yuansui/folio huggingface dataset:
Premises:
The PlayStation EyeToy is a camera accessory for the PlayStation 2 system. 
The PlayStation Eye is a camera accessory for the PlayStation 3 system.
The PlayStation Camera is a camera accessory for the PlayStation 4 and the PlayStation 5 systems.
Camera accessories for a system are compatible with that system.
Playstation 2, 3,4, and 5 are all different.
Only the PlayStation Camera camera system is compatible with different systems.

Premises in first-order logic:
System(playStation2) ∧ CameraAccessoryFor(playStationEyeToy, playStation2)
System(playStation3) ∧ CameraAccessoryFor(playStationEye, playStation3)  
System(playStation4) ∧ System(playStation5) ∧ CameraAccessoryFor(playStationCamera, playStation4) ∧ CameraAccessoryFor(playStationCamera, playStation5)
∀x ∀y (CameraAccessoryFor(x, y) ∧ System(y) → CompatibleWith(x, y))
¬(playStation2=playStation3) ∧ ¬(playStation2=playStation4) ∧ ¬(playStation2=playStation5) ∧ ¬(playStation3=playStation4) ∧ ¬(playStation3=playStation5) ∧ ¬(playStation4=playStation5)
∀x ∃y ∃z (System(y) ∧ System(z) ∧ ¬(y=z) ∧ CompatibleWith(x, y) ∧ CompatibleWith(x, z) → x=playstationCamera)

Conclusions:
The Playstation Eye is compatible with the PlayStation 2 and the PlayStation 3. 
The Playstation EyeToy is compatible with the PlayStation 2. 
The Playstation Camera can be used for all Playstation consoles. 

Conclusions in first-order logic:
Compatible(playStationEye, playStation2) ∧ Compatible(playStationEye, playStation3)
Compatible(playStationEyeToy, playStation2)
Compatible(playStationCamera, playStation2) ∧ Compatible(playStationCamera, playStation3) ∧ Compatible(playStationCamera, playStation4) ∧ Compatible(playStationCamera, playStation5)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
F
T
U
Premises:
Sūduva Marijampolė holds the Lithuanian Super Cup.
Sūduva Marijampolė is a soccer team.

Premises in first-order logic:
Holds(suduva, theLithuanianSuperCup)
SoccerTeam(suduva)

Conclusions:
Some soccer team holds the Lithuanian Super Cup.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
∃x (SoccerTeam(x) ∧ Holds(x, theLithuanianSuperCup))

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
Premises:
Video Gag is a French television series that airs weekly.
Video Gag airs on the French broadcast channel TF1. 
If viewers send funny videos to the French broadcast channel TF1, then Video Gag airs them weekly.
All videos aired on Video Gag are in French.

Premises in first-order logic:
FrenchTelevision(videoGag) ∧ AirWeekly(videoGag)
AirOn(videoGag, frenchBroadcastChannelTF1)
∀x (Funny(x) ∧ Video(x) ∧ SendIn(viewers, x, frenchBroadcastChannelTF1)  → AirWeekly(x) ) ∧ AirOn(videoGag, x))
∀x (Video(x) ∧ AirOn(videoGag, x) → In(x, french))

Conclusions:
Viewers send funny videos to the French broadcast channel TF1 that are in French.
Viewers send funny videos to the French broadcast channel that are in English.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
∃x (SendIn(viewers, x, frenchBroadcastChannelTF1) ∧ French(x))
∃x (SendIn(viewers, x, frenchBroadcastChannelTF1) ∧ English(x))

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
U
U
Premises:
Federico Garcia Lorca was a talented Spanish poet, and he supported the Popular Front.
The Spanish Nationalists opposed anyone who supported the Popular Front
Talented poets are popular.
Spanish Nationalists killed anyone who they opposed and who was popular.
Daniel supported the Popular Front but was not popular.

Premises in first-order logic:
TalentedPoet(lorca) ∧ Support(lorca, populists)
∀x (Support(x, populists) → Opposed(nationalists, x))
∀x (TalentedPoet(x) → Popular(x))
∀x ((Opposed(nationalists, x) ∧ Popular(x)) → Killed(nationalists, x))
Support(daniel, populists) ∧ (¬Popular(daniel))

Conclusions:
The Spanish Nationalists killed Daniel. 
The Spanish Nationalists killed Lorca.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
¬Killed(nationalists, daniel)
Killed(nationalists, lorca)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
U
T
Premises:
The bottle not falling is either standing upright or toppled over. 
The bottle not falling is not standing upright.

