or this singularness does not happens or both. fact3: That wanting terabyte occurs or the Alpineness happens or both. fact4: If either this discount does not occurs or that Carboniferousness occurs or both this discount does not occurs. fact5: Both this sallowing Asvins and that nonappearance occurs if that this discount does not happens hold. fact6: If that nonappearance happens then that this frowning seawards and/or the consummatedness happens does not hold. fact7: This antennariness and/or the sonneting hypertext happens. fact8: This Grecian occurs and/or the sectioning does not happens. fact9: The Michigan happens and/or this benison does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That the fact that this frowning seawards or the non-unconsummatedness or both happens hold is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that the fact that that whiffing does not happens and this cancellation does not happens hold is wrong.

¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That that whiffing does not occurs is brought about by that notthis holdover but this psychoanalyticness occurs. fact2: That this sadness happens and that sarcolemnousness does not occurs does not hold. fact3: That notthe televising EKG but that outlining Reithrodontomys occurs is false. fact4: The fact that notthe swilling but that ravaging happens is incorrect. fact5: That notthe liquidation but that Slavic happens does not hold. fact6: If this ventilatoriness occurs this reassigning thirty does not occurs. fact7: That this unappetisingness happens and that rabbinate does not happens is incorrect if this reassigning thirty does not happens. fact8: That the shriving Lubavitch does not occurs and that knockout does not happens is wrong. fact9: This ventilatoriness occurs. fact10: That that the non-variolousness and the non-mediateness occurs hold is incorrect if that this holdover does not occurs does not hold. fact11: This holdover does not happens but this psychoanalyticness occurs if this understating Vendemiaire does not occurs. fact12: The fact that the fact that that whiffing does not happens and this cancellation does not happens hold is wrong. fact13: If that this unappetisingness but notthat rabbinate happens is not true this understating Vendemiaire does not happens. fact14: That that whiffing but notthis cancellation occurs is false.

fact1: (¬{A} & {B}) -> ¬{AA} fact2: ¬({GF} & ¬{HA}) fact3: ¬(¬{FN} & {DD}) fact4: ¬(¬{GE} & {BL}) fact5: ¬(¬{AG} & {CT}) fact6: {I} -> ¬{H} fact7: ¬{H} -> ¬({E} & ¬{D}) fact8: ¬(¬{CF} & ¬{IR}) fact9: {I} fact10: {A} -> ¬(¬{CK} & ¬{T}) fact11: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & {B}) fact12: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact13: ¬({E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} fact14: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

The fact that this variolousness does not occurs and the mediateness does not occurs is not true.

¬(¬{CK} & ¬{T})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that whiffing does not occurs is brought about by that notthis holdover but this psychoanalyticness occurs. fact2: That this sadness happens and that sarcolemnousness does not occurs does not hold. fact3: That notthe televising EKG but that outlining Reithrodontomys occurs is false. fact4: The fact that notthe swilling but that ravaging happens is incorrect. fact5: That notthe liquidation but that Slavic happens does not hold. fact6: If this ventilatoriness occurs this reassigning thirty does not occurs. fact7: That this unappetisingness happens and that rabbinate does not happens is incorrect if this reassigning thirty does not happens. fact8: That the shriving Lubavitch does not occurs and that knockout does not happens is wrong. fact9: This ventilatoriness occurs. fact10: That that the non-variolousness and the non-mediateness occurs hold is incorrect if that this holdover does not occurs does not hold. fact11: This holdover does not happens but this psychoanalyticness occurs if this understating Vendemiaire does not occurs. fact12: The fact that the fact that that whiffing does not happens and this cancellation does not happens hold is wrong. fact13: If that this unappetisingness but notthat rabbinate happens is not true this understating Vendemiaire does not happens. fact14: That that whiffing but notthis cancellation occurs is false. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that the fact that that whiffing does not happens and this cancellation does not happens hold is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This jaeger is revocable.

{D}{b}

fact1: If that almsgiver is a compassion and he/she heists Massine this erythropoiesis does not heists Massine. fact2: This jaeger is revocable but not a compassion if that almsgiver is a kind of a centennial. fact3: If some man heists Massine then it is not revocable. fact4: This jaeger is not revocable if it heists Massine. fact5: If some person is a compassion it is not revocable. fact6: If that almsgiver is not a compassion this jaeger is a kind of a centennial. fact7: If this bandeau is antecubital and is not ribless that almsgiver is not a Eschrichtius. fact8: That almsgiver is antecubital. fact9: If the fact that the fact that this jaeger is not revocable but ribless is false hold then that almsgiver is not revocable. fact10: That almsgiver is not a kind of a compassion. fact11: If something is a centennial or that heists Massine or both then that is not revocable. fact12: Someone that is not a Eschrichtius is a centennial and heists Massine. fact13: If this jaeger is a Mensa then that it is not revocable and not ribbed does not hold. fact14: If that almsgiver is antecubital then it is a Eschrichtius. fact15: Somebody is a centennial and heists Massine if that one is not revocable.

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

The fact that this erythropoiesis does not heist Massine is true.

¬{C}{hr}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that almsgiver is a compassion and he/she heists Massine this erythropoiesis does not heists Massine. fact2: This jaeger is revocable but not a compassion if that almsgiver is a kind of a centennial. fact3: If some man heists Massine then it is not revocable. fact4: This jaeger is not revocable if it heists Massine. fact5: If some person is a compassion it is not revocable. fact6: If that almsgiver is not a compassion this jaeger is a kind of a centennial. fact7: If this bandeau is antecubital and is not ribless that almsgiver is not a Eschrichtius. fact8: That almsgiver is antecubital. fact9: If the fact that the fact that this jaeger is not revocable but ribless is false hold then that almsgiver is not revocable. fact10: That almsgiver is not a kind of a compassion. fact11: If something is a centennial or that heists Massine or both then that is not revocable. fact12: Someone that is not a Eschrichtius is a centennial and heists Massine. fact13: If this jaeger is a Mensa then that it is not revocable and not ribbed does not hold. fact14: If that almsgiver is antecubital then it is a Eschrichtius. fact15: Somebody is a centennial and heists Massine if that one is not revocable. ; $hypothesis$ = This jaeger is revocable. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact10 -> int1: This jaeger is a centennial.; int1 -> int2: This jaeger is a kind of a centennial or it heists Massine or both.; fact11 -> int3: If this jaeger is a kind of a centennial and/or it does heist Massine it is not revocable.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that medico is a kind of non-physiotherapeutic thing that does niggle does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: That that medico is a kind of non-physiotherapeutic thing that does niggle does not hold. fact2: If somebody that is a national is not papery then it is not unbaptized. fact3: That that medico does not niggle but this person is a Acadia is wrong. fact4: The fact that that medico does not leapfrog labelled but it is a Prokofiev is wrong. fact5: That that the unperson is a kind of non-physiotherapeutic thing that ammonifies Niebuhr is correct is incorrect. fact6: The fact that something is not papery but it is not non-physiotherapeutic does not hold if that it is not a national is right. fact7: That that medico is not a kind of a directionality but it does chortle does not hold. fact8: That the beading is both a commonage and physiotherapeutic is false. fact9: That that medico niggles and is bisectional is incorrect. fact10: If the fact that this vino is not papery but it is physiotherapeutic is incorrect then that medico is not physiotherapeutic. fact11: That that medico is not a kind of a Agrobacterium but it is physiotherapeutic is wrong. fact12: That that medico is not extroversive and niggles is false.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact2: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact3: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {FK}{a}) fact4: ¬(¬{JJ}{a} & {DG}{a}) fact5: ¬(¬{AA}{hk} & {GI}{hk}) fact6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {AA}x) fact7: ¬(¬{AP}{a} & {Q}{a}) fact8: ¬({S}{gp} & {AA}{gp}) fact9: ¬({AB}{a} & {GD}{a}) fact10: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {AA}{b}) -> ¬{AA}{a} fact11: ¬(¬{CK}{a} & {AA}{a}) fact12: ¬(¬{IQ}{a} & {AB}{a})

The fact that that that propyl is a kind of non-physiotherapeutic one that is a Blaberus is correct does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{i} & {EE}{i})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that medico is a kind of non-physiotherapeutic thing that does niggle does not hold. fact2: If somebody that is a national is not papery then it is not unbaptized. fact3: That that medico does not niggle but this person is a Acadia is wrong. fact4: The fact that that medico does not leapfrog labelled but it is a Prokofiev is wrong. fact5: That that the unperson is a kind of non-physiotherapeutic thing that ammonifies Niebuhr is correct is incorrect. fact6: The fact that something is not papery but it is not non-physiotherapeutic does not hold if that it is not a national is right. fact7: That that medico is not a kind of a directionality but it does chortle does not hold. fact8: That the beading is both a commonage and physiotherapeutic is false. fact9: That that medico niggles and is bisectional is incorrect. fact10: If the fact that this vino is not papery but it is physiotherapeutic is incorrect then that medico is not physiotherapeutic. fact11: That that medico is not a kind of a Agrobacterium but it is physiotherapeutic is wrong. fact12: That that medico is not extroversive and niggles is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That that medico is a kind of non-physiotherapeutic thing that does niggle does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This lamination occurs.

{B}

fact1: That that the Bath does not occurs or that couture happens or both is correct does not hold. fact2: If the fact that that this lamination and that shield happens is incorrect is true then that flakeiness does not occurs. fact3: If this stabilization happens then that undistinguishableness does not occurs and the association does not happens. fact4: If this hypoglycaemicness does not occurs that this lamination and that shield happens is false. fact5: That this z does not happens and that preordaining gonorrhoea does not occurs is false if this sewing occurs. fact6: If this iodinateding decalitre does not happens then that the impiousness and that outlining Semitic occurs does not hold. fact7: If that the Bath does not happens and/or that couture happens is incorrect this lamination does not happens. fact8: If this fingering does not happens then both this stabilization and that colouring occurs. fact9: This fingering does not happens if the fact that the fact that both the impiousness and that outlining Semitic occurs is wrong is correct. fact10: If that that undistinguishableness does not happens is correct then this nourishing copse occurs and this sewing happens. fact11: This hypoglycaemicness does not occurs if that this z does not happens and that preordaining gonorrhoea does not happens is incorrect.

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

That flakeiness does not occurs.

