Datasets:

hitachi-nlp

/

FLD.v2

like 8

DeductionInstance

that the pakchoi is commodious and/or it is a dogtooth is not right.

¬({A}{a} v {B}{a})

sent1: the pakchoi is actinomorphic and/or it is a amenability. sent2: the pakchoi is a kind of a dogtooth. sent3: that either something is commodious or it is a dogtooth or both is wrong if it is not an insecurity. sent4: if something is not a kind of a spiritualty it is an insecurity and is not prosodic. sent5: the cricket is rabid or it unfastens deadeye or both. sent6: that the pakchoi is a amenability is true. sent7: the cataract is a baneberry or it is a dogtooth or both. sent8: the peanuts is commodious. sent9: the jugular is a kind of a dogtooth. sent10: the pakchoi is either a crenel or commodious or both. sent11: the pakchoi is a kind of a mesohippus. sent12: the jampan is a kind of a abohm and/or furls quahog. sent13: the massager is commodious. sent14: something is commodious if it is both not a dogtooth and not an insecurity. sent15: the pakchoi does unfasten forcemeat or it is a dogtooth or both. sent16: the fact that the pakchoi is anaphasic hold. sent17: the pakchoi is either a indigestibility or a dogtooth or both.

sent1: ({L}{a} v {IB}{a}) sent2: {B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v {B}x) sent4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent5: ({DB}{cn} v {DH}{cn}) sent6: {IB}{a} sent7: ({FN}{bg} v {B}{bg}) sent8: {A}{fb} sent9: {B}{gm} sent10: ({DR}{a} v {A}{a}) sent11: {IK}{a} sent12: ({GU}{ho} v {JE}{ho}) sent13: {A}{gh} sent14: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}x sent15: ({DT}{a} v {B}{a}) sent16: {Q}{a} sent17: ({EP}{a} v {B}{a})

the falangist is commodious.

{A}{k}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the pakchoi is commodious and/or it is a dogtooth is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the pakchoi is actinomorphic and/or it is a amenability. sent2: the pakchoi is a kind of a dogtooth. sent3: that either something is commodious or it is a dogtooth or both is wrong if it is not an insecurity. sent4: if something is not a kind of a spiritualty it is an insecurity and is not prosodic. sent5: the cricket is rabid or it unfastens deadeye or both. sent6: that the pakchoi is a amenability is true. sent7: the cataract is a baneberry or it is a dogtooth or both. sent8: the peanuts is commodious. sent9: the jugular is a kind of a dogtooth. sent10: the pakchoi is either a crenel or commodious or both. sent11: the pakchoi is a kind of a mesohippus. sent12: the jampan is a kind of a abohm and/or furls quahog. sent13: the massager is commodious. sent14: something is commodious if it is both not a dogtooth and not an insecurity. sent15: the pakchoi does unfasten forcemeat or it is a dogtooth or both. sent16: the fact that the pakchoi is anaphasic hold. sent17: the pakchoi is either a indigestibility or a dogtooth or both. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the angiocarp is stomatous a malignancy is not true.

¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa})

sent1: the angiocarp platitudinizes and is a Ruritanian. sent2: that the tormenter is not aboriginal but it is a Mississippian is incorrect if it is not a kind of a Trojan. sent3: if the tormenter is not a kind of a malignancy then the angiocarp is falconine and it is stomatous. sent4: that something is a Trojan but it is not a kind of a sporophyll is incorrect if it dazzles. sent5: if the fact that something is a Trojan and not a sporophyll is not right it is not Trojan. sent6: everything is a Nigerian and fumes. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not a celibacy that the skinny-dipper is a sporophyll that is not a kind of a dazzle is not right. sent8: the groove unfastens Ephesians. sent9: the Fry is not a kind of a Soleidae but it is a celibacy if something does unfasten Ephesians. sent10: the angiocarp is indeterminable and does embrown. sent11: the artilleryman is a malignancy and is a kind of a solvability. sent12: the calabash is not a celibacy if the fact that the Fry is both not a Soleidae and a celibacy is not wrong. sent13: the angiocarp is stomatous. sent14: the guilloche is a kind of a malignancy that is not attentive. sent15: if the fact that either something is not a Mississippian or it is aboriginal or both is wrong it is not a malignancy. sent16: everything is stomatous. sent17: if the tormenter is not a Mississippian then the fact that the angiocarp is both not non-stomatous and a malignancy is wrong. sent18: if something is not a Trojan then the fact that it is not a Mississippian and/or is aboriginal is not right. sent19: everything is stomatous and it is a malignancy.

sent1: ({GJ}{aa} & {HR}{aa}) sent2: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: ¬{B}{a} -> ({DT}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent4: (x): {F}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{G}x) sent5: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent6: (x): ({JF}x & {EK}x) sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent8: {I}{e} sent9: (x): {I}x -> (¬{J}{d} & {H}{d}) sent10: ({R}{aa} & {CG}{aa}) sent11: ({B}{ch} & {HP}{ch}) sent12: (¬{J}{d} & {H}{d}) -> ¬{H}{c} sent13: {A}{aa} sent14: ({B}{m} & {GR}{m}) sent15: (x): ¬(¬{C}x v {D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent16: (x): {A}x sent17: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent18: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x v {D}x) sent19: (x): ({A}x & {B}x)

that the angiocarp is stomatous a malignancy is incorrect.

¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the angiocarp is stomatous a malignancy is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the angiocarp platitudinizes and is a Ruritanian. sent2: that the tormenter is not aboriginal but it is a Mississippian is incorrect if it is not a kind of a Trojan. sent3: if the tormenter is not a kind of a malignancy then the angiocarp is falconine and it is stomatous. sent4: that something is a Trojan but it is not a kind of a sporophyll is incorrect if it dazzles. sent5: if the fact that something is a Trojan and not a sporophyll is not right it is not Trojan. sent6: everything is a Nigerian and fumes. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not a celibacy that the skinny-dipper is a sporophyll that is not a kind of a dazzle is not right. sent8: the groove unfastens Ephesians. sent9: the Fry is not a kind of a Soleidae but it is a celibacy if something does unfasten Ephesians. sent10: the angiocarp is indeterminable and does embrown. sent11: the artilleryman is a malignancy and is a kind of a solvability. sent12: the calabash is not a celibacy if the fact that the Fry is both not a Soleidae and a celibacy is not wrong. sent13: the angiocarp is stomatous. sent14: the guilloche is a kind of a malignancy that is not attentive. sent15: if the fact that either something is not a Mississippian or it is aboriginal or both is wrong it is not a malignancy. sent16: everything is stomatous. sent17: if the tormenter is not a Mississippian then the fact that the angiocarp is both not non-stomatous and a malignancy is wrong. sent18: if something is not a Trojan then the fact that it is not a Mississippian and/or is aboriginal is not right. sent19: everything is stomatous and it is a malignancy. ; $proof$ =

sent19 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

not the shopping but the furling breastplate happens.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

sent1: the azonalness does not occur. sent2: if the azonalness does not occur not the shopping but the furling breastplate occurs. sent3: the azonalness is brought about by that the anticoagulation happens. sent4: if the fact that the anticoagulation does not occur and the beats happens does not hold the anticoagulation happens. sent5: that the ambulacralness does not occur hold. sent6: if the azonalness happens that not the shop but the furling breastplate occurs is not true.

sent1: ¬{A} sent2: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent3: {B} -> {A} sent4: ¬(¬{B} & {D}) -> {B} sent5: ¬{HQ} sent6: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

the fact that the shop does not occur but the furling breastplate happens is not true.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = not the shopping but the furling breastplate happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the azonalness does not occur. sent2: if the azonalness does not occur not the shopping but the furling breastplate occurs. sent3: the azonalness is brought about by that the anticoagulation happens. sent4: if the fact that the anticoagulation does not occur and the beats happens does not hold the anticoagulation happens. sent5: that the ambulacralness does not occur hold. sent6: if the azonalness happens that not the shop but the furling breastplate occurs is not true. ; $proof$ =

sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the lure is not expendable.

¬{B}{a}

sent1: that the riboflavin is neuropsychological is right. sent2: the lure is a amine. sent3: the lure is inhumane. sent4: the acrosome does sing abomination if that it does inhabit is true. sent5: the recapitulation is neuropsychological. sent6: the lure is Shuha. sent7: if the lure is Solomonic it sonnets. sent8: the moonflower is neuropsychological. sent9: the stoma is neuropsychological. sent10: the nozzle is neuropsychological. sent11: the lure is neuropsychological. sent12: the lure is expendable if it is neuropsychological. sent13: if the lure is neuropsychological it is manageable. sent14: the tryptophan is expendable. sent15: if the lure does unfasten Momotidae then it unfastens aerology.

sent1: {A}{do} sent2: {JD}{a} sent3: {EP}{a} sent4: {DG}{ih} -> {CQ}{ih} sent5: {A}{au} sent6: {JB}{a} sent7: {EM}{a} -> {E}{a} sent8: {A}{hf} sent9: {A}{ds} sent10: {A}{fn} sent11: {A}{a} sent12: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent13: {A}{a} -> {CI}{a} sent14: {B}{fu} sent15: {IJ}{a} -> {GM}{a}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = the lure is not expendable. ; $context$ = sent1: that the riboflavin is neuropsychological is right. sent2: the lure is a amine. sent3: the lure is inhumane. sent4: the acrosome does sing abomination if that it does inhabit is true. sent5: the recapitulation is neuropsychological. sent6: the lure is Shuha. sent7: if the lure is Solomonic it sonnets. sent8: the moonflower is neuropsychological. sent9: the stoma is neuropsychological. sent10: the nozzle is neuropsychological. sent11: the lure is neuropsychological. sent12: the lure is expendable if it is neuropsychological. sent13: if the lure is neuropsychological it is manageable. sent14: the tryptophan is expendable. sent15: if the lure does unfasten Momotidae then it unfastens aerology. ; $proof$ =

sent12 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the programmer does not scythe confederate.

¬{C}{a}

sent1: there exists something such that that it is not full and it does not repaint is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that that it is not an adolescent and it is not a sonogram does not hold. sent3: if something is not a midsummer then it is not safe. sent4: the countertop is not a kind of a midsummer if that it does unfasten mongoose and is a kind of a Morocco is not true. sent5: if something is not a safe then the fact that it does not scythe confederate and sings countertop does not hold. sent6: the programmer sings countertop if there is something such that that it is both not an adolescent and not a sonogram does not hold. sent7: if the Maya is not a kind of a Morocco then the raise is a safe but it is not a midsummer. sent8: if something is not acroscopic then it scythes confederate and it does sing countertop. sent9: if there are adolescent things that the programmer sings countertop hold. sent10: the raise is not non-acroscopic. sent11: if something that sings countertop is acroscopic then it does not scythe confederate. sent12: if the raise is a safe and is not a midsummer that the programmer is not acroscopic is true.

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

the programmer scythes confederate.

{C}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the programmer does not scythe confederate. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that that it is not full and it does not repaint is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that that it is not an adolescent and it is not a sonogram does not hold. sent3: if something is not a midsummer then it is not safe. sent4: the countertop is not a kind of a midsummer if that it does unfasten mongoose and is a kind of a Morocco is not true. sent5: if something is not a safe then the fact that it does not scythe confederate and sings countertop does not hold. sent6: the programmer sings countertop if there is something such that that it is both not an adolescent and not a sonogram does not hold. sent7: if the Maya is not a kind of a Morocco then the raise is a safe but it is not a midsummer. sent8: if something is not acroscopic then it scythes confederate and it does sing countertop. sent9: if there are adolescent things that the programmer sings countertop hold. sent10: the raise is not non-acroscopic. sent11: if something that sings countertop is acroscopic then it does not scythe confederate. sent12: if the raise is a safe and is not a midsummer that the programmer is not acroscopic is true. ; $proof$ =

sent2 & sent6 -> int1: the programmer sings countertop.; sent11 -> int2: the programmer does not scythe confederate if it does sing countertop and it is acroscopic.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the linkboy is not a nose and is a buck is not correct.

¬(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b})

sent1: the fact that the casein is not a rock but a nose is not right. sent2: the limber sings moloch. sent3: the fact that the linkboy is not a kind of a buck and noses is not right if the limber is a noses. sent4: the fact that the limber is a nose is not incorrect. sent5: the limber is a toothache. sent6: if the limber bucks the fact that the linkboy is both not a nose and a bucks is not true. sent7: if the limber is a toothache then it bucks. sent8: the fact that the moloch is not a Offenbach but it is gutless is not right if the fact that it is not a toothache is not wrong. sent9: the fact that the limber is not a nose but it is a buck is wrong if the linkboy buck.

sent1: ¬(¬{AE}{gr} & {D}{gr}) sent2: {JJ}{a} sent3: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {D}{b}) sent4: {D}{a} sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent8: ¬{A}{dr} -> ¬(¬{JB}{dr} & {K}{dr}) sent9: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {B}{a})

the fact that the moloch is not a Offenbach but gutless is not true.

¬(¬{JB}{dr} & {K}{dr})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the linkboy is not a nose and is a buck is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the casein is not a rock but a nose is not right. sent2: the limber sings moloch. sent3: the fact that the linkboy is not a kind of a buck and noses is not right if the limber is a noses. sent4: the fact that the limber is a nose is not incorrect. sent5: the limber is a toothache. sent6: if the limber bucks the fact that the linkboy is both not a nose and a bucks is not true. sent7: if the limber is a toothache then it bucks. sent8: the fact that the moloch is not a Offenbach but it is gutless is not right if the fact that it is not a toothache is not wrong. sent9: the fact that the limber is not a nose but it is a buck is wrong if the linkboy buck. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent5 -> int1: the limber bucks.; sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the seedcake is not a kind of a blacking.

¬{A}{aa}

sent1: the U is not incident if the fact that it is a catechumen and it concords is false. sent2: if something that is not a Renoir is coherent then it is a blacking. sent3: there exists nothing such that it is a kind of a Turk's-cap and it is a gallinacean. sent4: the repeater is not Argentine if it is a thruster. sent5: if the fact that something is a pepperwort and is significant is not true then the fact that it is not a treelet hold. sent6: the repeater is a thruster. sent7: something that is not an incident is not a blacking. sent8: there is nothing such that it is an incident and does unfasten rectification. sent9: if the fact that something is a kind of an influence and is not significant is false then it is significant. sent10: if that something unfastens spam and it does furl Atriplex is not correct it is not alar. sent11: the seedcake does not furl Soleidae. sent12: if the seedcake is not a kind of an incident then it is not a kind of a blacking. sent13: there is nothing that is both punctureless and elemental. sent14: if the fact that something is nonracial and it does unfasten hypertensive is incorrect then it is not servomechanical. sent15: the mill is not profound if there exists something such that that it furls liter and it does not furl Crux is not correct. sent16: that the hypertensive influences and is not significant is not true if there exists something such that that it is not profound hold. sent17: if the repeater is not Argentine that the timeserver furls liter and does not furl Crux is false.

sent1: ¬({IC}{bh} & {GR}{bh}) -> ¬{AA}{bh} sent2: (x): (¬{C}x & {B}x) -> {A}x sent3: (x): ¬({CJ}x & {FI}x) sent4: {J}{d} -> ¬{I}{d} sent5: (x): ¬({Q}x & {D}x) -> ¬{DI}x sent6: {J}{d} sent7: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{A}x sent8: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{D}x) -> {D}x sent10: (x): ¬({FU}x & {DU}x) -> ¬{EI}x sent11: ¬{GC}{aa} sent12: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{A}{aa} sent13: (x): ¬({JI}x & {DS}x) sent14: (x): ¬({DQ}x & {CQ}x) -> ¬{GA}x sent15: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}{b} sent16: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({F}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent17: ¬{I}{d} -> ¬({H}{c} & ¬{G}{c})

the seedcake is a kind of a blacking.

{A}{aa}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the seedcake is not a kind of a blacking. ; $context$ = sent1: the U is not incident if the fact that it is a catechumen and it concords is false. sent2: if something that is not a Renoir is coherent then it is a blacking. sent3: there exists nothing such that it is a kind of a Turk's-cap and it is a gallinacean. sent4: the repeater is not Argentine if it is a thruster. sent5: if the fact that something is a pepperwort and is significant is not true then the fact that it is not a treelet hold. sent6: the repeater is a thruster. sent7: something that is not an incident is not a blacking. sent8: there is nothing such that it is an incident and does unfasten rectification. sent9: if the fact that something is a kind of an influence and is not significant is false then it is significant. sent10: if that something unfastens spam and it does furl Atriplex is not correct it is not alar. sent11: the seedcake does not furl Soleidae. sent12: if the seedcake is not a kind of an incident then it is not a kind of a blacking. sent13: there is nothing that is both punctureless and elemental. sent14: if the fact that something is nonracial and it does unfasten hypertensive is incorrect then it is not servomechanical. sent15: the mill is not profound if there exists something such that that it furls liter and it does not furl Crux is not correct. sent16: that the hypertensive influences and is not significant is not true if there exists something such that that it is not profound hold. sent17: if the repeater is not Argentine that the timeserver furls liter and does not furl Crux is false. ; $proof$ =

sent8 -> int1: that the seedcake is incident and unfastens rectification is wrong.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the satinet is a kind of a M.

{C}{a}

sent1: if the fact that something is limbless and it is not unapproachable is correct then the satinet is a kind of a M. sent2: if something is a kind of a M and is a Medellin the satinet incurs. sent3: if something that is a kind of a licitness is catabolic the satinet is approachable. sent4: there is something such that it is comprehensive. sent5: the satinet is limbless if something is manorial and it clusters. sent6: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Serbian and it is a Lipscomb. sent7: something is a kind of limbless thing that is approachable. sent8: that the satinet is not a kind of a M is not false if there exists something such that it is not limbless. sent9: there is something such that it is a Esox. sent10: there is something such that it is a kind of a M. sent11: that the satinet is meridional is true. sent12: the fact that the ibex is limbless is correct. sent13: the satinet is approachable.

sent1: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent2: (x): ({C}x & {IR}x) -> {IP}{a} sent3: (x): ({EB}x & {AC}x) -> {B}{a} sent4: (Ex): {FF}x sent5: (x): ({U}x & {FA}x) -> {A}{a} sent6: (Ex): ({IB}x & {IF}x) sent7: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent9: (Ex): {HI}x sent10: (Ex): {C}x sent11: {DU}{a} sent12: {A}{if} sent13: {B}{a}

that the satinet is not a kind of a M hold.

¬{C}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the satinet is a kind of a M. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something is limbless and it is not unapproachable is correct then the satinet is a kind of a M. sent2: if something is a kind of a M and is a Medellin the satinet incurs. sent3: if something that is a kind of a licitness is catabolic the satinet is approachable. sent4: there is something such that it is comprehensive. sent5: the satinet is limbless if something is manorial and it clusters. sent6: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Serbian and it is a Lipscomb. sent7: something is a kind of limbless thing that is approachable. sent8: that the satinet is not a kind of a M is not false if there exists something such that it is not limbless. sent9: there is something such that it is a Esox. sent10: there is something such that it is a kind of a M. sent11: that the satinet is meridional is true. sent12: the fact that the ibex is limbless is correct. sent13: the satinet is approachable. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the viscounty does not sing actor.

¬{D}{c}

sent1: if something is a Phasianidae then it is not infinitival and/or it is not a kind of a climatologist. sent2: the viscounty does not furl cacophony. sent3: the viscounty does sing actor if the SI does not reorganize and does not scythe gelatinousness. sent4: if the door is not a Caucasus then it is a Phasianidae and is not non-aeromechanics. sent5: if the door furls cacophony but it does not scythe gelatinousness then the viscounty does not sing actor. sent6: if the door furls cacophony it scythes gelatinousness. sent7: the SI does not furl cacophony and it does not reorganize if the door does reorganize. sent8: the SI sings preamble if it is tertian. sent9: the fact that the SI does furl cacophony is not incorrect if that it scythes gelatinousness is not false. sent10: The cacophony furls door. sent11: if the viscounty does scythe gelatinousness but it does not sing actor the door furls cacophony. sent12: if something does reorganize then it furls cacophony and does not scythe gelatinousness. sent13: the pome does not scythe gelatinousness. sent14: if the SI does sing actor but it does not furl cacophony the viscounty reorganizes. sent15: the door is not a kind of a Caucasus if that the SI is not a kind of a Caucasus and is hypoglycemic is not right. sent16: the SI does not reorganize and does not scythe gelatinousness if the door scythe gelatinousness. sent17: the door unfastens Lygus. sent18: the door does not reorganize. sent19: if something is not infinitival or it is not a climatologist or both then that it reorganizes hold. sent20: the door does scythe gelatinousness if it reorganizes. sent21: the door furls cacophony. sent22: the SI does not scythe gelatinousness and it does not sing actor.

sent1: (x): {G}x -> (¬{F}x v ¬{E}x) sent2: ¬{A}{c} sent3: (¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {D}{c} sent4: ¬{I}{a} -> ({G}{a} & {H}{a}) sent5: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent6: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent7: {C}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent8: {II}{b} -> {FN}{b} sent9: {B}{b} -> {A}{b} sent10: {AA}{aa} sent11: ({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {A}{a} sent12: (x): {C}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent13: ¬{B}{hk} sent14: ({D}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {C}{c} sent15: ¬(¬{I}{b} & {K}{b}) -> ¬{I}{a} sent16: {B}{a} -> (¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent17: {BN}{a} sent18: ¬{C}{a} sent19: (x): (¬{F}x v ¬{E}x) -> {C}x sent20: {C}{a} -> {B}{a} sent21: {A}{a} sent22: (¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b})

the viscounty does not sing actor.

¬{D}{c}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the viscounty does not sing actor. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a Phasianidae then it is not infinitival and/or it is not a kind of a climatologist. sent2: the viscounty does not furl cacophony. sent3: the viscounty does sing actor if the SI does not reorganize and does not scythe gelatinousness. sent4: if the door is not a Caucasus then it is a Phasianidae and is not non-aeromechanics. sent5: if the door furls cacophony but it does not scythe gelatinousness then the viscounty does not sing actor. sent6: if the door furls cacophony it scythes gelatinousness. sent7: the SI does not furl cacophony and it does not reorganize if the door does reorganize. sent8: the SI sings preamble if it is tertian. sent9: the fact that the SI does furl cacophony is not incorrect if that it scythes gelatinousness is not false. sent10: The cacophony furls door. sent11: if the viscounty does scythe gelatinousness but it does not sing actor the door furls cacophony. sent12: if something does reorganize then it furls cacophony and does not scythe gelatinousness. sent13: the pome does not scythe gelatinousness. sent14: if the SI does sing actor but it does not furl cacophony the viscounty reorganizes. sent15: the door is not a kind of a Caucasus if that the SI is not a kind of a Caucasus and is hypoglycemic is not right. sent16: the SI does not reorganize and does not scythe gelatinousness if the door scythe gelatinousness. sent17: the door unfastens Lygus. sent18: the door does not reorganize. sent19: if something is not infinitival or it is not a climatologist or both then that it reorganizes hold. sent20: the door does scythe gelatinousness if it reorganizes. sent21: the door furls cacophony. sent22: the SI does not scythe gelatinousness and it does not sing actor. ; $proof$ =

sent6 & sent21 -> int1: the door does scythe gelatinousness.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the SI does not reorganize and does not scythe gelatinousness.; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the non-progressiveness and the non-centrifugalness happens.

(¬{B} & ¬{C})

sent1: if the singing animator does not occur then the fact that the singing basil does not occur and the quantitativeness does not occur is not correct. sent2: if the fact that the centrifugalness and the non-quantitativeness happens does not hold then the centrifugalness does not occur. sent3: that the fact that the centrifugalness occurs but the quantitativeness does not occur does not hold hold. sent4: if the singing basil does not occur the fact that the belay occurs and the abrasion happens is wrong. sent5: that the progressiveness does not occur is triggered by that the belay happens. sent6: the singing basil does not occur. sent7: both the non-progressiveness and the centrifugalness happens if the singing animator happens. sent8: that the fact that not the crackle but the plain occurs is wrong is not incorrect if the amnestying does not occur. sent9: the fact that the vigilantism does not occur but the condescension occurs is false. sent10: the heraldicness does not occur. sent11: the Samoan does not occur and the hiring does not occur. sent12: the restriction does not occur. sent13: the singing basil triggers that the furling epigone does not occur and the raylessness does not occur. sent14: the resoluteness does not occur. sent15: that the belaying and the abrasion occurs is wrong. sent16: that the progressiveness does not occur and the centrifugalness does not occur is not right if the fact that the singing basil occurs is correct. sent17: the progressive does not occur if the fact that the belaying does not occur and the abrasion occurs is not true. sent18: the crying does not occur and the predation does not occur. sent19: the fact that the furling stirk happens but the singing absentee does not occur is wrong. sent20: the fact that not the belaying but the abrasion occurs is not right if the singing basil does not occur. sent21: that the singing absentee does not occur hold if the overpressure does not occur.

sent1: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{E}) sent2: ¬({C} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} sent3: ¬({C} & ¬{E}) sent4: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent5: {AA} -> ¬{B} sent6: ¬{A} sent7: {D} -> (¬{B} & {C}) sent8: ¬{CO} -> ¬(¬{CT} & {IN}) sent9: ¬(¬{BG} & {DG}) sent10: ¬{FB} sent11: (¬{AJ} & ¬{FK}) sent12: ¬{AE} sent13: {A} -> (¬{DO} & ¬{GR}) sent14: ¬{HR} sent15: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent16: {A} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent17: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent18: (¬{EA} & ¬{BR}) sent19: ¬({FS} & ¬{HQ}) sent20: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent21: ¬{AP} -> ¬{HQ}

the fact that the progressiveness does not occur and the centrifugalness does not occur is incorrect.

¬(¬{B} & ¬{C})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the non-progressiveness and the non-centrifugalness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the singing animator does not occur then the fact that the singing basil does not occur and the quantitativeness does not occur is not correct. sent2: if the fact that the centrifugalness and the non-quantitativeness happens does not hold then the centrifugalness does not occur. sent3: that the fact that the centrifugalness occurs but the quantitativeness does not occur does not hold hold. sent4: if the singing basil does not occur the fact that the belay occurs and the abrasion happens is wrong. sent5: that the progressiveness does not occur is triggered by that the belay happens. sent6: the singing basil does not occur. sent7: both the non-progressiveness and the centrifugalness happens if the singing animator happens. sent8: that the fact that not the crackle but the plain occurs is wrong is not incorrect if the amnestying does not occur. sent9: the fact that the vigilantism does not occur but the condescension occurs is false. sent10: the heraldicness does not occur. sent11: the Samoan does not occur and the hiring does not occur. sent12: the restriction does not occur. sent13: the singing basil triggers that the furling epigone does not occur and the raylessness does not occur. sent14: the resoluteness does not occur. sent15: that the belaying and the abrasion occurs is wrong. sent16: that the progressiveness does not occur and the centrifugalness does not occur is not right if the fact that the singing basil occurs is correct. sent17: the progressive does not occur if the fact that the belaying does not occur and the abrasion occurs is not true. sent18: the crying does not occur and the predation does not occur. sent19: the fact that the furling stirk happens but the singing absentee does not occur is wrong. sent20: the fact that not the belaying but the abrasion occurs is not right if the singing basil does not occur. sent21: that the singing absentee does not occur hold if the overpressure does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent20 & sent6 -> int1: the fact that not the belay but the abrasion occurs is incorrect.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the progressive does not occur.; sent2 & sent3 -> int3: the centrifugalness does not occur.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that that the khanate happens and the unhelpfulness occurs is not incorrect is not correct.

¬({C} & {D})

sent1: if the calyptrateness does not occur both the unhelpfulness and the indentation happens. sent2: if the indentation does not occur then both the unhelpfulness and the singing forge happens. sent3: the fact that the sass does not occur but the nonsteroidalness occurs does not hold if the singing forge does not occur. sent4: the irregular does not occur if that that not the singing actor but the eschatologicalness happens is not incorrect is false. sent5: the singing forge happens. sent6: the khanate occurs if the unhelpfulness occurs. sent7: that not the singing ACLANT but the atonalness happens results in that the calyptrateness does not occur. sent8: the fact that the singing actor does not occur but the eschatologicalness happens is not true if the singing forge occurs.

sent1: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent2: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {A}) sent3: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{HU} & {IJ}) sent4: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent5: {A} sent6: {D} -> {C} sent7: (¬{H} & {G}) -> ¬{F} sent8: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

the khanate and the unhelpfulness occurs.

({C} & {D})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the khanate happens and the unhelpfulness occurs is not incorrect is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the calyptrateness does not occur both the unhelpfulness and the indentation happens. sent2: if the indentation does not occur then both the unhelpfulness and the singing forge happens. sent3: the fact that the sass does not occur but the nonsteroidalness occurs does not hold if the singing forge does not occur. sent4: the irregular does not occur if that that not the singing actor but the eschatologicalness happens is not incorrect is false. sent5: the singing forge happens. sent6: the khanate occurs if the unhelpfulness occurs. sent7: that not the singing ACLANT but the atonalness happens results in that the calyptrateness does not occur. sent8: the fact that the singing actor does not occur but the eschatologicalness happens is not true if the singing forge occurs. ; $proof$ =

sent8 & sent5 -> int1: that not the singing actor but the eschatologicalness occurs is not correct.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the irregularness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that that the manganese is not a kind of a deerskin but it is a kind of a wild is not correct is right if the chick is a Kurdistan.

{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b})

sent1: the Burr is a kind of a boomerang. sent2: the fact that the manganese is not a wild but it is a kind of a boomerang is not true if the chick is a kind of a deerskin. sent3: that the chick is not a nosedive but it is meteoric is false. sent4: that the manganese is a deerskin that is wild is not right if the chick boomerangs. sent5: the manganese is a wild if it is a kind of a Kurdistan. sent6: the thimerosal is a wild. sent7: the manganese is not a kind of a deerskin and is a kind of a wild if the chick is a kind of a Kurdistan. sent8: the manganese does boomerang. sent9: that the chick is a deerskin and it is a kind of a wild does not hold if the fact that the manganese does boomerang is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that the manganese is not a deerskin and is a wild hold. sent11: the fact that the manganese is a deerskin that is a wild is wrong. sent12: if the chick is a kind of a boomerang then the fact that the manganese is not a deerskin but it is wild is incorrect. sent13: the fact that the chick is not a deerskin but it boomerangs does not hold. sent14: if the manganese is a deerskin then the chick is not a boomerang and is wild. sent15: the manganese is both not a deerskin and a wild if the chick is a boomerang. sent16: the fact that the chick is normative and a deerskin is not true. sent17: if the chick is a Kurdistan the fact that the manganese is a kind of a deerskin that is a kind of a wild is incorrect. sent18: something that is not a deerskin is a kind of a boomerang and is a Kurdistan. sent19: the fact that the chick unfastens quartering hold.

sent1: {B}{fo} sent2: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent3: ¬(¬{CM}{a} & {IC}{a}) sent4: {B}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent5: {A}{b} -> {C}{b} sent6: {C}{je} sent7: {A}{a} -> (¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent8: {B}{b} sent9: {B}{b} -> ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent10: (¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent11: ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent12: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent13: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {B}{a}) sent14: {D}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent15: {B}{a} -> (¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent16: ¬({F}{a} & {D}{a}) sent17: {A}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent18: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent19: {GT}{a}

the sassaby is wild.

{C}{dl}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the manganese is not a kind of a deerskin but it is a kind of a wild is not correct is right if the chick is a Kurdistan. ; $context$ = sent1: the Burr is a kind of a boomerang. sent2: the fact that the manganese is not a wild but it is a kind of a boomerang is not true if the chick is a kind of a deerskin. sent3: that the chick is not a nosedive but it is meteoric is false. sent4: that the manganese is a deerskin that is wild is not right if the chick boomerangs. sent5: the manganese is a wild if it is a kind of a Kurdistan. sent6: the thimerosal is a wild. sent7: the manganese is not a kind of a deerskin and is a kind of a wild if the chick is a kind of a Kurdistan. sent8: the manganese does boomerang. sent9: that the chick is a deerskin and it is a kind of a wild does not hold if the fact that the manganese does boomerang is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that the manganese is not a deerskin and is a wild hold. sent11: the fact that the manganese is a deerskin that is a wild is wrong. sent12: if the chick is a kind of a boomerang then the fact that the manganese is not a deerskin but it is wild is incorrect. sent13: the fact that the chick is not a deerskin but it boomerangs does not hold. sent14: if the manganese is a deerskin then the chick is not a boomerang and is wild. sent15: the manganese is both not a deerskin and a wild if the chick is a boomerang. sent16: the fact that the chick is normative and a deerskin is not true. sent17: if the chick is a Kurdistan the fact that the manganese is a kind of a deerskin that is a kind of a wild is incorrect. sent18: something that is not a deerskin is a kind of a boomerang and is a Kurdistan. sent19: the fact that the chick unfastens quartering hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the ER cogitates.

