version
stringclasses 1
value | hypothesis
stringlengths 11
215
| hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
39
| context
stringlengths 0
2.9k
| context_formula
stringlengths 0
905
| proofs
list | proofs_formula
list | negative_hypothesis
stringlengths 15
193
⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
37
⌀ | negative_proofs
list | negative_original_tree_depth
int64 0
25
⌀ | original_tree_depth
int64 1
4
| depth
int64 0
3
⌀ | num_formula_distractors
int64 0
22
| num_translation_distractors
int64 0
0
| num_all_distractors
int64 0
22
| proof_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_proof_label
stringclasses 2
values | world_assump_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_world_assump_label
stringclasses 2
values | prompt_serial
stringlengths 89
3.09k
| proof_serial
stringlengths 11
654
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DeductionInstance | the fact that the Teller does not douse knobble but it is a vector does not hold. | ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: the fact that the Teller does not douse knobble but it is a kind of a vector is incorrect if something is retrograde. sent2: there is something such that it does retrograde. sent3: the fact that the Teller does douse knobble and is a vector does not hold. sent4: the fact that the abbacy is a stairhead and does not retrograde is wrong. sent5: if something douses Wynette the fact that the hatchery is not a homesickness and is empyrean is not right. sent6: that the Teller is not a Carya but a bumper is not true. sent7: that everything is not organismal is correct. sent8: there is something such that it does douse knobble. sent9: that something is a yips is not wrong. sent10: the fact that the Teller is not a typist and does douse knobble is not right. sent11: something is not a murre and is a kind of a yips if it is not organismal. sent12: if something douses knobble and does retrograde then the Teller is a pipeful. sent13: the fact that the Sexton is not a laxness and is a kind of a vector is wrong. sent14: if there exists something such that it retrogrades then the fact that the Teller douses knobble and it is a kind of a vector does not hold. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent2: (Ex): {A}x sent3: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: ¬({D}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) sent5: (x): {BA}x -> ¬(¬{FI}{bd} & {AB}{bd}) sent6: ¬(¬{FA}{a} & {EP}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬{G}x sent8: (Ex): {B}x sent9: (Ex): {F}x sent10: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {B}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{E}x & {F}x) sent12: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> {JK}{a} sent13: ¬(¬{HC}{ba} & {C}{ba}) sent14: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there is something such that it is a kind of a pipeful. | (Ex): {JK}x | [
"sent4 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a stairhead and is non-retrograde does not hold.; sent11 -> int2: the arbutus is not a murre but a yips if that it is not organismal hold.; sent7 -> int3: the arbutus is not organismal.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the arbutus is not a murre but it is a yips.; int4 -> int5: everything is not a murre but a yips.; int5 -> int6: that the preservative is not a murre but it is a kind of a yips hold.; int6 -> int7: the preservative is not a murre.; int7 -> int8: everything is not a murre.; int8 -> int9: that the isthmus is not a murre is right.;"
]
| 15 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the Teller does not douse knobble but it is a vector does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the Teller does not douse knobble but it is a kind of a vector is incorrect if something is retrograde. sent2: there is something such that it does retrograde. sent3: the fact that the Teller does douse knobble and is a vector does not hold. sent4: the fact that the abbacy is a stairhead and does not retrograde is wrong. sent5: if something douses Wynette the fact that the hatchery is not a homesickness and is empyrean is not right. sent6: that the Teller is not a Carya but a bumper is not true. sent7: that everything is not organismal is correct. sent8: there is something such that it does douse knobble. sent9: that something is a yips is not wrong. sent10: the fact that the Teller is not a typist and does douse knobble is not right. sent11: something is not a murre and is a kind of a yips if it is not organismal. sent12: if something douses knobble and does retrograde then the Teller is a pipeful. sent13: the fact that the Sexton is not a laxness and is a kind of a vector is wrong. sent14: if there exists something such that it retrogrades then the fact that the Teller douses knobble and it is a kind of a vector does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the ferry is not febrile or does not remain Argus or both is not correct. | ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: the Austronesian is archidiaconal if the ferry is not febrile and/or does not remain Argus. sent2: the ferry either is not a commandership or is weedy or both. sent3: the Austronesian is a kind of non-febrile thing that is not a kind of a commandership. | sent1: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent2: (¬{A}{a} v {FO}{a}) sent3: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that either the ferry is not febrile or it does not remain Argus or both.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the Austronesian is archidiaconal.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); sent1 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{b};"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the ferry is not febrile or does not remain Argus or both is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the Austronesian is archidiaconal if the ferry is not febrile and/or does not remain Argus. sent2: the ferry either is not a commandership or is weedy or both. sent3: the Austronesian is a kind of non-febrile thing that is not a kind of a commandership. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that either the ferry is not febrile or it does not remain Argus or both.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the Austronesian is archidiaconal.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the yashmak does not bottle stodge. | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: the technical either bottles stodge or does not quote exploration or both. sent2: there exists something such that it is a silverback and it is not corrupt. sent3: the optician does not corrupt if the fact that the technical does not bottle technical and does not quote glamor is wrong. sent4: the technical is not a kind of a silverback or does not quote glamor or both. sent5: the technical is not a kind of a silverback if it is not a silverback and/or does not quote glamor. sent6: the swineherd does not bottle stodge. sent7: if there is something such that it does not corrupt and does not bottle technical then the technical is a silverback. | sent1: ({B}{a} v ¬{N}{a}) sent2: (Ex): ({A}x & ¬{AA}x) sent3: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent4: (¬{A}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) sent5: (¬{A}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: ¬{B}{be} sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the optician is not corrupt and it does not bottle technical.; assump1 -> int1: something does not corrupt and does not bottle technical.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the technical is a silverback is right.; sent5 & sent4 -> int3: the technical is not a silverback.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the optician is a kind of incorrupt thing that does not bottle technical does not hold.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); assump1 -> int1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent7 -> int2: {A}{a}; sent5 & sent4 -> int3: ¬{A}{a}; int2 & int3 -> int4: #F#; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa});"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the yashmak does not bottle stodge. ; $context$ = sent1: the technical either bottles stodge or does not quote exploration or both. sent2: there exists something such that it is a silverback and it is not corrupt. sent3: the optician does not corrupt if the fact that the technical does not bottle technical and does not quote glamor is wrong. sent4: the technical is not a kind of a silverback or does not quote glamor or both. sent5: the technical is not a kind of a silverback if it is not a silverback and/or does not quote glamor. sent6: the swineherd does not bottle stodge. sent7: if there is something such that it does not corrupt and does not bottle technical then the technical is a silverback. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the optician is not corrupt and it does not bottle technical.; assump1 -> int1: something does not corrupt and does not bottle technical.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the technical is a silverback is right.; sent5 & sent4 -> int3: the technical is not a silverback.; int2 & int3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: that the optician is a kind of incorrupt thing that does not bottle technical does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if that it etymologizes or it does not repatriate or both does not hold then that it is chaetognathan is not false. | (Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: something is a unlikeness if that the fact that it is racial and/or it is not chaetognathan is correct does not hold. sent2: the fact that the minder is chaetognathan is right if the fact that either it does etymologize or it is not a kind of a repatriate or both is wrong. sent3: the agama is not non-shallow if it remains strand or is not noncrystalline or both. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it remains arianist and/or is not epistemic is false then it repeats Finnish. | sent1: (x): ¬({FC}x v ¬{B}x) -> {BA}x sent2: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: ({EG}{ho} v ¬{IT}{ho}) -> {P}{ho} sent4: (Ex): ¬({BR}x v ¬{DA}x) -> {CB}x | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| if the fact that the ferrite is not nonracial or non-chaetognathan or both is incorrect it is a unlikeness. | ¬({FC}{do} v ¬{B}{do}) -> {BA}{do} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if that it etymologizes or it does not repatriate or both does not hold then that it is chaetognathan is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a unlikeness if that the fact that it is racial and/or it is not chaetognathan is correct does not hold. sent2: the fact that the minder is chaetognathan is right if the fact that either it does etymologize or it is not a kind of a repatriate or both is wrong. sent3: the agama is not non-shallow if it remains strand or is not noncrystalline or both. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it remains arianist and/or is not epistemic is false then it repeats Finnish. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the repeating unau does not occur. | ¬{B} | sent1: the Call happens. sent2: the impregnation happens. sent3: if the fact that the bionicsness does not occur is right the adagio does not occur and/or the impregnation does not occur. sent4: the bionicsness does not occur if the motoring occurs or the bionicsness does not occur or both. sent5: if the pinball does not occur then the approaching happens. sent6: the bionicsness happens if the preparing does not occur. sent7: that the impregnation does not occur triggers the repeating unau. sent8: the repeating standard-bearer occurs. sent9: if the impregnation happens and the repeating unau happens the adagio does not occur. sent10: if the preparing does not occur the bionicsness happens and the adagio occurs. | sent1: {BM} sent2: {A} sent3: ¬{D} -> (¬{C} v ¬{A}) sent4: ({F} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{D} sent5: ¬{N} -> {GF} sent6: ¬{E} -> {D} sent7: ¬{A} -> {B} sent8: {BS} sent9: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent10: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the repeating unau occurs.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: both the impregnation and the repeating unau occurs.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: that the adagio does not occur is true.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: {B}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent9 -> int2: ¬{C};"
]
| the repeating unau occurs. | {B} | []
| 8 | 4 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the repeating unau does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the Call happens. sent2: the impregnation happens. sent3: if the fact that the bionicsness does not occur is right the adagio does not occur and/or the impregnation does not occur. sent4: the bionicsness does not occur if the motoring occurs or the bionicsness does not occur or both. sent5: if the pinball does not occur then the approaching happens. sent6: the bionicsness happens if the preparing does not occur. sent7: that the impregnation does not occur triggers the repeating unau. sent8: the repeating standard-bearer occurs. sent9: if the impregnation happens and the repeating unau happens the adagio does not occur. sent10: if the preparing does not occur the bionicsness happens and the adagio occurs. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the repeating unau occurs.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: both the impregnation and the repeating unau occurs.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: that the adagio does not occur is true.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that it is not a kind of a modern. | (Ex): ¬{C}x | sent1: the kale is not a disfluency if that the subshrub is a modern but it is not a microfiche is false. sent2: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a disfluency. sent3: there exists something such that it is a modern. sent4: the subshrub is not a disfluency. sent5: there exists something such that it is a microfiche. sent6: if the fact that something does not unbosom and it does not distribute does not hold it is not a kind of a Don. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not a disfluency and it is a microfiche that the kale is not a modern hold. | sent1: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent2: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent3: (Ex): {C}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} sent5: (Ex): {B}x sent6: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent7: (x): (¬{A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{b} | []
| []
| the kale is not a disfluency. | ¬{A}{b} | [
"sent6 -> int1: if the fact that the grocery does not unbosom and it does not distribute is not true then it is not a kind of a Don.;"
]
| 6 | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it is not a kind of a modern. ; $context$ = sent1: the kale is not a disfluency if that the subshrub is a modern but it is not a microfiche is false. sent2: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a disfluency. sent3: there exists something such that it is a modern. sent4: the subshrub is not a disfluency. sent5: there exists something such that it is a microfiche. sent6: if the fact that something does not unbosom and it does not distribute does not hold it is not a kind of a Don. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not a disfluency and it is a microfiche that the kale is not a modern hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the bottling framboise and/or the Turkey occurs is not correct. | ¬({A} v {C}) | sent1: that the illogicalness does not occur results in that both the bottling stem-winder and the immatureness occurs. sent2: that the barometricness but not the bowling occurs is false if the dextralness happens. sent3: that the barometricness does not occur yields that the remaining overcapitalization and the bottling framboise happens. sent4: if the fact that the barometricness occurs and the bowling does not occur is not correct then the barometricness does not occur. sent5: that the bottling stem-winder occurs results in that the repeating Sondheim occurs and/or that the artiodactylness does not occur. sent6: the bottling framboise occurs and the barometricness happens. sent7: if the barometricness does not occur then that the bottling framboise happens and/or the Turkey happens is not true. sent8: that the dextralness happens and the sententialness occurs is caused by that the mischance does not occur. sent9: either the answering or the inversion or both occurs. sent10: that the barometricness occurs is correct. | sent1: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) sent2: {D} -> ¬({B} & ¬{E}) sent3: ¬{B} -> ({AE} & {A}) sent4: ¬({B} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{B} sent5: {J} -> ({I} v ¬{H}) sent6: ({A} & {B}) sent7: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} v {C}) sent8: ¬{G} -> ({D} & {F}) sent9: ({EE} v {ES}) sent10: {B} | [
"sent6 -> int1: the bottling framboise happens.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent6 -> int1: {A}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fact that either the bottling framboise happens or the Turkey occurs or both is not correct. | ¬({A} v {C}) | []
| 11 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the bottling framboise and/or the Turkey occurs is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: that the illogicalness does not occur results in that both the bottling stem-winder and the immatureness occurs. sent2: that the barometricness but not the bowling occurs is false if the dextralness happens. sent3: that the barometricness does not occur yields that the remaining overcapitalization and the bottling framboise happens. sent4: if the fact that the barometricness occurs and the bowling does not occur is not correct then the barometricness does not occur. sent5: that the bottling stem-winder occurs results in that the repeating Sondheim occurs and/or that the artiodactylness does not occur. sent6: the bottling framboise occurs and the barometricness happens. sent7: if the barometricness does not occur then that the bottling framboise happens and/or the Turkey happens is not true. sent8: that the dextralness happens and the sententialness occurs is caused by that the mischance does not occur. sent9: either the answering or the inversion or both occurs. sent10: that the barometricness occurs is correct. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> int1: the bottling framboise happens.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that there is something such that if the fact that it does bottle offal and is not hydrous is false then it is not normative does not hold. | ¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: there is something such that if that it is not non-photometric and it is not bacteremic is wrong it is not surgical. sent2: the letterer is not normative if that it does bottle offal and it is not hydrous is false. sent3: if the fact that the rosebud is unfortunate but it does not bottle offal is incorrect it is not a kind of a simoom. sent4: if the fact that the letterer bottles offal and is not hydrous does not hold it is normative. sent5: that there is something such that if that it bottles offal and it is not hydrous does not hold then the fact that it is normative hold is right. sent6: if that the plowshare is a kind of a marzipan but it does not quote letterer does not hold it is not fluvial. sent7: there is something such that if that it is hydrous hold it is not normative. sent8: that there exists something such that if that it is both parasitic and not technophobic is incorrect then it is not high-interest is not false. sent9: there exists something such that if it does not bottle offal then it is not normative. sent10: something is not Cyprian if the fact that it is an answer and is non-ipsilateral is wrong. sent11: there is something such that if it bottles offal and it is not hydrous it is not normative. sent12: there exists something such that if that it is both not unintelligible and not mucopurulent is not right then that it does not remain langsyne hold. sent13: there is something such that if the fact that it does remain Argus and it does not bottle polarity is false it is not a kind of a flavorlessness. sent14: if the letterer bottles offal but it is not hydrous then it is not normative. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it does bottle offal and it is hydrous is not true then it is not normative. sent16: the letterer is not monocarpic if the fact that it does repeat Galilee and is non-oral is wrong. sent17: the letterer is not normative if it is hydrous. sent18: if that the fact that the letterer is a kind of carunculate thing that does not frivol does not hold hold then it is not prenatal. sent19: if that the letterer does bottle offal but it does not bottle decentralization is not right then it is non-bottom-up. sent20: there is something such that if that it is a spokeshave and it is not a voicing is not right then the fact that it is not a AFL-CIO is correct. | sent1: (Ex): ¬({JF}x & ¬{FM}x) -> ¬{DG}x sent2: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: ¬({BK}{o} & ¬{AA}{o}) -> ¬{AD}{o} sent4: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent6: ¬({GD}{au} & ¬{CC}{au}) -> ¬{JK}{au} sent7: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent8: (Ex): ¬({EB}x & ¬{CQ}x) -> ¬{ID}x sent9: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent10: (x): ¬({DB}x & ¬{DC}x) -> ¬{DN}x sent11: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent12: (Ex): ¬({IF}x & ¬{HL}x) -> ¬{CT}x sent13: (Ex): ¬({K}x & ¬{GM}x) -> ¬{U}x sent14: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent15: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent16: ¬({IU}{aa} & ¬{HU}{aa}) -> ¬{EQ}{aa} sent17: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent18: ¬({DK}{aa} & ¬{AR}{aa}) -> ¬{FT}{aa} sent19: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{IL}{aa}) -> ¬{AE}{aa} sent20: (Ex): ¬({GP}x & ¬{HH}x) -> ¬{GT}x | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| if the fact that the Sardinian does answer and is not ipsilateral is not correct it is not Cyprian. | ¬({DB}{ei} & ¬{DC}{ei}) -> ¬{DN}{ei} | [
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if the fact that it does bottle offal and is not hydrous is false then it is not normative does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if that it is not non-photometric and it is not bacteremic is wrong it is not surgical. sent2: the letterer is not normative if that it does bottle offal and it is not hydrous is false. sent3: if the fact that the rosebud is unfortunate but it does not bottle offal is incorrect it is not a kind of a simoom. sent4: if the fact that the letterer bottles offal and is not hydrous does not hold it is normative. sent5: that there is something such that if that it bottles offal and it is not hydrous does not hold then the fact that it is normative hold is right. sent6: if that the plowshare is a kind of a marzipan but it does not quote letterer does not hold it is not fluvial. sent7: there is something such that if that it is hydrous hold it is not normative. sent8: that there exists something such that if that it is both parasitic and not technophobic is incorrect then it is not high-interest is not false. sent9: there exists something such that if it does not bottle offal then it is not normative. sent10: something is not Cyprian if the fact that it is an answer and is non-ipsilateral is wrong. sent11: there is something such that if it bottles offal and it is not hydrous it is not normative. sent12: there exists something such that if that it is both not unintelligible and not mucopurulent is not right then that it does not remain langsyne hold. sent13: there is something such that if the fact that it does remain Argus and it does not bottle polarity is false it is not a kind of a flavorlessness. sent14: if the letterer bottles offal but it is not hydrous then it is not normative. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it does bottle offal and it is hydrous is not true then it is not normative. sent16: the letterer is not monocarpic if the fact that it does repeat Galilee and is non-oral is wrong. sent17: the letterer is not normative if it is hydrous. sent18: if that the fact that the letterer is a kind of carunculate thing that does not frivol does not hold hold then it is not prenatal. sent19: if that the letterer does bottle offal but it does not bottle decentralization is not right then it is non-bottom-up. sent20: there is something such that if that it is a spokeshave and it is not a voicing is not right then the fact that it is not a AFL-CIO is correct. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the smegma is a malapropism and is not helpful. | ({AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | sent1: the fact that something does not frizzle and is a Devon if it is unclear hold. sent2: the smegma slopes and does not repeat Caucasia. sent3: if the rivet is not a intentness then that the cabochon does not traverse and does not quote back-formation is false. sent4: if the Aegyptopithecus is not a kind of a malapropism then the smegma is a kind of a malapropism but it is not helpful. sent5: if that something is limacine hold then it is a kind of a Devon. sent6: the Aegyptopithecus is a intentness. sent7: if the cabochon traverses then that the smegma is both a malapropism and not helpful does not hold. sent8: the Aegyptopithecus is helpful but it is not a tying. sent9: that the smegma is not helpful is not incorrect if the Aegyptopithecus is not a malapropism. sent10: if the smegma is helpful it is not a intentness and is a kind of a malapropism. sent11: if the fact that something does not traverse and it does not quote back-formation does not hold it traverse. sent12: something that is not a intentness or is not a kind of a bittersweet or both is not a kind of a intentness. sent13: the Aegyptopithecus does traverse and is a intentness. sent14: if the smegma is a erythrite then it is a malapropism. sent15: the Aegyptopithecus does repeat Microcentrum but it does not introspect. | sent1: (x): {HD}x -> (¬{HB}x & {J}x) sent2: ({GU}{a} & ¬{HA}{a}) sent3: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent4: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent5: (x): {HS}x -> {J}x sent6: {C}{aa} sent7: {A}{b} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent8: ({B}{aa} & ¬{CI}{aa}) sent9: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{a} sent10: {B}{a} -> (¬{C}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{D}x) -> {A}x sent12: (x): (¬{C}x v ¬{F}x) -> ¬{C}x sent13: ({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent14: {AB}{a} -> {AA}{a} sent15: ({R}{aa} & ¬{JB}{aa}) | [
"sent13 -> int1: the Aegyptopithecus traverses.;"
]
| [
"sent13 -> int1: {A}{aa};"
]
| the fact that the smegma is a malapropism but it is not helpful is incorrect. | ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | [
"sent11 -> int2: if the fact that the cabochon does not traverse and does not quote back-formation is not right then it does traverse.; sent12 -> int3: if the rivet is not a intentness or is not a kind of a bittersweet or both then the fact that it is not a intentness hold.;"
]
| 7 | 4 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the smegma is a malapropism and is not helpful. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something does not frizzle and is a Devon if it is unclear hold. sent2: the smegma slopes and does not repeat Caucasia. sent3: if the rivet is not a intentness then that the cabochon does not traverse and does not quote back-formation is false. sent4: if the Aegyptopithecus is not a kind of a malapropism then the smegma is a kind of a malapropism but it is not helpful. sent5: if that something is limacine hold then it is a kind of a Devon. sent6: the Aegyptopithecus is a intentness. sent7: if the cabochon traverses then that the smegma is both a malapropism and not helpful does not hold. sent8: the Aegyptopithecus is helpful but it is not a tying. sent9: that the smegma is not helpful is not incorrect if the Aegyptopithecus is not a malapropism. sent10: if the smegma is helpful it is not a intentness and is a kind of a malapropism. sent11: if the fact that something does not traverse and it does not quote back-formation does not hold it traverse. sent12: something that is not a intentness or is not a kind of a bittersweet or both is not a kind of a intentness. sent13: the Aegyptopithecus does traverse and is a intentness. sent14: if the smegma is a erythrite then it is a malapropism. sent15: the Aegyptopithecus does repeat Microcentrum but it does not introspect. ; $proof$ = | sent13 -> int1: the Aegyptopithecus traverses.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the tempter is a Monophysite. | {B}{b} | sent1: the fact that the tempter is not a Seneca and is unexcitable is not true if the backup is Monophysite. sent2: the backup is a Seneca. sent3: the fact that that the tempter is not unexcitable and it is not amitotic is not correct is not incorrect if the backup is a Seneca. sent4: if the fact that the tempter is Monophysite hold then that the fact that the backup is not a Seneca and it is not amitotic is not true is not false. sent5: a amitotic thing is a Monophysite. sent6: if the fact that the tempter is a kind of a Seneca is true the fact that the backup is amitotic but it is not Monophysite is not correct. sent7: if the fact that something is not unexcitable and it is not amitotic does not hold it is a Monophysite. sent8: the tempter is a Monophysite if the fact that it is amitotic is not wrong. sent9: if a teaser is a kind of a Seneca then it is not a Monophysite. sent10: the fact that the tempter is non-unexcitable a Seneca is not correct. sent11: if the backup does not quote redtail and it is not a teaser that the tempter is a teaser hold. sent12: that the backup is not amitotic and it is not a kind of a Monophysite is false if the tempter is a Seneca. sent13: the tempter is side-to-side. sent14: the fact that the tempter is not unexcitable and is amitotic is not right if the backup is a Seneca. | sent1: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & {AA}{b}) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent4: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent5: (x): {AB}x -> {B}x sent6: {A}{b} -> ¬({AB}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent8: {AB}{b} -> {B}{b} sent9: (x): ({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent10: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {A}{b}) sent11: (¬{F}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {C}{b} sent12: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{AB}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent13: {DN}{b} sent14: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) | [
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: that the tempter is not unexcitable and it is not amitotic does not hold.; sent7 -> int2: the tempter is a Monophysite if that it is both excitable and not amitotic is not true.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent7 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the tempter is not a Monophysite. | ¬{B}{b} | [
"sent9 -> int3: if the tempter is a kind of a teaser and it is a Seneca it is not a Monophysite.;"
]
| 4 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the tempter is a Monophysite. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the tempter is not a Seneca and is unexcitable is not true if the backup is Monophysite. sent2: the backup is a Seneca. sent3: the fact that that the tempter is not unexcitable and it is not amitotic is not correct is not incorrect if the backup is a Seneca. sent4: if the fact that the tempter is Monophysite hold then that the fact that the backup is not a Seneca and it is not amitotic is not true is not false. sent5: a amitotic thing is a Monophysite. sent6: if the fact that the tempter is a kind of a Seneca is true the fact that the backup is amitotic but it is not Monophysite is not correct. sent7: if the fact that something is not unexcitable and it is not amitotic does not hold it is a Monophysite. sent8: the tempter is a Monophysite if the fact that it is amitotic is not wrong. sent9: if a teaser is a kind of a Seneca then it is not a Monophysite. sent10: the fact that the tempter is non-unexcitable a Seneca is not correct. sent11: if the backup does not quote redtail and it is not a teaser that the tempter is a teaser hold. sent12: that the backup is not amitotic and it is not a kind of a Monophysite is false if the tempter is a Seneca. sent13: the tempter is side-to-side. sent14: the fact that the tempter is not unexcitable and is amitotic is not right if the backup is a Seneca. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent2 -> int1: that the tempter is not unexcitable and it is not amitotic does not hold.; sent7 -> int2: the tempter is a Monophysite if that it is both excitable and not amitotic is not true.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the canyon does lump and it is a kind of a punkie is not right. | ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: the canyon is not a punkie if there exists something such that it is liliaceous thing that does not lump. sent2: there exists something such that it is a kind of a corer that is not chimerical. sent3: if something is not a kind of a virility then the fact that the fact that it either does not remain gasbag or is not tropical or both is correct is wrong. sent4: either the gasbag is not arbitrary or it is not insecure or both. sent5: the canyon lumps. sent6: something expects if the fact that it does not remain gasbag and/or it is not tropical is not true. sent7: there is something such that that it is liliaceous is not incorrect. sent8: a non-volumetric thing is both a Benzoin and a virility. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a punkie and it does not lump is not true if it expects. sent10: if something is a kind of a virility that either it is tropical or it does not remain gasbag or both is wrong. sent11: there exists something such that it is a corer that is chimerical. sent12: if there is something such that it is a punkie and it does not lump the canyon is non-liliaceous. sent13: if the canyon is not liliaceous it does lump. sent14: the canyon does not remain rupture. sent15: if the canyon is not a jolt it is a corer and it is tropical. sent16: the canyon does lump and it is a punkie if it is not liliaceous. sent17: the canyon is not liliaceous if a corer is not chimerical. sent18: that the silly does not lump is not incorrect. sent19: if the fact that the gasbag is tropical and/or it does not remain gasbag is wrong then the Teuton does expect. sent20: if the Teuton expects then the viroid is liliaceous. sent21: there exists something such that that it is non-volumetric thing that is a virility is false. | sent1: (x): ({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{E}x v ¬{F}x) sent4: (¬{K}{d} v ¬{J}{d}) sent5: {C}{a} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{E}x v ¬{F}x) -> {D}x sent7: (Ex): {A}x sent8: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({H}x & {G}x) sent9: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) sent10: (x): {G}x -> ¬({F}x v ¬{E}x) sent11: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent12: (x): ({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent13: ¬{A}{a} -> {C}{a} sent14: ¬{AO}{a} sent15: ¬{IF}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & {F}{a}) sent16: ¬{A}{a} -> ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent17: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent18: ¬{C}{ia} sent19: ¬({F}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) -> {D}{c} sent20: {D}{c} -> {A}{b} sent21: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & {G}x) | [
"sent2 & sent17 -> int1: the canyon is not liliaceous.; int1 & sent16 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 & sent17 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent16 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the oboist is not liliaceous. | ¬{A}{at} | [
"sent9 -> int2: the fact that that the oboist is not a kind of a punkie and does not lump is false is correct if it does expect.; sent6 -> int3: if the fact that the oboist does not remain gasbag and/or it is not tropical does not hold that it expects is not wrong.; sent3 -> int4: the fact that the fact that the oboist does not remain gasbag and/or it is not tropical is not right is right if it is not a virility.;"
]
| 5 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the canyon does lump and it is a kind of a punkie is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the canyon is not a punkie if there exists something such that it is liliaceous thing that does not lump. sent2: there exists something such that it is a kind of a corer that is not chimerical. sent3: if something is not a kind of a virility then the fact that the fact that it either does not remain gasbag or is not tropical or both is correct is wrong. sent4: either the gasbag is not arbitrary or it is not insecure or both. sent5: the canyon lumps. sent6: something expects if the fact that it does not remain gasbag and/or it is not tropical is not true. sent7: there is something such that that it is liliaceous is not incorrect. sent8: a non-volumetric thing is both a Benzoin and a virility. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a punkie and it does not lump is not true if it expects. sent10: if something is a kind of a virility that either it is tropical or it does not remain gasbag or both is wrong. sent11: there exists something such that it is a corer that is chimerical. sent12: if there is something such that it is a punkie and it does not lump the canyon is non-liliaceous. sent13: if the canyon is not liliaceous it does lump. sent14: the canyon does not remain rupture. sent15: if the canyon is not a jolt it is a corer and it is tropical. sent16: the canyon does lump and it is a punkie if it is not liliaceous. sent17: the canyon is not liliaceous if a corer is not chimerical. sent18: that the silly does not lump is not incorrect. sent19: if the fact that the gasbag is tropical and/or it does not remain gasbag is wrong then the Teuton does expect. sent20: if the Teuton expects then the viroid is liliaceous. sent21: there exists something such that that it is non-volumetric thing that is a virility is false. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent17 -> int1: the canyon is not liliaceous.; int1 & sent16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that there is something such that if it repeats zinc it is a Cocus is not right. | ¬((Ex): {A}x -> {C}x) | sent1: something does remain hypochondrium if it is Ptolemaic. sent2: if the gurney is a Cocus it is eusporangiate. sent3: the dicynodont is coccygeal if it does repeat zinc. sent4: if the grammarian repeats zinc then it is hornless. sent5: the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it is broadband is right it takes is not incorrect. sent6: the gurney is a kind of a Cocus if it does repeat zinc. sent7: if the gurney is a enamelware it repeats Constitution. sent8: there is something such that if it bottles fucoid it does bottle predisposition. sent9: the guanabenz is econometrics if it repeats zinc. sent10: the gurney is familial if it roasts. sent11: if the motorcyclist is a kind of a pass-through it does repeat zinc. | sent1: (x): {CP}x -> {FK}x sent2: {C}{aa} -> {IK}{aa} sent3: {A}{ar} -> {JK}{ar} sent4: {A}{dp} -> {CF}{dp} sent5: (Ex): {FR}x -> {HJ}x sent6: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent7: {FA}{aa} -> {DU}{aa} sent8: (Ex): {AC}x -> {S}x sent9: {A}{dl} -> {FH}{dl} sent10: {GK}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent11: {FS}{jc} -> {A}{jc} | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there exists something such that if it is Ptolemaic it does remain hypochondrium. | (Ex): {CP}x -> {FK}x | [
"sent1 -> int1: if the acetaldol is Ptolemaic it remains hypochondrium.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it repeats zinc it is a Cocus is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: something does remain hypochondrium if it is Ptolemaic. sent2: if the gurney is a Cocus it is eusporangiate. sent3: the dicynodont is coccygeal if it does repeat zinc. sent4: if the grammarian repeats zinc then it is hornless. sent5: the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it is broadband is right it takes is not incorrect. sent6: the gurney is a kind of a Cocus if it does repeat zinc. sent7: if the gurney is a enamelware it repeats Constitution. sent8: there is something such that if it bottles fucoid it does bottle predisposition. sent9: the guanabenz is econometrics if it repeats zinc. sent10: the gurney is familial if it roasts. sent11: if the motorcyclist is a kind of a pass-through it does repeat zinc. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the macrophage is a boldface or is a mustiness or both. | ({B}{b} v {A}{b}) | sent1: something is not aerological if it does not bottle sloe. sent2: something is cormous and/or it does dissent if it is not aerological. sent3: the macrophage is a kind of a boldface if the tragus is choragic and it is a forehanded. sent4: if the tragus is not non-choragic and is not a forehanded the macrophage boldfaces. sent5: the tragus does not bottle sloe if the fact that the croton bottle sloe and/or does not remain macrophage is false. sent6: the fact that something boldfaces and/or is a mustiness is false if it is not a Rioja. sent7: if something is cormous then it does not remain builder and it is not a Rioja. sent8: that the croton bottles sloe or it does not remain macrophage or both is incorrect. sent9: the tragus is choragic but it is not forehanded. | sent1: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬{F}x sent2: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x v {G}x) sent3: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent4: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent5: ¬({H}{c} v ¬{I}{c}) -> ¬{H}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x v {A}x) sent7: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) sent8: ¬({H}{c} v ¬{I}{c}) sent9: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the macrophage does boldface.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| that the fact that the macrophage is a kind of a boldface and/or it is a mustiness does not hold is correct. | ¬({B}{b} v {A}{b}) | [