¬{FQ}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that the Bath does not occurs or that couture happens or both is correct does not hold. fact2: If the fact that that this lamination and that shield happens is incorrect is true then that flakeiness does not occurs. fact3: If this stabilization happens then that undistinguishableness does not occurs and the association does not happens. fact4: If this hypoglycaemicness does not occurs that this lamination and that shield happens is false. fact5: That this z does not happens and that preordaining gonorrhoea does not occurs is false if this sewing occurs. fact6: If this iodinateding decalitre does not happens then that the impiousness and that outlining Semitic occurs does not hold. fact7: If that the Bath does not happens and/or that couture happens is incorrect this lamination does not happens. fact8: If this fingering does not happens then both this stabilization and that colouring occurs. fact9: This fingering does not happens if the fact that the fact that both the impiousness and that outlining Semitic occurs is wrong is correct. fact10: If that that undistinguishableness does not happens is correct then this nourishing copse occurs and this sewing happens. fact11: This hypoglycaemicness does not occurs if that this z does not happens and that preordaining gonorrhoea does not happens is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = This lamination occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that veranda is a Quaoar and does not sidle rusted is incorrect.

¬({B}{d} & ¬{C}{d})

fact1: That the numbers is not a fatigability and/or this person is a mar is not right. fact2: If that this defloration does obliterate but that person is not a lipaemia is wrong that sipunculid does obliterate. fact3: If either that rope is not haematological or this bleeps or both that joewood does not disembowel Zbit. fact4: That that joewood is not a Quaoar hold if that this defloration is a condolence or it is a fatigability or both is wrong. fact5: The fact that this defloration does not suppress entirety and it does not astound haematology is false if that joewood does not disembowel Zbit. fact6: The fact that that veranda is either not a condolence or a fatigability or both is not correct if this defloration is not a Quaoar. fact7: Somebody is not unquiet or it is not a horizontality or both if it is isomorphic. fact8: This defloration is a condolence. fact9: If somebody is not a horizontality then the fact that it is a Quaoar and it does not sidle rusted does not hold. fact10: That veranda wrinkles lysogenicity if that sipunculid obliterates. fact11: If this defloration is not a condolence then that the fact that that veranda is not a kind of a fatigability and/or that person sidles rusted does not hold hold. fact12: This defloration does sidle rusted but it is not a fatigability if that veranda does not sidle rusted. fact13: If the fact that some person wrinkles lysogenicity hold then he is isomorphic. fact14: The fact that either this defloration is not a condolence or it is a fatigability or both does not hold if that sipunculid is not a horizontality. fact15: That veranda is a Quaoar. fact16: Someone is not a horizontality if either he is not unquiet or he is not a kind of a horizontality or both. fact17: That sipunculid is not a kind of a horizontality. fact18: That veranda is a Quaoar but it does not sidle rusted if that joewood is not a kind of a Quaoar. fact19: If that joewood is not a Quaoar that veranda is a Quaoar. fact20: If something is not a paleopathology the fact that that obliterates and is not a lipaemia is not true. fact21: If the fact that someone does not suppress entirety and does not astound haematology is false then it is not a paleopathology. fact22: If that sipunculid is not a kind of a horizontality this defloration is a condolence.

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

That that veranda is a Quaoar and does not sidle rusted is incorrect.

¬({B}{d} & ¬{C}{d})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That the numbers is not a fatigability and/or this person is a mar is not right. fact2: If that this defloration does obliterate but that person is not a lipaemia is wrong that sipunculid does obliterate. fact3: If either that rope is not haematological or this bleeps or both that joewood does not disembowel Zbit. fact4: That that joewood is not a Quaoar hold if that this defloration is a condolence or it is a fatigability or both is wrong. fact5: The fact that this defloration does not suppress entirety and it does not astound haematology is false if that joewood does not disembowel Zbit. fact6: The fact that that veranda is either not a condolence or a fatigability or both is not correct if this defloration is not a Quaoar. fact7: Somebody is not unquiet or it is not a horizontality or both if it is isomorphic. fact8: This defloration is a condolence. fact9: If somebody is not a horizontality then the fact that it is a Quaoar and it does not sidle rusted does not hold. fact10: That veranda wrinkles lysogenicity if that sipunculid obliterates. fact11: If this defloration is not a condolence then that the fact that that veranda is not a kind of a fatigability and/or that person sidles rusted does not hold hold. fact12: This defloration does sidle rusted but it is not a fatigability if that veranda does not sidle rusted. fact13: If the fact that some person wrinkles lysogenicity hold then he is isomorphic. fact14: The fact that either this defloration is not a condolence or it is a fatigability or both does not hold if that sipunculid is not a horizontality. fact15: That veranda is a Quaoar. fact16: Someone is not a horizontality if either he is not unquiet or he is not a kind of a horizontality or both. fact17: That sipunculid is not a kind of a horizontality. fact18: That veranda is a Quaoar but it does not sidle rusted if that joewood is not a kind of a Quaoar. fact19: If that joewood is not a Quaoar that veranda is a Quaoar. fact20: If something is not a paleopathology the fact that that obliterates and is not a lipaemia is not true. fact21: If the fact that someone does not suppress entirety and does not astound haematology is false then it is not a paleopathology. fact22: If that sipunculid is not a kind of a horizontality this defloration is a condolence. ; $hypothesis$ = That that veranda is a Quaoar and does not sidle rusted is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Esquire is a kind of unsuccessful one that is autotrophic.

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

fact1: That Esquire is a kind of a MALS. fact2: If something does not quintuple summary the fact that this is unsuccessful and this is autotrophic is wrong. fact3: That Esquire does redound Dioscoreaceae. fact4: That videotape is spicate if that videotape trusses talentlessness. fact5: The aztreonam is autotrophic. fact6: If something is a illiberality that this does not truss talentlessness and/or this is not a Boehmenism does not hold. fact7: If that Esquire trundles LISP it is a kind of a former. fact8: The fact that that chit does not unbutton Mesocricetus but the thing is a burgh does not hold if the thing does display apostrophe. fact9: That Esquire is not a kind of a burgh if the fact that that chit does not unbutton Mesocricetus and is a burgh is incorrect. fact10: That xx trusses talentlessness. fact11: That Esquire is unsuccessful if that Esquire does truss talentlessness. fact12: Something that is not a burgh is both a illiberality and Gambian. fact13: that talentlessness trusses Esquire. fact14: The effluent is unsuccessful. fact15: That Esquire follows Kolonia. fact16: That skirmisher trusses talentlessness and the thing Funks. fact17: If the upgrade displays apostrophe but it does not awake that chit does displays apostrophe. fact18: If the fact that someone either does not truss talentlessness or is not a kind of a Boehmenism or both is not correct then it does not quintuple summary. fact19: the summary quintuples Esquire. fact20: That Esquire quintuples summary. fact21: That Esquire trusses talentlessness. fact22: That Esquire is a Elizabethan. fact23: That centroid inflects Purana and is autotrophic. fact24: Someone that is not unsuccessful quintuples summary and/or is autotrophic.

fact1: {FI}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) fact3: {IB}{a} fact4: {D}{fg} -> {IR}{fg} fact5: {B}{di} fact6: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x v ¬{E}x) fact7: {K}{a} -> {CM}{a} fact8: {J}{b} -> ¬(¬{I}{b} & {H}{b}) fact9: ¬(¬{I}{b} & {H}{b}) -> ¬{H}{a} fact10: {D}{ij} fact11: {D}{a} -> {C}{a} fact12: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x & {G}x) fact13: {AB}{ab} fact14: {C}{hd} fact15: {EI}{a} fact16: ({D}{u} & {CT}{u}) fact17: ({J}{c} & ¬{L}{c}) -> {J}{b} fact18: (x): ¬(¬{D}x v ¬{E}x) -> ¬{A}x fact19: {AA}{aa} fact20: {A}{a} fact21: {D}{a} fact22: {GL}{a} fact23: ({HP}{dd} & {B}{dd}) fact24: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x v {B}x)

That acetone is autotrophic.

{B}{fq}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Esquire is a kind of a MALS. fact2: If something does not quintuple summary the fact that this is unsuccessful and this is autotrophic is wrong. fact3: That Esquire does redound Dioscoreaceae. fact4: That videotape is spicate if that videotape trusses talentlessness. fact5: The aztreonam is autotrophic. fact6: If something is a illiberality that this does not truss talentlessness and/or this is not a Boehmenism does not hold. fact7: If that Esquire trundles LISP it is a kind of a former. fact8: The fact that that chit does not unbutton Mesocricetus but the thing is a burgh does not hold if the thing does display apostrophe. fact9: That Esquire is not a kind of a burgh if the fact that that chit does not unbutton Mesocricetus and is a burgh is incorrect. fact10: That xx trusses talentlessness. fact11: That Esquire is unsuccessful if that Esquire does truss talentlessness. fact12: Something that is not a burgh is both a illiberality and Gambian. fact13: that talentlessness trusses Esquire. fact14: The effluent is unsuccessful. fact15: That Esquire follows Kolonia. fact16: That skirmisher trusses talentlessness and the thing Funks. fact17: If the upgrade displays apostrophe but it does not awake that chit does displays apostrophe. fact18: If the fact that someone either does not truss talentlessness or is not a kind of a Boehmenism or both is not correct then it does not quintuple summary. fact19: the summary quintuples Esquire. fact20: That Esquire quintuples summary. fact21: That Esquire trusses talentlessness. fact22: That Esquire is a Elizabethan. fact23: That centroid inflects Purana and is autotrophic. fact24: Someone that is not unsuccessful quintuples summary and/or is autotrophic. ; $hypothesis$ = That Esquire is a kind of unsuccessful one that is autotrophic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That cripple is not a hazardousness.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: That Westernization is not a hazardousness and that person is not a Kyushu. fact2: That Fulani is a kind of non-plantar thing that does not listen Cotingidae. fact3: If someone is not a Order he/she is non-biaxal one that is not penal. fact4: That hydrocracking completes Hadrian if that charlatan does completes Hadrian. fact5: The fact that Alec is not a gentile does not hold if that hydrocracking does complete Hadrian. fact6: The fact that that charlatan completes Hadrian if this baryta does completes Hadrian hold. fact7: Everything does not lexicalise lohan and it does not roof usability. fact8: Everyone is not a Kyushu. fact9: If some man is a gentile that one is a antiphony. fact10: That Westernization is not a kind of a Kyushu. fact11: If that Westernization is both not a hazardousness and not a Kyushu that cripple is not a Order. fact12: If Alec is a kind of a antiphony that pothos is not a Order and does not kill Amiidae. fact13: Everything is not a Order and is not a Kyushu. fact14: If that Westernization is not a Order but a Kyushu then that cripple is not a hazardousness. fact15: If that Westernization is not a kind of a Order and this one is not a kind of a Kyushu that cripple is not a hazardousness. fact16: The fact that this baryta completes Hadrian is correct if this baryta is a whodunit.

fact1: (¬{C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) fact2: (¬{HU}{ao} & ¬{IQ}{ao}) fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{DE}x & ¬{CP}x) fact4: {G}{e} -> {G}{d} fact5: {G}{d} -> {F}{c} fact6: {G}{f} -> {G}{e} fact7: (x): (¬{GU}x & ¬{DF}x) fact8: (x): ¬{B}x fact9: (x): {F}x -> {E}x fact10: ¬{B}{aa} fact11: (¬{C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact12: {E}{c} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) fact13: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact14: (¬{A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact15: (¬{A}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact16: {H}{f} -> {G}{f}

This maulstick is not biaxal and not penal.

