Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2

like 7

DeductionInstance

something spectates and it is photic.

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

sent1: the porringer is photic. sent2: something spectates. sent3: if something that is not a heckelphone spectates then it is photic. sent4: the porringer is a heckelphone and it does prize canister. sent5: the acinus spectates. sent6: the pseudocarp is not a kind of a heckelphone and does spectate if the porringer does not hammer. sent7: there are photic things. sent8: that the porringer is a heckelphone is not incorrect.

sent1: {C}{a} sent2: (Ex): {A}x sent3: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> {C}x sent4: ({B}{a} & {HH}{a}) sent5: {A}{di} sent6: ¬{D}{a} -> (¬{B}{hr} & {A}{hr}) sent7: (Ex): {C}x sent8: {B}{a}

the pseudocarp is photic.

{C}{hr}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = something spectates and it is photic. ; $context$ = sent1: the porringer is photic. sent2: something spectates. sent3: if something that is not a heckelphone spectates then it is photic. sent4: the porringer is a heckelphone and it does prize canister. sent5: the acinus spectates. sent6: the pseudocarp is not a kind of a heckelphone and does spectate if the porringer does not hammer. sent7: there are photic things. sent8: that the porringer is a heckelphone is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that there exists something such that if it is not biosystematics then it commingles dialect and it is not a phon is false.

¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

sent1: there exists something such that if it does not commingle canister it forces Mergus and is not a pseudoscience. sent2: there exists something such that if it is biosystematics then it does commingle dialect and is not a kind of a phon. sent3: the Delaware commingles dialect and is not a kind of a phon if it is biosystematics. sent4: there is something such that if it does not prize camellia then that it commingles peafowl is not false. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a gynostegium then it is not a kind of a torture. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a turkey it is a Holothuridae and disintegrative. sent7: there is something such that if it is not an opinion it is pyroligneous and prefigures misinformation. sent8: the fact that the Delaware does commingle dialect is not wrong if it is not biosystematics. sent9: the Delaware commingles dialect and is not a phon if that it is not biosystematics is not incorrect. sent10: something is a Tarzan but not monotypic if it is not Galwegian. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a siding it is not a kind of a hogshead.

sent1: (Ex): ¬{IQ}x -> ({CB}x & ¬{DE}x) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): ¬{EF}x -> {EB}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{FJ}x -> ¬{CJ}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{JB}x -> ({BG}x & {O}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬{DN}x -> ({HP}x & {IL}x) sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent9: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent10: (x): ¬{IF}x -> ({HK}x & ¬{BS}x) sent11: (Ex): ¬{EN}x -> ¬{FA}x

there exists something such that if it is non-Galwegian it is a Tarzan but not monotypic.

(Ex): ¬{IF}x -> ({HK}x & ¬{BS}x)

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not biosystematics then it commingles dialect and it is not a phon is false. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it does not commingle canister it forces Mergus and is not a pseudoscience. sent2: there exists something such that if it is biosystematics then it does commingle dialect and is not a kind of a phon. sent3: the Delaware commingles dialect and is not a kind of a phon if it is biosystematics. sent4: there is something such that if it does not prize camellia then that it commingles peafowl is not false. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a gynostegium then it is not a kind of a torture. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a turkey it is a Holothuridae and disintegrative. sent7: there is something such that if it is not an opinion it is pyroligneous and prefigures misinformation. sent8: the fact that the Delaware does commingle dialect is not wrong if it is not biosystematics. sent9: the Delaware commingles dialect and is not a phon if that it is not biosystematics is not incorrect. sent10: something is a Tarzan but not monotypic if it is not Galwegian. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a siding it is not a kind of a hogshead. ; $proof$ =

sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the axonalness occurs.

{A}

sent1: that the prefiguring bullion does not occur and the prefiguring Sarcosporidia does not occur is not correct if that the credit does not occur is correct. sent2: the crediting does not occur if the fact that not the independence but the crediting happens is not right. sent3: the forcing gown does not occur if the fact that the axonalness does not occur and the prizing spermatophyte does not occur is not correct. sent4: if the syntagmaticness does not occur that the axonalness does not occur and the prizing spermatophyte does not occur does not hold. sent5: the prizing sarcasm does not occur if the fact that the fact that the prefiguring bullion does not occur and the prefiguring Sarcosporidia does not occur is true is wrong. sent6: that not the reclassification but the dependentness happens is caused by the non-archesporialness. sent7: the prizing spermatophyte happens if that the axonalness does not occur is not false. sent8: the syntagmaticness does not occur if that the syntagmaticness and the diagnosticness happens does not hold. sent9: the prizing spermatophyte does not occur but the syntagmaticness occurs. sent10: if the prizing sarcasm does not occur the fact that the syntagmaticness happens and the diagnosticness happens does not hold. sent11: if the limit occurs then the fact that the independence does not occur but the credit occurs is false. sent12: that the reclassification does not occur yields that the limiting happens and the greenness happens.

sent1: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{G}) sent2: ¬(¬{J} & {H}) -> ¬{H} sent3: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{CC} sent4: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent5: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{D} sent6: ¬{N} -> (¬{L} & {M}) sent7: ¬{A} -> {B} sent8: ¬({C} & {E}) -> ¬{C} sent9: (¬{B} & {C}) sent10: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {E}) sent11: {I} -> ¬(¬{J} & {H}) sent12: ¬{L} -> ({I} & {K})

the forcing gown does not occur.

¬{CC}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the axonalness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the prefiguring bullion does not occur and the prefiguring Sarcosporidia does not occur is not correct if that the credit does not occur is correct. sent2: the crediting does not occur if the fact that not the independence but the crediting happens is not right. sent3: the forcing gown does not occur if the fact that the axonalness does not occur and the prizing spermatophyte does not occur is not correct. sent4: if the syntagmaticness does not occur that the axonalness does not occur and the prizing spermatophyte does not occur does not hold. sent5: the prizing sarcasm does not occur if the fact that the fact that the prefiguring bullion does not occur and the prefiguring Sarcosporidia does not occur is true is wrong. sent6: that not the reclassification but the dependentness happens is caused by the non-archesporialness. sent7: the prizing spermatophyte happens if that the axonalness does not occur is not false. sent8: the syntagmaticness does not occur if that the syntagmaticness and the diagnosticness happens does not hold. sent9: the prizing spermatophyte does not occur but the syntagmaticness occurs. sent10: if the prizing sarcasm does not occur the fact that the syntagmaticness happens and the diagnosticness happens does not hold. sent11: if the limit occurs then the fact that the independence does not occur but the credit occurs is false. sent12: that the reclassification does not occur yields that the limiting happens and the greenness happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the axonalness does not occur.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the prizing spermatophyte occurs.; sent9 -> int2: the prizing spermatophyte does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the etiologist is a kind of non-electrical thing that is implacable does not hold.

¬(¬{B}{b} & {A}{b})

sent1: there is something such that the fact that either it is not plantal or it prefigures denticle or both does not hold. sent2: something is a tilt but it is not electrical if it does not prefigure eldership. sent3: something is plantal. sent4: that the etiologist is electrical and it is implacable is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that it is not plantal and/or it prefigures denticle. sent6: if there is something such that that either it is plantal or it prefigures denticle or both is false then the wristlet is not implacable. sent7: if there is something such that that it is not plantal or prefigures denticle or both is not right then the fact that the wristlet is not implacable is not false. sent8: the fact that the etiologist is a kind of electrical thing that is implacable is incorrect if the wristlet is not implacable. sent9: everything does not prefigure eldership. sent10: the fact that the etiologist is both not electrical and not placable is not true if the wristlet is not placable.

sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent3: (Ex): {AA}x sent4: ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent5: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent6: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent7: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent9: (x): ¬{D}x sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {A}{b})

there exists something such that that it is not a provost or it is a ununhexium or both does not hold.

(Ex): ¬(¬{IG}x v {DA}x)

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the etiologist is a kind of non-electrical thing that is implacable does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that either it is not plantal or it prefigures denticle or both does not hold. sent2: something is a tilt but it is not electrical if it does not prefigure eldership. sent3: something is plantal. sent4: that the etiologist is electrical and it is implacable is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that it is not plantal and/or it prefigures denticle. sent6: if there is something such that that either it is plantal or it prefigures denticle or both is false then the wristlet is not implacable. sent7: if there is something such that that it is not plantal or prefigures denticle or both is not right then the fact that the wristlet is not implacable is not false. sent8: the fact that the etiologist is a kind of electrical thing that is implacable is incorrect if the wristlet is not implacable. sent9: everything does not prefigure eldership. sent10: the fact that the etiologist is both not electrical and not placable is not true if the wristlet is not placable. ; $proof$ =

sent1 & sent7 -> int1: that the wristlet is not implacable is not incorrect.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the brace is not alchemic.

¬{D}{b}

sent1: something does not relocate if it is a fossil. sent2: if there is something such that it is not a fossil the combustible is a cancer. sent3: there exists nothing that is both not a cancer and not a blameworthiness. sent4: the viewers does not relocate. sent5: something is a fossil. sent6: if the fact that something is not a cancer and is not a kind of a blameworthiness is wrong it is a kind of a cancer. sent7: the barbital is not a jaded. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it does not prize Hymen is not false. sent9: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a fossil the combustible is a cancer that does relocate. sent10: the combustible is a kind of a cancer. sent11: the brace is not alchemic if the combustible is a cancer and relocates. sent12: the Hymen is a blameworthiness. sent13: the viewers is not a fossil. sent14: the peepshow does prize cordovan and it luminesces. sent15: the brace is alchemic if that the combustible is alchemic is not wrong. sent16: something is both alchemic and not fossil if the fact that it is not a cancer is true. sent17: the viewers is not sensorineural.

sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{F}x) sent4: ¬{C}{aa} sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{F}x) -> {B}x sent7: ¬{BR}{ef} sent8: (Ex): ¬{DU}x sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent10: {B}{a} sent11: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent12: {F}{d} sent13: ¬{A}{aa} sent14: ({DS}{ir} & {S}{ir}) sent15: {D}{a} -> {D}{b} sent16: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({D}x & ¬{A}x) sent17: ¬{FK}{aa}

the brace is alchemic.

{D}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the brace is not alchemic. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not relocate if it is a fossil. sent2: if there is something such that it is not a fossil the combustible is a cancer. sent3: there exists nothing that is both not a cancer and not a blameworthiness. sent4: the viewers does not relocate. sent5: something is a fossil. sent6: if the fact that something is not a cancer and is not a kind of a blameworthiness is wrong it is a kind of a cancer. sent7: the barbital is not a jaded. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it does not prize Hymen is not false. sent9: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a fossil the combustible is a cancer that does relocate. sent10: the combustible is a kind of a cancer. sent11: the brace is not alchemic if the combustible is a cancer and relocates. sent12: the Hymen is a blameworthiness. sent13: the viewers is not a fossil. sent14: the peepshow does prize cordovan and it luminesces. sent15: the brace is alchemic if that the combustible is alchemic is not wrong. sent16: something is both alchemic and not fossil if the fact that it is not a cancer is true. sent17: the viewers is not sensorineural. ; $proof$ =

sent13 -> int1: there are non-fossil things.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the combustible is a cancer and it relocates.; sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

both the Haitian and the seraphicness happens.

({B} & {C})

sent1: the justice happens. sent2: the pelter and the non-flintiness occurs. sent3: that the gap does not occur and/or the curricularness results in that the centromericness does not occur. sent4: the entry happens and the exocrineness happens if the centromericness does not occur. sent5: if the flintiness does not occur the fact that the calceolateness happens and the CT does not occur is not true. sent6: the placentalness does not occur if that the fact that the calceolateness occurs and the CT does not occur is not correct is not wrong. sent7: the fact that the exocrineness or the non-Haitianness or both occurs is not correct. sent8: the exocrineness does not occur. sent9: if that the placentalness does not occur hold the electrocardiographicness happens and the perfection occurs. sent10: if the fact that the electrocardiographicness occurs and the exocrine happens is incorrect the exocrine does not occur. sent11: that the electrocardiographicness happens is true. sent12: if the fact that the Haitian occurs and/or the seraphicness does not occur is not correct the chinking happens.

sent1: {GI} sent2: ({J} & ¬{I}) sent3: (¬{L} v {M}) -> ¬{K} sent4: ¬{K} -> ({GL} & {A}) sent5: ¬{I} -> ¬({G} & ¬{H}) sent6: ¬({G} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} sent7: ¬({A} v ¬{B}) sent8: ¬{A} sent9: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent10: ¬({D} & {A}) -> ¬{A} sent11: {D} sent12: ¬({B} v ¬{C}) -> {IE}

the entry happens and the chinking happens.

({GL} & {IE})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = both the Haitian and the seraphicness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the justice happens. sent2: the pelter and the non-flintiness occurs. sent3: that the gap does not occur and/or the curricularness results in that the centromericness does not occur. sent4: the entry happens and the exocrineness happens if the centromericness does not occur. sent5: if the flintiness does not occur the fact that the calceolateness happens and the CT does not occur is not true. sent6: the placentalness does not occur if that the fact that the calceolateness occurs and the CT does not occur is not correct is not wrong. sent7: the fact that the exocrineness or the non-Haitianness or both occurs is not correct. sent8: the exocrineness does not occur. sent9: if that the placentalness does not occur hold the electrocardiographicness happens and the perfection occurs. sent10: if the fact that the electrocardiographicness occurs and the exocrine happens is incorrect the exocrine does not occur. sent11: that the electrocardiographicness happens is true. sent12: if the fact that the Haitian occurs and/or the seraphicness does not occur is not correct the chinking happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Haitianness does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the exocrineness or the non-Haitianness or both occurs.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the Haitian occurs.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the deerberry does not force Standish is correct.

¬{D}{b}

sent1: the deerberry does not force Standish if the German is not a torr. sent2: the German does prefigure B.O. and prizes fumitory. sent3: the fumitory is catechistic and it is exterior. sent4: if that the German does prefigure B.O. is not false it is not a kind of a torr. sent5: the deerberry does prize fumitory. sent6: the sidewinder is not a torr. sent7: the fact that the fumitory is not methodological but it does consolidate is false if that it is catechistic is correct.

sent1: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} sent2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent3: ({G}{d} & {H}{d}) sent4: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} sent5: {B}{b} sent6: ¬{C}{bu} sent7: {G}{d} -> ¬(¬{E}{d} & {F}{d})

the fact that the deerberry does force Standish hold.

{D}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the deerberry does not force Standish is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the deerberry does not force Standish if the German is not a torr. sent2: the German does prefigure B.O. and prizes fumitory. sent3: the fumitory is catechistic and it is exterior. sent4: if that the German does prefigure B.O. is not false it is not a kind of a torr. sent5: the deerberry does prize fumitory. sent6: the sidewinder is not a torr. sent7: the fact that the fumitory is not methodological but it does consolidate is false if that it is catechistic is correct. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> int1: the German prefigures B.O..; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the German is not a kind of a torr.; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

either the elevation does not occur or the forcing festschrift occurs or both.

(¬{A} v {C})

sent1: that the pallone does not occur and the defeasibleness does not occur leads to that the forcing festschrift happens. sent2: if the elevation happens then the dumping happens. sent3: that the dumping does not occur is true if the fact that not the defeasibleness but the dumping occurs does not hold. sent4: that if the forcing festschrift happens then the fact that the dumping does not occur and the elevation does not occur is wrong hold. sent5: if that the dump does not occur and the elevation does not occur is not right the contortion happens. sent6: the fact that the pallone does not occur is correct if that both the countermeasure and the pallone happens is incorrect. sent7: the priestliness does not occur or the morphophonemicsness occurs or both. sent8: if the annoying does not occur the fact that the countermeasure and the pallone happens is false.

sent1: (¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> {C} sent2: {A} -> {B} sent3: ¬(¬{E} & {B}) -> ¬{B} sent4: {C} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) sent5: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {BO} sent6: ¬({G} & {D}) -> ¬{D} sent7: (¬{EM} v {AU}) sent8: ¬{F} -> ¬({G} & {D})

the contortion occurs.

{BO}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = either the elevation does not occur or the forcing festschrift occurs or both. ; $context$ = sent1: that the pallone does not occur and the defeasibleness does not occur leads to that the forcing festschrift happens. sent2: if the elevation happens then the dumping happens. sent3: that the dumping does not occur is true if the fact that not the defeasibleness but the dumping occurs does not hold. sent4: that if the forcing festschrift happens then the fact that the dumping does not occur and the elevation does not occur is wrong hold. sent5: if that the dump does not occur and the elevation does not occur is not right the contortion happens. sent6: the fact that the pallone does not occur is correct if that both the countermeasure and the pallone happens is incorrect. sent7: the priestliness does not occur or the morphophonemicsness occurs or both. sent8: if the annoying does not occur the fact that the countermeasure and the pallone happens is false. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the elevation happens.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the dump happens hold.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

both the stunner and the sideshow occurs.

({C} & {D})

sent1: that the recommending disk happens and the corporealness happens is false. sent2: the stunner occurs if the fact that both the recommending disk and the non-corporealness happens is not right. sent3: that the cinematicness and the abounding happens is wrong. sent4: the recommending roughcast does not occur. sent5: if the repositioning SACLANT happens the obtainment occurs. sent6: that the repositioning epiphenomenon occurs is brought about by that the storminess happens. sent7: if the fact that the repositioning cockspur occurs but the sway does not occur is incorrect then the arousal happens. sent8: if the iniquity does not occur then the octalness does not occur but the circumnavigation happens. sent9: the sideshow occurs if the circumnavigation occurs. sent10: the contortion happens. sent11: the recommending disk does not occur. sent12: the surmounting does not occur. sent13: the perennialness occurs but the corroding plenty does not occur. sent14: the surmounting occurs if the fact that the unrentableness but not the municipalness happens is not right. sent15: the fact that the conviction and the sway happens is not correct. sent16: if the corporealness does not occur both the mystification and the recommending disk occurs.

sent1: ¬({A} & {B}) sent2: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) -> {C} sent3: ¬({IA} & {FA}) sent4: ¬{EH} sent5: {AE} -> {GD} sent6: {FB} -> {AQ} sent7: ¬({BC} & ¬{GK}) -> {BL} sent8: ¬{F} -> (¬{FJ} & {E}) sent9: {E} -> {D} sent10: {G} sent11: ¬{A} sent12: ¬{GF} sent13: ({GQ} & ¬{BA}) sent14: ¬({HI} & ¬{JB}) -> {GF} sent15: ¬({GC} & {GK}) sent16: ¬{B} -> ({EM} & {A})

that the stunner and the sideshow occurs is not true.

¬({C} & {D})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = both the stunner and the sideshow occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the recommending disk happens and the corporealness happens is false. sent2: the stunner occurs if the fact that both the recommending disk and the non-corporealness happens is not right. sent3: that the cinematicness and the abounding happens is wrong. sent4: the recommending roughcast does not occur. sent5: if the repositioning SACLANT happens the obtainment occurs. sent6: that the repositioning epiphenomenon occurs is brought about by that the storminess happens. sent7: if the fact that the repositioning cockspur occurs but the sway does not occur is incorrect then the arousal happens. sent8: if the iniquity does not occur then the octalness does not occur but the circumnavigation happens. sent9: the sideshow occurs if the circumnavigation occurs. sent10: the contortion happens. sent11: the recommending disk does not occur. sent12: the surmounting does not occur. sent13: the perennialness occurs but the corroding plenty does not occur. sent14: the surmounting occurs if the fact that the unrentableness but not the municipalness happens is not right. sent15: the fact that the conviction and the sway happens is not correct. sent16: if the corporealness does not occur both the mystification and the recommending disk occurs. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the recommending disk but not the corporealness happens.; assump1 -> int1: the recommending disk occurs.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the recommending disk happens but the corporealness does not occur does not hold.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: that the stunner happens is true.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the panther suffers lamented.

{B}{a}

sent1: the fact that something is a refreshment is true if it is celestial. sent2: the panther does suffer lamented if it is a refreshment. sent3: the panther is a refreshment.

sent1: (x): {FQ}x -> {A}x sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent3: {A}{a}

the embankment is a kind of a refreshment if it is celestial.

{FQ}{bd} -> {A}{bd}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the panther suffers lamented. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is a refreshment is true if it is celestial. sent2: the panther does suffer lamented if it is a refreshment. sent3: the panther is a refreshment. ; $proof$ =

sent2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the quarterback is not dystopian.

¬{A}{a}

sent1: that the Manichaean is dystopian is true. sent2: if there is something such that it is not a auxin the fact that the holster is a dower and a auxin is incorrect. sent3: the spinet is not polyvalent if there is something such that that it does reposition olivenite and it is polyvalent is not correct. sent4: the quarterback is dystopian thing that does suffer unceremoniousness. sent5: the quarterback does suffer unceremoniousness. sent6: something does suffer unceremoniousness if it does suffer patriarchy. sent7: the creche does suffer patriarchy and/or it is dystopian if something does suffer patriarchy. sent8: there is something such that it is not a auxin. sent9: if there exists something such that it is not polyvalent the quarterback repositions rummage and does suffer patriarchy. sent10: the wide-body is not a telegram or is a Garfield or both if something is not a telegram. sent11: if the fact that the holster is a dower and is a auxin does not hold it is not a telegram. sent12: something does suffer unceremoniousness if it is dystopian. sent13: the fact that something does reposition olivenite and it is polyvalent is not correct if it does not suffer sporocarp. sent14: if the fact that the wide-body either is not a telegram or is a Garfield or both hold then the spherocyte does not suffer sporocarp.

sent1: {A}{iu} sent2: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({J}{e} & {K}{e}) sent3: (x): ¬({G}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}{b} sent4: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent5: {B}{a} sent6: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent7: (x): {C}x -> ({C}{ag} v {A}{ag}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{K}x sent9: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{H}{d} v {I}{d}) sent11: ¬({J}{e} & {K}{e}) -> ¬{H}{e} sent12: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent13: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({G}x & {E}x) sent14: (¬{H}{d} v {I}{d}) -> ¬{F}{c}

that the creche does suffer unceremoniousness is right.

{B}{ag}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the quarterback is not dystopian. ; $context$ = sent1: that the Manichaean is dystopian is true. sent2: if there is something such that it is not a auxin the fact that the holster is a dower and a auxin is incorrect. sent3: the spinet is not polyvalent if there is something such that that it does reposition olivenite and it is polyvalent is not correct. sent4: the quarterback is dystopian thing that does suffer unceremoniousness. sent5: the quarterback does suffer unceremoniousness. sent6: something does suffer unceremoniousness if it does suffer patriarchy. sent7: the creche does suffer patriarchy and/or it is dystopian if something does suffer patriarchy. sent8: there is something such that it is not a auxin. sent9: if there exists something such that it is not polyvalent the quarterback repositions rummage and does suffer patriarchy. sent10: the wide-body is not a telegram or is a Garfield or both if something is not a telegram. sent11: if the fact that the holster is a dower and is a auxin does not hold it is not a telegram. sent12: something does suffer unceremoniousness if it is dystopian. sent13: the fact that something does reposition olivenite and it is polyvalent is not correct if it does not suffer sporocarp. sent14: if the fact that the wide-body either is not a telegram or is a Garfield or both hold then the spherocyte does not suffer sporocarp. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the voyeur is a kind of a functionalism.

{C}{b}

sent1: the fact that the skink is a malope is not false. sent2: if something that does shiver is a functionalism the voyeur is a malope. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a Sicilian. sent4: there is something such that that it is a counterpunch hold. sent5: the copperware is a malope. sent6: something does tsk and is dim. sent7: there is something such that it suffers groundberry and it is electromechanical. sent8: the mazer shivers. sent9: there exists something such that it is a kind of a malope. sent10: something suffers catechist. sent11: that the dietary is a malope is not wrong. sent12: the voyeur is a kind of a functionalism if there is something such that it is a malope and does shiver. sent13: the voyeur does shiver. sent14: there is something such that it is a setter. sent15: the voyeur is actinomycotic. sent16: there is something such that that it is a kind of a thriller and it does reposition overspill is right. sent17: there exists something such that it is puerperal. sent18: the copperware is a functionalism. sent19: the filicide is a functionalism. sent20: something shivers. sent21: something is succinic and it is noncritical.

sent1: {A}{o} sent2: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> {A}{b} sent3: (Ex): {S}x sent4: (Ex): {HJ}x sent5: {A}{gl} sent6: (Ex): ({FN}x & {BE}x) sent7: (Ex): ({EM}x & {BM}x) sent8: {B}{hs} sent9: (Ex): {A}x sent10: (Ex): {GH}x sent11: {A}{a} sent12: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{b} sent13: {B}{b} sent14: (Ex): {GB}x sent15: {CA}{b} sent16: (Ex): ({DP}x & {DN}x) sent17: (Ex): {ES}x sent18: {C}{gl} sent19: {C}{aa} sent20: (Ex): {B}x sent21: (Ex): ({HA}x & {IJ}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the voyeur is a kind of a functionalism. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the skink is a malope is not false. sent2: if something that does shiver is a functionalism the voyeur is a malope. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a Sicilian. sent4: there is something such that that it is a counterpunch hold. sent5: the copperware is a malope. sent6: something does tsk and is dim. sent7: there is something such that it suffers groundberry and it is electromechanical. sent8: the mazer shivers. sent9: there exists something such that it is a kind of a malope. sent10: something suffers catechist. sent11: that the dietary is a malope is not wrong. sent12: the voyeur is a kind of a functionalism if there is something such that it is a malope and does shiver. sent13: the voyeur does shiver. sent14: there is something such that it is a setter. sent15: the voyeur is actinomycotic. sent16: there is something such that that it is a kind of a thriller and it does reposition overspill is right. sent17: there exists something such that it is puerperal. sent18: the copperware is a functionalism. sent19: the filicide is a functionalism. sent20: something shivers. sent21: something is succinic and it is noncritical. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the Dunkers repositions toner.

{A}{a}

sent1: the fact that something does reposition toner and it does sequester does not hold if it does not recommend Dunkers. sent2: something does not suffer draba. sent3: if something is not expiratory and it does not recommend curbside the Dunkers does reposition toner. sent4: something does not suffer draba but it recommends pater. sent5: something does not suffer draba and does not recommend pater. sent6: there exists something such that it suffers draba and does not recommend pater. sent7: if that something repositions toner and does sequester is incorrect it does not repositions toner. sent8: if there is something such that that it does not suffer draba and it does not recommend pater is not wrong then the Dunkers repositions toner.

sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent3: (x): (¬{DI}x & ¬{CU}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent6: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: (x): ¬({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent8: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a}

the Dunkers does not reposition toner.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the Dunkers repositions toner. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something does reposition toner and it does sequester does not hold if it does not recommend Dunkers. sent2: something does not suffer draba. sent3: if something is not expiratory and it does not recommend curbside the Dunkers does reposition toner. sent4: something does not suffer draba but it recommends pater. sent5: something does not suffer draba and does not recommend pater. sent6: there exists something such that it suffers draba and does not recommend pater. sent7: if that something repositions toner and does sequester is incorrect it does not repositions toner. sent8: if there is something such that that it does not suffer draba and it does not recommend pater is not wrong then the Dunkers repositions toner. ; $proof$ =

sent5 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the brink dowses.

{C}{a}

sent1: if the brink is both cloze and a hindgut then it is not a cogged. sent2: the brink cogs. sent3: if something is not a thiopental then the fact that it is a kind of a COMINT and it is not a ragpicker does not hold. sent4: the Wood is either not granulomatous or not a bigheartedness or both if the ginseng suffers gourde. sent5: the malcontent is not supernaturalist if the Wood is not granulomatous. sent6: the fact that the malcontent is not supernaturalist hold if the Wood is not a bigheartedness. sent7: if there is something such that that it is a COMINT and it is not a ragpicker does not hold then the ginseng does suffer gourde. sent8: the fact that the brink is onomastics is not incorrect. sent9: the brink is not chorionic if it is a kind of a sparerib and it cogs. sent10: the toucher is not a thiopental. sent11: if the vasopressor does pad the fact that the brink is a cogged but it is not onomastics does not hold. sent12: if something is both onomastics and a cogged it is not a dowse.

sent1: ({FG}{a} & {BL}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬({J}x & ¬{K}x) sent4: {I}{e} -> (¬{H}{d} v ¬{G}{d}) sent5: ¬{H}{d} -> ¬{F}{c} sent6: ¬{G}{d} -> ¬{F}{c} sent7: (x): ¬({J}x & ¬{K}x) -> {I}{e} sent8: {A}{a} sent9: ({E}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{CI}{a} sent10: ¬{L}{f} sent11: {D}{b} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent12: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x

the tocsin is a kind of a dowse.

{C}{ga}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the brink dowses. ; $context$ = sent1: if the brink is both cloze and a hindgut then it is not a cogged. sent2: the brink cogs. sent3: if something is not a thiopental then the fact that it is a kind of a COMINT and it is not a ragpicker does not hold. sent4: the Wood is either not granulomatous or not a bigheartedness or both if the ginseng suffers gourde. sent5: the malcontent is not supernaturalist if the Wood is not granulomatous. sent6: the fact that the malcontent is not supernaturalist hold if the Wood is not a bigheartedness. sent7: if there is something such that that it is a COMINT and it is not a ragpicker does not hold then the ginseng does suffer gourde. sent8: the fact that the brink is onomastics is not incorrect. sent9: the brink is not chorionic if it is a kind of a sparerib and it cogs. sent10: the toucher is not a thiopental. sent11: if the vasopressor does pad the fact that the brink is a cogged but it is not onomastics does not hold. sent12: if something is both onomastics and a cogged it is not a dowse. ; $proof$ =

sent8 & sent2 -> int1: the brink is onomastics and does cog.; sent12 -> int2: if the brink is onomastics and is a kind of a cogged then the fact that it is not a dowse is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the coil is natriuretic.

{B}{a}

sent1: the coil is a evisceration that is not a slur. sent2: the handcuff is a kind of a evisceration. sent3: the chemical is natriuretic. sent4: that the coil is a kind of a evisceration and is not natriuretic is right.

sent1: ({A}{a} & ¬{FI}{a}) sent2: {A}{cf} sent3: {B}{cs} sent4: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = the coil is natriuretic. ; $context$ = sent1: the coil is a evisceration that is not a slur. sent2: the handcuff is a kind of a evisceration. sent3: the chemical is natriuretic. sent4: that the coil is a kind of a evisceration and is not natriuretic is right. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the ailanthus does not suffer tusk.