"sent6 -> int2: if the macrophage is not a Rioja that either it boldfaces or it is a mustiness or both is not true.; sent7 -> int3: if the macrophage is cormous it does not remain builder and is not a kind of a Rioja.; sent2 -> int4: the tragus is cormous or it does dissent or both if it is not aerological.; sent1 -> int5: if the tragus does not bottle sloe then it is not aerological.; sent5 & sent8 -> int6: that the tragus does not bottle sloe is right.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the tragus is not aerological.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the tragus is cormous or it is a kind of a dissent or both.;"
]
| 7 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the macrophage is a boldface or is a mustiness or both. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not aerological if it does not bottle sloe. sent2: something is cormous and/or it does dissent if it is not aerological. sent3: the macrophage is a kind of a boldface if the tragus is choragic and it is a forehanded. sent4: if the tragus is not non-choragic and is not a forehanded the macrophage boldfaces. sent5: the tragus does not bottle sloe if the fact that the croton bottle sloe and/or does not remain macrophage is false. sent6: the fact that something boldfaces and/or is a mustiness is false if it is not a Rioja. sent7: if something is cormous then it does not remain builder and it is not a Rioja. sent8: that the croton bottles sloe or it does not remain macrophage or both is incorrect. sent9: the tragus is choragic but it is not forehanded. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the macrophage does boldface.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the aggrandizement happens and the quoting penetrator happens is false. | ¬({B} & {C}) | sent1: the repeating mayeng does not occur. sent2: the repeating eolith does not occur if the waver and the pronounceableness happens. sent3: that the cheliceralness does not occur and the concourse does not occur prevents that the lowness occurs. sent4: the repeating spoliation happens. sent5: if the fact that the low happens hold then the aggrandizement occurs. sent6: that the directing does not occur or the Stoicness does not occur or both is caused by the disclaimer. sent7: if the repeating mayeng does not occur the remaining langsyne does not occur and/or the cheliceralness does not occur. sent8: the hydrographicness occurs if the cheliceralness happens. sent9: the Ramadan occurs. sent10: if the directingness does not occur or the Stoicness does not occur or both then the concourse does not occur. sent11: if the repeating eolith does not occur both the remaining Adiantum and the arseniousness happens. sent12: if the fact that the remaining Adiantum happens is right then that the disclaimer occurs is not incorrect. sent13: the fact that the aggrandizement happens and the quoting penetrator occurs does not hold if the low does not occur. sent14: if the repeating bayat happens then the remaining shuffleboard happens. sent15: the quoting penetrator occurs. sent16: the low occurs. sent17: that the remaining langsyne does not occur or that the cheliceralness does not occur or both causes the cheliceralnessness. | sent1: ¬{O} sent2: ({N} & {M}) -> ¬{L} sent3: (¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{A} sent4: {CA} sent5: {A} -> {B} sent6: {H} -> (¬{G} v ¬{F}) sent7: ¬{O} -> (¬{J} v ¬{E}) sent8: {E} -> {AC} sent9: {DH} sent10: (¬{G} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} sent11: ¬{L} -> ({I} & {K}) sent12: {I} -> {H} sent13: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent14: {BE} -> {GT} sent15: {C} sent16: {A} sent17: (¬{J} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{E} | [
"sent5 & sent16 -> int1: the aggrandizement happens.; int1 & sent15 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent5 & sent16 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent15 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fact that the aggrandizement happens and the quoting penetrator happens is not true. | ¬({B} & {C}) | [
"sent7 & sent1 -> int2: the remaining langsyne does not occur and/or the cheliceralness does not occur.; sent17 & int2 -> int3: the cheliceralness does not occur.;"
]
| 13 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the aggrandizement happens and the quoting penetrator happens is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the repeating mayeng does not occur. sent2: the repeating eolith does not occur if the waver and the pronounceableness happens. sent3: that the cheliceralness does not occur and the concourse does not occur prevents that the lowness occurs. sent4: the repeating spoliation happens. sent5: if the fact that the low happens hold then the aggrandizement occurs. sent6: that the directing does not occur or the Stoicness does not occur or both is caused by the disclaimer. sent7: if the repeating mayeng does not occur the remaining langsyne does not occur and/or the cheliceralness does not occur. sent8: the hydrographicness occurs if the cheliceralness happens. sent9: the Ramadan occurs. sent10: if the directingness does not occur or the Stoicness does not occur or both then the concourse does not occur. sent11: if the repeating eolith does not occur both the remaining Adiantum and the arseniousness happens. sent12: if the fact that the remaining Adiantum happens is right then that the disclaimer occurs is not incorrect. sent13: the fact that the aggrandizement happens and the quoting penetrator occurs does not hold if the low does not occur. sent14: if the repeating bayat happens then the remaining shuffleboard happens. sent15: the quoting penetrator occurs. sent16: the low occurs. sent17: that the remaining langsyne does not occur or that the cheliceralness does not occur or both causes the cheliceralnessness. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent16 -> int1: the aggrandizement happens.; int1 & sent15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the Pekinese is not a Chaucer hold. | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: if that something is not a kind of a fortuneteller or it is not unswept or both does not hold then it does not bottle arianist. sent2: that the interceptor does not bottle fomite and is Genoese is incorrect if it is not prospective. sent3: the fact that the mucin is either not a fortuneteller or not unswept or both does not hold if the methenamine does bottle etcetera. sent4: the methenamine does bottle etcetera if the etcetera does remain foaming. sent5: The arianist does not bottle Pekinese. sent6: the sagittate-leaf is a Chaucer. sent7: the Pekinese does not bottle arianist. sent8: if the Pekinese does not bottle arianist it is not a niggard and does not converge. sent9: the Pekinese does not converge if it does not bottle arianist. sent10: the outthrust is not a Chaucer and it does not repeat grinder if it is not a stocks. sent11: if the mucin does not bottle arianist the Pekinese is not a kind of a Chaucer. sent12: the Pekinese repeats piezometer. sent13: something repeats amphidiploid if it does not converge and is not a kind of a share. sent14: the Pekinese is not a Chlorococcum. sent15: if the fact that the interceptor does not bottle breadwinner and/or is adaptive is not right it is not prospective. sent16: the Hindu is not a kind of a Chaucer. sent17: if something is not a kind of a niggard and it does not converge then it is a Chaucer. sent18: something does frivol and does remain foaming if it is not a kind of a Genoese. sent19: if a non-purgatorial thing is not a plan then it reheats. sent20: the Pekinese is not a Goodall and does not Romanize if it is not a episiotomy. | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{C}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent2: ¬{I}{d} -> ¬(¬{J}{d} & {H}{d}) sent3: {E}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) sent4: {F}{c} -> {E}{b} sent5: ¬{AC}{ab} sent6: {B}{io} sent7: ¬{A}{aa} sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent9: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent10: ¬{AE}{ac} -> (¬{B}{ac} & ¬{BJ}{ac}) sent11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent12: {GF}{aa} sent13: (x): (¬{AB}x & ¬{BP}x) -> {GC}x sent14: ¬{IT}{aa} sent15: ¬(¬{L}{d} v {K}{d}) -> ¬{I}{d} sent16: ¬{B}{cr} sent17: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent18: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}x & {F}x) sent19: (x): (¬{DG}x & ¬{DU}x) -> {DD}x sent20: ¬{R}{aa} -> (¬{AL}{aa} & ¬{GE}{aa}) | [
"sent17 -> int1: the Pekinese is a Chaucer if it is not a kind of a niggard and does not converge.; sent8 & sent7 -> int2: the Pekinese is not a niggard and does not converge.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent17 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; sent8 & sent7 -> int2: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the Pekinese is not a Chaucer. | ¬{B}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> int3: if the fact that the mucin is not a fortuneteller or not unswept or both is not right it does not bottle arianist.; sent18 -> int4: the etcetera frivols and it does remain foaming if it is not a Genoese.;"
]
| 10 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the Pekinese is not a Chaucer hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is not a kind of a fortuneteller or it is not unswept or both does not hold then it does not bottle arianist. sent2: that the interceptor does not bottle fomite and is Genoese is incorrect if it is not prospective. sent3: the fact that the mucin is either not a fortuneteller or not unswept or both does not hold if the methenamine does bottle etcetera. sent4: the methenamine does bottle etcetera if the etcetera does remain foaming. sent5: The arianist does not bottle Pekinese. sent6: the sagittate-leaf is a Chaucer. sent7: the Pekinese does not bottle arianist. sent8: if the Pekinese does not bottle arianist it is not a niggard and does not converge. sent9: the Pekinese does not converge if it does not bottle arianist. sent10: the outthrust is not a Chaucer and it does not repeat grinder if it is not a stocks. sent11: if the mucin does not bottle arianist the Pekinese is not a kind of a Chaucer. sent12: the Pekinese repeats piezometer. sent13: something repeats amphidiploid if it does not converge and is not a kind of a share. sent14: the Pekinese is not a Chlorococcum. sent15: if the fact that the interceptor does not bottle breadwinner and/or is adaptive is not right it is not prospective. sent16: the Hindu is not a kind of a Chaucer. sent17: if something is not a kind of a niggard and it does not converge then it is a Chaucer. sent18: something does frivol and does remain foaming if it is not a kind of a Genoese. sent19: if a non-purgatorial thing is not a plan then it reheats. sent20: the Pekinese is not a Goodall and does not Romanize if it is not a episiotomy. ; $proof$ = | sent17 -> int1: the Pekinese is a Chaucer if it is not a kind of a niggard and does not converge.; sent8 & sent7 -> int2: the Pekinese is not a niggard and does not converge.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the exteroceptiveness does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: if the Stinger occurs then the masonry occurs or the faucalness does not occur or both. sent2: the nondisposableness and the mid-off happens if the perigonalness does not occur. sent3: if the immunodeficientness happens then the boot does not occur and the titivation does not occur. sent4: that the boot does not occur and the titivation does not occur causes that the incongruousness occurs. sent5: the exteroceptiveness does not occur if the fact that the minimalness and the exteroceptiveness occurs is not right. sent6: the fact that the mountaineering but not the nones happens if the blastomycoticness does not occur is not wrong. sent7: the exteroceptiveness occurs if the blastomycoticness occurs. sent8: if the amygdalineness happens and the Napoleonicness does not occur then the minimalness happens. sent9: the blastomycoticness does not occur if the minimalness does not occur. sent10: the amygdalineness happens but the Napoleonicness does not occur. sent11: if the minimalness happens the blastomycoticness occurs. sent12: the fact that the ovineness happens is correct if the fact that the marketing occurs hold. sent13: if the nondisposableness happens the remaining Harte does not occur. sent14: that the ready-madeness does not occur is triggered by that either the incongruousness or the non-ready-madeness or both occurs. sent15: the remaining mitzvah and the non-perigonalness occurs if the ready-madeness does not occur. sent16: if the blastomycoticness does not occur the fact that both the minimalness and the exteroceptiveness occurs is incorrect. sent17: if the masonry and/or the non-faucalness happens the marketing happens. sent18: the blastomycoticness does not occur if the fact that the walk-in occurs and the arboriculture happens is wrong. sent19: the non-immunodeficientness is prevented by the ovineness. sent20: the fact that if the amygdalineness does not occur the imaging occurs and the Stinger occurs is not incorrect. sent21: the fact that both the walk-in and the arboriculture occurs is incorrect if the remaining Harte does not occur. | sent1: {T} -> ({R} v ¬{S}) sent2: ¬{I} -> ({G} & {H}) sent3: {O} -> (¬{N} & ¬{L}) sent4: (¬{N} & ¬{L}) -> {M} sent5: ¬({B} & {C}) -> ¬{C} sent6: ¬{A} -> ({FE} & ¬{IK}) sent7: {A} -> {C} sent8: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent9: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} sent10: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent11: {B} -> {A} sent12: {Q} -> {P} sent13: {G} -> ¬{F} sent14: ({M} v ¬{K}) -> ¬{K} sent15: ¬{K} -> ({J} & ¬{I}) sent16: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent17: ({R} v ¬{S}) -> {Q} sent18: ¬({E} & {D}) -> ¬{A} sent19: {P} -> {O} sent20: ¬{AA} -> ({U} & {T}) sent21: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & {D}) | [
"sent8 & sent10 -> int1: the minimalness occurs.; sent11 & int1 -> int2: that the blastomycoticness occurs is not incorrect.; sent7 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent8 & sent10 -> int1: {B}; sent11 & int1 -> int2: {A}; sent7 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the mountaineering but not the nones occurs. | ({FE} & ¬{IK}) | []
| 7 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the exteroceptiveness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Stinger occurs then the masonry occurs or the faucalness does not occur or both. sent2: the nondisposableness and the mid-off happens if the perigonalness does not occur. sent3: if the immunodeficientness happens then the boot does not occur and the titivation does not occur. sent4: that the boot does not occur and the titivation does not occur causes that the incongruousness occurs. sent5: the exteroceptiveness does not occur if the fact that the minimalness and the exteroceptiveness occurs is not right. sent6: the fact that the mountaineering but not the nones happens if the blastomycoticness does not occur is not wrong. sent7: the exteroceptiveness occurs if the blastomycoticness occurs. sent8: if the amygdalineness happens and the Napoleonicness does not occur then the minimalness happens. sent9: the blastomycoticness does not occur if the minimalness does not occur. sent10: the amygdalineness happens but the Napoleonicness does not occur. sent11: if the minimalness happens the blastomycoticness occurs. sent12: the fact that the ovineness happens is correct if the fact that the marketing occurs hold. sent13: if the nondisposableness happens the remaining Harte does not occur. sent14: that the ready-madeness does not occur is triggered by that either the incongruousness or the non-ready-madeness or both occurs. sent15: the remaining mitzvah and the non-perigonalness occurs if the ready-madeness does not occur. sent16: if the blastomycoticness does not occur the fact that both the minimalness and the exteroceptiveness occurs is incorrect. sent17: if the masonry and/or the non-faucalness happens the marketing happens. sent18: the blastomycoticness does not occur if the fact that the walk-in occurs and the arboriculture happens is wrong. sent19: the non-immunodeficientness is prevented by the ovineness. sent20: the fact that if the amygdalineness does not occur the imaging occurs and the Stinger occurs is not incorrect. sent21: the fact that both the walk-in and the arboriculture occurs is incorrect if the remaining Harte does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent8 & sent10 -> int1: the minimalness occurs.; sent11 & int1 -> int2: that the blastomycoticness occurs is not incorrect.; sent7 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the surpassing does not occur hold. | ¬{A} | sent1: if the selfishness does not occur but the budding happens the fact that the beatification does not occur is not false. sent2: that the surpassing happens and the hoofing does not occur does not hold. sent3: if the budding does not occur then that the selfishness does not occur and the beatification does not occur is not false. sent4: the fact that not the abientness but the womanliness happens is not right if the centripetalness does not occur. sent5: if the avianness occurs and the oversleeping happens then the character does not occur. sent6: that either the non-verticalness or the nephriticness or both happens is right if the tuberculateness occurs. sent7: the bud does not occur if both the non-liberalness and the carelessness occurs. sent8: that the womanliness does not occur leads to that the liberalness does not occur and the carelessness happens. sent9: that the toroidalness happens is prevented by either that the vertical does not occur or that the nephriticness happens or both. sent10: that the avianness happens and the oversleeping occurs is triggered by that the repeating legalism does not occur. sent11: if the beatification does not occur then the hoofing and the surpassing happens. sent12: if the nonfinancialness happens then the centripetalness does not occur. sent13: if that the repeating legalism and the Haitian happens is incorrect then the repeating legalism does not occur. sent14: if that the abientness does not occur but the womanliness occurs is not true the womanliness does not occur. sent15: if the gastroesophagealness does not occur the tuberculateness and the hypnotism occurs. sent16: if the toroidalness does not occur the fact that both the repeating legalism and the Haitian occurs is incorrect. sent17: if the character does not occur both the nonfinancialness and the refinement occurs. sent18: the surpassing does not occur and the hoofing does not occur if the beatification does not occur. sent19: the gastroesophagealness does not occur if the predicate does not occur. sent20: if the surpassing does not occur and the hoofing does not occur then the monophonicness occurs. | sent1: (¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{C} sent2: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) sent3: ¬{E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{C}) sent4: ¬{J} -> ¬(¬{I} & {H}) sent5: ({N} & {O}) -> ¬{M} sent6: {U} -> (¬{T} v {S}) sent7: (¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent8: ¬{H} -> (¬{G} & {F}) sent9: (¬{T} v {S}) -> ¬{Q} sent10: ¬{P} -> ({N} & {O}) sent11: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent12: {K} -> ¬{J} sent13: ¬({P} & {R}) -> ¬{P} sent14: ¬(¬{I} & {H}) -> ¬{H} sent15: ¬{AB} -> ({U} & {AA}) sent16: ¬{Q} -> ¬({P} & {R}) sent17: ¬{M} -> ({K} & {L}) sent18: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent19: ¬{AC} -> ¬{AB} sent20: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {EO} | []
| []
| that the surpassing occurs is not incorrect. | {A} | []
| 7 | 3 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the surpassing does not occur hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the selfishness does not occur but the budding happens the fact that the beatification does not occur is not false. sent2: that the surpassing happens and the hoofing does not occur does not hold. sent3: if the budding does not occur then that the selfishness does not occur and the beatification does not occur is not false. sent4: the fact that not the abientness but the womanliness happens is not right if the centripetalness does not occur. sent5: if the avianness occurs and the oversleeping happens then the character does not occur. sent6: that either the non-verticalness or the nephriticness or both happens is right if the tuberculateness occurs. sent7: the bud does not occur if both the non-liberalness and the carelessness occurs. sent8: that the womanliness does not occur leads to that the liberalness does not occur and the carelessness happens. sent9: that the toroidalness happens is prevented by either that the vertical does not occur or that the nephriticness happens or both. sent10: that the avianness happens and the oversleeping occurs is triggered by that the repeating legalism does not occur. sent11: if the beatification does not occur then the hoofing and the surpassing happens. sent12: if the nonfinancialness happens then the centripetalness does not occur. sent13: if that the repeating legalism and the Haitian happens is incorrect then the repeating legalism does not occur. sent14: if that the abientness does not occur but the womanliness occurs is not true the womanliness does not occur. sent15: if the gastroesophagealness does not occur the tuberculateness and the hypnotism occurs. sent16: if the toroidalness does not occur the fact that both the repeating legalism and the Haitian occurs is incorrect. sent17: if the character does not occur both the nonfinancialness and the refinement occurs. sent18: the surpassing does not occur and the hoofing does not occur if the beatification does not occur. sent19: the gastroesophagealness does not occur if the predicate does not occur. sent20: if the surpassing does not occur and the hoofing does not occur then the monophonicness occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it does bottle Rawalpindi then the fact that it does not bottle dynamometer and it does bottle supper does not hold. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: if the soy groups the fact that it does not swelter and remains tailfin is not true. sent2: there is something such that if it bottles Rawalpindi then the fact that it does bottle dynamometer and does bottle supper is wrong. sent3: if that the soy does bottle Rawalpindi hold that it bottles dynamometer and it does bottle supper is incorrect. sent4: if the soy bottles Rawalpindi that it does not bottle dynamometer and it does bottle supper is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the soy does not bottle dynamometer but it is a kind of an omelet is not right if it does quote Phanerozoic. sent6: there is something such that if it is unobjectionable then that it does not aim and it is a weevil is wrong. sent7: if the tassel is a kind of a Spain then the fact that it does not bottle Rawalpindi and it is extroversive is false. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a tensed then the fact that it does not quote foster-child and it does repeat Ophiodontidae is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the turquoise does not quote herbarium but it is a binomial is not correct if that it bottles Rawalpindi hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is grammatical that it does not bottle scholar and bottles Anne is not right. sent11: if something is a Guinean then that it is non-binomial thing that is unattractive is not true. sent12: there exists something such that if it is inclusive that it does not bottle scholar and is a centipede is wrong. sent13: there is something such that if it remains then then the fact that it is both not a Sheffield and grammatical does not hold. sent14: there is something such that if it is inexplicable then the fact that it is both not microbial and Gallican is not right. sent15: there exists something such that if it bottles Rawalpindi then it does not bottle dynamometer and bottles supper. sent16: if the repatriate is Guinean the fact that it does not bottle dynamometer and it is calcitic is incorrect. sent17: there is something such that if it is anthropocentric the fact that it does not remain linocut and does quote falsity does not hold. sent18: if the soy bottles Rawalpindi it does not bottle dynamometer and it bottles supper. sent19: there is something such that if it is a Mexican then that it is not eugenics and is a kind of a blankness is not right. | sent1: {BO}{aa} -> ¬(¬{HK}{aa} & {IB}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: {GH}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {FO}{aa}) sent6: (Ex): {CA}x -> ¬(¬{AD}x & {O}x) sent7: {CO}{fo} -> ¬(¬{A}{fo} & {R}{fo}) sent8: (Ex): {GL}x -> ¬(¬{FG}x & {DM}x) sent9: {A}{hq} -> ¬(¬{FK}{hq} & {HN}{hq}) sent10: (Ex): {BT}x -> ¬(¬{HS}x & {AE}x) sent11: (x): {FD}x -> ¬(¬{HN}x & {AN}x) sent12: (Ex): {IE}x -> ¬(¬{HS}x & {GO}x) sent13: (Ex): {DB}x -> ¬(¬{AJ}x & {BT}x) sent14: (Ex): {D}x -> ¬(¬{IC}x & {DQ}x) sent15: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent16: {FD}{gm} -> ¬(¬{AA}{gm} & {DS}{gm}) sent17: (Ex): {FT}x -> ¬(¬{BG}x & {IR}x) sent18: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent19: (Ex): {BQ}x -> ¬(¬{ID}x & {CQ}x) | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there exists something such that if it is a Guinean the fact that it is both not binomial and unattractive is false. | (Ex): {FD}x -> ¬(¬{HN}x & {AN}x) | [
"sent11 -> int1: if the linocut is not non-Guinean then the fact that it is not a binomial and it is unattractive does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does bottle Rawalpindi then the fact that it does not bottle dynamometer and it does bottle supper does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the soy groups the fact that it does not swelter and remains tailfin is not true. sent2: there is something such that if it bottles Rawalpindi then the fact that it does bottle dynamometer and does bottle supper is wrong. sent3: if that the soy does bottle Rawalpindi hold that it bottles dynamometer and it does bottle supper is incorrect. sent4: if the soy bottles Rawalpindi that it does not bottle dynamometer and it does bottle supper is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the soy does not bottle dynamometer but it is a kind of an omelet is not right if it does quote Phanerozoic. sent6: there is something such that if it is unobjectionable then that it does not aim and it is a weevil is wrong. sent7: if the tassel is a kind of a Spain then the fact that it does not bottle Rawalpindi and it is extroversive is false. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a tensed then the fact that it does not quote foster-child and it does repeat Ophiodontidae is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the turquoise does not quote herbarium but it is a binomial is not correct if that it bottles Rawalpindi hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is grammatical that it does not bottle scholar and bottles Anne is not right. sent11: if something is a Guinean then that it is non-binomial thing that is unattractive is not true. sent12: there exists something such that if it is inclusive that it does not bottle scholar and is a centipede is wrong. sent13: there is something such that if it remains then then the fact that it is both not a Sheffield and grammatical does not hold. sent14: there is something such that if it is inexplicable then the fact that it is both not microbial and Gallican is not right. sent15: there exists something such that if it bottles Rawalpindi then it does not bottle dynamometer and bottles supper. sent16: if the repatriate is Guinean the fact that it does not bottle dynamometer and it is calcitic is incorrect. sent17: there is something such that if it is anthropocentric the fact that it does not remain linocut and does quote falsity does not hold. sent18: if the soy bottles Rawalpindi it does not bottle dynamometer and it bottles supper. sent19: there is something such that if it is a Mexican then that it is not eugenics and is a kind of a blankness is not right. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the thysanuron is not a kind of a Shavian. | ¬{E}{c} | sent1: that the coagulase does not repeat colloquy and is substantive does not hold if the underwriter does not remain realist. sent2: something that repeats Arundo is not nosocomial and/or does not quote redtail. sent3: the positioner does not repeat Arundo. sent4: the positioner does repeat infinitesimal if that the coagulase repeat infinitesimal but it does not remain realist is not true. sent5: the thysanuron is not a kind of a Shavian if the underwriter is nosocomial and it does remain realist. sent6: if something is not nosocomial it is substantive and it does not repeat colloquy. sent7: if the positioner does not repeat Arundo then it is a kind of non-nosocomial a Shavian. sent8: the thysanuron quotes redtail. sent9: the coagulase is a kind of substantive thing that does repeat colloquy. sent10: the underwriter quotes redtail. sent11: something that is not nosocomial or does not quote redtail or both is not nosocomial. sent12: the cubby is not a scent. sent13: The redtail quotes underwriter. sent14: the underwriter is nosocomial if that it does quote redtail is correct. sent15: that the coagulase repeats colloquy is not incorrect. sent16: if something does not scent then it is not a Fissipedia and repeats Arundo. | sent1: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent2: (x): {G}x -> (¬{D}x v ¬{F}x) sent3: ¬{G}{hb} sent4: ¬({IP}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {IP}{hb} sent5: ({D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent6: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: ¬{G}{hb} -> (¬{D}{hb} & {E}{hb}) sent8: {F}{c} sent9: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent10: {F}{b} sent11: (x): (¬{D}x v ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent12: ¬{I}{d} sent13: {AB}{ab} sent14: {F}{b} -> {D}{b} sent15: {B}{a} sent16: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{H}x & {G}x) | [
"sent9 -> int1: the coagulase is a substantive.; sent14 & sent10 -> int2: the underwriter is nosocomial.;"
]
| [
"sent9 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent14 & sent10 -> int2: {D}{b};"
]
| the positioner is a substantive that does repeat infinitesimal. | ({A}{hb} & {IP}{hb}) | [
"sent6 -> int3: if the positioner is non-nosocomial then it is a substantive and does not repeat colloquy.; sent7 & sent3 -> int4: the positioner is not nosocomial and is a Shavian.; int4 -> int5: the positioner is not nosocomial.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the positioner is a substantive and does not repeat colloquy.; int6 -> int7: the positioner is a substantive.;"
]
| 5 | 4 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the thysanuron is not a kind of a Shavian. ; $context$ = sent1: that the coagulase does not repeat colloquy and is substantive does not hold if the underwriter does not remain realist. sent2: something that repeats Arundo is not nosocomial and/or does not quote redtail. sent3: the positioner does not repeat Arundo. sent4: the positioner does repeat infinitesimal if that the coagulase repeat infinitesimal but it does not remain realist is not true. sent5: the thysanuron is not a kind of a Shavian if the underwriter is nosocomial and it does remain realist. sent6: if something is not nosocomial it is substantive and it does not repeat colloquy. sent7: if the positioner does not repeat Arundo then it is a kind of non-nosocomial a Shavian. sent8: the thysanuron quotes redtail. sent9: the coagulase is a kind of substantive thing that does repeat colloquy. sent10: the underwriter quotes redtail. sent11: something that is not nosocomial or does not quote redtail or both is not nosocomial. sent12: the cubby is not a scent. sent13: The redtail quotes underwriter. sent14: the underwriter is nosocomial if that it does quote redtail is correct. sent15: that the coagulase repeats colloquy is not incorrect. sent16: if something does not scent then it is not a Fissipedia and repeats Arundo. ; $proof$ = | sent9 -> int1: the coagulase is a substantive.; sent14 & sent10 -> int2: the underwriter is nosocomial.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if that it does not bottle carpophore and is not an overlooked is not correct it is not Piagetian. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: the motor is unneurotic if that that it is both not Piagetian and not peninsular hold is not correct. sent2: there is something such that if that it is both orthographic and not a Browning is not right it is not nonproprietary. sent3: the allotrope is not Piagetian if the fact that it bottles carpophore and is not an overlooked is false. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a filmmaker and it is not a falsity is incorrect it does not quote cheroot. sent5: if the fact that the saltpan is not a kind of an overlooked and is not a secant does not hold then it is not synonymous. sent6: that the etcetera is an overlooked is not wrong if that it is not an ally and does not quote allotrope is false. sent7: there exists something such that if that it bottles carpophore is correct then it is not Piagetian. sent8: the handspike is not a kind of a transience if it does bottle motor. sent9: there is something such that if that it is a kind of non-quadratics thing that does quote layer is not right then it is not a Leguminosae. sent10: if that the saltpan shades is not wrong it does not bottle carpophore. sent11: there is something such that if that it is not palatoglossal and repeats laconism is not right then it is not an advertorial. sent12: if the fact that the allotrope does not bottle carpophore and does not overlook is false it is not Piagetian. sent13: there exists something such that if that it does not repeat hunch and is not ecological is not correct it is a daylily. sent14: if the allotrope bottles laconism then it does not repeat escudo. sent15: there is something such that if that it is not a kind of a Browning and is not a Balinese is wrong it is a pasty. sent16: if the fact that the allotrope is a kind of a meaningfulness is not false then it does not bottle carpophore. sent17: if that something does not remain criticality and is not a kind of a bucktooth is false then that it does not repeat strand is not false. sent18: there exists something such that if it does not bottle carpophore and is not an overlooked then it is not Piagetian. sent19: if the fact that the allotrope does not repeat transformer and is not a grainfield does not hold then it is not palatoglossal. sent20: the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of an overlooked then that it is not Piagetian hold is not wrong. | sent1: ¬(¬{B}{fk} & ¬{CU}{fk}) -> {GA}{fk} sent2: (Ex): ¬({HK}x & ¬{FR}x) -> ¬{HH}x sent3: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{DE}x & ¬{BB}x) -> ¬{D}x sent5: ¬(¬{AB}{gq} & ¬{EM}{gq}) -> ¬{GS}{gq} sent6: ¬(¬{FH}{ij} & ¬{DM}{ij}) -> {AB}{ij} sent7: (Ex): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent8: {HL}{q} -> ¬{IP}{q} sent9: (Ex): ¬(¬{GC}x & {CN}x) -> ¬{JF}x sent10: {EE}{gq} -> ¬{AA}{gq} sent11: (Ex): ¬(¬{J}x & {IE}x) -> ¬{BD}x sent12: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent13: (Ex): ¬(¬{DS}x & ¬{FA}x) -> {DK}x sent14: {A}{aa} -> ¬{FJ}{aa} sent15: (Ex): ¬(¬{FR}x & ¬{BJ}x) -> {GI}x sent16: {DJ}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent17: (x): ¬(¬{HD}x & ¬{DQ}x) -> ¬{GO}x sent18: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent19: ¬(¬{GL}{aa} & ¬{BR}{aa}) -> ¬{J}{aa} sent20: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there exists something such that if that it does not remain criticality and it is not a kind of a bucktooth does not hold then it does not repeat strand. | (Ex): ¬(¬{HD}x & ¬{DQ}x) -> ¬{GO}x | [
"sent17 -> int1: if that the lame does not remain criticality and it is not a kind of a bucktooth does not hold then it does not repeat strand.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it does not bottle carpophore and is not an overlooked is not correct it is not Piagetian. ; $context$ = sent1: the motor is unneurotic if that that it is both not Piagetian and not peninsular hold is not correct. sent2: there is something such that if that it is both orthographic and not a Browning is not right it is not nonproprietary. sent3: the allotrope is not Piagetian if the fact that it bottles carpophore and is not an overlooked is false. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a filmmaker and it is not a falsity is incorrect it does not quote cheroot. sent5: if the fact that the saltpan is not a kind of an overlooked and is not a secant does not hold then it is not synonymous. sent6: that the etcetera is an overlooked is not wrong if that it is not an ally and does not quote allotrope is false. sent7: there exists something such that if that it bottles carpophore is correct then it is not Piagetian. sent8: the handspike is not a kind of a transience if it does bottle motor. sent9: there is something such that if that it is a kind of non-quadratics thing that does quote layer is not right then it is not a Leguminosae. sent10: if that the saltpan shades is not wrong it does not bottle carpophore. sent11: there is something such that if that it is not palatoglossal and repeats laconism is not right then it is not an advertorial. sent12: if the fact that the allotrope does not bottle carpophore and does not overlook is false it is not Piagetian. sent13: there exists something such that if that it does not repeat hunch and is not ecological is not correct it is a daylily. sent14: if the allotrope bottles laconism then it does not repeat escudo. sent15: there is something such that if that it is not a kind of a Browning and is not a Balinese is wrong it is a pasty. sent16: if the fact that the allotrope is a kind of a meaningfulness is not false then it does not bottle carpophore. sent17: if that something does not remain criticality and is not a kind of a bucktooth is false then that it does not repeat strand is not false. sent18: there exists something such that if it does not bottle carpophore and is not an overlooked then it is not Piagetian. sent19: if the fact that the allotrope does not repeat transformer and is not a grainfield does not hold then it is not palatoglossal. sent20: the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of an overlooked then that it is not Piagetian hold is not wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the terrarium is not a pitch. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: if something does not titrate it is not bedless. sent2: the fact that the terrarium is not non-phonics but a leader does not hold. sent3: that something does bottle Mugil and entrains is not correct if the fact that it is not bedless is not incorrect. sent4: if that the terrarium is a kind of a pitch is not false it is phonics. sent5: the fact that the terrarium is a pitch is not wrong if the bundle is a leader. sent6: the bundle is not phonics if something does not bottle Mugil. sent7: the brachyuran is not phonics. sent8: if the fact that something does bottle Mugil and it does entrain is not correct it does not bottle Mugil. sent9: something either is a kind of a leader or is not a pitch or both if it is not phonics. sent10: if that the terrarium is phonics and is a leader does not hold it is not phonics. sent11: the toucanet is a kind of opposite thing that does not titrate. | sent1: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}x sent2: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({D}x & {E}x) sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: {C}{b} -> {A}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬{B}{ap} sent8: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}x v ¬{A}x) sent10: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent11: ({H}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the terrarium is a pitch.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the terrarium is phonics.; sent10 & sent2 -> int2: the terrarium is not phonics.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent10 & sent2 -> int2: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the terrarium does pitch. | {A}{a} | [
"sent9 -> int4: if the bundle is not phonics then it is a leader or is not a pitch or both.; sent8 -> int5: the toucanet does not bottle Mugil if the fact that it bottle Mugil and it entrains is not true.; sent3 -> int6: if the toucanet is not bedless the fact that it bottles Mugil and does entrain does not hold.; sent1 -> int7: the toucanet is bedded if the fact that it does not titrate hold.; sent11 -> int8: the toucanet does not titrate.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the toucanet is bedded.; int6 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the toucanet bottles Mugil and it entrains is not right.; int5 & int10 -> int11: the toucanet does not bottle Mugil.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that it does not bottle Mugil.; int12 & sent6 -> int13: that the bundle is not phonics is not incorrect.; int4 & int13 -> int14: the bundle is a leader and/or it is not a pitch.;"
