version
stringclasses 1
value | hypothesis
stringlengths 11
215
| hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
39
| context
stringlengths 0
2.9k
| context_formula
stringlengths 0
905
| proofs
sequence | proofs_formula
sequence | negative_hypothesis
stringlengths 15
193
⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
37
⌀ | negative_proofs
sequence | negative_original_tree_depth
int64 0
25
⌀ | original_tree_depth
int64 1
4
| depth
int64 0
3
⌀ | num_formula_distractors
int64 0
22
| num_translation_distractors
int64 0
0
| num_all_distractors
int64 0
22
| proof_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_proof_label
stringclasses 2
values | world_assump_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_world_assump_label
stringclasses 2
values | prompt_serial
stringlengths 89
3.09k
| proof_serial
stringlengths 11
654
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DeductionInstance | the fact that the soapberry does not cane Sawan and is not bold is incorrect. | ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | sent1: if the salsa is not costal then the soapberry does not cane Sawan and it is not bold. sent2: the fact that the soapberry does not cane Sawan and it is not bold is incorrect if the salsa does cane Sawan. sent3: there is something such that it is not a Taegu and it is not an express. sent4: if something that is not a Taegu is not an express then the salsa does cane Sawan. | sent1: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent2: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent3: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the salsa does cane Sawan is not incorrect.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the soapberry does not cane Sawan and is non-bold. | (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | [] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the soapberry does not cane Sawan and is not bold is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the salsa is not costal then the soapberry does not cane Sawan and it is not bold. sent2: the fact that the soapberry does not cane Sawan and it is not bold is incorrect if the salsa does cane Sawan. sent3: there is something such that it is not a Taegu and it is not an express. sent4: if something that is not a Taegu is not an express then the salsa does cane Sawan. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the salsa does cane Sawan is not incorrect.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the flatness does not occur. | ¬{AA} | sent1: the barring occurs and the ideologicalness occurs. sent2: the jamming occurs. sent3: the suppling does not occur but the sanitation occurs. sent4: the impinging Orff occurs and the sit-down occurs. sent5: the caning cheer does not occur if that both the writtenness and the thermography occurs is not true. sent6: the ship does not occur. sent7: the jacks is prevented by that the coping does not occur. sent8: the structuralness does not occur. sent9: the detriment occurs. sent10: the non-flatness is prevented by that the non-flat happens and/or the sit-down does not occur. sent11: the caning orthodoxy does not occur but the supplication happens. sent12: that not the invaliding but the caning born happens does not hold. sent13: the affirmation and the beam occurs. sent14: the babel does not occur. | sent1: ({JH} & {DJ}) sent2: {EK} sent3: (¬{JI} & {JF}) sent4: ({B} & {A}) sent5: ¬(¬{FO} & {I}) -> ¬{AJ} sent6: ¬{AD} sent7: ¬{DE} -> ¬{GE} sent8: ¬{DS} sent9: {HM} sent10: ({AA} v ¬{A}) -> {AA} sent11: (¬{HP} & {IO}) sent12: ¬(¬{FR} & {EA}) sent13: ({HU} & {IM}) sent14: ¬{O} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that both the non-flatness and the impinging nardoo occurs is incorrect.; sent4 -> int1: the impinging Orff occurs.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}); sent4 -> int1: {B};"
] | the flat happens. | {AA} | [] | 3 | 4 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the flatness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the barring occurs and the ideologicalness occurs. sent2: the jamming occurs. sent3: the suppling does not occur but the sanitation occurs. sent4: the impinging Orff occurs and the sit-down occurs. sent5: the caning cheer does not occur if that both the writtenness and the thermography occurs is not true. sent6: the ship does not occur. sent7: the jacks is prevented by that the coping does not occur. sent8: the structuralness does not occur. sent9: the detriment occurs. sent10: the non-flatness is prevented by that the non-flat happens and/or the sit-down does not occur. sent11: the caning orthodoxy does not occur but the supplication happens. sent12: that not the invaliding but the caning born happens does not hold. sent13: the affirmation and the beam occurs. sent14: the babel does not occur. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that both the non-flatness and the impinging nardoo occurs is incorrect.; sent4 -> int1: the impinging Orff occurs.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the buckthorn is not angiomatous and it is non-Seljuk. | (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | sent1: if there exists something such that it is mud-brick then the buckthorn is non-angiomatous thing that is not a kind of a Seljuk. sent2: the buckthorn is not a kind of a scientist and it is not mud-brick. sent3: there is something such that it is mud-brick. sent4: there is something such that it is angiomatous. sent5: the antimatter is not angiomatous. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent2: (¬{BC}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: (Ex): {B}x sent5: ¬{B}{eu} | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the buckthorn is not angiomatous and it is non-Seljuk. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it is mud-brick then the buckthorn is non-angiomatous thing that is not a kind of a Seljuk. sent2: the buckthorn is not a kind of a scientist and it is not mud-brick. sent3: there is something such that it is mud-brick. sent4: there is something such that it is angiomatous. sent5: the antimatter is not angiomatous. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the crashing happens. | {AB} | sent1: the discomycetousness occurs if the dissolution does not occur. sent2: if that the crumbling does not occur hold the diploid and the crashing occurs. sent3: if the fact that not the viaticalness but the crash occurs is false the crash does not occur. sent4: the fact that the diploidness happens is not wrong. sent5: if the crumbling happens then the fact that both the non-viaticalness and the crash happens is false. sent6: if the crumbling does not occur then the fact that the diploid happens is true. sent7: if the battue does not occur then the times happens and the repetition occurs. sent8: that the crumbling does not occur hold. | sent1: ¬{F} -> {HE} sent2: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & {AB}) sent3: ¬(¬{B} & {AB}) -> ¬{AB} sent4: {AA} sent5: {A} -> ¬(¬{B} & {AB}) sent6: ¬{A} -> {AA} sent7: ¬{E} -> ({IL} & {D}) sent8: ¬{A} | [
"sent2 & sent8 -> int1: the diploid happens and the crash occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent8 -> int1: ({AA} & {AB}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the crashing does not occur. | ¬{AB} | [] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the crashing happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the discomycetousness occurs if the dissolution does not occur. sent2: if that the crumbling does not occur hold the diploid and the crashing occurs. sent3: if the fact that not the viaticalness but the crash occurs is false the crash does not occur. sent4: the fact that the diploidness happens is not wrong. sent5: if the crumbling happens then the fact that both the non-viaticalness and the crash happens is false. sent6: if the crumbling does not occur then the fact that the diploid happens is true. sent7: if the battue does not occur then the times happens and the repetition occurs. sent8: that the crumbling does not occur hold. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent8 -> int1: the diploid happens and the crash occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the laird does not communicate. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: the machilid communicates. sent2: if the trapezius is a gratuity then the laird is not a kind of a cords. sent3: the brucine is a kind of a gratuity. sent4: if the fact that the Santee does cord and it canes brandysnap is not true the trapezius is not a cord. sent5: the trapezius does communicate. sent6: if the fact that the trapezius does apologize and it is a gratuity does not hold then the laird is not a gratuity. sent7: the trapezius does cord. sent8: the trapezius is not astronomic. sent9: if something is not a kind of a gratuity then it does communicate. sent10: the trapezius is a gratuity and does cord. sent11: that something does apologize and is a kind of a gratuity is not true if the fact that it is not a cords is right. sent12: the Santee is a phi. | sent1: {C}{q} sent2: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: {A}{if} sent4: ¬({B}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: {C}{a} sent6: ¬({D}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent7: {B}{a} sent8: ¬{HH}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> {C}x sent10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({D}x & {A}x) sent12: {F}{c} | [
"sent10 -> int1: the trapezius is a kind of a gratuity.;"
] | [
"sent10 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] | the laird does communicate. | {C}{b} | [
"sent9 -> int2: the laird communicates if it is not a gratuity.; sent11 -> int3: that the trapezius does apologize and is a kind of a gratuity is wrong if that it is not a kind of a cords is not incorrect.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the laird does not communicate. ; $context$ = sent1: the machilid communicates. sent2: if the trapezius is a gratuity then the laird is not a kind of a cords. sent3: the brucine is a kind of a gratuity. sent4: if the fact that the Santee does cord and it canes brandysnap is not true the trapezius is not a cord. sent5: the trapezius does communicate. sent6: if the fact that the trapezius does apologize and it is a gratuity does not hold then the laird is not a gratuity. sent7: the trapezius does cord. sent8: the trapezius is not astronomic. sent9: if something is not a kind of a gratuity then it does communicate. sent10: the trapezius is a gratuity and does cord. sent11: that something does apologize and is a kind of a gratuity is not true if the fact that it is not a cords is right. sent12: the Santee is a phi. ; $proof$ = | sent10 -> int1: the trapezius is a kind of a gratuity.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the phonologist is lexicographic. | {C}{b} | sent1: the vesicant does dishonor arrangement. sent2: there exists something such that it dishonors arrangement. sent3: the vesicant is evidentiary. sent4: the vesicant is limbic. sent5: there is something such that it is evidentiary. sent6: the phonologist is evidentiary if that the carotene is evidentiary hold. sent7: the phonologist does dishonor arrangement. sent8: if something is evidentiary then it is discernible. sent9: The arrangement does dishonor vesicant. sent10: the photometer does dishonor arrangement. sent11: something is evidentiary but not lexicographic if it does not dishonor arrangement. | sent1: {B}{a} sent2: (Ex): {B}x sent3: {A}{a} sent4: {FL}{a} sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: {A}{c} -> {A}{b} sent7: {B}{b} sent8: (x): {A}x -> {DO}x sent9: {AA}{aa} sent10: {B}{fj} sent11: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{C}x) | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the vesicant is evidentiary and it does dishonor arrangement.; int1 -> int2: something is evidentiary and dishonors arrangement.;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x);"
] | the phonologist is not lexicographic. | ¬{C}{b} | [
"sent11 -> int3: the phonologist is evidentiary but it is not lexicographic if it does not dishonor arrangement.;"
] | 4 | 3 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the phonologist is lexicographic. ; $context$ = sent1: the vesicant does dishonor arrangement. sent2: there exists something such that it dishonors arrangement. sent3: the vesicant is evidentiary. sent4: the vesicant is limbic. sent5: there is something such that it is evidentiary. sent6: the phonologist is evidentiary if that the carotene is evidentiary hold. sent7: the phonologist does dishonor arrangement. sent8: if something is evidentiary then it is discernible. sent9: The arrangement does dishonor vesicant. sent10: the photometer does dishonor arrangement. sent11: something is evidentiary but not lexicographic if it does not dishonor arrangement. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the vesicant is evidentiary and it does dishonor arrangement.; int1 -> int2: something is evidentiary and dishonors arrangement.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that if the fact that the settlement is not a kind of an unfamiliarity and it is not the pop is not true then the settlement is philhellenic does not hold. | ¬(¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}) | sent1: the settlement is anastomotic if that it is not vinaceous and is not indeterminate is not correct. sent2: if something is sublittoral then it is a slush. sent3: the settlement is syntagmatic if the fact that it is year-round and it is not a kind of a pop does not hold. sent4: something that is not a kind of an unfamiliarity and does not pop is not philhellenic. sent5: if that something is not putrid and does not recoup Goudy does not hold then it is propulsive. sent6: if the fact that the settlement is not lithophytic and it is not a pop is not right it seeps. sent7: if something is unpalatable it is a summary. sent8: if the fact that something is not an unfamiliarity and is not a pop does not hold it is philhellenic. sent9: something canes cornet if it assembles. sent10: something is philhellenic if the fact that it is an unfamiliarity and it is not a pop does not hold. sent11: if the fact that something is photochemical is true then it is omnidirectional. sent12: the settlement is philhellenic if it is a pop. sent13: if that something does not recoup pyelography and it is not a kind of a popularization is not right then it does scratch. sent14: if something is a pop then it is philhellenic. sent15: the cornet is philhellenic if the fact that it is a kind of unobvious thing that is not diametral is not correct. sent16: that the bottle-grass is a waterline is not wrong if it does sputter. | sent1: ¬(¬{HL}{aa} & ¬{BN}{aa}) -> {AD}{aa} sent2: (x): {BS}x -> {HP}x sent3: ¬({II}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {HT}{aa} sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{HF}x & ¬{GG}x) -> {GQ}x sent6: ¬(¬{K}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {BE}{aa} sent7: (x): {AK}x -> {HE}x sent8: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent9: (x): {JJ}x -> {IT}x sent10: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: (x): {CC}x -> {GR}x sent12: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent13: (x): ¬(¬{IB}x & ¬{IJ}x) -> {GB}x sent14: (x): {AB}x -> {B}x sent15: ¬(¬{CJ}{eh} & ¬{BI}{eh}) -> {B}{eh} sent16: {I}{je} -> {HU}{je} | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that if the fact that the settlement is not a kind of an unfamiliarity and it is not the pop is not true then the settlement is philhellenic does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the settlement is anastomotic if that it is not vinaceous and is not indeterminate is not correct. sent2: if something is sublittoral then it is a slush. sent3: the settlement is syntagmatic if the fact that it is year-round and it is not a kind of a pop does not hold. sent4: something that is not a kind of an unfamiliarity and does not pop is not philhellenic. sent5: if that something is not putrid and does not recoup Goudy does not hold then it is propulsive. sent6: if the fact that the settlement is not lithophytic and it is not a pop is not right it seeps. sent7: if something is unpalatable it is a summary. sent8: if the fact that something is not an unfamiliarity and is not a pop does not hold it is philhellenic. sent9: something canes cornet if it assembles. sent10: something is philhellenic if the fact that it is an unfamiliarity and it is not a pop does not hold. sent11: if the fact that something is photochemical is true then it is omnidirectional. sent12: the settlement is philhellenic if it is a pop. sent13: if that something does not recoup pyelography and it is not a kind of a popularization is not right then it does scratch. sent14: if something is a pop then it is philhellenic. sent15: the cornet is philhellenic if the fact that it is a kind of unobvious thing that is not diametral is not correct. sent16: that the bottle-grass is a waterline is not wrong if it does sputter. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the amoralist is a kind of a Linux. | {A}{a} | sent1: the cricket canes frappe if the pinscher does not canes frappe. sent2: if the amoralist is not a Linux that the cricket is not dot-com and it does not cane topsoil is incorrect. sent3: the cricket does not cane topsoil. sent4: if the cricket does cane frappe and it is a Linux then the amoralist is not a Linux. sent5: the fact that the servant is not a Linux hold. sent6: the fact that the counterirritant does not recoup modality and/or it is not a lexicography hold. sent7: the fact that the cricket is not dot-com is not incorrect. sent8: The topsoil does not cane cricket. | sent1: ¬{C}{c} -> {C}{b} sent2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent3: ¬{AB}{b} sent4: ({C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent5: ¬{A}{ad} sent6: (¬{F}{d} v ¬{G}{d}) sent7: ¬{AA}{b} sent8: ¬{AC}{aa} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the amoralist is not a Linux.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: that the cricket is non-dot-com thing that does not cane topsoil is wrong.; sent7 & sent3 -> int2: the cricket is not a dot-com and it does not cane topsoil.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent7 & sent3 -> int2: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the amoralist is not a Linux. | ¬{A}{a} | [] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the amoralist is a kind of a Linux. ; $context$ = sent1: the cricket canes frappe if the pinscher does not canes frappe. sent2: if the amoralist is not a Linux that the cricket is not dot-com and it does not cane topsoil is incorrect. sent3: the cricket does not cane topsoil. sent4: if the cricket does cane frappe and it is a Linux then the amoralist is not a Linux. sent5: the fact that the servant is not a Linux hold. sent6: the fact that the counterirritant does not recoup modality and/or it is not a lexicography hold. sent7: the fact that the cricket is not dot-com is not incorrect. sent8: The topsoil does not cane cricket. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the amoralist is not a Linux.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: that the cricket is non-dot-com thing that does not cane topsoil is wrong.; sent7 & sent3 -> int2: the cricket is not a dot-com and it does not cane topsoil.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is not non-autobiographical and it is not a kind of a force it is not canicular. | (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: there is something such that if it is both hircine and not a manual it is not a rout. sent2: there exists something such that if it does cane Steinberg and is not centralist it is a rout. sent3: if a flexible thing is not a caramel it does not leaf. sent4: there exists something such that if it is autobiographical and does force then it is not canicular. sent5: if the insemination is agrypnotic but it is not a kind of a sketch it does not force. sent6: the fact that the fact that the watercolor is fiducial hold if the watercolor recoups cracker and is not a arrogator is correct. sent7: there is something such that if that it dishonors fatigue and is not a muralist is correct then it is cryogenic. | sent1: (Ex): ({FF}x & ¬{IE}x) -> ¬{CD}x sent2: (Ex): ({GL}x & ¬{JI}x) -> {CD}x sent3: (x): ({II}x & ¬{HP}x) -> ¬{IO}x sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: ({CL}{aa} & ¬{EH}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent6: ({AN}{dh} & ¬{GF}{dh}) -> {FD}{dh} sent7: (Ex): ({FR}x & ¬{HJ}x) -> {BA}x | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not non-autobiographical and it is not a kind of a force it is not canicular. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is both hircine and not a manual it is not a rout. sent2: there exists something such that if it does cane Steinberg and is not centralist it is a rout. sent3: if a flexible thing is not a caramel it does not leaf. sent4: there exists something such that if it is autobiographical and does force then it is not canicular. sent5: if the insemination is agrypnotic but it is not a kind of a sketch it does not force. sent6: the fact that the fact that the watercolor is fiducial hold if the watercolor recoups cracker and is not a arrogator is correct. sent7: there is something such that if that it dishonors fatigue and is not a muralist is correct then it is cryogenic. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that there exists something such that if that it is retinal is not wrong it is not a label and it is a Kabul is not true. | ¬((Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)) | sent1: if the bookshop is horticultural then it is not a ticking and is ignoble. sent2: if the lox is retinal then it is a kind of a label that is a Kabul. sent3: something does not granulate and is a sika if it is a kind of a cardinalate. sent4: if the lox is retinal then it is not a label and it is a Kabul. sent5: there is something such that if it is retinal then that it is a Kabul is correct. sent6: there is something such that if the fact that it does impinge hardwood is true it is a kind of a constitutionalist. | sent1: {FU}{cr} -> (¬{EK}{cr} & {CN}{cr}) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (x): {DH}x -> (¬{AJ}x & {BR}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): {A}x -> {AB}x sent6: (Ex): {HM}x -> {FE}x | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | there exists something such that if it is a kind of a cardinalate it does not granulate and is a sika. | (Ex): {DH}x -> (¬{AJ}x & {BR}x) | [
"sent3 -> int1: the valsartan does not granulate but it is a sika if it is a cardinalate.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if that it is retinal is not wrong it is not a label and it is a Kabul is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bookshop is horticultural then it is not a ticking and is ignoble. sent2: if the lox is retinal then it is a kind of a label that is a Kabul. sent3: something does not granulate and is a sika if it is a kind of a cardinalate. sent4: if the lox is retinal then it is not a label and it is a Kabul. sent5: there is something such that if it is retinal then that it is a Kabul is correct. sent6: there is something such that if the fact that it does impinge hardwood is true it is a kind of a constitutionalist. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the tri-iodothyronine does not cane sinning hold. | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: if the tri-iodothyronine does not wring then the fact that it is piezoelectric and it is not a kind of a chute is not right. sent2: something does cane sinning if that it is piezoelectric and it is not a chute is wrong. sent3: the tri-iodothyronine does not wring. | sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: ¬{A}{aa} | [
"sent2 -> int1: if that the fact that the tri-iodothyronine is piezoelectric thing that is not a chute is incorrect is not incorrect it canes sinning.; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: that the tri-iodothyronine is piezoelectric and does not chute is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that the tri-iodothyronine does not cane sinning hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the tri-iodothyronine does not wring then the fact that it is piezoelectric and it is not a kind of a chute is not right. sent2: something does cane sinning if that it is piezoelectric and it is not a chute is wrong. sent3: the tri-iodothyronine does not wring. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: if that the fact that the tri-iodothyronine is piezoelectric thing that is not a chute is incorrect is not incorrect it canes sinning.; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: that the tri-iodothyronine is piezoelectric and does not chute is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fog does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: the precancerousness does not occur. sent2: that the approachableness does not occur is true if the fact that the dishonoring showplace does not occur and the inconsiderableness does not occur is not right. sent3: the dishonoring Eschscholtzia does not occur and the precancerousness does not occur. sent4: if the approachableness and/or the March occurs then the fog does not occur. sent5: if the dishonoring headache occurs then that the dishonoring showplace does not occur and the inconsiderableness does not occur is wrong. sent6: the purgatorialness occurs and/or the scouring happens if the March does not occur. | sent1: ¬{AB} sent2: ¬(¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} sent3: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent4: ({B} v {A}) -> ¬{C} sent5: {F} -> ¬(¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent6: ¬{A} -> ({DT} v {AI}) | [] | [] | the purgatorialness and/or the scouring occurs. | ({DT} v {AI}) | [] | 6 | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fog does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the precancerousness does not occur. sent2: that the approachableness does not occur is true if the fact that the dishonoring showplace does not occur and the inconsiderableness does not occur is not right. sent3: the dishonoring Eschscholtzia does not occur and the precancerousness does not occur. sent4: if the approachableness and/or the March occurs then the fog does not occur. sent5: if the dishonoring headache occurs then that the dishonoring showplace does not occur and the inconsiderableness does not occur is wrong. sent6: the purgatorialness occurs and/or the scouring happens if the March does not occur. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the obsolescence is a puncture but it is not a kind of a Bellerophon does not hold. | ¬({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) | sent1: if that the obsolescence is unsuccessful or it is Czech or both is not true it is not a Bellerophon. sent2: there exists something such that it is not a recessive. sent3: the obsolescence dishonors reaffiliation. sent4: if there is something such that it is not a recessive the obsolescence is unsuccessful. sent5: if the metacarpal is unsuccessful the obsolescence is recessive. sent6: the obsolescence is a kind of a secureness and does not recoup Solresol. sent7: the obsolescence punctures. sent8: if something is a recessive the fact that it is not saxicolous and/or it is a spherometer is wrong. sent9: there is something such that it is not a kind of a Czech. sent10: if there is something such that it is not recessive then the fact that the obsolescence is not unsuccessful and/or it is a Czech is incorrect. sent11: the treelet is not unsuccessful. sent12: that something punctures but it is not a Bellerophon is false if it is a recessive. sent13: if that the obsolescence does not expectorate and/or is a kind of a overbid does not hold it is not a Czech. sent14: the obsolescence is unsuccessful. sent15: the chalcocite is not a skylight if the fact that it is not a unprofitableness and/or it dishonors mayhem does not hold. sent16: that something is recessive is true. sent17: the obsolescence does not dishonor puritan. sent18: the fact that the obsolescence is not a kind of a Bellerophon is right if that it is either not unsuccessful or a Czech or both is not correct. | sent1: ¬({B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent2: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent3: {BP}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}{a} sent5: {B}{b} -> {A}{a} sent6: ({HE}{a} & ¬{DR}{a}) sent7: {E}{a} sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{CS}x v {GP}x) sent9: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent11: ¬{B}{hp} sent12: (x): {A}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{D}x) sent13: ¬(¬{GB}{a} v {IS}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent14: {B}{a} sent15: ¬(¬{GN}{ce} v {HC}{ce}) -> ¬{I}{ce} sent16: (Ex): {A}x sent17: ¬{IN}{a} sent18: ¬(¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} | [
"sent2 & sent10 -> int1: that the obsolescence is not unsuccessful and/or it is a Czech is not correct.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the obsolescence is not a Bellerophon.; int2 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent10 -> int1: ¬(¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}); int1 & sent18 -> int2: ¬{D}{a}; int2 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the obsolescence is a kind of a puncture but it is not a Bellerophon does not hold. | ¬({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) | [
"sent12 -> int3: that the obsolescence punctures but it is not a kind of a Bellerophon is wrong if it is a kind of a recessive.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the obsolescence is a puncture but it is not a kind of a Bellerophon does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the obsolescence is unsuccessful or it is Czech or both is not true it is not a Bellerophon. sent2: there exists something such that it is not a recessive. sent3: the obsolescence dishonors reaffiliation. sent4: if there is something such that it is not a recessive the obsolescence is unsuccessful. sent5: if the metacarpal is unsuccessful the obsolescence is recessive. sent6: the obsolescence is a kind of a secureness and does not recoup Solresol. sent7: the obsolescence punctures. sent8: if something is a recessive the fact that it is not saxicolous and/or it is a spherometer is wrong. sent9: there is something such that it is not a kind of a Czech. sent10: if there is something such that it is not recessive then the fact that the obsolescence is not unsuccessful and/or it is a Czech is incorrect. sent11: the treelet is not unsuccessful. sent12: that something punctures but it is not a Bellerophon is false if it is a recessive. sent13: if that the obsolescence does not expectorate and/or is a kind of a overbid does not hold it is not a Czech. sent14: the obsolescence is unsuccessful. sent15: the chalcocite is not a skylight if the fact that it is not a unprofitableness and/or it dishonors mayhem does not hold. sent16: that something is recessive is true. sent17: the obsolescence does not dishonor puritan. sent18: the fact that the obsolescence is not a kind of a Bellerophon is right if that it is either not unsuccessful or a Czech or both is not correct. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent10 -> int1: that the obsolescence is not unsuccessful and/or it is a Czech is not correct.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the obsolescence is not a Bellerophon.; int2 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that there is something such that if it does not croak it is not Ghanaian is wrong. | ¬((Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x) | sent1: there is something such that if it is not a noumenon then it is not Victorian. sent2: if something is a Isurus then it is not a statement. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a worldliness then it does dishonor byte. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a sour then it is a quadruple. sent5: there is something such that if it does not transpire then it is politics. sent6: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a croak hold it is Ghanaian. sent7: there is something such that if it is not antitypic then the fact that it is pugilistic is not incorrect. sent8: there is something such that if it is unintelligible it is not a kind of a legitimacy. sent9: there exists something such that if it succumbs then the fact that it is not a neoconservatism is not false. sent10: that the amphibolite is discordant is not wrong if it is not Ghanaian. sent11: there exists something such that if it is genetic then it is not nonterritorial. sent12: the amphibolite is not a multiplex if it does cane crith. sent13: something is not astrocytic if it does not transpire. sent14: if something is not a kind of a Epicurus then it does not recoup Kahlua. sent15: something does not incinerate if it is a devilfish. sent16: if something is a croak it is not Ghanaian. sent17: if the amphibolite is not a kind of a croak then it is Ghanaian. sent18: if something does not dishonor militarist then it is not unidentifiable. sent19: something does not dishonor Vonnegut if it does not cane milord. sent20: something is not Ghanaian if it is not a croak. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{BA}x -> ¬{FQ}x sent2: (x): {CG}x -> ¬{HJ}x sent3: (Ex): ¬{AE}x -> {JE}x sent4: (Ex): ¬{EQ}x -> {FF}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{EH}x -> {K}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{IF}x -> {BM}x sent8: (Ex): {E}x -> ¬{HF}x sent9: (Ex): {JH}x -> ¬{GT}x sent10: ¬{C}{aa} -> {DR}{aa} sent11: (Ex): {AA}x -> ¬{CI}x sent12: {EP}{aa} -> ¬{DU}{aa} sent13: (x): ¬{EH}x -> ¬{GB}x sent14: (x): ¬{JB}x -> ¬{F}x sent15: (x): {BU}x -> ¬{AF}x sent16: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent17: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent18: (x): ¬{DN}x -> ¬{D}x sent19: (x): ¬{II}x -> ¬{BL}x sent20: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x | [
"sent20 -> int1: the fact that the amphibolite is not Ghanaian if the amphibolite is not a kind of a croak is not wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent20 -> int1: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it does not croak it is not Ghanaian is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is not a noumenon then it is not Victorian. sent2: if something is a Isurus then it is not a statement. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a worldliness then it does dishonor byte. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a sour then it is a quadruple. sent5: there is something such that if it does not transpire then it is politics. sent6: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a croak hold it is Ghanaian. sent7: there is something such that if it is not antitypic then the fact that it is pugilistic is not incorrect. sent8: there is something such that if it is unintelligible it is not a kind of a legitimacy. sent9: there exists something such that if it succumbs then the fact that it is not a neoconservatism is not false. sent10: that the amphibolite is discordant is not wrong if it is not Ghanaian. sent11: there exists something such that if it is genetic then it is not nonterritorial. sent12: the amphibolite is not a multiplex if it does cane crith. sent13: something is not astrocytic if it does not transpire. sent14: if something is not a kind of a Epicurus then it does not recoup Kahlua. sent15: something does not incinerate if it is a devilfish. sent16: if something is a croak it is not Ghanaian. sent17: if the amphibolite is not a kind of a croak then it is Ghanaian. sent18: if something does not dishonor militarist then it is not unidentifiable. sent19: something does not dishonor Vonnegut if it does not cane milord. sent20: something is not Ghanaian if it is not a croak. ; $proof$ = | sent20 -> int1: the fact that the amphibolite is not Ghanaian if the amphibolite is not a kind of a croak is not wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is not a kind of a self-renewal and/or does pilfer it is not a exteroceptor. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: if something is not postmillennial and/or it is a handstand it is not an angstrom. sent2: something is not a coralwood if it is immeasurable and/or tamed. sent3: there exists something such that if it does pilfer then it is not a kind of a exteroceptor. sent4: if either the checkroom is not a kind of a self-renewal or it pilfers or both it is a kind of a exteroceptor. sent5: there is something such that if it is not operational or naval or both then that it is not a Father hold. sent6: if that the checkroom does pilfer is not false then it is not a exteroceptor. sent7: the checkroom is not a exteroceptor if it is not a self-renewal or it pilfers or both. sent8: there exists something such that if it either is a kind of a self-renewal or pilfers or both then it is not a exteroceptor. sent9: the fact that there is something such that if it is not a self-renewal or does pilfer or both then it is a exteroceptor hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a self-renewal then it is not a kind of a exteroceptor. sent11: if the checkroom is a self-renewal and/or does pilfer then it is not a exteroceptor. | sent1: (x): (¬{HA}x v {U}x) -> ¬{EB}x sent2: (x): (¬{AE}x v {BD}x) -> ¬{HJ}x sent3: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): (¬{DL}x v {IR}x) -> ¬{GR}x sent6: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent9: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent11: ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | there exists something such that if it is not postmillennial or is a handstand or both it is not an angstrom. | (Ex): (¬{HA}x v {U}x) -> ¬{EB}x | [