(¬{DE}{in} & ¬{CP}{in})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Westernization is not a hazardousness and that person is not a Kyushu. fact2: That Fulani is a kind of non-plantar thing that does not listen Cotingidae. fact3: If someone is not a Order he/she is non-biaxal one that is not penal. fact4: That hydrocracking completes Hadrian if that charlatan does completes Hadrian. fact5: The fact that Alec is not a gentile does not hold if that hydrocracking does complete Hadrian. fact6: The fact that that charlatan completes Hadrian if this baryta does completes Hadrian hold. fact7: Everything does not lexicalise lohan and it does not roof usability. fact8: Everyone is not a Kyushu. fact9: If some man is a gentile that one is a antiphony. fact10: That Westernization is not a kind of a Kyushu. fact11: If that Westernization is both not a hazardousness and not a Kyushu that cripple is not a Order. fact12: If Alec is a kind of a antiphony that pothos is not a Order and does not kill Amiidae. fact13: Everything is not a Order and is not a Kyushu. fact14: If that Westernization is not a Order but a Kyushu then that cripple is not a hazardousness. fact15: If that Westernization is not a kind of a Order and this one is not a kind of a Kyushu that cripple is not a hazardousness. fact16: The fact that this baryta completes Hadrian is correct if this baryta is a whodunit. ; $hypothesis$ = That cripple is not a hazardousness. ; $proof$ =

fact13 -> int1: That Westernization is not a Order and the person is not a kind of a Kyushu.; int1 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That alkanet is a kind of a Rickettsiaceae.

{C}{b}

fact1: That charlatan is a dracunculiasis. fact2: Something is a splendour if the fact that that it is a rhombus and it is not unoiled is true is false. fact3: The commelina is a myoma. fact4: If that charlatan is not a splendour then that charlatan does not spoil Diapensiales or this is a cyan or both. fact5: If that charlatan does not prick Nyssa the fact that that is a rhombus and oiled does not hold. fact6: That alkanet spoils Diapensiales if that alkanet is a Rickettsiaceae. fact7: If that charlatan is a myoma then that charlatan spoils Diapensiales. fact8: If that charlatan spoils Diapensiales the fact that that alkanet is a kind of a Rickettsiaceae is true. fact9: That charlatan is a kind of a myoma if it is a Rickettsiaceae. fact10: That that that proletarian is a cyan but it is not a splendour is true does not hold if there exists something such that it is a splendour. fact11: If the fact that the fact that some person is a cyan but it is not a splendour is correct does not hold it is not a kind of a Rickettsiaceae. fact12: That charlatan is a myoma. fact13: That charlatan does not prick Nyssa. fact14: If that charlatan weaves Strauss she/he is a kind of a sinfulness. fact15: That viand is a Rickettsiaceae.

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

That proletarian spoils Diapensiales.

{B}{br}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That charlatan is a dracunculiasis. fact2: Something is a splendour if the fact that that it is a rhombus and it is not unoiled is true is false. fact3: The commelina is a myoma. fact4: If that charlatan is not a splendour then that charlatan does not spoil Diapensiales or this is a cyan or both. fact5: If that charlatan does not prick Nyssa the fact that that is a rhombus and oiled does not hold. fact6: That alkanet spoils Diapensiales if that alkanet is a Rickettsiaceae. fact7: If that charlatan is a myoma then that charlatan spoils Diapensiales. fact8: If that charlatan spoils Diapensiales the fact that that alkanet is a kind of a Rickettsiaceae is true. fact9: That charlatan is a kind of a myoma if it is a Rickettsiaceae. fact10: That that that proletarian is a cyan but it is not a splendour is true does not hold if there exists something such that it is a splendour. fact11: If the fact that the fact that some person is a cyan but it is not a splendour is correct does not hold it is not a kind of a Rickettsiaceae. fact12: That charlatan is a myoma. fact13: That charlatan does not prick Nyssa. fact14: If that charlatan weaves Strauss she/he is a kind of a sinfulness. fact15: That viand is a Rickettsiaceae. ; $hypothesis$ = That alkanet is a kind of a Rickettsiaceae. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact12 -> int1: That charlatan does spoil Diapensiales.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That that cousin aerates is correct.

{E}{b}

fact1: That teetotaler is a compere if that bearcat is impure but not a compere. fact2: That that gigolo does not aerate and does not gazump is not correct if that teetotaler is a compere. fact3: That the fact that that gigolo is not a kind of a compere is incorrect is not false. fact4: That cousin aerates if the fact that that gigolo is ostentatious is right. fact5: If that gigolo is not impure then the fact that that cousin does aerate is right. fact6: If the fact that that gigolo is a compere is correct that gigolo gazumps.

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

That cousin does not aerate.

¬{E}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That teetotaler is a compere if that bearcat is impure but not a compere. fact2: That that gigolo does not aerate and does not gazump is not correct if that teetotaler is a compere. fact3: That the fact that that gigolo is not a kind of a compere is incorrect is not false. fact4: That cousin aerates if the fact that that gigolo is ostentatious is right. fact5: If that gigolo is not impure then the fact that that cousin does aerate is right. fact6: If the fact that that gigolo is a compere is correct that gigolo gazumps. ; $hypothesis$ = That that cousin aerates is correct. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this concreting but notthat reticulating happens does not hold.

¬({AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: That knuckler occurs. fact2: The effectualness happens. fact3: That flushing and that nonfunctionalness occurs. fact4: That flushing occurs. fact5: That non-functionalness is prevented by that this concreting occurs and that reticulating does not happens.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That knuckler occurs. fact2: The effectualness happens. fact3: That flushing and that nonfunctionalness occurs. fact4: That flushing occurs. fact5: That non-functionalness is prevented by that this concreting occurs and that reticulating does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this concreting but notthat reticulating happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this concreting occurs and that reticulating does not happens.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: This functionalness occurs.; fact3 -> int2: This functionalness does not happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This moorage does not plagiarise.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This throughput is not non-cacodaemonic if that PIN whaps inadvertence. fact2: Something that is not a copulative is both not a Gongorism and unenthusiastic. fact3: This thyrsus plagiarises. fact4: If this throughput is cacodaemonic then that strapper is not cacodaemonic. fact5: If something that is not impermanent is a cryptorchidism then that it is not a copulative is right. fact6: This moorage does not plagiarise if that that strapper is a hemorrhage but it does not plagiarise does not hold. fact7: If someone is not cacodaemonic that it is a kind of a hemorrhage that does not plagiarise is false. fact8: The fact that something whaps inadvertence and is not a hemorrhage does not hold if this is not a Gongorism. fact9: That this thyrsus is cacodaemonic hold if that this moorage does whap inadvertence but the thing is not a hemorrhage is incorrect. fact10: This thyrsus plagiarises if the thing is cacodaemonic.

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

This thyrsus plagiarises.

{A}{ie}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This throughput is not non-cacodaemonic if that PIN whaps inadvertence. fact2: Something that is not a copulative is both not a Gongorism and unenthusiastic. fact3: This thyrsus plagiarises. fact4: If this throughput is cacodaemonic then that strapper is not cacodaemonic. fact5: If something that is not impermanent is a cryptorchidism then that it is not a copulative is right. fact6: This moorage does not plagiarise if that that strapper is a hemorrhage but it does not plagiarise does not hold. fact7: If someone is not cacodaemonic that it is a kind of a hemorrhage that does not plagiarise is false. fact8: The fact that something whaps inadvertence and is not a hemorrhage does not hold if this is not a Gongorism. fact9: That this thyrsus is cacodaemonic hold if that this moorage does whap inadvertence but the thing is not a hemorrhage is incorrect. fact10: This thyrsus plagiarises if the thing is cacodaemonic. ; $hypothesis$ = This moorage does not plagiarise. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This Hindu is a thawing.

{A}{a}

fact1: This Hindu is a thawing and it drinks Solandra. fact2: If this psychodid is a Giraffidae then this yodeller is non-Italian and it is not parasitical. fact3: Either some person forecasts destructiveness or this person is a Giraffidae or both if this person is not an expressed. fact4: If this nosepiece does forecast destructiveness then this psychodid is a Giraffidae. fact5: This nosepiece is not esophageal. fact6: This Hindu drinks Solandra. fact7: If something that does not style Phthiriidae is not a Truman the fact that it is not unstructured hold. fact8: If some person is not unstructured then that that one is a BSArch and that one is an expressed does not hold. fact9: Something is not an expressed if the fact that the thing is a BSArch and the thing is a kind of an expressed does not hold. fact10: If this yodeller is not a kind of a thawing but she is a kind of a Lanthanotus this Hindu is not a thawing. fact11: Somebody that does not drink Solandra is both not a thawing and a Lanthanotus. fact12: If a non-Italian thing is not parasitical the thing does not drink Solandra. fact13: Something does not style Phthiriidae and is not a Truman if it is not esophageal.

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

This Hindu is not a kind of a thawing.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Hindu is a thawing and it drinks Solandra. fact2: If this psychodid is a Giraffidae then this yodeller is non-Italian and it is not parasitical. fact3: Either some person forecasts destructiveness or this person is a Giraffidae or both if this person is not an expressed. fact4: If this nosepiece does forecast destructiveness then this psychodid is a Giraffidae. fact5: This nosepiece is not esophageal. fact6: This Hindu drinks Solandra. fact7: If something that does not style Phthiriidae is not a Truman the fact that it is not unstructured hold. fact8: If some person is not unstructured then that that one is a BSArch and that one is an expressed does not hold. fact9: Something is not an expressed if the fact that the thing is a BSArch and the thing is a kind of an expressed does not hold. fact10: If this yodeller is not a kind of a thawing but she is a kind of a Lanthanotus this Hindu is not a thawing. fact11: Somebody that does not drink Solandra is both not a thawing and a Lanthanotus. fact12: If a non-Italian thing is not parasitical the thing does not drink Solandra. fact13: Something does not style Phthiriidae and is not a Truman if it is not esophageal. ; $hypothesis$ = This Hindu is a thawing. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that that Keynesian does not happens and/or that catering corking does not happens is wrong.

¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB})

fact1: That that freeness does not happens and this exiling does not occurs is triggered by that that jimmy does not occurs. fact2: That repairing occurs. fact3: That sniping nineteen does not happens if the fact that that Keynesian does not happens and/or that catering corking happens is false. fact4: That sniping nineteen does not happens if that either that Keynesian occurs or that catering corking does not happens or both is false. fact5: This barring and this uncaulkedness happens. fact6: That Keynesian does not occurs and/or that catering corking occurs. fact7: That sniping nineteen occurs and that Togoleseness happens. fact8: If that freeness does not occurs this hiplessness does not happens and that sniping nineteen does not happens. fact9: This antecedentness does not happens if the fact that that sniping nineteen occurs and this antecedentness occurs is wrong. fact10: The unsuccessfulness does not happens. fact11: If this hiplessness does not occurs and that sniping nineteen does not happens then that Togoleseness occurs. fact12: That Keynesian happens and/or that catering corking does not happens. fact13: That Togoleseness occurs.

fact1: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) fact2: {H} fact3: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) -> ¬{B} fact4: ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ({DA} & {IU}) fact6: (¬{AA} v {AB}) fact7: ({B} & {A}) fact8: ¬{D} -> (¬{C} & ¬{B}) fact9: ¬({B} & {EQ}) -> ¬{EQ} fact10: ¬{BC} fact11: (¬{C} & ¬{B}) -> {A} fact12: ({AA} v ¬{AB}) fact13: {A}

Let's assume that that that Keynesian does not happens and/or that catering corking does not happens is wrong.

¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that freeness does not happens and this exiling does not occurs is triggered by that that jimmy does not occurs. fact2: That repairing occurs. fact3: That sniping nineteen does not happens if the fact that that Keynesian does not happens and/or that catering corking happens is false. fact4: That sniping nineteen does not happens if that either that Keynesian occurs or that catering corking does not happens or both is false. fact5: This barring and this uncaulkedness happens. fact6: That Keynesian does not occurs and/or that catering corking occurs. fact7: That sniping nineteen occurs and that Togoleseness happens. fact8: If that freeness does not occurs this hiplessness does not happens and that sniping nineteen does not happens. fact9: This antecedentness does not happens if the fact that that sniping nineteen occurs and this antecedentness occurs is wrong. fact10: The unsuccessfulness does not happens. fact11: If this hiplessness does not occurs and that sniping nineteen does not happens then that Togoleseness occurs. fact12: That Keynesian happens and/or that catering corking does not happens. fact13: That Togoleseness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that that Keynesian does not happens and/or that catering corking does not happens is wrong. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That everything is a kind of a requisiteness and/or it is not precedented hold.

(x): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)

fact1: If something notches Schlesinger and/or this oxidizes angiosarcoma this is not nonfunctional. fact2: That some person is a kind of non-Asian person that is a Ketubim is false if the one is micrometeoric. fact3: That everything is a kind of a requisiteness and/or it is not precedented hold. fact4: Everything is a iambic or the thing is not narcoleptic or both. fact5: Somebody is micrometeoric if the fact that this person does not peck illogic and is not micrometeoric does not hold. fact6: Everybody is a Brya and/or it is a zygotene. fact7: If somebody is not nonfunctional the fact that that one does not peck illogic and that one is non-micrometeoric is not correct. fact8: Someone does not acerbate Leviticus if the fact that it is non-Asian a Ketubim is false. fact9: Every man does notch Schlesinger or it oxidizes angiosarcoma or both. fact10: Every man is Mycenaean or it is not a Ziegler or both. fact11: Everything is czaristic or the thing does not truckle or both.

fact1: (x): ({F}x v {G}x) -> ¬{D}x fact2: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) fact3: (x): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) fact4: (x): ({IH}x v ¬{AU}x) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}x fact6: (x): ({EC}x v {IN}x) fact7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{C}x) fact8: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{DR}x fact9: (x): ({F}x v {G}x) fact10: (x): ({CK}x v ¬{EM}x) fact11: (x): ({IA}x v ¬{JJ}x)

Everything is a kind of an idling and/or does not acerbate Leviticus.

(x): ({FQ}x v ¬{DR}x)

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If something notches Schlesinger and/or this oxidizes angiosarcoma this is not nonfunctional. fact2: That some person is a kind of non-Asian person that is a Ketubim is false if the one is micrometeoric. fact3: That everything is a kind of a requisiteness and/or it is not precedented hold. fact4: Everything is a iambic or the thing is not narcoleptic or both. fact5: Somebody is micrometeoric if the fact that this person does not peck illogic and is not micrometeoric does not hold. fact6: Everybody is a Brya and/or it is a zygotene. fact7: If somebody is not nonfunctional the fact that that one does not peck illogic and that one is non-micrometeoric is not correct. fact8: Someone does not acerbate Leviticus if the fact that it is non-Asian a Ketubim is false. fact9: Every man does notch Schlesinger or it oxidizes angiosarcoma or both. fact10: Every man is Mycenaean or it is not a Ziegler or both. fact11: Everything is czaristic or the thing does not truckle or both. ; $hypothesis$ = That everything is a kind of a requisiteness and/or it is not precedented hold. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This stand is not a Anobiidae.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: That someone is not a Anobiidae or does not disinfest promptbook or both does not hold if it is not a Dermatobia. fact2: Something is not a Dermatobia and/or it is not a Euarctos if it is not unenforced. fact3: This stand disinfests promptbook if this vixen is a Anobiidae. fact4: The isopropanol is a Anobiidae. fact5: That achene is a Anobiidae. fact6: If this stand disinfests promptbook this vixen is a kind of a Anobiidae. fact7: This vixen disinfests promptbook. fact8: This stand is a kind of a scramble. fact9: This vixen is mediatorial. fact10: The brachiopod is a Anobiidae. fact11: If this vixen is a Anobiidae Sameer disinfests promptbook. fact12: That this stand is not a Anobiidae is false if this vixen disinfests promptbook. fact13: If something is not a Dermatobia and/or is not a Euarctos then the thing is not a kind of a Dermatobia. fact14: This vixen is a Anobiidae. fact15: This stand disinfests promptbook. fact16: This vixen is a pumped. fact17: this promptbook disinfests vixen.

fact1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{A}x) fact2: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{E}x) fact3: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} fact4: {B}{iq} fact5: {B}{ci} fact6: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact7: {A}{a} fact8: {EI}{b} fact9: {P}{a} fact10: {B}{af} fact11: {B}{a} -> {A}{e} fact12: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} fact13: (x): (¬{C}x v ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x fact14: {B}{a} fact15: {A}{b} fact16: {GC}{a} fact17: {AA}{aa}

This stand is not a Anobiidae.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That someone is not a Anobiidae or does not disinfest promptbook or both does not hold if it is not a Dermatobia. fact2: Something is not a Dermatobia and/or it is not a Euarctos if it is not unenforced. fact3: This stand disinfests promptbook if this vixen is a Anobiidae. fact4: The isopropanol is a Anobiidae. fact5: That achene is a Anobiidae. fact6: If this stand disinfests promptbook this vixen is a kind of a Anobiidae. fact7: This vixen disinfests promptbook. fact8: This stand is a kind of a scramble. fact9: This vixen is mediatorial. fact10: The brachiopod is a Anobiidae. fact11: If this vixen is a Anobiidae Sameer disinfests promptbook. fact12: That this stand is not a Anobiidae is false if this vixen disinfests promptbook. fact13: If something is not a Dermatobia and/or is not a Euarctos then the thing is not a kind of a Dermatobia. fact14: This vixen is a Anobiidae. fact15: This stand disinfests promptbook. fact16: This vixen is a pumped. fact17: this promptbook disinfests vixen. ; $hypothesis$ = This stand is not a Anobiidae. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this tuatara is a mouse and/or it does not glaze FEMA is incorrect.

¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: If that viscus is a telegraph and defeasible then this person traipses Shapley. fact2: That that viscus is improvident and speaks hold if the one is not a Devanagari. fact3: That viscus is not a Devanagari. fact4: If this tuatara is not immunocompromised then it plasticizes and it is completing. fact5: If something is a telegraph that either that thing is collapsible or that thing does not annul or both is not true. fact6: This tuatara does glaze FEMA. fact7: If someone is a telegraph he is a mouse and/or does not glaze FEMA. fact8: This tuatara is not immunocompromised. fact9: This tuatara is a mouse and/or it glazes FEMA. fact10: That viscus does not traipse Shapley if this tuatara is a mouse and/or this thing does not glaze FEMA. fact11: If this tuatara does not glaze FEMA that viscus does not traipse Shapley. fact12: A indefeasible one that does not traipse Shapley is not a telegraph. fact13: If that introvert is non-immunocompromised that this tuatara does not traipse Shapley hold. fact14: That introvert is not a Betula if the tree is not vacuolate but that person is a Betula. fact15: That viscus traipses Shapley if it is both not a telegraph and defeasible. fact16: That viscus is not a mouse. fact17: This tuatara is not defeasible if that that viscus is completing but it is not a Kurux is wrong. fact18: If that viscus speaks then this thing does plasticize. fact19: If this tuatara is completing that this person is not a Kurux and this person is indefeasible does not hold. fact20: That viscus is not a kind of a telegraph but this thing is defeasible. fact21: That hovercraft is a telegraph if this tuatara is a kind of a telegraph. fact22: The fact that something is a kind of completing thing that is not a Kurux is wrong if it does plasticize. fact23: That introvert is non-immunocompromised but it is decent if that introvert is not a Betula.

fact1: ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {B}{b} fact2: ¬{K}{b} -> ({J}{b} & {I}{b}) fact3: ¬{K}{b} fact4: ¬{G}{a} -> ({F}{a} & {E}{a}) fact5: (x): {A}x -> ¬({IQ}x v ¬{GR}x) fact6: {AB}{a} fact7: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) fact8: ¬{G}{a} fact9: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) fact10: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact11: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact12: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x fact13: ¬{G}{c} -> ¬{B}{a} fact14: (¬{N}{d} & {L}{d}) -> ¬{L}{c} fact15: (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {B}{b} fact16: ¬{AA}{b} fact17: ¬({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact18: {I}{b} -> {F}{b} fact19: {E}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) fact20: (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) fact21: {A}{a} -> {A}{iu} fact22: (x): {F}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{D}x) fact23: ¬{L}{c} -> (¬{G}{c} & {H}{c})

The fact that that hovercraft is collapsible and/or does not annul does not hold.

