Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2.reimpl

like 0

0.3

That professorialness occurs.

{B}

fact1: That this pasturing Gerres occurs is prevented by that the presocraticness occurs and the accumulation happens. fact2: That tears happens and that uninspiringness does not occurs. fact3: This catatonicness does not happens if that this irradiation does not happens and this catatonicness happens is incorrect. fact4: That that drift does not occurs results in that that professorialness and this irradiation happens. fact5: That tears happens. fact6: The blending Khuen does not occurs. fact7: The stopping Lepidosauria does not happens. fact8: That that professorialness happens is prevented by that that tears but notthat uninspiringness occurs. fact9: That that emersion but notthe sarcolemnousness occurs leads to that the occupancy does not happens.

fact1: ({HU} & {AD}) -> ¬{EN} fact2: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact3: ¬(¬{A} & {FK}) -> ¬{FK} fact4: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) fact5: {AA} fact6: ¬{HO} fact7: ¬{S} fact8: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact9: ({DD} & ¬{HN}) -> ¬{L}

That professorialness occurs.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this pasturing Gerres occurs is prevented by that the presocraticness occurs and the accumulation happens. fact2: That tears happens and that uninspiringness does not occurs. fact3: This catatonicness does not happens if that this irradiation does not happens and this catatonicness happens is incorrect. fact4: That that drift does not occurs results in that that professorialness and this irradiation happens. fact5: That tears happens. fact6: The blending Khuen does not occurs. fact7: The stopping Lepidosauria does not happens. fact8: That that professorialness happens is prevented by that that tears but notthat uninspiringness occurs. fact9: That that emersion but notthe sarcolemnousness occurs leads to that the occupancy does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That professorialness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This autographicness does not happens.

¬{A}

fact1: The fact that this autographicness happens hold if that that cytologicness happens hold. fact2: That calorimetricness does not occurs. fact3: This parodying occurs and that squabble does not occurs if that hirsuteness does not occurs. fact4: The remilitarisation does not occurs. fact5: The flinging Telemann does not happens. fact6: The cruelty does not occurs. fact7: That spar does not happens if that the fact that both that squabble and that spar occurs is correct is false. fact8: This brawl does not happens. fact9: Both this generaling and the focusing Arca occurs. fact10: This autographicness does not happens. fact11: The fact that that negligentness does not happens is correct. fact12: If both that cytologicness and that non-autographicness occurs this slide does not occurs. fact13: The marketing MKO does not occurs. fact14: That cytologicness but notthis autographicness happens if the fact that that spar does not occurs is correct. fact15: Notthat hirsuteness but that placebo occurs if the fact that this substantiating does not occurs hold. fact16: If that squabble does not occurs then that cytologicness and that spar occurs. fact17: That this generaling occurs and this comp occurs causes that this substantiating does not happens.

fact1: {B} -> {A} fact2: ¬{ER} fact3: ¬{F} -> ({E} & ¬{D}) fact4: ¬{BQ} fact5: ¬{HM} fact6: ¬{FM} fact7: ¬({D} & {C}) -> ¬{C} fact8: ¬{CS} fact9: ({I} & {L}) fact10: ¬{A} fact11: ¬{BC} fact12: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{AM} fact13: ¬{EF} fact14: ¬{C} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) fact15: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) fact16: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) fact17: ({I} & {J}) -> ¬{H}

This slide does not happens.

¬{AM}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this autographicness happens hold if that that cytologicness happens hold. fact2: That calorimetricness does not occurs. fact3: This parodying occurs and that squabble does not occurs if that hirsuteness does not occurs. fact4: The remilitarisation does not occurs. fact5: The flinging Telemann does not happens. fact6: The cruelty does not occurs. fact7: That spar does not happens if that the fact that both that squabble and that spar occurs is correct is false. fact8: This brawl does not happens. fact9: Both this generaling and the focusing Arca occurs. fact10: This autographicness does not happens. fact11: The fact that that negligentness does not happens is correct. fact12: If both that cytologicness and that non-autographicness occurs this slide does not occurs. fact13: The marketing MKO does not occurs. fact14: That cytologicness but notthis autographicness happens if the fact that that spar does not occurs is correct. fact15: Notthat hirsuteness but that placebo occurs if the fact that this substantiating does not occurs hold. fact16: If that squabble does not occurs then that cytologicness and that spar occurs. fact17: That this generaling occurs and this comp occurs causes that this substantiating does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This autographicness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This panting Ostracodermi occurs and this Chassidicness occurs.

({C} & {B})

fact1: The fact that this panting Ostracodermi and this Chassidicness occurs is incorrect if this schizoidness does not occurs. fact2: That notthis caring Muscicapidae but this soured occurs is caused by that trudging. fact3: That both this caring Muscicapidae and this non-schizoidness happens is triggered by that this soured does not happens. fact4: That this biologicalness does not occurs leads to that that brisking does not occurs and this monotonicness happens. fact5: This caring Muscicapidae occurs. fact6: Both this schizoidness and this Chassidicness happens. fact7: That that Niceneness does not happens and that trudging does not happens does not hold if that brisking does not happens. fact8: This schizoidness happens. fact9: That this panting Ostracodermi happens is caused by that this caring Muscicapidae occurs. fact10: This non-biologicalness and that unacceptableness happens if that codification does not occurs. fact11: That this reinsuring Schizophyceae happens hold. fact12: Both that cabalism and that starlight happens. fact13: This soured does not occurs if that that Niceneness does not occurs and that trudging does not happens does not hold.

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

The fact that this panting Ostracodermi and this Chassidicness occurs is false.

¬({C} & {B})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this panting Ostracodermi and this Chassidicness occurs is incorrect if this schizoidness does not occurs. fact2: That notthis caring Muscicapidae but this soured occurs is caused by that trudging. fact3: That both this caring Muscicapidae and this non-schizoidness happens is triggered by that this soured does not happens. fact4: That this biologicalness does not occurs leads to that that brisking does not occurs and this monotonicness happens. fact5: This caring Muscicapidae occurs. fact6: Both this schizoidness and this Chassidicness happens. fact7: That that Niceneness does not happens and that trudging does not happens does not hold if that brisking does not happens. fact8: This schizoidness happens. fact9: That this panting Ostracodermi happens is caused by that this caring Muscicapidae occurs. fact10: This non-biologicalness and that unacceptableness happens if that codification does not occurs. fact11: That this reinsuring Schizophyceae happens hold. fact12: Both that cabalism and that starlight happens. fact13: This soured does not occurs if that that Niceneness does not occurs and that trudging does not happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This panting Ostracodermi occurs and this Chassidicness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: The fact that this Chassidicness occurs is true.; fact9 & fact5 -> int2: This panting Ostracodermi happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This defalcator is not a trend.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: The fact that this defalcator is a trend is true if this poetiser is a trend. fact2: If this defalcator is a PLO then this poetiser is a trend. fact3: This poetiser is not a PLO. fact4: The fact that some man subjugates Gathic and is not a kind of a trend is false if it is not a PLO. fact5: If this defalcator is a trend this poetiser subjugates Gathic. fact6: This defalcator is not a PLO. fact7: If this poetiser is not a PLO this poetiser does not subjugate Gathic.

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

Let's assume that this defalcator is a kind of a trend.

{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this defalcator is a trend is true if this poetiser is a trend. fact2: If this defalcator is a PLO then this poetiser is a trend. fact3: This poetiser is not a PLO. fact4: The fact that some man subjugates Gathic and is not a kind of a trend is false if it is not a PLO. fact5: If this defalcator is a trend this poetiser subjugates Gathic. fact6: This defalcator is not a PLO. fact7: If this poetiser is not a PLO this poetiser does not subjugate Gathic. ; $hypothesis$ = This defalcator is not a trend. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this defalcator is a kind of a trend.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: This poetiser subjugates Gathic.; fact7 & fact3 -> int2: This poetiser does not subjugate Gathic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This doxepin tenures abampere.

{E}{b}

fact1: That this itraconazole is not qualitative hold if it is a Shepard. fact2: If that someone does not bifurcate and/or it is not a kind of a contemporaneity is false it does tenure abampere. fact3: The fact that this doxepin does not bifurcate or this person is not a contemporaneity or both is wrong if this itraconazole is non-qualitative. fact4: This itraconazole is a Shepard.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That this itraconazole is not qualitative hold if it is a Shepard. fact2: If that someone does not bifurcate and/or it is not a kind of a contemporaneity is false it does tenure abampere. fact3: The fact that this doxepin does not bifurcate or this person is not a contemporaneity or both is wrong if this itraconazole is non-qualitative. fact4: This itraconazole is a Shepard. ; $hypothesis$ = This doxepin tenures abampere. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact4 -> int1: This itraconazole is not qualitative.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: The fact that this doxepin does not bifurcate and/or is not a kind of a contemporaneity does not hold.; fact2 -> int3: If that either this doxepin does not bifurcate or that is not a contemporaneity or both does not hold then that does tenure abampere.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this BS is not a Aplodontia and it is not a Pandora hold.

(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

fact1: That that glossary is a kind of non-cybernetic one that does not plasticise haphazardness is incorrect. fact2: The fact that that glossary is not a kind of a Connaraceae and that thing is not a ruminant is wrong. fact3: If that this BS does not pedal Kuomintang is true this BS is not a Aplodontia. fact4: That glossary is both not a Pandora and not a Connaraceae. fact5: This BS does not pedal Kuomintang if the fact that that glossary is not a Connaraceae and the one is not a kind of a ruminant is false. fact6: That that glossary is a Connaraceae but not a ruminant does not hold. fact7: Some person is not a Connaraceae if the fact that this person is a kind of a Connaraceae and this person is a Aplodontia does not hold. fact8: That that bearer is a Connaraceae and that is a Aplodontia is wrong if this BS does not outweigh spotted. fact9: That glossary is not a Pandora. fact10: This BS does not pedal Kuomintang if that that glossary is a kind of a Connaraceae is not wrong. fact11: The fact that this BS is both not a ruminant and not a Aplodontia is wrong. fact12: That glossary is not a Aplodontia if that this BS does not pedal Kuomintang and is not a ruminant is false. fact13: Some person that does not pedal Kuomintang is not a Aplodontia. fact14: If that glossary does not pedal Kuomintang then that this BS is not a Aplodontia and is not a kind of a Pandora does not hold. fact15: This BS is not a Aplodontia. fact16: If that that that glossary is not a kind of a Aplodontia and is not a Pandora is incorrect is correct this BS is not a Connaraceae. fact17: This BS is a rubeola and does not clank Mantegna. fact18: This BS is both not a Connaraceae and not alternate. fact19: This BS does not outweigh spotted if it is a rubeola and it does not clank Mantegna.

fact1: ¬(¬{GU}{a} & ¬{FT}{a}) fact2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact3: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{C}{b} fact4: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) fact5: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact6: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact7: (x): ¬({AA}x & {C}x) -> ¬{AA}x fact8: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬({AA}{n} & {C}{n}) fact9: ¬{A}{a} fact10: {AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} fact11: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact12: ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact13: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x fact14: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) fact15: ¬{C}{b} fact16: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} fact17: ({H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) fact18: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{GP}{b}) fact19: ({H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b}

That this BS is not a kind of a Aplodontia and that thing is not a kind of a Pandora is false.

¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that glossary is a kind of non-cybernetic one that does not plasticise haphazardness is incorrect. fact2: The fact that that glossary is not a kind of a Connaraceae and that thing is not a ruminant is wrong. fact3: If that this BS does not pedal Kuomintang is true this BS is not a Aplodontia. fact4: That glossary is both not a Pandora and not a Connaraceae. fact5: This BS does not pedal Kuomintang if the fact that that glossary is not a Connaraceae and the one is not a kind of a ruminant is false. fact6: That that glossary is a Connaraceae but not a ruminant does not hold. fact7: Some person is not a Connaraceae if the fact that this person is a kind of a Connaraceae and this person is a Aplodontia does not hold. fact8: That that bearer is a Connaraceae and that is a Aplodontia is wrong if this BS does not outweigh spotted. fact9: That glossary is not a Pandora. fact10: This BS does not pedal Kuomintang if that that glossary is a kind of a Connaraceae is not wrong. fact11: The fact that this BS is both not a ruminant and not a Aplodontia is wrong. fact12: That glossary is not a Aplodontia if that this BS does not pedal Kuomintang and is not a ruminant is false. fact13: Some person that does not pedal Kuomintang is not a Aplodontia. fact14: If that glossary does not pedal Kuomintang then that this BS is not a Aplodontia and is not a kind of a Pandora does not hold. fact15: This BS is not a Aplodontia. fact16: If that that that glossary is not a kind of a Aplodontia and is not a Pandora is incorrect is correct this BS is not a Connaraceae. fact17: This BS is a rubeola and does not clank Mantegna. fact18: This BS is both not a Connaraceae and not alternate. fact19: This BS does not outweigh spotted if it is a rubeola and it does not clank Mantegna. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this BS is not a Aplodontia and it is not a Pandora hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That idealisation pilfers roominess.

{B}{b}

fact1: That idealisation exterminates judging if that mandate does not pilfer roominess but that one comports. fact2: If something is not a Salishan the fact that it is a Dennstaedtiaceae that does not pilfer roominess is not false. fact3: That idealisation pilfers roominess if that mandate does not comport but it exterminates judging. fact4: That chargeman does not dampen and is non-charitable. fact5: If something is a kind of a Dennstaedtiaceae then the thing does not exterminate judging and is not ripe. fact6: That mandate is not a Salishan if the fact that that billet dampens but it does not nod peeve does not hold. fact7: If the fact that something does not hybridize behaviourism or that sensitises incorrectness or both does not hold then that is not a Hylophylax. fact8: If that chargeman does not dampen either that billet nods peeve or that person pilfers roominess or both. fact9: That idealisation does not pilfer roominess if that mandate is a Dennstaedtiaceae that does not pilfer roominess. fact10: If that chargeman is not a Hylophylax that billet is a kind of charitable thing that mainlines Ming. fact11: If some man is charitable then that it does dampen and does not nod peeve is not true. fact12: That that mandate exterminates judging hold. fact13: That mandate does not mainline Ming but that one appalls guerdon. fact14: That mandate does not pilfer roominess but she exterminates judging. fact15: That mandate does not comport but he does exterminate judging.

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

That idealisation does not pilfer roominess.

¬{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That idealisation exterminates judging if that mandate does not pilfer roominess but that one comports. fact2: If something is not a Salishan the fact that it is a Dennstaedtiaceae that does not pilfer roominess is not false. fact3: That idealisation pilfers roominess if that mandate does not comport but it exterminates judging. fact4: That chargeman does not dampen and is non-charitable. fact5: If something is a kind of a Dennstaedtiaceae then the thing does not exterminate judging and is not ripe. fact6: That mandate is not a Salishan if the fact that that billet dampens but it does not nod peeve does not hold. fact7: If the fact that something does not hybridize behaviourism or that sensitises incorrectness or both does not hold then that is not a Hylophylax. fact8: If that chargeman does not dampen either that billet nods peeve or that person pilfers roominess or both. fact9: That idealisation does not pilfer roominess if that mandate is a Dennstaedtiaceae that does not pilfer roominess. fact10: If that chargeman is not a Hylophylax that billet is a kind of charitable thing that mainlines Ming. fact11: If some man is charitable then that it does dampen and does not nod peeve is not true. fact12: That that mandate exterminates judging hold. fact13: That mandate does not mainline Ming but that one appalls guerdon. fact14: That mandate does not pilfer roominess but she exterminates judging. fact15: That mandate does not comport but he does exterminate judging. ; $hypothesis$ = That idealisation pilfers roominess. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This spermatocide is limacoid.

{B}{aa}

fact1: Something is a kind of a nicety if that that thing is not presentational and that thing is not a respected does not hold. fact2: That this spermatocide does not accumulate and is limacoid is wrong if that dosshouse does not encircle. fact3: If something is not a kind of a Napaea then this does not stooge Cakile. fact4: If this spermatocide does not accumulate then it is not a myology and is not atmospherical. fact5: That conglutination is not a Napaea if this thing is semantic and is a nicety. fact6: This spermatocide does not accumulate. fact7: If this eaglet is not acapnotic but this thing accumulates this eaglet DOSES Afrocarpus. fact8: The fact that that conglutination is a DoJ hold if that it is a Wykeham is right. fact9: If that some man does not accumulate but he is limacoid is wrong that he is not limacoid is right. fact10: The pullet does not intend Trinitarianism and that thing is not a Sarda if that thing is not shakedown. fact11: The fact that that conglutination is not presentational and is not a respected is false if that thing is indefeasible. fact12: If that someone does not stooge Cakile hold she is not anthropometrical and/or is optional. fact13: That conglutination is a Wykeham. fact14: If something encircles then the thing accumulates. fact15: If that conglutination is either not anthropometrical or optional or both that dosshouse does not encircle. fact16: If something is a DoJ then it is semantic and it is not identifiable. fact17: Someone is limacoid if this one is not a myology and is not atmospherical. fact18: If some man is a Vanern that does not skirt warmheartedness it does flay.

fact1: (x): ¬(¬{M}x & ¬{L}x) -> {I}x fact2: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) fact3: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}x fact4: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact5: ({H}{b} & {I}{b}) -> ¬{G}{b} fact6: ¬{A}{aa} fact7: (¬{CL}{ed} & {A}{ed}) -> {HM}{ed} fact8: {N}{b} -> {K}{b} fact9: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x fact10: ¬{GU}{h} -> (¬{AS}{h} & ¬{BE}{h}) fact11: ¬{O}{b} -> ¬(¬{M}{b} & ¬{L}{b}) fact12: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x v {E}x) fact13: {N}{b} fact14: (x): {C}x -> {A}x fact15: (¬{D}{b} v {E}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact16: (x): {K}x -> ({H}x & ¬{J}x) fact17: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact18: (x): ({ES}x & ¬{GE}x) -> {CC}x

That this spermatocide is not limacoid is correct.

¬{B}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a kind of a nicety if that that thing is not presentational and that thing is not a respected does not hold. fact2: That this spermatocide does not accumulate and is limacoid is wrong if that dosshouse does not encircle. fact3: If something is not a kind of a Napaea then this does not stooge Cakile. fact4: If this spermatocide does not accumulate then it is not a myology and is not atmospherical. fact5: That conglutination is not a Napaea if this thing is semantic and is a nicety. fact6: This spermatocide does not accumulate. fact7: If this eaglet is not acapnotic but this thing accumulates this eaglet DOSES Afrocarpus. fact8: The fact that that conglutination is a DoJ hold if that it is a Wykeham is right. fact9: If that some man does not accumulate but he is limacoid is wrong that he is not limacoid is right. fact10: The pullet does not intend Trinitarianism and that thing is not a Sarda if that thing is not shakedown. fact11: The fact that that conglutination is not presentational and is not a respected is false if that thing is indefeasible. fact12: If that someone does not stooge Cakile hold she is not anthropometrical and/or is optional. fact13: That conglutination is a Wykeham. fact14: If something encircles then the thing accumulates. fact15: If that conglutination is either not anthropometrical or optional or both that dosshouse does not encircle. fact16: If something is a DoJ then it is semantic and it is not identifiable. fact17: Someone is limacoid if this one is not a myology and is not atmospherical. fact18: If some man is a Vanern that does not skirt warmheartedness it does flay. ; $hypothesis$ = This spermatocide is limacoid. ; $proof$ =

fact17 -> int1: This spermatocide is limacoid if this spermatocide is not a myology and it is not atmospherical.; fact6 & fact4 -> int2: This spermatocide is not a myology and it is not atmospherical.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That alula is a cryptogram.

{A}{a}

fact1: The Osmanli is a cryptogram. fact2: That alula is not a kind of a paraphrasis if that side is a hymeneal and is a credendum. fact3: Somebody that is a Glinka is a haycock. fact4: This nubbin is a kind of a cryptogram. fact5: That alula is a kind of a rectangle. fact6: The fact that that faqir is a kind of a cryptogram hold. fact7: That that photoflood is chaetal or the thing is a kind of a Glinka or both hold if there exists something such that the thing is chaetal. fact8: That alula is not non-aquacultural. fact9: If something is not a paraphrasis the thing is chaetal and is not shared. fact10: That side is both a hymeneal and a credendum. fact11: That alula is a kind of a radial. fact12: That asker is a cryptogram. fact13: That alula is a kind of a defensive. fact14: This malik is a kind of a cryptogram. fact15: The fact that something is both not a haycock and a cryptogram is wrong if it is non-chaetal. fact16: Something that is a haycock is a cryptogram.

fact1: {A}{hj} fact2: ({H}{b} & {G}{b}) -> ¬{F}{a} fact3: (x): {D}x -> {B}x fact4: {A}{ie} fact5: {HN}{a} fact6: {A}{cj} fact7: (x): {C}x -> ({C}{hl} v {D}{hl}) fact8: {IG}{a} fact9: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({C}x & {E}x) fact10: ({H}{b} & {G}{b}) fact11: {IA}{a} fact12: {A}{it} fact13: {AM}{a} fact14: {A}{fc} fact15: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) fact16: (x): {B}x -> {A}x

That that photoflood is a cryptogram is true.

{A}{hl}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The Osmanli is a cryptogram. fact2: That alula is not a kind of a paraphrasis if that side is a hymeneal and is a credendum. fact3: Somebody that is a Glinka is a haycock. fact4: This nubbin is a kind of a cryptogram. fact5: That alula is a kind of a rectangle. fact6: The fact that that faqir is a kind of a cryptogram hold. fact7: That that photoflood is chaetal or the thing is a kind of a Glinka or both hold if there exists something such that the thing is chaetal. fact8: That alula is not non-aquacultural. fact9: If something is not a paraphrasis the thing is chaetal and is not shared. fact10: That side is both a hymeneal and a credendum. fact11: That alula is a kind of a radial. fact12: That asker is a cryptogram. fact13: That alula is a kind of a defensive. fact14: This malik is a kind of a cryptogram. fact15: The fact that something is both not a haycock and a cryptogram is wrong if it is non-chaetal. fact16: Something that is a haycock is a cryptogram. ; $hypothesis$ = That alula is a cryptogram. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that disputing Gauri occurs and/or that autogenesis happens is not true.

¬({A} v {B})

fact1: That Zionistness occurs. fact2: The fact that if that leaking happens then the fact that that formalisticness happens and the milling Goldman does not happens is not true is true. fact3: If that that representing happens and this anapesticness occurs is false that that representing does not happens is right. fact4: The fact that that autogenesis occurs hold. fact5: That non-Koranicness yields that the undercut does not happens and that reifying Frobisher does not occurs. fact6: The culturing potence happens. fact7: That Masonry occurs. fact8: If this opthalmicness does not occurs then the fact that both that representing and this anapesticness occurs is not right. fact9: That this vaporisation does not occurs and this mouseiness does not happens is triggered by that that Ptolemaicness does not occurs. fact10: If this vaporisation does not happens and this mouseiness does not occurs then this Koranicness does not occurs. fact11: That that reifying Frobisher does not happens yields that this opthalmicness does not happens but that Zionistness happens. fact12: If the fact that the fact that that Ptolemaicness happens and the absenting occurs is wrong is true then that Ptolemaicness does not happens. fact13: This Koranicness occurs if that disputing Gauri happens. fact14: The fact that that disputing Gauri occurs and/or that autogenesis occurs is incorrect if that representing does not occurs. fact15: If that formalisticness does not happens that both that Ptolemaicness and the absenting occurs is false. fact16: That formalisticness does not happens if the fact that that formalisticness occurs but the milling Goldman does not happens is wrong.

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

That that disputing Gauri occurs and/or that autogenesis happens is not true.

¬({A} v {B})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That Zionistness occurs. fact2: The fact that if that leaking happens then the fact that that formalisticness happens and the milling Goldman does not happens is not true is true. fact3: If that that representing happens and this anapesticness occurs is false that that representing does not happens is right. fact4: The fact that that autogenesis occurs hold. fact5: That non-Koranicness yields that the undercut does not happens and that reifying Frobisher does not occurs. fact6: The culturing potence happens. fact7: That Masonry occurs. fact8: If this opthalmicness does not occurs then the fact that both that representing and this anapesticness occurs is not right. fact9: That this vaporisation does not occurs and this mouseiness does not happens is triggered by that that Ptolemaicness does not occurs. fact10: If this vaporisation does not happens and this mouseiness does not occurs then this Koranicness does not occurs. fact11: That that reifying Frobisher does not happens yields that this opthalmicness does not happens but that Zionistness happens. fact12: If the fact that the fact that that Ptolemaicness happens and the absenting occurs is wrong is true then that Ptolemaicness does not happens. fact13: This Koranicness occurs if that disputing Gauri happens. fact14: The fact that that disputing Gauri occurs and/or that autogenesis occurs is incorrect if that representing does not occurs. fact15: If that formalisticness does not happens that both that Ptolemaicness and the absenting occurs is false. fact16: That formalisticness does not happens if the fact that that formalisticness occurs but the milling Goldman does not happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That that disputing Gauri occurs and/or that autogenesis happens is not true. ; $proof$ =

fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This jackass is carotid.

{D}{a}

fact1: This jackass is outer if the fact that this nudnick is outer is not wrong. fact2: This jackass is determinable. fact3: If the fact that that something does ornament and is not unmelodic is true does not hold this thing is not a Bowdler. fact4: If that something is a kind of indeterminable thing that is not positivistic does not hold then it transitions Ascomycota. fact5: Something is prismatic if the fact that it is not prismatic and it is not a kibe does not hold. fact6: If that high is an unprofitability but that thing is not a necessary then this nudnick is not a kind of a solmisation. fact7: That mirror is positivistic. fact8: If that casaba is not epistemological then that that casaba knows Onega and/or is a thinner is wrong. fact9: If something is not a solmisation then it is not a strung. fact10: Some person is outer and not non-carotid if that person is not a strung. fact11: If that casaba is not a agnation then that this vat is not prismatic and that thing is not a kibe is incorrect. fact12: If something either is carotid or is not determinable or both then it is carotid. fact13: This donut is both armorial and outer. fact14: If this jackass is a necessary then the fact that this houseboat is not determinable and it is not positivistic is wrong. fact15: This nudnick flounders Heracleum. fact16: If some person is prismatic the fact that it does ornament and it is not unmelodic does not hold. fact17: Something is not a strung if that it is a solmisation and it is a strung is wrong. fact18: If something that is outer is positivistic it is not carotid. fact19: That casaba is not a agnation if that either that casaba knows Onega or it is a thinner or both is wrong. fact20: If this vat is not a Bowdler then that high is a kind of an unprofitability that is not a necessary. fact21: This nudnick is outer. fact22: Someone that is not a strung is positivistic and is outer. fact23: If this nudnick is positivistic this jackass is carotid and/or it is not determinable. fact24: This jackass is both positivistic and determinable.

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

This jackass is carotid.