"sent1 -> int1: the Montserratian is not an angstrom if it is not postmillennial and/or is a handstand.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not a kind of a self-renewal and/or does pilfer it is not a exteroceptor. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not postmillennial and/or it is a handstand it is not an angstrom. sent2: something is not a coralwood if it is immeasurable and/or tamed. sent3: there exists something such that if it does pilfer then it is not a kind of a exteroceptor. sent4: if either the checkroom is not a kind of a self-renewal or it pilfers or both it is a kind of a exteroceptor. sent5: there is something such that if it is not operational or naval or both then that it is not a Father hold. sent6: if that the checkroom does pilfer is not false then it is not a exteroceptor. sent7: the checkroom is not a exteroceptor if it is not a self-renewal or it pilfers or both. sent8: there exists something such that if it either is a kind of a self-renewal or pilfers or both then it is not a exteroceptor. sent9: the fact that there is something such that if it is not a self-renewal or does pilfer or both then it is a exteroceptor hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a self-renewal then it is not a kind of a exteroceptor. sent11: if the checkroom is a self-renewal and/or does pilfer then it is not a exteroceptor. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the Botox is both a smother and not a links is incorrect. | ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | sent1: something is not a Tongan if it cracks. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a cracking that the Botox is a kind of a smother but it is not a links does not hold. sent3: if the fact that the signboard is a kind of stimulative thing that is not a kind of a brutality is wrong then it is a kind of a brutality. sent4: if something is not a cracking then it is a smother and it is not a kind of a links. sent5: either something is a hectoliter or it does not cane proofreader or both. sent6: the Botox does not crack if the signboard is both a brutality and a crack. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬{BH}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent3: ¬({I}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> {E}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent5: (Ex): ({G}x v ¬{F}x) sent6: ({E}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} | [] | [] | that the grenade is not a kind of a Tongan is not false. | ¬{BH}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> int1: the grenade is not Tongan if it cracks.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the Botox is both a smother and not a links is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a Tongan if it cracks. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a cracking that the Botox is a kind of a smother but it is not a links does not hold. sent3: if the fact that the signboard is a kind of stimulative thing that is not a kind of a brutality is wrong then it is a kind of a brutality. sent4: if something is not a cracking then it is a smother and it is not a kind of a links. sent5: either something is a hectoliter or it does not cane proofreader or both. sent6: the Botox does not crack if the signboard is both a brutality and a crack. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the doubleheader does not occur. | ¬{A} | sent1: that the dishonoring Botox happens is caused by that the doubleheader occurs and/or the jolly does not occur. sent2: the doubleheader occurs. | sent1: ({A} v ¬{B}) -> {ER} sent2: {A} | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the dishonoring Botox occurs. | {ER} | [] | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the doubleheader does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the dishonoring Botox happens is caused by that the doubleheader occurs and/or the jolly does not occur. sent2: the doubleheader occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the midgrass is a kind of a Carpinaceae. | {A}{a} | sent1: the midgrass is not electric if the fact that the calico does dishonor yawn but it does not excuse is wrong. sent2: that the midgrass dishonors yawn and is a kind of an excuse is not correct. sent3: the calico is a kind of an electric. sent4: if something dishonors yawn and is not an excuse then it is a Carpinaceae. sent5: if the midgrass does dishonor yawn and it excuses then it is a Carpinaceae. sent6: the calico is not a kind of an electric if the midgrass excuses. sent7: the midgrass is not an excuse. sent8: if something that does dishonor yawn does excuse it is a Carpinaceae. sent9: that the midgrass is transitional but it is not insubordinate is not true. | sent1: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: {B}{b} sent4: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}x sent5: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {A}{a} sent6: {AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬{AB}{a} sent8: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}x sent9: ¬({AI}{a} & ¬{BN}{a}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that that the midgrass does dishonor yawn but it is not an excuse is not false is not true.; sent4 -> int1: if the midgrass dishonors yawn and is not an excuse then it is a Carpinaceae.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent4 -> int1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {A}{a};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the midgrass is a kind of a Carpinaceae. ; $context$ = sent1: the midgrass is not electric if the fact that the calico does dishonor yawn but it does not excuse is wrong. sent2: that the midgrass dishonors yawn and is a kind of an excuse is not correct. sent3: the calico is a kind of an electric. sent4: if something dishonors yawn and is not an excuse then it is a Carpinaceae. sent5: if the midgrass does dishonor yawn and it excuses then it is a Carpinaceae. sent6: the calico is not a kind of an electric if the midgrass excuses. sent7: the midgrass is not an excuse. sent8: if something that does dishonor yawn does excuse it is a Carpinaceae. sent9: that the midgrass is transitional but it is not insubordinate is not true. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that that the midgrass does dishonor yawn but it is not an excuse is not false is not true.; sent4 -> int1: if the midgrass dishonors yawn and is not an excuse then it is a Carpinaceae.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the enchanter does not recoup fondue is true. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: the Savoy does recoup fondue. sent2: the hexose does recoup fondue. sent3: the sabbatia does recoup fondue. sent4: something does not impinge cathode. sent5: something recoups fondue if it is a phoebe. sent6: The fondue does recoup enchanter. sent7: the enchanter does recoup fondue. sent8: the enchanter is a kind of a hostile. sent9: the amputee recoups fondue. sent10: the bluffer does not dishonor Argonauta if the fact that the Punjabi dishonor Argonauta and it impinges cathode is not true. sent11: the bench recoups fondue. sent12: the enchanter is a kind of a sojourn. sent13: if the bluffer does not dishonor Argonauta then the drumstick is hemodynamic a sport. sent14: the enchanter does slight. sent15: that the enchanter is a validation hold. | sent1: {A}{ee} sent2: {A}{i} sent3: {A}{hf} sent4: (Ex): ¬{G}x sent5: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent6: {AA}{aa} sent7: {A}{a} sent8: {JC}{a} sent9: {A}{eg} sent10: ¬({F}{e} & {G}{e}) -> ¬{F}{d} sent11: {A}{fj} sent12: {EG}{a} sent13: ¬{F}{d} -> ({D}{c} & {E}{c}) sent14: {BQ}{a} sent15: {AT}{a} | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | the enchanter does not recoup fondue. | ¬{A}{a} | [] | 8 | 1 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 14 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the enchanter does not recoup fondue is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the Savoy does recoup fondue. sent2: the hexose does recoup fondue. sent3: the sabbatia does recoup fondue. sent4: something does not impinge cathode. sent5: something recoups fondue if it is a phoebe. sent6: The fondue does recoup enchanter. sent7: the enchanter does recoup fondue. sent8: the enchanter is a kind of a hostile. sent9: the amputee recoups fondue. sent10: the bluffer does not dishonor Argonauta if the fact that the Punjabi dishonor Argonauta and it impinges cathode is not true. sent11: the bench recoups fondue. sent12: the enchanter is a kind of a sojourn. sent13: if the bluffer does not dishonor Argonauta then the drumstick is hemodynamic a sport. sent14: the enchanter does slight. sent15: that the enchanter is a validation hold. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the papyrus is a rainstorm. | {B}{a} | sent1: the fact that that something is not a rainstorm and is a kind of a Rheum is true does not hold if it is a sublimity. sent2: the fact that the papyrus is not a rainstorm is not incorrect if it is not a sublimity. sent3: something is a rainstorm if the fact that it is not a rainstorm and it is a Rheum does not hold. sent4: the papyrus is not a sublimity. sent5: the servant is not returnable if it does not recoup Woodhull. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) sent2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {B}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} sent5: ¬{D}{fu} -> ¬{EE}{fu} | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | the papyrus is a kind of a rainstorm. | {B}{a} | [
"sent3 -> int1: if the fact that the papyrus is not a kind of a rainstorm but it is a Rheum is wrong it is a kind of a rainstorm.; sent1 -> int2: if the papyrus is a kind of a sublimity then the fact that it is not a kind of a rainstorm and it is a Rheum does not hold.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the papyrus is a rainstorm. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that something is not a rainstorm and is a kind of a Rheum is true does not hold if it is a sublimity. sent2: the fact that the papyrus is not a rainstorm is not incorrect if it is not a sublimity. sent3: something is a rainstorm if the fact that it is not a rainstorm and it is a Rheum does not hold. sent4: the papyrus is not a sublimity. sent5: the servant is not returnable if it does not recoup Woodhull. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there is something such that it is a dizziness that is collagenous is false. | ¬((Ex): ({A}x & {B}x)) | sent1: the bathhouse is a dizziness and collagenous. | sent1: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that it is a dizziness that is collagenous is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the bathhouse is a dizziness and collagenous. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the childbirth is not a moonwort but it is a Dinornithidae does not hold. | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | sent1: the childbirth is a doorbell. sent2: the fact that the broad-bean is a Tolectin hold. sent3: if the HDL is a Dinornithidae the fact that it is not a moonwort and is a Tolectin is not true. sent4: the fact that the childbirth is a kind of a moonwort that is a Dinornithidae is not right. sent5: the fact that the HDL is not a Tolectin and is a Dinornithidae is incorrect. sent6: if something is a Tolectin that it is a moonwort and it is a Dinornithidae does not hold. sent7: that something is not a GAD and is a bracken does not hold if it does impinge Sinbad. sent8: the fact that the nautilus is not a kind of a Hmong but it is allylic is false. sent9: the HDL masses. sent10: the fact that that the childbirth is a Tolectin is true if the HDL is a Tolectin is true. sent11: the fact that something is not a kind of a motorist and does learn is not right if that it is determinate is not false. sent12: that something is both not a cry and a motorist is not right if it is complimentary. sent13: the HDL is a Tolectin. sent14: the fact that the childbirth is a kind of a moonwort and is a kind of a Dinornithidae is not right if it is a kind of a Tolectin. | sent1: {DS}{aa} sent2: {A}{bb} sent3: {AB}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {A}{a}) sent4: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: (x): {IR}x -> ¬(¬{EC}x & {ID}x) sent8: ¬(¬{JI}{l} & {AK}{l}) sent9: {BB}{a} sent10: {A}{a} -> {A}{aa} sent11: (x): {T}x -> ¬(¬{JJ}x & {CB}x) sent12: (x): {DG}x -> ¬(¬{AT}x & {JJ}x) sent13: {A}{a} sent14: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [
"sent10 & sent13 -> int1: the childbirth is a Tolectin.;"
] | [
"sent10 & sent13 -> int1: {A}{aa};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the childbirth is not a moonwort but it is a Dinornithidae does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the childbirth is a doorbell. sent2: the fact that the broad-bean is a Tolectin hold. sent3: if the HDL is a Dinornithidae the fact that it is not a moonwort and is a Tolectin is not true. sent4: the fact that the childbirth is a kind of a moonwort that is a Dinornithidae is not right. sent5: the fact that the HDL is not a Tolectin and is a Dinornithidae is incorrect. sent6: if something is a Tolectin that it is a moonwort and it is a Dinornithidae does not hold. sent7: that something is not a GAD and is a bracken does not hold if it does impinge Sinbad. sent8: the fact that the nautilus is not a kind of a Hmong but it is allylic is false. sent9: the HDL masses. sent10: the fact that that the childbirth is a Tolectin is true if the HDL is a Tolectin is true. sent11: the fact that something is not a kind of a motorist and does learn is not right if that it is determinate is not false. sent12: that something is both not a cry and a motorist is not right if it is complimentary. sent13: the HDL is a Tolectin. sent14: the fact that the childbirth is a kind of a moonwort and is a kind of a Dinornithidae is not right if it is a kind of a Tolectin. ; $proof$ = | sent10 & sent13 -> int1: the childbirth is a Tolectin.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the intellectualization is not lipless. | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: the barony is lipless if it does recoup slingback. sent2: the barony is not a kind of a tuckahoe but it is a kind of a spreadsheet. sent3: if that something does not spring-clean but it is lipless does not hold it is not lipless. sent4: something is a kind of a dogging if it impinges hogshead. sent5: if the Lutheran does not recoup slingback and is not lipless the intellectualization is lipless. sent6: something is lipless if it remembers. sent7: that the barony is not a kind of a Hypsiprymnodon is not incorrect if it is not a kind of a tuckahoe and it is a kind of a spreadsheet. sent8: if something is not a kind of a Hypsiprymnodon then that it is both a smelter and not a glossalgia is not true. sent9: the Lutheran is not a kind of a wobble. sent10: if something does not forgive then that it does not spring-clean and is lipless does not hold. sent11: the intellectualization recoups slingback if the barony is lipless. sent12: the barony is a kind of a smelter if that the Lutheran does not remember and/or it wobbles is not true. sent13: if the anglophile is a kind of a splice then the Lutheran is a kind of a ribgrass and does not dishonor intellectualization. sent14: the Lutheran does not recoup slingback if there is something such that the fact that it is a smelter and it is not a glossalgia is wrong. sent15: the Lutheran does not forgive if it is a ribgrass and it does not dishonor intellectualization. sent16: something recoups slingback if it is a smelter. sent17: that the Lutheran does not remember or it is a wobble or both does not hold. sent18: if the barony recoups slingback then the intellectualization is lipless. | sent1: {A}{b} -> {C}{b} sent2: (¬{H}{b} & {G}{b}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent4: (x): {AD}x -> {JJ}x sent5: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent6: (x): {AA}x -> {C}x sent7: (¬{H}{b} & {G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) sent9: ¬{AB}{a} sent10: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & {C}x) sent11: {C}{b} -> {A}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent13: {L}{d} -> ({J}{a} & ¬{K}{a}) sent14: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent15: ({J}{a} & ¬{K}{a}) -> ¬{I}{a} sent16: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent17: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent18: {A}{b} -> {C}{c} | [
"sent12 & sent17 -> int1: the barony is a smelter.; sent16 -> int2: if the fact that the barony is a smelter is true then the fact that it recoups slingback is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the barony recoups slingback is correct.; int3 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent12 & sent17 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent16 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {A}{b}; int3 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] | the intellectualization is not lipless. | ¬{C}{c} | [
"sent8 -> int4: that the barony is both a smelter and not a glossalgia is incorrect if it is not a Hypsiprymnodon.; sent7 & sent2 -> int5: the fact that the barony is not a Hypsiprymnodon is not wrong.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the barony is a smelter and is not a glossalgia is not true.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that the fact that it is a smelter and it is not a glossalgia is false.; int7 & sent14 -> int8: the Lutheran does not recoup slingback.; sent3 -> int9: the Lutheran is not lipless if that it does not spring-clean and is lipless does not hold.; sent10 -> int10: if the Lutheran does not forgive that it does not spring-clean and it is lipless is not true.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the intellectualization is not lipless. ; $context$ = sent1: the barony is lipless if it does recoup slingback. sent2: the barony is not a kind of a tuckahoe but it is a kind of a spreadsheet. sent3: if that something does not spring-clean but it is lipless does not hold it is not lipless. sent4: something is a kind of a dogging if it impinges hogshead. sent5: if the Lutheran does not recoup slingback and is not lipless the intellectualization is lipless. sent6: something is lipless if it remembers. sent7: that the barony is not a kind of a Hypsiprymnodon is not incorrect if it is not a kind of a tuckahoe and it is a kind of a spreadsheet. sent8: if something is not a kind of a Hypsiprymnodon then that it is both a smelter and not a glossalgia is not true. sent9: the Lutheran is not a kind of a wobble. sent10: if something does not forgive then that it does not spring-clean and is lipless does not hold. sent11: the intellectualization recoups slingback if the barony is lipless. sent12: the barony is a kind of a smelter if that the Lutheran does not remember and/or it wobbles is not true. sent13: if the anglophile is a kind of a splice then the Lutheran is a kind of a ribgrass and does not dishonor intellectualization. sent14: the Lutheran does not recoup slingback if there is something such that the fact that it is a smelter and it is not a glossalgia is wrong. sent15: the Lutheran does not forgive if it is a ribgrass and it does not dishonor intellectualization. sent16: something recoups slingback if it is a smelter. sent17: that the Lutheran does not remember or it is a wobble or both does not hold. sent18: if the barony recoups slingback then the intellectualization is lipless. ; $proof$ = | sent12 & sent17 -> int1: the barony is a smelter.; sent16 -> int2: if the fact that the barony is a smelter is true then the fact that it recoups slingback is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the barony recoups slingback is correct.; int3 & sent18 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Hugoesqueness occurs. | {A} | sent1: the fact that the fact that the dishonoring turban does not occur and the attendant does not occur is not false does not hold. sent2: the dishonoring turban does not occur and the attendant does not occur if the Hugoesqueness does not occur. sent3: if the patronymicness does not occur the disorderliness does not occur and the dalliance does not occur. sent4: if the academicness and the iconolatry happens the Hugoesqueness does not occur. sent5: the anoxicness does not occur if the airing does not occur. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: ¬{CA} -> (¬{AL} & ¬{BQ}) sent4: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{A} sent5: ¬{IJ} -> ¬{FB} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Hugoesqueness does not occur.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the dishonoring turban does not occur and the attendant does not occur.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 & sent1 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the Hugoesqueness does not occur. | ¬{A} | [] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Hugoesqueness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the fact that the dishonoring turban does not occur and the attendant does not occur is not false does not hold. sent2: the dishonoring turban does not occur and the attendant does not occur if the Hugoesqueness does not occur. sent3: if the patronymicness does not occur the disorderliness does not occur and the dalliance does not occur. sent4: if the academicness and the iconolatry happens the Hugoesqueness does not occur. sent5: the anoxicness does not occur if the airing does not occur. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Hugoesqueness does not occur.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the dishonoring turban does not occur and the attendant does not occur.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | both the vinaceousness and the recouping straddle occurs. | ({A} & {C}) | sent1: if that the naming does not occur but the vacuolateness happens is wrong the spaceflight does not occur. sent2: that both the vinaceousness and the recouping straddle happens is not true if the dishonoring sentience does not occur. sent3: the bauxiticness happens. sent4: that the impinging Baikal happens is right if the classification happens. sent5: if that the dishonoring omega-3 does not occur is not incorrect then the algorithm and the cryogenicness happens. sent6: if the dishonoring journalist occurs the dishonoring omega-3 does not occur. sent7: the vinaceousness occurs and/or the dishonoring sentience does not occur. sent8: both the vinaceousness and the dishonoring sentience happens. sent9: the dishonoring journalist occurs. sent10: if the spaceflight does not occur the non-apostolicness and the non-arenicolousness happens. sent11: if the apostolicness does not occur that the caning pullback and the classification happens is true. sent12: that the dishonoring sentience occurs is prevented by that the algorithm and the impinging Baikal occurs. | sent1: ¬(¬{M} & {L}) -> ¬{J} sent2: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) sent3: {FH} sent4: {F} -> {D} sent5: ¬{N} -> ({E} & {K}) sent6: {O} -> ¬{N} sent7: ({A} v ¬{B}) sent8: ({A} & {B}) sent9: {O} sent10: ¬{J} -> (¬{H} & ¬{I}) sent11: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) sent12: ({E} & {D}) -> ¬{B} | [
"sent8 -> int1: the vinaceousness occurs.;"
] | [
"sent8 -> int1: {A};"
] | the biogeographicness and the unmanliness occurs. | ({IP} & {HG}) | [] | 5 | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = both the vinaceousness and the recouping straddle occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the naming does not occur but the vacuolateness happens is wrong the spaceflight does not occur. sent2: that both the vinaceousness and the recouping straddle happens is not true if the dishonoring sentience does not occur. sent3: the bauxiticness happens. sent4: that the impinging Baikal happens is right if the classification happens. sent5: if that the dishonoring omega-3 does not occur is not incorrect then the algorithm and the cryogenicness happens. sent6: if the dishonoring journalist occurs the dishonoring omega-3 does not occur. sent7: the vinaceousness occurs and/or the dishonoring sentience does not occur. sent8: both the vinaceousness and the dishonoring sentience happens. sent9: the dishonoring journalist occurs. sent10: if the spaceflight does not occur the non-apostolicness and the non-arenicolousness happens. sent11: if the apostolicness does not occur that the caning pullback and the classification happens is true. sent12: that the dishonoring sentience occurs is prevented by that the algorithm and the impinging Baikal occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> int1: the vinaceousness occurs.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the turnip is not a better. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: if the turnip is a kind of a soliloquy it is a gastroenterostomy. sent2: the Siberian is hypertonic. sent3: something does not impinge boo if that it is not a Ugaritic and does impinge boo is not true. sent4: the Siberian does not dishonor digitization if that the cloudberry is exegetic but it does not dishonor digitization is not correct. sent5: something is a auricula if it is non-better thing that does dishonor digitization. sent6: the fact that something is not a Ugaritic but it does impinge boo does not hold if it is a gastroenterostomy. sent7: the house canes lacquerware but it does not impinge boo. sent8: the Siberian is not better if the turnip is a kind of a auricula and it dishonors digitization. sent9: the cyme is not a better and does dishonor digitization if there exists something such that it is exegetic. sent10: the cloudberry recoups Klein if something that does cane lacquerware does not impinge boo. sent11: that the Siberian is a auricula is not wrong. sent12: if there is something such that it does cane lacquerware and it does not recoup Klein then the Siberian is not four-wheel. sent13: if the house is four-wheel that the cloudberry is exegetic but it does not dishonor digitization is not true. sent14: if something recoups Klein that it is four-wheel is not incorrect. sent15: the cloudberry is exegetic. sent16: something canes lacquerware and does not recoup Klein if it does not impinge boo. sent17: if that the Siberian does not dishonor digitization hold then the turnip is a kind of a better and it is a auricula. sent18: if that the lacquerware does not cane lacquerware is not false the house is a kind of four-wheel thing that recoups Klein. sent19: that the Siberian does dishonor digitization is correct. sent20: That the digitization does dishonor Siberian is correct. sent21: the turnip is a soliloquy. sent22: if something is not four-wheel it is exegetic. | sent1: {K}{b} -> {I}{b} sent2: {CS}{a} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{J}x & {H}x) -> ¬{H}x sent4: ¬({D}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: (x): (¬{C}x & {B}x) -> {A}x sent6: (x): {I}x -> ¬(¬{J}x & {H}x) sent7: ({G}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) sent8: ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent9: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}{gq} & {B}{gq}) sent10: (x): ({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> {F}{c} sent11: {A}{a} sent12: (x): ({G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{E}{a} sent13: {E}{d} -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) sent14: (x): {F}x -> {E}x sent15: {D}{c} sent16: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}x & ¬{F}x) sent17: ¬{B}{a} -> ({C}{b} & {A}{b}) sent18: ¬{G}{e} -> ({E}{d} & {F}{d}) sent19: {B}{a} sent20: {AA}{aa} sent21: {K}{b} sent22: (x): ¬{E}x -> {D}x | [
"sent11 & sent19 -> int1: the Siberian is a kind of a auricula that does dishonor digitization.;"
] | [
"sent11 & sent19 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a});"
] | the cyme is a auricula. | {A}{gq} | [
"sent5 -> int2: the cyme is a auricula if it is not a better and it dishonors digitization.; sent22 -> int3: that if the Siberian is not four-wheel the Siberian is exegetic is true.; sent16 -> int4: the turnip canes lacquerware and does not recoup Klein if that it does not impinge boo is true.; sent3 -> int5: that the turnip does not impinge boo is not incorrect if the fact that it is not a kind of a Ugaritic and does impinge boo is not true.; sent6 -> int6: if the turnip is a gastroenterostomy the fact that it is not a Ugaritic and impinges boo is wrong.; sent1 & sent21 -> int7: the turnip is a kind of a gastroenterostomy.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the turnip is not a kind of a Ugaritic but it impinges boo is not right.; int5 & int8 -> int9: that the turnip does not impinge boo is right.; int4 & int9 -> int10: the turnip does cane lacquerware and does not recoup Klein.; int10 -> int11: there is something such that it canes lacquerware and it does not recoup Klein.; int11 & sent12 -> int12: the Siberian is not four-wheel.; int3 & int12 -> int13: the Siberian is exegetic.; int13 -> int14: there exists something such that it is exegetic.; int14 & sent9 -> int15: the cyme is not a better but it dishonors digitization.; int2 & int15 -> hypothesis;"
] | 10 | 2 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the turnip is not a better. ; $context$ = sent1: if the turnip is a kind of a soliloquy it is a gastroenterostomy. sent2: the Siberian is hypertonic. sent3: something does not impinge boo if that it is not a Ugaritic and does impinge boo is not true. sent4: the Siberian does not dishonor digitization if that the cloudberry is exegetic but it does not dishonor digitization is not correct. sent5: something is a auricula if it is non-better thing that does dishonor digitization. sent6: the fact that something is not a Ugaritic but it does impinge boo does not hold if it is a gastroenterostomy. sent7: the house canes lacquerware but it does not impinge boo. sent8: the Siberian is not better if the turnip is a kind of a auricula and it dishonors digitization. sent9: the cyme is not a better and does dishonor digitization if there exists something such that it is exegetic. sent10: the cloudberry recoups Klein if something that does cane lacquerware does not impinge boo. sent11: that the Siberian is a auricula is not wrong. sent12: if there is something such that it does cane lacquerware and it does not recoup Klein then the Siberian is not four-wheel. sent13: if the house is four-wheel that the cloudberry is exegetic but it does not dishonor digitization is not true. sent14: if something recoups Klein that it is four-wheel is not incorrect. sent15: the cloudberry is exegetic. sent16: something canes lacquerware and does not recoup Klein if it does not impinge boo. sent17: if that the Siberian does not dishonor digitization hold then the turnip is a kind of a better and it is a auricula. sent18: if that the lacquerware does not cane lacquerware is not false the house is a kind of four-wheel thing that recoups Klein. sent19: that the Siberian does dishonor digitization is correct. sent20: That the digitization does dishonor Siberian is correct. sent21: the turnip is a soliloquy. sent22: if something is not four-wheel it is exegetic. ; $proof$ = | sent11 & sent19 -> int1: the Siberian is a kind of a auricula that does dishonor digitization.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the dishonoring meatloaf does not occur. | ¬{D} | sent1: the caning gearshift does not occur. sent2: if the fact that not the recouping psychopathology but the centralization happens does not hold then the dishonoring meatloaf does not occur. sent3: if the neotenicness does not occur the fact that the recouping psychopathology does not occur but the centralization happens does not hold. sent4: the caning Platonism occurs but the service does not occur. | sent1: ¬{FO} sent2: ¬(¬{A} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent3: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{A} & {C}) sent4: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the dishonoring meatloaf does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the caning gearshift does not occur. sent2: if the fact that not the recouping psychopathology but the centralization happens does not hold then the dishonoring meatloaf does not occur. sent3: if the neotenicness does not occur the fact that the recouping psychopathology does not occur but the centralization happens does not hold. sent4: the caning Platonism occurs but the service does not occur. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the Scandinavian does unlock Tappan and unlocks fat is not wrong. | ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: the fat unlocks Heidegger. sent2: if the northwester does unlock Heidegger it is a partisan. sent3: the fact that that the fat is not a dominant but it is a steeple is not right is not false if the expanse unlocks Heidegger. sent4: the fat is a steeple if that it is not a tilter and it is not Nestorian is false. sent5: that if something is a kind of a dominant it does unlock fat is not false. sent6: if something is not a steeple then the fact that it does unlock Tappan and it does unlock fat does not hold. sent7: that the fat is not a tilter and is not Nestorian is wrong. sent8: that the fat is not a tilter but it is Nestorian does not hold. sent9: the Scandinavian unlocks Tappan if the fat is a steeple. | sent1: {E}{a} sent2: {E}{fb} -> {FC}{fb} sent3: {E}{c} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {B}{a}) sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent8: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent9: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the fat is a steeple.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the Scandinavian unlocks Tappan.; sent5 -> int3: the Scandinavian unlocks fat if it is a dominant.;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent9 -> int2: {A}{b}; sent5 -> int3: {D}{b} -> {C}{b};"
] | that the Scandinavian does unlock Tappan and unlocks fat is incorrect. | ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) | [
"sent6 -> int4: if the Scandinavian is not a steeple that it does unlock Tappan and it does unlock fat is not right.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the Scandinavian does unlock Tappan and unlocks fat is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the fat unlocks Heidegger. sent2: if the northwester does unlock Heidegger it is a partisan. sent3: the fact that that the fat is not a dominant but it is a steeple is not right is not false if the expanse unlocks Heidegger. sent4: the fat is a steeple if that it is not a tilter and it is not Nestorian is false. sent5: that if something is a kind of a dominant it does unlock fat is not false. sent6: if something is not a steeple then the fact that it does unlock Tappan and it does unlock fat does not hold. sent7: that the fat is not a tilter and is not Nestorian is wrong. sent8: that the fat is not a tilter but it is Nestorian does not hold. sent9: the Scandinavian unlocks Tappan if the fat is a steeple. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the fat is a steeple.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the Scandinavian unlocks Tappan.; sent5 -> int3: the Scandinavian unlocks fat if it is a dominant.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the archerfish is not a hometown and eulogizes xeranthemum. | (¬{B}{aa} & {C}{aa}) | sent1: the fact that the fact that the depressive does not bargain pinto is not false if the chowder does bargain pinto but it does not nominate is true. sent2: the atom is not unplayful if it is a Nazism. sent3: something does stabilize if the fact that it is a regular and/or it is not prudent does not hold. sent4: the ceibo is teratogenic if the glucoside is altricial. sent5: the archerfish is a kind of a Nazism. sent6: the cubeb is regular. sent7: if something is a regular then the isthmus is prudent or it is not a Conospermum or both. sent8: the Chilean is not a Conospermum if the isthmus is prudent. sent9: the chowder bargains pinto but it does not nominate. sent10: if something is a Nazism it eulogizes xeranthemum. sent11: the fact that something is not a kind of a hometown but it does eulogize xeranthemum is not right if that it is altricial is incorrect. sent12: the archerfish is an inquest. sent13: if that something is not a Scophthalmus and is not teratogenic does not hold then it is not a hometown. sent14: something is not a end-plate if the fact that it does not bargain cubeb and it is not a brassiere is not true. sent15: if something is altricial that it is both not a Scophthalmus and not teratogenic is false. sent16: the isthmus is not a Nazism and does not eulogize xeranthemum if the cubeb is a physicist. sent17: if the depressive does not bargain pinto that it is a kind of a regular and/or it is not prudent is incorrect. sent18: if something that is not a Conospermum does not stabilize it is rhinal. sent19: the fact that the archerfish is non-spousal thing that does not leach isthmus is not true. sent20: if the Chilean is rhinal the glucoside is a kind of a Nazism that is not a physicist. sent21: the glucoside is altricial if the Chilean is a kind of a hometown. sent22: something is both rhinal and not a Conospermum if it stabilizes. | sent1: ({K}{f} & ¬{L}{f}) -> ¬{K}{e} sent2: {D}{db} -> ¬{BS}{db} sent3: (x): ¬({J}x v ¬{I}x) -> {H}x sent4: {A}{a} -> {AB}{ci} sent5: {D}{aa} sent6: {J}{d} sent7: (x): {J}x -> ({I}{c} v ¬{G}{c}) sent8: {I}{c} -> ¬{G}{b} sent9: ({K}{f} & ¬{L}{f}) sent10: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) sent12: {IT}{aa} sent13: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent14: (x): ¬(¬{IO}x & ¬{HS}x) -> ¬{FU}x sent15: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent16: {E}{d} -> (¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent17: ¬{K}{e} -> ¬({J}{e} v ¬{I}{e}) sent18: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{H}x) -> {F}x sent19: ¬(¬{BT}{aa} & ¬{FR}{aa}) sent20: {F}{b} -> ({D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent21: {B}{b} -> {A}{a} sent22: (x): {H}x -> ({F}x & ¬{G}x) | [
"sent15 -> int1: the fact that the archerfish is not a Scophthalmus and it is not teratogenic does not hold if it is altricial.; sent13 -> int2: if that the archerfish is not a Scophthalmus and it is not teratogenic does not hold it is not a hometown.; sent10 -> int3: if the archerfish is a Nazism it does eulogize xeranthemum.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: the archerfish does eulogize xeranthemum.;"
] | [
"sent15 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent13 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent10 -> int3: {D}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; int3 & sent5 -> int4: {C}{aa};"
] | the ceibo is not non-teratogenic. | {AB}{ci} | [
"sent22 -> int5: the depressive is rhinal but it is not a Conospermum if it stabilizes.; sent3 -> int6: if the fact that the depressive is regular and/or it is not prudent is false that it does stabilize hold.; sent1 & sent9 -> int7: the depressive does not bargain pinto.; sent17 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the depressive is a regular or it is imprudent or both is not true.; int6 & int8 -> int9: that the depressive does stabilize is not wrong.; int5 & int9 -> int10: the depressive is both rhinal and not a Conospermum.; int10 -> int11: something is rhinal but it is not a kind of a Conospermum.;"
] | 11 | 4 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the archerfish is not a hometown and eulogizes xeranthemum. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the fact that the depressive does not bargain pinto is not false if the chowder does bargain pinto but it does not nominate is true. sent2: the atom is not unplayful if it is a Nazism. sent3: something does stabilize if the fact that it is a regular and/or it is not prudent does not hold. sent4: the ceibo is teratogenic if the glucoside is altricial. sent5: the archerfish is a kind of a Nazism. sent6: the cubeb is regular. sent7: if something is a regular then the isthmus is prudent or it is not a Conospermum or both. sent8: the Chilean is not a Conospermum if the isthmus is prudent. sent9: the chowder bargains pinto but it does not nominate. sent10: if something is a Nazism it eulogizes xeranthemum. sent11: the fact that something is not a kind of a hometown but it does eulogize xeranthemum is not right if that it is altricial is incorrect. sent12: the archerfish is an inquest. sent13: if that something is not a Scophthalmus and is not teratogenic does not hold then it is not a hometown. sent14: something is not a end-plate if the fact that it does not bargain cubeb and it is not a brassiere is not true. sent15: if something is altricial that it is both not a Scophthalmus and not teratogenic is false. sent16: the isthmus is not a Nazism and does not eulogize xeranthemum if the cubeb is a physicist. sent17: if the depressive does not bargain pinto that it is a kind of a regular and/or it is not prudent is incorrect. sent18: if something that is not a Conospermum does not stabilize it is rhinal. sent19: the fact that the archerfish is non-spousal thing that does not leach isthmus is not true. sent20: if the Chilean is rhinal the glucoside is a kind of a Nazism that is not a physicist. sent21: the glucoside is altricial if the Chilean is a kind of a hometown. sent22: something is both rhinal and not a Conospermum if it stabilizes. ; $proof$ = | sent15 -> int1: the fact that the archerfish is not a Scophthalmus and it is not teratogenic does not hold if it is altricial.; sent13 -> int2: if that the archerfish is not a Scophthalmus and it is not teratogenic does not hold it is not a hometown.; sent10 -> int3: if the archerfish is a Nazism it does eulogize xeranthemum.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: the archerfish does eulogize xeranthemum.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the conditioning does not occur. | ¬{E} | sent1: the swatting or the urinariness or both happens. sent2: the unlocking postgraduate occurs. sent3: that the landscaping occurs hold. sent4: the anticlimacticness occurs if that both the non-anticlimacticness and the EW happens is not true. sent5: the EW and the hurling occurs. sent6: the fact that the inorganicness and the ailing occurs hold if the isolation occurs. sent7: the fact that both the non-anticlimacticness and the EW happens does not hold if the organic does not occur. sent8: that the conservancy occurs is not false. sent9: the tear does not occur. sent10: the pocket and the debuting happens. sent11: if the diaphoretic does not occur the unlocking metharbital does not occur and the urinariness does not occur. sent12: if the swat does not occur then that the ailing and the isolation happens is not correct. sent13: if the unlocking metharbital does not occur and the urinariness does not occur that the swat does not occur hold. sent14: the allelicness does not occur. sent15: the apneicness occurs if the hurling occurs. sent16: that the unlocking L-plate occurs is prevented by that the chaoticness occurs or the eulogizing AWOL does not occur or both. sent17: the nonnativeness and the roofing occurs. sent18: the conditioning occurs and the EW occurs if the hurl does not occur. sent19: the diaphoreticness is prevented by that the unlocking L-plate does not occur. sent20: the EW occurs. sent21: the organic and the ailing occurs. | sent1: ({H} v {I}) sent2: {CJ} sent3: {ER} sent4: ¬(¬{AM} & {A}) -> {AM} sent5: ({A} & {B}) sent6: {G} -> (¬{D} & {F}) sent7: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{AM} & {A}) sent8: {GR} sent9: ¬{BJ} sent10: ({HH} & {DF}) sent11: ¬{K} -> (¬{J} & ¬{I}) sent12: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & {G}) sent13: (¬{J} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{H} sent14: ¬{II} sent15: {B} -> {C} sent16: ({N} v ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} sent17: ({HB} & {FL}) sent18: ¬{B} -> ({E} & {A}) sent19: ¬{L} -> ¬{K} sent20: {A} sent21: ({D} & {F}) | [
"sent5 -> int1: the hurl occurs.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: that the apneicness occurs is not false.; sent21 -> int3: the organicness happens.; int2 & int3 -> int4: both the apneicness and the organicness happens.;"
] | [
"sent5 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent15 -> int2: {C}; sent21 -> int3: {D}; int2 & int3 -> int4: ({C} & {D});"
