premise
stringlengths 923
1.41k
| hypothesis
stringlengths 11
33
| label
stringclasses 4
values |
|---|---|---|
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Eunice is not oak. | neutral |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Crispin is oak. | self_contradiction |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Eunice is fair-minded. | neutral |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Royce is not automatic. | entailment |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Anabelle is fair-minded. | self_contradiction |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Crispin is not oak. | self_contradiction |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Crispin is careful. | contradiction |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Bruce is not fair-minded. | entailment |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Isabel is careful. | neutral |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Royce is automatic. | contradiction |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Eunice is not careful. | contradiction |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Isabel is not evil. | neutral |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Isabel is not automatic. | entailment |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Anabelle is careful. | contradiction |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Anabelle is automatic. | contradiction |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Bruce is not crazy. | neutral |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Anabelle is not automatic. | entailment |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Kathie is not fair-minded. | entailment |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Anabelle is not fair-minded. | self_contradiction |
Bruce is not fair-minded.
Eunice is careful.
Kathie is not crazy.
Crispin is oak.
Royce is crazy.
Royce is not automatic.
Isabel is not automatic.
Crispin is fair-minded.
Anabelle is fair-minded.
Kathie is not fair-minded.
Anabelle is not careful.
Isabel is fair-minded.It can be concluded that Anabelle is not crazy once knowing that Kathie is not automatic.
Someone who is automatic is always both not evil and not oak.
Someone is not crazy and not careful if and only if he is oak.
If there is someone who is either evil or automatic, then Anabelle is not crazy.
Isabel is crazy if and only if Kathie is evil and Isabel is not fair-minded.
If there is someone who is not automatic, then Anabelle is crazy.
If Eunice is not careful, then Crispin is automatic and Royce is not fair-minded.
If Kathie is not careful and Eunice is crazy, then Anabelle is automatic.
If someone is fair-minded, then he is not oak, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both oak and not automatic, then Kathie is not careful.
If there is someone who is not oak, then Anabelle is not automatic and Anabelle is not fair-minded.
Someone is not careful if and only if he is oak. | Anabelle is not crazy. | self_contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Ambrose is not superior. | self_contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Ambrose is superior. | self_contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Benton is good-tempered. | contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Rupert is not superior. | neutral |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Benton is impartial. | entailment |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Abraham is impartial. | entailment |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Greyson is not adventurous. | neutral |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Benton is not grotesque. | entailment |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Benton is not superior. | self_contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Ambrose is impartial. | entailment |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Abraham is superior. | self_contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Abraham is not careful. | contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Robert is superior. | neutral |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Greyson is grotesque. | self_contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Rupert is grotesque. | contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Benton is not careful. | contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Griswald is not careful. | contradiction |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Ambrose is not adventurous. | entailment |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Robert is careful. | neutral |
Rupert is good-tempered.
Greyson is not superior.
Abraham is not grotesque.
Rupert is not grotesque.
Benton is impartial.
Ambrose is not adventurous.
Robert is not good-tempered.
Griswald is not adventurous.
Griswald is grotesque.
Benton is not good-tempered.
Ambrose is impartial.
Greyson is grotesque.It can be concluded that Abraham is not superior once knowing that Benton is impartial or Rupert is careful.
It can be concluded that Benton is not superior and Benton is adventurous once knowing that Griswald is not impartial.
Robert is impartial and Benton is not superior if and only if Ambrose is not good-tempered and Greyson is not careful.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being superior.
Someone being impartial is equivalent to being not superior.
If there is someone who is impartial, then Griswald is not superior.
Ambrose being careful is equivalent to Rupert being not adventurous.
If there is someone who is not superior, then Ambrose is grotesque and Griswald is impartial.
If there is someone who is both not good-tempered and not superior, then Greyson is not grotesque.
Rupert being not adventurous and Griswald being not good-tempered imply that Rupert is grotesque.
Someone who is not superior is always both careful and not grotesque.
Someone who is both not careful and impartial is always not good-tempered. | Abraham is good-tempered. | neutral |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Titus is not good. | contradiction |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Titus is good. | entailment |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Janet is not hypocritical. | contradiction |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Jed is charming. | neutral |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Jed is not pleasant. | neutral |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Matthew is not naughty. | self_contradiction |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Matthew is not charming. | entailment |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Titus is charming. | neutral |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Connell is not pleasant. | entailment |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Isaac is pleasant. | contradiction |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Jed is good. | neutral |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Jed is pleasant. | neutral |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Connell is pleasant. | contradiction |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Ives is not naughty. | entailment |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Matthew is not hypocritical. | self_contradiction |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Titus is comprehensive. | self_contradiction |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Isaac is hypocritical. | entailment |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Janet is not pleasant. | self_contradiction |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Connell is good. | self_contradiction |
Janet is hypocritical.