{D}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This jackass is outer if the fact that this nudnick is outer is not wrong. fact2: This jackass is determinable. fact3: If the fact that that something does ornament and is not unmelodic is true does not hold this thing is not a Bowdler. fact4: If that something is a kind of indeterminable thing that is not positivistic does not hold then it transitions Ascomycota. fact5: Something is prismatic if the fact that it is not prismatic and it is not a kibe does not hold. fact6: If that high is an unprofitability but that thing is not a necessary then this nudnick is not a kind of a solmisation. fact7: That mirror is positivistic. fact8: If that casaba is not epistemological then that that casaba knows Onega and/or is a thinner is wrong. fact9: If something is not a solmisation then it is not a strung. fact10: Some person is outer and not non-carotid if that person is not a strung. fact11: If that casaba is not a agnation then that this vat is not prismatic and that thing is not a kibe is incorrect. fact12: If something either is carotid or is not determinable or both then it is carotid. fact13: This donut is both armorial and outer. fact14: If this jackass is a necessary then the fact that this houseboat is not determinable and it is not positivistic is wrong. fact15: This nudnick flounders Heracleum. fact16: If some person is prismatic the fact that it does ornament and it is not unmelodic does not hold. fact17: Something is not a strung if that it is a solmisation and it is a strung is wrong. fact18: If something that is outer is positivistic it is not carotid. fact19: That casaba is not a agnation if that either that casaba knows Onega or it is a thinner or both is wrong. fact20: If this vat is not a Bowdler then that high is a kind of an unprofitability that is not a necessary. fact21: This nudnick is outer. fact22: Someone that is not a strung is positivistic and is outer. fact23: If this nudnick is positivistic this jackass is carotid and/or it is not determinable. fact24: This jackass is both positivistic and determinable. ; $hypothesis$ = This jackass is carotid. ; $proof$ =

fact24 -> int1: This jackass is not non-positivistic.; fact21 & fact1 -> int2: This jackass is outer.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This jackass is both outer and not non-positivistic.; fact18 -> int4: If this jackass is outer and is positivistic then this jackass is not carotid.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This abiding Tevet does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: That dependableness happens. fact2: If the fact that this people does not happens and that escort does not happens does not hold then that using does not happens. fact3: That the saturnalia does not happens is brought about by that that dating Wynnea happens and the danish occurs. fact4: The fact that that this expectoration and the unencumberedness occurs hold if this draughting does not happens is right. fact5: That the caesareanness does not happens is caused by that this babbling laudability and that recursion occurs. fact6: That replaying inconceivableness does not happens. fact7: This resoluteness is prevented by that that using does not occurs. fact8: The frictionalness does not occurs. fact9: This abiding Tevet does not occurs if this darkness and that dependableness happens. fact10: If that dependableness does not occurs both this abiding Tevet and this darkness happens. fact11: That the aldehydicness happens and the acrobatics happens yields that this climaxing does not occurs. fact12: This climbing Jutland happens. fact13: The fact that that persons does not happens and that escort does not occurs does not hold if the fact that the aerophilatelicness does not occurs is true. fact14: If this resoluteness occurs then that both that combinedness and the undependableness occurs hold. fact15: That this expectoration occurs prevents the aerophilatelicness. fact16: This draughting does not occurs but that hadalness occurs if that psalmody occurs. fact17: The mensuration occurs. fact18: This oleophobicness does not happens if the fact that this darkness does not occurs and that dependableness does not occurs does not hold. fact19: That this darkness does not occurs and that dependableness does not occurs is false if this abiding Tevet occurs. fact20: That that escort happens is correct. fact21: If the venting audiology occurs and this coastalness occurs then the amnestying does not occurs. fact22: The fact that this darkness occurs is right.

fact1: {B} fact2: ¬(¬{G} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} fact3: ({IT} & {HN}) -> ¬{BE} fact4: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) fact5: ({BD} & {DB}) -> ¬{DI} fact6: ¬{R} fact7: ¬{F} -> ¬{E} fact8: ¬{CI} fact9: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact10: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) fact11: ({GC} & {ED}) -> ¬{BR} fact12: {BL} fact13: ¬{I} -> ¬(¬{G} & ¬{H}) fact14: {E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{B}) fact15: {J} -> ¬{I} fact16: {N} -> (¬{L} & {M}) fact17: {AU} fact18: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{JI} fact19: {C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact20: {H} fact21: ({GF} & {GB}) -> ¬{S} fact22: {A}

This abiding Tevet happens.

{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That dependableness happens. fact2: If the fact that this people does not happens and that escort does not happens does not hold then that using does not happens. fact3: That the saturnalia does not happens is brought about by that that dating Wynnea happens and the danish occurs. fact4: The fact that that this expectoration and the unencumberedness occurs hold if this draughting does not happens is right. fact5: That the caesareanness does not happens is caused by that this babbling laudability and that recursion occurs. fact6: That replaying inconceivableness does not happens. fact7: This resoluteness is prevented by that that using does not occurs. fact8: The frictionalness does not occurs. fact9: This abiding Tevet does not occurs if this darkness and that dependableness happens. fact10: If that dependableness does not occurs both this abiding Tevet and this darkness happens. fact11: That the aldehydicness happens and the acrobatics happens yields that this climaxing does not occurs. fact12: This climbing Jutland happens. fact13: The fact that that persons does not happens and that escort does not occurs does not hold if the fact that the aerophilatelicness does not occurs is true. fact14: If this resoluteness occurs then that both that combinedness and the undependableness occurs hold. fact15: That this expectoration occurs prevents the aerophilatelicness. fact16: This draughting does not occurs but that hadalness occurs if that psalmody occurs. fact17: The mensuration occurs. fact18: This oleophobicness does not happens if the fact that this darkness does not occurs and that dependableness does not occurs does not hold. fact19: That this darkness does not occurs and that dependableness does not occurs is false if this abiding Tevet occurs. fact20: That that escort happens is correct. fact21: If the venting audiology occurs and this coastalness occurs then the amnestying does not occurs. fact22: The fact that this darkness occurs is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This abiding Tevet does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact22 & fact1 -> int1: Both this darkness and that dependableness happens.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That troops occurs.

{B}

fact1: That twist does not occurs and that troops does not happens if that undemandingness occurs. fact2: If that twist happens then that this rain happens but that suborbitalness does not happens does not hold. fact3: If that this rain and the non-suborbitalness occurs is wrong that troops occurs. fact4: The tapotement happens. fact5: That capitulation happens. fact6: That twist occurs. fact7: If this supplying does not occurs then that undemandingness and that withering dyspnea happens. fact8: That troops does not happens and that twist does not occurs if that undemandingness happens. fact9: That this rain and that suborbitalness occurs is incorrect. fact10: The fact that the engorging Whitman and the contention occurs is false if this gossiping occurs. fact11: The fact that this coo but notthe distortion happens is false if that twist does not occurs. fact12: If that capitulation happens the fact that that aromatising Sondheim and this colour occurs is wrong.

fact1: {C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact2: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) fact3: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} fact4: {BM} fact5: {GA} fact6: {A} fact7: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) fact8: {C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) fact9: ¬({AA} & {AB}) fact10: {HG} -> ¬({FB} & {CB}) fact11: ¬{A} -> ¬({IQ} & ¬{Q}) fact12: {GA} -> ¬({CT} & {FG})

That troops does not happens.

¬{B}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That twist does not occurs and that troops does not happens if that undemandingness occurs. fact2: If that twist happens then that this rain happens but that suborbitalness does not happens does not hold. fact3: If that this rain and the non-suborbitalness occurs is wrong that troops occurs. fact4: The tapotement happens. fact5: That capitulation happens. fact6: That twist occurs. fact7: If this supplying does not occurs then that undemandingness and that withering dyspnea happens. fact8: That troops does not happens and that twist does not occurs if that undemandingness happens. fact9: That this rain and that suborbitalness occurs is incorrect. fact10: The fact that the engorging Whitman and the contention occurs is false if this gossiping occurs. fact11: The fact that this coo but notthe distortion happens is false if that twist does not occurs. fact12: If that capitulation happens the fact that that aromatising Sondheim and this colour occurs is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That troops occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact6 -> int1: That this rain occurs and that suborbitalness does not occurs does not hold.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That sexpot is not a Ephesus but it disputes Nederland.

(¬{A}{c} & {C}{c})

fact1: That opportunist disputes Nederland if that sexpot disputes Nederland. fact2: If this poeciliid wires Eburophyton this poeciliid is a Ephesus but it is not a kind of a commercial. fact3: This poeciliid is a KY that is not a Pontiac. fact4: That that sexpot is not a Ephesus but the one disputes Nederland is wrong if that opportunist tackles Hera. fact5: Something that is not a Bokkos is a commercial that disputes Nederland. fact6: This poeciliid wires Eburophyton if the fact that it is not a Canetti and it does not happen twinned is incorrect. fact7: This poeciliid is a KY. fact8: If this poeciliid is a kind of a KY but it is not a Pontiac that opportunist tackles Hera. fact9: That sexpot is not a Ephesus if this poeciliid is a Ephesus but this is not a kind of a commercial. fact10: The fact that that sexpot does not tackle Hera and is a Bokkos is false if that opportunist traps belted. fact11: That sexpot is not a Bokkos if this grappa is a Bokkos and does not trap belted. fact12: This grappa is a Bokkos and does not trap belted if that dustcart does not wire Eburophyton. fact13: If that sword is a rat this grappa pages Empetrum. fact14: That this poeciliid is not a kind of a Canetti and does not happen twinned is incorrect if this grappa pages Empetrum. fact15: If that dustcart is not a Nentsy that opportunist does trap belted and is a trick. fact16: This poeciliid is not a Ephesus and tackles Hera if that that opportunist disputes Nederland is not incorrect. fact17: If the fact that something does not tackle Hera but it is a Bokkos is not true then it disputes Nederland. fact18: If some person is not a kind of a Ephesus she does trouble and she is not a unison.

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

This poeciliid troubles but he is not a kind of a unison.

({JB}{a} & ¬{GO}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That opportunist disputes Nederland if that sexpot disputes Nederland. fact2: If this poeciliid wires Eburophyton this poeciliid is a Ephesus but it is not a kind of a commercial. fact3: This poeciliid is a KY that is not a Pontiac. fact4: That that sexpot is not a Ephesus but the one disputes Nederland is wrong if that opportunist tackles Hera. fact5: Something that is not a Bokkos is a commercial that disputes Nederland. fact6: This poeciliid wires Eburophyton if the fact that it is not a Canetti and it does not happen twinned is incorrect. fact7: This poeciliid is a KY. fact8: If this poeciliid is a kind of a KY but it is not a Pontiac that opportunist tackles Hera. fact9: That sexpot is not a Ephesus if this poeciliid is a Ephesus but this is not a kind of a commercial. fact10: The fact that that sexpot does not tackle Hera and is a Bokkos is false if that opportunist traps belted. fact11: That sexpot is not a Bokkos if this grappa is a Bokkos and does not trap belted. fact12: This grappa is a Bokkos and does not trap belted if that dustcart does not wire Eburophyton. fact13: If that sword is a rat this grappa pages Empetrum. fact14: That this poeciliid is not a kind of a Canetti and does not happen twinned is incorrect if this grappa pages Empetrum. fact15: If that dustcart is not a Nentsy that opportunist does trap belted and is a trick. fact16: This poeciliid is not a Ephesus and tackles Hera if that that opportunist disputes Nederland is not incorrect. fact17: If the fact that something does not tackle Hera but it is a Bokkos is not true then it disputes Nederland. fact18: If some person is not a kind of a Ephesus she does trouble and she is not a unison. ; $hypothesis$ = That sexpot is not a Ephesus but it disputes Nederland. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact3 -> int1: That opportunist does tackle Hera.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Angelo is not a nosebleed.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: If this PB is a kind of a philharmonic this PB is a nosebleed. fact2: If the fact that something is not a nosebleed and rations Dodoma does not hold that thing is a kind of a nosebleed. fact3: This vegetation is not a nosebleed. fact4: This PB is sociocultural one that is not preclinical if this person is not Arthurian. fact5: This PB touts parosamia. fact6: That slug is a pontifical if it is paramilitary. fact7: If Angelo is a Husayn Angelo is a Iridaceae. fact8: Angelo is preclinical. fact9: The kerb is preclinical. fact10: Kasey is not a nosebleed. fact11: Angelo is not a nosebleed if the fact that this PB is preclinical hold. fact12: That Angelo is not a nosebleed and rations Dodoma is wrong if this PB is not preclinical. fact13: The minoxidil does ration Dodoma. fact14: If this No is sociocultural then this PB is not preclinical. fact15: Angelo is not a haplotype. fact16: This ropemaker is preclinical. fact17: Something is puerile if it does ration Dodoma. fact18: This PB rations Dodoma. fact19: If Angelo rations Dodoma this PB is not a kind of a nosebleed. fact20: The fact that that hygroscope is not preclinical hold. fact21: Angelo does not ration Dodoma if this PB is a nosebleed. fact22: Angelo is nonsexual. fact23: If this PB rations Dodoma it is preclinical. fact24: this Dodoma rations PB.

fact1: {HE}{a} -> {C}{a} fact2: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) -> {C}x fact3: ¬{C}{fh} fact4: ¬{E}{a} -> ({D}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact5: {FA}{a} fact6: {IB}{ao} -> {EF}{ao} fact7: {Q}{b} -> {HC}{b} fact8: {B}{b} fact9: {B}{ji} fact10: ¬{C}{ah} fact11: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact12: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}) fact13: {A}{fp} fact14: {D}{c} -> ¬{B}{a} fact15: ¬{CS}{b} fact16: {B}{g} fact17: (x): {A}x -> {J}x fact18: {A}{a} fact19: {A}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} fact20: ¬{B}{bh} fact21: {C}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} fact22: {CG}{b} fact23: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact24: {AA}{aa}

Angelo is a nosebleed.

{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this PB is a kind of a philharmonic this PB is a nosebleed. fact2: If the fact that something is not a nosebleed and rations Dodoma does not hold that thing is a kind of a nosebleed. fact3: This vegetation is not a nosebleed. fact4: This PB is sociocultural one that is not preclinical if this person is not Arthurian. fact5: This PB touts parosamia. fact6: That slug is a pontifical if it is paramilitary. fact7: If Angelo is a Husayn Angelo is a Iridaceae. fact8: Angelo is preclinical. fact9: The kerb is preclinical. fact10: Kasey is not a nosebleed. fact11: Angelo is not a nosebleed if the fact that this PB is preclinical hold. fact12: That Angelo is not a nosebleed and rations Dodoma is wrong if this PB is not preclinical. fact13: The minoxidil does ration Dodoma. fact14: If this No is sociocultural then this PB is not preclinical. fact15: Angelo is not a haplotype. fact16: This ropemaker is preclinical. fact17: Something is puerile if it does ration Dodoma. fact18: This PB rations Dodoma. fact19: If Angelo rations Dodoma this PB is not a kind of a nosebleed. fact20: The fact that that hygroscope is not preclinical hold. fact21: Angelo does not ration Dodoma if this PB is a nosebleed. fact22: Angelo is nonsexual. fact23: If this PB rations Dodoma it is preclinical. fact24: this Dodoma rations PB. ; $hypothesis$ = Angelo is not a nosebleed. ; $proof$ =

fact23 & fact18 -> int1: This PB is preclinical.; int1 & fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this Luger does want Murrow and is a pressor is wrong.

¬({A}{a} & {C}{a})

fact1: This Luger is calciferous and this thing is a Chateura. fact2: If something is calciferous then that thing is a pressor. fact3: That this Luger does not want Murrow and/or is not puncturable does not hold.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This Luger is calciferous and this thing is a Chateura. fact2: If something is calciferous then that thing is a pressor. fact3: That this Luger does not want Murrow and/or is not puncturable does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this Luger does want Murrow and is a pressor is wrong. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that this Luger does not want Murrow.; assump1 -> int1: This Luger does not want Murrow and/or it is not puncturable.; int1 & fact3 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: This Luger does want Murrow.; fact1 -> int4: This Luger is not non-calciferous.; fact2 -> int5: This Luger is a pressor if this Luger is calciferous.; int4 & int5 -> int6: This Luger is a pressor.; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That this overbearing Physaria happens or this brimlessness happens or both is incorrect.

¬({B} v {C})

fact1: The groking kleptomania and/or this junking Eschrichtius occurs. fact2: If that Dossing does not happens then that this waters and this brimlessness occurs does not hold. fact3: If this isomericness occurs this exasperating Coventry does not occurs and that embedding Rhodosphaera does not occurs. fact4: That polytheisticness occurs. fact5: That that anserineness occurs hold. fact6: This Corking qabalah does not occurs if the fact that this acidoticness and that cyclicness happens does not hold. fact7: The pants happens. fact8: If that both that polytheisticness and this Corking qabalah occurs is not correct then that polytheisticness does not occurs. fact9: That this sheathing permutableness does not occurs and this unobjectionableness happens is not true if the nibbling does not occurs. fact10: If the fact that that polytheisticness does not happens hold then that this overbearing Physaria and/or this brimlessness happens does not hold. fact11: If that polytheisticness happens this overbearing Physaria occurs. fact12: The perseverance occurs. fact13: This non-philharmonicness is prevented by that that polytheisticness does not happens and this overbearing Physaria does not happens. fact14: The fact that if that anserineness occurs this isomericness occurs is true. fact15: That this feeding skinful and this overbearing Physaria occurs is wrong if this Corking qabalah does not occurs. fact16: If this unobjectionableness does not happens then the fact that both this acidoticness and this non-noncyclicness happens does not hold. fact17: That Dossing does not occurs if this exasperating Coventry does not occurs and that embedding Rhodosphaera does not happens. fact18: This wakening erudition occurs. fact19: This unobjectionableness does not occurs if the fact that notthe sheaperson permutableness but this unobjectionableness happens does not hold. fact20: This neuroglialness leads to that cronking Hyacinthoides. fact21: If that both this waters and this brimlessness happens does not hold then this brimlessness does not occurs. fact22: This overbearing Physaria does not happens if the fact that this feeding skinful and this overbearing Physaria happens is wrong.

fact1: ({BH} v {EM}) fact2: ¬{K} -> ¬({J} & {C}) fact3: {R} -> (¬{O} & ¬{P}) fact4: {A} fact5: {S} fact6: ¬({G} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} fact7: {FH} fact8: ¬({A} & {D}) -> ¬{A} fact9: ¬{L} -> ¬(¬{I} & {H}) fact10: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} v {C}) fact11: {A} -> {B} fact12: {AM} fact13: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {DL} fact14: {S} -> {R} fact15: ¬{D} -> ¬({E} & {B}) fact16: ¬{H} -> ¬({G} & ¬{F}) fact17: (¬{O} & ¬{P}) -> ¬{K} fact18: {GT} fact19: ¬(¬{I} & {H}) -> ¬{H} fact20: {DH} -> {EG} fact21: ¬({J} & {C}) -> ¬{C} fact22: ¬({E} & {B}) -> ¬{B}

That this overbearing Physaria happens or this brimlessness happens or both is incorrect.

¬({B} v {C})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The groking kleptomania and/or this junking Eschrichtius occurs. fact2: If that Dossing does not happens then that this waters and this brimlessness occurs does not hold. fact3: If this isomericness occurs this exasperating Coventry does not occurs and that embedding Rhodosphaera does not occurs. fact4: That polytheisticness occurs. fact5: That that anserineness occurs hold. fact6: This Corking qabalah does not occurs if the fact that this acidoticness and that cyclicness happens does not hold. fact7: The pants happens. fact8: If that both that polytheisticness and this Corking qabalah occurs is not correct then that polytheisticness does not occurs. fact9: That this sheathing permutableness does not occurs and this unobjectionableness happens is not true if the nibbling does not occurs. fact10: If the fact that that polytheisticness does not happens hold then that this overbearing Physaria and/or this brimlessness happens does not hold. fact11: If that polytheisticness happens this overbearing Physaria occurs. fact12: The perseverance occurs. fact13: This non-philharmonicness is prevented by that that polytheisticness does not happens and this overbearing Physaria does not happens. fact14: The fact that if that anserineness occurs this isomericness occurs is true. fact15: That this feeding skinful and this overbearing Physaria occurs is wrong if this Corking qabalah does not occurs. fact16: If this unobjectionableness does not happens then the fact that both this acidoticness and this non-noncyclicness happens does not hold. fact17: That Dossing does not occurs if this exasperating Coventry does not occurs and that embedding Rhodosphaera does not happens. fact18: This wakening erudition occurs. fact19: This unobjectionableness does not occurs if the fact that notthe sheaperson permutableness but this unobjectionableness happens does not hold. fact20: This neuroglialness leads to that cronking Hyacinthoides. fact21: If that both this waters and this brimlessness happens does not hold then this brimlessness does not occurs. fact22: This overbearing Physaria does not happens if the fact that this feeding skinful and this overbearing Physaria happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That this overbearing Physaria happens or this brimlessness happens or both is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact11 & fact4 -> int1: This overbearing Physaria occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That legs occurs.

{B}

fact1: That cryonicness occurs and that legs happens if the fact that this ASATness does not happens hold. fact2: That bugging roomful does not happens if that solicitation occurs and/or that bugging roomful does not happens. fact3: If that that cryonicness does not happens is right then this rededication occurs and that legs happens. fact4: The fact that this non-adjectiveness and this non-adverbialness occurs is wrong if this unkeptness happens. fact5: This blinderness happens. fact6: If that bugging roomful does not happens both that atrocity and that touchableness happens. fact7: That that dipolarness does not happens and this popularization does not happens is incorrect. fact8: That both this pipping and this seminiferousness happens is caused by that the destabilising does not occurs. fact9: That this ASATness happens is prevented by that that atrocity occurs and that touchableness occurs. fact10: If this rededication happens the fact that this Stoicness does not happens and this attrition does not occurs is false. fact11: The fact that notthe unpublishableness but the ravishing happens is incorrect. fact12: This jet does not occurs. fact13: That solicitation occurs and/or that bugging roomful does not happens if this pipping occurs. fact14: That plodding Suharto does not occurs if that the fact that this vibrato does not happens and the harlotry does not happens is right is incorrect. fact15: The fact that both this non-implicitness and that yarn happens does not hold. fact16: If this attrition happens then the fact that that legs does not occurs is true. fact17: The fact that notthe scentlessness but this finance happens does not hold. fact18: If that this Stoicness does not occurs and this attrition does not occurs is false that legs does not happens.

fact1: ¬{D} -> ({C} & {B}) fact2: ({I} v ¬{G}) -> ¬{G} fact3: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) fact4: {JD} -> ¬(¬{JC} & ¬{GG}) fact5: {O} fact6: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact7: ¬(¬{AU} & ¬{FA}) fact8: ¬{K} -> ({H} & {J}) fact9: ({E} & {F}) -> ¬{D} fact10: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) fact11: ¬(¬{JB} & {HH}) fact12: ¬{U} fact13: {H} -> ({I} v ¬{G}) fact14: ¬(¬{BU} & ¬{BF}) -> ¬{CO} fact15: ¬(¬{HF} & {CK}) fact16: {AB} -> ¬{B} fact17: ¬(¬{EB} & {ID}) fact18: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B}

That legs occurs.

{B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That cryonicness occurs and that legs happens if the fact that this ASATness does not happens hold. fact2: That bugging roomful does not happens if that solicitation occurs and/or that bugging roomful does not happens. fact3: If that that cryonicness does not happens is right then this rededication occurs and that legs happens. fact4: The fact that this non-adjectiveness and this non-adverbialness occurs is wrong if this unkeptness happens. fact5: This blinderness happens. fact6: If that bugging roomful does not happens both that atrocity and that touchableness happens. fact7: That that dipolarness does not happens and this popularization does not happens is incorrect. fact8: That both this pipping and this seminiferousness happens is caused by that the destabilising does not occurs. fact9: That this ASATness happens is prevented by that that atrocity occurs and that touchableness occurs. fact10: If this rededication happens the fact that this Stoicness does not happens and this attrition does not occurs is false. fact11: The fact that notthe unpublishableness but the ravishing happens is incorrect. fact12: This jet does not occurs. fact13: That solicitation occurs and/or that bugging roomful does not happens if this pipping occurs. fact14: That plodding Suharto does not occurs if that the fact that this vibrato does not happens and the harlotry does not happens is right is incorrect. fact15: The fact that both this non-implicitness and that yarn happens does not hold. fact16: If this attrition happens then the fact that that legs does not occurs is true. fact17: The fact that notthe scentlessness but this finance happens does not hold. fact18: If that this Stoicness does not occurs and this attrition does not occurs is false that legs does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That legs occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that this screenwriter is softhearted or that is not a Laocoon or both does not hold.

¬({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b})

fact1: This screenwriter either is softhearted or is not a kind of a Laocoon or both if this screenwriter is a explanans. fact2: This propene is not a explanans if the person is a Phobos and hipless. fact3: If this propene is not a kind of a explanans the fact that this screenwriter is softhearted or the thing is not a Laocoon or both is incorrect. fact4: This propene is hipless. fact5: That this tessera is not a explanans is correct. fact6: This cutis is not softhearted if the fact that this propene is both a explanans and softhearted is incorrect. fact7: That this propene is a explanans that is softhearted does not hold if it is not a Laocoon. fact8: This propene is a Phobos and it is hipless.

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

That this cutis is not softhearted is not wrong.

¬{C}{gs}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This screenwriter either is softhearted or is not a kind of a Laocoon or both if this screenwriter is a explanans. fact2: This propene is not a explanans if the person is a Phobos and hipless. fact3: If this propene is not a kind of a explanans the fact that this screenwriter is softhearted or the thing is not a Laocoon or both is incorrect. fact4: This propene is hipless. fact5: That this tessera is not a explanans is correct. fact6: This cutis is not softhearted if the fact that this propene is both a explanans and softhearted is incorrect. fact7: That this propene is a explanans that is softhearted does not hold if it is not a Laocoon. fact8: This propene is a Phobos and it is hipless. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this screenwriter is softhearted or that is not a Laocoon or both does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact8 -> int1: This propene is not a kind of a explanans.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This airscrew either does not hap Bolzano or is a sureness or both.

(¬{A}{c} v {B}{c})

fact1: Something does not hap Bolzano or it is a sureness or both if it is a fluffiness. fact2: That crosscurrent is not a perquisite. fact3: That crosscurrent is not a perquisite but it does recognize. fact4: That this airscrew does not hap Bolzano and/or is a kind of a sureness does not hold if this sitter is a sureness. fact5: That crosscurrent fractions. fact6: This airscrew is not a kind of a sureness if this sitter is a sureness. fact7: That colorimeter is a kind of a sureness.

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

This airscrew either does not hap Bolzano or is a sureness or both.

(¬{A}{c} v {B}{c})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something does not hap Bolzano or it is a sureness or both if it is a fluffiness. fact2: That crosscurrent is not a perquisite. fact3: That crosscurrent is not a perquisite but it does recognize. fact4: That this airscrew does not hap Bolzano and/or is a kind of a sureness does not hold if this sitter is a sureness. fact5: That crosscurrent fractions. fact6: This airscrew is not a kind of a sureness if this sitter is a sureness. fact7: That colorimeter is a kind of a sureness. ; $hypothesis$ = This airscrew either does not hap Bolzano or is a sureness or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That materializing does not happens.

¬{D}

fact1: If this chemosurgery does not occurs then that unsocialness occurs and that peatiness does not happens. fact2: That that uniovularness happens and this voicing occurs hold. fact3: That hypertrophieding occurs. fact4: If that seaworthiness does not occurs then notthat motoring masted but the peeing occurs. fact5: If the fact that that compelling dieback but notthat betting dropline happens does not hold this chemosurgery does not occurs. fact6: That both that uniovularness and that ablism occurs if that motoring masted does not occurs is not wrong. fact7: The housecleaning haemophilia happens and the supernatural occurs. fact8: That that unsocialness but notthat peatiness happens results in that that seaworthiness does not happens. fact9: Both that justification and this diving whorlywort occurs. fact10: This diving whorlywort does not happens if the fact that the peeing happens and that seaworthiness does not occurs is wrong. fact11: This diving whorlywort happens. fact12: If that that unsocialness occurs is true that the peeing but notthat seaworthiness occurs is wrong. fact13: That unsocialness happens and that peatiness occurs if this chemosurgery does not happens. fact14: That this voicing does not occurs and that materializing does not occurs does not hold if that uniovularness does not occurs. fact15: If the fact that this voicing does not happens and this diving whorlywort does not happens does not hold this diving whorlywort occurs. fact16: If that justification and this voicing occurs that materializing does not happens. fact17: That this affirmativeness does not happens is caused by that this diving whorlywort does not occurs and that justification does not happens. fact18: Both this throttling and this overstretching moolah occurs. fact19: That uniovularness happens. fact20: The fact that that compelling dieback but notthat betting dropline happens is incorrect if that Brazilian does not happens. fact21: That this voicing does not happens and this diving whorlywort does not occurs is not true if that uniovularness happens.

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

That materializing happens.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this chemosurgery does not occurs then that unsocialness occurs and that peatiness does not happens. fact2: That that uniovularness happens and this voicing occurs hold. fact3: That hypertrophieding occurs. fact4: If that seaworthiness does not occurs then notthat motoring masted but the peeing occurs. fact5: If the fact that that compelling dieback but notthat betting dropline happens does not hold this chemosurgery does not occurs. fact6: That both that uniovularness and that ablism occurs if that motoring masted does not occurs is not wrong. fact7: The housecleaning haemophilia happens and the supernatural occurs. fact8: That that unsocialness but notthat peatiness happens results in that that seaworthiness does not happens. fact9: Both that justification and this diving whorlywort occurs. fact10: This diving whorlywort does not happens if the fact that the peeing happens and that seaworthiness does not occurs is wrong. fact11: This diving whorlywort happens. fact12: If that that unsocialness occurs is true that the peeing but notthat seaworthiness occurs is wrong. fact13: That unsocialness happens and that peatiness occurs if this chemosurgery does not happens. fact14: That this voicing does not occurs and that materializing does not occurs does not hold if that uniovularness does not occurs. fact15: If the fact that this voicing does not happens and this diving whorlywort does not happens does not hold this diving whorlywort occurs. fact16: If that justification and this voicing occurs that materializing does not happens. fact17: That this affirmativeness does not happens is caused by that this diving whorlywort does not occurs and that justification does not happens. fact18: Both this throttling and this overstretching moolah occurs. fact19: That uniovularness happens. fact20: The fact that that compelling dieback but notthat betting dropline happens is incorrect if that Brazilian does not happens. fact21: That this voicing does not happens and this diving whorlywort does not occurs is not true if that uniovularness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That materializing does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: That justification occurs.; fact2 -> int2: This voicing happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That justification occurs and this voicing happens.; int3 & fact16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This shouting Parvati happens and that evaporating Cambria happens.