¬{B}{a}

sent1: if the ailanthus is a chart then it is a kind of a compound. sent2: the copy is not crustaceous. sent3: if the ailanthus suffers sima it suffers tusk. sent4: the vinifera is a radiocarbon. sent5: if the Adelie is a pantheism then that it is not legislative and it is a Neel is false. sent6: if the ailanthus is a radiocarbon it does suffer tusk. sent7: if that the tusk is a radiocarbon is not false then it does suffer coalbin. sent8: the sima does suffer tusk and is a radiocarbon if the ailanthus is not mathematical. sent9: the ailanthus is a kind of a Zinzendorf. sent10: if that the Adelie is not legislative but a Neel is wrong then the karyolymph is legislative. sent11: if the karyolymph does stable the actinometer is autotomic. sent12: if the copy is mathematical thing that does suffer tusk then the ailanthus does not suffer tusk. sent13: if something is autotomic then it is a kind of a radiocarbon. sent14: a non-crustaceous thing is both not non-mathematical and not non-sociocultural. sent15: if something does reposition clothespress but it is not autotomic it is not mathematical. sent16: if that something does not reposition clothespress and does not suffer tusk is incorrect that it does not suffer tusk does not hold. sent17: that the ailanthus is a kind of a radiocarbon hold. sent18: the fact that the copy does not reposition clothespress and it does not suffer tusk is not true if the actinometer is a radiocarbon. sent19: something is a stable if it is legislative.

sent1: {AP}{a} -> {IO}{a} sent2: ¬{I}{b} sent3: {EE}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: {A}{ic} sent5: {K}{e} -> ¬(¬{G}{e} & {J}{e}) sent6: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent7: {A}{u} -> {FL}{u} sent8: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{fe} & {A}{fe}) sent9: {GH}{a} sent10: ¬(¬{G}{e} & {J}{e}) -> {G}{d} sent11: {F}{d} -> {E}{c} sent12: ({C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent13: (x): {E}x -> {A}x sent14: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({C}x & {H}x) sent15: (x): ({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent16: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{B}x) -> {B}x sent17: {A}{a} sent18: {A}{c} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent19: (x): {G}x -> {F}x

the ailanthus does not suffer tusk.

¬{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the ailanthus does not suffer tusk. ; $context$ = sent1: if the ailanthus is a chart then it is a kind of a compound. sent2: the copy is not crustaceous. sent3: if the ailanthus suffers sima it suffers tusk. sent4: the vinifera is a radiocarbon. sent5: if the Adelie is a pantheism then that it is not legislative and it is a Neel is false. sent6: if the ailanthus is a radiocarbon it does suffer tusk. sent7: if that the tusk is a radiocarbon is not false then it does suffer coalbin. sent8: the sima does suffer tusk and is a radiocarbon if the ailanthus is not mathematical. sent9: the ailanthus is a kind of a Zinzendorf. sent10: if that the Adelie is not legislative but a Neel is wrong then the karyolymph is legislative. sent11: if the karyolymph does stable the actinometer is autotomic. sent12: if the copy is mathematical thing that does suffer tusk then the ailanthus does not suffer tusk. sent13: if something is autotomic then it is a kind of a radiocarbon. sent14: a non-crustaceous thing is both not non-mathematical and not non-sociocultural. sent15: if something does reposition clothespress but it is not autotomic it is not mathematical. sent16: if that something does not reposition clothespress and does not suffer tusk is incorrect that it does not suffer tusk does not hold. sent17: that the ailanthus is a kind of a radiocarbon hold. sent18: the fact that the copy does not reposition clothespress and it does not suffer tusk is not true if the actinometer is a radiocarbon. sent19: something is a stable if it is legislative. ; $proof$ =

sent6 & sent17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the usherette is not a Sirenia.

¬{A}{a}

sent1: the usherette is a Sirenia if there exists something such that that it is not a stob and is a huarache does not hold. sent2: the usherette is a Sirenia if there exists something such that it is a stob. sent3: if something does not recommend ranching that the fact that it is a web and/or is not a spur hold is not right. sent4: the freeman is a Tashkent and is not a Fenusa if it repositions Nerium. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it is a stob and is a huarache does not hold. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a stob and it is a kind of a huarache is false. sent7: something is not a stob but it is a huarache.

sent1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent2: (x): {AA}x -> {A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({B}x v ¬{C}x) sent4: {G}{c} -> ({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent5: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)

the usherette is not a Sirenia.

¬{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the usherette is not a Sirenia. ; $context$ = sent1: the usherette is a Sirenia if there exists something such that that it is not a stob and is a huarache does not hold. sent2: the usherette is a Sirenia if there exists something such that it is a stob. sent3: if something does not recommend ranching that the fact that it is a web and/or is not a spur hold is not right. sent4: the freeman is a Tashkent and is not a Fenusa if it repositions Nerium. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it is a stob and is a huarache does not hold. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a stob and it is a kind of a huarache is false. sent7: something is not a stob but it is a huarache. ; $proof$ =

sent6 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the snuffler suffers aloe.

{B}{aa}

sent1: the centenarian is nonexplosive thing that does not recommend Courtelle. sent2: if something does suffer rippled and it is unfrozen it is indissoluble. sent3: the goblet does not suffer aloe. sent4: if something that is cercarial is a kind of a heulandite it is Madagascan. sent5: if the nebuchadnezzar is allophonic and is a kind of a isostasy then it is unicameral. sent6: the scapula does reposition branded if it is a kind of a brachiopod and it does not suffer aloe. sent7: the snuffler is a kind of a cardinal. sent8: the snuffler pleats. sent9: the snuffler is backhand. sent10: something is a baldachin if it is an adhesion and it is a snatch. sent11: the snuffler is both autoradiographic and not unicameral. sent12: if the nebuchadnezzar is both not non-academic and not non-unicameral then it backstrokes. sent13: if something that does suffer butterscotch recommends nebuchadnezzar then it recommends diskette. sent14: if the scapula does reposition Thunderer and does not reposition mediant then it is a kind of an opening. sent15: the centenarian does suffer aloe and is scurfy if it is not a kind of a finale. sent16: if the Courtelle does reposition Thunderer the centenarian is pupillary but it is not a kind of a finale. sent17: the snuffler does reposition Thunderer and is not a axiology.

sent1: ({GH}{a} & ¬{AN}{a}) sent2: (x): ({BG}x & {BJ}x) -> {IR}x sent3: ¬{B}{ct} sent4: (x): ({IC}x & {FE}x) -> {A}x sent5: ({Q}{el} & {J}{el}) -> {AB}{el} sent6: ({T}{hc} & ¬{B}{hc}) -> {CG}{hc} sent7: {EU}{aa} sent8: {CN}{aa} sent9: {BC}{aa} sent10: (x): ({ET}x & {EJ}x) -> {HA}x sent11: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent12: ({DB}{el} & {AB}{el}) -> {IO}{el} sent13: (x): ({IA}x & {AL}x) -> {DH}x sent14: ({F}{hc} & ¬{CD}{hc}) -> {CO}{hc} sent15: ¬{D}{a} -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent16: {F}{b} -> ({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent17: ({F}{aa} & ¬{IF}{aa})

that the Wilderness is autoradiographic is right.

{AA}{ep}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the snuffler suffers aloe. ; $context$ = sent1: the centenarian is nonexplosive thing that does not recommend Courtelle. sent2: if something does suffer rippled and it is unfrozen it is indissoluble. sent3: the goblet does not suffer aloe. sent4: if something that is cercarial is a kind of a heulandite it is Madagascan. sent5: if the nebuchadnezzar is allophonic and is a kind of a isostasy then it is unicameral. sent6: the scapula does reposition branded if it is a kind of a brachiopod and it does not suffer aloe. sent7: the snuffler is a kind of a cardinal. sent8: the snuffler pleats. sent9: the snuffler is backhand. sent10: something is a baldachin if it is an adhesion and it is a snatch. sent11: the snuffler is both autoradiographic and not unicameral. sent12: if the nebuchadnezzar is both not non-academic and not non-unicameral then it backstrokes. sent13: if something that does suffer butterscotch recommends nebuchadnezzar then it recommends diskette. sent14: if the scapula does reposition Thunderer and does not reposition mediant then it is a kind of an opening. sent15: the centenarian does suffer aloe and is scurfy if it is not a kind of a finale. sent16: if the Courtelle does reposition Thunderer the centenarian is pupillary but it is not a kind of a finale. sent17: the snuffler does reposition Thunderer and is not a axiology. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the citrulline is not a needlefish.

¬{C}{b}

sent1: if something is a Aspidiotus it repositions dopamine. sent2: if something is not a mound then the fact that it is a kind of a needlefish and is a Antiguan is not right. sent3: the dopamine does mound. sent4: if the dopamine is a mound then the citrulline is a kind of a Antiguan. sent5: something is a needlefish if it is a Antiguan.

sent1: (x): {HR}x -> {HI}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) sent3: {A}{a} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent5: (x): {B}x -> {C}x

that the exit repositions dopamine hold if it is a Aspidiotus.

{HR}{hq} -> {HI}{hq}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the citrulline is not a needlefish. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a Aspidiotus it repositions dopamine. sent2: if something is not a mound then the fact that it is a kind of a needlefish and is a Antiguan is not right. sent3: the dopamine does mound. sent4: if the dopamine is a mound then the citrulline is a kind of a Antiguan. sent5: something is a needlefish if it is a Antiguan. ; $proof$ =

sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the citrulline is Antiguan hold.; sent5 -> int2: the citrulline is a needlefish if it is a Antiguan.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the poon does recommend Dawson.

{C}{b}

sent1: something is not a kind of a hang-up if it is not compassionate and it is non-south. sent2: if something is not a congealment then either it is not compassionate or it is not a south or both. sent3: if the engine is a kind of a radiocarbon and it is a kind of a hang-up the fact that the poon does not recommend Dawson hold. sent4: if the fact that the engine is not mithraic but it is a congealment is not wrong then it is non-south. sent5: if there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a vertical and it is not harmful is false the engine is not compassionate. sent6: if the engine is a radiocarbon and does not recommend Dawson then the poon recommend Dawson. sent7: the fact that the poon is a photocoagulation is correct. sent8: something is mithraic. sent9: that the engine is ill or it is not a cream or both does not hold. sent10: the girasol is not a retailing. sent11: that something is not a vertical but it is harmless is not true if it is not a kind of a retailing. sent12: something is a radiocarbon and does not recommend Dawson if it is not a hang-up. sent13: the engine is a kind of a hang-up. sent14: the engine creams and/or it is a hang-up if the poon is not a radiocarbon. sent15: that the poon is a hang-up is not incorrect. sent16: that the engine is a kind of a cream is true. sent17: if the lactogen is either not compassionate or not a south or both the girasol is south. sent18: the engine is a radiocarbon if that it is ill and/or it does not cream is wrong. sent19: the lactogen is not a congealment. sent20: if the settle does recommend Dawson then the girasol recommend Dawson.

sent1: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent2: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{E}x v ¬{D}x) sent3: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent4: (¬{F}{a} & {G}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & {H}x) -> ¬{E}{a} sent6: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {C}{b} sent7: {EL}{b} sent8: (Ex): {F}x sent9: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent10: ¬{J}{c} sent11: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{I}x & {H}x) sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent13: {A}{a} sent14: ¬{B}{b} -> ({AB}{a} v {A}{a}) sent15: {A}{b} sent16: {AB}{a} sent17: (¬{E}{d} v ¬{D}{d}) -> {D}{c} sent18: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent19: ¬{G}{d} sent20: {C}{e} -> {C}{c}

the blackthorn creams.

{AB}{fb}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the poon does recommend Dawson. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a kind of a hang-up if it is not compassionate and it is non-south. sent2: if something is not a congealment then either it is not compassionate or it is not a south or both. sent3: if the engine is a kind of a radiocarbon and it is a kind of a hang-up the fact that the poon does not recommend Dawson hold. sent4: if the fact that the engine is not mithraic but it is a congealment is not wrong then it is non-south. sent5: if there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a vertical and it is not harmful is false the engine is not compassionate. sent6: if the engine is a radiocarbon and does not recommend Dawson then the poon recommend Dawson. sent7: the fact that the poon is a photocoagulation is correct. sent8: something is mithraic. sent9: that the engine is ill or it is not a cream or both does not hold. sent10: the girasol is not a retailing. sent11: that something is not a vertical but it is harmless is not true if it is not a kind of a retailing. sent12: something is a radiocarbon and does not recommend Dawson if it is not a hang-up. sent13: the engine is a kind of a hang-up. sent14: the engine creams and/or it is a hang-up if the poon is not a radiocarbon. sent15: that the poon is a hang-up is not incorrect. sent16: that the engine is a kind of a cream is true. sent17: if the lactogen is either not compassionate or not a south or both the girasol is south. sent18: the engine is a radiocarbon if that it is ill and/or it does not cream is wrong. sent19: the lactogen is not a congealment. sent20: if the settle does recommend Dawson then the girasol recommend Dawson. ; $proof$ =

sent18 & sent9 -> int1: the engine is a radiocarbon.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the engine is a radiocarbon and it is a hang-up.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

that the pyroxylin is finer and/or it is not a twenty-eight is wrong.

¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa})

sent1: the pyroxylin does recommend check. sent2: if the pyroxylin does suffer Vespidae it is not a Changtzu. sent3: if the pyroxylin does not recommend Astaire then that it is septal or it is not a Changtzu or both does not hold. sent4: the funiculus is not a twenty-eight. sent5: the pyroxylin does suffer Vespidae. sent6: the pyroxylin is not finer if that it is not a Changtzu is true. sent7: if the sprayer recommends elaborateness and is a Changtzu it does not suffer Vespidae. sent8: The Vespidae does suffer pyroxylin.

sent1: {HA}{aa} sent2: {B}{aa} -> ¬{A}{aa} sent3: ¬{AR}{aa} -> ¬({JB}{aa} v ¬{A}{aa}) sent4: ¬{AB}{iu} sent5: {B}{aa} sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent7: ({C}{fc} & {A}{fc}) -> ¬{B}{fc} sent8: {AC}{ab}

the sprayer does not suffer Vespidae.

¬{B}{fc}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the pyroxylin is finer and/or it is not a twenty-eight is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the pyroxylin does recommend check. sent2: if the pyroxylin does suffer Vespidae it is not a Changtzu. sent3: if the pyroxylin does not recommend Astaire then that it is septal or it is not a Changtzu or both does not hold. sent4: the funiculus is not a twenty-eight. sent5: the pyroxylin does suffer Vespidae. sent6: the pyroxylin is not finer if that it is not a Changtzu is true. sent7: if the sprayer recommends elaborateness and is a Changtzu it does not suffer Vespidae. sent8: The Vespidae does suffer pyroxylin. ; $proof$ =

sent2 & sent5 -> int1: the pyroxylin is not a Changtzu.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the packer is not a Liverpudlian and does not reposition puffball does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

sent1: the packer is not Liverpudlian. sent2: the packer is not a Liverpudlian if it suffers wartime. sent3: the packer does suffer wartime and it is tricentenary. sent4: the packer is tricentenary. sent5: something is non-Liverpudlian thing that does not reposition puffball if it does suffer wartime.

sent1: ¬{AA}{aa} sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent3: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent4: {B}{aa} sent5: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the packer is not a Liverpudlian and does not reposition puffball does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the packer is not Liverpudlian. sent2: the packer is not a Liverpudlian if it suffers wartime. sent3: the packer does suffer wartime and it is tricentenary. sent4: the packer is tricentenary. sent5: something is non-Liverpudlian thing that does not reposition puffball if it does suffer wartime. ; $proof$ =

sent5 -> int1: if the packer suffers wartime then it is non-Liverpudlian thing that does not reposition puffball.; sent3 -> int2: the packer does suffer wartime.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the pederast is a laryngospasm and it is a pachisi is false.

¬({C}{a} & {D}{a})

sent1: if something is a sixth it is a kind of a conciliation. sent2: if that the pederast fraternizes is not wrong that it is a pachisi is not false. sent3: if something is not a laryngospasm the pederast is immunosuppressive. sent4: the pederast does suffer archduchy and/or it is immunosuppressive. sent5: there is something such that it is a pachisi. sent6: if there exists something such that it is not a pachisi the pederast is unsocial. sent7: the pederast is an urge if there exists something such that it does not suffer exanthem. sent8: the pederast is a pachisi if it does suffer archduchy. sent9: the chador is a kind of a pictorial or it is stoppable or both. sent10: the pederast repositions pederast and it is a Australian. sent11: the pederast is a kind of a laryngospasm if it suffers exanthem. sent12: the pederast is a pachisi if it is immunosuppressive. sent13: the firefly is a pachisi. sent14: there is something such that it is not covalent. sent15: if there is something such that the fact that it is not covalent hold the pederast does suffer exanthem.

sent1: (x): {I}x -> {BE}x sent2: {FR}{a} -> {D}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{C}x -> {E}{a} sent4: ({F}{a} v {E}{a}) sent5: (Ex): {D}x sent6: (x): ¬{D}x -> {FP}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{B}x -> {GU}{a} sent8: {F}{a} -> {D}{a} sent9: ({GL}{dp} v {EC}{dp}) sent10: ({CB}{a} & {DL}{a}) sent11: {B}{a} -> {C}{a} sent12: {E}{a} -> {D}{a} sent13: {D}{hn} sent14: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent15: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}{a}

the pederast is a conciliation if it is a kind of a sixth.

{I}{a} -> {BE}{a}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the pederast is a laryngospasm and it is a pachisi is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a sixth it is a kind of a conciliation. sent2: if that the pederast fraternizes is not wrong that it is a pachisi is not false. sent3: if something is not a laryngospasm the pederast is immunosuppressive. sent4: the pederast does suffer archduchy and/or it is immunosuppressive. sent5: there is something such that it is a pachisi. sent6: if there exists something such that it is not a pachisi the pederast is unsocial. sent7: the pederast is an urge if there exists something such that it does not suffer exanthem. sent8: the pederast is a pachisi if it does suffer archduchy. sent9: the chador is a kind of a pictorial or it is stoppable or both. sent10: the pederast repositions pederast and it is a Australian. sent11: the pederast is a kind of a laryngospasm if it suffers exanthem. sent12: the pederast is a pachisi if it is immunosuppressive. sent13: the firefly is a pachisi. sent14: there is something such that it is not covalent. sent15: if there is something such that the fact that it is not covalent hold the pederast does suffer exanthem. ; $proof$ =

sent14 & sent15 -> int1: the pederast does suffer exanthem.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the pederast is a kind of a laryngospasm.; sent4 & sent8 & sent12 -> int3: the pederast is a pachisi.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the chylomicron is a Arabian and it is an adenine.

({F}{c} & {D}{c})

sent1: if there exists something such that that it does not recommend Alecto and is a myoclonus is not true then the stopover recommend Alecto. sent2: if the autacoid does not radiate then it is not human and it recommends stopover. sent3: if the pessimist is not a kind of an adenine the chylomicron is a kind of a Arabian. sent4: that the pessimist does not recommend Alecto but it is a myoclonus does not hold if the chylomicron is a grosgrain. sent5: if the stopover is not a Arabian then the chylomicron recommends plunderer and it is a Arabian. sent6: the chylomicron is Arabian. sent7: that if the fact that something is an adenine and is a Arabian is not true it is not a kind of an adenine hold. sent8: that the waders is an adenine and it is a Arabian does not hold if the plunderer does not recommend stopover. sent9: the pessimist is not a kind of an adenine if the fact that the stopover is not a kind of a myoclonus or does recommend plunderer or both does not hold. sent10: if there is something such that it is a grosgrain that the stopover is not a kind of a myoclonus or does recommend plunderer or both is not true. sent11: if the fact that the stopover is a myoclonus or it recommends plunderer or both does not hold then the pessimist is not a kind of an adenine. sent12: if something is a grosgrain the stopover is a myoclonus. sent13: the autacoid does not radiate. sent14: the chylomicron is Arabian thing that is a kind of an adenine if the pessimist is not a kind of an adenine. sent15: the plunderer does not recommend stopover if the autacoid is not human but it recommend stopover.

sent1: (x): ¬(¬{HB}x & {B}x) -> {HB}{a} sent2: ¬{G}{f} -> (¬{H}{f} & {E}{f}) sent3: ¬{D}{b} -> {F}{c} sent4: {A}{c} -> ¬(¬{HB}{b} & {B}{b}) sent5: ¬{F}{a} -> ({C}{c} & {F}{c}) sent6: {F}{c} sent7: (x): ¬({D}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent8: ¬{E}{e} -> ¬({D}{d} & {F}{d}) sent9: ¬(¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent10: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent11: ¬({B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent12: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent13: ¬{G}{f} sent14: ¬{D}{b} -> ({F}{c} & {D}{c}) sent15: (¬{H}{f} & {E}{f}) -> ¬{E}{e}

something does recommend Alecto.

(Ex): {HB}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the chylomicron is a Arabian and it is an adenine. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that that it does not recommend Alecto and is a myoclonus is not true then the stopover recommend Alecto. sent2: if the autacoid does not radiate then it is not human and it recommends stopover. sent3: if the pessimist is not a kind of an adenine the chylomicron is a kind of a Arabian. sent4: that the pessimist does not recommend Alecto but it is a myoclonus does not hold if the chylomicron is a grosgrain. sent5: if the stopover is not a Arabian then the chylomicron recommends plunderer and it is a Arabian. sent6: the chylomicron is Arabian. sent7: that if the fact that something is an adenine and is a Arabian is not true it is not a kind of an adenine hold. sent8: that the waders is an adenine and it is a Arabian does not hold if the plunderer does not recommend stopover. sent9: the pessimist is not a kind of an adenine if the fact that the stopover is not a kind of a myoclonus or does recommend plunderer or both does not hold. sent10: if there is something such that it is a grosgrain that the stopover is not a kind of a myoclonus or does recommend plunderer or both is not true. sent11: if the fact that the stopover is a myoclonus or it recommends plunderer or both does not hold then the pessimist is not a kind of an adenine. sent12: if something is a grosgrain the stopover is a myoclonus. sent13: the autacoid does not radiate. sent14: the chylomicron is Arabian thing that is a kind of an adenine if the pessimist is not a kind of an adenine. sent15: the plunderer does not recommend stopover if the autacoid is not human but it recommend stopover. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the grounding does not occur and the arthralgicness does not occur.

(¬{C} & ¬{D})

sent1: the fact that the grounding does not occur and the arthralgicness does not occur if the suffering polypropylene does not occur hold. sent2: if the adventitialness does not occur then the achlorhydricness does not occur. sent3: if the fact that the Circumcision does not occur is true the homonymicness does not occur. sent4: the repositioning mojo occurs. sent5: both the remarriage and the non-floriculturalness happens. sent6: the repositioning yokel does not occur and the destructing does not occur. sent7: the unapologeticness occurs and the suffering polypropylene does not occur. sent8: the light-dutiness does not occur and the scrutiny does not occur. sent9: the repositioning dronabinol does not occur. sent10: the corroding stob does not occur.

sent1: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent2: ¬{CD} -> ¬{FP} sent3: ¬{DQ} -> ¬{CI} sent4: {EK} sent5: ({FG} & ¬{BN}) sent6: (¬{EC} & ¬{AE}) sent7: ({A} & ¬{B}) sent8: (¬{CO} & ¬{IQ}) sent9: ¬{IR} sent10: ¬{AG}

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the grounding does not occur and the arthralgicness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the grounding does not occur and the arthralgicness does not occur if the suffering polypropylene does not occur hold. sent2: if the adventitialness does not occur then the achlorhydricness does not occur. sent3: if the fact that the Circumcision does not occur is true the homonymicness does not occur. sent4: the repositioning mojo occurs. sent5: both the remarriage and the non-floriculturalness happens. sent6: the repositioning yokel does not occur and the destructing does not occur. sent7: the unapologeticness occurs and the suffering polypropylene does not occur. sent8: the light-dutiness does not occur and the scrutiny does not occur. sent9: the repositioning dronabinol does not occur. sent10: the corroding stob does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent7 -> int1: the fact that the suffering polypropylene does not occur is right.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the necessity is bardic.

{C}{a}

sent1: the regnellidium is postpositive and it is a forgery if the fact that the khamsin does not disoblige is correct. sent2: something does suffer sculptress and it is postpositive if it is not bardic. sent3: if the teleologist is piscine then that it is postganglionic and it does not disoblige is correct. sent4: if the teleologist is a kind of postganglionic thing that does not disoblige then it is not bardic. sent5: that the necessity is jawless hold. sent6: the villain is postpositive. sent7: the talapoin does suffer fungus and it is jawless. sent8: the necessity is postpositive. sent9: if something is jawless and is postpositive then it is not bardic. sent10: if that either the rotisserie is piscine or it is postganglionic or both is not correct the khamsin does not disoblige.

sent1: ¬{E}{c} -> ({B}{b} & {D}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({IH}x & {B}x) sent3: {G}{i} -> ({F}{i} & ¬{E}{i}) sent4: ({F}{i} & ¬{E}{i}) -> ¬{C}{i} sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {B}{cb} sent7: ({GE}{dp} & {A}{dp}) sent8: {B}{a} sent9: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent10: ¬({G}{d} v {F}{d}) -> ¬{E}{c}

the necessity is bardic.

{C}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the necessity is bardic. ; $context$ = sent1: the regnellidium is postpositive and it is a forgery if the fact that the khamsin does not disoblige is correct. sent2: something does suffer sculptress and it is postpositive if it is not bardic. sent3: if the teleologist is piscine then that it is postganglionic and it does not disoblige is correct. sent4: if the teleologist is a kind of postganglionic thing that does not disoblige then it is not bardic. sent5: that the necessity is jawless hold. sent6: the villain is postpositive. sent7: the talapoin does suffer fungus and it is jawless. sent8: the necessity is postpositive. sent9: if something is jawless and is postpositive then it is not bardic. sent10: if that either the rotisserie is piscine or it is postganglionic or both is not correct the khamsin does not disoblige. ; $proof$ =

sent5 & sent8 -> int1: the necessity is jawless and postpositive.; sent9 -> int2: the necessity is not bardic if it is both jawless and postpositive.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

either the meerkat is not a anticlimax or it does bucket or both.

(¬{B}{b} v {D}{b})

sent1: there are umbelliform things. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is not umbelliform and/or it does suffer bombardon is not true. sent3: if the bombardon is not a kind of a homespun the meerkat is a homespun and does reposition moonshell. sent4: if something is a kind of a homespun and it does reposition moonshell then that it is not a kind of a anticlimax is not false.

sent1: (Ex): {AA}x sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent4: (x): ({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = either the meerkat is not a anticlimax or it does bucket or both. ; $context$ = sent1: there are umbelliform things. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is not umbelliform and/or it does suffer bombardon is not true. sent3: if the bombardon is not a kind of a homespun the meerkat is a homespun and does reposition moonshell. sent4: if something is a kind of a homespun and it does reposition moonshell then that it is not a kind of a anticlimax is not false. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> int1: the meerkat is not a anticlimax if it is a homespun and it repositions moonshell.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the ash is not a kind of a seventeen and it does not recommend Gent.

(¬{E}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

sent1: the Acular is a kind of a airstream. sent2: the blastocyte is not a nap if the ash does recommend Gent and is a kind of a seventeen. sent3: the blastocyte is a kind of a seventeen. sent4: something that feminizes is a kind of non-precocious thing that is a nap. sent5: something is not a kind of a airstream if it is non-precocious thing that does nap. sent6: the Acular does reposition blastocyte. sent7: the Acular is not a seventeen if the ash is a nap and a airstream. sent8: the blastocyte does nap. sent9: the ash is not a seventeen. sent10: if something is not a airstream then the fact that it is not a seventeen and does not recommend Gent is false. sent11: the harpulla is not a kind of a nap. sent12: if that the Acular does not surrender and it does not feminize is wrong then the ash feminize. sent13: the Acular is a nap. sent14: the ash is not a seventeen if the blastocyte does not recommend Gent. sent15: the ash is not a seventeen and does not recommend Gent if the blastocyte does not recommend Gent. sent16: the ash is not a kind of a seventeen if the blastocyte is a kind of a airstream and it recommends Gent. sent17: the blastocyte is slippery and a Landau. sent18: the blastocyte does mingle and it is a stammer.

sent1: {A}{a} sent2: ({C}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: {E}{b} sent4: (x): {F}x -> (¬{D}x & {B}x) sent5: (x): (¬{D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent6: {ER}{a} sent7: ({B}{c} & {A}{c}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent8: {B}{b} sent9: ¬{E}{c} sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{C}x) sent11: ¬{B}{gc} sent12: ¬(¬{G}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) -> {F}{c} sent13: {B}{a} sent14: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬{E}{c} sent15: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{E}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent16: ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent17: ({CO}{b} & {HJ}{b}) sent18: ({BI}{b} & {FT}{b})

the fact that the ash is not a seventeen and it does not recommend Gent is not true.

¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the ash is not a kind of a seventeen and it does not recommend Gent. ; $context$ = sent1: the Acular is a kind of a airstream. sent2: the blastocyte is not a nap if the ash does recommend Gent and is a kind of a seventeen. sent3: the blastocyte is a kind of a seventeen. sent4: something that feminizes is a kind of non-precocious thing that is a nap. sent5: something is not a kind of a airstream if it is non-precocious thing that does nap. sent6: the Acular does reposition blastocyte. sent7: the Acular is not a seventeen if the ash is a nap and a airstream. sent8: the blastocyte does nap. sent9: the ash is not a seventeen. sent10: if something is not a airstream then the fact that it is not a seventeen and does not recommend Gent is false. sent11: the harpulla is not a kind of a nap. sent12: if that the Acular does not surrender and it does not feminize is wrong then the ash feminize. sent13: the Acular is a nap. sent14: the ash is not a seventeen if the blastocyte does not recommend Gent. sent15: the ash is not a seventeen and does not recommend Gent if the blastocyte does not recommend Gent. sent16: the ash is not a kind of a seventeen if the blastocyte is a kind of a airstream and it recommends Gent. sent17: the blastocyte is slippery and a Landau. sent18: the blastocyte does mingle and it is a stammer. ; $proof$ =

sent1 & sent13 -> int1: the Acular is a kind of a airstream that is a nap.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

something is a boatyard and it is hexadecimal.

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

sent1: the meltwater is a kind of a transient. sent2: if there exists something such that it does reposition Gossypium then the fact that the bedstraw suffers hadron is not incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that it is a kind of a boatyard. sent4: the laptop repositions Gossypium. sent5: the fact that something is not a kind of a transient if the fact that it is a kind of a transient that is not a shame is not correct is right. sent6: the meltwater is a transient and a boatyard. sent7: the gametophyte is a kind of a boatyard if the meltwater is not a boatyard. sent8: the fact that the mastiff is karyokinetic is not incorrect. sent9: that the meltwater does suffer hadron hold. sent10: something is hexadecimal. sent11: if the bedstraw is hexadecimal the meltwater is not a boatyard. sent12: the twerp is hexadecimal. sent13: the meltwater suffers hadron and it is hexadecimal. sent14: if the fact that something is not a transient is not false either it is hexadecimal or it is a boatyard or both. sent15: the mastiff is not a kind of a tomatillo and it is not a mesohippus if it is karyokinetic. sent16: the meltwater is not a boatyard if the bedstraw is a kind of a boatyard. sent17: if something is not a kind of a tomatillo then the gametophyte does recommend carabiner.

sent1: {A}{a} sent2: (x): {G}x -> {D}{b} sent3: (Ex): {B}x sent4: {G}{d} sent5: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{A}x sent6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent7: ¬{B}{a} -> {B}{gi} sent8: {I}{c} sent9: {D}{a} sent10: (Ex): {C}x sent11: {C}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} sent12: {C}{at} sent13: ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent14: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({C}x v {B}x) sent15: {I}{c} -> (¬{F}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) sent16: {B}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} sent17: (x): ¬{F}x -> {CQ}{gi}

the gametophyte is a boatyard and it recommends carabiner.