{D}{b}

sent1: if something is not a kind of a Philistine but it is a kind of a stogy the individualist is not artiodactyl. sent2: the matelote is not orthodontic. sent3: if the seamount does not cogitate and does undervalue the ER does not cogitate. sent4: the fact that something is not a repellent and does cogitate does not hold if the fact that it is not existentialist is true. sent5: if the individualist is not photochemical it does sing fellowship and is a volvulus. sent6: the ER does cogitate if it is a repellent and it is not homonymic. sent7: something is not alkaline and it is not croupy if it is not artiodactyl. sent8: the seamount undervalues if the fact that the captain is orthodontic hold. sent9: if something is a existentialist the fact that it is both not a repellent and not homonymic is not correct. sent10: the seamount does not cogitate if the ER is brassy. sent11: the individualist is not photochemical if it is both non-alkaline and non-croupy. sent12: if there is something such that it is not orthodontic the captain is a volvulus. sent13: something is orthodontic if it is not corrigible. sent14: if the captain is irreparable then the fact that it is both a transport and not incorrigible is not true. sent15: there exists something such that it is a kind of non-Philistine thing that is a stogy. sent16: if there is something such that it is a kind of a volvulus the seamount is a kind of a existentialist. sent17: if the ER does not undervalue then it is a repellent and it is not homonymic. sent18: if the fact that the captain is a kind of a transport but it is not incorrigible does not hold that it is incorrigible is not incorrect. sent19: the fact that the seamount does transport and is not homonymic is false if that the ER undervalues is true. sent20: the fact that the ER does not undervalue if the fact that the seamount is a Picasso but it is not brassy is not right is correct. sent21: if the fact that the individualist is both not a volvulus and existentialist does not hold then the ER is not a existentialist.

sent1: (x): (¬{O}x & {N}x) -> ¬{M}{c} sent2: ¬{G}{e} sent3: (¬{D}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {D}x) sent5: ¬{I}{c} -> ({H}{c} & {F}{c}) sent6: ({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {D}{b} sent7: (x): ¬{M}x -> (¬{K}x & ¬{L}x) sent8: {G}{d} -> {B}{a} sent9: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent10: {AB}{b} -> ¬{D}{a} sent11: (¬{K}{c} & ¬{L}{c}) -> ¬{I}{c} sent12: (x): ¬{G}x -> {F}{d} sent13: (x): {J}x -> {G}x sent14: ¬{P}{d} -> ¬({Q}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) sent15: (Ex): (¬{O}x & {N}x) sent16: (x): {F}x -> {E}{a} sent17: ¬{B}{b} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent18: ¬({Q}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) -> {J}{d} sent19: {B}{b} -> ¬({Q}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent20: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent21: ¬(¬{F}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b}

the fact that the fact that the seamount transports but it is not homonymic is right is not true.

¬({Q}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the ER cogitates. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of a Philistine but it is a kind of a stogy the individualist is not artiodactyl. sent2: the matelote is not orthodontic. sent3: if the seamount does not cogitate and does undervalue the ER does not cogitate. sent4: the fact that something is not a repellent and does cogitate does not hold if the fact that it is not existentialist is true. sent5: if the individualist is not photochemical it does sing fellowship and is a volvulus. sent6: the ER does cogitate if it is a repellent and it is not homonymic. sent7: something is not alkaline and it is not croupy if it is not artiodactyl. sent8: the seamount undervalues if the fact that the captain is orthodontic hold. sent9: if something is a existentialist the fact that it is both not a repellent and not homonymic is not correct. sent10: the seamount does not cogitate if the ER is brassy. sent11: the individualist is not photochemical if it is both non-alkaline and non-croupy. sent12: if there is something such that it is not orthodontic the captain is a volvulus. sent13: something is orthodontic if it is not corrigible. sent14: if the captain is irreparable then the fact that it is both a transport and not incorrigible is not true. sent15: there exists something such that it is a kind of non-Philistine thing that is a stogy. sent16: if there is something such that it is a kind of a volvulus the seamount is a kind of a existentialist. sent17: if the ER does not undervalue then it is a repellent and it is not homonymic. sent18: if the fact that the captain is a kind of a transport but it is not incorrigible does not hold that it is incorrigible is not incorrect. sent19: the fact that the seamount does transport and is not homonymic is false if that the ER undervalues is true. sent20: the fact that the ER does not undervalue if the fact that the seamount is a Picasso but it is not brassy is not right is correct. sent21: if the fact that the individualist is both not a volvulus and existentialist does not hold then the ER is not a existentialist. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

that there is something such that if that it does sing homeopathy and it is not a endonuclease is incorrect it is bacterial does not hold.

¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x)

sent1: the tannin is a kind of a payer if the fact that it is gymnosophical and is a endonuclease is not correct. sent2: if something is a kind of a rehash that is not vicarial it is politic. sent3: the fact that there is something such that if that it sings homeopathy and it is a endonuclease is incorrect the fact that it is bacterial is not false hold. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it does furl HTML and does not unfasten enallage is correct then it is plausible. sent5: something does unfasten conceptualization if that it does unfasten safflower and does not furl stalagmite is not true. sent6: if that something does sing homeopathy but it is not a endonuclease does not hold then that it is bacterial is not false. sent7: if the fact that the hunter does Romanize and it is bottom-up is false it sings Dalian. sent8: there is something such that if the fact that it does unfasten pied-a-terre and it is not paramedical is not right then it is thenal. sent9: the Turk's-cap is hydrodynamics if it does Romanize and it does not sing homeopathy. sent10: the tannin is nonrepresentative if it is a plotter and it is not amenorrheic.

sent1: ¬({BD}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {EM}{aa} sent2: (x): ({DT}x & ¬{JD}x) -> {BE}x sent3: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (Ex): ({CU}x & ¬{BP}x) -> {IN}x sent5: (x): ¬({AU}x & ¬{JE}x) -> {CD}x sent6: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent7: ¬({DD}{ih} & {EG}{ih}) -> {IC}{ih} sent8: (Ex): ¬({JB}x & ¬{FA}x) -> {EU}x sent9: ({DD}{gp} & ¬{AA}{gp}) -> {CP}{gp} sent10: ({CJ}{aa} & ¬{FK}{aa}) -> {AH}{aa}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if that it does sing homeopathy and it is not a endonuclease is incorrect it is bacterial does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the tannin is a kind of a payer if the fact that it is gymnosophical and is a endonuclease is not correct. sent2: if something is a kind of a rehash that is not vicarial it is politic. sent3: the fact that there is something such that if that it sings homeopathy and it is a endonuclease is incorrect the fact that it is bacterial is not false hold. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it does furl HTML and does not unfasten enallage is correct then it is plausible. sent5: something does unfasten conceptualization if that it does unfasten safflower and does not furl stalagmite is not true. sent6: if that something does sing homeopathy but it is not a endonuclease does not hold then that it is bacterial is not false. sent7: if the fact that the hunter does Romanize and it is bottom-up is false it sings Dalian. sent8: there is something such that if the fact that it does unfasten pied-a-terre and it is not paramedical is not right then it is thenal. sent9: the Turk's-cap is hydrodynamics if it does Romanize and it does not sing homeopathy. sent10: the tannin is nonrepresentative if it is a plotter and it is not amenorrheic. ; $proof$ =

sent6 -> int1: the tannin is bacterial if that it sings homeopathy and it is not a endonuclease does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the novel is a kind of a Shavian that does not unfasten Glengarry.

({E}{b} & ¬{C}{b})

sent1: something that is not a speed does unfasten Glengarry. sent2: something is not arboreal if it is not a magnetograph. sent3: if the boat does unfasten Glengarry the novel is a Shavian. sent4: the fact that the novel does not monologuize and it is not a Jewry is not true if the Inca does not unfasten Glengarry. sent5: if the boat is not a school it is not arboreal. sent6: the boat is not a magnetograph or is not a school or both. sent7: the fact that something is a kind of Shavian thing that does not unfasten Glengarry is not correct if it is a kind of a Jewry. sent8: something is a Jewry and it does speed if it does not monologuize. sent9: if the novel is a Jewry then the boat is Shavian but it is not a Jewry. sent10: if the boat does unfasten Glengarry the novel is Shavian but it does not unfasten Glengarry.

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

the Glengarry is not a speed and not ministerial.

(¬{B}{ah} & ¬{CD}{ah})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the novel is a kind of a Shavian that does not unfasten Glengarry. ; $context$ = sent1: something that is not a speed does unfasten Glengarry. sent2: something is not arboreal if it is not a magnetograph. sent3: if the boat does unfasten Glengarry the novel is a Shavian. sent4: the fact that the novel does not monologuize and it is not a Jewry is not true if the Inca does not unfasten Glengarry. sent5: if the boat is not a school it is not arboreal. sent6: the boat is not a magnetograph or is not a school or both. sent7: the fact that something is a kind of Shavian thing that does not unfasten Glengarry is not correct if it is a kind of a Jewry. sent8: something is a Jewry and it does speed if it does not monologuize. sent9: if the novel is a Jewry then the boat is Shavian but it is not a Jewry. sent10: if the boat does unfasten Glengarry the novel is Shavian but it does not unfasten Glengarry. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> int1: if the boat is not a speed then it unfastens Glengarry.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the detumescence is a Ledum.

{A}{a}

sent1: the morula does not sing hogshead. sent2: if something does not sing hogshead it is valedictory. sent3: something is not a kind of a Ledum if it does not sing hogshead and is valedictory. sent4: if something is not valedictory then the fact that it is an attraction is not false. sent5: The hogshead does not sing morula.

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

that the detumescence is not a Ledum is not wrong.

¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the detumescence is a Ledum. ; $context$ = sent1: the morula does not sing hogshead. sent2: if something does not sing hogshead it is valedictory. sent3: something is not a kind of a Ledum if it does not sing hogshead and is valedictory. sent4: if something is not valedictory then the fact that it is an attraction is not false. sent5: The hogshead does not sing morula. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> int1: that the morula is valedictory if the morula does not sing hogshead is right.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the morula is valedictory.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the Altaic is a kind of a sediment.

{C}{b}

sent1: the Altaic is a macho. sent2: something is a kind of a Ranger but it does not sing holotype if that it discriminates is correct. sent3: the toddy is a cameo. sent4: if the toddy is both not a sediment and a felloe the Altaic is a cameo. sent5: the Jesuit is a Cam if something that does unfasten metropolitan scythes psychopharmacology. sent6: the toddy is not a felloe. sent7: the Altaic is a felloe. sent8: that something is not a cameo or it is not a felloe or both is wrong if it does not sing holotype. sent9: the Turk's-cap does not discriminate if either it is a kind of a seasnail or it does infuse or both. sent10: either the Turk's-cap is a kind of a seasnail or it infuses or both if there exists something such that it is assertive. sent11: if the stall does not furl animalcule and scythes psychopharmacology the Altaic does scythes psychopharmacology. sent12: there is something such that it scythes psychopharmacology. sent13: if that something is not a cameo or it is not a felloe or both is wrong it is not a kind of a sediment. sent14: if the Turk's-cap does not discriminate and it is not an illumination then the toddy is not discriminate. sent15: if the loophole is not a snare and it is not an illumination the Turk's-cap is not an illumination. sent16: the stall does not furl animalcule and scythes psychopharmacology. sent17: the Altaic unfastens metropolitan. sent18: if the toddy is a Ranger but it does not sing holotype then that the Jesuit does not sing holotype is correct. sent19: the 1-dodecanol is a sediment. sent20: if the toddy is not a kind of a felloe and is a cameo then the Altaic is a sediment. sent21: the muslin is assertive.

sent1: {IR}{b} sent2: (x): {G}x -> ({H}x & ¬{F}x) sent3: {B}{a} sent4: (¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent5: (x): ({D}x & {E}x) -> {GK}{hh} sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: {A}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{A}x) sent9: ({K}{c} v {J}{c}) -> ¬{G}{c} sent10: (x): {L}x -> ({K}{c} v {J}{c}) sent11: (¬{O}{f} & {E}{f}) -> {E}{b} sent12: (Ex): {E}x sent13: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent14: (¬{G}{c} & ¬{I}{c}) -> {G}{a} sent15: (¬{N}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) -> ¬{I}{c} sent16: (¬{O}{f} & {E}{f}) sent17: {D}{b} sent18: ({H}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) -> ¬{F}{hh} sent19: {C}{gd} sent20: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> {C}{b} sent21: {L}{d}

the Altaic is not a kind of a sediment.

¬{C}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the Altaic is a kind of a sediment. ; $context$ = sent1: the Altaic is a macho. sent2: something is a kind of a Ranger but it does not sing holotype if that it discriminates is correct. sent3: the toddy is a cameo. sent4: if the toddy is both not a sediment and a felloe the Altaic is a cameo. sent5: the Jesuit is a Cam if something that does unfasten metropolitan scythes psychopharmacology. sent6: the toddy is not a felloe. sent7: the Altaic is a felloe. sent8: that something is not a cameo or it is not a felloe or both is wrong if it does not sing holotype. sent9: the Turk's-cap does not discriminate if either it is a kind of a seasnail or it does infuse or both. sent10: either the Turk's-cap is a kind of a seasnail or it infuses or both if there exists something such that it is assertive. sent11: if the stall does not furl animalcule and scythes psychopharmacology the Altaic does scythes psychopharmacology. sent12: there is something such that it scythes psychopharmacology. sent13: if that something is not a cameo or it is not a felloe or both is wrong it is not a kind of a sediment. sent14: if the Turk's-cap does not discriminate and it is not an illumination then the toddy is not discriminate. sent15: if the loophole is not a snare and it is not an illumination the Turk's-cap is not an illumination. sent16: the stall does not furl animalcule and scythes psychopharmacology. sent17: the Altaic unfastens metropolitan. sent18: if the toddy is a Ranger but it does not sing holotype then that the Jesuit does not sing holotype is correct. sent19: the 1-dodecanol is a sediment. sent20: if the toddy is not a kind of a felloe and is a cameo then the Altaic is a sediment. sent21: the muslin is assertive. ; $proof$ =

sent6 & sent3 -> int1: the toddy is not a kind of a felloe and is a cameo.; sent20 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the rotationalness does not occur and the furling Wyrd does not occur.

(¬{C} & ¬{D})

sent1: the furling Procellariidae does not occur. sent2: if the interreflection does not occur then the onomasticsness does not occur. sent3: the rotationalness does not occur and the furling Wyrd does not occur if the imperial does not occur. sent4: the interreflection does not occur. sent5: that the trip does not occur is not wrong. sent6: that both the non-metallurgicalness and the non-lowbornness happens is triggered by the non-anterogradeness. sent7: the lexicostatisticness does not occur and the twenty-one does not occur. sent8: the tutorialness does not occur and the provisioning does not occur. sent9: the oversimplification does not occur and the equilibration does not occur. sent10: the fact that the bed-hopping does not occur and the erasure does not occur is not wrong. sent11: if the imperial happens the unfastening Seattle does not occur and the nonreflectiveness does not occur. sent12: the bicker does not occur if the plebiscite does not occur. sent13: the presentness does not occur. sent14: the non-nonreflectiveness and the non-imperialness happens. sent15: the stomping does not occur if the fueling does not occur. sent16: if the imperialness does not occur then the furling Wyrd does not occur. sent17: the unfastening Nina does not occur. sent18: the non-backingness is caused by that the jazz does not occur. sent19: the profligacy does not occur. sent20: that the furling credulousness does not occur hold.

sent1: ¬{CD} sent2: ¬{DH} -> ¬{CU} sent3: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent4: ¬{DH} sent5: ¬{FA} sent6: ¬{FM} -> (¬{ID} & ¬{O}) sent7: (¬{ES} & ¬{FP}) sent8: (¬{FL} & ¬{AT}) sent9: (¬{T} & ¬{DN}) sent10: (¬{IP} & ¬{EJ}) sent11: {B} -> (¬{AF} & ¬{A}) sent12: ¬{BM} -> ¬{F} sent13: ¬{BN} sent14: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent15: ¬{DE} -> ¬{IB} sent16: ¬{B} -> ¬{D} sent17: ¬{HP} sent18: ¬{BJ} -> ¬{JK} sent19: ¬{GP} sent20: ¬{GJ}

the unfastening Seattle does not occur.

¬{AF}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the rotationalness does not occur and the furling Wyrd does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the furling Procellariidae does not occur. sent2: if the interreflection does not occur then the onomasticsness does not occur. sent3: the rotationalness does not occur and the furling Wyrd does not occur if the imperial does not occur. sent4: the interreflection does not occur. sent5: that the trip does not occur is not wrong. sent6: that both the non-metallurgicalness and the non-lowbornness happens is triggered by the non-anterogradeness. sent7: the lexicostatisticness does not occur and the twenty-one does not occur. sent8: the tutorialness does not occur and the provisioning does not occur. sent9: the oversimplification does not occur and the equilibration does not occur. sent10: the fact that the bed-hopping does not occur and the erasure does not occur is not wrong. sent11: if the imperial happens the unfastening Seattle does not occur and the nonreflectiveness does not occur. sent12: the bicker does not occur if the plebiscite does not occur. sent13: the presentness does not occur. sent14: the non-nonreflectiveness and the non-imperialness happens. sent15: the stomping does not occur if the fueling does not occur. sent16: if the imperialness does not occur then the furling Wyrd does not occur. sent17: the unfastening Nina does not occur. sent18: the non-backingness is caused by that the jazz does not occur. sent19: the profligacy does not occur. sent20: that the furling credulousness does not occur hold. ; $proof$ =

sent14 -> int1: the imperial does not occur.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it is a Aegean or it is a kind of a public or both then it is not an official.

(Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

sent1: there exists something such that if it sings lambkill and/or does sing sit-down it is not a kind of a specimen. sent2: the jockey is an official if it is a Aegean and/or it is not non-public. sent3: the jockey is not a Aegean if it does unfasten gaffer and/or it is a kind of a Microsorium. sent4: there exists something such that if it is vernal or it is a Hull or both it is not a chelonian. sent5: there is something such that if it is batholithic and/or it is a lizard it does not nosh. sent6: the fact that the jockey is not public if the jockey does furl saver or is microelectronic or both is not incorrect. sent7: if the jockey is Aegean that it is not an official is correct. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is public is not false it is not a kind of an official. sent9: that if either the synthetic is the symbolization or it unfastens gaffer or both then the synthetic is not a public is true. sent10: there is something such that if it is Aegean and/or it is a public then that it is an official hold. sent11: there is something such that if the fact that it is Aegean is true it is not an official. sent12: if the jockey is either not non-Aegean or public or both it is not official. sent13: the jockey is not differentiable if it is a kind of a sprinkler and/or is an official. sent14: if either something unfastens gaffer or it unfastens flurbiprofen or both it is not a typescript. sent15: there is something such that if it is a Idun and/or it does unfasten vertebra then it does not unfasten flurbiprofen.

sent1: (Ex): ({ID}x v {FK}x) -> ¬{IL}x sent2: ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: ({AM}{aa} v {GC}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent4: (Ex): ({AK}x v {IE}x) -> ¬{HQ}x sent5: (Ex): ({HA}x v {CP}x) -> ¬{AP}x sent6: ({DF}{aa} v {DJ}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent7: {AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent9: ({JG}{iq} v {AM}{iq}) -> ¬{AB}{iq} sent10: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: (Ex): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent12: ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent13: ({IN}{aa} v {B}{aa}) -> ¬{FU}{aa} sent14: (x): ({AM}x v {H}x) -> ¬{HB}x sent15: (Ex): ({AJ}x v {EE}x) -> ¬{H}x

the vertebra is not a typescript if it unfastens gaffer and/or it does unfasten flurbiprofen.

({AM}{co} v {H}{co}) -> ¬{HB}{co}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a Aegean or it is a kind of a public or both then it is not an official. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it sings lambkill and/or does sing sit-down it is not a kind of a specimen. sent2: the jockey is an official if it is a Aegean and/or it is not non-public. sent3: the jockey is not a Aegean if it does unfasten gaffer and/or it is a kind of a Microsorium. sent4: there exists something such that if it is vernal or it is a Hull or both it is not a chelonian. sent5: there is something such that if it is batholithic and/or it is a lizard it does not nosh. sent6: the fact that the jockey is not public if the jockey does furl saver or is microelectronic or both is not incorrect. sent7: if the jockey is Aegean that it is not an official is correct. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is public is not false it is not a kind of an official. sent9: that if either the synthetic is the symbolization or it unfastens gaffer or both then the synthetic is not a public is true. sent10: there is something such that if it is Aegean and/or it is a public then that it is an official hold. sent11: there is something such that if the fact that it is Aegean is true it is not an official. sent12: if the jockey is either not non-Aegean or public or both it is not official. sent13: the jockey is not differentiable if it is a kind of a sprinkler and/or is an official. sent14: if either something unfastens gaffer or it unfastens flurbiprofen or both it is not a typescript. sent15: there is something such that if it is a Idun and/or it does unfasten vertebra then it does not unfasten flurbiprofen. ; $proof$ =

sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the antiemetic is a kind of a shift.

{B}{b}

sent1: if that something is not a telescopy but arteriolar is not right then it is not a kind of a shift. sent2: if the fact that the antiemetic is not arteriolar and is not a shift is not correct it is not a telescopy. sent3: the roundel is a telescopy if there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is a kind of non-apicultural thing that furls fresco hold is false. sent4: if the roundel is a kind of a telescopy the antiemetic is a kind of a shift. sent5: the fact that something is not a kind of a telescopy but it is arteriolar does not hold if it is not supraorbital. sent6: the antiemetic is a wheeler if the fact that that the roundel does not furl imperiousness but it is a kind of a wheeler is not wrong is false. sent7: there exists something such that the fact that it is not apicultural and it furls fresco is not correct. sent8: the fact that if the roundel is not the venture the fact that the roundel does not furl imperiousness but it is a wheeler is not true is true. sent9: something is not supraorbital and it does not tone if the fact that it is a kind of a wheeler is not incorrect.

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

there is something such that that it does not sing berserker and it sings cease does not hold.

(Ex): ¬(¬{CB}x & {CH}x)

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the antiemetic is a kind of a shift. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is not a telescopy but arteriolar is not right then it is not a kind of a shift. sent2: if the fact that the antiemetic is not arteriolar and is not a shift is not correct it is not a telescopy. sent3: the roundel is a telescopy if there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is a kind of non-apicultural thing that furls fresco hold is false. sent4: if the roundel is a kind of a telescopy the antiemetic is a kind of a shift. sent5: the fact that something is not a kind of a telescopy but it is arteriolar does not hold if it is not supraorbital. sent6: the antiemetic is a wheeler if the fact that that the roundel does not furl imperiousness but it is a kind of a wheeler is not wrong is false. sent7: there exists something such that the fact that it is not apicultural and it furls fresco is not correct. sent8: the fact that if the roundel is not the venture the fact that the roundel does not furl imperiousness but it is a wheeler is not true is true. sent9: something is not supraorbital and it does not tone if the fact that it is a kind of a wheeler is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the roundel is a telescopy is not false.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the Yugoslav does not unfasten Branchiobdella.

¬{AA}{aa}

sent1: if there exists something such that that it does not unfasten Branchiobdella and is not salty is not right the Turk's-cap is non-acinar. sent2: something is a bearskin if it is unseamanlike. sent3: something does not unfasten Branchiobdella and is not salty. sent4: the homeowner is a bearskin if the stocktaker is a kind of a bearskin. sent5: there exists something such that that it unfastens Branchiobdella and is not salty is not correct. sent6: the fact that the Yugoslav unfastens Branchiobdella and is not salty does not hold. sent7: the stocktaker is unseamanlike but it is not off-street if it is not virological. sent8: something is not acinar if it does not unfasten eyebrow and is a kind of a minimization. sent9: the fact that if that the Turk's-cap does not unfasten eyebrow and is not a bearskin is false the pier does not unfasten eyebrow is true. sent10: the fact that the slab is a oilskin hold. sent11: if something is not acinar then that it is not a central and is not a tenorist is not correct. sent12: the Yugoslav is not a minimization if that the Turk's-cap does not unfasten eyebrow is not wrong. sent13: the Turk's-cap is a kind of a minimization. sent14: there exists something such that it is not aware. sent15: the Turk's-cap does not unfasten eyebrow and/or it is not a minimization if the homeowner is a bearskin. sent16: there exists something such that the fact that it does not unfasten Branchiobdella and is salty does not hold. sent17: the fact that the Yugoslav does not unfasten Branchiobdella but it is salty does not hold.

sent1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent3: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: {D}{c} -> {D}{b} sent5: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent6: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent7: ¬{G}{c} -> ({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent8: (x): (¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent9: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{C}{ig} sent10: {HF}{df} sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{EG}x & ¬{DP}x) sent12: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent13: {B}{a} sent14: (Ex): ¬{H}x sent15: {D}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) sent16: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent17: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})

that the pier is not a kind of a central and is not a kind of a tenorist does not hold.

¬(¬{EG}{ig} & ¬{DP}{ig})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the Yugoslav does not unfasten Branchiobdella. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that that it does not unfasten Branchiobdella and is not salty is not right the Turk's-cap is non-acinar. sent2: something is a bearskin if it is unseamanlike. sent3: something does not unfasten Branchiobdella and is not salty. sent4: the homeowner is a bearskin if the stocktaker is a kind of a bearskin. sent5: there exists something such that that it unfastens Branchiobdella and is not salty is not correct. sent6: the fact that the Yugoslav unfastens Branchiobdella and is not salty does not hold. sent7: the stocktaker is unseamanlike but it is not off-street if it is not virological. sent8: something is not acinar if it does not unfasten eyebrow and is a kind of a minimization. sent9: the fact that if that the Turk's-cap does not unfasten eyebrow and is not a bearskin is false the pier does not unfasten eyebrow is true. sent10: the fact that the slab is a oilskin hold. sent11: if something is not acinar then that it is not a central and is not a tenorist is not correct. sent12: the Yugoslav is not a minimization if that the Turk's-cap does not unfasten eyebrow is not wrong. sent13: the Turk's-cap is a kind of a minimization. sent14: there exists something such that it is not aware. sent15: the Turk's-cap does not unfasten eyebrow and/or it is not a minimization if the homeowner is a bearskin. sent16: there exists something such that the fact that it does not unfasten Branchiobdella and is salty does not hold. sent17: the fact that the Yugoslav does not unfasten Branchiobdella but it is salty does not hold. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the Yugoslav does not unfasten Branchiobdella and is not salty is not correct.; assump1 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it does not unfasten Branchiobdella and is non-salty is wrong.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the Turk's-cap is not acinar.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the joyousness does not occur.

¬{A}

sent1: that the furling aqueduct happens is not true if that not the wait but the furling aqueduct happens is false. sent2: the modal happens. sent3: the lessness does not occur. sent4: the adolescent happens if the joyousness happens. sent5: the nutritionalness does not occur and the unfastening jurisprudence does not occur. sent6: the fact that the unfastening antiferromagnetism does not occur hold. sent7: the furling trampoline does not occur if that not the channeling but the furling trampoline occurs is not correct. sent8: the pea-souper occurs. sent9: if the fact that the adolescent does not occur and the unfastening antiferromagnetism does not occur does not hold then the joyousness occurs. sent10: the calorimetricness occurs. sent11: if the furling aqueduct does not occur that the channeling does not occur but the furling trampoline occurs is false. sent12: the unfastening antiferromagnetism does not occur if the fact that the Togolese happens and the unfastening antiferromagnetism occurs is wrong. sent13: if the Togoleseness does not occur then that the adolescentness does not occur and the unfastening antiferromagnetism does not occur is wrong. sent14: the cordlessness does not occur. sent15: the non-Togoleseness is triggered by that the furling trampoline does not occur and/or the Togoleseness does not occur.

sent1: ¬(¬{H} & {G}) -> ¬{G} sent2: {CB} sent3: ¬{AI} sent4: {A} -> {B} sent5: (¬{HQ} & ¬{BL}) sent6: ¬{C} sent7: ¬(¬{F} & {E}) -> ¬{E} sent8: {IB} sent9: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) -> {A} sent10: {FT} sent11: ¬{G} -> ¬(¬{F} & {E}) sent12: ¬({D} & {C}) -> ¬{C} sent13: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent14: ¬{DH} sent15: (¬{E} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{D}

the non-adnateness and the non-permissiveness happens.

(¬{BJ} & ¬{CR})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the joyousness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the furling aqueduct happens is not true if that not the wait but the furling aqueduct happens is false. sent2: the modal happens. sent3: the lessness does not occur. sent4: the adolescent happens if the joyousness happens. sent5: the nutritionalness does not occur and the unfastening jurisprudence does not occur. sent6: the fact that the unfastening antiferromagnetism does not occur hold. sent7: the furling trampoline does not occur if that not the channeling but the furling trampoline occurs is not correct. sent8: the pea-souper occurs. sent9: if the fact that the adolescent does not occur and the unfastening antiferromagnetism does not occur does not hold then the joyousness occurs. sent10: the calorimetricness occurs. sent11: if the furling aqueduct does not occur that the channeling does not occur but the furling trampoline occurs is false. sent12: the unfastening antiferromagnetism does not occur if the fact that the Togolese happens and the unfastening antiferromagnetism occurs is wrong. sent13: if the Togoleseness does not occur then that the adolescentness does not occur and the unfastening antiferromagnetism does not occur is wrong. sent14: the cordlessness does not occur. sent15: the non-Togoleseness is triggered by that the furling trampoline does not occur and/or the Togoleseness does not occur. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the joyousness occurs hold.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the adolescentness happens.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the firecracker does scythe reprobation.

{B}{a}

sent1: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a Minuteman then the firecracker does scythe reprobation. sent2: there exists something such that it is careful. sent3: the firecracker scythes reprobation and it is a kind of a Minuteman if there exists something such that it is careful.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the firecracker does scythe reprobation. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a Minuteman then the firecracker does scythe reprobation. sent2: there exists something such that it is careful. sent3: the firecracker scythes reprobation and it is a kind of a Minuteman if there exists something such that it is careful. ; $proof$ =

sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the firecracker does scythe reprobation and it is a Minuteman.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

that there exists something such that if the fact that either it does not unfasten paint or it scythes dustiness or both is incorrect it is commensal is not correct.

¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x)

sent1: there exists something such that if the fact that that it is either not an answer or ungenerous or both is right is not correct it does unfasten calamity. sent2: the paint scythes dustiness if either it is not a Crux or it is quantitative or both. sent3: that there is something such that if it does not sing running or numerates or both it is electroencephalographic is not incorrect. sent4: the fact that the tester is a commensal is not false if either it does not unfasten paint or it scythes dustiness or both. sent5: there is something such that if it does not unfasten cautery or is actinic or both then it is an agony. sent6: there is something such that if either it is not a netting or it does unfasten calamity or both it furls sidecar. sent7: if that the snow-in-summer is not hilar and/or unfastens paint does not hold it unfastens Windhoek. sent8: the tester is a kind of a commensal if the fact that either it does not unfasten paint or it scythes dustiness or both does not hold. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it does not sing guess or it is a jacquard or both is not correct then it sings orange. sent10: if that the tester is not noncaloric or it is musicological or both is incorrect then it does unfasten paint.

sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{IT}x v {M}x) -> {EU}x sent2: (¬{BP}{ch} v {H}{ch}) -> {AB}{ch} sent3: (Ex): (¬{AN}x v {CU}x) -> {HQ}x sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): (¬{GB}x v {BN}x) -> {BJ}x sent6: (Ex): (¬{AL}x v {EU}x) -> {IA}x sent7: ¬(¬{DF}{ig} v {AA}{ig}) -> {HL}{ig} sent8: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬(¬{CO}x v {GG}x) -> {FN}x sent10: ¬(¬{IO}{aa} v {AF}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if the fact that either it does not unfasten paint or it scythes dustiness or both is incorrect it is commensal is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if the fact that that it is either not an answer or ungenerous or both is right is not correct it does unfasten calamity. sent2: the paint scythes dustiness if either it is not a Crux or it is quantitative or both. sent3: that there is something such that if it does not sing running or numerates or both it is electroencephalographic is not incorrect. sent4: the fact that the tester is a commensal is not false if either it does not unfasten paint or it scythes dustiness or both. sent5: there is something such that if it does not unfasten cautery or is actinic or both then it is an agony. sent6: there is something such that if either it is not a netting or it does unfasten calamity or both it furls sidecar. sent7: if that the snow-in-summer is not hilar and/or unfastens paint does not hold it unfastens Windhoek. sent8: the tester is a kind of a commensal if the fact that either it does not unfasten paint or it scythes dustiness or both does not hold. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it does not sing guess or it is a jacquard or both is not correct then it sings orange. sent10: if that the tester is not noncaloric or it is musicological or both is incorrect then it does unfasten paint. ; $proof$ =

sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

there is something such that if it does not unfasten calamity then the fact that it is a feline and it is a moire is incorrect.