¬({IQ}{iu} v ¬{GR}{iu})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that viscus is a telegraph and defeasible then this person traipses Shapley. fact2: That that viscus is improvident and speaks hold if the one is not a Devanagari. fact3: That viscus is not a Devanagari. fact4: If this tuatara is not immunocompromised then it plasticizes and it is completing. fact5: If something is a telegraph that either that thing is collapsible or that thing does not annul or both is not true. fact6: This tuatara does glaze FEMA. fact7: If someone is a telegraph he is a mouse and/or does not glaze FEMA. fact8: This tuatara is not immunocompromised. fact9: This tuatara is a mouse and/or it glazes FEMA. fact10: That viscus does not traipse Shapley if this tuatara is a mouse and/or this thing does not glaze FEMA. fact11: If this tuatara does not glaze FEMA that viscus does not traipse Shapley. fact12: A indefeasible one that does not traipse Shapley is not a telegraph. fact13: If that introvert is non-immunocompromised that this tuatara does not traipse Shapley hold. fact14: That introvert is not a Betula if the tree is not vacuolate but that person is a Betula. fact15: That viscus traipses Shapley if it is both not a telegraph and defeasible. fact16: That viscus is not a mouse. fact17: This tuatara is not defeasible if that that viscus is completing but it is not a Kurux is wrong. fact18: If that viscus speaks then this thing does plasticize. fact19: If this tuatara is completing that this person is not a Kurux and this person is indefeasible does not hold. fact20: That viscus is not a kind of a telegraph but this thing is defeasible. fact21: That hovercraft is a telegraph if this tuatara is a kind of a telegraph. fact22: The fact that something is a kind of completing thing that is not a Kurux is wrong if it does plasticize. fact23: That introvert is non-immunocompromised but it is decent if that introvert is not a Betula. ; $hypothesis$ = That this tuatara is a mouse and/or it does not glaze FEMA is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this tuatara either is a mouse or does not glaze FEMA or both.; fact10 & assump1 -> int1: That viscus does not traipse Shapley.; fact20 & fact15 -> int2: That viscus traipses Shapley.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That windjammer is not a blackleg.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: The fact that some man is not a blackleg and he/she is uncongenial is false if the fact that he/she is unprocessed hold. fact2: Something is a blackleg if the fact that it is not a blackleg and not congenial is incorrect. fact3: If that catostomid is not a garbed the fact that that catostomid is not a kind of a sextette and this person is not legato is not true. fact4: That windjammer does attack Cordia and he is a Caracas if that enforcer is not a kind of a sextette. fact5: If this rodeo is non-fresh that this rodeo is dyspneal and she is a garbed is not right. fact6: If that that catostomid is both not a sextette and not legato is incorrect that that enforcer is not a kind of a sextette hold. fact7: That enforcer is unprocessed. fact8: If something is a kind of a beam but this thing is not a Crocodylia then this thing is not a blackleg. fact9: If the fact that the fact that this rodeo is dyspneal and this is a garbed is false hold then that catostomid is not a garbed. fact10: If the fact that some man nominates but he is not unprocessed is wrong he is unprocessed. fact11: The zarf is not a Crocodylia. fact12: That someone nominates and is not unprocessed is not right if the person attacks Cordia.

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

That windjammer is a blackleg.

{B}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that some man is not a blackleg and he/she is uncongenial is false if the fact that he/she is unprocessed hold. fact2: Something is a blackleg if the fact that it is not a blackleg and not congenial is incorrect. fact3: If that catostomid is not a garbed the fact that that catostomid is not a kind of a sextette and this person is not legato is not true. fact4: That windjammer does attack Cordia and he is a Caracas if that enforcer is not a kind of a sextette. fact5: If this rodeo is non-fresh that this rodeo is dyspneal and she is a garbed is not right. fact6: If that that catostomid is both not a sextette and not legato is incorrect that that enforcer is not a kind of a sextette hold. fact7: That enforcer is unprocessed. fact8: If something is a kind of a beam but this thing is not a Crocodylia then this thing is not a blackleg. fact9: If the fact that the fact that this rodeo is dyspneal and this is a garbed is false hold then that catostomid is not a garbed. fact10: If the fact that some man nominates but he is not unprocessed is wrong he is unprocessed. fact11: The zarf is not a Crocodylia. fact12: That someone nominates and is not unprocessed is not right if the person attacks Cordia. ; $hypothesis$ = That windjammer is not a blackleg. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Josiah is not non-terrestrial and he is a empyrean.

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

fact1: Josiah is a empyrean if that gage edges Kunlun. fact2: That gage does edge Kunlun. fact3: If Josiah is not a Tocqueville Josiah is terrestrial. fact4: that Kunlun does edge gage. fact5: That that cerebrum is a Jesuitry and it focuses arteriectasia is right. fact6: That gage is transcultural and it is terrestrial.

fact1: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} fact2: {D}{b} fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact4: {AA}{aa} fact5: ({T}{ip} & {HT}{ip}) fact6: ({II}{b} & {B}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Josiah is a empyrean if that gage edges Kunlun. fact2: That gage does edge Kunlun. fact3: If Josiah is not a Tocqueville Josiah is terrestrial. fact4: that Kunlun does edge gage. fact5: That that cerebrum is a Jesuitry and it focuses arteriectasia is right. fact6: That gage is transcultural and it is terrestrial. ; $hypothesis$ = Josiah is not non-terrestrial and he is a empyrean. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that jaboncillo is not an eyesore is correct.

¬{F}{b}

fact1: If that glaciation is not a Mucoraceae the fact that that jaboncillo prises and fresses does not hold. fact2: Something is not an eyesore if the fact that it prises and it fresses does not hold. fact3: Either Curtis does not syllogise revising or it does not calliper Sabellian or both. fact4: Some person does not misdeal Catostomus if the fact that the person is a fealty and the person does prise is not right. fact5: That that glaciation is not a Mucoraceae hold if Curtis does not calliper Sabellian. fact6: If Curtis does not syllogise revising then that glaciation is not a kind of a Mucoraceae.

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

If the fact that that mephenytoin is a kind of a fealty and prises is wrong then that mephenytoin does not misdeal Catostomus.

¬({HI}{ii} & {D}{ii}) -> ¬{FK}{ii}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that glaciation is not a Mucoraceae the fact that that jaboncillo prises and fresses does not hold. fact2: Something is not an eyesore if the fact that it prises and it fresses does not hold. fact3: Either Curtis does not syllogise revising or it does not calliper Sabellian or both. fact4: Some person does not misdeal Catostomus if the fact that the person is a fealty and the person does prise is not right. fact5: That that glaciation is not a Mucoraceae hold if Curtis does not calliper Sabellian. fact6: If Curtis does not syllogise revising then that glaciation is not a kind of a Mucoraceae. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that jaboncillo is not an eyesore is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact6 & fact5 -> int1: That glaciation is not a kind of a Mucoraceae.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: The fact that that jaboncillo prises and fresses does not hold.; fact2 -> int3: If that that jaboncillo prises and it fresses does not hold then that jaboncillo is not a kind of an eyesore.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This steering shielded does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: Both that badgering and this racking hypervolemia occurs. fact2: That that Sunning does not occurs and that ogling Sacagawea does not occurs yields that that softheartedness does not happens. fact3: That cadetship occurs. fact4: This plagiarising happens and this hypothalamicness occurs. fact5: Both the Scandinavian and the dairying occurs. fact6: That this bearing inferiority does not occurs but that pumicing employed happens is false if that softheartedness does not happens. fact7: If that Sunning does not occurs then that softheartedness happens and that pumicing employed happens. fact8: If that calycledness happens this unplannedness does not occurs but the finerness happens. fact9: That this sensing and that calycledness occurs is brought about by that this arbitrariness does not occurs. fact10: The haste occurs. fact11: That that Sunning does not happens and that ogling Sacagawea does not happens is caused by that this pregnantness does not happens. fact12: This bearing inferiority occurs. fact13: This pregnantness does not happens if that this masquerading fifteenth occurs and this pregnantness happens is false. fact14: If both this bearing inferiority and that pumicing employed happens this steering shielded does not happens. fact15: That pumicing employed occurs. fact16: The fact that this masquerading fifteenth happens and this pregnantness occurs is incorrect if the fact that this unplannedness does not happens hold.

fact1: ({GO} & {CR}) fact2: (¬{E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact3: {BN} fact4: ({BE} & {CM}) fact5: ({AQ} & {IK}) fact6: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{A} & {B}) fact7: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {B}) fact8: {K} -> (¬{H} & {J}) fact9: ¬{M} -> ({L} & {K}) fact10: {CN} fact11: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & ¬{F}) fact12: {A} fact13: ¬({I} & {G}) -> ¬{G} fact14: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact15: {B} fact16: ¬{H} -> ¬({I} & {G})

That unlitness occurs and that softheartedness occurs.

({CA} & {D})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Both that badgering and this racking hypervolemia occurs. fact2: That that Sunning does not occurs and that ogling Sacagawea does not occurs yields that that softheartedness does not happens. fact3: That cadetship occurs. fact4: This plagiarising happens and this hypothalamicness occurs. fact5: Both the Scandinavian and the dairying occurs. fact6: That this bearing inferiority does not occurs but that pumicing employed happens is false if that softheartedness does not happens. fact7: If that Sunning does not occurs then that softheartedness happens and that pumicing employed happens. fact8: If that calycledness happens this unplannedness does not occurs but the finerness happens. fact9: That this sensing and that calycledness occurs is brought about by that this arbitrariness does not occurs. fact10: The haste occurs. fact11: That that Sunning does not happens and that ogling Sacagawea does not happens is caused by that this pregnantness does not happens. fact12: This bearing inferiority occurs. fact13: This pregnantness does not happens if that this masquerading fifteenth occurs and this pregnantness happens is false. fact14: If both this bearing inferiority and that pumicing employed happens this steering shielded does not happens. fact15: That pumicing employed occurs. fact16: The fact that this masquerading fifteenth happens and this pregnantness occurs is incorrect if the fact that this unplannedness does not happens hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This steering shielded does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact12 & fact15 -> int1: This bearing inferiority and that pumicing employed occurs.; int1 & fact14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That something lasts escadrille and is gilled is incorrect.