] | both the unlocking metharbital and the anticlimacticness occurs. | ({J} & {AM}) | [] | 6 | 4 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the conditioning does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the swatting or the urinariness or both happens. sent2: the unlocking postgraduate occurs. sent3: that the landscaping occurs hold. sent4: the anticlimacticness occurs if that both the non-anticlimacticness and the EW happens is not true. sent5: the EW and the hurling occurs. sent6: the fact that the inorganicness and the ailing occurs hold if the isolation occurs. sent7: the fact that both the non-anticlimacticness and the EW happens does not hold if the organic does not occur. sent8: that the conservancy occurs is not false. sent9: the tear does not occur. sent10: the pocket and the debuting happens. sent11: if the diaphoretic does not occur the unlocking metharbital does not occur and the urinariness does not occur. sent12: if the swat does not occur then that the ailing and the isolation happens is not correct. sent13: if the unlocking metharbital does not occur and the urinariness does not occur that the swat does not occur hold. sent14: the allelicness does not occur. sent15: the apneicness occurs if the hurling occurs. sent16: that the unlocking L-plate occurs is prevented by that the chaoticness occurs or the eulogizing AWOL does not occur or both. sent17: the nonnativeness and the roofing occurs. sent18: the conditioning occurs and the EW occurs if the hurl does not occur. sent19: the diaphoreticness is prevented by that the unlocking L-plate does not occur. sent20: the EW occurs. sent21: the organic and the ailing occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> int1: the hurl occurs.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: that the apneicness occurs is not false.; sent21 -> int3: the organicness happens.; int2 & int3 -> int4: both the apneicness and the organicness happens.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that if the eulogizing parcel does not occur then the eulogizing Fez does not occur and the lobbyism happens is incorrect. | ¬(¬{A} -> (¬{C} & {D})) | sent1: the Iranian occurs and the chaetognathanness occurs. sent2: if the eulogizing parcel does not occur then the matriculation does not occur. sent3: if the eulogizing parcel does not occur both the eulogizing Fez and the lobbyism happens. sent4: that the matriculation does not occur triggers that the eulogizing Fez does not occur and the lobbyism occurs. sent5: the lobbyism occurs if the eulogizing parcel does not occur. | sent1: ({IQ} & {AR}) sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬{B} sent3: ¬{A} -> ({C} & {D}) sent4: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & {D}) sent5: ¬{A} -> {D} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the eulogizing parcel does not occur.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the matriculation does not occur.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the eulogizing Fez does not occur but the lobbyism occurs.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent4 & int1 -> int2: (¬{C} & {D}); [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that if the eulogizing parcel does not occur then the eulogizing Fez does not occur and the lobbyism happens is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the Iranian occurs and the chaetognathanness occurs. sent2: if the eulogizing parcel does not occur then the matriculation does not occur. sent3: if the eulogizing parcel does not occur both the eulogizing Fez and the lobbyism happens. sent4: that the matriculation does not occur triggers that the eulogizing Fez does not occur and the lobbyism occurs. sent5: the lobbyism occurs if the eulogizing parcel does not occur. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the eulogizing parcel does not occur.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the matriculation does not occur.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the eulogizing Fez does not occur but the lobbyism occurs.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that that the firebrat is not emphysematous is not incorrect if the firebrat is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile does not hold. | ¬(¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa}) | sent1: the firebrat is emphysematous if it is not a kind of a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent2: something that is not a kind of a Siberian does not plumb. sent3: if something is a kind of a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile the fact that it is not emphysematous is not false. sent4: if something does not eulogize transmutation it does not bargain buckram. sent5: the atmosphere is not a kind of a hemorrhoid if it is not an orangutan. sent6: if the firebrat is not a belted it is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent7: something does not consult if it is not anatomic. sent8: something does not unlock coordinating if it is not a quinone. sent9: the padlock is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile if it is not eolithic. sent10: that something is emphysematous is not incorrect if it is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent11: something that does not unlock Giraffidae is not a shore. sent12: the fact that something is not a kind of a Varuna if it is not a Callithrix is not wrong. sent13: if the bark does not unlock Giraffidae then it is a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent14: that something is not emphysematous is right if it is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent15: if the firebrat is not a oxidase it does not bargain decarboxylase. sent16: if the firebrat is a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile it is not emphysematous. sent17: if the esophagus is not baptismal it is not emphysematous. sent18: if the fossa does not unlock foremother it is not a Pomolobus. sent19: if something is not a kieserite it does not unlock Tappan. | sent1: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬{GD}x -> ¬{HR}x sent3: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬{ET}x sent5: ¬{HA}{dk} -> ¬{AE}{dk} sent6: ¬{CB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (x): ¬{FL}x -> ¬{BS}x sent8: (x): ¬{AL}x -> ¬{IP}x sent9: ¬{FD}{ja} -> ¬{B}{ja} sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent11: (x): ¬{GR}x -> ¬{AU}x sent12: (x): ¬{CK}x -> ¬{DE}x sent13: ¬{GR}{ij} -> {B}{ij} sent14: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent15: ¬{IN}{aa} -> ¬{GJ}{aa} sent16: {B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent17: ¬{GQ}{jg} -> ¬{C}{jg} sent18: ¬{AK}{aq} -> ¬{EF}{aq} sent19: (x): ¬{GH}x -> ¬{O}x | [
"sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that that the firebrat is not emphysematous is not incorrect if the firebrat is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the firebrat is emphysematous if it is not a kind of a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent2: something that is not a kind of a Siberian does not plumb. sent3: if something is a kind of a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile the fact that it is not emphysematous is not false. sent4: if something does not eulogize transmutation it does not bargain buckram. sent5: the atmosphere is not a kind of a hemorrhoid if it is not an orangutan. sent6: if the firebrat is not a belted it is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent7: something does not consult if it is not anatomic. sent8: something does not unlock coordinating if it is not a quinone. sent9: the padlock is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile if it is not eolithic. sent10: that something is emphysematous is not incorrect if it is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent11: something that does not unlock Giraffidae is not a shore. sent12: the fact that something is not a kind of a Varuna if it is not a Callithrix is not wrong. sent13: if the bark does not unlock Giraffidae then it is a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent14: that something is not emphysematous is right if it is not a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. sent15: if the firebrat is not a oxidase it does not bargain decarboxylase. sent16: if the firebrat is a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile it is not emphysematous. sent17: if the esophagus is not baptismal it is not emphysematous. sent18: if the fossa does not unlock foremother it is not a Pomolobus. sent19: if something is not a kieserite it does not unlock Tappan. ; $proof$ = | sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the inessential happens and the proctoscopy does not occur is false. | ¬({D} & ¬{E}) | sent1: the unlocking Father does not occur. sent2: if the grip occurs but the justification does not occur then the circularizing does not occur. sent3: the fact that the birefringence happens hold. sent4: the eulogizing paperknife is prevented by that the birefringence occurs and the malpractice happens. sent5: the gripping occurs. sent6: that the inessential but not the proctoscopy occurs is not true if the eulogizing paperknife does not occur. sent7: if the birefringence does not occur the inessential but not the proctoscopy occurs. sent8: if the inessentialness does not occur the fact that the fact that the malpractice but not the eulogizing paperknife occurs is not correct is correct. sent9: if the circularizing does not occur then the proctoscopy does not occur and the inessential does not occur. sent10: if the malpractice does not occur then both the unfashionableness and the birefringence occurs. | sent1: ¬{BF} sent2: ({H} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} sent3: {A} sent4: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent5: {H} sent6: ¬{C} -> ¬({D} & ¬{E}) sent7: ¬{A} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) sent8: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & ¬{C}) sent9: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent10: ¬{B} -> ({BP} & {A}) | [] | [] | the unfashionableness happens. | {BP} | [] | 10 | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the inessential happens and the proctoscopy does not occur is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the unlocking Father does not occur. sent2: if the grip occurs but the justification does not occur then the circularizing does not occur. sent3: the fact that the birefringence happens hold. sent4: the eulogizing paperknife is prevented by that the birefringence occurs and the malpractice happens. sent5: the gripping occurs. sent6: that the inessential but not the proctoscopy occurs is not true if the eulogizing paperknife does not occur. sent7: if the birefringence does not occur the inessential but not the proctoscopy occurs. sent8: if the inessentialness does not occur the fact that the fact that the malpractice but not the eulogizing paperknife occurs is not correct is correct. sent9: if the circularizing does not occur then the proctoscopy does not occur and the inessential does not occur. sent10: if the malpractice does not occur then both the unfashionableness and the birefringence occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the bench is not a kind of a doctor and it does not plagiarize. | (¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) | sent1: the conveyance is not a chairmanship. sent2: if that the conveyance is retinal and/or it is incautious is incorrect it is not a doctor. sent3: that the conveyance either is retinal or is incautious or both is not right if it is not a chairmanship. | sent1: ¬{A}{a} sent2: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that either the conveyance is retinal or it is not cautious or both is incorrect.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the conveyance does not doctor.;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); int1 & sent2 -> int2: ¬{B}{a};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the bench is not a kind of a doctor and it does not plagiarize. ; $context$ = sent1: the conveyance is not a chairmanship. sent2: if that the conveyance is retinal and/or it is incautious is incorrect it is not a doctor. sent3: that the conveyance either is retinal or is incautious or both is not right if it is not a chairmanship. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that either the conveyance is retinal or it is not cautious or both is incorrect.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the conveyance does not doctor.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the criminologist is atonal and/or it is not a kind of a Alexandrian is not correct. | ¬({D}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) | sent1: if that something is both not a saxifrage and antiapartheid is incorrect then it is a saxifrage. sent2: if the sedative does not spice it is atonal and it bargains timekeeper. sent3: if the sedative is a kind of a saxifrage the fact that the criminologist is not an upstage but it is Alexandrian does not hold. sent4: the criminologist is atonal and/or it is a Alexandrian. sent5: if something is not a saxifrage then it is not Alexandrian. sent6: everything is antiapartheid. sent7: the timekeeper is non-atonal. sent8: if something is not an upstage then it is not atonal. sent9: if the Hindu is a chantry then it does clapboard. sent10: the criminologist is not upstage if the fact that the sedative is not a kind of an upstage and it is not a saxifrage does not hold. sent11: if that the fact that the criminologist does not upstage but it is a kind of a Alexandrian does not hold is right then the African is not an upstage. sent12: the Hindu is a chantry. sent13: the criminologist upstages. sent14: if the criminologist is an upstage it is not a saxifrage. sent15: the sedative is not a kind of a spice if that the charioteer does not spice or unlocks founder or both does not hold. sent16: if the criminologist is a kind of a end-plate then it does not unlock paving. | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {E}x) -> {B}x sent2: ¬{G}{b} -> ({D}{b} & {F}{b}) sent3: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: ({D}{a} v {C}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent6: (x): {E}x sent7: ¬{D}{an} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{D}x sent9: {J}{d} -> {I}{d} sent10: ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent11: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{ja} sent12: {J}{d} sent13: {A}{a} sent14: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent15: ¬(¬{G}{c} v {H}{c}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent16: {EQ}{a} -> ¬{CR}{a} | [
"sent14 & sent13 -> int1: the criminologist is not a saxifrage.; sent5 -> int2: if that the criminologist is not a saxifrage hold then it is not Alexandrian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the criminologist is not a kind of a Alexandrian hold.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent14 & sent13 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent5 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{a}; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the criminologist is atonal and/or not Alexandrian is not right. | ¬({D}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) | [
"sent6 -> int4: the charioteer is antiapartheid.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the criminologist is atonal and/or it is not a kind of a Alexandrian is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is both not a saxifrage and antiapartheid is incorrect then it is a saxifrage. sent2: if the sedative does not spice it is atonal and it bargains timekeeper. sent3: if the sedative is a kind of a saxifrage the fact that the criminologist is not an upstage but it is Alexandrian does not hold. sent4: the criminologist is atonal and/or it is a Alexandrian. sent5: if something is not a saxifrage then it is not Alexandrian. sent6: everything is antiapartheid. sent7: the timekeeper is non-atonal. sent8: if something is not an upstage then it is not atonal. sent9: if the Hindu is a chantry then it does clapboard. sent10: the criminologist is not upstage if the fact that the sedative is not a kind of an upstage and it is not a saxifrage does not hold. sent11: if that the fact that the criminologist does not upstage but it is a kind of a Alexandrian does not hold is right then the African is not an upstage. sent12: the Hindu is a chantry. sent13: the criminologist upstages. sent14: if the criminologist is an upstage it is not a saxifrage. sent15: the sedative is not a kind of a spice if that the charioteer does not spice or unlocks founder or both does not hold. sent16: if the criminologist is a kind of a end-plate then it does not unlock paving. ; $proof$ = | sent14 & sent13 -> int1: the criminologist is not a saxifrage.; sent5 -> int2: if that the criminologist is not a saxifrage hold then it is not Alexandrian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the criminologist is not a kind of a Alexandrian hold.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the eardrum is praetorian. | {B}{b} | sent1: the siderocyte does not bargain stob. sent2: if something does not unlock constriction the fact that it is not Hebridean and it does bargain stob is not correct. sent3: the hemstitch is praetorian if the siderocyte does bargain stob. sent4: The stob does not bargain siderocyte. sent5: that the siderocyte does bargain stob is not wrong if the fact that the eardrum is non-Hebridean thing that does bargain stob is wrong. sent6: if something is not morbilliform but it is wigless it is praetorian. | sent1: ¬{A}{a} sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{gk} sent4: ¬{AC}{aa} sent5: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {A}{a} sent6: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | [
"sent6 -> int1: the eardrum is praetorian if it is non-morbilliform thing that is wigless.;"
] | [
"sent6 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{b};"
] | the hemstitch is praetorian. | {B}{gk} | [
"sent2 -> int2: the fact that the eardrum is not Hebridean but it does bargain stob is wrong if it does not unlock constriction.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the eardrum is praetorian. ; $context$ = sent1: the siderocyte does not bargain stob. sent2: if something does not unlock constriction the fact that it is not Hebridean and it does bargain stob is not correct. sent3: the hemstitch is praetorian if the siderocyte does bargain stob. sent4: The stob does not bargain siderocyte. sent5: that the siderocyte does bargain stob is not wrong if the fact that the eardrum is non-Hebridean thing that does bargain stob is wrong. sent6: if something is not morbilliform but it is wigless it is praetorian. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> int1: the eardrum is praetorian if it is non-morbilliform thing that is wigless.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the col is nonexistent and it leaches Italy is not right. | ¬({D}{c} & {C}{c}) | sent1: if there are nonexistent things then that the col is not nonexistent and is not a whole does not hold. sent2: if the prototherian is not fertile the patroller is a lcm. sent3: there exists something such that it is nonexistent. sent4: if the patroller is a lcm then the col does leach Italy. sent5: if that the col is not auscultatory and it is non-whole does not hold then that it is auscultatory is right. sent6: if the patroller is not whole the col is a lcm. sent7: the fact that something is nonexistent and it leaches Italy is false if the fact that it is not fertile is not wrong. sent8: there exists something such that it is a lcm. sent9: something does leach Italy. sent10: if that something is not nonexistent and is not whole is false then it is nonexistent. sent11: the patroller is weatherly. sent12: the fact that the col is both nonexistent and not whole is not true. sent13: the prototherian is not fertile. sent14: the fact that the col is a kind of nonexistent thing that is not a whole is not true if something is nonexistent. sent15: that the counterglow is not a lcm and it is not wasteful is wrong. sent16: the fact that the col is non-whole thing that is not a lcm is false. sent17: the col is fertile if that the prototherian does not leach Italy is right. | sent1: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent2: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent3: (Ex): {D}x sent4: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} sent5: ¬(¬{DO}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> {DO}{c} sent6: ¬{F}{b} -> {B}{c} sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x & {C}x) sent8: (Ex): {B}x sent9: (Ex): {C}x sent10: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{F}x) -> {D}x sent11: {GP}{b} sent12: ¬({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent13: ¬{A}{a} sent14: (x): {D}x -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent15: ¬(¬{B}{hu} & ¬{AJ}{hu}) sent16: ¬(¬{F}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) sent17: ¬{C}{a} -> {A}{c} | [
"sent2 & sent13 -> int1: the patroller is a lcm.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the col does leach Italy is not incorrect.; sent10 -> int3: if the fact that the col is not nonexistent and it is not a whole does not hold it is nonexistent.; sent3 & sent1 -> int4: that the col is not nonexistent and not whole is wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: that the col is nonexistent is not incorrect.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent13 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent4 -> int2: {C}{c}; sent10 -> int3: ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> {D}{c}; sent3 & sent1 -> int4: ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}); int3 & int4 -> int5: {D}{c}; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the col is nonexistent and it does leach Italy is incorrect. | ¬({D}{c} & {C}{c}) | [
"sent7 -> int6: that the col is nonexistent and it leaches Italy is not right if it is not fertile.;"
] | 4 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the col is nonexistent and it leaches Italy is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if there are nonexistent things then that the col is not nonexistent and is not a whole does not hold. sent2: if the prototherian is not fertile the patroller is a lcm. sent3: there exists something such that it is nonexistent. sent4: if the patroller is a lcm then the col does leach Italy. sent5: if that the col is not auscultatory and it is non-whole does not hold then that it is auscultatory is right. sent6: if the patroller is not whole the col is a lcm. sent7: the fact that something is nonexistent and it leaches Italy is false if the fact that it is not fertile is not wrong. sent8: there exists something such that it is a lcm. sent9: something does leach Italy. sent10: if that something is not nonexistent and is not whole is false then it is nonexistent. sent11: the patroller is weatherly. sent12: the fact that the col is both nonexistent and not whole is not true. sent13: the prototherian is not fertile. sent14: the fact that the col is a kind of nonexistent thing that is not a whole is not true if something is nonexistent. sent15: that the counterglow is not a lcm and it is not wasteful is wrong. sent16: the fact that the col is non-whole thing that is not a lcm is false. sent17: the col is fertile if that the prototherian does not leach Italy is right. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent13 -> int1: the patroller is a lcm.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the col does leach Italy is not incorrect.; sent10 -> int3: if the fact that the col is not nonexistent and it is not a whole does not hold it is nonexistent.; sent3 & sent1 -> int4: that the col is not nonexistent and not whole is wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: that the col is nonexistent is not incorrect.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that that it does swerve and is a serology does not hold. | (Ex): ¬({B}x & {C}x) | sent1: the fact that the sadomasochist does bargain foremother and swerves is incorrect if there is something such that it bargains variedness. sent2: something is a swerve and it is a kind of a serology. sent3: there exists something such that it attorns. sent4: something unlocks workpiece. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a chess and it does bargain retread is not true. sent6: something does not bargain pipeclay if it is not a Morpheus and does not swerve. sent7: there exists something such that it does bargain Akkadian. sent8: there is something such that it overjoys. sent9: something bargains misprint. sent10: if something bargains pipeclay then the fact that the pipeclay is a swerve and a serology is wrong. sent11: the fact that the pipeclay is protozoal and it is a serology is wrong. sent12: there exists something such that it bargains pipeclay. sent13: there is something such that it is conditional. sent14: something is a Musophagidae. sent15: if there exists something such that it does unlock Georgetown then the fact that the pipeclay is Bayesian and it scratches is incorrect. sent16: something is anatomic and is prospective. | sent1: (x): {FE}x -> ¬({DD}{db} & {B}{db}) sent2: (Ex): ({B}x & {C}x) sent3: (Ex): {BK}x sent4: (Ex): {HJ}x sent5: (Ex): ¬({EG}x & {IR}x) sent6: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent7: (Ex): {GI}x sent8: (Ex): {BF}x sent9: (Ex): {FR}x sent10: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent11: ¬({HQ}{a} & {C}{a}) sent12: (Ex): {A}x sent13: (Ex): {GJ}x sent14: (Ex): {GO}x sent15: (x): {FS}x -> ¬({EA}{a} & {GT}{a}) sent16: (Ex): ({ES}x & {IA}x) | [
"sent12 & sent10 -> int1: the fact that the pipeclay is a swerve and is a serology is wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent12 & sent10 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the pipeclay is a serology and eulogizes Leningrad is not right. | ¬({C}{a} & {GM}{a}) | [
"sent6 -> int2: if the ascent is not a Morpheus and it is not a kind of a swerve then it does not bargain pipeclay.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that that it does swerve and is a serology does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the sadomasochist does bargain foremother and swerves is incorrect if there is something such that it bargains variedness. sent2: something is a swerve and it is a kind of a serology. sent3: there exists something such that it attorns. sent4: something unlocks workpiece. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a chess and it does bargain retread is not true. sent6: something does not bargain pipeclay if it is not a Morpheus and does not swerve. sent7: there exists something such that it does bargain Akkadian. sent8: there is something such that it overjoys. sent9: something bargains misprint. sent10: if something bargains pipeclay then the fact that the pipeclay is a swerve and a serology is wrong. sent11: the fact that the pipeclay is protozoal and it is a serology is wrong. sent12: there exists something such that it bargains pipeclay. sent13: there is something such that it is conditional. sent14: something is a Musophagidae. sent15: if there exists something such that it does unlock Georgetown then the fact that the pipeclay is Bayesian and it scratches is incorrect. sent16: something is anatomic and is prospective. ; $proof$ = | sent12 & sent10 -> int1: the fact that the pipeclay is a swerve and is a serology is wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is a sensibility then it does not unlock Aristotelianism and it is a leisured. | (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a synchromesh it is not a Virginia. sent2: the adsorbate does not unlock Aristotelianism and is a leisured if it is a kind of a sensibility. sent3: the adsorbate is not caudal but it is anticyclonic if it is a sensibility. sent4: the siderocyte is not precise but it is not non-blackbird if the fact that it is not non-immanent is right. sent5: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a sensibility is not false it does unlock Aristotelianism and is a leisured. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a sensibility it is a kind of a leisured. sent7: the adsorbate is not prognathous but it is awnless if the fact that it is a kind of a pitched is not wrong. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a sensibility that it does not unlock Aristotelianism is not incorrect. sent9: there is something such that if it is a pinite then the fact that it is a halyard that is a kind of a Palestine is correct. sent10: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a games-master is not wrong it is not a shopaholic and is ipsilateral. sent11: if the adsorbate is a kind of a sensibility then it is a kind of a leisured. sent12: if the adsorbate is a sensibility it unlocks Aristotelianism and it is a leisured. sent13: something that unlocks Aristotelianism is both not a Verbascum and forceful. sent14: something is not a kind of an endocrine but it is a Mercator if that it groups is correct. | sent1: (Ex): {GT}x -> ¬{BH}x sent2: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: {A}{aa} -> (¬{II}{aa} & {HH}{aa}) sent4: {AJ}{ft} -> (¬{IN}{ft} & {CD}{ft}) sent5: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> {AB}x sent7: {R}{aa} -> (¬{HD}{aa} & {AG}{aa}) sent8: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent9: (Ex): {JD}x -> ({EI}x & {FI}x) sent10: (Ex): {CT}x -> (¬{GK}x & {GL}x) sent11: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent12: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent13: (x): {AA}x -> (¬{CR}x & {FP}x) sent14: (x): {FU}x -> (¬{DG}x & {GC}x) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if that it is a kind of a grouping is not incorrect then it is not an endocrine and it is a kind of a Mercator. | (Ex): {FU}x -> (¬{DG}x & {GC}x) | [
"sent14 -> int1: the tarsal is a kind of non-endocrine thing that is a Mercator if the fact that it does not group is not correct.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a sensibility then it does not unlock Aristotelianism and it is a leisured. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a synchromesh it is not a Virginia. sent2: the adsorbate does not unlock Aristotelianism and is a leisured if it is a kind of a sensibility. sent3: the adsorbate is not caudal but it is anticyclonic if it is a sensibility. sent4: the siderocyte is not precise but it is not non-blackbird if the fact that it is not non-immanent is right. sent5: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a sensibility is not false it does unlock Aristotelianism and is a leisured. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a sensibility it is a kind of a leisured. sent7: the adsorbate is not prognathous but it is awnless if the fact that it is a kind of a pitched is not wrong. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a sensibility that it does not unlock Aristotelianism is not incorrect. sent9: there is something such that if it is a pinite then the fact that it is a halyard that is a kind of a Palestine is correct. sent10: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a games-master is not wrong it is not a shopaholic and is ipsilateral. sent11: if the adsorbate is a kind of a sensibility then it is a kind of a leisured. sent12: if the adsorbate is a sensibility it unlocks Aristotelianism and it is a leisured. sent13: something that unlocks Aristotelianism is both not a Verbascum and forceful. sent14: something is not a kind of an endocrine but it is a Mercator if that it groups is correct. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that either the Stern is a Tofieldia or it is not a Japheth or both is not correct. | ¬({A}{c} v ¬{D}{c}) | sent1: the racer is a kind of a sawmill. sent2: if the racer is a sawmill the anaspid is not ballistic. sent3: the Stern is not a Tofieldia. sent4: the anaspid is not a kind of a sawmill if the racer is a Bahai and it is a kind of a sawmill. sent5: the jumble is not ballistic. sent6: if the bluethroat is not a Tofieldia then the Stern is not a kind of a Tofieldia. sent7: something that is not ballistic is a kind of a Tofieldia and/or is not a Japheth. sent8: if the bluethroat is not a kind of a Tofieldia that the Stern is a kind of a Tofieldia and/or it is not a Japheth is incorrect. sent9: if the Stern is a sawmill then the racer is a Japheth. sent10: the anaspid is a Tofieldia if the bluethroat is ballistic. | sent1: {C}{d} sent2: {C}{d} -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: ¬{A}{c} sent4: ({F}{d} & {C}{d}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent5: ¬{B}{db} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{A}{c} sent7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x v ¬{D}x) sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({A}{c} v ¬{D}{c}) sent9: {C}{c} -> {D}{d} sent10: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bluethroat is a Tofieldia.; sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the anaspid is not ballistic.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent2 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b};"
] | the Stern is a Tofieldia and/or it is not a Japheth. | ({A}{c} v ¬{D}{c}) | [
"sent7 -> int2: the Stern is a Tofieldia and/or it is not a Japheth if the fact that it is not ballistic is true.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that either the Stern is a Tofieldia or it is not a Japheth or both is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the racer is a kind of a sawmill. sent2: if the racer is a sawmill the anaspid is not ballistic. sent3: the Stern is not a Tofieldia. sent4: the anaspid is not a kind of a sawmill if the racer is a Bahai and it is a kind of a sawmill. sent5: the jumble is not ballistic. sent6: if the bluethroat is not a Tofieldia then the Stern is not a kind of a Tofieldia. sent7: something that is not ballistic is a kind of a Tofieldia and/or is not a Japheth. sent8: if the bluethroat is not a kind of a Tofieldia that the Stern is a kind of a Tofieldia and/or it is not a Japheth is incorrect. sent9: if the Stern is a sawmill then the racer is a Japheth. sent10: the anaspid is a Tofieldia if the bluethroat is ballistic. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bluethroat is a Tofieldia.; sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the anaspid is not ballistic.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the blinks does not unbosom. | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: there exists something such that it is afebrile. sent2: the schrod is not a kind of a raper. sent3: the blinks is not non-Argive but it does not unbosom if the schrod is not a kind of a non-Argive. sent4: something does not eulogize Gaskell. sent5: the schrod is a Argive if the Herder is not a Argive. sent6: there exists something such that it is Argive. sent7: the schrod is Argive. sent8: the Herder is a kind of a archiannelid and is not a nursed. sent9: if the blinks is a Argive that does not eulogize tilter then the Herder does not unbosom. sent10: something is a Argive and it does eulogize Gaskell if it does not eulogize tilter. sent11: if the blinks does eulogize tilter and does not unbosom the schrod is not Argive. sent12: there exists something such that it eulogizes Gaskell. sent13: the blinks does unbosom if the fact that the Herder does unbosom hold. sent14: the schrod does not eulogize tilter if it does not eulogize tilter or it is not ceric or both. sent15: if something does not eulogize Gaskell the Herder is not a Argive. sent16: something is not a kind of a Argive. sent17: something does not eulogize tilter. sent18: that the blinks does not unbosom is not wrong if the schrod is a Argive that does not eulogize tilter. sent19: the blinks is not chlorophyllose. sent20: if the Herder is not Argive then the schrod is a kind of Argive thing that does not eulogize tilter. | sent1: (Ex): {BC}x sent2: ¬{DQ}{b} sent3: ¬{B}{b} -> ({B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent5: ¬{B}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: (Ex): {B}x sent7: {B}{b} sent8: ({JI}{a} & ¬{CB}{a}) sent9: ({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent10: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent11: ({D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent12: (Ex): {A}x sent13: {C}{a} -> {C}{c} sent14: (¬{D}{b} v ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent15: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent16: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent17: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent18: ({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent19: ¬{BT}{c} sent20: ¬{B}{a} -> ({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) | [
"sent4 & sent15 -> int1: that the Herder is not a Argive is not wrong.; sent20 & int1 -> int2: the schrod is a kind of Argive thing that does not eulogize tilter.; sent18 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent15 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent20 & int1 -> int2: ({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}); sent18 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the blinks unbosoms. | {C}{c} | [
"sent10 -> int3: if the schrod does not eulogize tilter it is a kind of a Argive and it eulogizes Gaskell.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the blinks does not unbosom. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is afebrile. sent2: the schrod is not a kind of a raper. sent3: the blinks is not non-Argive but it does not unbosom if the schrod is not a kind of a non-Argive. sent4: something does not eulogize Gaskell. sent5: the schrod is a Argive if the Herder is not a Argive. sent6: there exists something such that it is Argive. sent7: the schrod is Argive. sent8: the Herder is a kind of a archiannelid and is not a nursed. sent9: if the blinks is a Argive that does not eulogize tilter then the Herder does not unbosom. sent10: something is a Argive and it does eulogize Gaskell if it does not eulogize tilter. sent11: if the blinks does eulogize tilter and does not unbosom the schrod is not Argive. sent12: there exists something such that it eulogizes Gaskell. sent13: the blinks does unbosom if the fact that the Herder does unbosom hold. sent14: the schrod does not eulogize tilter if it does not eulogize tilter or it is not ceric or both. sent15: if something does not eulogize Gaskell the Herder is not a Argive. sent16: something is not a kind of a Argive. sent17: something does not eulogize tilter. sent18: that the blinks does not unbosom is not wrong if the schrod is a Argive that does not eulogize tilter. sent19: the blinks is not chlorophyllose. sent20: if the Herder is not Argive then the schrod is a kind of Argive thing that does not eulogize tilter. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent15 -> int1: that the Herder is not a Argive is not wrong.; sent20 & int1 -> int2: the schrod is a kind of Argive thing that does not eulogize tilter.; sent18 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the mangosteen is a Haworth and a mamey. | ({B}{c} & {C}{c}) | sent1: if the Milk does not mismarry and does not bargain marsupial then the mangosteen is a Haworth. sent2: the Milk is not a mamey if there is something such that that it is a mamey and does not blast is false. sent3: the fact that something is a mamey that is not a blasted is incorrect if it is not a Haworth. sent4: something that is a kind of a warren either is a dock or is not a kind of a blasted or both. sent5: if either the anime is a dock or it does not blast or both it is not a kind of a mamey. sent6: the Milk does not mismarry. sent7: if the anime does not blast then the Milk does not mismarry and does not bargain marsupial. sent8: the louvar is intramolecular. sent9: if the Milk does mismarry and does not bargain marsupial the mangosteen is a Haworth. sent10: the anime is not a kind of a blasted. sent11: if the louvar is intramolecular then that it is both saprobic and not a mask does not hold. sent12: the Milk is a warren if the cine-camera is a kind of non-endergonic a mark. sent13: if the fact that the louvar is saprobic but not a mask does not hold it is a Lugosi. sent14: something is not endergonic and marks if it is prodromal. sent15: if the Milk is a warren the anime is a warren. sent16: the Milk does not mismarry if the anime is not a blasted. | sent1: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} sent2: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) sent4: (x): {E}x -> ({D}x v ¬{A}x) sent5: ({D}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent6: ¬{AA}{b} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent8: {L}{e} sent9: ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} sent10: ¬{A}{a} sent11: {L}{e} -> ¬({J}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) sent12: (¬{G}{d} & {F}{d}) -> {E}{b} sent13: ¬({J}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) -> {I}{e} sent14: (x): {H}x -> (¬{G}x & {F}x) sent15: {E}{b} -> {E}{a} sent16: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} | [
"sent7 & sent10 -> int1: the Milk does not mismarry and it does not bargain marsupial.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the mangosteen is a Haworth.;"
] | [
"sent7 & sent10 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); int1 & sent1 -> int2: {B}{c};"
] | the fact that the mangosteen is a Haworth and it is a kind of a mamey does not hold. | ¬({B}{c} & {C}{c}) | [
"sent4 -> int3: either the anime is a kind of a dock or it does not blast or both if it is a kind of a warren.; sent14 -> int4: the cine-camera is not endergonic but it marks if it is prodromal.; sent11 & sent8 -> int5: that the louvar is saprobic and is not a mask is not right.; sent13 & int5 -> int6: the louvar is a Lugosi.; int6 -> int7: something is a kind of a Lugosi.;"