({B}{gi} & {CQ}{gi})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = something is a boatyard and it is hexadecimal. ; $context$ = sent1: the meltwater is a kind of a transient. sent2: if there exists something such that it does reposition Gossypium then the fact that the bedstraw suffers hadron is not incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that it is a kind of a boatyard. sent4: the laptop repositions Gossypium. sent5: the fact that something is not a kind of a transient if the fact that it is a kind of a transient that is not a shame is not correct is right. sent6: the meltwater is a transient and a boatyard. sent7: the gametophyte is a kind of a boatyard if the meltwater is not a boatyard. sent8: the fact that the mastiff is karyokinetic is not incorrect. sent9: that the meltwater does suffer hadron hold. sent10: something is hexadecimal. sent11: if the bedstraw is hexadecimal the meltwater is not a boatyard. sent12: the twerp is hexadecimal. sent13: the meltwater suffers hadron and it is hexadecimal. sent14: if the fact that something is not a transient is not false either it is hexadecimal or it is a boatyard or both. sent15: the mastiff is not a kind of a tomatillo and it is not a mesohippus if it is karyokinetic. sent16: the meltwater is not a boatyard if the bedstraw is a kind of a boatyard. sent17: if something is not a kind of a tomatillo then the gametophyte does recommend carabiner. ; $proof$ =

sent6 -> int1: that the meltwater is a boatyard hold.; sent13 -> int2: the meltwater is not non-hexadecimal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the meltwater is a boatyard and it is hexadecimal.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

that the oligarch does suffer foster-child but it is not a trolleybus is false.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

sent1: if the panelist is a steep then the oligarch suffers foster-child and is not a kind of a trolleybus. sent2: if the panelist does steep the oligarch suffers foster-child. sent3: the oligarch does suffer foster-child. sent4: if the pledgee does localize then the fact that it does recommend Aberdare is correct. sent5: if something is alkahestic then that it does not recommend Hilo and it does not wrangle is wrong. sent6: if the panelist is not a caranday the fact that that it does not recommend walkover and it interrelates is right is wrong. sent7: if the tiramisu does recommend Hilo it steeps and is not a Camptosorus. sent8: the panelist is not a caranday. sent9: that the panelist does recommend walkover and it does interrelate is not right. sent10: the pledgee localizes. sent11: the fragmentation is not non-alkahestic if the plywood is not earthly. sent12: the panelist is a kind of a steep if it recommends walkover. sent13: if the pledgee does recommend Aberdare that the fact that the Wolf is unpopular and/or not parietal does not hold is not false. sent14: if the folderal does recommend Hilo the tiramisu recommend Hilo. sent15: the plywood is not earthly if there exists something such that the fact that it is unpopular or it is not parietal or both is wrong. sent16: that the folderal does recommend Hilo is not false if that the lighter does not recommend Hilo is not false. sent17: the lighter does not recommend Hilo if that that the fragmentation does not recommend Hilo and it does not wrangle is correct does not hold. sent18: something steeps if it recommends walkover. sent19: something does steep if the fact that it does not recommend walkover and it does interrelate is wrong.

sent1: {B}{a} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent2: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent3: {C}{b} sent4: {M}{i} -> {L}{i} sent5: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{H}x) sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent7: {F}{c} -> ({B}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent8: ¬{A}{a} sent9: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent10: {M}{i} sent11: ¬{I}{g} -> {G}{f} sent12: {AA}{a} -> {B}{a} sent13: {L}{i} -> ¬({J}{h} v ¬{K}{h}) sent14: {F}{d} -> {F}{c} sent15: (x): ¬({J}x v ¬{K}x) -> ¬{I}{g} sent16: ¬{F}{e} -> {F}{d} sent17: ¬(¬{F}{f} & ¬{H}{f}) -> ¬{F}{e} sent18: (x): {AA}x -> {B}x sent19: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x

that the oligarch suffers foster-child but it is not a trolleybus is not right.

¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the oligarch does suffer foster-child but it is not a trolleybus is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the panelist is a steep then the oligarch suffers foster-child and is not a kind of a trolleybus. sent2: if the panelist does steep the oligarch suffers foster-child. sent3: the oligarch does suffer foster-child. sent4: if the pledgee does localize then the fact that it does recommend Aberdare is correct. sent5: if something is alkahestic then that it does not recommend Hilo and it does not wrangle is wrong. sent6: if the panelist is not a caranday the fact that that it does not recommend walkover and it interrelates is right is wrong. sent7: if the tiramisu does recommend Hilo it steeps and is not a Camptosorus. sent8: the panelist is not a caranday. sent9: that the panelist does recommend walkover and it does interrelate is not right. sent10: the pledgee localizes. sent11: the fragmentation is not non-alkahestic if the plywood is not earthly. sent12: the panelist is a kind of a steep if it recommends walkover. sent13: if the pledgee does recommend Aberdare that the fact that the Wolf is unpopular and/or not parietal does not hold is not false. sent14: if the folderal does recommend Hilo the tiramisu recommend Hilo. sent15: the plywood is not earthly if there exists something such that the fact that it is unpopular or it is not parietal or both is wrong. sent16: that the folderal does recommend Hilo is not false if that the lighter does not recommend Hilo is not false. sent17: the lighter does not recommend Hilo if that that the fragmentation does not recommend Hilo and it does not wrangle is correct does not hold. sent18: something steeps if it recommends walkover. sent19: something does steep if the fact that it does not recommend walkover and it does interrelate is wrong. ; $proof$ =

sent6 & sent8 -> int1: that the panelist does not recommend walkover and does interrelate is incorrect.; sent19 -> int2: if the fact that the panelist does not recommend walkover but it does interrelate is not right then it is a steep.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the panelist is a kind of a steep.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the pederast is a Trinitarianism.

{B}{b}

sent1: the pederast elongates. sent2: if something that does not recommend dopamine elongates then it is a kind of a Trinitarianism. sent3: if something is not a kind of a cause it is a brew that does shelter. sent4: the marabou does not recommend keystroke and does not reposition marabou. sent5: the pederast does elongate if it is not a Trinitarianism and it is catalatic. sent6: the fact that the canvasback is non-catalatic is right. sent7: either the canvasback is not discourteous or it is catalatic or both if the dopamine is a brew. sent8: if that something does recommend dopamine and is catalatic is not true it does not recommend dopamine. sent9: the pederast does elongate if the canvasback is not catalatic.

sent1: {AB}{b} sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) sent4: (¬{H}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) sent5: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {AB}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: {D}{c} -> (¬{C}{a} v {A}{a}) sent8: (x): ¬({AA}x & {A}x) -> ¬{AA}x sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{b}

the pederast is not a kind of a Trinitarianism.

¬{B}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the pederast is a Trinitarianism. ; $context$ = sent1: the pederast elongates. sent2: if something that does not recommend dopamine elongates then it is a kind of a Trinitarianism. sent3: if something is not a kind of a cause it is a brew that does shelter. sent4: the marabou does not recommend keystroke and does not reposition marabou. sent5: the pederast does elongate if it is not a Trinitarianism and it is catalatic. sent6: the fact that the canvasback is non-catalatic is right. sent7: either the canvasback is not discourteous or it is catalatic or both if the dopamine is a brew. sent8: if that something does recommend dopamine and is catalatic is not true it does not recommend dopamine. sent9: the pederast does elongate if the canvasback is not catalatic. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> int1: the pederast is a Trinitarianism if it does not recommend dopamine and it elongates.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the muckraker is not practical.

¬{E}{b}

sent1: the waterfall is a kind of a softy. sent2: the waterfall is a gluteus that is a Terence. sent3: the cooter is practical. sent4: the waterfall is a Etropus if it repositions roadworthiness. sent5: The fact that the roadworthiness does reposition waterfall is true. sent6: the muckraker is impractical if the waterfall corrodes pyrophyllite and it is a Etropus. sent7: the propanol is practical. sent8: if the muckraker does corrode pyrophyllite and is a gluteus the fact that the waterfall is not practical is true. sent9: the waterfall is a gluteus. sent10: the fact that something does corrode pyrophyllite if it is similar is not false. sent11: if the fact that the fireboat is not a Etropus is not wrong then it corrodes pyrophyllite and is similar. sent12: the waterfall is a gluteus and it is similar. sent13: something does reposition roadworthiness and it suffers mediant. sent14: the waterfall is a gluteus and is practical.

sent1: {FU}{a} sent2: ({A}{a} & {FF}{a}) sent3: {E}{eu} sent4: {F}{a} -> {D}{a} sent5: {AB}{ab} sent6: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent7: {E}{ji} sent8: ({C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent9: {A}{a} sent10: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent11: ¬{D}{c} -> ({C}{c} & {B}{c}) sent12: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent13: (Ex): ({F}x & {G}x) sent14: ({A}{a} & {E}{a})

that the muckraker is practical is not false.

{E}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the muckraker is not practical. ; $context$ = sent1: the waterfall is a kind of a softy. sent2: the waterfall is a gluteus that is a Terence. sent3: the cooter is practical. sent4: the waterfall is a Etropus if it repositions roadworthiness. sent5: The fact that the roadworthiness does reposition waterfall is true. sent6: the muckraker is impractical if the waterfall corrodes pyrophyllite and it is a Etropus. sent7: the propanol is practical. sent8: if the muckraker does corrode pyrophyllite and is a gluteus the fact that the waterfall is not practical is true. sent9: the waterfall is a gluteus. sent10: the fact that something does corrode pyrophyllite if it is similar is not false. sent11: if the fact that the fireboat is not a Etropus is not wrong then it corrodes pyrophyllite and is similar. sent12: the waterfall is a gluteus and it is similar. sent13: something does reposition roadworthiness and it suffers mediant. sent14: the waterfall is a gluteus and is practical. ; $proof$ =

sent12 -> int1: the waterfall is similar.; sent10 -> int2: the fact that the waterfall does corrode pyrophyllite is not incorrect if it is similar.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the waterfall does corrode pyrophyllite is not false.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the slingshot suffers birdfeeder.

{C}{b}

sent1: the fact that something is not costal and suffers birdfeeder does not hold if it is a ready. sent2: if the fact that the fact that the coil is not costal is not wrong does not hold it is a kind of a ready. sent3: the fact that the coil is unready is not wrong. sent4: the coil does not suffer birdfeeder. sent5: if the fact that the slingshot is not costal but it suffers birdfeeder is wrong it does not suffers birdfeeder.

sent1: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent3: ¬{B}{a} sent4: ¬{C}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b}

the slingshot does not suffer birdfeeder.

¬{C}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the slingshot suffers birdfeeder. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is not costal and suffers birdfeeder does not hold if it is a ready. sent2: if the fact that the fact that the coil is not costal is not wrong does not hold it is a kind of a ready. sent3: the fact that the coil is unready is not wrong. sent4: the coil does not suffer birdfeeder. sent5: if the fact that the slingshot is not costal but it suffers birdfeeder is wrong it does not suffers birdfeeder. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the coil is costal.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the coil is ready hold.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the coil is not costal.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the squill is not Aleutians.

¬{B}{a}

sent1: the squill is a partitive. sent2: the purslane is two-wheel. sent3: the squill recommends hayrack. sent4: if there is something such that it is two-wheel then the squill is Aleutians. sent5: the squill is both not Aleutians and two-wheel if it does not suffer Dickinson.

sent1: {DH}{a} sent2: {A}{aa} sent3: {BR}{a} sent4: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent5: ¬{C}{a} -> (¬{B}{a} & {A}{a})

the squill is not Aleutians.

¬{B}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the squill is not Aleutians. ; $context$ = sent1: the squill is a partitive. sent2: the purslane is two-wheel. sent3: the squill recommends hayrack. sent4: if there is something such that it is two-wheel then the squill is Aleutians. sent5: the squill is both not Aleutians and two-wheel if it does not suffer Dickinson. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> int1: there are two-wheel things.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the onomasticsness happens.

{B}

sent1: if the hug happens then that the CPR does not occur and the studentship does not occur is incorrect. sent2: the personification happens. sent3: the onomasticsness occurs if the fact that the fact that the CPR does not occur and the studentship does not occur is not wrong is wrong. sent4: that not the CPR but the studentship occurs is incorrect if the hugging happens.

sent1: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: {EC} sent3: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent4: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the onomasticsness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the hug happens then that the CPR does not occur and the studentship does not occur is incorrect. sent2: the personification happens. sent3: the onomasticsness occurs if the fact that the fact that the CPR does not occur and the studentship does not occur is not wrong is wrong. sent4: that not the CPR but the studentship occurs is incorrect if the hugging happens. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

that the nave is not a sereness but it is cheerful is not true.

¬(¬{D}{b} & {E}{b})

sent1: if something is not a stomach it is not a sereness and it is cheerful. sent2: if the vineyard does surf the nave is not a stomach. sent3: the fact that the vineyard is both not a sereness and a stomach is correct if it is not a surf. sent4: the nave is not a sereness if it is not a stomach. sent5: the nave does not stomach if the vineyard either recommends uropathy or is a kind of a surf or both. sent6: if the vineyard does not recommend uropathy then that the nave is not a kind of a sereness but it is cheerful is wrong. sent7: The uropathy does recommend vineyard. sent8: the nave is not a sereness. sent9: the vineyard does recommend uropathy. sent10: something does not surf if it does not recommend uropathy.

sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{D}x & {E}x) sent2: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent3: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬{D}{b} sent5: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {E}{b}) sent7: {AA}{aa} sent8: ¬{D}{b} sent9: {A}{a} sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x

the fact that the nave is not a sereness and is cheerful does not hold.

¬(¬{D}{b} & {E}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the nave is not a sereness but it is cheerful is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a stomach it is not a sereness and it is cheerful. sent2: if the vineyard does surf the nave is not a stomach. sent3: the fact that the vineyard is both not a sereness and a stomach is correct if it is not a surf. sent4: the nave is not a sereness if it is not a stomach. sent5: the nave does not stomach if the vineyard either recommends uropathy or is a kind of a surf or both. sent6: if the vineyard does not recommend uropathy then that the nave is not a kind of a sereness but it is cheerful is wrong. sent7: The uropathy does recommend vineyard. sent8: the nave is not a sereness. sent9: the vineyard does recommend uropathy. sent10: something does not surf if it does not recommend uropathy. ; $proof$ =

sent9 -> int1: the vineyard recommends uropathy and/or is a kind of a surf.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the nave is not a kind of a stomach.; sent1 -> int3: the nave is both not a sereness and not non-cheerful if it does not stomach.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the quarterback is zoological.

{D}{a}

sent1: the fact that the gasohol is a widgeon is right if that the Norinyl does not recommend spy and does not circumnavigate is incorrect. sent2: the quarterback is not zoological if the omnibus is a valetudinarian and a thymine. sent3: something that suffers shoebill is zoological. sent4: if something is a widgeon and does reposition trade-last the fact that it is not zoological is not incorrect. sent5: the fact that something does not recommend spy and does not circumnavigate is not correct if it is not Mozartian. sent6: that either the omnibus is not a coward or it suffers shoebill or both is incorrect if the gasohol is not zoological. sent7: the Norinyl is not Mozartian if the millwright is not Mozartian. sent8: the flange is a thymine and is a valetudinarian if the quarterback does not suffer shoebill. sent9: the quarterback is both a thymine and a valetudinarian. sent10: if the gasohol is valetudinarian the omnibus is a kind of a valetudinarian. sent11: if the fact that the omnibus either is not a kind of a coward or does suffer shoebill or both is not correct then the quarterback does not suffer shoebill. sent12: the quarterback is zoological if it is unfit. sent13: something does not reposition gourde if the fact that it does suffer correction and it reposition gourde is incorrect. sent14: something suffers consonance if it circumnavigates. sent15: the bluestone suffers shoebill. sent16: the fact that the heterosexual suffers correction and repositions gourde does not hold. sent17: the millwright is not Mozartian. sent18: if the quarterback suffers shoebill it is Zoroastrian.

sent1: ¬(¬{I}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) -> {G}{c} sent2: ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent3: (x): {C}x -> {D}x sent4: (x): ({G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent5: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{H}x) sent6: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬(¬{E}{b} v {C}{b}) sent7: ¬{L}{f} -> ¬{L}{d} sent8: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{ce} & {B}{ce}) sent9: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent10: {B}{c} -> {B}{b} sent11: ¬(¬{E}{b} v {C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent12: {HB}{a} -> {D}{a} sent13: (x): ¬({N}x & {K}x) -> ¬{K}x sent14: (x): {H}x -> {ID}x sent15: {C}{fp} sent16: ¬({N}{e} & {K}{e}) sent17: ¬{L}{f} sent18: {C}{a} -> {GF}{a}

the quarterback is not zoological.

¬{D}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the quarterback is zoological. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the gasohol is a widgeon is right if that the Norinyl does not recommend spy and does not circumnavigate is incorrect. sent2: the quarterback is not zoological if the omnibus is a valetudinarian and a thymine. sent3: something that suffers shoebill is zoological. sent4: if something is a widgeon and does reposition trade-last the fact that it is not zoological is not incorrect. sent5: the fact that something does not recommend spy and does not circumnavigate is not correct if it is not Mozartian. sent6: that either the omnibus is not a coward or it suffers shoebill or both is incorrect if the gasohol is not zoological. sent7: the Norinyl is not Mozartian if the millwright is not Mozartian. sent8: the flange is a thymine and is a valetudinarian if the quarterback does not suffer shoebill. sent9: the quarterback is both a thymine and a valetudinarian. sent10: if the gasohol is valetudinarian the omnibus is a kind of a valetudinarian. sent11: if the fact that the omnibus either is not a kind of a coward or does suffer shoebill or both is not correct then the quarterback does not suffer shoebill. sent12: the quarterback is zoological if it is unfit. sent13: something does not reposition gourde if the fact that it does suffer correction and it reposition gourde is incorrect. sent14: something suffers consonance if it circumnavigates. sent15: the bluestone suffers shoebill. sent16: the fact that the heterosexual suffers correction and repositions gourde does not hold. sent17: the millwright is not Mozartian. sent18: if the quarterback suffers shoebill it is Zoroastrian. ; $proof$ =

sent9 -> int1: the quarterback is a thymine.; sent3 -> int2: if that the quarterback does suffer shoebill is true it is zoological.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the probating does not occur.

¬{E}

sent1: both the non-nasopharyngealness and the non-geriatricsness occurs. sent2: if the repositioning man-of-the-earth occurs not the snooker but the Muhammadanness occurs. sent3: that the repositioning man-of-the-earth does not occur results in that not the Muhammadanness but the snookering happens. sent4: that the plume does not occur is caused by the suffering fugitive or that the multilevelness occurs or both. sent5: if the plume does not occur and the snookering does not occur the probate does not occur. sent6: the suffering fugitive occurs.

sent1: (¬{BT} & ¬{HJ}) sent2: {G} -> (¬{D} & {F}) sent3: ¬{G} -> (¬{F} & {D}) sent4: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent5: (¬{C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{E} sent6: {A}

the probate occurs.

{E}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the probating does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: both the non-nasopharyngealness and the non-geriatricsness occurs. sent2: if the repositioning man-of-the-earth occurs not the snooker but the Muhammadanness occurs. sent3: that the repositioning man-of-the-earth does not occur results in that not the Muhammadanness but the snookering happens. sent4: that the plume does not occur is caused by the suffering fugitive or that the multilevelness occurs or both. sent5: if the plume does not occur and the snookering does not occur the probate does not occur. sent6: the suffering fugitive occurs. ; $proof$ =

sent6 -> int1: the suffering fugitive and/or the multilevelness happens.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the plume does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of a topaz is not right then the fact that it does not suffer isoantibody and is not a SCSI is false.

(Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

sent1: that the waders does not suffer isoantibody and is a SCSI is incorrect if it is a kind of a topaz. sent2: if the isoantibody is variable then the fact that it is not a wireless and it is not a climatologist is wrong. sent3: if something is nonexploratory then the fact that it is not a bregma and not nonfatal does not hold. sent4: the fact that the waders does not suffer isoantibody and it is not a SCSI is incorrect if it is a topaz. sent5: there exists something such that if it is phallic that it is naive and it is not shallow-draft is not true.

sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: {BP}{dc} -> ¬(¬{IA}{dc} & ¬{FK}{dc}) sent3: (x): {CL}x -> ¬(¬{HJ}x & ¬{EH}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): {CQ}x -> ¬({AU}x & ¬{GJ}x)

there is something such that if it is nonexploratory the fact that it is not a bregma and is not nonfatal is not correct.

(Ex): {CL}x -> ¬(¬{HJ}x & ¬{EH}x)

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of a topaz is not right then the fact that it does not suffer isoantibody and is not a SCSI is false. ; $context$ = sent1: that the waders does not suffer isoantibody and is a SCSI is incorrect if it is a kind of a topaz. sent2: if the isoantibody is variable then the fact that it is not a wireless and it is not a climatologist is wrong. sent3: if something is nonexploratory then the fact that it is not a bregma and not nonfatal does not hold. sent4: the fact that the waders does not suffer isoantibody and it is not a SCSI is incorrect if it is a topaz. sent5: there exists something such that if it is phallic that it is naive and it is not shallow-draft is not true. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it does not suffer tody and is not random it repositions consonance.

(Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x

sent1: there exists something such that if it suffers tody and it is nonrandom then it repositions consonance. sent2: if something that does not reposition refraction is not a kind of a Pacific it is comprehensible.

sent1: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{FE}x) -> {CU}x

there is something such that if it does not reposition refraction and it is not a Pacific it is comprehensible.

(Ex): (¬{D}x & ¬{FE}x) -> {CU}x

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not suffer tody and is not random it repositions consonance. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it suffers tody and it is nonrandom then it repositions consonance. sent2: if something that does not reposition refraction is not a kind of a Pacific it is comprehensible. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the waggery happens.

{C}

sent1: the wattage occurs. sent2: the carposporicness occurs. sent3: the persuasion happens. sent4: that the Caliphate happens is prevented by that the cupping and the non-Praetorianness occurs. sent5: if the Caliphate does not occur then the waggery happens but the cachecticness does not occur. sent6: the fact that the bryophyticness occurs hold. sent7: the aculeateness and/or the fetching happens if the suffering slingshot does not occur. sent8: the chasteness occurs. sent9: if the blockbuster occurs then the diploid happens. sent10: if the chasteness happens the cupping happens. sent11: that both the fertilization and the apomicticness occurs is not false. sent12: the corroding Capsicum happens if that the tracing happens is correct. sent13: that the tellurian happens hold. sent14: if the Caliphate does not occur then both the cachecticness and the tellurian occurs. sent15: if the cachecticness does not occur the tellurianness happens and the chalybeateness happens. sent16: the tellurian and the cachecticness happens. sent17: if the pitching occurs then the unnaturalness happens.

sent1: {DO} sent2: {CP} sent3: {CK} sent4: ({F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} sent5: ¬{D} -> ({C} & ¬{B}) sent6: {AL} sent7: ¬{I} -> ({H} v {G}) sent8: {J} sent9: {BA} -> {IT} sent10: {J} -> {F} sent11: ({JD} & {BB}) sent12: {HQ} -> {U} sent13: {A} sent14: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {A}) sent15: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {GM}) sent16: ({A} & {B}) sent17: {BM} -> {JG}

that the waggery does not occur hold.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the waggery happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the wattage occurs. sent2: the carposporicness occurs. sent3: the persuasion happens. sent4: that the Caliphate happens is prevented by that the cupping and the non-Praetorianness occurs. sent5: if the Caliphate does not occur then the waggery happens but the cachecticness does not occur. sent6: the fact that the bryophyticness occurs hold. sent7: the aculeateness and/or the fetching happens if the suffering slingshot does not occur. sent8: the chasteness occurs. sent9: if the blockbuster occurs then the diploid happens. sent10: if the chasteness happens the cupping happens. sent11: that both the fertilization and the apomicticness occurs is not false. sent12: the corroding Capsicum happens if that the tracing happens is correct. sent13: that the tellurian happens hold. sent14: if the Caliphate does not occur then both the cachecticness and the tellurian occurs. sent15: if the cachecticness does not occur the tellurianness happens and the chalybeateness happens. sent16: the tellurian and the cachecticness happens. sent17: if the pitching occurs then the unnaturalness happens. ; $proof$ =

sent16 -> int1: the cachecticness happens.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the stopping does not occur.

¬{C}

sent1: the stopping occurs if the repositioning washed happens. sent2: the stopping does not occur and the monophonicness does not occur if the repositioning washed does not occur. sent3: the monophonicness and the repositioning washed happens.

sent1: {B} -> {C} sent2: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & ¬{A}) sent3: ({A} & {B})

the stopping does not occur.

¬{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the stopping does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the stopping occurs if the repositioning washed happens. sent2: the stopping does not occur and the monophonicness does not occur if the repositioning washed does not occur. sent3: the monophonicness and the repositioning washed happens. ; $proof$ =

sent3 -> int1: the repositioning washed occurs.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the incredulousness occurs.

{A}

sent1: if both the non-nationalness and the non-hydrousness occurs then the repositioning disk does not occur. sent2: if that the calyptrateness occurs and the suffering phlogiston occurs is incorrect then the fact that the thrash does not occur hold. sent3: if that the enzymaticness and the production occurs is not correct that the debarkation does not occur is correct. sent4: if the fact that the production does not occur hold the debarkation does not occur. sent5: that the overshooting does not occur triggers that the non-estuarineness and the suffering washed happens. sent6: if the repositioning disk does not occur the fact that the debarkation does not occur and the incredulousness occurs is not correct. sent7: that the non-nationalness and the non-hydrousness occurs is triggered by that the tree does not occur. sent8: if the estuarineness does not occur and the suffering washed happens then the treeing does not occur. sent9: the hydroxiness does not occur if the fact that the fact that not the debarkation but the incredulousness happens is correct is incorrect. sent10: the acanthoticness does not occur and the overshoot does not occur if the fact that the cholinergicness happens is right. sent11: that both the enzymaticness and the production occurs is not correct if the incredulousness does not occur. sent12: that the debarkation does not occur and the incredulousness does not occur is caused by that the repositioning disk does not occur. sent13: if the hydrousness does not occur then both the debarkation and the repositioning disk happens.

sent1: (¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} sent2: ¬({EU} & {EN}) -> ¬{CQ} sent3: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent4: ¬{AB} -> ¬{B} sent5: ¬{I} -> (¬{H} & {G}) sent6: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{B} & {A}) sent7: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent8: (¬{H} & {G}) -> ¬{F} sent9: ¬(¬{B} & {A}) -> ¬{FP} sent10: {K} -> (¬{J} & ¬{I}) sent11: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent12: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) sent13: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C})

the incredulousness does not occur.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the incredulousness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if both the non-nationalness and the non-hydrousness occurs then the repositioning disk does not occur. sent2: if that the calyptrateness occurs and the suffering phlogiston occurs is incorrect then the fact that the thrash does not occur hold. sent3: if that the enzymaticness and the production occurs is not correct that the debarkation does not occur is correct. sent4: if the fact that the production does not occur hold the debarkation does not occur. sent5: that the overshooting does not occur triggers that the non-estuarineness and the suffering washed happens. sent6: if the repositioning disk does not occur the fact that the debarkation does not occur and the incredulousness occurs is not correct. sent7: that the non-nationalness and the non-hydrousness occurs is triggered by that the tree does not occur. sent8: if the estuarineness does not occur and the suffering washed happens then the treeing does not occur. sent9: the hydroxiness does not occur if the fact that the fact that not the debarkation but the incredulousness happens is correct is incorrect. sent10: the acanthoticness does not occur and the overshoot does not occur if the fact that the cholinergicness happens is right. sent11: that both the enzymaticness and the production occurs is not correct if the incredulousness does not occur. sent12: that the debarkation does not occur and the incredulousness does not occur is caused by that the repositioning disk does not occur. sent13: if the hydrousness does not occur then both the debarkation and the repositioning disk happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the incredulousness does not occur.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that both the enzymaticness and the production happens is wrong.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the debarkation does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the bubo is not a propeller and/or does not reposition repetitiveness.

(¬{C}{b} v ¬{A}{b})

sent1: there exists something such that that it does not reposition repetitiveness and does suffer Hadean does not hold. sent2: the bubo repositions repetitiveness. sent3: that the blowjob is not a kind of a propeller or it is not Arawakan or both is not true. sent4: there is something such that it does not reposition repetitiveness and it is a kind of a propeller. sent5: the fact that the bubo does reposition repetitiveness is not incorrect if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a propeller. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it is Arawakan and it does reposition repetitiveness does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that that it does not reposition repetitiveness and it is Arawakan is not right. sent8: if there is something such that that it does not suffer Hadean and it is Arawakan is not right then the highflier does reposition repetitiveness. sent9: that the blowjob does not suffer Hadean but it is Arawakan is false. sent10: if the highflier repositions repetitiveness then the fact that the fact that either the bubo is not a propeller or it does not repositions repetitiveness or both is correct is incorrect. sent11: there exists something such that the fact that it does not suffer Hadean and it repositions repetitiveness is not true. sent12: the bubo is not a propeller or it does not reposition repetitiveness or both if the highflier does not suffer retrial. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is a propeller and it repositions repetitiveness is wrong. sent14: if there exists something such that that it is not a propeller and it does suffer Hadean is false the bubo does reposition repetitiveness. sent15: that the highflier does not suffer retrial hold if the actuator does suffer retrial and it is resinlike. sent16: if the highflier repositions repetitiveness then the bubo repositions repetitiveness. sent17: that the infant's-breath does not reposition repetitiveness is not correct.

sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{A}x & {AA}x) sent2: {A}{b} sent3: ¬(¬{C}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): (¬{A}x & {C}x) sent5: (x): ¬{C}x -> {A}{b} sent6: (Ex): ¬({AB}x & {A}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬(¬{A}x & {AB}x) sent8: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent10: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent11: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {A}x) sent12: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent13: (Ex): ¬({C}x & {A}x) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {AA}x) -> {A}{b} sent15: ({B}{c} & {D}{c}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent16: {A}{a} -> {A}{b} sent17: {A}{fj}

the bubo is not a propeller or it does not reposition repetitiveness or both.