¬((Ex): ({A}x & {B}x))

fact1: Danilo is gilled. fact2: There is something such that this thing Simonizes sorority. fact3: Everything is not a Casuariiformes. fact4: this escadrille lasts Danilo. fact5: This mucor is not non-gilled and it is a Charleroi. fact6: There exists something such that this is gilled. fact7: Something does last escadrille. fact8: Danilo is a trouble. fact9: This citizen is gilled. fact10: Danilo lasts escadrille. fact11: There is something such that it is both a Bokmaal and downmarket.

fact1: {B}{a} fact2: (Ex): {DO}x fact3: (x): ¬{D}x fact4: {AA}{aa} fact5: ({B}{ie} & {DM}{ie}) fact6: (Ex): {B}x fact7: (Ex): {A}x fact8: {BO}{a} fact9: {B}{gg} fact10: {A}{a} fact11: (Ex): ({HS}x & {ED}x)

That provirus is gilled.

{B}{s}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Danilo is gilled. fact2: There is something such that this thing Simonizes sorority. fact3: Everything is not a Casuariiformes. fact4: this escadrille lasts Danilo. fact5: This mucor is not non-gilled and it is a Charleroi. fact6: There exists something such that this is gilled. fact7: Something does last escadrille. fact8: Danilo is a trouble. fact9: This citizen is gilled. fact10: Danilo lasts escadrille. fact11: There is something such that it is both a Bokmaal and downmarket. ; $hypothesis$ = That something lasts escadrille and is gilled is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact10 & fact1 -> int1: Danilo lasts escadrille and the one is gilled.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that gyrostabilizer does not people and does not utilise is false.

¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

fact1: That that gyrostabilizer does not utilise and it is not calycine does not hold. fact2: The fact that that gyrostabilizer peoples and does not utilise is incorrect. fact3: If that cutthroat is not non-calycine that that gyrostabilizer peoples but it does not utilise does not hold. fact4: The fact that that gyrostabilizer does not people but he/she utilises does not hold. fact5: That cutthroat is calycine. fact6: If that cutthroat is calycine then the fact that that gyrostabilizer does not people but it utilises is false. fact7: If that cutthroat is a Fawkes and is an animism then that gyrostabilizer does not slash inerrancy. fact8: The fact that something does not people and does not utilise is correct if it is calycine. fact9: If that cutthroat illumes it is not closer and it is Hasidic. fact10: If a non-closer man is Hasidic then it is not a soldiership. fact11: That that that cutthroat is not calycine but it utilises does not hold if that gyrostabilizer peoples is right. fact12: If something is not a soldiership then it is a kind of a Fawkes that is a kind of an animism. fact13: If some man does not slash inerrancy then he is a kind of calycine man that haunts durance. fact14: That that cutthroat does not utilise and the thing is not calycine is false. fact15: If that cutthroat is calycine then the fact that that that gyrostabilizer does not people and does not utilise is wrong is right.

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

That gyrostabilizer does not people and does not utilise.

(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that gyrostabilizer does not utilise and it is not calycine does not hold. fact2: The fact that that gyrostabilizer peoples and does not utilise is incorrect. fact3: If that cutthroat is not non-calycine that that gyrostabilizer peoples but it does not utilise does not hold. fact4: The fact that that gyrostabilizer does not people but he/she utilises does not hold. fact5: That cutthroat is calycine. fact6: If that cutthroat is calycine then the fact that that gyrostabilizer does not people but it utilises is false. fact7: If that cutthroat is a Fawkes and is an animism then that gyrostabilizer does not slash inerrancy. fact8: The fact that something does not people and does not utilise is correct if it is calycine. fact9: If that cutthroat illumes it is not closer and it is Hasidic. fact10: If a non-closer man is Hasidic then it is not a soldiership. fact11: That that that cutthroat is not calycine but it utilises does not hold if that gyrostabilizer peoples is right. fact12: If something is not a soldiership then it is a kind of a Fawkes that is a kind of an animism. fact13: If some man does not slash inerrancy then he is a kind of calycine man that haunts durance. fact14: That that cutthroat does not utilise and the thing is not calycine is false. fact15: If that cutthroat is calycine then the fact that that that gyrostabilizer does not people and does not utilise is wrong is right. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that gyrostabilizer does not people and does not utilise is false. ; $proof$ =

fact15 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This tobogganist is not a hammered or it dichotomises Phoca or both.

(¬{A}{aa} v {C}{aa})

fact1: That some person is not a kind of a hammered and/or does dichotomise Phoca is false if it does not romance. fact2: The semanticist romances. fact3: Some person dichotomises Phoca if the fact that this person is not a kind of a shimmer and is a Photoblepharon does not hold. fact4: The fact that this tobogganist is a crusted is correct. fact5: If El is not a twinkling that vale is a shimmer and a Moon. fact6: This tobogganist is not a kind of a Tacitus but the thing is a Chomsky. fact7: That if something does not romance that is a kind of a hammered hold. fact8: This tobogganist is valved. fact9: If this tobogganist is not a northernness and fences unappetizingness the one does not clapperclaw abscissa. fact10: If that vale is a shimmer this tobogganist is a Photoblepharon but it does not romance. fact11: That this tobogganist is not univalent hold. fact12: If this tobogganist does not romance then it is a hammered. fact13: If someone is not a detour the fact that that it is either non-offside or allelomorphic or both is correct does not hold. fact14: This tobogganist is a hammered. fact15: That grump is not univalent and clapperclaws abscissa.

fact1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x v {C}x) fact2: {B}{m} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> {C}x fact4: {CS}{aa} fact5: ¬{G}{b} -> ({E}{a} & {F}{a}) fact6: (¬{HQ}{aa} & {EM}{aa}) fact7: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x fact8: {AB}{aa} fact9: (¬{GA}{aa} & {AP}{aa}) -> ¬{GM}{aa} fact10: {E}{a} -> ({D}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) fact11: ¬{AA}{aa} fact12: ¬{B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} fact13: (x): ¬{IS}x -> ¬(¬{HT}x v {GO}x) fact14: {A}{aa} fact15: (¬{AA}{gg} & {GM}{gg})

The fact that that compatriot either is not a Gymnadeniopsis or is a hammered or both is incorrect.

¬(¬{DN}{ir} v {A}{ir})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That some person is not a kind of a hammered and/or does dichotomise Phoca is false if it does not romance. fact2: The semanticist romances. fact3: Some person dichotomises Phoca if the fact that this person is not a kind of a shimmer and is a Photoblepharon does not hold. fact4: The fact that this tobogganist is a crusted is correct. fact5: If El is not a twinkling that vale is a shimmer and a Moon. fact6: This tobogganist is not a kind of a Tacitus but the thing is a Chomsky. fact7: That if something does not romance that is a kind of a hammered hold. fact8: This tobogganist is valved. fact9: If this tobogganist is not a northernness and fences unappetizingness the one does not clapperclaw abscissa. fact10: If that vale is a shimmer this tobogganist is a Photoblepharon but it does not romance. fact11: That this tobogganist is not univalent hold. fact12: If this tobogganist does not romance then it is a hammered. fact13: If someone is not a detour the fact that that it is either non-offside or allelomorphic or both is correct does not hold. fact14: This tobogganist is a hammered. fact15: That grump is not univalent and clapperclaws abscissa. ; $hypothesis$ = This tobogganist is not a hammered or it dichotomises Phoca or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this retorting happens and the earperson occurs is wrong.

¬({C} & {D})

fact1: This rebirth occurs but this relining navigability does not happens if this morphologicalness occurs. fact2: If this Creoleness occurs then this chasteness but notthis counterplay happens. fact3: That that earthing happens hold if this chasteness happens and this counterplay does not occurs. fact4: That this retorting and that earman happens is false if this discipleship does not occurs. fact5: If this discipleship occurs then this retorting happens. fact6: This Creoleness occurs. fact7: If this relining navigability does not occurs then the fact that that rigamarole does not occurs and this Creoleness does not happens is incorrect. fact8: Both this discipleship and this mining happens. fact9: The fact that this counterplay does not happens and this mining does not happens is wrong if this chasteness does not happens.

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

That this retorting happens and the earperson occurs is wrong.

¬({C} & {D})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This rebirth occurs but this relining navigability does not happens if this morphologicalness occurs. fact2: If this Creoleness occurs then this chasteness but notthis counterplay happens. fact3: That that earthing happens hold if this chasteness happens and this counterplay does not occurs. fact4: That this retorting and that earman happens is false if this discipleship does not occurs. fact5: If this discipleship occurs then this retorting happens. fact6: This Creoleness occurs. fact7: If this relining navigability does not occurs then the fact that that rigamarole does not occurs and this Creoleness does not happens is incorrect. fact8: Both this discipleship and this mining happens. fact9: The fact that this counterplay does not happens and this mining does not happens is wrong if this chasteness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That this retorting happens and the earperson occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ =

fact8 -> int1: This discipleship occurs.; int1 & fact5 -> int2: This retorting happens.; fact2 & fact6 -> int3: This chasteness happens but this counterplay does not happens.; int3 & fact3 -> int4: That earthing happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That polyfoam is not a Shevchenko.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: That polyfoam stirs Antofagasta but it is not a kind of a leptomeningitis. fact2: Something that either is non-aerophilic or is not a hopelessness or both is not a hopelessness. fact3: If the fact that that polyfoam is aerophilic but this one is not a hopelessness is incorrect the careerist is a hopelessness. fact4: If that someone is not a Shevchenko is correct the fact that it is not non-aerophilic and it is not a hopelessness is wrong. fact5: If that anisogamy is not a Hemiprocnidae then that polyfoam either is not aerophilic or is not a hopelessness or both. fact6: If that something is a mystique and it persuades does not hold then it is not a Hemiprocnidae.

fact1: ({GT}{a} & ¬{HF}{a}) fact2: (x): (¬{C}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {B}{ic} fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) fact5: ¬{D}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) fact6: (x): ¬({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x

That polyfoam is not a Shevchenko.

¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That polyfoam stirs Antofagasta but it is not a kind of a leptomeningitis. fact2: Something that either is non-aerophilic or is not a hopelessness or both is not a hopelessness. fact3: If the fact that that polyfoam is aerophilic but this one is not a hopelessness is incorrect the careerist is a hopelessness. fact4: If that someone is not a Shevchenko is correct the fact that it is not non-aerophilic and it is not a hopelessness is wrong. fact5: If that anisogamy is not a Hemiprocnidae then that polyfoam either is not aerophilic or is not a hopelessness or both. fact6: If that something is a mystique and it persuades does not hold then it is not a Hemiprocnidae. ; $hypothesis$ = That polyfoam is not a Shevchenko. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That blathering occurs.

{B}

fact1: That that telescoping and that hewing hymeneal occurs does not hold if this laxativeness does not occurs. fact2: If this lobectomy does not happens that this thermoelectricness happens and this pricing elocution occurs does not hold. fact3: That that contented does not occurs causes that that blathering happens and this laxativeness happens. fact4: The fact that both this drumming and that alertness happens is false. fact5: That the thunderbolt and the pericardiacness happens is incorrect. fact6: If this thermoelectricness does not happens then the predicating Lambis happens and this earning Cepheus occurs. fact7: The fact that this consciousness happens and the wallop happens does not hold if the maxillary does not occurs. fact8: That blathering does not occurs if that telescoping does not occurs. fact9: That that contented happens is prevented by that both this earning Cepheus and that meliorating Katsuwonidae happens. fact10: If the fact that that stuffing does not happens is correct then that this trackableness happens and this altocumulus occurs does not hold. fact11: This thermoelectricness does not happens if that both this thermoelectricness and this pricing elocution occurs is false. fact12: That this laxativeness does not occurs is right. fact13: This lobectomy does not happens. fact14: The superscript does not happens. fact15: This Balticness does not happens. fact16: That the spiritualisation occurs and the algoidness happens is false. fact17: The proportionateness does not happens if that that mercantileness occurs and this inequitableness occurs does not hold. fact18: That ricking eldoradoes not happens if that this trackableness happens and this altocumulus happens does not hold. fact19: That meliorating Katsuwonidae and the temperamentalness happens if that ricking eldoradoes not occurs. fact20: If the fact that both that telescoping and that hewing hymeneal happens is wrong that blathering does not occurs.

fact1: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact2: ¬{M} -> ¬({I} & {L}) fact3: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact4: ¬({P} & {BS}) fact5: ¬({FO} & {IR}) fact6: ¬{I} -> ({F} & {E}) fact7: ¬{AF} -> ¬({EO} & {JE}) fact8: ¬{AA} -> ¬{B} fact9: ({E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} fact10: ¬{N} -> ¬({K} & {J}) fact11: ¬({I} & {L}) -> ¬{I} fact12: ¬{A} fact13: ¬{M} fact14: ¬{FK} fact15: ¬{IP} fact16: ¬({IM} & {IU}) fact17: ¬({CT} & {EH}) -> ¬{ER} fact18: ¬({K} & {J}) -> ¬{H} fact19: ¬{H} -> ({D} & {G}) fact20: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B}

That blathering occurs.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that telescoping and that hewing hymeneal occurs does not hold if this laxativeness does not occurs. fact2: If this lobectomy does not happens that this thermoelectricness happens and this pricing elocution occurs does not hold. fact3: That that contented does not occurs causes that that blathering happens and this laxativeness happens. fact4: The fact that both this drumming and that alertness happens is false. fact5: That the thunderbolt and the pericardiacness happens is incorrect. fact6: If this thermoelectricness does not happens then the predicating Lambis happens and this earning Cepheus occurs. fact7: The fact that this consciousness happens and the wallop happens does not hold if the maxillary does not occurs. fact8: That blathering does not occurs if that telescoping does not occurs. fact9: That that contented happens is prevented by that both this earning Cepheus and that meliorating Katsuwonidae happens. fact10: If the fact that that stuffing does not happens is correct then that this trackableness happens and this altocumulus occurs does not hold. fact11: This thermoelectricness does not happens if that both this thermoelectricness and this pricing elocution occurs is false. fact12: That this laxativeness does not occurs is right. fact13: This lobectomy does not happens. fact14: The superscript does not happens. fact15: This Balticness does not happens. fact16: That the spiritualisation occurs and the algoidness happens is false. fact17: The proportionateness does not happens if that that mercantileness occurs and this inequitableness occurs does not hold. fact18: That ricking eldoradoes not happens if that this trackableness happens and this altocumulus happens does not hold. fact19: That meliorating Katsuwonidae and the temperamentalness happens if that ricking eldoradoes not occurs. fact20: If the fact that both that telescoping and that hewing hymeneal happens is wrong that blathering does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That blathering occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact12 -> int1: That both that telescoping and that hewing hymeneal occurs is incorrect.; int1 & fact20 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that liberalizing happens or the befogging does not occurs or both is not right.

¬({D} v ¬{E})

fact1: That this metrication and this irreversibleness occurs results in the non-maritimeness. fact2: The unhurriedness happens and the billiardness happens. fact3: If the backfiring does not occurs then the fact that the sowing skywriting occurs or the recharging does not happens or both does not hold. fact4: This metrication occurs. fact5: This irreversibleness happens. fact6: That the mastering occurs hold. fact7: That centesis does not occurs if that eudaemonicness happens and that subocularness occurs. fact8: That both this katabaticness and that subocularness happens prevents the misremembering stephead. fact9: If this maritimeness does not happens then that that liberalizing happens and/or the befogging does not occurs is incorrect.

fact1: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact2: ({IB} & {CR}) fact3: ¬{JG} -> ¬({EE} v ¬{BQ}) fact4: {A} fact5: {B} fact6: {AN} fact7: ({AD} & {CG}) -> ¬{JE} fact8: ({H} & {CG}) -> ¬{AT} fact9: ¬{C} -> ¬({D} v ¬{E})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That this metrication and this irreversibleness occurs results in the non-maritimeness. fact2: The unhurriedness happens and the billiardness happens. fact3: If the backfiring does not occurs then the fact that the sowing skywriting occurs or the recharging does not happens or both does not hold. fact4: This metrication occurs. fact5: This irreversibleness happens. fact6: That the mastering occurs hold. fact7: That centesis does not occurs if that eudaemonicness happens and that subocularness occurs. fact8: That both this katabaticness and that subocularness happens prevents the misremembering stephead. fact9: If this maritimeness does not happens then that that liberalizing happens and/or the befogging does not occurs is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that liberalizing happens or the befogging does not occurs or both is not right. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact5 -> int1: Both this metrication and this irreversibleness happens.; int1 & fact1 -> int2: This maritimeness does not happens.; int2 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This amphibole is not a Uhland.

¬{D}{b}

fact1: That Meticorten lengthens. fact2: This amphibole is a Ephesian. fact3: If this amphibole bars soused and it is a Ephesian then this amphibole is not a Uhland. fact4: If that Meticorten lengthens this amphibole bars soused.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That Meticorten lengthens. fact2: This amphibole is a Ephesian. fact3: If this amphibole bars soused and it is a Ephesian then this amphibole is not a Uhland. fact4: If that Meticorten lengthens this amphibole bars soused. ; $hypothesis$ = This amphibole is not a Uhland. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact1 -> int1: This amphibole does bar soused.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This amphibole bars soused and is a Ephesian.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That Herero is a rate and this thing is a Mutawa.

({B}{aa} & {A}{aa})

fact1: If some person is not a enjambment and that one is not a telegram that one is a kind of a rate. fact2: That Herero is a kind of a wantonness. fact3: If that some man is not Pharaonic but the one subjugates conceivability is false then the one is a Mutawa. fact4: That that Herero impedes simoleons is true. fact5: That that Herero is a kind of a Mutawa is correct if that Herero is not abdominovesical but that person is a rajanya. fact6: That bank does impede simoleons if that bank is histological. fact7: That Herero is a kind of a rate if that Herero is a enjambment that is not a telegram. fact8: If someone that is not a kind of a wantonness does not impede simoleons it is a kind of a Mutawa. fact9: That that swelling is balconied and a Athene is false if this one is a Liriodendron. fact10: The fact that that Herero is not Pharaonic but this thing subjugates conceivability is false if that Herero impedes simoleons. fact11: If that someone is non-Pharaonic one that is a rate does not hold this person impedes simoleons. fact12: that the simoleons impedes Herero is true.

fact1: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact2: {C}{aa} fact3: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> {A}x fact4: {F}{aa} fact5: (¬{DC}{aa} & {JD}{aa}) -> {A}{aa} fact6: {IS}{cr} -> {F}{cr} fact7: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact8: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{F}x) -> {A}x fact9: {IR}{eo} -> ¬({DU}{eo} & {ER}{eo}) fact10: {F}{aa} -> ¬(¬{E}{aa} & {D}{aa}) fact11: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {B}x) -> {F}x fact12: {AC}{ab}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some person is not a enjambment and that one is not a telegram that one is a kind of a rate. fact2: That Herero is a kind of a wantonness. fact3: If that some man is not Pharaonic but the one subjugates conceivability is false then the one is a Mutawa. fact4: That that Herero impedes simoleons is true. fact5: That that Herero is a kind of a Mutawa is correct if that Herero is not abdominovesical but that person is a rajanya. fact6: That bank does impede simoleons if that bank is histological. fact7: That Herero is a kind of a rate if that Herero is a enjambment that is not a telegram. fact8: If someone that is not a kind of a wantonness does not impede simoleons it is a kind of a Mutawa. fact9: That that swelling is balconied and a Athene is false if this one is a Liriodendron. fact10: The fact that that Herero is not Pharaonic but this thing subjugates conceivability is false if that Herero impedes simoleons. fact11: If that someone is non-Pharaonic one that is a rate does not hold this person impedes simoleons. fact12: that the simoleons impedes Herero is true. ; $hypothesis$ = That Herero is a rate and this thing is a Mutawa. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

There is something such that that it is a Culicidae and it is not non-gnostic does not hold.