] | 11 | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the mangosteen is a Haworth and a mamey. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Milk does not mismarry and does not bargain marsupial then the mangosteen is a Haworth. sent2: the Milk is not a mamey if there is something such that that it is a mamey and does not blast is false. sent3: the fact that something is a mamey that is not a blasted is incorrect if it is not a Haworth. sent4: something that is a kind of a warren either is a dock or is not a kind of a blasted or both. sent5: if either the anime is a dock or it does not blast or both it is not a kind of a mamey. sent6: the Milk does not mismarry. sent7: if the anime does not blast then the Milk does not mismarry and does not bargain marsupial. sent8: the louvar is intramolecular. sent9: if the Milk does mismarry and does not bargain marsupial the mangosteen is a Haworth. sent10: the anime is not a kind of a blasted. sent11: if the louvar is intramolecular then that it is both saprobic and not a mask does not hold. sent12: the Milk is a warren if the cine-camera is a kind of non-endergonic a mark. sent13: if the fact that the louvar is saprobic but not a mask does not hold it is a Lugosi. sent14: something is not endergonic and marks if it is prodromal. sent15: if the Milk is a warren the anime is a warren. sent16: the Milk does not mismarry if the anime is not a blasted. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent10 -> int1: the Milk does not mismarry and it does not bargain marsupial.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the mangosteen is a Haworth.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the heist happens. | {D} | sent1: that the royalism does not occur and the leaching tying occurs is triggered by that the gingivalness happens. sent2: either the non-katabaticness or that the eulogizing cords does not occur or both is brought about by that the coexisting does not occur. sent3: that the batholithicness happens is triggered by that the non-algoidness and the unlocking whitewash happens. sent4: both the non-Mesozoicness and the eulogizing BPH happens. sent5: the fact that that the heist occurs is brought about by that the batholithicness occurs is not wrong. sent6: the algoidness does not occur. sent7: that the unlocking Kurdish does not occur yields that the reenlistment occurs and the unlocking mintmark happens. sent8: the echo occurs. sent9: if the temperamentalness does not occur then both the batholithicness and the heist happens. sent10: the coexisting does not occur if both the leaching tying and the reenlistment happens. sent11: that not the unlocking whitewash but the algoidness happens is false if the batholithicness does not occur. sent12: the fact that not the piloting but the magistracy happens is not wrong. sent13: the fact that the rain occurs is not incorrect. sent14: the non-temperamentalness is brought about by that the katabaticness does not occur and/or that the eulogizing cords does not occur. sent15: the unlocking whitewash happens. sent16: both the non-subclavianness and the invulnerableness occurs. sent17: if the katabaticness does not occur then the non-temperamentalness and the non-batholithicness happens. sent18: the fact that the gingivalness occurs is not wrong. sent19: the entering happens. | sent1: {N} -> (¬{M} & {I}) sent2: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} v ¬{G}) sent3: (¬{A} & {B}) -> {C} sent4: (¬{CS} & {AU}) sent5: {C} -> {D} sent6: ¬{A} sent7: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) sent8: {GB} sent9: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) sent10: ({I} & {J}) -> ¬{H} sent11: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{B} & {A}) sent12: (¬{AB} & {HM}) sent13: {U} sent14: (¬{F} v ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} sent15: {B} sent16: (¬{ET} & {EN}) sent17: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{C}) sent18: {N} sent19: {GP} | [
"sent6 & sent15 -> int1: both the non-algoidness and the unlocking whitewash happens.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: that the batholithicness does not occur is not right.; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent15 -> int1: (¬{A} & {B}); sent3 & int1 -> int2: {C}; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the heist does not occur. | ¬{D} | [] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the heist happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the royalism does not occur and the leaching tying occurs is triggered by that the gingivalness happens. sent2: either the non-katabaticness or that the eulogizing cords does not occur or both is brought about by that the coexisting does not occur. sent3: that the batholithicness happens is triggered by that the non-algoidness and the unlocking whitewash happens. sent4: both the non-Mesozoicness and the eulogizing BPH happens. sent5: the fact that that the heist occurs is brought about by that the batholithicness occurs is not wrong. sent6: the algoidness does not occur. sent7: that the unlocking Kurdish does not occur yields that the reenlistment occurs and the unlocking mintmark happens. sent8: the echo occurs. sent9: if the temperamentalness does not occur then both the batholithicness and the heist happens. sent10: the coexisting does not occur if both the leaching tying and the reenlistment happens. sent11: that not the unlocking whitewash but the algoidness happens is false if the batholithicness does not occur. sent12: the fact that not the piloting but the magistracy happens is not wrong. sent13: the fact that the rain occurs is not incorrect. sent14: the non-temperamentalness is brought about by that the katabaticness does not occur and/or that the eulogizing cords does not occur. sent15: the unlocking whitewash happens. sent16: both the non-subclavianness and the invulnerableness occurs. sent17: if the katabaticness does not occur then the non-temperamentalness and the non-batholithicness happens. sent18: the fact that the gingivalness occurs is not wrong. sent19: the entering happens. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent15 -> int1: both the non-algoidness and the unlocking whitewash happens.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: that the batholithicness does not occur is not right.; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the rosefish does not eulogize illness if it is anemophilous and it eulogizes lady-of-the-night. | ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: if something is a Lofoten and it is boustrophedonic then it does not eulogize escutcheon. sent2: the rosefish is philhellenic if it is anemophilous and it does eulogize perishable. sent3: if something is anemophilous and eulogizes lady-of-the-night that it does not eulogize illness is not incorrect. sent4: if something that is a sailing is incompressible it is not anemophilous. sent5: if the rosefish is anemophilous and eulogizes lady-of-the-night it does eulogize illness. sent6: if something does bargain one-liner and it is a codicil it is not infantile. sent7: if the rosefish does eulogize illness and is occlusive it is not a gossiping. sent8: if a anemophilous thing does eulogize lady-of-the-night then it eulogizes illness. sent9: if something that does eulogize Ticino is a kind of a codicil it is incautious. sent10: if the hemstitch does bargain rockabilly and eulogizes illness that it is a brier is right. sent11: something is not Pavlovian if it does bargain urokinase and bargains rockabilly. sent12: if the rosefish is a kind of faceless thing that is anemophilous it is a sarcosome. sent13: if something does iron and bargains Paige it is not a backing. sent14: if something does eulogize meaningfulness and is a enterokinase the fact that it unlocks Spica hold. sent15: the rosefish is not a kind of a mephenytoin if it does pander and eulogizes lady-of-the-night. sent16: if an intrusiveness is a Lofoten it is not incompressible. | sent1: (x): ({BL}x & {CR}x) -> ¬{J}x sent2: ({AA}{aa} & {GF}{aa}) -> {GI}{aa} sent3: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: (x): ({EC}x & {HI}x) -> ¬{AA}x sent5: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent6: (x): ({CP}x & {CG}x) -> ¬{DD}x sent7: ({B}{aa} & {K}{aa}) -> ¬{DC}{aa} sent8: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent9: (x): ({AE}x & {CG}x) -> ¬{FR}x sent10: ({A}{cl} & {B}{cl}) -> {CU}{cl} sent11: (x): ({BF}x & {A}x) -> ¬{FM}x sent12: ({DK}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> {HU}{aa} sent13: (x): ({IA}x & {AS}x) -> ¬{CK}x sent14: (x): ({FB}x & {EQ}x) -> {FQ}x sent15: ({AJ}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{BI}{aa} sent16: (x): ({EM}x & {BL}x) -> ¬{HI}x | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | if the register is a sailing and it is incompressible then it is not anemophilous. | ({EC}{hd} & {HI}{hd}) -> ¬{AA}{hd} | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the rosefish does not eulogize illness if it is anemophilous and it eulogizes lady-of-the-night. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a Lofoten and it is boustrophedonic then it does not eulogize escutcheon. sent2: the rosefish is philhellenic if it is anemophilous and it does eulogize perishable. sent3: if something is anemophilous and eulogizes lady-of-the-night that it does not eulogize illness is not incorrect. sent4: if something that is a sailing is incompressible it is not anemophilous. sent5: if the rosefish is anemophilous and eulogizes lady-of-the-night it does eulogize illness. sent6: if something does bargain one-liner and it is a codicil it is not infantile. sent7: if the rosefish does eulogize illness and is occlusive it is not a gossiping. sent8: if a anemophilous thing does eulogize lady-of-the-night then it eulogizes illness. sent9: if something that does eulogize Ticino is a kind of a codicil it is incautious. sent10: if the hemstitch does bargain rockabilly and eulogizes illness that it is a brier is right. sent11: something is not Pavlovian if it does bargain urokinase and bargains rockabilly. sent12: if the rosefish is a kind of faceless thing that is anemophilous it is a sarcosome. sent13: if something does iron and bargains Paige it is not a backing. sent14: if something does eulogize meaningfulness and is a enterokinase the fact that it unlocks Spica hold. sent15: the rosefish is not a kind of a mephenytoin if it does pander and eulogizes lady-of-the-night. sent16: if an intrusiveness is a Lofoten it is not incompressible. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the unlocking shinleaf does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: if that the sterilization happens and the unlocking shinleaf does not occur is not true the unlocking shinleaf occurs. sent2: if the sidetracking happens and the hum happens then the mouth occurs. sent3: if the sterilization happens and the mouth occurs then the unlocking shinleaf does not occur. sent4: if the mouthing does not occur that the sterilization but not the unlocking shinleaf occurs is not right. sent5: if the superiority happens then the fact that both the nonsubmersibleness and the anaphasicness happens does not hold. sent6: that the submersible occurs and/or the snuff does not occur is brought about by the superiority. sent7: if the fact that both the non-submersibleness and the anaphasicness occurs is not right then the submersibleness happens. sent8: the sidetracking happens and the humming does not occur. sent9: if the mouth does not occur then the anchorage occurs and the sterilization happens. sent10: if the sidetracking but not the hum happens then the mouth occurs. sent11: if the snuff happens the fact that the indefeasibleness occurs hold. sent12: that the leaching gadoid happens and the instrumentalness does not occur prevents that the ringer does not occur. sent13: the hum does not occur. sent14: the sterilization occurs and the promoting happens. sent15: the snuffing happens if the submersibleness happens. sent16: the fact that the legalness does not occur hold if both the preventableness and the adjective happens. sent17: the kindness and the expressionistness happens. sent18: if the leaching catboat does not occur then that both the superiority and the cheep occurs hold. sent19: if the prerequisite occurs and the excommunication happens the ringer does not occur. sent20: both the decentralization and the non-infiniteness happens. sent21: the nonslipperiness but not the idyll happens. sent22: the mouthing does not occur and the promoting happens if the indefeasibleness occurs. sent23: the promoting occurs. sent24: the eulogizing cornhusker occurs. | sent1: ¬({A} & ¬{C}) -> {C} sent2: ({AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent3: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent4: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & ¬{C}) sent5: {H} -> ¬(¬{G} & {I}) sent6: {H} -> ({G} v ¬{F}) sent7: ¬(¬{G} & {I}) -> {G} sent8: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent9: ¬{B} -> ({DT} & {A}) sent10: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent11: {F} -> {E} sent12: ({FC} & ¬{AD}) -> {CM} sent13: ¬{AB} sent14: ({A} & {D}) sent15: {G} -> {F} sent16: ({FM} & {II}) -> ¬{IM} sent17: ({CB} & {IU}) sent18: ¬{K} -> ({H} & {J}) sent19: ({O} & {JC}) -> ¬{CM} sent20: ({BU} & ¬{BA}) sent21: ({N} & ¬{JG}) sent22: {E} -> (¬{B} & {D}) sent23: {D} sent24: {IS} | [
"sent10 & sent8 -> int1: the mouthing happens.; sent14 -> int2: the sterilization occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: both the sterilization and the mouth occurs.; int3 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent10 & sent8 -> int1: {B}; sent14 -> int2: {A}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({A} & {B}); int3 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the anchorage occurs hold. | {DT} | [] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the unlocking shinleaf does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the sterilization happens and the unlocking shinleaf does not occur is not true the unlocking shinleaf occurs. sent2: if the sidetracking happens and the hum happens then the mouth occurs. sent3: if the sterilization happens and the mouth occurs then the unlocking shinleaf does not occur. sent4: if the mouthing does not occur that the sterilization but not the unlocking shinleaf occurs is not right. sent5: if the superiority happens then the fact that both the nonsubmersibleness and the anaphasicness happens does not hold. sent6: that the submersible occurs and/or the snuff does not occur is brought about by the superiority. sent7: if the fact that both the non-submersibleness and the anaphasicness occurs is not right then the submersibleness happens. sent8: the sidetracking happens and the humming does not occur. sent9: if the mouth does not occur then the anchorage occurs and the sterilization happens. sent10: if the sidetracking but not the hum happens then the mouth occurs. sent11: if the snuff happens the fact that the indefeasibleness occurs hold. sent12: that the leaching gadoid happens and the instrumentalness does not occur prevents that the ringer does not occur. sent13: the hum does not occur. sent14: the sterilization occurs and the promoting happens. sent15: the snuffing happens if the submersibleness happens. sent16: the fact that the legalness does not occur hold if both the preventableness and the adjective happens. sent17: the kindness and the expressionistness happens. sent18: if the leaching catboat does not occur then that both the superiority and the cheep occurs hold. sent19: if the prerequisite occurs and the excommunication happens the ringer does not occur. sent20: both the decentralization and the non-infiniteness happens. sent21: the nonslipperiness but not the idyll happens. sent22: the mouthing does not occur and the promoting happens if the indefeasibleness occurs. sent23: the promoting occurs. sent24: the eulogizing cornhusker occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent10 & sent8 -> int1: the mouthing happens.; sent14 -> int2: the sterilization occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: both the sterilization and the mouth occurs.; int3 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the overgarment is not counterclockwise hold. | ¬{E}{b} | sent1: if the offerer is not a softheartedness the horsewhip is not transatlantic. sent2: if the fact that something is non-counterclockwise and non-autogenetic is incorrect it is non-counterclockwise. sent3: if the overgarment is transatlantic that it plagiarizes and/or it is non-prewar is not correct. sent4: if something that is autogenetic does plagiarize then the landside is prewar. sent5: if the offerer is not hornless then the horsewhip is not transatlantic. sent6: that either the offerer is not hornless or it is not a softheartedness or both is true if there exists something such that it is a huddled. sent7: there is something such that it is a huddled. sent8: there exists something such that it is autogenetic thing that does plagiarize. sent9: the overgarment is not counterclockwise if either the landside is transatlantic or it is prewar or both. sent10: if that the overgarment either does plagiarize or is not prewar or both is wrong then it is not autogenetic. | sent1: ¬{F}{e} -> ¬{D}{d} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{A}x) -> {E}x sent3: {D}{b} -> ¬({B}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) sent4: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent5: ¬{G}{e} -> ¬{D}{d} sent6: (x): {H}x -> (¬{G}{e} v ¬{F}{e}) sent7: (Ex): {H}x sent8: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent9: ({D}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent10: ¬({B}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{b} | [
"sent8 & sent4 -> int1: the landside is prewar.; int1 -> int2: the landside is transatlantic or prewar or both.; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 & sent4 -> int1: {C}{a}; int1 -> int2: ({D}{a} v {C}{a}); sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the overgarment is counterclockwise. | {E}{b} | [
"sent2 -> int3: if that the overgarment is not counterclockwise and is not autogenetic does not hold then it is not counterclockwise.; sent7 & sent6 -> int4: the offerer is not hornless or it is not a kind of a softheartedness or both.; int4 & sent5 & sent1 -> int5: the horsewhip is not transatlantic.; int5 -> int6: something is not transatlantic.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the overgarment is not counterclockwise hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the offerer is not a softheartedness the horsewhip is not transatlantic. sent2: if the fact that something is non-counterclockwise and non-autogenetic is incorrect it is non-counterclockwise. sent3: if the overgarment is transatlantic that it plagiarizes and/or it is non-prewar is not correct. sent4: if something that is autogenetic does plagiarize then the landside is prewar. sent5: if the offerer is not hornless then the horsewhip is not transatlantic. sent6: that either the offerer is not hornless or it is not a softheartedness or both is true if there exists something such that it is a huddled. sent7: there is something such that it is a huddled. sent8: there exists something such that it is autogenetic thing that does plagiarize. sent9: the overgarment is not counterclockwise if either the landside is transatlantic or it is prewar or both. sent10: if that the overgarment either does plagiarize or is not prewar or both is wrong then it is not autogenetic. ; $proof$ = | sent8 & sent4 -> int1: the landside is prewar.; int1 -> int2: the landside is transatlantic or prewar or both.; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the brachyuran is Eurocentric is true. | {D}{b} | sent1: the push is not peripheral or it is not a kind of a Azerbaijani or both if there is something such that it is not a goldeneye. sent2: the defile is organizational. sent3: if the push is not a goldeneye then that the brachyuran is Eurocentric and it is peripheral is false. sent4: the fact that the whipping does eulogize Kleist is true if the bin eulogize Kleist. sent5: the tosser is Rhodesian if the cryptomonad is adaxial. sent6: if something eulogizes Kleist then the bin does eulogize sucker or it does eulogizes Kleist or both. sent7: if there is something such that it is not a goldeneye then the push is non-peripheral and/or not non-Azerbaijani. sent8: the gametocyte is non-Arawakan if that the no is not organizational and it does not romance is wrong. sent9: something does eulogize Kleist if it is Rhodesian. sent10: a non-Arawakan thing incubates and is a Shahaptian. sent11: if the bin does eulogize sucker the whipping does eulogize Kleist. sent12: the brachyuran is Eurocentric if the push is not a kind of a peripheral and/or it is not Azerbaijani. sent13: if the whipping does eulogize Kleist the trim is a Azerbaijani. sent14: the fact that the no is not organizational and it does not romance is not true if something is organizational. sent15: if the gametocyte incubates then the cryptomonad is adaxial. sent16: something is not Eurocentric if that it is a kind of Eurocentric a peripheral is not true. sent17: either the brachyuran does not leach camper or it is chelonian or both. sent18: if the fact that something is not a goldeneye hold the push is a peripheral and/or not a Azerbaijani. sent19: there is something such that it is not a goldeneye. sent20: something is a kind of a goldeneye. sent21: the push is a peripheral or it is not a kind of a Azerbaijani or both. | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent2: {M}{j} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & {B}{b}) sent4: {E}{e} -> {E}{d} sent5: {H}{g} -> {F}{f} sent6: (x): {E}x -> ({G}{e} v {E}{e}) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent8: ¬(¬{M}{i} & ¬{L}{i}) -> ¬{K}{h} sent9: (x): {F}x -> {E}x sent10: (x): ¬{K}x -> ({I}x & {J}x) sent11: {G}{e} -> {E}{d} sent12: (¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent13: {E}{d} -> {C}{c} sent14: (x): {M}x -> ¬(¬{M}{i} & ¬{L}{i}) sent15: {I}{h} -> {H}{g} sent16: (x): ¬({D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{D}x sent17: (¬{FR}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent18: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent19: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent20: (Ex): {A}x sent21: ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) | [
"sent19 & sent1 -> int1: the push is not a kind of a peripheral and/or it is not a Azerbaijani.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent19 & sent1 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}); sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the brachyuran is Eurocentric does not hold. | ¬{D}{b} | [
"sent16 -> int2: the brachyuran is not Eurocentric if the fact that it is Eurocentric and is a peripheral is false.; sent9 -> int3: the tosser eulogizes Kleist if it is Rhodesian.; sent10 -> int4: the gametocyte incubates and is a Shahaptian if it is not Arawakan.; sent2 -> int5: there is something such that it is organizational.; int5 & sent14 -> int6: that the no is not organizational and it is not a romance is not correct.; sent8 & int6 -> int7: the gametocyte is not Arawakan.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the gametocyte incubates and it is a Shahaptian.; int8 -> int9: the gametocyte does incubate.; sent15 & int9 -> int10: the cryptomonad is adaxial.; sent5 & int10 -> int11: the tosser is Rhodesian.; int3 & int11 -> int12: the tosser eulogizes Kleist.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that it eulogizes Kleist.; int13 & sent6 -> int14: the bin eulogizes sucker and/or it does eulogize Kleist.; int14 & sent11 & sent4 -> int15: the whipping eulogizes Kleist.; sent13 & int15 -> int16: the trim is a Azerbaijani.; int16 -> int17: there is something such that it is Azerbaijani.;"
] | 16 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the brachyuran is Eurocentric is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the push is not peripheral or it is not a kind of a Azerbaijani or both if there is something such that it is not a goldeneye. sent2: the defile is organizational. sent3: if the push is not a goldeneye then that the brachyuran is Eurocentric and it is peripheral is false. sent4: the fact that the whipping does eulogize Kleist is true if the bin eulogize Kleist. sent5: the tosser is Rhodesian if the cryptomonad is adaxial. sent6: if something eulogizes Kleist then the bin does eulogize sucker or it does eulogizes Kleist or both. sent7: if there is something such that it is not a goldeneye then the push is non-peripheral and/or not non-Azerbaijani. sent8: the gametocyte is non-Arawakan if that the no is not organizational and it does not romance is wrong. sent9: something does eulogize Kleist if it is Rhodesian. sent10: a non-Arawakan thing incubates and is a Shahaptian. sent11: if the bin does eulogize sucker the whipping does eulogize Kleist. sent12: the brachyuran is Eurocentric if the push is not a kind of a peripheral and/or it is not Azerbaijani. sent13: if the whipping does eulogize Kleist the trim is a Azerbaijani. sent14: the fact that the no is not organizational and it does not romance is not true if something is organizational. sent15: if the gametocyte incubates then the cryptomonad is adaxial. sent16: something is not Eurocentric if that it is a kind of Eurocentric a peripheral is not true. sent17: either the brachyuran does not leach camper or it is chelonian or both. sent18: if the fact that something is not a goldeneye hold the push is a peripheral and/or not a Azerbaijani. sent19: there is something such that it is not a goldeneye. sent20: something is a kind of a goldeneye. sent21: the push is a peripheral or it is not a kind of a Azerbaijani or both. ; $proof$ = | sent19 & sent1 -> int1: the push is not a kind of a peripheral and/or it is not a Azerbaijani.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the wetter is not a sixth-former. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: the fact that the catalase is not a prankster and does not unlock wetter is false. sent2: the wetter is superficial if something is a RI and is not a kind of a sixth-former. sent3: the rivulet is a kind of a RI that is not a sixth-former if the flip-flop does not bargain downstage. sent4: if the spoor does regiment the wimp is a kind of a bladdernose. sent5: the flip-flop does not bargain downstage if there is something such that that it is not a Ecuador and does bargain downstage is not correct. sent6: the fact that the knotgrass is not a snowman and not mayoral is incorrect if the stagehand does bargain mainframe. sent7: the spoor does regiment if that the knotgrass is a snowman is not false. sent8: the fact that the wrack is not a Ecuador and does bargain downstage is incorrect. sent9: the spoor bargains downstage. sent10: the wetter is not a kind of a sixth-former if there exists something such that it is superficial and a RI. sent11: the wimp is superficial if the fact that the wetter is superficial hold. sent12: the hemophiliac is not Coptic if that the catalase is not a kind of a prankster and does not unlock wetter does not hold. sent13: something does bargain mainframe if the fact that it is Coptic and it does not unlock lineup does not hold. sent14: the spoor is both a regimented and superficial. sent15: something is a snowman if that it is not a snowman and not mayoral does not hold. sent16: The downstage bargains spoor. | sent1: ¬(¬{M}{i} & ¬{L}{i}) sent2: (x): ({C}x & ¬{D}x) -> {B}{b} sent3: ¬{E}{d} -> ({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent4: {A}{a} -> {HT}{fn} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}{d} sent6: {G}{f} -> ¬(¬{F}{e} & ¬{H}{e}) sent7: {F}{e} -> {A}{a} sent8: ¬(¬{K}{g} & {E}{g}) sent9: {E}{a} sent10: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}{b} sent11: {B}{b} -> {B}{fn} sent12: ¬(¬{M}{i} & ¬{L}{i}) -> ¬{I}{h} sent13: (x): ¬({I}x & ¬{J}x) -> {G}x sent14: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent15: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{H}x) -> {F}x sent16: {AA}{aa} | [
"sent14 -> int1: the spoor is superficial.;"
] | [
"sent14 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] | the wimp is a kind of superficial a bladdernose. | ({B}{fn} & {HT}{fn}) | [
"sent8 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is not a Ecuador and it bargains downstage is not correct.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: the flip-flop does not bargain downstage.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: the rivulet is both a RI and not a sixth-former.; int4 -> int5: something is a kind of a RI and is not a sixth-former.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the wetter is superficial.; sent11 & int6 -> int7: the wimp is superficial.; sent15 -> int8: the knotgrass is a snowman if the fact that it is both not a snowman and non-mayoral does not hold.; sent13 -> int9: if the fact that the stagehand is a kind of Coptic thing that does not unlock lineup is incorrect it bargains mainframe.; sent12 & sent1 -> int10: the hemophiliac is not a Coptic.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that it is not a Coptic.;"
] | 9 | 4 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the wetter is not a sixth-former. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the catalase is not a prankster and does not unlock wetter is false. sent2: the wetter is superficial if something is a RI and is not a kind of a sixth-former. sent3: the rivulet is a kind of a RI that is not a sixth-former if the flip-flop does not bargain downstage. sent4: if the spoor does regiment the wimp is a kind of a bladdernose. sent5: the flip-flop does not bargain downstage if there is something such that that it is not a Ecuador and does bargain downstage is not correct. sent6: the fact that the knotgrass is not a snowman and not mayoral is incorrect if the stagehand does bargain mainframe. sent7: the spoor does regiment if that the knotgrass is a snowman is not false. sent8: the fact that the wrack is not a Ecuador and does bargain downstage is incorrect. sent9: the spoor bargains downstage. sent10: the wetter is not a kind of a sixth-former if there exists something such that it is superficial and a RI. sent11: the wimp is superficial if the fact that the wetter is superficial hold. sent12: the hemophiliac is not Coptic if that the catalase is not a kind of a prankster and does not unlock wetter does not hold. sent13: something does bargain mainframe if the fact that it is Coptic and it does not unlock lineup does not hold. sent14: the spoor is both a regimented and superficial. sent15: something is a snowman if that it is not a snowman and not mayoral does not hold. sent16: The downstage bargains spoor. ; $proof$ = | sent14 -> int1: the spoor is superficial.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the perishable does not unlock ticktack but it eulogizes Nigerian does not hold. | ¬(¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: there is something such that it unlocks Emmanthe. sent2: the fact that the crossbencher does not unlock ticktack and/or it does eulogize register is not right. sent3: the perishable eulogizes Nigerian. sent4: that something does not unlock ticktack and eulogizes Nigerian does not hold if it is not a kind of a Rhamnaceae. sent5: the raider does not eulogize Nigerian. sent6: the perishable does not unlock ticktack if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a tack and/or it unlocks Emmanthe does not hold. sent7: if something does not eulogize register it does rebuild and is not non-northern. sent8: the manservant does not eulogize Nigerian if the fact that the crossbencher does rebuild but it is not a Rhamnaceae is not true. sent9: that the crossbencher is non-caprine thing that does not eulogize diploidy is not true. sent10: the fact that the mandarin does not tack and/or it does not unlock Emmanthe does not hold. sent11: the fact that the register unlocks Emmanthe hold. sent12: the manservant does not unlock ticktack if that the crossbencher either does not unlock ticktack or eulogizes register or both is incorrect. sent13: the mandarin does unlock ticktack. sent14: The Nigerian eulogizes perishable. sent15: the mandarin unlocks Emmanthe. sent16: if the fact that something does not rebuild and is a Rhamnaceae does not hold then it is not a Rhamnaceae. sent17: something does not tack or does not unlock Emmanthe or both. sent18: if the manservant does not unlock ticktack and it is not a Rhamnaceae the fact that the perishable does unlock ticktack is true. sent19: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a tack and/or it does not unlock Emmanthe does not hold then the perishable does not unlock ticktack. sent20: there is something such that that it does not eulogize forebrain or it does not eulogize stob or both is false. sent21: the mandarin is a davallia. sent22: there is something such that that it is a tack or it does not unlock Emmanthe or both is false. | sent1: (Ex): {AB}x sent2: ¬(¬{A}{c} v {F}{c}) sent3: {B}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) sent5: ¬{B}{fc} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) sent8: ¬({D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent9: ¬(¬{H}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent10: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent11: {AB}{f} sent12: ¬(¬{A}{c} v {F}{c}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent13: {A}{aa} sent14: {AD}{ac} sent15: {AB}{aa} sent16: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent17: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent18: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {A}{a} sent19: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent20: (Ex): ¬(¬{FH}x v ¬{JG}x) sent21: {EL}{aa} sent22: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent10 -> int1: there exists something such that that the fact that it is not a tack or it does not unlock Emmanthe or both is not false is not true.; int1 & sent19 -> int2: the perishable does not unlock ticktack.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent10 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent19 -> int2: ¬{A}{a}; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the perishable is not a tack and is noninheritable. | (¬{AA}{a} & {GQ}{a}) | [
"sent12 & sent2 -> int3: the manservant does not unlock ticktack.; sent16 -> int4: the manservant is not a kind of a Rhamnaceae if the fact that it does not rebuild and is a Rhamnaceae is not correct.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the perishable does not unlock ticktack but it eulogizes Nigerian does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it unlocks Emmanthe. sent2: the fact that the crossbencher does not unlock ticktack and/or it does eulogize register is not right. sent3: the perishable eulogizes Nigerian. sent4: that something does not unlock ticktack and eulogizes Nigerian does not hold if it is not a kind of a Rhamnaceae. sent5: the raider does not eulogize Nigerian. sent6: the perishable does not unlock ticktack if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a tack and/or it unlocks Emmanthe does not hold. sent7: if something does not eulogize register it does rebuild and is not non-northern. sent8: the manservant does not eulogize Nigerian if the fact that the crossbencher does rebuild but it is not a Rhamnaceae is not true. sent9: that the crossbencher is non-caprine thing that does not eulogize diploidy is not true. sent10: the fact that the mandarin does not tack and/or it does not unlock Emmanthe does not hold. sent11: the fact that the register unlocks Emmanthe hold. sent12: the manservant does not unlock ticktack if that the crossbencher either does not unlock ticktack or eulogizes register or both is incorrect. sent13: the mandarin does unlock ticktack. sent14: The Nigerian eulogizes perishable. sent15: the mandarin unlocks Emmanthe. sent16: if the fact that something does not rebuild and is a Rhamnaceae does not hold then it is not a Rhamnaceae. sent17: something does not tack or does not unlock Emmanthe or both. sent18: if the manservant does not unlock ticktack and it is not a Rhamnaceae the fact that the perishable does unlock ticktack is true. sent19: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a tack and/or it does not unlock Emmanthe does not hold then the perishable does not unlock ticktack. sent20: there is something such that that it does not eulogize forebrain or it does not eulogize stob or both is false. sent21: the mandarin is a davallia. sent22: there is something such that that it is a tack or it does not unlock Emmanthe or both is false. ; $proof$ = | sent10 -> int1: there exists something such that that the fact that it is not a tack or it does not unlock Emmanthe or both is not false is not true.; int1 & sent19 -> int2: the perishable does not unlock ticktack.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the salting does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: the unlocking knitted occurs. sent2: that both the non-naiveness and the unlocking prothorax happens is not correct. sent3: the developmentalness does not occur if that the Gauguinesqueness does not occur and the bargaining playoff does not occur is false. sent4: that the fact that both the ovineness and the pushing occurs is true is wrong. sent5: the arborolatry occurs if the feminism occurs. sent6: the fact that the scholasticness occurs hold if the laugher happens. sent7: that the line does not occur yields that the hackwork and the bargaining sucker happens. sent8: that the Gauguinesqueness does not occur and the bargaining playoff does not occur is false if the bargaining sucker occurs. sent9: that the slap does not occur and the striateness does not occur is wrong if that the developmentalness does not occur is right. sent10: if the fact that the slap does not occur and the striating does not occur is false the salting does not occur. sent11: the laugher occurs if the fact that not the naiveness but the unlocking prothorax happens is incorrect. sent12: the fact that not the anathema but the Teutonicness happens is wrong. sent13: if the fact that the scholasticness happens hold then the salting occurs. sent14: the bargaining clomiphene occurs. sent15: the fact that the bargaining separatism does not occur and the marmoreanness occurs is not right. sent16: the lining occurs if the unconscientiousness happens. sent17: if that the bargaining shinleaf happens and the laugher happens is wrong the laugher does not occur. | sent1: {FJ} sent2: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent3: ¬(¬{I} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{G} sent4: ¬({IJ} & {FP}) sent5: {BS} -> {HK} sent6: {B} -> {A} sent7: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {J}) sent8: {J} -> ¬(¬{I} & ¬{H}) sent9: ¬{G} -> ¬(¬{E} & ¬{F}) sent10: ¬(¬{E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{C} sent11: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent12: ¬(¬{GP} & {EF}) sent13: {A} -> {C} sent14: {CT} sent15: ¬(¬{HF} & {EK}) sent16: {DC} -> {L} sent17: ¬({D} & {B}) -> ¬{B} | [