Premises in first-order logic:
¬Falling(bottle) → (Upright(bottle) ⊕ ToppledOver(bottle))
¬Falling(bottle) → ¬Upright(bottle)

Conclusions:
The bottle not falling is toppled over.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
¬Falling(bottle) → ToppleOver(bottle)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
Premises:
The Special Operation Group is an Indian elite paramilitary unit that operates under the Odisha police.
The Special Operation Group specializes in neutralizing terrorists, insurgents, and extremists.
All people recruited for the Special Operations Group are highly trained in the skills involved in accomplishing the Special Operations Group's specialties.
Neutralizing terrorists, insurgents, and extremists involve skills such as executing rapid action under any circumstance and engaging in field craft and jungle warfare.
The Special Operation Group recruits people from the Indian Armed Forces and the Central Paramilitary Forces.

Premises in first-order logic:
Indian(specialOperationGroup) ∧ EliteParamilitaryUnit(specialOperationGroup) ∧ OperatesUnder(specialOperationGroup, odishaPolice)
SpecializesIn(specialOperationGroup, neutralizingTerroristsInsurgentsAndExtremists)
∀x ∀y ∀z (RecruitedFor(x, specialOperationGroup) ∧ SpecializesIn(specialOperationGroup, y) ∧ SkillFor(z, y) → TrainedIn(x, z))
SkillFor(executingRapidAction, neutralizingTerroristsInsurgentsAndExtremists) ∧ SkillFor(engagingInWarfare, neutralizingTerroristsInsurgentsAndExtremists)
∃x ∃y (In(x, indianArmedForces) ∧ RecruitedFor(x, specialOperationGroup) ∧  In(y, centralParamilitaryForces) ∧ RecruitedFor(y, specialOperationGroup))

Conclusions:
Some people in the Indian Armed Forces are recruited by the Special Operation Group.
Some people who were in the Indian Armed Forces are highly trained in engaging in field craft and jungle warfare.
The Special Operation Group specializes in neutralizing extremists.
Some people recruited to the Special operation Group are from the Central Para Military Forces and their new group operates under the Odisha police.
The Special Operation Group specializes in naval warfare.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
∃x (In(x, indianArmedForces) ∧ RecruitedFor(x, specialOperationGroup))
∃x (In(x, indianArmedForces) ∧ TrainedIn(x, engagingInWarfare))
SpecializesIn(specialOperationGroup, neutralizing)
∃x (In(x, centralParamilitaryForces) ∧ RecruitedFor(x, specialOperationGroup) ∧ OperatesUnder(specialOperationGroup, odishaPolice))
SpecializesIn(specialOperationGroup, navalWarfare)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
T
T
T
U
Premises:
There are eight federal districts of Russia: Central, Northwestern, Southern, North Caucasian, Volga, Ural, Siberian, and Far Eastern.
The Central federal district has the largest population among all federal districts in Russia.
Moscow is the administrative center of the Central federal district.
Yekaterinburg is the administrative center of the Ural federal district.
Vladivostok is the administrative center of the Far Eastern federal district.
The Far Eastern federal district has the largest area among all federal districts in Russia.
Some federal districts in Russia were established in 2000.

Premises in first-order logic:
FederalDistrictOf(central, russia) ∧ FederalDistrictOf(northwestern, russia) ∧ FederalDistrictOf(southern, russia) ∧ FederalDistrictOf(northcaucasian, russia) ∧ FederalDistrictOf(volga, russia) ∧ FederalDistrictOf(ural, russia) ∧ FederalDistrictOf(siberian, russia) ∧ FederalDistrictOf(fareastern, russia)
LargestPopulation(central) 
AdministrativeCenterOf(moscow, central)
AdministrativeCenterOf(yekaterinburg, ural)
AdministrativeCenterOf(vladivostok, farEastern)
LargestArea(farEastern)
∃x (FederalDistrictOf(x, russia) ∧ EstablishedIn(x, 2000))

Conclusions:
Vladivostok is the administrative center of the federal district with the largest area.
Moscow is the administrative center of the federal district with the largest population.
The Northwestern federal district was established in 2000.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
∃x (AdministrativeCenterOf(vladivostok, x) ∧ LargestArea(x))
∃x (AdministrativeCenterOf(moscow, x) ∧ LargestPopulationIn(x))
EstablishedIn(northwestern, 2000)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
T
U
Premises:
Robert Lewandowski is a striker.
Strikers are soccer players.
Robert Lewandowski left Bayern Munchen.
If a player leaves a team they no longer play for that team.