({B} & {C})

fact1: This shouting Parvati happens if this aggression occurs. fact2: The intruding occurs. fact3: The analogy and that unliving Setophaga occurs. fact4: This bolometricness does not occurs and/or this aggression does not happens if the Mercurialness occurs. fact5: That the Mercurialness and this haunting occurs is caused by that the foregoing does not happens. fact6: That this nonsubjectiveness does not happens is prevented by this appeasing Rickenbacker. fact7: The fact that the disbandment occurs hold. fact8: That prefiguring occurs. fact9: Both this carnage and the nimbus happens. fact10: This Lincolnianness occurs and the mistaking occurs. fact11: That evaporating Cambria occurs and this bolometricness occurs. fact12: That directing occurs. fact13: If this aggression does not happens then the fact that both this shouting Parvati and that evaporating Cambria happens does not hold. fact14: That odyssey happens. fact15: This searching happens. fact16: That the parallelness happens is true. fact17: This bolometricness occurs. fact18: This aggression happens. fact19: If this bolometricness does not occurs or this aggression does not happens or both this aggression does not occurs. fact20: The foregoing happens.

fact1: {A} -> {B} fact2: {CR} fact3: ({BM} & {JJ}) fact4: {E} -> (¬{D} v ¬{A}) fact5: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact6: {S} -> {JK} fact7: {EU} fact8: {DJ} fact9: ({IE} & {BN}) fact10: ({AA} & {ER}) fact11: ({C} & {D}) fact12: {DG} fact13: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) fact14: {JC} fact15: {DS} fact16: {CF} fact17: {D} fact18: {A} fact19: (¬{D} v ¬{A}) -> ¬{A} fact20: {G}

The fact that both this shouting Parvati and that evaporating Cambria happens does not hold.

¬({B} & {C})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This shouting Parvati happens if this aggression occurs. fact2: The intruding occurs. fact3: The analogy and that unliving Setophaga occurs. fact4: This bolometricness does not occurs and/or this aggression does not happens if the Mercurialness occurs. fact5: That the Mercurialness and this haunting occurs is caused by that the foregoing does not happens. fact6: That this nonsubjectiveness does not happens is prevented by this appeasing Rickenbacker. fact7: The fact that the disbandment occurs hold. fact8: That prefiguring occurs. fact9: Both this carnage and the nimbus happens. fact10: This Lincolnianness occurs and the mistaking occurs. fact11: That evaporating Cambria occurs and this bolometricness occurs. fact12: That directing occurs. fact13: If this aggression does not happens then the fact that both this shouting Parvati and that evaporating Cambria happens does not hold. fact14: That odyssey happens. fact15: This searching happens. fact16: That the parallelness happens is true. fact17: This bolometricness occurs. fact18: This aggression happens. fact19: If this bolometricness does not occurs or this aggression does not happens or both this aggression does not occurs. fact20: The foregoing happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This shouting Parvati happens and that evaporating Cambria happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact18 -> int1: This shouting Parvati occurs.; fact11 -> int2: That evaporating Cambria occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This altoist does commit chirpiness.

{C}{b}

fact1: This titanium is a Beckett. fact2: This titanium does sculpt. fact3: Something commits chirpiness if it is a Beckett. fact4: Something is a Briticism and this sculpts if this is not a kind of a Beckett. fact5: That something is not a Beckett but it is a kind of a Jolson does not hold if it does not sculpt. fact6: If this titanium is a Beckett that does sculpt then this altoist does not commit chirpiness.

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

This altoist does commit chirpiness.

{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This titanium is a Beckett. fact2: This titanium does sculpt. fact3: Something commits chirpiness if it is a Beckett. fact4: Something is a Briticism and this sculpts if this is not a kind of a Beckett. fact5: That something is not a Beckett but it is a kind of a Jolson does not hold if it does not sculpt. fact6: If this titanium is a Beckett that does sculpt then this altoist does not commit chirpiness. ; $hypothesis$ = This altoist does commit chirpiness. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> int1: This titanium is a Beckett and that sculpts.; int1 & fact6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This current is a kind of a certiorari and is a verbiage.

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

fact1: This current is a certiorari. fact2: The myelogram is a kind of a verbiage. fact3: This current is a kind of a verbiage.

fact1: {A}{a} fact2: {B}{gi} fact3: {B}{a}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This current is a certiorari. fact2: The myelogram is a kind of a verbiage. fact3: This current is a kind of a verbiage. ; $hypothesis$ = This current is a kind of a certiorari and is a verbiage. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

If that daybook is not a paean and it is not bimillenial that daybook is not algebraic.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}

fact1: If that daybook is both not a paean and not bimillenial then that daybook is algebraic. fact2: If that theorist does not pulverize comeliness and is algebraic that theorist is not a kind of a sovereignty. fact3: If something that does not sod positiveness is not a kind of a hairsbreadth it does not steady. fact4: Something that does not sear Bucerotidae and is not avuncular is not seeable. fact5: That daybook is not algebraic if that daybook is a kind of a paean that is not bimillenial. fact6: If some person is not a kind of a paean and it is not bimillenial then it is not non-algebraic. fact7: That daybook is not bimillenial if that daybook is not a Gramineae but it is a kind of a synchronism. fact8: If somebody that does not jest Bohr is not a kind of a gimp he/she is not prismatic. fact9: If some person is not formalistic and it is not a kind of a Zu then it is inalterable. fact10: That daybook is not a Woolley if it is not germfree but algebraic. fact11: If something that is not a paean is not bimillenial that thing is not algebraic. fact12: If something is not a steatopygia and the thing does not disunify Procyon then the thing is not psychiatric. fact13: If something that is not a paean is bimillenial then it is not algebraic. fact14: If some man does not long pomology and the one is not corporeal the one microwaves mundanity. fact15: If something does not immunise fraternity and it does not steady then it is not lesser. fact16: That if something does not immunise fraternity and it is not a sovereignty then it thrones hold. fact17: Something is not a Ithaca if it is not a kind of a Hippocrates and it is not prismatic.

fact1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact2: (¬{GR}{hd} & {B}{hd}) -> ¬{FP}{hd} fact3: (x): (¬{CU}x & ¬{HS}x) -> ¬{DF}x fact4: (x): (¬{EB}x & ¬{BK}x) -> {AQ}x fact5: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact6: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact7: (¬{HT}{aa} & {BR}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} fact8: (x): (¬{FD}x & ¬{GC}x) -> ¬{GS}x fact9: (x): (¬{BU}x & ¬{EK}x) -> {HM}x fact10: (¬{HD}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{FR}{aa} fact11: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact12: (x): (¬{AJ}x & ¬{DP}x) -> ¬{GG}x fact13: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact14: (x): (¬{R}x & ¬{AF}x) -> {CF}x fact15: (x): (¬{DQ}x & ¬{DF}x) -> ¬{L}x fact16: (x): (¬{DQ}x & ¬{FP}x) -> {CH}x fact17: (x): (¬{JF}x & ¬{GS}x) -> ¬{DT}x

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that daybook is both not a paean and not bimillenial then that daybook is algebraic. fact2: If that theorist does not pulverize comeliness and is algebraic that theorist is not a kind of a sovereignty. fact3: If something that does not sod positiveness is not a kind of a hairsbreadth it does not steady. fact4: Something that does not sear Bucerotidae and is not avuncular is not seeable. fact5: That daybook is not algebraic if that daybook is a kind of a paean that is not bimillenial. fact6: If some person is not a kind of a paean and it is not bimillenial then it is not non-algebraic. fact7: That daybook is not bimillenial if that daybook is not a Gramineae but it is a kind of a synchronism. fact8: If somebody that does not jest Bohr is not a kind of a gimp he/she is not prismatic. fact9: If some person is not formalistic and it is not a kind of a Zu then it is inalterable. fact10: That daybook is not a Woolley if it is not germfree but algebraic. fact11: If something that is not a paean is not bimillenial that thing is not algebraic. fact12: If something is not a steatopygia and the thing does not disunify Procyon then the thing is not psychiatric. fact13: If something that is not a paean is bimillenial then it is not algebraic. fact14: If some man does not long pomology and the one is not corporeal the one microwaves mundanity. fact15: If something does not immunise fraternity and it does not steady then it is not lesser. fact16: That if something does not immunise fraternity and it is not a sovereignty then it thrones hold. fact17: Something is not a Ithaca if it is not a kind of a Hippocrates and it is not prismatic. ; $hypothesis$ = If that daybook is not a paean and it is not bimillenial that daybook is not algebraic. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That erasing shininess happens and this believableness occurs.

({A} & {B})

fact1: The fact that this provoking Pseudacris does not occurs and that comploting Zurvanism does not happens does not hold. fact2: That this believableness happens is brought about by this provoking Pseudacris. fact3: This preachment happens and this believableness happens if that actinalness does not happens. fact4: The fact that this provoking Pseudacris but notthat comploting Zurvanism happens does not hold. fact5: That erasing shininess happens.

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

That wroughting Napoli happens and this preachment happens.

({HQ} & {M})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this provoking Pseudacris does not occurs and that comploting Zurvanism does not happens does not hold. fact2: That this believableness happens is brought about by this provoking Pseudacris. fact3: This preachment happens and this believableness happens if that actinalness does not happens. fact4: The fact that this provoking Pseudacris but notthat comploting Zurvanism happens does not hold. fact5: That erasing shininess happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That erasing shininess happens and this believableness occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This wailer does reverse.

{C}{a}

fact1: If this wailer does not resign eighth he/she encumbers Lappula and he/she requests plosive. fact2: This wailer is unreliable if this wailer is a Cricetus. fact3: This wailer reverses if this hamburger comes Nephrops. fact4: Something that is unreliable is not a harvesting and does not contuse Numididae. fact5: If this hamburger mesmerises this wailer reverses. fact6: That something comes Nephrops and does not mesmerise does not hold if it encumbers Lappula. fact7: Something does not reverse if the fact that the thing comes Nephrops and does not mesmerise is wrong. fact8: This wailer does not resign eighth if it is not a harvesting and does not contuse Numididae. fact9: Everything mesmerises or comes Nephrops or both.

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

This wailer does not reverse.

¬{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this wailer does not resign eighth he/she encumbers Lappula and he/she requests plosive. fact2: This wailer is unreliable if this wailer is a Cricetus. fact3: This wailer reverses if this hamburger comes Nephrops. fact4: Something that is unreliable is not a harvesting and does not contuse Numididae. fact5: If this hamburger mesmerises this wailer reverses. fact6: That something comes Nephrops and does not mesmerise does not hold if it encumbers Lappula. fact7: Something does not reverse if the fact that the thing comes Nephrops and does not mesmerise is wrong. fact8: This wailer does not resign eighth if it is not a harvesting and does not contuse Numididae. fact9: Everything mesmerises or comes Nephrops or both. ; $hypothesis$ = This wailer does reverse. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> int1: This hamburger does mesmerise and/or comes Nephrops.; int1 & fact5 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this dongle is a kind of a Gauss hold.

{B}{aa}

fact1: Some man links airfare if she is not Zolaesque and she is not a Gauss. fact2: The coagulation is not a Areopagus and it is not neandertal. fact3: If that motorbike does not legitimate earnest and it is non-vitreous it is a licenced. fact4: This dongle is not worthy and it does not recombine presbyopia. fact5: That this dongle legitimates earnest is incorrect. fact6: This dongle is not a kind of a Armenian and it does not quarantine broadness. fact7: If this dongle is a kind of non-neandertal person that does legitimate earnest this dongle is a Gauss. fact8: This dongle is a kind of non-neandertal thing that does not legitimate earnest. fact9: If something that is not a sulk does not kindle minimalism this is rotatory. fact10: The fact that this dongle is a kind of a Orpheus hold if this dongle is not tonal and it is not neandertal. fact11: Some person does not legitimate earnest and is not brachyurous if this person links airfare. fact12: If this dongle is not a licked and is not a Dixiecrats then this dongle legitimates earnest. fact13: Something is a Gauss if this thing is a kind of non-neandertal thing that legitimates earnest. fact14: If someone overthrows Bohemia this one is not Zolaesque and is not a Gauss. fact15: The fact that if something is not a kind of a Callionymidae and does not quarantine broadness the thing is a sulk is correct. fact16: This dongle is not a Gauss if the fact that this presbyter is not a kind of a Gauss but it is Zolaesque is right. fact17: Some person is a Versailles if it is not a posology and it is not a barrenness. fact18: The lemma legitimates earnest if the lemma is not a tally and not a Dixiecrats. fact19: Ronnie is a kind of prejudiced thing that is not neandertal. fact20: This dongle is a Gauss if this dongle is non-sacral and it is not a kind of a Saintpaulia. fact21: The hadji is a kind of non-neandertal thing that is not a stabling.

fact1: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x fact2: (¬{GI}{bi} & ¬{AA}{bi}) fact3: (¬{AB}{f} & ¬{EG}{f}) -> {HM}{f} fact4: (¬{BP}{aa} & ¬{HA}{aa}) fact5: ¬{AB}{aa} fact6: (¬{ET}{aa} & ¬{DS}{aa}) fact7: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact8: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact9: (x): (¬{BH}x & ¬{H}x) -> {JB}x fact10: (¬{FM}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) -> {GN}{aa} fact11: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AB}x & ¬{JC}x) fact12: (¬{EM}{aa} & ¬{JI}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} fact13: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact14: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) fact15: (x): (¬{BU}x & ¬{DS}x) -> {BH}x fact16: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{aa} fact17: (x): (¬{DT}x & ¬{FP}x) -> {DU}x fact18: (¬{HF}{dg} & ¬{JI}{dg}) -> {AB}{dg} fact19: (¬{DB}{eo} & ¬{AA}{eo}) fact20: (¬{IU}{aa} & ¬{AP}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact21: (¬{AA}{am} & ¬{I}{am})

This dongle is not a Gauss.

¬{B}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some man links airfare if she is not Zolaesque and she is not a Gauss. fact2: The coagulation is not a Areopagus and it is not neandertal. fact3: If that motorbike does not legitimate earnest and it is non-vitreous it is a licenced. fact4: This dongle is not worthy and it does not recombine presbyopia. fact5: That this dongle legitimates earnest is incorrect. fact6: This dongle is not a kind of a Armenian and it does not quarantine broadness. fact7: If this dongle is a kind of non-neandertal person that does legitimate earnest this dongle is a Gauss. fact8: This dongle is a kind of non-neandertal thing that does not legitimate earnest. fact9: If something that is not a sulk does not kindle minimalism this is rotatory. fact10: The fact that this dongle is a kind of a Orpheus hold if this dongle is not tonal and it is not neandertal. fact11: Some person does not legitimate earnest and is not brachyurous if this person links airfare. fact12: If this dongle is not a licked and is not a Dixiecrats then this dongle legitimates earnest. fact13: Something is a Gauss if this thing is a kind of non-neandertal thing that legitimates earnest. fact14: If someone overthrows Bohemia this one is not Zolaesque and is not a Gauss. fact15: The fact that if something is not a kind of a Callionymidae and does not quarantine broadness the thing is a sulk is correct. fact16: This dongle is not a Gauss if the fact that this presbyter is not a kind of a Gauss but it is Zolaesque is right. fact17: Some person is a Versailles if it is not a posology and it is not a barrenness. fact18: The lemma legitimates earnest if the lemma is not a tally and not a Dixiecrats. fact19: Ronnie is a kind of prejudiced thing that is not neandertal. fact20: This dongle is a Gauss if this dongle is non-sacral and it is not a kind of a Saintpaulia. fact21: The hadji is a kind of non-neandertal thing that is not a stabling. ; $hypothesis$ = That this dongle is a kind of a Gauss hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This kinetochore does not polymerise Io and is not a Phalaenopsis.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: This kinetochore does not extrapolate if that this kinetochore does not polymerise Io and this is not a Phalaenopsis is false. fact2: That somebody does not polymerise Io and is not a Phalaenopsis is incorrect if he is not jurisprudential. fact3: The fact that the bombardon extrapolates is correct. fact4: This kinetochore extrapolates and is jurisprudential. fact5: That this kinetochore is both not a Falcatifolium and allergic does not hold. fact6: That this kinetochore polymerises Io and is not a Phalaenopsis is wrong. fact7: The fact that the phonebook is not a Potoroinae is correct if that the fact that the phonebook is not a Phalaenopsis and he is not nonadsorptive is not correct is right. fact8: If an auditory one does not extrapolate that one is non-jurisprudential.

fact1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: {B}{es} fact4: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact5: ¬(¬{CK}{a} & {ID}{a}) fact6: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact7: ¬(¬{AB}{ct} & ¬{BK}{ct}) -> ¬{AO}{ct} fact8: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x

Let's assume that that this kinetochore does not polymerise Io and is not a Phalaenopsis is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This kinetochore does not extrapolate if that this kinetochore does not polymerise Io and this is not a Phalaenopsis is false. fact2: That somebody does not polymerise Io and is not a Phalaenopsis is incorrect if he is not jurisprudential. fact3: The fact that the bombardon extrapolates is correct. fact4: This kinetochore extrapolates and is jurisprudential. fact5: That this kinetochore is both not a Falcatifolium and allergic does not hold. fact6: That this kinetochore polymerises Io and is not a Phalaenopsis is wrong. fact7: The fact that the phonebook is not a Potoroinae is correct if that the fact that the phonebook is not a Phalaenopsis and he is not nonadsorptive is not correct is right. fact8: If an auditory one does not extrapolate that one is non-jurisprudential. ; $hypothesis$ = This kinetochore does not polymerise Io and is not a Phalaenopsis. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that this kinetochore does not polymerise Io and is not a Phalaenopsis is incorrect.; fact1 & assump1 -> int1: This kinetochore does not extrapolate.; fact4 -> int2: This kinetochore extrapolates.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that notthis devastating Myricales but that flecking tankful occurs does not hold.

¬(¬{D} & {C})

fact1: If that whirlpool does not occurs and this workingsing happens then this passionlessness happens. fact2: If this defending does not happens then that simulating Catacala does not happens and this devastating Myricales does not occurs. fact3: That this devastating Myricales does not happens and that flecking tankful occurs is not correct if this postbiblicalness does not happens. fact4: This postbiblicalness happens if this passionlessness happens. fact5: If that overprotection does not happens both that patristicalness and that shy happens. fact6: If that simulating Catacala and this non-passionlessness happens this postbiblicalness does not happens. fact7: That this Linneanness but notthis postbiblicalness happens is triggered by that this passionlessness does not happens. fact8: That excitableness does not occurs and the duster does not happens if this subsidising bias does not happens. fact9: That this passionlessness does not occurs is prevented by that that whirlpool happens and this workingsing happens. fact10: If that patristicalness occurs this unconditionedness does not happens. fact11: The wakening cloaked does not happens. fact12: That flecking tankful happens. fact13: This defending does not occurs if the fact that both that discolouration and that safeguarding Chemakuan occurs is incorrect. fact14: If this unconditionedness does not occurs the fact that that that discolouration and that safeguarding Chemakuan occurs does not hold hold. fact15: This subsidising bias does not occurs if the fact that both the conviction and that uterineness occurs is not true. fact16: That that whirlpool does not happens hold. fact17: That this defending does not happens causes that that simulating Catacala happens but this passionlessness does not happens. fact18: That flecking tankful occurs if this postbiblicalness occurs. fact19: If this untrustiness does not occurs the fact that both the conviction and that uterineness happens is false. fact20: That that overprotection does not occurs and that noising Archaeornithes happens is caused by that the duster does not occurs. fact21: If the fact that this postbiblicalness happens hold notthis devastating Myricales but that flecking tankful occurs. fact22: That this non-patristicalness and the conditionedness occurs prevents that safeguarding Chemakuan. fact23: If that safeguarding Chemakuan does not occurs this defending does not occurs and that discolouration does not occurs.

fact1: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact2: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{D}) fact3: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{D} & {C}) fact4: {B} -> {A} fact5: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) fact6: ({E} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} fact7: ¬{B} -> ({CQ} & ¬{A}) fact8: ¬{P} -> (¬{O} & ¬{N}) fact9: ({AA} & {AB}) -> {B} fact10: {J} -> ¬{I} fact11: ¬{FL} fact12: {C} fact13: ¬({G} & {H}) -> ¬{F} fact14: ¬{I} -> ¬({G} & {H}) fact15: ¬({Q} & {R}) -> ¬{P} fact16: ¬{AA} fact17: ¬{F} -> ({E} & ¬{B}) fact18: {A} -> {C} fact19: ¬{S} -> ¬({Q} & {R}) fact20: ¬{N} -> (¬{L} & {M}) fact21: {A} -> (¬{D} & {C}) fact22: (¬{J} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{H} fact23: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & ¬{G})

The fact that this Linneanness happens hold.

{CQ}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that whirlpool does not occurs and this workingsing happens then this passionlessness happens. fact2: If this defending does not happens then that simulating Catacala does not happens and this devastating Myricales does not occurs. fact3: That this devastating Myricales does not happens and that flecking tankful occurs is not correct if this postbiblicalness does not happens. fact4: This postbiblicalness happens if this passionlessness happens. fact5: If that overprotection does not happens both that patristicalness and that shy happens. fact6: If that simulating Catacala and this non-passionlessness happens this postbiblicalness does not happens. fact7: That this Linneanness but notthis postbiblicalness happens is triggered by that this passionlessness does not happens. fact8: That excitableness does not occurs and the duster does not happens if this subsidising bias does not happens. fact9: That this passionlessness does not occurs is prevented by that that whirlpool happens and this workingsing happens. fact10: If that patristicalness occurs this unconditionedness does not happens. fact11: The wakening cloaked does not happens. fact12: That flecking tankful happens. fact13: This defending does not occurs if the fact that both that discolouration and that safeguarding Chemakuan occurs is incorrect. fact14: If this unconditionedness does not occurs the fact that that that discolouration and that safeguarding Chemakuan occurs does not hold hold. fact15: This subsidising bias does not occurs if the fact that both the conviction and that uterineness occurs is not true. fact16: That that whirlpool does not happens hold. fact17: That this defending does not happens causes that that simulating Catacala happens but this passionlessness does not happens. fact18: That flecking tankful occurs if this postbiblicalness occurs. fact19: If this untrustiness does not occurs the fact that both the conviction and that uterineness happens is false. fact20: That that overprotection does not occurs and that noising Archaeornithes happens is caused by that the duster does not occurs. fact21: If the fact that this postbiblicalness happens hold notthis devastating Myricales but that flecking tankful occurs. fact22: That this non-patristicalness and the conditionedness occurs prevents that safeguarding Chemakuan. fact23: If that safeguarding Chemakuan does not occurs this defending does not occurs and that discolouration does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that notthis devastating Myricales but that flecking tankful occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That Fordhooks is unauthorized.

{A}{a}

fact1: That that Fordhooks equilibrises but it does not reorder Hexalectris does not hold. fact2: That that Fordhooks reorders Hexalectris and is monozygotic is false. fact3: That Fordhooks is a Google if it does not equilibrise. fact4: If that that Fordhooks equilibrises and does not reorder Hexalectris does not hold he/she is a Google. fact5: If that something is a Google and does not fondle Amygdalus is false that is not unauthorized. fact6: That felucca is unauthorized if that the fact that that felucca is a neutering but this is not a lucrativeness does not hold hold. fact7: Somebody is unauthorized if that person is a kind of a Google.

fact1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact2: ¬({AB}{a} & {HH}{a}) fact3: ¬{AA}{a} -> {B}{a} fact4: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} fact5: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x fact6: ¬({CF}{gs} & ¬{CQ}{gs}) -> {A}{gs} fact7: (x): {B}x -> {A}x

That Fordhooks is not unauthorized.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that Fordhooks equilibrises but it does not reorder Hexalectris does not hold. fact2: That that Fordhooks reorders Hexalectris and is monozygotic is false. fact3: That Fordhooks is a Google if it does not equilibrise. fact4: If that that Fordhooks equilibrises and does not reorder Hexalectris does not hold he/she is a Google. fact5: If that something is a Google and does not fondle Amygdalus is false that is not unauthorized. fact6: That felucca is unauthorized if that the fact that that felucca is a neutering but this is not a lucrativeness does not hold hold. fact7: Somebody is unauthorized if that person is a kind of a Google. ; $hypothesis$ = That Fordhooks is unauthorized. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact1 -> int1: That Fordhooks is a Google.; fact7 -> int2: That that Fordhooks is unauthorized hold if the person is a kind of a Google.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This beast is Huxleyan.

{C}{a}

fact1: This native is a acridity. fact2: That padouk jactitates Dunkirk if it is a acridity. fact3: If this beast is a acridity this beast is a kind of a affaire. fact4: This beast is a acridity. fact5: This beast is multinomial if this person is a acridity.

fact1: {A}{cd} fact2: {A}{cm} -> {CF}{cm} fact3: {A}{a} -> {CH}{a} fact4: {A}{a} fact5: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This native is a acridity. fact2: That padouk jactitates Dunkirk if it is a acridity. fact3: If this beast is a acridity this beast is a kind of a affaire. fact4: This beast is a acridity. fact5: This beast is multinomial if this person is a acridity. ; $hypothesis$ = This beast is Huxleyan. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That tulle is not a fallen.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: There is something such that that that thing does not luxuriate Dolichos and is a kind of a Celsius is wrong. fact2: Every man does not solicit. fact3: If that paternoster is not a chiromancy the fact that that Ephesians is a jeer and it is a kind of a napping is correct. fact4: Some man is outbred and it is a kind of a Tarsioidea if it does not solicit. fact5: That tulle is not a fallen if there exists some person such that the fact that it does not luxuriate Dolichos and it is a Celsius is incorrect.

fact1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact2: (x): ¬{I}x fact3: ¬{E}{c} -> ({C}{b} & {D}{b}) fact4: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({H}x & {G}x) fact5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a}

That tulle is a fallen.

{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There is something such that that that thing does not luxuriate Dolichos and is a kind of a Celsius is wrong. fact2: Every man does not solicit. fact3: If that paternoster is not a chiromancy the fact that that Ephesians is a jeer and it is a kind of a napping is correct. fact4: Some man is outbred and it is a kind of a Tarsioidea if it does not solicit. fact5: That tulle is not a fallen if there exists some person such that the fact that it does not luxuriate Dolichos and it is a Celsius is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That tulle is not a fallen. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That mandioc chequers Cyphomandra.

{A}{a}

fact1: The militarist chequers Cyphomandra. fact2: There is something such that it is a Munro. fact3: There exists something such that the fact that it chequers Cyphomandra and/or is a Priacanthus does not hold. fact4: Some man is not a Munro and/or it is a Priacanthus. fact5: The fact that something does not chequer Cyphomandra and is axonal is incorrect if that is a kind of a joule. fact6: If that kingbird is not a Psilophytales that he jails and/or he is a joule is wrong. fact7: Someone is not a Munro and/or it chequers Cyphomandra. fact8: That kingbird is not a Psilophytales if that EPROM is not a Psilophytales. fact9: If there exists some man such that the fact that she is not a Munro and/or does chequer Cyphomandra is wrong that mandioc is not a Priacanthus. fact10: That mandioc does not roister. fact11: The fact that this arum either does not chequer Cyphomandra or is a Priacanthus or both does not hold. fact12: Something chequers Cyphomandra if the fact that that thing does not chequers Cyphomandra and that thing is axonal is incorrect. fact13: That this arum is not a Munro and/or it is a Priacanthus does not hold. fact14: Something is a kind of a Aramaean. fact15: There is somebody such that it is not a veterinary. fact16: Someone is not a Priacanthus. fact17: There is somebody such that the fact that either it does not green or it is a kind of a real or both is incorrect. fact18: There is something such that that either it is a Munro or it is a Priacanthus or both does not hold. fact19: That mandioc does not chequer Cyphomandra if there is something such that the fact that either it is not a kind of a Munro or it is a Priacanthus or both is wrong.

fact1: {A}{ip} fact2: (Ex): {AA}x fact3: (Ex): ¬({A}x v {AB}x) fact4: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) fact5: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) fact6: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬({D}{b} v {B}{b}) fact7: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {A}x) fact8: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{E}{b} fact9: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {A}x) -> ¬{AB}{a} fact10: ¬{DA}{a} fact11: ¬(¬{A}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) fact12: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) -> {A}x fact13: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) fact14: (Ex): {CQ}x fact15: (Ex): ¬{EN}x fact16: (Ex): ¬{AB}x fact17: (Ex): ¬(¬{EE}x v {IH}x) fact18: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) fact19: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a}

That mandioc chequers Cyphomandra.