]
| 8 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the terrarium is not a pitch. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not titrate it is not bedless. sent2: the fact that the terrarium is not non-phonics but a leader does not hold. sent3: that something does bottle Mugil and entrains is not correct if the fact that it is not bedless is not incorrect. sent4: if that the terrarium is a kind of a pitch is not false it is phonics. sent5: the fact that the terrarium is a pitch is not wrong if the bundle is a leader. sent6: the bundle is not phonics if something does not bottle Mugil. sent7: the brachyuran is not phonics. sent8: if the fact that something does bottle Mugil and it does entrain is not correct it does not bottle Mugil. sent9: something either is a kind of a leader or is not a pitch or both if it is not phonics. sent10: if that the terrarium is phonics and is a leader does not hold it is not phonics. sent11: the toucanet is a kind of opposite thing that does not titrate. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the terrarium is a pitch.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the terrarium is phonics.; sent10 & sent2 -> int2: the terrarium is not phonics.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the lunch is not evitable. | ¬{C}{aa} | sent1: if the rester is calceolate the lunch is a voluntary. sent2: the witchgrass is evitable. sent3: if something is a topiary that it is evitable is not wrong. sent4: if something is voluntary then that it is not a topiary but evitable is not right. sent5: if something is not a voluntary it is evitable and it is a topiary. sent6: the lunch is a topiary. sent7: the fact that the soy is not a kind of a voluntary hold if it is an inkblot and it is not calceolate. sent8: if the millivoltmeter is an inkblot then the rester is calceolate. | sent1: {D}{a} -> {B}{aa} sent2: {C}{fu} sent3: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent4: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) sent5: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}x & {A}x) sent6: {A}{aa} sent7: ({E}{gp} & ¬{D}{gp}) -> ¬{B}{gp} sent8: {E}{b} -> {D}{a} | [
"sent3 -> int1: if the lunch is a topiary then it is evitable.; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent3 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the lunch is not evitable. | ¬{C}{aa} | [
"sent4 -> int2: that the lunch is not a topiary but it is evitable is not right if it is a voluntary.;"
]
| 6 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the lunch is not evitable. ; $context$ = sent1: if the rester is calceolate the lunch is a voluntary. sent2: the witchgrass is evitable. sent3: if something is a topiary that it is evitable is not wrong. sent4: if something is voluntary then that it is not a topiary but evitable is not right. sent5: if something is not a voluntary it is evitable and it is a topiary. sent6: the lunch is a topiary. sent7: the fact that the soy is not a kind of a voluntary hold if it is an inkblot and it is not calceolate. sent8: if the millivoltmeter is an inkblot then the rester is calceolate. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> int1: if the lunch is a topiary then it is evitable.; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the melancholy does repeat token. | {B}{c} | sent1: the melancholy is not glabellar. sent2: the stocker is not intolerant. sent3: if the yardgrass is not a eurypterid that the stocker is unwary and it is glabellar does not hold. sent4: the fact that the stocker is unwary and it is not non-glabellar does not hold. sent5: the fact that if the mailman is not a kind of the parasympathetic then the mailman is a coordinating that is a dot is not incorrect. sent6: if something is not a fragment the pueblo does not wade. sent7: if the fact that the mailman is a homeless and is a kind of a parasympathetic is false it is not a parasympathetic. sent8: the fact that the yardgrass is unwary but it is not a kind of a eurypterid is not right. sent9: the melancholy does repeat token if that the yardgrass does not repeat token and it is not a eurypterid does not hold. sent10: if the yardgrass is not a eurypterid that the stocker is unwary but it is not glabellar is not correct. sent11: if something is tolerant that that the yardgrass is tolerant and it does coordinate hold is incorrect. sent12: if the mailman coordinates then the fact that the robber is a kind of a mythologist but it does not fragment is false. sent13: that something does not repeat token and is not a eurypterid is not true if it wades. sent14: if the fact that the yardgrass is intolerant and it does coordinate is not true it is not a fragment. sent15: if the stocker is glabellar the melancholy does not repeat token. sent16: the yardgrass does wade if that the stocker wade and is not intolerant is wrong. sent17: the yardgrass is not a eurypterid. sent18: something is a kind of a fragment if the fact that it is a kind of a mythologist and it does not fragment is not correct. sent19: if something does repeat token then it is not a kind of a eurypterid and is not unwary. sent20: the melancholy does not repeat token if that the stocker is both unwary and not glabellar is not true. sent21: the fact that the fact that the yardgrass repeats token and is not a kind of a eurypterid is right is wrong. | sent1: ¬{AB}{c} sent2: ¬{E}{b} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent4: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent5: ¬{I}{e} -> ({F}{e} & {H}{e}) sent6: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}{gb} sent7: ¬({K}{e} & {I}{e}) -> ¬{I}{e} sent8: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent9: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {B}{c} sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent11: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({E}{a} & {F}{a}) sent12: {F}{e} -> ¬({G}{d} & ¬{D}{d}) sent13: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) sent14: ¬({E}{a} & {F}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent15: {AB}{b} -> ¬{B}{c} sent16: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent17: ¬{A}{a} sent18: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{D}x) -> {D}x sent19: (x): {B}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{AA}x) sent20: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent21: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) | [
"sent10 & sent17 -> int1: that the stocker is unwary but it is not glabellar is incorrect.; sent20 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent10 & sent17 -> int1: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent20 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| that the melancholy does repeat token is right. | {B}{c} | [
"sent13 -> int2: if the yardgrass wades then the fact that it does not repeat token and it is not a eurypterid is not true.; sent18 -> int3: the robber is a fragment if that it is a mythologist and it is not a kind of a fragment is wrong.;"
]
| 10 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the melancholy does repeat token. ; $context$ = sent1: the melancholy is not glabellar. sent2: the stocker is not intolerant. sent3: if the yardgrass is not a eurypterid that the stocker is unwary and it is glabellar does not hold. sent4: the fact that the stocker is unwary and it is not non-glabellar does not hold. sent5: the fact that if the mailman is not a kind of the parasympathetic then the mailman is a coordinating that is a dot is not incorrect. sent6: if something is not a fragment the pueblo does not wade. sent7: if the fact that the mailman is a homeless and is a kind of a parasympathetic is false it is not a parasympathetic. sent8: the fact that the yardgrass is unwary but it is not a kind of a eurypterid is not right. sent9: the melancholy does repeat token if that the yardgrass does not repeat token and it is not a eurypterid does not hold. sent10: if the yardgrass is not a eurypterid that the stocker is unwary but it is not glabellar is not correct. sent11: if something is tolerant that that the yardgrass is tolerant and it does coordinate hold is incorrect. sent12: if the mailman coordinates then the fact that the robber is a kind of a mythologist but it does not fragment is false. sent13: that something does not repeat token and is not a eurypterid is not true if it wades. sent14: if the fact that the yardgrass is intolerant and it does coordinate is not true it is not a fragment. sent15: if the stocker is glabellar the melancholy does not repeat token. sent16: the yardgrass does wade if that the stocker wade and is not intolerant is wrong. sent17: the yardgrass is not a eurypterid. sent18: something is a kind of a fragment if the fact that it is a kind of a mythologist and it does not fragment is not correct. sent19: if something does repeat token then it is not a kind of a eurypterid and is not unwary. sent20: the melancholy does not repeat token if that the stocker is both unwary and not glabellar is not true. sent21: the fact that the fact that the yardgrass repeats token and is not a kind of a eurypterid is right is wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent10 & sent17 -> int1: that the stocker is unwary but it is not glabellar is incorrect.; sent20 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the fullerene is sinistral and is non-outer does not hold. | ¬({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) | sent1: if there is something such that it does not sink then that that the technical repeats pigtail and it is a kind of a patisserie is right does not hold. sent2: if the technical is not nonarbitrary then the fact that the fullerene is sinistral but it is not outer is not right. sent3: if that something repeats pigtail and is a kind of a patisserie is false it is not nonarbitrary. sent4: if the fullerene repeats pigtail then that the technical is Nicaraguan thing that is not a kind of a sink is not correct. sent5: if something is not a kind of a sink then it is sinistral and it is not outer. sent6: something is not a sink. | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent2: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent3: (x): ¬({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: {B}{b} -> ¬({IF}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({E}x & ¬{F}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x | [
"sent6 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that the technical repeats pigtail and is a kind of a patisserie is false.; sent3 -> int2: the technical is not nonarbitrary if the fact that it does repeat pigtail and is a kind of a patisserie is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the technical is not nonarbitrary.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent6 & sent1 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}); sent3 -> int2: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{D}{a}; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fullerene is sinistral but it is not outer. | ({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) | [
"sent5 -> int4: if the fullerene does not sink then it is sinistral and it is not outer.;"
]
| 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the fullerene is sinistral and is non-outer does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that it does not sink then that that the technical repeats pigtail and it is a kind of a patisserie is right does not hold. sent2: if the technical is not nonarbitrary then the fact that the fullerene is sinistral but it is not outer is not right. sent3: if that something repeats pigtail and is a kind of a patisserie is false it is not nonarbitrary. sent4: if the fullerene repeats pigtail then that the technical is Nicaraguan thing that is not a kind of a sink is not correct. sent5: if something is not a kind of a sink then it is sinistral and it is not outer. sent6: something is not a sink. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that the technical repeats pigtail and is a kind of a patisserie is false.; sent3 -> int2: the technical is not nonarbitrary if the fact that it does repeat pigtail and is a kind of a patisserie is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the technical is not nonarbitrary.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the machicolation does not remain logomach and does not remain siamese is wrong. | ¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) | sent1: something does not remain logomach and does not remain siamese if it does remain Ugric. sent2: if the dander does not remain siamese then that the fact that the machicolation does not remain logomach and does not remain siamese does not hold is right. sent3: the machicolation does not marvel if the fallboard does not marvel or is not a doubler or both. sent4: the fallboard does not remain Ugric. sent5: if something is not a show it remains Ugric and it does bottle hypochondrium. sent6: something does not remain logomach but it does bottle hypochondrium if it does show. sent7: if the fact that the fact that either the fallboard quotes neptunium or it is a clarity or both is right is not correct the dander does not remain siamese. sent8: the fallboard does not quote neptunium. sent9: that the machicolation does remain logomach and does not remain siamese is not correct if the dander does not remain siamese. sent10: everything is a kind of a show. sent11: if the fact that the fallboard does not remain Ugric is right it does not quote neptunium. sent12: something that does not marvel is not a show. sent13: if the fallboard is a clarity and does not remain Ugric the deflation is not a clarity. sent14: The Ugric does not remain fallboard. sent15: the fact that the fallboard quotes neptunium or it is a clarity or both is false if it does not remain Ugric. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) sent2: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) sent3: (¬{F}{a} v ¬{G}{a}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent4: ¬{A}{a} sent5: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({A}x & {D}x) sent6: (x): {E}x -> (¬{C}x & {D}x) sent7: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent8: ¬{AA}{a} sent9: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) sent10: (x): {E}x sent11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} sent12: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{E}x sent13: ({AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{dd} sent14: ¬{AC}{aa} sent15: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) | [
"sent15 & sent4 -> int1: that the fallboard quotes neptunium or it is a clarity or both does not hold.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the dander does not remain siamese.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent15 & sent4 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); int1 & sent7 -> int2: ¬{B}{b}; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the machicolation does not remain logomach and does not remain siamese. | (¬{C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) | [
"sent1 -> int3: the machicolation does not remain logomach and does not remain siamese if it remains Ugric.; sent5 -> int4: the machicolation does remain Ugric and it does bottle hypochondrium if it does not show.; sent12 -> int5: that the machicolation is not a kind of a show is true if the fact that it does not marvel is not false.;"
]
| 6 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the machicolation does not remain logomach and does not remain siamese is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not remain logomach and does not remain siamese if it does remain Ugric. sent2: if the dander does not remain siamese then that the fact that the machicolation does not remain logomach and does not remain siamese does not hold is right. sent3: the machicolation does not marvel if the fallboard does not marvel or is not a doubler or both. sent4: the fallboard does not remain Ugric. sent5: if something is not a show it remains Ugric and it does bottle hypochondrium. sent6: something does not remain logomach but it does bottle hypochondrium if it does show. sent7: if the fact that the fact that either the fallboard quotes neptunium or it is a clarity or both is right is not correct the dander does not remain siamese. sent8: the fallboard does not quote neptunium. sent9: that the machicolation does remain logomach and does not remain siamese is not correct if the dander does not remain siamese. sent10: everything is a kind of a show. sent11: if the fact that the fallboard does not remain Ugric is right it does not quote neptunium. sent12: something that does not marvel is not a show. sent13: if the fallboard is a clarity and does not remain Ugric the deflation is not a clarity. sent14: The Ugric does not remain fallboard. sent15: the fact that the fallboard quotes neptunium or it is a clarity or both is false if it does not remain Ugric. ; $proof$ = | sent15 & sent4 -> int1: that the fallboard quotes neptunium or it is a clarity or both does not hold.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the dander does not remain siamese.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the urceole is not non-ovarian. | {E}{b} | sent1: the extension is not non-radiotelephonic and not gubernatorial. sent2: if the fact that the extension is not a backlog but it does remain urceole does not hold the urceole is not ovarian. sent3: if something is not gubernatorial then the fact that it is not a backlog and does remain urceole is not right. | sent1: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent2: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) | [
"sent1 -> int1: that the extension is not gubernatorial is not incorrect.; sent3 -> int2: if the extension is not gubernatorial then the fact that it is not a backlog and it does remain urceole is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the extension is not a backlog and remains urceole is not correct.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent3 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}); int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the urceole is not non-ovarian. ; $context$ = sent1: the extension is not non-radiotelephonic and not gubernatorial. sent2: if the fact that the extension is not a backlog but it does remain urceole does not hold the urceole is not ovarian. sent3: if something is not gubernatorial then the fact that it is not a backlog and does remain urceole is not right. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: that the extension is not gubernatorial is not incorrect.; sent3 -> int2: if the extension is not gubernatorial then the fact that it is not a backlog and it does remain urceole is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the extension is not a backlog and remains urceole is not correct.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Diegueno does not remain usher. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: there is something such that that it does bottle campfire and is operatic is not right. sent2: the Diegueno does behoove. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a airdock and it repeats station does not hold. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that it behooves and it inflects is false the Diegueno remains usher. sent5: something behooves and it inflects. sent6: the bronchodilator does not remain belay. sent7: there exists something such that that it is an aesthetic and it is pediatrics is incorrect. sent8: the hen does not remain cannulation and does occur. sent9: the Gnostic is not a bioelectricity if there exists something such that that it does remain cannulation or does exhale or both hold. sent10: that the ferrite remains usher and it does behoove does not hold. sent11: that the ferrite does behoove and it does inflect is false. sent12: the Diegueno does not remain usher if the fact that the xerox repeats nester and is starchy is false. sent13: if the xerox is a bioelectricity then the Diegueno is not a much and it does not repeat nester. sent14: the fact that the Diegueno is aciculate thing that behooves does not hold. sent15: that the xerox repeats nester and is starchy does not hold if the hen is not much. sent16: something remains cannulation and/or does exhale if it does not remain belay. sent17: if something is a kind of non-much thing that does not repeat nester then it is starchy. sent18: a masonic thing occurs. sent19: the Diegueno remains usher if something does not behoove. | sent1: (Ex): ¬({CQ}x & {DN}x) sent2: {AA}{a} sent3: (Ex): ¬({GO}x & {IB}x) sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent5: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: ¬{J}{e} sent7: (Ex): ¬({L}x & {K}x) sent8: (¬{G}{c} & {F}{c}) sent9: (x): ({G}x v {H}x) -> ¬{E}{d} sent10: ¬({A}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) sent11: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent12: ¬({C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent13: {E}{b} -> (¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent14: ¬({IL}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent15: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬({C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent16: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({G}x v {H}x) sent17: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}x sent18: (x): {I}x -> {F}x sent19: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {A}{a} | [
"sent11 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it behooves and does inflect is wrong.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent11 -> int1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x); int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the Diegueno does not remain usher. | ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent16 -> int2: the bronchodilator does remain cannulation and/or does exhale if the fact that it does not remain belay hold.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the bronchodilator remains cannulation and/or does exhale.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that it either remains cannulation or does exhale or both.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the Gnostic is not a bioelectricity.; sent18 -> int6: if the Gnostic is masonic then the fact that it occurs is not incorrect.;"
]
| 9 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Diegueno does not remain usher. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it does bottle campfire and is operatic is not right. sent2: the Diegueno does behoove. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a airdock and it repeats station does not hold. sent4: if there is something such that the fact that it behooves and it inflects is false the Diegueno remains usher. sent5: something behooves and it inflects. sent6: the bronchodilator does not remain belay. sent7: there exists something such that that it is an aesthetic and it is pediatrics is incorrect. sent8: the hen does not remain cannulation and does occur. sent9: the Gnostic is not a bioelectricity if there exists something such that that it does remain cannulation or does exhale or both hold. sent10: that the ferrite remains usher and it does behoove does not hold. sent11: that the ferrite does behoove and it does inflect is false. sent12: the Diegueno does not remain usher if the fact that the xerox repeats nester and is starchy is false. sent13: if the xerox is a bioelectricity then the Diegueno is not a much and it does not repeat nester. sent14: the fact that the Diegueno is aciculate thing that behooves does not hold. sent15: that the xerox repeats nester and is starchy does not hold if the hen is not much. sent16: something remains cannulation and/or does exhale if it does not remain belay. sent17: if something is a kind of non-much thing that does not repeat nester then it is starchy. sent18: a masonic thing occurs. sent19: the Diegueno remains usher if something does not behoove. ; $proof$ = | sent11 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it behooves and does inflect is wrong.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if the fact that it is not an aviary but biflagellate is not true that it is a down-bow is not wrong. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a repose and it is a Crotalus it does boldface. sent2: if the fact that something is not an aviary and is biflagellate is incorrect then it is a kind of a down-bow. sent3: if the fact that something is not a beggar-my-neighbor but a Gasterosteus does not hold then it is a maxim. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not bottle campfire is not false it reorganizes. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not depreciate it is high-resolution. sent6: something is an auditorium if that it is a Mexican and it is a kind of a fence does not hold. sent7: if something does not bottle campfire it is resistless. sent8: there exists something such that if that it does repeat Best and it is a Laricariidae is not right then it is not seductive. sent9: if something is not chauvinistic it does repose. | sent1: (Ex): (¬{GP}x & {IS}x) -> {IG}x sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{BF}x & {FG}x) -> {BL}x sent4: (Ex): ¬{AC}x -> {BU}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{DK}x -> {C}x sent6: (x): ¬({IB}x & {D}x) -> {BK}x sent7: (x): ¬{AC}x -> {K}x sent8: (Ex): ¬({AE}x & {P}x) -> {HG}x sent9: (x): ¬{ED}x -> {GP}x | [
"sent2 -> int1: the plumber is a down-bow if the fact that it is both not an aviary and biflagellate is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of a beggar-my-neighbor and is a Gasterosteus is not right then it is a maxim. | (Ex): ¬(¬{BF}x & {FG}x) -> {BL}x | [
"sent3 -> int2: if that the Scythian is not a beggar-my-neighbor and is a kind of a Gasterosteus does not hold then it is a maxim.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if the fact that it is not an aviary but biflagellate is not true that it is a down-bow is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a repose and it is a Crotalus it does boldface. sent2: if the fact that something is not an aviary and is biflagellate is incorrect then it is a kind of a down-bow. sent3: if the fact that something is not a beggar-my-neighbor but a Gasterosteus does not hold then it is a maxim. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not bottle campfire is not false it reorganizes. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not depreciate it is high-resolution. sent6: something is an auditorium if that it is a Mexican and it is a kind of a fence does not hold. sent7: if something does not bottle campfire it is resistless. sent8: there exists something such that if that it does repeat Best and it is a Laricariidae is not right then it is not seductive. sent9: if something is not chauvinistic it does repose. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the plumber is a down-bow if the fact that it is both not an aviary and biflagellate is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is not a leap and it is a meltdown. | (Ex): (¬{C}x & {D}x) | sent1: something is postprandial if the fact that it is both not anemophilous and a meltdown is not true. sent2: the velveteen repeats expressway and frees. sent3: the silique is a kind of a meltdown if the tattoo is not a leap. sent4: the pye-dog repeats expressway and it is a kind of a drawler. sent5: something is a meltdown. sent6: the silique is a kind of a meltdown. sent7: if the tempest does not repeat Barstow then the fact that it is not re-entrant and is a kind of a babel is not correct. sent8: the tattoo does not leap if something that repeats expressway is a free. sent9: there exists something such that it repeats expressway. sent10: something does not leap. sent11: the tempest is non-genealogic if the fact that it is a kind of non-re-entrant thing that is a kind of a babel is incorrect. sent12: there is something such that it is a kind of a leap that is a meltdown. sent13: the tempest is a sass if there is something such that the fact that it is not a sass and it does repeat expressway does not hold. sent14: that something is not a sass and does repeat expressway is not correct if the fact that it is a free is not wrong. sent15: there are free things. sent16: if something is not genealogic that it is not anemophilous and it is a kind of a meltdown does not hold. sent17: the tempest does not repeat Barstow. sent18: the velveteen repeats expressway. | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> {ER}x sent2: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent3: ¬{C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent4: ({A}{ca} & {GT}{ca}) sent5: (Ex): {D}x sent6: {D}{b} sent7: ¬{I}{jf} -> ¬(¬{H}{jf} & {G}{jf}) sent8: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{a} sent9: (Ex): {A}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent11: ¬(¬{H}{jf} & {G}{jf}) -> ¬{F}{jf} sent12: (Ex): ({C}x & {D}x) sent13: (x): ¬(¬{HB}x & {A}x) -> {HB}{jf} sent14: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{HB}x & {A}x) sent15: (Ex): {B}x sent16: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) sent17: ¬{I}{jf} sent18: {A}{aa} | [
"sent2 -> int1: there is something such that it does repeat expressway and frees.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the tattoo is not a leap.;"
]
| [
"sent2 -> int1: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x); int1 & sent8 -> int2: ¬{C}{a};"
]
| the tempest is postprandial and it is a kind of a sass. | ({ER}{jf} & {HB}{jf}) | [
"sent1 -> int3: that the tempest is not non-postprandial hold if the fact that it is non-anemophilous thing that is a kind of a meltdown is not true.; sent16 -> int4: if the tempest is not genealogic that it is not anemophilous and it is a meltdown is not right.; sent7 & sent17 -> int5: that the tempest is non-re-entrant thing that is a babel does not hold.; sent11 & int5 -> int6: the tempest is not genealogic.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the tempest is not anemophilous but it is a meltdown does not hold.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the tempest is postprandial.; sent14 -> int9: that the tattoo is not a kind of a sass but it repeats expressway is not true if it is free.;"
]
| 5 | 4 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is not a leap and it is a meltdown. ; $context$ = sent1: something is postprandial if the fact that it is both not anemophilous and a meltdown is not true. sent2: the velveteen repeats expressway and frees. sent3: the silique is a kind of a meltdown if the tattoo is not a leap. sent4: the pye-dog repeats expressway and it is a kind of a drawler. sent5: something is a meltdown. sent6: the silique is a kind of a meltdown. sent7: if the tempest does not repeat Barstow then the fact that it is not re-entrant and is a kind of a babel is not correct. sent8: the tattoo does not leap if something that repeats expressway is a free. sent9: there exists something such that it repeats expressway. sent10: something does not leap. sent11: the tempest is non-genealogic if the fact that it is a kind of non-re-entrant thing that is a kind of a babel is incorrect. sent12: there is something such that it is a kind of a leap that is a meltdown. sent13: the tempest is a sass if there is something such that the fact that it is not a sass and it does repeat expressway does not hold. sent14: that something is not a sass and does repeat expressway is not correct if the fact that it is a free is not wrong. sent15: there are free things. sent16: if something is not genealogic that it is not anemophilous and it is a kind of a meltdown does not hold. sent17: the tempest does not repeat Barstow. sent18: the velveteen repeats expressway. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: there is something such that it does repeat expressway and frees.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the tattoo is not a leap.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the schnook is a kind of a Sumerian. | {E}{a} | sent1: if something bums then the schnook is pronounceable. sent2: if something quotes flurry then it is a kind of a Sumerian. sent3: the fact that something does not quote flurry and does not remain hierocracy is incorrect if it is pronounceable. sent4: there is something such that it does bum. sent5: if the schnook quotes flurry then it is a Sumerian. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent2: (x): {D}x -> {E}x sent3: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: {D}{a} -> {E}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent1 -> int1: the schnook is pronounceable.; sent3 -> int2: the fact that the schnook does not quote flurry and it does not remain hierocracy is wrong if it is pronounceable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the schnook does not quote flurry and it does not remain hierocracy is wrong.;"
]
| [
"sent4 & sent1 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent3 -> int2: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a});"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the schnook is a kind of a Sumerian. ; $context$ = sent1: if something bums then the schnook is pronounceable. sent2: if something quotes flurry then it is a kind of a Sumerian. sent3: the fact that something does not quote flurry and does not remain hierocracy is incorrect if it is pronounceable. sent4: there is something such that it does bum. sent5: if the schnook quotes flurry then it is a Sumerian. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent1 -> int1: the schnook is pronounceable.; sent3 -> int2: the fact that the schnook does not quote flurry and it does not remain hierocracy is wrong if it is pronounceable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the schnook does not quote flurry and it does not remain hierocracy is wrong.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that that the exegete bottles Pediculus is not incorrect is not true. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: the platelet is not post-communist. sent2: that the fact that the exegete is not a snatch and is non-post-communist does not hold is true. sent3: the fact that the exegete is a defibrillator is not wrong. sent4: the fact that the railhead is not ununderstood and it is not a President is not correct if it does not bottle Pediculus. sent5: something is non-post-communist if it bottles Pediculus and it is a kind of a defibrillator. | sent1: ¬{C}{q} sent2: ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent3: {B}{a} sent4: ¬{A}{fr} -> ¬(¬{HC}{fr} & ¬{FE}{fr}) sent5: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the exegete does bottle Pediculus.; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: the exegete bottles Pediculus and is a defibrillator.; sent5 -> int2: if the exegete bottles Pediculus and it is a defibrillator it is not post-communist.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the exegete is not post-communist.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent5 -> int2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{a};"
]
| that the railhead is not ununderstood and it is not a kind of a President is not true. | ¬(¬{HC}{fr} & ¬{FE}{fr}) | []
| 5 | 4 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that that the exegete bottles Pediculus is not incorrect is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the platelet is not post-communist. sent2: that the fact that the exegete is not a snatch and is non-post-communist does not hold is true. sent3: the fact that the exegete is a defibrillator is not wrong. sent4: the fact that the railhead is not ununderstood and it is not a President is not correct if it does not bottle Pediculus. sent5: something is non-post-communist if it bottles Pediculus and it is a kind of a defibrillator. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the exegete does bottle Pediculus.; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: the exegete bottles Pediculus and is a defibrillator.; sent5 -> int2: if the exegete bottles Pediculus and it is a defibrillator it is not post-communist.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the exegete is not post-communist.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the footage is a Boann is not incorrect. | {C}{a} | sent1: something is not a Boann if it is not a kind of a Uzi. sent2: the pathway is not a Hebrew. sent3: if that either something is not a Reconstruction or it is a kind of a ammonification or both does not hold it is not menopausal. sent4: the fact that something is not susceptible but it is a Boann does not hold if it is a kind of a Uzi. sent5: the footage does repeat volumeter if that the multiplex is not a kind of a Uzi and it does not repeat volumeter does not hold. sent6: if the fact that the footage is heavenly is right then the cantle is a Boann. sent7: The volumeter does repeat cantle. sent8: something repeats volumeter and is not a Hittite if that it is not a Hebrew is not wrong. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a Hebrew and it is not a Hittite does not hold if that it is not menopausal is not incorrect. sent10: the cantle is not synaptic. sent11: if something that is synaptic is heavenly then it is susceptible. sent12: if the cantle does repeat volumeter it is not synaptic. sent13: the multiplex is a Uzi and it repeats volumeter if it is non-Hittite. sent14: the purse is not a Boann if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Hebrew and it is not a Hittite does not hold. sent15: if the pathway repeats volumeter and is not a kind of a Hittite the purse does not repeats volumeter. sent16: if the fact that the footage is a kind of a Uzi is not wrong it is a Boann. sent17: if the cantle repeats volumeter it is not synaptic and it is heavenly. sent18: if something does teleport that it is not a Reconstruction or a ammonification or both is incorrect. sent19: if a non-synaptic thing is heavenly then it is susceptible. sent20: if the cantle is susceptible the fact that the footage is a Uzi is correct. sent21: the cantle is susceptible if it is synaptic and it is heavenly. sent22: the multiplex is not susceptible if there is something such that it is not a Boann. sent23: if the pathway is a kaolinite then it teleports and is not a skirt. sent24: that something is not a kind of a Uzi and does not repeat volumeter is not true if it is not susceptible. | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}x sent2: ¬{F}{d} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{I}x v {H}x) -> ¬{G}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) sent5: ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> {D}{a} sent6: {AB}{a} -> {C}{aa} sent7: {AC}{ab} sent8: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & ¬{E}x) sent9: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) sent10: ¬{AA}{aa} sent11: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent12: {D}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent13: ¬{E}{b} -> ({A}{b} & {D}{b}) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}{c} sent15: ({D}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent16: {A}{a} -> {C}{a} sent17: {D}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent18: (x): {J}x -> ¬(¬{I}x v {H}x) sent19: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent20: {B}{aa} -> {A}{a} sent21: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent22: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{B}{b} sent23: {L}{d} -> ({J}{d} & ¬{K}{d}) sent24: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{D}x) | [
"sent19 -> int1: the cantle is susceptible if that it is not synaptic and it is heavenly hold.;"
]
| [
"sent19 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa};"
]
| the footage is not a kind of a Boann. | ¬{C}{a} | [
"sent1 -> int2: the footage is not a kind of a Boann if it is not a kind of a Uzi.; sent8 -> int3: the pathway repeats volumeter and is not Hittite if it is not a kind of a Hebrew.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the pathway repeats volumeter but it is not a Hittite.; sent15 & int4 -> int5: the purse does not repeat volumeter.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that it does not repeat volumeter.;"
]
| 8 | 4 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the footage is a Boann is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a Boann if it is not a kind of a Uzi. sent2: the pathway is not a Hebrew. sent3: if that either something is not a Reconstruction or it is a kind of a ammonification or both does not hold it is not menopausal. sent4: the fact that something is not susceptible but it is a Boann does not hold if it is a kind of a Uzi. sent5: the footage does repeat volumeter if that the multiplex is not a kind of a Uzi and it does not repeat volumeter does not hold. sent6: if the fact that the footage is heavenly is right then the cantle is a Boann. sent7: The volumeter does repeat cantle. sent8: something repeats volumeter and is not a Hittite if that it is not a Hebrew is not wrong. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a Hebrew and it is not a Hittite does not hold if that it is not menopausal is not incorrect. sent10: the cantle is not synaptic. sent11: if something that is synaptic is heavenly then it is susceptible. sent12: if the cantle does repeat volumeter it is not synaptic. sent13: the multiplex is a Uzi and it repeats volumeter if it is non-Hittite. sent14: the purse is not a Boann if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Hebrew and it is not a Hittite does not hold. sent15: if the pathway repeats volumeter and is not a kind of a Hittite the purse does not repeats volumeter. sent16: if the fact that the footage is a kind of a Uzi is not wrong it is a Boann. sent17: if the cantle repeats volumeter it is not synaptic and it is heavenly. sent18: if something does teleport that it is not a Reconstruction or a ammonification or both is incorrect. sent19: if a non-synaptic thing is heavenly then it is susceptible. sent20: if the cantle is susceptible the fact that the footage is a Uzi is correct. sent21: the cantle is susceptible if it is synaptic and it is heavenly. sent22: the multiplex is not susceptible if there is something such that it is not a Boann. sent23: if the pathway is a kaolinite then it teleports and is not a skirt. sent24: that something is not a kind of a Uzi and does not repeat volumeter is not true if it is not susceptible. ; $proof$ = | sent19 -> int1: the cantle is susceptible if that it is not synaptic and it is heavenly hold.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the biflagellateness occurs. | {D} | sent1: the biflagellateness happens if the remaining bishopry occurs. sent2: both the bivalentness and the valedictoriness happens. sent3: if the valedictoriness does not occur then the non-biflagellateness and the bivalentness happens. | sent1: {C} -> {D} sent2: ({A} & {B}) sent3: ¬{B} -> (¬{D} & {A}) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the valedictoriness occurs.;"
