premise
stringlengths 923
1.41k
| hypothesis
stringlengths 11
33
| label
stringclasses 4
values |
|---|---|---|
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Rex is not agreeable. | contradiction |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Kimberly is elegant. | neutral |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Kimberly is clever. | contradiction |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Kimball is aggressive. | self_contradiction |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Kimball is not agreeable. | contradiction |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Sidney is not magnificent. | self_contradiction |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Connell is not agreeable. | neutral |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Hall is political. | self_contradiction |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Marlin is agreeable. | entailment |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Rex is aggressive. | neutral |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Kimberly is aggressive. | neutral |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Marlin is not political. | entailment |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Marlin is clever. | self_contradiction |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Sidney is agreeable. | entailment |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Kimball is not magnificent. | contradiction |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Kimball is magnificent. | entailment |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Sidney is magnificent. | self_contradiction |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Connell is clever. | neutral |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Hall is not elegant. | entailment |
Marlin is agreeable.
Sidney is not aggressive.
Rex is elegant.
Hall is political.
Sidney is clever.
Hall is not elegant.
Kimball is clever.
Kimberly is political.
Kimball is aggressive.
Kimberly is agreeable.
Kimberly is not clever.
Sidney is not magnificent.If there is at least one people who is not political, then Marlin is not elegant and Marlin is not aggressive.
If there is at least one people who is aggressive or political, then Marlin is not clever.
It can be concluded that Connell is not clever once knowing that Kimball is not magnificent or Connell is aggressive.
If someone is aggressive or he is not elegant, then he is not political.
Marlin is political if and only if Sidney is not elegant and Kimberly is clever.
If there is someone who is clever, then Connell is not magnificent.
Someone who is not aggressive or not political is always not elegant and magnificent.
If someone is magnificent or aggressive, then he is agreeable.
If someone is agreeable and not aggressive, then he is both clever and not elegant, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is elegant, then Rex is agreeable and Rex is clever.
If there is someone who is not elegant, then Connell is not magnificent.
It can be concluded that Sidney is not agreeable once knowing that Sidney is not elegant and Rex is not magnificent. | Marlin is aggressive. | contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Jerry is dizzy. | neutral |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Tyler is not brave. | self_contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Jerry is aware. | contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Tyler is not traditional. | self_contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Jerry is not cheeky. | contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Jerry is not traditional. | neutral |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Homer is cheeky. | entailment |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Tyler is aware. | entailment |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Bryant is not mellow. | neutral |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Ramsey is not dizzy. | entailment |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Tyler is brave. | self_contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Baldwin is mellow. | entailment |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Baldwin is not brave. | self_contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Ives is cheeky. | neutral |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Homer is not mellow. | contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Jerry is not aware. | entailment |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Baldwin is not traditional. | neutral |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Homer is not cheeky. | contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Jerry is mellow. | self_contradiction |
Homer is mellow.
Jerry is not brave.
Jerry is mellow.
Tyler is not traditional.
Ramsey is traditional.
Baldwin is not cheeky.
Homer is cheeky.
Jerry is not aware.
Tyler is mellow.
Bryant is traditional.
Ramsey is not dizzy.
Bryant is not aware.Someone who is eithor not traditional or not cheeky is always brave.
Jerry is not mellow if and only if Tyler is traditional.
If there is someone who is both not dizzy and cheeky, then Ramsey is brave.
It can be concluded that Bryant is not brave and Ives is not aware once knowing that Ramsey is cheeky.
Someone being both not cheeky and aware is equivalent to being mellow and brave.
If there is someone who is brave, then Jerry is not mellow and Jerry is not aware.
Ives is aware if and only if Ramsey is not brave.
If there is at least one people who is not dizzy, then Baldwin is not brave and Jerry is cheeky.
Someone is cheeky and aware if and only if he is dizzy and not mellow.
Someone is aware and not brave if and only if he is not cheeky.
If there is nobody who is not not aware, then Bryant is cheeky.
If Baldwin is aware and Bryant is not traditional, then Jerry is dizzy. | Baldwin is not mellow. | contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Matthew is tremendous. | entailment |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Ricardo is black. | entailment |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Jarvis is lively. | neutral |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Leslie is various. | self_contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Horace is tremendous. | contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Jarvis is triangular. | entailment |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Leslie is tremendous. | entailment |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Leslie is not tremendous. | contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Leslie is weak. | neutral |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Horace is not various. | self_contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Ricardo is not tremendous. | neutral |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Ricardo is not black. | contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Ricardo is weak. | entailment |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Albern is various. | self_contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Matthew is black. | neutral |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Albern is not tremendous. | neutral |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Horace is not lively. | contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Jarvis is various. | self_contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Horace is various. | self_contradiction |
Horace is lively.