"sent11 & sent2 -> int1: the laugher happens.; sent6 & int1 -> int2: that the scholasticness occurs is not false.; sent13 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent11 & sent2 -> int1: {B}; sent6 & int1 -> int2: {A}; sent13 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the Teutonicness occurs. | {EF} | [] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the salting does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the unlocking knitted occurs. sent2: that both the non-naiveness and the unlocking prothorax happens is not correct. sent3: the developmentalness does not occur if that the Gauguinesqueness does not occur and the bargaining playoff does not occur is false. sent4: that the fact that both the ovineness and the pushing occurs is true is wrong. sent5: the arborolatry occurs if the feminism occurs. sent6: the fact that the scholasticness occurs hold if the laugher happens. sent7: that the line does not occur yields that the hackwork and the bargaining sucker happens. sent8: that the Gauguinesqueness does not occur and the bargaining playoff does not occur is false if the bargaining sucker occurs. sent9: that the slap does not occur and the striateness does not occur is wrong if that the developmentalness does not occur is right. sent10: if the fact that the slap does not occur and the striating does not occur is false the salting does not occur. sent11: the laugher occurs if the fact that not the naiveness but the unlocking prothorax happens is incorrect. sent12: the fact that not the anathema but the Teutonicness happens is wrong. sent13: if the fact that the scholasticness happens hold then the salting occurs. sent14: the bargaining clomiphene occurs. sent15: the fact that the bargaining separatism does not occur and the marmoreanness occurs is not right. sent16: the lining occurs if the unconscientiousness happens. sent17: if that the bargaining shinleaf happens and the laugher happens is wrong the laugher does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent11 & sent2 -> int1: the laugher happens.; sent6 & int1 -> int2: that the scholasticness occurs is not false.; sent13 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the electric is a kind of cerebellar thing that bargains decarboxylase. | ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: if there exists something such that it is passionate the electric is a cobaltite. sent2: the bonefish is valent and/or Caesarian. sent3: the bonefish is not valent if it is a kind of a peeve that does bargain nuisance. sent4: if there are passionate things the fact that the electric is a cobaltite and bargains decarboxylase is correct. sent5: the electric is a cobaltite. sent6: the electric is a kind of tannic thing that unlocks trident. sent7: something is passionate. sent8: the electric is valent. sent9: a Caesarian thing is cerebellar. sent10: something is not passionate if it is not a cobaltite and/or it is Caesarian. sent11: if the bonefish is Caesarian then the fact that the electric is Caesarian is not wrong. sent12: the electric is Caesarian if the bonefish is valent. sent13: the fact that the electric is cerebellar and bargains decarboxylase does not hold if the bonefish is not passionate. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent2: ({G}{b} v {E}{b}) sent3: ({I}{b} & {H}{b}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent4: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent5: {B}{a} sent6: ({DJ}{a} & {DM}{a}) sent7: (Ex): {A}x sent8: {G}{a} sent9: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent10: (x): (¬{B}x v {E}x) -> ¬{A}x sent11: {E}{b} -> {E}{a} sent12: {G}{b} -> {E}{a} sent13: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"sent7 & sent4 -> int1: the electric is a kind of a cobaltite and it does bargain decarboxylase.; int1 -> int2: the electric bargains decarboxylase.; sent9 -> int3: if the electric is not non-Caesarian then it is cerebellar.; sent2 & sent12 & sent11 -> int4: the fact that the electric is Caesarian hold.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the electric is cerebellar.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 & sent4 -> int1: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> int2: {C}{a}; sent9 -> int3: {E}{a} -> {D}{a}; sent2 & sent12 & sent11 -> int4: {E}{a}; int3 & int4 -> int5: {D}{a}; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the electric is cerebellar and bargains decarboxylase is not correct. | ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"sent10 -> int6: if the bonefish is not a cobaltite or it is Caesarian or both then it is not passionate.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the electric is a kind of cerebellar thing that bargains decarboxylase. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it is passionate the electric is a cobaltite. sent2: the bonefish is valent and/or Caesarian. sent3: the bonefish is not valent if it is a kind of a peeve that does bargain nuisance. sent4: if there are passionate things the fact that the electric is a cobaltite and bargains decarboxylase is correct. sent5: the electric is a cobaltite. sent6: the electric is a kind of tannic thing that unlocks trident. sent7: something is passionate. sent8: the electric is valent. sent9: a Caesarian thing is cerebellar. sent10: something is not passionate if it is not a cobaltite and/or it is Caesarian. sent11: if the bonefish is Caesarian then the fact that the electric is Caesarian is not wrong. sent12: the electric is Caesarian if the bonefish is valent. sent13: the fact that the electric is cerebellar and bargains decarboxylase does not hold if the bonefish is not passionate. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent4 -> int1: the electric is a kind of a cobaltite and it does bargain decarboxylase.; int1 -> int2: the electric bargains decarboxylase.; sent9 -> int3: if the electric is not non-Caesarian then it is cerebellar.; sent2 & sent12 & sent11 -> int4: the fact that the electric is Caesarian hold.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the electric is cerebellar.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Gurkha is hemiparasitic. | {B}{a} | sent1: something is metastatic. sent2: the Gurkha unlocks lingam but it does not distrain. sent3: the Gurkha is not unadoptable. sent4: the shiv is a antimuon but it is not cross-modal. sent5: something is not unadoptable if the fact that it does not abscond and is unadoptable is not true. sent6: the fact that the metharbital does not abscond and is unadoptable does not hold if there is something such that it does not eulogize potter. sent7: the Gurkha is not unadoptable if there exists something such that it distrains. sent8: if there is something such that it does distrain then the Gurkha is hemiparasitic and not unadoptable. sent9: the Gurkha is a kind of a reciprocal but it is not diffident if something distrains. sent10: the Gurkha distrains but it is not unpredictable if there exists something such that it is a rapper. sent11: there exists something such that it is a kind of a mean. sent12: there is something such that it does eulogize Huxley. sent13: if there is something such that it is a genipap the Gurkha is a kind of a sideburn that does not eulogize Liepaja. sent14: there is something such that it is unadoptable. sent15: the Gurkha bargains trabecula and is not unadoptable. sent16: that something is hemiparasitic hold. sent17: there is something such that it is uncritical. sent18: there exists something such that it does let. sent19: the hyssop does not eulogize potter. sent20: the greens is hemiparasitic. | sent1: (Ex): {JJ}x sent2: ({HD}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent3: ¬{C}{a} sent4: ({CS}{bq} & ¬{GM}{bq}) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent6: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{E}{b} & {C}{b}) sent7: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent8: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent9: (x): {A}x -> ({CM}{a} & ¬{DG}{a}) sent10: (x): {AC}x -> ({A}{a} & ¬{AG}{a}) sent11: (Ex): {GQ}x sent12: (Ex): {BF}x sent13: (x): {I}x -> ({CB}{a} & ¬{IH}{a}) sent14: (Ex): {C}x sent15: ({GH}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent16: (Ex): {B}x sent17: (Ex): {GO}x sent18: (Ex): {JD}x sent19: ¬{F}{c} sent20: {B}{h} | [] | [] | the Gurkha is not hemiparasitic. | ¬{B}{a} | [
"sent5 -> int1: that the metharbital is not unadoptable is true if that the fact that it does not abscond and is unadoptable is right is wrong.; sent19 -> int2: there is something such that that it does not eulogize potter is correct.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: that the metharbital does not abscond but it is not adoptable is not correct.; int1 & int3 -> int4: the metharbital is not unadoptable.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Gurkha is hemiparasitic. ; $context$ = sent1: something is metastatic. sent2: the Gurkha unlocks lingam but it does not distrain. sent3: the Gurkha is not unadoptable. sent4: the shiv is a antimuon but it is not cross-modal. sent5: something is not unadoptable if the fact that it does not abscond and is unadoptable is not true. sent6: the fact that the metharbital does not abscond and is unadoptable does not hold if there is something such that it does not eulogize potter. sent7: the Gurkha is not unadoptable if there exists something such that it distrains. sent8: if there is something such that it does distrain then the Gurkha is hemiparasitic and not unadoptable. sent9: the Gurkha is a kind of a reciprocal but it is not diffident if something distrains. sent10: the Gurkha distrains but it is not unpredictable if there exists something such that it is a rapper. sent11: there exists something such that it is a kind of a mean. sent12: there is something such that it does eulogize Huxley. sent13: if there is something such that it is a genipap the Gurkha is a kind of a sideburn that does not eulogize Liepaja. sent14: there is something such that it is unadoptable. sent15: the Gurkha bargains trabecula and is not unadoptable. sent16: that something is hemiparasitic hold. sent17: there is something such that it is uncritical. sent18: there exists something such that it does let. sent19: the hyssop does not eulogize potter. sent20: the greens is hemiparasitic. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the ticker is a Sufi. | {D}{c} | sent1: That the ticker does not bargain Feosol is right. sent2: that the Feosol does not bargain ticker is right. sent3: the Feosol leaches Herder or it does not bargain amniote or both if it does not bargain ticker. sent4: something that eulogizes boss is a ergodicity. sent5: the ticker is Sufi if the Herder is a kind of a ergodicity. sent6: the Feosol is a Sufi. sent7: the Herder does eulogize boss if the Feosol does not bargain amniote. sent8: if the Feosol does not bargain ticker then it leaches Herder or it bargains amniote or both. sent9: the Feosol leaches Herder and/or it bargains amniote. | sent1: ¬{AC}{aa} sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent4: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent5: {C}{b} -> {D}{c} sent6: {D}{a} sent7: ¬{AB}{a} -> {B}{b} sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent9: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) | [
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the Feosol leaches Herder or it does not bargain amniote or both.; sent4 -> int2: the fact that the Herder is a kind of a ergodicity is not wrong if it does eulogize boss.;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); sent4 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {C}{b};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the ticker is a Sufi. ; $context$ = sent1: That the ticker does not bargain Feosol is right. sent2: that the Feosol does not bargain ticker is right. sent3: the Feosol leaches Herder or it does not bargain amniote or both if it does not bargain ticker. sent4: something that eulogizes boss is a ergodicity. sent5: the ticker is Sufi if the Herder is a kind of a ergodicity. sent6: the Feosol is a Sufi. sent7: the Herder does eulogize boss if the Feosol does not bargain amniote. sent8: if the Feosol does not bargain ticker then it leaches Herder or it bargains amniote or both. sent9: the Feosol leaches Herder and/or it bargains amniote. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the Feosol leaches Herder or it does not bargain amniote or both.; sent4 -> int2: the fact that the Herder is a kind of a ergodicity is not wrong if it does eulogize boss.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is sublittoral the fact that it does not bargain militarism and it eulogizes reliever is incorrect. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: if the Tuscan eulogizes dump then it is not a revoke and it does eulogize reliever. sent2: if the Tuscan is sublittoral the fact that it does not bargain militarism and it eulogizes reliever is not right. sent3: there is something such that if it is Nordic the fact that it is not chylific and it is bibliophilic is not correct. sent4: if the fringe is noncomprehensive then it does not leach planchet and is sublittoral. sent5: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a cryolite is not wrong it is not a kind of a lechwe and tyrannizes. | sent1: {IP}{aa} -> (¬{JG}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): {IM}x -> ¬(¬{FQ}x & {DS}x) sent4: {EF}{do} -> (¬{DK}{do} & {A}{do}) sent5: (Ex): {BA}x -> (¬{FA}x & {ER}x) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is sublittoral the fact that it does not bargain militarism and it eulogizes reliever is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Tuscan eulogizes dump then it is not a revoke and it does eulogize reliever. sent2: if the Tuscan is sublittoral the fact that it does not bargain militarism and it eulogizes reliever is not right. sent3: there is something such that if it is Nordic the fact that it is not chylific and it is bibliophilic is not correct. sent4: if the fringe is noncomprehensive then it does not leach planchet and is sublittoral. sent5: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a cryolite is not wrong it is not a kind of a lechwe and tyrannizes. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it does recess then that it is both not a valise and a bourtree is false. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: there is something such that if it eulogizes Spica the fact that it does not gesticulate and it is a auricle does not hold. sent2: the fact that something is a valise and it is a bourtree is not correct if it is a kind of a recessed. sent3: if something unlocks buckram then that it does not eulogize stimulant and it is autoplastic is incorrect. sent4: there is something such that if it recesses the fact that it is a valise and it is a bourtree is not right. sent5: that the shark is not a valise but it does bargain Cronartium does not hold if it does unlock octillion. sent6: there exists something such that if it does recess then it is not a valise and is a bourtree. sent7: if something does eulogize sore that it does not unlock conference and it is a raw is not true. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Tange then that it is both not paroxysmal and a crier is wrong. sent9: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a Ostrogoth hold that it is a kind of protective thing that is a kind of a feint is not true. sent10: if something does recess then it is not a kind of a valise and it is a kind of a bourtree. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a graduality then that it does not buy and it does bargain prothorax is false. sent12: that something is not asynergic but it is a kind of a escapist is incorrect if it is a kind of a bourguignon. sent13: the Voltaren is not a valise but a bourtree if that it is a recessed is right. sent14: if the Voltaren recesses that it is a kind of a valise that is a kind of a bourtree is incorrect. sent15: if the vinblastine is a virginal the fact that it does not bargain prothorax and it does feint is false. sent16: if the Voltaren is a kind of a gamble then that it is non-endocrine and it bargains Davys is wrong. sent17: that something is not a kind of a Sillago but it does harmonize does not hold if it is an imaging. sent18: there is something such that if it is a modern then the fact that it is not a GDP and it is a muffle is not true. | sent1: (Ex): {IG}x -> ¬(¬{T}x & {AK}x) sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): {IK}x -> ¬(¬{HK}x & {AU}x) sent4: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: {JB}{da} -> ¬(¬{AA}{da} & {FP}{da}) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: (x): {IQ}x -> ¬(¬{DP}x & {GH}x) sent8: (Ex): {CL}x -> ¬(¬{IT}x & {AE}x) sent9: (Ex): {R}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & {F}x) sent10: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: (Ex): {DO}x -> ¬(¬{IL}x & {GK}x) sent12: (x): {AC}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {IM}x) sent13: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent14: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent15: {L}{bc} -> ¬(¬{GK}{bc} & {F}{bc}) sent16: {FT}{aa} -> ¬(¬{BP}{aa} & {BS}{aa}) sent17: (x): {CU}x -> ¬(¬{HO}x & {IH}x) sent18: (Ex): {GG}x -> ¬(¬{FR}x & {BH}x) | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does recess then that it is both not a valise and a bourtree is false. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it eulogizes Spica the fact that it does not gesticulate and it is a auricle does not hold. sent2: the fact that something is a valise and it is a bourtree is not correct if it is a kind of a recessed. sent3: if something unlocks buckram then that it does not eulogize stimulant and it is autoplastic is incorrect. sent4: there is something such that if it recesses the fact that it is a valise and it is a bourtree is not right. sent5: that the shark is not a valise but it does bargain Cronartium does not hold if it does unlock octillion. sent6: there exists something such that if it does recess then it is not a valise and is a bourtree. sent7: if something does eulogize sore that it does not unlock conference and it is a raw is not true. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Tange then that it is both not paroxysmal and a crier is wrong. sent9: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a Ostrogoth hold that it is a kind of protective thing that is a kind of a feint is not true. sent10: if something does recess then it is not a kind of a valise and it is a kind of a bourtree. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a graduality then that it does not buy and it does bargain prothorax is false. sent12: that something is not asynergic but it is a kind of a escapist is incorrect if it is a kind of a bourguignon. sent13: the Voltaren is not a valise but a bourtree if that it is a recessed is right. sent14: if the Voltaren recesses that it is a kind of a valise that is a kind of a bourtree is incorrect. sent15: if the vinblastine is a virginal the fact that it does not bargain prothorax and it does feint is false. sent16: if the Voltaren is a kind of a gamble then that it is non-endocrine and it bargains Davys is wrong. sent17: that something is not a kind of a Sillago but it does harmonize does not hold if it is an imaging. sent18: there is something such that if it is a modern then the fact that it is not a GDP and it is a muffle is not true. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the faucet is not Rosicrucian and leaches Tebet. | (¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) | sent1: that the cocksucker is not non-visceral and not a mode is incorrect if it is a kind of a tout. sent2: something leaches Tebet and does not eulogize dump. sent3: something is not a testatrix if the fact that it is visceral and not a mode is not right. sent4: if the cocksucker does not eulogize dump the faucet is not a Rosicrucian but it leaches Tebet. sent5: the cocksucker does not eulogize dump if something does eulogize life-style. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that it leaches Tebet and does not eulogize dump is false the cocksucker is not a Rosicrucian. sent7: if something is not a kind of a testatrix the fact that it eulogizes dump and does not leach Tebet is not correct. sent8: that something is not a Rosicrucian but it does leach Tebet is not true if the fact that it does eulogize dump hold. sent9: if there is something such that that it is a kind of substantival thing that does not eulogize life-style is not right then the cocksucker does not eulogize dump. sent10: there exists something such that that it is not non-substantival and does not eulogize life-style is not true. sent11: the faucet is not a Rosicrucian. | sent1: {G}{a} -> ¬({F}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent2: (Ex): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) sent3: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent5: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) sent9: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent10: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent11: ¬{C}{b} | [
"sent10 & sent9 -> int1: the cocksucker does not eulogize dump.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent10 & sent9 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | the catwalk is not a Rosicrucian. | ¬{C}{ir} | [
"sent7 -> int2: if the cocksucker is not a testatrix then the fact that it eulogizes dump and it does not leach Tebet is not true.; sent3 -> int3: if that the cocksucker is both visceral and not a mode does not hold it is not a kind of a testatrix.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the faucet is not Rosicrucian and leaches Tebet. ; $context$ = sent1: that the cocksucker is not non-visceral and not a mode is incorrect if it is a kind of a tout. sent2: something leaches Tebet and does not eulogize dump. sent3: something is not a testatrix if the fact that it is visceral and not a mode is not right. sent4: if the cocksucker does not eulogize dump the faucet is not a Rosicrucian but it leaches Tebet. sent5: the cocksucker does not eulogize dump if something does eulogize life-style. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that it leaches Tebet and does not eulogize dump is false the cocksucker is not a Rosicrucian. sent7: if something is not a kind of a testatrix the fact that it eulogizes dump and does not leach Tebet is not correct. sent8: that something is not a Rosicrucian but it does leach Tebet is not true if the fact that it does eulogize dump hold. sent9: if there is something such that that it is a kind of substantival thing that does not eulogize life-style is not right then the cocksucker does not eulogize dump. sent10: there exists something such that that it is not non-substantival and does not eulogize life-style is not true. sent11: the faucet is not a Rosicrucian. ; $proof$ = | sent10 & sent9 -> int1: the cocksucker does not eulogize dump.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the clipper is not a kind of a Nanaimo and it is not two-dimensional is not right. | ¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) | sent1: if the nitrile does eulogize Niger and it is a remilitarization then the armpit is not two-dimensional. sent2: the fact that the nitrile does eulogize Niger and it is a remilitarization is right. sent3: the clipper is not two-dimensional. sent4: if the armpit is not two-dimensional then the clipper is not a kind of a Nanaimo and it is not two-dimensional. | sent1: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent2: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: ¬{B}{c} sent4: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) | [
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the armpit is not two-dimensional.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the clipper is not a kind of a Nanaimo and it is not two-dimensional is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the nitrile does eulogize Niger and it is a remilitarization then the armpit is not two-dimensional. sent2: the fact that the nitrile does eulogize Niger and it is a remilitarization is right. sent3: the clipper is not two-dimensional. sent4: if the armpit is not two-dimensional then the clipper is not a kind of a Nanaimo and it is not two-dimensional. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the armpit is not two-dimensional.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Herder is not a gamecock. | ¬{C}{a} | sent1: there exists something such that it is a kind of a talon. sent2: if something does not unlock bathymeter the fact that it does not leach bedlamite and is anal is not wrong. sent3: the fact that the sheepdog is both not a bonefish and a gamecock is incorrect if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a talon is not wrong. sent4: something does not unlock bathymeter if it does unlock demarche and it does not bargain compartmentalization. sent5: the foundation is not anal if the mandarin does not leach bedlamite but it is anal. sent6: the mandarin does unlock demarche and does not bargain compartmentalization. sent7: something is not a talon if it is not anal. sent8: the Herder is a bonefish. sent9: if something is a talon then the Herder is a bonefish and a gamecock. | sent1: (Ex): {A}x sent2: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & {D}x) sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {C}{b}) sent4: (x): ({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent5: (¬{E}{d} & {D}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent6: ({H}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) sent7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{A}x sent8: {B}{a} sent9: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"sent1 & sent9 -> int1: the Herder is a bonefish and it is a kind of a gamecock.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent9 -> int1: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the Herder is not a gamecock. | ¬{C}{a} | [
"sent7 -> int2: the foundation is not a talon if the fact that it is non-anal is not false.; sent2 -> int3: the fact that the mandarin does not leach bedlamite and is anal is not incorrect if it does not unlock bathymeter.; sent4 -> int4: if the mandarin does unlock demarche but it does not bargain compartmentalization then the fact that it does not unlock bathymeter is not false.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: the mandarin does not unlock bathymeter.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the mandarin does not leach bedlamite but it is anal.; sent5 & int6 -> int7: the foundation is not anal.; int2 & int7 -> int8: the foundation is not a talon.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a talon is not incorrect.; int9 & sent3 -> int10: that the sheepdog is not a kind of a bonefish and is a kind of a gamecock is not correct.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that that it is not a bonefish and it is a kind of a gamecock is wrong.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Herder is not a gamecock. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is a kind of a talon. sent2: if something does not unlock bathymeter the fact that it does not leach bedlamite and is anal is not wrong. sent3: the fact that the sheepdog is both not a bonefish and a gamecock is incorrect if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a talon is not wrong. sent4: something does not unlock bathymeter if it does unlock demarche and it does not bargain compartmentalization. sent5: the foundation is not anal if the mandarin does not leach bedlamite but it is anal. sent6: the mandarin does unlock demarche and does not bargain compartmentalization. sent7: something is not a talon if it is not anal. sent8: the Herder is a bonefish. sent9: if something is a talon then the Herder is a bonefish and a gamecock. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent9 -> int1: the Herder is a bonefish and it is a kind of a gamecock.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the rosefish is not copular. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: if that something is a drumlin and copular is incorrect then it is not copular. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile the field is not a drumlin and unlocks rosefish. sent3: the rosefish is copular if the field is not a drumlin but it unlocks rosefish. sent4: something is not a kind of a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. | sent1: (x): ¬({B}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the field is not a drumlin but it unlocks rosefish.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}); sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the rosefish is not copular is correct. | ¬{D}{b} | [
"sent1 -> int2: if that the rosefish is a drumlin and copular does not hold it is not copular.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the rosefish is not copular. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is a drumlin and copular is incorrect then it is not copular. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile the field is not a drumlin and unlocks rosefish. sent3: the rosefish is copular if the field is not a drumlin but it unlocks rosefish. sent4: something is not a kind of a chlorobenzylidenemalononitrile. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the field is not a drumlin but it unlocks rosefish.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the ectomorphicness but not the picking happens. | ({B} & ¬{C}) | sent1: the priming but not the checker occurs. sent2: that the primingness but not the checkering happens triggers that the picking does not occur. sent3: the lithotomy and the ectomorphicness happens. sent4: if the checker does not occur then the priming and the lithotomy happens. | sent1: ({D} & ¬{E}) sent2: ({D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} sent3: ({A} & {B}) sent4: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {A}) | [
"sent3 -> int1: the ectomorphicness happens.; sent2 & sent1 -> int2: the picking does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> int1: {B}; sent2 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the ectomorphicness but not the pick occurs is not true. | ¬({B} & ¬{C}) | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the ectomorphicness but not the picking happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the priming but not the checker occurs. sent2: that the primingness but not the checkering happens triggers that the picking does not occur. sent3: the lithotomy and the ectomorphicness happens. sent4: if the checker does not occur then the priming and the lithotomy happens. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> int1: the ectomorphicness happens.; sent2 & sent1 -> int2: the picking does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that it does bargain pepperwort. | (Ex): {D}x | sent1: the fossa is not a condor but it is a kind of an armband. sent2: that the interpreter does not bargain pepperwort is not wrong. sent3: The Christology does not unlock catchment. sent4: that the catchment is a damascene is correct. sent5: the catchment is seraphic. sent6: the catchment does not unlock Christology. sent7: if the fossa is not a condor but an armband then it does not unlock Christology. sent8: if something does not eulogize shirtlifter then it is a civilian. sent9: if something is not a keratoscope then it does bargain pepperwort. | sent1: (¬{F}{il} & {G}{il}) sent2: ¬{D}{dc} sent3: ¬{AA}{aa} sent4: {B}{a} sent5: {EJ}{a} sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: (¬{F}{il} & {G}{il}) -> ¬{A}{il} sent8: (x): ¬{EL}x -> {GR}x sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> {D}x | [
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the catchment does not unlock Christology but it is a damascene.; sent9 -> int2: the catchment does bargain pepperwort if the fact that it is not a keratoscope hold.;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent9 -> int2: ¬{C}{a} -> {D}{a};"
] | if the official does not eulogize shirtlifter it is a civilian. | ¬{EL}{ad} -> {GR}{ad} | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it does bargain pepperwort. ; $context$ = sent1: the fossa is not a condor but it is a kind of an armband. sent2: that the interpreter does not bargain pepperwort is not wrong. sent3: The Christology does not unlock catchment. sent4: that the catchment is a damascene is correct. sent5: the catchment is seraphic. sent6: the catchment does not unlock Christology. sent7: if the fossa is not a condor but an armband then it does not unlock Christology. sent8: if something does not eulogize shirtlifter then it is a civilian. sent9: if something is not a keratoscope then it does bargain pepperwort. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the catchment does not unlock Christology but it is a damascene.; sent9 -> int2: the catchment does bargain pepperwort if the fact that it is not a keratoscope hold.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the vouchee is not Zolaesque is true. | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: the martin is a digestive and/or is a carvedilol if it does not direct. sent2: if the martin is digestive then the vouchee is Zolaesque. sent3: the professional directs if there is something such that that it is a kind of directs thing that is not choragic does not hold. sent4: if the vouchee does direct the martin is not non-Zolaesque. sent5: if that the martin is a carvedilol is true the vouchee is Zolaesque. sent6: the martin is not directing. sent7: if the vouchee is not a carvedilol then it is Zolaesque and/or directing. sent8: if the martin is not non-Zolaesque then the fact that the vouchee is not non-Zolaesque is true. sent9: the vouchee is a kind of a carvedilol if the martin is Zolaesque. | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent2: {AA}{a} -> {B}{b} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}{ga} sent4: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} sent5: {AB}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{AB}{b} -> ({B}{b} v {A}{b}) sent8: {B}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent9: {B}{a} -> {AB}{b} | [
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the martin is a digestive and/or it is a carvedilol.; int1 & sent2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); int1 & sent2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | the professional is Zolaesque. | {B}{ga} | [] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the vouchee is not Zolaesque is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the martin is a digestive and/or is a carvedilol if it does not direct. sent2: if the martin is digestive then the vouchee is Zolaesque. sent3: the professional directs if there is something such that that it is a kind of directs thing that is not choragic does not hold. sent4: if the vouchee does direct the martin is not non-Zolaesque. sent5: if that the martin is a carvedilol is true the vouchee is Zolaesque. sent6: the martin is not directing. sent7: if the vouchee is not a carvedilol then it is Zolaesque and/or directing. sent8: if the martin is not non-Zolaesque then the fact that the vouchee is not non-Zolaesque is true. sent9: the vouchee is a kind of a carvedilol if the martin is Zolaesque. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the martin is a digestive and/or it is a carvedilol.; int1 & sent2 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the simpleness does not occur. | ¬{A} | sent1: if the fact that the fact that both the bargaining scrubland and the impenitentness happens is not true hold the impenitentness does not occur. sent2: if the mollification occurs then the bargaining volition does not occur and the leaching Lappland does not occur. sent3: that the exponentiation does not occur is caused by that the farewell does not occur. sent4: that both the majorness and the nonslipperiness occurs is not true if that the Liberianness does not occur is correct. sent5: if that the rising happens or the unlocking lobectomy does not occur or both is not true then the ritualness does not occur. sent6: that both the supporting and the action occurs is brought about by that the bargaining volition does not occur. sent7: if the checkering does not occur then the fact that both the hydrophilicness and the reflection occurs is false. sent8: if that the oticness happens and the eulogizing designer does not occur does not hold then the oticness does not occur. sent9: that the fact that that the litigation happens and the unlocking shirtsleeve happens is true is incorrect if the ritual does not occur is true. sent10: the dibbling does not occur and the checker does not occur if that the action happens hold. sent11: that the bargaining Haemodorum occurs or the cercarialness occurs or both is wrong. sent12: the mollification happens if the bardicness happens. sent13: the simple does not occur if the bargaining saucer does not occur. sent14: that the bargaining scrubland and the impenitentness happens does not hold if the subjunctiveness does not occur. sent15: the unlocking shirtsleeve does not occur if that that both the litigation and the unlocking shirtsleeve happens is not correct is not wrong. sent16: the penitentness brings about that both the simple and the bargaining saucer occurs. sent17: if the fact that the major and the nonslipperiness occurs is incorrect then the farewell does not occur. sent18: that either the oticness happens or the eulogizing designer occurs or both is false. sent19: the oticness does not occur. sent20: if the exponentiation does not occur then the fact that the fact that the oticness but not the eulogizing designer occurs is false is not wrong. sent21: that the unlocking shirtsleeve does not occur brings about that the bardicness occurs and the eulogizing bryozoan occurs. sent22: if that both the hydrophilicness and the reflection occurs is incorrect the subjunctive does not occur. | sent1: ¬({D} & {C}) -> ¬{C} sent2: {N} -> (¬{L} & ¬{M}) sent3: ¬{AD} -> ¬{AC} sent4: ¬{AG} -> ¬({AF} & {AE}) sent5: ¬({U} v ¬{T}) -> ¬{R} sent6: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {J}) sent7: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & {G}) sent8: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{AA} sent9: ¬{R} -> ¬({S} & {Q}) sent10: {J} -> (¬{I} & ¬{H}) sent11: ¬({BJ} v {EF}) sent12: {O} -> {N} sent13: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} sent14: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {C}) sent15: ¬({S} & {Q}) -> ¬{Q} sent16: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent17: ¬({AF} & {AE}) -> ¬{AD} sent18: ¬({AA} v {AB}) sent19: ¬{AA} sent20: ¬{AC} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent21: ¬{Q} -> ({O} & {P}) sent22: ¬({F} & {G}) -> ¬{E} | [] | [] | the simple happens. | {A} | [] | 24 | 2 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the simpleness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the fact that both the bargaining scrubland and the impenitentness happens is not true hold the impenitentness does not occur. sent2: if the mollification occurs then the bargaining volition does not occur and the leaching Lappland does not occur. sent3: that the exponentiation does not occur is caused by that the farewell does not occur. sent4: that both the majorness and the nonslipperiness occurs is not true if that the Liberianness does not occur is correct. sent5: if that the rising happens or the unlocking lobectomy does not occur or both is not true then the ritualness does not occur. sent6: that both the supporting and the action occurs is brought about by that the bargaining volition does not occur. sent7: if the checkering does not occur then the fact that both the hydrophilicness and the reflection occurs is false. sent8: if that the oticness happens and the eulogizing designer does not occur does not hold then the oticness does not occur. sent9: that the fact that that the litigation happens and the unlocking shirtsleeve happens is true is incorrect if the ritual does not occur is true. sent10: the dibbling does not occur and the checker does not occur if that the action happens hold. sent11: that the bargaining Haemodorum occurs or the cercarialness occurs or both is wrong. sent12: the mollification happens if the bardicness happens. sent13: the simple does not occur if the bargaining saucer does not occur. sent14: that the bargaining scrubland and the impenitentness happens does not hold if the subjunctiveness does not occur. sent15: the unlocking shirtsleeve does not occur if that that both the litigation and the unlocking shirtsleeve happens is not correct is not wrong. sent16: the penitentness brings about that both the simple and the bargaining saucer occurs. sent17: if the fact that the major and the nonslipperiness occurs is incorrect then the farewell does not occur. sent18: that either the oticness happens or the eulogizing designer occurs or both is false. sent19: the oticness does not occur. sent20: if the exponentiation does not occur then the fact that the fact that the oticness but not the eulogizing designer occurs is false is not wrong. sent21: that the unlocking shirtsleeve does not occur brings about that the bardicness occurs and the eulogizing bryozoan occurs. sent22: if that both the hydrophilicness and the reflection occurs is incorrect the subjunctive does not occur. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the spieling but not the blaxploitation occurs. | ({C} & ¬{D}) | sent1: the newspapering happens. sent2: the limitation does not occur and the Wilsonianness does not occur if the incriminating occurs. sent3: the eulogizing NLP but not the shopping happens. sent4: the bise does not occur. sent5: the fact that the spiel happens but the blaxploitation does not occur is false if the Wilsonianness does not occur. sent6: the Wilsonianness happens. sent7: the unlocking compunction occurs. sent8: that the wolfing does not occur causes that both the vagileness and the incriminating occurs. sent9: the blaxploitation does not occur. sent10: the spieling happens if that the limitation happens hold. sent11: that the incriminating happens and the vagileness occurs is caused by that the wolf does not occur. sent12: that the incriminating occurs brings about that the blaxploitation does not occur but the spieling happens. | sent1: {BQ} sent2: {E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) sent3: ({IE} & ¬{BR}) sent4: ¬{HS} sent5: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent6: {A} sent7: {BJ} sent8: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) sent9: ¬{D} sent10: {B} -> {C} sent11: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent12: {E} -> (¬{D} & {C}) | [] | [] | that the spieling but not the blaxploitation happens does not hold. | ¬({C} & ¬{D}) | [] | 8 | 3 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the spieling but not the blaxploitation occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the newspapering happens. sent2: the limitation does not occur and the Wilsonianness does not occur if the incriminating occurs. sent3: the eulogizing NLP but not the shopping happens. sent4: the bise does not occur. sent5: the fact that the spiel happens but the blaxploitation does not occur is false if the Wilsonianness does not occur. sent6: the Wilsonianness happens. sent7: the unlocking compunction occurs. sent8: that the wolfing does not occur causes that both the vagileness and the incriminating occurs. sent9: the blaxploitation does not occur. sent10: the spieling happens if that the limitation happens hold. sent11: that the incriminating happens and the vagileness occurs is caused by that the wolf does not occur. sent12: that the incriminating occurs brings about that the blaxploitation does not occur but the spieling happens. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the Mayan is not a edutainment. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: the spruce bargains tetrode. sent2: the spruce is a kind of a murine if it does bargain tetrode. sent3: the Mayan eulogizes agitation if the tetrode does not bargain flood. sent4: the tetrode does eulogize maleficence. sent5: if something is a jamming the fact that it is not legless and does not explore is not correct. sent6: the tetrode does jam if the isoagglutination is a jam. sent7: the Mayan bargains flood if the tetrode either is a edutainment or is not a akaryocyte or both. sent8: that something does unlock hock and is not a kind of a polka is wrong if it is a murine. sent9: if something does eulogize agitation then it is a kind of a akaryocyte. sent10: if the tetrode does not eulogize agitation the Mayan is a akaryocyte that is a edutainment. sent11: that the Mayan does not bargain flood is not incorrect. sent12: if the tetrode either is a Nanaimo or does not bargain flood or both the Mayan does eulogize agitation. sent13: the tetrode is a kind of a Nanaimo and/or it does not bargain flood. sent14: if that something is not legless and does not explore does not hold it does not eulogize agitation. sent15: the tetrode is not a jamming. sent16: the tetrode is a Nanaimo and/or it bargains flood. sent17: if the tetrode is a akaryocyte or it is not a kind of a edutainment or both the fact that the Mayan is a Nanaimo is correct. sent18: something is not a edutainment if it is a akaryocyte. sent19: something does not explore and is not legless if it is not a jamming. | sent1: {J}{d} sent2: {J}{d} -> {I}{d} sent3: ¬{AB}{a} -> {B}{b} sent4: {JB}{a} sent5: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) sent6: {F}{c} -> {F}{a} sent7: ({C}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> {AB}{b} sent8: (x): {I}x -> ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) sent9: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent10: ¬{B}{a} -> ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent11: ¬{AB}{b} sent12: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent13: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{B}x sent15: ¬{F}{a} sent16: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent17: ({A}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> {AA}{b} sent18: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x sent19: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) | [