Janet is not charming.
Matthew is not charming.
Connell is not pleasant.
Connell is not hypocritical.
Matthew is naughty.
Ives is not charming.
Titus is naughty.
Connell is comprehensive.
Isaac is not charming.
Ives is pleasant.
Janet is pleasant.If someone is comprehensive and not good, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is both not naughty and not charming, then Jed is comprehensive.
Matthew being charming implies that Matthew is not naughty and Connell is good.
If Ives is naughty, then Isaac is hypocritical and Titus is not good.
Matthew is not good if and only if Connell is not naughty and Titus is comprehensive.
As long as someone is either not charming or naughty, he is not pleasant and hypocritical.
If someone is not comprehensive and good, then he is not naughty, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is hypocritical, then Connell is not good.
If there is someone who is either not good or not charming, then Matthew is naughty.
If someone is pleasant, then he is both hypocritical and not naughty.
Isaac being not charming and Matthew being hypocritical imply that Janet is not naughty.
If someone is pleasant and not hypocritical, then he is naughty, and vice versa. | Janet is naughty. | contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Rachelle is not hard-working. | entailment |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Kim is additional. | entailment |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Miranda is not whispering. | neutral |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Abraham is not funny. | entailment |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Rachelle is additional. | self_contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Abraham is not additional. | entailment |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Garrick is not hard-working. | neutral |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Rachelle is funny. | contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Rachelle is not large. | contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Abraham is not whispering. | neutral |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Tommy is logical. | contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Kim is not hard-working. | neutral |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Chalmers is whispering. | self_contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Rachelle is not whispering. | self_contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Rachelle is large. | entailment |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Tommy is whispering. | self_contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Tommy is funny. | contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Miranda is not hard-working. | neutral |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Abraham is additional. | contradiction |
Tommy is whispering.
Abraham is not additional.
Kim is additional.
Kim is large.
Rachelle is whispering.
Chalmers is not hard-working.
Rachelle is not funny.
Tommy is not logical.
Abraham is not funny.
Kim is funny.
Chalmers is not whispering.
Tommy is hard-working.If someone is not hard-working, then he is both not funny and not logical.
If someone is not hard-working and large, then he is whispering, and vice versa.
If someone is not logical, then he is both additional and large.
If there is someone who is either additional or not large, then Miranda is not funny.
If someone is not large or not logical, then he is additional.
Miranda being whispering and Garrick being additional imply that Abraham is not funny.
Someone is not logical and not hard-working if and only if he is not additional and whispering.
If Chalmers is funny, then Chalmers is whispering and Garrick is additional.
All whispering people are large.
If there is at least one people who is large or not hard-working, then Chalmers is funny.
If someone is not hard-working and not logical, then he is both not whispering and additional, and vice versa.
If Tommy is whispering, then Tommy is hard-working and Kim is not funny, and vice versa. | Tommy is not hard-working. | self_contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Stephen is disobedient. | self_contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Della is tender. | contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Leona is tender. | self_contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Trent is concerned. | neutral |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Gideon is not tender. | neutral |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Gideon is fresh. | entailment |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Gideon is tender. | neutral |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Gideon is easygoing. | contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Gideon is not disobedient. | neutral |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Stephen is not disobedient. | self_contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Trent is fresh. | entailment |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Albion is easygoing. | self_contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Leona is not tender. | self_contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Albion is fresh. | entailment |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Gideon is not fresh. | contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Leona is not disobedient. | entailment |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Stephen is fresh. | entailment |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Leona is not concerned. | neutral |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Trent is not fresh. | contradiction |
Stephen is not informal.
Albion is not easygoing.
Albion is tender.
Kyle is fresh.
Gideon is not easygoing.
Leona is not tender.
Albion is not concerned.
Gideon is fresh.
Trent is easygoing.
Leona is not disobedient.
Stephen is disobedient.
Kyle is not tender.If there is at least one people who is easygoing, then Stephen is not disobedient and Della is not tender.
Leona being easygoing or Trent being not fresh implies that Stephen is not disobedient.
If someone is tender, then he is easygoing.
All informal people are disobedient.
If there is someone who is either disobedient or easygoing, then Leona is tender.
Albion being not informal is equivalent to Kyle being tender and Kyle being concerned.
If there is someone who is not tender, then Stephen is fresh.
It can be concluded that Della is not concerned and Kyle is informal once knowing that Stephen is not fresh.
If someone is easygoing or disobedient, then he is fresh.
If someone is not tender, then he is easygoing.
Albion being not easygoing and Leona being tender imply that Albion is not concerned.
If there is someone who is fresh, then Kyle is not disobedient and Trent is easygoing. | Stephen is not fresh. | contradiction |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.