premise
stringlengths 923
1.41k
| hypothesis
stringlengths 11
33
| label
stringclasses 4
values |
|---|---|---|
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Alfie is not various. | entailment |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Garrick is tan. | contradiction |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Alfie is relevant. | neutral |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Griswald is not dynamic. | neutral |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Hubert is not various. | entailment |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Jacob is dynamic. | neutral |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Griswald is dynamic. | neutral |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Garrick is not relevant. | self_contradiction |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Garrick is not tan. | entailment |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Griswald is various. | neutral |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Hubert is not relevant. | contradiction |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Alfie is untidy. | self_contradiction |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Quillan is dynamic. | entailment |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Sheridan is not various. | self_contradiction |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Hubert is untidy. | self_contradiction |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Griswald is not fresh. | contradiction |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Hubert is not dynamic. | entailment |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Alfie is tan. | contradiction |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Sheridan is relevant. | self_contradiction |
Garrick is not various.
Sheridan is various.
Hubert is not untidy.
Alfie is not untidy.
Quillan is dynamic.
Griswald is fresh.
Alfie is not tan.
Sheridan is untidy.
Sheridan is dynamic.
Sheridan is tan.
Hubert is not dynamic.
Garrick is fresh.Someone who is both not relevant and fresh is always not tan.
Someone is not various if and only if he is not untidy.
If someone is various or he is relevant, then he is untidy.
Someone is not various and fresh if and only if he is not dynamic.
Sheridan is not dynamic if and only if Garrick is not relevant.
If there is someone who is both not tan and untidy, then Jacob is not various and Quillan is not fresh.
All not various people are untidy.
If there is at least one people who is dynamic or relevant, then Sheridan is not tan.
If someone is not dynamic, then he is both untidy and not tan.
If someone who is not various is also fresh, then he is relevant.
As long as someone is tan and not relevant, he is not dynamic and not fresh.
If someone is not relevant and various, then he is tan, and vice versa. | Alfie is various. | contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Alice is not sweet. | self_contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Grayson is plucky. | neutral |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Rodney is not fair-minded. | neutral |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Grayson is not fair-minded. | contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Alice is sweet. | self_contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Herman is modern. | entailment |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Rodney is not sweet. | neutral |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Alice is not plucky. | self_contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Alice is plucky. | self_contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Melville is not naughty. | entailment |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Herman is plucky. | contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Johnny is better. | entailment |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Melville is better. | entailment |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Melville is not better. | contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Herman is better. | entailment |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Alice is naughty. | self_contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Alice is fair-minded. | contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Herman is not better. | contradiction |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Johnny is sweet. | neutral |
Melville is modern.
Johnny is better.
Alice is modern.
Alice is not plucky.
Herman is better.
Alice is naughty.
Rodney is plucky.
Herman is sweet.
Herman is modern.
Alice is not sweet.
Herman is not plucky.
Johnny is modern.If there is someone who is either not better or naughty, then Grayson is fair-minded.
If there is at least one people who is not modern, then Johnny is fair-minded and Melville is not naughty.
Herman being better is equivalent to Alice being plucky.
It can be concluded that Grayson is better once knowing that Grayson is naughty.
Someone who is naughty is always sweet.
Someone being both not better and fair-minded is equivalent to being not modern.
If Alice is not naughty and Rodney is not sweet, then Johnny is not plucky and Grayson is better.
Joshua being better or Alice being plucky implies that Melville is not sweet.
It can be concluded that Melville is not better once knowing that Rodney is not fair-minded.
Someone being both not naughty and better is equivalent to being not sweet.
If there is someone who is fair-minded, then Alice is not plucky.
Someone being both not sweet and plucky is equivalent to being not fair-minded. | Johnny is not plucky. | neutral |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Arthur is open. | self_contradiction |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Arthur is not open. | self_contradiction |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Lombard is mental. | entailment |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Arthur is not cooperative. | neutral |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Harlan is not mental. | contradiction |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Jerry is not unusual. | entailment |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Sean is mental. | neutral |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Albion is not mental. | entailment |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Melville is not open. | neutral |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Sean is not popular. | neutral |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Harlan is mental. | entailment |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Lombard is not cooperative. | neutral |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Harlan is not open. | contradiction |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Harlan is not popular. | self_contradiction |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Lombard is not open. | self_contradiction |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Harlan is not cooperative. | self_contradiction |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Jerry is not popular. | contradiction |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Jerry is not mental. | contradiction |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Harlan is open. | entailment |
Jerry is mental.