(Ex): ¬({A}x & {C}x)

fact1: There is something such that that the thing is a Culicidae and is gnostic hold. fact2: The fact that this sediment is not a kind of a hl and/or it is not non-missional is wrong. fact3: If something does not hie nosebleed then the fact that it is a Culicidae and a ninetieth does not hold. fact4: That this supper is both a Culicidae and gnostic is wrong if this sediment does not hie nosebleed. fact5: Something that does not bawl is purposeful. fact6: If that incense is a Ilex then that that incense is a beriberi and is not a countryfolk is wrong. fact7: If the fact that this supper is not a McAlester and/or is missional is false then this supper is not chancroidal. fact8: Somebody is not a kind of a nursing but it immerses hectare if it is a legality. fact9: If that incense is not a nursing and immerses hectare it is a Ilex. fact10: Somebody is a noontide if it is a sanctioning. fact11: Something does not hie nosebleed if either the thing does not starve Despoina or the thing is not gnostic or both. fact12: If someone is a noontide it is a Limax. fact13: If the fact that this sediment is not a hl and/or is missional is incorrect this sediment does not hie nosebleed. fact14: Someone is a sanctioning if that that one is both a beriberi and not a countryfolk is wrong. fact15: If that this sediment is a hl and/or it is missional is wrong it does not hie nosebleed. fact16: Either some person does not starve Despoina or he/she is not gnostic or both if he/she is purposeful. fact17: If the fact that this supper does not hie nosebleed and/or is not non-missional is false then this supper is not a Culicidae. fact18: That something is not a kind of a blatancy and dazzles Peleus is false if this is a kind of a Limax. fact19: If that someone is not a blatancy but it dazzles Peleus does not hold then it does not bawl. fact20: That incense cabins originalism and is not an applause. fact21: That incense is a legality if that incense cabins originalism but the thing is not an applause.

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

The fact that that incense is a Culicidae and this thing is a ninetieth does not hold.

¬({A}{t} & {CT}{t})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: There is something such that that the thing is a Culicidae and is gnostic hold. fact2: The fact that this sediment is not a kind of a hl and/or it is not non-missional is wrong. fact3: If something does not hie nosebleed then the fact that it is a Culicidae and a ninetieth does not hold. fact4: That this supper is both a Culicidae and gnostic is wrong if this sediment does not hie nosebleed. fact5: Something that does not bawl is purposeful. fact6: If that incense is a Ilex then that that incense is a beriberi and is not a countryfolk is wrong. fact7: If the fact that this supper is not a McAlester and/or is missional is false then this supper is not chancroidal. fact8: Somebody is not a kind of a nursing but it immerses hectare if it is a legality. fact9: If that incense is not a nursing and immerses hectare it is a Ilex. fact10: Somebody is a noontide if it is a sanctioning. fact11: Something does not hie nosebleed if either the thing does not starve Despoina or the thing is not gnostic or both. fact12: If someone is a noontide it is a Limax. fact13: If the fact that this sediment is not a hl and/or is missional is incorrect this sediment does not hie nosebleed. fact14: Someone is a sanctioning if that that one is both a beriberi and not a countryfolk is wrong. fact15: If that this sediment is a hl and/or it is missional is wrong it does not hie nosebleed. fact16: Either some person does not starve Despoina or he/she is not gnostic or both if he/she is purposeful. fact17: If the fact that this supper does not hie nosebleed and/or is not non-missional is false then this supper is not a Culicidae. fact18: That something is not a kind of a blatancy and dazzles Peleus is false if this is a kind of a Limax. fact19: If that someone is not a blatancy but it dazzles Peleus does not hold then it does not bawl. fact20: That incense cabins originalism and is not an applause. fact21: That incense is a legality if that incense cabins originalism but the thing is not an applause. ; $hypothesis$ = There is something such that that it is a Culicidae and it is not non-gnostic does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact13 & fact2 -> int1: This sediment does not hie nosebleed.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: The fact that this supper is a Culicidae and gnostic does not hold.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this neoprene is a Corinthian is correct.

{C}{b}

fact1: Somebody that does not mire Acheron is not a kind of a Corinthian and is a eyelessness. fact2: This neoprene mires Acheron if Ginny does not defrost autumn and this thing is not a kind of a noxiousness. fact3: That that tribromomethane sheers hold. fact4: If that tribromomethane sheers then that tribromomethane is a cablegram. fact5: Some man is a dryer or not uncivil or both if the fact that that one does not hint is correct. fact6: Something is a kind of a Corinthian if that mires Acheron. fact7: If the fact that that tribromomethane is not implausible but non-courageous does not hold that noctambulist does not hint. fact8: This neoprene mires Acheron if Ginny does not defrost autumn and is a noxiousness. fact9: If that noctambulist is a kind of a dryer then this Monsieur is not uncivil. fact10: If the fact that somebody is a Corinthian is correct the fact that the person mires Acheron and the person is not a tailoring does not hold. fact11: Something defrosts autumn and that thing is a eyelessness if that thing does not mire Acheron. fact12: Ginny is a eyelessness. fact13: If someone defrosts autumn then the one is a noxiousness. fact14: This neoprene mires Acheron if Ginny defrosts autumn but it is not a kind of a noxiousness. fact15: Someone that does not record prevision is a Corinthian and a square. fact16: Something does not mire Acheron if that it is a kind of a tailoring and mire Acheron is incorrect. fact17: Ginny does not record prevision if the fact that this neoprene is not a xanthomatosis and/or the thing does record prevision does not hold. fact18: That kitchenware does not mire Acheron if that Ginny mire Acheron but it is not a kind of a tailoring is false. fact19: If some man is a cablegram the fact that that person is a kind of non-implausible man that is not courageous is false. fact20: Ginny does not defrost autumn and is not a noxiousness if it is a kind of a eyelessness. fact21: That this neoprene is not a xanthomatosis or that person records prevision or both is not correct if this Monsieur is not uncivil. fact22: Meghan mires Acheron.

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

This neoprene is not a Corinthian.

¬{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Somebody that does not mire Acheron is not a kind of a Corinthian and is a eyelessness. fact2: This neoprene mires Acheron if Ginny does not defrost autumn and this thing is not a kind of a noxiousness. fact3: That that tribromomethane sheers hold. fact4: If that tribromomethane sheers then that tribromomethane is a cablegram. fact5: Some man is a dryer or not uncivil or both if the fact that that one does not hint is correct. fact6: Something is a kind of a Corinthian if that mires Acheron. fact7: If the fact that that tribromomethane is not implausible but non-courageous does not hold that noctambulist does not hint. fact8: This neoprene mires Acheron if Ginny does not defrost autumn and is a noxiousness. fact9: If that noctambulist is a kind of a dryer then this Monsieur is not uncivil. fact10: If the fact that somebody is a Corinthian is correct the fact that the person mires Acheron and the person is not a tailoring does not hold. fact11: Something defrosts autumn and that thing is a eyelessness if that thing does not mire Acheron. fact12: Ginny is a eyelessness. fact13: If someone defrosts autumn then the one is a noxiousness. fact14: This neoprene mires Acheron if Ginny defrosts autumn but it is not a kind of a noxiousness. fact15: Someone that does not record prevision is a Corinthian and a square. fact16: Something does not mire Acheron if that it is a kind of a tailoring and mire Acheron is incorrect. fact17: Ginny does not record prevision if the fact that this neoprene is not a xanthomatosis and/or the thing does record prevision does not hold. fact18: That kitchenware does not mire Acheron if that Ginny mire Acheron but it is not a kind of a tailoring is false. fact19: If some man is a cablegram the fact that that person is a kind of non-implausible man that is not courageous is false. fact20: Ginny does not defrost autumn and is not a noxiousness if it is a kind of a eyelessness. fact21: That this neoprene is not a xanthomatosis or that person records prevision or both is not correct if this Monsieur is not uncivil. fact22: Meghan mires Acheron. ; $hypothesis$ = That this neoprene is a Corinthian is correct. ; $proof$ =

fact20 & fact12 -> int1: Ginny does not defrost autumn and that is not a kind of a noxiousness.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This neoprene mires Acheron.; fact6 -> int3: If this neoprene mires Acheron it is a Corinthian.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The friary is not a clanking and mends deuteranopia.

(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})

fact1: The friary is not a clanking and mends deuteranopia. fact2: The demander does not mend deuteranopia but the thing is a pronominal.

fact1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact2: (¬{AB}{fa} & {EF}{fa})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The friary is not a clanking and mends deuteranopia. fact2: The demander does not mend deuteranopia but the thing is a pronominal. ; $hypothesis$ = The friary is not a clanking and mends deuteranopia. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That neutrophile is non-autoecious.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: This ibex is autoecious. fact2: That neutrophile is not autoecious if this ibex does diffuse Maximian and that person is not lighted. fact3: The cargo diffuses Maximian. fact4: This ibex is not autoecious if that neutrophile diffuses Maximian and is unlighted. fact5: The roofing is autoecious. fact6: This ibex does not persist ingenuousness. fact7: That this ibex is lighted is true if that neutrophile diffuses Maximian and is autoecious. fact8: the Maximian diffuses ibex. fact9: That neutrophile is not unlighted if this ibex diffuses Maximian and it is autoecious. fact10: This ibex does not diffuse Maximian if that neutrophile is unlighted and he/she is autoecious. fact11: That some person does not diffuse Maximian and it is not unlighted is incorrect if it does not part Altoona. fact12: If that neutrophile is autoecious and it does diffuse Maximian this ibex is lighted. fact13: This ibex is unlighted. fact14: Some person is a meerestone and this one is autoecious if this one does not diffuse Maximian. fact15: That eider diffuses Maximian and it completes exiguity.

fact1: {C}{a} fact2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact3: {A}{ff} fact4: ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact5: {C}{am} fact6: ¬{T}{a} fact7: ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact8: {AA}{aa} fact9: ({A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact10: ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact11: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) fact12: ({C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact13: {B}{a} fact14: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({EC}x & {C}x) fact15: ({A}{co} & {GM}{co})

This ibex is both a meerestone and autoecious.

({EC}{a} & {C}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This ibex is autoecious. fact2: That neutrophile is not autoecious if this ibex does diffuse Maximian and that person is not lighted. fact3: The cargo diffuses Maximian. fact4: This ibex is not autoecious if that neutrophile diffuses Maximian and is unlighted. fact5: The roofing is autoecious. fact6: This ibex does not persist ingenuousness. fact7: That this ibex is lighted is true if that neutrophile diffuses Maximian and is autoecious. fact8: the Maximian diffuses ibex. fact9: That neutrophile is not unlighted if this ibex diffuses Maximian and it is autoecious. fact10: This ibex does not diffuse Maximian if that neutrophile is unlighted and he/she is autoecious. fact11: That some person does not diffuse Maximian and it is not unlighted is incorrect if it does not part Altoona. fact12: If that neutrophile is autoecious and it does diffuse Maximian this ibex is lighted. fact13: This ibex is unlighted. fact14: Some person is a meerestone and this one is autoecious if this one does not diffuse Maximian. fact15: That eider diffuses Maximian and it completes exiguity. ; $hypothesis$ = That neutrophile is non-autoecious. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__