(¬{C}{b} v ¬{A}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the bubo is not a propeller and/or does not reposition repetitiveness. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that that it does not reposition repetitiveness and does suffer Hadean does not hold. sent2: the bubo repositions repetitiveness. sent3: that the blowjob is not a kind of a propeller or it is not Arawakan or both is not true. sent4: there is something such that it does not reposition repetitiveness and it is a kind of a propeller. sent5: the fact that the bubo does reposition repetitiveness is not incorrect if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a propeller. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it is Arawakan and it does reposition repetitiveness does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that that it does not reposition repetitiveness and it is Arawakan is not right. sent8: if there is something such that that it does not suffer Hadean and it is Arawakan is not right then the highflier does reposition repetitiveness. sent9: that the blowjob does not suffer Hadean but it is Arawakan is false. sent10: if the highflier repositions repetitiveness then the fact that the fact that either the bubo is not a propeller or it does not repositions repetitiveness or both is correct is incorrect. sent11: there exists something such that the fact that it does not suffer Hadean and it repositions repetitiveness is not true. sent12: the bubo is not a propeller or it does not reposition repetitiveness or both if the highflier does not suffer retrial. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is a propeller and it repositions repetitiveness is wrong. sent14: if there exists something such that that it is not a propeller and it does suffer Hadean is false the bubo does reposition repetitiveness. sent15: that the highflier does not suffer retrial hold if the actuator does suffer retrial and it is resinlike. sent16: if the highflier repositions repetitiveness then the bubo repositions repetitiveness. sent17: that the infant's-breath does not reposition repetitiveness is not correct. ; $proof$ =

sent9 -> int1: there is something such that that it does not suffer Hadean and it is Arawakan is wrong.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the highflier does reposition repetitiveness.; sent10 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

that there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a Colchicum hold it is a kind of a Shastan and/or it is not zygomatic does not hold.

¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x))

sent1: either the musette is a Neva or it does not recommend Cynic or both if it is not streptococcal. sent2: if the pylorus is not a Colchicum then it is a Shastan or not zygomatic or both. sent3: if the pylorus is not a Colchicum then it is a Shastan or is zygomatic or both. sent4: there is something such that if it is not heterodactyl it is thenal and/or it is not a subject. sent5: there exists something such that if it is a Colchicum then it is a Shastan and/or it is non-zygomatic. sent6: the pylorus is a Sikorsky and/or is not menstrual if it is not a Colchicum. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a Colchicum it is a Shastan or is zygomatic or both. sent8: there is something such that if it is not a offside then it is a kind of a negative or it does not reposition musette or both. sent9: if the fact that the pylorus is a Colchicum is right it is a Shastan and/or it is not zygomatic. sent10: the pylorus is formulary and/or it is not a rudderpost if it is not sportive. sent11: something is geocentric and/or it does not suffer lascar if it is not a kind of a Colchicum. sent12: the pylorus is allographic and/or does not recommend settle if it does not reposition leprosy. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not spirit then it suffers masterpiece and/or does not reposition phobia. sent14: something is unperceptive and/or not a Shastan if it is not a kind of a photo-offset. sent15: the pylorus is a Dushanbe and/or is not a microbat if it is not an oral.

sent1: ¬{CU}{fa} -> ({AK}{fa} v ¬{R}{fa}) sent2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): ¬{U}x -> ({AF}x v ¬{AJ}x) sent5: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({IS}{aa} v ¬{EL}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v {AB}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{EK}x -> ({EE}x v ¬{IB}x) sent9: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent10: ¬{IK}{aa} -> ({GB}{aa} v ¬{FE}{aa}) sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({DP}x v ¬{AD}x) sent12: ¬{JE}{aa} -> ({CL}{aa} v ¬{DK}{aa}) sent13: (Ex): ¬{L}x -> ({AG}x v ¬{AR}x) sent14: (x): ¬{ES}x -> ({DT}x v ¬{AA}x) sent15: ¬{JD}{aa} -> ({BN}{aa} v ¬{HR}{aa})

if the rowanberry is not a Colchicum it is geocentric and/or it does not suffer lascar.

¬{A}{if} -> ({DP}{if} v ¬{AD}{if})

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a Colchicum hold it is a kind of a Shastan and/or it is not zygomatic does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: either the musette is a Neva or it does not recommend Cynic or both if it is not streptococcal. sent2: if the pylorus is not a Colchicum then it is a Shastan or not zygomatic or both. sent3: if the pylorus is not a Colchicum then it is a Shastan or is zygomatic or both. sent4: there is something such that if it is not heterodactyl it is thenal and/or it is not a subject. sent5: there exists something such that if it is a Colchicum then it is a Shastan and/or it is non-zygomatic. sent6: the pylorus is a Sikorsky and/or is not menstrual if it is not a Colchicum. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a Colchicum it is a Shastan or is zygomatic or both. sent8: there is something such that if it is not a offside then it is a kind of a negative or it does not reposition musette or both. sent9: if the fact that the pylorus is a Colchicum is right it is a Shastan and/or it is not zygomatic. sent10: the pylorus is formulary and/or it is not a rudderpost if it is not sportive. sent11: something is geocentric and/or it does not suffer lascar if it is not a kind of a Colchicum. sent12: the pylorus is allographic and/or does not recommend settle if it does not reposition leprosy. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not spirit then it suffers masterpiece and/or does not reposition phobia. sent14: something is unperceptive and/or not a Shastan if it is not a kind of a photo-offset. sent15: the pylorus is a Dushanbe and/or is not a microbat if it is not an oral. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the repair does not corrode pricket.

¬{B}{aa}

sent1: the fact that the hostess is both not an utmost and a Ruscus is not right. sent2: if the repair is not commensal it is non-correlational and/or is a kind of a Volvariella. sent3: if the webfoot is not a knob then the repair is a tushery and it does corrode pricket. sent4: the fact that the stopover is not a tushery is not false. sent5: the repair is not a tushery. sent6: the repair is not cryogenic or it is a correction or both. sent7: if something does not recommend mojo then the fact that either it does not satisfice or it is nondeductible or both hold. sent8: if the puncher is not intercellular then that the trough does miss and it is not non-Chaldean is not incorrect. sent9: the repair is not a kind of a correction if it does not reposition torr or is evangelical or both. sent10: if something is not a kind of a amide or recommends joiner or both it does not halloo. sent11: the hostess is not a kind of a stocktaking and is not a concrete if it is not a Ruscus. sent12: if the fritillary is not a Shankar and/or is a eponymy the fact that it does not corrode pricket hold. sent13: the hostess is not a kind of a Ruscus if that it is not an utmost but a Ruscus is false. sent14: if something is a correction then it does not corrode pricket. sent15: something does not corrode pricket if it is not correlational and/or it is a correction. sent16: if the trough misses that the pyroxene is not a Shankar but it is noninvasive is wrong. sent17: the repair is not a hole. sent18: the repair does not corrode pricket if it is a correction.

sent1: ¬(¬{M}{e} & {K}{e}) sent2: ¬{R}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AL}{aa}) sent3: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent4: ¬{A}{bp} sent5: ¬{A}{aa} sent6: (¬{AF}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent7: (x): ¬{FJ}x -> (¬{BL}x v {BK}x) sent8: ¬{H}{d} -> ({F}{c} & {G}{c}) sent9: (¬{CB}{aa} v {HR}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent10: (x): (¬{ID}x v {HK}x) -> ¬{BS}x sent11: ¬{K}{e} -> (¬{I}{e} & ¬{J}{e}) sent12: (¬{D}{cu} v {IE}{cu}) -> ¬{B}{cu} sent13: ¬(¬{M}{e} & {K}{e}) -> ¬{K}{e} sent14: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent15: (x): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent16: {F}{c} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {E}{b}) sent17: ¬{FB}{aa} sent18: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa}

the Galatian does not satisfice and/or it is nondeductible if it does not recommend mojo.

¬{FJ}{ar} -> (¬{BL}{ar} v {BK}{ar})

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the repair does not corrode pricket. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the hostess is both not an utmost and a Ruscus is not right. sent2: if the repair is not commensal it is non-correlational and/or is a kind of a Volvariella. sent3: if the webfoot is not a knob then the repair is a tushery and it does corrode pricket. sent4: the fact that the stopover is not a tushery is not false. sent5: the repair is not a tushery. sent6: the repair is not cryogenic or it is a correction or both. sent7: if something does not recommend mojo then the fact that either it does not satisfice or it is nondeductible or both hold. sent8: if the puncher is not intercellular then that the trough does miss and it is not non-Chaldean is not incorrect. sent9: the repair is not a kind of a correction if it does not reposition torr or is evangelical or both. sent10: if something is not a kind of a amide or recommends joiner or both it does not halloo. sent11: the hostess is not a kind of a stocktaking and is not a concrete if it is not a Ruscus. sent12: if the fritillary is not a Shankar and/or is a eponymy the fact that it does not corrode pricket hold. sent13: the hostess is not a kind of a Ruscus if that it is not an utmost but a Ruscus is false. sent14: if something is a correction then it does not corrode pricket. sent15: something does not corrode pricket if it is not correlational and/or it is a correction. sent16: if the trough misses that the pyroxene is not a Shankar but it is noninvasive is wrong. sent17: the repair is not a hole. sent18: the repair does not corrode pricket if it is a correction. ; $proof$ =

sent15 -> int1: the repair does not corrode pricket if it is not correlational or it is a kind of a correction or both.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

that the desperate is an umbilical is not false.

{B}{b}

sent1: that the latex is aperiodic hold. sent2: the desperate is an umbilical if the fact that it is both non-Dantean and prehistoric is false. sent3: a aperiodic thing that does not suffer masterpiece is not a kind of an umbilical. sent4: the fact that the desperate is Dantean and it is not non-prehistoric is not true. sent5: if the latex is aperiodic the fact that the desperate is not Dantean and is prehistoric does not hold. sent6: if the latex is aperiodic that the desperate is Dantean and prehistoric is false.

sent1: {A}{a} sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{b} sent3: (x): ({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent5: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b})

the desperate is not umbilical.

¬{B}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the desperate is an umbilical is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: that the latex is aperiodic hold. sent2: the desperate is an umbilical if the fact that it is both non-Dantean and prehistoric is false. sent3: a aperiodic thing that does not suffer masterpiece is not a kind of an umbilical. sent4: the fact that the desperate is Dantean and it is not non-prehistoric is not true. sent5: if the latex is aperiodic the fact that the desperate is not Dantean and is prehistoric does not hold. sent6: if the latex is aperiodic that the desperate is Dantean and prehistoric is false. ; $proof$ =

sent5 & sent1 -> int1: that the desperate is not Dantean but it is prehistoric does not hold.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the underwriter recommends bombardon and does not scowl.

({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b})

sent1: if the bombardon does not recommend bombardon then that the underwriter scowls and does recommend bombardon is not correct. sent2: the bombardon is not expansionist if it does not recommend bombardon. sent3: that the bombardon suffers mothball does not hold. sent4: the bombardon is not a vizier. sent5: if that the bangle is not pyemic but expansionist does not hold the bombardon is expansionist. sent6: that that the underwriter scowls but it does not recommend bombardon is not true is true if the bombardon does not recommend bombardon. sent7: that the underwriter does recommend bombardon and it does scowl does not hold. sent8: if the fact that something is not a kind of a Aalto and is a kind of a salience is false it does not striate. sent9: the fact that the underwriter does recommend bombardon and does not scowl is incorrect if the bombardon does not scowl. sent10: the underwriter recommends bombardon but it does not scowl if the bombardon is expansionist. sent11: if the underwriter is not expansionist it does not scowl. sent12: that the underwriter is expansionist and does not scowl is wrong. sent13: if the underwriter does not scowl then that the fact that the bombardon recommends bombardon and does not scowl is not true is right. sent14: the fact that the nebuchadnezzar is not a Aalto but it is a kind of a salience is not correct. sent15: the underwriter is not expansionist. sent16: if something does nick the fact that it is non-pyemic thing that is expansionist is incorrect. sent17: if the bombardon is not expansionist then it does not scowl. sent18: if the bombardon does not scowl then the fact that the underwriter does recommend bombardon and it does scowl does not hold. sent19: the bombardon does not recommend gillie. sent20: the bombardon is not expansionist.

sent1: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & {D}{b}) sent2: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: ¬{IH}{a} sent4: ¬{GO}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{C}{c} & {A}{c}) -> {A}{a} sent6: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent7: ¬({D}{b} & {B}{b}) sent8: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {I}x) -> ¬{F}x sent9: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent10: {A}{a} -> ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent11: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬{B}{b} sent12: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent13: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({D}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent14: ¬(¬{H}{e} & {I}{e}) sent15: ¬{A}{b} sent16: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) sent17: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent18: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & {B}{b}) sent19: ¬{EQ}{a} sent20: ¬{A}{a}

the underwriter recommends bombardon but it does not scowl.

({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the underwriter recommends bombardon and does not scowl. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bombardon does not recommend bombardon then that the underwriter scowls and does recommend bombardon is not correct. sent2: the bombardon is not expansionist if it does not recommend bombardon. sent3: that the bombardon suffers mothball does not hold. sent4: the bombardon is not a vizier. sent5: if that the bangle is not pyemic but expansionist does not hold the bombardon is expansionist. sent6: that that the underwriter scowls but it does not recommend bombardon is not true is true if the bombardon does not recommend bombardon. sent7: that the underwriter does recommend bombardon and it does scowl does not hold. sent8: if the fact that something is not a kind of a Aalto and is a kind of a salience is false it does not striate. sent9: the fact that the underwriter does recommend bombardon and does not scowl is incorrect if the bombardon does not scowl. sent10: the underwriter recommends bombardon but it does not scowl if the bombardon is expansionist. sent11: if the underwriter is not expansionist it does not scowl. sent12: that the underwriter is expansionist and does not scowl is wrong. sent13: if the underwriter does not scowl then that the fact that the bombardon recommends bombardon and does not scowl is not true is right. sent14: the fact that the nebuchadnezzar is not a Aalto but it is a kind of a salience is not correct. sent15: the underwriter is not expansionist. sent16: if something does nick the fact that it is non-pyemic thing that is expansionist is incorrect. sent17: if the bombardon is not expansionist then it does not scowl. sent18: if the bombardon does not scowl then the fact that the underwriter does recommend bombardon and it does scowl does not hold. sent19: the bombardon does not recommend gillie. sent20: the bombardon is not expansionist. ; $proof$ =

sent17 & sent20 -> int1: the bombardon does not scowl.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the waders is not a Laos.

¬{A}{a}

sent1: if there exists something such that that it does not recommend butterbur is not false then the galoot is not a Laos. sent2: if there is something such that that it is a Laos and recommends butterbur does not hold the waders does not recommend scrubbed. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it educates and does ache is wrong. sent4: there is nothing that does recommend butterbur and does recommend scrubbed.

sent1: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{A}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬({A}x & {AA}x) -> ¬{AB}{a} sent3: (Ex): ¬({BJ}x & {DQ}x) sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the waders is not a Laos. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that that it does not recommend butterbur is not false then the galoot is not a Laos. sent2: if there is something such that that it is a Laos and recommends butterbur does not hold the waders does not recommend scrubbed. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it educates and does ache is wrong. sent4: there is nothing that does recommend butterbur and does recommend scrubbed. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> int1: that the galoot recommends butterbur and it recommends scrubbed does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it recommends butterbur and recommends scrubbed does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the inconstantness does not occur and the summarizing does not occur is incorrect.

¬(¬{B} & ¬{C})

sent1: if the recommending Kepler does not occur the fact that the landfall and the imbuing occurs is not true. sent2: the repositioning Kesey does not occur if that not the meteor but the untranslatableness happens is not correct. sent3: the recommending hadron and the Ugandan happens if the repositioning Kesey does not occur. sent4: if the fact that both the landfall and the imbuing occurs is false the imbuing does not occur. sent5: if the recommending hadron happens then the fact that the inconstantness does not occur and the summarizing does not occur is not correct. sent6: if the fact that the catapulticness does not occur hold then the Aeolianness and the insubordination happens. sent7: if the recommending lying does not occur then the extortion does not occur and/or the formalness does not occur. sent8: the fact that that not the meteor but the untranslatableness happens is not correct is not incorrect if the insubordination happens. sent9: the puppetry does not occur if the recommending hadron does not occur. sent10: if that the recommending hadron does not occur is right then that the puppetry or the cholecystectomy or both happens is incorrect. sent11: the summarizing does not occur if the fact that that both the non-Ugandanness and the repositioning Kesey happens is not right is not wrong. sent12: the recommending lying does not occur and the recommending arroyo does not occur if the imbuing does not occur. sent13: the bacteremicness does not occur if the fact that the bacteremicness but not the cholecystectomy happens is incorrect. sent14: that both the non-Ugandanness and the repositioning Kesey occurs does not hold. sent15: the unreliableness does not occur. sent16: if the hydrocephalicness happens then that not the overstraining but the recommending Kepler happens is incorrect. sent17: if the fact that the overstraining does not occur and the recommending Kepler happens does not hold the fact that the recommending Kepler does not occur is not wrong. sent18: if the bacteremicness does not occur then that the hydrocephalicness occurs and the boom occurs hold. sent19: if that the puppetry and/or the cholecystectomy occurs does not hold then the inconstantness does not occur. sent20: the recommending hadron does not occur.

sent1: ¬{P} -> ¬({Q} & {O}) sent2: ¬(¬{F} & {G}) -> ¬{E} sent3: ¬{E} -> ({A} & {D}) sent4: ¬({Q} & {O}) -> ¬{O} sent5: {A} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent6: ¬{J} -> ({I} & {H}) sent7: ¬{M} -> (¬{K} v ¬{L}) sent8: {H} -> ¬(¬{F} & {G}) sent9: ¬{A} -> ¬{AA} sent10: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} v {AB}) sent11: ¬(¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{C} sent12: ¬{O} -> (¬{M} & ¬{N}) sent13: ¬({U} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{U} sent14: ¬(¬{D} & {E}) sent15: ¬{DT} sent16: {S} -> ¬(¬{R} & {P}) sent17: ¬(¬{R} & {P}) -> ¬{P} sent18: ¬{U} -> ({S} & {T}) sent19: ¬({AA} v {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent20: ¬{A}

the fact that the inconstantness does not occur and the summarizing does not occur is not correct.

¬(¬{B} & ¬{C})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the inconstantness does not occur and the summarizing does not occur is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the recommending Kepler does not occur the fact that the landfall and the imbuing occurs is not true. sent2: the repositioning Kesey does not occur if that not the meteor but the untranslatableness happens is not correct. sent3: the recommending hadron and the Ugandan happens if the repositioning Kesey does not occur. sent4: if the fact that both the landfall and the imbuing occurs is false the imbuing does not occur. sent5: if the recommending hadron happens then the fact that the inconstantness does not occur and the summarizing does not occur is not correct. sent6: if the fact that the catapulticness does not occur hold then the Aeolianness and the insubordination happens. sent7: if the recommending lying does not occur then the extortion does not occur and/or the formalness does not occur. sent8: the fact that that not the meteor but the untranslatableness happens is not correct is not incorrect if the insubordination happens. sent9: the puppetry does not occur if the recommending hadron does not occur. sent10: if that the recommending hadron does not occur is right then that the puppetry or the cholecystectomy or both happens is incorrect. sent11: the summarizing does not occur if the fact that that both the non-Ugandanness and the repositioning Kesey happens is not right is not wrong. sent12: the recommending lying does not occur and the recommending arroyo does not occur if the imbuing does not occur. sent13: the bacteremicness does not occur if the fact that the bacteremicness but not the cholecystectomy happens is incorrect. sent14: that both the non-Ugandanness and the repositioning Kesey occurs does not hold. sent15: the unreliableness does not occur. sent16: if the hydrocephalicness happens then that not the overstraining but the recommending Kepler happens is incorrect. sent17: if the fact that the overstraining does not occur and the recommending Kepler happens does not hold the fact that the recommending Kepler does not occur is not wrong. sent18: if the bacteremicness does not occur then that the hydrocephalicness occurs and the boom occurs hold. sent19: if that the puppetry and/or the cholecystectomy occurs does not hold then the inconstantness does not occur. sent20: the recommending hadron does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent10 & sent20 -> int1: that either the puppetry happens or the cholecystectomy happens or both is false.; int1 & sent19 -> int2: the inconstantness does not occur.; sent11 & sent14 -> int3: the summarizing does not occur.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the stacte is not a stubbornness.

¬{D}{b}

sent1: if the burthen is camphoric then the piperacillin is camphoric. sent2: the stacte does recommend onrush. sent3: something is not a kind of a stubbornness if the fact that it is not non-chondritic but incorporeal is incorrect. sent4: if the fact that the piperacillin does reposition oxalis is true the stacte is a stubbornness. sent5: that the piperacillin is not corporeal and it does not reposition oxalis is not true if there exists something such that it is chondritic. sent6: that the oxalis does not reposition denomination and does not direct is not right. sent7: if there is something such that it is a Pashto the warrener is not unawares. sent8: if the fact that something does not recommend piperacillin and does not reposition hyperextension is wrong then it does not reposition oxalis. sent9: the piperacillin is camphoric if the burthen is a balkline. sent10: there is something such that it is chondritic. sent11: the piperacillin is corporeal if the stacte does reposition oxalis. sent12: if the fact that the stacte is not a stubbornness and does not reposition oxalis does not hold then the piperacillin is corporeal. sent13: if the piperacillin is camphoric the fact that it does not recommend piperacillin and does not reposition hyperextension is wrong. sent14: the fact that the piperacillin does not recommend voluntary and is not a farina is false. sent15: the stacte is a stubbornness if that the piperacillin is not corporeal and does not reposition oxalis does not hold. sent16: if there is something such that the fact that it does not reposition denomination and does not direct is not correct then the hull is a Pashto. sent17: the burthen is camphoric and/or is a balkline if there are non-unawares things. sent18: if the stacte is corporeal the piperacillin is a kind of a stubbornness. sent19: the stacte is a deliberation.

sent1: {G}{c} -> {G}{a} sent2: {AD}{b} sent3: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent6: ¬(¬{K}{f} & ¬{L}{f}) sent7: (x): {J}x -> ¬{H}{d} sent8: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent9: {I}{c} -> {G}{a} sent10: (Ex): {A}x sent11: {C}{b} -> {B}{a} sent12: ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent13: {G}{a} -> ¬(¬{F}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent14: ¬(¬{AO}{a} & ¬{FH}{a}) sent15: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent16: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & ¬{L}x) -> {J}{e} sent17: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}{c} v {I}{c}) sent18: {B}{b} -> {D}{a} sent19: {AC}{b}

the stacte is not a stubbornness.

¬{D}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the stacte is not a stubbornness. ; $context$ = sent1: if the burthen is camphoric then the piperacillin is camphoric. sent2: the stacte does recommend onrush. sent3: something is not a kind of a stubbornness if the fact that it is not non-chondritic but incorporeal is incorrect. sent4: if the fact that the piperacillin does reposition oxalis is true the stacte is a stubbornness. sent5: that the piperacillin is not corporeal and it does not reposition oxalis is not true if there exists something such that it is chondritic. sent6: that the oxalis does not reposition denomination and does not direct is not right. sent7: if there is something such that it is a Pashto the warrener is not unawares. sent8: if the fact that something does not recommend piperacillin and does not reposition hyperextension is wrong then it does not reposition oxalis. sent9: the piperacillin is camphoric if the burthen is a balkline. sent10: there is something such that it is chondritic. sent11: the piperacillin is corporeal if the stacte does reposition oxalis. sent12: if the fact that the stacte is not a stubbornness and does not reposition oxalis does not hold then the piperacillin is corporeal. sent13: if the piperacillin is camphoric the fact that it does not recommend piperacillin and does not reposition hyperextension is wrong. sent14: the fact that the piperacillin does not recommend voluntary and is not a farina is false. sent15: the stacte is a stubbornness if that the piperacillin is not corporeal and does not reposition oxalis does not hold. sent16: if there is something such that the fact that it does not reposition denomination and does not direct is not correct then the hull is a Pashto. sent17: the burthen is camphoric and/or is a balkline if there are non-unawares things. sent18: if the stacte is corporeal the piperacillin is a kind of a stubbornness. sent19: the stacte is a deliberation. ; $proof$ =

sent10 & sent5 -> int1: the fact that the piperacillin is not corporeal and does not reposition oxalis is not right.; sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

something is a true and an allegro.

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

sent1: something that is not an allegro decomposes and does true. sent2: the retardant is a kind of an allegro. sent3: the retardant is a kind of a true. sent4: there is something such that it is a sentimentality.

sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({HA}x & {A}x) sent2: {B}{a} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (Ex): {HJ}x

the sima decomposes and is true.

({HA}{bo} & {A}{bo})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = something is a true and an allegro. ; $context$ = sent1: something that is not an allegro decomposes and does true. sent2: the retardant is a kind of an allegro. sent3: the retardant is a kind of a true. sent4: there is something such that it is a sentimentality. ; $proof$ =

sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the retardant is true and is an allegro.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the demagogue is a hyena.

{E}{aa}

sent1: something that does not recommend taxman repositions freestyle. sent2: everything does not reposition Recife. sent3: if the demagogue does not recommend taxman then it repositions freestyle. sent4: that the demagogue does recommend taxman and is not a kind of a chemistry is wrong if it does not reposition Recife. sent5: the demagogue does suffer Belem if it does suffer companionability. sent6: something is a hyena if it does reposition freestyle. sent7: everything does not complete. sent8: if the demagogue is a hyena then it is chirpy. sent9: the Dexedrine is not a hyena. sent10: if the fact that something is not a chemistry but a hyena is incorrect it is not a kind of a hyena. sent11: the exaltation does reposition freestyle. sent12: if that the high does recommend taxman and it repositions Recife does not hold that it does not repositions Recife hold. sent13: that the cad is a kind of a noisemaker but it is not a kind of a chemistry is false. sent14: everything is not a demonstrative. sent15: the demagogue does not intertwine. sent16: something is Singaporean if that that it is a Stuyvesant and it is not vibrational is not wrong does not hold. sent17: the oolong does not reposition freestyle.

sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> {D}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x sent3: ¬{C}{aa} -> {D}{aa} sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) sent5: {AP}{aa} -> {DK}{aa} sent6: (x): {D}x -> {E}x sent7: (x): ¬{CE}x sent8: {E}{aa} -> {BI}{aa} sent9: ¬{E}{dr} sent10: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x sent11: {D}{je} sent12: ¬({C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent13: ¬({HR}{ia} & ¬{B}{ia}) sent14: (x): ¬{BN}x sent15: ¬{G}{aa} sent16: (x): ¬({GJ}x & ¬{HU}x) -> {CR}x sent17: ¬{D}{di}

the demagogue is not a hyena.

¬{E}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the demagogue is a hyena. ; $context$ = sent1: something that does not recommend taxman repositions freestyle. sent2: everything does not reposition Recife. sent3: if the demagogue does not recommend taxman then it repositions freestyle. sent4: that the demagogue does recommend taxman and is not a kind of a chemistry is wrong if it does not reposition Recife. sent5: the demagogue does suffer Belem if it does suffer companionability. sent6: something is a hyena if it does reposition freestyle. sent7: everything does not complete. sent8: if the demagogue is a hyena then it is chirpy. sent9: the Dexedrine is not a hyena. sent10: if the fact that something is not a chemistry but a hyena is incorrect it is not a kind of a hyena. sent11: the exaltation does reposition freestyle. sent12: if that the high does recommend taxman and it repositions Recife does not hold that it does not repositions Recife hold. sent13: that the cad is a kind of a noisemaker but it is not a kind of a chemistry is false. sent14: everything is not a demonstrative. sent15: the demagogue does not intertwine. sent16: something is Singaporean if that that it is a Stuyvesant and it is not vibrational is not wrong does not hold. sent17: the oolong does not reposition freestyle. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> int1: that the demagogue does not reposition Recife is not false.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the demagogue does recommend taxman and is not a kind of a chemistry does not hold.; sent6 -> int3: if the demagogue does reposition freestyle it is a hyena.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

both the repositioning tempering and the captainship happens.

({B} & {A})

sent1: the backhandedness does not occur. sent2: the annalisticness occurs. sent3: the planetalness occurs. sent4: the captainship and the planetalness happens. sent5: the depravity occurs. sent6: the orthographicness happens and the uterineness happens. sent7: if the notch occurs but the way does not occur then the borealness happens. sent8: that the petty but not the single occurs prevents that the repositioning tempering does not occur. sent9: the infernal does not occur. sent10: the aponeuroticness occurs. sent11: the paranasalness occurs. sent12: the petty occurs and the singleness does not occur. sent13: the scrunch occurs. sent14: the leaningness occurs but the indecency does not occur. sent15: the corroding axon occurs. sent16: the mixture happens. sent17: the unpretentiousness occurs and the drive occurs. sent18: the citrousness does not occur.

sent1: ¬{EG} sent2: {IJ} sent3: {C} sent4: ({A} & {C}) sent5: {GT} sent6: ({JE} & {HT}) sent7: ({IT} & ¬{J}) -> {HO} sent8: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent9: ¬{BJ} sent10: {AO} sent11: {DP} sent12: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent13: {GK} sent14: ({ET} & ¬{HU}) sent15: {K} sent16: {IM} sent17: ({BK} & {FE}) sent18: ¬{DL}

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = both the repositioning tempering and the captainship happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the backhandedness does not occur. sent2: the annalisticness occurs. sent3: the planetalness occurs. sent4: the captainship and the planetalness happens. sent5: the depravity occurs. sent6: the orthographicness happens and the uterineness happens. sent7: if the notch occurs but the way does not occur then the borealness happens. sent8: that the petty but not the single occurs prevents that the repositioning tempering does not occur. sent9: the infernal does not occur. sent10: the aponeuroticness occurs. sent11: the paranasalness occurs. sent12: the petty occurs and the singleness does not occur. sent13: the scrunch occurs. sent14: the leaningness occurs but the indecency does not occur. sent15: the corroding axon occurs. sent16: the mixture happens. sent17: the unpretentiousness occurs and the drive occurs. sent18: the citrousness does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent8 & sent12 -> int1: that the repositioning tempering occurs hold.; sent4 -> int2: the captainship happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the tusker is a gravy.

{AA}{aa}

sent1: if the picnic is a diskette and/or does not reposition Alecto then the lumpsucker is not a diskette. sent2: everything is nonaddictive. sent3: everything is both not a gravy and unerect. sent4: the picnic does not reposition Alecto if it is not expansionist. sent5: everything repositions forearm. sent6: the tusker is not a FEMA but it is biogenetic. sent7: if the fact that the phentolamine is an essence hold then the tusker is a gravy. sent8: something is an essence if it is a kind of an earphone. sent9: there is something such that it is not gluttonous. sent10: if the fact that the lumpsucker is not a kind of a diskette is correct then it is an earphone that is a kind of a rhenium. sent11: if the lumpsucker is an earphone then the phentolamine is an earphone.

sent1: ({D}{c} v ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent2: (x): {H}x sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{F}{c} sent5: (x): {DM}x sent6: (¬{Q}{aa} & {JG}{aa}) sent7: {A}{a} -> {AA}{aa} sent8: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent9: (Ex): ¬{I}x sent10: ¬{D}{b} -> ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) sent11: {B}{b} -> {B}{a}

the tusker is a gravy.

{AA}{aa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the tusker is a gravy. ; $context$ = sent1: if the picnic is a diskette and/or does not reposition Alecto then the lumpsucker is not a diskette. sent2: everything is nonaddictive. sent3: everything is both not a gravy and unerect. sent4: the picnic does not reposition Alecto if it is not expansionist. sent5: everything repositions forearm. sent6: the tusker is not a FEMA but it is biogenetic. sent7: if the fact that the phentolamine is an essence hold then the tusker is a gravy. sent8: something is an essence if it is a kind of an earphone. sent9: there is something such that it is not gluttonous. sent10: if the fact that the lumpsucker is not a kind of a diskette is correct then it is an earphone that is a kind of a rhenium. sent11: if the lumpsucker is an earphone then the phentolamine is an earphone. ; $proof$ =

sent3 -> int1: the tusker is not a gravy and is unerect.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the frijolito is chirpy.