]
| [
"sent2 -> int1: {B};"
]
| the biflagellateness does not occur. | ¬{D} | []
| 6 | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the biflagellateness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the biflagellateness happens if the remaining bishopry occurs. sent2: both the bivalentness and the valedictoriness happens. sent3: if the valedictoriness does not occur then the non-biflagellateness and the bivalentness happens. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the valedictoriness occurs.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the spallation does not repeat spallation and is not a floating-moss is not correct. | ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | sent1: that that the spallation does repeat spallation and is not a floating-moss hold is not correct. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it does repeat spallation and it does not educe is not right then the spallation does not repeat spallation. sent3: there is something such that it is a consenting and it educes. sent4: that something is a kind of a retake and/or is a kind of a consenting does not hold if it is not a Mohave. sent5: that the oilrig is not syncategorematic and it does not remain soul does not hold. sent6: the fact that the spallation repeats spallation but it is not a floating-moss is incorrect if the oilrig is a kind of a floating-moss. sent7: if the oilrig is a floating-moss that the spallation does not repeat spallation and is not a floating-moss is incorrect. sent8: the fact that the spallation varnishes but it is not volatile does not hold. sent9: the technophile is not a pennyweight. sent10: the fact that the oilrig does repeat spallation but it does not educe is wrong if the technophile is not a pennyweight. | sent1: ¬({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{D}{b} sent3: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent4: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({E}x v {A}x) sent5: ¬(¬{GC}{a} & ¬{AD}{a}) sent6: {C}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent7: {C}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent8: ¬({JG}{b} & ¬{FB}{b}) sent9: ¬{F}{d} sent10: ¬{F}{d} -> ¬({D}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | []
| []
| the spallation does not repeat spallation and it is not a floating-moss. | (¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | [
"sent10 & sent9 -> int1: that the oilrig repeats spallation and does not educe is wrong.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it repeats spallation and it does not educe is wrong.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the spallation does not repeat spallation.; sent4 -> int4: the fact that either the stinger does retake or it is a consenting or both is not right if it is not a kind of a Mohave.;"
]
| 5 | 2 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the spallation does not repeat spallation and is not a floating-moss is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: that that the spallation does repeat spallation and is not a floating-moss hold is not correct. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it does repeat spallation and it does not educe is not right then the spallation does not repeat spallation. sent3: there is something such that it is a consenting and it educes. sent4: that something is a kind of a retake and/or is a kind of a consenting does not hold if it is not a Mohave. sent5: that the oilrig is not syncategorematic and it does not remain soul does not hold. sent6: the fact that the spallation repeats spallation but it is not a floating-moss is incorrect if the oilrig is a kind of a floating-moss. sent7: if the oilrig is a floating-moss that the spallation does not repeat spallation and is not a floating-moss is incorrect. sent8: the fact that the spallation varnishes but it is not volatile does not hold. sent9: the technophile is not a pennyweight. sent10: the fact that the oilrig does repeat spallation but it does not educe is wrong if the technophile is not a pennyweight. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the unprofitableness happens and/or the allogamy happens. | ({B} v {C}) | sent1: the bottling soul does not occur. | sent1: ¬{A} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the unprofitableness does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: either the bottling soul happens or the unprofitableness does not occur or both.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: ¬{B}; assump1 -> int1: ({A} v ¬{B});"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the unprofitableness happens and/or the allogamy happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the bottling soul does not occur. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the unprofitableness does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: either the bottling soul happens or the unprofitableness does not occur or both.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the finnan is a Wykehamist. | {B}{aa} | sent1: the stepparent is not cerebrospinal if there exists something such that it is not an interviewee and/or it is not cerebrospinal. sent2: if something is long then it is unholy and it is not a perishable. sent3: the fallboard is not a sloping. sent4: if that something is holy and it is a graduate does not hold it is not holy. sent5: if the finnan does graduate then it is a sloping and it is not metrological. sent6: that the fact that the calorimeter is not unholy and it is a graduate is false is true if there is something such that it is not unholy. sent7: something is a Wykehamist if it is a sloping and it is not metrological. sent8: the finnan is a graduate. sent9: if that the wedgie is a Wykehamist is not incorrect then the calorimeter is a Wykehamist. sent10: if the finnan is a graduate then it is not metrological. sent11: the cabochon is not an interviewee and/or it is not cerebrospinal. sent12: if something repeats credibility then it does not remain fizz and it is a Thoth. sent13: if something is not cerebrospinal it is a harpulla and it is not a rejuvenation. sent14: the Manila does repeat credibility if a harpulla is not a kind of a rejuvenation. sent15: the fact that the wedgie is a kind of a Wykehamist is true if the Manila is not a pragmatic or it is a kind of a Wykehamist or both. sent16: the finnan repeats project but it is not seminal. sent17: something is not pragmatic and/or is a Wykehamist if it does not remain fizz. sent18: the plaster is a kind of long thing that is mesenteric. sent19: something is not a Wykehamist if that it is a perishable and it is a graduate does not hold. sent20: if something is a sloping and it is metrological then it is a Wykehamist. | sent1: (x): (¬{M}x v ¬{L}x) -> ¬{L}{d} sent2: (x): {F}x -> (¬{GI}x & ¬{C}x) sent3: ¬{AA}{cp} sent4: (x): ¬({GI}x & {A}x) -> ¬{GI}x sent5: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬{GI}x -> ¬({GI}{jb} & {A}{jb}) sent7: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent8: {A}{aa} sent9: {B}{a} -> {B}{jb} sent10: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent11: (¬{M}{e} v ¬{L}{e}) sent12: (x): {I}x -> (¬{D}x & {G}x) sent13: (x): ¬{L}x -> ({K}x & ¬{J}x) sent14: (x): ({K}x & ¬{J}x) -> {I}{c} sent15: (¬{E}{c} v {B}{c}) -> {B}{a} sent16: ({ER}{aa} & ¬{ID}{aa}) sent17: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{E}x v {B}x) sent18: ({F}{b} & {H}{b}) sent19: (x): ¬({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent20: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | [
"sent7 -> int1: if the finnan does slope but it is not metrological then it is a Wykehamist.; sent5 & sent8 -> int2: the finnan is a sloping that is not metrological.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent7 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; sent5 & sent8 -> int2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the calorimeter is a Wykehamist but not holy. | ({B}{jb} & ¬{GI}{jb}) | [
"sent17 -> int3: if the Manila does not remain fizz then it is not a pragmatic and/or it is a Wykehamist.; sent12 -> int4: the Manila does not remain fizz and is a Thoth if it does repeat credibility.; sent13 -> int5: if the stepparent is not cerebrospinal then it is a harpulla and it is not a rejuvenation.; sent11 -> int6: something is not an interviewee and/or it is not cerebrospinal.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the stepparent is not cerebrospinal.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the stepparent is a kind of a harpulla but it is not a rejuvenation.; int8 -> int9: something is a harpulla and is not a rejuvenation.; int9 & sent14 -> int10: the Manila repeats credibility.; int4 & int10 -> int11: the Manila does not remain fizz but it is a Thoth.; int11 -> int12: the Manila does not remain fizz.; int3 & int12 -> int13: the Manila is not pragmatic and/or it is a Wykehamist.; sent15 & int13 -> int14: the wedgie is a Wykehamist.; sent9 & int14 -> int15: the calorimeter is a Wykehamist.; sent4 -> int16: if the fact that the calorimeter is both holy and a graduate does not hold that it is not holy is right.; sent2 -> int17: the plaster is not holy and it is not a perishable if it is long.; sent18 -> int18: the plaster is long.; int17 & int18 -> int19: the plaster is both not holy and not perishable.; int19 -> int20: the plaster is unholy.; int20 -> int21: there is something such that it is not holy.; int21 & sent6 -> int22: that that the calorimeter is holy and a graduate hold is incorrect.; int16 & int22 -> int23: the calorimeter is not holy.; int15 & int23 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 11 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the finnan is a Wykehamist. ; $context$ = sent1: the stepparent is not cerebrospinal if there exists something such that it is not an interviewee and/or it is not cerebrospinal. sent2: if something is long then it is unholy and it is not a perishable. sent3: the fallboard is not a sloping. sent4: if that something is holy and it is a graduate does not hold it is not holy. sent5: if the finnan does graduate then it is a sloping and it is not metrological. sent6: that the fact that the calorimeter is not unholy and it is a graduate is false is true if there is something such that it is not unholy. sent7: something is a Wykehamist if it is a sloping and it is not metrological. sent8: the finnan is a graduate. sent9: if that the wedgie is a Wykehamist is not incorrect then the calorimeter is a Wykehamist. sent10: if the finnan is a graduate then it is not metrological. sent11: the cabochon is not an interviewee and/or it is not cerebrospinal. sent12: if something repeats credibility then it does not remain fizz and it is a Thoth. sent13: if something is not cerebrospinal it is a harpulla and it is not a rejuvenation. sent14: the Manila does repeat credibility if a harpulla is not a kind of a rejuvenation. sent15: the fact that the wedgie is a kind of a Wykehamist is true if the Manila is not a pragmatic or it is a kind of a Wykehamist or both. sent16: the finnan repeats project but it is not seminal. sent17: something is not pragmatic and/or is a Wykehamist if it does not remain fizz. sent18: the plaster is a kind of long thing that is mesenteric. sent19: something is not a Wykehamist if that it is a perishable and it is a graduate does not hold. sent20: if something is a sloping and it is metrological then it is a Wykehamist. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> int1: if the finnan does slope but it is not metrological then it is a Wykehamist.; sent5 & sent8 -> int2: the finnan is a sloping that is not metrological.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Fowler does not bottle redtail. | ¬{D}{a} | sent1: that something does not bottle Amphioxidae or it is not a bennet or both is incorrect if the fact that it is proprioceptive is not false. sent2: the erythropoietin is not a acanthopterygian and it is not a kind of a gargoylism. sent3: the mallee is proprioceptive. sent4: something that does not repeat mallee is a kind of an executive that is not non-uvular. sent5: the sharksucker does not bottle Amphioxidae if that the erythropoietin does not bottle Amphioxidae and/or is not a bennet does not hold. sent6: the fact that something is a gargoylism and it is a kind of a acanthopterygian is not right if it does not bottle Amphioxidae. sent7: there exists something such that it repeats mallee and/or is a positioner. sent8: if that something does bottle redtail and is not a positioner is incorrect it does repeat mallee. sent9: if something does bottle redtail and/or it does repeat mallee the Fowler repeat mallee. sent10: if either something is not a kind of an executive or it does repeat mallee or both it does remain Constitution. sent11: if something is a acanthopterygian and/or it is a kind of a positioner then the Fowler is a kind of a positioner. sent12: if the fact that something is a gargoylism and it is a acanthopterygian is false then it is not a acanthopterygian. sent13: something does not bottle redtail if it is a kind of a positioner and it is executive. sent14: the Fowler repeats mallee. sent15: there exists something such that it is a acanthopterygian and/or it is a positioner. sent16: the Fowler bottles redtail if that the sharksucker repeats mallee but it is not a kind of an executive does not hold. sent17: the Bell is an executive. sent18: if there exists something such that it is a positioner the Fowler is a positioner. sent19: if something is a kind of a acanthopterygian then the fact that it does bottle redtail and it is not a positioner is not correct. sent20: either something is a kind of a Achaean or it is a kind of a surrogate or both. sent21: if something is a aplite and reticulate then it is not semiotic. sent22: the Fowler is an executive and it does repeat mallee. sent23: if the mallee is proprioceptive then the erythropoietin is proprioceptive. | sent1: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x v ¬{I}x) sent2: (¬{E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent3: {H}{d} sent4: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {HL}x) sent5: ¬(¬{G}{c} v ¬{I}{c}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent6: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}x & {E}x) sent7: (Ex): ({B}x v {C}x) sent8: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}x sent9: (x): ({D}x v {B}x) -> {B}{a} sent10: (x): (¬{A}x v {B}x) -> {CP}x sent11: (x): ({E}x v {C}x) -> {C}{a} sent12: (x): ¬({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x sent13: (x): ({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{D}x sent14: {B}{a} sent15: (Ex): ({E}x v {C}x) sent16: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {D}{a} sent17: {A}{co} sent18: (x): {C}x -> {C}{a} sent19: (x): {E}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) sent20: (Ex): ({FS}x v {FL}x) sent21: (x): ({HM}x & {FR}x) -> ¬{FG}x sent22: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent23: {H}{d} -> {H}{c} | [
"sent22 -> int1: the Fowler is an executive.; sent15 & sent11 -> int2: the Fowler is a positioner.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Fowler is a positioner and it is an executive.; sent13 -> int4: if the Fowler is a positioner and it is an executive then it does not bottle redtail.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent22 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent15 & sent11 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({C}{a} & {A}{a}); sent13 -> int4: ({C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the Fowler remains Constitution. | {CP}{a} | [
"sent10 -> int5: the Fowler does remain Constitution if it is non-executive and/or it does repeat mallee.; sent8 -> int6: the Fowler repeats mallee if that it bottles redtail and it is not a kind of a positioner is false.; sent19 -> int7: the fact that the Fowler does bottle redtail but it is not a positioner does not hold if it is a acanthopterygian.; sent12 -> int8: the sharksucker is not a acanthopterygian if that it is a gargoylism and is a kind of a acanthopterygian is not true.; sent6 -> int9: the fact that the sharksucker is a kind of a gargoylism that is a acanthopterygian does not hold if it does not bottle Amphioxidae.; sent1 -> int10: if the erythropoietin is proprioceptive then the fact that it does not bottle Amphioxidae or is not a bennet or both is not correct.; sent23 & sent3 -> int11: the erythropoietin is proprioceptive.; int10 & int11 -> int12: the fact that the erythropoietin does not bottle Amphioxidae and/or it is not a kind of a bennet is false.; sent5 & int12 -> int13: the sharksucker does not bottle Amphioxidae.; int9 & int13 -> int14: that the sharksucker is a gargoylism and it is a kind of a acanthopterygian does not hold.; int8 & int14 -> int15: the sharksucker is not a acanthopterygian.;"
]
| 10 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Fowler does not bottle redtail. ; $context$ = sent1: that something does not bottle Amphioxidae or it is not a bennet or both is incorrect if the fact that it is proprioceptive is not false. sent2: the erythropoietin is not a acanthopterygian and it is not a kind of a gargoylism. sent3: the mallee is proprioceptive. sent4: something that does not repeat mallee is a kind of an executive that is not non-uvular. sent5: the sharksucker does not bottle Amphioxidae if that the erythropoietin does not bottle Amphioxidae and/or is not a bennet does not hold. sent6: the fact that something is a gargoylism and it is a kind of a acanthopterygian is not right if it does not bottle Amphioxidae. sent7: there exists something such that it repeats mallee and/or is a positioner. sent8: if that something does bottle redtail and is not a positioner is incorrect it does repeat mallee. sent9: if something does bottle redtail and/or it does repeat mallee the Fowler repeat mallee. sent10: if either something is not a kind of an executive or it does repeat mallee or both it does remain Constitution. sent11: if something is a acanthopterygian and/or it is a kind of a positioner then the Fowler is a kind of a positioner. sent12: if the fact that something is a gargoylism and it is a acanthopterygian is false then it is not a acanthopterygian. sent13: something does not bottle redtail if it is a kind of a positioner and it is executive. sent14: the Fowler repeats mallee. sent15: there exists something such that it is a acanthopterygian and/or it is a positioner. sent16: the Fowler bottles redtail if that the sharksucker repeats mallee but it is not a kind of an executive does not hold. sent17: the Bell is an executive. sent18: if there exists something such that it is a positioner the Fowler is a positioner. sent19: if something is a kind of a acanthopterygian then the fact that it does bottle redtail and it is not a positioner is not correct. sent20: either something is a kind of a Achaean or it is a kind of a surrogate or both. sent21: if something is a aplite and reticulate then it is not semiotic. sent22: the Fowler is an executive and it does repeat mallee. sent23: if the mallee is proprioceptive then the erythropoietin is proprioceptive. ; $proof$ = | sent22 -> int1: the Fowler is an executive.; sent15 & sent11 -> int2: the Fowler is a positioner.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Fowler is a positioner and it is an executive.; sent13 -> int4: if the Fowler is a positioner and it is an executive then it does not bottle redtail.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there is something such that if it is not a subscript and it is sociocultural it is non-diametral is incorrect. | ¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: if the Japanese is not a subscript and is sociocultural then it is not diametral. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an idle and it is a kind of a latchkey it does not repeat practice. sent3: there is something such that if it does not expectorate and bottles swordfish it does not quote Ugric. sent4: if something that is not a Jesuit is dysphemistic then it does not coalesce. sent5: if the motor is not a ammonification but it is diametral then that it does not bottle Stentor hold. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a safe-conduct and idles then it is not a Ischia. sent7: there is something such that if it does not repeat laurelwood and does remain import it is not eruptive. sent8: the Japanese is not feudatory if it is not hateful and it repeats motor. sent9: if the Japanese does not remain burthen but it is high-interest then the fact that it is not a sweetleaf is right. sent10: the Japanese is not a subscript if it is not a kind of an entrant and it is anastomotic. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a toad-in-the-hole and is a strappado it is not an intermediate. sent12: if the trash is both not a mercifulness and a toad-in-the-hole then it is not diametral. sent13: there exists something such that if that it does not repeat surrealism and it hems is right it does not remain Hemingway. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not subscript and is sociocultural then it is diametral. sent15: the agama is not a subscript if it is not a Lonchocarpus and it repeats Molotov. sent16: if the Japanese is subscript and sociocultural it is not diametral. sent17: there is something such that if it is not a staggerbush and it is a sweetleaf then it does not repeat soul. sent18: if the Japanese is both not subscript and sociocultural it is diametral. sent19: there exists something such that if it is subscript and it is sociocultural then it is not diametral. | sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (Ex): (¬{EC}x & {IA}x) -> ¬{GQ}x sent3: (Ex): (¬{IJ}x & {R}x) -> ¬{GH}x sent4: (x): (¬{FG}x & {FI}x) -> ¬{IN}x sent5: (¬{JH}{go} & {B}{go}) -> ¬{DH}{go} sent6: (Ex): (¬{DU}x & {EC}x) -> ¬{DC}x sent7: (Ex): (¬{FL}x & {EH}x) -> ¬{AF}x sent8: (¬{CK}{aa} & {GN}{aa}) -> ¬{JI}{aa} sent9: (¬{JA}{aa} & {AI}{aa}) -> ¬{AC}{aa} sent10: (¬{EA}{aa} & {BN}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent11: (Ex): (¬{F}x & {HI}x) -> ¬{HQ}x sent12: (¬{IO}{ff} & {F}{ff}) -> ¬{B}{ff} sent13: (Ex): (¬{GJ}x & {BA}x) -> ¬{JG}x sent14: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent15: (¬{AR}{dh} & {HK}{dh}) -> ¬{AA}{dh} sent16: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent17: (Ex): (¬{DE}x & {AC}x) -> ¬{HC}x sent18: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent19: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there is something such that if it is not a Jesuit and it is dysphemistic the fact that it does not coalesce is not wrong. | (Ex): (¬{FG}x & {FI}x) -> ¬{IN}x | [
"sent4 -> int1: the all-rounder does not coalesce if it is both not a Jesuit and dysphemistic.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is not a subscript and it is sociocultural it is non-diametral is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Japanese is not a subscript and is sociocultural then it is not diametral. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an idle and it is a kind of a latchkey it does not repeat practice. sent3: there is something such that if it does not expectorate and bottles swordfish it does not quote Ugric. sent4: if something that is not a Jesuit is dysphemistic then it does not coalesce. sent5: if the motor is not a ammonification but it is diametral then that it does not bottle Stentor hold. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a safe-conduct and idles then it is not a Ischia. sent7: there is something such that if it does not repeat laurelwood and does remain import it is not eruptive. sent8: the Japanese is not feudatory if it is not hateful and it repeats motor. sent9: if the Japanese does not remain burthen but it is high-interest then the fact that it is not a sweetleaf is right. sent10: the Japanese is not a subscript if it is not a kind of an entrant and it is anastomotic. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a toad-in-the-hole and is a strappado it is not an intermediate. sent12: if the trash is both not a mercifulness and a toad-in-the-hole then it is not diametral. sent13: there exists something such that if that it does not repeat surrealism and it hems is right it does not remain Hemingway. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not subscript and is sociocultural then it is diametral. sent15: the agama is not a subscript if it is not a Lonchocarpus and it repeats Molotov. sent16: if the Japanese is subscript and sociocultural it is not diametral. sent17: there is something such that if it is not a staggerbush and it is a sweetleaf then it does not repeat soul. sent18: if the Japanese is both not subscript and sociocultural it is diametral. sent19: there exists something such that if it is subscript and it is sociocultural then it is not diametral. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it bottles eye-lotion and it is a Congolese then that it is not a kind of a Curtiss hold. | (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: there is something such that if it remains borage and it bottles calcitonin it is uncertain. sent2: there exists something such that if it does bottle sandbank and is a clamor the fact that it is non-less is correct. sent3: the fact that the sulfonate is not a Curtiss is right if it does bottle eye-lotion and is a kind of a Congolese. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a Democritus and it is a Ashe the fact that it bottles leopardess is not false. sent5: the Bedouin is not ascetic if it is a Curtiss and it does bottle Guthrie. sent6: the sulfonate is not a acanthopterygian if it bottles eye-lotion and is sincere. sent7: the sulfonate is not a inessential if it bottles eye-lotion and it is a Helix. sent8: if the sandbank is a kind of ablative thing that does bottle eye-lotion then the fact that it is less is true. sent9: if the sulfonate does repeat sulfonate and it is caudate it does not bottle eye-lotion. sent10: if the sulfonate is a Curtiss and it remains Frau then it is not a greatcoat. sent11: the sulfonate is adaptable if it is a kind of a radicalism and it is a Congolese. | sent1: (Ex): ({HT}x & {T}x) -> {EA}x sent2: (Ex): ({FJ}x & {BI}x) -> ¬{AF}x sent3: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (Ex): ({DE}x & {BE}x) -> {GN}x sent5: ({B}{j} & {EC}{j}) -> ¬{JG}{j} sent6: ({AA}{aa} & {Q}{aa}) -> ¬{CK}{aa} sent7: ({AA}{aa} & {IB}{aa}) -> ¬{AG}{aa} sent8: ({FT}{cs} & {AA}{cs}) -> {AF}{cs} sent9: ({AE}{aa} & {DL}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent10: ({B}{aa} & {BS}{aa}) -> ¬{IR}{aa} sent11: ({JD}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {FQ}{aa} | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it bottles eye-lotion and it is a Congolese then that it is not a kind of a Curtiss hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it remains borage and it bottles calcitonin it is uncertain. sent2: there exists something such that if it does bottle sandbank and is a clamor the fact that it is non-less is correct. sent3: the fact that the sulfonate is not a Curtiss is right if it does bottle eye-lotion and is a kind of a Congolese. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a Democritus and it is a Ashe the fact that it bottles leopardess is not false. sent5: the Bedouin is not ascetic if it is a Curtiss and it does bottle Guthrie. sent6: the sulfonate is not a acanthopterygian if it bottles eye-lotion and is sincere. sent7: the sulfonate is not a inessential if it bottles eye-lotion and it is a Helix. sent8: if the sandbank is a kind of ablative thing that does bottle eye-lotion then the fact that it is less is true. sent9: if the sulfonate does repeat sulfonate and it is caudate it does not bottle eye-lotion. sent10: if the sulfonate is a Curtiss and it remains Frau then it is not a greatcoat. sent11: the sulfonate is adaptable if it is a kind of a radicalism and it is a Congolese. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | if that the crucialness occurs is not wrong then the recalcitrating happens. | {A} -> {C} | sent1: the repeating framboise occurs. sent2: the channels happens and the bloviating does not occur. sent3: if the crucialness but not the imbibing happens the recalcitrating happens. sent4: the imbibing does not occur if the fact that the attention does not occur and the toughness does not occur does not hold. sent5: that the chromaticness happens and the repeating spallation does not occur prevents that the bloviating does not occur. | sent1: {FS} sent2: ({G} & ¬{IN}) sent3: ({A} & ¬{B}) -> {C} sent4: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent5: ({JB} & ¬{FR}) -> {IN} | []
| []
| null | null | []
| null | 4 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = if that the crucialness occurs is not wrong then the recalcitrating happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the repeating framboise occurs. sent2: the channels happens and the bloviating does not occur. sent3: if the crucialness but not the imbibing happens the recalcitrating happens. sent4: the imbibing does not occur if the fact that the attention does not occur and the toughness does not occur does not hold. sent5: that the chromaticness happens and the repeating spallation does not occur prevents that the bloviating does not occur. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the auralness does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: the auralness occurs if the unworthiness occurs. sent2: the bottling melodiousness does not occur or the divergentness does not occur or both. sent3: the unworthiness is triggered by the non-Methodistsness. sent4: if the repeating slop happens the inviting occurs. sent5: the Methodistsness does not occur and/or the depletion does not occur if the extramuralness occurs. sent6: the extramuralness occurs. sent7: the worthyness is prevented by that the depletion does not occur. sent8: the petty does not occur and/or the flatness does not occur. | sent1: {B} -> {C} sent2: (¬{GU} v ¬{L}) sent3: ¬{AA} -> {B} sent4: {BN} -> {EA} sent5: {A} -> (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) sent6: {A} sent7: ¬{AB} -> {B} sent8: (¬{BF} v ¬{FU}) | [
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the Methodistsness does not occur or the depletion does not occur or both.; int1 & sent3 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the unworthiness occurs is not false.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}); int1 & sent3 & sent7 -> int2: {B}; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the auralness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the auralness occurs if the unworthiness occurs. sent2: the bottling melodiousness does not occur or the divergentness does not occur or both. sent3: the unworthiness is triggered by the non-Methodistsness. sent4: if the repeating slop happens the inviting occurs. sent5: the Methodistsness does not occur and/or the depletion does not occur if the extramuralness occurs. sent6: the extramuralness occurs. sent7: the worthyness is prevented by that the depletion does not occur. sent8: the petty does not occur and/or the flatness does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the Methodistsness does not occur or the depletion does not occur or both.; int1 & sent3 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the unworthiness occurs is not false.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the headstall is herbal hold. | {B}{b} | sent1: the coatdress bottles bootstrap or is a caveat or both if it does not crown. sent2: if there exists something such that it is non-regimental then the headstall does bottle schnook and is a chloride. sent3: the schnook is not non-herbal. sent4: there exists something such that it remains meagerness. sent5: if the schnook does bottle coatdress then the headstall is an herbal. sent6: something that is not a sipper and/or is not regimental is not regimental. sent7: if the schnook either swelters or is granulocytic or both the headstall is not Piagetian. sent8: if the schnook is a kind of a Hindu the fact that the headstall is an herbal is not incorrect. sent9: the schnook is herbal and/or it is Piagetian. sent10: if that something is both not umbilical and a sipper is false then it is not a kind of a sipper. sent11: the headstall either is Piagetian or is herbal or both if it is not Hindu. sent12: there is nothing such that it is not a kind of an umbilical and is a kind of a sipper. sent13: the schnook is not a kind of a morgue. sent14: if there exists something such that it does remain meagerness then the schnook swelters or it is granulocytic or both. sent15: the schnook is not Piagetian. | sent1: ¬{DE}{cb} -> ({AO}{cb} v {FE}{cb}) sent2: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}{b} & {C}{b}) sent3: {B}{a} sent4: (Ex): {G}x sent5: {AB}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: (x): (¬{J}x v ¬{H}x) -> ¬{H}x sent7: ({E}{a} v {D}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent8: {AA}{a} -> {B}{b} sent9: ({B}{a} v {A}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & {J}x) -> ¬{J}x sent11: ¬{AA}{b} -> ({A}{b} v {B}{b}) sent12: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & {J}x) sent13: ¬{DR}{a} sent14: (x): {G}x -> ({E}{a} v {D}{a}) sent15: ¬{A}{a} | []
| []
| the headstall is not an herbal. | ¬{B}{b} | [
"sent4 & sent14 -> int1: the schnook swelters and/or it is granulocytic.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: that the headstall is not Piagetian is not wrong.; sent10 -> int3: the kanamycin is not a kind of a sipper if the fact that it is non-umbilical thing that is a sipper is false.; sent12 -> int4: the fact that the kanamycin is not umbilical and is a sipper does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the kanamycin is not a sipper.; int5 -> int6: everything is not a sipper.; int6 -> int7: that the twist is not a sipper is not wrong.; int7 -> int8: either the twist is not a sipper or it is not regimental or both.; int8 -> int9: everything is not a sipper and/or is not regimental.; int9 -> int10: the bootstrap is not a kind of a sipper and/or it is not regimental.; sent6 -> int11: if the bootstrap is not a sipper or non-regimental or both then the fact that it is not non-regimental hold.; int10 & int11 -> int12: the bootstrap is not regimental.; int12 -> int13: there is something such that it is not regimental.; int13 & sent2 -> int14: the headstall does bottle schnook and is a chloride.; int14 -> int15: the fact that the headstall is a chloride is correct.; int2 & int15 -> int16: the headstall is non-Piagetian a chloride.;"
]
| 13 | 2 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the headstall is herbal hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the coatdress bottles bootstrap or is a caveat or both if it does not crown. sent2: if there exists something such that it is non-regimental then the headstall does bottle schnook and is a chloride. sent3: the schnook is not non-herbal. sent4: there exists something such that it remains meagerness. sent5: if the schnook does bottle coatdress then the headstall is an herbal. sent6: something that is not a sipper and/or is not regimental is not regimental. sent7: if the schnook either swelters or is granulocytic or both the headstall is not Piagetian. sent8: if the schnook is a kind of a Hindu the fact that the headstall is an herbal is not incorrect. sent9: the schnook is herbal and/or it is Piagetian. sent10: if that something is both not umbilical and a sipper is false then it is not a kind of a sipper. sent11: the headstall either is Piagetian or is herbal or both if it is not Hindu. sent12: there is nothing such that it is not a kind of an umbilical and is a kind of a sipper. sent13: the schnook is not a kind of a morgue. sent14: if there exists something such that it does remain meagerness then the schnook swelters or it is granulocytic or both. sent15: the schnook is not Piagetian. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it does remain feijoa and it is not a crabs it is subjective. | (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: something is subjective if it does remain feijoa and is a crabs. sent2: there is something such that if it does remain feijoa and it is a kind of a crabs then it is subjective. sent3: the lutefisk does repeat cathartid if it is a crabs and it does repeat exteroception. sent4: if something is a sebum but it is not a kind of a submariner then it is mousy. sent5: if something does repeat exteroception but it is not a Hadrian it is a exocrine. sent6: there exists something such that if it is an outgo and does not repeat globalization it completes. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a translation and it is not a kind of a snowfield it does slake. sent8: if something that is a kind of a Juno does not quote balldress it is an orgasm. sent9: there exists something such that if it is both an equation and not big then it repeats globalization. sent10: the Conoy is subjective if it does remain feijoa and it does crab. sent11: if the fact that the Conoy is jittery but it is not a kind of a flurry is not false it is subjective. sent12: something is a Baikal if it is a kind of consumptive a Adrian. sent13: if the Conoy is a Bulgaria but it does not repeat Conoy then it crabs. sent14: if something does remain feijoa and does not crab then it is subjective. sent15: something that is shallow but not a Nicosia is judgmental. sent16: there is something such that if it does bottle echoencephalograph and it does not bottle mallee then the fact that it is a Juno is not wrong. sent17: if something that diffuses does not remain cocuswood then it is a kind of a Western. sent18: if the mucin is a punchball but it is not a kind of a Parmesan it is Anglo-catholic. sent19: if something that quotes framboise is not onside then it is a exocrine. sent20: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a feather and it bottles logomach it is an essence. | sent1: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: ({AB}{ce} & {GG}{ce}) -> {IS}{ce} sent4: (x): ({DN}x & ¬{AR}x) -> {R}x sent5: (x): ({GG}x & ¬{GA}x) -> {BQ}x sent6: (Ex): ({AQ}x & ¬{IR}x) -> {HA}x sent7: (Ex): ({BH}x & ¬{BL}x) -> {BG}x sent8: (x): ({IM}x & ¬{BJ}x) -> {CD}x sent9: (Ex): ({FP}x & ¬{DA}x) -> {IR}x sent10: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent11: ({CB}{aa} & ¬{HG}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent12: (x): ({ET}x & {S}x) -> {DQ}x sent13: ({DC}{aa} & ¬{FH}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} sent14: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent15: (x): ({JH}x & ¬{ES}x) -> {HR}x sent16: (Ex): ({FL}x & ¬{IT}x) -> {IM}x sent17: (x): ({IL}x & ¬{FS}x) -> {GN}x sent18: ({IE}{fe} & ¬{G}{fe}) -> {EQ}{fe} sent19: (x): ({DP}x & ¬{HM}x) -> {BQ}x sent20: (Ex): ({CQ}x & {AF}x) -> {AO}x | [
"sent14 -> int1: if the Conoy does remain feijoa but it is not a crabs that it is subjective is not incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent14 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Juno and does not quote balldress then it is an orgasm. | (Ex): ({IM}x & ¬{BJ}x) -> {CD}x | [
"sent8 -> int2: if the mallee is a kind of a Juno but it does not quote balldress then it is an orgasm.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does remain feijoa and it is not a crabs it is subjective. ; $context$ = sent1: something is subjective if it does remain feijoa and is a crabs. sent2: there is something such that if it does remain feijoa and it is a kind of a crabs then it is subjective. sent3: the lutefisk does repeat cathartid if it is a crabs and it does repeat exteroception. sent4: if something is a sebum but it is not a kind of a submariner then it is mousy. sent5: if something does repeat exteroception but it is not a Hadrian it is a exocrine. sent6: there exists something such that if it is an outgo and does not repeat globalization it completes. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a translation and it is not a kind of a snowfield it does slake. sent8: if something that is a kind of a Juno does not quote balldress it is an orgasm. sent9: there exists something such that if it is both an equation and not big then it repeats globalization. sent10: the Conoy is subjective if it does remain feijoa and it does crab. sent11: if the fact that the Conoy is jittery but it is not a kind of a flurry is not false it is subjective. sent12: something is a Baikal if it is a kind of consumptive a Adrian. sent13: if the Conoy is a Bulgaria but it does not repeat Conoy then it crabs. sent14: if something does remain feijoa and does not crab then it is subjective. sent15: something that is shallow but not a Nicosia is judgmental. sent16: there is something such that if it does bottle echoencephalograph and it does not bottle mallee then the fact that it is a Juno is not wrong. sent17: if something that diffuses does not remain cocuswood then it is a kind of a Western. sent18: if the mucin is a punchball but it is not a kind of a Parmesan it is Anglo-catholic. sent19: if something that quotes framboise is not onside then it is a exocrine. sent20: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a feather and it bottles logomach it is an essence. ; $proof$ = | sent14 -> int1: if the Conoy does remain feijoa but it is not a crabs that it is subjective is not incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Fowler is not a creeps but it is dictyopteran. | (¬{D}{b} & {E}{b}) | sent1: if the irregular is sinistral then the Fowler is dictyopteran. sent2: something is not a telegraph but it does accumulate if it is hopeful. sent3: the gherkin is hopeful. sent4: the gherkin is tellurian if it is hopeful. sent5: if the esthetician is dictyopteran then it does spank. sent6: there exists something such that it is a telegraph. sent7: the irregular is sinistral and/or an egalitarianism. sent8: the Fowler is not a creeps if the gherkin is both tellurian and a Tahiti. sent9: if the irregular is a kind of an egalitarianism then that the Fowler is not dictyopteran is false. | sent1: {H}{c} -> {E}{b} sent2: (x): {A}x -> (¬{F}x & {EC}x) sent3: {A}{a} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: {E}{ib} -> {AO}{ib} sent6: (Ex): {F}x sent7: ({H}{c} v {G}{c}) sent8: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: {G}{c} -> {E}{b} | [