Premises in first-order logic:
Striker(robertLewandowski)
∀x (Striker(x) → SoccerPlayer(x))
Left(robertLewandowski, bayernMunchen)
∀x ∀y (Left(x, y) → ¬PlaysFor(x, y))

Conclusions:
Robert Lewandowski is a soccer player.
Robert Lewandowski plays for Bayern Munchen.
Robert Lewandowski is a star.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
SoccerPlayer(robertLewandowski)
PlaysFor(robertLewandowski, bayernMunchen)
SoccerStar(robertLewandowski)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
F
U
Premises:
The party provides five kinds of fruits: strawberry, orange, blueberry, grape, and cherry.
If the fruit had the lowest remaining weight at the end of the party, then it means it was the most popular fruit.
At the end of the party, strawberries had the lowest remaining weight.
At the end of the party, the number of leftover blueberries was lower than that of cherries.
Benjamin only ate oranges and grapes at the party.

Premises in first-order logic:
Provide(party, strawberry) ∧ Provide(party, orange) ∧ Provide(party, blueberry) ∧ Provide(party, grape) ∧ Provide(party, cherry) 
∀x (LowestWeightRemainingAt(x, endOfParty) → MostPopular(x)) 
LowestWeightRemainingAt(strawberries, endOfParty)
LowerWeightAt(blueberry, cherry, endOfParty)
Eat(benjamin, orange) ∧ Eat(benjamin, grape) ∧ ¬Eat(benjamin, blueberry) ∧ ¬Eat(benjamin, cherry) ∧ ¬Eat(benjamin, strawberry)

Conclusions:
Blueberries were the most popular fruit at the party.
Cherries were the most popular fruit at the party.
Benjamin ate blueberries at the party.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
MostPopular(blueberry)
MostPopular(cherry)
Eat(blueberry, benjamin)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
U
U
F
Premises:
The movie "Riel" was made in Canada.
In "Riel," Christopher Plummer appeared as Canada's first prime minister, John A. Macdonald.
"Riel" was filmed in or before 1979.
If a mvie was filmed in or before a year, then the movie was not filmed after the year.

Premises in first-order logic:
Movie(riel) ∧ MadeIn(riel, canada)
AppearAs(plummer, macdonald, riel) ∧ CanadiansFirstPrimeMinister(johnAMacdonald)
FilmedInOrBefore(riel, year1979)
∀x ∀y (FilmedInOrBefore(x, y) → ¬FilmedAfter(x, y))

Conclusions:
"Riel" was filmed after 1979.
Alexander Mackenzie was Canada's second prime minister.   

Conclusions in first-order logic:
FilmedAfter(riel, year1979)
CanadiansSecondPrimeMinester(alexanderMackenzie)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
F
U
Premises:
No sandwich cookies are healthy.
Oreos are sandwich cookies.

Premises in first-order logic:
∀x (SandwichCookie(x) → ¬Healthy(x))
∀x (Oreo(x) → SandwichCookie(x))

Conclusions:
All sandwich cookies are delicious.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
∀x (SandwichCookie(x) → Delicious(x))

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
U
Premises:
If a person can distinguish the taste of different condiments, then they can also use different condiments for cooking.
People who have a talent of cooking can distinguish the taste of different condiments.
Only people with the talent of cooking can make delicious meals.
If the meal is popular at the party, then it is delicious.
John can make meals which are popular at the party.

Premises in first-order logic:
∀x (Person(x) ∧ Can(x, distinguishTheTasteOfDifferentCondiments) → Can(x, useDifferentCondimentsToCook))
∀x (Person(x) ∧ Has(x, talentOfCooking) → Can(x, distinguishTheTasteOfDifferentCondiments))
∀x ∀y (CanMake(x, y) ∧ Meal(y) ∧ Delicious(y) ∧ Person(x) → Has(x, talentOfCooking)) 
∀x ∀y (Meal(y) ∧ PopularAt(y, party) → Delicious(y))
∃x (Person(john) ∧ MakeMeal(john, x) ∧ Meal(x) ∧ PopularAt(x, party))

Conclusions:
John cannot use different condiments for cooking.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
¬Can(john, useDifferentCondimentsToCook)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
F
Premises:
Daveed Diggs is an actor and film producer.
Daveed Diggs played two roles in the musical Hamilton on Broadway.
One of the actors from Hamilton won the best actor award.
The actor playing Thomas Jefferson won the best actor award.
Daveed Diggs played Thomas Jefferson.
Musicals on Broadway are not films.