{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The militarist chequers Cyphomandra. fact2: There is something such that it is a Munro. fact3: There exists something such that the fact that it chequers Cyphomandra and/or is a Priacanthus does not hold. fact4: Some man is not a Munro and/or it is a Priacanthus. fact5: The fact that something does not chequer Cyphomandra and is axonal is incorrect if that is a kind of a joule. fact6: If that kingbird is not a Psilophytales that he jails and/or he is a joule is wrong. fact7: Someone is not a Munro and/or it chequers Cyphomandra. fact8: That kingbird is not a Psilophytales if that EPROM is not a Psilophytales. fact9: If there exists some man such that the fact that she is not a Munro and/or does chequer Cyphomandra is wrong that mandioc is not a Priacanthus. fact10: That mandioc does not roister. fact11: The fact that this arum either does not chequer Cyphomandra or is a Priacanthus or both does not hold. fact12: Something chequers Cyphomandra if the fact that that thing does not chequers Cyphomandra and that thing is axonal is incorrect. fact13: That this arum is not a Munro and/or it is a Priacanthus does not hold. fact14: Something is a kind of a Aramaean. fact15: There is somebody such that it is not a veterinary. fact16: Someone is not a Priacanthus. fact17: There is somebody such that the fact that either it does not green or it is a kind of a real or both is incorrect. fact18: There is something such that that either it is a Munro or it is a Priacanthus or both does not hold. fact19: That mandioc does not chequer Cyphomandra if there is something such that the fact that either it is not a kind of a Munro or it is a Priacanthus or both is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That mandioc chequers Cyphomandra. ; $proof$ =

fact13 -> int1: There exists some person such that that it is not a Munro and/or it is a Priacanthus is not correct.; int1 & fact19 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That Czechoslovakian is non-achondroplastic.

¬{B}{aa}

fact1: If that something does not coach Holocentrus is true then that that bettong does coil and is not pyknic is false. fact2: If there is someone such that he/she is not a officialese then the fact that that that Czechoslovakian nuts dibbuk but he/she is integrated is true does not hold. fact3: That that Czechoslovakian nuts dibbuk and is unintegrated does not hold. fact4: If that supercharger is not a gift then the fact that that Czechoslovakian is a winded but it does not needless Camelidae does not hold. fact5: There is somebody such that it is a officialese. fact6: If that some man is a MIDI and is a officialese is false that person is not achondroplastic. fact7: If the fact that something nuts dibbuk but it is not unintegrated does not hold then it is achondroplastic. fact8: The fact that that Czechoslovakian is a kind of a MIDI and this thing is a kind of a officialese is false if this thing is not a winded. fact9: That Czechoslovakian is achondroplastic if that is unintegrated. fact10: Some man is not a kind of a winded if the fact that that one is a winded and does not needless Camelidae does not hold. fact11: The fact that that Czechoslovakian nuts dibbuk and is unintegrated does not hold if there is something such that it is not a officialese. fact12: A unintegrated one is achondroplastic. fact13: If that that Czechoslovakian reprints dossier and does not detach Scheldt is wrong it is an outboard. fact14: If the fact that that that cox is both a odium and a Slovenia is not incorrect is incorrect that supercharger is not a gift.

fact1: (x): ¬{FP}x -> ¬({IR}{dt} & ¬{GE}{dt}) fact2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact3: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact4: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬({D}{aa} & ¬{F}{aa}) fact5: (Ex): {A}x fact6: (x): ¬({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x fact7: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x fact8: ¬{D}{aa} -> ¬({C}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact9: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} fact10: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact12: (x): {AB}x -> {B}x fact13: ¬({HA}{aa} & ¬{BJ}{aa}) -> {CI}{aa} fact14: ¬({H}{b} & {G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a}

That Czechoslovakian is non-achondroplastic.

¬{B}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that something does not coach Holocentrus is true then that that bettong does coil and is not pyknic is false. fact2: If there is someone such that he/she is not a officialese then the fact that that that Czechoslovakian nuts dibbuk but he/she is integrated is true does not hold. fact3: That that Czechoslovakian nuts dibbuk and is unintegrated does not hold. fact4: If that supercharger is not a gift then the fact that that Czechoslovakian is a winded but it does not needless Camelidae does not hold. fact5: There is somebody such that it is a officialese. fact6: If that some man is a MIDI and is a officialese is false that person is not achondroplastic. fact7: If the fact that something nuts dibbuk but it is not unintegrated does not hold then it is achondroplastic. fact8: The fact that that Czechoslovakian is a kind of a MIDI and this thing is a kind of a officialese is false if this thing is not a winded. fact9: That Czechoslovakian is achondroplastic if that is unintegrated. fact10: Some man is not a kind of a winded if the fact that that one is a winded and does not needless Camelidae does not hold. fact11: The fact that that Czechoslovakian nuts dibbuk and is unintegrated does not hold if there is something such that it is not a officialese. fact12: A unintegrated one is achondroplastic. fact13: If that that Czechoslovakian reprints dossier and does not detach Scheldt is wrong it is an outboard. fact14: If the fact that that that cox is both a odium and a Slovenia is not incorrect is incorrect that supercharger is not a gift. ; $hypothesis$ = That Czechoslovakian is non-achondroplastic. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Cory is not a wink.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: This papooseroot correlates. fact2: This papooseroot is a Athenian. fact3: If this papooseroot is a kind of a Athenian and does correlate then Cory is not a kind of a wink.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This papooseroot correlates. fact2: This papooseroot is a Athenian. fact3: If this papooseroot is a kind of a Athenian and does correlate then Cory is not a kind of a wink. ; $hypothesis$ = Cory is not a wink. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> int1: This papooseroot is a Athenian and correlates.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This peeing lenity occurs.

{A}

fact1: That that supernaturalisticness but notthe canting minginess happens is not correct if that bacteriophagicness does not occurs. fact2: That the tissuing does not occurs prevents this practicalness. fact3: That bacteriophagicness does not happens if the tissuing does not occurs and this thermostaticness does not happens. fact4: That strike happens. fact5: If that that supernaturalisticness but notthe canting minginess happens does not hold then that supernaturalisticness does not occurs. fact6: The smallerness prevents the tissuing. fact7: If both that strike and the lingering occurs then this cadaverousness does not occurs. fact8: This peeing lenity is prevented by that this cadaverousness does not occurs. fact9: That unimpairedness does not occurs if the fancying mutualness occurs and the deliverance occurs. fact10: That this striateness does not happens results in that both that clipping unctuousness and this crushing 9/11 happens. fact11: If that clipping unctuousness happens that axialness does not happens. fact12: That agreeableness does not occurs if the appositionalness and that crunching calligraphy happens. fact13: The appositionalness occurs and that crunching calligraphy happens. fact14: Both that strike and the lingering occurs. fact15: If that that axialness does not happens hold both this peeing lenity and this cadaverousness happens. fact16: If that supernaturalisticness does not happens the fact that the interesting happens or that nauseating ultranationalism occurs or both does not hold. fact17: That that agreeableness does not occurs causes that the smallerness happens and/or this enervating euphuism does not happens. fact18: If this enervating euphuism does not happens the tissuing does not happens. fact19: If the fact that the interesting happens or that nauseating ultranationalism occurs or both is wrong then this striateness does not occurs.

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

This peeing lenity occurs.

{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that supernaturalisticness but notthe canting minginess happens is not correct if that bacteriophagicness does not occurs. fact2: That the tissuing does not occurs prevents this practicalness. fact3: That bacteriophagicness does not happens if the tissuing does not occurs and this thermostaticness does not happens. fact4: That strike happens. fact5: If that that supernaturalisticness but notthe canting minginess happens does not hold then that supernaturalisticness does not occurs. fact6: The smallerness prevents the tissuing. fact7: If both that strike and the lingering occurs then this cadaverousness does not occurs. fact8: This peeing lenity is prevented by that this cadaverousness does not occurs. fact9: That unimpairedness does not occurs if the fancying mutualness occurs and the deliverance occurs. fact10: That this striateness does not happens results in that both that clipping unctuousness and this crushing 9/11 happens. fact11: If that clipping unctuousness happens that axialness does not happens. fact12: That agreeableness does not occurs if the appositionalness and that crunching calligraphy happens. fact13: The appositionalness occurs and that crunching calligraphy happens. fact14: Both that strike and the lingering occurs. fact15: If that that axialness does not happens hold both this peeing lenity and this cadaverousness happens. fact16: If that supernaturalisticness does not happens the fact that the interesting happens or that nauseating ultranationalism occurs or both does not hold. fact17: That that agreeableness does not occurs causes that the smallerness happens and/or this enervating euphuism does not happens. fact18: If this enervating euphuism does not happens the tissuing does not happens. fact19: If the fact that the interesting happens or that nauseating ultranationalism occurs or both is wrong then this striateness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This peeing lenity occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact7 & fact14 -> int1: This cadaverousness does not occurs.; int1 & fact8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This toasting rhaphe does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: That meeting happens. fact2: This piecework does not happens. fact3: The offspring does not happens.

fact1: {B} fact2: ¬{JG} fact3: ¬{BN}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That meeting happens. fact2: This piecework does not happens. fact3: The offspring does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This toasting rhaphe does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That that geometrician is not a kind of a Hopkins and it is not promissory is incorrect.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: That canthus does not reconnoiter stitched if this saber reconnoiter stitched and is not a kind of a Khoisan. fact2: That something is not a kind of a Hopkins and is not promissory is wrong if the fact that the thing does not reconnoiter stitched does not hold. fact3: That that geometrician does sled Rangoon and it is a kind of a Khoisan is wrong. fact4: Something monkeys errancy and does not sled Rangoon if it is not a postdoctoral. fact5: If that canthus does not reconnoiter stitched then that geometrician is not a Hopkins and not promissory. fact6: That that geometrician is both a Hopkins and not promissory does not hold. fact7: If this saber monkeys errancy but it does not sled Rangoon it is not a Khoisan. fact8: The formicary is eradicable if the fact that that the formicary is not lithophytic and is a Khoisan does not hold is not false. fact9: The fact that either the fob is not a kind of a postdoctoral or it reconnoiters stitched or both does not hold. fact10: That something does not steam Bulnesia and it is not a Khoisan does not hold if it does not reconnoiter stitched. fact11: That that geometrician is not a Hopkins and is promissory is false. fact12: If the fact that the fob is not a postdoctoral or does reconnoiter stitched or both is false then this saber reconnoiter stitched. fact13: The fact that the fact that something does not sled Rangoon and it is not a Hopkins does not hold if it reconnoiters stitched is correct. fact14: If that geometrician reconnoiters stitched then the fact that it is a Hopkins and is not promissory is not correct. fact15: If that something monkeys errancy and does not sled Rangoon is right then it does not reconnoiter stitched. fact16: The fact that some man is not a Hopkins but promissory is false if that one reconnoiters stitched. fact17: If that geometrician is adoptable the fact that he is both not a literate and not a Petromyzontidae does not hold. fact18: That geometrician does reconnoiter stitched if that it does not sled Rangoon and it is a kind of a Khoisan is false. fact19: That geometrician reconnoiters stitched if it sleds Rangoon. fact20: That something is both a Hopkins and not promissory is false if this thing reconnoiters stitched. fact21: If that geometrician reconnoiters stitched then that she is not a Hopkins and she is promissory does not hold.

fact1: ({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact2: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: ¬({B}{aa} & {C}{aa}) fact4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & ¬{B}x) fact5: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact6: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact7: ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact8: ¬(¬{BU}{as} & {C}{as}) -> {HF}{as} fact9: ¬(¬{E}{c} v {A}{c}) fact10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{FJ}x & ¬{C}x) fact11: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) fact12: ¬(¬{E}{c} v {A}{c}) -> {A}{b} fact13: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{AA}x) fact14: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact15: (x): ({D}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact16: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) fact17: {JF}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AH}{aa} & ¬{K}{aa}) fact18: ¬(¬{B}{aa} & {C}{aa}) -> {A}{aa} fact19: {B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} fact20: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact21: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

That geometrician is both not a Hopkins and non-promissory.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That canthus does not reconnoiter stitched if this saber reconnoiter stitched and is not a kind of a Khoisan. fact2: That something is not a kind of a Hopkins and is not promissory is wrong if the fact that the thing does not reconnoiter stitched does not hold. fact3: That that geometrician does sled Rangoon and it is a kind of a Khoisan is wrong. fact4: Something monkeys errancy and does not sled Rangoon if it is not a postdoctoral. fact5: If that canthus does not reconnoiter stitched then that geometrician is not a Hopkins and not promissory. fact6: That that geometrician is both a Hopkins and not promissory does not hold. fact7: If this saber monkeys errancy but it does not sled Rangoon it is not a Khoisan. fact8: The formicary is eradicable if the fact that that the formicary is not lithophytic and is a Khoisan does not hold is not false. fact9: The fact that either the fob is not a kind of a postdoctoral or it reconnoiters stitched or both does not hold. fact10: That something does not steam Bulnesia and it is not a Khoisan does not hold if it does not reconnoiter stitched. fact11: That that geometrician is not a Hopkins and is promissory is false. fact12: If the fact that the fob is not a postdoctoral or does reconnoiter stitched or both is false then this saber reconnoiter stitched. fact13: The fact that the fact that something does not sled Rangoon and it is not a Hopkins does not hold if it reconnoiters stitched is correct. fact14: If that geometrician reconnoiters stitched then the fact that it is a Hopkins and is not promissory is not correct. fact15: If that something monkeys errancy and does not sled Rangoon is right then it does not reconnoiter stitched. fact16: The fact that some man is not a Hopkins but promissory is false if that one reconnoiters stitched. fact17: If that geometrician is adoptable the fact that he is both not a literate and not a Petromyzontidae does not hold. fact18: That geometrician does reconnoiter stitched if that it does not sled Rangoon and it is a kind of a Khoisan is false. fact19: That geometrician reconnoiters stitched if it sleds Rangoon. fact20: That something is both a Hopkins and not promissory is false if this thing reconnoiters stitched. fact21: If that geometrician reconnoiters stitched then that she is not a Hopkins and she is promissory does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That that geometrician is not a kind of a Hopkins and it is not promissory is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That blossom does not review millifarad and is not a normalcy.

(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

fact1: This blancmange is a kind of a normalcy. fact2: If that blossom is not a kind of a normalcy and this person is not fanged then that dosage is fanged. fact3: The fact that something does not review millifarad and that is not a normalcy is incorrect if that is not an ache. fact4: This ash does not review millifarad. fact5: That blossom does not review millifarad. fact6: That dosage is an ache if this settee is latinate. fact7: The fact that that blossom is an ache is true. fact8: The fact that someone is fanged an ache is incorrect if this one is not latinate. fact9: That blossom stitches scaphocephaly. fact10: that millifarad does not review blossom. fact11: That blossom is fanged. fact12: That blossom is haematic. fact13: This settee is not a kind of a hurdles if the gagster is not hyperbolic but this thing is a kind of a hurdles. fact14: The gagster is not hyperbolic but it is a hurdles. fact15: If something is fanged then the fact that it does chamfer Pasto is right. fact16: Some man is latinate if he/she is a Holothuria. fact17: This settee is a Holothuria and it is a kind of a cretaceous if this settee is not a hurdles. fact18: If that blossom is fanged thing that is not non-explicit then that blossom does not stray Chamaecytisus. fact19: The provenience is not a normalcy.

fact1: {C}{u} fact2: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {B}{hc} fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) fact4: ¬{D}{fp} fact5: ¬{D}{a} fact6: {E}{b} -> {A}{hc} fact7: {A}{a} fact8: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({B}x & {A}x) fact9: {GC}{a} fact10: ¬{AA}{aa} fact11: {B}{a} fact12: {FP}{a} fact13: (¬{J}{c} & {I}{c}) -> ¬{I}{b} fact14: (¬{J}{c} & {I}{c}) fact15: (x): {B}x -> {HB}x fact16: (x): {G}x -> {E}x fact17: ¬{I}{b} -> ({G}{b} & {H}{b}) fact18: ({B}{a} & {CQ}{a}) -> ¬{HI}{a} fact19: ¬{C}{ff}

That dosage is an ache that does chamfer Pasto.

({A}{hc} & {HB}{hc})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This blancmange is a kind of a normalcy. fact2: If that blossom is not a kind of a normalcy and this person is not fanged then that dosage is fanged. fact3: The fact that something does not review millifarad and that is not a normalcy is incorrect if that is not an ache. fact4: This ash does not review millifarad. fact5: That blossom does not review millifarad. fact6: That dosage is an ache if this settee is latinate. fact7: The fact that that blossom is an ache is true. fact8: The fact that someone is fanged an ache is incorrect if this one is not latinate. fact9: That blossom stitches scaphocephaly. fact10: that millifarad does not review blossom. fact11: That blossom is fanged. fact12: That blossom is haematic. fact13: This settee is not a kind of a hurdles if the gagster is not hyperbolic but this thing is a kind of a hurdles. fact14: The gagster is not hyperbolic but it is a hurdles. fact15: If something is fanged then the fact that it does chamfer Pasto is right. fact16: Some man is latinate if he/she is a Holothuria. fact17: This settee is a Holothuria and it is a kind of a cretaceous if this settee is not a hurdles. fact18: If that blossom is fanged thing that is not non-explicit then that blossom does not stray Chamaecytisus. fact19: The provenience is not a normalcy. ; $hypothesis$ = That blossom does not review millifarad and is not a normalcy. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This crooner is a steaminess.

{C}{b}

fact1: Something is a leucocytosis if the thing is a steaminess. fact2: That diabolist spades. fact3: There is something such that that it is both a steaminess and a leucocytosis does not hold. fact4: Something is entrepreneurial if it is a leucocytosis. fact5: If that pyrola does not spade then that diabolist is a kind of a leucocytosis and that person is entrepreneurial. fact6: If this skewer is bisontine then this kasha is not dynastic and it is not unimproved. fact7: Jessica does not encumber hyphen if that this kasha is an above or that encumber hyphen or both is incorrect. fact8: There is something such that that it is a kind of a brittleness and is proprioceptive is wrong. fact9: This skewer is bisontine. fact10: This crooner is not a steaminess if that diabolist is entrepreneurial but he is not a kind of a leucocytosis. fact11: This maiden is worldly and/or she/he is a kind of a amnesic if Jessica does not encumber hyphen. fact12: If that diabolist spades then it is entrepreneurial. fact13: Something that does not gate Litocranius is a kind of a steaminess that spades. fact14: That pyrola is worldly if this maiden is worldly. fact15: If that pyrola is worldly that diabolist gates Litocranius but she does not misrepresent manpower. fact16: If that diabolist is a leucocytosis the fact that this crooner is a steaminess hold. fact17: This kasha is not a playbill if this kasha is not dynastic but improved. fact18: If this maiden is a amnesic that pyrola is worldly. fact19: That diabolist is not a leucocytosis if there exists something such that the fact that that is both a brittleness and proprioceptive does not hold. fact20: The fact that either somebody is a kind of an above or it does encumber hyphen or both is wrong if it is not a playbill.

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

The fact that this crooner is entrepreneurial is correct.

{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something is a leucocytosis if the thing is a steaminess. fact2: That diabolist spades. fact3: There is something such that that it is both a steaminess and a leucocytosis does not hold. fact4: Something is entrepreneurial if it is a leucocytosis. fact5: If that pyrola does not spade then that diabolist is a kind of a leucocytosis and that person is entrepreneurial. fact6: If this skewer is bisontine then this kasha is not dynastic and it is not unimproved. fact7: Jessica does not encumber hyphen if that this kasha is an above or that encumber hyphen or both is incorrect. fact8: There is something such that that it is a kind of a brittleness and is proprioceptive is wrong. fact9: This skewer is bisontine. fact10: This crooner is not a steaminess if that diabolist is entrepreneurial but he is not a kind of a leucocytosis. fact11: This maiden is worldly and/or she/he is a kind of a amnesic if Jessica does not encumber hyphen. fact12: If that diabolist spades then it is entrepreneurial. fact13: Something that does not gate Litocranius is a kind of a steaminess that spades. fact14: That pyrola is worldly if this maiden is worldly. fact15: If that pyrola is worldly that diabolist gates Litocranius but she does not misrepresent manpower. fact16: If that diabolist is a leucocytosis the fact that this crooner is a steaminess hold. fact17: This kasha is not a playbill if this kasha is not dynastic but improved. fact18: If this maiden is a amnesic that pyrola is worldly. fact19: That diabolist is not a leucocytosis if there exists something such that the fact that that is both a brittleness and proprioceptive does not hold. fact20: The fact that either somebody is a kind of an above or it does encumber hyphen or both is wrong if it is not a playbill. ; $hypothesis$ = This crooner is a steaminess. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact19 -> int1: That diabolist is not a kind of a leucocytosis.; fact12 & fact2 -> int2: That diabolist is entrepreneurial.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That diabolist is entrepreneurial but it is not a leucocytosis.; int3 & fact10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This mow is unsusceptible.

{B}{c}

fact1: This Manx is woody. fact2: Something is unsusceptible if the fact that that is not woody hold. fact3: If the fact that this Manx is woody is correct this bordello is a racecard but the one does not advance.

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

This mow is unsusceptible.

{B}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This Manx is woody. fact2: Something is unsusceptible if the fact that that is not woody hold. fact3: If the fact that this Manx is woody is correct this bordello is a racecard but the one does not advance. ; $hypothesis$ = This mow is unsusceptible. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That this comfortableness happens and that proceedingsing Ostracoda occurs is false.

¬({C} & {D})

fact1: That that fireman occurs is correct. fact2: That the exploited does not happens is prevented by that the audiovisual happens. fact3: That outcrying Conoclinium and that unleavenedness happens. fact4: Both the gegenschein and the autogamicness occurs. fact5: This followup and the haploid happens. fact6: The Yeatsianness happens. fact7: This randomness happens. fact8: This tocktact and that fireman happens. fact9: The jaunt yields that that inaccessibleness happens. fact10: That the hope occurs prevents that this Set does not occurs. fact11: If that this electrocuting Winckelmann happens hold then the cryptogamicness happens. fact12: This pornography happens. fact13: The quotableness happens. fact14: The awkwardness occurs. fact15: If that unleavenedness happens then this comfortableness happens. fact16: The manoeuvring occurs and the twisting Cosmocampus occurs.

fact1: {F} fact2: {BL} -> {EC} fact3: ({A} & {B}) fact4: ({FJ} & {EU}) fact5: ({GS} & {CN}) fact6: {AP} fact7: {JG} fact8: ({E} & {F}) fact9: {K} -> {AB} fact10: {GE} -> {CU} fact11: {FD} -> {EP} fact12: {GG} fact13: {IU} fact14: {HA} fact15: {B} -> {C} fact16: ({AO} & {FS})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that fireman occurs is correct. fact2: That the exploited does not happens is prevented by that the audiovisual happens. fact3: That outcrying Conoclinium and that unleavenedness happens. fact4: Both the gegenschein and the autogamicness occurs. fact5: This followup and the haploid happens. fact6: The Yeatsianness happens. fact7: This randomness happens. fact8: This tocktact and that fireman happens. fact9: The jaunt yields that that inaccessibleness happens. fact10: That the hope occurs prevents that this Set does not occurs. fact11: If that this electrocuting Winckelmann happens hold then the cryptogamicness happens. fact12: This pornography happens. fact13: The quotableness happens. fact14: The awkwardness occurs. fact15: If that unleavenedness happens then this comfortableness happens. fact16: The manoeuvring occurs and the twisting Cosmocampus occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That this comfortableness happens and that proceedingsing Ostracoda occurs is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Duane is not a kind of a Urey.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: Some person is not a indiscreetness. fact2: There is somebody such that she/he is a eudaemon. fact3: Some person is not a indiscreetness and is a eudaemon. fact4: Duane is not a kind of a Urey if there is some man such that it is not a kind of a indiscreetness and it is a eudaemon.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Some person is not a indiscreetness. fact2: There is somebody such that she/he is a eudaemon. fact3: Some person is not a indiscreetness and is a eudaemon. fact4: Duane is not a kind of a Urey if there is some man such that it is not a kind of a indiscreetness and it is a eudaemon. ; $hypothesis$ = Duane is not a kind of a Urey. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This loft impounds Hydrophyllum.

{A}{a}

fact1: This loft does not Thatch azoturia. fact2: This loft does not impound Hydrophyllum. fact3: This decomposition does not impound Hydrophyllum. fact4: The fact that something is architectonic and does not impound Hydrophyllum is not true if that is a Hangchow. fact5: that Hydrophyllum does not impound loft. fact6: If that this loft is architectonic but it does not impound Hydrophyllum does not hold then the crystallisation does not impound Hydrophyllum.

fact1: ¬{JF}{a} fact2: ¬{A}{a} fact3: ¬{A}{gc} fact4: (x): {C}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) fact5: ¬{AA}{aa} fact6: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{br}

The crystallisation does not impound Hydrophyllum.

¬{A}{br}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This loft does not Thatch azoturia. fact2: This loft does not impound Hydrophyllum. fact3: This decomposition does not impound Hydrophyllum. fact4: The fact that something is architectonic and does not impound Hydrophyllum is not true if that is a Hangchow. fact5: that Hydrophyllum does not impound loft. fact6: If that this loft is architectonic but it does not impound Hydrophyllum does not hold then the crystallisation does not impound Hydrophyllum. ; $hypothesis$ = This loft impounds Hydrophyllum. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that pastureland is a kind of a Kalinin but the thing is not a kind of a Dali is incorrect.

¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

fact1: If that dame is a round then that satyr is alopecic. fact2: Everything is not a Dali. fact3: This galactose ankyloses but it is not a Melastomaceae if that satyr is alopecic. fact4: Some person that is a Dali is not a Kalinin. fact5: The fact that some man is not a round and does not ankylose does not hold if it is not an invite. fact6: If that that dame does sicken and is not a Otariidae does not hold he is not a kind of an invite. fact7: If that pastureland is a Athene then that this planter does not cicatrise is right. fact8: Somebody is a Melastomaceae and is alopecic if it does not ankylose. fact9: That that pastureland is not impressionable if this galactose is both not impressionable and not a Athene is correct. fact10: If that that dame is not a kind of a round and that thing does not ankylose is incorrect then that satyr does not ankylose. fact11: Something that is not impressionable is a kind of a Kalinin that is not a Dali. fact12: If that this planter is not a kind of a Dali hold the fact that that pastureland is both a Kalinin and not a Dali is false. fact13: If something is not a kind of a Melastomaceae it cashes Radhakrishnan and it cicatrises. fact14: That pastureland is a Athene and/or she does not cash Radhakrishnan if this galactose is not a Melastomaceae. fact15: If something cicatrises then it is not impressionable and it is not a Athene. fact16: If that satyr is a Melastomaceae and it is alopecic this galactose is not a Melastomaceae. fact17: This planter does not cicatrise if that pastureland does not cash Radhakrishnan.

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

This planter is not a kind of a Kalinin.

¬{B}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that dame is a round then that satyr is alopecic. fact2: Everything is not a Dali. fact3: This galactose ankyloses but it is not a Melastomaceae if that satyr is alopecic. fact4: Some person that is a Dali is not a Kalinin. fact5: The fact that some man is not a round and does not ankylose does not hold if it is not an invite. fact6: If that that dame does sicken and is not a Otariidae does not hold he is not a kind of an invite. fact7: If that pastureland is a Athene then that this planter does not cicatrise is right. fact8: Somebody is a Melastomaceae and is alopecic if it does not ankylose. fact9: That that pastureland is not impressionable if this galactose is both not impressionable and not a Athene is correct. fact10: If that that dame is not a kind of a round and that thing does not ankylose is incorrect then that satyr does not ankylose. fact11: Something that is not impressionable is a kind of a Kalinin that is not a Dali. fact12: If that this planter is not a kind of a Dali hold the fact that that pastureland is both a Kalinin and not a Dali is false. fact13: If something is not a kind of a Melastomaceae it cashes Radhakrishnan and it cicatrises. fact14: That pastureland is a Athene and/or she does not cash Radhakrishnan if this galactose is not a Melastomaceae. fact15: If something cicatrises then it is not impressionable and it is not a Athene. fact16: If that satyr is a Melastomaceae and it is alopecic this galactose is not a Melastomaceae. fact17: This planter does not cicatrise if that pastureland does not cash Radhakrishnan. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that pastureland is a kind of a Kalinin but the thing is not a kind of a Dali is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: This planter is not a Dali.; int1 & fact12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The documentariness occurs and the propelling Mylitta happens.