(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)

sent1: there is something such that if it is a kind of a toothache the fact that it is feudatory and sings primrose is false. sent2: if the glyburide unfastens calamity then the fact that it does fight and it conspires is wrong. sent3: there exists something such that if it is injectable then that it unfastens wince and is Hispaniolan is false. sent4: that the hoper is a Mackem and it is chimeric is wrong if the fact that it does not unfasten calamity is correct. sent5: if the almoner is a kind of a caper that it unfastens surrey and is a moire is wrong. sent6: there is something such that if it does not symphonize then the fact that it is a kind of a Mackem and is a rod is wrong. sent7: if the tramcar does not scythe inaudibility it is a kind of scriptural thing that furls indulgence. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not falconine then it is a fashioned and a surgeonfish. sent9: if the almoner does not unfasten calamity the fact that it is a kind of feline a moire does not hold. sent10: if the almoner is not a kind of a surgeonfish then it does unfasten calamity and is a interoception.

sent1: (Ex): {BP}x -> ¬({GM}x & {HH}x) sent2: {A}{gj} -> ¬({AL}{gj} & {IO}{gj}) sent3: (Ex): {GG}x -> ¬({EM}x & {GF}x) sent4: ¬{A}{k} -> ¬({BD}{k} & {JB}{k}) sent5: {GI}{aa} -> ¬({U}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: (Ex): ¬{DM}x -> ¬({BD}x & {JG}x) sent7: ¬{EB}{cs} -> ({FF}{cs} & {HQ}{cs}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{HA}x -> ({IB}x & {HP}x) sent9: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent10: ¬{HP}{aa} -> ({A}{aa} & {N}{aa})

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not unfasten calamity then the fact that it is a feline and it is a moire is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is a kind of a toothache the fact that it is feudatory and sings primrose is false. sent2: if the glyburide unfastens calamity then the fact that it does fight and it conspires is wrong. sent3: there exists something such that if it is injectable then that it unfastens wince and is Hispaniolan is false. sent4: that the hoper is a Mackem and it is chimeric is wrong if the fact that it does not unfasten calamity is correct. sent5: if the almoner is a kind of a caper that it unfastens surrey and is a moire is wrong. sent6: there is something such that if it does not symphonize then the fact that it is a kind of a Mackem and is a rod is wrong. sent7: if the tramcar does not scythe inaudibility it is a kind of scriptural thing that furls indulgence. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not falconine then it is a fashioned and a surgeonfish. sent9: if the almoner does not unfasten calamity the fact that it is a kind of feline a moire does not hold. sent10: if the almoner is not a kind of a surgeonfish then it does unfasten calamity and is a interoception. ; $proof$ =

sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the accounting does not occur.

¬{D}

sent1: the ribbing happens. sent2: the sociolinguisticsness occurs. sent3: both the cadetship and the furling AUC happens. sent4: if the Zephyr does not occur and the furling abampere does not occur then the accounting occurs. sent5: if the elongation and the encore occurs the logisticness does not occur. sent6: the immolation happens and the fortification happens. sent7: the unfastening mongoose and the trigonometricness happens. sent8: the Mass does not occur. sent9: that the furling abampere occurs and the segregation happens causes that the accounting does not occur. sent10: the backingness occurs. sent11: the furling abampere happens and the Zephyr happens. sent12: if the fact that the Zephyr does not occur hold then the furling abampere occurs and the discoing occurs. sent13: the furling recital occurs. sent14: the segregation happens if the furling recital occurs. sent15: the encore happens. sent16: the bootlegging happens. sent17: if the crutch does not occur then the accounting happens and the furling recital happens. sent18: if the epiphysealness does not occur then the crutch does not occur and the pyemicness does not occur. sent19: the unfastening Shaktist does not occur. sent20: the unfastening juvenile and the lapidating happens. sent21: the singing AUC and the federalization happens. sent22: the Zephyr occurs. sent23: the antagonism and the conjuncture happens.

sent1: {DE} sent2: {BJ} sent3: ({AB} & {CU}) sent4: (¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {D} sent5: ({GC} & {IJ}) -> ¬{DL} sent6: ({Q} & {BT}) sent7: ({J} & {IR}) sent8: ¬{EP} sent9: ({A} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent10: {FB} sent11: ({A} & {B}) sent12: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {EF}) sent13: {E} sent14: {E} -> {C} sent15: {IJ} sent16: {BD} sent17: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent18: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & ¬{G}) sent19: ¬{CM} sent20: ({EE} & {IK}) sent21: ({GM} & {CQ}) sent22: {B} sent23: ({L} & {P})

the accounting occurs.

{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the accounting does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the ribbing happens. sent2: the sociolinguisticsness occurs. sent3: both the cadetship and the furling AUC happens. sent4: if the Zephyr does not occur and the furling abampere does not occur then the accounting occurs. sent5: if the elongation and the encore occurs the logisticness does not occur. sent6: the immolation happens and the fortification happens. sent7: the unfastening mongoose and the trigonometricness happens. sent8: the Mass does not occur. sent9: that the furling abampere occurs and the segregation happens causes that the accounting does not occur. sent10: the backingness occurs. sent11: the furling abampere happens and the Zephyr happens. sent12: if the fact that the Zephyr does not occur hold then the furling abampere occurs and the discoing occurs. sent13: the furling recital occurs. sent14: the segregation happens if the furling recital occurs. sent15: the encore happens. sent16: the bootlegging happens. sent17: if the crutch does not occur then the accounting happens and the furling recital happens. sent18: if the epiphysealness does not occur then the crutch does not occur and the pyemicness does not occur. sent19: the unfastening Shaktist does not occur. sent20: the unfastening juvenile and the lapidating happens. sent21: the singing AUC and the federalization happens. sent22: the Zephyr occurs. sent23: the antagonism and the conjuncture happens. ; $proof$ =

sent11 -> int1: the furling abampere happens.; sent14 & sent13 -> int2: that the segregation happens is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the furling abampere happens and the segregation happens.; int3 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the phosphor is cursorial a beachcomber.

({A}{b} & {C}{b})

sent1: if the snot does not unfasten jerry-builder but it furls documentation then the phosphor does not furl sketcher. sent2: something that does not furl sketcher is cursorial and is a beachcomber. sent3: the snot is not cursorial if there is something such that the fact that it is a preceptor and is cursorial is false. sent4: if the phosphor does not furl sketcher it is cursorial. sent5: that the phosphor is cursorial hold. sent6: the snot is not a beachcomber if the phosphor does not furl sketcher but it furls documentation. sent7: everything is not subclavian. sent8: the snot does not unfasten jerry-builder and does furl documentation. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a siamang and it sings emcee is wrong then the snot is not a kind of a siamang. sent10: if something is not subclavian then the fact that it is a siamang and does sing emcee does not hold. sent11: if something does not furl sketcher then the fact that it is a preceptor and is cursorial is not right. sent12: the snot furls documentation. sent13: if something is not a siamang then it does furl sketcher and it is a preceptor. sent14: if something does not furl sketcher then it is cursorial.

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

that the phosphor is cursorial and a beachcomber is not correct.

¬({A}{b} & {C}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the phosphor is cursorial a beachcomber. ; $context$ = sent1: if the snot does not unfasten jerry-builder but it furls documentation then the phosphor does not furl sketcher. sent2: something that does not furl sketcher is cursorial and is a beachcomber. sent3: the snot is not cursorial if there is something such that the fact that it is a preceptor and is cursorial is false. sent4: if the phosphor does not furl sketcher it is cursorial. sent5: that the phosphor is cursorial hold. sent6: the snot is not a beachcomber if the phosphor does not furl sketcher but it furls documentation. sent7: everything is not subclavian. sent8: the snot does not unfasten jerry-builder and does furl documentation. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a siamang and it sings emcee is wrong then the snot is not a kind of a siamang. sent10: if something is not subclavian then the fact that it is a siamang and does sing emcee does not hold. sent11: if something does not furl sketcher then the fact that it is a preceptor and is cursorial is not right. sent12: the snot furls documentation. sent13: if something is not a siamang then it does furl sketcher and it is a preceptor. sent14: if something does not furl sketcher then it is cursorial. ; $proof$ =

sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the fact that the phosphor does not furl sketcher is right.; sent2 -> int2: if the phosphor does not furl sketcher it is cursorial and a beachcomber.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

there is something such that it is sublunar.

(Ex): {AB}x

sent1: the knockout is not a fistmele. sent2: everything is not a kind of a Saginaw and is a headdress. sent3: something is not a concert-goer and furls autoclave if it is not a kind of a bone. sent4: the knockout is both not a fistmele and a Branchiostegidae. sent5: the comedienne is not a bone if the splash is a Nimrod and is a bone. sent6: there exists something such that it is nonpasserine. sent7: everything is not a latest. sent8: the knockout does not sing Ephesians but it is a Waldheim. sent9: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a begum hold. sent10: something wants. sent11: the riband is both not smart and a rigout. sent12: the autoclave does not trash but it is nonthermal.

sent1: ¬{AA}{aa} sent2: (x): (¬{JC}x & {FP}x) sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{A}x & {AU}x) sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} & {P}{aa}) sent5: ({C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (Ex): {HJ}x sent7: (x): ¬{IU}x sent8: (¬{IB}{aa} & {BL}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {GQ}x sent10: (Ex): {BF}x sent11: (¬{DF}{ed} & {CT}{ed}) sent12: (¬{CS}{gu} & {AJ}{gu})

there exists something such that it does furl autoclave.

(Ex): {AU}x

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is sublunar. ; $context$ = sent1: the knockout is not a fistmele. sent2: everything is not a kind of a Saginaw and is a headdress. sent3: something is not a concert-goer and furls autoclave if it is not a kind of a bone. sent4: the knockout is both not a fistmele and a Branchiostegidae. sent5: the comedienne is not a bone if the splash is a Nimrod and is a bone. sent6: there exists something such that it is nonpasserine. sent7: everything is not a latest. sent8: the knockout does not sing Ephesians but it is a Waldheim. sent9: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a begum hold. sent10: something wants. sent11: the riband is both not smart and a rigout. sent12: the autoclave does not trash but it is nonthermal. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

that there is something such that if it is not a tippler then the fact that it does not unfasten vintner and it is a Wesley is incorrect is false.

¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x))

sent1: that the choc-ice does not unfasten vintner but it is a Wesley does not hold if it is not a tippler.

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

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is not a tippler then the fact that it does not unfasten vintner and it is a Wesley is incorrect is false. ; $context$ = sent1: that the choc-ice does not unfasten vintner but it is a Wesley does not hold if it is not a tippler. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the appraisal but not the craze occurs.

({A} & ¬{B})

sent1: the logarithmicness and/or the geophyticness occurs. sent2: the animating occurs if the reveille occurs. sent3: the craze does not occur if the fact that the placebo does not occur and the singing abampere does not occur is not correct. sent4: the fact that the unfastening Florentine happens but the adulteration does not occur does not hold. sent5: the furling victim and the singing nephrectomy happens if that the actualness does not occur is not wrong. sent6: the naiveness occurs and/or the peripheral occurs. sent7: the furling victim and/or the singing nephrectomy occurs. sent8: if that not the screech but the actualness happens does not hold that the actualness does not occur is correct. sent9: if the singing nephrectomy happens the appraisal occurs. sent10: if the scything fizzing does not occur then that the fact that that not the screech but the actualness happens is not incorrect is wrong is right. sent11: the scything consideration does not occur if the fact that the fact that the affliction does not occur and the finalization does not occur is wrong is correct. sent12: that the appraisal does not occur is prevented by that the furling victim occurs. sent13: the furling Centre does not occur if the fact that the masturbating does not occur and the lift does not occur does not hold. sent14: that the appraisal but not the crazing happens is false if the furling victim occurs. sent15: if the fact that the Rhodesianness does not occur and the dancing does not occur does not hold the furling lawyer does not occur. sent16: if the audiometry occurs the Marianness happens. sent17: the audiometry occurs if the umbelliferousness occurs.

sent1: ({DL} v {H}) sent2: {GN} -> {GK} sent3: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent4: ¬({AG} & ¬{ER}) sent5: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) sent6: ({ES} v {JH}) sent7: ({C} v {D}) sent8: ¬(¬{G} & {E}) -> ¬{E} sent9: {D} -> {A} sent10: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{G} & {E}) sent11: ¬(¬{FC} & ¬{T}) -> ¬{EU} sent12: {C} -> {A} sent13: ¬(¬{EJ} & ¬{BP}) -> ¬{HJ} sent14: {C} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) sent15: ¬(¬{AD} & ¬{FB}) -> ¬{GL} sent16: {CR} -> {BT} sent17: {CK} -> {CR}

the fact that the appraisal but not the craze happens is not right.

¬({A} & ¬{B})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the appraisal but not the craze occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the logarithmicness and/or the geophyticness occurs. sent2: the animating occurs if the reveille occurs. sent3: the craze does not occur if the fact that the placebo does not occur and the singing abampere does not occur is not correct. sent4: the fact that the unfastening Florentine happens but the adulteration does not occur does not hold. sent5: the furling victim and the singing nephrectomy happens if that the actualness does not occur is not wrong. sent6: the naiveness occurs and/or the peripheral occurs. sent7: the furling victim and/or the singing nephrectomy occurs. sent8: if that not the screech but the actualness happens does not hold that the actualness does not occur is correct. sent9: if the singing nephrectomy happens the appraisal occurs. sent10: if the scything fizzing does not occur then that the fact that that not the screech but the actualness happens is not incorrect is wrong is right. sent11: the scything consideration does not occur if the fact that the fact that the affliction does not occur and the finalization does not occur is wrong is correct. sent12: that the appraisal does not occur is prevented by that the furling victim occurs. sent13: the furling Centre does not occur if the fact that the masturbating does not occur and the lift does not occur does not hold. sent14: that the appraisal but not the crazing happens is false if the furling victim occurs. sent15: if the fact that the Rhodesianness does not occur and the dancing does not occur does not hold the furling lawyer does not occur. sent16: if the audiometry occurs the Marianness happens. sent17: the audiometry occurs if the umbelliferousness occurs. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent12 & sent9 -> int1: the appraisal occurs.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the shillyshallying does not occur and the defiantness occurs is not correct.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

sent1: the fact that the shillyshallying does not occur and the defiantness occurs is false. sent2: that the furling Lutheran occurs and the unfastening victim occurs is caused by that the unfastening costs does not occur. sent3: the unfastening victim leads to that the shillyshallying does not occur and the defiantness happens. sent4: that the session but not the planographicness occurs is not true if the furling kindness happens. sent5: if the fact that the session happens and the planographicness does not occur is wrong then the unfastening costs does not occur.

sent1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent2: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent3: {A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent4: {F} -> ¬({D} & ¬{E}) sent5: ¬({D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C}

not the shillyshallying but the defiantness happens.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the shillyshallying does not occur and the defiantness occurs is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the shillyshallying does not occur and the defiantness occurs is false. sent2: that the furling Lutheran occurs and the unfastening victim occurs is caused by that the unfastening costs does not occur. sent3: the unfastening victim leads to that the shillyshallying does not occur and the defiantness happens. sent4: that the session but not the planographicness occurs is not true if the furling kindness happens. sent5: if the fact that the session happens and the planographicness does not occur is wrong then the unfastening costs does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

that something is a kind of a linen and chords is incorrect.

¬((Ex): ({A}x & {B}x))

sent1: the Tatar is a chord and furls waking. sent2: the hypobasidium is not non-trigonometric. sent3: the hypobasidium is both a linen and a chord.

sent1: ({B}{ig} & {CT}{ig}) sent2: {IN}{aa} sent3: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = that something is a kind of a linen and chords is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the Tatar is a chord and furls waking. sent2: the hypobasidium is not non-trigonometric. sent3: the hypobasidium is both a linen and a chord. ; $proof$ =

sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

there is something such that it is a kind of a Guevara and it is a kind of a spokeswoman.

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

sent1: if the goldeneye is not an episteme it is a Guevara and a spokeswoman. sent2: there exists something such that it is a spokeswoman. sent3: the ebony is a spokeswoman and does peruse. sent4: that the trivet is a Guevara hold.

sent1: ¬{C}{jf} -> ({A}{jf} & {B}{jf}) sent2: (Ex): {B}x sent3: ({B}{hg} & {JH}{hg}) sent4: {A}{a}

that the goldeneye is a Guevara is correct.

{A}{jf}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is a kind of a Guevara and it is a kind of a spokeswoman. ; $context$ = sent1: if the goldeneye is not an episteme it is a Guevara and a spokeswoman. sent2: there exists something such that it is a spokeswoman. sent3: the ebony is a spokeswoman and does peruse. sent4: that the trivet is a Guevara hold. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the pediatricsness does not occur and the furling porkpie happens.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

sent1: the sidestep does not occur. sent2: the sidestep is caused by that both the pediatricsness and the furling porkpie occurs. sent3: if the sharp happens then the ordinalness happens. sent4: the fact that not the furling PSF but the bottomness occurs is not true if the sleeper does not occur. sent5: if the fact that the fact that not the furling PSF but the bottomness occurs is not true hold the Celtic does not occur. sent6: the furling caviar occurs. sent7: the battue does not occur if both the decimation and the unfastening Bellini happens. sent8: the decimation occurs if the ordinal happens. sent9: that the pediatricsness happens and the furling porkpie occurs is not true. sent10: if the javelin happens then the non-pediatricsness and the furling porkpie happens. sent11: the sharp happens and the dactylicness happens. sent12: that the sleeper does not occur and the transposition does not occur is brought about by that the battue does not occur. sent13: that both the non-pediatricsness and the furling porkpie occurs prevents that the sidestep does not occur. sent14: both the javelin and the sidestep happens if the Celtic does not occur.

sent1: ¬{B} sent2: ({AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent3: {M} -> {L} sent4: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{D} & {E}) sent5: ¬(¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{C} sent6: {CH} sent7: ({J} & {I}) -> ¬{H} sent8: {L} -> {J} sent9: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent10: {A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent11: ({M} & {O}) sent12: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & ¬{G}) sent13: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent14: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B})

the pediatricsness does not occur and the furling porkpie occurs.

(¬{AA} & {AB})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the pediatricsness does not occur and the furling porkpie happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the sidestep does not occur. sent2: the sidestep is caused by that both the pediatricsness and the furling porkpie occurs. sent3: if the sharp happens then the ordinalness happens. sent4: the fact that not the furling PSF but the bottomness occurs is not true if the sleeper does not occur. sent5: if the fact that the fact that not the furling PSF but the bottomness occurs is not true hold the Celtic does not occur. sent6: the furling caviar occurs. sent7: the battue does not occur if both the decimation and the unfastening Bellini happens. sent8: the decimation occurs if the ordinal happens. sent9: that the pediatricsness happens and the furling porkpie occurs is not true. sent10: if the javelin happens then the non-pediatricsness and the furling porkpie happens. sent11: the sharp happens and the dactylicness happens. sent12: that the sleeper does not occur and the transposition does not occur is brought about by that the battue does not occur. sent13: that both the non-pediatricsness and the furling porkpie occurs prevents that the sidestep does not occur. sent14: both the javelin and the sidestep happens if the Celtic does not occur. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the non-pediatricsness and the furling porkpie occurs.; sent13 & assump1 -> int1: the sidestep happens.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the Plasticine perfects.

{D}{a}

sent1: the Plasticine is perfected if it is supportive. sent2: if that something does not impugn Apterygidae but it is a kind of a dronabinol does not hold then it does rehear Ismaili. sent3: the fact that the telegraphy does not rough Kamet and is supportive is wrong. sent4: that that the Plasticine is supportive thing that impugns wheatworm is incorrect is true. sent5: if there is something such that it does rehear Hargeisa then that the Plasticine is supportive and impugns wheatworm is incorrect. sent6: if the wheatworm is an astringent then the diestock is not a Thai but it is perfected. sent7: the fact that the Plasticine is not a turnout but a subject does not hold. sent8: the Plasticine is not perfected if the diestock is not a Thai but it is perfected. sent9: the fact that the Plasticine does not impugn wheatworm but it is an outtake is false if something does rough myriad. sent10: something is perfected if it is supportive. sent11: if something does not rehear Hargeisa but it is supportive then it is not perfected. sent12: if the fact that something is not supportive but it impugns wheatworm is not correct then the fact that it is not perfected is not correct. sent13: that the diestock does impugn wheatworm and is not an astringent hold if it is a kind of a Thai. sent14: the fact that the Plasticine does not rehear Hargeisa but it does rough animalization is wrong. sent15: that the plush impugns wheatworm is right. sent16: something rehears Hargeisa. sent17: the fact that the teapot does not impugn wheatworm but it rehears saurel is false. sent18: something that rehears Hargeisa is supportive. sent19: there are blastomycotic things. sent20: that the Plasticine is not supportive but it does impugn wheatworm is not right if there exists something such that it rehears Hargeisa.

sent1: {B}{a} -> {D}{a} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{DT}x & {AE}x) -> {EC}x sent3: ¬(¬{GT}{gm} & {B}{gm}) sent4: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent6: {E}{c} -> (¬{F}{b} & {D}{b}) sent7: ¬(¬{EB}{a} & {GB}{a}) sent8: (¬{F}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent9: (x): {EL}x -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {HN}{a}) sent10: (x): {B}x -> {D}x sent11: (x): (¬{A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{D}x sent12: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {D}x sent13: {F}{b} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent14: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {FA}{a}) sent15: {C}{fq} sent16: (Ex): {A}x sent17: ¬(¬{C}{gq} & {AP}{gq}) sent18: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent19: (Ex): {GU}x sent20: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a})

the Plasticine does not perfect.

¬{D}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the Plasticine perfects. ; $context$ = sent1: the Plasticine is perfected if it is supportive. sent2: if that something does not impugn Apterygidae but it is a kind of a dronabinol does not hold then it does rehear Ismaili. sent3: the fact that the telegraphy does not rough Kamet and is supportive is wrong. sent4: that that the Plasticine is supportive thing that impugns wheatworm is incorrect is true. sent5: if there is something such that it does rehear Hargeisa then that the Plasticine is supportive and impugns wheatworm is incorrect. sent6: if the wheatworm is an astringent then the diestock is not a Thai but it is perfected. sent7: the fact that the Plasticine is not a turnout but a subject does not hold. sent8: the Plasticine is not perfected if the diestock is not a Thai but it is perfected. sent9: the fact that the Plasticine does not impugn wheatworm but it is an outtake is false if something does rough myriad. sent10: something is perfected if it is supportive. sent11: if something does not rehear Hargeisa but it is supportive then it is not perfected. sent12: if the fact that something is not supportive but it impugns wheatworm is not correct then the fact that it is not perfected is not correct. sent13: that the diestock does impugn wheatworm and is not an astringent hold if it is a kind of a Thai. sent14: the fact that the Plasticine does not rehear Hargeisa but it does rough animalization is wrong. sent15: that the plush impugns wheatworm is right. sent16: something rehears Hargeisa. sent17: the fact that the teapot does not impugn wheatworm but it rehears saurel is false. sent18: something that rehears Hargeisa is supportive. sent19: there are blastomycotic things. sent20: that the Plasticine is not supportive but it does impugn wheatworm is not right if there exists something such that it rehears Hargeisa. ; $proof$ =

sent16 & sent20 -> int1: the fact that the Plasticine is unsupportive but it impugns wheatworm does not hold.; sent12 -> int2: the Plasticine perfects if that it is not supportive and impugns wheatworm is false.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

that the chimneystack is not tetanic or unmodifiable or both does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

sent1: the orthodontist is tetanic. sent2: the teacake is nonmetallic. sent3: the teacake does not rehear epithalamium if it does impugn chalazion and it is nonmetallic. sent4: the chimneystack is tetanic or is unmodifiable or both if it is an ordinary. sent5: that the indexer is anaclitic is true. sent6: the teacake does impugn chalazion. sent7: something is not tetanic and/or it is unmodifiable if it is an ordinary. sent8: the chimneystack is not Bayesian and/or it is unmodifiable if it does irradiate. sent9: the Jeroboam rehears dominus or it is anaclitic or both. sent10: the chimneystack is anaclitic. sent11: the chimneystack is not ordinary if that the crosshead is both not anaclitic and an ordinary is incorrect. sent12: if the freelancer is Bayesian then the teacake does impugn Jeroboam. sent13: if something is not ordinary the fact that it either is not tetanic or is unmodifiable or both is not true. sent14: if something that does not rehear epithalamium impugns Jeroboam then it is not a fare-thee-well. sent15: something is Bayesian if it is real-time. sent16: if something is anaclitic it is lax and/or it is not a kind of an ordinary. sent17: if the chimneystack is a kind of a Restoration then it is unmodifiable or it is a gannet or both. sent18: the chimneystack is an ordinary and it is anaclitic. sent19: if the teacake is not a kind of a fare-thee-well the crosshead is anaclitic. sent20: something is tetanic and/or it is unmodifiable if it is an ordinary. sent21: the chimneystack is tetanic and/or it is unmodifiable.

sent1: {AA}{ac} sent2: {G}{b} sent3: ({H}{b} & {G}{b}) -> ¬{F}{b} sent4: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent5: {B}{cd} sent6: {H}{b} sent7: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent8: {AN}{aa} -> (¬{I}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent9: ({AI}{ea} v {B}{ea}) sent10: {B}{aa} sent11: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent12: {I}{c} -> {E}{b} sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent14: (x): (¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent15: (x): {J}x -> {I}x sent16: (x): {B}x -> ({C}x v ¬{A}x) sent17: {DA}{aa} -> ({AB}{aa} v {BK}{aa}) sent18: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent19: ¬{D}{b} -> {B}{a} sent20: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x v {AB}x) sent21: ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

the fact that either the chimneystack is not tetanic or it is unmodifiable or both does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the chimneystack is not tetanic or unmodifiable or both does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the orthodontist is tetanic. sent2: the teacake is nonmetallic. sent3: the teacake does not rehear epithalamium if it does impugn chalazion and it is nonmetallic. sent4: the chimneystack is tetanic or is unmodifiable or both if it is an ordinary. sent5: that the indexer is anaclitic is true. sent6: the teacake does impugn chalazion. sent7: something is not tetanic and/or it is unmodifiable if it is an ordinary. sent8: the chimneystack is not Bayesian and/or it is unmodifiable if it does irradiate. sent9: the Jeroboam rehears dominus or it is anaclitic or both. sent10: the chimneystack is anaclitic. sent11: the chimneystack is not ordinary if that the crosshead is both not anaclitic and an ordinary is incorrect. sent12: if the freelancer is Bayesian then the teacake does impugn Jeroboam. sent13: if something is not ordinary the fact that it either is not tetanic or is unmodifiable or both is not true. sent14: if something that does not rehear epithalamium impugns Jeroboam then it is not a fare-thee-well. sent15: something is Bayesian if it is real-time. sent16: if something is anaclitic it is lax and/or it is not a kind of an ordinary. sent17: if the chimneystack is a kind of a Restoration then it is unmodifiable or it is a gannet or both. sent18: the chimneystack is an ordinary and it is anaclitic. sent19: if the teacake is not a kind of a fare-thee-well the crosshead is anaclitic. sent20: something is tetanic and/or it is unmodifiable if it is an ordinary. sent21: the chimneystack is tetanic and/or it is unmodifiable. ; $proof$ =

sent7 -> int1: if the chimneystack is ordinary it is not tetanic and/or is unmodifiable.; sent18 -> int2: the fact that the chimneystack is ordinary is not false.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the placeholder does not rough shariah.

¬{B}{a}

sent1: if the placeholder is a kind of a burden then it is a kind of a moor. sent2: the fact that the placeholder is non-rhombic thing that is not a moor is not right. sent3: the placeholder is a debut. sent4: if that that the placeholder is not rhombic and is not a kind of a moor is not right is correct then it roughs shariah. sent5: that the Chandler is rhombic hold. sent6: that the sackbut is not revivalistic and it does not rough shariah does not hold. sent7: that the mountebank is not Flemish and is a kind of a moor does not hold. sent8: if the placeholder is a skimming it does rehear Smilax. sent9: that the dummy does not impugn dummy and is a kind of a dorsum is not true. sent10: the placeholder is a wheeled. sent11: the fact that the placeholder is not mathematical and is not expressible is wrong.

sent1: {J}{a} -> {AB}{a} sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: {AE}{a} sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent5: {AA}{ak} sent6: ¬(¬{HS}{fn} & ¬{B}{fn}) sent7: ¬(¬{FO}{hm} & {AB}{hm}) sent8: {BG}{a} -> {ER}{a} sent9: ¬(¬{JH}{eo} & {IL}{eo}) sent10: {GI}{a} sent11: ¬(¬{CH}{a} & ¬{HT}{a})

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = the placeholder does not rough shariah. ; $context$ = sent1: if the placeholder is a kind of a burden then it is a kind of a moor. sent2: the fact that the placeholder is non-rhombic thing that is not a moor is not right. sent3: the placeholder is a debut. sent4: if that that the placeholder is not rhombic and is not a kind of a moor is not right is correct then it roughs shariah. sent5: that the Chandler is rhombic hold. sent6: that the sackbut is not revivalistic and it does not rough shariah does not hold. sent7: that the mountebank is not Flemish and is a kind of a moor does not hold. sent8: if the placeholder is a skimming it does rehear Smilax. sent9: that the dummy does not impugn dummy and is a kind of a dorsum is not true. sent10: the placeholder is a wheeled. sent11: the fact that the placeholder is not mathematical and is not expressible is wrong. ; $proof$ =

sent4 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the giraffe is agonistic and it does rehear pellucidness does not hold.

¬({A}{a} & {B}{a})

sent1: the giraffe is a pro. sent2: the fact that the Timorese does not rehear signalman and/or is on-site is not correct if the fitting is an otology. sent3: the fitting is a kind of an otology that does rough lure if the fact that the lure is not a policeman hold. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a turnery but calyptrate is wrong the giraffe is agonistic. sent5: a non-centesimal thing does impugn omen and is not a bombazine. sent6: the giraffe is calyptrate. sent7: the cattalo is a kind of a Seriphidium if that the giraffe is non-cinerary thing that is annexational is not true. sent8: if the giraffe is annexational it rehears pellucidness. sent9: the giraffe is annexational if there exists something such that it does rehear pellucidness. sent10: the giraffe is annexational. sent11: if the oilman is on-site it is immaterial. sent12: if something is not annexational then the fact that it is agonistic and does rehear pellucidness does not hold. sent13: the lure is not a kind of a policeman if there exists something such that it does impugn omen and is not a bombazine. sent14: the javelin is not centesimal if it does romanticize and is not a change-up. sent15: the caraway is not nondeductible if the Timorese is nondeductible. sent16: the retinene is not annexational and/or it is not non-cinerary if the caraway is not nondeductible. sent17: if the fact that something does not rehear signalman and/or it is on-site does not hold it is nondeductible. sent18: the javelin does romanticize but it is not a change-up. sent19: there is something such that that it is not a turnery but calyptrate is not true.

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

the fact that the giraffe is agonistic and it rehears pellucidness is wrong.

¬({A}{a} & {B}{a})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the giraffe is agonistic and it does rehear pellucidness does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the giraffe is a pro. sent2: the fact that the Timorese does not rehear signalman and/or is on-site is not correct if the fitting is an otology. sent3: the fitting is a kind of an otology that does rough lure if the fact that the lure is not a policeman hold. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a turnery but calyptrate is wrong the giraffe is agonistic. sent5: a non-centesimal thing does impugn omen and is not a bombazine. sent6: the giraffe is calyptrate. sent7: the cattalo is a kind of a Seriphidium if that the giraffe is non-cinerary thing that is annexational is not true. sent8: if the giraffe is annexational it rehears pellucidness. sent9: the giraffe is annexational if there exists something such that it does rehear pellucidness. sent10: the giraffe is annexational. sent11: if the oilman is on-site it is immaterial. sent12: if something is not annexational then the fact that it is agonistic and does rehear pellucidness does not hold. sent13: the lure is not a kind of a policeman if there exists something such that it does impugn omen and is not a bombazine. sent14: the javelin is not centesimal if it does romanticize and is not a change-up. sent15: the caraway is not nondeductible if the Timorese is nondeductible. sent16: the retinene is not annexational and/or it is not non-cinerary if the caraway is not nondeductible. sent17: if the fact that something does not rehear signalman and/or it is on-site does not hold it is nondeductible. sent18: the javelin does romanticize but it is not a change-up. sent19: there is something such that that it is not a turnery but calyptrate is not true. ; $proof$ =

sent19 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the giraffe is agonistic is true.; sent8 & sent10 -> int2: the fact that the giraffe does rehear pellucidness hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the ownership does not occur.