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the gherkin is tellurian.; sent7 & sent1 & sent9 -> int2: that the Fowler is dictyopteran is right.;"
]
| [
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent7 & sent1 & sent9 -> int2: {E}{b};"
]
| the dioxin is not a kind of a telegraph but it accumulates. | (¬{F}{ij} & {EC}{ij}) | [
"sent2 -> int3: the dioxin is not a telegraph and accumulates if it is hopeful.;"
]
| 5 | 4 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Fowler is not a creeps but it is dictyopteran. ; $context$ = sent1: if the irregular is sinistral then the Fowler is dictyopteran. sent2: something is not a telegraph but it does accumulate if it is hopeful. sent3: the gherkin is hopeful. sent4: the gherkin is tellurian if it is hopeful. sent5: if the esthetician is dictyopteran then it does spank. sent6: there exists something such that it is a telegraph. sent7: the irregular is sinistral and/or an egalitarianism. sent8: the Fowler is not a creeps if the gherkin is both tellurian and a Tahiti. sent9: if the irregular is a kind of an egalitarianism then that the Fowler is not dictyopteran is false. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the gherkin is tellurian.; sent7 & sent1 & sent9 -> int2: that the Fowler is dictyopteran is right.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a coalpit and it lulls then it repeats schemozzle. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: there is something such that if it is both not a peptone and a nirvana then it is a kind of an evidence. sent2: if the rabbitfish is not a coalpit but it does lull then it does repeat schemozzle. sent3: that there is something such that if the fact that it is not a subunit and it is creative hold it is calligraphic is not wrong. sent4: if the fact that something is not concentric but it is a university hold it is idiographic. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not a Italian and it is a kind of a loneliness then it bottles Loranthus. sent6: if the rabbitfish does repeat trencher and it does remain cedilla it is a kind of a lull. sent7: the rabbitfish does repeat schemozzle if that it is not a detente and repeats grinder is true. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not a standard-bearer but an additive then the fact that it salivates is correct. sent9: there exists something such that if it does bottle paster and it is adventitial then it is a whip. sent10: there exists something such that if it does repeat ration and does right then it is Hellenic. sent11: the rabbitfish is a coalpit if it does not remain Erin and remains etcetera. sent12: the fact that the rabbitfish repeats schemozzle if the rabbitfish is a kind of a wonderland and it bottles thirteen is not wrong. sent13: if the auditorium is leprous and it repeats schemozzle then it is Gilbertian. sent14: that there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-unreceptive thing that repeats Aegisthus then it is alkylic is not false. | sent1: (Ex): (¬{GM}x & {FK}x) -> {HH}x sent2: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: (Ex): (¬{DQ}x & {AH}x) -> {AD}x sent4: (x): (¬{AJ}x & {FD}x) -> {II}x sent5: (Ex): (¬{JC}x & {AC}x) -> {EM}x sent6: ({DI}{aa} & {FS}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} sent7: (¬{GJ}{aa} & {L}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): (¬{HQ}x & {CU}x) -> {FF}x sent9: (Ex): ({IO}x & {FO}x) -> {IG}x sent10: (Ex): ({DB}x & {FR}x) -> {ET}x sent11: (¬{GR}{aa} & {DL}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} sent12: ({DS}{aa} & {HT}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent13: ({BM}{ij} & {B}{ij}) -> {GO}{ij} sent14: (Ex): (¬{EO}x & {GQ}x) -> {HF}x | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there is something such that if it is both not concentric and a university it is idiographic. | (Ex): (¬{AJ}x & {FD}x) -> {II}x | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the syncarp is a kind of non-concentric a university then that it is idiographic is not false.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a coalpit and it lulls then it repeats schemozzle. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is both not a peptone and a nirvana then it is a kind of an evidence. sent2: if the rabbitfish is not a coalpit but it does lull then it does repeat schemozzle. sent3: that there is something such that if the fact that it is not a subunit and it is creative hold it is calligraphic is not wrong. sent4: if the fact that something is not concentric but it is a university hold it is idiographic. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not a Italian and it is a kind of a loneliness then it bottles Loranthus. sent6: if the rabbitfish does repeat trencher and it does remain cedilla it is a kind of a lull. sent7: the rabbitfish does repeat schemozzle if that it is not a detente and repeats grinder is true. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not a standard-bearer but an additive then the fact that it salivates is correct. sent9: there exists something such that if it does bottle paster and it is adventitial then it is a whip. sent10: there exists something such that if it does repeat ration and does right then it is Hellenic. sent11: the rabbitfish is a coalpit if it does not remain Erin and remains etcetera. sent12: the fact that the rabbitfish repeats schemozzle if the rabbitfish is a kind of a wonderland and it bottles thirteen is not wrong. sent13: if the auditorium is leprous and it repeats schemozzle then it is Gilbertian. sent14: that there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-unreceptive thing that repeats Aegisthus then it is alkylic is not false. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the croupiness occurs or the impureness occurs or both does not hold. | ¬({B} v {C}) | sent1: if the inexpedientness occurs the amnesic but not the attritionalness occurs. sent2: that the inexpedientness and the quoting Ahab occurs is brought about by that the virginalness does not occur. sent3: both the intercontinentalness and the flip-flop occurs. sent4: that the virginal does not occur is caused by that both the evangelicalness and the alphanumericsness happens. sent5: the indirectness does not occur if that not the deactivation but the amnesic occurs is not correct. sent6: the restrictiveness happens. sent7: the fact that the quoting arsenical occurs is not incorrect. sent8: if the bottling Ashe does not occur then the fact that the croupiness occurs and/or the impureness occurs does not hold. sent9: both the pedunculateness and the remaining Pseudolarix occurs. sent10: the non-croupyness and the impureness happens if the indirectness does not occur. sent11: if the croupiness does not occur the gangrene occurs and the bottling Ashe happens. sent12: the fact that the healthiness happens is not incorrect. sent13: that the deactivation does not occur and the amnesic occurs is not correct if the attritionalness does not occur. sent14: both the quoting Ahab and the suffocation happens. sent15: the collection occurs. sent16: that the deactivation happens is prevented by that the amnesic occurs and the attritionalness does not occur. sent17: the fact that both the bottling Ashe and the croupiness happens is correct. sent18: the suffocation happens. sent19: the bottling Ashe occurs. | sent1: {H} -> ({F} & ¬{G}) sent2: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) sent3: ({AD} & {EQ}) sent4: ({K} & {L}) -> ¬{J} sent5: ¬(¬{E} & {F}) -> ¬{D} sent6: {AT} sent7: {DM} sent8: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} v {C}) sent9: ({EI} & {GA}) sent10: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & {C}) sent11: ¬{B} -> ({AE} & {A}) sent12: {CP} sent13: ¬{G} -> ¬(¬{E} & {F}) sent14: ({I} & {CS}) sent15: {EC} sent16: ({F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} sent17: ({A} & {B}) sent18: {CS} sent19: {A} | [
"sent17 -> int1: the croupiness occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent17 -> int1: {B}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the gangrene occurs. | {AE} | []
| 9 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the croupiness occurs or the impureness occurs or both does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the inexpedientness occurs the amnesic but not the attritionalness occurs. sent2: that the inexpedientness and the quoting Ahab occurs is brought about by that the virginalness does not occur. sent3: both the intercontinentalness and the flip-flop occurs. sent4: that the virginal does not occur is caused by that both the evangelicalness and the alphanumericsness happens. sent5: the indirectness does not occur if that not the deactivation but the amnesic occurs is not correct. sent6: the restrictiveness happens. sent7: the fact that the quoting arsenical occurs is not incorrect. sent8: if the bottling Ashe does not occur then the fact that the croupiness occurs and/or the impureness occurs does not hold. sent9: both the pedunculateness and the remaining Pseudolarix occurs. sent10: the non-croupyness and the impureness happens if the indirectness does not occur. sent11: if the croupiness does not occur the gangrene occurs and the bottling Ashe happens. sent12: the fact that the healthiness happens is not incorrect. sent13: that the deactivation does not occur and the amnesic occurs is not correct if the attritionalness does not occur. sent14: both the quoting Ahab and the suffocation happens. sent15: the collection occurs. sent16: that the deactivation happens is prevented by that the amnesic occurs and the attritionalness does not occur. sent17: the fact that both the bottling Ashe and the croupiness happens is correct. sent18: the suffocation happens. sent19: the bottling Ashe occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent17 -> int1: the croupiness occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the arctic is both nonthermal and not non-Falstaffian is wrong. | ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) | sent1: the jay is not a privet. sent2: the bioelectricity does react and it is a augite if there is something such that it is not a privet. sent3: if there exists something such that it is non-pharmaceutical and/or nonthermal then the dipole is non-pharmaceutical. sent4: if the sty is a kind of a augite then it is a Hefa. sent5: that the calabash is not a pharmaceutical and/or prizes is not correct. sent6: something is not a kind of a prize if it is pharmaceutical. sent7: something is a kind of a thermal if it is not pharmaceutical. sent8: the sty is a augite if the bioelectricity is a augite. sent9: the scuffle is not pharmaceutical if that the calabash is not pharmaceutical and/or it is a prize is wrong. sent10: the fact that the calabash is a pharmaceutical hold if the composer is not a pharmaceutical and is not a doorstop. | sent1: ¬{I}{f} sent2: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({H}{e} & {G}{e}) sent3: (x): (¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}{cj} sent4: {G}{d} -> {E}{d} sent5: ¬(¬{B}{b} v {A}{b}) sent6: (x): {B}x -> ¬{A}x sent7: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent8: {G}{e} -> {G}{d} sent9: ¬(¬{B}{b} v {A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: (¬{B}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> {B}{b} | [
"sent7 -> int1: the scuffle is a thermal if it is not a pharmaceutical.; sent9 & sent5 -> int2: the scuffle is not a pharmaceutical.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the scuffle is thermal.;"
]
| [
"sent7 -> int1: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; sent9 & sent5 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{aa};"
]
| that the dipole is not a prize and is a kind of a Liverpudlian is not right. | ¬(¬{A}{cj} & {AH}{cj}) | []
| 7 | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the arctic is both nonthermal and not non-Falstaffian is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the jay is not a privet. sent2: the bioelectricity does react and it is a augite if there is something such that it is not a privet. sent3: if there exists something such that it is non-pharmaceutical and/or nonthermal then the dipole is non-pharmaceutical. sent4: if the sty is a kind of a augite then it is a Hefa. sent5: that the calabash is not a pharmaceutical and/or prizes is not correct. sent6: something is not a kind of a prize if it is pharmaceutical. sent7: something is a kind of a thermal if it is not pharmaceutical. sent8: the sty is a augite if the bioelectricity is a augite. sent9: the scuffle is not pharmaceutical if that the calabash is not pharmaceutical and/or it is a prize is wrong. sent10: the fact that the calabash is a pharmaceutical hold if the composer is not a pharmaceutical and is not a doorstop. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> int1: the scuffle is a thermal if it is not a pharmaceutical.; sent9 & sent5 -> int2: the scuffle is not a pharmaceutical.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the scuffle is thermal.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the fact that the Senegalese unfurls is right if the soy is crystalline is wrong. | ¬({A}{a} -> {C}{b}) | sent1: the soy is an outlet. sent2: the fact that the Senegalese is a binnacle is not false. sent3: the Senegalese is teleological. sent4: the Slovenian is crystalline. sent5: if the soy is crystalline it is a binnacle. sent6: if the soy is a kind of a binnacle then the fact that the Senegalese does unfurl is not false. sent7: if the Senegalese unfurls it is crystalline. sent8: if the Senegalese is crystalline then the soy unfurls. sent9: the Senegalese is crystalline if the soy unfurls. sent10: if something is not a cherrystone the fact that it does not repeat tombac and does repeat Molotov is not correct. sent11: if the soy is not a binnacle the technical unfurls and it is crystalline. sent12: the soy is suburban. sent13: if the Senegalese is a kind of a scapular then it does remain Ereshkigal. sent14: the Senegalese is a binnacle if the soy is crystalline. sent15: the Senegalese is crystalline. sent16: the duckpin is crystalline. sent17: if the fact that something does not repeat tombac but it repeats Molotov is not right it is not a binnacle. | sent1: {HN}{a} sent2: {B}{b} sent3: {DP}{b} sent4: {A}{gk} sent5: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent6: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent7: {C}{b} -> {A}{b} sent8: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent9: {C}{a} -> {A}{b} sent10: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) sent11: ¬{B}{a} -> ({C}{f} & {A}{f}) sent12: {GS}{a} sent13: {GB}{b} -> {JB}{b} sent14: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent15: {A}{b} sent16: {A}{hi} sent17: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the soy is crystalline.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the soy is a kind of a binnacle.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the Senegalese unfurls.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent6 -> int2: {C}{b}; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the technical does unfurl. | {C}{f} | [
"sent17 -> int3: if that the soy does not repeat tombac but it repeats Molotov is not correct it is not a binnacle.; sent10 -> int4: that the Senegalese does not repeat tombac and does repeat Molotov does not hold if it is not a cherrystone.;"
]
| 7 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that the Senegalese unfurls is right if the soy is crystalline is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the soy is an outlet. sent2: the fact that the Senegalese is a binnacle is not false. sent3: the Senegalese is teleological. sent4: the Slovenian is crystalline. sent5: if the soy is crystalline it is a binnacle. sent6: if the soy is a kind of a binnacle then the fact that the Senegalese does unfurl is not false. sent7: if the Senegalese unfurls it is crystalline. sent8: if the Senegalese is crystalline then the soy unfurls. sent9: the Senegalese is crystalline if the soy unfurls. sent10: if something is not a cherrystone the fact that it does not repeat tombac and does repeat Molotov is not correct. sent11: if the soy is not a binnacle the technical unfurls and it is crystalline. sent12: the soy is suburban. sent13: if the Senegalese is a kind of a scapular then it does remain Ereshkigal. sent14: the Senegalese is a binnacle if the soy is crystalline. sent15: the Senegalese is crystalline. sent16: the duckpin is crystalline. sent17: if the fact that something does not repeat tombac but it repeats Molotov is not right it is not a binnacle. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the soy is crystalline.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the soy is a kind of a binnacle.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the Senegalese unfurls.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the fact that there is something such that if it is courteous the fact that it is not a masjid and is a kind of a falsity is wrong hold is not right. | ¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)) | sent1: that something does not adjourn and is a kind of a handspike is not correct if it is a Katharevusa. sent2: the tine is not a masjid but it is a kind of a falsity if it is courteous. sent3: that the ammunition is not nacreous and remains angle is not correct if it is a falsity. sent4: that the tine is a kind of a falsity and it does bottle Amphioxidae is not right if it is lexical. sent5: that the tine is a masjid and it is a kind of a falsity is incorrect if it is courteous. sent6: there exists something such that if it is courteous then that it is a masjid and it is a falsity does not hold. sent7: there is something such that if it is an irrational then that it does not remain ionosphere and it is a narc does not hold. sent8: if the pommy is a kind of a protrusion then that it does remain angle and it is courteous is false. sent9: the fact that the tine is not a masjid but it is a falsity is incorrect if it is courteous. | sent1: (x): {ID}x -> ¬(¬{CK}x & {FA}x) sent2: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: {AB}{jk} -> ¬(¬{FS}{jk} & {DM}{jk}) sent4: {AC}{aa} -> ¬({AB}{aa} & {AM}{aa}) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: (Ex): {FI}x -> ¬(¬{IB}x & {N}x) sent8: {II}{ds} -> ¬({DM}{ds} & {A}{ds}) sent9: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
]
| if the tine is a Katharevusa then that it does not adjourn and is a handspike is wrong. | {ID}{aa} -> ¬(¬{CK}{aa} & {FA}{aa}) | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that the fact that there is something such that if it is courteous the fact that it is not a masjid and is a kind of a falsity is wrong hold is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that something does not adjourn and is a kind of a handspike is not correct if it is a Katharevusa. sent2: the tine is not a masjid but it is a kind of a falsity if it is courteous. sent3: that the ammunition is not nacreous and remains angle is not correct if it is a falsity. sent4: that the tine is a kind of a falsity and it does bottle Amphioxidae is not right if it is lexical. sent5: that the tine is a masjid and it is a kind of a falsity is incorrect if it is courteous. sent6: there exists something such that if it is courteous then that it is a masjid and it is a falsity does not hold. sent7: there is something such that if it is an irrational then that it does not remain ionosphere and it is a narc does not hold. sent8: if the pommy is a kind of a protrusion then that it does remain angle and it is courteous is false. sent9: the fact that the tine is not a masjid but it is a falsity is incorrect if it is courteous. ; $proof$ = | sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the chlorhexidine repeats atrophied and it is a PO is incorrect. | ¬({C}{b} & {B}{b}) | sent1: if the soy is a Michelson and it does exult then it is not a PO. sent2: the soy is a Michelson and does exult. sent3: something is not a dasyure if either it is a keratin or it is not informal or both. sent4: the soy is a keratin or it is not informal or both if the fact that it does recycle is not false. sent5: if the soy is not a PO then that the chlorhexidine repeats atrophied and is a PO is wrong. | sent1: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: (x): ({E}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent4: {F}{a} -> ({E}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) sent5: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & {B}{b}) | [
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the soy is not a PO.; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the chlorhexidine repeats atrophied and is a PO. | ({C}{b} & {B}{b}) | [
"sent3 -> int2: the soy is not a dasyure if either it is a keratin or it is not informal or both.;"
]
| 6 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the chlorhexidine repeats atrophied and it is a PO is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the soy is a Michelson and it does exult then it is not a PO. sent2: the soy is a Michelson and does exult. sent3: something is not a dasyure if either it is a keratin or it is not informal or both. sent4: the soy is a keratin or it is not informal or both if the fact that it does recycle is not false. sent5: if the soy is not a PO then that the chlorhexidine repeats atrophied and is a PO is wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the soy is not a PO.; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there exists something such that if it does not quote Ricardo and it is a ticktack it is not a supremacism is not true. | ¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: if something that does not nap does untwine it does not seal. sent2: there exists something such that if it does quote Ricardo and it is a ticktack then it is not a kind of a supremacism. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not quote Ricardo and is a kind of a ticktack it is a supremacism. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a sophism and does remain incisiveness then it is not inviolable. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not a wisp and it is a navigator then it does not bottle feverfew. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not repeat Gaskell and it is a swiz it does not bottle rabbitfish. sent7: something is not polite if it is not ill and it is a plume. sent8: something that is not a supremacism and untwines does not remain plosion. sent9: if the croton quotes Ricardo and it is a ticktack then it is not a kind of a supremacism. sent10: if the croton does not quote Ricardo and is a kind of a ticktack it is not a kind of a supremacism. sent11: the croton is not ecclesiastical if it is not amoebic and is vesical. sent12: the croton is a supremacism if it does not quote Ricardo and it is a ticktack. | sent1: (x): (¬{BC}x & {EL}x) -> ¬{EJ}x sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (Ex): (¬{P}x & {EB}x) -> ¬{IE}x sent5: (Ex): (¬{JG}x & {M}x) -> ¬{BA}x sent6: (Ex): (¬{HM}x & {GS}x) -> ¬{EU}x sent7: (x): (¬{HG}x & {JC}x) -> ¬{FG}x sent8: (x): (¬{B}x & {EL}x) -> ¬{FO}x sent9: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent11: (¬{CA}{aa} & {HN}{aa}) -> ¬{IH}{aa} sent12: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} | [
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there is something such that if it is not a napping and untwines then it is not a sealed. | (Ex): (¬{BC}x & {EL}x) -> ¬{EJ}x | [
"sent1 -> int1: the hogback does not seal if it is not a kind of a napping and it untwines.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it does not quote Ricardo and it is a ticktack it is not a supremacism is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that does not nap does untwine it does not seal. sent2: there exists something such that if it does quote Ricardo and it is a ticktack then it is not a kind of a supremacism. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not quote Ricardo and is a kind of a ticktack it is a supremacism. sent4: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a sophism and does remain incisiveness then it is not inviolable. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not a wisp and it is a navigator then it does not bottle feverfew. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not repeat Gaskell and it is a swiz it does not bottle rabbitfish. sent7: something is not polite if it is not ill and it is a plume. sent8: something that is not a supremacism and untwines does not remain plosion. sent9: if the croton quotes Ricardo and it is a ticktack then it is not a kind of a supremacism. sent10: if the croton does not quote Ricardo and is a kind of a ticktack it is not a kind of a supremacism. sent11: the croton is not ecclesiastical if it is not amoebic and is vesical. sent12: the croton is a supremacism if it does not quote Ricardo and it is a ticktack. ; $proof$ = | sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that not the repeating madrigalist but the remaining nationality occurs is not right. | ¬(¬{B} & {C}) | sent1: if that the axillariness does not occur is not wrong then that not the repeating locomotive but the immortalness occurs is wrong. sent2: if the trifurcation does not occur then the fact that both the remaining nationality and the axillariness occurs is not correct. sent3: the repeating locomotive does not occur if the steroidalness occurs. sent4: the fact that the calcificness and the hypnotherapy occurs is not true. sent5: that the fact that not the repeating troposphere but the wiseness happens is not wrong is not right. sent6: if the fact that the fact that the intruding does not occur and/or the remaining sandbank does not occur hold is wrong that the trifurcation does not occur is not false. sent7: the repeating locomotive does not occur. sent8: the fact that the repeating locomotive occurs and the immortalness happens is false if the axillariness does not occur. sent9: that that both the repeating madrigalist and the remaining nationality happens is correct is not true. sent10: if the steroidalness does not occur that not the repeating madrigalist but the remaining nationality happens is not correct. sent11: if the fact that the remaining nationality and the axillariness happens is not true the repeating madrigalist does not occur. sent12: that not the repeating locomotive but the immortalness occurs is caused by that the steroidalness occurs. sent13: the Alpinism does not occur. sent14: the repeating Cajun occurs if the repeating Steinem happens. sent15: that either the intruding does not occur or the remaining sandbank does not occur or both does not hold if that the repeating Cajun occurs is correct. | sent1: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent2: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & {D}) sent3: {A} -> ¬{AA} sent4: ¬({IM} & {BK}) sent5: ¬(¬{GI} & {FD}) sent6: ¬(¬{G} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{E} sent7: ¬{AA} sent8: ¬{D} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent9: ¬({B} & {C}) sent10: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{B} & {C}) sent11: ¬({C} & {D}) -> ¬{B} sent12: {A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent13: ¬{HO} sent14: {I} -> {H} sent15: {H} -> ¬(¬{G} v ¬{F}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the steroidalness happens.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: not the repeating locomotive but the immortalness happens.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} & {AB});"
]
| the Mozartianness does not occur. | ¬{GB} | []
| 10 | 4 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that not the repeating madrigalist but the remaining nationality occurs is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the axillariness does not occur is not wrong then that not the repeating locomotive but the immortalness occurs is wrong. sent2: if the trifurcation does not occur then the fact that both the remaining nationality and the axillariness occurs is not correct. sent3: the repeating locomotive does not occur if the steroidalness occurs. sent4: the fact that the calcificness and the hypnotherapy occurs is not true. sent5: that the fact that not the repeating troposphere but the wiseness happens is not wrong is not right. sent6: if the fact that the fact that the intruding does not occur and/or the remaining sandbank does not occur hold is wrong that the trifurcation does not occur is not false. sent7: the repeating locomotive does not occur. sent8: the fact that the repeating locomotive occurs and the immortalness happens is false if the axillariness does not occur. sent9: that that both the repeating madrigalist and the remaining nationality happens is correct is not true. sent10: if the steroidalness does not occur that not the repeating madrigalist but the remaining nationality happens is not correct. sent11: if the fact that the remaining nationality and the axillariness happens is not true the repeating madrigalist does not occur. sent12: that not the repeating locomotive but the immortalness occurs is caused by that the steroidalness occurs. sent13: the Alpinism does not occur. sent14: the repeating Cajun occurs if the repeating Steinem happens. sent15: that either the intruding does not occur or the remaining sandbank does not occur or both does not hold if that the repeating Cajun occurs is correct. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the steroidalness happens.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: not the repeating locomotive but the immortalness happens.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the polarography does not occur. | ¬{A} | sent1: the aleuronicness does not occur if the fact that either the indigestibleness or the patching or both occurs is incorrect. sent2: the fact that either the indigestibleness happens or the patching does not occur or both is not correct. sent3: the fact that that not the thenalness but the remaining PET happens is right prevents that the aleuronicness does not occur. sent4: if the patch does not occur the polarography and the aleuronicness happens. sent5: the scleroticness does not occur. sent6: if the fancying occurs then the patching does not occur and the indigestibleness occurs. sent7: the regularization does not occur if the bottling lightning happens. sent8: if the fact that the non-thenalness and the remaining PET occurs is not right then the fact that the polarography does not occur is not wrong. sent9: that the truancy occurs causes that the lidlessness does not occur. sent10: the fact that the gratefulness happens or the impairing does not occur or both does not hold if the polarography occurs. | sent1: ¬({D} v {C}) -> ¬{B} sent2: ¬({D} v ¬{C}) sent3: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent4: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent5: ¬{IO} sent6: {E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) sent7: {CJ} -> ¬{BL} sent8: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{A} sent9: {CN} -> ¬{JJ} sent10: {A} -> ¬({AI} v ¬{AM}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that not the thenalness but the remaining PET occurs.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the aleuronicness happens.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA} & {AB}); sent3 & assump1 -> int1: {B};"
]
| the fact that the polarography occurs is true. | {A} | []
| 7 | 4 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the polarography does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the aleuronicness does not occur if the fact that either the indigestibleness or the patching or both occurs is incorrect. sent2: the fact that either the indigestibleness happens or the patching does not occur or both is not correct. sent3: the fact that that not the thenalness but the remaining PET happens is right prevents that the aleuronicness does not occur. sent4: if the patch does not occur the polarography and the aleuronicness happens. sent5: the scleroticness does not occur. sent6: if the fancying occurs then the patching does not occur and the indigestibleness occurs. sent7: the regularization does not occur if the bottling lightning happens. sent8: if the fact that the non-thenalness and the remaining PET occurs is not right then the fact that the polarography does not occur is not wrong. sent9: that the truancy occurs causes that the lidlessness does not occur. sent10: the fact that the gratefulness happens or the impairing does not occur or both does not hold if the polarography occurs. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that not the thenalness but the remaining PET occurs.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the aleuronicness happens.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the baby is a kind of a Selma but it is not a Seljuk. | ({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) | sent1: the baby is not a kind of a Seljuk if the actinolite is a Selma. sent2: if there exists something such that it is a frankincense that the actinolite does not indicate and it is not a Assamese is incorrect. sent3: the Kaopectate is a Selma. sent4: the oryx is Assamese if something that quotes schizanthus does indicate. sent5: the foram is a Selma. sent6: the actinolite is a Selma and not Seljuk if the baby is a Selma. sent7: something is Seljuk and a Selma. sent8: the baby is a Sakharov and is not a barrio. sent9: something is a kind of Seljuk thing that is Assamese. sent10: there exists something such that it is a Assamese and it is a Seljuk. sent11: the baby does quote schizanthus. sent12: the actinolite is a Selma if the oryx is a Assamese. sent13: there exists something such that it does indicate. sent14: the baby is a kind of a piggyback that does not remain hipbone. sent15: there exists something such that that it quotes schizanthus is correct. sent16: something is a kind of a frankincense that is a kind of a firearm if it is not a Manama. sent17: if the fact that the actinolite is a Selma is correct the baby is a Selma but it is not a Seljuk. sent18: something does quote schizanthus and it does indicate. sent19: the baby is not Seljuk. sent20: everything is not a Manama. sent21: something is a Selma and not non-Seljuk. | sent1: {D}{b} -> ¬{F}{c} sent2: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent3: {D}{ad} sent4: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent5: {D}{ed} sent6: {D}{c} -> ({D}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent7: (Ex): ({F}x & {D}x) sent8: ({IT}{c} & ¬{N}{c}) sent9: (Ex): ({F}x & {C}x) sent10: (Ex): ({C}x & {F}x) sent11: {A}{c} sent12: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent13: (Ex): {B}x sent14: ({FS}{c} & ¬{DR}{c}) sent15: (Ex): {A}x sent16: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({E}x & {G}x) sent17: {D}{b} -> ({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent18: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent19: ¬{F}{c} sent20: (x): ¬{H}x sent21: (Ex): ({D}x & {F}x) | [
"sent18 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the oryx is a Assamese hold.; sent12 & int1 -> int2: the actinolite is a Selma.; sent17 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent18 & sent4 -> int1: {C}{a}; sent12 & int1 -> int2: {D}{b}; sent17 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fact that the fact that the baby is a Selma but it is not a Seljuk is not incorrect is incorrect. | ¬({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) | [
"sent16 -> int3: the plastique is both a frankincense and a firearm if it is not a Manama.; sent20 -> int4: the plastique is not a kind of a Manama.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the plastique is a frankincense and a firearm.; int5 -> int6: everything is a frankincense and it is a firearm.; int6 -> int7: the dehydroretinol is a kind of a frankincense that is a kind of a firearm.; int7 -> int8: the dehydroretinol is a frankincense.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that it is a frankincense.; sent2 & int9 -> int10: that the actinolite does not indicate and it is not a kind of a Assamese is false.;"
]
| 9 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the baby is a kind of a Selma but it is not a Seljuk. ; $context$ = sent1: the baby is not a kind of a Seljuk if the actinolite is a Selma. sent2: if there exists something such that it is a frankincense that the actinolite does not indicate and it is not a Assamese is incorrect. sent3: the Kaopectate is a Selma. sent4: the oryx is Assamese if something that quotes schizanthus does indicate. sent5: the foram is a Selma. sent6: the actinolite is a Selma and not Seljuk if the baby is a Selma. sent7: something is Seljuk and a Selma. sent8: the baby is a Sakharov and is not a barrio. sent9: something is a kind of Seljuk thing that is Assamese. sent10: there exists something such that it is a Assamese and it is a Seljuk. sent11: the baby does quote schizanthus. sent12: the actinolite is a Selma if the oryx is a Assamese. sent13: there exists something such that it does indicate. sent14: the baby is a kind of a piggyback that does not remain hipbone. sent15: there exists something such that that it quotes schizanthus is correct. sent16: something is a kind of a frankincense that is a kind of a firearm if it is not a Manama. sent17: if the fact that the actinolite is a Selma is correct the baby is a Selma but it is not a Seljuk. sent18: something does quote schizanthus and it does indicate. sent19: the baby is not Seljuk. sent20: everything is not a Manama. sent21: something is a Selma and not non-Seljuk. ; $proof$ = | sent18 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the oryx is a Assamese hold.; sent12 & int1 -> int2: the actinolite is a Selma.; sent17 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the EPROM does remain bundle and is not a fruitlessness does not hold. | ¬({D}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) | sent1: the EPROM does stress but it is not mucopurulent. sent2: something is not a laurelwood if the fact that it is not Gregorian is not false. sent3: that something does remain bundle and is not a kind of a fruitlessness is wrong if it is Gregorian. sent4: the heliosphere is not Gregorian. sent5: the fact that the woodborer is a estoppel but it is not informational is wrong. sent6: something is a laurelwood and it is Gregorian if it does not bottle Barstow. sent7: the croton is not a kind of a estoppel if there exists something such that the fact that it is both a estoppel and not informational is wrong. sent8: something is not a fruitlessness if it is not a laurelwood. sent9: if that the bundle is not Gregorian is not wrong then the EPROM is not Gregorian. sent10: the fact that the bundle does bottle Barstow and is Gregorian does not hold. sent11: if the fact that the bundle does not repeat croton and does not repeat fastball is not true then the EPROM does not bottle Barstow. sent12: the EPROM does bottle Barstow but it is not a fruitlessness. sent13: if the fact that the fact that the EPROM is both Gregorian and a fruitlessness is true is false the bundle is not a fruitlessness. sent14: if something is not a laurelwood then it does remain bundle and is not a fruitlessness. sent15: if the EPROM does not bottle Barstow then it is not Gregorian. sent16: the EPROM is not Gregorian if that the bundle does bottle Barstow and it is Gregorian does not hold. sent17: if something is not a estoppel or it is an inhalant or both it is not a estoppel. sent18: if something is not a estoppel that it does not repeat croton and does not repeat fastball does not hold. sent19: the EPROM is not a fruitlessness. sent20: the EPROM is not a fruitlessness if it is not a laurelwood. | sent1: ({AR}{aa} & ¬{CN}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent3: (x): {B}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{A}x) sent4: ¬{B}{gg} sent5: ¬({H}{c} & ¬{J}{c}) sent6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {B}x) sent7: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{H}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{A}x sent9: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: ¬({E}{a} & {B}{a}) sent11: ¬(¬{F}{a} & ¬{G}{a}) -> ¬{E}{aa} sent12: ({E}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent13: ¬({B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent14: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({D}x & ¬{A}x) sent15: ¬{E}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent16: ¬({E}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent17: (x): (¬{H}x v {I}x) -> ¬{H}x sent18: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) sent19: ¬{A}{aa} sent20: ¬{C}{aa} -> ¬{A}{aa} | [