Premises in first-order logic:
Actor(daveedDiggs) ∧ FilmProducer(daveedDiggs)
∃x ∃y (PlaysIn(daveedDiggs, x, hamilton) ∧ (¬(x=y)) ∧ PlaysIn(daveedDiggs, y, hamilton)) ∧ OnBroadway(hamilton) ∧ Musical(hamilton)
∃x ∃y (Actor(x) ∧ PlaysIn(x, y, hamilton) ∧ Wins(x, bestActorAward))
∃x (Actor(x) ∧ PlaysIn(x, thomasJefferson, hamilton) ∧ Wins(x, bestActorAward))
Plays(daveedDiggs, thomasJefferson)
∀x ((Musical(x) ∧ OnBroadway(x)) → ¬Film(x))

Conclusions:
Hamilton is a film.
Daveed Diggs won the best actor award.
Hamilton won two awards.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
Film(hamilton)
Wins(daveedDiggs, bestActorAward)
∃x ∃y (Wins(hamilton, x) ∧ (¬(x=y)) ∧ Wins(hamilton, y))

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
F
T
U
Premises:
When Hugo is at home and it is cold in his apartment, he is wearing a sweater.
In the winter, Hugo’s apartment is cold.
It is February now.
February is in the winter.
The only place Hugo reads novels is at home.
Hugo is reading a novel.

Premises in first-order logic:
∃x (AtHome(hugo) ∧ Cold(hugosApartment, presentMoment) → Sweater(x) ∧ Wear(hugo, x, presentMoment))
∀x (InWinter(x) → Cold(hugosApartment, x))
February(presentMoment)
February(presentMoment) → InWinter(now)
Reading(hugo, novel) → AtHome(hugo)
Reading(hugo, novel)

Conclusions:
Hugo is wearing a sweater.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
∃x (Sweater(x) ∧ Wear(hugo, x, presentMoment))

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
Premises:
Quiksilver sells sportswear, clothing, footwear, and accessories.
Flannels are a type of clothing.
Joe owns an item from Quiksilver.

Premises in first-order logic:
∀x (Sells(quiksilver, x) → (Sportswear(x) ∨ Clothing(x) ∨ Footwear(x) ∨ Accessory(x)))
Clothing(flannel)
∃x (Sells(quiksilver, x) ∧ Owns(joe, x))

Conclusions:
Quiksilver sells beer. 
Joe owns a flannel. 
Joe owns at least one piece of sportswear, clothing, footwear, or accessory

Conclusions in first-order logic:
Sells(quiksilver, beer)
Owns(joe, flannel)
∃x (Owns(joe, x) ∧ Sportswear(x) ∨ Clothing(x) ∨ Footwear(x) ∨ Accessory(x))

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
U
U
T
Premises:
Some monitors equipped in the lab are produced by the company named AOC. 
All monitors equipped in the lab are cheaper than their original prices. 
If a monitor is cheaper than its original price, then its resolution is 1080p. 
If a monitor has a resolution of 1080p, then it does not support the type-c port. 
LG34 is equipped in the lab.  

Premises in first-order logic:
∃x ∃y  (LabMonitor(x) ∧ AOC(x) ∧ (¬(x=y)) ∧ LabMonitor(y) ∧ AOC(y))
∀x (LabMonitor(x) → Discounted(x))
∀x (Discounted(x) → A1080p(x))
∀x (A1080p(x) → ¬TypeC(x))
LabMonitor(lg-34)

Conclusions:
LG34 machine is produced by AOC. 
LG34 machine does not support the type-c port. 
LG34 is not with a resolution of 1080p.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
AOC(lg-34)
¬TypeC(lg-34)
¬A1080p(lg-34)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
U
T
F
Premises:
The only types of mammals that lay eggs are either platypuses or echidnas.
Platypuses are not hyrax.
Echidnas are not hyrax.
No mammals are invertebrates.
All animals are either vertebrates or invertebrates.
Mammals are animals.
Hyraxes are mammals.
Grebes lay eggs.
Grebes are not platypuses and also not echidnas.