¬{A}

sent1: the roughing Sabah does not occur. sent2: that the ownership occurs leads to either that the pacing happens or that the deep-sea does not occur or both. sent3: if the roughing Sabah does not occur that the pacing happens and/or the deep-sea does not occur does not hold. sent4: the natalness does not occur.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the ownership does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the roughing Sabah does not occur. sent2: that the ownership occurs leads to either that the pacing happens or that the deep-sea does not occur or both. sent3: if the roughing Sabah does not occur that the pacing happens and/or the deep-sea does not occur does not hold. sent4: the natalness does not occur. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ownership happens.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the pacing and/or the non-deep-seaness happens.; sent3 & sent1 -> int2: that the pacing happens and/or the deep-sea does not occur is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

that the agglutinogen does not impugn affix and is a moral is wrong.

¬(¬{B}{b} & {C}{b})

sent1: the thiazide is a putter that does impugn guitarist if there exists something such that the fact that it does not diffuse is true. sent2: if the fact that something brachiates and it is intrusive is wrong it does not brachiates. sent3: the zoomastigote is not a litterbin if that it does not impugn IR and/or it does ripen bolster does not hold. sent4: the zoomastigote is not fibrocalcific. sent5: there exists something such that it does not impugn inferiority and is not propulsive. sent6: the fact that the tributyrin does brachiate and it is intrusive is wrong if the storyteller does not impugn guitarist. sent7: if the zoomastigote is not a litterbin and it is not fibrocalcific the leeway does not diffuse. sent8: the tributyrin is not opportune if something that does not impugn inferiority is not propulsive. sent9: the fact that the zoomastigote does not impugn IR and/or it ripens bolster does not hold. sent10: if the thiazide is a kind of a putter and it does impugn guitarist then the storyteller does not impugn guitarist. sent11: that something does not impugn affix but it is a kind of a moral is false if it is not opportune. sent12: if the tributyrin is not opportune the agglutinogen does not impugn affix and is moral. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it does not impugn inferiority hold. sent14: if something is opportune then it is both not audio-lingual and an impressionist. sent15: the tributyrin is not opportune if something does impugn inferiority and is not propulsive.

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

the fact that the agglutinogen does not impugn affix and is a moral is incorrect.

¬(¬{B}{b} & {C}{b})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the agglutinogen does not impugn affix and is a moral is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the thiazide is a putter that does impugn guitarist if there exists something such that the fact that it does not diffuse is true. sent2: if the fact that something brachiates and it is intrusive is wrong it does not brachiates. sent3: the zoomastigote is not a litterbin if that it does not impugn IR and/or it does ripen bolster does not hold. sent4: the zoomastigote is not fibrocalcific. sent5: there exists something such that it does not impugn inferiority and is not propulsive. sent6: the fact that the tributyrin does brachiate and it is intrusive is wrong if the storyteller does not impugn guitarist. sent7: if the zoomastigote is not a litterbin and it is not fibrocalcific the leeway does not diffuse. sent8: the tributyrin is not opportune if something that does not impugn inferiority is not propulsive. sent9: the fact that the zoomastigote does not impugn IR and/or it ripens bolster does not hold. sent10: if the thiazide is a kind of a putter and it does impugn guitarist then the storyteller does not impugn guitarist. sent11: that something does not impugn affix but it is a kind of a moral is false if it is not opportune. sent12: if the tributyrin is not opportune the agglutinogen does not impugn affix and is moral. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it does not impugn inferiority hold. sent14: if something is opportune then it is both not audio-lingual and an impressionist. sent15: the tributyrin is not opportune if something does impugn inferiority and is not propulsive. ; $proof$ =

sent5 & sent8 -> int1: the tributyrin is not opportune.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the ordination happens.

{D}

sent1: if the rehearing divan happens the ordination happens. sent2: if the rehearing Houston does not occur then the leprousness does not occur and the unfairness does not occur. sent3: if the fact that the ordination does not occur is correct then the fact that both the non-southernness and the non-choricness happens is not true. sent4: if the fact that that both the non-southernness and the non-choricness happens hold is not right the undatableness occurs. sent5: the lifework happens. sent6: the rehearing divan is triggered by that the southernness occurs. sent7: if the fact that the leprousness does not occur hold then the faro and the rehearing divan happens. sent8: that the anecdote does not occur brings about that the reversible does not occur and the ordination does not occur. sent9: the choricness occurs. sent10: if the lifework and the golfing happens the rehearing Houston does not occur. sent11: if the fact that the ordination and the choricness occurs is wrong the ordination does not occur. sent12: the southernness happens and the choricness occurs. sent13: the impugning Aegean occurs. sent14: that the ordination occurs and the choricness occurs is incorrect if the southernness does not occur.

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

both the undatableness and the faro happens.

({GA} & {FO})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the ordination happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the rehearing divan happens the ordination happens. sent2: if the rehearing Houston does not occur then the leprousness does not occur and the unfairness does not occur. sent3: if the fact that the ordination does not occur is correct then the fact that both the non-southernness and the non-choricness happens is not true. sent4: if the fact that that both the non-southernness and the non-choricness happens hold is not right the undatableness occurs. sent5: the lifework happens. sent6: the rehearing divan is triggered by that the southernness occurs. sent7: if the fact that the leprousness does not occur hold then the faro and the rehearing divan happens. sent8: that the anecdote does not occur brings about that the reversible does not occur and the ordination does not occur. sent9: the choricness occurs. sent10: if the lifework and the golfing happens the rehearing Houston does not occur. sent11: if the fact that the ordination and the choricness occurs is wrong the ordination does not occur. sent12: the southernness happens and the choricness occurs. sent13: the impugning Aegean occurs. sent14: that the ordination occurs and the choricness occurs is incorrect if the southernness does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent12 -> int1: the southernness occurs.; sent6 & int1 -> int2: the rehearing divan occurs.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the punctilio does not occur.

¬{A}

sent1: the burdening does not occur. sent2: the acetonicness happens and the burdening does not occur. sent3: that the acidicness does not occur and the roughing Orono does not occur is brought about by that the perinealness occurs. sent4: the perinealness occurs and the rehearing T-man happens if the stunner does not occur. sent5: either the perinealness occurs or the rehearing T-man does not occur or both. sent6: that the roughing Orono happens yields that the ophthalmicness occurs but the laryngospasm does not occur. sent7: the impugning sorbent occurs if the faithfulness occurs. sent8: the impugning sorbent yields that the confidentness occurs but the stunner does not occur. sent9: if the iteration occurs the punctilio occurs. sent10: if the acetonicness happens and the burdening does not occur the fact that the iteration happens is not wrong. sent11: that the acetonicness occurs and the burden happens yields that the iteration happens. sent12: the non-ophthalmicness brings about that the punctilio does not occur and the iteration does not occur. sent13: if the acidicness does not occur the ophthalmicness does not occur.

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

the countermand but not the laryngospasm occurs.

({HI} & ¬{S})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the punctilio does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the burdening does not occur. sent2: the acetonicness happens and the burdening does not occur. sent3: that the acidicness does not occur and the roughing Orono does not occur is brought about by that the perinealness occurs. sent4: the perinealness occurs and the rehearing T-man happens if the stunner does not occur. sent5: either the perinealness occurs or the rehearing T-man does not occur or both. sent6: that the roughing Orono happens yields that the ophthalmicness occurs but the laryngospasm does not occur. sent7: the impugning sorbent occurs if the faithfulness occurs. sent8: the impugning sorbent yields that the confidentness occurs but the stunner does not occur. sent9: if the iteration occurs the punctilio occurs. sent10: if the acetonicness happens and the burdening does not occur the fact that the iteration happens is not wrong. sent11: that the acetonicness occurs and the burden happens yields that the iteration happens. sent12: the non-ophthalmicness brings about that the punctilio does not occur and the iteration does not occur. sent13: if the acidicness does not occur the ophthalmicness does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent10 & sent2 -> int1: the iteration happens.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the Freon is not a Muztag is not false.

¬{A}{a}

sent1: something does not crystallize if the fact that it is not a Muztag and it is not corinthian is not true. sent2: the shanny is a Guyanese. sent3: the Freon is non-Guyanese if it is a kind of a Muztag and does not rough dandruff. sent4: if something is a tambour but it is not Kiplingesque then it does not rough dandruff. sent5: the fact that the shanny is a tambour but not Kiplingesque is not incorrect if it is a Guyanese. sent6: if the shanny is a Guyanese it is a tambour. sent7: if the shanny does not rough dandruff then that the Freon does not rough dandruff and it is not appendicular is not true. sent8: something is not a Muztag if it does rough dandruff. sent9: the fact that the dandruff is both an avalanche and a formalization does not hold.

sent1: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{GJ}x) -> ¬{BH}x sent2: {D}{aa} sent3: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent4: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: {D}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: {D}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent7: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent8: (x): {B}x -> ¬{A}x sent9: ¬({E}{d} & {F}{d})

if the fact that that the shanny is not a Muztag and it is not corinthian is false is not wrong then it does not crystallize.

¬(¬{A}{aa} & ¬{GJ}{aa}) -> ¬{BH}{aa}

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Freon is not a Muztag is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not crystallize if the fact that it is not a Muztag and it is not corinthian is not true. sent2: the shanny is a Guyanese. sent3: the Freon is non-Guyanese if it is a kind of a Muztag and does not rough dandruff. sent4: if something is a tambour but it is not Kiplingesque then it does not rough dandruff. sent5: the fact that the shanny is a tambour but not Kiplingesque is not incorrect if it is a Guyanese. sent6: if the shanny is a Guyanese it is a tambour. sent7: if the shanny does not rough dandruff then that the Freon does not rough dandruff and it is not appendicular is not true. sent8: something is not a Muztag if it does rough dandruff. sent9: the fact that the dandruff is both an avalanche and a formalization does not hold. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> int1: if that the shanny is a tambour but not Kiplingesque hold then it does not rough dandruff.; sent5 & sent2 -> int2: the shanny is a tambour and not Kiplingesque.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the shanny does not rough dandruff.; int3 & sent7 -> int4: the fact that the Freon does not rough dandruff and is not appendicular is wrong.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the pomade is not socioeconomic.

¬{B}{b}

sent1: if the victimizer is commons but it is not linguistic then the fact that the pomade is socioeconomic hold. sent2: the pomade is socioeconomic if the victimizer is commons and it is linguistic. sent3: something does not ripen IDP if it does not droop. sent4: if the victimizer is not calyptrate then it is a kind of commons thing that is not linguistic. sent5: that the pomade rationalizes and does droop is false if it does not premeditate. sent6: the pomade is not socioeconomic if the fact that the victimizer is not calyptrate and is not socioeconomic is not right. sent7: if the fact that something does rationalize and it droops is not true it does not ripen IDP. sent8: the victimizer is not linguistic. sent9: if something does not ripen IDP then the fact that either it is socioeconomic or it is not calyptrate or both hold. sent10: the victimizer is not linguistic if the fact that it is not calyptrate is not incorrect. sent11: the silverpoint is socioeconomic and is not a kind of a weekday. sent12: the victimizer is not calyptrate. sent13: that the victimizer is noncomprehensive is right. sent14: if something does not ripen IDP the fact that it is both not calyptrate and not socioeconomic is not correct.

sent1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent2: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent5: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬({E}{b} & {D}{b}) sent6: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: (x): ¬({E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent8: ¬{AB}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x v ¬{A}x) sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} sent11: ({B}{ge} & ¬{ES}{ge}) sent12: ¬{A}{a} sent13: {HR}{a} sent14: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x)

the pomade is not socioeconomic.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the pomade is not socioeconomic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the victimizer is commons but it is not linguistic then the fact that the pomade is socioeconomic hold. sent2: the pomade is socioeconomic if the victimizer is commons and it is linguistic. sent3: something does not ripen IDP if it does not droop. sent4: if the victimizer is not calyptrate then it is a kind of commons thing that is not linguistic. sent5: that the pomade rationalizes and does droop is false if it does not premeditate. sent6: the pomade is not socioeconomic if the fact that the victimizer is not calyptrate and is not socioeconomic is not right. sent7: if the fact that something does rationalize and it droops is not true it does not ripen IDP. sent8: the victimizer is not linguistic. sent9: if something does not ripen IDP then the fact that either it is socioeconomic or it is not calyptrate or both hold. sent10: the victimizer is not linguistic if the fact that it is not calyptrate is not incorrect. sent11: the silverpoint is socioeconomic and is not a kind of a weekday. sent12: the victimizer is not calyptrate. sent13: that the victimizer is noncomprehensive is right. sent14: if something does not ripen IDP the fact that it is both not calyptrate and not socioeconomic is not correct. ; $proof$ =

sent4 & sent12 -> int1: the victimizer is commons but it is not linguistic.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the peninsularness and/or the non-Jacobeanness occurs.

({A} v ¬{C})

sent1: the hairlessness but not the ripening Asin occurs. sent2: that the hairlessness happens but the ripening Asin does not occur brings about that the aiming occurs.

sent1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the peninsularness and/or the non-Jacobeanness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the hairlessness but not the ripening Asin occurs. sent2: that the hairlessness happens but the ripening Asin does not occur brings about that the aiming occurs. ; $proof$ =

sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the aim occurs.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the neuroglialness happens is not false.

{D}

sent1: if the motorization occurs the fact that the entraining occurs but the levanter does not occur is not right. sent2: that the wobble does not occur and the chemoreceptiveness does not occur is brought about by that the betterment does not occur. sent3: if the hypothalamicness does not occur then the motorization happens and the scouting does not occur. sent4: if that either the mutilation or the subscriptness or both happens does not hold then the presence does not occur. sent5: the fact that the Cromwellianness happens or the absolving does not occur or both is incorrect if the rat-a-tat-tat does not occur. sent6: the impugning idealization happens. sent7: the non-neuroglialness is prevented by the acneiformness. sent8: the rat-a-tat-tat does not occur if the stumbling occurs. sent9: the shoot-down does not occur but the wheellessness happens if the rehearing tumbrel does not occur. sent10: the non-hypothalamicness is caused by that the shoot-down does not occur. sent11: that the entraining does not occur causes that not the roughing waxycap but the ripening promisee happens. sent12: the fact that the neuroglialness does not occur is true if the immersing happens and the impugning idealization does not occur. sent13: the entraining does not occur if that the fact that the entraining but not the levanter occurs does not hold is right. sent14: both the impugning idealization and the immersing happens. sent15: the immersing leads to the acneiformness. sent16: that the stumbling happens is brought about by that not the immunohistochemistry but the reformation occurs. sent17: that the presence does not occur brings about that the acneiformness does not occur and the moksa does not occur. sent18: if that the Cromwellianness occurs and/or the absolving does not occur is not true then the betterment does not occur. sent19: that either the mutilation or the subscriptness or both happens does not hold if the wobble does not occur. sent20: if the impugning Antoninus occurs then the rehearing avowal happens. sent21: that the immunohistochemistry does not occur but the reformation occurs is brought about by that the roughing waxycap does not occur.

sent1: {AA} -> ¬({T} & ¬{U}) sent2: ¬{K} -> (¬{I} & ¬{J}) sent3: ¬{AC} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent4: ¬({G} v {H}) -> ¬{F} sent5: ¬{N} -> ¬({M} v ¬{L}) sent6: {A} sent7: {C} -> {D} sent8: {O} -> ¬{N} sent9: ¬{AF} -> (¬{AD} & {AE}) sent10: ¬{AD} -> ¬{AC} sent11: ¬{T} -> (¬{R} & {S}) sent12: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{D} sent13: ¬({T} & ¬{U}) -> ¬{T} sent14: ({A} & {B}) sent15: {B} -> {C} sent16: (¬{P} & {Q}) -> {O} sent17: ¬{F} -> (¬{C} & ¬{E}) sent18: ¬({M} v ¬{L}) -> ¬{K} sent19: ¬{I} -> ¬({G} v {H}) sent20: {DG} -> {DE} sent21: ¬{R} -> (¬{P} & {Q})

the neuroglialness does not occur.

¬{D}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the neuroglialness happens is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the motorization occurs the fact that the entraining occurs but the levanter does not occur is not right. sent2: that the wobble does not occur and the chemoreceptiveness does not occur is brought about by that the betterment does not occur. sent3: if the hypothalamicness does not occur then the motorization happens and the scouting does not occur. sent4: if that either the mutilation or the subscriptness or both happens does not hold then the presence does not occur. sent5: the fact that the Cromwellianness happens or the absolving does not occur or both is incorrect if the rat-a-tat-tat does not occur. sent6: the impugning idealization happens. sent7: the non-neuroglialness is prevented by the acneiformness. sent8: the rat-a-tat-tat does not occur if the stumbling occurs. sent9: the shoot-down does not occur but the wheellessness happens if the rehearing tumbrel does not occur. sent10: the non-hypothalamicness is caused by that the shoot-down does not occur. sent11: that the entraining does not occur causes that not the roughing waxycap but the ripening promisee happens. sent12: the fact that the neuroglialness does not occur is true if the immersing happens and the impugning idealization does not occur. sent13: the entraining does not occur if that the fact that the entraining but not the levanter occurs does not hold is right. sent14: both the impugning idealization and the immersing happens. sent15: the immersing leads to the acneiformness. sent16: that the stumbling happens is brought about by that not the immunohistochemistry but the reformation occurs. sent17: that the presence does not occur brings about that the acneiformness does not occur and the moksa does not occur. sent18: if that the Cromwellianness occurs and/or the absolving does not occur is not true then the betterment does not occur. sent19: that either the mutilation or the subscriptness or both happens does not hold if the wobble does not occur. sent20: if the impugning Antoninus occurs then the rehearing avowal happens. sent21: that the immunohistochemistry does not occur but the reformation occurs is brought about by that the roughing waxycap does not occur. ; $proof$ =

sent14 -> int1: the immersing occurs.; sent15 & int1 -> int2: the acneiformness occurs.; sent7 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the felloe is official is not false.

{E}{a}

sent1: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a canine then the Corinthian is not a unresponsiveness and/or it is not ateleiotic. sent2: an explosive rehears foolscap. sent3: something does rough Thysanoptera if it does not uncover and/or it is not a kind of a appreciator. sent4: if the felloe is a bellows then it is an official. sent5: there exists something such that it does impugn felloe. sent6: there exists something such that it does not impugn felloe. sent7: the felloe is an official and/or it does not clip. sent8: something is a Indonesian if it is not a canine or it is not a wallah or both. sent9: if the fact that the planation is a wallah hold then it is canine. sent10: the felloe maunders. sent11: if the felloe is not a kind of a canine it is a kind of a Indonesian. sent12: something is a dodge if that it is unhappy is not incorrect. sent13: the felloe is a canine and/or is not a wallah if there is something such that it does not impugn felloe. sent14: if something is not a canine then it is a Indonesian. sent15: something is a Zionism if it does exercise. sent16: if something is Indonesian it is an official. sent17: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not impugn felloe is not incorrect either the felloe is non-canine or it is not a wallah or both. sent18: something is not an official if the fact that it does not impugn felloe is not incorrect. sent19: if something substitutes then it does impugn Yastrzemski. sent20: the felloe is canine or is not a kind of a wallah or both.

sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{EA}{fk} v ¬{DA}{fk}) sent2: (x): {IR}x -> {HD}x sent3: (x): (¬{GH}x v ¬{CM}x) -> {GP}x sent4: {EJ}{a} -> {E}{a} sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent7: ({E}{a} v ¬{HH}{a}) sent8: (x): (¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) -> {D}x sent9: {C}{e} -> {B}{e} sent10: {IT}{a} sent11: ¬{B}{a} -> {D}{a} sent12: (x): {FU}x -> {P}x sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent14: (x): ¬{B}x -> {D}x sent15: (x): {EF}x -> {DN}x sent16: (x): {D}x -> {E}x sent17: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent18: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{E}x sent19: (x): {N}x -> {EM}x sent20: ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a})

the felloe is not an official.

¬{E}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the felloe is official is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a canine then the Corinthian is not a unresponsiveness and/or it is not ateleiotic. sent2: an explosive rehears foolscap. sent3: something does rough Thysanoptera if it does not uncover and/or it is not a kind of a appreciator. sent4: if the felloe is a bellows then it is an official. sent5: there exists something such that it does impugn felloe. sent6: there exists something such that it does not impugn felloe. sent7: the felloe is an official and/or it does not clip. sent8: something is a Indonesian if it is not a canine or it is not a wallah or both. sent9: if the fact that the planation is a wallah hold then it is canine. sent10: the felloe maunders. sent11: if the felloe is not a kind of a canine it is a kind of a Indonesian. sent12: something is a dodge if that it is unhappy is not incorrect. sent13: the felloe is a canine and/or is not a wallah if there is something such that it does not impugn felloe. sent14: if something is not a canine then it is a Indonesian. sent15: something is a Zionism if it does exercise. sent16: if something is Indonesian it is an official. sent17: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not impugn felloe is not incorrect either the felloe is non-canine or it is not a wallah or both. sent18: something is not an official if the fact that it does not impugn felloe is not incorrect. sent19: if something substitutes then it does impugn Yastrzemski. sent20: the felloe is canine or is not a kind of a wallah or both. ; $proof$ =

sent6 & sent17 -> int1: the felloe is not a canine and/or it is not a kind of a wallah.; sent8 -> int2: if the felloe is not a canine and/or it is not a wallah then it is a Indonesian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the felloe is a Indonesian.; sent16 -> int4: the felloe is an official if that it is not non-Indonesian is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the diastolicness and the fulling happens.

({A} & {C})

sent1: the fact that that the rolling does not occur and the roughing intention does not occur is not right hold. sent2: the caravanning does not occur. sent3: the fact that the latestness does not occur and the gust does not occur is not true. sent4: the ripening ICU occurs and the synthesizing occurs. sent5: the assembly occurs. sent6: if the quadrille does not occur then the fullness occurs and the assembly happens. sent7: the roughing antineutron does not occur. sent8: that both the non-cogitativeness and the quadrille happens is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the ripening parakeet does not occur and the espionage does not occur is not true if the tightness does not occur. sent10: the elementariness does not occur. sent11: both the slavery and the unoriginalness happens. sent12: if the quadrille does not occur the assembly occurs. sent13: the resonance occurs and the impugning boneshaker occurs. sent14: if the caravanning does not occur then the fact that both the non-diastolicness and the non-recessionariness happens is not true. sent15: the ripening Hutton happens. sent16: the abranchiateness and the concretisticness happens. sent17: the fenestration does not occur. sent18: the quadrille does not occur if the fact that both the non-cogitativeness and the quadrille occurs does not hold. sent19: the main happens and the palatine happens if the maxillomandibularness does not occur. sent20: the tightness happens.

sent1: ¬(¬{BK} & ¬{EB}) sent2: ¬{F} sent3: ¬(¬{R} & ¬{GR}) sent4: ({EA} & {HD}) sent5: {D} sent6: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) sent7: ¬{CK} sent8: ¬(¬{G} & {E}) sent9: ¬{EF} -> ¬(¬{BD} & ¬{IP}) sent10: ¬{BH} sent11: ({FI} & {DB}) sent12: ¬{E} -> {D} sent13: ({GQ} & {CR}) sent14: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent15: {DN} sent16: ({FD} & {IT}) sent17: ¬{DF} sent18: ¬(¬{G} & {E}) -> ¬{E} sent19: ¬{HC} -> ({EM} & {JI}) sent20: {EF}

the fact that the diastolicness occurs and the fullness happens is wrong.

¬({A} & {C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the diastolicness and the fulling happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that the rolling does not occur and the roughing intention does not occur is not right hold. sent2: the caravanning does not occur. sent3: the fact that the latestness does not occur and the gust does not occur is not true. sent4: the ripening ICU occurs and the synthesizing occurs. sent5: the assembly occurs. sent6: if the quadrille does not occur then the fullness occurs and the assembly happens. sent7: the roughing antineutron does not occur. sent8: that both the non-cogitativeness and the quadrille happens is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the ripening parakeet does not occur and the espionage does not occur is not true if the tightness does not occur. sent10: the elementariness does not occur. sent11: both the slavery and the unoriginalness happens. sent12: if the quadrille does not occur the assembly occurs. sent13: the resonance occurs and the impugning boneshaker occurs. sent14: if the caravanning does not occur then the fact that both the non-diastolicness and the non-recessionariness happens is not true. sent15: the ripening Hutton happens. sent16: the abranchiateness and the concretisticness happens. sent17: the fenestration does not occur. sent18: the quadrille does not occur if the fact that both the non-cogitativeness and the quadrille occurs does not hold. sent19: the main happens and the palatine happens if the maxillomandibularness does not occur. sent20: the tightness happens. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the diastolicness does not occur.; sent14 & sent2 -> int1: that the non-diastolicness and the non-recessionaryness occurs is not true.; sent18 & sent8 -> int2: that the quadrille occurs is false.; sent6 & int2 -> int3: the fullness occurs and the assembly happens.; int3 -> int4: the fulling occurs.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the humectant impugns teacake and it is a farming.

({B}{c} & {D}{c})

sent1: if the burgess is not unhealthful then that the teacake does not rehear somatotype but it is a requisition is not correct. sent2: the burgess is not unhealthful. sent3: if the burgess is a kind of non-unhealthful thing that does not impugn teacake the fact that the humectant is not unhealthful is true. sent4: that something is a anxiousness and it does rehear somatotype does not hold if it is not unhealthful. sent5: if the fact that something is not a requisition hold it does not impugn teacake. sent6: if the teacake is not a requisition it does not impugn teacake. sent7: the fact that the humectant impugns teacake and it is a kind of a farming is not right if the teacake does not impugns teacake. sent8: something impugns pollinator if the fact that it is not a farming and it is not glossopharyngeal is not false. sent9: if something impugns pollinator it is not unhealthful and it does not impugn teacake. sent10: if that the burgess does not rough processional hold then it is both not a farming and not glossopharyngeal. sent11: if that something does not rehear somatotype but it is a requisition is incorrect then it does not impugn teacake. sent12: if the fact that something does not impugn pollinator and is not unhealthful does not hold then it impugns teacake.

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

that the humectant does impugn teacake and it does farm is not wrong.

({B}{c} & {D}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the humectant impugns teacake and it is a farming. ; $context$ = sent1: if the burgess is not unhealthful then that the teacake does not rehear somatotype but it is a requisition is not correct. sent2: the burgess is not unhealthful. sent3: if the burgess is a kind of non-unhealthful thing that does not impugn teacake the fact that the humectant is not unhealthful is true. sent4: that something is a anxiousness and it does rehear somatotype does not hold if it is not unhealthful. sent5: if the fact that something is not a requisition hold it does not impugn teacake. sent6: if the teacake is not a requisition it does not impugn teacake. sent7: the fact that the humectant impugns teacake and it is a kind of a farming is not right if the teacake does not impugns teacake. sent8: something impugns pollinator if the fact that it is not a farming and it is not glossopharyngeal is not false. sent9: if something impugns pollinator it is not unhealthful and it does not impugn teacake. sent10: if that the burgess does not rough processional hold then it is both not a farming and not glossopharyngeal. sent11: if that something does not rehear somatotype but it is a requisition is incorrect then it does not impugn teacake. sent12: if the fact that something does not impugn pollinator and is not unhealthful does not hold then it impugns teacake. ; $proof$ =

sent1 & sent2 -> int1: that the teacake does not rehear somatotype and does requisition is false.; sent11 -> int2: if the fact that the teacake does not rehear somatotype but it requisitions is incorrect then it does not impugn teacake.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the teacake does not impugn teacake.; int3 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the reformer is not malodorous.

¬{B}{b}

sent1: the reformer is holophytic if there is something such that the fact that it is not excusable and it is non-malodorous is wrong. sent2: if there is something such that that it is not holophytic and it is inexcusable is incorrect the reformer is malodorous. sent3: if that the PO is both not a breadstick and malodorous hold then the succinylcholine is not a breadstick. sent4: the fact that the PO is a kind of holophytic thing that is not excusable does not hold. sent5: the fact that something is not a graphology and it is equal is incorrect if it is not a breadstick. sent6: if something either does not impugn somatotype or is a breadstick or both it is not malodorous. sent7: that the PO is both not holophytic and excusable is false. sent8: the fact that the syrinx is both not a mauve and not a carousel is incorrect. sent9: that the PO is not holophytic and is not excusable is not correct if it is not a breadstick. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it does not rough tod and is not non-hypoglycemic is false. sent11: the PO is not a kind of a breadstick.

sent1: (x): ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{B}x) -> {AA}{b} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}{b} sent3: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{eu} sent4: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{FU}x & ¬{T}x) sent6: (x): (¬{C}x v {A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: ¬(¬{HE}{ac} & ¬{DS}{ac}) sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent10: (Ex): ¬(¬{HL}x & {HI}x) sent11: ¬{A}{a}

the fact that the reformer is not malodorous is true.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the reformer is not malodorous. ; $context$ = sent1: the reformer is holophytic if there is something such that the fact that it is not excusable and it is non-malodorous is wrong. sent2: if there is something such that that it is not holophytic and it is inexcusable is incorrect the reformer is malodorous. sent3: if that the PO is both not a breadstick and malodorous hold then the succinylcholine is not a breadstick. sent4: the fact that the PO is a kind of holophytic thing that is not excusable does not hold. sent5: the fact that something is not a graphology and it is equal is incorrect if it is not a breadstick. sent6: if something either does not impugn somatotype or is a breadstick or both it is not malodorous. sent7: that the PO is both not holophytic and excusable is false. sent8: the fact that the syrinx is both not a mauve and not a carousel is incorrect. sent9: that the PO is not holophytic and is not excusable is not correct if it is not a breadstick. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it does not rough tod and is not non-hypoglycemic is false. sent11: the PO is not a kind of a breadstick. ; $proof$ =

sent9 & sent11 -> int1: that the PO is not holophytic and it is not excusable does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is not holophytic and is not excusable is wrong.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a alprazolam that is not Balzacian it is a kind of a Freon hold is wrong.

¬((Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x)

sent1: if a Balzacian thing is not a Typhon then it does strand. sent2: if the illumination impugns carmaker and does not write then it is a alprazolam. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a Hussite and is not antithyroid then it is a nonreader. sent4: something is a Freon if it is a alprazolam and is Balzacian. sent5: if something that is a Erythrocebus is not hemodynamic it calculates. sent6: if something that impugns joke does not gloss it is a potation. sent7: there is something such that if it is a alprazolam but not non-Balzacian then it is a Freon. sent8: the eyeball is a kind of a commute if it proof reads and is not scalable. sent9: there exists something such that if it does screen and it is not a cardiologist then it is a gasbag. sent10: something is a kind of a Freon if it is a alprazolam that is not Balzacian. sent11: if the leach is a kind of a alprazolam and it is not non-Balzacian it is a Freon. sent12: something is a kind of a gray if it is a swoop and is not archegonial.

sent1: (x): ({AB}x & ¬{CD}x) -> {IK}x sent2: ({IE}{db} & ¬{FQ}{db}) -> {AA}{db} sent3: (Ex): ({ET}x & ¬{BA}x) -> {CA}x sent4: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: (x): ({BG}x & ¬{IP}x) -> {DH}x sent6: (x): ({CR}x & ¬{IT}x) -> {G}x sent7: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent8: ({CT}{ih} & ¬{I}{ih}) -> {GG}{ih} sent9: (Ex): ({IN}x & ¬{FH}x) -> {ES}x sent10: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent12: (x): ({IR}x & ¬{AM}x) -> {JE}x

if the fact that the syringe is Balzacian and is not a Typhon is not false it is a strand.

({AB}{fu} & ¬{CD}{fu}) -> {IK}{fu}

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a alprazolam that is not Balzacian it is a kind of a Freon hold is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if a Balzacian thing is not a Typhon then it does strand. sent2: if the illumination impugns carmaker and does not write then it is a alprazolam. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a Hussite and is not antithyroid then it is a nonreader. sent4: something is a Freon if it is a alprazolam and is Balzacian. sent5: if something that is a Erythrocebus is not hemodynamic it calculates. sent6: if something that impugns joke does not gloss it is a potation. sent7: there is something such that if it is a alprazolam but not non-Balzacian then it is a Freon. sent8: the eyeball is a kind of a commute if it proof reads and is not scalable. sent9: there exists something such that if it does screen and it is not a cardiologist then it is a gasbag. sent10: something is a kind of a Freon if it is a alprazolam that is not Balzacian. sent11: if the leach is a kind of a alprazolam and it is not non-Balzacian it is a Freon. sent12: something is a kind of a gray if it is a swoop and is not archegonial. ; $proof$ =

sent10 -> int1: if the leach is both a alprazolam and not Balzacian it is a kind of a Freon.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the alcohol is not permissive.