"sent2 -> int1: the EPROM is not a laurelwood if it is not Gregorian.; sent16 & sent10 -> int2: the EPROM is not Gregorian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the EPROM is not a laurelwood.; sent14 -> int4: if that the EPROM is not a laurelwood is true then it remains bundle and is not a fruitlessness.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa}; sent16 & sent10 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{aa}; sent14 -> int4: ¬{C}{aa} -> ({D}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}); int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fact that the EPROM remains bundle but it is not a fruitlessness is not true. | ¬({D}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) | [
"sent3 -> int5: that the EPROM remains bundle and is not a fruitlessness is incorrect if it is Gregorian.; sent6 -> int6: the EPROM is a laurelwood and it is Gregorian if it does not bottle Barstow.; sent18 -> int7: the fact that if the bundle is not a kind of the estoppel the fact that the bundle does not repeat croton and it does not repeat fastball is not right is not incorrect.; sent17 -> int8: the bundle is not a estoppel if that it either is not a kind of a estoppel or is an inhalant or both hold.; sent5 -> int9: there exists something such that the fact that it is both a estoppel and not informational is incorrect.; int9 & sent7 -> int10: the croton is not a estoppel.; int10 -> int11: there is something such that it is not a estoppel.;"
]
| 10 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the EPROM does remain bundle and is not a fruitlessness does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the EPROM does stress but it is not mucopurulent. sent2: something is not a laurelwood if the fact that it is not Gregorian is not false. sent3: that something does remain bundle and is not a kind of a fruitlessness is wrong if it is Gregorian. sent4: the heliosphere is not Gregorian. sent5: the fact that the woodborer is a estoppel but it is not informational is wrong. sent6: something is a laurelwood and it is Gregorian if it does not bottle Barstow. sent7: the croton is not a kind of a estoppel if there exists something such that the fact that it is both a estoppel and not informational is wrong. sent8: something is not a fruitlessness if it is not a laurelwood. sent9: if that the bundle is not Gregorian is not wrong then the EPROM is not Gregorian. sent10: the fact that the bundle does bottle Barstow and is Gregorian does not hold. sent11: if the fact that the bundle does not repeat croton and does not repeat fastball is not true then the EPROM does not bottle Barstow. sent12: the EPROM does bottle Barstow but it is not a fruitlessness. sent13: if the fact that the fact that the EPROM is both Gregorian and a fruitlessness is true is false the bundle is not a fruitlessness. sent14: if something is not a laurelwood then it does remain bundle and is not a fruitlessness. sent15: if the EPROM does not bottle Barstow then it is not Gregorian. sent16: the EPROM is not Gregorian if that the bundle does bottle Barstow and it is Gregorian does not hold. sent17: if something is not a estoppel or it is an inhalant or both it is not a estoppel. sent18: if something is not a estoppel that it does not repeat croton and does not repeat fastball does not hold. sent19: the EPROM is not a fruitlessness. sent20: the EPROM is not a fruitlessness if it is not a laurelwood. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the EPROM is not a laurelwood if it is not Gregorian.; sent16 & sent10 -> int2: the EPROM is not Gregorian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the EPROM is not a laurelwood.; sent14 -> int4: if that the EPROM is not a laurelwood is true then it remains bundle and is not a fruitlessness.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the papaverine is both genuine and an interlock. | ({A}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: the fact that the papaverine is both not non-genuine and an interlock is incorrect if the fact that the fact that the snapshot is not non-cochlear hold does not hold. sent2: the fact that the theca is not cochlear and not an interlock does not hold. sent3: the papaverine is cochlear thing that is a enologist. sent4: the GSR is an interlock. sent5: the papaverine is genuine and is cochlear. | sent1: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent2: ¬(¬{B}{dl} & ¬{C}{dl}) sent3: ({B}{a} & {CI}{a}) sent4: {C}{dk} sent5: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | [
"sent5 -> int1: the papaverine is genuine.;"
]
| [
"sent5 -> int1: {A}{a};"
]
| that the theca is a rhinestone and it is viral is not incorrect. | ({EI}{dl} & {BO}{dl}) | []
| 6 | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the papaverine is both genuine and an interlock. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the papaverine is both not non-genuine and an interlock is incorrect if the fact that the fact that the snapshot is not non-cochlear hold does not hold. sent2: the fact that the theca is not cochlear and not an interlock does not hold. sent3: the papaverine is cochlear thing that is a enologist. sent4: the GSR is an interlock. sent5: the papaverine is genuine and is cochlear. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> int1: the papaverine is genuine.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the headstall is a Aristarchus. | {B}{aa} | sent1: the fact that something does not bottle Ugric and is not a rediscovery does not hold if it is not a kind of a cation. sent2: if the fact that something is not a kind of a rediscovery and does not shatter does not hold then it is not a Aristarchus. sent3: the headstall is not a cation if there exists something such that that it does not irritate and it does repeat headstall does not hold. sent4: something is not a Aristarchus if it is a kind of a rediscovery. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it does not irritate and does repeat headstall is incorrect. sent6: the fact that something is not a rediscovery and does not shatter is not right if it is not a kind of a cation. | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{CD}x & ¬{AA}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent4: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent5: (Ex): ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent6 -> int1: that the headstall is not a rediscovery and does not shatter is not right if it is not a kind of a cation.; sent5 & sent3 -> int2: the headstall is not a cation.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the headstall is not a rediscovery and does not shatter is incorrect.; sent2 -> int4: if that the headstall is not a rediscovery and does not shatter does not hold it is not a Aristarchus.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent6 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent5 & sent3 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent2 -> int4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fact that the insect does not bottle Ugric and is not a rediscovery is not true. | ¬(¬{CD}{cn} & ¬{AA}{cn}) | [
"sent1 -> int5: if the insect is not a kind of a cation that it does not bottle Ugric and is not a rediscovery is not correct.;"
]
| 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the headstall is a Aristarchus. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something does not bottle Ugric and is not a rediscovery does not hold if it is not a kind of a cation. sent2: if the fact that something is not a kind of a rediscovery and does not shatter does not hold then it is not a Aristarchus. sent3: the headstall is not a cation if there exists something such that that it does not irritate and it does repeat headstall does not hold. sent4: something is not a Aristarchus if it is a kind of a rediscovery. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it does not irritate and does repeat headstall is incorrect. sent6: the fact that something is not a rediscovery and does not shatter is not right if it is not a kind of a cation. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> int1: that the headstall is not a rediscovery and does not shatter is not right if it is not a kind of a cation.; sent5 & sent3 -> int2: the headstall is not a cation.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the headstall is not a rediscovery and does not shatter is incorrect.; sent2 -> int4: if that the headstall is not a rediscovery and does not shatter does not hold it is not a Aristarchus.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the annunciatoriness occurs. | {C} | sent1: the odorousness occurs. sent2: the self-discipline happens if the propulsiveness does not occur. sent3: the self-discipline leads to that the annunciatoriness occurs. sent4: the crystallization happens. sent5: if the bottling eolith happens the propulsiveness occurs. sent6: the assimilating does not occur. sent7: both the non-Fahrenheitness and the odorousness occurs. sent8: the propulsiveness does not occur if the Fahrenheit does not occur but the odorousness occurs. | sent1: {AB} sent2: ¬{B} -> {A} sent3: {A} -> {C} sent4: {EP} sent5: {D} -> {B} sent6: ¬{IR} sent7: (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent8: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} | [
"sent8 & sent7 -> int1: the propulsiveness does not occur.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the self-discipline occurs.; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent8 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent2 & int1 -> int2: {A}; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| that the annunciatoriness does not occur is right. | ¬{C} | []
| 6 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the annunciatoriness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the odorousness occurs. sent2: the self-discipline happens if the propulsiveness does not occur. sent3: the self-discipline leads to that the annunciatoriness occurs. sent4: the crystallization happens. sent5: if the bottling eolith happens the propulsiveness occurs. sent6: the assimilating does not occur. sent7: both the non-Fahrenheitness and the odorousness occurs. sent8: the propulsiveness does not occur if the Fahrenheit does not occur but the odorousness occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent8 & sent7 -> int1: the propulsiveness does not occur.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the self-discipline occurs.; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the calciferousness and/or the bottling plasterer happens is incorrect. | ¬({C} v {D}) | sent1: the antiquating prevents the non-calciferousness. sent2: the unpaidness occurs and the antiquating happens. sent3: the unpaidness happens. sent4: either the affairs or the remaining morion or both occurs. sent5: both the remaining fizz and the bacteriostaticness happens. | sent1: {B} -> {C} sent2: ({A} & {B}) sent3: {A} sent4: ({BN} v {GH}) sent5: ({AP} & {EE}) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the antiquating happens.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the calciferousness happens.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 -> int1: {B}; sent1 & int1 -> int2: {C}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the calciferousness and/or the bottling plasterer happens is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the antiquating prevents the non-calciferousness. sent2: the unpaidness occurs and the antiquating happens. sent3: the unpaidness happens. sent4: either the affairs or the remaining morion or both occurs. sent5: both the remaining fizz and the bacteriostaticness happens. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the antiquating happens.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the calciferousness happens.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the residence is a bunt and not a Rawalpindi does not hold. | ¬({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) | sent1: the punchball is not a bunt. sent2: the residence is not a chuck if the fact that it is not apocynaceous and it is not proximal is not right. sent3: the Constable is a anointer. sent4: if something is not a chuck it is a Rawalpindi and it bottles Ereshkigal. sent5: if the fact that something is not proximal and does not bottle Ereshkigal is incorrect it does bottle Ereshkigal. sent6: if the Manchu is a bunt the fact that the residence does bunt and it is a Rawalpindi is not true. sent7: that something is both an indicator and not a bunt does not hold if it bottles Greco. sent8: if something is a anointer it is apocynaceous. sent9: that the urbanization is not a bunt hold. sent10: that the cootie is not proximal and it does not bottle Ereshkigal is not correct if the Constable is apocynaceous. sent11: the headrace does bottle Greco. sent12: if something does bottle Ereshkigal it does bottle Greco. sent13: that the Manchu is a Rawalpindi but it is not a kind of a bunt is not right. sent14: the fact that the residence is a bunt but it does not bottle Greco is wrong. sent15: something that does bottle Greco is both a bunt and not a Rawalpindi. sent16: the residence does bottle Greco if the fact that the Manchu is a chuck but it does not bottle Greco is incorrect. sent17: that the residence bunts and is not a kind of a Rawalpindi is wrong if the Manchu bunts. | sent1: ¬{B}{eh} sent2: ¬(¬{G}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent3: {H}{d} sent4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & {C}x) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}x sent6: {B}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & {D}{b}) sent7: (x): {A}x -> ¬({CL}x & ¬{B}x) sent8: (x): {H}x -> {G}x sent9: ¬{B}{cs} sent10: {G}{d} -> ¬(¬{F}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent11: {A}{aj} sent12: (x): {C}x -> {A}x sent13: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent14: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent15: (x): {A}x -> ({B}x & ¬{D}x) sent16: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {A}{b} sent17: {B}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) | []
| []
| the fact that the residence bunts but it is not a Rawalpindi is correct. | ({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) | [
"sent15 -> int1: if the residence does bottle Greco then it does bunt and it is not a Rawalpindi.; sent12 -> int2: if the cootie does bottle Ereshkigal it does bottle Greco.; sent5 -> int3: if the fact that the cootie is not proximal and does not bottle Ereshkigal is wrong then it bottle Ereshkigal.; sent8 -> int4: if that the Constable is a anointer is true then it is apocynaceous.; int4 & sent3 -> int5: the Constable is apocynaceous.; sent10 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the cootie is not proximal and it does not bottle Ereshkigal is false.; int3 & int6 -> int7: the cootie does bottle Ereshkigal.; int2 & int7 -> int8: the cootie does bottle Greco.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that it bottles Greco.;"
]
| 9 | 2 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the residence is a bunt and not a Rawalpindi does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the punchball is not a bunt. sent2: the residence is not a chuck if the fact that it is not apocynaceous and it is not proximal is not right. sent3: the Constable is a anointer. sent4: if something is not a chuck it is a Rawalpindi and it bottles Ereshkigal. sent5: if the fact that something is not proximal and does not bottle Ereshkigal is incorrect it does bottle Ereshkigal. sent6: if the Manchu is a bunt the fact that the residence does bunt and it is a Rawalpindi is not true. sent7: that something is both an indicator and not a bunt does not hold if it bottles Greco. sent8: if something is a anointer it is apocynaceous. sent9: that the urbanization is not a bunt hold. sent10: that the cootie is not proximal and it does not bottle Ereshkigal is not correct if the Constable is apocynaceous. sent11: the headrace does bottle Greco. sent12: if something does bottle Ereshkigal it does bottle Greco. sent13: that the Manchu is a Rawalpindi but it is not a kind of a bunt is not right. sent14: the fact that the residence is a bunt but it does not bottle Greco is wrong. sent15: something that does bottle Greco is both a bunt and not a Rawalpindi. sent16: the residence does bottle Greco if the fact that the Manchu is a chuck but it does not bottle Greco is incorrect. sent17: that the residence bunts and is not a kind of a Rawalpindi is wrong if the Manchu bunts. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that that it is a kind of a purveyor and/or does remain squatness is not right. | (Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) | sent1: that the syncarp does not remain squatness if that the syncarp is not supernal is true is not wrong. sent2: there is something such that it does not remain squatness. sent3: there exists something such that it is a purveyor or it remains squatness or both. sent4: the fact that the marzipan is a forebrain or it is a hypsometer or both does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a dogma and/or it is a victimizer does not hold. sent6: if the syncarp does not remain squatness then the fact that it is a profit and/or it does remain eon is wrong. sent7: the syncarp does not remain squatness. sent8: the syncarp is not a cover. sent9: the syncarp is not supernal. sent10: that something either is a kind of a cover or is a Solresol or both is not right if it is not appropriative. sent11: the toucanet is not a livedo. sent12: something does not remain squatness if it is not supernal. sent13: that the syncarp is a kind of a creeps and/or is supernal does not hold if it is not vagal. sent14: if something is not a kind of a viewpoint the fact that it is an incrimination or it does quibble or both is not true. sent15: there is something such that the fact that either it is a kind of a halftime or it is a kind of a stibnite or both is not true. sent16: something is not a purveyor. sent17: if something is not a Romans that it is a fin or it is urogenital or both is not true. | sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent3: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) sent4: ¬({AP}{e} v {FR}{e}) sent5: (Ex): ¬({EL}x v {ER}x) sent6: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬({BO}{aa} v {IT}{aa}) sent7: ¬{AB}{aa} sent8: ¬{EO}{aa} sent9: ¬{A}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬{ID}x -> ¬({EO}x v {HJ}x) sent11: ¬{EJ}{gj} sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent13: ¬{DF}{aa} -> ¬({J}{aa} v {A}{aa}) sent14: (x): ¬{AM}x -> ¬({GB}x v {G}x) sent15: (Ex): ¬({DL}x v {EI}x) sent16: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent17: (x): ¬{GC}x -> ¬({IK}x v {HB}x) | []
| []
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that that it is a kind of a purveyor and/or does remain squatness is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that the syncarp does not remain squatness if that the syncarp is not supernal is true is not wrong. sent2: there is something such that it does not remain squatness. sent3: there exists something such that it is a purveyor or it remains squatness or both. sent4: the fact that the marzipan is a forebrain or it is a hypsometer or both does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a dogma and/or it is a victimizer does not hold. sent6: if the syncarp does not remain squatness then the fact that it is a profit and/or it does remain eon is wrong. sent7: the syncarp does not remain squatness. sent8: the syncarp is not a cover. sent9: the syncarp is not supernal. sent10: that something either is a kind of a cover or is a Solresol or both is not right if it is not appropriative. sent11: the toucanet is not a livedo. sent12: something does not remain squatness if it is not supernal. sent13: that the syncarp is a kind of a creeps and/or is supernal does not hold if it is not vagal. sent14: if something is not a kind of a viewpoint the fact that it is an incrimination or it does quibble or both is not true. sent15: there is something such that the fact that either it is a kind of a halftime or it is a kind of a stibnite or both is not true. sent16: something is not a purveyor. sent17: if something is not a Romans that it is a fin or it is urogenital or both is not true. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there exists something such that if that it is both a Monterrey and not a obliviousness is wrong then it is not a mesoderm is incorrect. | ¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: if that the fact that the dada is a Monterrey but it is not a obliviousness is not correct is true then it is not a kind of a mesoderm. | sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if that it is both a Monterrey and not a obliviousness is wrong then it is not a mesoderm is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the fact that the dada is a Monterrey but it is not a obliviousness is not correct is true then it is not a kind of a mesoderm. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Coue is a Diodon. | {A}{a} | sent1: if the Coue is not a kind of a Diodon it is not a priesthood. sent2: the Coue is a priesthood. sent3: something does repeat characteristic and it is a Pseudobombax if it is not abranchiate. sent4: that the pentobarbital is a Diodon and it is a priesthood if the Coue is not gustatory is true. | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) sent4: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{io} & {B}{io}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Coue is not a Diodon.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the Coue is not a priesthood.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & sent2 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the pentobarbital is a kind of a priesthood. | {B}{io} | [
"sent3 -> int3: if the inflation is not abranchiate then it does repeat characteristic and is a Pseudobombax.;"
]
| 7 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Coue is a Diodon. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Coue is not a kind of a Diodon it is not a priesthood. sent2: the Coue is a priesthood. sent3: something does repeat characteristic and it is a Pseudobombax if it is not abranchiate. sent4: that the pentobarbital is a Diodon and it is a priesthood if the Coue is not gustatory is true. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Coue is not a Diodon.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the Coue is not a priesthood.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that it bottles moth and repeats morgue. | (Ex): ({C}x & {B}x) | sent1: the culdoscope is valvular. sent2: if the convict is not dirty and it is not a convulsion the faddist repeats morgue. sent3: the barrelfish does bottle moth. sent4: the faddist is valvular. sent5: the convict is not dirty and it is not a convulsion if the culdoscope is valvular. sent6: the culdoscope is a kind of a namer. sent7: the convict is not dirty. sent8: there is something such that it does repeat morgue. sent9: something is a convulsion if it is a kind of valvular thing that does not repeat morgue. sent10: the convict does bottle moth. sent11: the faddist repeats morgue if the convict dirties and is not a kind of a convulsion. sent12: if the culdoscope is valvular the convict does not dirty. sent13: the culdoscope does dirty. sent14: if the convict does repeat morgue then the faddist does not bottle moth and it is not a convulsion. sent15: something does bottle moth. sent16: the aragonite does bottle moth. sent17: The moth bottles faddist. | sent1: {A}{a} sent2: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} sent3: {C}{aj} sent4: {A}{c} sent5: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent6: {E}{a} sent7: ¬{AA}{b} sent8: (Ex): {B}x sent9: (x): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {AB}x sent10: {C}{b} sent11: ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} sent12: {A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent13: {AA}{a} sent14: {B}{b} -> (¬{C}{c} & ¬{AB}{c}) sent15: (Ex): {C}x sent16: {C}{bk} sent17: {AD}{ab} | [
"sent5 & sent1 -> int1: the convict is non-dirty and it is not a kind of a convulsion.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the faddist repeats morgue.;"
]
| [
"sent5 & sent1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); int1 & sent2 -> int2: {B}{c};"
]
| the strontianite is a kind of a convulsion. | {AB}{am} | [
"sent9 -> int3: if the strontianite is valvular but it does not repeat morgue it is a convulsion.;"
]
| 4 | 4 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it bottles moth and repeats morgue. ; $context$ = sent1: the culdoscope is valvular. sent2: if the convict is not dirty and it is not a convulsion the faddist repeats morgue. sent3: the barrelfish does bottle moth. sent4: the faddist is valvular. sent5: the convict is not dirty and it is not a convulsion if the culdoscope is valvular. sent6: the culdoscope is a kind of a namer. sent7: the convict is not dirty. sent8: there is something such that it does repeat morgue. sent9: something is a convulsion if it is a kind of valvular thing that does not repeat morgue. sent10: the convict does bottle moth. sent11: the faddist repeats morgue if the convict dirties and is not a kind of a convulsion. sent12: if the culdoscope is valvular the convict does not dirty. sent13: the culdoscope does dirty. sent14: if the convict does repeat morgue then the faddist does not bottle moth and it is not a convulsion. sent15: something does bottle moth. sent16: the aragonite does bottle moth. sent17: The moth bottles faddist. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent1 -> int1: the convict is non-dirty and it is not a kind of a convulsion.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the faddist repeats morgue.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the angulation does not occur. | ¬{A} | sent1: if the bane does not occur then not the nonexploratoriness but the dominicalness happens. sent2: the repeating cradle happens if the fact that the repeating cradle does not occur and the reconsideration does not occur is not correct. sent3: the self-help occurs. sent4: if the inshoreness occurs the fact that the Mill but not the quartering occurs is not correct. sent5: the identicalness does not occur if the popularization happens. sent6: the musculoskeletalness does not occur if the fact that the Mill happens and the quartering does not occur is not correct. sent7: the non-inshoreness is prevented by the non-identicalness. sent8: the fact that the Fijianness does not occur and the anthropogeneticness does not occur is false if the repeating cradle occurs. sent9: if the unmodifiableness occurs then that the repeating cradle does not occur and the reconsideration does not occur is not right. sent10: if that the self-help occurs hold then that the remaining radiobiology does not occur or the annihilation does not occur or both does not hold. sent11: the cautioning is prevented by that the diametralness and the repeating Guthrie occurs. sent12: the unmodifiableness happens. sent13: the lowlandness happens if the fact that the remaining radiobiology does not occur and the metric happens is false. sent14: if the annihilation does not occur the diametralness and the trifurcation occurs. sent15: the remaining paternity occurs if that the non-Fijianness and the non-anthropogeneticness happens does not hold. sent16: if the lowland occurs then the repeating Guthrie but not the snookering occurs. sent17: the fact that not the remaining radiobiology but the metricness happens is wrong if the detracting occurs. sent18: the popularization happens if not the nonexploratoriness but the dominicalness happens. sent19: the angulation and the self-help happens if the musculoskeletalness does not occur. sent20: that the bane does not occur is true if the remaining paternity occurs but the cautioning does not occur. sent21: if the angulation happens then the remaining radiobiology does not occur or the annihilation does not occur or both. | sent1: ¬{K} -> (¬{I} & {J}) sent2: ¬(¬{AC} & ¬{AD}) -> {AC} sent3: {B} sent4: {F} -> ¬({D} & ¬{E}) sent5: {H} -> ¬{G} sent6: ¬({D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} sent7: ¬{G} -> {F} sent8: {AC} -> ¬(¬{Q} & ¬{R}) sent9: {AF} -> ¬(¬{AC} & ¬{AD}) sent10: {B} -> ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) sent11: ({N} & {O}) -> ¬{L} sent12: {AF} sent13: ¬(¬{AA} & {U}) -> {T} sent14: ¬{AB} -> ({N} & {P}) sent15: ¬(¬{Q} & ¬{R}) -> {M} sent16: {T} -> ({O} & ¬{S}) sent17: {AG} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {U}) sent18: (¬{I} & {J}) -> {H} sent19: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent20: ({M} & ¬{L}) -> ¬{K} sent21: {A} -> (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the angulation happens.; sent21 & assump1 -> int1: the remaining radiobiology does not occur and/or the annihilation does not occur.; sent10 & sent3 -> int2: the fact that either the remaining radiobiology does not occur or the annihilation does not occur or both is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent21 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}); sent10 & sent3 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the angulation occurs. | {A} | [
"sent9 & sent12 -> int4: that that the repeating cradle does not occur and the reconsideration does not occur hold is false.; sent2 & int4 -> int5: the repeating cradle occurs.; sent8 & int5 -> int6: that the Fijian does not occur and the anthropogeneticness does not occur is not right.; sent15 & int6 -> int7: the remaining paternity occurs.;"
]
| 16 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the angulation does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bane does not occur then not the nonexploratoriness but the dominicalness happens. sent2: the repeating cradle happens if the fact that the repeating cradle does not occur and the reconsideration does not occur is not correct. sent3: the self-help occurs. sent4: if the inshoreness occurs the fact that the Mill but not the quartering occurs is not correct. sent5: the identicalness does not occur if the popularization happens. sent6: the musculoskeletalness does not occur if the fact that the Mill happens and the quartering does not occur is not correct. sent7: the non-inshoreness is prevented by the non-identicalness. sent8: the fact that the Fijianness does not occur and the anthropogeneticness does not occur is false if the repeating cradle occurs. sent9: if the unmodifiableness occurs then that the repeating cradle does not occur and the reconsideration does not occur is not right. sent10: if that the self-help occurs hold then that the remaining radiobiology does not occur or the annihilation does not occur or both does not hold. sent11: the cautioning is prevented by that the diametralness and the repeating Guthrie occurs. sent12: the unmodifiableness happens. sent13: the lowlandness happens if the fact that the remaining radiobiology does not occur and the metric happens is false. sent14: if the annihilation does not occur the diametralness and the trifurcation occurs. sent15: the remaining paternity occurs if that the non-Fijianness and the non-anthropogeneticness happens does not hold. sent16: if the lowland occurs then the repeating Guthrie but not the snookering occurs. sent17: the fact that not the remaining radiobiology but the metricness happens is wrong if the detracting occurs. sent18: the popularization happens if not the nonexploratoriness but the dominicalness happens. sent19: the angulation and the self-help happens if the musculoskeletalness does not occur. sent20: that the bane does not occur is true if the remaining paternity occurs but the cautioning does not occur. sent21: if the angulation happens then the remaining radiobiology does not occur or the annihilation does not occur or both. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the angulation happens.; sent21 & assump1 -> int1: the remaining radiobiology does not occur and/or the annihilation does not occur.; sent10 & sent3 -> int2: the fact that either the remaining radiobiology does not occur or the annihilation does not occur or both is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the lot does rise. | {A}{a} | sent1: something is a rise if it is not a kind of a rape. sent2: that the fact that the lot does not clink but it repeats Chondrus is not true hold. sent3: if the fact that the lot does not clink but it repeats Chondrus does not hold then it is not a rape. | sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} | [
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the lot is not a rape.; sent1 -> int2: if the lot is not a kind of a rape then it rises.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent1 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> {A}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the lot does rise. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a rise if it is not a kind of a rape. sent2: that the fact that the lot does not clink but it repeats Chondrus is not true hold. sent3: if the fact that the lot does not clink but it repeats Chondrus does not hold then it is not a rape. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the lot is not a rape.; sent1 -> int2: if the lot is not a kind of a rape then it rises.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the lick is a foreman or does not bottle Mayflower or both. | ({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) | sent1: if the praetor does not bottle Mayflower the lick does bottle Mayflower. sent2: the clofibrate is a 9/11. sent3: the praetor is not a kind of a foreman and it is not a paramilitary. sent4: if a shrimp does remain rolled then it is non-paramilitary. sent5: the lick is not a kind of a paramilitary. sent6: the praetor does not remain scroll. sent7: if the Mayflower is a Malawian then it does remain rolled. sent8: something is a foreman if that it is a kind of a rotl that is not a foreman is false. sent9: if something is not a rotl then it is a paramilitary. sent10: the fact that the lick either is a foreman or does not bottle Mayflower or both is not true if the fact that the praetor does not bottle Mayflower is true. sent11: the praetor does not bottle Mayflower and it is not a paramilitary. sent12: the Mayflower is a shrimp if it is a 9/11. sent13: if the clofibrate is a 9/11 then the Mayflower is a 9/11. sent14: the praetor is not a kind of a paramilitary. sent15: the Mayflower is Malawian. sent16: something is not a foreman and does not bottle fandango if it does not bottle Mayflower. sent17: if that the lick does not bottle Mayflower is not false then the fact that either the praetor is a foreman or it does not bottle Mayflower or both is false. sent18: the lick does bottle Mayflower. | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> {A}{b} sent2: {G}{d} sent3: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent4: (x): ({E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: ¬{B}{b} sent6: ¬{CC}{a} sent7: {H}{c} -> {F}{c} sent8: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}x sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> {B}x sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent11: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent12: {G}{c} -> {E}{c} sent13: {G}{d} -> {G}{c} sent14: ¬{B}{a} sent15: {H}{c} sent16: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{DF}x) sent17: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) sent18: {A}{b} | [
"sent11 -> int1: the praetor does not bottle Mayflower.; sent10 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent11 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; sent10 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the praetor is not a foreman and does not bottle fandango. | (¬{C}{a} & ¬{DF}{a}) | [
"sent16 -> int2: the lick is not a foreman and does not bottle fandango if it does not bottle Mayflower.; sent9 -> int3: if the lick is not a kind of a rotl it is paramilitary.;"
]
| 6 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the lick is a foreman or does not bottle Mayflower or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if the praetor does not bottle Mayflower the lick does bottle Mayflower. sent2: the clofibrate is a 9/11. sent3: the praetor is not a kind of a foreman and it is not a paramilitary. sent4: if a shrimp does remain rolled then it is non-paramilitary. sent5: the lick is not a kind of a paramilitary. sent6: the praetor does not remain scroll. sent7: if the Mayflower is a Malawian then it does remain rolled. sent8: something is a foreman if that it is a kind of a rotl that is not a foreman is false. sent9: if something is not a rotl then it is a paramilitary. sent10: the fact that the lick either is a foreman or does not bottle Mayflower or both is not true if the fact that the praetor does not bottle Mayflower is true. sent11: the praetor does not bottle Mayflower and it is not a paramilitary. sent12: the Mayflower is a shrimp if it is a 9/11. sent13: if the clofibrate is a 9/11 then the Mayflower is a 9/11. sent14: the praetor is not a kind of a paramilitary. sent15: the Mayflower is Malawian. sent16: something is not a foreman and does not bottle fandango if it does not bottle Mayflower. sent17: if that the lick does not bottle Mayflower is not false then the fact that either the praetor is a foreman or it does not bottle Mayflower or both is false. sent18: the lick does bottle Mayflower. ; $proof$ = | sent11 -> int1: the praetor does not bottle Mayflower.; sent10 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the retentiveness happens and the impiousness does not occur. | ({AA} & ¬{AB}) | sent1: that the condescension occurs and/or that the centralization does not occur prevents that the condescension does not occur. sent2: if the filling does not occur then the fact that that the retentiveness happens but the impiousness does not occur is incorrect is true. sent3: the fact that the coexisting and the non-Ambrosianness occurs is not right if the filling does not occur. sent4: if the saccade occurs the apocryphalness happens. sent5: the filling happens. sent6: the impiousness does not occur. sent7: that the precondition occurs is right. sent8: the diabaticness does not occur if the impiousness occurs. sent9: if the bacteremicness does not occur either the condescension happens or the centralization does not occur or both. sent10: the fact that the cricketing but not the stall happens does not hold. sent11: that the bottling Hemingway happens results in that the quoting Laudo occurs. sent12: the practice does not occur if that that the adoption does not occur and the intermediateness does not occur is not wrong is not right. sent13: that the practice does not occur yields that the bottling differentiation does not occur and the bacteremicness does not occur. sent14: the fact that the bottling Piper does not occur hold. sent15: if that the retentiveness and the piousness happens is wrong then the diabaticness does not occur. sent16: if the filling does not occur the fact that the benevolence but not the bottling watt occurs is wrong. sent17: the fact that that both the retentiveness and the impiousness happens is wrong is correct. sent18: if the condescension occurs that the diabaticness does not occur and the uterineness happens is incorrect. sent19: the Tudor but not the coexisting happens. | sent1: ({D} v ¬{F}) -> {D} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: ¬{A} -> ¬({GC} & ¬{CH}) sent4: {II} -> {IK} sent5: {A} sent6: ¬{AB} sent7: {HQ} sent8: {AB} -> ¬{B} sent9: ¬{E} -> ({D} v ¬{F}) sent10: ¬({EH} & ¬{AM}) sent11: {GR} -> {AU} sent12: ¬(¬{I} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} sent13: ¬{H} -> (¬{G} & ¬{E}) sent14: ¬{IP} sent15: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent16: ¬{A} -> ¬({CO} & ¬{CE}) sent17: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent18: {D} -> ¬(¬{B} & {C}) sent19: ({IA} & ¬{GC}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that both the retentiveness and the piousness occurs is wrong.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the diabaticness does not occur.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}); sent15 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B};"
]
| the fact that the benevolence but not the bottling watt occurs is incorrect. | ¬({CO} & ¬{CE}) | []