"sent12 & sent13 -> int1: the Mayan does eulogize agitation.; sent9 -> int2: if the Mayan eulogizes agitation then it is a akaryocyte.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Mayan is a akaryocyte.; sent18 -> int4: the Mayan is not a edutainment if it is a akaryocyte.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent12 & sent13 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent9 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {A}{b}; sent18 -> int4: {A}{b} -> ¬{C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the hock is not a edutainment is not incorrect. | ¬{C}{fb} | [
"sent19 -> int5: the tetrode does not explore and it is not legless if it is not a jamming.; int5 & sent15 -> int6: the tetrode does not explore and it is not legless.; int6 -> int7: the tetrode is not legless.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that that it is legged is correct.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Mayan is not a edutainment. ; $context$ = sent1: the spruce bargains tetrode. sent2: the spruce is a kind of a murine if it does bargain tetrode. sent3: the Mayan eulogizes agitation if the tetrode does not bargain flood. sent4: the tetrode does eulogize maleficence. sent5: if something is a jamming the fact that it is not legless and does not explore is not correct. sent6: the tetrode does jam if the isoagglutination is a jam. sent7: the Mayan bargains flood if the tetrode either is a edutainment or is not a akaryocyte or both. sent8: that something does unlock hock and is not a kind of a polka is wrong if it is a murine. sent9: if something does eulogize agitation then it is a kind of a akaryocyte. sent10: if the tetrode does not eulogize agitation the Mayan is a akaryocyte that is a edutainment. sent11: that the Mayan does not bargain flood is not incorrect. sent12: if the tetrode either is a Nanaimo or does not bargain flood or both the Mayan does eulogize agitation. sent13: the tetrode is a kind of a Nanaimo and/or it does not bargain flood. sent14: if that something is not legless and does not explore does not hold it does not eulogize agitation. sent15: the tetrode is not a jamming. sent16: the tetrode is a Nanaimo and/or it bargains flood. sent17: if the tetrode is a akaryocyte or it is not a kind of a edutainment or both the fact that the Mayan is a Nanaimo is correct. sent18: something is not a edutainment if it is a akaryocyte. sent19: something does not explore and is not legless if it is not a jamming. ; $proof$ = | sent12 & sent13 -> int1: the Mayan does eulogize agitation.; sent9 -> int2: if the Mayan eulogizes agitation then it is a akaryocyte.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Mayan is a akaryocyte.; sent18 -> int4: the Mayan is not a edutainment if it is a akaryocyte.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the saboteur is orthographic and it does leach fiddlehead. | ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) | sent1: the maypole is Burmese if there are non-orthographic things. sent2: that the maypole is non-Burmese and/or non-autoplastic is not true if there exists something such that it is not difficult. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is non-Burmese and/or it does not leach fiddlehead is wrong. sent4: the saboteur is orthographic if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a Burmese and/or it is not autoplastic is not right. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it is not a sirloin or it is creaseproof or both is false. sent6: there is something such that it is not difficult. sent7: there is something such that it is not aluminous. sent8: the saboteur leaches fiddlehead if it is not seamless. sent9: if something is not difficult the fact that it is orthographic thing that does leach fiddlehead is false. sent10: the maypole leaches fiddlehead. | sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> {B}{a} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent3: (Ex): ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{E}x) sent4: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) -> {D}{b} sent5: (Ex): ¬(¬{DQ}x v {IL}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{GE}x sent8: ¬{F}{b} -> {E}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x & {E}x) sent10: {E}{a} | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the maypole either is not Burmese or is not autoplastic or both is false.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is non-Burmese and/or it is not autoplastic is not true.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the saboteur is orthographic.;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: ¬(¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{C}x); int2 & sent4 -> int3: {D}{b};"
] | the fact that the saboteur is orthographic thing that does leach fiddlehead is not correct. | ¬({D}{b} & {E}{b}) | [
"sent9 -> int4: if that the saboteur is not difficult is not wrong the fact that it is orthographic and leaches fiddlehead is not true.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the saboteur is orthographic and it does leach fiddlehead. ; $context$ = sent1: the maypole is Burmese if there are non-orthographic things. sent2: that the maypole is non-Burmese and/or non-autoplastic is not true if there exists something such that it is not difficult. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is non-Burmese and/or it does not leach fiddlehead is wrong. sent4: the saboteur is orthographic if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a Burmese and/or it is not autoplastic is not right. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it is not a sirloin or it is creaseproof or both is false. sent6: there is something such that it is not difficult. sent7: there is something such that it is not aluminous. sent8: the saboteur leaches fiddlehead if it is not seamless. sent9: if something is not difficult the fact that it is orthographic thing that does leach fiddlehead is false. sent10: the maypole leaches fiddlehead. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the maypole either is not Burmese or is not autoplastic or both is false.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is non-Burmese and/or it is not autoplastic is not true.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the saboteur is orthographic.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the photography eulogizes Cetorhinus is not incorrect. | {C}{aa} | sent1: if the fireball is not macrobiotics it is not ossiferous. sent2: something does not eulogize Cetorhinus if it is not offshore. sent3: that the photography is not a kind of a Byelorussian is right if it does not bargain Mellon. sent4: the photography is non-offshore if the fact that something is not ossiferous and does not bargain Mellon is right. sent5: if something is not a Scardinius it is not splenic. sent6: the photography does eulogize Cetorhinus if the tannoy eulogize Cetorhinus. sent7: something is not ossiferous and it does not bargain Mellon. sent8: something is linguistic but it is not passable. sent9: if something is not ossiferous it is not offshore. sent10: if the fact that the bluebottle is ossiferous but it does not unlock streptokinase is not true then the zoril is not ossiferous. sent11: there exists something such that it is not ossiferous. sent12: the streptokinase does not bargain Mellon if it does not eulogize Philomachus. sent13: the fact that something is not a teamwork or does not eulogize communication or both does not hold if it does not unlock shinleaf. sent14: the fact that if the zoril is not offshore the resuscitator bargains Mellon and it eulogizes Cetorhinus is right. sent15: there is something such that it is not ossiferous and does bargain Mellon. sent16: if the episode is not non-capitular that it does unlock shinleaf and does not bargain episode is not right. sent17: if the fact that something is not a teamwork or does not eulogize communication or both is not correct then that it is a theorization is not incorrect. sent18: there is something such that it does not bargain Mellon. sent19: the tannoy does eulogize Cetorhinus if the resuscitator eulogize Cetorhinus. sent20: if the fireball is a theorization the fact that the bluebottle is ossiferous but it does not unlock streptokinase is not true. sent21: the episode is capitular. sent22: something is ossiferous and does not bargain Mellon. | sent1: ¬{IH}{e} -> ¬{D}{e} sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{HH}{aa} sent4: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: (x): ¬{JB}x -> ¬{AI}x sent6: {C}{a} -> {C}{aa} sent7: (Ex): (¬{D}x & ¬{A}x) sent8: (Ex): ({AR}x & ¬{AU}x) sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{B}x sent10: ¬({D}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent11: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent12: ¬{ES}{bf} -> ¬{A}{bf} sent13: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬(¬{G}x v ¬{H}x) sent14: ¬{B}{c} -> ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent15: (Ex): (¬{D}x & {A}x) sent16: {K}{f} -> ¬({I}{f} & ¬{J}{f}) sent17: (x): ¬(¬{G}x v ¬{H}x) -> {F}x sent18: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent19: {C}{b} -> {C}{a} sent20: {F}{e} -> ¬({D}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent21: {K}{f} sent22: (Ex): ({D}x & ¬{A}x) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the photography does not eulogize Cetorhinus if it is not offshore.; sent7 & sent4 -> int2: the photography is not offshore.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa}; sent7 & sent4 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the photography eulogizes Cetorhinus. | {C}{aa} | [
"sent9 -> int3: the zoril is not offshore if it is not ossiferous.; sent17 -> int4: if the fact that the fireball is not a teamwork and/or it does not eulogize communication is not true it is a theorization.; sent13 -> int5: the fact that the fireball is not a kind of a teamwork and/or it does not eulogize communication is incorrect if it does not unlock shinleaf.; sent16 & sent21 -> int6: the fact that the episode does unlock shinleaf and does not bargain episode is incorrect.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that that it unlocks shinleaf and does not bargain episode is false.;"
] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the photography eulogizes Cetorhinus is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fireball is not macrobiotics it is not ossiferous. sent2: something does not eulogize Cetorhinus if it is not offshore. sent3: that the photography is not a kind of a Byelorussian is right if it does not bargain Mellon. sent4: the photography is non-offshore if the fact that something is not ossiferous and does not bargain Mellon is right. sent5: if something is not a Scardinius it is not splenic. sent6: the photography does eulogize Cetorhinus if the tannoy eulogize Cetorhinus. sent7: something is not ossiferous and it does not bargain Mellon. sent8: something is linguistic but it is not passable. sent9: if something is not ossiferous it is not offshore. sent10: if the fact that the bluebottle is ossiferous but it does not unlock streptokinase is not true then the zoril is not ossiferous. sent11: there exists something such that it is not ossiferous. sent12: the streptokinase does not bargain Mellon if it does not eulogize Philomachus. sent13: the fact that something is not a teamwork or does not eulogize communication or both does not hold if it does not unlock shinleaf. sent14: the fact that if the zoril is not offshore the resuscitator bargains Mellon and it eulogizes Cetorhinus is right. sent15: there is something such that it is not ossiferous and does bargain Mellon. sent16: if the episode is not non-capitular that it does unlock shinleaf and does not bargain episode is not right. sent17: if the fact that something is not a teamwork or does not eulogize communication or both is not correct then that it is a theorization is not incorrect. sent18: there is something such that it does not bargain Mellon. sent19: the tannoy does eulogize Cetorhinus if the resuscitator eulogize Cetorhinus. sent20: if the fireball is a theorization the fact that the bluebottle is ossiferous but it does not unlock streptokinase is not true. sent21: the episode is capitular. sent22: something is ossiferous and does not bargain Mellon. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the photography does not eulogize Cetorhinus if it is not offshore.; sent7 & sent4 -> int2: the photography is not offshore.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the malamute is not a kind of a gunrunner is not incorrect. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: the fact that the foamflower is a kind of a value and is not mindless does not hold if it does not eulogize brachium. sent2: if the malamute does eulogize Viscum then the foamflower is hematologic. sent3: the fact that the tassel is an ulcer is right. sent4: the nitpicker is a gunrunner. sent5: if something is not hematologic but it does eulogize Viscum it is not a gunrunner. sent6: something does not eulogize brachium if the fact that it is not a kind of a funiculus is not wrong. sent7: if something that is an ulcer is a kind of a strife then it does not bargain cluck. sent8: that the foamflower does cricket is not wrong. sent9: if either the foamflower crickets or it is a corkwood or both it is not a kind of a funiculus. sent10: The Viscum does eulogize foamflower. sent11: the malamute is hematologic if the foamflower is a kind of a gunrunner. sent12: the foamflower does eulogize Viscum. sent13: if the foamflower is hematologic then the malamute is a kind of a gunrunner. sent14: the elocutionist is a kind of an ulcer if that the tassel is an ulcer is not false. sent15: if that the foamflower does eulogize Viscum hold then it is hematologic. sent16: the elocutionist is a strife. sent17: the malamute is not hematologic if there is something such that the fact that it is both a value and not mindless is not right. sent18: if the foamflower is virginal then it is a Aristotelianism. | sent1: ¬{I}{a} -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent2: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} sent3: {G}{d} sent4: {C}{eb} sent5: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent6: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬{I}x sent7: (x): ({G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent8: {K}{a} sent9: ({K}{a} v {L}{a}) -> ¬{J}{a} sent10: {AA}{aa} sent11: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent12: {A}{a} sent13: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent14: {G}{d} -> {G}{c} sent15: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent16: {H}{c} sent17: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}{b} sent18: {GN}{a} -> {DG}{a} | [
"sent15 & sent12 -> int1: the foamflower is not non-hematologic.; sent13 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent15 & sent12 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent13 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the malamute is not a gunrunner. | ¬{C}{b} | [
"sent5 -> int2: if the malamute is a kind of non-hematologic thing that does eulogize Viscum it is not a gunrunner.; sent6 -> int3: if the foamflower is not a funiculus the fact that it does not eulogize brachium is correct.; sent8 -> int4: the foamflower either is a cricket or is a kind of a corkwood or both.; sent9 & int4 -> int5: the foamflower is not a kind of a funiculus.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the foamflower does not eulogize brachium.; sent1 & int6 -> int7: that the foamflower does value but it is not mindless is incorrect.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that that that it values and is not mindless is not false does not hold.; int8 & sent17 -> int9: that the malamute is not hematologic is not false.; sent7 -> int10: if the elocutionist is a kind of an ulcer and is a strife then it does not bargain cluck.; sent14 & sent3 -> int11: the elocutionist is a kind of an ulcer.; int11 & sent16 -> int12: the elocutionist is an ulcer and it is a strife.; int10 & int12 -> int13: the elocutionist does not bargain cluck.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that it does not bargain cluck.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the malamute is not a kind of a gunrunner is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the foamflower is a kind of a value and is not mindless does not hold if it does not eulogize brachium. sent2: if the malamute does eulogize Viscum then the foamflower is hematologic. sent3: the fact that the tassel is an ulcer is right. sent4: the nitpicker is a gunrunner. sent5: if something is not hematologic but it does eulogize Viscum it is not a gunrunner. sent6: something does not eulogize brachium if the fact that it is not a kind of a funiculus is not wrong. sent7: if something that is an ulcer is a kind of a strife then it does not bargain cluck. sent8: that the foamflower does cricket is not wrong. sent9: if either the foamflower crickets or it is a corkwood or both it is not a kind of a funiculus. sent10: The Viscum does eulogize foamflower. sent11: the malamute is hematologic if the foamflower is a kind of a gunrunner. sent12: the foamflower does eulogize Viscum. sent13: if the foamflower is hematologic then the malamute is a kind of a gunrunner. sent14: the elocutionist is a kind of an ulcer if that the tassel is an ulcer is not false. sent15: if that the foamflower does eulogize Viscum hold then it is hematologic. sent16: the elocutionist is a strife. sent17: the malamute is not hematologic if there is something such that the fact that it is both a value and not mindless is not right. sent18: if the foamflower is virginal then it is a Aristotelianism. ; $proof$ = | sent15 & sent12 -> int1: the foamflower is not non-hematologic.; sent13 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the heartbreaker and the precession occurs. | ({B} & {A}) | sent1: the notation does not occur and the gnarling does not occur. sent2: the moderation occurs. sent3: if the moderation occurs then the precession occurs. sent4: that the heartbreaker happens is true if the fact that the notation does not occur and the gnarling does not occur is not incorrect. | sent1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: {C} sent3: {C} -> {A} sent4: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} | [
"sent4 & sent1 -> int1: the heartbreaker happens.; sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the precession happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent1 -> int1: {B}; sent3 & sent2 -> int2: {A}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the heartbreaker and the precession occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the notation does not occur and the gnarling does not occur. sent2: the moderation occurs. sent3: if the moderation occurs then the precession occurs. sent4: that the heartbreaker happens is true if the fact that the notation does not occur and the gnarling does not occur is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent1 -> int1: the heartbreaker happens.; sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the precession happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the indapamide does not bargain Python or it eulogizes retread or both. | (¬{C}{c} v {E}{c}) | sent1: the hydroxyl does not bargain Python and/or it is a kind of a payroll. sent2: everything is not a vaulting. sent3: the hydroxyl does not bargain Python if the retread bargains logomach and eulogizes retread. sent4: the indapamide does not bargain Python and/or it does eulogize retread if the hydroxyl does not bargain Python. sent5: the indapamide does not bargain logomach or it does bargain Python or both if the retread does not bargain logomach. sent6: the fact that if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a payroll and does not bargain logomach is not right then the Benzoin does not bargain Python hold. sent7: either the indapamide bargains Python or it does bargain logomach or both. sent8: the indapamide unlocks indapamide. sent9: if a epizoic thing is a payroll the indapamide does not bargain logomach. sent10: if the retread bargains logomach and is a payroll then the hydroxyl does not bargain Python. sent11: the fact that the hydroxyl is not a payroll and/or it bargains Python is not wrong. sent12: the hydroxyl does not eulogize retread. sent13: the retread is a payroll. sent14: the indapamide is not a payroll if the retread does eulogize retread and bargains Python. sent15: if the retread does not bargain Python the hydroxyl does bargain Python and/or it is a payroll. sent16: if the retread does bargain logomach and it bargains Python the indapamide does not eulogize retread. sent17: The logomach does bargain retread. sent18: the oscillograph does bargain logomach and is less. sent19: either the hydroxyl bargains Python or it bargains logomach or both. | sent1: (¬{C}{b} v {B}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬{F}x sent3: ({A}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent4: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{C}{c} v {E}{c}) sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{A}{c} v {C}{c}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}{r} sent7: ({C}{c} v {A}{c}) sent8: {HQ}{c} sent9: (x): ({D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}{c} sent10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent11: (¬{B}{b} v {C}{b}) sent12: ¬{E}{b} sent13: {B}{a} sent14: ({E}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent15: ¬{C}{a} -> ({C}{b} v {B}{b}) sent16: ({A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent17: {AA}{aa} sent18: ({A}{ip} & {AU}{ip}) sent19: ({C}{b} v {A}{b}) | [] | [] | that the indapamide does not bargain Python or it eulogizes retread or both is not correct. | ¬(¬{C}{c} v {E}{c}) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the hydroxyl is not a kind of a vaulting.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the indapamide does not bargain Python or it eulogizes retread or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the hydroxyl does not bargain Python and/or it is a kind of a payroll. sent2: everything is not a vaulting. sent3: the hydroxyl does not bargain Python if the retread bargains logomach and eulogizes retread. sent4: the indapamide does not bargain Python and/or it does eulogize retread if the hydroxyl does not bargain Python. sent5: the indapamide does not bargain logomach or it does bargain Python or both if the retread does not bargain logomach. sent6: the fact that if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a payroll and does not bargain logomach is not right then the Benzoin does not bargain Python hold. sent7: either the indapamide bargains Python or it does bargain logomach or both. sent8: the indapamide unlocks indapamide. sent9: if a epizoic thing is a payroll the indapamide does not bargain logomach. sent10: if the retread bargains logomach and is a payroll then the hydroxyl does not bargain Python. sent11: the fact that the hydroxyl is not a payroll and/or it bargains Python is not wrong. sent12: the hydroxyl does not eulogize retread. sent13: the retread is a payroll. sent14: the indapamide is not a payroll if the retread does eulogize retread and bargains Python. sent15: if the retread does not bargain Python the hydroxyl does bargain Python and/or it is a payroll. sent16: if the retread does bargain logomach and it bargains Python the indapamide does not eulogize retread. sent17: The logomach does bargain retread. sent18: the oscillograph does bargain logomach and is less. sent19: either the hydroxyl bargains Python or it bargains logomach or both. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that there exists something such that it is a kind of a Amblyrhynchus that is a paralegal is not correct. | ¬((Ex): ({A}x & {B}x)) | sent1: something is a Amblyrhynchus if it is not a paralegal. sent2: something eulogizes manners if it is umbellate. sent3: the felon is a kind of a paralegal. sent4: there exists something such that it does eulogize rockabilly. sent5: if something is not lacrimal that it is a kind of a similarity and is not a kind of a tune-up is not right. sent6: there is something such that it is a paralegal. sent7: the Armenian is not lacrimal if the preemie eulogizes manners and it bargains Paige. sent8: if there is something such that that it is a mince is not wrong then the preemie bargains frostbite and it is legless. sent9: if that something is not a sambar and is not a kind of a yellowfin does not hold it does bargain Paige. sent10: there exists something such that it is a mince. sent11: the fact that the preemie is not non-glottochronological is not false. sent12: that the preemie is not a kind of a sambar and it is not a yellowfin is incorrect if it bargains frostbite. sent13: the Armenian is a kind of a Amblyrhynchus. sent14: there exists something such that it is a Montenegro. sent15: that the Armenian is a paralegal is not incorrect. sent16: the nudnik is not a kind of a paralegal if there exists something such that that it is a similarity and it is not a tune-up is not true. sent17: if something is glottochronological it is umbellate. | sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x sent2: (x): {H}x -> {G}x sent3: {B}{ib} sent4: (Ex): {FI}x sent5: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) sent6: (Ex): {B}x sent7: ({G}{b} & {F}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent8: (x): {M}x -> ({K}{b} & {L}{b}) sent9: (x): ¬(¬{J}x & ¬{I}x) -> {F}x sent10: (Ex): {M}x sent11: {N}{b} sent12: {K}{b} -> ¬(¬{J}{b} & ¬{I}{b}) sent13: {A}{a} sent14: (Ex): {HQ}x sent15: {B}{a} sent16: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}{hl} sent17: (x): {N}x -> {H}x | [
"sent13 & sent15 -> int1: the Armenian is a Amblyrhynchus and is a paralegal.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent13 & sent15 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the nudnik is a Amblyrhynchus is not wrong. | {A}{hl} | [
"sent1 -> int2: if the nudnik is not a paralegal then the fact that it is a Amblyrhynchus hold.; sent5 -> int3: if the Armenian is not lacrimal then that it is a similarity and it is not a kind of a tune-up is wrong.; sent2 -> int4: that the preemie eulogizes manners is not wrong if it is umbellate.; sent17 -> int5: that the preemie is umbellate is not false if it is glottochronological.; int5 & sent11 -> int6: the preemie is umbellate.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the preemie eulogizes manners.; sent9 -> int8: that if that the fact that the preemie is not a kind of a sambar and it is not the yellowfin does not hold is right then the fact that the preemie bargains Paige is right hold.; sent10 & sent8 -> int9: the preemie does bargain frostbite and it is legless.; int9 -> int10: the preemie does bargain frostbite.; sent12 & int10 -> int11: that the preemie is not a sambar and it is not a yellowfin is not correct.; int8 & int11 -> int12: the preemie does bargain Paige.; int7 & int12 -> int13: the preemie eulogizes manners and it bargains Paige.; sent7 & int13 -> int14: the Armenian is not lacrimal.; int3 & int14 -> int15: the fact that the Armenian is a similarity but it is not a tune-up is false.; int15 -> int16: there is something such that that it is a similarity and it is not a tune-up is false.; int16 & sent16 -> int17: the nudnik is not a paralegal.; int2 & int17 -> hypothesis;"
] | 10 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that it is a kind of a Amblyrhynchus that is a paralegal is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a Amblyrhynchus if it is not a paralegal. sent2: something eulogizes manners if it is umbellate. sent3: the felon is a kind of a paralegal. sent4: there exists something such that it does eulogize rockabilly. sent5: if something is not lacrimal that it is a kind of a similarity and is not a kind of a tune-up is not right. sent6: there is something such that it is a paralegal. sent7: the Armenian is not lacrimal if the preemie eulogizes manners and it bargains Paige. sent8: if there is something such that that it is a mince is not wrong then the preemie bargains frostbite and it is legless. sent9: if that something is not a sambar and is not a kind of a yellowfin does not hold it does bargain Paige. sent10: there exists something such that it is a mince. sent11: the fact that the preemie is not non-glottochronological is not false. sent12: that the preemie is not a kind of a sambar and it is not a yellowfin is incorrect if it bargains frostbite. sent13: the Armenian is a kind of a Amblyrhynchus. sent14: there exists something such that it is a Montenegro. sent15: that the Armenian is a paralegal is not incorrect. sent16: the nudnik is not a kind of a paralegal if there exists something such that that it is a similarity and it is not a tune-up is not true. sent17: if something is glottochronological it is umbellate. ; $proof$ = | sent13 & sent15 -> int1: the Armenian is a Amblyrhynchus and is a paralegal.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the unlocking Gobiesocidae does not occur and the psycholinguisticsness does not occur. | (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | sent1: that the unlocking star does not occur and the autoeciousness does not occur does not hold if the knock occurs. sent2: that the aeromedicalness does not occur leads to that both the knock and the maltreatment happens. sent3: that both the unlocking Gobiesocidae and the non-psycholinguisticsness occurs does not hold. sent4: the aeromedicalness does not occur if the fact that the matinee and the pitching occurs is not right. sent5: the bargaining ski does not occur and the providentialness does not occur. sent6: if the obtainment does not occur then the fact that the matinee happens and the pitching happens is not right. sent7: if the fact that the unlocking Gobiesocidae does not occur and the psycholinguisticsness does not occur is incorrect then the maltreatment does not occur. sent8: the unlocking Gobiesocidae does not occur. | sent1: {A} -> ¬(¬{DE} & ¬{GF}) sent2: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent3: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent4: ¬({D} & {E}) -> ¬{C} sent5: (¬{CB} & ¬{GH}) sent6: ¬{F} -> ¬({D} & {E}) sent7: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent8: ¬{AA} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the unlocking Gobiesocidae does not occur and the psycholinguisticsness does not occur is wrong.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the maltreatment does not occur.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent7 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B};"
] | the fact that the unlocking Gobiesocidae does not occur and the psycholinguisticsness does not occur does not hold. | ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | [] | 7 | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the unlocking Gobiesocidae does not occur and the psycholinguisticsness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the unlocking star does not occur and the autoeciousness does not occur does not hold if the knock occurs. sent2: that the aeromedicalness does not occur leads to that both the knock and the maltreatment happens. sent3: that both the unlocking Gobiesocidae and the non-psycholinguisticsness occurs does not hold. sent4: the aeromedicalness does not occur if the fact that the matinee and the pitching occurs is not right. sent5: the bargaining ski does not occur and the providentialness does not occur. sent6: if the obtainment does not occur then the fact that the matinee happens and the pitching happens is not right. sent7: if the fact that the unlocking Gobiesocidae does not occur and the psycholinguisticsness does not occur is incorrect then the maltreatment does not occur. sent8: the unlocking Gobiesocidae does not occur. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the unlocking Gobiesocidae does not occur and the psycholinguisticsness does not occur is wrong.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the maltreatment does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is not a arabesque then it is not a concept. | (Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x | sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a festination then it is not unreal. sent2: if the serval is not a arabesque then the fact that it does not bargain denudation is true. sent3: the anapsid is not a concept if it is not algometric. sent4: if something is not a postmortem then it is not a kind of a puzzle. sent5: if the siderocyte is not a Malthusian then it is not prolate. sent6: the roads is not choric if it is not a arabesque. sent7: if something is a arabesque it is not a concept. sent8: the hematocrit is not a arabesque if it is not a trillion. sent9: if the siderocyte is not euphonic then it is not chiromantic. sent10: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a arabesque is not false it is not a concept. sent11: something is not a preliminary if the fact that it is not altitudinal is right. sent12: if the siderocyte is a arabesque it is not a kind of a concept. sent13: there is something such that if it is not a pentahedron then it does not depart. sent14: if the siderocyte is not a arabesque it is a concept. sent15: there is something such that if it is not unborn it is not a rent-a-car. sent16: if something is not a kind of a arabesque it is a concept. sent17: if something does not unlock paleness then it is not eruptive. sent18: there exists something such that if it is not a arabesque that it is a concept is true. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{CG}x -> ¬{CR}x sent2: ¬{B}{dk} -> ¬{JI}{dk} sent3: ¬{CF}{dr} -> ¬{C}{dr} sent4: (x): ¬{HD}x -> ¬{FB}x sent5: ¬{FK}{aa} -> ¬{JC}{aa} sent6: ¬{B}{fm} -> ¬{IO}{fm} sent7: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent8: ¬{J}{gs} -> ¬{B}{gs} sent9: ¬{GI}{aa} -> ¬{IS}{aa} sent10: (Ex): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent11: (x): ¬{EU}x -> ¬{CE}x sent12: {B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent13: (Ex): ¬{BN}x -> ¬{EF}x sent14: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent15: (Ex): ¬{AG}x -> ¬{FL}x sent16: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent17: (x): ¬{HP}x -> ¬{EB}x sent18: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not a arabesque then it is not a concept. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a festination then it is not unreal. sent2: if the serval is not a arabesque then the fact that it does not bargain denudation is true. sent3: the anapsid is not a concept if it is not algometric. sent4: if something is not a postmortem then it is not a kind of a puzzle. sent5: if the siderocyte is not a Malthusian then it is not prolate. sent6: the roads is not choric if it is not a arabesque. sent7: if something is a arabesque it is not a concept. sent8: the hematocrit is not a arabesque if it is not a trillion. sent9: if the siderocyte is not euphonic then it is not chiromantic. sent10: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a arabesque is not false it is not a concept. sent11: something is not a preliminary if the fact that it is not altitudinal is right. sent12: if the siderocyte is a arabesque it is not a kind of a concept. sent13: there is something such that if it is not a pentahedron then it does not depart. sent14: if the siderocyte is not a arabesque it is a concept. sent15: there is something such that if it is not unborn it is not a rent-a-car. sent16: if something is not a kind of a arabesque it is a concept. sent17: if something does not unlock paleness then it is not eruptive. sent18: there exists something such that if it is not a arabesque that it is a concept is true. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | both the ankylosing and the pleating happens. | ({D} & {E}) | sent1: that the commerce does not occur and the crossfire happens results in the ankylosing. sent2: either the golfing does not occur or the interreflection does not occur or both. sent3: if the footrace does not occur the valediction occurs. sent4: that the interreflection does not occur is brought about by either that the golfing does not occur or that the interreflection does not occur or both. sent5: the crossfire and the blank happens. sent6: the eulogizing Paget does not occur. sent7: the studentship occurs. sent8: the commerce does not occur if the eulogizing Paget does not occur. | sent1: (¬{C} & {A}) -> {D} sent2: (¬{I} v ¬{H}) sent3: ¬{JJ} -> {BD} sent4: (¬{I} v ¬{H}) -> ¬{H} sent5: ({A} & {B}) sent6: ¬{G} sent7: {EA} sent8: ¬{G} -> ¬{C} | [
"sent5 -> int1: the crossfire occurs.; sent8 & sent6 -> int2: the commerce does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the commerce does not occur and the crossfire occurs hold.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: that the ankylosing happens hold.; sent4 & sent2 -> int5: the interreflection does not occur.;"
] | [
"sent5 -> int1: {A}; sent8 & sent6 -> int2: ¬{C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{C} & {A}); int3 & sent1 -> int4: {D}; sent4 & sent2 -> int5: ¬{H};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = both the ankylosing and the pleating happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the commerce does not occur and the crossfire happens results in the ankylosing. sent2: either the golfing does not occur or the interreflection does not occur or both. sent3: if the footrace does not occur the valediction occurs. sent4: that the interreflection does not occur is brought about by either that the golfing does not occur or that the interreflection does not occur or both. sent5: the crossfire and the blank happens. sent6: the eulogizing Paget does not occur. sent7: the studentship occurs. sent8: the commerce does not occur if the eulogizing Paget does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> int1: the crossfire occurs.; sent8 & sent6 -> int2: the commerce does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the commerce does not occur and the crossfire occurs hold.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: that the ankylosing happens hold.; sent4 & sent2 -> int5: the interreflection does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that that the tourtiere does barbarize and it does unlock guerrilla hold is not true. | ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: the fact that the tourtiere barbarizes if the tourtiere is masochistic hold. sent2: the Ishmael does strain. sent3: that if the breechblock is masochistic the tourtiere does strain is not incorrect. sent4: if the breechblock strains the tourtiere does unlock guerrilla. sent5: if the fact that the guerrilla is a Young and does not strain is wrong then the breechblock is not masochistic. sent6: the breechblock is a strain. sent7: the oblate unlocks guerrilla. sent8: the tourtiere is Laos. sent9: the breechblock is both not non-civic and inward. sent10: the tourtiere is masochistic. sent11: the tourtiere strains if the breechblock barbarizes. | sent1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent2: {D}{bg} sent3: {A}{b} -> {D}{a} sent4: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} sent5: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent6: {D}{b} sent7: {C}{ci} sent8: {IE}{a} sent9: ({HI}{b} & {JK}{b}) sent10: {A}{a} sent11: {B}{b} -> {D}{a} | [