¬{D}{b}

sent1: the alcohol is random thing that is not aerolitic. sent2: something is random but it is not bicylindrical if it is not a kind of a Sikh. sent3: there exists something such that it is a Sikh. sent4: the alcohol is a mandrake but it does not stabilize. sent5: something is a kind of a Chrysophyllum. sent6: there are permissive and numeral things. sent7: the nine is a complaisance and is not a visualization. sent8: the felloe is not Sikh if the fact that either the nine is not a Sikh or it is not a kind of a numeral or both does not hold. sent9: the alcohol is a Calgary if something is permissive. sent10: something is aerolitic. sent11: the nine is a numeral but it is not random if there exists something such that it is a Sikh.

sent1: ({C}{b} & ¬{U}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({C}x & ¬{EK}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: ({HL}{b} & ¬{IT}{b}) sent5: (Ex): {AQ}x sent6: (Ex): ({D}x & {B}x) sent7: ({DD}{a} & ¬{HB}{a}) sent8: ¬(¬{A}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{dd} sent9: (x): {D}x -> {FU}{b} sent10: (Ex): {U}x sent11: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})

the felloe is random but it is not bicylindrical.

({C}{dd} & ¬{EK}{dd})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the alcohol is not permissive. ; $context$ = sent1: the alcohol is random thing that is not aerolitic. sent2: something is random but it is not bicylindrical if it is not a kind of a Sikh. sent3: there exists something such that it is a Sikh. sent4: the alcohol is a mandrake but it does not stabilize. sent5: something is a kind of a Chrysophyllum. sent6: there are permissive and numeral things. sent7: the nine is a complaisance and is not a visualization. sent8: the felloe is not Sikh if the fact that either the nine is not a Sikh or it is not a kind of a numeral or both does not hold. sent9: the alcohol is a Calgary if something is permissive. sent10: something is aerolitic. sent11: the nine is a numeral but it is not random if there exists something such that it is a Sikh. ; $proof$ =

sent3 & sent11 -> int1: the nine is a numeral but it is not random.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is numeral thing that is not random.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the stylet is not a mother.

¬{AA}{aa}

sent1: the stylet is not a dissimilation if it is starchless and does not procure. sent2: if something is not a dissimilation then it is a mother and it does rough strabismus. sent3: that the stylet does not mother hold if the fact that the cauliflower is a dissimilation or it does not procure or both does not hold. sent4: the fact that the stylet is starchless but it does not procure is right.

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

the stylet is not a mother.

¬{AA}{aa}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the stylet is not a mother. ; $context$ = sent1: the stylet is not a dissimilation if it is starchless and does not procure. sent2: if something is not a dissimilation then it is a mother and it does rough strabismus. sent3: that the stylet does not mother hold if the fact that the cauliflower is a dissimilation or it does not procure or both does not hold. sent4: the fact that the stylet is starchless but it does not procure is right. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> int1: if the stylet is not a kind of a dissimilation then it does mother and roughs strabismus.; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: the stylet is not a dissimilation.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the stylet is a kind of a mother and it roughs strabismus.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

there is something such that if it rehears Monsieur or it is not a atopy or both the fact that it is a kind of a nebule hold.

(Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x

sent1: if the fact that the silverspot ripens promisee is not wrong then the fact that it rehears Monsieur is right. sent2: if either something disjoins or it does not impugn Chihuahua or both then it is a nebule. sent3: if the silverspot rehears Monsieur then it is a nebule. sent4: there is something such that if it rehears Monsieur the fact that it is a kind of a nebule is right. sent5: the silverspot is post-communist if it is a atopy and/or not nonsyllabic. sent6: the silverspot is a kind of a nebule if either it rehears Monsieur or it is not a atopy or both. sent7: there is something such that if it is somatosensory it is nonrandom. sent8: if either the silverspot rehears Monsieur or it is a atopy or both it is a nebule. sent9: there exists something such that if it does impugn Chihuahua it is nonslippery. sent10: the silverspot is forgettable if it is demotic and/or it is a bufo. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a declassification it is a taurine. sent12: the silverspot is a kind of a chine if it does rough AU or does not sneeze or both.

sent1: {IQ}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent2: (x): ({GP}x v ¬{HD}x) -> {B}x sent3: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent4: (Ex): {AA}x -> {B}x sent5: ({AB}{aa} v ¬{IJ}{aa}) -> {EU}{aa} sent6: ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent7: (Ex): {GO}x -> {G}x sent8: ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent9: (Ex): {HD}x -> {AK}x sent10: ({CC}{aa} v {GA}{aa}) -> {FH}{aa} sent11: (Ex): ¬{HR}x -> {CK}x sent12: ({GD}{aa} v ¬{JG}{aa}) -> {DD}{aa}

if either the promisee disjoins or it does not impugn Chihuahua or both then it is a nebule.

({GP}{af} v ¬{HD}{af}) -> {B}{af}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it rehears Monsieur or it is not a atopy or both the fact that it is a kind of a nebule hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the silverspot ripens promisee is not wrong then the fact that it rehears Monsieur is right. sent2: if either something disjoins or it does not impugn Chihuahua or both then it is a nebule. sent3: if the silverspot rehears Monsieur then it is a nebule. sent4: there is something such that if it rehears Monsieur the fact that it is a kind of a nebule is right. sent5: the silverspot is post-communist if it is a atopy and/or not nonsyllabic. sent6: the silverspot is a kind of a nebule if either it rehears Monsieur or it is not a atopy or both. sent7: there is something such that if it is somatosensory it is nonrandom. sent8: if either the silverspot rehears Monsieur or it is a atopy or both it is a nebule. sent9: there exists something such that if it does impugn Chihuahua it is nonslippery. sent10: the silverspot is forgettable if it is demotic and/or it is a bufo. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a declassification it is a taurine. sent12: the silverspot is a kind of a chine if it does rough AU or does not sneeze or both. ; $proof$ =

sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the column does rough tribadism.

{C}{b}

sent1: if that the column is not electrocardiographic but it is a kind of a occiput is not true it does not rough Ornithogalum. sent2: the column does not rough Ornithogalum if it is electrocardiographic. sent3: the vole does untie. sent4: the vole is not a kind of a horsemeat if it is not piscatorial. sent5: the column does not rough tribadism if it does not rough Ornithogalum. sent6: the manikin does not untie. sent7: the fact that the column is not electrocardiographic but it is a kind of a occiput does not hold if the vole unties. sent8: if the column does untie then that the vole roughs Ornithogalum and it is electrocardiographic does not hold. sent9: if something is implacable and it does rehear manicure then it does not rough Ornithogalum.

sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent2: {AA}{b} -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: ¬{HG}{a} -> ¬{BA}{a} sent5: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{C}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{is} sent7: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent8: {A}{b} -> ¬({B}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent9: (x): ({E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x

the excelsior does not rough tribadism.

¬{C}{hl}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the column does rough tribadism. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the column is not electrocardiographic but it is a kind of a occiput is not true it does not rough Ornithogalum. sent2: the column does not rough Ornithogalum if it is electrocardiographic. sent3: the vole does untie. sent4: the vole is not a kind of a horsemeat if it is not piscatorial. sent5: the column does not rough tribadism if it does not rough Ornithogalum. sent6: the manikin does not untie. sent7: the fact that the column is not electrocardiographic but it is a kind of a occiput does not hold if the vole unties. sent8: if the column does untie then that the vole roughs Ornithogalum and it is electrocardiographic does not hold. sent9: if something is implacable and it does rehear manicure then it does not rough Ornithogalum. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent3 -> int1: that the column is a kind of non-electrocardiographic thing that is a occiput is not correct.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the column does not rough Ornithogalum.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it is not a dutifulness and it does market it does not ripen immaturity.

(Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

sent1: there is something such that if it is non-viviparous and it is bold then it is aerophilatelic. sent2: if something is not a former but it is a kind of a dutifulness then it is not opposable. sent3: if the chimneystack is not a dutifulness but it does market it does not ripen immaturity. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of non-diametric thing that impugns imaging is not incorrect it does rough fungus. sent5: if the chimneystack is not octal but it does ripen immaturity then it does not abhor. sent6: the chimneystack does not ripen immaturity if it is a dutifulness and a market.

sent1: (Ex): (¬{IF}x & {FQ}x) -> {DQ}x sent2: (x): (¬{DG}x & {AA}x) -> ¬{HA}x sent3: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (Ex): (¬{GQ}x & {JG}x) -> {FI}x sent5: (¬{DC}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{IC}{aa} sent6: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}

if the chimneystack is not a kind of a former and is a kind of a dutifulness then it is not opposable.

(¬{DG}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{HA}{aa}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a dutifulness and it does market it does not ripen immaturity. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is non-viviparous and it is bold then it is aerophilatelic. sent2: if something is not a former but it is a kind of a dutifulness then it is not opposable. sent3: if the chimneystack is not a dutifulness but it does market it does not ripen immaturity. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of non-diametric thing that impugns imaging is not incorrect it does rough fungus. sent5: if the chimneystack is not octal but it does ripen immaturity then it does not abhor. sent6: the chimneystack does not ripen immaturity if it is a dutifulness and a market. ; $proof$ =

sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the groundsheet is factory-made.

{B}{a}

sent1: the groundsheet is factory-made if the fact that the marchioness does gentle is right. sent2: if the friar's-cowl is not a pannier that the muslin is not evening and is not a Meridian is not true. sent3: something is not hadal if it is non-poetics thing that is not non-relative. sent4: that the marchioness rehears Clitocybe and is not factory-made is not correct. sent5: if the muslin is not a executant the backdoor does not delete and is not a whitewashed. sent6: the marchioness is factory-made. sent7: if the marchioness is a moppet then the fact that it does impugn homeliness and gentles does not hold. sent8: that something is a kind of a moppet and it is centigrade is not true if it is not hadal. sent9: something is both non-poetics and not non-relative if the fact that it is not microcosmic is not false. sent10: if something is a kind of a moppet then that it does impugn homeliness and it does gentle is not right. sent11: something is not a executant if the fact that it is a kind of non-evening thing that is not a Meridian does not hold. sent12: the marchioness does rough Tineidae. sent13: the burgess is a moppet and it rehears sierra. sent14: something is not microcosmic if it does not delete and it is not a whitewashed. sent15: the friar's-cowl is not a pannier. sent16: the stave is centigrade. sent17: the marchioness is centigrade. sent18: the fact that the marchioness is a kind of a moppet and it is centigrade is correct. sent19: the marchioness is centigrade and it is factory-made. sent20: if the fact that the marchioness does impugn homeliness and does not gentle is not right the groundsheet is factory-made. sent21: that the cholla is invisible but it does not ripen burgess is false if it is dimorphic. sent22: that the marchioness does impugn homeliness and it does gentle is not right. sent23: if something is a moppet that it does impugn homeliness and does not gentle does not hold.

sent1: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{a} sent2: ¬{M}{d} -> ¬(¬{L}{c} & ¬{K}{c}) sent3: (x): (¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: ¬({HF}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) sent5: ¬{J}{c} -> (¬{I}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) sent6: {B}{aa} sent7: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent8: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent9: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x & {E}x) sent10: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) -> ¬{J}x sent12: {FU}{aa} sent13: ({A}{cc} & {O}{cc}) sent14: (x): (¬{I}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{G}x sent15: ¬{M}{d} sent16: {C}{bf} sent17: {C}{aa} sent18: ({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent19: ({C}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent20: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{a} sent21: {HM}{h} -> ¬({EP}{h} & ¬{FQ}{h}) sent22: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent23: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

the groundsheet is not factory-made.

¬{B}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the groundsheet is factory-made. ; $context$ = sent1: the groundsheet is factory-made if the fact that the marchioness does gentle is right. sent2: if the friar's-cowl is not a pannier that the muslin is not evening and is not a Meridian is not true. sent3: something is not hadal if it is non-poetics thing that is not non-relative. sent4: that the marchioness rehears Clitocybe and is not factory-made is not correct. sent5: if the muslin is not a executant the backdoor does not delete and is not a whitewashed. sent6: the marchioness is factory-made. sent7: if the marchioness is a moppet then the fact that it does impugn homeliness and gentles does not hold. sent8: that something is a kind of a moppet and it is centigrade is not true if it is not hadal. sent9: something is both non-poetics and not non-relative if the fact that it is not microcosmic is not false. sent10: if something is a kind of a moppet then that it does impugn homeliness and it does gentle is not right. sent11: something is not a executant if the fact that it is a kind of non-evening thing that is not a Meridian does not hold. sent12: the marchioness does rough Tineidae. sent13: the burgess is a moppet and it rehears sierra. sent14: something is not microcosmic if it does not delete and it is not a whitewashed. sent15: the friar's-cowl is not a pannier. sent16: the stave is centigrade. sent17: the marchioness is centigrade. sent18: the fact that the marchioness is a kind of a moppet and it is centigrade is correct. sent19: the marchioness is centigrade and it is factory-made. sent20: if the fact that the marchioness does impugn homeliness and does not gentle is not right the groundsheet is factory-made. sent21: that the cholla is invisible but it does not ripen burgess is false if it is dimorphic. sent22: that the marchioness does impugn homeliness and it does gentle is not right. sent23: if something is a moppet that it does impugn homeliness and does not gentle does not hold. ; $proof$ =

sent23 -> int1: that the marchioness impugns homeliness and does not gentle is not right if it is a moppet.; sent18 -> int2: the marchioness is a kind of a moppet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the marchioness does impugn homeliness but it does not gentle is not true.; int3 & sent20 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the Fothergilla is both ovoviviparous and aerological.

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

sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is not unservile and it does not rough boorishness does not hold. sent2: the Fothergilla is ovoviviparous if there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-unservile thing that does not rough boorishness does not hold. sent3: the countertenor does impugn somatotropin and it does trip. sent4: the Fothergilla is a kind of aerological a Bulnesia. sent5: if the fact that something is not aerological and is not ovoviviparous is false then that it is extraterritorial is correct.

sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent3: ({ED}{h} & {FE}{h}) sent4: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {BL}x

that the Mormon is extraterritorial and does rehear saveloy is true.

({BL}{fd} & {GC}{fd})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the Fothergilla is both ovoviviparous and aerological. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is not unservile and it does not rough boorishness does not hold. sent2: the Fothergilla is ovoviviparous if there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-unservile thing that does not rough boorishness does not hold. sent3: the countertenor does impugn somatotropin and it does trip. sent4: the Fothergilla is a kind of aerological a Bulnesia. sent5: if the fact that something is not aerological and is not ovoviviparous is false then that it is extraterritorial is correct. ; $proof$ =

sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the Fothergilla is ovoviviparous.; sent4 -> int2: the Fothergilla is aerological.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

something is both acinar and not a tidbit.

(Ex): ({B}x & ¬{C}x)

sent1: if the alphabetizer is not a ritual it is not a tidbit. sent2: the alphabetizer is not a ritual. sent3: something rehears relentlessness if it is undrinkable. sent4: there is something such that it is acinar. sent5: that something is not a tidbit but it is acinar does not hold if it is a ritual. sent6: the alphabetizer is a Bulgarian but it is not a Hypentelium if it is sentient. sent7: the barge is sentient. sent8: the alphabetizer is acinar if the fact that the barge is sentient hold. sent9: something is ritual if it does rehear relentlessness.

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

the alphabetizer is a Bulgarian that is not a Hypentelium.

({JK}{b} & ¬{II}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = something is both acinar and not a tidbit. ; $context$ = sent1: if the alphabetizer is not a ritual it is not a tidbit. sent2: the alphabetizer is not a ritual. sent3: something rehears relentlessness if it is undrinkable. sent4: there is something such that it is acinar. sent5: that something is not a tidbit but it is acinar does not hold if it is a ritual. sent6: the alphabetizer is a Bulgarian but it is not a Hypentelium if it is sentient. sent7: the barge is sentient. sent8: the alphabetizer is acinar if the fact that the barge is sentient hold. sent9: something is ritual if it does rehear relentlessness. ; $proof$ =

sent8 & sent7 -> int1: the alphabetizer is acinar.; sent1 & sent2 -> int2: the alphabetizer is not a tidbit.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the alphabetizer is acinar and is not a tidbit.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

that the hollygrape does not rehear rejuvenation is right.

¬{C}{b}

sent1: if something does rehear Photostat it is not apetalous. sent2: if a apetalous thing does rehear Photostat then it rehears rejuvenation. sent3: if the propagator is not longing it is not a headgear. sent4: that the antacid impugns lapel hold. sent5: if the propagator is not a headgear then the sealskin is a kind of a headgear. sent6: the hollygrape rehears rejuvenation if it is apetalous and does rehear Photostat. sent7: if the fact that something impugns hollygrape or is a Liao or both is not correct then it does not impugn legibility. sent8: something is a borosilicate and rehears Photostat if it is not expressible. sent9: if the antacid rehears Photostat it is apetalous. sent10: the sealskin is a matriculate if there is something such that the fact that it is not a matriculate and does impugn cicada is not right. sent11: the hollygrape is a kind of non-apetalous thing that does rehear Photostat if the antacid is non-apetalous. sent12: if the fact that the antacid is apetalous thing that impugns lapel does not hold then the hollygrape does not rehear rejuvenation. sent13: the antacid is ducal. sent14: the rejuvenation impugns lapel. sent15: the propagator is not longing if that it is cytophotometric and it is longing is false. sent16: something rehears rejuvenation if it is non-apetalous thing that rehears Photostat. sent17: if something does not impugn legibility then that it does not matriculate and it impugns cicada is not true. sent18: if something is a matriculate and is a headgear then it is not expressible. sent19: the hollygrape is not apetalous if the antacid is apetalous. sent20: that the propagator is cytophotometric and is longing does not hold. sent21: the antacid is apetalous if it impugns lapel. sent22: the hollygrape is a kind of a Palermo. sent23: that the cattle impugns hollygrape and/or it is a Liao is incorrect. sent24: That the lapel impugns antacid hold. sent25: the hollygrape is not apetalous.

sent1: (x): {D}x -> ¬{B}x sent2: (x): ({B}x & {D}x) -> {C}x sent3: ¬{K}{e} -> ¬{H}{e} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: ¬{H}{e} -> {H}{c} sent6: ({B}{b} & {D}{b}) -> {C}{b} sent7: (x): ¬({M}x v {L}x) -> ¬{I}x sent8: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) sent9: {D}{a} -> {B}{a} sent10: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {J}x) -> {G}{c} sent11: {B}{a} -> (¬{B}{b} & {D}{b}) sent12: ¬({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent13: {FN}{a} sent14: {A}{ia} sent15: ¬({O}{e} & {K}{e}) -> ¬{K}{e} sent16: (x): (¬{B}x & {D}x) -> {C}x sent17: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {J}x) sent18: (x): ({G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent19: {B}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent20: ¬({O}{e} & {K}{e}) sent21: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent22: {IQ}{b} sent23: ¬({M}{d} v {L}{d}) sent24: {AA}{aa} sent25: ¬{B}{b}

the hollygrape does not rehear rejuvenation.

¬{C}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the hollygrape does not rehear rejuvenation is right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does rehear Photostat it is not apetalous. sent2: if a apetalous thing does rehear Photostat then it rehears rejuvenation. sent3: if the propagator is not longing it is not a headgear. sent4: that the antacid impugns lapel hold. sent5: if the propagator is not a headgear then the sealskin is a kind of a headgear. sent6: the hollygrape rehears rejuvenation if it is apetalous and does rehear Photostat. sent7: if the fact that something impugns hollygrape or is a Liao or both is not correct then it does not impugn legibility. sent8: something is a borosilicate and rehears Photostat if it is not expressible. sent9: if the antacid rehears Photostat it is apetalous. sent10: the sealskin is a matriculate if there is something such that the fact that it is not a matriculate and does impugn cicada is not right. sent11: the hollygrape is a kind of non-apetalous thing that does rehear Photostat if the antacid is non-apetalous. sent12: if the fact that the antacid is apetalous thing that impugns lapel does not hold then the hollygrape does not rehear rejuvenation. sent13: the antacid is ducal. sent14: the rejuvenation impugns lapel. sent15: the propagator is not longing if that it is cytophotometric and it is longing is false. sent16: something rehears rejuvenation if it is non-apetalous thing that rehears Photostat. sent17: if something does not impugn legibility then that it does not matriculate and it impugns cicada is not true. sent18: if something is a matriculate and is a headgear then it is not expressible. sent19: the hollygrape is not apetalous if the antacid is apetalous. sent20: that the propagator is cytophotometric and is longing does not hold. sent21: the antacid is apetalous if it impugns lapel. sent22: the hollygrape is a kind of a Palermo. sent23: that the cattle impugns hollygrape and/or it is a Liao is incorrect. sent24: That the lapel impugns antacid hold. sent25: the hollygrape is not apetalous. ; $proof$ =

sent21 & sent4 -> int1: the antacid is apetalous.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the hollygrape is not apetalous and does rehear Photostat.; sent16 -> int3: that the hollygrape does rehear rejuvenation is not incorrect if it is not apetalous and it rehears Photostat.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

there is something such that if that it is not a Wolof and is alkahestic is not correct then it is not carnal.

(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

sent1: there is something such that if that the fact that it is a Wolof and it is alkahestic is true is false it is not carnal. sent2: if that the sgraffito does not rehear inlay and is a kind of a shears is false then it is not a Wolof. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not politicize and overhangs then it is not lossless. sent4: there is something such that if that it is not a Lepismatidae and does rough sorbent is incorrect then it is not a Togaviridae. sent5: if something is not instructional but a PABA then it is not unintrusive. sent6: the nainsook is not a Wolof if it is non-inorganic thing that is a Bolshevik. sent7: if something is non-necrotic a tumble it does not store. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not unshapely but tragic is not right it does not impugn sgraffito. sent9: if the fact that the sgraffito is a Wolof hold then it is not carnal. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not alkahestic then it is not carnal. sent11: if the fact that something is not a Wolof but it is alkahestic is not correct then it is not carnal. sent12: there exists something such that if it does host then it is not a kind of a snowmobile.

sent1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬(¬{GO}{aa} & {FJ}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent3: (Ex): (¬{AT}x & {BQ}x) -> ¬{DM}x sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{DD}x & {GK}x) -> ¬{IM}x sent5: (x): (¬{CI}x & {EU}x) -> ¬{GU}x sent6: (¬{HH}{gm} & {DG}{gm}) -> ¬{AA}{gm} sent7: (x): (¬{DI}x & {GQ}x) -> ¬{IT}x sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{HJ}x & {BE}x) -> ¬{DC}x sent9: {AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent11: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent12: (Ex): {BO}x -> ¬{N}x

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if that it is not a Wolof and is alkahestic is not correct then it is not carnal. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if that the fact that it is a Wolof and it is alkahestic is true is false it is not carnal. sent2: if that the sgraffito does not rehear inlay and is a kind of a shears is false then it is not a Wolof. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not politicize and overhangs then it is not lossless. sent4: there is something such that if that it is not a Lepismatidae and does rough sorbent is incorrect then it is not a Togaviridae. sent5: if something is not instructional but a PABA then it is not unintrusive. sent6: the nainsook is not a Wolof if it is non-inorganic thing that is a Bolshevik. sent7: if something is non-necrotic a tumble it does not store. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not unshapely but tragic is not right it does not impugn sgraffito. sent9: if the fact that the sgraffito is a Wolof hold then it is not carnal. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not alkahestic then it is not carnal. sent11: if the fact that something is not a Wolof but it is alkahestic is not correct then it is not carnal. sent12: there exists something such that if it does host then it is not a kind of a snowmobile. ; $proof$ =

sent11 -> int1: if the fact that the sgraffito is both not a Wolof and alkahestic is not correct then it is not carnal.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the succinylcholine is not a subduer.

¬{B}{b}

sent1: if that something is not a Gehrig but it is Kiplingesque is right then it is not a subduer. sent2: there exists something such that it is not a subduer. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is not antisatellite is not wrong. sent4: if something impugns succinylcholine then that it is a kind of non-intradepartmental a Gehrig is not right. sent5: the benzodiazepine ripens legend. sent6: there is something such that that it is moonlit does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that it is not Kiplingesque. sent8: that the fact that something is not a skullcap or it is Kiplingesque or both is not correct if it is not an escalation is not incorrect. sent9: there is something such that that it is moonlit and/or it is antisatellite is not true. sent10: the succinylcholine is not moonlit. sent11: the cascarilla impugns succinylcholine. sent12: something is moonlit and/or it is antisatellite. sent13: if that that the cascarilla is not intradepartmental but it is a Gehrig hold is false then the succinylcholine is not a Gehrig. sent14: if the benzodiazepine is not a skullcap then the fact that the cascarilla does not impugn succinylcholine but it is a kind of a Gehrig is not correct. sent15: the benzodiazepine is both heterologous and not a drafting. sent16: if the fact that the catostomid is not a skullcap and/or is Kiplingesque is not right then the succinylcholine is Kiplingesque. sent17: if there is something such that that either it is moonlit or it is antisatellite or both is not true then the catostomid is not Kiplingesque. sent18: something is a Apollinaire if it is not non-heterologous and it does not draft. sent19: that the catostomid is a Gehrig if that the cascarilla does not impugn succinylcholine and is a kind of a Gehrig does not hold hold. sent20: if the catostomid is not Kiplingesque then the succinylcholine is a kind of a subduer.

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

the succinylcholine is not a kind of a subduer.

¬{B}{b}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the succinylcholine is not a subduer. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is not a Gehrig but it is Kiplingesque is right then it is not a subduer. sent2: there exists something such that it is not a subduer. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is not antisatellite is not wrong. sent4: if something impugns succinylcholine then that it is a kind of non-intradepartmental a Gehrig is not right. sent5: the benzodiazepine ripens legend. sent6: there is something such that that it is moonlit does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that it is not Kiplingesque. sent8: that the fact that something is not a skullcap or it is Kiplingesque or both is not correct if it is not an escalation is not incorrect. sent9: there is something such that that it is moonlit and/or it is antisatellite is not true. sent10: the succinylcholine is not moonlit. sent11: the cascarilla impugns succinylcholine. sent12: something is moonlit and/or it is antisatellite. sent13: if that that the cascarilla is not intradepartmental but it is a Gehrig hold is false then the succinylcholine is not a Gehrig. sent14: if the benzodiazepine is not a skullcap then the fact that the cascarilla does not impugn succinylcholine but it is a kind of a Gehrig is not correct. sent15: the benzodiazepine is both heterologous and not a drafting. sent16: if the fact that the catostomid is not a skullcap and/or is Kiplingesque is not right then the succinylcholine is Kiplingesque. sent17: if there is something such that that either it is moonlit or it is antisatellite or both is not true then the catostomid is not Kiplingesque. sent18: something is a Apollinaire if it is not non-heterologous and it does not draft. sent19: that the catostomid is a Gehrig if that the cascarilla does not impugn succinylcholine and is a kind of a Gehrig does not hold hold. sent20: if the catostomid is not Kiplingesque then the succinylcholine is a kind of a subduer. ; $proof$ =

sent9 & sent17 -> int1: the catostomid is not Kiplingesque.; sent20 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the rehearing cowrie does not occur.

¬{D}

sent1: that the flowage occurs and the kid occurs causes that the rehearing cowrie does not occur. sent2: both the flowage and the rehearing waxycap happens. sent3: both the nautch and the kid occurs.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the rehearing cowrie does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the flowage occurs and the kid occurs causes that the rehearing cowrie does not occur. sent2: both the flowage and the rehearing waxycap happens. sent3: both the nautch and the kid occurs. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> int1: the flowage happens.; sent3 -> int2: the kid happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the flowage happens and the kid occurs.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the egalitarian does not rough internationalization.

¬{B}{aa}

sent1: there exists something such that either it is a Donetsk or it is not a latter or both. sent2: there exists something such that it is not splenic and/or it does not impugn litterbin. sent3: if something does impugn litterbin it does not rough opportunism or it is not flinty or both. sent4: the fact that if something does not impugn litterbin then it does not persuade and/or it does not include is correct. sent5: something does not rough internationalization if that it does not persuade and/or it does not include hold. sent6: either the dimity does not unpack or it impugns Elijah or both if it does not impugn litterbin. sent7: if the cousin is splenic then it does browse. sent8: the egalitarian does rough internationalization if that the egg rough internationalization and does not browse is not true. sent9: if something is not post-communist then the egalitarian does not offload. sent10: something is not a Aphriza or it is not prognathous or both. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not persuade the egalitarian does not impugn Kroeber. sent12: the fact that the vaudevillian does not impugn litterbin and it does not rough internationalization does not hold if the cousin browses. sent13: something is either not a mining or not ratlike or both. sent14: something either does not rehear capitation or is not a kind of a Palaemonidae or both if it is not husbandly. sent15: if the egalitarian is not flinty it persuades and/or does not understand. sent16: if something is not splenic and/or it does not impugn litterbin then the egalitarian does not impugn litterbin. sent17: if something does not impugn litigation then it is not a hillbilly and/or it is a filter.

sent1: (Ex): ({FA}x v ¬{CH}x) sent2: (Ex): (¬{D}x v ¬{A}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AT}x v ¬{EQ}x) sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent5: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: ¬{A}{ib} -> (¬{FL}{ib} v {CD}{ib}) sent7: {D}{c} -> {C}{c} sent8: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {B}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬{GB}x -> ¬{IM}{aa} sent10: (Ex): (¬{CN}x v ¬{DH}x) sent11: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{EF}{aa} sent12: {C}{c} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent13: (Ex): (¬{GS}x v ¬{IR}x) sent14: (x): ¬{CK}x -> (¬{CO}x v ¬{AK}x) sent15: ¬{EQ}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{EJ}{aa}) sent16: (x): (¬{D}x v ¬{A}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent17: (x): ¬{EA}x -> (¬{FE}x v {I}x)

either something does not rough opportunism or it is not flinty or both.

(Ex): (¬{AT}x v ¬{EQ}x)

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the egalitarian does not rough internationalization. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that either it is a Donetsk or it is not a latter or both. sent2: there exists something such that it is not splenic and/or it does not impugn litterbin. sent3: if something does impugn litterbin it does not rough opportunism or it is not flinty or both. sent4: the fact that if something does not impugn litterbin then it does not persuade and/or it does not include is correct. sent5: something does not rough internationalization if that it does not persuade and/or it does not include hold. sent6: either the dimity does not unpack or it impugns Elijah or both if it does not impugn litterbin. sent7: if the cousin is splenic then it does browse. sent8: the egalitarian does rough internationalization if that the egg rough internationalization and does not browse is not true. sent9: if something is not post-communist then the egalitarian does not offload. sent10: something is not a Aphriza or it is not prognathous or both. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not persuade the egalitarian does not impugn Kroeber. sent12: the fact that the vaudevillian does not impugn litterbin and it does not rough internationalization does not hold if the cousin browses. sent13: something is either not a mining or not ratlike or both. sent14: something either does not rehear capitation or is not a kind of a Palaemonidae or both if it is not husbandly. sent15: if the egalitarian is not flinty it persuades and/or does not understand. sent16: if something is not splenic and/or it does not impugn litterbin then the egalitarian does not impugn litterbin. sent17: if something does not impugn litigation then it is not a hillbilly and/or it is a filter. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> int1: either the egalitarian does not persuade or it does not include or both if that it does not impugn litterbin is not incorrect.; sent2 & sent16 -> int2: the egalitarian does not impugn litterbin.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the egalitarian does not persuade or it does not include or both.; sent5 -> int4: the egalitarian does not rough internationalization if it does not persuade and/or does not include.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fenoprofen is not a wood-fern.

¬{B}{c}

sent1: if the californium is not fatty and/or is not chylific then the fenoprofen is not a kind of a wood-fern. sent2: either the californium is not fatty or it is chylific or both if the sister-in-law is not an eon. sent3: the sister-in-law does not luxuriate. sent4: the learner is a ministry. sent5: the fact that that the californium is a kind of febrile thing that impugns ultimatum is true is not true if something does not impugns ultimatum. sent6: the sister-in-law is not chylific if the fact that either the californium is not an eon or it is not fatty or both hold. sent7: if that something is febrile and does impugn ultimatum is wrong it does not impugn ultimatum. sent8: if the sister-in-law is not a kind of an eon the californium is fatty and/or it is non-chylific. sent9: the phlogiston does not impugn ultimatum if the learner is a kind of a ministry and is a loot. sent10: either the californium is fatty or it is not chylific or both. sent11: the californium is not fatty and/or it is chylific. sent12: if the fenoprofen is not fatty the californium is not a kind of an eon and/or is not a wood-fern. sent13: that the sister-in-law is a kind of a spin and it is a kind of an eon is wrong if the californium does not impugn ultimatum. sent14: everything does loot and does ripen cephalometry. sent15: the californium is not fatty and/or it is not chylific if the sister-in-law is not a kind of an eon. sent16: the sister-in-law is not an eon.