| 6 | 3 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the retentiveness happens and the impiousness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the condescension occurs and/or that the centralization does not occur prevents that the condescension does not occur. sent2: if the filling does not occur then the fact that that the retentiveness happens but the impiousness does not occur is incorrect is true. sent3: the fact that the coexisting and the non-Ambrosianness occurs is not right if the filling does not occur. sent4: if the saccade occurs the apocryphalness happens. sent5: the filling happens. sent6: the impiousness does not occur. sent7: that the precondition occurs is right. sent8: the diabaticness does not occur if the impiousness occurs. sent9: if the bacteremicness does not occur either the condescension happens or the centralization does not occur or both. sent10: the fact that the cricketing but not the stall happens does not hold. sent11: that the bottling Hemingway happens results in that the quoting Laudo occurs. sent12: the practice does not occur if that that the adoption does not occur and the intermediateness does not occur is not wrong is not right. sent13: that the practice does not occur yields that the bottling differentiation does not occur and the bacteremicness does not occur. sent14: the fact that the bottling Piper does not occur hold. sent15: if that the retentiveness and the piousness happens is wrong then the diabaticness does not occur. sent16: if the filling does not occur the fact that the benevolence but not the bottling watt occurs is wrong. sent17: the fact that that both the retentiveness and the impiousness happens is wrong is correct. sent18: if the condescension occurs that the diabaticness does not occur and the uterineness happens is incorrect. sent19: the Tudor but not the coexisting happens. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that both the retentiveness and the piousness occurs is wrong.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the diabaticness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the hatchway is not agential is right. | ¬{A}{b} | sent1: something that does bottle hatchway is agential. sent2: something does bottle hatchway if it does quote bovine. sent3: the hatchway is not agential and it does not quote bovine if the nudnik is agential. sent4: something quotes methenamine. sent5: the nudnik is not agential if the fact that the basilisk is a kind of a retake and does thunder is incorrect. sent6: that something does not quote bovine and does not quote methenamine does not hold if it is a flak. sent7: something is a flak if it quotes declassification. sent8: the hatchway is agential if the nudnik does bottle hatchway. sent9: if the mephenytoin is chaetal and it is pubertal the methenamine is not pubertal. sent10: if the hatchway is a flak then the nudnik does quote bovine. sent11: the junk is a flak if the fact that the combustible does quote declassification is correct. sent12: if the methenamine is not pubertal then the fact that it is a wagtail and it does not remain Bitis is not right. sent13: the hatchway does quote declassification or it quotes methenamine or both if there exists something such that it does quotes methenamine. sent14: the nudnik is not agential if the basilisk is not a thunder. sent15: the fact that the nudnik does bottle Frau and is synovial is incorrect. sent16: the mephenytoin is chaetal and it is pubertal. | sent1: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent2: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent4: (Ex): {E}x sent5: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) sent7: (x): {F}x -> {D}x sent8: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} sent9: ({J}{f} & {I}{f}) -> ¬{I}{e} sent10: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} sent11: {F}{d} -> {D}{c} sent12: ¬{I}{e} -> ¬({H}{e} & ¬{G}{e}) sent13: (x): {E}x -> ({F}{b} v {E}{b}) sent14: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{A}{a} sent15: ¬({GQ}{a} & {JA}{a}) sent16: ({J}{f} & {I}{f}) | []
| []
| the hatchway is agential. | {A}{b} | [
"sent2 -> int1: the nudnik does bottle hatchway if it quotes bovine.; sent6 -> int2: if that the junk is a flak is true then that it does not quote bovine and it does not quote methenamine is not correct.; sent9 & sent16 -> int3: the methenamine is not pubertal.; sent12 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the methenamine is a kind of a wagtail but it does not remain Bitis does not hold.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a wagtail and it does not remain Bitis does not hold.;"
]
| 10 | 4 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the hatchway is not agential is right. ; $context$ = sent1: something that does bottle hatchway is agential. sent2: something does bottle hatchway if it does quote bovine. sent3: the hatchway is not agential and it does not quote bovine if the nudnik is agential. sent4: something quotes methenamine. sent5: the nudnik is not agential if the fact that the basilisk is a kind of a retake and does thunder is incorrect. sent6: that something does not quote bovine and does not quote methenamine does not hold if it is a flak. sent7: something is a flak if it quotes declassification. sent8: the hatchway is agential if the nudnik does bottle hatchway. sent9: if the mephenytoin is chaetal and it is pubertal the methenamine is not pubertal. sent10: if the hatchway is a flak then the nudnik does quote bovine. sent11: the junk is a flak if the fact that the combustible does quote declassification is correct. sent12: if the methenamine is not pubertal then the fact that it is a wagtail and it does not remain Bitis is not right. sent13: the hatchway does quote declassification or it quotes methenamine or both if there exists something such that it does quotes methenamine. sent14: the nudnik is not agential if the basilisk is not a thunder. sent15: the fact that the nudnik does bottle Frau and is synovial is incorrect. sent16: the mephenytoin is chaetal and it is pubertal. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is not a Aesculus and is not healthy it is international. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: if the gristmill is not a Aesculus and not healthy it is international. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a notch and it does not indicate then it is a burglary. | sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: (Ex): (¬{O}x & ¬{JH}x) -> {IJ}x | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a Aesculus and is not healthy it is international. ; $context$ = sent1: if the gristmill is not a Aesculus and not healthy it is international. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a notch and it does not indicate then it is a burglary. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | something does not whine or it is not monotheistic or both. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) | sent1: the haptoglobin does not remain Scheele if something is either penitent or not specialistic or both. sent2: something does whine or it is not monotheistic or both if it is not a registrar. sent3: the mycologist is a penitent and/or it is not specialistic if there exists something such that it is not a tear. sent4: something does repeat Shebat if it is a corn. sent5: if something is not a glare it is a processional and is a corn. sent6: the swine either is not a Fowler or is false or both if the haptoglobin does not remain Scheele. sent7: if the swine is not a registrar and/or it is inertial the pyrene is a kind of a registrar. sent8: the fiduciary does not whine and/or it is monotheistic if it is not a registrar. sent9: that the fiduciary does not repeat Shebat and it is not inertial is not correct. sent10: something is false if it is not a kind of a Fowler and/or it is false. sent11: the Jesuit is not a treasurership and/or it is not returnable if the pyrene is a registrar. sent12: if the fiduciary is not a registrar then either it whines or it is not monotheistic or both. sent13: the flophouse is not a kind of a tear. sent14: if something is not a registrar either it does not whine or it is not monotheistic or both. sent15: something does not whine and/or it is monotheistic. sent16: that something is not a registrar or it is inertial or both is not incorrect if that it repeats Shebat hold. sent17: a false thing does not glare. | sent1: (x): ({K}x v ¬{J}x) -> ¬{H}{d} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬{L}x -> ({K}{e} v ¬{J}{e}) sent4: (x): {D}x -> {B}x sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) sent6: ¬{H}{d} -> (¬{I}{c} v {G}{c}) sent7: (¬{A}{c} v {C}{c}) -> {A}{b} sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent9: ¬(¬{B}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) sent10: (x): (¬{I}x v {G}x) -> {G}x sent11: {A}{b} -> (¬{GU}{a} v ¬{EU}{a}) sent12: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent13: ¬{L}{f} sent14: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent15: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent16: (x): {B}x -> (¬{A}x v {C}x) sent17: (x): {G}x -> ¬{F}x | [
"sent14 -> int1: the fiduciary does not whine and/or it is non-monotheistic if it is not a registrar.;"
]
| [
"sent14 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa});"
]
| there exists something such that either it is not a kind of a treasurership or it is not returnable or both. | (Ex): (¬{GU}x v ¬{EU}x) | [
"sent16 -> int2: if the swine does repeat Shebat it is not a registrar or inertial or both.; sent4 -> int3: if the swine is a corn then it does repeat Shebat.; sent5 -> int4: the swine is processional and it does corn if it is not a glare.; sent17 -> int5: the swine is not a glare if it is false.; sent10 -> int6: the swine is false if it is not a Fowler or it is false or both.; sent13 -> int7: there exists something such that it does not tear.; int7 & sent3 -> int8: the mycologist is a penitent and/or it is not specialistic.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that it either is a kind of a penitent or is not specialistic or both.; int9 & sent1 -> int10: the haptoglobin does not remain Scheele.; sent6 & int10 -> int11: the swine is not a Fowler and/or is false.; int6 & int11 -> int12: the swine is false.; int5 & int12 -> int13: the swine is not a glare.; int4 & int13 -> int14: the swine is a processional and it is a kind of a corn.; int14 -> int15: the swine does corn.; int3 & int15 -> int16: the swine does repeat Shebat.; int2 & int16 -> int17: the swine is not a kind of a registrar or it is inertial or both.; sent7 & int17 -> int18: the pyrene is a registrar.; sent11 & int18 -> int19: the Jesuit either is not a kind of a treasurership or is not returnable or both.; int19 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 14 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = something does not whine or it is not monotheistic or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the haptoglobin does not remain Scheele if something is either penitent or not specialistic or both. sent2: something does whine or it is not monotheistic or both if it is not a registrar. sent3: the mycologist is a penitent and/or it is not specialistic if there exists something such that it is not a tear. sent4: something does repeat Shebat if it is a corn. sent5: if something is not a glare it is a processional and is a corn. sent6: the swine either is not a Fowler or is false or both if the haptoglobin does not remain Scheele. sent7: if the swine is not a registrar and/or it is inertial the pyrene is a kind of a registrar. sent8: the fiduciary does not whine and/or it is monotheistic if it is not a registrar. sent9: that the fiduciary does not repeat Shebat and it is not inertial is not correct. sent10: something is false if it is not a kind of a Fowler and/or it is false. sent11: the Jesuit is not a treasurership and/or it is not returnable if the pyrene is a registrar. sent12: if the fiduciary is not a registrar then either it whines or it is not monotheistic or both. sent13: the flophouse is not a kind of a tear. sent14: if something is not a registrar either it does not whine or it is not monotheistic or both. sent15: something does not whine and/or it is monotheistic. sent16: that something is not a registrar or it is inertial or both is not incorrect if that it repeats Shebat hold. sent17: a false thing does not glare. ; $proof$ = | sent14 -> int1: the fiduciary does not whine and/or it is non-monotheistic if it is not a registrar.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that there exists something such that the fact that that it does seed and it is not a kind of a Pediculus is correct is wrong is false. | ¬((Ex): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x)) | sent1: the hatchway does not remain hatchway. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is a seed and a Pediculus is not right. sent3: there exists something such that it is a pyxie. sent4: there is something such that it is a seed and is not a kind of a Pediculus. sent5: if there exists something such that that it is not a Pediculus or it does not soak or both is not right then the atenolol seeds. sent6: there exists something such that it remains Dimetapp. sent7: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a pyxie or it does not remain Dimetapp or both is wrong. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is not realistic and/or it is not run-on is not right. sent9: if something does not remain hatchway then it is phosphorous and realizes. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it does not remain Farmington or it does not numb or both is not right. sent11: if the atenolol soaks the fact that the Sardinian is a seed and it is a Pediculus does not hold. sent12: if the atenolol is a seed the Sardinian is a kind of a soaking. sent13: there is something such that that it is a pyxie or does not remain Dimetapp or both is not right. sent14: there is something such that that it is not a pyxie and/or it does remain Dimetapp is wrong. sent15: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a pyxie or does not remain Dimetapp or both does not hold then the atenolol does soak. sent16: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a soaking that is not a kind of a seed is not correct. sent17: the fact that the Sardinian is a seed and it is a Pediculus does not hold. sent18: the fact that the atenolol is a kind of a Pediculus that is not a kind of a soaking is incorrect. sent19: something is not a pyxie or it does not remain Dimetapp or both. sent20: the fact that the Sardinian is a seed that is not a Pediculus does not hold if the atenolol does soak. sent21: if there is something such that it seeds then the atenolol seeds or it soaks or both. sent22: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a seed and/or is not a kind of a Pediculus is incorrect the Sardinian does soak. | sent1: ¬{F}{d} sent2: (Ex): ¬({C}x & {B}x) sent3: (Ex): {AA}x sent4: (Ex): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{A}x) -> {C}{a} sent6: (Ex): {AB}x sent7: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{CA}x v ¬{DG}x) sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬(¬{FI}x v ¬{HE}x) sent11: {A}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent12: {C}{a} -> {A}{b} sent13: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent15: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent16: (Ex): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) sent17: ¬({C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent18: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent19: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent20: {A}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent21: (x): {C}x -> ({C}{a} v {A}{a}) sent22: (x): ¬(¬{C}x v ¬{B}x) -> {A}{b} | [
"sent7 & sent15 -> int1: the atenolol soaks.; sent20 & int1 -> int2: the fact that that the Sardinian is a kind of a seed but it is not a Pediculus is correct is false.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent7 & sent15 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent20 & int1 -> int2: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the Sardinian is a soaking. | {A}{b} | [
"sent9 -> int3: the hatchway is phosphorous and it does realize if it does not remain hatchway.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the hatchway is phosphorous and realizes.; int4 -> int5: the hatchway is phosphorous.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that it is phosphorous.;"
]
| 9 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that the fact that that it does seed and it is not a kind of a Pediculus is correct is wrong is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the hatchway does not remain hatchway. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is a seed and a Pediculus is not right. sent3: there exists something such that it is a pyxie. sent4: there is something such that it is a seed and is not a kind of a Pediculus. sent5: if there exists something such that that it is not a Pediculus or it does not soak or both is not right then the atenolol seeds. sent6: there exists something such that it remains Dimetapp. sent7: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a pyxie or it does not remain Dimetapp or both is wrong. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is not realistic and/or it is not run-on is not right. sent9: if something does not remain hatchway then it is phosphorous and realizes. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it does not remain Farmington or it does not numb or both is not right. sent11: if the atenolol soaks the fact that the Sardinian is a seed and it is a Pediculus does not hold. sent12: if the atenolol is a seed the Sardinian is a kind of a soaking. sent13: there is something such that that it is a pyxie or does not remain Dimetapp or both is not right. sent14: there is something such that that it is not a pyxie and/or it does remain Dimetapp is wrong. sent15: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a pyxie or does not remain Dimetapp or both does not hold then the atenolol does soak. sent16: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a soaking that is not a kind of a seed is not correct. sent17: the fact that the Sardinian is a seed and it is a Pediculus does not hold. sent18: the fact that the atenolol is a kind of a Pediculus that is not a kind of a soaking is incorrect. sent19: something is not a pyxie or it does not remain Dimetapp or both. sent20: the fact that the Sardinian is a seed that is not a Pediculus does not hold if the atenolol does soak. sent21: if there is something such that it seeds then the atenolol seeds or it soaks or both. sent22: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a seed and/or is not a kind of a Pediculus is incorrect the Sardinian does soak. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent15 -> int1: the atenolol soaks.; sent20 & int1 -> int2: the fact that that the Sardinian is a kind of a seed but it is not a Pediculus is correct is false.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there exists something such that if it is not prognathous then it is integumentary and it repeats grisaille is wrong. | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x)) | sent1: if the plug-ugly is non-prognathous then it is integumentary and it repeats grisaille. sent2: if the plug-ugly is not prognathous then that it repeats grisaille is true. sent3: if the plug-ugly is Nigerian it is a kind of prognathous thing that is nihilistic. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not remain calorimetry it exults. sent5: there is something such that if that it does not chloroform is not wrong then it is a walk and it is keyless. sent6: there is something such that if the fact that it is a Romans hold it is birefringent and it repeats yarmulke. sent7: something quotes cradle and it is marmorean if that it does not bottle counterargument hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is not prognathous then it repeats grisaille. sent9: if the plug-ugly is non-rosaceous it is both integumentary and a Macao. sent10: the plug-ugly is integumentary thing that repeats grisaille if the fact that it is not non-prognathous is not wrong. sent11: if the eurypterid is autoplastic then that it is alkalotic and does repeat banger is true. sent12: if the plug-ugly does not repeat grisaille it is a infantilism and is a kind of a corporatist. sent13: there exists something such that if it is prognathous then it is integumentary and it does repeat grisaille. sent14: there is something such that if it is not a Macao it launders and is a Aare. sent15: if something is not a kind of a Raoulia then it is a postern and is a melodiousness. sent16: there is something such that if it is not prognathous it is not non-integumentary. | sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent3: {GE}{aa} -> ({A}{aa} & {CH}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): ¬{HF}x -> {M}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{JC}x -> ({HQ}x & {EM}x) sent6: (Ex): {F}x -> ({IO}x & {U}x) sent7: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({BE}x & {ED}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x sent9: ¬{HH}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {IJ}{aa}) sent10: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent11: {GK}{gs} -> ({GB}{gs} & {FA}{gs}) sent12: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ({IC}{aa} & {FU}{aa}) sent13: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬{IJ}x -> ({BH}x & {JI}x) sent15: (x): ¬{BA}x -> ({IG}x & {EI}x) sent16: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there exists something such that if it does not bottle counterargument it does quote cradle and it is marmorean. | (Ex): ¬{J}x -> ({BE}x & {ED}x) | [
"sent7 -> int1: if the banger does not bottle counterargument then it does quote cradle and is marmorean.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not prognathous then it is integumentary and it repeats grisaille is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the plug-ugly is non-prognathous then it is integumentary and it repeats grisaille. sent2: if the plug-ugly is not prognathous then that it repeats grisaille is true. sent3: if the plug-ugly is Nigerian it is a kind of prognathous thing that is nihilistic. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not remain calorimetry it exults. sent5: there is something such that if that it does not chloroform is not wrong then it is a walk and it is keyless. sent6: there is something such that if the fact that it is a Romans hold it is birefringent and it repeats yarmulke. sent7: something quotes cradle and it is marmorean if that it does not bottle counterargument hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is not prognathous then it repeats grisaille. sent9: if the plug-ugly is non-rosaceous it is both integumentary and a Macao. sent10: the plug-ugly is integumentary thing that repeats grisaille if the fact that it is not non-prognathous is not wrong. sent11: if the eurypterid is autoplastic then that it is alkalotic and does repeat banger is true. sent12: if the plug-ugly does not repeat grisaille it is a infantilism and is a kind of a corporatist. sent13: there exists something such that if it is prognathous then it is integumentary and it does repeat grisaille. sent14: there is something such that if it is not a Macao it launders and is a Aare. sent15: if something is not a kind of a Raoulia then it is a postern and is a melodiousness. sent16: there is something such that if it is not prognathous it is not non-integumentary. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the teratogenicness does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: the Western happens. sent2: the fact that the bottling Thomson occurs is correct. sent3: the non-teratogenicness is triggered by that both the Western and the succussion occurs. sent4: the intro happens. sent5: the succussion occurs. | sent1: {A} sent2: {AS} sent3: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent4: {GH} sent5: {B} | [
"sent1 & sent5 -> int1: the Western happens and the succussion occurs.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent1 & sent5 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the teratogenicness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the Western happens. sent2: the fact that the bottling Thomson occurs is correct. sent3: the non-teratogenicness is triggered by that both the Western and the succussion occurs. sent4: the intro happens. sent5: the succussion occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent5 -> int1: the Western happens and the succussion occurs.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the gusher is not a kind of a tabby. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: the sparkler is obligatory. sent2: the bullhorn repeats Orthotomus and is a tabby. sent3: the gusher is not psycholinguistics if the sparkler is a tabby and isotopic. sent4: the sparkler is both a majors and a Aleyrodidae. sent5: the sparkler is psycholinguistics. sent6: something is a tabby and psycholinguistics if it is not a spot-welding. sent7: the gusher is ametropic and it is a Jewess. sent8: the piccolo is not isotopic. sent9: the sparkler is isotopic. sent10: if the sparkler is not non-isotopic and it is psycholinguistics then that the gusher is not a tabby is right. sent11: the sparkler does repeat Pediculus and is a kind of a tabby. sent12: if the pro does not bottle Scottish it is Gaussian and it is a slopseller. sent13: the gusher is isotopic. sent14: the fact that the hive is not a tabby is not false. sent15: the sparkler is not isotopic if the gusher is both psycholinguistics and a tabby. sent16: the gusher is linguistic. sent17: if something is a tabby and it is psycholinguistics the pro is isotopic. sent18: the sparkler is not a spot-welding if the gusher does bottle endocrinology and is a kind of a spot-welding. sent19: the fact that the sparkler is psycholinguistics but it is not a spot-welding does not hold if the paddle-box is Gaussian. | sent1: {IQ}{a} sent2: ({AL}{gk} & {C}{gk}) sent3: ({C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: ({HU}{a} & {N}{a}) sent5: {B}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {B}x) sent7: ({IF}{b} & {AF}{b}) sent8: ¬{A}{gd} sent9: {A}{a} sent10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent11: ({GB}{a} & {C}{a}) sent12: ¬{F}{gg} -> ({D}{gg} & {AJ}{gg}) sent13: {A}{b} sent14: ¬{C}{fb} sent15: ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent16: {CT}{b} sent17: (x): ({C}x & {B}x) -> {A}{gg} sent18: ({G}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent19: {D}{c} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) | [
"sent9 & sent5 -> int1: the sparkler is isotopic and it is psycholinguistics.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent9 & sent5 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the pro is isotopic thing that is a kind of a slopseller. | ({A}{gg} & {AJ}{gg}) | [
"sent6 -> int2: if the sparkler is not a spot-welding then it is a kind of a tabby and it is psycholinguistics.;"
]
| 5 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the gusher is not a kind of a tabby. ; $context$ = sent1: the sparkler is obligatory. sent2: the bullhorn repeats Orthotomus and is a tabby. sent3: the gusher is not psycholinguistics if the sparkler is a tabby and isotopic. sent4: the sparkler is both a majors and a Aleyrodidae. sent5: the sparkler is psycholinguistics. sent6: something is a tabby and psycholinguistics if it is not a spot-welding. sent7: the gusher is ametropic and it is a Jewess. sent8: the piccolo is not isotopic. sent9: the sparkler is isotopic. sent10: if the sparkler is not non-isotopic and it is psycholinguistics then that the gusher is not a tabby is right. sent11: the sparkler does repeat Pediculus and is a kind of a tabby. sent12: if the pro does not bottle Scottish it is Gaussian and it is a slopseller. sent13: the gusher is isotopic. sent14: the fact that the hive is not a tabby is not false. sent15: the sparkler is not isotopic if the gusher is both psycholinguistics and a tabby. sent16: the gusher is linguistic. sent17: if something is a tabby and it is psycholinguistics the pro is isotopic. sent18: the sparkler is not a spot-welding if the gusher does bottle endocrinology and is a kind of a spot-welding. sent19: the fact that the sparkler is psycholinguistics but it is not a spot-welding does not hold if the paddle-box is Gaussian. ; $proof$ = | sent9 & sent5 -> int1: the sparkler is isotopic and it is psycholinguistics.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that if the sedative-hypnotic does not buzz gasohol the sedative-hypnotic unbends and it represses sedative-hypnotic does not hold. | ¬(¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})) | sent1: something unbends and it does repress sedative-hypnotic if it does not buzz gasohol. | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that if the sedative-hypnotic does not buzz gasohol the sedative-hypnotic unbends and it represses sedative-hypnotic does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: something unbends and it does repress sedative-hypnotic if it does not buzz gasohol. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the clothier does not buzz mutant. | ¬{AA}{aa} | sent1: if something does lunge educator it does not repress eremitism. sent2: everything does not buzz mutant and is not a cyclone. | sent1: (x): {C}x -> ¬{B}x sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the clothier does not buzz mutant and it is not a kind of a cyclone.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the clothier buzzes mutant. | {AA}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> int2: if the piranha lunges educator then it does not repress eremitism.;"
]
| 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the clothier does not buzz mutant. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does lunge educator it does not repress eremitism. sent2: everything does not buzz mutant and is not a cyclone. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the clothier does not buzz mutant and it is not a kind of a cyclone.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the moderating and the buzzing Priapus occurs is not true. | ¬({B} & {C}) | sent1: the measure occurs and the validation occurs. sent2: the fact that the spitter occurs hold. sent3: the lunging rook happens. sent4: that the moderateness and the buzzing Priapus occurs is not true if the constant does not occur. sent5: the fact that the laryngectomy happens and the kidding does not occur is incorrect. sent6: if the apery does not occur then both the SIGINT and the misfortune happens. sent7: if the sincereness occurs the pervaporation happens. sent8: the fact that the smiling gavial occurs and the throwing does not occur is not correct. sent9: the fact that the lunging caracolito happens but the manacling does not occur is incorrect. sent10: that the SIGINT but not the buzzing Priapus happens is not true. sent11: both the boost and the cannibalism occurs. sent12: that that the abbatialness but not the Eucharist happens is not incorrect is not true. sent13: the sincereness occurs. sent14: the terrestrialness and the buzzing lieutenancy happens. sent15: the constant occurs. sent16: that the fact that both the SIGINT and the buzzing Priapus occurs is not right is correct. sent17: the consecrating happens and the losslessness happens. sent18: if the abnegation happens then the vesper happens. sent19: the buzzing Priapus occurs if that the SIGINT but not the buzzing Priapus happens is not right. sent20: that the lunging crocket happens is true. sent21: that the constant happens leads to that the moderateness happens. | sent1: ({DK} & {GP}) sent2: {GU} sent3: {GT} sent4: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent5: ¬({P} & ¬{DQ}) sent6: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent7: {GA} -> {BJ} sent8: ¬({IQ} & ¬{IU}) sent9: ¬({BN} & ¬{EA}) sent10: ¬({D} & ¬{C}) sent11: ({CP} & {CA}) sent12: ¬({AH} & ¬{BQ}) sent13: {GA} sent14: ({GG} & {H}) sent15: {A} sent16: ¬({D} & {C}) sent17: ({HH} & {FL}) sent18: {AP} -> {EM} sent19: ¬({D} & ¬{C}) -> {C} sent20: {FH} sent21: {A} -> {B} | [
"sent21 & sent15 -> int1: the moderating happens.; sent19 & sent10 -> int2: the buzzing Priapus occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent21 & sent15 -> int1: {B}; sent19 & sent10 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fact that the moderating occurs and the buzzing Priapus occurs is incorrect. | ¬({B} & {C}) | []
| 7 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the moderating and the buzzing Priapus occurs is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the measure occurs and the validation occurs. sent2: the fact that the spitter occurs hold. sent3: the lunging rook happens. sent4: that the moderateness and the buzzing Priapus occurs is not true if the constant does not occur. sent5: the fact that the laryngectomy happens and the kidding does not occur is incorrect. sent6: if the apery does not occur then both the SIGINT and the misfortune happens. sent7: if the sincereness occurs the pervaporation happens. sent8: the fact that the smiling gavial occurs and the throwing does not occur is not correct. sent9: the fact that the lunging caracolito happens but the manacling does not occur is incorrect. sent10: that the SIGINT but not the buzzing Priapus happens is not true. sent11: both the boost and the cannibalism occurs. sent12: that that the abbatialness but not the Eucharist happens is not incorrect is not true. sent13: the sincereness occurs. sent14: the terrestrialness and the buzzing lieutenancy happens. sent15: the constant occurs. sent16: that the fact that both the SIGINT and the buzzing Priapus occurs is not right is correct. sent17: the consecrating happens and the losslessness happens. sent18: if the abnegation happens then the vesper happens. sent19: the buzzing Priapus occurs if that the SIGINT but not the buzzing Priapus happens is not right. sent20: that the lunging crocket happens is true. sent21: that the constant happens leads to that the moderateness happens. ; $proof$ = | sent21 & sent15 -> int1: the moderating happens.; sent19 & sent10 -> int2: the buzzing Priapus occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Raffia is on-site. | {C}{c} | sent1: if the fragmentation lunges Edwardian the Raffia is on-site. sent2: the fact that the agnostic is not a Cash and does repress Chain is false. sent3: if the agnostic does not repress Chain that it does smile occlusion is not wrong. sent4: if the fact that the agnostic is not a Cash but it represses Chain is wrong it does smile occlusion. sent5: that something does not lunge Edwardian and does not smile occlusion is incorrect if it is not a kind of a annunciator. | sent1: {A}{b} -> {C}{c} sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: ¬{AB}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the agnostic does smile occlusion.;"
]
| [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: {B}{a};"
]
| the Raffia is not on-site. | ¬{C}{c} | [
"sent5 -> int2: if the agnostic is not a kind of a annunciator then the fact that it does not lunge Edwardian and it does not smile occlusion does not hold.;"
]
| 4 | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Raffia is on-site. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fragmentation lunges Edwardian the Raffia is on-site. sent2: the fact that the agnostic is not a Cash and does repress Chain is false. sent3: if the agnostic does not repress Chain that it does smile occlusion is not wrong. sent4: if the fact that the agnostic is not a Cash but it represses Chain is wrong it does smile occlusion. sent5: that something does not lunge Edwardian and does not smile occlusion is incorrect if it is not a kind of a annunciator. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the agnostic does smile occlusion.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-weak a sherry it is not microcephalic. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: if the scrimshaw does not repress biohazard and is micrometeoric then it is not a sherry. sent2: the hurricane is microcephalic if it is not weak and it is a kind of a sherry. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a theosophism and is revenant then it is not alterable. sent4: something that is a kind of non-pupillary thing that buzzes scrimshaw does not repress geophyte. sent5: if the hurricane is not microcephalic but it does repress geophyte it does not repress hemerobiid. sent6: there is something such that if it is both not a Shastan and a fishpond it is not a reflexive. sent7: if the hurricane is not weak but a sherry then it is not microcephalic. sent8: if something is both not a Carbondale and alterable then it does not lunge bighorn. sent9: that the geophyte is not a run is not false if it is not a broadcaster and is weak. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not weak and it is a sherry then the fact that it is microcephalic is not false. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a hydroxyl and does buzz scrimshaw it is not Jain. sent12: the hurricane is not microcephalic if it is weak and it is a sherry. sent13: there is something such that if it is not nonfictional and it is desirous then it does not repress planthopper. sent14: the hurricane is not a undercharge if it is a kind of non-microcephalic thing that does retract. sent15: if the hurricane is not a kind of a sherry and does repress Terry it is not a overspill. sent16: if the hurricane does not buzz duck and is a sherry it is not a chiropodist. sent17: if the hurricane does not repress manageability but it is weak then that it is not a Shastan is true. sent18: there is something such that if it is not a Turkey and is Jain it is not stiff. sent19: there exists something such that if it is weak and it is a sherry then that it is not microcephalic is not wrong. sent20: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Bramidae and it is not non-vocational it is not a Barth. | sent1: (¬{DO}{gm} & {CU}{gm}) -> ¬{AB}{gm} sent2: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: (Ex): (¬{GQ}x & {EJ}x) -> ¬{JI}x sent4: (x): (¬{CK}x & {EH}x) -> ¬{GR}x sent5: (¬{B}{aa} & {GR}{aa}) -> ¬{GT}{aa} sent6: (Ex): (¬{BL}x & {FT}x) -> ¬{AE}x sent7: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent8: (x): (¬{GA}x & {JI}x) -> ¬{CS}x sent9: (¬{IJ}{bn} & {AA}{bn}) -> ¬{FO}{bn} sent10: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: (Ex): (¬{CI}x & {EH}x) -> ¬{BS}x sent12: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent13: (Ex): (¬{CL}x & {JA}x) -> ¬{FC}x sent14: (¬{B}{aa} & {HE}{aa}) -> ¬{FF}{aa} sent15: (¬{AB}{aa} & {JF}{aa}) -> ¬{IH}{aa} sent16: (¬{DR}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{IE}{aa} sent17: (¬{I}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{BL}{aa} sent18: (Ex): (¬{CG}x & {BS}x) -> ¬{R}x sent19: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent20: (Ex): (¬{IP}x & {AQ}x) -> ¬{FP}x | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
]
| there is something such that if the fact that it is not a Carbondale and it is alterable is not wrong that it does not lunge bighorn hold. | (Ex): (¬{GA}x & {JI}x) -> ¬{CS}x | [
"sent8 -> int1: if the foster-mother is not a Carbondale but it is alterable then it does not lunge bighorn.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-weak a sherry it is not microcephalic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the scrimshaw does not repress biohazard and is micrometeoric then it is not a sherry. sent2: the hurricane is microcephalic if it is not weak and it is a kind of a sherry. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a theosophism and is revenant then it is not alterable. sent4: something that is a kind of non-pupillary thing that buzzes scrimshaw does not repress geophyte. sent5: if the hurricane is not microcephalic but it does repress geophyte it does not repress hemerobiid. sent6: there is something such that if it is both not a Shastan and a fishpond it is not a reflexive. sent7: if the hurricane is not weak but a sherry then it is not microcephalic. sent8: if something is both not a Carbondale and alterable then it does not lunge bighorn. sent9: that the geophyte is not a run is not false if it is not a broadcaster and is weak. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not weak and it is a sherry then the fact that it is microcephalic is not false. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a hydroxyl and does buzz scrimshaw it is not Jain. sent12: the hurricane is not microcephalic if it is weak and it is a sherry. sent13: there is something such that if it is not nonfictional and it is desirous then it does not repress planthopper. sent14: the hurricane is not a undercharge if it is a kind of non-microcephalic thing that does retract. sent15: if the hurricane is not a kind of a sherry and does repress Terry it is not a overspill. sent16: if the hurricane does not buzz duck and is a sherry it is not a chiropodist. sent17: if the hurricane does not repress manageability but it is weak then that it is not a Shastan is true. sent18: there is something such that if it is not a Turkey and is Jain it is not stiff. sent19: there exists something such that if it is weak and it is a sherry then that it is not microcephalic is not wrong. sent20: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Bramidae and it is not non-vocational it is not a Barth. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is not a undoer it is not noncrucial. | (Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x | sent1: the desmid is not a kind of a hypercatalectic if it is not noncrucial. sent2: that the tester is a Chara is not incorrect if it is not cadastral. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not buzz datum it is not a heritage. sent4: if something is not a undoer it is not a victimizer. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a Ehrlich it represses FAO. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not descend it is not a Japanese. sent7: the desmid is not noncrucial if it is not a undoer. sent8: that the desmid is noncrucial is not wrong if it is not a undoer. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a undoer then it is noncrucial. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a corollary then it is corrupt. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a undoer it is not noncrucial. sent12: if the Atlas is not a hypercatalectic then it is not noncrucial. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not lunge Loiseleuria then it is not a Crotaphytus. sent14: the desmid is critical if the fact that it is a undoer is correct. | sent1: ¬{C}{aa} -> ¬{BH}{aa} sent2: ¬{BB}{fa} -> {K}{fa} sent3: (Ex): ¬{T}x -> ¬{DG}x sent4: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{HK}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{CC}x -> {CG}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{HJ}x -> ¬{AC}x sent7: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent8: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{EH}x -> ¬{DP}x sent11: (Ex): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent12: ¬{BH}{fn} -> ¬{C}{fn} sent13: (Ex): ¬{AI}x -> ¬{FE}x sent14: {B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the lunatic is not a kind of a victimizer if it is not a undoer. | ¬{B}{ej} -> ¬{HK}{ej} | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not a undoer it is not noncrucial. ; $context$ = sent1: the desmid is not a kind of a hypercatalectic if it is not noncrucial. sent2: that the tester is a Chara is not incorrect if it is not cadastral. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not buzz datum it is not a heritage. sent4: if something is not a undoer it is not a victimizer. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a Ehrlich it represses FAO. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not descend it is not a Japanese. sent7: the desmid is not noncrucial if it is not a undoer. sent8: that the desmid is noncrucial is not wrong if it is not a undoer. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a undoer then it is noncrucial. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a corollary then it is corrupt. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a undoer it is not noncrucial. sent12: if the Atlas is not a hypercatalectic then it is not noncrucial. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not lunge Loiseleuria then it is not a Crotaphytus. sent14: the desmid is critical if the fact that it is a undoer is correct. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that both the relieving and the obliqueness happens is wrong. | ¬({B} & {C}) | sent1: the pullback does not occur if the fact that the repressing Epistle occurs and the lunging propaedeutic happens does not hold. sent2: if the unionness does not occur the fact that the relieving occurs and the obliqueness happens is wrong. sent3: the fact that the unionness occurs is right. sent4: the obliqueness occurs if the fountain does not occur. sent5: the fountain does not occur. sent6: that the relieving occurs is correct if that the union occurs hold. sent7: the armorialness happens. sent8: that the union does not occur and the fountain does not occur is triggered by that the pullback does not occur. | sent1: ¬({G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent3: {A} sent4: ¬{D} -> {C} sent5: ¬{D} sent6: {A} -> {B} sent7: {FI} sent8: ¬{E} -> (¬{A} & ¬{D}) | [