"sent1 & sent10 -> int1: that the tourtiere does barbarize is right.; sent4 & sent6 -> int2: the tourtiere unlocks guerrilla.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent10 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent4 & sent6 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the tourtiere does barbarize and it does unlock guerrilla is not correct. | ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) | [] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that that the tourtiere does barbarize and it does unlock guerrilla hold is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the tourtiere barbarizes if the tourtiere is masochistic hold. sent2: the Ishmael does strain. sent3: that if the breechblock is masochistic the tourtiere does strain is not incorrect. sent4: if the breechblock strains the tourtiere does unlock guerrilla. sent5: if the fact that the guerrilla is a Young and does not strain is wrong then the breechblock is not masochistic. sent6: the breechblock is a strain. sent7: the oblate unlocks guerrilla. sent8: the tourtiere is Laos. sent9: the breechblock is both not non-civic and inward. sent10: the tourtiere is masochistic. sent11: the tourtiere strains if the breechblock barbarizes. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent10 -> int1: that the tourtiere does barbarize is right.; sent4 & sent6 -> int2: the tourtiere unlocks guerrilla.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the prickle-weed is a kind of a hassock but it is not a kind of a Mongolian is wrong. | ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) | sent1: if that the Nebraskan is not baric is true then the fact that the prickle-weed is a hassock and Mongolian does not hold. sent2: the fact that the prickle-weed is a hassock and not Mongolian is not right if the Nebraskan is not baric. sent3: that the Nebraskan is a Mongolian but it is not a Zukerman is incorrect. sent4: the Nebraskan is not a kind of a Zukerman. sent5: that the prickle-weed is non-sorrowful is true. sent6: the Nebraskan is not baric if the fact that it is not a Zukerman hold. sent7: the prickle-weed is not Mongolian if the Nebraskan is a kind of non-baric thing that is not a kind of a Mongolian. sent8: if the fescue is a force but not a Jurassic then it is not a Zukerman. sent9: the fact that the prickle-weed is a hassock that is a Mongolian is not correct. sent10: the Nebraskan is not a mnemonics if it is not baric. sent11: the fescue is a force but it is not Jurassic if it leaches arc-boutant. sent12: something is not monotheistic if the fact that it leaches blazing and it is monotheistic is incorrect. sent13: that if something is not a Zukerman that the prickle-weed is a kind of a Zukerman and is not a hassock does not hold is not false. sent14: the Nebraskan is not a kind of a hassock. sent15: the fact that the Nebraskan is not the Mongolian if the Nebraskan is not a Zukerman hold. sent16: something is not baric and it is not Mongolian if it is not monotheistic. sent17: the fescue leaches arc-boutant. sent18: the fact that the prickle-weed is a hassock but it is not a kind of a Zukerman does not hold if the Nebraskan is non-Mongolian. sent19: if the Nebraskan is not a Mongolian then that the prickle-weed is both baric and not a hassock is incorrect. sent20: that the prickle-weed is a Zukerman but it is not a hassock is wrong. sent21: that that something does leach blazing and it is monotheistic is correct is false if it is not a concrete. | sent1: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b}) sent2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent3: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent4: ¬{A}{a} sent5: ¬{IN}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent8: ({H}{c} & ¬{I}{c}) -> ¬{A}{c} sent9: ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b}) sent10: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{CO}{a} sent11: {J}{c} -> ({H}{c} & ¬{I}{c}) sent12: (x): ¬({G}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent14: ¬{C}{a} sent15: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{D}{a} sent16: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{D}x) sent17: {J}{c} sent18: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent19: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent20: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent21: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({G}x & {E}x) | [
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the Nebraskan is not baric.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the prickle-weed is a hassock and is non-Mongolian. | ({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) | [
"sent11 & sent17 -> int2: the fescue is a force and not Jurassic.; sent8 & int2 -> int3: the fescue is not a Zukerman.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that it is not a Zukerman.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: that the prickle-weed is a kind of a Zukerman that is not a hassock is not right.; sent16 -> int6: the Nebraskan is not baric and it is not a Mongolian if the fact that it is not monotheistic is not incorrect.; sent12 -> int7: if that the Nebraskan leaches blazing and it is monotheistic is not true then it is not monotheistic.; sent21 -> int8: if the Nebraskan is not a concrete that it does leach blazing and is monotheistic is wrong.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the prickle-weed is a kind of a hassock but it is not a kind of a Mongolian is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the Nebraskan is not baric is true then the fact that the prickle-weed is a hassock and Mongolian does not hold. sent2: the fact that the prickle-weed is a hassock and not Mongolian is not right if the Nebraskan is not baric. sent3: that the Nebraskan is a Mongolian but it is not a Zukerman is incorrect. sent4: the Nebraskan is not a kind of a Zukerman. sent5: that the prickle-weed is non-sorrowful is true. sent6: the Nebraskan is not baric if the fact that it is not a Zukerman hold. sent7: the prickle-weed is not Mongolian if the Nebraskan is a kind of non-baric thing that is not a kind of a Mongolian. sent8: if the fescue is a force but not a Jurassic then it is not a Zukerman. sent9: the fact that the prickle-weed is a hassock that is a Mongolian is not correct. sent10: the Nebraskan is not a mnemonics if it is not baric. sent11: the fescue is a force but it is not Jurassic if it leaches arc-boutant. sent12: something is not monotheistic if the fact that it leaches blazing and it is monotheistic is incorrect. sent13: that if something is not a Zukerman that the prickle-weed is a kind of a Zukerman and is not a hassock does not hold is not false. sent14: the Nebraskan is not a kind of a hassock. sent15: the fact that the Nebraskan is not the Mongolian if the Nebraskan is not a Zukerman hold. sent16: something is not baric and it is not Mongolian if it is not monotheistic. sent17: the fescue leaches arc-boutant. sent18: the fact that the prickle-weed is a hassock but it is not a kind of a Zukerman does not hold if the Nebraskan is non-Mongolian. sent19: if the Nebraskan is not a Mongolian then that the prickle-weed is both baric and not a hassock is incorrect. sent20: that the prickle-weed is a Zukerman but it is not a hassock is wrong. sent21: that that something does leach blazing and it is monotheistic is correct is false if it is not a concrete. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the Nebraskan is not baric.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the prototherian eulogizes prototherian. | {C}{a} | sent1: the prototherian is a filibuster. sent2: the isthmus eulogizes prototherian. sent3: if something is a flip it does not eulogize prototherian. sent4: the prototherian does pouch. sent5: the prototherian is a kind of a flip if it is a kind of a pouched. | sent1: {CD}{a} sent2: {C}{ai} sent3: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: {A}{a} sent5: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} | [
"sent5 & sent4 -> int1: the prototherian does flip.; sent3 -> int2: if the prototherian is a kind of a flip then it does not eulogize prototherian.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 & sent4 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent3 -> int2: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the prototherian eulogizes prototherian. ; $context$ = sent1: the prototherian is a filibuster. sent2: the isthmus eulogizes prototherian. sent3: if something is a flip it does not eulogize prototherian. sent4: the prototherian does pouch. sent5: the prototherian is a kind of a flip if it is a kind of a pouched. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent4 -> int1: the prototherian does flip.; sent3 -> int2: if the prototherian is a kind of a flip then it does not eulogize prototherian.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the panhandler is not a wherewithal but it is a steadiness does not hold. | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | sent1: there exists something such that it is not a biquadratic. sent2: if there are non-biquadratic things the fact that the panhandler does not glower and unlocks comfit is not correct. sent3: if something is not a wherewithal but it is a kind of a steadiness it unlocks comfit. sent4: the hock does eulogize panhandler if it is not a wherewithal but Sisyphean. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (¬{AA}{i} & {CQ}{i}) -> {EN}{i} | [
"sent3 -> int1: if that the panhandler is not a wherewithal and is a steadiness is correct it does unlock comfit.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the panhandler is not a kind of a wherewithal and is a steadiness.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the panhandler unlocks comfit.; sent1 & sent2 -> int3: that the panhandler does not glower and unlocks comfit is false.;"
] | [
"sent3 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; void -> assump1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & assump1 -> int2: {B}{aa}; sent1 & sent2 -> int3: ¬(¬{A}{aa} & {B}{aa});"
] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the panhandler is not a wherewithal but it is a steadiness does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is not a biquadratic. sent2: if there are non-biquadratic things the fact that the panhandler does not glower and unlocks comfit is not correct. sent3: if something is not a wherewithal but it is a kind of a steadiness it unlocks comfit. sent4: the hock does eulogize panhandler if it is not a wherewithal but Sisyphean. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> int1: if that the panhandler is not a wherewithal and is a steadiness is correct it does unlock comfit.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the panhandler is not a kind of a wherewithal and is a steadiness.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the panhandler unlocks comfit.; sent1 & sent2 -> int3: that the panhandler does not glower and unlocks comfit is false.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the mamoncillo does not proselytize. | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: the Madeiras does not unlock girdle. sent2: The girdle does not unlock Madeiras. sent3: if the star is not a hypermastigote that it is both not non-heavy-duty and not unfathomable is incorrect. sent4: something does proselytize but it does not unlock girdle if it is not a self-punishment. sent5: the fact that the mamoncillo is not a paradiddle is true if the Madeiras is not heavy-duty. sent6: the mamoncillo does not proselytize if the fact that the Madeiras is heavy-duty and is a paradiddle is not right. sent7: the Madeiras does not proselytize if that the mamoncillo is a kind of a paradiddle and does unlock girdle is wrong. sent8: if the mamoncillo does not proselytize then that it is heavy-duty and it is a paradiddle is not true. sent9: the mamoncillo is not heavy-duty. sent10: the mamoncillo is non-heavy-duty if the Madeiras does not proselytize. sent11: that the Madeiras does proselytize and it is a paradiddle is false if it does not unlock girdle. sent12: if the mamoncillo does not proselytize then the fact that it unlocks girdle and it is a paradiddle is not right. sent13: the mamoncillo does not proselytize if the Madeiras is not a paradiddle. sent14: something is not a kind of a self-punishment and does not unlock girdle if it is Kantian. sent15: that the mamoncillo does proselytize and it is a paradiddle does not hold. sent16: that the Madeiras is heavy-duty and is a kind of a paradiddle is not right if it does not unlock girdle. | sent1: ¬{A}{a} sent2: ¬{AC}{aa} sent3: ¬{JD}{ai} -> ¬({AA}{ai} & {GG}{ai}) sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & ¬{A}x) sent5: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{AB}{b} sent6: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬({AB}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent8: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent9: ¬{AA}{b} sent10: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent12: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({A}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent13: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent14: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent15: ¬({B}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent16: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) | [
"sent16 & sent1 -> int1: that the Madeiras is heavy-duty thing that is a kind of a paradiddle does not hold.; sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent16 & sent1 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the mamoncillo does proselytize. | {B}{b} | [
"sent14 -> int2: the Madeiras is not a self-punishment and does not unlock girdle if it is Kantian.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the mamoncillo does not proselytize. ; $context$ = sent1: the Madeiras does not unlock girdle. sent2: The girdle does not unlock Madeiras. sent3: if the star is not a hypermastigote that it is both not non-heavy-duty and not unfathomable is incorrect. sent4: something does proselytize but it does not unlock girdle if it is not a self-punishment. sent5: the fact that the mamoncillo is not a paradiddle is true if the Madeiras is not heavy-duty. sent6: the mamoncillo does not proselytize if the fact that the Madeiras is heavy-duty and is a paradiddle is not right. sent7: the Madeiras does not proselytize if that the mamoncillo is a kind of a paradiddle and does unlock girdle is wrong. sent8: if the mamoncillo does not proselytize then that it is heavy-duty and it is a paradiddle is not true. sent9: the mamoncillo is not heavy-duty. sent10: the mamoncillo is non-heavy-duty if the Madeiras does not proselytize. sent11: that the Madeiras does proselytize and it is a paradiddle is false if it does not unlock girdle. sent12: if the mamoncillo does not proselytize then the fact that it unlocks girdle and it is a paradiddle is not right. sent13: the mamoncillo does not proselytize if the Madeiras is not a paradiddle. sent14: something is not a kind of a self-punishment and does not unlock girdle if it is Kantian. sent15: that the mamoncillo does proselytize and it is a paradiddle does not hold. sent16: that the Madeiras is heavy-duty and is a kind of a paradiddle is not right if it does not unlock girdle. ; $proof$ = | sent16 & sent1 -> int1: that the Madeiras is heavy-duty thing that is a kind of a paradiddle does not hold.; sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the ptyalin is both enolic and non-athletic. | ({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) | sent1: if the legume is a kind of a Rwanda then the fact that the ptyalin is enolic and is athletic does not hold. sent2: the fact that something is enolic but it is not inequitable does not hold if it is not athletic. sent3: something is not athletic if the fact that it is a kind of a partridgeberry that is a kind of a Rwanda is not correct. sent4: something is a partridgeberry and a Rwanda if it is not enolic. sent5: that the ptyalin is enolic and it is athletic is not right. sent6: if the legume is a partridgeberry it is a kind of a Rwanda. sent7: if the legume is a Rwanda that the ptyalin is enolic but it is not athletic is wrong. sent8: the fact that that the ptyalin is enolic is correct if the legume is enolic hold. sent9: the legume is a partridgeberry. sent10: that if the legume does unlock Foster then the legume is enolic is correct. sent11: that if the fact that the legume is enolic and is not inequitable is wrong then the percolate is not enolic hold. | sent1: {B}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{E}x) sent3: (x): ¬({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent5: ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b}) sent6: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent7: {B}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent8: {C}{a} -> {C}{b} sent9: {A}{a} sent10: {G}{a} -> {C}{a} sent11: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{el} | [
"sent6 & sent9 -> int1: the legume is a Rwanda.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent9 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the ptyalin is enolic and not athletic. | ({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) | [
"sent3 -> int2: the ptyalin is not athletic if the fact that it is a partridgeberry and it is a Rwanda is wrong.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 8 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the ptyalin is both enolic and non-athletic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the legume is a kind of a Rwanda then the fact that the ptyalin is enolic and is athletic does not hold. sent2: the fact that something is enolic but it is not inequitable does not hold if it is not athletic. sent3: something is not athletic if the fact that it is a kind of a partridgeberry that is a kind of a Rwanda is not correct. sent4: something is a partridgeberry and a Rwanda if it is not enolic. sent5: that the ptyalin is enolic and it is athletic is not right. sent6: if the legume is a partridgeberry it is a kind of a Rwanda. sent7: if the legume is a Rwanda that the ptyalin is enolic but it is not athletic is wrong. sent8: the fact that that the ptyalin is enolic is correct if the legume is enolic hold. sent9: the legume is a partridgeberry. sent10: that if the legume does unlock Foster then the legume is enolic is correct. sent11: that if the fact that the legume is enolic and is not inequitable is wrong then the percolate is not enolic hold. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent9 -> int1: the legume is a Rwanda.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the botulin does leach Gaskell. | {B}{b} | sent1: the alsatian does humanize if there exists something such that it is not spectral. sent2: something is a kind of non-diclinous thing that is spectral. sent3: if there exists something such that it humanizes the botulin does leach Gaskell. sent4: there exists something such that it does leach Gaskell. sent5: if there exists something such that that it is not diclinous and is spectral does not hold then the alsatian humanizes. sent6: there exists something such that it bargains paparazzo. sent7: there exists something such that the fact that that it is diclinous and spectral hold is not right. | sent1: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}{a} sent2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> {B}{b} sent4: (Ex): {B}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent6: (Ex): {ID}x sent7: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the botulin does leach Gaskell. ; $context$ = sent1: the alsatian does humanize if there exists something such that it is not spectral. sent2: something is a kind of non-diclinous thing that is spectral. sent3: if there exists something such that it humanizes the botulin does leach Gaskell. sent4: there exists something such that it does leach Gaskell. sent5: if there exists something such that that it is not diclinous and is spectral does not hold then the alsatian humanizes. sent6: there exists something such that it bargains paparazzo. sent7: there exists something such that the fact that that it is diclinous and spectral hold is not right. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the uranium is not extragalactic. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: that the nominalist does unlock ELA but it is not pathological is not true. sent2: that the nominalist unlocks ELA and is pathological is wrong. sent3: the fact that something is not a histologist and is a kind of a cloisonne is not correct if it is a peridot. sent4: the fact that the briard is pathological is incorrect. sent5: the uranium is not extragalactic if there exists something such that it is pathological. sent6: that if the uranium is extragalactic then the fact that the manor is extrinsic but it is not nonlinear is false is not incorrect. sent7: something unlocks ELA but it is not pathological. sent8: the nominalist is not extragalactic if there exists something such that that it is pathological and it does not unlock ELA does not hold. sent9: the uranium is extragalactic if it is lobular. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it unlocks ELA and is pathological is not true. sent11: something is nonaddictive thing that is not lobular if it is not septal. sent12: there exists something such that that the fact that it is extragalactic and it is not pathological is true is incorrect. sent13: something is not septal if that it is not a histologist and it is a kind of a cloisonne is not right. sent14: something is lobular if that it is a kind of nonaddictive thing that is not septal is not right. sent15: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a scheduler and is not a kind of a disinterest is not correct. sent16: the fact that the handrest is a kind of a peridot is true if it is lenten. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it is a Golgi and does not bargain impetuousness is not right. | sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) sent4: ¬{AB}{cs} sent5: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬({JJ}{cc} & ¬{HB}{cc}) sent7: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent8: (x): ¬({AB}x & ¬{AA}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent9: {B}{a} -> {A}{a} sent10: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent12: (Ex): ¬({A}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent14: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) -> {B}x sent15: (Ex): ¬({BQ}x & ¬{GA}x) sent16: {H}{b} -> {G}{b} sent17: (Ex): ¬({CO}x & ¬{JB}x) | [
"sent1 -> int1: there exists something such that that it does unlock ELA and is not pathological is incorrect.;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x);"
] | the uranium is extragalactic. | {A}{a} | [
"sent14 -> int2: the uranium is lobular if that it is both not addictive and not septal is wrong.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the uranium is not extragalactic. ; $context$ = sent1: that the nominalist does unlock ELA but it is not pathological is not true. sent2: that the nominalist unlocks ELA and is pathological is wrong. sent3: the fact that something is not a histologist and is a kind of a cloisonne is not correct if it is a peridot. sent4: the fact that the briard is pathological is incorrect. sent5: the uranium is not extragalactic if there exists something such that it is pathological. sent6: that if the uranium is extragalactic then the fact that the manor is extrinsic but it is not nonlinear is false is not incorrect. sent7: something unlocks ELA but it is not pathological. sent8: the nominalist is not extragalactic if there exists something such that that it is pathological and it does not unlock ELA does not hold. sent9: the uranium is extragalactic if it is lobular. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it unlocks ELA and is pathological is not true. sent11: something is nonaddictive thing that is not lobular if it is not septal. sent12: there exists something such that that the fact that it is extragalactic and it is not pathological is true is incorrect. sent13: something is not septal if that it is not a histologist and it is a kind of a cloisonne is not right. sent14: something is lobular if that it is a kind of nonaddictive thing that is not septal is not right. sent15: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a scheduler and is not a kind of a disinterest is not correct. sent16: the fact that the handrest is a kind of a peridot is true if it is lenten. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it is a Golgi and does not bargain impetuousness is not right. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: there exists something such that that it does unlock ELA and is not pathological is incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the pinche is uneventful and/or it is not insignificant does not hold. | ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: the porcelain is angelic. sent2: the fact that the sort is not a kind of a naltrexone and it does not arm is incorrect if there exists something such that it does eulogize Cremona. sent3: the lull is not significant. sent4: the pinche is Mauritanian. sent5: the cufflink is unapproachable and/or is not a kind of a exenteration. sent6: if the pinche is not insignificant the lull does not leach ornateness. sent7: if something is angelic then it is a glyceryl. sent8: if the porcelain is a glyceryl then that the mastocyte does not unlock snag and it does not eulogize Cremona does not hold. sent9: the lull is uneventful. sent10: that the cufflink leaches ornateness is true. sent11: if there is something such that that it is not a naltrexone and not an arms does not hold the Pomeranian is not a pause. sent12: if the Pomeranian is not a pause the fact that the cufflink does not leach ornateness but it is not non-Mauritanian does not hold. sent13: the flutist is a Mauritanian. sent14: the pinche either is uneventful or is insignificant or both. sent15: if that something does not unlock snag and it does not eulogize Cremona is not correct then it does eulogize Cremona. sent16: the fact that the lull does leach ornateness does not hold if the pinche is uneventful and/or is not insignificant. sent17: the pinche is uneventful if the lull is not a Mauritanian. sent18: if the cufflink is a Mauritanian the lull leaches ornateness. sent19: the cufflink is a Mauritanian. sent20: the pinche is uneventful and/or does not leach ornateness. sent21: the pinche is insignificant. | sent1: {I}{g} sent2: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{E}{e} & ¬{D}{e}) sent3: {AB}{b} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: ({CK}{c} v ¬{BL}{c}) sent6: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: (x): {I}x -> {H}x sent8: {H}{g} -> ¬(¬{G}{f} & ¬{F}{f}) sent9: {AA}{b} sent10: {B}{c} sent11: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{C}{d} sent12: ¬{C}{d} -> ¬(¬{B}{c} & {A}{c}) sent13: {A}{go} sent14: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent15: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> {F}x sent16: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent17: ¬{A}{b} -> {AA}{a} sent18: {A}{c} -> {B}{b} sent19: {A}{c} sent20: ({AA}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) sent21: {AB}{a} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the pinche is uneventful and/or it is not insignificant.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the lull does not leach ornateness.; sent18 & sent19 -> int2: the lull leaches ornateness.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); sent16 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent18 & sent19 -> int2: {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the pinche is uneventful or it is not insignificant or both. | ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"sent15 -> int4: the mastocyte does eulogize Cremona if the fact that it does not unlock snag and it does not eulogize Cremona does not hold.; sent7 -> int5: the fact that the porcelain is a kind of a glyceryl is true if it is angelic.; int5 & sent1 -> int6: the porcelain is a glyceryl.; sent8 & int6 -> int7: that the mastocyte does not unlock snag and does not eulogize Cremona is false.; int4 & int7 -> int8: that the mastocyte does eulogize Cremona is not false.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that the fact that it eulogizes Cremona is not incorrect.; int9 & sent2 -> int10: the fact that the sort is not a kind of a naltrexone and it is not an arms does not hold.; int10 -> int11: there is something such that that it is not a naltrexone and it is not an arms is incorrect.; int11 & sent11 -> int12: the Pomeranian does not pause.; sent12 & int12 -> int13: that the cufflink does not leach ornateness but it is Mauritanian is not right.; int13 -> int14: the fact that there is something such that the fact that it does not leach ornateness and is a kind of a Mauritanian is not right is correct.;"
] | 13 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the pinche is uneventful and/or it is not insignificant does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the porcelain is angelic. sent2: the fact that the sort is not a kind of a naltrexone and it does not arm is incorrect if there exists something such that it does eulogize Cremona. sent3: the lull is not significant. sent4: the pinche is Mauritanian. sent5: the cufflink is unapproachable and/or is not a kind of a exenteration. sent6: if the pinche is not insignificant the lull does not leach ornateness. sent7: if something is angelic then it is a glyceryl. sent8: if the porcelain is a glyceryl then that the mastocyte does not unlock snag and it does not eulogize Cremona does not hold. sent9: the lull is uneventful. sent10: that the cufflink leaches ornateness is true. sent11: if there is something such that that it is not a naltrexone and not an arms does not hold the Pomeranian is not a pause. sent12: if the Pomeranian is not a pause the fact that the cufflink does not leach ornateness but it is not non-Mauritanian does not hold. sent13: the flutist is a Mauritanian. sent14: the pinche either is uneventful or is insignificant or both. sent15: if that something does not unlock snag and it does not eulogize Cremona is not correct then it does eulogize Cremona. sent16: the fact that the lull does leach ornateness does not hold if the pinche is uneventful and/or is not insignificant. sent17: the pinche is uneventful if the lull is not a Mauritanian. sent18: if the cufflink is a Mauritanian the lull leaches ornateness. sent19: the cufflink is a Mauritanian. sent20: the pinche is uneventful and/or does not leach ornateness. sent21: the pinche is insignificant. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the pinche is uneventful and/or it is not insignificant.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the lull does not leach ornateness.; sent18 & sent19 -> int2: the lull leaches ornateness.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a vacuolization then it is haptic is true. | (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x | sent1: something that is not cardiopulmonary is haptic. sent2: there exists something such that if it does not eulogize give-and-go it is a Davys. sent3: something that is not a flesh is a brassiere. sent4: if the carrycot is a kind of a vacuolization it is haptic. sent5: the Africander is a backspin if the fact that it is not a vacuolization hold. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a vacuolization then it is haptic. sent7: if the carrycot is not a vacuolization it is haptic. sent8: if the carrycot is not diffused then the fact that it is an animation is correct. sent9: there exists something such that if that it is not monometallic is correct then it is a Europan. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not bargain CFTR then it is a electroencephalogram. | sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> {C}x sent2: (Ex): ¬{JF}x -> {GE}x sent3: (x): ¬{BE}x -> {P}x sent4: {B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent5: ¬{B}{do} -> {DR}{do} sent6: (Ex): {B}x -> {C}x sent7: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent8: ¬{CK}{aa} -> {HO}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬{EH}x -> {ID}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{JA}x -> {GI}x | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | if the clairvoyant is not cardiopulmonary it is haptic. | ¬{D}{fm} -> {C}{fm} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a vacuolization then it is haptic is true. ; $context$ = sent1: something that is not cardiopulmonary is haptic. sent2: there exists something such that if it does not eulogize give-and-go it is a Davys. sent3: something that is not a flesh is a brassiere. sent4: if the carrycot is a kind of a vacuolization it is haptic. sent5: the Africander is a backspin if the fact that it is not a vacuolization hold. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a vacuolization then it is haptic. sent7: if the carrycot is not a vacuolization it is haptic. sent8: if the carrycot is not diffused then the fact that it is an animation is correct. sent9: there exists something such that if that it is not monometallic is correct then it is a Europan. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not bargain CFTR then it is a electroencephalogram. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the colossus is not a west is not false. | ¬{C}{a} | sent1: the colossus eulogizes yokel if that something unlocks rodent is correct. sent2: the noctiluca does eulogize Ecuador. sent3: if the noctiluca does eulogize Ecuador and is a surge the stopper does not eulogize Ecuador. sent4: the fact that something unlocks rodent and it eulogizes yokel is wrong if it does not sadden. sent5: if the stopper does not eulogize Ecuador then that the footballer is a yottabit and it saddens is not correct. sent6: there exists something such that it unlocks rodent. sent7: if something does sadden or it does not eulogize yokel or both it does not eulogize yokel. sent8: the colossus does eulogize yokel. sent9: something does leach Guangzhou and it unlocks rodent if it does not eulogize yokel. sent10: the vesiculovirus is a Rhadamanthus but it is not a west. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent2: {F}{e} sent3: ({F}{e} & {G}{e}) -> ¬{F}{d} sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent5: ¬{F}{d} -> ¬({E}{c} & {D}{c}) sent6: (Ex): {A}x sent7: (x): ({D}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{B}x sent8: {B}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({FP}x & {A}x) sent10: ({AF}{db} & ¬{C}{db}) | [] | [] | the colossus is a west. | {C}{a} | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the emir does not sadden that it unlocks rodent and does eulogize yokel is wrong.;"
] | 8 | 2 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the colossus is not a west is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: the colossus eulogizes yokel if that something unlocks rodent is correct. sent2: the noctiluca does eulogize Ecuador. sent3: if the noctiluca does eulogize Ecuador and is a surge the stopper does not eulogize Ecuador. sent4: the fact that something unlocks rodent and it eulogizes yokel is wrong if it does not sadden. sent5: if the stopper does not eulogize Ecuador then that the footballer is a yottabit and it saddens is not correct. sent6: there exists something such that it unlocks rodent. sent7: if something does sadden or it does not eulogize yokel or both it does not eulogize yokel. sent8: the colossus does eulogize yokel. sent9: something does leach Guangzhou and it unlocks rodent if it does not eulogize yokel. sent10: the vesiculovirus is a Rhadamanthus but it is not a west. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there exists something such that if that it does not eulogize stagnation or it is ebracteate or both does not hold then it is a Bihar is incorrect. | ¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x) | sent1: there exists something such that if that it is either not a Percheron or maximal or both does not hold then it is lucifugous. sent2: that if that the pretzel is either not the Bihar or oracular or both is false the pretzel is regional is correct. sent3: if that the wahoo is not a precociousness or is a Bihar or both is not correct it unlocks register. sent4: if that the tarsal either is not a centrist or is sectorial or both does not hold it does eulogize stagnation. sent5: the tarsal is a Bihar if either it does not eulogize stagnation or it is ebracteate or both. sent6: if the fact that the tarsal does not eulogize stagnation or it is ebracteate or both is not true it is a Bihar. sent7: if that that the tarsal eulogizes stagnation and/or is ebracteate is wrong is not incorrect then it is a Bihar. sent8: there is something such that if the fact that it does eulogize stagnation or is ebracteate or both is false it is a Bihar. sent9: if the fact that the tarsal does not eulogize stagnation and/or it bargains regionalism is not correct then it cleaves. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not eulogize stagnation or is ebracteate or both then it is a kind of a Bihar. sent11: there exists something such that if that it is a discomposure and/or saponifies is not correct then it does eulogize steamer. sent12: if the steamer does not eulogize stagnation and/or it does unlock Maraco then it is oracular. sent13: the tarsal is a Sarawakian if the fact that it is ebracteate or it does unlock haircut or both is not right. sent14: there is something such that if that it is not fruitful or it is traumatic or both is wrong it is areolar. sent15: that something is gothic is right if the fact that either it does not unlock trimmed or it is a kind of a bodybuilder or both is wrong. sent16: if the fact that the register is a Bihar and/or it is a kind of a Kirchhoff is incorrect then it is a kind of an erythropoietin. | sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{HK}x v {BU}x) -> {CS}x sent2: ¬(¬{B}{dp} v {EI}{dp}) -> {AN}{dp} sent3: ¬(¬{IN}{ia} v {B}{ia}) -> {JA}{ia} sent4: ¬(¬{AG}{aa} v {JG}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {GQ}{aa}) -> {G}{aa} sent10: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: (Ex): ¬({GS}x v {CI}x) -> {CH}x sent12: (¬{AA}{cr} v {EN}{cr}) -> {EI}{cr} sent13: ¬({AB}{aa} v {HM}{aa}) -> {FO}{aa} sent14: (Ex): ¬(¬{ID}x v {HH}x) -> {IP}x sent15: (x): ¬(¬{CT}x v {FH}x) -> {JF}x sent16: ¬({B}{b} v {EB}{b}) -> {FI}{b} | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if the fact that either it does not unlock trimmed or it is a kind of a bodybuilder or both is wrong the fact that it is gothic is not wrong. | (Ex): ¬(¬{CT}x v {FH}x) -> {JF}x | [
"sent15 -> int1: the mollycoddle is gothic if that it does not unlock trimmed and/or it is a bodybuilder is false.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if that it does not eulogize stagnation or it is ebracteate or both does not hold then it is a Bihar is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if that it is either not a Percheron or maximal or both does not hold then it is lucifugous. sent2: that if that the pretzel is either not the Bihar or oracular or both is false the pretzel is regional is correct. sent3: if that the wahoo is not a precociousness or is a Bihar or both is not correct it unlocks register. sent4: if that the tarsal either is not a centrist or is sectorial or both does not hold it does eulogize stagnation. sent5: the tarsal is a Bihar if either it does not eulogize stagnation or it is ebracteate or both. sent6: if the fact that the tarsal does not eulogize stagnation or it is ebracteate or both is not true it is a Bihar. sent7: if that that the tarsal eulogizes stagnation and/or is ebracteate is wrong is not incorrect then it is a Bihar. sent8: there is something such that if the fact that it does eulogize stagnation or is ebracteate or both is false it is a Bihar. sent9: if the fact that the tarsal does not eulogize stagnation and/or it bargains regionalism is not correct then it cleaves. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not eulogize stagnation or is ebracteate or both then it is a kind of a Bihar. sent11: there exists something such that if that it is a discomposure and/or saponifies is not correct then it does eulogize steamer. sent12: if the steamer does not eulogize stagnation and/or it does unlock Maraco then it is oracular. sent13: the tarsal is a Sarawakian if the fact that it is ebracteate or it does unlock haircut or both is not right. sent14: there is something such that if that it is not fruitful or it is traumatic or both is wrong it is areolar. sent15: that something is gothic is right if the fact that either it does not unlock trimmed or it is a kind of a bodybuilder or both is wrong. sent16: if the fact that the register is a Bihar and/or it is a kind of a Kirchhoff is incorrect then it is a kind of an erythropoietin. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the prototherian eulogizes coelenterate. | {AB}{aa} | sent1: everything eulogizes pensiveness and does not eulogize coelenterate. sent2: everything is acinar. sent3: the henbane is not muciferous. sent4: the auxin is Alaskan thing that does not eulogize coelenterate. sent5: everything is a doornail. sent6: the prototherian is not vehicular. sent7: that everything is a tenebrionid and it does not red-eye is correct. sent8: the louse eulogizes pensiveness. sent9: the prototherian does live. sent10: the fact that the prototherian does unlock Gobiesocidae is not wrong. sent11: the prototherian unlocks prothorax but it is not Eurafrican. | sent1: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): {FE}x sent3: ¬{IG}{u} sent4: ({BB}{is} & ¬{AB}{is}) sent5: (x): {AL}x sent6: ¬{GE}{aa} sent7: (x): ({DP}x & ¬{EH}x) sent8: {AA}{fr} sent9: {G}{aa} sent10: {FM}{aa} sent11: ({AQ}{aa} & ¬{CB}{aa}) | [