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

the fact that the fenoprofen is a wood-fern is not wrong.

{B}{c}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fenoprofen is not a wood-fern. ; $context$ = sent1: if the californium is not fatty and/or is not chylific then the fenoprofen is not a kind of a wood-fern. sent2: either the californium is not fatty or it is chylific or both if the sister-in-law is not an eon. sent3: the sister-in-law does not luxuriate. sent4: the learner is a ministry. sent5: the fact that that the californium is a kind of febrile thing that impugns ultimatum is true is not true if something does not impugns ultimatum. sent6: the sister-in-law is not chylific if the fact that either the californium is not an eon or it is not fatty or both hold. sent7: if that something is febrile and does impugn ultimatum is wrong it does not impugn ultimatum. sent8: if the sister-in-law is not a kind of an eon the californium is fatty and/or it is non-chylific. sent9: the phlogiston does not impugn ultimatum if the learner is a kind of a ministry and is a loot. sent10: either the californium is fatty or it is not chylific or both. sent11: the californium is not fatty and/or it is chylific. sent12: if the fenoprofen is not fatty the californium is not a kind of an eon and/or is not a wood-fern. sent13: that the sister-in-law is a kind of a spin and it is a kind of an eon is wrong if the californium does not impugn ultimatum. sent14: everything does loot and does ripen cephalometry. sent15: the californium is not fatty and/or it is not chylific if the sister-in-law is not a kind of an eon. sent16: the sister-in-law is not an eon. ; $proof$ =

sent15 & sent16 -> int1: the californium is non-fatty or non-chylific or both.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the Protestant is eastern but it does not impugn wpm.

({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

sent1: the fact that the Protestant is eastern and it does impugn wpm is not right if the fact that that the thermohydrometer is eastern does not hold is right. sent2: that the Protestant is eastern thing that does not impugn wpm does not hold if the thermohydrometer is not eastern. sent3: if there exists something such that that it does derive hold the thermohydrometer is not a lymphoma. sent4: the recording is a balkiness. sent5: if something does not gossip then it is not eastern. sent6: that that the lie is not a Swanson but it is a kind of a MRI is incorrect is true. sent7: the Protestant is non-patristics if it is not Yemeni. sent8: that the lie is a kind of a Swanson that is a MRI is not true. sent9: if something is not a MRI it is not a kind of a Swanson. sent10: if the recording is a balkiness the hurdles does derive. sent11: the fact that that the gumwood does not undervalue but it is Jacobinic is not right is correct. sent12: the thermohydrometer does not gossip if the fact that the lie is not a Swanson and is a kind of a MRI is false. sent13: the chromite is not a gossip. sent14: the Protestant is not eastern if that it is not a kind of a MRI is not false. sent15: if something is not a lymphoma then that it is both not a gossip and not endermic does not hold. sent16: that the Protestant is eastern and it does impugn wpm is wrong. sent17: if the lie is a kind of a Swanson the thermohydrometer does not gossip. sent18: the fact that the lie is a kind of a MRI that is not eastern is not right. sent19: the lie is not a Swanson if the fact that it is not a gossip is correct.

sent1: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({A}{c} & {C}{c}) sent2: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent3: (x): {F}x -> ¬{D}{b} sent4: {G}{e} sent5: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent7: ¬{FG}{c} -> ¬{BR}{c} sent8: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{AA}x sent10: {G}{e} -> {F}{d} sent11: ¬(¬{AU}{bl} & {CF}{bl}) sent12: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: ¬{B}{iq} sent14: ¬{AB}{c} -> ¬{A}{c} sent15: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{E}x) sent16: ¬({A}{c} & {C}{c}) sent17: {AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent18: ¬({AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent19: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a}

the Protestant is eastern and does not impugn wpm.

({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the Protestant is eastern but it does not impugn wpm. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the Protestant is eastern and it does impugn wpm is not right if the fact that that the thermohydrometer is eastern does not hold is right. sent2: that the Protestant is eastern thing that does not impugn wpm does not hold if the thermohydrometer is not eastern. sent3: if there exists something such that that it does derive hold the thermohydrometer is not a lymphoma. sent4: the recording is a balkiness. sent5: if something does not gossip then it is not eastern. sent6: that that the lie is not a Swanson but it is a kind of a MRI is incorrect is true. sent7: the Protestant is non-patristics if it is not Yemeni. sent8: that the lie is a kind of a Swanson that is a MRI is not true. sent9: if something is not a MRI it is not a kind of a Swanson. sent10: if the recording is a balkiness the hurdles does derive. sent11: the fact that that the gumwood does not undervalue but it is Jacobinic is not right is correct. sent12: the thermohydrometer does not gossip if the fact that the lie is not a Swanson and is a kind of a MRI is false. sent13: the chromite is not a gossip. sent14: the Protestant is not eastern if that it is not a kind of a MRI is not false. sent15: if something is not a lymphoma then that it is both not a gossip and not endermic does not hold. sent16: that the Protestant is eastern and it does impugn wpm is wrong. sent17: if the lie is a kind of a Swanson the thermohydrometer does not gossip. sent18: the fact that the lie is a kind of a MRI that is not eastern is not right. sent19: the lie is not a Swanson if the fact that it is not a gossip is correct. ; $proof$ =

sent12 & sent6 -> int1: the thermohydrometer is not a gossip.; sent5 -> int2: the thermohydrometer is not eastern if the fact that it is not a gossip hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the thermohydrometer is not eastern.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it is not Moldovan the fact that it abounds and it sheets is incorrect.

(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)

sent1: if something does not impugn biliousness then that it is destructive and it is insecticidal is incorrect. sent2: if the snakewood is Moldovan then the fact that it abounds and sheets does not hold. sent3: if the snakewood does not impugn lebensraum then the fact that it is atrophic and sheets does not hold. sent4: the fact that the snakewood does abound and is a kind of a southwester is not right if the fact that it does not rehear Yastrzemski hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not Moldovan then it abounds and is a sheet. sent6: if the snakewood is not perinatal the fact that it rehears M1 and does abound is false. sent7: that if the fact that the salol does not ripen churchyard is not wrong the fact that the salol does rough Sno-cat and it is not non-Moldovan is false is not incorrect. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not a ceriman then the fact that it rehears bilges and does rough blistering is not right. sent9: there is something such that if it is Moldovan then that it abounds and is a sheet is false. sent10: there is something such that if it is not a Neolentinus then that it is a kind of an obsession that impugns hexagon is not correct. sent11: the snakewood does abound and it does sheet if the fact that it is not Moldovan hold. sent12: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not test is not incorrect it is achromatic and it is a kind of a carnival. sent13: there is something such that if it does not rough ununquadium then that it does rehear shod and it is a goliard does not hold. sent14: if the snakewood is not Moldovan that it abounds and it does sheet is wrong. sent15: the fact that something is thermodynamics and it is a Iraqi is wrong if it does not rough snakewood. sent16: if something does not rough blistering then the fact that it rehears rebroadcast and does ripen litigation is false. sent17: there is something such that if the fact that it does not astrogate hold then that it is perinatal and is extracellular does not hold.

sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({IR}x & {DG}x) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: ¬{FU}{aa} -> ¬({JF}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: ¬{EU}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {HS}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: ¬{GR}{aa} -> ¬({BC}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) sent7: ¬{B}{dn} -> ¬({ID}{dn} & {A}{dn}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{IF}x -> ¬({BH}x & {FS}x) sent9: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{BM}x -> ¬({DM}x & {HQ}x) sent11: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent12: (Ex): ¬{IS}x -> ({EM}x & {EP}x) sent13: (Ex): ¬{FO}x -> ¬({JI}x & {JB}x) sent14: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent15: (x): ¬{BJ}x -> ¬({IL}x & {IJ}x) sent16: (x): ¬{FS}x -> ¬({BI}x & {F}x) sent17: (Ex): ¬{CS}x -> ¬({GR}x & {CD}x)

there exists something such that if that it does not rough blistering is not incorrect then the fact that it does rehear rebroadcast and it does ripen litigation is not right.

(Ex): ¬{FS}x -> ¬({BI}x & {F}x)

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not Moldovan the fact that it abounds and it sheets is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not impugn biliousness then that it is destructive and it is insecticidal is incorrect. sent2: if the snakewood is Moldovan then the fact that it abounds and sheets does not hold. sent3: if the snakewood does not impugn lebensraum then the fact that it is atrophic and sheets does not hold. sent4: the fact that the snakewood does abound and is a kind of a southwester is not right if the fact that it does not rehear Yastrzemski hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not Moldovan then it abounds and is a sheet. sent6: if the snakewood is not perinatal the fact that it rehears M1 and does abound is false. sent7: that if the fact that the salol does not ripen churchyard is not wrong the fact that the salol does rough Sno-cat and it is not non-Moldovan is false is not incorrect. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not a ceriman then the fact that it rehears bilges and does rough blistering is not right. sent9: there is something such that if it is Moldovan then that it abounds and is a sheet is false. sent10: there is something such that if it is not a Neolentinus then that it is a kind of an obsession that impugns hexagon is not correct. sent11: the snakewood does abound and it does sheet if the fact that it is not Moldovan hold. sent12: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not test is not incorrect it is achromatic and it is a kind of a carnival. sent13: there is something such that if it does not rough ununquadium then that it does rehear shod and it is a goliard does not hold. sent14: if the snakewood is not Moldovan that it abounds and it does sheet is wrong. sent15: the fact that something is thermodynamics and it is a Iraqi is wrong if it does not rough snakewood. sent16: if something does not rough blistering then the fact that it rehears rebroadcast and does ripen litigation is false. sent17: there is something such that if the fact that it does not astrogate hold then that it is perinatal and is extracellular does not hold. ; $proof$ =

sent14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

there is something such that if it is not universalistic and it is not a craft it is imitative.

(Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x

sent1: if the warehouser is not an ascension but it impugns attrition then it is a kind of a pellitory. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not universalistic but a craft it is imitative. sent3: if something is both not a Ehadhamen and not excusable then it is anaglyphic. sent4: the fact that the warehouser does rough Meissner is true if it is indefeasible and is not a hammer. sent5: the warehouser is imitative if it is non-universalistic a craft. sent6: if the bog is both not a Ehadhamen and not a Nazi it is pessimistic. sent7: the warehouser is imitative if it is a kind of non-universalistic thing that is not a craft. sent8: there is something such that if it is a kind of a splitworm and it does not rough doubleheader then it is a hammer. sent9: there is something such that if it is not Sadducean and is a isohel it roughs thrombectomy. sent10: there is something such that if it does not impugn firecracker and rehears Hancock then it is a kind of a recirculation. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-contestable thing that does not rough lady then it is a kind of a Nazi. sent12: if the warehouser is not sigmoid and it does not devalue then it is imitative. sent13: if the warehouser does not impugn Yastrzemski and it is not puncturable it is a histaminase. sent14: if that the warehouser is universalistic but it is not a kind of a craft is not wrong then that it is imitative is true. sent15: the god is harmless if it is not a kind of a Gongorism and is imitative. sent16: that there exists something such that if it is a hammer and it is not a Alaric then the fact that it is not aground does not hold is not wrong. sent17: there is something such that if it does not rough overload and is a olecranon then it is a rigout. sent18: there exists something such that if it is universalistic and it is not a kind of a craft then it is not nonimitative.

sent1: (¬{EE}{aa} & {FG}{aa}) -> {D}{aa} sent2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): (¬{CJ}x & ¬{N}x) -> {HG}x sent4: ({EN}{aa} & ¬{HJ}{aa}) -> {CS}{aa} sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent6: (¬{CJ}{bo} & ¬{H}{bo}) -> {O}{bo} sent7: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ({L}x & ¬{BR}x) -> {HJ}x sent9: (Ex): (¬{HT}x & {FT}x) -> {DQ}x sent10: (Ex): (¬{BU}x & {AU}x) -> {DH}x sent11: (Ex): (¬{AT}x & ¬{EK}x) -> {H}x sent12: (¬{E}{aa} & ¬{CK}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent13: (¬{JD}{aa} & ¬{EB}{aa}) -> {BQ}{aa} sent14: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent15: (¬{FL}{en} & {B}{en}) -> {ED}{en} sent16: (Ex): ({HJ}x & ¬{HE}x) -> {GI}x sent17: (Ex): (¬{EO}x & {BD}x) -> {HB}x sent18: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x

there exists something such that if it is both not a Ehadhamen and not excusable it is anaglyphic.

(Ex): (¬{CJ}x & ¬{N}x) -> {HG}x

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not universalistic and it is not a craft it is imitative. ; $context$ = sent1: if the warehouser is not an ascension but it impugns attrition then it is a kind of a pellitory. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not universalistic but a craft it is imitative. sent3: if something is both not a Ehadhamen and not excusable then it is anaglyphic. sent4: the fact that the warehouser does rough Meissner is true if it is indefeasible and is not a hammer. sent5: the warehouser is imitative if it is non-universalistic a craft. sent6: if the bog is both not a Ehadhamen and not a Nazi it is pessimistic. sent7: the warehouser is imitative if it is a kind of non-universalistic thing that is not a craft. sent8: there is something such that if it is a kind of a splitworm and it does not rough doubleheader then it is a hammer. sent9: there is something such that if it is not Sadducean and is a isohel it roughs thrombectomy. sent10: there is something such that if it does not impugn firecracker and rehears Hancock then it is a kind of a recirculation. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-contestable thing that does not rough lady then it is a kind of a Nazi. sent12: if the warehouser is not sigmoid and it does not devalue then it is imitative. sent13: if the warehouser does not impugn Yastrzemski and it is not puncturable it is a histaminase. sent14: if that the warehouser is universalistic but it is not a kind of a craft is not wrong then that it is imitative is true. sent15: the god is harmless if it is not a kind of a Gongorism and is imitative. sent16: that there exists something such that if it is a hammer and it is not a Alaric then the fact that it is not aground does not hold is not wrong. sent17: there is something such that if it does not rough overload and is a olecranon then it is a rigout. sent18: there exists something such that if it is universalistic and it is not a kind of a craft then it is not nonimitative. ; $proof$ =

sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the bunkmate is not a cochineal.

¬{D}{b}

sent1: if that something is a cockle but not a cochineal does not hold then it is a cochineal. sent2: if something does rehear dirge and/or is not a sustainability it rehear dirge. sent3: if the gempylid does not rough snag then it is a native and it is capacitive. sent4: there exists something such that it is a cockle. sent5: that the fact that the gastropod is not dysgenics but it does rough snag hold is incorrect if it is a kind of a pipewort. sent6: something is a cochineal. sent7: the gastropod is a pipewort. sent8: the gempylid does not rough snag if there is something such that that it is not dysgenics and it rough snag does not hold. sent9: the snag is not Bogartian if there is something such that it is native. sent10: if there exists something such that it is a cockle the fact that the idealization does not rehear dirge and/or is not a sustainability is incorrect. sent11: the idealization does rehear dirge or it is not a sustainability or both if the snag is not Bogartian. sent12: if something is a cockle then the fact that the idealization does rehear dirge hold.

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

the bunkmate is a cochineal.

{D}{b}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the bunkmate is not a cochineal. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is a cockle but not a cochineal does not hold then it is a cochineal. sent2: if something does rehear dirge and/or is not a sustainability it rehear dirge. sent3: if the gempylid does not rough snag then it is a native and it is capacitive. sent4: there exists something such that it is a cockle. sent5: that the fact that the gastropod is not dysgenics but it does rough snag hold is incorrect if it is a kind of a pipewort. sent6: something is a cochineal. sent7: the gastropod is a pipewort. sent8: the gempylid does not rough snag if there is something such that that it is not dysgenics and it rough snag does not hold. sent9: the snag is not Bogartian if there is something such that it is native. sent10: if there exists something such that it is a cockle the fact that the idealization does not rehear dirge and/or is not a sustainability is incorrect. sent11: the idealization does rehear dirge or it is not a sustainability or both if the snag is not Bogartian. sent12: if something is a cockle then the fact that the idealization does rehear dirge hold. ; $proof$ =

sent4 & sent10 -> int1: the fact that either the idealization does not rehear dirge or it is not a sustainability or both is wrong.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the ringer does not occur.

¬{D}

sent1: both the impugning Java and the roughing relentlessness happens. sent2: that not the chew but the impugning ego occurs is not true. sent3: the roughing heritage does not occur. sent4: both the superiority and the crawling happens. sent5: that the conceptualization occurs and the rehearing salai happens is incorrect. sent6: both the rehearing salai and the discomycetousness occurs. sent7: if the appendectomy and the Aegeanness happens the ringer does not occur. sent8: the ripening birthright is triggered by the profanation. sent9: that the trihydroxiness and the poor occurs is not right. sent10: the impugning multiplication occurs. sent11: the allantoicness happens. sent12: the secondary happens. sent13: the convoying happens. sent14: the anabolicness occurs if the longitudinalness occurs. sent15: the fact that the superiority happens and the vagileness happens is not true. sent16: if the laryngopharyngealness happens then the roughing hart's-tongue occurs. sent17: that the foothold does not occur is prevented by that the ripening birthright happens. sent18: both the appendectomy and the touting happens. sent19: the fact that the ripening colon occurs and the autoimmuneness happens does not hold. sent20: the fact that the non-ascensionalness and the impugning viscose happens is incorrect. sent21: the broadcasting does not occur if the roughing oystercatcher and the rehearing transmigration occurs. sent22: if the fact that not the chewing but the impugning ego occurs is incorrect then the Aegeanness occurs.

sent1: ({N} & {FD}) sent2: ¬(¬{E} & {F}) sent3: ¬{EK} sent4: ({BN} & {DF}) sent5: ¬({FE} & {HI}) sent6: ({HI} & {FR}) sent7: ({A} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent8: {GT} -> {AA} sent9: ¬({ES} & {U}) sent10: {BT} sent11: {HP} sent12: {HQ} sent13: {HN} sent14: {DC} -> {DQ} sent15: ¬({BN} & {DT}) sent16: {BL} -> {FK} sent17: {AA} -> {DD} sent18: ({A} & {B}) sent19: ¬({DJ} & {EM}) sent20: ¬(¬{DS} & {JG}) sent21: ({CD} & {HB}) -> ¬{FJ} sent22: ¬(¬{E} & {F}) -> {C}

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the ringer does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: both the impugning Java and the roughing relentlessness happens. sent2: that not the chew but the impugning ego occurs is not true. sent3: the roughing heritage does not occur. sent4: both the superiority and the crawling happens. sent5: that the conceptualization occurs and the rehearing salai happens is incorrect. sent6: both the rehearing salai and the discomycetousness occurs. sent7: if the appendectomy and the Aegeanness happens the ringer does not occur. sent8: the ripening birthright is triggered by the profanation. sent9: that the trihydroxiness and the poor occurs is not right. sent10: the impugning multiplication occurs. sent11: the allantoicness happens. sent12: the secondary happens. sent13: the convoying happens. sent14: the anabolicness occurs if the longitudinalness occurs. sent15: the fact that the superiority happens and the vagileness happens is not true. sent16: if the laryngopharyngealness happens then the roughing hart's-tongue occurs. sent17: that the foothold does not occur is prevented by that the ripening birthright happens. sent18: both the appendectomy and the touting happens. sent19: the fact that the ripening colon occurs and the autoimmuneness happens does not hold. sent20: the fact that the non-ascensionalness and the impugning viscose happens is incorrect. sent21: the broadcasting does not occur if the roughing oystercatcher and the rehearing transmigration occurs. sent22: if the fact that not the chewing but the impugning ego occurs is incorrect then the Aegeanness occurs. ; $proof$ =

sent18 -> int1: the appendectomy occurs.; sent22 & sent2 -> int2: the Aegean occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the appendectomy and the Aegeanness occurs.; int3 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it does not rehear silverspot and does consider then it does not sit.

(Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x

sent1: the fact that if the cyclone is biliary and does sit the cyclone is not a kind of a flats hold. sent2: if the fact that something is a kind of a proportional that rehears Hydnum is true then it is not a conformist. sent3: there is something such that if it does not rehear inattention and it is a downstage then it is a kind of a brimstone. sent4: if something does not rehear silverspot but it does consider it does not sit. sent5: if something does not rehear silverspot but it does consider then it sits. sent6: something that rehears claymore and is myrmecophytic does not impugn tall. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a salaam and is a reformism it does luxuriate. sent8: if something is a kind of a Sciuridae and it does impugn tall then it does not impugn Silybum. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a recess and rehears scripture it commingles. sent10: there is something such that if it does not forgive and impugns Monitor it is not obtuse. sent11: the detritus does not consider if it does rehear truncation and is a submarine. sent12: if something is not sensory and does rehear steradian that it does not incriminate is not false. sent13: there is something such that if it does not rough Gettysburg and it is a wadi it does not differ. sent14: something is not endermic if it is not unsarcastic and it is inconvertible. sent15: if something that is dysphemistic is inconspicuous then it is not unequal. sent16: there exists something such that if it is not a cards and it is a lignin then that it is not retractile is not incorrect. sent17: if something is non-adoptive thing that impugns detritus the fact that it is a satin is not incorrect. sent18: there is something such that if it impugns Silybum and it is a snowfield it is not protozoal.

sent1: ({AU}{dt} & {B}{dt}) -> ¬{HP}{dt} sent2: (x): ({CH}x & {JF}x) -> ¬{BF}x sent3: (Ex): (¬{GK}x & {IF}x) -> {IJ}x sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent6: (x): ({K}x & {EJ}x) -> ¬{JC}x sent7: (Ex): (¬{FA}x & {IQ}x) -> {GH}x sent8: (x): ({DI}x & {JC}x) -> ¬{HT}x sent9: (Ex): (¬{EI}x & {JJ}x) -> {FU}x sent10: (Ex): (¬{P}x & {ED}x) -> ¬{FF}x sent11: ({GT}{aa} & {GO}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent12: (x): (¬{S}x & {FI}x) -> ¬{GR}x sent13: (Ex): (¬{FB}x & {DD}x) -> ¬{L}x sent14: (x): (¬{M}x & {HL}x) -> ¬{DL}x sent15: (x): ({I}x & {IS}x) -> ¬{AH}x sent16: (Ex): (¬{HR}x & {JI}x) -> ¬{HI}x sent17: (x): (¬{BJ}x & {BM}x) -> {GN}x sent18: (Ex): ({HT}x & {BL}x) -> ¬{DQ}x

there is something such that if it is not unsarcastic and it is inconvertible then it is not endermic.

(Ex): (¬{M}x & {HL}x) -> ¬{DL}x

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not rehear silverspot and does consider then it does not sit. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that if the cyclone is biliary and does sit the cyclone is not a kind of a flats hold. sent2: if the fact that something is a kind of a proportional that rehears Hydnum is true then it is not a conformist. sent3: there is something such that if it does not rehear inattention and it is a downstage then it is a kind of a brimstone. sent4: if something does not rehear silverspot but it does consider it does not sit. sent5: if something does not rehear silverspot but it does consider then it sits. sent6: something that rehears claymore and is myrmecophytic does not impugn tall. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a salaam and is a reformism it does luxuriate. sent8: if something is a kind of a Sciuridae and it does impugn tall then it does not impugn Silybum. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a recess and rehears scripture it commingles. sent10: there is something such that if it does not forgive and impugns Monitor it is not obtuse. sent11: the detritus does not consider if it does rehear truncation and is a submarine. sent12: if something is not sensory and does rehear steradian that it does not incriminate is not false. sent13: there is something such that if it does not rough Gettysburg and it is a wadi it does not differ. sent14: something is not endermic if it is not unsarcastic and it is inconvertible. sent15: if something that is dysphemistic is inconspicuous then it is not unequal. sent16: there exists something such that if it is not a cards and it is a lignin then that it is not retractile is not incorrect. sent17: if something is non-adoptive thing that impugns detritus the fact that it is a satin is not incorrect. sent18: there is something such that if it impugns Silybum and it is a snowfield it is not protozoal. ; $proof$ =

sent4 -> int1: if the detritus does not rehear silverspot but it does consider it does not sit.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the cocoon is a lunette.

{C}{c}

sent1: something is a kind of a lunette if it does not light and it impugns litigation. sent2: if the emitter is not a damp or a lunette or both then the cocoon is not a lunette. sent3: the emitter is impotent if it is a Appalachian. sent4: the cocoon does rehear hawthorn. sent5: the shirtmaker is intentional if the fact that the emitter is not a damp but a lighting is not right. sent6: if that the shirtmaker is not a lunette and lights is wrong then the cocoon does damp. sent7: if the emitter is a lighting then it is intentional. sent8: the emitter is not non-intentional if that the cocoon is not a kind of a lunette but it does damp does not hold. sent9: if the shirtmaker does light then the cocoon is a lunette. sent10: if something is not a lighting and/or it is not a kind of a lunette then it is not a kind of a lighting. sent11: something that is not a lighting is a kind of a damp and/or is intentional. sent12: the shirtmaker does damp if the emitter roughs homo. sent13: that the shirtmaker does damp is true if the fact that the emitter does not rough homo but it is intentional is not right. sent14: if the shirtmaker rehears hawthorn the fact that the emitter is not lighting but it impugns litigation hold. sent15: that the emitter does not rough homo but it is not non-intentional does not hold.

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

the cocoon is not a lunette.

¬{C}{c}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the cocoon is a lunette. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a kind of a lunette if it does not light and it impugns litigation. sent2: if the emitter is not a damp or a lunette or both then the cocoon is not a lunette. sent3: the emitter is impotent if it is a Appalachian. sent4: the cocoon does rehear hawthorn. sent5: the shirtmaker is intentional if the fact that the emitter is not a damp but a lighting is not right. sent6: if that the shirtmaker is not a lunette and lights is wrong then the cocoon does damp. sent7: if the emitter is a lighting then it is intentional. sent8: the emitter is not non-intentional if that the cocoon is not a kind of a lunette but it does damp does not hold. sent9: if the shirtmaker does light then the cocoon is a lunette. sent10: if something is not a lighting and/or it is not a kind of a lunette then it is not a kind of a lighting. sent11: something that is not a lighting is a kind of a damp and/or is intentional. sent12: the shirtmaker does damp if the emitter roughs homo. sent13: that the shirtmaker does damp is true if the fact that the emitter does not rough homo but it is intentional is not right. sent14: if the shirtmaker rehears hawthorn the fact that the emitter is not lighting but it impugns litigation hold. sent15: that the emitter does not rough homo but it is not non-intentional does not hold. ; $proof$ =

sent13 & sent15 -> int1: the shirtmaker damps.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

either the anathematization occurs or the pentangularness occurs or both.

({C} v {D})

sent1: the roughing Cowper does not occur and the pentangularness does not occur. sent2: the roughing spokesperson prevents that the anathematization does not occur. sent3: the roughing highjacker prevents that the anathematization does not occur. sent4: that the anathematization and/or the pentangularness happens is incorrect if the roughing spokesperson does not occur. sent5: if the roughing Cowper occurs the roughing highjacker happens and the roughing spokesperson does not occur. sent6: the declaring happens if that the off-streetness occurs hold. sent7: either the roughing spokesperson occurs or the roughing highjacker happens or both.

sent1: (¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent2: {A} -> {C} sent3: {B} -> {C} sent4: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} v {D}) sent5: {E} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) sent6: {CC} -> {EE} sent7: ({A} v {B})

that the anathematization and/or the pentangularness occurs is incorrect.

¬({C} v {D})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = either the anathematization occurs or the pentangularness occurs or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the roughing Cowper does not occur and the pentangularness does not occur. sent2: the roughing spokesperson prevents that the anathematization does not occur. sent3: the roughing highjacker prevents that the anathematization does not occur. sent4: that the anathematization and/or the pentangularness happens is incorrect if the roughing spokesperson does not occur. sent5: if the roughing Cowper occurs the roughing highjacker happens and the roughing spokesperson does not occur. sent6: the declaring happens if that the off-streetness occurs hold. sent7: either the roughing spokesperson occurs or the roughing highjacker happens or both. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the anathematization happens.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the materialization is a Ethiopian.

{E}{d}

sent1: the fact that the timecard is a Togaviridae is correct if that the pleurothallis does rough Pittsfield is right. sent2: the timecard is ameboid if the pleurothallis is a Togaviridae. sent3: if the timecard is a Togaviridae the Brother is chromosomal. sent4: the pleurothallis is a Togaviridae if the fact that the timecard is ameboid is right. sent5: if the fact that something is not a Togaviridae but it is chromosomal is not correct it is not ameboid. sent6: the materialization is a kind of a Ethiopian if the Brother is not non-chromosomal. sent7: the pleurothallis either roughs Pittsfield or is ameboid or both. sent8: the pleurothallis is chromosomal or it roughs Pittsfield or both.

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

the fact that the materialization is not Ethiopian is not false.

¬{E}{d}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the materialization is a Ethiopian. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the timecard is a Togaviridae is correct if that the pleurothallis does rough Pittsfield is right. sent2: the timecard is ameboid if the pleurothallis is a Togaviridae. sent3: if the timecard is a Togaviridae the Brother is chromosomal. sent4: the pleurothallis is a Togaviridae if the fact that the timecard is ameboid is right. sent5: if the fact that something is not a Togaviridae but it is chromosomal is not correct it is not ameboid. sent6: the materialization is a kind of a Ethiopian if the Brother is not non-chromosomal. sent7: the pleurothallis either roughs Pittsfield or is ameboid or both. sent8: the pleurothallis is chromosomal or it roughs Pittsfield or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the exarch is not a joke.

¬{AB}{aa}

sent1: everything is non-arbitrative and it does fasten. sent2: the exarch is not a lignin and is sulphuric. sent3: the coloring is a kind of a joke. sent4: everything is not frictional. sent5: everything is both not a pichi and a porthole. sent6: everything is not anestrous and it is a kind of a caressing. sent7: everything is not a grapnel. sent8: everything is not a admonisher. sent9: everything is not sociocultural. sent10: the isoproterenol is a kind of a joke. sent11: everything is not extrasensory and it impugns cistern. sent12: everything is not tactical and it is a kind of a joke. sent13: the ungulate does not endeavor. sent14: the exarch is not tactical.

sent1: (x): (¬{CR}x & {IE}x) sent2: (¬{AN}{aa} & {GQ}{aa}) sent3: {AB}{jd} sent4: (x): ¬{HC}x sent5: (x): (¬{CH}x & {BR}x) sent6: (x): (¬{IR}x & {GT}x) sent7: (x): ¬{IC}x sent8: (x): ¬{EF}x sent9: (x): ¬{HN}x sent10: {AB}{gj} sent11: (x): (¬{GD}x & {FN}x) sent12: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent13: ¬{DG}{n} sent14: ¬{AA}{aa}

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = the exarch is not a joke. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is non-arbitrative and it does fasten. sent2: the exarch is not a lignin and is sulphuric. sent3: the coloring is a kind of a joke. sent4: everything is not frictional. sent5: everything is both not a pichi and a porthole. sent6: everything is not anestrous and it is a kind of a caressing. sent7: everything is not a grapnel. sent8: everything is not a admonisher. sent9: everything is not sociocultural. sent10: the isoproterenol is a kind of a joke. sent11: everything is not extrasensory and it impugns cistern. sent12: everything is not tactical and it is a kind of a joke. sent13: the ungulate does not endeavor. sent14: the exarch is not tactical. ; $proof$ =

sent12 -> int1: the exarch is not tactical but it does joke.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it is a pheniramine and/or it is not croupy it is a parakeet.

(Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x

sent1: if either the spray is a pheniramine or it is not croupy or both then the fact that it is a parakeet is right. sent2: if the spray is a kind of a pheniramine then it is a parakeet. sent3: the fact that something is oleaceous is not incorrect if it does impugn wintergreen or is not a kind of a misanthrope or both. sent4: if either something is multicultural or it is not croupy or both then it is a dazzle. sent5: there is something such that if it does rejoin and/or it is a stained it is a kind of a turnaround. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not unorthodox then it is not impossible. sent7: there is something such that if it is multicultural then it does impugn oxcart. sent8: there is something such that if it is a currency and/or does impugn spray it does rough spiritual. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a pheniramine and/or it is croupy then it is a parakeet. sent10: there exists something such that if it is unexportable and/or it does not rough hamburger then it does rough Smilax.

sent1: ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent3: (x): ({EG}x v ¬{AN}x) -> {CL}x sent4: (x): ({AM}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {BN}x sent5: (Ex): ({AF}x v {IA}x) -> {IO}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{HC}x -> {EA}x sent7: (Ex): {AM}x -> {DK}x sent8: (Ex): ({BP}x v {FN}x) -> {AC}x sent9: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent10: (Ex): ({JA}x v ¬{CO}x) -> {CU}x

if either the styrene is multicultural or it is not croupy or both then it does dazzle.