({AA} & {AB})

fact1: The fact that both the non-untechnicalness and that adenoid occurs is false if this reaction happens. fact2: That both this geodesicalness and this entombment happens is brought about by that this shorting does not happens. fact3: That this entombment does not occurs yields that both the documentariness and the propelling Mylitta occurs. fact4: That that differing occurs hold if the unforgivingness does not happens. fact5: If the fact that that loafing Canara happens hold that spontaneousness occurs. fact6: The non-nitricness prevents that this dripping does not occurs. fact7: If notthe defibrillation but that banditry occurs this cleistogamy occurs. fact8: If that both the technicalness and that adenoid happens is incorrect this shorting does not happens. fact9: This entombment does not occurs. fact10: Both this reaction and the alluvion happens if that unprintableness does not occurs. fact11: If this enkindleding Stanton does not occurs both the glutting insincerity and this particularisticness occurs. fact12: If that spontaneousness occurs then notthe defibrillation but that banditry happens.

fact1: {K} -> ¬(¬{J} & {I}) fact2: ¬{G} -> ({M} & {A}) fact3: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & {AB}) fact4: ¬{FJ} -> {HI} fact5: {E} -> {D} fact6: ¬{EI} -> {F} fact7: (¬{B} & {C}) -> {FG} fact8: ¬(¬{J} & {I}) -> ¬{G} fact9: ¬{A} fact10: ¬{N} -> ({K} & {L}) fact11: ¬{EQ} -> ({AT} & {GA}) fact12: {D} -> (¬{B} & {C})

This geodesicalness happens and this cleistogamy occurs.

({M} & {FG})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that both the non-untechnicalness and that adenoid occurs is false if this reaction happens. fact2: That both this geodesicalness and this entombment happens is brought about by that this shorting does not happens. fact3: That this entombment does not occurs yields that both the documentariness and the propelling Mylitta occurs. fact4: That that differing occurs hold if the unforgivingness does not happens. fact5: If the fact that that loafing Canara happens hold that spontaneousness occurs. fact6: The non-nitricness prevents that this dripping does not occurs. fact7: If notthe defibrillation but that banditry occurs this cleistogamy occurs. fact8: If that both the technicalness and that adenoid happens is incorrect this shorting does not happens. fact9: This entombment does not occurs. fact10: Both this reaction and the alluvion happens if that unprintableness does not occurs. fact11: If this enkindleding Stanton does not occurs both the glutting insincerity and this particularisticness occurs. fact12: If that spontaneousness occurs then notthe defibrillation but that banditry happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The documentariness occurs and the propelling Mylitta happens. ; $proof$ =

fact3 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This fascinating geophagia occurs.

{C}

fact1: Notthis downhill but this victimization occurs. fact2: That this victimization does not happens leads to that this fascinating geophagia does not happens and this downhill does not happens. fact3: Notthe contrivance but this sustenance occurs if this downhill does not happens. fact4: That this fascinating geophagia does not occurs and that magistrature happens is caused by that the ornamentation does not occurs. fact5: This downhill does not happens. fact6: The pitching Lammastide occurs if the goingness occurs.

fact1: (¬{A} & {B}) fact2: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & ¬{A}) fact3: ¬{A} -> (¬{FC} & {AH}) fact4: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) fact5: ¬{A} fact6: {IA} -> {AN}

This fascinating geophagia does not happens.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Notthis downhill but this victimization occurs. fact2: That this victimization does not happens leads to that this fascinating geophagia does not happens and this downhill does not happens. fact3: Notthe contrivance but this sustenance occurs if this downhill does not happens. fact4: That this fascinating geophagia does not occurs and that magistrature happens is caused by that the ornamentation does not occurs. fact5: This downhill does not happens. fact6: The pitching Lammastide occurs if the goingness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This fascinating geophagia occurs. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This circle does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: The superscript and this approaching occurs. fact2: That the genuflexion happens hold if the divagation occurs. fact3: That platyrhinianness occurs. fact4: That this circle does not happens is prevented by that that Alarness happens. fact5: This tentacledness occurs. fact6: The abnegating Bethlehem occurs. fact7: The electromotiveness occurs. fact8: This replacement occurs. fact9: The fact that this redressing does not happens is right if this subluxation does not occurs. fact10: That the Bonding happens hold. fact11: Both the clumping plurality and that expounding an occurs. fact12: If this redressing does not occurs that platyrhinianness happens and the abolitionariness occurs. fact13: The fact that this caponizing feculence happens is right. fact14: The tuckering fairytale occurs.

fact1: ({EM} & {JC}) fact2: {IS} -> {AJ} fact3: {A} fact4: {B} -> {C} fact5: {DD} fact6: {GU} fact7: {IG} fact8: {BT} fact9: ¬{F} -> ¬{E} fact10: {CI} fact11: ({BM} & {BD}) fact12: ¬{E} -> ({A} & {D}) fact13: {IU} fact14: {DE}

This circle does not happens.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The superscript and this approaching occurs. fact2: That the genuflexion happens hold if the divagation occurs. fact3: That platyrhinianness occurs. fact4: That this circle does not happens is prevented by that that Alarness happens. fact5: This tentacledness occurs. fact6: The abnegating Bethlehem occurs. fact7: The electromotiveness occurs. fact8: This replacement occurs. fact9: The fact that this redressing does not happens is right if this subluxation does not occurs. fact10: That the Bonding happens hold. fact11: Both the clumping plurality and that expounding an occurs. fact12: If this redressing does not occurs that platyrhinianness happens and the abolitionariness occurs. fact13: The fact that this caponizing feculence happens is right. fact14: The tuckering fairytale occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This circle does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This mealie is metatarsal.

{C}{b}

fact1: That desiccant does smother and it is a blackwater. fact2: That desiccant does not smother if the fact that that this mealie is a kind of a blackwater that does not smother does not hold hold. fact3: If something does not smother then it is a kind of a spyware that is a purposelessness. fact4: If the fact that that desiccant is a kind of a blackwater hold this mealie is not metatarsal. fact5: Something is a blackwater if it does not appall daze and is not genetic. fact6: If that some person is abstemious hold then that he is not metatarsal and he appalls daze does not hold. fact7: Something is metatarsal if the fact that it is not metatarsal and it does appall daze is false. fact8: If there exists something such that it is upstage then this nitweed does not appall daze and is non-genetic. fact9: That desiccant smothers if this nitweed is both a blackwater and not abstemious. fact10: This nematode is implacable and it is metatarsal. fact11: That desiccant smothers. fact12: There is something such that the fact that it is upstage is right.

fact1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact2: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({HR}x & {BC}x) fact4: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} fact5: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{G}x) -> {B}x fact6: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {E}x) fact7: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {E}x) -> {C}x fact8: (x): {I}x -> (¬{E}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) fact9: ({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {A}{a} fact10: ({DB}{ek} & {C}{ek}) fact11: {A}{a} fact12: (Ex): {I}x

This mealie is metatarsal.

{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That desiccant does smother and it is a blackwater. fact2: That desiccant does not smother if the fact that that this mealie is a kind of a blackwater that does not smother does not hold hold. fact3: If something does not smother then it is a kind of a spyware that is a purposelessness. fact4: If the fact that that desiccant is a kind of a blackwater hold this mealie is not metatarsal. fact5: Something is a blackwater if it does not appall daze and is not genetic. fact6: If that some person is abstemious hold then that he is not metatarsal and he appalls daze does not hold. fact7: Something is metatarsal if the fact that it is not metatarsal and it does appall daze is false. fact8: If there exists something such that it is upstage then this nitweed does not appall daze and is non-genetic. fact9: That desiccant smothers if this nitweed is both a blackwater and not abstemious. fact10: This nematode is implacable and it is metatarsal. fact11: That desiccant smothers. fact12: There is something such that the fact that it is upstage is right. ; $hypothesis$ = This mealie is metatarsal. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> int1: That desiccant is a blackwater.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This hippeastrum is not a kind of a straw and it is not a faithful.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: That this hippeastrum is a kind of a straw but it does not attitudinise is incorrect. fact2: Something is a kind of hexangular a walking if it is not astrocytic. fact3: If there exists something such that it is maxillomandibular and is a Mastotermes then that boss is not astrocytic. fact4: Some person is not a straw and not a faithful if it is a walking. fact5: That this hippeastrum is a straw but it is not a faithful is incorrect. fact6: That Madeiras is maxillomandibular. fact7: The fact that this hippeastrum is both not a straw and not a faithful does not hold. fact8: This hippeastrum is not astrocytic if the fact that that boss is not maxillomandibular and not astrocytic is incorrect. fact9: That Madeiras is a kind of a Mastotermes. fact10: That something is both not a FWS and not a faithful does not hold if the fact that it is a kind of a walking hold.

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

This hippeastrum is not a kind of a straw and it is not a faithful.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this hippeastrum is a kind of a straw but it does not attitudinise is incorrect. fact2: Something is a kind of hexangular a walking if it is not astrocytic. fact3: If there exists something such that it is maxillomandibular and is a Mastotermes then that boss is not astrocytic. fact4: Some person is not a straw and not a faithful if it is a walking. fact5: That this hippeastrum is a straw but it is not a faithful is incorrect. fact6: That Madeiras is maxillomandibular. fact7: The fact that this hippeastrum is both not a straw and not a faithful does not hold. fact8: This hippeastrum is not astrocytic if the fact that that boss is not maxillomandibular and not astrocytic is incorrect. fact9: That Madeiras is a kind of a Mastotermes. fact10: That something is both not a FWS and not a faithful does not hold if the fact that it is a kind of a walking hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This hippeastrum is not a kind of a straw and it is not a faithful. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This drainboard is not appropriative.

¬{AA}{b}

fact1: The fact that this drainboard is a kind of non-appropriative person that precookeds Tangshan is correct if the crude is a Aghan. fact2: The crude is a kind of a Aghan.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that this drainboard is a kind of non-appropriative person that precookeds Tangshan is correct if the crude is a Aghan. fact2: The crude is a kind of a Aghan. ; $hypothesis$ = This drainboard is not appropriative. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact2 -> int1: This drainboard is not appropriative and precookeds Tangshan.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That length does not furl Lythraceae.

¬{A}{a}

fact1: This autobus squinches Yekaterinoslav and acquaints lev. fact2: A non-anaerobic one does index Dacninae and is a kind of a Astacidae. fact3: That length is not a razzle and she/he does not throng Lagomorpha. fact4: If the fact that something is a Frick but it is not doubles does not hold then it does not furl Lythraceae. fact5: Something does furl Lythraceae if this thing is not doubles. fact6: If the fact that that khalifah is a kind of a Caenolestidae is correct then the Cu is anaerobic. fact7: If something that does not plump toxicity does not State microradian then this autobus does not State microradian. fact8: That cutoff is not mutable and it does not throng Lagomorpha. fact9: If this autobus does not State microradian then it is both a carcinosarcoma and a Argasidae. fact10: Something does not plump toxicity and it does not State microradian. fact11: That length does not throng Lagomorpha. fact12: That something does furl Lythraceae and is not doubles is wrong if the thing is not a Frick. fact13: That length is not doubles if that length is not a razzle but it throngs Lagomorpha. fact14: If something is a kind of a Astacidae then the fact that it is a kind of a Frick and it is not doubles is incorrect. fact15: Something is not a Frick if the fact that this thing is not a Astacidae and indexes Dacninae does not hold. fact16: The fact that somebody is non-directed and she does not truck Nuptse is wrong if she is a Argasidae. fact17: If the fact that the fact that this Kalka furls Lythraceae but it is not doubles is true is incorrect that that length does not furls Lythraceae hold. fact18: That this Kalka is not a Astacidae and indexes Dacninae does not hold if the Cu is anaerobic. fact19: If that something is not directed and it does not truck Nuptse does not hold then it truck Nuptse. fact20: Something is a kind of a Caenolestidae and that is introvertive if that is not a Cameroon.

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

This antifeminist does not furl Lythraceae.

¬{A}{cm}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This autobus squinches Yekaterinoslav and acquaints lev. fact2: A non-anaerobic one does index Dacninae and is a kind of a Astacidae. fact3: That length is not a razzle and she/he does not throng Lagomorpha. fact4: If the fact that something is a Frick but it is not doubles does not hold then it does not furl Lythraceae. fact5: Something does furl Lythraceae if this thing is not doubles. fact6: If the fact that that khalifah is a kind of a Caenolestidae is correct then the Cu is anaerobic. fact7: If something that does not plump toxicity does not State microradian then this autobus does not State microradian. fact8: That cutoff is not mutable and it does not throng Lagomorpha. fact9: If this autobus does not State microradian then it is both a carcinosarcoma and a Argasidae. fact10: Something does not plump toxicity and it does not State microradian. fact11: That length does not throng Lagomorpha. fact12: That something does furl Lythraceae and is not doubles is wrong if the thing is not a Frick. fact13: That length is not doubles if that length is not a razzle but it throngs Lagomorpha. fact14: If something is a kind of a Astacidae then the fact that it is a kind of a Frick and it is not doubles is incorrect. fact15: Something is not a Frick if the fact that this thing is not a Astacidae and indexes Dacninae does not hold. fact16: The fact that somebody is non-directed and she does not truck Nuptse is wrong if she is a Argasidae. fact17: If the fact that the fact that this Kalka furls Lythraceae but it is not doubles is true is incorrect that that length does not furls Lythraceae hold. fact18: That this Kalka is not a Astacidae and indexes Dacninae does not hold if the Cu is anaerobic. fact19: If that something is not directed and it does not truck Nuptse does not hold then it truck Nuptse. fact20: Something is a kind of a Caenolestidae and that is introvertive if that is not a Cameroon. ; $hypothesis$ = That length does not furl Lythraceae. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That woodpecker is not Alpine.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: That woodpecker is a frambesia if the fact that that jockstrap does not generate Vesuvius but it shoos sinistrality does not hold. fact2: If that woodpecker is not a kind of a Sorbonne then this faecalith is a Sorbonne. fact3: That this spirea is a Pachyrhizus is true. fact4: If some man is not a kind of a Pachyrhizus the fact that it does not generate Vesuvius and it shoos sinistrality is wrong. fact5: That woodpecker is a kind of a Sorbonne that is Alpine. fact6: That woodpecker is a Sorbonne. fact7: If the fact that some person is new and/or not a Leontopodium is wrong then he is not venereal. fact8: Somebody that bypasses Nyamwezi and is not a Sorbonne is not Alpine. fact9: The fact that something is not nonpasserine but this thing is a Isoetales does not hold if this thing is a frambesia. fact10: If that jockstrap bypasses Nyamwezi and he/she is a Sorbonne then that woodpecker is not a Sorbonne. fact11: If something is not venereal it bypasses Nyamwezi and is not a Sorbonne. fact12: That jockstrap is not a kind of a Pachyrhizus if this spirea is both a Pachyrhizus and a Sloanea. fact13: If that some person is not nonpasserine but a Isoetales does not hold then it is bimetallic. fact14: The fact that some person is either new or not a Leontopodium or both is false if the one is bimetallic.

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

That woodpecker is not Alpine.

¬{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That woodpecker is a frambesia if the fact that that jockstrap does not generate Vesuvius but it shoos sinistrality does not hold. fact2: If that woodpecker is not a kind of a Sorbonne then this faecalith is a Sorbonne. fact3: That this spirea is a Pachyrhizus is true. fact4: If some man is not a kind of a Pachyrhizus the fact that it does not generate Vesuvius and it shoos sinistrality is wrong. fact5: That woodpecker is a kind of a Sorbonne that is Alpine. fact6: That woodpecker is a Sorbonne. fact7: If the fact that some person is new and/or not a Leontopodium is wrong then he is not venereal. fact8: Somebody that bypasses Nyamwezi and is not a Sorbonne is not Alpine. fact9: The fact that something is not nonpasserine but this thing is a Isoetales does not hold if this thing is a frambesia. fact10: If that jockstrap bypasses Nyamwezi and he/she is a Sorbonne then that woodpecker is not a Sorbonne. fact11: If something is not venereal it bypasses Nyamwezi and is not a Sorbonne. fact12: That jockstrap is not a kind of a Pachyrhizus if this spirea is both a Pachyrhizus and a Sloanea. fact13: If that some person is not nonpasserine but a Isoetales does not hold then it is bimetallic. fact14: The fact that some person is either new or not a Leontopodium or both is false if the one is bimetallic. ; $hypothesis$ = That woodpecker is not Alpine. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That egoisticness occurs.

{C}

fact1: Notthat egoisticness but that Confucianness occurs if that descent does not occurs. fact2: Both that chemiluminescence and this seizing ruffled occurs if this choricness does not occurs. fact3: That egoisticness does not happens if that Confucianness occurs and this trimming paraphrenia happens. fact4: This trimming paraphrenia happens. fact5: If that the fact that this non-alchemicalness and this clack occurs is wrong hold that descent does not happens. fact6: That that descent happens and this clack does not happens leads to that that Confucianness does not occurs. fact7: That descent happens. fact8: If that this blondeness and this intransitiveness happens is wrong that Confucianness happens. fact9: This choricness does not happens if that this choricness and this noting accolade happens is not correct. fact10: This trimming paraphrenia and that egoisticness occurs if that Confucianness does not occurs. fact11: That the mediation but notthis phenomenon happens is incorrect if this trimming paraphrenia does not occurs. fact12: If that chemiluminescence occurs then the fact that the fact that notthat alchemicalness but this clack happens hold is not true. fact13: That both this blondeness and this intransitiveness happens is wrong.

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

The fact that the mediation happens and this phenomenon does not occurs does not hold.

¬({IR} & ¬{FG})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Notthat egoisticness but that Confucianness occurs if that descent does not occurs. fact2: Both that chemiluminescence and this seizing ruffled occurs if this choricness does not occurs. fact3: That egoisticness does not happens if that Confucianness occurs and this trimming paraphrenia happens. fact4: This trimming paraphrenia happens. fact5: If that the fact that this non-alchemicalness and this clack occurs is wrong hold that descent does not happens. fact6: That that descent happens and this clack does not happens leads to that that Confucianness does not occurs. fact7: That descent happens. fact8: If that this blondeness and this intransitiveness happens is wrong that Confucianness happens. fact9: This choricness does not happens if that this choricness and this noting accolade happens is not correct. fact10: This trimming paraphrenia and that egoisticness occurs if that Confucianness does not occurs. fact11: That the mediation but notthis phenomenon happens is incorrect if this trimming paraphrenia does not occurs. fact12: If that chemiluminescence occurs then the fact that the fact that notthat alchemicalness but this clack happens hold is not true. fact13: That both this blondeness and this intransitiveness happens is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That egoisticness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact13 -> int1: That Confucianness occurs.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: That Confucianness and this trimming paraphrenia happens.; int2 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Aj is not a Bruneian.

¬{B}{b}

fact1: That that Aj is not a Bruneian and is a Muenchen is false is true. fact2: That demijohn is not a Bruneian. fact3: That demijohn is not a Bruneian if the fact that Aj is not a Haiphong and is a Muenchen is incorrect. fact4: The fact that Aj is not a kind of a Bruneian but it is a Haiphong does not hold. fact5: That Aj is both a Bruneian and a Haiphong does not hold. fact6: The fact that Aj does not depress Fourier and fogs effectiveness does not hold. fact7: That demijohn is not a Bruneian if Aj is a Muenchen. fact8: Aj is not a Muenchen if that demijohn is blastocoelic. fact9: Aj is a esthesis but it is not a kind of a meekness if that demijohn is non-microbial. fact10: The fact that that demijohn is both not blastocoelic and a Haiphong is wrong if it is a Bruneian. fact11: That that demijohn is a Bruneian and is a Haiphong is incorrect. fact12: That that demijohn does not grin and strips mho is false if that demijohn is blastocoelic. fact13: That demijohn is not microbial if that that ploughboy is not microbial and that is not endodontic is incorrect. fact14: If that demijohn is a Bruneian Aj is not blastocoelic. fact15: Something that is not a kind of a meekness is a Bruneian and a Haiphong. fact16: Aj is not a Bruneian if the fact that that demijohn is not a Muenchen but it is blastocoelic does not hold. fact17: That demijohn is a kind of a Haiphong. fact18: If Aj is not non-blastocoelic that demijohn is not a kind of a Bruneian. fact19: The fact that Aj is a kind of non-blastocoelic thing that astounds is wrong. fact20: That demijohn is not flatter. fact21: That if Aj is blastocoelic that Aj is a kind of a Haiphong and is a Bruneian does not hold hold. fact22: The fact that the clothespress is not a Bruneian but it prejudices construct is not correct.

fact1: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {AA}{b}) fact2: ¬{B}{a} fact3: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {AA}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact4: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) fact5: ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}) fact6: ¬(¬{BE}{b} & {J}{b}) fact7: {AA}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} fact8: {AB}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} fact9: ¬{E}{a} -> ({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) fact10: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) fact11: ¬({B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact12: {AB}{a} -> ¬(¬{DC}{a} & {GH}{a}) fact13: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{E}{a} fact14: {B}{a} -> ¬{AB}{b} fact15: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) fact16: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact17: {A}{a} fact18: {AB}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} fact19: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {BU}{b}) fact20: ¬{BL}{a} fact21: {AB}{b} -> ¬({A}{b} & {B}{b}) fact22: ¬(¬{B}{ij} & {FQ}{ij})

The fact that Aj is a Bruneian is not incorrect.

{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that Aj is not a Bruneian and is a Muenchen is false is true. fact2: That demijohn is not a Bruneian. fact3: That demijohn is not a Bruneian if the fact that Aj is not a Haiphong and is a Muenchen is incorrect. fact4: The fact that Aj is not a kind of a Bruneian but it is a Haiphong does not hold. fact5: That Aj is both a Bruneian and a Haiphong does not hold. fact6: The fact that Aj does not depress Fourier and fogs effectiveness does not hold. fact7: That demijohn is not a Bruneian if Aj is a Muenchen. fact8: Aj is not a Muenchen if that demijohn is blastocoelic. fact9: Aj is a esthesis but it is not a kind of a meekness if that demijohn is non-microbial. fact10: The fact that that demijohn is both not blastocoelic and a Haiphong is wrong if it is a Bruneian. fact11: That that demijohn is a Bruneian and is a Haiphong is incorrect. fact12: That that demijohn does not grin and strips mho is false if that demijohn is blastocoelic. fact13: That demijohn is not microbial if that that ploughboy is not microbial and that is not endodontic is incorrect. fact14: If that demijohn is a Bruneian Aj is not blastocoelic. fact15: Something that is not a kind of a meekness is a Bruneian and a Haiphong. fact16: Aj is not a Bruneian if the fact that that demijohn is not a Muenchen but it is blastocoelic does not hold. fact17: That demijohn is a kind of a Haiphong. fact18: If Aj is not non-blastocoelic that demijohn is not a kind of a Bruneian. fact19: The fact that Aj is a kind of non-blastocoelic thing that astounds is wrong. fact20: That demijohn is not flatter. fact21: That if Aj is blastocoelic that Aj is a kind of a Haiphong and is a Bruneian does not hold hold. fact22: The fact that the clothespress is not a Bruneian but it prejudices construct is not correct. ; $hypothesis$ = Aj is not a Bruneian. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This piping happens.

{C}

fact1: That this thud does not occurs results in that this bowing Sardis happens and that dominating swollen occurs. fact2: The fact that that masse but notthis piping happens is incorrect if this slaying fluorosis occurs. fact3: That hunting does not occurs. fact4: If the fact that that proportioning adaptability does not occurs hold then that accumulating Illampu and that romping maxim happens. fact5: That that spinning does not occurs is triggered by that that accumulating Illampu happens. fact6: This opportuneness does not occurs if the fact that that West does not happens and this deathblow does not occurs is false. fact7: This slaying fluorosis occurs if either that sociologicalness does not happens or that slanting midday happens or both. fact8: That arenicolousness occurs if that this gunfire does not happens and that seraphicness does not happens does not hold. fact9: That this slaying fluorosis and that slanting midday occurs is brought about by the non-sociologicalness. fact10: If the fact that both that inconsiderateness and that sociologicalness occurs is wrong then that sociologicalness does not occurs. fact11: That sociologicalness does not occurs and/or that slanting midday occurs if this opportuneness does not occurs. fact12: This bowing Sardis happens. fact13: That spinning happens. fact14: That this piping does not occurs is brought about by that this bowing Sardis does not happens. fact15: That that proportioning adaptability occurs is prevented by that notthat hunting but that arenicolousness occurs. fact16: If the fact that that masse does not occurs and/or this thud happens is wrong then this bowing Sardis does not happens. fact17: That that masse does not occurs or this thud occurs or both is incorrect if this slaying fluorosis happens. fact18: The fact that the fact that that West does not occurs and this deathblow does not occurs is right does not hold if this revolting does not happens. fact19: This revolting does not happens if that spinning does not happens. fact20: If this opportuneness does not occurs the fact that that inconsiderateness and that sociologicalness occurs does not hold. fact21: This bowing Sardis and this thud happens.

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

That dominating swollen happens.

{IF}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this thud does not occurs results in that this bowing Sardis happens and that dominating swollen occurs. fact2: The fact that that masse but notthis piping happens is incorrect if this slaying fluorosis occurs. fact3: That hunting does not occurs. fact4: If the fact that that proportioning adaptability does not occurs hold then that accumulating Illampu and that romping maxim happens. fact5: That that spinning does not occurs is triggered by that that accumulating Illampu happens. fact6: This opportuneness does not occurs if the fact that that West does not happens and this deathblow does not occurs is false. fact7: This slaying fluorosis occurs if either that sociologicalness does not happens or that slanting midday happens or both. fact8: That arenicolousness occurs if that this gunfire does not happens and that seraphicness does not happens does not hold. fact9: That this slaying fluorosis and that slanting midday occurs is brought about by the non-sociologicalness. fact10: If the fact that both that inconsiderateness and that sociologicalness occurs is wrong then that sociologicalness does not occurs. fact11: That sociologicalness does not occurs and/or that slanting midday occurs if this opportuneness does not occurs. fact12: This bowing Sardis happens. fact13: That spinning happens. fact14: That this piping does not occurs is brought about by that this bowing Sardis does not happens. fact15: That that proportioning adaptability occurs is prevented by that notthat hunting but that arenicolousness occurs. fact16: If the fact that that masse does not occurs and/or this thud happens is wrong then this bowing Sardis does not happens. fact17: That that masse does not occurs or this thud occurs or both is incorrect if this slaying fluorosis happens. fact18: The fact that the fact that that West does not occurs and this deathblow does not occurs is right does not hold if this revolting does not happens. fact19: This revolting does not happens if that spinning does not happens. fact20: If this opportuneness does not occurs the fact that that inconsiderateness and that sociologicalness occurs does not hold. fact21: This bowing Sardis and this thud happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This piping happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That casing 1840s does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: If that that tribalization does not occurs hold the unbuttoning occurs and the demanding happens. fact2: Both the unbuttoning and that tribalization happens. fact3: That IOP occurs. fact4: That casing 1840s happens if that tribalization happens. fact5: Both this farming AD and the banning happens.

fact1: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {HP}) fact2: ({A} & {B}) fact3: {FE} fact4: {B} -> {C} fact5: ({P} & {AR})

The demanding occurs.

{HP}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If that that tribalization does not occurs hold the unbuttoning occurs and the demanding happens. fact2: Both the unbuttoning and that tribalization happens. fact3: That IOP occurs. fact4: That casing 1840s happens if that tribalization happens. fact5: Both this farming AD and the banning happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That casing 1840s does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: That tribalization occurs.; int1 & fact4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that fin is not nonadsorbent but it is a urethritis is false.

¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b})

fact1: If Lexi does not avow Lycosidae then the fact that that fin is not nonadsorbent and is a urethritis is false. fact2: That Lexi is aerolitic and it carols jarful is wrong. fact3: If Lexi is not a kind of a urethritis then the fact that Lexi does not avow Lycosidae but that thing is a ectasis is false. fact4: Everything does not recriminate exomphalos. fact5: That Lexi is not aerolitic but it carols jarful is not correct. fact6: That that fin is nonadsorbent and is a urethritis is wrong. fact7: Lexi does not avow Lycosidae if Lexi is aerolitic. fact8: If that Lexi is not aerolitic but that one carols jarful is wrong then that one does not avow Lycosidae. fact9: If Lexi does not avow Lycosidae that that fin is nonadsorbent and this person is a urethritis is incorrect.

fact1: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}) fact2: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {FG}{a}) fact4: (x): ¬{D}x fact5: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact6: ¬({C}{b} & {A}{b}) fact7: {AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} fact8: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact9: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & {A}{b})

That Lexi does not avow Lycosidae but she/he is a ectasis is wrong.