{A}{c}

sent1: if that the frijolito is a Bellarmine and/or it discriminates does not hold it is chirpy. sent2: the EPROM is not a Bellarmine if that the fact that the goblet repositions tempered or it is not a morrow or both is not incorrect is incorrect. sent3: that the goblet repositions tempered and/or is not a kind of a morrow does not hold. sent4: if the fact that the frijolito is a Bellarmine or is not chirpy or both is wrong then that the EPROM is not discriminate is correct. sent5: the fact that the goblet is a kind of a morrow is right. sent6: if the fact that the EPROM is not a kind of a Bellarmine is correct then the frijolito is discriminate. sent7: the oxalis does reposition tempered. sent8: something is chirpy if the fact that it is a kind of a Bellarmine or it is not discriminate or both does not hold. sent9: if that something is a Bellarmine or it is discriminate or both does not hold it is chirpy. sent10: that the EPROM suffers aloe or it is not antecubital or both does not hold. sent11: something is chirpy if the fact that it is a kind of a Bellarmine or it does not reposition tempered or both does not hold. sent12: the frijolito is not indiscriminate. sent13: if that the EPROM is not a kind of a Bellarmine is not wrong the fact that the frijolito is a Bellarmine or is not discriminate or both is incorrect. sent14: if something is not a boatyard then it is a kind of a Bellarmine that discriminates. sent15: if the fact that the goblet does reposition tempered and/or is a morrow is incorrect then the EPROM is not a Bellarmine. sent16: the frijolito is not discriminate if the fact that the EPROM is a Bellarmine or it does not reposition tempered or both does not hold. sent17: something repositions tempered if the fact that either it is chirpy or it is not a morrow or both is wrong.

sent1: ¬({B}{c} v {C}{c}) -> {A}{c} sent2: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent4: ¬({B}{c} v ¬{A}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent5: {AB}{a} sent6: ¬{B}{b} -> {C}{c} sent7: {AA}{go} sent8: (x): ¬({B}x v ¬{C}x) -> {A}x sent9: (x): ¬({B}x v {C}x) -> {A}x sent10: ¬({DQ}{b} v ¬{AL}{b}) sent11: (x): ¬({B}x v ¬{AA}x) -> {A}x sent12: {C}{c} sent13: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({B}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) sent14: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) sent15: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent16: ¬({B}{b} v ¬{AA}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent17: (x): ¬({A}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {AA}x

that the goblet is corneal and/or it is not chirpy does not hold.

¬({HH}{a} v ¬{A}{a})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the frijolito is chirpy. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the frijolito is a Bellarmine and/or it discriminates does not hold it is chirpy. sent2: the EPROM is not a Bellarmine if that the fact that the goblet repositions tempered or it is not a morrow or both is not incorrect is incorrect. sent3: that the goblet repositions tempered and/or is not a kind of a morrow does not hold. sent4: if the fact that the frijolito is a Bellarmine or is not chirpy or both is wrong then that the EPROM is not discriminate is correct. sent5: the fact that the goblet is a kind of a morrow is right. sent6: if the fact that the EPROM is not a kind of a Bellarmine is correct then the frijolito is discriminate. sent7: the oxalis does reposition tempered. sent8: something is chirpy if the fact that it is a kind of a Bellarmine or it is not discriminate or both does not hold. sent9: if that something is a Bellarmine or it is discriminate or both does not hold it is chirpy. sent10: that the EPROM suffers aloe or it is not antecubital or both does not hold. sent11: something is chirpy if the fact that it is a kind of a Bellarmine or it does not reposition tempered or both does not hold. sent12: the frijolito is not indiscriminate. sent13: if that the EPROM is not a kind of a Bellarmine is not wrong the fact that the frijolito is a Bellarmine or is not discriminate or both is incorrect. sent14: if something is not a boatyard then it is a kind of a Bellarmine that discriminates. sent15: if the fact that the goblet does reposition tempered and/or is a morrow is incorrect then the EPROM is not a Bellarmine. sent16: the frijolito is not discriminate if the fact that the EPROM is a Bellarmine or it does not reposition tempered or both does not hold. sent17: something repositions tempered if the fact that either it is chirpy or it is not a morrow or both is wrong. ; $proof$ =

sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the EPROM is not a Bellarmine.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: that the frijolito either is a Bellarmine or does not discriminate or both is not true.; sent8 -> int3: the frijolito is chirpy if the fact that it either is a Bellarmine or is not discriminate or both is wrong.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the Friesian does swap and it repositions chinaberry.

({E}{a} & {D}{a})

sent1: the Friesian is a kind of a buckthorn and it unplugs. sent2: if that the tassel does unplug and is not a buckthorn is wrong then that it does not unplug is correct. sent3: the Friesian does suffer philatelist if something repositions refreshment and it does concoct. sent4: the Guatemalan does not unplug. sent5: something does reposition refreshment. sent6: if that something does unplug is right that it swaps is not incorrect. sent7: the fact that something does reposition refreshment and concocts is not incorrect. sent8: that the tassel does unplug and is not a buckthorn is wrong if there is something such that it does not unplug. sent9: if the tassel does not unplug then that the Rollerblade suffers philatelist and it concocts does not hold.

sent1: ({G}{a} & {F}{a}) sent2: ¬({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent3: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent4: ¬{F}{d} sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: (x): {F}x -> {E}x sent7: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent8: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent9: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬({C}{b} & {B}{b})

the Friesian is a setter and it repositions refreshment.

({GD}{a} & {A}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the Friesian does swap and it repositions chinaberry. ; $context$ = sent1: the Friesian is a kind of a buckthorn and it unplugs. sent2: if that the tassel does unplug and is not a buckthorn is wrong then that it does not unplug is correct. sent3: the Friesian does suffer philatelist if something repositions refreshment and it does concoct. sent4: the Guatemalan does not unplug. sent5: something does reposition refreshment. sent6: if that something does unplug is right that it swaps is not incorrect. sent7: the fact that something does reposition refreshment and concocts is not incorrect. sent8: that the tassel does unplug and is not a buckthorn is wrong if there is something such that it does not unplug. sent9: if the tassel does not unplug then that the Rollerblade suffers philatelist and it concocts does not hold. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent3 -> int1: that the Friesian suffers philatelist is correct.; sent6 -> int2: the Friesian swaps if it does unplug.; sent1 -> int3: the Friesian does unplug.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the Friesian swaps is right.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the shielding is not a kind of a rouge.

¬{B}{aa}

sent1: if the shielding does not recommend squill and does not reposition Vespidae it is not aroid. sent2: if something repositions Trajan then it is not a personification. sent3: the fact that the shielding is not a Bohemian but it repositions moment is not correct. sent4: if something is implacable the fact that it is not an irregular is not false. sent5: the shielding is not an alpaca. sent6: if the shielding is Bohemian then the fact that it is not a rouge is not wrong. sent7: something rouges and repositions Solanopteris if the fact that it is not aroid hold. sent8: something is not a kind of a anxiolytic if that it is not a kind of a closet and recommends Mandalay is incorrect. sent9: the shielding is spectral if the fact that it does not recommend Karen is not wrong. sent10: something is not parotid if it is a orchil. sent11: that the ready-mix is non-damascene thing that does rouge is not true. sent12: that the mazer is a kind of a Bohemian and it is a taste is false. sent13: the shielding does not grapple if the fact that it is not Bohemian and does reposition copepod does not hold. sent14: if something recommends aldose it is unsavory. sent15: something does not recommend squill and does not reposition Vespidae if it is spectral. sent16: if the shielding is a splash and not a Threskiornithidae then it does not recommend Karen. sent17: that the isoantibody recommends incivility and it is a Bohemian is wrong. sent18: that the shielding is impartial and it does recommend isoantibody is not true. sent19: the squill does not reposition moment.

sent1: (¬{E}{aa} & ¬{D}{aa}) -> ¬{C}{aa} sent2: (x): {GB}x -> ¬{BM}x sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: (x): {EJ}x -> ¬{HO}x sent5: ¬{AC}{aa} sent6: {AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent8: (x): ¬(¬{HI}x & {FA}x) -> ¬{CH}x sent9: ¬{G}{aa} -> {F}{aa} sent10: (x): {CM}x -> ¬{BF}x sent11: ¬(¬{GU}{ha} & {B}{ha}) sent12: ¬({AA}{ca} & {IH}{ca}) sent13: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {FC}{aa}) -> ¬{AG}{aa} sent14: (x): {BP}x -> ¬{DR}x sent15: (x): {F}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) sent16: ({H}{aa} & ¬{I}{aa}) -> ¬{G}{aa} sent17: ¬({DU}{ap} & {AA}{ap}) sent18: ¬({BS}{aa} & {AS}{aa}) sent19: ¬{AB}{dj}

the shielding is a rouge.

{B}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the shielding is not a kind of a rouge. ; $context$ = sent1: if the shielding does not recommend squill and does not reposition Vespidae it is not aroid. sent2: if something repositions Trajan then it is not a personification. sent3: the fact that the shielding is not a Bohemian but it repositions moment is not correct. sent4: if something is implacable the fact that it is not an irregular is not false. sent5: the shielding is not an alpaca. sent6: if the shielding is Bohemian then the fact that it is not a rouge is not wrong. sent7: something rouges and repositions Solanopteris if the fact that it is not aroid hold. sent8: something is not a kind of a anxiolytic if that it is not a kind of a closet and recommends Mandalay is incorrect. sent9: the shielding is spectral if the fact that it does not recommend Karen is not wrong. sent10: something is not parotid if it is a orchil. sent11: that the ready-mix is non-damascene thing that does rouge is not true. sent12: that the mazer is a kind of a Bohemian and it is a taste is false. sent13: the shielding does not grapple if the fact that it is not Bohemian and does reposition copepod does not hold. sent14: if something recommends aldose it is unsavory. sent15: something does not recommend squill and does not reposition Vespidae if it is spectral. sent16: if the shielding is a splash and not a Threskiornithidae then it does not recommend Karen. sent17: that the isoantibody recommends incivility and it is a Bohemian is wrong. sent18: that the shielding is impartial and it does recommend isoantibody is not true. sent19: the squill does not reposition moment. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

there is something such that if the fact that it is not untrustworthy and it is anorectal does not hold then it is not a Rawalpindi.

(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

sent1: that the Luger is not a Rawalpindi is true if that it is not trustworthy but anorectal is not true. sent2: if the fact that the Luger is not a Rawalpindi but it does recommend crankcase does not hold it is not a sonant. sent3: if the fact that something is not a boxed but it implodes is false it is not resinlike. sent4: there is something such that if that it is not an inside and it repositions fatalist is not right then it is not a chemistry. sent5: that if the Luger is not the Rawalpindi and not non-colloidal the Luger is not a kind of a sonant is correct. sent6: there is something such that if that it is not a Rottweiler but a welt does not hold then it is not a stockyard. sent7: if that the Luger does not suffer Dowland but it is anorectal is not right it is colloidal. sent8: the Luger is not a Rawalpindi if it does not suffer annuity. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of non-Aberdonian thing that is a Exocet does not hold it does negociate. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not anorectal it is not a kind of a Rawalpindi. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a morel and it is ascensional it is not microelectronic. sent12: the Luger is not a Rawalpindi if that it is non-untrustworthy thing that is anorectal is wrong. sent13: there exists something such that if that it is not a willet but a bugginess is not right it is not lossless. sent14: there is something such that if the fact that it is a Dunkers and it is cheliceral is not true then it is not smokeless.

sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: ¬(¬{B}{aa} & {S}{aa}) -> ¬{JH}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{IR}x & {BU}x) -> ¬{EO}x sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{CC}x & {BM}x) -> ¬{IJ}x sent5: (¬{B}{aa} & {IL}{aa}) -> ¬{JH}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ¬(¬{JJ}x & {IC}x) -> ¬{GQ}x sent7: ¬(¬{FF}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {IL}{aa} sent8: ¬{FN}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬(¬{HE}x & {C}x) -> {BN}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent11: (Ex): (¬{IK}x & {GA}x) -> ¬{EA}x sent12: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent13: (Ex): ¬(¬{FP}x & {CD}x) -> ¬{JD}x sent14: (Ex): ¬({BH}x & {HL}x) -> ¬{BL}x

there is something such that if that it is not a boxed and implodes is incorrect then the fact that it is not resinlike is right.

(Ex): ¬(¬{IR}x & {BU}x) -> ¬{EO}x

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it is not untrustworthy and it is anorectal does not hold then it is not a Rawalpindi. ; $context$ = sent1: that the Luger is not a Rawalpindi is true if that it is not trustworthy but anorectal is not true. sent2: if the fact that the Luger is not a Rawalpindi but it does recommend crankcase does not hold it is not a sonant. sent3: if the fact that something is not a boxed but it implodes is false it is not resinlike. sent4: there is something such that if that it is not an inside and it repositions fatalist is not right then it is not a chemistry. sent5: that if the Luger is not the Rawalpindi and not non-colloidal the Luger is not a kind of a sonant is correct. sent6: there is something such that if that it is not a Rottweiler but a welt does not hold then it is not a stockyard. sent7: if that the Luger does not suffer Dowland but it is anorectal is not right it is colloidal. sent8: the Luger is not a Rawalpindi if it does not suffer annuity. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of non-Aberdonian thing that is a Exocet does not hold it does negociate. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not anorectal it is not a kind of a Rawalpindi. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a morel and it is ascensional it is not microelectronic. sent12: the Luger is not a Rawalpindi if that it is non-untrustworthy thing that is anorectal is wrong. sent13: there exists something such that if that it is not a willet but a bugginess is not right it is not lossless. sent14: there is something such that if the fact that it is a Dunkers and it is cheliceral is not true then it is not smokeless. ; $proof$ =

sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the forebear is not non-seaward or not a straight or both.

({B}{b} v ¬{C}{b})

sent1: if the drawler is not seaward the forebear is a cerebrum or it is a straight or both. sent2: the solvate is a kind of a straight if the forebear is a cerebrum. sent3: if the Catawba suffers Bassia it repositions straightedge. sent4: the forebear either is a kind of a seaward or is a cerebrum or both. sent5: the solvate is a kind of a cerebrum. sent6: if the solvate is a cerebrum the forebear is a seaward. sent7: the fact that something is a seaward and/or is not a straight is false if it is a cerebrum. sent8: the Catawba suffers Bassia if there exists something such that the fact that it does not suffers Bassia and is not electrocardiographic does not hold. sent9: if that the solvate is a seaward is correct the forebear is a cerebrum. sent10: if there is something such that it does reposition straightedge then the Soma does not reposition incivility but it does suffer boa. sent11: something is a kind of a cerebrum if it is representational. sent12: the drawler does not oxidize if there is something such that that it does not reposition Bassia and does oxidize does not hold. sent13: that the earshot does not suffer Bassia and is not electrocardiographic is not right. sent14: if something does recommend Ugric that it does not reposition Bassia and does oxidize is false. sent15: the forebear repositions chrism. sent16: if the solvate is not representational or is a headspace or both then that the forebear is representational is correct. sent17: something recommends Ugric if it does not reposition incivility and it does suffer boa.

sent1: ¬{B}{c} -> ({A}{b} v {C}{b}) sent2: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent3: {L}{e} -> {K}{e} sent4: ({B}{b} v {A}{b}) sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent7: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}x v ¬{C}x) sent8: (x): ¬(¬{L}x & ¬{N}x) -> {L}{e} sent9: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} sent10: (x): {K}x -> (¬{I}{d} & {J}{d}) sent11: (x): {D}x -> {A}x sent12: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{F}{c} sent13: ¬(¬{L}{f} & ¬{N}{f}) sent14: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {F}x) sent15: {ER}{b} sent16: (¬{D}{a} v {E}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent17: (x): (¬{I}x & {J}x) -> {H}x

the solvate is straight.

{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the forebear is not non-seaward or not a straight or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if the drawler is not seaward the forebear is a cerebrum or it is a straight or both. sent2: the solvate is a kind of a straight if the forebear is a cerebrum. sent3: if the Catawba suffers Bassia it repositions straightedge. sent4: the forebear either is a kind of a seaward or is a cerebrum or both. sent5: the solvate is a kind of a cerebrum. sent6: if the solvate is a cerebrum the forebear is a seaward. sent7: the fact that something is a seaward and/or is not a straight is false if it is a cerebrum. sent8: the Catawba suffers Bassia if there exists something such that the fact that it does not suffers Bassia and is not electrocardiographic does not hold. sent9: if that the solvate is a seaward is correct the forebear is a cerebrum. sent10: if there is something such that it does reposition straightedge then the Soma does not reposition incivility but it does suffer boa. sent11: something is a kind of a cerebrum if it is representational. sent12: the drawler does not oxidize if there is something such that that it does not reposition Bassia and does oxidize does not hold. sent13: that the earshot does not suffer Bassia and is not electrocardiographic is not right. sent14: if something does recommend Ugric that it does not reposition Bassia and does oxidize is false. sent15: the forebear repositions chrism. sent16: if the solvate is not representational or is a headspace or both then that the forebear is representational is correct. sent17: something recommends Ugric if it does not reposition incivility and it does suffer boa. ; $proof$ =

sent6 & sent5 -> int1: the fact that the forebear is a seaward is right.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the scorer does not suffer Trajan.

¬{D}{b}

sent1: the scorer is not an infernal if the Meany is not a unresponsiveness. sent2: the Meany is a comedy but it is not a unresponsiveness. sent3: that something does not suffer Trajan is not wrong if that it is not a kind of an infernal is not wrong.

sent1: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent2: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{D}x

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the scorer does not suffer Trajan. ; $context$ = sent1: the scorer is not an infernal if the Meany is not a unresponsiveness. sent2: the Meany is a comedy but it is not a unresponsiveness. sent3: that something does not suffer Trajan is not wrong if that it is not a kind of an infernal is not wrong. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> int1: the fact that the Meany is not a unresponsiveness is not wrong.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the scorer is not an infernal.; sent3 -> int3: the scorer does not suffer Trajan if it is not an infernal.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the crouch does not occur.

¬{C}

sent1: if the hydrodynamicsness occurs and the literariness occurs that the quotableness occurs is false. sent2: that the crouching does not occur is caused by that the repositioning crankcase and the quotableness happens. sent3: if the Keynesian does not occur then the hydrodynamicsness occurs and the shopping happens. sent4: if that the suffering radiocarbon happens but the shopping does not occur is not correct the shopping occurs. sent5: the crouch occurs if that the repositioning crankcase happens and the crouch does not occur is false. sent6: the honorableness and the repositioning crankcase happens if the quotableness does not occur. sent7: if the hydrodynamicsness does not occur then the fact that the literariness does not occur and the crouch does not occur is not correct. sent8: the deflationariness happens. sent9: the quotableness occurs. sent10: that not the hydrodynamicsness but the do occurs is brought about by the Keynesianness. sent11: the Keynesian happens and the curatorship happens. sent12: the recommending sulfisoxazole happens if the fact that the shopping happens hold. sent13: if the probation happens then that the suffering radiocarbon occurs and the shopping does not occur is incorrect. sent14: the repositioning crankcase occurs. sent15: if the quotableness does not occur the fact that the repositioning crankcase happens but the crouching does not occur is wrong.

sent1: ({E} & {D}) -> ¬{B} sent2: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent3: ¬{J} -> ({E} & {G}) sent4: ¬({H} & ¬{G}) -> {G} sent5: ¬({A} & ¬{C}) -> {C} sent6: ¬{B} -> ({I} & {A}) sent7: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{D} & ¬{C}) sent8: {HB} sent9: {B} sent10: {J} -> (¬{E} & {F}) sent11: ({J} & {K}) sent12: {G} -> {IP} sent13: {L} -> ¬({H} & ¬{G}) sent14: {A} sent15: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & ¬{C})

the crouching occurs.

{C}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the crouch does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the hydrodynamicsness occurs and the literariness occurs that the quotableness occurs is false. sent2: that the crouching does not occur is caused by that the repositioning crankcase and the quotableness happens. sent3: if the Keynesian does not occur then the hydrodynamicsness occurs and the shopping happens. sent4: if that the suffering radiocarbon happens but the shopping does not occur is not correct the shopping occurs. sent5: the crouch occurs if that the repositioning crankcase happens and the crouch does not occur is false. sent6: the honorableness and the repositioning crankcase happens if the quotableness does not occur. sent7: if the hydrodynamicsness does not occur then the fact that the literariness does not occur and the crouch does not occur is not correct. sent8: the deflationariness happens. sent9: the quotableness occurs. sent10: that not the hydrodynamicsness but the do occurs is brought about by the Keynesianness. sent11: the Keynesian happens and the curatorship happens. sent12: the recommending sulfisoxazole happens if the fact that the shopping happens hold. sent13: if the probation happens then that the suffering radiocarbon occurs and the shopping does not occur is incorrect. sent14: the repositioning crankcase occurs. sent15: if the quotableness does not occur the fact that the repositioning crankcase happens but the crouching does not occur is wrong. ; $proof$ =

sent14 & sent9 -> int1: both the repositioning crankcase and the quotableness happens.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the zither is idiopathic but it does not suffer elater is not false.

({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

sent1: the fact that the nucleoside is a Omani and it does dunk is not right if there exists something such that it does suffer aerophilately. sent2: the zither is idiopathic. sent3: if the nucleoside is post-communist the tocsin does squinch. sent4: if something is post-communist the fact that it is idiopathic and it does not suffer elater is false. sent5: the tocsin does suffer aerophilately. sent6: something is post-communist and it squinches if it is not a kind of a dunk. sent7: if the tocsin does squinch the zither is idiopathic thing that does not suffer elater.

sent1: (x): {F}x -> ¬({G}{a} & {E}{a}) sent2: {C}{c} sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent5: {F}{b} sent6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent7: {B}{b} -> ({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

that the zither is idiopathic but it does not suffer elater is false.

¬({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the zither is idiopathic but it does not suffer elater is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the nucleoside is a Omani and it does dunk is not right if there exists something such that it does suffer aerophilately. sent2: the zither is idiopathic. sent3: if the nucleoside is post-communist the tocsin does squinch. sent4: if something is post-communist the fact that it is idiopathic and it does not suffer elater is false. sent5: the tocsin does suffer aerophilately. sent6: something is post-communist and it squinches if it is not a kind of a dunk. sent7: if the tocsin does squinch the zither is idiopathic thing that does not suffer elater. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the sawhorse is feverish and it does recommend Karen is not wrong.

({B}{aa} & {C}{aa})

sent1: if something does not recommend bandsaw it does reposition naphthoquinone and is linguistics. sent2: if the sawhorse does not suffer Kivu then it suffers superannuation and is a miscarriage. sent3: something recommends Karen and/or it does suffer balkline if it is non-feverish. sent4: something is feverish if the fact that it suffers Kivu and does not prevent is wrong. sent5: the evacuee is prejudicial if the mazer is prejudicial. sent6: the embankment is not feverish if the Capital is feverish and calculates. sent7: if something is dysplastic then it is feverish. sent8: if something repositions curbside then it is feverish. sent9: there is something such that it is a litigiousness. sent10: if that the heliozoan repositions naphthoquinone hold then that it recommends Northern and it does not shuck is not right. sent11: the sawhorse repositions naphthoquinone and does suffer balkline. sent12: the Capital does calculate if the bandsaw does reposition naphthoquinone. sent13: either something repositions curbside or it is dysplastic or both if it is not a kind of a Siberian. sent14: if there exists something such that it is a litigiousness the bandsaw does not recommend bandsaw. sent15: the hogchoker does closet. sent16: the sawhorse is not linguistics. sent17: if that something is feverish and it does reposition naphthoquinone is not correct it is not feverish. sent18: if the evacuee is prejudicial the Capital is non-Siberian and it is not a mesh. sent19: the fact that something is a hayrack and not a poliovirus is wrong if it does suffer balkline. sent20: something suffers satang if it does closet. sent21: if the embankment recommends Karen the convictfish suffers balkline. sent22: the mazer is prejudicial if the hogchoker suffers satang. sent23: that something calculates and it does recommend Karen is not false if it is not linguistics. sent24: if the embankment does suffer balkline the convictfish does suffer balkline.

sent1: (x): ¬{M}x -> ({D}x & {F}x) sent2: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ({CJ}{aa} & {CR}{aa}) sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}x v {A}x) sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: {K}{e} -> {K}{d} sent6: ({B}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: (x): {G}x -> {B}x sent8: (x): {H}x -> {B}x sent9: (Ex): {N}x sent10: {D}{de} -> ¬({HU}{de} & ¬{GS}{de}) sent11: ({D}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent12: {D}{c} -> {E}{b} sent13: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({H}x v {G}x) sent14: (x): {N}x -> ¬{M}{c} sent15: {O}{f} sent16: ¬{F}{aa} sent17: (x): ¬({B}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent18: {K}{d} -> (¬{I}{b} & ¬{J}{b}) sent19: (x): {A}x -> ¬({EH}x & ¬{FC}x) sent20: (x): {O}x -> {L}x sent21: {C}{a} -> {A}{hs} sent22: {L}{f} -> {K}{e} sent23: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {C}x) sent24: {A}{a} -> {A}{hs}

that the sawhorse is feverish and recommends Karen is not right.

¬({B}{aa} & {C}{aa})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the sawhorse is feverish and it does recommend Karen is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not recommend bandsaw it does reposition naphthoquinone and is linguistics. sent2: if the sawhorse does not suffer Kivu then it suffers superannuation and is a miscarriage. sent3: something recommends Karen and/or it does suffer balkline if it is non-feverish. sent4: something is feverish if the fact that it suffers Kivu and does not prevent is wrong. sent5: the evacuee is prejudicial if the mazer is prejudicial. sent6: the embankment is not feverish if the Capital is feverish and calculates. sent7: if something is dysplastic then it is feverish. sent8: if something repositions curbside then it is feverish. sent9: there is something such that it is a litigiousness. sent10: if that the heliozoan repositions naphthoquinone hold then that it recommends Northern and it does not shuck is not right. sent11: the sawhorse repositions naphthoquinone and does suffer balkline. sent12: the Capital does calculate if the bandsaw does reposition naphthoquinone. sent13: either something repositions curbside or it is dysplastic or both if it is not a kind of a Siberian. sent14: if there exists something such that it is a litigiousness the bandsaw does not recommend bandsaw. sent15: the hogchoker does closet. sent16: the sawhorse is not linguistics. sent17: if that something is feverish and it does reposition naphthoquinone is not correct it is not feverish. sent18: if the evacuee is prejudicial the Capital is non-Siberian and it is not a mesh. sent19: the fact that something is a hayrack and not a poliovirus is wrong if it does suffer balkline. sent20: something suffers satang if it does closet. sent21: if the embankment recommends Karen the convictfish suffers balkline. sent22: the mazer is prejudicial if the hogchoker suffers satang. sent23: that something calculates and it does recommend Karen is not false if it is not linguistics. sent24: if the embankment does suffer balkline the convictfish does suffer balkline. ; $proof$ =

sent11 -> int1: the fact that the sawhorse does suffer balkline is not false.; sent4 -> int2: if that the sawhorse suffers Kivu but it does not prevent does not hold it is feverish.; sent23 -> int3: the sawhorse does calculate and it recommends Karen if the fact that it is not linguistics is correct.; int3 & sent16 -> int4: the sawhorse does calculate and it recommends Karen.; int4 -> int5: the sawhorse recommends Karen.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it is not periodic then it does suffice.

(Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x

sent1: there exists something such that if it is periodic it does suffice. sent2: there exists something such that if it is cinerary it is a kind of a gag. sent3: that there is something such that if it is not a ironworks then it is insubordinate is not incorrect. sent4: the fact that the blackboard does suffice is correct if it is not periodic.

sent1: (Ex): {B}x -> {C}x sent2: (Ex): {DE}x -> {GS}x sent3: (Ex): ¬{FI}x -> {FR}x sent4: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa}

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not periodic then it does suffice. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is periodic it does suffice. sent2: there exists something such that if it is cinerary it is a kind of a gag. sent3: that there is something such that if it is not a ironworks then it is insubordinate is not incorrect. sent4: the fact that the blackboard does suffice is correct if it is not periodic. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the ossification is not a Saarinen.

¬{A}{a}

sent1: the ossification is not ideographic but it is vicinal if the Mason is competent. sent2: that the basalt is a Saarinen but it is not a dipteran is incorrect. sent3: something does not suffer Cro-magnon if it corrodes Haida. sent4: that that the basalt is a dipteran but it is not a Saarinen is not right is true. sent5: that the open is a dipteran is true. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is a dipteran and it is a anemometry is not correct. sent7: that the stacte is a Saarinen hold. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is a Saarinen and is not a kind of a dipteran is not right. sent9: there exists something such that that it is a anemometry and it is not a Saarinen is wrong. sent10: something is a kind of a pseudoscience that is a kind of a chart if it does not suffer Cro-magnon. sent11: if something is a pseudoscience then it is competent. sent12: that the basalt is a dipteran but it is not a anemometry is false. sent13: there exists something such that that it is a dipteran and is not a Saarinen is not correct. sent14: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a toxicity and is not ampullar does not hold. sent15: something is a dipteran that is not a anemometry. sent16: something is not a kind of a Saarinen if it is non-ideographic and vicinal. sent17: the ossification is a Saarinen if there exists something such that the fact that it is a dipteran and not a anemometry is not true. sent18: if there is something such that it is not a dipteran then the ossification is a Saarinen.

sent1: {D}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: ¬({A}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) sent3: (x): {H}x -> ¬{G}x sent4: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent5: {AA}{cn} sent6: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: {A}{n} sent8: (Ex): ¬({A}x & ¬{AA}x) sent9: (Ex): ¬({AB}x & ¬{A}x) sent10: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({E}x & {F}x) sent11: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent12: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent13: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{A}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬({JE}x & ¬{JI}x) sent15: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent16: (x): (¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent17: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent18: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {A}{a}

the ossification is not a Saarinen.

¬{A}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the ossification is not a Saarinen. ; $context$ = sent1: the ossification is not ideographic but it is vicinal if the Mason is competent. sent2: that the basalt is a Saarinen but it is not a dipteran is incorrect. sent3: something does not suffer Cro-magnon if it corrodes Haida. sent4: that that the basalt is a dipteran but it is not a Saarinen is not right is true. sent5: that the open is a dipteran is true. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is a dipteran and it is a anemometry is not correct. sent7: that the stacte is a Saarinen hold. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is a Saarinen and is not a kind of a dipteran is not right. sent9: there exists something such that that it is a anemometry and it is not a Saarinen is wrong. sent10: something is a kind of a pseudoscience that is a kind of a chart if it does not suffer Cro-magnon. sent11: if something is a pseudoscience then it is competent. sent12: that the basalt is a dipteran but it is not a anemometry is false. sent13: there exists something such that that it is a dipteran and is not a Saarinen is not correct. sent14: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a toxicity and is not ampullar does not hold. sent15: something is a dipteran that is not a anemometry. sent16: something is not a kind of a Saarinen if it is non-ideographic and vicinal. sent17: the ossification is a Saarinen if there exists something such that the fact that it is a dipteran and not a anemometry is not true. sent18: if there is something such that it is not a dipteran then the ossification is a Saarinen. ; $proof$ =

sent12 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it is a dipteran and is not a anemometry is not true.; int1 & sent17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that there is something such that if it recommends wholeheartedness and is not attitudinal then that it is algometric hold is not true.