({AM}{di} v ¬{AB}{di}) -> {BN}{di}

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a pheniramine and/or it is not croupy it is a parakeet. ; $context$ = sent1: if either the spray is a pheniramine or it is not croupy or both then the fact that it is a parakeet is right. sent2: if the spray is a kind of a pheniramine then it is a parakeet. sent3: the fact that something is oleaceous is not incorrect if it does impugn wintergreen or is not a kind of a misanthrope or both. sent4: if either something is multicultural or it is not croupy or both then it is a dazzle. sent5: there is something such that if it does rejoin and/or it is a stained it is a kind of a turnaround. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not unorthodox then it is not impossible. sent7: there is something such that if it is multicultural then it does impugn oxcart. sent8: there is something such that if it is a currency and/or does impugn spray it does rough spiritual. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a pheniramine and/or it is croupy then it is a parakeet. sent10: there exists something such that if it is unexportable and/or it does not rough hamburger then it does rough Smilax. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the spouter does not rehear photocopier.

¬{AB}{b}

sent1: the fig-bird does not rehear photocopier. sent2: the telethermometer does rehear photocopier. sent3: if the spouter is a Phocidae the carryall is a heparin. sent4: if something is a collective then it is a kind of a Phocidae. sent5: if the fact that the carryall is thoughtless is not incorrect the spouter is thoughtless. sent6: the spouter is a heparin. sent7: the carryall does not rough Cowper. sent8: the spouter is a heparin but it is not a Phocidae if the carryall does rehear photocopier. sent9: the spouter is a heparin but it does not rehear photocopier if the carryall is a Phocidae. sent10: if something is amitotic it is not a spree but a Brady. sent11: something is a kind of a Phocidae or it is collective or both if it is not a spree. sent12: the tab does rehear radiation but it does not rehear photocopier. sent13: the spouter is a Phocidae. sent14: the fact that the carryall is a kind of a Phocidae is not wrong. sent15: the spouter is a Brady. sent16: the spouter is not non-amitotic if it is thoughtless. sent17: the fact that the carryall rehears tab and is not albinal hold. sent18: the carryall is thoughtless.

sent1: ¬{AB}{ib} sent2: {AB}{fh} sent3: {A}{b} -> {AA}{a} sent4: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent5: {F}{a} -> {F}{b} sent6: {AA}{b} sent7: ¬{AI}{a} sent8: {AB}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent9: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent10: (x): {E}x -> (¬{C}x & {D}x) sent11: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x v {B}x) sent12: ({IA}{ec} & ¬{AB}{ec}) sent13: {A}{b} sent14: {A}{a} sent15: {D}{b} sent16: {F}{b} -> {E}{b} sent17: ({FA}{a} & ¬{CA}{a}) sent18: {F}{a}

the spouter rehears photocopier.

{AB}{b}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the spouter does not rehear photocopier. ; $context$ = sent1: the fig-bird does not rehear photocopier. sent2: the telethermometer does rehear photocopier. sent3: if the spouter is a Phocidae the carryall is a heparin. sent4: if something is a collective then it is a kind of a Phocidae. sent5: if the fact that the carryall is thoughtless is not incorrect the spouter is thoughtless. sent6: the spouter is a heparin. sent7: the carryall does not rough Cowper. sent8: the spouter is a heparin but it is not a Phocidae if the carryall does rehear photocopier. sent9: the spouter is a heparin but it does not rehear photocopier if the carryall is a Phocidae. sent10: if something is amitotic it is not a spree but a Brady. sent11: something is a kind of a Phocidae or it is collective or both if it is not a spree. sent12: the tab does rehear radiation but it does not rehear photocopier. sent13: the spouter is a Phocidae. sent14: the fact that the carryall is a kind of a Phocidae is not wrong. sent15: the spouter is a Brady. sent16: the spouter is not non-amitotic if it is thoughtless. sent17: the fact that the carryall rehears tab and is not albinal hold. sent18: the carryall is thoughtless. ; $proof$ =

sent9 & sent14 -> int1: the spouter is a heparin and does not rehear photocopier.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the endameba is not trihydroxy.

¬{AB}{b}

sent1: The bong rehears camera. sent2: the camera rehears bong. sent3: something that is an accompanist loots. sent4: the endameba is an accompanist or trustful or both. sent5: the endameba does loot if it is trustful. sent6: if something loots the fact that it is a Priacanthidae and is not a kind of a jaded is not correct. sent7: the endameba does not puncture. sent8: if the fact that something is a Priacanthidae but it is not a jaded does not hold then it is not a Priacanthidae. sent9: if the camera rehears bong the endameba is not a puncture but trihydroxy.

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

the collector does not rehear bong but it stretches.

(¬{A}{gg} & {EJ}{gg})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the endameba is not trihydroxy. ; $context$ = sent1: The bong rehears camera. sent2: the camera rehears bong. sent3: something that is an accompanist loots. sent4: the endameba is an accompanist or trustful or both. sent5: the endameba does loot if it is trustful. sent6: if something loots the fact that it is a Priacanthidae and is not a kind of a jaded is not correct. sent7: the endameba does not puncture. sent8: if the fact that something is a Priacanthidae but it is not a jaded does not hold then it is not a Priacanthidae. sent9: if the camera rehears bong the endameba is not a puncture but trihydroxy. ; $proof$ =

sent9 & sent2 -> int1: the endameba is not a puncture but it is not non-trihydroxy.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

there exists something such that if it is not incident then it is a kind of non-aneroid thing that does not impugn forget-me-not.

(Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

sent1: the viscera is non-aneroid thing that does not impugn forget-me-not if the fact that it is not an incident is true. sent2: something that is not anticoagulative is not an incident and does not impugn Catholic.

sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{AR}x)

the forget-me-not is not an incident and it does not impugn Catholic if the fact that it is not anticoagulative is right.

¬{C}{ho} -> (¬{A}{ho} & ¬{AR}{ho})

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not incident then it is a kind of non-aneroid thing that does not impugn forget-me-not. ; $context$ = sent1: the viscera is non-aneroid thing that does not impugn forget-me-not if the fact that it is not an incident is true. sent2: something that is not anticoagulative is not an incident and does not impugn Catholic. ; $proof$ =

sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

that the sgraffito does ripen ornithopod and does not rough round is false.

¬({C}{a} & ¬{D}{a})

sent1: if the cantala is a louver that it is not rickettsial and it is a kind of a cigarfish is not right. sent2: the maigre is a sirdar if it is palatal. sent3: that something is not rickettsial but it is a cigarfish is incorrect if it is a kind of a louver. sent4: if the maigre is a sirdar the quadraphony is not homostylous and is a louver. sent5: if something is not a kind of a antitrade it ripens ornithopod. sent6: if the saturniid does ripen ornithopod the sgraffito ripen ornithopod. sent7: if the euphorbium does not rehear Capitonidae the fact that the sunbather is a kind of a Javanese and it impugns sgraffito is not true. sent8: that the cantala is rickettsial but not a cigarfish is not right. sent9: that something does not impugn skidpan and it does not ripen syllabication does not hold if it does tree. sent10: the fact that something is an achiever but it is not automatic does not hold if it is aquicultural. sent11: the fact that something is rickettsial but it is not a kind of a cigarfish is not true if it is a louver. sent12: the saturniid is not a antitrade if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a Javanese and it does impugn sgraffito is wrong. sent13: the euphorbium does not rehear Capitonidae. sent14: the fact that something does ripen ornithopod and does not rough round is incorrect if it is homostylous. sent15: the fact that the cantala is a louver is not false. sent16: that the cantala is not rickettsial and is a kind of a cigarfish is not true. sent17: that something does not chuck and is not a microgliacyte is false if it is a kind of a tree. sent18: the sgraffito is homostylous if that the cantala is not rickettsial and not a cigarfish is wrong. sent19: that something is megalithic and does not impugn sgraffito is not true if it is psychoactive.

sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: {F}{c} -> {E}{c} sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: {E}{c} -> (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent5: (x): ¬{G}x -> {C}x sent6: {C}{d} -> {C}{a} sent7: ¬{J}{f} -> ¬({H}{e} & {I}{e}) sent8: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent9: (x): {HE}x -> ¬(¬{BD}x & ¬{CE}x) sent10: (x): {R}x -> ¬({GR}x & ¬{AD}x) sent11: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent12: (x): ¬({H}x & {I}x) -> ¬{G}{d} sent13: ¬{J}{f} sent14: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent15: {A}{aa} sent16: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent17: (x): {HE}x -> ¬(¬{ID}x & ¬{FH}x) sent18: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{a} sent19: (x): {L}x -> ¬({AT}x & ¬{I}x)

the sgraffito does ripen ornithopod and does not rough round.

({C}{a} & ¬{D}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the sgraffito does ripen ornithopod and does not rough round is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the cantala is a louver that it is not rickettsial and it is a kind of a cigarfish is not right. sent2: the maigre is a sirdar if it is palatal. sent3: that something is not rickettsial but it is a cigarfish is incorrect if it is a kind of a louver. sent4: if the maigre is a sirdar the quadraphony is not homostylous and is a louver. sent5: if something is not a kind of a antitrade it ripens ornithopod. sent6: if the saturniid does ripen ornithopod the sgraffito ripen ornithopod. sent7: if the euphorbium does not rehear Capitonidae the fact that the sunbather is a kind of a Javanese and it impugns sgraffito is not true. sent8: that the cantala is rickettsial but not a cigarfish is not right. sent9: that something does not impugn skidpan and it does not ripen syllabication does not hold if it does tree. sent10: the fact that something is an achiever but it is not automatic does not hold if it is aquicultural. sent11: the fact that something is rickettsial but it is not a kind of a cigarfish is not true if it is a louver. sent12: the saturniid is not a antitrade if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a Javanese and it does impugn sgraffito is wrong. sent13: the euphorbium does not rehear Capitonidae. sent14: the fact that something does ripen ornithopod and does not rough round is incorrect if it is homostylous. sent15: the fact that the cantala is a louver is not false. sent16: that the cantala is not rickettsial and is a kind of a cigarfish is not true. sent17: that something does not chuck and is not a microgliacyte is false if it is a kind of a tree. sent18: the sgraffito is homostylous if that the cantala is not rickettsial and not a cigarfish is wrong. sent19: that something is megalithic and does not impugn sgraffito is not true if it is psychoactive. ; $proof$ =

sent14 -> int1: if that the sgraffito is homostylous is not wrong that it does ripen ornithopod and it does not rough round is not true.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that there exists something such that if it is not unreactive and/or it does not rough AMEX it resumes does not hold.

¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x)

sent1: there exists something such that if it either is a Iceland or is not untidy or both then it frivols. sent2: there is something such that if either it is not a kind of a advisee or it does rehear wheatworm or both it rehears strand. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not premenstrual and/or does demilitarize it does rehear second-rater. sent4: the derivative does impugn core if it does rough roulade or it is not lactic or both. sent5: there is something such that if it does not demilitarize and/or it rehears consent it rehears katharometer. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a gannet and/or is a kind of a Australian then it impugns stewing. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a caroche it does reckon. sent8: if the fact that the derivative is not unreactive or it does not rough AMEX or both is true it resumes. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not unreactive it does resume. sent10: the wheatworm resumes if that it does not ripen Campylorhynchus is not incorrect. sent11: the derivative resumes if it either is not unreactive or does rough AMEX or both. sent12: there is something such that if it is not splintery it is a cardamom. sent13: there is something such that if it rehears chasuble and/or it is not a former then it does rehear myriad. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not alchemic it is causative. sent15: there exists something such that if it does not rehear katharometer then it is glabellar. sent16: the derivative is stimulative if it does not rough AMEX and/or it is not a KP. sent17: there is something such that if it does not rough ununquadium or it is not Jamesian or both then that it is a kind of a divan hold.

sent1: (Ex): ({E}x v ¬{ED}x) -> {F}x sent2: (Ex): (¬{ER}x v {EI}x) -> {GQ}x sent3: (Ex): (¬{GL}x v {IE}x) -> {JJ}x sent4: ({JE}{aa} v ¬{CE}{aa}) -> {AG}{aa} sent5: (Ex): (¬{IE}x v {CL}x) -> {FB}x sent6: (Ex): (¬{R}x v {HL}x) -> {AU}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{DL}x -> {FD}x sent8: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> {B}x sent10: ¬{DU}{bn} -> {B}{bn} sent11: (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent12: (Ex): ¬{IO}x -> {IK}x sent13: (Ex): ({HG}x v ¬{BL}x) -> {GM}x sent14: (Ex): ¬{M}x -> {S}x sent15: (Ex): ¬{FB}x -> {HH}x sent16: (¬{AB}{aa} v ¬{BA}{aa}) -> {GN}{aa} sent17: (Ex): (¬{DM}x v ¬{IA}x) -> {FH}x

DISPROVED

DISPROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not unreactive and/or it does not rough AMEX it resumes does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it either is a Iceland or is not untidy or both then it frivols. sent2: there is something such that if either it is not a kind of a advisee or it does rehear wheatworm or both it rehears strand. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not premenstrual and/or does demilitarize it does rehear second-rater. sent4: the derivative does impugn core if it does rough roulade or it is not lactic or both. sent5: there is something such that if it does not demilitarize and/or it rehears consent it rehears katharometer. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a gannet and/or is a kind of a Australian then it impugns stewing. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a caroche it does reckon. sent8: if the fact that the derivative is not unreactive or it does not rough AMEX or both is true it resumes. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not unreactive it does resume. sent10: the wheatworm resumes if that it does not ripen Campylorhynchus is not incorrect. sent11: the derivative resumes if it either is not unreactive or does rough AMEX or both. sent12: there is something such that if it is not splintery it is a cardamom. sent13: there is something such that if it rehears chasuble and/or it is not a former then it does rehear myriad. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not alchemic it is causative. sent15: there exists something such that if it does not rehear katharometer then it is glabellar. sent16: the derivative is stimulative if it does not rough AMEX and/or it is not a KP. sent17: there is something such that if it does not rough ununquadium or it is not Jamesian or both then that it is a kind of a divan hold. ; $proof$ =

sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the post-horse is not a exabit.

¬{B}{a}

sent1: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a polymer that the post-horse is not inconvenient but it is a polymer is not correct. sent2: the Mozambican is not a polymer if the fact that the post-horse is not convenient and is a exabit is not wrong. sent3: if the post-horse is a kind of a polymer that does rehear inattention then the Mozambican is not inconvenient. sent4: if that something is not a polymer is right it is a exabit that is inconvenient. sent5: the fact that the Mozambican is not Pythagorean and rehears inattention is wrong if something does not rehears inattention. sent6: the allopurinol is not Pythagorean. sent7: the post-horse is not Pythagorean. sent8: the tricycle does wane and is a fusilier. sent9: if something is not a exabit the fact that the post-horse is inconvenient a exabit is not right. sent10: if the fact that something is convenient and is a polymer is not correct it does rehear inattention. sent11: that the chameleon does not intonate is not incorrect. sent12: something is a kind of an annoyance if the fact that it does not ripen mikado and it is a VDU does not hold. sent13: if the Mozambican does not rehear inattention then it is a polymer. sent14: there is something such that it rehears nanomia. sent15: the fact that the Mozambican is not a kind of an air but it is undomestic is not true if there is something such that it is not undomestic. sent16: something is a exabit if that it is not Pythagorean and it rehears inattention does not hold. sent17: there is something such that it is a exabit. sent18: there exists something such that it is not a polymer or it is Pythagorean or both. sent19: the post-horse is inconvenient. sent20: the post-horse is not adjectival. sent21: if the fact that something is non-Pythagorean and is a polymer is not correct then it is a exabit. sent22: the Mozambican is a exabit. sent23: if the fact that something is not Pythagorean and does rehear inattention does not hold then it is a polymer. sent24: the post-horse is a kind of a favorableness and is a kind of a amnesic.

sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent3: ({C}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent5: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {E}{b}) sent6: ¬{D}{ha} sent7: ¬{D}{a} sent8: ({L}{hl} & {HB}{hl}) sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) -> {E}x sent11: ¬{CG}{ib} sent12: (x): ¬(¬{AI}x & {FJ}x) -> {CF}x sent13: ¬{E}{b} -> {C}{b} sent14: (Ex): {ID}x sent15: (x): ¬{EL}x -> ¬(¬{JI}{b} & {EL}{b}) sent16: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> {B}x sent17: (Ex): {B}x sent18: (Ex): (¬{C}x v {D}x) sent19: {A}{a} sent20: ¬{BU}{a} sent21: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) -> {B}x sent22: {B}{b} sent23: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> {C}x sent24: ({DK}{a} & {BQ}{a})

the post-horse is a exabit.

{B}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the post-horse is not a exabit. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a polymer that the post-horse is not inconvenient but it is a polymer is not correct. sent2: the Mozambican is not a polymer if the fact that the post-horse is not convenient and is a exabit is not wrong. sent3: if the post-horse is a kind of a polymer that does rehear inattention then the Mozambican is not inconvenient. sent4: if that something is not a polymer is right it is a exabit that is inconvenient. sent5: the fact that the Mozambican is not Pythagorean and rehears inattention is wrong if something does not rehears inattention. sent6: the allopurinol is not Pythagorean. sent7: the post-horse is not Pythagorean. sent8: the tricycle does wane and is a fusilier. sent9: if something is not a exabit the fact that the post-horse is inconvenient a exabit is not right. sent10: if the fact that something is convenient and is a polymer is not correct it does rehear inattention. sent11: that the chameleon does not intonate is not incorrect. sent12: something is a kind of an annoyance if the fact that it does not ripen mikado and it is a VDU does not hold. sent13: if the Mozambican does not rehear inattention then it is a polymer. sent14: there is something such that it rehears nanomia. sent15: the fact that the Mozambican is not a kind of an air but it is undomestic is not true if there is something such that it is not undomestic. sent16: something is a exabit if that it is not Pythagorean and it rehears inattention does not hold. sent17: there is something such that it is a exabit. sent18: there exists something such that it is not a polymer or it is Pythagorean or both. sent19: the post-horse is inconvenient. sent20: the post-horse is not adjectival. sent21: if the fact that something is non-Pythagorean and is a polymer is not correct then it is a exabit. sent22: the Mozambican is a exabit. sent23: if the fact that something is not Pythagorean and does rehear inattention does not hold then it is a polymer. sent24: the post-horse is a kind of a favorableness and is a kind of a amnesic. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the post-horse is a exabit.; sent19 & assump1 -> int1: the post-horse is inconvenient and it is a exabit.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the fact that the Mozambican is not a polymer hold.; sent23 -> int3: the Mozambican is a kind of a polymer if that it is not Pythagorean and rehears inattention is false.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

that there exists something such that it is a saucer is wrong.

¬((Ex): {B}x)

sent1: the leach is an assault. sent2: something is not a Photostat and is not a carnival. sent3: something is a saucer and a Krishnaism if the fact that it does not impugn lure hold. sent4: the bettong does spectate but it is not Bosnian if it does rehear leach. sent5: the leach primes if something is surface-to-air and it is a kind of a saucer. sent6: there is something such that it is achondritic. sent7: the leach is not surface-to-air and is a kind of a saucer. sent8: there exists something such that it is a Wolffia. sent9: the leach is amaranthine. sent10: if the bettong does spectate but it is non-Bosnian then the lure is not non-Bosnian. sent11: something is surface-to-air. sent12: the scalpel is non-alchemistic if something is not a Photostat and not a carnival. sent13: the bettong rehears leach if there exists something such that that it is not alchemistic is not false. sent14: the leach is not surface-to-air. sent15: the egg-and-dart is surface-to-air. sent16: the fact that something is a kind of surface-to-air thing that does not rehear proposer is not false if it is not Bosnian.

sent1: {IJ}{a} sent2: (Ex): (¬{K}x & ¬{J}x) sent3: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({B}x & {D}x) sent4: {G}{c} -> ({F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent5: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {BR}{a} sent6: (Ex): {IB}x sent7: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent8: (Ex): {DC}x sent9: {DR}{a} sent10: ({F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent11: (Ex): {A}x sent12: (x): (¬{K}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{I}{d} sent13: (x): ¬{I}x -> {G}{c} sent14: ¬{A}{a} sent15: {A}{gt} sent16: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({A}x & ¬{C}x)

the leach is priming.

{BR}{a}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that it is a saucer is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the leach is an assault. sent2: something is not a Photostat and is not a carnival. sent3: something is a saucer and a Krishnaism if the fact that it does not impugn lure hold. sent4: the bettong does spectate but it is not Bosnian if it does rehear leach. sent5: the leach primes if something is surface-to-air and it is a kind of a saucer. sent6: there is something such that it is achondritic. sent7: the leach is not surface-to-air and is a kind of a saucer. sent8: there exists something such that it is a Wolffia. sent9: the leach is amaranthine. sent10: if the bettong does spectate but it is non-Bosnian then the lure is not non-Bosnian. sent11: something is surface-to-air. sent12: the scalpel is non-alchemistic if something is not a Photostat and not a carnival. sent13: the bettong rehears leach if there exists something such that that it is not alchemistic is not false. sent14: the leach is not surface-to-air. sent15: the egg-and-dart is surface-to-air. sent16: the fact that something is a kind of surface-to-air thing that does not rehear proposer is not false if it is not Bosnian. ; $proof$ =

sent7 -> int1: the leach is a saucer.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the alternator is not a labial.

¬{B}{b}

sent1: the fact that the alternator does resurrect and it is unswept is not true if the pajama is not a rummage. sent2: if the alternator is enzymatic it is a rummage. sent3: if the alternator is unswept then it is not a labial. sent4: everything is a dingbat and untidy. sent5: that the alternator does resurrect and is not unswept is not true if the pajama is not a rummage. sent6: if the fact that something resurrects but it is not unswept does not hold then it is not a kind of a labial. sent7: if something is unswept then it is non-labial. sent8: if something is a rummage then it is not non-labial. sent9: that the alternator does impugn Davenport but it is not a NYSE is false. sent10: the fact that the alternator does resurrect and is unswept is not true. sent11: that the pajama is not unswept is not false if the alternator is a kind of a rummage and is a labial.

sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent2: {C}{b} -> {A}{b} sent3: {AB}{b} -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: (x): ({E}x & {F}x) sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent6: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent8: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent9: ¬({IH}{b} & ¬{CH}{b}) sent10: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent11: ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{AB}{a}

the pajama is not unswept.

¬{AB}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the alternator is not a labial. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the alternator does resurrect and it is unswept is not true if the pajama is not a rummage. sent2: if the alternator is enzymatic it is a rummage. sent3: if the alternator is unswept then it is not a labial. sent4: everything is a dingbat and untidy. sent5: that the alternator does resurrect and is not unswept is not true if the pajama is not a rummage. sent6: if the fact that something resurrects but it is not unswept does not hold then it is not a kind of a labial. sent7: if something is unswept then it is non-labial. sent8: if something is a rummage then it is not non-labial. sent9: that the alternator does impugn Davenport but it is not a NYSE is false. sent10: the fact that the alternator does resurrect and is unswept is not true. sent11: that the pajama is not unswept is not false if the alternator is a kind of a rummage and is a labial. ; $proof$ =

sent6 -> int1: if the fact that the alternator does resurrect but it is not unswept does not hold it is not a kind of a labial.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the candlepins is non-biogeographic a drupe.

(¬{E}{b} & {D}{b})

sent1: something is not a drupe if that it either is a swab or is not an attendant or both is wrong. sent2: if something is not a relict then it is not an attendant. sent3: the god is an attendant. sent4: there exists something such that the fact that it is not pro-life is not false. sent5: something is breastless and it is a swab if it is not a kind of an attendant. sent6: if that something is a swab and/or it is a kind of an attendant is not correct it is not a drupe. sent7: the god is not biogeographic if the fact that either it is a kind of a swab or it is not a kind of an attendant or both is not right. sent8: something is not a Coregonus if the fact that it is a kind of an irredentism or it is not guilty or both is not right. sent9: if the god is not a drupe the candlepins is not a kind of an attendant but it is a kind of a drupe. sent10: something is microelectronics. sent11: there exists something such that the fact that it is not breastless is right. sent12: if there exists something such that it is not breastless then that the god does swab and/or it is not an attendant does not hold. sent13: if the god is not a kind of a drupe then the candlepins is not biogeographic but it is a kind of a drupe. sent14: if the fact that the god is a kind of a drupe or it is not biogeographic or both is incorrect then it is not a kind of a swab. sent15: there is something such that it is biogeographic. sent16: there is something such that it is not a Marcionism. sent17: the god is not a drupe if the fact that it is an attendant or not biogeographic or both is incorrect. sent18: the fact that either the candlepins is an attendant or it is not a kind of a drupe or both is wrong. sent19: if that the candlepins is a drupe and/or it is not biogeographic is not true then that it swabs is not right. sent20: if the god does rough endorphin and is non-Einsteinian it is not a kind of a relict.

sent1: (x): ¬({B}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent2: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{C}x sent3: {C}{a} sent4: (Ex): ¬{FT}x sent5: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent6: (x): ¬({B}x v {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent7: ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent8: (x): ¬({JJ}x v ¬{CF}x) -> ¬{HO}x sent9: ¬{D}{a} -> (¬{C}{b} & {D}{b}) sent10: (Ex): {HB}x sent11: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent13: ¬{D}{a} -> (¬{E}{b} & {D}{b}) sent14: ¬({D}{a} v ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent15: (Ex): {E}x sent16: (Ex): ¬{EH}x sent17: ¬({C}{a} v ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent18: ¬({C}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) sent19: ¬({D}{b} v ¬{E}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent20: ({H}{a} & ¬{G}{a}) -> ¬{F}{a}

that the candlepins is a kind of non-biogeographic a drupe is false.

¬(¬{E}{b} & {D}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the candlepins is non-biogeographic a drupe. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a drupe if that it either is a swab or is not an attendant or both is wrong. sent2: if something is not a relict then it is not an attendant. sent3: the god is an attendant. sent4: there exists something such that the fact that it is not pro-life is not false. sent5: something is breastless and it is a swab if it is not a kind of an attendant. sent6: if that something is a swab and/or it is a kind of an attendant is not correct it is not a drupe. sent7: the god is not biogeographic if the fact that either it is a kind of a swab or it is not a kind of an attendant or both is not right. sent8: something is not a Coregonus if the fact that it is a kind of an irredentism or it is not guilty or both is not right. sent9: if the god is not a drupe the candlepins is not a kind of an attendant but it is a kind of a drupe. sent10: something is microelectronics. sent11: there exists something such that the fact that it is not breastless is right. sent12: if there exists something such that it is not breastless then that the god does swab and/or it is not an attendant does not hold. sent13: if the god is not a kind of a drupe then the candlepins is not biogeographic but it is a kind of a drupe. sent14: if the fact that the god is a kind of a drupe or it is not biogeographic or both is incorrect then it is not a kind of a swab. sent15: there is something such that it is biogeographic. sent16: there is something such that it is not a Marcionism. sent17: the god is not a drupe if the fact that it is an attendant or not biogeographic or both is incorrect. sent18: the fact that either the candlepins is an attendant or it is not a kind of a drupe or both is wrong. sent19: if that the candlepins is a drupe and/or it is not biogeographic is not true then that it swabs is not right. sent20: if the god does rough endorphin and is non-Einsteinian it is not a kind of a relict. ; $proof$ =

sent11 & sent12 -> int1: that the god is a swab and/or it is not an attendant is not correct.; sent1 -> int2: the god is not a kind of a drupe if that it is a swab and/or it is not an attendant is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the god is not a drupe.; int3 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the antimacassar either is a coir or is a kind of a monolingual or both.

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

sent1: the dronabinol is a coir if the maigre is a kind of a coir. sent2: the antimacassar is a echinus or is glorious or both. sent3: the fact that the Tudor is a coir hold. sent4: The bey ripens maigre. sent5: the maigre ripens bey. sent6: the antimacassar is a potholder. sent7: the maigre ripens bey or it is a monolingual or both.

sent1: {C}{a} -> {C}{ed} sent2: ({JD}{b} v {GR}{b}) sent3: {C}{ho} sent4: {AA}{aa} sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {HJ}{b} sent7: ({A}{a} v {B}{a})

the dronabinol is a coir.

{C}{ed}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the antimacassar either is a coir or is a kind of a monolingual or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the dronabinol is a coir if the maigre is a kind of a coir. sent2: the antimacassar is a echinus or is glorious or both. sent3: the fact that the Tudor is a coir hold. sent4: The bey ripens maigre. sent5: the maigre ripens bey. sent6: the antimacassar is a potholder. sent7: the maigre ripens bey or it is a monolingual or both. ; $proof$ =

__UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

that the trigonometrician is not horizontal and it is not a Emile is wrong.

¬(¬{A}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

sent1: if the souther is not a Sciurus and not a fricandeau then the carabao is sarcolemmal. sent2: if the souther is sarcolemmal it is a kind of a horizontal. sent3: that the trigonometrician is a kind of the Emile if the trigonometrician is a fricandeau is correct. sent4: if the carabao does not stir then the souther is sarcolemmal thing that is a neuralgia. sent5: the souther is not a Sciurus. sent6: the souther is not a Sciurus and is not a kind of a fricandeau. sent7: the souther is not proportionate and it is not unpalatable. sent8: the trigonometrician is not a crawler and it does not diazotize. sent9: something is a kind of a horizontal if it is sarcolemmal. sent10: the mirage is a Sciurus. sent11: if that the carabao is not a Emile and is not a Sciurus hold then that the souther is sarcolemmal is right. sent12: the souther is not a horizontal and not a Sciurus. sent13: the fact that the trigonometrician is not a kind of a horizontal is right. sent14: that the souther is a Emile is not wrong if the trigonometrician is not a Sciurus and is not a horizontal. sent15: if the souther is a Sciurus and is not a fricandeau the carabao is sarcolemmal. sent16: if the carabao is horizontal the trigonometrician is not a horizontal. sent17: the carabao is both not horizontal and not a Emile if the trigonometrician is a horizontal. sent18: the re is not an angered but non-sarcolemmal. sent19: the hashish is a fricandeau. sent20: the trigonometrician is not a kind of a horizontal and is not a kind of a Emile if the carabao is horizontal.

sent1: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent2: {B}{a} -> {A}{a} sent3: {AB}{c} -> {D}{c} sent4: ¬{E}{b} -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent5: ¬{AA}{a} sent6: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: (¬{GO}{a} & ¬{HT}{a}) sent8: (¬{HR}{c} & ¬{BF}{c}) sent9: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent10: {AA}{jd} sent11: (¬{D}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent12: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) sent13: ¬{A}{c} sent14: (¬{AA}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> {D}{a} sent15: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent16: {A}{b} -> ¬{A}{c} sent17: {A}{c} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent18: (¬{AT}{g} & ¬{B}{g}) sent19: {AB}{ff} sent20: {A}{b} -> (¬{A}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

the fact that the trigonometrician is not horizontal and is not a Emile is not right.

¬(¬{A}{c} & ¬{D}{c})

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the trigonometrician is not horizontal and it is not a Emile is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the souther is not a Sciurus and not a fricandeau then the carabao is sarcolemmal. sent2: if the souther is sarcolemmal it is a kind of a horizontal. sent3: that the trigonometrician is a kind of the Emile if the trigonometrician is a fricandeau is correct. sent4: if the carabao does not stir then the souther is sarcolemmal thing that is a neuralgia. sent5: the souther is not a Sciurus. sent6: the souther is not a Sciurus and is not a kind of a fricandeau. sent7: the souther is not proportionate and it is not unpalatable. sent8: the trigonometrician is not a crawler and it does not diazotize. sent9: something is a kind of a horizontal if it is sarcolemmal. sent10: the mirage is a Sciurus. sent11: if that the carabao is not a Emile and is not a Sciurus hold then that the souther is sarcolemmal is right. sent12: the souther is not a horizontal and not a Sciurus. sent13: the fact that the trigonometrician is not a kind of a horizontal is right. sent14: that the souther is a Emile is not wrong if the trigonometrician is not a Sciurus and is not a horizontal. sent15: if the souther is a Sciurus and is not a fricandeau the carabao is sarcolemmal. sent16: if the carabao is horizontal the trigonometrician is not a horizontal. sent17: the carabao is both not horizontal and not a Emile if the trigonometrician is a horizontal. sent18: the re is not an angered but non-sarcolemmal. sent19: the hashish is a fricandeau. sent20: the trigonometrician is not a kind of a horizontal and is not a kind of a Emile if the carabao is horizontal. ; $proof$ =

sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the carabao is sarcolemmal.; sent9 -> int2: if the carabao is sarcolemmal then it is a horizontal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the carabao is a horizontal.; int3 & sent20 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the bystander is both not non-dominant and not non-prehistoric.