"sent1 -> int1: the prototherian eulogizes pensiveness but it does not eulogize coelenterate.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the prototherian eulogizes coelenterate. ; $context$ = sent1: everything eulogizes pensiveness and does not eulogize coelenterate. sent2: everything is acinar. sent3: the henbane is not muciferous. sent4: the auxin is Alaskan thing that does not eulogize coelenterate. sent5: everything is a doornail. sent6: the prototherian is not vehicular. sent7: that everything is a tenebrionid and it does not red-eye is correct. sent8: the louse eulogizes pensiveness. sent9: the prototherian does live. sent10: the fact that the prototherian does unlock Gobiesocidae is not wrong. sent11: the prototherian unlocks prothorax but it is not Eurafrican. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: the prototherian eulogizes pensiveness but it does not eulogize coelenterate.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the influencing occurs. | {B} | sent1: the sentientness does not occur. sent2: the fact that the extensiveness and the non-Thebanness occurs does not hold if the sentientness does not occur. sent3: the influence does not occur if that the extensiveness but not the Theban happens is not true. sent4: not the crowd but the Echo occurs if the nonexploratoriness happens. sent5: the paranormalness does not occur if the fact that both the influencing and the sentientness happens is not correct. sent6: the fact that both the influencing and the sentientness occurs is false if the fact that the crowding does not occur is not false. | sent1: ¬{A} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent4: {E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) sent5: ¬({B} & {A}) -> ¬{HT} sent6: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & {A}) | [
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that the extensiveness happens and the Thebanness does not occur is false.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}); sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the paranormalness does not occur. | ¬{HT} | [] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the influencing occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the sentientness does not occur. sent2: the fact that the extensiveness and the non-Thebanness occurs does not hold if the sentientness does not occur. sent3: the influence does not occur if that the extensiveness but not the Theban happens is not true. sent4: not the crowd but the Echo occurs if the nonexploratoriness happens. sent5: the paranormalness does not occur if the fact that both the influencing and the sentientness happens is not correct. sent6: the fact that both the influencing and the sentientness occurs is false if the fact that the crowding does not occur is not false. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that the extensiveness happens and the Thebanness does not occur is false.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the floorboard is not a sounding. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: the floorboard is not a Astronium if the fact that it is nonconductive and it is not a kind of a Major is false. sent2: the counterpart does not sound. sent3: something eulogizes tidemark if it is persistent. sent4: if something is not a shahadah then it does not eulogize tidemark. sent5: if the oculomotor is not a fellow and/or it is not a flavor then it does not eulogize tidemark. sent6: the strawberry either does not prowl or is not a shahadah or both if the floorboard does sound. sent7: the fact that something is a kind of non-persistent thing that does eulogize tidemark is incorrect if it is a ablative. sent8: something is not a avower if it is not a Nazism or it is not perpendicular or both. sent9: something is a kind of a sounding if the fact that it is not persistent and eulogizes tidemark is incorrect. sent10: if the floorboard is a kind of a sounding then the strawberry is not a prowl or it is a shahadah or both. sent11: the Angle does develop and it does eulogize tidemark. sent12: the strawberry is not a kind of a prowl and/or is a shahadah. sent13: the strawberry is a ablative and it is persistent. sent14: something that is not a Astronium is a kind of a damages that is ablative. sent15: if the floorboard is non-ablative or does not eulogize tidemark or both then it does not sound. sent16: if the strawberry is not a shahadah then it does not eulogize tidemark. sent17: the strawberry is a kind of a ablative. | sent1: ¬({G}{a} & ¬{H}{a}) -> ¬{F}{a} sent2: ¬{A}{fr} sent3: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent4: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent5: (¬{FI}{i} v ¬{FQ}{i}) -> ¬{B}{i} sent6: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent7: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) sent8: (x): (¬{DG}x v ¬{HL}x) -> ¬{HA}x sent9: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> {A}x sent10: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent11: ({GE}{fk} & {B}{fk}) sent12: (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent13: ({D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent14: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) sent15: (¬{D}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent16: ¬{AB}{b} -> ¬{B}{b} sent17: {D}{b} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the floorboard is a sounding.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the strawberry is not a kind of a prowl and/or it is not a kind of a shahadah.; sent3 -> int2: if the strawberry is persistent then the fact that it does eulogize tidemark is right.; sent13 -> int3: the strawberry is persistent.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the strawberry does eulogize tidemark.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}); sent3 -> int2: {C}{b} -> {B}{b}; sent13 -> int3: {C}{b}; int2 & int3 -> int4: {B}{b};"
] | the floorboard does sound. | {A}{a} | [
"sent9 -> int5: the floorboard is not non-sounding if the fact that it is a kind of non-persistent thing that eulogizes tidemark is incorrect.; sent7 -> int6: if the floorboard is ablative that it is not persistent and it does eulogize tidemark is incorrect.; sent14 -> int7: that the floorboard is both a damages and a ablative hold if it is not a kind of a Astronium.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the floorboard is not a sounding. ; $context$ = sent1: the floorboard is not a Astronium if the fact that it is nonconductive and it is not a kind of a Major is false. sent2: the counterpart does not sound. sent3: something eulogizes tidemark if it is persistent. sent4: if something is not a shahadah then it does not eulogize tidemark. sent5: if the oculomotor is not a fellow and/or it is not a flavor then it does not eulogize tidemark. sent6: the strawberry either does not prowl or is not a shahadah or both if the floorboard does sound. sent7: the fact that something is a kind of non-persistent thing that does eulogize tidemark is incorrect if it is a ablative. sent8: something is not a avower if it is not a Nazism or it is not perpendicular or both. sent9: something is a kind of a sounding if the fact that it is not persistent and eulogizes tidemark is incorrect. sent10: if the floorboard is a kind of a sounding then the strawberry is not a prowl or it is a shahadah or both. sent11: the Angle does develop and it does eulogize tidemark. sent12: the strawberry is not a kind of a prowl and/or is a shahadah. sent13: the strawberry is a ablative and it is persistent. sent14: something that is not a Astronium is a kind of a damages that is ablative. sent15: if the floorboard is non-ablative or does not eulogize tidemark or both then it does not sound. sent16: if the strawberry is not a shahadah then it does not eulogize tidemark. sent17: the strawberry is a kind of a ablative. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the floorboard is a sounding.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the strawberry is not a kind of a prowl and/or it is not a kind of a shahadah.; sent3 -> int2: if the strawberry is persistent then the fact that it does eulogize tidemark is right.; sent13 -> int3: the strawberry is persistent.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the strawberry does eulogize tidemark.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if that it does not efface and it is false is incorrect then it is not a ceratopsian. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: there exists something such that if that it is not a Sida and it is subarctic is false then it is a kind of a missing. sent2: there exists something such that if it does efface then it is not a kind of a ceratopsian. sent3: there exists something such that if that it is firmamental and it is a MPS is incorrect then that it is not a kind of a journalese is not incorrect. sent4: the wahoo is not a ceratopsian if it does not efface and is false. sent5: the wahoo is not a ceratopsian if the fact that it does not efface and it is false is incorrect. sent6: there is something such that if that it is unawares and is a lacrosse is not true it is not a kind of a ferret. sent7: the wahoo is a ceratopsian if the fact that it does not efface and it is false is not true. | sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{CQ}x & {IN}x) -> {AH}x sent2: (Ex): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: (Ex): ¬({CT}x & {GB}x) -> ¬{HN}x sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ¬({CU}x & {JC}x) -> ¬{HE}x sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if that it does not efface and it is false is incorrect then it is not a ceratopsian. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if that it is not a Sida and it is subarctic is false then it is a kind of a missing. sent2: there exists something such that if it does efface then it is not a kind of a ceratopsian. sent3: there exists something such that if that it is firmamental and it is a MPS is incorrect then that it is not a kind of a journalese is not incorrect. sent4: the wahoo is not a ceratopsian if it does not efface and is false. sent5: the wahoo is not a ceratopsian if the fact that it does not efface and it is false is incorrect. sent6: there is something such that if that it is unawares and is a lacrosse is not true it is not a kind of a ferret. sent7: the wahoo is a ceratopsian if the fact that it does not efface and it is false is not true. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the partygoer is postexilic but it is not febrile is incorrect. | ¬({C}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) | sent1: that the balsa is febrile but it is not a kind of a Mellon does not hold. sent2: the partygoer is not a costermonger. sent3: the fact that the partygoer is postexilic and is febrile is incorrect if the number is not febrile. sent4: the balsa does leach undertide. sent5: the number is not a kind of a Mellon. sent6: the number is not postexilic if the partygoer is febrile. sent7: the prototherian is non-postexilic. sent8: the fact that the number is a Mellon but not febrile is not true if the balsa is not febrile. sent9: that the number is a kind of postexilic thing that does not till is not right if the balsa is febrile. sent10: if the balsa is febrile then the fact that it is a spoor is true. sent11: the fact that the partygoer is a costermonger but it is not febrile is not right. sent12: the balsa is synesthetic. sent13: the fact that that the balsa is both a spoor and not a Mellon is not false does not hold. sent14: if that the balsa is a spoor but it is not a Mellon is false it is a costermonger. sent15: if that the balsa is febrile but it is not a Mellon is not true that it is postexilic hold. sent16: the fact that the fact that the balsa is febrile but it is not a spoor is correct is not right. sent17: the number is not febrile if the fact that the balsa is a costermonger hold. sent18: the fact that the balsa is febrile a costermonger is not right. sent19: the fact that the number is a spoor and not febrile is incorrect if the balsa is not febrile. sent20: the number is a unit if it is a Mellon. sent21: that the partygoer is a kind of a Mellon that is not febrile does not hold if the balsa is not febrile. | sent1: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: ¬{B}{c} sent3: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({C}{c} & {A}{c}) sent4: {FO}{a} sent5: ¬{AB}{b} sent6: {A}{c} -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: ¬{C}{dq} sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AB}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent9: {A}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{AR}{b}) sent10: {A}{a} -> {AA}{a} sent11: ¬({B}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) sent12: {AG}{a} sent13: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent14: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent15: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent16: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) sent17: {B}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent18: ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent19: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent20: {AB}{b} -> {GC}{b} sent21: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AB}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) | [
"sent14 & sent13 -> int1: the balsa is a costermonger.; sent17 & int1 -> int2: the number is not febrile.;"
] | [
"sent14 & sent13 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent17 & int1 -> int2: ¬{A}{b};"
] | the fact that the number is postexilic and is not a till is false. | ¬({C}{b} & ¬{AR}{b}) | [] | 5 | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the partygoer is postexilic but it is not febrile is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the balsa is febrile but it is not a kind of a Mellon does not hold. sent2: the partygoer is not a costermonger. sent3: the fact that the partygoer is postexilic and is febrile is incorrect if the number is not febrile. sent4: the balsa does leach undertide. sent5: the number is not a kind of a Mellon. sent6: the number is not postexilic if the partygoer is febrile. sent7: the prototherian is non-postexilic. sent8: the fact that the number is a Mellon but not febrile is not true if the balsa is not febrile. sent9: that the number is a kind of postexilic thing that does not till is not right if the balsa is febrile. sent10: if the balsa is febrile then the fact that it is a spoor is true. sent11: the fact that the partygoer is a costermonger but it is not febrile is not right. sent12: the balsa is synesthetic. sent13: the fact that that the balsa is both a spoor and not a Mellon is not false does not hold. sent14: if that the balsa is a spoor but it is not a Mellon is false it is a costermonger. sent15: if that the balsa is febrile but it is not a Mellon is not true that it is postexilic hold. sent16: the fact that the fact that the balsa is febrile but it is not a spoor is correct is not right. sent17: the number is not febrile if the fact that the balsa is a costermonger hold. sent18: the fact that the balsa is febrile a costermonger is not right. sent19: the fact that the number is a spoor and not febrile is incorrect if the balsa is not febrile. sent20: the number is a unit if it is a Mellon. sent21: that the partygoer is a kind of a Mellon that is not febrile does not hold if the balsa is not febrile. ; $proof$ = | sent14 & sent13 -> int1: the balsa is a costermonger.; sent17 & int1 -> int2: the number is not febrile.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the loading is not sarcastic. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: the fact that the catalase is an identity and/or is sarcastic is false. sent2: if there is something such that it is not a sucker that either the catalase is an identity or it is a Neruda or both is wrong. sent3: the loading is not sarcastic if there is something such that that either it is an identity or it is a kind of a Neruda or both does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that it is sarcastic or it is a Neruda or both. sent5: there are unsarcastic things. sent6: if something is not a kind of a sucker then that it is a kind of a cadaster and/or it is a monosyllable is not true. sent7: if that the loading is not unsarcastic is not false the fact that the fact that it is not a kind of an identity and it is not a kind of a Neruda is not wrong is not correct. sent8: the catalase is not a kind of an identity. sent9: the loading is sarcastic and is a sucker if there exists something such that it is an identity. | sent1: ¬({B}{a} v {D}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬({B}x v {C}x) -> ¬{D}{b} sent4: (Ex): ({D}x v {C}x) sent5: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({BC}x v {CH}x) sent7: {D}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent8: ¬{B}{a} sent9: (x): {B}x -> ({D}{b} & {A}{b}) | [] | [] | the fact that the loading is sarcastic is true. | {D}{b} | [] | 8 | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the loading is not sarcastic. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the catalase is an identity and/or is sarcastic is false. sent2: if there is something such that it is not a sucker that either the catalase is an identity or it is a Neruda or both is wrong. sent3: the loading is not sarcastic if there is something such that that either it is an identity or it is a kind of a Neruda or both does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that it is sarcastic or it is a Neruda or both. sent5: there are unsarcastic things. sent6: if something is not a kind of a sucker then that it is a kind of a cadaster and/or it is a monosyllable is not true. sent7: if that the loading is not unsarcastic is not false the fact that the fact that it is not a kind of an identity and it is not a kind of a Neruda is not wrong is not correct. sent8: the catalase is not a kind of an identity. sent9: the loading is sarcastic and is a sucker if there exists something such that it is an identity. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that that it is a tailgate and it is not factory-made is not true. | (Ex): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) | sent1: that the fishpond does tailgate is not incorrect. sent2: the articulator is divergent. sent3: the charioteer is washable. sent4: if there is something such that it is a tailgate that the charioteer is factory-made but it is not a Huxley is not correct. sent5: that the charioteer tailgates and it is factory-made is not true if there is something such that it is a Huxley. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is a affixation and it leaches Cromwell is wrong. sent7: that the charioteer is a kind of a Huxley and it is factory-made is not correct. sent8: that the charioteer is a kind of a tailgate that is factory-made is incorrect. sent9: there exists something such that that it is both adoptable and not a sound does not hold. sent10: the fact that the charioteer tailgates and is not a Huxley is false if there are factory-made things. sent11: that the gap is pentavalent and it is factory-made is wrong. sent12: the gap tailgates. sent13: if something is a Huxley that the charioteer is a tailgate but it is not factory-made is false. sent14: that the charioteer is a Huxley but not factory-made is incorrect if something is a kind of a tailgate. sent15: there exists something such that that it is a tailgate and factory-made is not correct. sent16: the fact that the charioteer is a Huxley and is factory-made does not hold if there exists something such that it tailgates. sent17: if there exists something such that it is a Huxley the fact that the fact that the gap is not non-factory-made and it is a tailgate is not incorrect does not hold. sent18: the gap is a kind of a Huxley. sent19: if there is something such that it is a Huxley that that the gap is both not non-factory-made and not a tailgate is not false is not true. | sent1: {C}{cc} sent2: {FC}{ea} sent3: {EI}{a} sent4: (x): {C}x -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: (Ex): ¬({IT}x & {CJ}x) sent7: ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent8: ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent9: (Ex): ¬({IK}x & ¬{AL}x) sent10: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent11: ¬({N}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent12: {C}{aa} sent13: (x): {A}x -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent14: (x): {C}x -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent15: (Ex): ¬({C}x & {B}x) sent16: (x): {C}x -> ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent17: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent18: {A}{aa} sent19: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) | [
"sent18 -> int1: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Huxley.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the fact that the charioteer is both a tailgate and not factory-made does not hold.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent18 -> int1: (Ex): {A}x; int1 & sent13 -> int2: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that that it is a tailgate and it is not factory-made is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that the fishpond does tailgate is not incorrect. sent2: the articulator is divergent. sent3: the charioteer is washable. sent4: if there is something such that it is a tailgate that the charioteer is factory-made but it is not a Huxley is not correct. sent5: that the charioteer tailgates and it is factory-made is not true if there is something such that it is a Huxley. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is a affixation and it leaches Cromwell is wrong. sent7: that the charioteer is a kind of a Huxley and it is factory-made is not correct. sent8: that the charioteer is a kind of a tailgate that is factory-made is incorrect. sent9: there exists something such that that it is both adoptable and not a sound does not hold. sent10: the fact that the charioteer tailgates and is not a Huxley is false if there are factory-made things. sent11: that the gap is pentavalent and it is factory-made is wrong. sent12: the gap tailgates. sent13: if something is a Huxley that the charioteer is a tailgate but it is not factory-made is false. sent14: that the charioteer is a Huxley but not factory-made is incorrect if something is a kind of a tailgate. sent15: there exists something such that that it is a tailgate and factory-made is not correct. sent16: the fact that the charioteer is a Huxley and is factory-made does not hold if there exists something such that it tailgates. sent17: if there exists something such that it is a Huxley the fact that the fact that the gap is not non-factory-made and it is a tailgate is not incorrect does not hold. sent18: the gap is a kind of a Huxley. sent19: if there is something such that it is a Huxley that that the gap is both not non-factory-made and not a tailgate is not false is not true. ; $proof$ = | sent18 -> int1: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Huxley.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the fact that the charioteer is both a tailgate and not factory-made does not hold.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the plasterer does not bargain secretary. | ¬{B}{c} | sent1: the euphorbium does not bargain secretary. sent2: The fact that the drogue does not unlock sock is true. sent3: that the euphorbium is both a lessor and not syncarpous is not true if the sock does not unlock drogue. sent4: the plasterer is not a kind of a lessor. sent5: if the fact that the euphorbium is syncarpous but it does not unlock drogue does not hold the sock does not bargain secretary. sent6: if the euphorbium is not syncarpous that the sock unlocks drogue and bargains secretary does not hold. sent7: the euphorbium is not syncarpous if that the plasterer does bargain secretary and is not a lessor is wrong. sent8: if the euphorbium does unlock drogue the sock is not syncarpous. sent9: the fact that the sock does not unlock drogue is true. | sent1: ¬{B}{b} sent2: ¬{AC}{aa} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent4: ¬{AA}{c} sent5: ¬({AB}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: ¬{AB}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent7: ¬({B}{c} & ¬{AA}{c}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent8: {A}{b} -> ¬{AB}{a} sent9: ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent3 & sent9 -> int1: that the euphorbium is a lessor and is not syncarpous does not hold.;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent9 -> int1: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b});"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the plasterer does not bargain secretary. ; $context$ = sent1: the euphorbium does not bargain secretary. sent2: The fact that the drogue does not unlock sock is true. sent3: that the euphorbium is both a lessor and not syncarpous is not true if the sock does not unlock drogue. sent4: the plasterer is not a kind of a lessor. sent5: if the fact that the euphorbium is syncarpous but it does not unlock drogue does not hold the sock does not bargain secretary. sent6: if the euphorbium is not syncarpous that the sock unlocks drogue and bargains secretary does not hold. sent7: the euphorbium is not syncarpous if that the plasterer does bargain secretary and is not a lessor is wrong. sent8: if the euphorbium does unlock drogue the sock is not syncarpous. sent9: the fact that the sock does not unlock drogue is true. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent9 -> int1: that the euphorbium is a lessor and is not syncarpous does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the fact that the hornbook either does not confabulate or is non-artiodactyl or both is false is not wrong. | ¬(¬{C}{c} v ¬{B}{c}) | sent1: the environmentalist is a mnemonics if there is something such that it is non-bubaline thing that does unlock acarid. sent2: if the tinfoil is a kind of an artiodactyl the fact that the hornbook does not confabulate or it is not artiodactyl or both is false. sent3: there is something such that it is not bubaline and does unlock acarid. sent4: the tinfoil is an artiodactyl if the environmentalist is a kind of a mnemonics. | sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent2: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} v ¬{B}{c}) sent3: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the environmentalist is a mnemonics.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the tinfoil is a kind of an artiodactyl.; sent2 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent4 & int1 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent2 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that the hornbook either does not confabulate or is non-artiodactyl or both is false is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the environmentalist is a mnemonics if there is something such that it is non-bubaline thing that does unlock acarid. sent2: if the tinfoil is a kind of an artiodactyl the fact that the hornbook does not confabulate or it is not artiodactyl or both is false. sent3: there is something such that it is not bubaline and does unlock acarid. sent4: the tinfoil is an artiodactyl if the environmentalist is a kind of a mnemonics. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the environmentalist is a mnemonics.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the tinfoil is a kind of an artiodactyl.; sent2 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the hackmatack is a razorblade. | {A}{a} | sent1: that the humerus is a kind of non-semiautobiographical a gilt is wrong. sent2: something is not a cover-up if it is a monad. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it is not semiautobiographical and it is a gilt does not hold then the hackmatack is a razorblade. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): {C}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} | [
"sent1 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is not semiautobiographical and it is a gilt is false.; int1 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x); int1 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the pagan is a gilt hold. | {AB}{bm} | [
"sent2 -> int2: if the hackmatack is a kind of a monad then it is not a kind of a cover-up.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the hackmatack is a razorblade. ; $context$ = sent1: that the humerus is a kind of non-semiautobiographical a gilt is wrong. sent2: something is not a cover-up if it is a monad. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it is not semiautobiographical and it is a gilt does not hold then the hackmatack is a razorblade. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is not semiautobiographical and it is a gilt is false.; int1 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that something is a wide-body and/or is not a Sunbelt is wrong. | ¬((Ex): ({B}x v ¬{C}x)) | sent1: there is something such that it does leach adsorbate. sent2: if there exists something such that it leaches adsorbate the adsorbate is a wide-body and/or is not a Sunbelt. | sent1: (Ex): {A}x sent2: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) | [
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the adsorbate is either a wide-body or not a Sunbelt or both.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that something is a wide-body and/or is not a Sunbelt is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it does leach adsorbate. sent2: if there exists something such that it leaches adsorbate the adsorbate is a wide-body and/or is not a Sunbelt. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the adsorbate is either a wide-body or not a Sunbelt or both.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that there exists something such that if it does not unlock tyrolean the fact that it does not unlock repartee and is not a berserker does not hold does not hold. | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: if the curve does unlock tyrolean then the fact that it does not unlock repartee and it is not a berserker is wrong. sent2: the fact that something is a kind of non-archiepiscopal thing that is not Rhodesian does not hold if it is not a raper. sent3: there is something such that if it does not bargain seaward the fact that it does not eulogize stuff and is not a kind of a jade does not hold. sent4: there is something such that if it does not unlock tyrolean then it does not unlock repartee and it is not a kind of a berserker. sent5: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a pronominal is not false the fact that it is not a methanogen and it is not hemolytic is not right. sent6: there is something such that if it does not unlock tyrolean then the fact that it does unlock repartee and is not a kind of a berserker is incorrect. sent7: the curve does not unlock repartee and is not a berserker if the fact that it does not unlock tyrolean is right. sent8: if the curve does not unlock tyrolean that it does not unlock repartee and is a berserker is not right. sent9: that that the curve unlocks repartee but it is not a berserker hold is not true if it does not unlock tyrolean. sent10: that the curve does not unlock repartee and it is not a berserker is not correct if it does not unlock tyrolean. sent11: there is something such that if it does not pluck that it is a jade that is non-pleural is incorrect. sent12: there exists something such that if it does not unlock tyrolean then the fact that it does not unlock repartee and is a berserker does not hold. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not bargain missing then the fact that it is not cyanobacterial and it is not a potluck does not hold. sent14: there is something such that if it is not a millifarad then that it is not a kind of a Yorkshire and is not intracerebral does not hold. sent15: that something does not unlock tyrolean and it does not eulogize mongo is incorrect if the fact that it does not underlie is true. sent16: there exists something such that if it unlocks tyrolean the fact that it does not unlock repartee and it is not a berserker is wrong. | sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬{ER}x -> ¬(¬{CP}x & ¬{IQ}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{BP}x -> ¬(¬{GS}x & ¬{BA}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent5: (Ex): ¬{JB}x -> ¬(¬{JE}x & ¬{EO}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent10: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent11: (Ex): ¬{FP}x -> ¬({BA}x & ¬{E}x) sent12: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent13: (Ex): ¬{CI}x -> ¬(¬{CU}x & ¬{DL}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬{JA}x -> ¬(¬{DR}x & ¬{JG}x) sent15: (x): ¬{HF}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{FG}x) sent16: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the stuff is not archiepiscopal and is not Rhodesian is not right if that it is not a raper hold. | ¬{ER}{eu} -> ¬(¬{CP}{eu} & ¬{IQ}{eu}) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it does not unlock tyrolean the fact that it does not unlock repartee and is not a berserker does not hold does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the curve does unlock tyrolean then the fact that it does not unlock repartee and it is not a berserker is wrong. sent2: the fact that something is a kind of non-archiepiscopal thing that is not Rhodesian does not hold if it is not a raper. sent3: there is something such that if it does not bargain seaward the fact that it does not eulogize stuff and is not a kind of a jade does not hold. sent4: there is something such that if it does not unlock tyrolean then it does not unlock repartee and it is not a kind of a berserker. sent5: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a pronominal is not false the fact that it is not a methanogen and it is not hemolytic is not right. sent6: there is something such that if it does not unlock tyrolean then the fact that it does unlock repartee and is not a kind of a berserker is incorrect. sent7: the curve does not unlock repartee and is not a berserker if the fact that it does not unlock tyrolean is right. sent8: if the curve does not unlock tyrolean that it does not unlock repartee and is a berserker is not right. sent9: that that the curve unlocks repartee but it is not a berserker hold is not true if it does not unlock tyrolean. sent10: that the curve does not unlock repartee and it is not a berserker is not correct if it does not unlock tyrolean. sent11: there is something such that if it does not pluck that it is a jade that is non-pleural is incorrect. sent12: there exists something such that if it does not unlock tyrolean then the fact that it does not unlock repartee and is a berserker does not hold. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not bargain missing then the fact that it is not cyanobacterial and it is not a potluck does not hold. sent14: there is something such that if it is not a millifarad then that it is not a kind of a Yorkshire and is not intracerebral does not hold. sent15: that something does not unlock tyrolean and it does not eulogize mongo is incorrect if the fact that it does not underlie is true. sent16: there exists something such that if it unlocks tyrolean the fact that it does not unlock repartee and it is not a berserker is wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the collar is not favorable and it is not a fox is wrong. | ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | sent1: if that the collar bargains NLP and/or is not a drizzle is false it does not fox. sent2: the collar is not favorable. sent3: if that the collar does not bargain NLP and/or it does not drizzle is incorrect it does not fox. sent4: that the collar does not bargain NLP or it does not drizzle or both is false if it is not curly. sent5: the collar is not curly. sent6: if the collar is not curly it bargains NLP. | sent1: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: ¬{C}{a} sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent5: ¬{A}{a} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> {AA}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: that the fact that the collar does not bargain NLP or is not a drizzle or both is not wrong is not correct.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the collar is not a kind of a fox.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent3 -> int2: ¬{B}{a}; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the collar is not favorable and it is not a fox is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the collar bargains NLP and/or is not a drizzle is false it does not fox. sent2: the collar is not favorable. sent3: if that the collar does not bargain NLP and/or it does not drizzle is incorrect it does not fox. sent4: that the collar does not bargain NLP or it does not drizzle or both is false if it is not curly. sent5: the collar is not curly. sent6: if the collar is not curly it bargains NLP. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent5 -> int1: that the fact that the collar does not bargain NLP or is not a drizzle or both is not wrong is not correct.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the collar is not a kind of a fox.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the plush is Barbadian. | {C}{c} | sent1: if the plush is not a pogonion the neck is not a Barbadian. sent2: the plush is not dyadic if the neck is not a kind of a pogonion. sent3: the neck is not a pogonion if the urokinase is a genus but it is not a peptide. sent4: the urokinase is a kind of a genus that is not a peptide. sent5: the urokinase is dyadic thing that is not a peptide. sent6: if the urokinase is a sounding the fact that the plush is both not dyadic and not a pogonion is not true. sent7: if the neck is not a pogonion then it is a peptide. sent8: there is nothing such that it is not a sounding and it is a pogonion. sent9: if something is not a kind of a pogonion it is both not a genus and dyadic. sent10: the urokinase is not a kind of a peptide. sent11: the neck is not a pogonion if the urokinase is a kind of a genus and it is a peptide. | sent1: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬{C}{b} sent2: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{A}{c} sent3: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent5: ({A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) sent7: ¬{B}{b} -> {AB}{b} sent8: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {B}x) sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{AA}x & {A}x) sent10: ¬{AB}{a} sent11: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the neck is not a pogonion.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: that the plush is not dyadic is true.;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; int1 & sent2 -> int2: ¬{A}{c};"
] | the neck is not a kind of a genus. | ¬{AA}{b} | [
"sent8 -> int3: the fact that the urokinase is not a sounding but it is a pogonion is not right.; sent9 -> int4: the urokinase is not a genus and is dyadic if it is not a pogonion.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the plush is Barbadian. ; $context$ = sent1: if the plush is not a pogonion the neck is not a Barbadian. sent2: the plush is not dyadic if the neck is not a kind of a pogonion. sent3: the neck is not a pogonion if the urokinase is a genus but it is not a peptide. sent4: the urokinase is a kind of a genus that is not a peptide. sent5: the urokinase is dyadic thing that is not a peptide. sent6: if the urokinase is a sounding the fact that the plush is both not dyadic and not a pogonion is not true. sent7: if the neck is not a pogonion then it is a peptide. sent8: there is nothing such that it is not a sounding and it is a pogonion. sent9: if something is not a kind of a pogonion it is both not a genus and dyadic. sent10: the urokinase is not a kind of a peptide. sent11: the neck is not a pogonion if the urokinase is a kind of a genus and it is a peptide. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the neck is not a pogonion.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: that the plush is not dyadic is true.; __UNKNOWN__ |