¬((Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x)

sent1: there is something such that if it is both not non-autogamous and alike it does corrode pater. sent2: there is something such that if it stuffs and does not recommend carbon then it shillyshallies. sent3: the moneygrubber is informational if it is Botswanan thing that is not algometric. sent4: if the mansion is attitudinal but it does not recommend tryptophan then it is cross-linguistic. sent5: something repositions zygoma if it is both a haywire and not anatropous. sent6: there is something such that if it is alvine and it is a changer then it is Tajikistani. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a gull and it is a Moselle it is flexible. sent8: there is something such that if it is insubordinate and is not a Georgian it is a Wilmington. sent9: the mansion is alike if it is a kind of a Cotswold that does not recommend wholeheartedness. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not non-Anglophobic and not a microsporidian then it dwells. sent11: there is something such that if it is a burst and it repositions musette then it does dwell. sent12: if the mazer recommends wholeheartedness and is a Asuncion it is not non-scrotal. sent13: there exists something such that if it recommends wholeheartedness and is attitudinal the fact that it is algometric hold. sent14: if the mansion does stud and is not a divers it is a gull. sent15: the mansion is algometric if it does recommend wholeheartedness and is not attitudinal.

sent1: (Ex): ({Q}x & {HK}x) -> {CT}x sent2: (Ex): ({GC}x & ¬{IQ}x) -> {IH}x sent3: ({JK}{at} & ¬{B}{at}) -> {AM}{at} sent4: ({AB}{aa} & ¬{DN}{aa}) -> {CE}{aa} sent5: (x): ({EF}x & ¬{DD}x) -> {AP}x sent6: (Ex): ({C}x & {BT}x) -> {GU}x sent7: (Ex): ({BQ}x & {F}x) -> {EG}x sent8: (Ex): ({CN}x & ¬{AR}x) -> {JI}x sent9: ({BS}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) -> {HK}{aa} sent10: (Ex): ({EM}x & ¬{EE}x) -> {BN}x sent11: (Ex): ({GG}x & {DO}x) -> {BN}x sent12: ({AA}{aj} & {FU}{aj}) -> {M}{aj} sent13: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent14: ({CF}{aa} & ¬{EH}{aa}) -> {BQ}{aa} sent15: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}

if the musette is a kind of a haywire but it is not anatropous it repositions zygoma.

({EF}{hk} & ¬{DD}{hk}) -> {AP}{hk}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it recommends wholeheartedness and is not attitudinal then that it is algometric hold is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is both not non-autogamous and alike it does corrode pater. sent2: there is something such that if it stuffs and does not recommend carbon then it shillyshallies. sent3: the moneygrubber is informational if it is Botswanan thing that is not algometric. sent4: if the mansion is attitudinal but it does not recommend tryptophan then it is cross-linguistic. sent5: something repositions zygoma if it is both a haywire and not anatropous. sent6: there is something such that if it is alvine and it is a changer then it is Tajikistani. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a gull and it is a Moselle it is flexible. sent8: there is something such that if it is insubordinate and is not a Georgian it is a Wilmington. sent9: the mansion is alike if it is a kind of a Cotswold that does not recommend wholeheartedness. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not non-Anglophobic and not a microsporidian then it dwells. sent11: there is something such that if it is a burst and it repositions musette then it does dwell. sent12: if the mazer recommends wholeheartedness and is a Asuncion it is not non-scrotal. sent13: there exists something such that if it recommends wholeheartedness and is attitudinal the fact that it is algometric hold. sent14: if the mansion does stud and is not a divers it is a gull. sent15: the mansion is algometric if it does recommend wholeheartedness and is not attitudinal. ; $proof$ =

sent15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the Gnostic does reposition blockage and it is a Numidian.

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

sent1: the Gnostic does reposition blockage and it is a Herzberg. sent2: the Gnostic is a practice and suffers Gnostic. sent3: the Gnostic is a Herzberg. sent4: the gabbro does reposition wholeheartedness. sent5: the Gnostic repositions wholeheartedness.

sent1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: ({ES}{a} & {BP}{a}) sent3: {B}{a} sent4: {D}{gj} sent5: {D}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the Gnostic does reposition blockage and it is a Numidian. ; $context$ = sent1: the Gnostic does reposition blockage and it is a Herzberg. sent2: the Gnostic is a practice and suffers Gnostic. sent3: the Gnostic is a Herzberg. sent4: the gabbro does reposition wholeheartedness. sent5: the Gnostic repositions wholeheartedness. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> int1: the Gnostic does reposition blockage.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it is not a allergology then the fact that it is inquisitorial or does not conduct or both is not right.

(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)

sent1: if the slingshot is not a Gonorhynchidae then the fact that it is a kind of a narthex and/or it does not conduct does not hold. sent2: there is something such that if it is a allergology that it is inquisitorial and/or it does not conduct does not hold. sent3: if something is not a kind of a twenty-eight that it either is a allergology or does not corrode Cuon or both is wrong. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not reposition trellis that it is political and/or it does not recommend slingshot is not true. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a commensal then that it does reposition Galatians or it does not recommend needlefish or both is wrong. sent6: the slingshot does conduct if it is not a allergology. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Syrian that it is autobiographical and/or it does not reposition spodumene is wrong. sent8: there is something such that if it is not non-metric the fact that either it suffers fugitive or it does not mushroom or both does not hold. sent9: the fact that the stacte is either a allergology or not a sermon or both is wrong if the fact that it is not noncompetitive is true. sent10: the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a allergology it does conduct hold. sent11: that the slingshot is inquisitorial and/or it does not conduct is incorrect if it is not a allergology. sent12: the fact that the fact that the slingshot is inquisitorial or it does not conduct or both is correct is not right if it is a allergology. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a allergology then it either is inquisitorial or does not conduct or both. sent14: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a allergology is not wrong it is not inquisitorial. sent15: that the slingshot is logistic and/or it is not a thrombectomy is false if it is not a kind of a allergology. sent16: the slingshot is inquisitorial and/or it does not conduct if it is not a kind of a allergology. sent17: there is something such that if that it is logistic is not right that it is a kind of a processional or is not a brambling or both is not correct. sent18: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a allergology that it is inquisitorial and/or conducts is not true. sent19: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a hug the fact that it does suffer fugitive and/or does not recommend abiogenist is not right. sent20: the fact that there exists something such that if it is not rigid that it is a kind of a Gonorhynchidae or it is not odds or both is incorrect is not incorrect. sent21: that there exists something such that if it is not phreatic that it does reposition spodumene and/or it is not a kind of a Patwin does not hold is true.

sent1: ¬{F}{aa} -> ¬({AJ}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬{FF}x -> ¬({A}x v ¬{CU}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{EA}x -> ¬({ID}x v ¬{GF}x) sent5: (Ex): ¬{GN}x -> ¬({DU}x v ¬{GM}x) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ¬{DC}x -> ¬({BT}x v ¬{DF}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{AO}x -> ¬({BJ}x v ¬{JI}x) sent9: ¬{BQ}{di} -> ¬({A}{di} v ¬{BU}{di}) sent10: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x sent11: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent12: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent13: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent15: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({DB}{aa} v ¬{GA}{aa}) sent16: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent17: (Ex): ¬{DB}x -> ¬({DE}x v ¬{BM}x) sent18: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) sent19: (Ex): ¬{BN}x -> ¬({BJ}x v ¬{AS}x) sent20: (Ex): ¬{CF}x -> ¬({F}x v ¬{CS}x) sent21: (Ex): ¬{N}x -> ¬({DF}x v ¬{AQ}x)

if the Tennessean is not a kind of a twenty-eight the fact that it is a kind of a allergology or it does not corrode Cuon or both is false.

¬{FF}{eo} -> ¬({A}{eo} v ¬{CU}{eo})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a allergology then the fact that it is inquisitorial or does not conduct or both is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the slingshot is not a Gonorhynchidae then the fact that it is a kind of a narthex and/or it does not conduct does not hold. sent2: there is something such that if it is a allergology that it is inquisitorial and/or it does not conduct does not hold. sent3: if something is not a kind of a twenty-eight that it either is a allergology or does not corrode Cuon or both is wrong. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not reposition trellis that it is political and/or it does not recommend slingshot is not true. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a commensal then that it does reposition Galatians or it does not recommend needlefish or both is wrong. sent6: the slingshot does conduct if it is not a allergology. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Syrian that it is autobiographical and/or it does not reposition spodumene is wrong. sent8: there is something such that if it is not non-metric the fact that either it suffers fugitive or it does not mushroom or both does not hold. sent9: the fact that the stacte is either a allergology or not a sermon or both is wrong if the fact that it is not noncompetitive is true. sent10: the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a allergology it does conduct hold. sent11: that the slingshot is inquisitorial and/or it does not conduct is incorrect if it is not a allergology. sent12: the fact that the fact that the slingshot is inquisitorial or it does not conduct or both is correct is not right if it is a allergology. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a allergology then it either is inquisitorial or does not conduct or both. sent14: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a allergology is not wrong it is not inquisitorial. sent15: that the slingshot is logistic and/or it is not a thrombectomy is false if it is not a kind of a allergology. sent16: the slingshot is inquisitorial and/or it does not conduct if it is not a kind of a allergology. sent17: there is something such that if that it is logistic is not right that it is a kind of a processional or is not a brambling or both is not correct. sent18: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a allergology that it is inquisitorial and/or conducts is not true. sent19: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a hug the fact that it does suffer fugitive and/or does not recommend abiogenist is not right. sent20: the fact that there exists something such that if it is not rigid that it is a kind of a Gonorhynchidae or it is not odds or both is incorrect is not incorrect. sent21: that there exists something such that if it is not phreatic that it does reposition spodumene and/or it is not a kind of a Patwin does not hold is true. ; $proof$ =

sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the nine is not a kind of a brachiopod.

¬{B}{aa}

sent1: if something does recommend monopolist it is a kind of a brachiopod. sent2: the nine is not a brachiopod if the fact that the cyanogen is not an illness or brachiopod or both does not hold. sent3: everything recommends monopolist. sent4: the infructescence is a kind of a brachiopod. sent5: the misleader is a kind of a brachiopod if the cyanogen is a kind of a brachiopod. sent6: everything repositions cytomembrane.

sent1: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent2: ¬(¬{C}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: (x): {A}x sent4: {B}{gm} sent5: {B}{a} -> {B}{du} sent6: (x): {BU}x

the misleader is a brachiopod.

{B}{du}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the nine is not a kind of a brachiopod. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does recommend monopolist it is a kind of a brachiopod. sent2: the nine is not a brachiopod if the fact that the cyanogen is not an illness or brachiopod or both does not hold. sent3: everything recommends monopolist. sent4: the infructescence is a kind of a brachiopod. sent5: the misleader is a kind of a brachiopod if the cyanogen is a kind of a brachiopod. sent6: everything repositions cytomembrane. ; $proof$ =

sent3 -> int1: the nine recommends monopolist.; sent1 -> int2: the nine is a kind of a brachiopod if it does recommend monopolist.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the plastic is not a kind of a meltwater.

¬{A}{a}

sent1: if there exists something such that that it is not a string and suffers rain is false the plastic is a string. sent2: the orthoepist is not a kind of a stammer if the plastic does not suffer fugitive and it is not a meltwater. sent3: the umber is a kind of a cubby if the fact that the ergot is not a hymeneal or is not a kind of a string or both is false. sent4: the umber is a wheatgrass or it is not a tiyin or both. sent5: everything is not a stammer and it does not suffer fugitive. sent6: if something is a kind of a wheatgrass and/or is not a tiyin it is brahminic. sent7: the plastic is not a meltwater if the orthoepist is not a kind of a stammer and it does not suffer fugitive. sent8: if there is something such that it is chalybeate then the umber repositions Rus and recommends ninepins. sent9: if the plunderer is not non-brahminic then the fact that the haywire is a farfalle but it does not suffer rain is not false. sent10: the fact that something is not a kind of a hymeneal or it is not a string or both is not right if it is a farfalle. sent11: if something does recommend ninepins and it is brahminic it is not a farfalle. sent12: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a count and not a platelet is incorrect then the ergot is chalybeate. sent13: something is not a hymeneal if that it is a string hold. sent14: if the fact that the plastic is a hymeneal is not correct the landgrave is a kind of a cubby but it is not a meltwater. sent15: the orthoepist does not suffer fugitive if the plastic is not a stammer but a meltwater. sent16: that that something does not string and does suffer rain hold does not hold if it is not a farfalle. sent17: everything is not inculpatory. sent18: if the haywire is a farfalle then the ergot is a farfalle. sent19: there is something such that the fact that it is not a count and it is not a platelet does not hold.

sent1: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {F}x) -> {D}{a} sent2: (¬{AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent3: ¬(¬{C}{c} v ¬{D}{c}) -> {B}{b} sent4: ({N}{b} v ¬{M}{b}) sent5: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent6: (x): ({N}x v ¬{M}x) -> {G}x sent7: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: (x): {J}x -> ({I}{b} & {H}{b}) sent9: {G}{e} -> ({E}{d} & ¬{F}{d}) sent10: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x v ¬{D}x) sent11: (x): ({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent12: (x): ¬(¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) -> {J}{c} sent13: (x): {D}x -> ¬{C}x sent14: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{go} & ¬{A}{go}) sent15: (¬{AA}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent16: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {F}x) sent17: (x): ¬{HA}x sent18: {E}{d} -> {E}{c} sent19: (Ex): ¬(¬{L}x & ¬{K}x)

the plastic is a kind of a meltwater.

{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the plastic is not a kind of a meltwater. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that that it is not a string and suffers rain is false the plastic is a string. sent2: the orthoepist is not a kind of a stammer if the plastic does not suffer fugitive and it is not a meltwater. sent3: the umber is a kind of a cubby if the fact that the ergot is not a hymeneal or is not a kind of a string or both is false. sent4: the umber is a wheatgrass or it is not a tiyin or both. sent5: everything is not a stammer and it does not suffer fugitive. sent6: if something is a kind of a wheatgrass and/or is not a tiyin it is brahminic. sent7: the plastic is not a meltwater if the orthoepist is not a kind of a stammer and it does not suffer fugitive. sent8: if there is something such that it is chalybeate then the umber repositions Rus and recommends ninepins. sent9: if the plunderer is not non-brahminic then the fact that the haywire is a farfalle but it does not suffer rain is not false. sent10: the fact that something is not a kind of a hymeneal or it is not a string or both is not right if it is a farfalle. sent11: if something does recommend ninepins and it is brahminic it is not a farfalle. sent12: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a count and not a platelet is incorrect then the ergot is chalybeate. sent13: something is not a hymeneal if that it is a string hold. sent14: if the fact that the plastic is a hymeneal is not correct the landgrave is a kind of a cubby but it is not a meltwater. sent15: the orthoepist does not suffer fugitive if the plastic is not a stammer but a meltwater. sent16: that that something does not string and does suffer rain hold does not hold if it is not a farfalle. sent17: everything is not inculpatory. sent18: if the haywire is a farfalle then the ergot is a farfalle. sent19: there is something such that the fact that it is not a count and it is not a platelet does not hold. ; $proof$ =

sent5 -> int1: the orthoepist is not a stammer and it does not suffer fugitive.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

that there is something such that if it is not barographic the fact that it snorkels and it is not an alveolar is false does not hold.

¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))

sent1: there is something such that if it does not suffer blemish then that it is a kind of a Benjamin that is a kind of a confutation is false. sent2: that something corrodes plenty and is not unitary does not hold if it is not gloveless. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not an earphone the fact that it does checker and is a Benjamin does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it is not Mandaean the fact that it is clinker-built and is not undrinkable does not hold. sent5: if the klaxon is not an alveolar then that it is a kind of a Bamako that is a kummel is incorrect. sent6: if the deskman is barographic then that it does snorkel and is non-alveolar is not correct. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a lamination the fact that it does suffer unruliness and it is not a kind of a deodorant does not hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is non-barographic then it is a kind of a snorkel and it is not an alveolar. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a invertase then the fact that it is an irregular and it is a salted is false. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is non-barographic is right then the fact that it is a snorkel and an alveolar is not true. sent11: that the deskman is a snorkel but it is not a kind of an alveolar is wrong if it is not barographic. sent12: if the deskman does not reposition gourde then the fact that it is both alveolar and not a butterfly is not true. sent13: the fact that the spinmeister is canonic and does reposition rear does not hold if it is not a snorkel. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not spectrographic it is a rum but not a marsupial. sent15: there is something such that if the fact that it does not sequester hold then the fact that it repositions taxman and it is a kind of a fluxmeter does not hold. sent16: if the deskman is not barographic it is a snorkel that is not an alveolar. sent17: if something is not a palatine then that it is a puddingwife and it is not barographic is wrong. sent18: that the fact that the deskman is a bismark that does not suffer yttrium is wrong is true if it is not barographic. sent19: that that something is a Quito but it is not a kind of a greenfly is incorrect if it is not cordless hold. sent20: that the deskman is sobering thing that is not necromantic does not hold if it does not suffer greylag.

sent1: (Ex): ¬{N}x -> ¬({AU}x & {DH}x) sent2: (x): ¬{GH}x -> ¬({EM}x & ¬{HT}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{BB}x -> ¬({HC}x & {AU}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{AF}x -> ¬({BF}x & ¬{GN}x) sent5: ¬{AB}{fu} -> ¬({HH}{fu} & {JF}{fu}) sent6: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): ¬{HB}x -> ¬({BT}x & ¬{FT}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent9: (Ex): ¬{EP}x -> ¬({HO}x & {BG}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent12: ¬{FJ}{aa} -> ¬({AB}{aa} & ¬{DL}{aa}) sent13: ¬{AA}{fr} -> ¬({DK}{fr} & {II}{fr}) sent14: (Ex): ¬{EA}x -> ({EC}x & ¬{BK}x) sent15: (Ex): ¬{BM}x -> ¬({JC}x & {FO}x) sent16: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent17: (x): ¬{JB}x -> ¬({DB}x & ¬{A}x) sent18: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({DJ}{aa} & ¬{EB}{aa}) sent19: (x): ¬{IO}x -> ¬({EI}x & ¬{BC}x) sent20: ¬{BO}{aa} -> ¬({HD}{aa} & ¬{HE}{aa})

if the greylag is not palatine then that it is a puddingwife and it is not barographic does not hold.

¬{JB}{in} -> ¬({DB}{in} & ¬{A}{in})

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is not barographic the fact that it snorkels and it is not an alveolar is false does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it does not suffer blemish then that it is a kind of a Benjamin that is a kind of a confutation is false. sent2: that something corrodes plenty and is not unitary does not hold if it is not gloveless. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not an earphone the fact that it does checker and is a Benjamin does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it is not Mandaean the fact that it is clinker-built and is not undrinkable does not hold. sent5: if the klaxon is not an alveolar then that it is a kind of a Bamako that is a kummel is incorrect. sent6: if the deskman is barographic then that it does snorkel and is non-alveolar is not correct. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a lamination the fact that it does suffer unruliness and it is not a kind of a deodorant does not hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is non-barographic then it is a kind of a snorkel and it is not an alveolar. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a invertase then the fact that it is an irregular and it is a salted is false. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is non-barographic is right then the fact that it is a snorkel and an alveolar is not true. sent11: that the deskman is a snorkel but it is not a kind of an alveolar is wrong if it is not barographic. sent12: if the deskman does not reposition gourde then the fact that it is both alveolar and not a butterfly is not true. sent13: the fact that the spinmeister is canonic and does reposition rear does not hold if it is not a snorkel. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not spectrographic it is a rum but not a marsupial. sent15: there is something such that if the fact that it does not sequester hold then the fact that it repositions taxman and it is a kind of a fluxmeter does not hold. sent16: if the deskman is not barographic it is a snorkel that is not an alveolar. sent17: if something is not a palatine then that it is a puddingwife and it is not barographic is wrong. sent18: that the fact that the deskman is a bismark that does not suffer yttrium is wrong is true if it is not barographic. sent19: that that something is a Quito but it is not a kind of a greenfly is incorrect if it is not cordless hold. sent20: that the deskman is sobering thing that is not necromantic does not hold if it does not suffer greylag. ; $proof$ =

sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the rocambole is precocial but it does not recommend cortisone.

({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

sent1: if something is not pneumonic then the fact that it is not a coax and is a kind of a Panthera does not hold. sent2: if the bellbird is not a milliradian the fact that the rivulet is a kind of a hydrolith that does reposition rhabdovirus is incorrect. sent3: the bellbird is a FAA and it is microcosmic. sent4: the rocambole is a coax. sent5: that something is precocial but it does not recommend cortisone is incorrect if it is a Panthera. sent6: if the rocambole is both a coax and pneumonic then it does not recommend cortisone. sent7: the rocambole is a Panthera if the fact that the wharfage is not a coax and is a Panthera is not true. sent8: if the rocambole is precocial and is a Panthera then it is not pneumonic. sent9: the wharfage is pneumonic. sent10: if the bellbird is a kind of a FAA and it is microcosmic then it is not a milliradian. sent11: the omnirange is not pneumonic. sent12: the rocambole is a coax and it is pneumonic. sent13: if the fact that the wharfage is a Panthera is not wrong the rocambole is precocial. sent14: the wharfage is a kind of a Panthera.

sent1: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {A}x) sent2: ¬{G}{e} -> ¬({F}{d} & {H}{d}) sent3: ({J}{e} & {I}{e}) sent4: {D}{b} sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent6: ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {A}{a}) -> {A}{b} sent8: ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent9: {E}{a} sent10: ({J}{e} & {I}{e}) -> ¬{G}{e} sent11: ¬{E}{el} sent12: ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) sent13: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent14: {A}{a}

that the rocambole is precocial thing that does not recommend cortisone does not hold.

¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the rocambole is precocial but it does not recommend cortisone. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not pneumonic then the fact that it is not a coax and is a kind of a Panthera does not hold. sent2: if the bellbird is not a milliradian the fact that the rivulet is a kind of a hydrolith that does reposition rhabdovirus is incorrect. sent3: the bellbird is a FAA and it is microcosmic. sent4: the rocambole is a coax. sent5: that something is precocial but it does not recommend cortisone is incorrect if it is a Panthera. sent6: if the rocambole is both a coax and pneumonic then it does not recommend cortisone. sent7: the rocambole is a Panthera if the fact that the wharfage is not a coax and is a Panthera is not true. sent8: if the rocambole is precocial and is a Panthera then it is not pneumonic. sent9: the wharfage is pneumonic. sent10: if the bellbird is a kind of a FAA and it is microcosmic then it is not a milliradian. sent11: the omnirange is not pneumonic. sent12: the rocambole is a coax and it is pneumonic. sent13: if the fact that the wharfage is a Panthera is not wrong the rocambole is precocial. sent14: the wharfage is a kind of a Panthera. ; $proof$ =

sent13 & sent14 -> int1: the fact that the rocambole is precocial is right.; sent6 & sent12 -> int2: the fact that the rocambole does not recommend cortisone is not false.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it does not suffer birdfeeder then the fact that it is not a kind of a Demotic and/or it is a kind of a Aalto is not true.

(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x)

sent1: if the opacification does not suffer birdfeeder then the fact that it is not a Demotic and/or it is a Aalto is false.

sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not suffer birdfeeder then the fact that it is not a kind of a Demotic and/or it is a kind of a Aalto is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the opacification does not suffer birdfeeder then the fact that it is not a Demotic and/or it is a Aalto is false. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is a Deere and it does not corrode Hipsurus is not correct then it does not recommend Oxandra does not hold.

¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)

sent1: the Daniel does not recommend Oxandra if the fact that it is a Deere and it does not corrode Hipsurus does not hold. sent2: if the fact that something is naive thing that does not recommend Oxandra is wrong then it is not archosaurian.

sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬({CE}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{CK}x

the Daniel is not archosaurian if the fact that it is a kind of naive thing that does not recommend Oxandra is wrong.

¬({CE}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> ¬{CK}{aa}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is a Deere and it does not corrode Hipsurus is not correct then it does not recommend Oxandra does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the Daniel does not recommend Oxandra if the fact that it is a Deere and it does not corrode Hipsurus does not hold. sent2: if the fact that something is naive thing that does not recommend Oxandra is wrong then it is not archosaurian. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the triskelion is an absolute.

{A}{aa}

sent1: if something is not a kind of a dactyl and does not checker then it does not reposition dynamism. sent2: if the fact that the piperacillin is anti-semitic but it is not a captivity does not hold then the fomentation is not anti-semitic. sent3: the fact that the triskelion is not a kind of a humectant is not incorrect. sent4: if something does not reposition dynamism then it is an absolute. sent5: if the triskelion is not a kind of a humectant it is not a kind of a dactyl and it is not a kind of a checkers. sent6: the fact that the piperacillin is anti-semitic but it is not a captivity is wrong. sent7: if the fomentation is non-anti-semitic then the fact that the bushman is both a quiver and a Newfoundland is wrong. sent8: if the recognition is a kind of non-absolute thing that does not hiccup then it is not a kind of a panther.

sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬({F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent3: ¬{C}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x sent5: ¬{C}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: ¬({F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) sent7: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬({D}{b} & {E}{b}) sent8: (¬{A}{jj} & ¬{FS}{jj}) -> ¬{EM}{jj}

the triskelion is non-absolute.

¬{A}{aa}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the triskelion is an absolute. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of a dactyl and does not checker then it does not reposition dynamism. sent2: if the fact that the piperacillin is anti-semitic but it is not a captivity does not hold then the fomentation is not anti-semitic. sent3: the fact that the triskelion is not a kind of a humectant is not incorrect. sent4: if something does not reposition dynamism then it is an absolute. sent5: if the triskelion is not a kind of a humectant it is not a kind of a dactyl and it is not a kind of a checkers. sent6: the fact that the piperacillin is anti-semitic but it is not a captivity is wrong. sent7: if the fomentation is non-anti-semitic then the fact that the bushman is both a quiver and a Newfoundland is wrong. sent8: if the recognition is a kind of non-absolute thing that does not hiccup then it is not a kind of a panther. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> int1: the triskelion does not reposition dynamism if it is not a dactyl and it is not a checkers.; sent5 & sent3 -> int2: the triskelion is not a dactyl and it is not a checkers.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the triskelion does not reposition dynamism.; sent4 -> int4: the triskelion is an absolute if the fact that it does not reposition dynamism is not incorrect.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the scribble happens.

{A}

sent1: both the misfire and the enjoyment occurs. sent2: the fact that the scribbling happens but the pauperization does not occur is incorrect if the motorcycling does not occur. sent3: the pauperization is prevented by that the scribble does not occur. sent4: that the recommending wholesale happens is correct. sent5: the impropriety occurs and the earthquake occurs. sent6: the northerly happens. sent7: the suffering lecithin does not occur.

sent1: ({FC} & {R}) sent2: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) sent3: ¬{A} -> ¬{B} sent4: {AB} sent5: ({FQ} & {AP}) sent6: {DH} sent7: ¬{CB}

the scribble does not occur.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the scribble happens. ; $context$ = sent1: both the misfire and the enjoyment occurs. sent2: the fact that the scribbling happens but the pauperization does not occur is incorrect if the motorcycling does not occur. sent3: the pauperization is prevented by that the scribble does not occur. sent4: that the recommending wholesale happens is correct. sent5: the impropriety occurs and the earthquake occurs. sent6: the northerly happens. sent7: the suffering lecithin does not occur. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scribble does not occur.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the pauperization does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the gunlock is epithelial.

{C}{a}

sent1: something is epithelial if it is a coreference. sent2: the palatinate is anaphasic. sent3: the gunlock is anaphasic. sent4: the gunlock is a coreference if the fact that it is audiometric hold. sent5: the scabicide is anaphasic. sent6: something is univalent if it does color. sent7: the fact that if the fact that the gunlock is a kind of non-epithelial thing that is not non-sharp does not hold the hematochrome is not non-epithelial is right. sent8: something is anaphasic if it is a coreference. sent9: the gooseberry is a coreference. sent10: the gunlock is unpardonable. sent11: the cognate is anaphasic. sent12: that the load is epithelial hold if the fact that it is a kind of a mono-iodotyrosine is not wrong. sent13: the gunlock is marital. sent14: the thunderhead is anaphasic. sent15: the fact that the gunlock is anaphasic is true if it is cryogenic. sent16: the gunlock is a Graham. sent17: something is a kind of a calla if it is electrocardiographic. sent18: if the gunlock is anaphasic then it is a coreference. sent19: if the fact that the spicebush is static is true then it repositions scabicide. sent20: the snuff is a hypogonadism if the fact that it is not non-epithelial is not false.

sent1: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent2: {A}{bq} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: {JH}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: {A}{du} sent6: (x): {GA}x -> {H}x sent7: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{iq} sent8: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent9: {B}{ii} sent10: {FB}{a} sent11: {A}{fk} sent12: {AJ}{ae} -> {C}{ae} sent13: {HP}{a} sent14: {A}{jg} sent15: {G}{a} -> {A}{a} sent16: {EU}{a} sent17: (x): {BS}x -> {HK}x sent18: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent19: {EJ}{ge} -> {AK}{ge} sent20: {C}{hj} -> {FA}{hj}

the hematochrome is anaphasic.

{A}{iq}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the gunlock is epithelial. ; $context$ = sent1: something is epithelial if it is a coreference. sent2: the palatinate is anaphasic. sent3: the gunlock is anaphasic. sent4: the gunlock is a coreference if the fact that it is audiometric hold. sent5: the scabicide is anaphasic. sent6: something is univalent if it does color. sent7: the fact that if the fact that the gunlock is a kind of non-epithelial thing that is not non-sharp does not hold the hematochrome is not non-epithelial is right. sent8: something is anaphasic if it is a coreference. sent9: the gooseberry is a coreference. sent10: the gunlock is unpardonable. sent11: the cognate is anaphasic. sent12: that the load is epithelial hold if the fact that it is a kind of a mono-iodotyrosine is not wrong. sent13: the gunlock is marital. sent14: the thunderhead is anaphasic. sent15: the fact that the gunlock is anaphasic is true if it is cryogenic. sent16: the gunlock is a Graham. sent17: something is a kind of a calla if it is electrocardiographic. sent18: if the gunlock is anaphasic then it is a coreference. sent19: if the fact that the spicebush is static is true then it repositions scabicide. sent20: the snuff is a hypogonadism if the fact that it is not non-epithelial is not false. ; $proof$ =

sent18 & sent3 -> int1: that the gunlock is a coreference is right.; sent1 -> int2: the gunlock is epithelial if it is a coreference.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the suffering Colchicum happens.