Lombard is mental.
Sean is cooperative.
Lombard is not open.
Jerry is not unusual.
Albion is not popular.
Albion is not angry.
Jerry is open.
Jerry is popular.
Arthur is not open.
Albion is not unusual.
Arthur is mental.If there is someone who is both popular and not open, then Melville is not unusual and Lombard is not angry.
It can be concluded that Albion is not open once knowing that Jerry is not angry and Albion is unusual.
Someone is mental and not cooperative if and only if he is popular.
Harlan being cooperative and Albion being not unusual imply that Sean is angry.
If someone is mental, then he is open.
If there is at least one people who is not angry, then Harlan is not popular.
If there is someone who is not cooperative, then Harlan is popular and Albion is open.
Someone being both cooperative and not unusual is equivalent to being not mental.
If Melville is angry or Melville is mental, then Jerry is open.
All popular people are not cooperative.
Harlan is mental if and only if Harlan is cooperative.
If someone is not popular, then he is cooperative. | Albion is unusual. | contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Merlin is not splendid. | contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Everett is not naughty. | neutral |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Leith is tan. | entailment |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Alfred is not splendid. | self_contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Gabriel is important. | entailment |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Leith is steep. | neutral |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Alfred is not steep. | entailment |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Everett is not important. | neutral |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Gabriel is not naughty. | contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Gabriel is splendid. | self_contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Gabriel is tan. | self_contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Sophie is tan. | entailment |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Alfred is not important. | self_contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Merlin is splendid. | entailment |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Sophie is not visible. | contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Gabriel is not visible. | self_contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Bert is not visible. | neutral |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Everett is splendid. | contradiction |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Bert is not steep. | neutral |
Sophie is visible.
Gabriel is important.
Everett is not splendid.
Gabriel is not steep.
Merlin is splendid.
Alfred is tan.
Leith is tan.
Merlin is important.
Gabriel is not visible.
Gabriel is not tan.
Alfred is not important.
Alfred is not steep.Someone who is eithor visible or not important is always tan.
If all people are not visible, then Gabriel is not splendid and Alfred is naughty.
If there is someone who is both important and not steep, then Leith is not naughty.
Alfred is not tan if and only if Gabriel is naughty and Alfred is not splendid.
If someone is both not steep and splendid, then he is naughty.
Someone is visible if and only if he is not splendid.
If someone is visible and important, then he is both tan and splendid, and vice versa.
Someone who is eithor naughty or steep is always important.
If there is someone who is both not naughty and not tan, then Merlin is not important.
If Everett is important or Everett is not visible, then Gabriel is naughty.
If there is at least one people who is not splendid or not steep, then Alfred is naughty.
Someone being both splendid and visible is equivalent to being not steep. | Gabriel is steep. | contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Rachelle is not serious. | self_contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Ives is not combative. | entailment |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Jarvis is clever. | neutral |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Charles is not inner. | contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Kirk is not combative. | self_contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Travis is not clever. | neutral |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Rachelle is not clever. | entailment |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Jarvis is not combative. | neutral |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Charles is not successful. | entailment |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Ives is combative. | contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Ives is not chestnut. | neutral |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Jarvis is successful. | contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Kirk is successful. | entailment |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Charles is not chestnut. | entailment |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Ives is inner. | contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Travis is clever. | neutral |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Rachelle is clever. | contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Kirk is serious. | self_contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Rachelle is not combative. | self_contradiction |
Jarvis is not successful.
Kirk is inner.
Rachelle is inner.
Charles is inner.
Kirk is not clever.
Kirk is successful.
Kirk is combative.
Travis is chestnut.
Ives is serious.
Rachelle is combative.
Ives is successful.
Travis is not combative.It can be concluded that Charles is not chestnut once knowing that Ives is not combative.
As long as someone is serious, he is not inner and not combative.
If there is someone who is inner, then Charles is not chestnut.
If all people are inner or successful, then Charles is not serious.
Someone is not serious and combative if and only if he is not clever.
If someone is not clever, then he is serious.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being not chestnut.
It can be concluded that Ian is successful once knowing that Jarvis is clever and Charles is not serious.
As long as someone is combative, he is chestnut and serious.
If there is at least one people who is combative, then Travis is inner.
Someone being both not inner and not serious is equivalent to being combative.
If Ives is serious and Travis is inner, then Rachelle is not clever. | Rachelle is not inner. | self_contradiction |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.