Premises in first-order logic:
∀x ((Mammal(x) ∧ LayEgg(x)) → (Platypus(x) ⊕ Echidna(x)))
∀x (Platypuses(x) → ¬Hyrax(x))
∀x (Echidnas(x) → ¬Hyrax(x))
∀x (Mammal(x) → ¬Invertebrate(x))
∀x (Animal(x) → (Vertebrate(x) ∨ Invertebrate(x)))
∀x (Mammal(x) → Animal(x))
∀x (Hyrax(x) → Mammal(x))
∀x (Grebes(x) → LayEgg(x))
∀x (Grebes(x) → (¬Platypuses(x) ∧ ¬Echidnas(x)))

Conclusions:
Hyraxes lay eggs. 
Grebes are not mammals.
Platypuses are vertebrates. 

Conclusions in first-order logic:
∃x (Hyrax(x) ∧ LayEgg(x))
∀x (Grebes(x) → ¬Mammal(x))
∀x (Platypuses(x) → Vertebrate(x))

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
F
T
U
Premises:
American superheroes come from either the DC Universe or Marvel Universe.
Captain America is one of America's top-ten favorite superheroes
Captain America does not come from the DC Universe.
America's top-ten favorite superheroes speak English.
Some superheroes speak both English and Spanish. 

Premises in first-order logic:
∀x (Superhero(x) ∧ American(x) → ComeFrom(x, dCUniverse) ⊕ ComeFrom(x, marvelUniverse)) 
American(captainAmerica) ∧ TopTenFavorite(captainAmerica) ∧ Superhero(captainAmerica) 
¬ComeFrom(captainAmerica, dCUniverse)
∀x (American(x) ∧ TopTenFavorite(x) ∧ Superhero(x)  → Speak(x, english)) 
∃x (Superhero(x) → (Speak(x, english) ∧ Speak(x, spanish)))

Conclusions:
Captain America does not speak English.
Captain America comes from the Marvel universe.
Captain America speaks Spanish.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
¬Speak(captainAmerica, english)
ComeFrom(captainAmerica, marvelUniverse)
Speak(captainAmerica, spanish)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
F
T
U
Premises:
A businessperson is someone who has ownership over part of a company. 
People who own a company make money from it. 
A businessperson can be either a businessman or a businesswoman. 
Many businesspersons are extroverted.
Businesspersons can handle money well.
Bob is a businessman who has ownership over Microsoft.

Premises in first-order logic:
∀x (BusinessPerson(x) → ∃y (Company(y) ∧ Ownership(x, y)))
∀x ∀y (Ownership(x, y) → MakeMoney(x, y))
∀x (BusinessPerson(x) → (BusinessMan(x) ⊕ BusinessWoman(x)))
∃x (BusinessPerson(x) ∧ Extrovert(x))
∀x (BusinessPerson(x) → HandleMoney(x))
BusinessPerson(bob) ∧ Ownership(bob, microsoft)

Conclusions:
Bob is extroverted.
Bob can handle money well.
Bob is a businessperson who makes money off Microsoft.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
Extrovert(bob)
HandleMoney(bob)
BusinessPerson(bob) ∧ MakeMoney(bob, microsoft)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
U
T
T
Premises:
Taste of Edmonton is an annual outdoor festival held in Alberta.
The festival went on hiatus in 2020.
If a festival goes on hiatus in a certain year, it does not run for that year.
Taste of Edmonton is the largest food and entertainment festival in Western Canada.

Premises in first-order logic:
Annual(tasteOfEdmonton) ∧ OutdoorFestival(tasteOfEdmonton) ∧ HeldIn(tasteOfEdmonton, alberta)
GoOnHiatus(tasteOfEdmonton, year2020)
∀x ∀y (GoOnHiatus(x, y) → ¬Run(x, y))
LargestFoodAndEntertainmentFestival(tasteOfEdmonton) ∧ HeldIn(tasteOfEdmonton, westernCanada)

Conclusions:
Some festival that is the largest food and entertainment festival in Western Canada did not run in the year 2020.
Some outdoor festivals did not run in the year 2020.
Taste of Edmonton went on hiatus in 2021.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
∃x (LargestFoodAndEntertainmentFestival(x) ∧ HeldIn(x, westernCanada(x) ∧ ¬Run(x, year2020))
∃x (OutdoorFestival(x) ∧ ¬Run(x, year2020))
GoOnHiatus(tasteOfEdmonton, year2021)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
T
U
Premises:
Adam will go to the downtown area on foot.
If Adam buys a T-shirt, the T-shirt must be blue.
Adam goes to the downtown area if and only if he is going shopping.
Adam goes to the downtown area either by bike or on foot.
If Adam goes to the downtown area on foot, he will buy a T-shirt.