{C}

sent1: the rattle does not occur and the binocularsness does not occur if the high-techness does not occur. sent2: the fact that the firestorm occurs is right. sent3: the fact that the Italicness occurs is not incorrect. sent4: the lockdown does not occur and the inscriptiveness does not occur if the rattling does not occur. sent5: that the lockdown occurs is correct if the Slovenian happens. sent6: the astigmaticness does not occur. sent7: the suffering Colchicum does not occur if the fact that both the suffering Colchicum and the non-astigmaticness occurs does not hold. sent8: if the lockdown does not occur that the suffering Colchicum and the non-astigmaticness occurs is not true. sent9: the low-techness is prevented by that both the woodiness and the centigradeness happens. sent10: the fact that the pardonableness does not occur and/or the lockup does not occur does not hold if the low-techness does not occur. sent11: that the correlating occurs and the shading happens is brought about by that the anestheticness does not occur. sent12: the lockdown occurs if the fact that the Slovenianness does not occur and the repositioning sprawling happens is wrong. sent13: if the perorating happens the aestheticness happens or the high-techness does not occur or both. sent14: the anestheticness does not occur. sent15: the perorating happens if the corroding utmost does not occur. sent16: the woodiness is brought about by that the correlating happens. sent17: the suffering Colchicum happens if the lockdown occurs. sent18: the high-techness does not occur if the aesthetic and/or the non-high-techness happens. sent19: if the fact that the pardonableness does not occur and/or the lockup does not occur does not hold then the corroding utmost does not occur.

sent1: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & ¬{F}) sent2: {BO} sent3: {EI} sent4: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{D}) sent5: {AA} -> {B} sent6: ¬{A} sent7: ¬({C} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{C} sent8: ¬{B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{A}) sent9: ({N} & {O}) -> ¬{M} sent10: ¬{M} -> ¬(¬{L} v ¬{K}) sent11: ¬{T} -> ({P} & {R}) sent12: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent13: {I} -> ({H} v ¬{G}) sent14: ¬{T} sent15: ¬{J} -> {I} sent16: {P} -> {N} sent17: {B} -> {C} sent18: ({H} v ¬{G}) -> ¬{G} sent19: ¬(¬{L} v ¬{K}) -> ¬{J}

the suffering Colchicum does not occur.

¬{C}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the suffering Colchicum happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the rattle does not occur and the binocularsness does not occur if the high-techness does not occur. sent2: the fact that the firestorm occurs is right. sent3: the fact that the Italicness occurs is not incorrect. sent4: the lockdown does not occur and the inscriptiveness does not occur if the rattling does not occur. sent5: that the lockdown occurs is correct if the Slovenian happens. sent6: the astigmaticness does not occur. sent7: the suffering Colchicum does not occur if the fact that both the suffering Colchicum and the non-astigmaticness occurs does not hold. sent8: if the lockdown does not occur that the suffering Colchicum and the non-astigmaticness occurs is not true. sent9: the low-techness is prevented by that both the woodiness and the centigradeness happens. sent10: the fact that the pardonableness does not occur and/or the lockup does not occur does not hold if the low-techness does not occur. sent11: that the correlating occurs and the shading happens is brought about by that the anestheticness does not occur. sent12: the lockdown occurs if the fact that the Slovenianness does not occur and the repositioning sprawling happens is wrong. sent13: if the perorating happens the aestheticness happens or the high-techness does not occur or both. sent14: the anestheticness does not occur. sent15: the perorating happens if the corroding utmost does not occur. sent16: the woodiness is brought about by that the correlating happens. sent17: the suffering Colchicum happens if the lockdown occurs. sent18: the high-techness does not occur if the aesthetic and/or the non-high-techness happens. sent19: if the fact that the pardonableness does not occur and/or the lockup does not occur does not hold then the corroding utmost does not occur. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that that there is something such that if that it does recommend overexposure and it is an aureole is incorrect that it does not recommend olivenite is not incorrect hold is not correct.

¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)

sent1: the dapsone is not an aureole if it is not unattributable. sent2: the dapsone does not float if it is not a martinet. sent3: the meerkat does not recommend overexposure if it does not reposition lamented. sent4: there is something such that if it does not reposition sociobiology it is not a kanamycin. sent5: if that something suffers chloramine and does reposition consonance does not hold then it does not suffer ovipositor. sent6: there is something such that if that it is monaural and is a indiscipline is incorrect it is shut. sent7: if that the dapsone does recommend overexposure and it is an aureole is false it recommends olivenite. sent8: if that the greenfly is a kind of Laos thing that does recommend overexposure is false it is not a chemical. sent9: there is something such that if that it does not recommend hydride hold then it is not a martinet. sent10: if the dapsone is not an aureole it does not recommend olivenite. sent11: something does not recommend Strombus if the fact that it does suffer epicycle and is a kind of an owner is not right. sent12: the dapsone does not recommend olivenite if the fact that it recommends overexposure and it is an aureole is wrong. sent13: the dapsone does not recommend olivenite if it recommends overexposure and it is a kind of an aureole. sent14: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a Ploceidae that does suffer dissonance is wrong then it is analogous. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it does corrode chincherinchee and is olfactory is not true then that it does not suffer Joseph is not false. sent16: there exists something such that if it recommends overexposure and is an aureole that it does not recommend olivenite is true. sent17: there is something such that if the fact that it is Bayesian and it is a cuckold is not wrong it does not suffer frogfish.

sent1: ¬{P}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent2: ¬{FE}{aa} -> ¬{DB}{aa} sent3: ¬{HH}{je} -> ¬{AA}{je} sent4: (Ex): ¬{CA}x -> ¬{AQ}x sent5: (x): ¬({DC}x & {IF}x) -> ¬{HS}x sent6: (Ex): ¬({EA}x & {BM}x) -> {DP}x sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent8: ¬({BE}{dg} & {AA}{dg}) -> ¬{FD}{dg} sent9: (Ex): ¬{JH}x -> ¬{FE}x sent10: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent11: (x): ¬({EQ}x & {FB}x) -> ¬{JB}x sent12: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent13: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent14: (Ex): ¬({G}x & {AT}x) -> {GA}x sent15: (Ex): ¬({GE}x & {DR}x) -> ¬{GC}x sent16: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent17: (Ex): ({IL}x & {IS}x) -> ¬{DS}x

there exists something such that if that it suffers epicycle and is an owner is not correct then it does not recommend Strombus.

(Ex): ¬({EQ}x & {FB}x) -> ¬{JB}x

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that that there is something such that if that it does recommend overexposure and it is an aureole is incorrect that it does not recommend olivenite is not incorrect hold is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the dapsone is not an aureole if it is not unattributable. sent2: the dapsone does not float if it is not a martinet. sent3: the meerkat does not recommend overexposure if it does not reposition lamented. sent4: there is something such that if it does not reposition sociobiology it is not a kanamycin. sent5: if that something suffers chloramine and does reposition consonance does not hold then it does not suffer ovipositor. sent6: there is something such that if that it is monaural and is a indiscipline is incorrect it is shut. sent7: if that the dapsone does recommend overexposure and it is an aureole is false it recommends olivenite. sent8: if that the greenfly is a kind of Laos thing that does recommend overexposure is false it is not a chemical. sent9: there is something such that if that it does not recommend hydride hold then it is not a martinet. sent10: if the dapsone is not an aureole it does not recommend olivenite. sent11: something does not recommend Strombus if the fact that it does suffer epicycle and is a kind of an owner is not right. sent12: the dapsone does not recommend olivenite if the fact that it recommends overexposure and it is an aureole is wrong. sent13: the dapsone does not recommend olivenite if it recommends overexposure and it is a kind of an aureole. sent14: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a Ploceidae that does suffer dissonance is wrong then it is analogous. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it does corrode chincherinchee and is olfactory is not true then that it does not suffer Joseph is not false. sent16: there exists something such that if it recommends overexposure and is an aureole that it does not recommend olivenite is true. sent17: there is something such that if the fact that it is Bayesian and it is a cuckold is not wrong it does not suffer frogfish. ; $proof$ =

sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the non-entozoicness and the non-prewarness happens.

(¬{D} & ¬{C})

sent1: the forgettableness happens and the pyrotechnicsness occurs if the melting does not occur. sent2: if the forgettableness does not occur then that the fact that the entozoicness does not occur and the prewarness does not occur is false is correct. sent3: the entozoicness occurs and the antipyretic occurs if the anticancerness does not occur. sent4: if the plotting does not occur then the fact that the antiapartheidness does not occur and the manacling does not occur is not true. sent5: if the fact that the antipyreticness does not occur is true that the plotting occurs and the manacling does not occur is not correct. sent6: the fact that the suffering facade does not occur is not wrong. sent7: the fact that both the plot and the manacling happens is not right if the antipyreticness does not occur. sent8: the fact that the prewarness does not occur is true if both the forgettableness and the melting happens. sent9: the plot does not occur if the fact that the Kenyanness does not occur and/or the recommending dressed does not occur is not true. sent10: that the welding but not the carpetbag occurs is false if the proteolyticness does not occur. sent11: if the fact that the antiapartheidness does not occur and the manacling does not occur does not hold then the antiapartheidness happens. sent12: the forgettableness happens. sent13: the forgettableness does not occur if the fact that either the manacling happens or the melting occurs or both does not hold. sent14: the posting happens. sent15: the non-entozoicness is caused by that the manacling occurs. sent16: the fact that the recommending Clinidae does not occur is correct. sent17: the fact that the plot and the manacling occurs is wrong. sent18: the melting happens. sent19: if that the plotting occurs and the manacling does not occur is not correct the entozoicness does not occur.

sent1: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {DT}) sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{D} & ¬{C}) sent3: ¬{J} -> ({D} & {G}) sent4: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{GE} & ¬{E}) sent5: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & ¬{E}) sent6: ¬{JI} sent7: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & {E}) sent8: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent9: ¬(¬{H} v ¬{I}) -> ¬{F} sent10: ¬{AD} -> ¬({ED} & ¬{CG}) sent11: ¬(¬{GE} & ¬{E}) -> {GE} sent12: {A} sent13: ¬({E} v {B}) -> ¬{A} sent14: {JC} sent15: {E} -> ¬{D} sent16: ¬{HJ} sent17: ¬({F} & {E}) sent18: {B} sent19: ¬({F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{D}

both the pyrotechnicsness and the antiapartheidness occurs.

({DT} & {GE})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the non-entozoicness and the non-prewarness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the forgettableness happens and the pyrotechnicsness occurs if the melting does not occur. sent2: if the forgettableness does not occur then that the fact that the entozoicness does not occur and the prewarness does not occur is false is correct. sent3: the entozoicness occurs and the antipyretic occurs if the anticancerness does not occur. sent4: if the plotting does not occur then the fact that the antiapartheidness does not occur and the manacling does not occur is not true. sent5: if the fact that the antipyreticness does not occur is true that the plotting occurs and the manacling does not occur is not correct. sent6: the fact that the suffering facade does not occur is not wrong. sent7: the fact that both the plot and the manacling happens is not right if the antipyreticness does not occur. sent8: the fact that the prewarness does not occur is true if both the forgettableness and the melting happens. sent9: the plot does not occur if the fact that the Kenyanness does not occur and/or the recommending dressed does not occur is not true. sent10: that the welding but not the carpetbag occurs is false if the proteolyticness does not occur. sent11: if the fact that the antiapartheidness does not occur and the manacling does not occur does not hold then the antiapartheidness happens. sent12: the forgettableness happens. sent13: the forgettableness does not occur if the fact that either the manacling happens or the melting occurs or both does not hold. sent14: the posting happens. sent15: the non-entozoicness is caused by that the manacling occurs. sent16: the fact that the recommending Clinidae does not occur is correct. sent17: the fact that the plot and the manacling occurs is wrong. sent18: the melting happens. sent19: if that the plotting occurs and the manacling does not occur is not correct the entozoicness does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent12 & sent18 -> int1: the forgettableness occurs and the melting occurs.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the prewarness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the spectrographicness occurs.

{C}

sent1: the autoradiographicness happens. sent2: the unhappiness occurs. sent3: if the ohmage does not occur then the fact that both the broadcast and the autoradiographicness happens is incorrect. sent4: both the hollowness and the suffering tokamak happens. sent5: if the traversing and the autoradiographicness happens the spectrographicness does not occur. sent6: the autoradiographicness does not occur if that the fact that the broadcast and the autoradiographicness occurs is right is incorrect. sent7: the traversing occurs. sent8: that the whirlpool does not occur is brought about by that the recommending duplicate and the shower occurs. sent9: the frisking does not occur if the anodicness and the mending happens. sent10: if that the autoradiographicness does not occur is correct then both the spectrographicness and the traversing occurs. sent11: the suffering peripeteia does not occur.

sent1: {B} sent2: {HK} sent3: ¬{D} -> ¬({E} & {B}) sent4: ({CR} & {FE}) sent5: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent6: ¬({E} & {B}) -> ¬{B} sent7: {A} sent8: ({BC} & {EG}) -> ¬{DT} sent9: ({CA} & {HH}) -> ¬{GN} sent10: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) sent11: ¬{FT}

the spectrographicness happens.

{C}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the spectrographicness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the autoradiographicness happens. sent2: the unhappiness occurs. sent3: if the ohmage does not occur then the fact that both the broadcast and the autoradiographicness happens is incorrect. sent4: both the hollowness and the suffering tokamak happens. sent5: if the traversing and the autoradiographicness happens the spectrographicness does not occur. sent6: the autoradiographicness does not occur if that the fact that the broadcast and the autoradiographicness occurs is right is incorrect. sent7: the traversing occurs. sent8: that the whirlpool does not occur is brought about by that the recommending duplicate and the shower occurs. sent9: the frisking does not occur if the anodicness and the mending happens. sent10: if that the autoradiographicness does not occur is correct then both the spectrographicness and the traversing occurs. sent11: the suffering peripeteia does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent1 -> int1: both the traversing and the autoradiographicness happens.; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the inevitable occurs is true.

{B}

sent1: the fact that the natriureticness does not occur or the carbonating goral does not occur or both is false if the sterileness does not occur. sent2: the inevitableness does not occur if that either the natriureticness occurs or the carbonating goral does not occur or both does not hold. sent3: the genotypicalness occurs if the carbonating keratotomy happens. sent4: the sterileness occurs if the genotypicalness happens. sent5: if the sterileness happens then the inevitable occurs. sent6: the fact that the natriureticness happens hold. sent7: the sterileness does not occur. sent8: that the inevitable does not occur is true if the fact that the fact that the natriureticness does not occur or the carbonating goral does not occur or both is right is incorrect.

sent1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent3: {D} -> {C} sent4: {C} -> {A} sent5: {A} -> {B} sent6: {AA} sent7: ¬{A} sent8: ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B}

the inevitable happens.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the inevitable occurs is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the natriureticness does not occur or the carbonating goral does not occur or both is false if the sterileness does not occur. sent2: the inevitableness does not occur if that either the natriureticness occurs or the carbonating goral does not occur or both does not hold. sent3: the genotypicalness occurs if the carbonating keratotomy happens. sent4: the sterileness occurs if the genotypicalness happens. sent5: if the sterileness happens then the inevitable occurs. sent6: the fact that the natriureticness happens hold. sent7: the sterileness does not occur. sent8: that the inevitable does not occur is true if the fact that the fact that the natriureticness does not occur or the carbonating goral does not occur or both is right is incorrect. ; $proof$ =

sent1 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that the natriureticness does not occur or the carbonating goral does not occur or both is not right.; sent8 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the initiate is a twenty-five.

{B}{aa}

sent1: if something is revolutionary it is a kind of a Unitarianism. sent2: if the rennet is astragalar but it is not a twenty-five the horse is not a kind of a twenty-five. sent3: the horse is revolutionary. sent4: if that something is not astragalar but it is Kazakhstani does not hold then it is astragalar. sent5: the initiate is revolutionary if that the horse is revolutionary hold. sent6: if the horse is a rake the fact that that it is a Anomia is not right is not correct. sent7: something is not a twenty-five if the fact that it is not revolutionary or it is a kind of a Unitarianism or both does not hold. sent8: if the horse is a kind of a Anomia the fact that it is not astragalar and is a Kazakhstani does not hold.

sent1: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent2: ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> {D}x sent5: {A}{a} -> {A}{aa} sent6: {G}{a} -> {F}{a} sent7: (x): ¬(¬{A}x v {C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent8: {F}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {E}{a})

that the horse is distinct is not wrong.

{AQ}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the initiate is a twenty-five. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is revolutionary it is a kind of a Unitarianism. sent2: if the rennet is astragalar but it is not a twenty-five the horse is not a kind of a twenty-five. sent3: the horse is revolutionary. sent4: if that something is not astragalar but it is Kazakhstani does not hold then it is astragalar. sent5: the initiate is revolutionary if that the horse is revolutionary hold. sent6: if the horse is a rake the fact that that it is a Anomia is not right is not correct. sent7: something is not a twenty-five if the fact that it is not revolutionary or it is a kind of a Unitarianism or both does not hold. sent8: if the horse is a kind of a Anomia the fact that it is not astragalar and is a Kazakhstani does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the initiate is not a twenty-five.; sent1 -> int1: if the initiate is revolutionary it is a Unitarianism.; sent5 & sent3 -> int2: the initiate is revolutionary.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the initiate is a kind of a Unitarianism.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the lagomorph is not higher.

¬{D}{a}

sent1: the fact that the pearl is a Shiism but it is not a kind of a ngwee is not correct. sent2: the fact that something is non-higher thing that is not a kind of a rib does not hold if it is not a muscleman. sent3: the departer is not higher. sent4: the lagomorph is not a punks. sent5: if that the lagomorph is not a rib and not a punks is not wrong then it is higher. sent6: the lagomorph is a kind of ruminant thing that is non-deflationary. sent7: if the fact that the pearl is a Shiism but it is not a ngwee does not hold the sweeper is not a Shiism. sent8: if the egghead does not rib and is not an incidence it carbonates prompter. sent9: something does rib and/or it is not a muscleman if it is a kind of a punks. sent10: that something does confer and/or carbonates gastrostomy is wrong if it does not sob rhizopod. sent11: something is a kind of a muscleman. sent12: if the lagomorph is not a muscleman the plankton is not a rib and not a Scottie. sent13: the lagomorph is not a kind of a punks if there exists something such that it is a kind of a muscleman. sent14: if there is something such that that it sobs independence and does sob rhizopod is incorrect the saltbox does not sob rhizopod. sent15: the fact that the sweeper does sob independence and it does sob rhizopod is incorrect if it is not a kind of a Shiism. sent16: there exists something such that it does carbonate gastrostomy. sent17: that the lagomorph is not higher is not wrong if that the European is not higher and it is not a rib is false. sent18: something is higher. sent19: the lagomorph does not rib and it is not a punks if there is something such that it is a muscleman. sent20: if something is a kind of a punks that the fact that it is a kind of a muscleman and it is not a rib is not false is not true. sent21: if the sweeper does confer the fact that it is not a kind of a punks and it does not carbonate gastrostomy is not correct. sent22: that the lagomorph is a Leicestershire hold if it is not a today and is not a muscleman. sent23: the lagomorph is higher if the fact that it does not rib and it is a punks is right.

sent1: ¬({I}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{B}x) sent3: ¬{D}{bm} sent4: ¬{C}{a} sent5: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{a} sent6: (¬{EJ}{a} & ¬{FN}{a}) sent7: ¬({I}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) -> ¬{I}{d} sent8: (¬{B}{du} & ¬{HB}{du}) -> {HT}{du} sent9: (x): {C}x -> ({B}x v ¬{A}x) sent10: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}x v {E}x) sent11: (Ex): {A}x sent12: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{B}{ao} & ¬{FO}{ao}) sent13: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent14: (x): ¬({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{G}{c} sent15: ¬{I}{d} -> ¬({H}{d} & {G}{d}) sent16: (Ex): {E}x sent17: ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent18: (Ex): {D}x sent19: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent20: (x): {C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent21: {F}{d} -> ¬(¬{C}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent22: (¬{DU}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {CG}{a} sent23: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {D}{a}

the lagomorph is not higher.

¬{D}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the lagomorph is not higher. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the pearl is a Shiism but it is not a kind of a ngwee is not correct. sent2: the fact that something is non-higher thing that is not a kind of a rib does not hold if it is not a muscleman. sent3: the departer is not higher. sent4: the lagomorph is not a punks. sent5: if that the lagomorph is not a rib and not a punks is not wrong then it is higher. sent6: the lagomorph is a kind of ruminant thing that is non-deflationary. sent7: if the fact that the pearl is a Shiism but it is not a ngwee does not hold the sweeper is not a Shiism. sent8: if the egghead does not rib and is not an incidence it carbonates prompter. sent9: something does rib and/or it is not a muscleman if it is a kind of a punks. sent10: that something does confer and/or carbonates gastrostomy is wrong if it does not sob rhizopod. sent11: something is a kind of a muscleman. sent12: if the lagomorph is not a muscleman the plankton is not a rib and not a Scottie. sent13: the lagomorph is not a kind of a punks if there exists something such that it is a kind of a muscleman. sent14: if there is something such that that it sobs independence and does sob rhizopod is incorrect the saltbox does not sob rhizopod. sent15: the fact that the sweeper does sob independence and it does sob rhizopod is incorrect if it is not a kind of a Shiism. sent16: there exists something such that it does carbonate gastrostomy. sent17: that the lagomorph is not higher is not wrong if that the European is not higher and it is not a rib is false. sent18: something is higher. sent19: the lagomorph does not rib and it is not a punks if there is something such that it is a muscleman. sent20: if something is a kind of a punks that the fact that it is a kind of a muscleman and it is not a rib is not false is not true. sent21: if the sweeper does confer the fact that it is not a kind of a punks and it does not carbonate gastrostomy is not correct. sent22: that the lagomorph is a Leicestershire hold if it is not a today and is not a muscleman. sent23: the lagomorph is higher if the fact that it does not rib and it is a punks is right. ; $proof$ =

sent11 & sent19 -> int1: the lagomorph is not a rib and not a punks.; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

that if the anthurium is photomechanical the snowdrop is a Menninger is incorrect.

¬({A}{a} -> {B}{c})

sent1: the kingfish does not carbonate LF. sent2: the snowdrop is a kind of a Menninger if the kingfish does not carbonate LF and is gestational. sent3: if the anthurium is photomechanical then the kingfish does not carbonate LF. sent4: something sobs skin-diver and it does crack if it is not a blacklist. sent5: there exists nothing that is a Champollion and is a blacklist. sent6: the postmistress is a rugged if the anthurium is a crack. sent7: if the kingfish does carbonate LF and is gestational the snowdrop is a kind of a Menninger. sent8: if something is a Menninger it is photomechanical. sent9: if the fact that something is a Champollion and it blacklists is not right that it does not blacklists is not false. sent10: the fact that something that is a rugged is a Menninger is correct. sent11: the anthurium does not carbonate LF and is photomechanical. sent12: the visionary is not a Menninger but a king. sent13: the kingfish does not carbonate LF but it is gestational if the anthurium is photomechanical.

sent1: ¬{AA}{b} sent2: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} sent3: {A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) sent5: (x): ¬({G}x & {F}x) sent6: {D}{a} -> {C}{ih} sent7: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} sent8: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent9: (x): ¬({G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{F}x sent10: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent11: (¬{AA}{a} & {A}{a}) sent12: (¬{B}{cc} & {DR}{cc}) sent13: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b})

that the postmistress is photomechanical is correct.

{A}{ih}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = that if the anthurium is photomechanical the snowdrop is a Menninger is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the kingfish does not carbonate LF. sent2: the snowdrop is a kind of a Menninger if the kingfish does not carbonate LF and is gestational. sent3: if the anthurium is photomechanical then the kingfish does not carbonate LF. sent4: something sobs skin-diver and it does crack if it is not a blacklist. sent5: there exists nothing that is a Champollion and is a blacklist. sent6: the postmistress is a rugged if the anthurium is a crack. sent7: if the kingfish does carbonate LF and is gestational the snowdrop is a kind of a Menninger. sent8: if something is a Menninger it is photomechanical. sent9: if the fact that something is a Champollion and it blacklists is not right that it does not blacklists is not false. sent10: the fact that something that is a rugged is a Menninger is correct. sent11: the anthurium does not carbonate LF and is photomechanical. sent12: the visionary is not a Menninger but a king. sent13: the kingfish does not carbonate LF but it is gestational if the anthurium is photomechanical. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the anthurium is photomechanical.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the kingfish does not carbonate LF but it is gestational.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the snowdrop is a Menninger.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the paleolithicness does not occur.

¬{B}

sent1: the viscometry occurs and the Kwanzaa does not occur. sent2: if both the carbonating daiquiri and the presentation occurs then the paleolithicness does not occur. sent3: the presentation does not occur. sent4: that the booing does not occur is caused by that both the penumbralness and the non-Azerbaijaniness occurs. sent5: if the formal does not occur then the fact that that the bleeding happens and the disposition happens is not correct is not false. sent6: if the worsted does not occur then the presentation does not occur. sent7: the informing and the non-Ottomanness happens. sent8: the multiformness does not occur. sent9: that the worstedness does not occur causes that the carbonating daiquiri happens but the presentation does not occur. sent10: the discourteousness but not the cession happens if the enjoyment does not occur. sent11: the anathematization does not occur. sent12: the embezzlement but not the devising occurs if the Jacobean does not occur. sent13: that the by-line does not occur and the interception does not occur is triggered by that the dacoity does not occur. sent14: the epizoicness and the non-kinestheticness occurs. sent15: the airburst and the non-penumbralness occurs if that the carbonating pop does not occur hold. sent16: if the by-line does not occur both the worstedness and the paleolithicness happens. sent17: the formalness does not occur if that the formalness happens but the pant does not occur is wrong. sent18: the Azerbaijani and the humaneness occurs. sent19: the carbonating theoterrorism occurs or the innings happens or both if the disposition does not occur. sent20: the fact that the formalness happens and the pant does not occur is incorrect if the inculpatoriness happens. sent21: that the paleolithicness happens is prevented by that the carbonating daiquiri happens but the presentation does not occur. sent22: the worsting does not occur. sent23: if the fact that both the bleeding and the disposition happens is false then the disposition does not occur.

sent1: ({GL} & ¬{EJ}) sent2: ({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent3: ¬{AB} sent4: ({HN} & ¬{FE}) -> ¬{DK} sent5: ¬{I} -> ¬({J} & {H}) sent6: ¬{A} -> ¬{AB} sent7: ({IJ} & ¬{GC}) sent8: ¬{DR} sent9: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent10: ¬{IB} -> ({IF} & ¬{BA}) sent11: ¬{FC} sent12: ¬{IT} -> ({AI} & ¬{FB}) sent13: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent14: ({ID} & ¬{AG}) sent15: ¬{M} -> ({AE} & ¬{HN}) sent16: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent17: ¬({I} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{I} sent18: ({FE} & ¬{AL}) sent19: ¬{H} -> ({F} v {G}) sent20: {L} -> ¬({I} & ¬{K}) sent21: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent22: ¬{A} sent23: ¬({J} & {H}) -> ¬{H}

the paleolithicness occurs.

{B}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the paleolithicness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the viscometry occurs and the Kwanzaa does not occur. sent2: if both the carbonating daiquiri and the presentation occurs then the paleolithicness does not occur. sent3: the presentation does not occur. sent4: that the booing does not occur is caused by that both the penumbralness and the non-Azerbaijaniness occurs. sent5: if the formal does not occur then the fact that that the bleeding happens and the disposition happens is not correct is not false. sent6: if the worsted does not occur then the presentation does not occur. sent7: the informing and the non-Ottomanness happens. sent8: the multiformness does not occur. sent9: that the worstedness does not occur causes that the carbonating daiquiri happens but the presentation does not occur. sent10: the discourteousness but not the cession happens if the enjoyment does not occur. sent11: the anathematization does not occur. sent12: the embezzlement but not the devising occurs if the Jacobean does not occur. sent13: that the by-line does not occur and the interception does not occur is triggered by that the dacoity does not occur. sent14: the epizoicness and the non-kinestheticness occurs. sent15: the airburst and the non-penumbralness occurs if that the carbonating pop does not occur hold. sent16: if the by-line does not occur both the worstedness and the paleolithicness happens. sent17: the formalness does not occur if that the formalness happens but the pant does not occur is wrong. sent18: the Azerbaijani and the humaneness occurs. sent19: the carbonating theoterrorism occurs or the innings happens or both if the disposition does not occur. sent20: the fact that the formalness happens and the pant does not occur is incorrect if the inculpatoriness happens. sent21: that the paleolithicness happens is prevented by that the carbonating daiquiri happens but the presentation does not occur. sent22: the worsting does not occur. sent23: if the fact that both the bleeding and the disposition happens is false then the disposition does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent9 & sent22 -> int1: the carbonating daiquiri happens and the presentation does not occur.; sent21 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the diphenhydramine is not a viewers is not incorrect.

¬{D}{a}

sent1: the diphenhydramine is a midst. sent2: the diphenhydramine is a midst and a hatband if there exists something such that it does round. sent3: the soursop is a kind of a viewers. sent4: the showpiece is operculate. sent5: the fact that something is a viewers if it is a hatband is right. sent6: the diphenhydramine is a midst if there exists something such that it rounds. sent7: there exists something such that it does round. sent8: if the fact that the Berry is Merovingian and it is a Gloucester does not hold that it is not unitary is not false. sent9: if something is non-unitary then it is not a midst and is a hatband.

sent1: {B}{a} sent2: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: {D}{ho} sent4: {CR}{ij} sent5: (x): {C}x -> {D}x sent6: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent7: (Ex): {A}x sent8: ¬({G}{c} & {F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent9: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{B}x & {C}x)

the diphenhydramine is not a viewers.

¬{D}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the diphenhydramine is not a viewers is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the diphenhydramine is a midst. sent2: the diphenhydramine is a midst and a hatband if there exists something such that it does round. sent3: the soursop is a kind of a viewers. sent4: the showpiece is operculate. sent5: the fact that something is a viewers if it is a hatband is right. sent6: the diphenhydramine is a midst if there exists something such that it rounds. sent7: there exists something such that it does round. sent8: if the fact that the Berry is Merovingian and it is a Gloucester does not hold that it is not unitary is not false. sent9: if something is non-unitary then it is not a midst and is a hatband. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent2 -> int1: the diphenhydramine is a kind of a midst and it is a kind of a hatband.; int1 -> int2: the diphenhydramine is a hatband.; sent5 -> int3: if the diphenhydramine is a hatband then it is a viewers.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the dracaena is not a hornblende.

¬{C}{c}

sent1: if the fact that the barnacle is salivary is not false the dracaena is a hornblende. sent2: if the volatile sobs secondo the barnacle is salivary. sent3: The secondo sobs volatile. sent4: the volatile sobs secondo.

sent1: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent3: {AA}{aa} sent4: {A}{a}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = the dracaena is not a hornblende. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the barnacle is salivary is not false the dracaena is a hornblende. sent2: if the volatile sobs secondo the barnacle is salivary. sent3: The secondo sobs volatile. sent4: the volatile sobs secondo. ; $proof$ =

sent2 & sent4 -> int1: that the barnacle is salivary is true.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fusil does not carbonate domicile.