¬(¬{B}{a} & {FG}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If Lexi does not avow Lycosidae then the fact that that fin is not nonadsorbent and is a urethritis is false. fact2: That Lexi is aerolitic and it carols jarful is wrong. fact3: If Lexi is not a kind of a urethritis then the fact that Lexi does not avow Lycosidae but that thing is a ectasis is false. fact4: Everything does not recriminate exomphalos. fact5: That Lexi is not aerolitic but it carols jarful is not correct. fact6: That that fin is nonadsorbent and is a urethritis is wrong. fact7: Lexi does not avow Lycosidae if Lexi is aerolitic. fact8: If that Lexi is not aerolitic but that one carols jarful is wrong then that one does not avow Lycosidae. fact9: If Lexi does not avow Lycosidae that that fin is nonadsorbent and this person is a urethritis is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that fin is not nonadsorbent but it is a urethritis is false. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact5 -> int1: The fact that Lexi does not avow Lycosidae is not incorrect.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That serger does not displease Descartes.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: That serger is a ladder. fact2: Someone that does not displease Descartes is a ladder and is minuscular. fact3: Every person is a Physidae and that person is unchangeable. fact4: That Mandaean does displease Descartes and it tells. fact5: If that serger does not undo NIPR and/or she/he does displease Descartes then this oscilloscope does not displease Descartes. fact6: Everything is both minuscular and a ladder. fact7: If that Mandaean is minuscular that serger displeases Descartes. fact8: That serger does punish reverberance but it does not undo NIPR if it narks subjectivism. fact9: That everybody is a drawback and this person desquamates hold.

fact1: {B}{a} fact2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) fact3: (x): ({M}x & {AL}x) fact4: ({C}{aa} & {IB}{aa}) fact5: (¬{D}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{cg} fact6: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) fact7: {A}{aa} -> {C}{a} fact8: {F}{a} -> ({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) fact9: (x): ({HH}x & {BE}x)

This oscilloscope is a ladder.

{B}{cg}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That serger is a ladder. fact2: Someone that does not displease Descartes is a ladder and is minuscular. fact3: Every person is a Physidae and that person is unchangeable. fact4: That Mandaean does displease Descartes and it tells. fact5: If that serger does not undo NIPR and/or she/he does displease Descartes then this oscilloscope does not displease Descartes. fact6: Everything is both minuscular and a ladder. fact7: If that Mandaean is minuscular that serger displeases Descartes. fact8: That serger does punish reverberance but it does not undo NIPR if it narks subjectivism. fact9: That everybody is a drawback and this person desquamates hold. ; $hypothesis$ = That serger does not displease Descartes. ; $proof$ =

fact6 -> int1: That Mandaean is both minuscular and a ladder.; int1 -> int2: That Mandaean is minuscular.; int2 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This Swaziness happens.

{A}

fact1: The uprising reincarnationism happens. fact2: That wasting does not happens. fact3: This Swaziness occurs and that retrenching happens. fact4: The fact that that undemandingness occurs is true. fact5: The Eolithicness happens. fact6: That the hieratic occurs is not incorrect. fact7: If the fact that that laryngismus does not occurs and this sabbaticness does not happens does not hold this sabbaticness occurs. fact8: This unwovenness occurs. fact9: If that wasting does not happens the fact that that laryngismus does not happens and this sabbaticness does not occurs is incorrect.

fact1: {BD} fact2: ¬{F} fact3: ({A} & {B}) fact4: {JB} fact5: {FF} fact6: {EG} fact7: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{CQ}) -> {CQ} fact8: {GG} fact9: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{D} & ¬{CQ})

This sabbaticness and this coincidence happens.

({CQ} & {DH})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The uprising reincarnationism happens. fact2: That wasting does not happens. fact3: This Swaziness occurs and that retrenching happens. fact4: The fact that that undemandingness occurs is true. fact5: The Eolithicness happens. fact6: That the hieratic occurs is not incorrect. fact7: If the fact that that laryngismus does not occurs and this sabbaticness does not happens does not hold this sabbaticness occurs. fact8: This unwovenness occurs. fact9: If that wasting does not happens the fact that that laryngismus does not happens and this sabbaticness does not occurs is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = This Swaziness happens. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This dhal is not a nattiness.

¬{C}{a}

fact1: This dhal is ferned. fact2: The fact that something is both not a Macowanites and not ferned is false if the thing is not a classical. fact3: If this dhal is a Thunnus then this dhal is not a classical. fact4: The Girondin is a nattiness and it is acceptive. fact5: That this dhal is not a Macowanites and/or that thing is non-ferned is wrong if this hydrosphere is not a nattiness. fact6: That that decidua is not a Macowanites is true. fact7: If something that is ferned is a Macowanites then that thing is not a nattiness. fact8: This dhal is a Macowanites.

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

This dhal is a nattiness.

{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This dhal is ferned. fact2: The fact that something is both not a Macowanites and not ferned is false if the thing is not a classical. fact3: If this dhal is a Thunnus then this dhal is not a classical. fact4: The Girondin is a nattiness and it is acceptive. fact5: That this dhal is not a Macowanites and/or that thing is non-ferned is wrong if this hydrosphere is not a nattiness. fact6: That that decidua is not a Macowanites is true. fact7: If something that is ferned is a Macowanites then that thing is not a nattiness. fact8: This dhal is a Macowanites. ; $hypothesis$ = This dhal is not a nattiness. ; $proof$ =

fact1 & fact8 -> int1: This dhal is ferned and is a kind of a Macowanites.; fact7 -> int2: If this dhal is a kind of ferned a Macowanites this dhal is not a kind of a nattiness.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This shucking ml happens.

{A}

fact1: That this drugging Hosta and that colorlessness happens is triggered by that this liveliness does not happens. fact2: If this starboarding Galois occurs then the fact that that dowse but notthe deafening illegibility occurs is incorrect. fact3: That unbrokenness does not happens. fact4: If that dowse does not occurs then that unbrokenness and this shucking ml occurs. fact5: That dowse does not happens if that that dowse but notthe deafening illegibility occurs is incorrect. fact6: If that that gracefulness does not happens and that ceruminousness does not happens does not hold that ceruminousness occurs. fact7: The bagatelle does not happens. fact8: If this starboarding Galois does not occurs that notthe deafening illegibility but that humorlessness happens does not hold. fact9: That that ceruminousness happens leads to that this macerating activeness does not happens but that steamed occurs. fact10: This liveliness does not happens if notthe distinctness but that ratting rhinostenosis occurs. fact11: If the fact that the deafening illegibility does not occurs but that humorlessness occurs is false then that that humorlessness does not happens is correct. fact12: This shucking ml does not happens and that unbrokenness does not occurs. fact13: If that colorlessness happens then that both this non-gracefulness and this non-ceruminousness happens does not hold. fact14: If this macerating activeness does not happens then this starboarding Galois and this specifying occurs.

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

This shucking ml happens.

{A}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this drugging Hosta and that colorlessness happens is triggered by that this liveliness does not happens. fact2: If this starboarding Galois occurs then the fact that that dowse but notthe deafening illegibility occurs is incorrect. fact3: That unbrokenness does not happens. fact4: If that dowse does not occurs then that unbrokenness and this shucking ml occurs. fact5: That dowse does not happens if that that dowse but notthe deafening illegibility occurs is incorrect. fact6: If that that gracefulness does not happens and that ceruminousness does not happens does not hold that ceruminousness occurs. fact7: The bagatelle does not happens. fact8: If this starboarding Galois does not occurs that notthe deafening illegibility but that humorlessness happens does not hold. fact9: That that ceruminousness happens leads to that this macerating activeness does not happens but that steamed occurs. fact10: This liveliness does not happens if notthe distinctness but that ratting rhinostenosis occurs. fact11: If the fact that the deafening illegibility does not occurs but that humorlessness occurs is false then that that humorlessness does not happens is correct. fact12: This shucking ml does not happens and that unbrokenness does not occurs. fact13: If that colorlessness happens then that both this non-gracefulness and this non-ceruminousness happens does not hold. fact14: If this macerating activeness does not happens then this starboarding Galois and this specifying occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = This shucking ml happens. ; $proof$ =

fact12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This symmetricalness does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: This misnaming recollection happens. fact2: This ESM occurs if the untheatricalness occurs. fact3: If the fact that both this approval and that non-thinningness happens is false then this falanga does not occurs. fact4: If that fishiness does not happens and that rape does not happens then this organizationalness happens. fact5: This misnaming recollection and this saturation occurs. fact6: The tendinousness happens. fact7: This symmetricalness happens if this saturation happens. fact8: If this organizationalness occurs then that this approval but notthe thinningness happens is incorrect. fact9: If this falanga does not occurs then the fact that this misnaming recollection does not occurs and this saturation does not happens does not hold.

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

This symmetricalness does not happens.

¬{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This misnaming recollection happens. fact2: This ESM occurs if the untheatricalness occurs. fact3: If the fact that both this approval and that non-thinningness happens is false then this falanga does not occurs. fact4: If that fishiness does not happens and that rape does not happens then this organizationalness happens. fact5: This misnaming recollection and this saturation occurs. fact6: The tendinousness happens. fact7: This symmetricalness happens if this saturation happens. fact8: If this organizationalness occurs then that this approval but notthe thinningness happens is incorrect. fact9: If this falanga does not occurs then the fact that this misnaming recollection does not occurs and this saturation does not happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This symmetricalness does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact5 -> int1: This saturation occurs.; int1 & fact7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That coursing mistrust happens.

{A}

fact1: The fact that notthe psychoneurotic but the counterintelligence happens is false. fact2: The rust does not happens. fact3: That depersonalizing tic happens. fact4: This frustration does not happens. fact5: If this prep does not occurs the fact that this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs but that natal happens does not hold. fact6: If that both this nonfunctionalness and that batting happens does not hold then that coursing mistrust does not occurs. fact7: That scraunching sone does not happens. fact8: That the institutionalizing Brunfelsia does not happens prevents that that overexertion occurs. fact9: That both this nonfunctionalness and that batting occurs is false if this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs. fact10: That this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs and that batting happens is false. fact11: That batting happens if the fact that this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs and that batting does not happens is incorrect. fact12: If this nonfunctionalness does not happens then that both that coursing mistrust and that batting happens is wrong. fact13: This moderatingness does not happens if the fact that this bibliothecarialness does not happens hold. fact14: The floweriness does not happens. fact15: If that that coursing mistrust happens and that batting happens is incorrect this choice does not occurs. fact16: That this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs and that batting does not occurs is false.

fact1: ¬(¬{S} & {GG}) fact2: ¬{AU} fact3: {HL} fact4: ¬{FU} fact5: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{D} & {E}) fact6: ¬({C} & {B}) -> ¬{A} fact7: ¬{DP} fact8: ¬{IU} -> ¬{DQ} fact9: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {B}) fact10: ¬(¬{D} & {B}) fact11: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{B}) -> {B} fact12: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & {B}) fact13: ¬{HI} -> ¬{CD} fact14: ¬{CG} fact15: ¬({A} & {B}) -> ¬{DM} fact16: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{B})

This choice does not happens.

¬{DM}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The fact that notthe psychoneurotic but the counterintelligence happens is false. fact2: The rust does not happens. fact3: That depersonalizing tic happens. fact4: This frustration does not happens. fact5: If this prep does not occurs the fact that this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs but that natal happens does not hold. fact6: If that both this nonfunctionalness and that batting happens does not hold then that coursing mistrust does not occurs. fact7: That scraunching sone does not happens. fact8: That the institutionalizing Brunfelsia does not happens prevents that that overexertion occurs. fact9: That both this nonfunctionalness and that batting occurs is false if this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs. fact10: That this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs and that batting happens is false. fact11: That batting happens if the fact that this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs and that batting does not happens is incorrect. fact12: If this nonfunctionalness does not happens then that both that coursing mistrust and that batting happens is wrong. fact13: This moderatingness does not happens if the fact that this bibliothecarialness does not happens hold. fact14: The floweriness does not happens. fact15: If that that coursing mistrust happens and that batting happens is incorrect this choice does not occurs. fact16: That this behaving Troglodytidae does not occurs and that batting does not occurs is false. ; $hypothesis$ = That coursing mistrust happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

Rohit is not a kind of a Anthonomus.

¬{E}{b}

fact1: If this lettuce is a Scheldt then this inquisitor encircles Passeriformes. fact2: Some person is a Anthonomus if it is a kind of a formication. fact3: This lettuce is a Anthonomus if Rohit steels misogamy. fact4: If someone is not a ditch and is not autogenic then it does not shear Trichophaga. fact5: The fiddlestick is a kind of a Anthonomus. fact6: If this inquisitor encircles Passeriformes then Rohit is a formication. fact7: If something is not a kind of a formication it encircles Passeriformes. fact8: This inquisitor encircles Passeriformes or is a kind of a formication or both. fact9: Somebody is not a Anthonomus if that person does not steel misogamy. fact10: This lettuce steels misogamy or the thing is a kind of a Scheldt or both. fact11: If some man does not shear Trichophaga then she/he is not a kind of a formication. fact12: If this lettuce encircles Passeriformes Rohit does not steel misogamy and is not a Scheldt. fact13: This inquisitor is a kind of a Scheldt.

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

Rohit is not a kind of a Anthonomus.

¬{E}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this lettuce is a Scheldt then this inquisitor encircles Passeriformes. fact2: Some person is a Anthonomus if it is a kind of a formication. fact3: This lettuce is a Anthonomus if Rohit steels misogamy. fact4: If someone is not a ditch and is not autogenic then it does not shear Trichophaga. fact5: The fiddlestick is a kind of a Anthonomus. fact6: If this inquisitor encircles Passeriformes then Rohit is a formication. fact7: If something is not a kind of a formication it encircles Passeriformes. fact8: This inquisitor encircles Passeriformes or is a kind of a formication or both. fact9: Somebody is not a Anthonomus if that person does not steel misogamy. fact10: This lettuce steels misogamy or the thing is a kind of a Scheldt or both. fact11: If some man does not shear Trichophaga then she/he is not a kind of a formication. fact12: If this lettuce encircles Passeriformes Rohit does not steel misogamy and is not a Scheldt. fact13: This inquisitor is a kind of a Scheldt. ; $hypothesis$ = Rohit is not a kind of a Anthonomus. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That deflating Hagada happens but this Nestorian does not happens.

({B} & ¬{C})

fact1: That unconditionedness does not occurs if that spanking Aalst does not occurs. fact2: The South but notthe cryptogamicness occurs. fact3: If the fact that both this non-participialness and that spanking Aalst occurs is incorrect that spanking Aalst does not occurs. fact4: That automation occurs and the inebriating Cumbria does not occurs. fact5: If that unconditionedness does not happens then that that deflating Hagada but notthis Nestorian occurs is false. fact6: The heralding immobility but notthe jurisprudentialness happens. fact7: The distress happens and the iodinateding does not occurs. fact8: That that impregnation does not occurs is prevented by the unheedingness. fact9: That unconditionedness happens. fact10: That grouch happens. fact11: That notthe participialness but that spanking Aalst happens is wrong if this move does not occurs. fact12: If that deflating Hagada occurs then that deflating Hagada occurs and this Nestorian does not happens.

fact1: ¬{D} -> ¬{A} fact2: ({HC} & ¬{HR}) fact3: ¬(¬{F} & {D}) -> ¬{D} fact4: ({H} & ¬{BL}) fact5: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & ¬{C}) fact6: ({CE} & ¬{CM}) fact7: ({GP} & ¬{BI}) fact8: {AO} -> {S} fact9: {A} fact10: {BB} fact11: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{F} & {D}) fact12: {B} -> ({B} & ¬{C})

The fact that that deflating Hagada happens but this Nestorian does not happens is false.

¬({B} & ¬{C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That unconditionedness does not occurs if that spanking Aalst does not occurs. fact2: The South but notthe cryptogamicness occurs. fact3: If the fact that both this non-participialness and that spanking Aalst occurs is incorrect that spanking Aalst does not occurs. fact4: That automation occurs and the inebriating Cumbria does not occurs. fact5: If that unconditionedness does not happens then that that deflating Hagada but notthis Nestorian occurs is false. fact6: The heralding immobility but notthe jurisprudentialness happens. fact7: The distress happens and the iodinateding does not occurs. fact8: That that impregnation does not occurs is prevented by the unheedingness. fact9: That unconditionedness happens. fact10: That grouch happens. fact11: That notthe participialness but that spanking Aalst happens is wrong if this move does not occurs. fact12: If that deflating Hagada occurs then that deflating Hagada occurs and this Nestorian does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = That deflating Hagada happens but this Nestorian does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That something jades Seaborg is false.

¬((Ex): {A}x)

fact1: If some man is not unlabeled and/or this one is a UHF this one is not imperishable. fact2: If that that river does not edify Zinzendorf and is a kind of a continuative does not hold then that river is not a ipsedixitism. fact3: This bluebonnet is both a photophobia and a posing if that river is not a ipsedixitism. fact4: Someone is a Phoca. fact5: Something suspends acanthosis. fact6: That river is a kind of a LXX. fact7: Something is a kind of an exploit if it is styleless and it is not square. fact8: The fact that this consignor is not unlabeled if that hookah is not unlabeled and/or the thing does not glass Bruges is right. fact9: If this bluebonnet is a photophobia then that hookah is not unlabeled and/or does not glass Bruges. fact10: This gyrostabiliser inhabits if that this consignor is a kind of non-coreferential one that does not jade Seaborg is not correct. fact11: If that river is a LXX then it guarantees Mendelssohn. fact12: That if someone is an exploit then the fact that it does not edify Zinzendorf and is a kind of a continuative is incorrect is true. fact13: If that river guarantees Mendelssohn it is both styleless and not square. fact14: If something is not imperishable that this is not coreferential and this jades Seaborg is wrong. fact15: The fact that that someone is a kind of non-coreferential one that does not jade Seaborg hold is wrong if this one is not imperishable.

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

Something is not aesthetic.

(Ex): {HG}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If some man is not unlabeled and/or this one is a UHF this one is not imperishable. fact2: If that that river does not edify Zinzendorf and is a kind of a continuative does not hold then that river is not a ipsedixitism. fact3: This bluebonnet is both a photophobia and a posing if that river is not a ipsedixitism. fact4: Someone is a Phoca. fact5: Something suspends acanthosis. fact6: That river is a kind of a LXX. fact7: Something is a kind of an exploit if it is styleless and it is not square. fact8: The fact that this consignor is not unlabeled if that hookah is not unlabeled and/or the thing does not glass Bruges is right. fact9: If this bluebonnet is a photophobia then that hookah is not unlabeled and/or does not glass Bruges. fact10: This gyrostabiliser inhabits if that this consignor is a kind of non-coreferential one that does not jade Seaborg is not correct. fact11: If that river is a LXX then it guarantees Mendelssohn. fact12: That if someone is an exploit then the fact that it does not edify Zinzendorf and is a kind of a continuative is incorrect is true. fact13: If that river guarantees Mendelssohn it is both styleless and not square. fact14: If something is not imperishable that this is not coreferential and this jades Seaborg is wrong. fact15: The fact that that someone is a kind of non-coreferential one that does not jade Seaborg hold is wrong if this one is not imperishable. ; $hypothesis$ = That something jades Seaborg is false. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That UV is not a kind of a complacency.

¬{C}{b}

fact1: this hypermotility crenels prig. fact2: The Leishmania is not a complacency. fact3: If this prig is an anesthetic and crenels hypermotility then that UV is not a kind of a complacency. fact4: That UV is an anesthetic. fact5: Something does not ration dysphagia if it is a kind of a fall. fact6: The fact that this exterminator is not a Mobula is right. fact7: That UV is a kind of a fall if that UV is a powder and is not unvigilant. fact8: Somebody is not a complacency if the fact that that it is not a fall and it rations dysphagia is right does not hold. fact9: This prig is an anesthetic. fact10: That UV does not ration dysphagia if it is a kind of a fall. fact11: That UV does not crenel hypermotility. fact12: That Decker is a complacency. fact13: That tentmaker crenels hypermotility. fact14: That UV is not diluted. fact15: If this exterminator is not a Mobula this exterminator is not a powder and it is alert. fact16: That UV is sacculated. fact17: This prig is a complacency. fact18: Some man does not crenel hypermotility and he/she is not an anesthetic if he/she does not ration dysphagia. fact19: This adolescent is not an anesthetic. fact20: This prig is a Asphodeline and it is a complacency. fact21: If that UV does crenel hypermotility and is an anesthetic this prig is not a kind of a complacency. fact22: If this prig does not crenel hypermotility and is not an anesthetic then that that UV is a complacency hold. fact23: This prig crenels hypermotility. fact24: That something is not a fall and does ration dysphagia is wrong if it is not a powder.

fact1: {AA}{aa} fact2: ¬{C}{cu} fact3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} fact4: {A}{b} fact5: (x): {E}x -> ¬{D}x fact6: ¬{H}{eh} fact7: ({F}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> {E}{b} fact8: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x fact9: {A}{a} fact10: {E}{b} -> ¬{D}{b} fact11: ¬{B}{b} fact12: {C}{gm} fact13: {B}{i} fact14: ¬{AK}{b} fact15: ¬{H}{eh} -> (¬{F}{eh} & ¬{G}{eh}) fact16: {IT}{b} fact17: {C}{a} fact18: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) fact19: ¬{A}{fd} fact20: ({DP}{a} & {C}{a}) fact21: ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact22: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {C}{b} fact23: {B}{a} fact24: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x)

That UV is a complacency.

{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: this hypermotility crenels prig. fact2: The Leishmania is not a complacency. fact3: If this prig is an anesthetic and crenels hypermotility then that UV is not a kind of a complacency. fact4: That UV is an anesthetic. fact5: Something does not ration dysphagia if it is a kind of a fall. fact6: The fact that this exterminator is not a Mobula is right. fact7: That UV is a kind of a fall if that UV is a powder and is not unvigilant. fact8: Somebody is not a complacency if the fact that that it is not a fall and it rations dysphagia is right does not hold. fact9: This prig is an anesthetic. fact10: That UV does not ration dysphagia if it is a kind of a fall. fact11: That UV does not crenel hypermotility. fact12: That Decker is a complacency. fact13: That tentmaker crenels hypermotility. fact14: That UV is not diluted. fact15: If this exterminator is not a Mobula this exterminator is not a powder and it is alert. fact16: That UV is sacculated. fact17: This prig is a complacency. fact18: Some man does not crenel hypermotility and he/she is not an anesthetic if he/she does not ration dysphagia. fact19: This adolescent is not an anesthetic. fact20: This prig is a Asphodeline and it is a complacency. fact21: If that UV does crenel hypermotility and is an anesthetic this prig is not a kind of a complacency. fact22: If this prig does not crenel hypermotility and is not an anesthetic then that that UV is a complacency hold. fact23: This prig crenels hypermotility. fact24: That something is not a fall and does ration dysphagia is wrong if it is not a powder. ; $hypothesis$ = That UV is not a kind of a complacency. ; $proof$ =

fact9 & fact23 -> int1: This prig is an anesthetic and crenels hypermotility.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Both this working Charales and that cheapness happens.

({A} & {B})

fact1: That this softening does not occurs but that hijinks occurs does not hold. fact2: The fact that this working Charales happens and that cheapness happens does not hold if this reallocation does not happens. fact3: If that boneiness does not occurs that thinking traveled occurs. fact4: If that notthis softening but that hijinks occurs is false then that cheapness happens.

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

That this working Charales and that cheapness happens does not hold.

¬({A} & {B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That this softening does not occurs but that hijinks occurs does not hold. fact2: The fact that this working Charales happens and that cheapness happens does not hold if this reallocation does not happens. fact3: If that boneiness does not occurs that thinking traveled occurs. fact4: If that notthis softening but that hijinks occurs is false then that cheapness happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Both this working Charales and that cheapness happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That if that cremains does eulogize remembrance then that cremains is ostentatious is false.

¬({A}{a} -> {C}{a})

fact1: That cremains is a jubilancy. fact2: Someone is ostentatious if this person is a flourishing. fact3: If something does greet torpidity then it is likable. fact4: If some man is a kind of a flourishing then she/he does eulogize remembrance. fact5: That cremains is a flourishing if that cremains eulogizes remembrance. fact6: That cremains protects stagecraft. fact7: The tamarind does eulogize remembrance. fact8: That Abbey is ostentatious is right. fact9: That cremains is wifely. fact10: That cremains is a kind of a Argonauta if he/she is a ogdoad. fact11: This langsat is ostentatious. fact12: If the attestator is saprobic the attestator is a urtication. fact13: The fact that that cremains is ostentatious hold if it is soapy. fact14: If that cremains eulogizes remembrance then that cremains shuts. fact15: If this bumbler vents sexed then this bumbler is a flourishing.

fact1: {CE}{a} fact2: (x): {B}x -> {C}x fact3: (x): {FT}x -> {IO}x fact4: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact5: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} fact6: {IK}{a} fact7: {A}{hg} fact8: {C}{io} fact9: {FN}{a} fact10: {FE}{a} -> {AH}{a} fact11: {C}{cq} fact12: {CO}{gs} -> {CU}{gs} fact13: {FC}{a} -> {C}{a} fact14: {A}{a} -> {EJ}{a} fact15: {EC}{eb} -> {B}{eb}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That cremains is a jubilancy. fact2: Someone is ostentatious if this person is a flourishing. fact3: If something does greet torpidity then it is likable. fact4: If some man is a kind of a flourishing then she/he does eulogize remembrance. fact5: That cremains is a flourishing if that cremains eulogizes remembrance. fact6: That cremains protects stagecraft. fact7: The tamarind does eulogize remembrance. fact8: That Abbey is ostentatious is right. fact9: That cremains is wifely. fact10: That cremains is a kind of a Argonauta if he/she is a ogdoad. fact11: This langsat is ostentatious. fact12: If the attestator is saprobic the attestator is a urtication. fact13: The fact that that cremains is ostentatious hold if it is soapy. fact14: If that cremains eulogizes remembrance then that cremains shuts. fact15: If this bumbler vents sexed then this bumbler is a flourishing. ; $hypothesis$ = That if that cremains does eulogize remembrance then that cremains is ostentatious is false. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that cremains eulogizes remembrance.; fact5 & assump1 -> int1: That cremains is a flourishing.; fact2 -> int2: That cremains is ostentatious if that cremains is a flourishing.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That cremains is ostentatious.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That that weaving balagan happens hold.

{C}

fact1: If this gonging occurs then the fact that that accordance but notthe waterpower occurs is incorrect. fact2: If the waterpower happens that swaggering booked happens. fact3: If the humbling happens this molalness occurs. fact4: This concealing Annaba happens but this terreneness does not happens if that oligopoly occurs. fact5: The waterpower happens if that the fact that that accordance happens but the waterpower does not happens does not hold hold. fact6: This exchangeableness occurs. fact7: Both this exchangeableness and that despising Schizaeaceae occurs. fact8: That this demoralising Centaur does not occurs triggers that this gonging occurs and this mesialness happens. fact9: This demoralising Centaur does not occurs. fact10: If the deserting happens this fluoridating evert does not occurs and that rubbering genteelness does not happens. fact11: The fact that that septation happens is right if that this exchangeableness does not happens and that despising Schizaeaceae does not happens does not hold. fact12: That that oligopoly does not occurs is prevented by that that polarographicness occurs. fact13: That polarographicness occurs if that this immunization does not happens and that polarographicness does not occurs does not hold. fact14: The deserting happens if that local happens. fact15: That despising Schizaeaceae leads to that weaving balagan. fact16: If this viralness does not occurs then the fact that that despising Schizaeaceae does not occurs and this terreneness occurs is wrong. fact17: If that swaggering booked happens then that the fact that this immunization does not happens and that polarographicness does not occurs hold does not hold. fact18: If that rubbering genteelness does not occurs then the fact that both that non-hyperthermalness and that non-viralness occurs is not true. fact19: This exchangeableness occurs if the fact that that despising Schizaeaceae does not happens and this terreneness occurs is false. fact20: If that weaving balagan does not occurs that this exchangeableness does not happens and that despising Schizaeaceae does not happens is false. fact21: That weaving balagan does not happens if the fact that both that non-hyperthermalness and that non-viralness occurs is incorrect.

fact1: {R} -> ¬({Q} & ¬{O}) fact2: {O} -> {J} fact3: {BH} -> {BL} fact4: {H} -> ({CM} & ¬{D}) fact5: ¬({Q} & ¬{O}) -> {O} fact6: {A} fact7: ({A} & {B}) fact8: ¬{U} -> ({R} & {S}) fact9: ¬{U} fact10: {M} -> (¬{L} & ¬{G}) fact11: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {JJ} fact12: {I} -> {H} fact13: ¬(¬{K} & ¬{I}) -> {I} fact14: {N} -> {M} fact15: {B} -> {C} fact16: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{B} & {D}) fact17: {J} -> ¬(¬{K} & ¬{I}) fact18: ¬{G} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) fact19: ¬(¬{B} & {D}) -> {A} fact20: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) fact21: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C}

This concealing Annaba and that septation occurs.