Albern is not lively.
Ricardo is not lively.
Horace is not tremendous.
Jarvis is not weak.
Albert is lively.
Albert is not weak.
Leslie is tremendous.
Horace is various.
Albern is various.
Leslie is various.
Jarvis is not various.Matthew being tremendous is equivalent to Matthew being weak and Albert being not black.
If there is at least one people who is lively, then Matthew is tremendous and Horace is various.
If there is at least one people who is not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Someone who is eithor black or triangular is always various.
If someone is tremendous and not various, then he is not triangular, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not triangular and not lively, then Ricardo is black.
Albern is not black if and only if Ricardo is not lively and Leslie is weak.
If Albern is black or Jarvis is triangular, then Ricardo is weak.
It can be concluded that Matthew is not weak and Albern is black once knowing that Horace is various and Ricardo is not triangular.
If someone is triangular, then he is various, and vice versa.
It can be concluded that Leslie is not tremendous once knowing that Matthew is black and Albern is not lively.
If someone is not various, then he is triangular, and vice versa. | Jarvis is weak. | contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Blanca is not tan. | entailment |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Carter is not adventurous. | contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Kilian is adventurous. | neutral |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Carter is not tan. | self_contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Blanca is determined. | entailment |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Chapman is determined. | self_contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Quinn is not orange. | self_contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Sherlock is orange. | contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Garrick is orange. | entailment |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Garrick is tan. | neutral |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Quinn is determined. | entailment |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Kilian is not wet. | entailment |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Sherlock is not adventurous. | neutral |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Chapman is not bright. | self_contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Carter is not wet. | contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Kilian is tan. | contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Blanca is bright. | contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Chapman is not determined. | self_contradiction |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Blanca is adventurous. | neutral |
Quinn is bright.
Chapman is not adventurous.
Chapman is not determined.
Carter is tan.
Kilian is not wet.
Quinn is orange.
Quinn is adventurous.
Garrick is orange.
Kilian is not orange.
Sherlock is determined.
Blanca is not bright.
Sherlock is not orange.Quinn is not wet if and only if Kilian is bright and Carter is tan.
If there is at least one people who is not adventurous, then Quinn is not orange and Chapman is bright.
If someone is bright or he is adventurous, then he is not tan.
If Chapman is not adventurous, then Carter is wet and Blanca is not tan.
Someone who is both not bright and wet is always determined.
If there is someone who is wet, then Kilian is determined and Chapman is not bright.
If someone is determined, then he is not tan, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not wet and not determined, then Carter is not tan.
Carter being not tan or Quinn being not wet implies that Sherlock is not orange.
If there is someone who is either not wet or not tan, then Garrick is not determined.
It can be concluded that Chapman is orange and Carter is wet once knowing that Sherlock is adventurous and Garrick is not bright.
If there is at least one people who is not determined, then Carter is adventurous and Chapman is orange. | Blanca is not orange. | neutral |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Marcus is terrible. | neutral |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Kendrick is terrible. | entailment |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Marcus is not weak. | contradiction |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Raymond is not automatic. | neutral |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Kerwin is wet. | self_contradiction |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Marcus is automatic. | entailment |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Caldwell is not better. | self_contradiction |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Kim is not historical. | entailment |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Caldwell is not wet. | self_contradiction |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Kerwin is not wet. | self_contradiction |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Marcus is not automatic. | contradiction |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Caldwell is historical. | contradiction |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Travis is not wet. | neutral |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Marcus is not terrible. | neutral |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Kim is better. | contradiction |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Kendrick is not historical. | neutral |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Marcus is wet. | self_contradiction |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Kerwin is automatic. | entailment |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Caldwell is terrible. | entailment |
Caldwell is terrible.
Kim is terrible.
Raymond is not terrible.
Caldwell is not weak.
Caldwell is not historical.
Raymond is not historical.
Kerwin is automatic.
Kendrick is terrible.
Caldwell is not better.
Kendrick is not wet.
Kerwin is not historical.
Marcus is automatic.If Kim is not better and Caldwell is wet, then Caldwell is weak and Kim is not terrible, and vice versa.
If someone is wet, then he is not better, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not weak or better, then Travis is terrible.
If Kendrick is historical and Marcus is not wet, then Kerwin is weak.
Someone being both weak and not historical is equivalent to being not better.
If there is someone who is better, then Kim is wet.
Someone who is not better is always both not historical and wet.
if there is at least one people who is not automatic and not historical, then Kerwin is terrible and Raymond is not better.
If someone is automatic, then he is both not wet and better.
Someone who is eithor not weak or automatic is always not better.
Someone who is not weak is always both not historical and automatic.
If there is at least one people who is both terrible and not better, then Caldwell is not historical. | Kim is historical. | contradiction |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.