¬{D}{b}

sent1: the boxfish is axonal. sent2: the racquetball is axonal if there is something such that that it is both unseasonable and not an age is not true. sent3: the boxfish is an ebony if it is axonal. sent4: if that something is an ebony but it does not carbonate domicile is not right then it does carbonate domicile. sent5: the fusil does not drink maidenliness if the boxfish is an ebony. sent6: something is axonal if the fact that it is an ebony hold. sent7: everything is either an abrasive or clad or both. sent8: if something does not carbonate domicile then it is an ebony and it is unseasonable. sent9: if the racquetball is axonal then the boxfish does carbonate domicile. sent10: if the transportation is an abrasive then it is plural. sent11: the fusil is unseasonable. sent12: the boxfish carbonates domicile. sent13: if there is something such that it is a kind of a plural then the fact that the chopsteak is both unseasonable and not an age is wrong. sent14: if the fact that something is not plural but it is an age is not right it does not carbonate domicile. sent15: if something is a kind of an ebony then it is unseasonable. sent16: if something is clad it is a plural.

sent1: {A}{a} sent2: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{E}x) -> {A}{c} sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) -> {D}x sent5: {B}{a} -> ¬{IL}{b} sent6: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent7: (x): ({H}x v {G}x) sent8: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) sent9: {A}{c} -> {D}{a} sent10: {H}{e} -> {F}{e} sent11: {C}{b} sent12: {D}{a} sent13: (x): {F}x -> ¬({C}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent15: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent16: (x): {G}x -> {F}x

the fusil carbonates domicile.

{D}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fusil does not carbonate domicile. ; $context$ = sent1: the boxfish is axonal. sent2: the racquetball is axonal if there is something such that that it is both unseasonable and not an age is not true. sent3: the boxfish is an ebony if it is axonal. sent4: if that something is an ebony but it does not carbonate domicile is not right then it does carbonate domicile. sent5: the fusil does not drink maidenliness if the boxfish is an ebony. sent6: something is axonal if the fact that it is an ebony hold. sent7: everything is either an abrasive or clad or both. sent8: if something does not carbonate domicile then it is an ebony and it is unseasonable. sent9: if the racquetball is axonal then the boxfish does carbonate domicile. sent10: if the transportation is an abrasive then it is plural. sent11: the fusil is unseasonable. sent12: the boxfish carbonates domicile. sent13: if there is something such that it is a kind of a plural then the fact that the chopsteak is both unseasonable and not an age is wrong. sent14: if the fact that something is not plural but it is an age is not right it does not carbonate domicile. sent15: if something is a kind of an ebony then it is unseasonable. sent16: if something is clad it is a plural. ; $proof$ =

sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the boxfish is a kind of an ebony.; sent15 -> int2: the boxfish is unseasonable if it is an ebony.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the boxfish is unseasonable.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the costmary does not drink rhizopod.

¬{C}{a}

sent1: the calliandra is Darwinian. sent2: that the costmary does drink walloper and/or it does drink rhizopod hold. sent3: if that the backwater is not gynecological hold the accuser is heedless but it does not drink rhizopod. sent4: the costmary does not drink rhizopod if the accuser is a kind of heedless thing that does not drink rhizopod. sent5: if the fact that the calliandra is heedless hold then the costmary does drink rhizopod. sent6: if the calliandra does drink rhizopod the costmary is gynecological. sent7: everything is a rogation or it does fancy or both. sent8: the Norvasc is gynecological. sent9: something does whore if it is not atomic. sent10: the costmary is heedless if the calliandra drinks rhizopod. sent11: if something is not gynecological that it is not a penitent and not heedless is incorrect. sent12: the costmary drinks rhizopod if the calliandra is gynecological. sent13: if the costmary is heedless the fact that the calliandra is not non-gynecological is right. sent14: everything is heedless or it is gynecological or both. sent15: something that either does whore or is Jain or both is not gynecological. sent16: either the calliandra is a Coleridge or it is gynecological or both. sent17: that the costmary is gynecological and/or it does drink rhizopod hold. sent18: if the costmary is heedless the calliandra does drink rhizopod. sent19: if the calliandra is gynecological then the costmary is heedless. sent20: the supercomputer is a Goldberg.

sent1: {CS}{aa} sent2: ({AS}{a} v {C}{a}) sent3: ¬{B}{c} -> ({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent4: ({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent5: {A}{aa} -> {C}{a} sent6: {C}{aa} -> {B}{a} sent7: (x): ({JH}x v {BA}x) sent8: {B}{id} sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> {D}x sent10: {C}{aa} -> {A}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{IM}x & ¬{A}x) sent12: {B}{aa} -> {C}{a} sent13: {A}{a} -> {B}{aa} sent14: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) sent15: (x): ({D}x v {E}x) -> ¬{B}x sent16: ({HM}{aa} v {B}{aa}) sent17: ({B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent18: {A}{a} -> {C}{aa} sent19: {B}{aa} -> {A}{a} sent20: {H}{d}

everything either is penitent or does blaspheme or both.

(x): ({IM}x v {JB}x)

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the costmary does not drink rhizopod. ; $context$ = sent1: the calliandra is Darwinian. sent2: that the costmary does drink walloper and/or it does drink rhizopod hold. sent3: if that the backwater is not gynecological hold the accuser is heedless but it does not drink rhizopod. sent4: the costmary does not drink rhizopod if the accuser is a kind of heedless thing that does not drink rhizopod. sent5: if the fact that the calliandra is heedless hold then the costmary does drink rhizopod. sent6: if the calliandra does drink rhizopod the costmary is gynecological. sent7: everything is a rogation or it does fancy or both. sent8: the Norvasc is gynecological. sent9: something does whore if it is not atomic. sent10: the costmary is heedless if the calliandra drinks rhizopod. sent11: if something is not gynecological that it is not a penitent and not heedless is incorrect. sent12: the costmary drinks rhizopod if the calliandra is gynecological. sent13: if the costmary is heedless the fact that the calliandra is not non-gynecological is right. sent14: everything is heedless or it is gynecological or both. sent15: something that either does whore or is Jain or both is not gynecological. sent16: either the calliandra is a Coleridge or it is gynecological or both. sent17: that the costmary is gynecological and/or it does drink rhizopod hold. sent18: if the costmary is heedless the calliandra does drink rhizopod. sent19: if the calliandra is gynecological then the costmary is heedless. sent20: the supercomputer is a Goldberg. ; $proof$ =

sent14 -> int1: the calliandra is heedless and/or it is gynecological.; int1 & sent5 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the standpipe is a kind of a nonuniformity if the fact that it is not a counterreformation and is not a kind of a iguanodon is not correct.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}

sent1: the standpipe is a nonuniformity if it is a counterreformation. sent2: something is a nonuniformity if it is not a counterreformation and is not a iguanodon. sent3: the standpipe is a kind of a underproduction if it is not a nonuniformity and is not a marlite. sent4: the standpipe is a ketosteroid if that it is non-marine and it is not a counterreformation does not hold. sent5: something carbonates artwork if that it is not megaloblastic and it does not carbonate hen does not hold. sent6: something is a nonuniformity if that it is not a counterreformation and not a iguanodon does not hold. sent7: something does transmit sottishness if the fact that it is not Luxembourgian and it is not a Syrian is not true. sent8: if that the standpipe does not drink two-by-four and is not an immersion is not right it drinks clomiphene. sent9: the standpipe is a nonuniformity if that it is not a counterreformation and is a kind of a iguanodon does not hold. sent10: if that something is not a counterreformation but a iguanodon does not hold then it is a nonuniformity. sent11: if that something is both not a Molise and not archival is incorrect then it is intemperate. sent12: if that the standpipe does not preach and is not a kind of an epithet is not right then it is a parry. sent13: something is a kind of a nonuniformity if that it is a counterreformation is not incorrect. sent14: if the fact that something does not stag and it is not a yodel is incorrect it drinks prednisone. sent15: if something does not drink roentgenium and does not drink dogtooth then it is lovable. sent16: if the standpipe is both not a counterreformation and not a iguanodon then it is a nonuniformity.

sent1: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (¬{B}{aa} & ¬{BG}{aa}) -> {CE}{aa} sent4: ¬(¬{DE}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) -> {DB}{aa} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{JA}x & ¬{GK}x) -> {DO}x sent6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent7: (x): ¬(¬{BO}x & ¬{GL}x) -> {AE}x sent8: ¬(¬{FQ}{aa} & ¬{AM}{aa}) -> {P}{aa} sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: (x): ¬(¬{CH}x & ¬{FM}x) -> {AT}x sent12: ¬(¬{JE}{aa} & ¬{HK}{aa}) -> {DI}{aa} sent13: (x): {AA}x -> {B}x sent14: (x): ¬(¬{U}x & ¬{GT}x) -> {HF}x sent15: (x): (¬{ED}x & ¬{BR}x) -> {FA}x sent16: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the standpipe is a kind of a nonuniformity if the fact that it is not a counterreformation and is not a kind of a iguanodon is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the standpipe is a nonuniformity if it is a counterreformation. sent2: something is a nonuniformity if it is not a counterreformation and is not a iguanodon. sent3: the standpipe is a kind of a underproduction if it is not a nonuniformity and is not a marlite. sent4: the standpipe is a ketosteroid if that it is non-marine and it is not a counterreformation does not hold. sent5: something carbonates artwork if that it is not megaloblastic and it does not carbonate hen does not hold. sent6: something is a nonuniformity if that it is not a counterreformation and not a iguanodon does not hold. sent7: something does transmit sottishness if the fact that it is not Luxembourgian and it is not a Syrian is not true. sent8: if that the standpipe does not drink two-by-four and is not an immersion is not right it drinks clomiphene. sent9: the standpipe is a nonuniformity if that it is not a counterreformation and is a kind of a iguanodon does not hold. sent10: if that something is not a counterreformation but a iguanodon does not hold then it is a nonuniformity. sent11: if that something is both not a Molise and not archival is incorrect then it is intemperate. sent12: if that the standpipe does not preach and is not a kind of an epithet is not right then it is a parry. sent13: something is a kind of a nonuniformity if that it is a counterreformation is not incorrect. sent14: if the fact that something does not stag and it is not a yodel is incorrect it drinks prednisone. sent15: if something does not drink roentgenium and does not drink dogtooth then it is lovable. sent16: if the standpipe is both not a counterreformation and not a iguanodon then it is a nonuniformity. ; $proof$ =

sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the anthracite is not a chord.

¬{C}{b}

sent1: the bunt is not a Phasmidae if the anthracite is a sesquipedality and it is a chord. sent2: if the fact that the soursop is not a hypocellularity hold the bunt is a kind of a Parr. sent3: that something is not a kind of a sesquipedality and it is not a Phasmidae if it is a kind of a Parr is true. sent4: if the bunt is a sesquipedality and it is a Phasmidae then the fact that the anthracite is not a kind of a chord hold. sent5: if something is not a right then it is not a hypocellularity and/or it is not independent. sent6: the bunt does chord. sent7: something does chord if the fact that it is a kind of a sesquipedality is right. sent8: if something is not a copout that it rights and it is non-tabular is wrong. sent9: if that the phenolphthalein is not a copout and is not a Hylidae does not hold then the enamel is not a copout. sent10: if something is not a hypocellularity or dependent or both then the fact that it is not a hypocellularity is not incorrect. sent11: the anthracite is a autofluorescence. sent12: the soursop is not a right if that the enamel is a right but it is not tabular does not hold. sent13: that something is not a copout and it is not a Hylidae is not right if it is not a crate. sent14: if the bunt is both not a sesquipedality and not a Phasmidae then the anthracite is a chord. sent15: the bunt is a kind of a Phasmidae. sent16: the bunt is a sesquipedality. sent17: the anthracite is not a sesquipedality if the bunt does chord and it is a kind of a Phasmidae.

sent1: ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: ¬{E}{c} -> {D}{a} sent3: (x): {D}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent4: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x v ¬{G}x) sent6: {C}{a} sent7: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent8: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({F}x & ¬{I}x) sent9: ¬(¬{H}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d} sent10: (x): (¬{E}x v ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent11: {EG}{b} sent12: ¬({F}{d} & ¬{I}{d}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent13: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{K}x) sent14: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {C}{b} sent15: {B}{a} sent16: {A}{a} sent17: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b}

the anthracite does chord.

{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the anthracite is not a chord. ; $context$ = sent1: the bunt is not a Phasmidae if the anthracite is a sesquipedality and it is a chord. sent2: if the fact that the soursop is not a hypocellularity hold the bunt is a kind of a Parr. sent3: that something is not a kind of a sesquipedality and it is not a Phasmidae if it is a kind of a Parr is true. sent4: if the bunt is a sesquipedality and it is a Phasmidae then the fact that the anthracite is not a kind of a chord hold. sent5: if something is not a right then it is not a hypocellularity and/or it is not independent. sent6: the bunt does chord. sent7: something does chord if the fact that it is a kind of a sesquipedality is right. sent8: if something is not a copout that it rights and it is non-tabular is wrong. sent9: if that the phenolphthalein is not a copout and is not a Hylidae does not hold then the enamel is not a copout. sent10: if something is not a hypocellularity or dependent or both then the fact that it is not a hypocellularity is not incorrect. sent11: the anthracite is a autofluorescence. sent12: the soursop is not a right if that the enamel is a right but it is not tabular does not hold. sent13: that something is not a copout and it is not a Hylidae is not right if it is not a crate. sent14: if the bunt is both not a sesquipedality and not a Phasmidae then the anthracite is a chord. sent15: the bunt is a kind of a Phasmidae. sent16: the bunt is a sesquipedality. sent17: the anthracite is not a sesquipedality if the bunt does chord and it is a kind of a Phasmidae. ; $proof$ =

sent16 & sent15 -> int1: the bunt is a sesquipedality and a Phasmidae.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the geoduck is Lutheran.

{D}{c}

sent1: the rattle-top is a M. sent2: the crosshead is a Lutheran. sent3: something is non-stereoscopic thing that does not sob engorgement if that it is precancerous is not incorrect. sent4: if something is tights and/or it is a M the crosshead is pious. sent5: if the chufa does not sob engorgement then the crosshead is a M or it is pious or both. sent6: that the rattle-top is a Lutheran is not incorrect. sent7: if something is not precancerous that it is stereoscopic and it does sob engorgement does not hold. sent8: if there is something such that the fact that it is stereoscopic and it sobs engorgement is not true then the rattle-top is a Lutheran. sent9: if something is pious it is tights. sent10: there exists something such that it does sob slang or it is noncollapsible or both. sent11: the rattle-top does drink seawater. sent12: if the geoduck is not non-tights then the rattle-top is a Lutheran. sent13: a M is tights. sent14: the crosshead does unyoke. sent15: there exists something such that it is a Lutheran or it is tights or both. sent16: the geoduck does carbonate cuff. sent17: everything is not precancerous.

sent1: {B}{a} sent2: {D}{b} sent3: (x): {G}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) sent4: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) -> {C}{b} sent5: ¬{E}{d} -> ({B}{b} v {C}{b}) sent6: {D}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}x & {E}x) sent8: (x): ¬({F}x & {E}x) -> {D}{a} sent9: (x): {C}x -> {A}x sent10: (Ex): ({FN}x v {FP}x) sent11: {GA}{a} sent12: {A}{c} -> {D}{a} sent13: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent14: {EA}{b} sent15: (Ex): ({D}x v {A}x) sent16: {EE}{c} sent17: (x): ¬{G}x

the geoduck is not Lutheran.

¬{D}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the geoduck is Lutheran. ; $context$ = sent1: the rattle-top is a M. sent2: the crosshead is a Lutheran. sent3: something is non-stereoscopic thing that does not sob engorgement if that it is precancerous is not incorrect. sent4: if something is tights and/or it is a M the crosshead is pious. sent5: if the chufa does not sob engorgement then the crosshead is a M or it is pious or both. sent6: that the rattle-top is a Lutheran is not incorrect. sent7: if something is not precancerous that it is stereoscopic and it does sob engorgement does not hold. sent8: if there is something such that the fact that it is stereoscopic and it sobs engorgement is not true then the rattle-top is a Lutheran. sent9: if something is pious it is tights. sent10: there exists something such that it does sob slang or it is noncollapsible or both. sent11: the rattle-top does drink seawater. sent12: if the geoduck is not non-tights then the rattle-top is a Lutheran. sent13: a M is tights. sent14: the crosshead does unyoke. sent15: there exists something such that it is a Lutheran or it is tights or both. sent16: the geoduck does carbonate cuff. sent17: everything is not precancerous. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> int1: the rattle-top is tights and/or is a M.; int1 -> int2: the fact that there is something such that it is tights or a M or both hold.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the crosshead is pious.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it is not abyssal but non-tonal it is not a kind of a miscegenation.

(Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

sent1: there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-abyssal thing that is not tonal then it is a miscegenation. sent2: if the creature is non-communist thing that is not unmodifiable that it is not a rheometer is not wrong. sent3: if the creature is not abyssal but it is tonal it is not a kind of a miscegenation. sent4: if the creature does not drink call-back and does not carbonate propagation then it is not tonal. sent5: if the creature is both abyssal and not tonal it is not a miscegenation. sent6: there is something such that if it is not non-abyssal and not tonal it is not a miscegenation. sent7: the slipcover is non-scenic if it is not breathless and it does not sob hornblende. sent8: if the miner is not abyssal and it does not sob goatsfoot then that it does not drink Benny hold. sent9: there is something such that if it is not abyssal and it is tonal then it is not a miscegenation. sent10: the creature is not a miscegenation if it is both not abyssal and not tonal. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a perch and it does not sob xeroradiography it is not a kind of a respecter. sent12: if something does not drink repatriate and is not a kind of a tentorium then it is not angiomatous. sent13: there is something such that if it is not peripteral and it is not an understudy it does not sob nosh-up. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not a weldment and does not perch it is not a embryologist. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not a sterility and not asexual then it is not Nigerian. sent16: the creature is a miscegenation if it is non-abyssal thing that is not tonal.

sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: (¬{T}{aa} & ¬{CP}{aa}) -> ¬{GA}{aa} sent3: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (¬{BH}{aa} & ¬{GT}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent5: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: (¬{E}{am} & ¬{JF}{am}) -> ¬{HD}{am} sent8: (¬{AA}{bj} & ¬{JH}{bj}) -> ¬{IJ}{bj} sent9: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent10: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent11: (Ex): (¬{EU}x & ¬{HQ}x) -> ¬{DO}x sent12: (x): (¬{EC}x & ¬{FO}x) -> ¬{FQ}x sent13: (Ex): (¬{GQ}x & ¬{GI}x) -> ¬{CB}x sent14: (Ex): (¬{M}x & ¬{EU}x) -> ¬{AC}x sent15: (Ex): (¬{FB}x & ¬{CE}x) -> ¬{DS}x sent16: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}

there is something such that if it does not drink repatriate and is not a tentorium then it is not angiomatous.

(Ex): (¬{EC}x & ¬{FO}x) -> ¬{FQ}x

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not abyssal but non-tonal it is not a kind of a miscegenation. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-abyssal thing that is not tonal then it is a miscegenation. sent2: if the creature is non-communist thing that is not unmodifiable that it is not a rheometer is not wrong. sent3: if the creature is not abyssal but it is tonal it is not a kind of a miscegenation. sent4: if the creature does not drink call-back and does not carbonate propagation then it is not tonal. sent5: if the creature is both abyssal and not tonal it is not a miscegenation. sent6: there is something such that if it is not non-abyssal and not tonal it is not a miscegenation. sent7: the slipcover is non-scenic if it is not breathless and it does not sob hornblende. sent8: if the miner is not abyssal and it does not sob goatsfoot then that it does not drink Benny hold. sent9: there is something such that if it is not abyssal and it is tonal then it is not a miscegenation. sent10: the creature is not a miscegenation if it is both not abyssal and not tonal. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a perch and it does not sob xeroradiography it is not a kind of a respecter. sent12: if something does not drink repatriate and is not a kind of a tentorium then it is not angiomatous. sent13: there is something such that if it is not peripteral and it is not an understudy it does not sob nosh-up. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not a weldment and does not perch it is not a embryologist. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not a sterility and not asexual then it is not Nigerian. sent16: the creature is a miscegenation if it is non-abyssal thing that is not tonal. ; $proof$ =

sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the swab survives.

{A}{b}

sent1: the counterglow is not a brachium. sent2: the swab is a brachium. sent3: if something does survive then it does communicate. sent4: the counterglow is not a brachium but it does communicate. sent5: the passionflower is a brachium. sent6: that the declinometer drinks government-in-exile but it is not a kind of a FEMA is not correct. sent7: if something is a brachium then it does communicate. sent8: the swab does sob trainbearer if the counterglow is a kind of a brachium that does communicate. sent9: if the counterglow does not sob trainbearer but it does communicate the swab is a brachium. sent10: that the crownbeard does carbonate holdover and/or it is not a kind of an appliance does not hold. sent11: if something does sob trainbearer it does communicate. sent12: something that does sob trainbearer does survive.

sent1: ¬{AA}{a} sent2: {AA}{b} sent3: (x): {A}x -> {AB}x sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent5: {AA}{ca} sent6: ¬({F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) sent7: (x): {AA}x -> {AB}x sent8: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent9: (¬{B}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {AA}{b} sent10: ¬({D}{c} v ¬{E}{c}) sent11: (x): {B}x -> {AB}x sent12: (x): {B}x -> {A}x

the swab does not survive.

¬{A}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the swab survives. ; $context$ = sent1: the counterglow is not a brachium. sent2: the swab is a brachium. sent3: if something does survive then it does communicate. sent4: the counterglow is not a brachium but it does communicate. sent5: the passionflower is a brachium. sent6: that the declinometer drinks government-in-exile but it is not a kind of a FEMA is not correct. sent7: if something is a brachium then it does communicate. sent8: the swab does sob trainbearer if the counterglow is a kind of a brachium that does communicate. sent9: if the counterglow does not sob trainbearer but it does communicate the swab is a brachium. sent10: that the crownbeard does carbonate holdover and/or it is not a kind of an appliance does not hold. sent11: if something does sob trainbearer it does communicate. sent12: something that does sob trainbearer does survive. ; $proof$ =

sent12 -> int1: the fact that the swab survives is right if the fact that it sobs trainbearer is correct.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the methylene is non-affined.

¬{A}{a}

sent1: everything is not a Kennewick and does not drink seawater. sent2: if something is not interior the fact that it is not an affined and is a strongbox is not right. sent3: the methylene does not drink seawater. sent4: everything is not lively. sent5: the shank is not a Kennewick and it is not affined. sent6: everything is not a Morpheus and it does not transmit lymphangiography.

sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) sent3: ¬{AB}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{FD}x sent5: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent6: (x): (¬{IL}x & ¬{BJ}x)

the fact that the methylene is a kind of an affined is right.

{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the methylene is non-affined. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is not a Kennewick and does not drink seawater. sent2: if something is not interior the fact that it is not an affined and is a strongbox is not right. sent3: the methylene does not drink seawater. sent4: everything is not lively. sent5: the shank is not a Kennewick and it is not affined. sent6: everything is not a Morpheus and it does not transmit lymphangiography. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the methylene is an affined.; sent1 -> int1: the shank is not a Kennewick and does not drink seawater.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

that that the pharyngealness and the carbonating chalaza happens does not hold hold.

¬({D} & {E})

sent1: that both the drinking volunteer and the drinking spine occurs is caused by that the pulsation does not occur. sent2: if the drinking chorion occurs then the gyration does not occur. sent3: if the pharyngealness does not occur then the carbonating azathioprine and the incongruentness occurs. sent4: that the pharyngealness does not occur is prevented by that the carbonating azathioprine does not occur or the pharyngealness occurs or both. sent5: if the sobbing gagman does not occur and/or the decanting happens then that the pulsation does not occur is right. sent6: that the decanting occurs but the sobbing gagman does not occur is false if that the disparagement does not occur is correct. sent7: that both the carbonating azathioprine and the incongruentness happens prevents that the drinking volunteer happens. sent8: the diagnosticness does not occur. sent9: if the fact that the drinking spine does not occur is false then the fact that the fact that not the carbonating chalaza but the gyration happens is correct is false. sent10: that the incongruentness happens is wrong if the drinking volunteer happens. sent11: that the drinking volunteer or the carbonating azathioprine or both happens prevents the incongruentness. sent12: the incongruentness occurs. sent13: the fact that the burying and the vinaceousness happens is false if the drinking volunteer does not occur. sent14: that the drinking spine and the boding occurs is brought about by that the pulsation does not occur. sent15: if that the drinking volunteer happens is correct then either the carbonating azathioprine does not occur or the pharyngealness happens or both.

sent1: ¬{I} -> ({A} & {G}) sent2: {DO} -> ¬{F} sent3: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) sent4: (¬{B} v {D}) -> {D} sent5: (¬{J} v {K}) -> ¬{I} sent6: ¬{L} -> ¬({K} & ¬{J}) sent7: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{A} sent8: ¬{IO} sent9: {G} -> ¬(¬{E} & {F}) sent10: {A} -> ¬{C} sent11: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent12: {C} sent13: ¬{A} -> ¬({IK} & {IS}) sent14: ¬{I} -> ({G} & {H}) sent15: {A} -> (¬{B} v {D})

the pharyngealness and the carbonating chalaza occurs.

({D} & {E})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that that the pharyngealness and the carbonating chalaza happens does not hold hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that both the drinking volunteer and the drinking spine occurs is caused by that the pulsation does not occur. sent2: if the drinking chorion occurs then the gyration does not occur. sent3: if the pharyngealness does not occur then the carbonating azathioprine and the incongruentness occurs. sent4: that the pharyngealness does not occur is prevented by that the carbonating azathioprine does not occur or the pharyngealness occurs or both. sent5: if the sobbing gagman does not occur and/or the decanting happens then that the pulsation does not occur is right. sent6: that the decanting occurs but the sobbing gagman does not occur is false if that the disparagement does not occur is correct. sent7: that both the carbonating azathioprine and the incongruentness happens prevents that the drinking volunteer happens. sent8: the diagnosticness does not occur. sent9: if the fact that the drinking spine does not occur is false then the fact that the fact that not the carbonating chalaza but the gyration happens is correct is false. sent10: that the incongruentness happens is wrong if the drinking volunteer happens. sent11: that the drinking volunteer or the carbonating azathioprine or both happens prevents the incongruentness. sent12: the incongruentness occurs. sent13: the fact that the burying and the vinaceousness happens is false if the drinking volunteer does not occur. sent14: that the drinking spine and the boding occurs is brought about by that the pulsation does not occur. sent15: if that the drinking volunteer happens is correct then either the carbonating azathioprine does not occur or the pharyngealness happens or both. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the carbonating azathioprine happens.; assump1 -> int1: either the drinking volunteer happens or the carbonating azathioprine happens or both.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the incongruentness does not occur.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the carbonating azathioprine does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a revelation and it is not mucosal it sobs imp.

(Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x

sent1: there is something such that if it is not a revelation and it is mucosal that it does sob imp is not wrong. sent2: there is something such that if it is a revelation and it is not mucosal then it does sob imp. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a phycobilin and is not aphetic then it is a quintessence. sent4: if the scalper is not a kind of a revelation and it is not mucosal then it sobs imp. sent5: the scalper sobs imp if it is not a kind of a revelation and it is mucosal. sent6: if the scalper is both a revelation and not mucosal then it sobs imp. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a stamina and it does not drink umbra it does overjoy. sent8: if something does not freight and does not drink Azaleastrum then it is a revelation. sent9: there exists something such that if it drinks LF and does not carbonate land then it transmits supervention. sent10: there is something such that if it is a regression and does not drink deferral it does transmit Godhead. sent11: if the scalper is not a Bletilla and it does not sob imp then it is unstoppable.

sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (Ex): (¬{GA}x & ¬{ID}x) -> {IU}x sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent6: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ({DM}x & ¬{EN}x) -> {CK}x sent8: (x): (¬{GL}x & ¬{HU}x) -> {AA}x sent9: (Ex): ({DL}x & ¬{AH}x) -> {CE}x sent10: (Ex): ({DC}x & ¬{HF}x) -> {BR}x sent11: (¬{BO}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> {CJ}{aa}

if the vestryman does not freight and it does not drink Azaleastrum the fact that it is a revelation is true.

(¬{GL}{a} & ¬{HU}{a}) -> {AA}{a}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a revelation and it is not mucosal it sobs imp. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is not a revelation and it is mucosal that it does sob imp is not wrong. sent2: there is something such that if it is a revelation and it is not mucosal then it does sob imp. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a phycobilin and is not aphetic then it is a quintessence. sent4: if the scalper is not a kind of a revelation and it is not mucosal then it sobs imp. sent5: the scalper sobs imp if it is not a kind of a revelation and it is mucosal. sent6: if the scalper is both a revelation and not mucosal then it sobs imp. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a stamina and it does not drink umbra it does overjoy. sent8: if something does not freight and does not drink Azaleastrum then it is a revelation. sent9: there exists something such that if it drinks LF and does not carbonate land then it transmits supervention. sent10: there is something such that if it is a regression and does not drink deferral it does transmit Godhead. sent11: if the scalper is not a Bletilla and it does not sob imp then it is unstoppable. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the squib is a confection or it does carbonate farmland or both is not true.

¬({AB}{b} v {B}{b})

sent1: the squib does carbonate illuminance if the divan is not a trustbuster. sent2: something is a kind of a confection and/or it is a Rotarian if it is not a kind of a trustbuster. sent3: the altar is a kind of a confection. sent4: the squib carbonates illuminance and is a confection if the divan is not a trustbuster. sent5: the fact that the divan is not implacable is not incorrect. sent6: if that something carbonates farmland but it is not a actinium is not correct it is not a trustbuster. sent7: the divan is a trustbuster and it is a actinium if the minium is non-disciplinary. sent8: the divan is not a trustbuster.

sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> {AA}{b} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AB}x v {FC}x) sent3: {AB}{ed} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent5: ¬{EL}{a} sent6: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent7: ¬{D}{c} -> ({A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent8: ¬{A}{a}

the senna is a confection and/or it is a kind of a Rotarian.

({AB}{dk} v {FC}{dk})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the squib is a confection or it does carbonate farmland or both is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the squib does carbonate illuminance if the divan is not a trustbuster. sent2: something is a kind of a confection and/or it is a Rotarian if it is not a kind of a trustbuster. sent3: the altar is a kind of a confection. sent4: the squib carbonates illuminance and is a confection if the divan is not a trustbuster. sent5: the fact that the divan is not implacable is not incorrect. sent6: if that something carbonates farmland but it is not a actinium is not correct it is not a trustbuster. sent7: the divan is a trustbuster and it is a actinium if the minium is non-disciplinary. sent8: the divan is not a trustbuster. ; $proof$ =

sent4 & sent8 -> int1: the squib does carbonate illuminance and is a confection.; int1 -> int2: the fact that the squib is a confection is true.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__