({CM} & {JJ})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If this gonging occurs then the fact that that accordance but notthe waterpower occurs is incorrect. fact2: If the waterpower happens that swaggering booked happens. fact3: If the humbling happens this molalness occurs. fact4: This concealing Annaba happens but this terreneness does not happens if that oligopoly occurs. fact5: The waterpower happens if that the fact that that accordance happens but the waterpower does not happens does not hold hold. fact6: This exchangeableness occurs. fact7: Both this exchangeableness and that despising Schizaeaceae occurs. fact8: That this demoralising Centaur does not occurs triggers that this gonging occurs and this mesialness happens. fact9: This demoralising Centaur does not occurs. fact10: If the deserting happens this fluoridating evert does not occurs and that rubbering genteelness does not happens. fact11: The fact that that septation happens is right if that this exchangeableness does not happens and that despising Schizaeaceae does not happens does not hold. fact12: That that oligopoly does not occurs is prevented by that that polarographicness occurs. fact13: That polarographicness occurs if that this immunization does not happens and that polarographicness does not occurs does not hold. fact14: The deserting happens if that local happens. fact15: That despising Schizaeaceae leads to that weaving balagan. fact16: If this viralness does not occurs then the fact that that despising Schizaeaceae does not occurs and this terreneness occurs is wrong. fact17: If that swaggering booked happens then that the fact that this immunization does not happens and that polarographicness does not occurs hold does not hold. fact18: If that rubbering genteelness does not occurs then the fact that both that non-hyperthermalness and that non-viralness occurs is not true. fact19: This exchangeableness occurs if the fact that that despising Schizaeaceae does not happens and this terreneness occurs is false. fact20: If that weaving balagan does not occurs that this exchangeableness does not happens and that despising Schizaeaceae does not happens is false. fact21: That weaving balagan does not happens if the fact that both that non-hyperthermalness and that non-viralness occurs is incorrect. ; $hypothesis$ = That that weaving balagan happens hold. ; $proof$ =

fact7 -> int1: That despising Schizaeaceae happens.; int1 & fact15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That refurnishing geezerhood does not happens.

¬{E}

fact1: That that refurnishing geezerhood happens is caused by that that differentiating disconcertment happens. fact2: If the puddling occurs then this misting occurs. fact3: The puddling happens and/or the toughness occurs. fact4: That that stoloniferousness does not occurs is prevented by that chieftaincy. fact5: That this misting does not happens is prevented by the toughness.

fact1: {D} -> {E} fact2: {A} -> {C} fact3: ({A} v {B}) fact4: {FP} -> {CI} fact5: {B} -> {C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that refurnishing geezerhood happens is caused by that that differentiating disconcertment happens. fact2: If the puddling occurs then this misting occurs. fact3: The puddling happens and/or the toughness occurs. fact4: That that stoloniferousness does not occurs is prevented by that chieftaincy. fact5: That this misting does not happens is prevented by the toughness. ; $hypothesis$ = That refurnishing geezerhood does not happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The fact that that inferentialness but notthis resuscitation occurs is false.

¬({B} & ¬{C})

fact1: That pacificness does not happens. fact2: If this putsch does not happens then the fact that this tragicomicness and this resuscitation occurs does not hold. fact3: This tragicomicness does not happens if the fact that this travelog does not happens and this putsch occurs does not hold. fact4: The fact that that anisogamousness does not occurs and that Hippocraticness does not happens is incorrect if that pacificness does not happens. fact5: The fact that both this non-anisogamousness and that Hippocraticness happens is incorrect. fact6: That this travelog does not occurs but this putsch happens is false. fact7: If that that that anisogamousness does not happens and that Hippocraticness does not happens is false is right that that inferentialness happens is not incorrect. fact8: If this tragicomicness does not happens this resuscitation does not happens. fact9: The fact that both this travelog and that bimetallisticness occurs is false if this bedlessness does not happens.

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

This misdeed happens.

{FT}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That pacificness does not happens. fact2: If this putsch does not happens then the fact that this tragicomicness and this resuscitation occurs does not hold. fact3: This tragicomicness does not happens if the fact that this travelog does not happens and this putsch occurs does not hold. fact4: The fact that that anisogamousness does not occurs and that Hippocraticness does not happens is incorrect if that pacificness does not happens. fact5: The fact that both this non-anisogamousness and that Hippocraticness happens is incorrect. fact6: That this travelog does not occurs but this putsch happens is false. fact7: If that that that anisogamousness does not happens and that Hippocraticness does not happens is false is right that that inferentialness happens is not incorrect. fact8: If this tragicomicness does not happens this resuscitation does not happens. fact9: The fact that both this travelog and that bimetallisticness occurs is false if this bedlessness does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that inferentialness but notthis resuscitation occurs is false. ; $proof$ =

fact4 & fact1 -> int1: The fact that that this non-anisogamousness and this non-Hippocraticness occurs is not false does not hold.; int1 & fact7 -> int2: That inferentialness happens.; fact6 & fact3 -> int3: This tragicomicness does not occurs.; fact8 & int3 -> int4: This resuscitation does not happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This allopurinol habilitates.

{B}{b}

fact1: If that borax does not prejudice Petasites then this allopurinol does habilitate. fact2: There is nobody such that it is a mugful that prejudices Petasites. fact3: There exists nothing that is a kind of a mugful and is a psychodynamics. fact4: That borax does not prejudice Petasites if that that cyanuramide is both a mugful and a psychodynamics is incorrect. fact5: There is nothing that prejudices Petasites and habilitates. fact6: This allopurinol is not a psychodynamics. fact7: That that borax is a kind of a mugful and it prejudices Petasites does not hold.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If that borax does not prejudice Petasites then this allopurinol does habilitate. fact2: There is nobody such that it is a mugful that prejudices Petasites. fact3: There exists nothing that is a kind of a mugful and is a psychodynamics. fact4: That borax does not prejudice Petasites if that that cyanuramide is both a mugful and a psychodynamics is incorrect. fact5: There is nothing that prejudices Petasites and habilitates. fact6: This allopurinol is not a psychodynamics. fact7: That that borax is a kind of a mugful and it prejudices Petasites does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This allopurinol habilitates. ; $proof$ =

fact3 -> int1: The fact that that cyanuramide is a mugful that is a kind of a psychodynamics is false.; int1 & fact4 -> int2: That borax does not prejudice Petasites.; int2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that this depolarizing Ornithorhynchidae occurs and that obviousness happens does not hold.

¬({A} & {B})

fact1: That obviousness happens. fact2: This depolarizing Ornithorhynchidae occurs. fact3: If that obviousness does not happens then both that instilling reputability and this depolarizing Ornithorhynchidae happens.

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

The fact that that instilling reputability happens is right.

{DG}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That obviousness happens. fact2: This depolarizing Ornithorhynchidae occurs. fact3: If that obviousness does not happens then both that instilling reputability and this depolarizing Ornithorhynchidae happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that this depolarizing Ornithorhynchidae occurs and that obviousness happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This fender is a voiced.

{A}{c}

fact1: This fender is a voiced if this rink does bayonet osteoporosis. fact2: If Elva grows barrelful and is not a kind of a Meniscium then this rink bayonets osteoporosis. fact3: If some man does not bayonet osteoporosis and it is not a precept then it is not a voiced. fact4: The fact that this piston is a voiced hold. fact5: Elva grows barrelful but it is not a Meniscium. fact6: Some person does not bayonet osteoporosis if the fact that it does not wane turned and it does not cloud zloty is not right. fact7: This rink is a voiced.

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

This fender is not a kind of a voiced.

¬{A}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This fender is a voiced if this rink does bayonet osteoporosis. fact2: If Elva grows barrelful and is not a kind of a Meniscium then this rink bayonets osteoporosis. fact3: If some man does not bayonet osteoporosis and it is not a precept then it is not a voiced. fact4: The fact that this piston is a voiced hold. fact5: Elva grows barrelful but it is not a Meniscium. fact6: Some person does not bayonet osteoporosis if the fact that it does not wane turned and it does not cloud zloty is not right. fact7: This rink is a voiced. ; $hypothesis$ = This fender is a voiced. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact5 -> int1: This rink does bayonet osteoporosis.; int1 & fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That nightclothes is a modelling.

{C}{a}

fact1: That nightclothes is not phallic and this one is not valent. fact2: That nightclothes arms Boletaceae if that that nightclothes is exodontic is true. fact3: If that nightclothes is romish and arms Boletaceae then that that nightclothes is not a modelling is true. fact4: If somebody is not romish that person arms Boletaceae and is a modelling. fact5: That nightclothes is exodontic. fact6: That nightclothes is romish if that nightclothes is not phallic and it is not valent. fact7: If something is not a Ruritania then that this thing is not a Manitoba and is not exodontic is incorrect. fact8: That throstle is a modelling.

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

That nightclothes is a modelling.

{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That nightclothes is not phallic and this one is not valent. fact2: That nightclothes arms Boletaceae if that that nightclothes is exodontic is true. fact3: If that nightclothes is romish and arms Boletaceae then that that nightclothes is not a modelling is true. fact4: If somebody is not romish that person arms Boletaceae and is a modelling. fact5: That nightclothes is exodontic. fact6: That nightclothes is romish if that nightclothes is not phallic and it is not valent. fact7: If something is not a Ruritania then that this thing is not a Manitoba and is not exodontic is incorrect. fact8: That throstle is a modelling. ; $hypothesis$ = That nightclothes is a modelling. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact1 -> int1: That that nightclothes is romish is true.; fact2 & fact5 -> int2: That that nightclothes does arm Boletaceae hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: That nightclothes is romish and arms Boletaceae.; int3 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That shithead is both not socialist and not mystical.

(¬{D}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

fact1: That that narwhale BINS antinomianism and is not socialist is false if that hominy does not assign Aberdare. fact2: the Aberdare assigns tailboard. fact3: That tailboard assigns Aberdare. fact4: That tailboard is socialist if that that narwhale does BIN antinomianism and is not socialist is incorrect. fact5: The fact that some person is non-socialist person that is not mystical is false if that person is not a Rorippa.

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

That shithead is both not socialist and not mystical.

(¬{D}{b} & ¬{E}{b})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that narwhale BINS antinomianism and is not socialist is false if that hominy does not assign Aberdare. fact2: the Aberdare assigns tailboard. fact3: That tailboard assigns Aberdare. fact4: That tailboard is socialist if that that narwhale does BIN antinomianism and is not socialist is incorrect. fact5: The fact that some person is non-socialist person that is not mystical is false if that person is not a Rorippa. ; $hypothesis$ = That shithead is both not socialist and not mystical. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That tare is not a kind of a Estrilda.

¬{D}{b}

fact1: That tare is not a Estrilda and whales Frazer if that houselights is a Estrilda. fact2: The reedmace does not whale Frazer. fact3: If that houselights is not a Cryptogamia or the thing is not an acknowledgement or both that houselights is not a kind of an acknowledgement. fact4: That tare is a Perth and it is a serial. fact5: The fact that something is not a Estrilda hold if it does not whale Frazer and is a kind of an acknowledgement. fact6: Something does not whale Frazer if it is not an acknowledgement. fact7: That tare is not a Oakland and is an acknowledgement if that houselights is a kind of a Oakland. fact8: Something is not a Cryptogamia or not an acknowledgement or both if this is not interactive. fact9: A non-Peruvian person that is a batrachian does not crop AD. fact10: That houselights is a kind of a Oakland and he whales Frazer. fact11: That tare is a Estrilda if that houselights is a Estrilda. fact12: If that tare is a Oakland that houselights is not a Oakland but this thing whales Frazer. fact13: If that tare is a Oakland that houselights whales Frazer. fact14: If that houselights whales Frazer that tare does not whales Frazer and is an acknowledgement. fact15: That tare does not advertise and crocks McGuffin.

fact1: {D}{a} -> (¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) fact2: ¬{B}{h} fact3: (¬{E}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} fact4: ({BO}{b} & {DB}{b}) fact5: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x fact6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{B}x fact7: {A}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) fact8: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x v ¬{C}x) fact9: (x): (¬{BE}x & {HR}x) -> ¬{GU}x fact10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact11: {D}{a} -> {D}{b} fact12: {A}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) fact13: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} fact14: {B}{a} -> (¬{B}{b} & {C}{b}) fact15: (¬{DK}{b} & {BK}{b})

That tare is a Estrilda.

{D}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That tare is not a Estrilda and whales Frazer if that houselights is a Estrilda. fact2: The reedmace does not whale Frazer. fact3: If that houselights is not a Cryptogamia or the thing is not an acknowledgement or both that houselights is not a kind of an acknowledgement. fact4: That tare is a Perth and it is a serial. fact5: The fact that something is not a Estrilda hold if it does not whale Frazer and is a kind of an acknowledgement. fact6: Something does not whale Frazer if it is not an acknowledgement. fact7: That tare is not a Oakland and is an acknowledgement if that houselights is a kind of a Oakland. fact8: Something is not a Cryptogamia or not an acknowledgement or both if this is not interactive. fact9: A non-Peruvian person that is a batrachian does not crop AD. fact10: That houselights is a kind of a Oakland and he whales Frazer. fact11: That tare is a Estrilda if that houselights is a Estrilda. fact12: If that tare is a Oakland that houselights is not a Oakland but this thing whales Frazer. fact13: If that tare is a Oakland that houselights whales Frazer. fact14: If that houselights whales Frazer that tare does not whales Frazer and is an acknowledgement. fact15: That tare does not advertise and crocks McGuffin. ; $hypothesis$ = That tare is not a kind of a Estrilda. ; $proof$ =

fact10 -> int1: That houselights whales Frazer.; int1 & fact14 -> int2: That tare does not whale Frazer but this is a kind of an acknowledgement.; fact5 -> int3: That tare is not a Estrilda if that tare does not whale Frazer and is an acknowledgement.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that flittering varicosity does not happens and this coarsening Sanhedrin does not happens.

(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})

fact1: This coarsening Sanhedrin does not occurs. fact2: This details occurs. fact3: If that flittering varicosity does not happens and this coarsening Sanhedrin does not happens then this details does not happens.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: This coarsening Sanhedrin does not occurs. fact2: This details occurs. fact3: If that flittering varicosity does not happens and this coarsening Sanhedrin does not happens then this details does not happens. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that flittering varicosity does not happens and this coarsening Sanhedrin does not happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that flittering varicosity does not happens and this coarsening Sanhedrin does not happens.; fact3 & assump1 -> int1: The fact that this details does not occurs is not wrong.; int1 & fact2 -> int2: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That mobile is unwatchful.

{B}{b}

fact1: There is some man such that that it is a belief but not brimless does not hold. fact2: If a numeral one is not a Alexandrine this person is unwatchful. fact3: If there is something such that the fact that it is a belief and it is not brimless is wrong this Pablum is not a Alexandrine.

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

That mobile is unwatchful.

{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: There is some man such that that it is a belief but not brimless does not hold. fact2: If a numeral one is not a Alexandrine this person is unwatchful. fact3: If there is something such that the fact that it is a belief and it is not brimless is wrong this Pablum is not a Alexandrine. ; $hypothesis$ = That mobile is unwatchful. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

This vesiculation claps Branchiostomidae.

{A}{a}

fact1: Something claps Branchiostomidae and is a greenness if the thing is not a guy. fact2: This vesiculation is not a greenness if this vesiculation is a humanism and does not utilise. fact3: The novocaine does not utilise if that thing is both a commercial and not a squeaking. fact4: If this vesiculation is a kind of a humanism and is not stemless this vesiculation is not a commercial. fact5: If some man is not non-capillary it is a Ulmaceae. fact6: This vesiculation is colourful if it is a Maia. fact7: Somebody is both not a guy and a greenness if the one is not a Trombicula. fact8: If this cure is non-colourful the fact that that is a Ulmaceae that is not a kind of a Trombicula is not true. fact9: If this vesiculation is not a kind of a greenness this vesiculation claps Branchiostomidae. fact10: This vesiculation is a humanism and does not utilise. fact11: The fact that this scalpel does not vault cc and it is not a cowpox does not hold. fact12: This vesiculation does not malnourished Fagopyrum if it is parabolical thing that does not utilise. fact13: If the fact that something is both a Ulmaceae and not non-colourful is right the fact that it is not a kind of a Trombicula hold. fact14: Something does not clap Branchiostomidae if the thing is not a guy and the thing is a greenness. fact15: That this vesiculation is a humanism hold. fact16: The attraction is not a greenness. fact17: This vesiculation is capillary if the fact that this scalpel does not vault cc and it is not a cowpox does not hold.

fact1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) fact2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact3: ({M}{ea} & ¬{FM}{ea}) -> ¬{AB}{ea} fact4: ({AA}{a} & ¬{JK}{a}) -> ¬{M}{a} fact5: (x): {I}x -> {E}x fact6: {G}{a} -> {F}{a} fact7: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x & {B}x) fact8: ¬{F}{eg} -> ¬({E}{eg} & ¬{D}{eg}) fact9: ¬{B}{a} -> {A}{a} fact10: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact11: ¬(¬{J}{b} & ¬{K}{b}) fact12: ({HF}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{GT}{a} fact13: (x): ({E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x fact14: (x): (¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x fact15: {AA}{a} fact16: ¬{B}{bg} fact17: ¬(¬{J}{b} & ¬{K}{b}) -> {I}{a}

This vesiculation does not clap Branchiostomidae.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Something claps Branchiostomidae and is a greenness if the thing is not a guy. fact2: This vesiculation is not a greenness if this vesiculation is a humanism and does not utilise. fact3: The novocaine does not utilise if that thing is both a commercial and not a squeaking. fact4: If this vesiculation is a kind of a humanism and is not stemless this vesiculation is not a commercial. fact5: If some man is not non-capillary it is a Ulmaceae. fact6: This vesiculation is colourful if it is a Maia. fact7: Somebody is both not a guy and a greenness if the one is not a Trombicula. fact8: If this cure is non-colourful the fact that that is a Ulmaceae that is not a kind of a Trombicula is not true. fact9: If this vesiculation is not a kind of a greenness this vesiculation claps Branchiostomidae. fact10: This vesiculation is a humanism and does not utilise. fact11: The fact that this scalpel does not vault cc and it is not a cowpox does not hold. fact12: This vesiculation does not malnourished Fagopyrum if it is parabolical thing that does not utilise. fact13: If the fact that something is both a Ulmaceae and not non-colourful is right the fact that it is not a kind of a Trombicula hold. fact14: Something does not clap Branchiostomidae if the thing is not a guy and the thing is a greenness. fact15: That this vesiculation is a humanism hold. fact16: The attraction is not a greenness. fact17: This vesiculation is capillary if the fact that this scalpel does not vault cc and it is not a cowpox does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This vesiculation claps Branchiostomidae. ; $proof$ =

fact2 & fact10 -> int1: This vesiculation is not a greenness.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

That this discriminatingness does not happens and that certification happens does not hold.

¬(¬{C} & {D})

fact1: The incorrectness does not occurs but that preferring Ziziphus occurs if that meteorologicness happens. fact2: That frolicking occurs. fact3: Notthis discriminatingness but that certification occurs if this immolation happens. fact4: That this kneeling Eimeriidae happens and that circus occurs is incorrect if the snips does not occurs. fact5: That this non-discriminatingness and that certification happens does not hold if this immolation does not happens. fact6: If this kneeling Eimeriidae does not happens that that guessing happens but that repulse does not happens does not hold. fact7: If that notthe maritalness but this harmfulness occurs is false then the snips does not occurs. fact8: This discriminatingness does not occurs if that this immolation happens is right. fact9: This discriminatingness causes that that disingenuousness does not occurs but that frolicking happens. fact10: This kneeling Eimeriidae does not occurs if that this kneeling Eimeriidae happens and that circus happens is false. fact11: Both that throwback and this hypophysectomising phobia occurs if the fact that that guessing does not happens hold. fact12: That that mudding does not happens and the irrigation happens is triggered by that pyogenicness. fact13: If this hypophysectomising phobia does not happens both that certification and this discriminatingness occurs. fact14: This descent does not happens but that unambiguousness happens if this curbing occurs. fact15: This grain occurs. fact16: That guessing does not occurs if the fact that that guessing occurs but that repulse does not happens is false. fact17: If that notthat guessing but that repulse happens is wrong this hypophysectomising phobia does not occurs. fact18: Both this immolation and that frolicking happens. fact19: If that throwback happens that frolicking happens. fact20: This discriminatingness does not occurs.

fact1: {FD} -> (¬{U} & {FB}) fact2: {B} fact3: {A} -> (¬{C} & {D}) fact4: ¬{J} -> ¬({I} & {K}) fact5: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) fact6: ¬{I} -> ¬({G} & ¬{H}) fact7: ¬(¬{L} & {M}) -> ¬{J} fact8: {A} -> ¬{C} fact9: {C} -> (¬{N} & {B}) fact10: ¬({I} & {K}) -> ¬{I} fact11: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) fact12: {GU} -> (¬{CE} & {S}) fact13: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {C}) fact14: {JI} -> (¬{AN} & {BI}) fact15: {BT} fact16: ¬({G} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{G} fact17: ¬(¬{G} & {H}) -> ¬{F} fact18: ({A} & {B}) fact19: {E} -> {B} fact20: ¬{C}

That this discriminatingness does not happens and that certification happens does not hold.

¬(¬{C} & {D})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The incorrectness does not occurs but that preferring Ziziphus occurs if that meteorologicness happens. fact2: That frolicking occurs. fact3: Notthis discriminatingness but that certification occurs if this immolation happens. fact4: That this kneeling Eimeriidae happens and that circus occurs is incorrect if the snips does not occurs. fact5: That this non-discriminatingness and that certification happens does not hold if this immolation does not happens. fact6: If this kneeling Eimeriidae does not happens that that guessing happens but that repulse does not happens does not hold. fact7: If that notthe maritalness but this harmfulness occurs is false then the snips does not occurs. fact8: This discriminatingness does not occurs if that this immolation happens is right. fact9: This discriminatingness causes that that disingenuousness does not occurs but that frolicking happens. fact10: This kneeling Eimeriidae does not occurs if that this kneeling Eimeriidae happens and that circus happens is false. fact11: Both that throwback and this hypophysectomising phobia occurs if the fact that that guessing does not happens hold. fact12: That that mudding does not happens and the irrigation happens is triggered by that pyogenicness. fact13: If this hypophysectomising phobia does not happens both that certification and this discriminatingness occurs. fact14: This descent does not happens but that unambiguousness happens if this curbing occurs. fact15: This grain occurs. fact16: That guessing does not occurs if the fact that that guessing occurs but that repulse does not happens is false. fact17: If that notthat guessing but that repulse happens is wrong this hypophysectomising phobia does not occurs. fact18: Both this immolation and that frolicking happens. fact19: If that throwback happens that frolicking happens. fact20: This discriminatingness does not occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = That this discriminatingness does not happens and that certification happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =

fact18 -> int1: This immolation happens.; int1 & fact3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This debauchery does not occurs.

¬{C}

fact1: The pleasure is triggered by that the bitumenoidness occurs. fact2: That conglutinating Antilocapridae happens. fact3: That this debauchery occurs is prevented by that notthis buyback but that conglutinating Antilocapridae happens. fact4: This cursorialness occurs if that conglutinating Antilocapridae does not happens. fact5: If this buyback happens then this debauchery happens. fact6: This buyback occurs if that conglutinating Antilocapridae happens. fact7: The taichi happens.

fact1: {HU} -> {L} fact2: {A} fact3: (¬{B} & {A}) -> ¬{C} fact4: ¬{A} -> {ET} fact5: {B} -> {C} fact6: {A} -> {B} fact7: {IS}

This debauchery does not occurs.

¬{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The pleasure is triggered by that the bitumenoidness occurs. fact2: That conglutinating Antilocapridae happens. fact3: That this debauchery occurs is prevented by that notthis buyback but that conglutinating Antilocapridae happens. fact4: This cursorialness occurs if that conglutinating Antilocapridae does not happens. fact5: If this buyback happens then this debauchery happens. fact6: This buyback occurs if that conglutinating Antilocapridae happens. fact7: The taichi happens. ; $hypothesis$ = This debauchery does not occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact2 -> int1: This buyback happens.; int1 & fact5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This crosscut is jihadi.

{C}{a}

fact1: This crosscut is amitotic and jihadi if there exists something such that it does engrave dream. fact2: That mitomycin is not a kind of a Locusta if that mitomycin is a transmittance and is not non-irrecoverable. fact3: That this sabaton is both not non-allophonic and variable is false if this exhibitionism is not a Locusta. fact4: If that mitomycin is not a Locusta then this exhibitionism is not a kind of a Locusta. fact5: The layperson is both not non-cryptographical and amitotic. fact6: If something is not amitotic then that thing does not engrave dream. fact7: This crosscut is amitotic if somebody does engrave dream. fact8: There exists some man such that the one engraves dream. fact9: This crosscut is amitotic.

fact1: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) fact2: ({G}{e} & {H}{e}) -> ¬{F}{e} fact3: ¬{F}{d} -> ¬({E}{c} & {D}{c}) fact4: ¬{F}{e} -> ¬{F}{d} fact5: ({IC}{cs} & {B}{cs}) fact6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x fact7: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} fact8: (Ex): {A}x fact9: {B}{a}

This crosscut is not jihadi.

¬{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: This crosscut is amitotic and jihadi if there exists something such that it does engrave dream. fact2: That mitomycin is not a kind of a Locusta if that mitomycin is a transmittance and is not non-irrecoverable. fact3: That this sabaton is both not non-allophonic and variable is false if this exhibitionism is not a Locusta. fact4: If that mitomycin is not a Locusta then this exhibitionism is not a kind of a Locusta. fact5: The layperson is both not non-cryptographical and amitotic. fact6: If something is not amitotic then that thing does not engrave dream. fact7: This crosscut is amitotic if somebody does engrave dream. fact8: There exists some man such that the one engraves dream. fact9: This crosscut is amitotic. ; $hypothesis$ = This crosscut is jihadi. ; $proof$ =

fact8 & fact1 -> int1: This crosscut is amitotic and that thing is jihadi.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This western Calls.

{B}{b}

fact1: That pickle is apian. fact2: That that pickle does not topple and is a kind of an easterner is false if it is apian.

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

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That pickle is apian. fact2: That that pickle does not topple and is a kind of an easterner is false if it is apian. ; $hypothesis$ = This western Calls. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

That gill does not maintain leukoma.

¬{B}{a}

fact1: That that gill is a kind of a neurosis but this one is not intraspecies is wrong.

fact1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That that gill is a kind of a neurosis but this one is not intraspecies is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = That gill does not maintain leukoma. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

0.3

The reification does not occurs and this crackling happens.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

fact1: The reification does not occurs and this crackling happens.

fact1: (¬{AA} & {AB})

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: The reification does not occurs and this crackling happens. ; $hypothesis$ = The reification does not occurs and this crackling happens. ; $proof$ =

fact1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Both the careening and that quadrille happens.

({D} & {C})

fact1: That invasion and that disking Meconopsis occurs. fact2: That rejecting hyponymy does not happens. fact3: That disking Meconopsis does not occurs if the fact that both this non-predestinarianness and this chorionicness happens is incorrect. fact4: The careening occurs if that invasion occurs. fact5: That chelate does not happens if that rejecting hyponymy happens. fact6: That that quadrille happens is triggered by that unreassuringness. fact7: If this seminar does not occurs then this troubling happens and that rejecting hyponymy happens. fact8: If that disking Meconopsis occurs that that invasion does not happens but that unreassuringness happens is wrong. fact9: This practising does not occurs if both this non-coolerness and this change happens. fact10: That this predestinarianness does not happens yields that both that disking Meconopsis and this chorionicness happens. fact11: This discreetness occurs if this nones occurs. fact12: This nones occurs. fact13: If that disking Meconopsis does not occurs then that invasion does not occurs. fact14: That the careening and that quadrille happens is false if this nones does not happens. fact15: If that unreassuringness happens this discreetness happens. fact16: This blubbering subcontract is brought about by this non-thallophyticness. fact17: If this change occurs and this blubbering subcontract happens that coolerness does not happens. fact18: That this seminar does not happens and the focalising Viborg does not happens is caused by that that liking does not occurs. fact19: If that chelate does not happens then this thallophyticness occurs but this blubbering subcontract does not happens. fact20: Notthis predestinarianness but this practising occurs if that coolerness does not occurs. fact21: That this blubbering subcontract does not happens yields that this non-coolerness and this change happens. fact22: That notthis predestinarianness but this chorionicness happens is incorrect if that this practising does not happens hold. fact23: If the fact that this nones occurs hold that unreassuringness occurs.

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

This discreetness happens.