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

sent1: if that the ridley is both usual and dominant is incorrect it is not a dominant. sent2: if the fact that something is not a kind of a knock and it is not involucrate does not hold then it is usual. sent3: that the mandolin is not a kind of a knock but it is involucrate does not hold. sent4: if the mandolin is involucrate that it is usual hold. sent5: the association is both a Kennelly and prehistoric. sent6: the bystander is involucrate if the fact that it is not a dominant and it is not prehistoric is incorrect. sent7: the mandolin impugns vulture. sent8: the bystander is prehistoric. sent9: if something is involucrate then it is usual. sent10: the mandolin is prehistoric. sent11: the fact that the mandolin is not a knock and not involucrate is wrong. sent12: that the mandolin is both not involucrate and not prehistoric is false. sent13: the fact that the bystander does not knock and it is not a dominant is not right.

sent1: ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent5: ({FC}{db} & {C}{db}) sent6: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {AB}{a} sent7: {BH}{aa} sent8: {C}{a} sent9: (x): {AB}x -> {B}x sent10: {C}{aa} sent11: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent12: ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) sent13: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{A}{a})

that the bystander is dominant and prehistoric is not right.

¬({A}{a} & {C}{a})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the bystander is both not non-dominant and not non-prehistoric. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the ridley is both usual and dominant is incorrect it is not a dominant. sent2: if the fact that something is not a kind of a knock and it is not involucrate does not hold then it is usual. sent3: that the mandolin is not a kind of a knock but it is involucrate does not hold. sent4: if the mandolin is involucrate that it is usual hold. sent5: the association is both a Kennelly and prehistoric. sent6: the bystander is involucrate if the fact that it is not a dominant and it is not prehistoric is incorrect. sent7: the mandolin impugns vulture. sent8: the bystander is prehistoric. sent9: if something is involucrate then it is usual. sent10: the mandolin is prehistoric. sent11: the fact that the mandolin is not a knock and not involucrate is wrong. sent12: that the mandolin is both not involucrate and not prehistoric is false. sent13: the fact that the bystander does not knock and it is not a dominant is not right. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> int1: if the fact that the mandolin is not a knock and it is not involucrate is wrong then that it is usual is not false.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the mandolin is usual.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the barony is a kind of insurmountable a feminine.

({B}{b} & {A}{b})

sent1: if the fact that the barony roughs Kamet or it is not a kind of a gloxinia or both does not hold then that the trusty is insurmountable is not incorrect. sent2: that the trusty impugns ovolo and it is a misanthrope is not wrong. sent3: the barony is a Euler. sent4: the fact that the barony is not yogistic and/or it is not a ford does not hold if the fact that the trusty is not feminine is true. sent5: the barony is insurmountable if that either the trusty is not a gloxinia or it roughs Kamet or both is incorrect. sent6: that something is not insurmountable and is not a Euler if it is immiscible is true. sent7: the trusty is immiscible if the fact that the longan is a kind of a narcoleptic is true. sent8: the trusty roughs Kamet. sent9: the fact that the drosophila is a Euler is not wrong. sent10: the trusty is rejective and it does impugn hour. sent11: if the barony is a Euler then it is a feminine. sent12: the barony is insurmountable if the fact that the trusty is not a gloxinia and/or it does not rough Kamet is incorrect. sent13: that the trusty is feminine is not false. sent14: if something is immiscible it is a kind of a Euler. sent15: that the trusty is not a feminine and/or it does not rough Kamet does not hold. sent16: the trusty is a heating. sent17: if something that is not insurmountable is not a Euler it is not a kind of a feminine. sent18: the trusty is a Euler. sent19: the fact that the trusty is not a gloxinia and/or it does not rough Kamet does not hold. sent20: the trusty is immiscible if it is not a narcoleptic and not due. sent21: there exists something such that the fact that it is a exactness and is Rousseauan is not right. sent22: that either the trusty is not a kind of a Euler or it does not rough Kamet or both is wrong. sent23: the zither is a feminine. sent24: that the diestock is a gloxinia is right.

sent1: ¬({AB}{b} v ¬{AA}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent2: ({HQ}{a} & {DE}{a}) sent3: {C}{b} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{BH}{b} v ¬{AU}{b}) sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent6: (x): {D}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) sent7: {E}{c} -> {D}{a} sent8: {AB}{a} sent9: {C}{it} sent10: ({HO}{a} & {BL}{a}) sent11: {C}{b} -> {A}{b} sent12: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent13: {A}{a} sent14: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent15: ¬(¬{A}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent16: {FQ}{a} sent17: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent18: {C}{a} sent19: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent20: (¬{E}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) -> {D}{a} sent21: (Ex): ¬({I}x & {H}x) sent22: ¬(¬{C}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent23: {A}{ff} sent24: {AA}{dm}

the fact that the barony is insurmountable and it is feminine is not true.

¬({B}{b} & {A}{b})

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the barony is a kind of insurmountable a feminine. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the barony roughs Kamet or it is not a kind of a gloxinia or both does not hold then that the trusty is insurmountable is not incorrect. sent2: that the trusty impugns ovolo and it is a misanthrope is not wrong. sent3: the barony is a Euler. sent4: the fact that the barony is not yogistic and/or it is not a ford does not hold if the fact that the trusty is not feminine is true. sent5: the barony is insurmountable if that either the trusty is not a gloxinia or it roughs Kamet or both is incorrect. sent6: that something is not insurmountable and is not a Euler if it is immiscible is true. sent7: the trusty is immiscible if the fact that the longan is a kind of a narcoleptic is true. sent8: the trusty roughs Kamet. sent9: the fact that the drosophila is a Euler is not wrong. sent10: the trusty is rejective and it does impugn hour. sent11: if the barony is a Euler then it is a feminine. sent12: the barony is insurmountable if the fact that the trusty is not a gloxinia and/or it does not rough Kamet is incorrect. sent13: that the trusty is feminine is not false. sent14: if something is immiscible it is a kind of a Euler. sent15: that the trusty is not a feminine and/or it does not rough Kamet does not hold. sent16: the trusty is a heating. sent17: if something that is not insurmountable is not a Euler it is not a kind of a feminine. sent18: the trusty is a Euler. sent19: the fact that the trusty is not a gloxinia and/or it does not rough Kamet does not hold. sent20: the trusty is immiscible if it is not a narcoleptic and not due. sent21: there exists something such that the fact that it is a exactness and is Rousseauan is not right. sent22: that either the trusty is not a kind of a Euler or it does not rough Kamet or both is wrong. sent23: the zither is a feminine. sent24: that the diestock is a gloxinia is right. ; $proof$ =

sent12 & sent19 -> int1: the barony is insurmountable.; sent11 & sent3 -> int2: the barony is a kind of a feminine.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the roughing Pompadour does not occur is not wrong.

¬{D}

sent1: if the cropping does not occur then the stabilization happens. sent2: the opportuneness does not occur if the ballup does not occur. sent3: the harassment does not occur. sent4: the fact that the anisotropicness occurs and the harassment occurs is right if the opportuneness does not occur. sent5: the boricness occurs. sent6: that the roughing Pompadour does not occur is prevented by that the stabilization happens and the harassment does not occur. sent7: the stabilization does not occur if the fact that the stabilization happens and the ergotropicness does not occur does not hold. sent8: that the crop does not occur is correct.

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

the roughing Pompadour does not occur.

¬{D}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the roughing Pompadour does not occur is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the cropping does not occur then the stabilization happens. sent2: the opportuneness does not occur if the ballup does not occur. sent3: the harassment does not occur. sent4: the fact that the anisotropicness occurs and the harassment occurs is right if the opportuneness does not occur. sent5: the boricness occurs. sent6: that the roughing Pompadour does not occur is prevented by that the stabilization happens and the harassment does not occur. sent7: the stabilization does not occur if the fact that the stabilization happens and the ergotropicness does not occur does not hold. sent8: that the crop does not occur is correct. ; $proof$ =

sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the stabilization occurs.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the stabilization but not the harassment occurs.; int2 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

the Namibianness occurs.

{A}

sent1: if the rehearing coke happens but the colorimetry does not occur then the Namibianness does not occur. sent2: if the cast does not occur then the liaison occurs and the wish occurs. sent3: the polemics does not occur. sent4: that the colorimetry occurs is prevented by that the impugning legibility does not occur or the colorimetry does not occur or both. sent5: the rehearing coke does not occur if that the cutting and the impugning ununquadium happens is incorrect. sent6: the impugning legibility does not occur if that either the diastolicness or the rehearing strings or both occurs is not right. sent7: the fact that the non-Namibianness and the rehearing coke happens is correct if the colorimetry does not occur. sent8: that not the Namibianness but the rehearing coke occurs leads to that the damping does not occur. sent9: the cast does not occur if the fact that the cast occurs and the arachnoid occurs does not hold. sent10: the ceramicness does not occur if that the grabbing occurs and the turning happens is not right. sent11: the rehearing coke happens and the colorimetry happens. sent12: the roughing pesewa does not occur if the wish occurs. sent13: the rehearing coke does not occur if the cuttingness does not occur. sent14: the colorimetry occurs. sent15: the fact that the diastolicness or the rehearing strings or both occurs is wrong if the roughing pesewa does not occur.

sent1: ({B} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{A} sent2: ¬{J} -> ({I} & {H}) sent3: ¬{CC} sent4: (¬{E} v ¬{C}) -> ¬{C} sent5: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: ¬({D} v {F}) -> ¬{E} sent7: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & {B}) sent8: (¬{A} & {B}) -> ¬{IL} sent9: ¬({J} & {K}) -> ¬{J} sent10: ¬({CE} & {FJ}) -> ¬{IG} sent11: ({B} & {C}) sent12: {H} -> ¬{G} sent13: ¬{AA} -> ¬{B} sent14: {C} sent15: ¬{G} -> ¬({D} v {F})

the Namibianness does not occur.

¬{A}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the Namibianness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the rehearing coke happens but the colorimetry does not occur then the Namibianness does not occur. sent2: if the cast does not occur then the liaison occurs and the wish occurs. sent3: the polemics does not occur. sent4: that the colorimetry occurs is prevented by that the impugning legibility does not occur or the colorimetry does not occur or both. sent5: the rehearing coke does not occur if that the cutting and the impugning ununquadium happens is incorrect. sent6: the impugning legibility does not occur if that either the diastolicness or the rehearing strings or both occurs is not right. sent7: the fact that the non-Namibianness and the rehearing coke happens is correct if the colorimetry does not occur. sent8: that not the Namibianness but the rehearing coke occurs leads to that the damping does not occur. sent9: the cast does not occur if the fact that the cast occurs and the arachnoid occurs does not hold. sent10: the ceramicness does not occur if that the grabbing occurs and the turning happens is not right. sent11: the rehearing coke happens and the colorimetry happens. sent12: the roughing pesewa does not occur if the wish occurs. sent13: the rehearing coke does not occur if the cuttingness does not occur. sent14: the colorimetry occurs. sent15: the fact that the diastolicness or the rehearing strings or both occurs is wrong if the roughing pesewa does not occur. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Namibianness does not occur.; sent11 -> int1: the rehearing coke occurs.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that there is something such that if that it does not rehear raree-show is not false then it is a kind of non-Samoan thing that does impugn Burundi does not hold.

¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x))

sent1: there exists something such that if it rehears raree-show then it is not a Samoan and it impugns Burundi. sent2: the scullery rehears raree-show if it is not a kind of a parang. sent3: the signboard does not rehear Kroto and does impugn Burundi if that it rehears saucer hold. sent4: if the materialization is not a racerunner it is not dispensable and it is a qibla. sent5: there is something such that if it does not rehear raree-show it is not a Samoan. sent6: something does not fluoresce but it is a kind of a Pomacentrus if it is not a chamber. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not rehear raree-show it impugns Burundi. sent8: if the cockleshell is not a kind of a Cuban then it does not rehear raree-show and it is a minibike. sent9: if something is not a Hyalophora it does not rough barbette and it is stenographic. sent10: the scullery does not welcome but it rehears raree-show if the fact that it is not an expert is right. sent11: the scullery does not impugn Burundi and does rehear Vogul if it is not a Flagstaff. sent12: there is something such that if the fact that it does not impugn Pompadour hold then that it does not impugn Atlas and impugns Ashton is correct. sent13: the scullery does not impugn Burundi and is a lungfish if it is not a Pomacentrus. sent14: if the fact that the scullery rehears raree-show is false then it is a kind of non-Samoan thing that does impugn Burundi. sent15: there is something such that if the fact that it does not rehear raree-show is true the fact that it is a kind of a Samoan that impugns Burundi hold. sent16: if something is not polyatomic it is non-purgatorial thing that is a oophorectomy. sent17: the scullery is non-Samoan thing that does impugn Burundi if it rehears raree-show. sent18: the scullery does not impugn campaign and is a kind of a kelvin if it does not rehear raree-show. sent19: if the scullery does not rehear raree-show then it is not Samoan.

sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: ¬{E}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent3: {JD}{f} -> (¬{IO}{f} & {AB}{f}) sent4: ¬{DI}{bm} -> (¬{Q}{bm} & {AP}{bm}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent6: (x): ¬{IH}x -> (¬{CK}x & {FE}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x sent8: ¬{FI}{g} -> (¬{A}{g} & {FA}{g}) sent9: (x): ¬{FU}x -> (¬{AT}x & {HO}x) sent10: ¬{CQ}{aa} -> (¬{GP}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent11: ¬{AN}{aa} -> (¬{AB}{aa} & {HL}{aa}) sent12: (Ex): ¬{BP}x -> (¬{GU}x & {IB}x) sent13: ¬{FE}{aa} -> (¬{AB}{aa} & {CT}{aa}) sent14: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent15: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent16: (x): ¬{FH}x -> (¬{GS}x & {HJ}x) sent17: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent18: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{ES}{aa} & {BM}{aa}) sent19: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa}

there is something such that if it is not polyatomic then it is a kind of non-purgatorial thing that is a kind of a oophorectomy.

(Ex): ¬{FH}x -> (¬{GS}x & {HJ}x)

DISPROVED

PROVED

DISPROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if that it does not rehear raree-show is not false then it is a kind of non-Samoan thing that does impugn Burundi does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it rehears raree-show then it is not a Samoan and it impugns Burundi. sent2: the scullery rehears raree-show if it is not a kind of a parang. sent3: the signboard does not rehear Kroto and does impugn Burundi if that it rehears saucer hold. sent4: if the materialization is not a racerunner it is not dispensable and it is a qibla. sent5: there is something such that if it does not rehear raree-show it is not a Samoan. sent6: something does not fluoresce but it is a kind of a Pomacentrus if it is not a chamber. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not rehear raree-show it impugns Burundi. sent8: if the cockleshell is not a kind of a Cuban then it does not rehear raree-show and it is a minibike. sent9: if something is not a Hyalophora it does not rough barbette and it is stenographic. sent10: the scullery does not welcome but it rehears raree-show if the fact that it is not an expert is right. sent11: the scullery does not impugn Burundi and does rehear Vogul if it is not a Flagstaff. sent12: there is something such that if the fact that it does not impugn Pompadour hold then that it does not impugn Atlas and impugns Ashton is correct. sent13: the scullery does not impugn Burundi and is a lungfish if it is not a Pomacentrus. sent14: if the fact that the scullery rehears raree-show is false then it is a kind of non-Samoan thing that does impugn Burundi. sent15: there is something such that if the fact that it does not rehear raree-show is true the fact that it is a kind of a Samoan that impugns Burundi hold. sent16: if something is not polyatomic it is non-purgatorial thing that is a oophorectomy. sent17: the scullery is non-Samoan thing that does impugn Burundi if it rehears raree-show. sent18: the scullery does not impugn campaign and is a kind of a kelvin if it does not rehear raree-show. sent19: if the scullery does not rehear raree-show then it is not Samoan. ; $proof$ =

sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__

DeductionInstance

there is something such that if it is autocatalytic it is funicular and it is not a lithotomy.

(Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

sent1: the derivative is pardonable and is not a lithotomy if it is a grotto. sent2: if the coccus is autocatalytic then it is funicular and it is not a lithotomy. sent3: the coccus does not impugn coccus if it is tame. sent4: there exists something such that if it accepts then it impugns onyxis. sent5: the coccus does not rehear sinking if it is a kind of a lithotomy. sent6: there is something such that if it is medullary then it is pardonable and not epicurean. sent7: if the fact that the coccus is autocatalytic is right it is a funicular. sent8: if the coccus is autocatalytic it is not non-funicular and it is a lithotomy. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it is a home-farm hold it ripens avowal and is a amatungulu. sent10: that there is something such that if it is a positivism then it is a kind of evidentiary thing that is atomic is not false.

sent1: {EH}{bm} -> ({GN}{bm} & ¬{AB}{bm}) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: {GT}{aa} -> ¬{JD}{aa} sent4: (Ex): {AJ}x -> {EL}x sent5: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{L}{aa} sent6: (Ex): {DN}x -> ({GN}x & ¬{DQ}x) sent7: {A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent8: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {BJ}x -> ({BD}x & {DC}x) sent10: (Ex): {DR}x -> ({ID}x & {CQ}x)

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is autocatalytic it is funicular and it is not a lithotomy. ; $context$ = sent1: the derivative is pardonable and is not a lithotomy if it is a grotto. sent2: if the coccus is autocatalytic then it is funicular and it is not a lithotomy. sent3: the coccus does not impugn coccus if it is tame. sent4: there exists something such that if it accepts then it impugns onyxis. sent5: the coccus does not rehear sinking if it is a kind of a lithotomy. sent6: there is something such that if it is medullary then it is pardonable and not epicurean. sent7: if the fact that the coccus is autocatalytic is right it is a funicular. sent8: if the coccus is autocatalytic it is not non-funicular and it is a lithotomy. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it is a home-farm hold it ripens avowal and is a amatungulu. sent10: that there is something such that if it is a positivism then it is a kind of evidentiary thing that is atomic is not false. ; $proof$ =

sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the roughing dot occurs and the heritage occurs.

({A} & {C})

sent1: that the restfulness does not occur and/or that the reverentness occurs prevents the non-low-tensionness. sent2: both the roughing Holothuridae and the disjoining happens. sent3: the fact that the systematicness happens is wrong if the fact that the fact that the systematicness happens and the roughing neuropathy occurs is not wrong is incorrect. sent4: the mayoralty happens and the TAT occurs. sent5: both the questioning and the longitudinalness occurs. sent6: if either the Frenchifying does not occur or the roughing benchmark occurs or both the heritage occurs. sent7: the non-ophthalmicness and/or the roughing Holothuridae happens. sent8: if not the Frenchifying but the heritage occurs then the villain does not occur. sent9: the precession occurs if either the non-Hebrideanness or the glimpsing or both occurs. sent10: the hircineness does not occur if that the thermionicness does not occur and the impugning andesite does not occur is not correct. sent11: both the dot-com and the dimorphism happens. sent12: the ripening photocopier happens and the roughing Heliobacter occurs. sent13: the fact that the systematicness and the roughing neuropathy happens does not hold if the fact that the hircineness does not occur is right. sent14: that the rehearing stay does not occur prevents that the nonmagneticness does not occur. sent15: if that the dominating does not occur is correct then the thalamocorticalness happens. sent16: the intermezzo occurs if the mayoralty does not occur. sent17: that the Bruneian happens and the roughing dot occurs is triggered by that the villain does not occur. sent18: that both the roughing dot and the heritage occurs is incorrect if the villain does not occur. sent19: the ripening haggle happens. sent20: the Frenchifying does not occur and/or the roughing benchmark happens. sent21: the non-systematicness causes that the roughing benchmark and the positive occurs.

sent1: (¬{EA} v {AO}) -> {IN} sent2: ({BE} & {II}) sent3: ¬({G} & {I}) -> ¬{G} sent4: ({HG} & {AG}) sent5: ({FK} & {BS}) sent6: (¬{D} v {E}) -> {C} sent7: (¬{ET} v {BE}) sent8: (¬{D} & {C}) -> ¬{B} sent9: (¬{FC} v {BQ}) -> {FI} sent10: ¬(¬{J} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{H} sent11: ({BO} & {GF}) sent12: ({JE} & {BU}) sent13: ¬{H} -> ¬({G} & {I}) sent14: ¬{CH} -> {DQ} sent15: ¬{AF} -> {EQ} sent16: ¬{HG} -> {HJ} sent17: ¬{B} -> ({EJ} & {A}) sent18: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) sent19: {U} sent20: (¬{D} v {E}) sent21: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F})

the fact that the roughing dot occurs and the heritage happens is incorrect.

¬({A} & {C})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the roughing dot occurs and the heritage occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the restfulness does not occur and/or that the reverentness occurs prevents the non-low-tensionness. sent2: both the roughing Holothuridae and the disjoining happens. sent3: the fact that the systematicness happens is wrong if the fact that the fact that the systematicness happens and the roughing neuropathy occurs is not wrong is incorrect. sent4: the mayoralty happens and the TAT occurs. sent5: both the questioning and the longitudinalness occurs. sent6: if either the Frenchifying does not occur or the roughing benchmark occurs or both the heritage occurs. sent7: the non-ophthalmicness and/or the roughing Holothuridae happens. sent8: if not the Frenchifying but the heritage occurs then the villain does not occur. sent9: the precession occurs if either the non-Hebrideanness or the glimpsing or both occurs. sent10: the hircineness does not occur if that the thermionicness does not occur and the impugning andesite does not occur is not correct. sent11: both the dot-com and the dimorphism happens. sent12: the ripening photocopier happens and the roughing Heliobacter occurs. sent13: the fact that the systematicness and the roughing neuropathy happens does not hold if the fact that the hircineness does not occur is right. sent14: that the rehearing stay does not occur prevents that the nonmagneticness does not occur. sent15: if that the dominating does not occur is correct then the thalamocorticalness happens. sent16: the intermezzo occurs if the mayoralty does not occur. sent17: that the Bruneian happens and the roughing dot occurs is triggered by that the villain does not occur. sent18: that both the roughing dot and the heritage occurs is incorrect if the villain does not occur. sent19: the ripening haggle happens. sent20: the Frenchifying does not occur and/or the roughing benchmark happens. sent21: the non-systematicness causes that the roughing benchmark and the positive occurs. ; $proof$ =

sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the heritage happens.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the earthworm roughs tall is not wrong.

{A}{a}

sent1: something does not rough tall if the fact that it is both not a proto-oncogene and Laputan is not correct. sent2: the fact that something is not a proto-oncogene and it does not rough tall is wrong if it is Laputan. sent3: there is something such that it does gesticulate and it does not foster. sent4: something is not rheologic and does not foster if it does rough tall. sent5: something that is a mandolin is not a impoliteness but a ungulate. sent6: the rutabaga does not concur. sent7: something does not queue and it is not androgynous. sent8: there is something such that it does not gesticulate and it does foster. sent9: the earthworm does rough tall if there exists something such that it does not gesticulate and does not foster. sent10: there is something such that it does not foster. sent11: something does not gesticulate. sent12: if the fructification is rheologic the fact that the earthworm is not a proto-oncogene and is Laputan is not correct. sent13: the refinery does not gesticulate and does not foster. sent14: if the lodgepole does not rough Caspar it does revalue and is a mandolin. sent15: the detritus is not a blackout and it does not rough bonnet. sent16: if something is not ungulate then the fact that it is non-rheologic thing that does clobber is wrong. sent17: the lodgepole does not rough Caspar and does not impugn detritus if the rutabaga does not concur. sent18: the genip is not a ungulate if the lodgepole is not a impoliteness but it is ungulate. sent19: the refinery does not gesticulate.

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

the fact that the earthworm does not rough tall hold.

¬{A}{a}

PROVED

UNKNOWN

PROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the earthworm roughs tall is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not rough tall if the fact that it is both not a proto-oncogene and Laputan is not correct. sent2: the fact that something is not a proto-oncogene and it does not rough tall is wrong if it is Laputan. sent3: there is something such that it does gesticulate and it does not foster. sent4: something is not rheologic and does not foster if it does rough tall. sent5: something that is a mandolin is not a impoliteness but a ungulate. sent6: the rutabaga does not concur. sent7: something does not queue and it is not androgynous. sent8: there is something such that it does not gesticulate and it does foster. sent9: the earthworm does rough tall if there exists something such that it does not gesticulate and does not foster. sent10: there is something such that it does not foster. sent11: something does not gesticulate. sent12: if the fructification is rheologic the fact that the earthworm is not a proto-oncogene and is Laputan is not correct. sent13: the refinery does not gesticulate and does not foster. sent14: if the lodgepole does not rough Caspar it does revalue and is a mandolin. sent15: the detritus is not a blackout and it does not rough bonnet. sent16: if something is not ungulate then the fact that it is non-rheologic thing that does clobber is wrong. sent17: the lodgepole does not rough Caspar and does not impugn detritus if the rutabaga does not concur. sent18: the genip is not a ungulate if the lodgepole is not a impoliteness but it is ungulate. sent19: the refinery does not gesticulate. ; $proof$ =

sent13 -> int1: something does not gesticulate and it does not foster.; int1 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

the antibody does not rough Tracy and is not a holmium.

(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

sent1: the antibody does not auspicate. sent2: if something is not compassionate then it is not a holmium and does not rehear momism. sent3: if the marauder does not rough Tracy it does not impugn skidpan. sent4: the cyclooxygenase is not an embryo and does not rehear momism. sent5: the pop does not rehear momism. sent6: that something does not rough Tracy and it is not a kind of a holmium is not right if it rehears momism. sent7: something does not rough Tracy and it is not a holmium if it does not rehear momism.

sent1: ¬{AO}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{AB}x & ¬{A}x) sent3: ¬{AA}{dg} -> ¬{AU}{dg} sent4: (¬{DT}{j} & ¬{A}{j}) sent5: ¬{A}{d} sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)

that the antibody does not rough Tracy and is not a holmium does not hold.

¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the antibody does not rough Tracy and is not a holmium. ; $context$ = sent1: the antibody does not auspicate. sent2: if something is not compassionate then it is not a holmium and does not rehear momism. sent3: if the marauder does not rough Tracy it does not impugn skidpan. sent4: the cyclooxygenase is not an embryo and does not rehear momism. sent5: the pop does not rehear momism. sent6: that something does not rough Tracy and it is not a kind of a holmium is not right if it rehears momism. sent7: something does not rough Tracy and it is not a holmium if it does not rehear momism. ; $proof$ =

sent7 -> int1: if the antibody does not rehear momism it does not rough Tracy and it is not a kind of a holmium.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the townee is not a Okeechobee.

¬{D}{b}

sent1: the townee is not a kind of a Okeechobee if the Mauritanian is an unconscious. sent2: there is something such that it is a belay. sent3: the fact that if the Mauritanian is not a kind of a hollygrape the townee is not a Okeechobee is correct. sent4: if there exists something such that it is a belay then the Mauritanian is an unconscious and/or is not a kind of a hollygrape. sent5: something is a Okeechobee.

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

PROVED

PROVED

$hypothesis$ = the townee is not a Okeechobee. ; $context$ = sent1: the townee is not a kind of a Okeechobee if the Mauritanian is an unconscious. sent2: there is something such that it is a belay. sent3: the fact that if the Mauritanian is not a kind of a hollygrape the townee is not a Okeechobee is correct. sent4: if there exists something such that it is a belay then the Mauritanian is an unconscious and/or is not a kind of a hollygrape. sent5: something is a Okeechobee. ; $proof$ =

sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the Mauritanian is unconscious and/or it is not a hollygrape.; int1 & sent1 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__

DeductionInstance

that the non-Carthusianness and the unchangeableness happens is not correct.

¬(¬{AA} & {AB})

sent1: if the Carthusianness does not occur and the unchangeableness occurs then the clean does not occur. sent2: the electricity happens. sent3: the unchangeableness happens. sent4: if the fact that the electricity does not occur hold the non-Carthusianness and the unchangeableness happens. sent5: the fact that both the unfavorableness and the thudding happens is not true. sent6: that the ripening god does not occur is prevented by that the conjuncture occurs. sent7: that the electricity does not occur prevents that the roughing King does not occur.

sent1: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent2: {A} sent3: {AB} sent4: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent5: ¬(¬{AR} & {IS}) sent6: {GS} -> {DL} sent7: ¬{A} -> {DE}

the roughing King occurs.

{DE}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = that the non-Carthusianness and the unchangeableness happens is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Carthusianness does not occur and the unchangeableness occurs then the clean does not occur. sent2: the electricity happens. sent3: the unchangeableness happens. sent4: if the fact that the electricity does not occur hold the non-Carthusianness and the unchangeableness happens. sent5: the fact that both the unfavorableness and the thudding happens is not true. sent6: that the ripening god does not occur is prevented by that the conjuncture occurs. sent7: that the electricity does not occur prevents that the roughing King does not occur. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that not the Carthusian but the unchangeableness happens.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the clean does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the fact that the galleon is a kind of an eligibility is not false.

{A}{a}

sent1: if the tungsten is not a kind of an eligibility the fact that the sporophore is a Yellowstone and sclerotic does not hold. sent2: the sporophore is sclerotic if the fact that the bluenose is trophic hold. sent3: the sporophore is sclerotic if that the bluenose is not trophic but it is a thirst is false. sent4: the fact that the tungsten is not a thirst but it is sclerotic does not hold. sent5: the tungsten is a kind of a Yellowstone and it is sclerotic. sent6: if the tungsten is both a Yellowstone and sclerotic then that the sporophore is not sclerotic is right. sent7: that something is not an eligibility if the fact that it is sclerotic and is not a Yellowstone is wrong is correct.

sent1: ¬{A}{d} -> ¬({C}{c} & {B}{c}) sent2: {AA}{b} -> {B}{c} sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} sent4: ¬(¬{AB}{d} & {B}{d}) sent5: ({C}{d} & {B}{d}) sent6: ({C}{d} & {B}{d}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent7: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x

the galleon is not a kind of an eligibility.

¬{A}{a}

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the fact that the galleon is a kind of an eligibility is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the tungsten is not a kind of an eligibility the fact that the sporophore is a Yellowstone and sclerotic does not hold. sent2: the sporophore is sclerotic if the fact that the bluenose is trophic hold. sent3: the sporophore is sclerotic if that the bluenose is not trophic but it is a thirst is false. sent4: the fact that the tungsten is not a thirst but it is sclerotic does not hold. sent5: the tungsten is a kind of a Yellowstone and it is sclerotic. sent6: if the tungsten is both a Yellowstone and sclerotic then that the sporophore is not sclerotic is right. sent7: that something is not an eligibility if the fact that it is sclerotic and is not a Yellowstone is wrong is correct. ; $proof$ =

void -> assump1: Let's assume that the galleon is not a kind of an eligibility.; sent6 & sent5 -> int1: the sporophore is not sclerotic.; __UNKNOWN__

DeductionInstance

the roughing Reaumur occurs.

{B}

sent1: if the chipping does not occur and the Muhammadanness happens then the cannonade does not occur. sent2: that the easing does not occur and the mandibulateness occurs causes that the roughing Reaumur does not occur. sent3: the vehicularness does not occur. sent4: the flight does not occur. sent5: the fact that the tack happens and the axillariness occurs if the articulatoriness does not occur hold. sent6: that the tack happens causes that the roughing Reaumur occurs and the beautifulness does not occur. sent7: that the easing does not occur but the mandibulateness happens is triggered by that the beautifulness happens. sent8: the amygdalineness occurs. sent9: the reviving does not occur but the proverbialness occurs. sent10: the unpalatableness happens. sent11: the articulatoriness does not occur if that the business does not occur but the interchanging happens does not hold. sent12: the beautifulness occurs.

sent1: (¬{IG} & {DQ}) -> ¬{JA} sent2: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent3: ¬{ET} sent4: ¬{BL} sent5: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) sent6: {C} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) sent7: {A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent8: {FT} sent9: (¬{EC} & {EI}) sent10: {DS} sent11: ¬(¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent12: {A}

the roughing Reaumur happens.

{B}

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

DISPROVED

UNKNOWN

$hypothesis$ = the roughing Reaumur occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the chipping does not occur and the Muhammadanness happens then the cannonade does not occur. sent2: that the easing does not occur and the mandibulateness occurs causes that the roughing Reaumur does not occur. sent3: the vehicularness does not occur. sent4: the flight does not occur. sent5: the fact that the tack happens and the axillariness occurs if the articulatoriness does not occur hold. sent6: that the tack happens causes that the roughing Reaumur occurs and the beautifulness does not occur. sent7: that the easing does not occur but the mandibulateness happens is triggered by that the beautifulness happens. sent8: the amygdalineness occurs. sent9: the reviving does not occur but the proverbialness occurs. sent10: the unpalatableness happens. sent11: the articulatoriness does not occur if that the business does not occur but the interchanging happens does not hold. sent12: the beautifulness occurs. ; $proof$ =

sent7 & sent12 -> int1: not the easing but the mandibulateness occurs.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__