Premises in first-order logic:
GoDowntown(adam) ∧ OnFoot(adam)
∀x ((TShirt(x) ∧ Buy(adam, x)) → Blue(x))
GoDowntown(adam) ↔ Shopping(adam)
GoDowntown(adam) → (ByBike(adam) ⊕ OnFoot(adam))
∃x (GoDowntown(adam) ∧ OnFoot(adam) → TShirt(x) ∧ Buy(adam, x))

Conclusions:
Adam will buy a blue T-shirt.
If Adam goes to the downtown area by bike, he will not buy any T-shift.
If Adam is going shopping, he will go either by bike or on foot.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
∃x (TShirt(x) ∧ Buy(adam, x)) 
∀x  (GoDowntown(adam) ∧ ByBike(adam) ∧ TShirt(x) → ¬Buy(adam, x))
Shopping(adam) → (ByBike(adam) ⊕ OnFoot(adam))

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
U
T
Premises:
Gasteren is a village located in the province of Drenthe.
Drenthe is a Dutch province. 
No cities are villages.
The population of a village in Drenthe was 155 people.

Premises in first-order logic:
Village(gasteren) ∧ Province(drenthe) ∧ In(gasteren, drenthe)
Province(drenthe) ∧ In(drenthe, netherlands)
∀x (City(x) → ¬Village(x))
∃x (Population(x, num155) ∧ Village(x) ∧ In(x, drenthe))

Conclusions:
Gasteren is a Dutch village.
Gasteren is a city.
Gasteren has a population of 155.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
Village(gasteren) ∧ In(gasteren, netherlands)
City(gasteren)
Population(gasteren, num155)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
U
F
U
Premises:
All students learning piano can strike the right notes. 
All students who can strike the right note can get the rhythms right. 
If a student can get the rhythms right, he will start working on coordination between the left and the right hands. 
Some students who start working on coordination between the left and the right hands become good at it, while other students find it challenging. 
If John can strike the right notes, get the rhythms right, and is good at coordination between right and left hands, then he puts emotions into his playing. 
John is a student learning piano. 
John does not find coordination between the left and the right hands challenging. 

Premises in first-order logic:
∀x (Student(x) ∧ LearningPiano(x) → Can(x, strike, rightNote))
∀x (Student(x) ∧  Can(x, strike, rightNote) → Can(x, getTheRhythmRight))
∀x (Student(x) ∧ Can(x, getTheRhythmRight) → Start(x, workingOnCoordinationBetweenTheLeftAndRightHands))
∀x (Student(x) ∧ Start(x, workingOnCoordinationBetweenTheLeftAndRightHands) → Become(x, goodAtCoordination) ⊕ Find(x, coordinationChallenging))
(Can(john, getTheRhythmRight) ∧ Can(john, getTheRhythmRight)) ∧  Become(john, goodAtCoordination)  → PutEmotionInto(john, hisPlaying)
Student(john) ∧ LearningPiano(john)
¬Find(john, coordinationChallenging)

Conclusions:
John can get the rhythms right. 
John does not put emotions into his playing. 

Conclusions in first-order logic:
Can(john, getTheRhythmRight)
PutEmotionInto(john, hisPlaying)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
F
Premises:
Zaha Hadid is a British-Iraqi architect, artist, and designer.
Zaha Hadid was born on 31 October 1950 in Baghdad, Iraq.
Zaha Hadid was a visiting professor of Architectural Design at the Yale School of Architecture.
Max is an aspiring architecture student and plans to apply to the Yale School of Architecture. 

Premises in first-order logic:
British-Iraqi(zahaHadid) ∧ Architect(zahaHadid) ∧ Artist(zahaHadid) ∧ Designer(zahaHadid)
BornOn(zahaHadid, 31October1950) ∧ BornIn(zahaHadid, baghdadIraq)
VisitingProfessorOf(zahaHadid, architecturalDesign) ∧ VisitingProfessorAt(zahaHadid, yaleSchoolOfArchitecture)
AspiringArchitectureStudent(max) ∧ PlansToApplyTo(max, yaleSchoolofArchitecture)

Conclusions:
Zaha Hadid was a citizen of Britain and Iraq.
Zaha Hadid did some work in interior design.
Zaha Hadid was born on the 31st of October in 1982.
Max admires Zaha Hadid.

Conclusions in first-order logic:
British-Iraqi(zahaHadid)
DidWorkIn(zahaHadid, interiorDesign)
BornOn(zahaHadid, 31October1950)
Admires(max, zahaHadid)

Truth value of each conclusion (T = true, F = false, U = unknown):
T
U
U
U