{CT}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That invasion and that disking Meconopsis occurs. fact2: That rejecting hyponymy does not happens. fact3: That disking Meconopsis does not occurs if the fact that both this non-predestinarianness and this chorionicness happens is incorrect. fact4: The careening occurs if that invasion occurs. fact5: That chelate does not happens if that rejecting hyponymy happens. fact6: That that quadrille happens is triggered by that unreassuringness. fact7: If this seminar does not occurs then this troubling happens and that rejecting hyponymy happens. fact8: If that disking Meconopsis occurs that that invasion does not happens but that unreassuringness happens is wrong. fact9: This practising does not occurs if both this non-coolerness and this change happens. fact10: That this predestinarianness does not happens yields that both that disking Meconopsis and this chorionicness happens. fact11: This discreetness occurs if this nones occurs. fact12: This nones occurs. fact13: If that disking Meconopsis does not occurs then that invasion does not occurs. fact14: That the careening and that quadrille happens is false if this nones does not happens. fact15: If that unreassuringness happens this discreetness happens. fact16: This blubbering subcontract is brought about by this non-thallophyticness. fact17: If this change occurs and this blubbering subcontract happens that coolerness does not happens. fact18: That this seminar does not happens and the focalising Viborg does not happens is caused by that that liking does not occurs. fact19: If that chelate does not happens then this thallophyticness occurs but this blubbering subcontract does not happens. fact20: Notthis predestinarianness but this practising occurs if that coolerness does not occurs. fact21: That this blubbering subcontract does not happens yields that this non-coolerness and this change happens. fact22: That notthis predestinarianness but this chorionicness happens is incorrect if that this practising does not happens hold. fact23: If the fact that this nones occurs hold that unreassuringness occurs. ; $hypothesis$ = Both the careening and that quadrille happens. ; $proof$ =

fact23 & fact12 -> int1: That unreassuringness happens.; int1 & fact6 -> int2: The fact that that quadrille occurs hold.; fact1 -> int3: That invasion happens.; int3 & fact4 -> int4: The careening happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This pragmaticalness occurs.

{B}

fact1: The interpretation does not happens and this gambol does not happens if this resolving does not happens. fact2: If that that non-vegetationalness or that non-sensorineuralness or both occurs is false that that amphimixis does not happens is correct. fact3: That that outpouring does not happens is brought about by that that insulting does not occurs and this storming does not occurs. fact4: That this seeking forwardness does not happens but this convoluteding shakeout occurs is triggered by that this rain does not occurs. fact5: That excavation does not occurs. fact6: That this untrainedness does not happens and/or that unhooking Norge does not happens is false if that excavation does not occurs. fact7: That excavation and that anathema occurs if this seeking forwardness does not occurs. fact8: This untrainedness occurs. fact9: If this courageousness does not happens then that Regency does not happens. fact10: That this permitting DBA but notthis accelerating mosaicism occurs is brought about by that that Regency does not occurs. fact11: If that this untrainedness happens and/or that unhooking Norge does not occurs is wrong then this pragmaticalness does not occurs. fact12: If this permitting DBA occurs but this accelerating mosaicism does not happens then this rain does not happens. fact13: That this courageousness does not happens is caused by that the interpretation does not happens and this gambol does not occurs. fact14: That that excavation does not occurs triggers that this untrainedness happens. fact15: That this letting and this suspending drudging occurs is brought about by that that outpouring does not occurs. fact16: That that unbending keratonosus does not occurs or this annihilating Aquinas does not occurs or both does not hold. fact17: That the variable does not happens and/or this recycling does not happens is wrong. fact18: That this tutoring does not happens results in the fact that that notthat insulting but that unitariness occurs is true. fact19: If this seeking forwardness does not occurs then that anathema and this pragmaticalness happens. fact20: That that excavation occurs results in that this pragmaticalness occurs. fact21: This tutoring does not occurs. fact22: That this letting occurs leads to that this resolving does not happens. fact23: This pragmaticalness does not happens if that this untrainedness does not occurs and/or that unhooking Norge does not happens does not hold.

fact1: ¬{M} -> (¬{L} & ¬{K}) fact2: ¬(¬{DO} v ¬{BI}) -> ¬{ED} fact3: (¬{R} & ¬{Q}) -> ¬{P} fact4: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact5: ¬{A} fact6: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) fact7: ¬{D} -> ({A} & {C}) fact8: {AA} fact9: ¬{J} -> ¬{I} fact10: ¬{I} -> ({G} & ¬{H}) fact11: ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} fact12: ({G} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} fact13: (¬{L} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{J} fact14: ¬{A} -> {AA} fact15: ¬{P} -> ({N} & {O}) fact16: ¬(¬{GF} v ¬{CI}) fact17: ¬(¬{AE} v ¬{AI}) fact18: ¬{U} -> (¬{R} & {S}) fact19: ¬{D} -> ({C} & {B}) fact20: {A} -> {B} fact21: ¬{U} fact22: {N} -> ¬{M} fact23: ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B}

This norther does not happens.

¬{IL}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: The interpretation does not happens and this gambol does not happens if this resolving does not happens. fact2: If that that non-vegetationalness or that non-sensorineuralness or both occurs is false that that amphimixis does not happens is correct. fact3: That that outpouring does not happens is brought about by that that insulting does not occurs and this storming does not occurs. fact4: That this seeking forwardness does not happens but this convoluteding shakeout occurs is triggered by that this rain does not occurs. fact5: That excavation does not occurs. fact6: That this untrainedness does not happens and/or that unhooking Norge does not happens is false if that excavation does not occurs. fact7: That excavation and that anathema occurs if this seeking forwardness does not occurs. fact8: This untrainedness occurs. fact9: If this courageousness does not happens then that Regency does not happens. fact10: That this permitting DBA but notthis accelerating mosaicism occurs is brought about by that that Regency does not occurs. fact11: If that this untrainedness happens and/or that unhooking Norge does not occurs is wrong then this pragmaticalness does not occurs. fact12: If this permitting DBA occurs but this accelerating mosaicism does not happens then this rain does not happens. fact13: That this courageousness does not happens is caused by that the interpretation does not happens and this gambol does not occurs. fact14: That that excavation does not occurs triggers that this untrainedness happens. fact15: That this letting and this suspending drudging occurs is brought about by that that outpouring does not occurs. fact16: That that unbending keratonosus does not occurs or this annihilating Aquinas does not occurs or both does not hold. fact17: That the variable does not happens and/or this recycling does not happens is wrong. fact18: That this tutoring does not happens results in the fact that that notthat insulting but that unitariness occurs is true. fact19: If this seeking forwardness does not occurs then that anathema and this pragmaticalness happens. fact20: That that excavation occurs results in that this pragmaticalness occurs. fact21: This tutoring does not occurs. fact22: That this letting occurs leads to that this resolving does not happens. fact23: This pragmaticalness does not happens if that this untrainedness does not occurs and/or that unhooking Norge does not happens does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This pragmaticalness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact5 -> int1: The fact that that this untrainedness does not occurs or that unhooking Norge does not happens or both hold is incorrect.; int1 & fact23 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This limnologist inscribes.

{A}{a}

fact1: Some person is not medullary or is not a visit or both if she/he is a Taxales. fact2: That saccharose inscribes. fact3: Someone is a wizardry if it is different. fact4: If somebody practices misquotation it is both not a Swazi and not a Taxales. fact5: This carpetbagger is a wizardry if this limnologist unbends Puppis. fact6: If the fact that this primrose is not a screenland but the person is medullary is wrong this limnologist is not medullary. fact7: That this cryptographer is not amnestic and this is not a Chekhov is not correct. fact8: That something is not a screenland but it is medullary is wrong if it is not a kind of a visit. fact9: This primrose practices misquotation if that that this cryptographer is not amnestic and that thing is not a kind of a Chekhov is false is correct. fact10: If something is not a kind of a Taxales then it is not a visit. fact11: This limnologist inscribes. fact12: This limnologist is different if this primrose is non-medullary. fact13: Some person unbends Puppis and/or it is different if the fact that it is not medullary is correct. fact14: Something does not inscribe if it is a wizardry and it unbends Puppis. fact15: If someone is a kind of a wizardry he inscribes.

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

This limnologist does not inscribe.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Some person is not medullary or is not a visit or both if she/he is a Taxales. fact2: That saccharose inscribes. fact3: Someone is a wizardry if it is different. fact4: If somebody practices misquotation it is both not a Swazi and not a Taxales. fact5: This carpetbagger is a wizardry if this limnologist unbends Puppis. fact6: If the fact that this primrose is not a screenland but the person is medullary is wrong this limnologist is not medullary. fact7: That this cryptographer is not amnestic and this is not a Chekhov is not correct. fact8: That something is not a screenland but it is medullary is wrong if it is not a kind of a visit. fact9: This primrose practices misquotation if that that this cryptographer is not amnestic and that thing is not a kind of a Chekhov is false is correct. fact10: If something is not a kind of a Taxales then it is not a visit. fact11: This limnologist inscribes. fact12: This limnologist is different if this primrose is non-medullary. fact13: Some person unbends Puppis and/or it is different if the fact that it is not medullary is correct. fact14: Something does not inscribe if it is a wizardry and it unbends Puppis. fact15: If someone is a kind of a wizardry he inscribes. ; $hypothesis$ = This limnologist inscribes. ; $proof$ =

fact11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

This menacing Balaenidae does not happens.

¬{C}

fact1: That orgasm occurs and that myocardialness occurs. fact2: If that blowback does not occurs that colouring Lardizabalaceae does not happens and this menacing Balaenidae does not happens. fact3: That colouring Lardizabalaceae happens. fact4: That colouring Lardizabalaceae does not happens if notthat blowback but this recess occurs. fact5: Both this encrusting Perth and the memorialisation occurs. fact6: This nonoperationalness occurs. fact7: If that incontinentness happens notthat blowback but this recess occurs. fact8: The winemaking occurs and the cranching Myrtaceae happens. fact9: That this nonoperationalness happens and that colouring Lardizabalaceae occurs causes that this menacing Balaenidae does not happens. fact10: That this bestirring lcm occurs is true. fact11: That this crystallizinging numerology happens hold. fact12: The mortising resoluteness occurs and the Marking happens. fact13: The tensionalness occurs. fact14: This recess and that trophoblasticness occurs. fact15: That both the invertibleness and the tearing occurs prevents this BAN. fact16: This starvation occurs and the adorning happens. fact17: If this ictalness does not happens then the fact that this recess occurs and that incontinentness occurs is wrong.

fact1: ({BO} & {IO}) fact2: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) fact3: {B} fact4: (¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{B} fact5: ({GJ} & {DM}) fact6: {A} fact7: {F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact8: ({IR} & {EQ}) fact9: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} fact10: {DS} fact11: {BU} fact12: ({HI} & {GP}) fact13: {DF} fact14: ({E} & {EU}) fact15: ({GC} & {DJ}) -> ¬{AQ} fact16: ({AK} & {HP}) fact17: ¬{G} -> ¬({E} & {F})

That abating does not occurs.

¬{CD}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That orgasm occurs and that myocardialness occurs. fact2: If that blowback does not occurs that colouring Lardizabalaceae does not happens and this menacing Balaenidae does not happens. fact3: That colouring Lardizabalaceae happens. fact4: That colouring Lardizabalaceae does not happens if notthat blowback but this recess occurs. fact5: Both this encrusting Perth and the memorialisation occurs. fact6: This nonoperationalness occurs. fact7: If that incontinentness happens notthat blowback but this recess occurs. fact8: The winemaking occurs and the cranching Myrtaceae happens. fact9: That this nonoperationalness happens and that colouring Lardizabalaceae occurs causes that this menacing Balaenidae does not happens. fact10: That this bestirring lcm occurs is true. fact11: That this crystallizinging numerology happens hold. fact12: The mortising resoluteness occurs and the Marking happens. fact13: The tensionalness occurs. fact14: This recess and that trophoblasticness occurs. fact15: That both the invertibleness and the tearing occurs prevents this BAN. fact16: This starvation occurs and the adorning happens. fact17: If this ictalness does not happens then the fact that this recess occurs and that incontinentness occurs is wrong. ; $hypothesis$ = This menacing Balaenidae does not happens. ; $proof$ =

fact6 & fact3 -> int1: This nonoperationalness occurs and that colouring Lardizabalaceae occurs.; int1 & fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

The fact that if this gold does not Tell and is algebraical this gold does not untie is false.

¬((¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})

fact1: If the fact that the lavender is non-algebraical man that is colorimetric is right then the lavender belches Salisbury. fact2: If something that does not Tell is algebraical then it does not untie. fact3: If something Tells and it is not non-algebraical then it does not untie. fact4: If the fact that somebody is not wary but it is a Strobilomyces is true then it is unambitious. fact5: Someone is non-subarctic if he is not a kind of a Setubal and is not non-algebraical. fact6: If something that does not Tell is algebraical that thing unties. fact7: If this gold is not metaphysical but it is uncompassionate then this gold is not non-algebraical. fact8: If that this gold does not Tell but it is algebraical is correct it unties. fact9: This gold does not untie if this gold Tells and is algebraical.

fact1: (¬{AB}{bd} & {GH}{bd}) -> {DG}{bd} fact2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact4: (x): (¬{IR}x & {EK}x) -> {EB}x fact5: (x): (¬{HT}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{BH}x fact6: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x fact7: (¬{ED}{aa} & {DK}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} fact8: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} fact9: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}

The fact that that scrapper is not subarctic if that scrapper is not a Setubal but algebraical hold.

(¬{HT}{cs} & {AB}{cs}) -> ¬{BH}{cs}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that the lavender is non-algebraical man that is colorimetric is right then the lavender belches Salisbury. fact2: If something that does not Tell is algebraical then it does not untie. fact3: If something Tells and it is not non-algebraical then it does not untie. fact4: If the fact that somebody is not wary but it is a Strobilomyces is true then it is unambitious. fact5: Someone is non-subarctic if he is not a kind of a Setubal and is not non-algebraical. fact6: If something that does not Tell is algebraical that thing unties. fact7: If this gold is not metaphysical but it is uncompassionate then this gold is not non-algebraical. fact8: If that this gold does not Tell but it is algebraical is correct it unties. fact9: This gold does not untie if this gold Tells and is algebraical. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that if this gold does not Tell and is algebraical this gold does not untie is false. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

That bacchant is a Acrasiomycetes that does not seek Loyang.

({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

fact1: That bacchant is endogamous and is a republican. fact2: The fact that some man is a kind of a Acrasiomycetes that does not seek Loyang is false if that that person is a republican hold. fact3: The fact that some person is a republican and she seeks Loyang is wrong if she is endogamous. fact4: Something substantiates ampleness and is a Kolonia if it is not a republican. fact5: That bacchant plasticizes Demavend.

fact1: ({B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) fact2: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact3: (x): {B}x -> ¬({A}x & {AB}x) fact4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({BE}x & {CP}x) fact5: {HJ}{aa}

That hardboard substantiates ampleness and it is a Kolonia.

({BE}{go} & {CP}{go})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: That bacchant is endogamous and is a republican. fact2: The fact that some man is a kind of a Acrasiomycetes that does not seek Loyang is false if that that person is a republican hold. fact3: The fact that some person is a republican and she seeks Loyang is wrong if she is endogamous. fact4: Something substantiates ampleness and is a Kolonia if it is not a republican. fact5: That bacchant plasticizes Demavend. ; $hypothesis$ = That bacchant is a Acrasiomycetes that does not seek Loyang. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: The fact that that bacchant is a Acrasiomycetes that does not seek Loyang is wrong if it is a republican.; fact1 -> int2: That bacchant is a kind of a republican.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

Priscilla is a Potamogalidae.

{A}{b}

fact1: Priscilla outguesses Napier. fact2: This accession is articulative if that thing stockingeds. fact3: This accession is a erythroderma. fact4: This accession is a kind of a Ashe. fact5: Priscilla is a kind of a Ashe if the fact that this accession does not outguess Napier and is a erythroderma hold. fact6: This accession does not outguess Napier but it is a erythroderma. fact7: This accession is a Ashe if Priscilla is both a Potamogalidae and a erythroderma. fact8: This accession is not phonological but it ripenesses. fact9: Someone spots tonus if that it famishes hold. fact10: Priscilla is not a Hesperis. fact11: If something is a Ashe then this thing is a Potamogalidae. fact12: If Priscilla is not a kind of a erythroderma but this is a Potamogalidae then this accession outguesses Napier. fact13: If that this accession does euphemize is right it is a Ashe. fact14: Someone braces hypotonus if he is not non-achenial. fact15: This accession is a Potamogalidae if Priscilla does outguess Napier and the thing is a erythroderma.

fact1: {AA}{b} fact2: {FC}{a} -> {K}{a} fact3: {AB}{a} fact4: {B}{a} fact5: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} fact6: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) fact7: ({A}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{a} fact8: (¬{JH}{a} & {EK}{a}) fact9: (x): {G}x -> {BO}x fact10: ¬{Q}{b} fact11: (x): {B}x -> {A}x fact12: (¬{AB}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {AA}{a} fact13: {JC}{a} -> {B}{a} fact14: (x): {JJ}x -> {FT}x fact15: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {A}{a}

PROVED

PROVED

$facts$ = fact1: Priscilla outguesses Napier. fact2: This accession is articulative if that thing stockingeds. fact3: This accession is a erythroderma. fact4: This accession is a kind of a Ashe. fact5: Priscilla is a kind of a Ashe if the fact that this accession does not outguess Napier and is a erythroderma hold. fact6: This accession does not outguess Napier but it is a erythroderma. fact7: This accession is a Ashe if Priscilla is both a Potamogalidae and a erythroderma. fact8: This accession is not phonological but it ripenesses. fact9: Someone spots tonus if that it famishes hold. fact10: Priscilla is not a Hesperis. fact11: If something is a Ashe then this thing is a Potamogalidae. fact12: If Priscilla is not a kind of a erythroderma but this is a Potamogalidae then this accession outguesses Napier. fact13: If that this accession does euphemize is right it is a Ashe. fact14: Someone braces hypotonus if he is not non-achenial. fact15: This accession is a Potamogalidae if Priscilla does outguess Napier and the thing is a erythroderma. ; $hypothesis$ = Priscilla is a Potamogalidae. ; $proof$ =

fact5 & fact6 -> int1: Priscilla is a Ashe.; fact11 -> int2: Priscilla is a Potamogalidae if Priscilla is a Ashe.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

Let's assume that that mopboard is not creaseproof and it is not seasonable.

(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})

fact1: If something is not a fidelity then the thing is carroty thing that does identify Stenocarpus. fact2: That mopboard does not misguide Miltiades. fact3: That the Neopolitan is not a kind of a Livistona is true. fact4: If some person is carroty the fact that it is not styleless and it is a Halacha does not hold. fact5: That mopboard traipses and this thing is a Livistona. fact6: That someone is styleless and does not traipse is wrong if she is non-carroty. fact7: That that myriapod does not traipse hold if that this musette is not styleless but a Halacha does not hold. fact8: If the fact that this musette is not a kind of a fidelity and does not identify Stenocarpus is wrong that myriapod is not carroty. fact9: That mopboard is chyliferous. fact10: That mopboard is not a kind of a worried if the fact that that mopboard does not traipse and it is not a sinuousness hold. fact11: If the fact that some man is styleless and does not traipse does not hold the one does traipse. fact12: That mopboard is not a Livistona if that myriapod is not a Livistona and is not a kind of a Halacha. fact13: That mopboard does not align. fact14: That that mopboard is a kind of a Hylocereus but it does not traipse is wrong. fact15: Something is not creaseproof and not seasonable if it is not a kind of a Livistona. fact16: If that that mopboard is seasonable is correct then that intoxicant is seasonable. fact17: If that mopboard is a kind of non-creaseproof one that is unseasonable that it does not traipse hold. fact18: That objector is both a drug and seasonable. fact19: The fact that that mopboard is both creaseproof and not seasonable is incorrect. fact20: That mopboard is non-ventral and is not a Ramses. fact21: If that myriapod does not traipse then that mopboard is seasonable and this is a Livistona. fact22: That mopboard does not traipse if that mopboard is creaseproof but not seasonable.

fact1: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({E}x & {F}x) fact2: ¬{CA}{a} fact3: ¬{A}{is} fact4: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) fact5: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) fact6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{B}x) fact7: ¬(¬{D}{c} & {C}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} fact8: ¬(¬{G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} fact9: {GF}{a} fact10: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{ER}{a}) -> ¬{EH}{a} fact11: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{B}x) -> {B}x fact12: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} fact13: ¬{AD}{a} fact14: ¬({IF}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) fact15: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) fact16: {AB}{a} -> {AB}{al} fact17: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} fact18: ({IG}{fi} & {AB}{fi}) fact19: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) fact20: (¬{EE}{a} & ¬{GB}{a}) fact21: ¬{B}{b} -> ({AB}{a} & {A}{a}) fact22: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}

That intoxicant is seasonable.

{AB}{al}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If something is not a fidelity then the thing is carroty thing that does identify Stenocarpus. fact2: That mopboard does not misguide Miltiades. fact3: That the Neopolitan is not a kind of a Livistona is true. fact4: If some person is carroty the fact that it is not styleless and it is a Halacha does not hold. fact5: That mopboard traipses and this thing is a Livistona. fact6: That someone is styleless and does not traipse is wrong if she is non-carroty. fact7: That that myriapod does not traipse hold if that this musette is not styleless but a Halacha does not hold. fact8: If the fact that this musette is not a kind of a fidelity and does not identify Stenocarpus is wrong that myriapod is not carroty. fact9: That mopboard is chyliferous. fact10: That mopboard is not a kind of a worried if the fact that that mopboard does not traipse and it is not a sinuousness hold. fact11: If the fact that some man is styleless and does not traipse does not hold the one does traipse. fact12: That mopboard is not a Livistona if that myriapod is not a Livistona and is not a kind of a Halacha. fact13: That mopboard does not align. fact14: That that mopboard is a kind of a Hylocereus but it does not traipse is wrong. fact15: Something is not creaseproof and not seasonable if it is not a kind of a Livistona. fact16: If that that mopboard is seasonable is correct then that intoxicant is seasonable. fact17: If that mopboard is a kind of non-creaseproof one that is unseasonable that it does not traipse hold. fact18: That objector is both a drug and seasonable. fact19: The fact that that mopboard is both creaseproof and not seasonable is incorrect. fact20: That mopboard is non-ventral and is not a Ramses. fact21: If that myriapod does not traipse then that mopboard is seasonable and this is a Livistona. fact22: That mopboard does not traipse if that mopboard is creaseproof but not seasonable. ; $hypothesis$ = Let's assume that that mopboard is not creaseproof and it is not seasonable. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that mopboard is not creaseproof and it is not seasonable.; fact17 & assump1 -> int1: That mopboard does not traipse.; fact5 -> int2: That mopboard does traipse.; int1 & int2 -> int3: This is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

The fact that that cat yearns hold.

{B}{aa}

fact1: That that cat yearns but that one is not a drilled does not hold. fact2: If that some person hypophysectomizeds tenge but it is not a kind of a Catholic does not hold it does not yearn. fact3: That cat does not yearn if that cat does not hypophysectomized tenge. fact4: That cat is not a kind of a perk. fact5: That that cat hypophysectomizeds tenge but it is not a Catholic is false if that cat is not a perk. fact6: If something does not hypophysectomized tenge then it does not yearn.

fact1: ¬({B}{aa} & ¬{BR}{aa}) fact2: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x fact3: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} fact4: ¬{A}{aa} fact5: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) fact6: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$facts$ = fact1: That that cat yearns but that one is not a drilled does not hold. fact2: If that some person hypophysectomizeds tenge but it is not a kind of a Catholic does not hold it does not yearn. fact3: That cat does not yearn if that cat does not hypophysectomized tenge. fact4: That cat is not a kind of a perk. fact5: That that cat hypophysectomizeds tenge but it is not a Catholic is false if that cat is not a perk. fact6: If something does not hypophysectomized tenge then it does not yearn. ; $hypothesis$ = The fact that that cat yearns hold. ; $proof$ =

fact2 -> int1: That cat does not yearn if that that cat hypophysectomizeds tenge but the person is not a Catholic is false.; fact4 & fact5 -> int2: The fact that that cat hypophysectomizeds tenge but this person is not a Catholic is false.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

0.3

This dyspneicness occurs.

{A}

fact1: Notthat theisticness but that Skinnerian occurs if that nonextensileness happens. fact2: Both this baroqueness and this enchanting sensuality occurs. fact3: This unsystematicness occurs and the Mulling Segovia happens. fact4: That nonextensileness happens if the socializing happens. fact5: The savings happens. fact6: If that nonextensileness occurs this rescuing does not occurs and that Skinnerian happens. fact7: Both the unenclosedness and the Odyssey happens. fact8: The succussing puzzlement happens. fact9: This dyspneicness and this worldliness occurs. fact10: The dinning occurs. fact11: This dyspneicness does not happens if this worldliness does not occurs. fact12: The fact that that unworldlyness and this hurling happens hold if that victimisation does not occurs. fact13: If this rescuing does not occurs then the fact that this hurling does not occurs and this eradication does not happens does not hold. fact14: If this rescuing does not occurs then notthat victimisation but that theisticness happens. fact15: This tolling happens and this dyspneicness happens if this worldliness does not occurs. fact16: This eradication happens if the fact that this hurling does not occurs and this eradication does not occurs is wrong. fact17: The fact that this worldliness occurs is right. fact18: If that theisticness does not happens the fact that this worldliness but notthat victimisation occurs does not hold.

fact1: {H} -> (¬{E} & {G}) fact2: ({K} & {FO}) fact3: ({HB} & {DP}) fact4: {I} -> {H} fact5: {P} fact6: {H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) fact7: ({DR} & {DB}) fact8: {IA} fact9: ({A} & {B}) fact10: {IB} fact11: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} fact12: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & {C}) fact13: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{GM}) fact14: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) fact15: ¬{B} -> ({JH} & {A}) fact16: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{GM}) -> {GM} fact17: {B} fact18: ¬{E} -> ¬({B} & ¬{D})

This eradication happens and this tolling happens.

({GM} & {JH})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: Notthat theisticness but that Skinnerian occurs if that nonextensileness happens. fact2: Both this baroqueness and this enchanting sensuality occurs. fact3: This unsystematicness occurs and the Mulling Segovia happens. fact4: That nonextensileness happens if the socializing happens. fact5: The savings happens. fact6: If that nonextensileness occurs this rescuing does not occurs and that Skinnerian happens. fact7: Both the unenclosedness and the Odyssey happens. fact8: The succussing puzzlement happens. fact9: This dyspneicness and this worldliness occurs. fact10: The dinning occurs. fact11: This dyspneicness does not happens if this worldliness does not occurs. fact12: The fact that that unworldlyness and this hurling happens hold if that victimisation does not occurs. fact13: If this rescuing does not occurs then the fact that this hurling does not occurs and this eradication does not happens does not hold. fact14: If this rescuing does not occurs then notthat victimisation but that theisticness happens. fact15: This tolling happens and this dyspneicness happens if this worldliness does not occurs. fact16: This eradication happens if the fact that this hurling does not occurs and this eradication does not occurs is wrong. fact17: The fact that this worldliness occurs is right. fact18: If that theisticness does not happens the fact that this worldliness but notthat victimisation occurs does not hold. ; $hypothesis$ = This dyspneicness occurs. ; $proof$ =

fact9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

0.3

There is something such that it pedals.

(Ex): {A}x

fact1: If the fact that this boffin is a Massine and/or that thing ransacks Platonism is false this boffin does not pedal. fact2: If this Gibbon is not a Charales this boffin is a kg or ransacks Platonism or both. fact3: That tungstate is not a Massine. fact4: That tungstate is not a Charales if that skirmisher is acculturative a Charales. fact5: Something pedals if it likes. fact6: Something likes if the thing is a whole. fact7: If there is something such that that thing is not a kind of a Charales and that thing is not a Massine then this Gibbon is not a kind of a Charales. fact8: The fact that something is a kind of a modishness hold if it does pedal. fact9: If some man is a kind of a kg that person is a whole. fact10: If somebody that does not like does not pedal then this person stargazings Cortinarius. fact11: If there is something such that this is not a kind of a Charales and this is not a kind of a kg this boffin is not a kg. fact12: Something is not a Charales and is not a kg. fact13: That skirmisher is acculturative and is a Charales. fact14: There is someone such that she is titulary. fact15: There exists something such that it is gladiatorial.

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

There is something such that it is a kind of a modishness.

(Ex): {DS}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$facts$ = fact1: If the fact that this boffin is a Massine and/or that thing ransacks Platonism is false this boffin does not pedal. fact2: If this Gibbon is not a Charales this boffin is a kg or ransacks Platonism or both. fact3: That tungstate is not a Massine. fact4: That tungstate is not a Charales if that skirmisher is acculturative a Charales. fact5: Something pedals if it likes. fact6: Something likes if the thing is a whole. fact7: If there is something such that that thing is not a kind of a Charales and that thing is not a Massine then this Gibbon is not a kind of a Charales. fact8: The fact that something is a kind of a modishness hold if it does pedal. fact9: If some man is a kind of a kg that person is a whole. fact10: If somebody that does not like does not pedal then this person stargazings Cortinarius. fact11: If there is something such that this is not a kind of a Charales and this is not a kind of a kg this boffin is not a kg. fact12: Something is not a Charales and is not a kg. fact13: That skirmisher is acculturative and is a Charales. fact14: There is someone such that she is titulary. fact15: There exists something such that it is gladiatorial. ; $hypothesis$ = There is something such that it pedals. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__