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the relieving occurs is not incorrect.; sent4 & sent5 -> int2: the oblique occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: {B}; sent4 & sent5 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fact that the fact that the relieving happens and the obliqueness happens is true is not true. | ¬({B} & {C}) | []
| 8 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that both the relieving and the obliqueness happens is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the pullback does not occur if the fact that the repressing Epistle occurs and the lunging propaedeutic happens does not hold. sent2: if the unionness does not occur the fact that the relieving occurs and the obliqueness happens is wrong. sent3: the fact that the unionness occurs is right. sent4: the obliqueness occurs if the fountain does not occur. sent5: the fountain does not occur. sent6: that the relieving occurs is correct if that the union occurs hold. sent7: the armorialness happens. sent8: that the union does not occur and the fountain does not occur is triggered by that the pullback does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the relieving occurs is not incorrect.; sent4 & sent5 -> int2: the oblique occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the fact that the podzol does sight is not incorrect if the belemnite represses lymphokine does not hold. | ¬({A}{a} -> {B}{b}) | sent1: the podzol is not an aquarium if the belemnite does repress lymphokine. sent2: the Leo is a kind of an aquarium. sent3: if the fact that something does not float and/or it is an aquarium is false it is a kind of a sights. sent4: the podzol does repress lymphokine. sent5: that the podzol is not a float or it is an aquarium or both does not hold if the belemnite represses lymphokine. sent6: if the fact that the podzol is not an aquarium and/or it does repress lymphokine is not right then it does sight. | sent1: {A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{b} sent2: {AB}{ap} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: {A}{b} sent5: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent6: ¬(¬{AB}{b} v {A}{b}) -> {B}{b} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the belemnite does repress lymphokine is true.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the podzol is not a kind of a float and/or it is an aquarium is wrong.; sent3 -> int2: the podzol is a sights if that it is not a float and/or it is an aquarium does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the podzol is a sights hold.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}); sent3 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) -> {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {B}{b}; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that the fact that the podzol does sight is not incorrect if the belemnite represses lymphokine does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the podzol is not an aquarium if the belemnite does repress lymphokine. sent2: the Leo is a kind of an aquarium. sent3: if the fact that something does not float and/or it is an aquarium is false it is a kind of a sights. sent4: the podzol does repress lymphokine. sent5: that the podzol is not a float or it is an aquarium or both does not hold if the belemnite represses lymphokine. sent6: if the fact that the podzol is not an aquarium and/or it does repress lymphokine is not right then it does sight. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the belemnite does repress lymphokine is true.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the podzol is not a kind of a float and/or it is an aquarium is wrong.; sent3 -> int2: the podzol is a sights if that it is not a float and/or it is an aquarium does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the podzol is a sights hold.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | not the fetching but the contesting happens. | (¬{A} & {D}) | sent1: both the non-Sovietsness and the intermediate happens. sent2: the unattractiveness does not occur if that the fashioning and/or the buzzing humiliation occurs hold. sent3: the rubifying occurs. sent4: the reversionariness is caused by that the overachievement and the inopportuneness occurs. sent5: that the rubifying does not occur is triggered by either that the fetching happens or that the resistiveness happens or both. sent6: the resistiveness does not occur if that the rubifying does not occur and the resistiveness occurs does not hold. sent7: if the Continentalness and/or the latinateness happens then the Mozartianness does not occur. sent8: the diving happens. sent9: the repressing piquet does not occur. sent10: the inexhaustibleness occurs. sent11: the particularisticness occurs and the middle does not occur. sent12: the fact that the lunging gaseousness does not occur is not incorrect. | sent1: (¬{HR} & {DS}) sent2: ({IC} v {DC}) -> ¬{Q} sent3: {C} sent4: ({FU} & {IB}) -> {JC} sent5: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent6: ¬(¬{C} & {B}) -> ¬{B} sent7: ({HU} v {FH}) -> ¬{FS} sent8: {IA} sent9: ¬{GQ} sent10: {R} sent11: ({F} & ¬{E}) sent12: ¬{IU} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fetching occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the fetching or the resistiveness or both occurs.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the rubifying does not occur.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the fetch does not occur is right.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: {A}; assump1 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); int1 & sent5 -> int2: ¬{C}; int2 & sent3 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: ¬{A};"
]
| that that the fact that the fetch does not occur but the contesting occurs is correct is false is not false. | ¬(¬{A} & {D}) | []
| 6 | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = not the fetching but the contesting happens. ; $context$ = sent1: both the non-Sovietsness and the intermediate happens. sent2: the unattractiveness does not occur if that the fashioning and/or the buzzing humiliation occurs hold. sent3: the rubifying occurs. sent4: the reversionariness is caused by that the overachievement and the inopportuneness occurs. sent5: that the rubifying does not occur is triggered by either that the fetching happens or that the resistiveness happens or both. sent6: the resistiveness does not occur if that the rubifying does not occur and the resistiveness occurs does not hold. sent7: if the Continentalness and/or the latinateness happens then the Mozartianness does not occur. sent8: the diving happens. sent9: the repressing piquet does not occur. sent10: the inexhaustibleness occurs. sent11: the particularisticness occurs and the middle does not occur. sent12: the fact that the lunging gaseousness does not occur is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fetching occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the fetching or the resistiveness or both occurs.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the rubifying does not occur.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the fetch does not occur is right.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the gitana is not a outstation. | ¬{A}{aa} | sent1: if the gitana is irremovable then the fact that it is a melatonin and it is not an intervenor is not true. sent2: that something is not a Lisbon and is not federal is not correct if it is a eremite. sent3: the gitana is a kind of a outstation and it is a kind of a presence if the cocker is not a ortolan. sent4: if something is a outstation then that it is not irremovable and it does not repress toast is not true. sent5: if the gitana is a kind of a presence that it is not irremovable and it does not repress toast is not wrong. sent6: the webbing does repress toast. sent7: if something does repress apprenticed that it is not popular and is advisable is incorrect. sent8: if something is not a eremite and not a osculation then it is not a ortolan. sent9: something that is not a ortolan is a outstation and a presence. sent10: if the gitana is a outstation then it is not acneiform and it is not a Megachiroptera. sent11: the fact that something is a kind of a presence but it is not irremovable is not right if it represses toast. | sent1: {AA}{aa} -> ¬({BI}{aa} & ¬{AQ}{aa}) sent2: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{CF}x & ¬{BE}x) sent3: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent5: {B}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: {AB}{fn} sent7: (x): {FS}x -> ¬(¬{Q}x & {DC}x) sent8: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent10: {A}{aa} -> (¬{BM}{aa} & ¬{CC}{aa}) sent11: (x): {AB}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{AA}x) | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the gitana is a outstation is correct the fact that it is not irremovable and does not repress toast is incorrect.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gitana is a outstation.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the gitana is not irremovable and it does not repress toast does not hold.;"
]
| [
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); void -> assump1: {A}{aa}; int1 & assump1 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa});"
]
| that the toast is a outstation is not incorrect. | {A}{dr} | [
"sent9 -> int3: if the fact that the toast is not a kind of a ortolan hold then it is a outstation and it is a presence.;"
]
| 4 | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the gitana is not a outstation. ; $context$ = sent1: if the gitana is irremovable then the fact that it is a melatonin and it is not an intervenor is not true. sent2: that something is not a Lisbon and is not federal is not correct if it is a eremite. sent3: the gitana is a kind of a outstation and it is a kind of a presence if the cocker is not a ortolan. sent4: if something is a outstation then that it is not irremovable and it does not repress toast is not true. sent5: if the gitana is a kind of a presence that it is not irremovable and it does not repress toast is not wrong. sent6: the webbing does repress toast. sent7: if something does repress apprenticed that it is not popular and is advisable is incorrect. sent8: if something is not a eremite and not a osculation then it is not a ortolan. sent9: something that is not a ortolan is a outstation and a presence. sent10: if the gitana is a outstation then it is not acneiform and it is not a Megachiroptera. sent11: the fact that something is a kind of a presence but it is not irremovable is not right if it represses toast. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the gitana is a outstation is correct the fact that it is not irremovable and does not repress toast is incorrect.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gitana is a outstation.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the gitana is not irremovable and it does not repress toast does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the HDL is not non-stoloniferous. | {C}{b} | sent1: if the HDL is ectomorphic then that it is thermionic and is not monozygotic is not true. sent2: if that that the HDL is thermionic but it is not monozygotic is false is true the evening-snow is monozygotic. sent3: if something is vestibular it is sulphuric. sent4: something is stoloniferous if it is sulphuric. sent5: the HDL is vestibular if the evening-snow agrees and does not smile Caranx. sent6: the evening-snow does agree and does not smile Caranx. sent7: if the evening-snow does agree and it smiles Caranx the HDL is vestibular. | sent1: {F}{b} -> ¬({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent2: ¬({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> {D}{a} sent3: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent5: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent6: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} | [
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the HDL is vestibular.; sent3 -> int2: if the HDL is vestibular it is sulphuric.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the HDL is sulphuric.; sent4 -> int4: the HDL is stoloniferous if it is sulphuric.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent3 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {A}{b}; sent4 -> int4: {A}{b} -> {C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the jungle is sulphuric thing that is not unalike. | ({A}{bi} & ¬{ID}{bi}) | []
| 6 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the HDL is not non-stoloniferous. ; $context$ = sent1: if the HDL is ectomorphic then that it is thermionic and is not monozygotic is not true. sent2: if that that the HDL is thermionic but it is not monozygotic is false is true the evening-snow is monozygotic. sent3: if something is vestibular it is sulphuric. sent4: something is stoloniferous if it is sulphuric. sent5: the HDL is vestibular if the evening-snow agrees and does not smile Caranx. sent6: the evening-snow does agree and does not smile Caranx. sent7: if the evening-snow does agree and it smiles Caranx the HDL is vestibular. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the HDL is vestibular.; sent3 -> int2: if the HDL is vestibular it is sulphuric.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the HDL is sulphuric.; sent4 -> int4: the HDL is stoloniferous if it is sulphuric.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a breechblock that is leaky it does not repress Tom is not true. | ¬((Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: there is something such that if it does disperse and it is monaural it is not a kind of a Venezuelan. sent2: there exists something such that if it is nontraditional and it is a Komi it is a brake. sent3: there is something such that if it smiles plasterer and it does buzz wrapped then it is not Paraguayan. sent4: if something that is not non-leaky is a kind of a Spalacidae then it does not repress indicator. sent5: there is something such that if it is genealogic and is an evergreen then it does repress flicker. sent6: there exists something such that if it does repress flicker and it does repress Eustachio it is not a kind of a chip. sent7: that there exists something such that if it does lunge bric-a-brac and does lunge causality it is not a swash is right. sent8: there is something such that if it is honorable and it is a Nicholas it does not smile trademarked. sent9: there exists something such that if it limps and it is a ladylove then it does suspend. sent10: there exists something such that if it lunges annulment and it is mediatory then it represses Edwardian. sent11: if the nankeen is leaky and a finger-roll then it is a kind of a plain. sent12: if the secularist is a breechblock and it is leaky it does repress Tom. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a expostulation and it is a chiropodist then the fact that it is not a terce hold. sent14: the secularist does not repress Tom if it is a breechblock and leaky. sent15: the benzofuran is leaky if it represses izar and it is pronounceable. sent16: the fact that if the secularist does smile occultism and is the Evert the secularist does not disperse is not wrong. sent17: there exists something such that if it is both a chiropodist and nonabsorbent it is not a spectacle. sent18: there exists something such that if it is a mean and is an affine then it does not overboil. sent19: there exists something such that if it is a breechblock and it is leaky then it represses Tom. sent20: if the secularist does repress corer and smiles plasterer it is a kind of a undecagon. sent21: if the secularist is a chiropodist and it is nonspecific then it represses Tom. | sent1: (Ex): ({BF}x & {IA}x) -> ¬{JJ}x sent2: (Ex): ({EN}x & {CS}x) -> {Q}x sent3: (Ex): ({IP}x & {HC}x) -> ¬{FC}x sent4: (x): ({AB}x & {EQ}x) -> ¬{DR}x sent5: (Ex): ({HR}x & {DS}x) -> {CR}x sent6: (Ex): ({CR}x & {BK}x) -> ¬{DC}x sent7: (Ex): ({DU}x & {CD}x) -> ¬{JG}x sent8: (Ex): ({GI}x & {FB}x) -> ¬{AM}x sent9: (Ex): ({IB}x & {GG}x) -> {N}x sent10: (Ex): ({HQ}x & {AH}x) -> {CK}x sent11: ({AB}{dg} & {HI}{dg}) -> {CB}{dg} sent12: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent13: (Ex): ({JA}x & {BJ}x) -> ¬{JF}x sent14: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent15: ({EA}{co} & {HJ}{co}) -> {AB}{co} sent16: ({AT}{aa} & {EB}{aa}) -> ¬{BF}{aa} sent17: (Ex): ({BJ}x & {F}x) -> ¬{HE}x sent18: (Ex): ({AS}x & {DM}x) -> ¬{U}x sent19: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent20: ({GH}{aa} & {IP}{aa}) -> {EC}{aa} sent21: ({BJ}{aa} & {CJ}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} | [
"sent14 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent14 -> hypothesis;"
]
| if the scrimshaw is leaky thing that is a kind of a Spalacidae it does not repress indicator. | ({AB}{h} & {EQ}{h}) -> ¬{DR}{h} | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a breechblock that is leaky it does not repress Tom is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it does disperse and it is monaural it is not a kind of a Venezuelan. sent2: there exists something such that if it is nontraditional and it is a Komi it is a brake. sent3: there is something such that if it smiles plasterer and it does buzz wrapped then it is not Paraguayan. sent4: if something that is not non-leaky is a kind of a Spalacidae then it does not repress indicator. sent5: there is something such that if it is genealogic and is an evergreen then it does repress flicker. sent6: there exists something such that if it does repress flicker and it does repress Eustachio it is not a kind of a chip. sent7: that there exists something such that if it does lunge bric-a-brac and does lunge causality it is not a swash is right. sent8: there is something such that if it is honorable and it is a Nicholas it does not smile trademarked. sent9: there exists something such that if it limps and it is a ladylove then it does suspend. sent10: there exists something such that if it lunges annulment and it is mediatory then it represses Edwardian. sent11: if the nankeen is leaky and a finger-roll then it is a kind of a plain. sent12: if the secularist is a breechblock and it is leaky it does repress Tom. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a expostulation and it is a chiropodist then the fact that it is not a terce hold. sent14: the secularist does not repress Tom if it is a breechblock and leaky. sent15: the benzofuran is leaky if it represses izar and it is pronounceable. sent16: the fact that if the secularist does smile occultism and is the Evert the secularist does not disperse is not wrong. sent17: there exists something such that if it is both a chiropodist and nonabsorbent it is not a spectacle. sent18: there exists something such that if it is a mean and is an affine then it does not overboil. sent19: there exists something such that if it is a breechblock and it is leaky then it represses Tom. sent20: if the secularist does repress corer and smiles plasterer it is a kind of a undecagon. sent21: if the secularist is a chiropodist and it is nonspecific then it represses Tom. ; $proof$ = | sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | both the reply and the runaway happens. | ({A} & {C}) | sent1: that the lunging kumquat does not occur is true. sent2: that the accurateness occurs hold if the lunging kumquat occurs and the intumescing occurs. sent3: that the repressing modernization occurs is not incorrect. sent4: if that the partisanness occurs hold the repressing lynx occurs. sent5: the lunging kumquat does not occur and the intumescing occurs. sent6: the concentrating occurs. sent7: if the X-ray happens then the correctedness happens. sent8: the description happens. sent9: the retrofitting occurs. sent10: the lunging sedative-hypnotic occurs and the retrofit occurs. sent11: the fact that the reply happens and the runaway occurs is not true if the accurateness does not occur. sent12: the carding occurs. sent13: that the pilosebaceousness happens is not false. sent14: the protectiveness happens. sent15: if the retrofit does not occur the accurateness does not occur but the lunging sedative-hypnotic happens. sent16: both the interdisciplinariness and the denationalization happens. sent17: the nutation happens. sent18: the accurateness prevents that the reply does not occur. sent19: the blogging happens and the organizing happens. sent20: that not the lunging kumquat but the intumescing occurs prevents the inaccurateness. sent21: if the lunging sedative-hypnotic occurs the runaway happens. sent22: that the megadeath happens is not wrong. sent23: that the arrogance does not occur but the printableness happens brings about the Land. | sent1: ¬{AA} sent2: ({AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent3: {JC} sent4: {HA} -> {Q} sent5: (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent6: {HE} sent7: {BR} -> {EL} sent8: {CF} sent9: {E} sent10: ({D} & {E}) sent11: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) sent12: {FF} sent13: {L} sent14: {BD} sent15: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & {D}) sent16: ({AN} & {FK}) sent17: {CA} sent18: {B} -> {A} sent19: ({FS} & {IF}) sent20: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent21: {D} -> {C} sent22: {AC} sent23: (¬{EU} & {N}) -> {AU} | [
"sent20 & sent5 -> int1: the accurateness happens.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the reply happens.; sent10 -> int3: the fact that the lunging sedative-hypnotic happens is correct.; sent21 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the runaway happens is not false.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent20 & sent5 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent18 -> int2: {A}; sent10 -> int3: {D}; sent21 & int3 -> int4: {C}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fact that both the reply and the runaway occurs is not right. | ¬({A} & {C}) | []
| 7 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = both the reply and the runaway happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the lunging kumquat does not occur is true. sent2: that the accurateness occurs hold if the lunging kumquat occurs and the intumescing occurs. sent3: that the repressing modernization occurs is not incorrect. sent4: if that the partisanness occurs hold the repressing lynx occurs. sent5: the lunging kumquat does not occur and the intumescing occurs. sent6: the concentrating occurs. sent7: if the X-ray happens then the correctedness happens. sent8: the description happens. sent9: the retrofitting occurs. sent10: the lunging sedative-hypnotic occurs and the retrofit occurs. sent11: the fact that the reply happens and the runaway occurs is not true if the accurateness does not occur. sent12: the carding occurs. sent13: that the pilosebaceousness happens is not false. sent14: the protectiveness happens. sent15: if the retrofit does not occur the accurateness does not occur but the lunging sedative-hypnotic happens. sent16: both the interdisciplinariness and the denationalization happens. sent17: the nutation happens. sent18: the accurateness prevents that the reply does not occur. sent19: the blogging happens and the organizing happens. sent20: that not the lunging kumquat but the intumescing occurs prevents the inaccurateness. sent21: if the lunging sedative-hypnotic occurs the runaway happens. sent22: that the megadeath happens is not wrong. sent23: that the arrogance does not occur but the printableness happens brings about the Land. ; $proof$ = | sent20 & sent5 -> int1: the accurateness happens.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the reply happens.; sent10 -> int3: the fact that the lunging sedative-hypnotic happens is correct.; sent21 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the runaway happens is not false.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it skippers then it is pyretic. | (Ex): {A}x -> {C}x | sent1: if the henbane skippers it is pyretic. sent2: the henbane is a kind of a gastroenterology if it does lunge plagiarism. sent3: a Fijian thing is a Passero. sent4: the acetyl is a penicillamine if it is zenithal. sent5: if something is pyretic that it lunges quarterly is correct. sent6: there is something such that if it represses backsword then it does buzz skater. sent7: there is something such that if it does buzz armhole it is lethargic. sent8: if something lunges quarterly it is nascent. sent9: the parsnip is minor if it consecrates. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a hogshead is correct it does disengage. sent11: there exists something such that if it is fragrant it is an at. sent12: there is something such that if it lunges eriogonum then it is calendric. | sent1: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent2: {HB}{aa} -> {HN}{aa} sent3: (x): {GA}x -> {CL}x sent4: {AQ}{es} -> {BE}{es} sent5: (x): {C}x -> {GG}x sent6: (Ex): {EK}x -> {HG}x sent7: (Ex): {HM}x -> {EH}x sent8: (x): {GG}x -> {FK}x sent9: {EP}{cd} -> {HI}{cd} sent10: (Ex): {DG}x -> {FJ}x sent11: (Ex): {AU}x -> {FR}x sent12: (Ex): {GK}x -> {BI}x | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| if the henbane is pyretic then that it does lunge quarterly hold. | {C}{aa} -> {GG}{aa} | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
]
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it skippers then it is pyretic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the henbane skippers it is pyretic. sent2: the henbane is a kind of a gastroenterology if it does lunge plagiarism. sent3: a Fijian thing is a Passero. sent4: the acetyl is a penicillamine if it is zenithal. sent5: if something is pyretic that it lunges quarterly is correct. sent6: there is something such that if it represses backsword then it does buzz skater. sent7: there is something such that if it does buzz armhole it is lethargic. sent8: if something lunges quarterly it is nascent. sent9: the parsnip is minor if it consecrates. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a hogshead is correct it does disengage. sent11: there exists something such that if it is fragrant it is an at. sent12: there is something such that if it lunges eriogonum then it is calendric. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the den does not misrepresent. | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a allocution and it does buzz productivity is not correct. sent2: the hiatus lunges Testament. sent3: if something does not buzz productivity then the Chechen dawns. sent4: if the hiatus does lunge Testament it is not non-humanist. sent5: the hiatus does not smile fuddy-duddy or it is a hypotensive or both if the Chechen smile fuddy-duddy. sent6: if something dawns it smiles fuddy-duddy. sent7: if the hiatus does not smile fuddy-duddy and/or it is hypotensive then the den does not misrepresent. sent8: the den is not a kind of a dawn if the Chechen does not misrepresent. sent9: the Chechen does not misrepresent if the den is not a kind of a dawn. | sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: {F}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}{a} sent4: {F}{b} -> {E}{b} sent5: {B}{a} -> (¬{B}{b} v {D}{b}) sent6: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent7: (¬{B}{b} v {D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent8: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{A}{c} sent9: ¬{A}{c} -> ¬{C}{a} | [
"sent6 -> int1: the Chechen does smile fuddy-duddy if it does dawn.;"
]
| [
"sent6 -> int1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a};"
]
| the transduction is a hypotensive. | {D}{ah} | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int2: the hiatus is humanist.; int2 -> int3: there are humanist things.;"
]
| 7 | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the den does not misrepresent. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a allocution and it does buzz productivity is not correct. sent2: the hiatus lunges Testament. sent3: if something does not buzz productivity then the Chechen dawns. sent4: if the hiatus does lunge Testament it is not non-humanist. sent5: the hiatus does not smile fuddy-duddy or it is a hypotensive or both if the Chechen smile fuddy-duddy. sent6: if something dawns it smiles fuddy-duddy. sent7: if the hiatus does not smile fuddy-duddy and/or it is hypotensive then the den does not misrepresent. sent8: the den is not a kind of a dawn if the Chechen does not misrepresent. sent9: the Chechen does not misrepresent if the den is not a kind of a dawn. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> int1: the Chechen does smile fuddy-duddy if it does dawn.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the repressing merit does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: the debarkation brings about that the repressing Lorisidae occurs but the cartooning does not occur. sent2: the repressing Ashurbanipal does not occur if that the repressing Ashurbanipal occurs and the repressing waw does not occur does not hold. sent3: the livery happens. sent4: if that the phone-in occurs and the vegetativeness happens does not hold that the phone-in does not occur is correct. sent5: if the repressing Ashurbanipal does not occur then the fact that the nonarbitrariness does not occur and the voting does not occur is not correct. sent6: that the skank happens brings about that the cytophotometricness does not occur. sent7: if the livery happens then the phone-in occurs. sent8: the mobilization does not occur if the fact that the fact that the nonarbitrariness does not occur and the voting does not occur is not correct is not false. sent9: the troop happens if the Jamaican happens. sent10: if the plantalness does not occur then both the debarkation and the repressing armpit happens. sent11: that the smiling birthmark does not occur results in that both the inexactness and the smiling Cronus happens. sent12: that the repressing Lorisidae but not the cartoon occurs prevents the smiling birthmark. sent13: that the phone-in occurs and the vegetativeness occurs is not correct if the mobilization does not occur. sent14: that that that the repressing Ashurbanipal but not the repressing waw occurs is not incorrect is wrong if the inexactness happens is not wrong. sent15: the quadraticsness occurs. | sent1: {O} -> ({N} & ¬{M}) sent2: ¬({H} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} sent3: {A} sent4: ¬({B} & {D}) -> ¬{B} sent5: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{G} & ¬{F}) sent6: {FE} -> ¬{FN} sent7: {A} -> {B} sent8: ¬(¬{G} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{E} sent9: {DH} -> {DM} sent10: ¬{Q} -> ({O} & {P}) sent11: ¬{L} -> ({I} & {K}) sent12: ({N} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} sent13: ¬{E} -> ¬({B} & {D}) sent14: {I} -> ¬({H} & ¬{J}) sent15: {GB} | [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: the phone-in happens.;"
]
| [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: {B};"
]
| the repressing merit occurs. | {C} | []
| 15 | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the repressing merit does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the debarkation brings about that the repressing Lorisidae occurs but the cartooning does not occur. sent2: the repressing Ashurbanipal does not occur if that the repressing Ashurbanipal occurs and the repressing waw does not occur does not hold. sent3: the livery happens. sent4: if that the phone-in occurs and the vegetativeness happens does not hold that the phone-in does not occur is correct. sent5: if the repressing Ashurbanipal does not occur then the fact that the nonarbitrariness does not occur and the voting does not occur is not correct. sent6: that the skank happens brings about that the cytophotometricness does not occur. sent7: if the livery happens then the phone-in occurs. sent8: the mobilization does not occur if the fact that the fact that the nonarbitrariness does not occur and the voting does not occur is not correct is not false. sent9: the troop happens if the Jamaican happens. sent10: if the plantalness does not occur then both the debarkation and the repressing armpit happens. sent11: that the smiling birthmark does not occur results in that both the inexactness and the smiling Cronus happens. sent12: that the repressing Lorisidae but not the cartoon occurs prevents the smiling birthmark. sent13: that the phone-in occurs and the vegetativeness occurs is not correct if the mobilization does not occur. sent14: that that that the repressing Ashurbanipal but not the repressing waw occurs is not incorrect is wrong if the inexactness happens is not wrong. sent15: the quadraticsness occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent3 -> int1: the phone-in happens.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the compromiser is not an assignment. | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: the choline is hematopoietic if the S is intracerebral. sent2: there exists something such that that it does buzz deduction and is a Solzhenitsyn is wrong. sent3: if the choline is hematopoietic the compromiser is an assignment. sent4: if there exists something such that that it does buzz deduction and is a Solzhenitsyn is not true the S is intracerebral. | sent1: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the S is intracerebral.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the choline is hematopoietic.; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent1 & int1 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the compromiser is not an assignment. ; $context$ = sent1: the choline is hematopoietic if the S is intracerebral. sent2: there exists something such that that it does buzz deduction and is a Solzhenitsyn is wrong. sent3: if the choline is hematopoietic the compromiser is an assignment. sent4: if there exists something such that that it does buzz deduction and is a Solzhenitsyn is not true the S is intracerebral. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the S is intracerebral.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the choline is hematopoietic.; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the birdhouse is a Josephus. | {B}{a} | sent1: something is postal if it is uncommunicative. sent2: that the sissy is not an effects and it is not a kind of a Josephus is not correct if the birdhouse is not a facilitator. sent3: the azurite is not a Josephus. sent4: the birdhouse is a Josephus if the Marines is a Josephus. sent5: the methapyrilene is not a kind of a conveyancer if the amaretto is not a conveyancer but it attaches. sent6: if something does effect then it is a kind of an epithet and it is not a kind of a PAC. sent7: the foster-mother is not unchaste if it effects and it does not buzz Mahdist. sent8: the birdhouse is citric and is not a kind of a PAC. sent9: if the fact that something is not a canthus and not a oropharynx does not hold then it is not postal. sent10: something does not repress televangelist if it is a potential and does not repress foster-mother. sent11: something is a Josephus and it effects if it is not a facilitator. sent12: that the Marines is not a canthus and it is not a kind of a oropharynx is not right. sent13: the Mahdist is not a PAC if it is a kind of a pogonip that is a procurer. sent14: the fact that the birdhouse is not a PAC is not wrong. sent15: the birdhouse is not a Josephus if it does repress foster-mother and it is not a PAC. sent16: the birdhouse represses foster-mother and is not a kind of a PAC. sent17: if the fact that something is not a kind of an effects and it is not a kind of a Josephus is incorrect then it effects. sent18: something is not a facilitator if it is postal. sent19: the Marines is communicative if that the methapyrilene is not a conveyancer hold. sent20: the birdhouse is not a Josephus if it does repress foster-mother and is a PAC. | sent1: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent2: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{as} & ¬{B}{as}) sent3: ¬{B}{jd} sent4: {B}{b} -> {B}{a} sent5: (¬{F}{d} & {I}{d}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent6: (x): {A}x -> ({BU}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: ({A}{iq} & ¬{CG}{iq}) -> ¬{BH}{iq} sent8: ({BR}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{D}x sent10: (x): ({GC}x & ¬{AA}x) -> ¬{IE}x sent11: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent12: ¬(¬{H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) sent13: ({HO}{at} & {CU}{at}) -> ¬{AB}{at} sent14: ¬{AB}{a} sent15: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent16: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent17: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x sent18: (x): {D}x -> ¬{C}x sent19: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬{E}{b} sent20: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} | [
"sent15 & sent16 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent15 & sent16 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the birdhouse is a Josephus. | {B}{a} | [
"sent11 -> int1: if the Marines is not a kind of a facilitator then it is a Josephus and it is an effects.; sent18 -> int2: if the Marines is postal it is not a facilitator.; sent1 -> int3: the Marines is postal if it is uncommunicative.;"
]
| 6 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the birdhouse is a Josephus. ; $context$ = sent1: something is postal if it is uncommunicative. sent2: that the sissy is not an effects and it is not a kind of a Josephus is not correct if the birdhouse is not a facilitator. sent3: the azurite is not a Josephus. sent4: the birdhouse is a Josephus if the Marines is a Josephus. sent5: the methapyrilene is not a kind of a conveyancer if the amaretto is not a conveyancer but it attaches. sent6: if something does effect then it is a kind of an epithet and it is not a kind of a PAC. sent7: the foster-mother is not unchaste if it effects and it does not buzz Mahdist. sent8: the birdhouse is citric and is not a kind of a PAC. sent9: if the fact that something is not a canthus and not a oropharynx does not hold then it is not postal. sent10: something does not repress televangelist if it is a potential and does not repress foster-mother. sent11: something is a Josephus and it effects if it is not a facilitator. sent12: that the Marines is not a canthus and it is not a kind of a oropharynx is not right. sent13: the Mahdist is not a PAC if it is a kind of a pogonip that is a procurer. sent14: the fact that the birdhouse is not a PAC is not wrong. sent15: the birdhouse is not a Josephus if it does repress foster-mother and it is not a PAC. sent16: the birdhouse represses foster-mother and is not a kind of a PAC. sent17: if the fact that something is not a kind of an effects and it is not a kind of a Josephus is incorrect then it effects. sent18: something is not a facilitator if it is postal. sent19: the Marines is communicative if that the methapyrilene is not a conveyancer hold. sent20: the birdhouse is not a Josephus if it does repress foster-mother and is a PAC. ; $proof$ = | sent15 & sent16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the brachiopod does buzz massage. | {A}{a} | sent1: the blockage does uncloak. sent2: the brachiopod uncloaks. sent3: if the brachiopod uncloaks then it is a Assault. sent4: that the brachiopod is both a Assault and not a strings does not hold if it does not buzz massage. sent5: the brachiopod is a Assault and is not a strings if it does uncloak. | sent1: {B}{bd} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: {B}{a} -> {AA}{a} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent5: {B}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the brachiopod does not buzz massage.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the brachiopod is a kind of a Assault that does not string is not right.; sent5 & sent2 -> int2: the brachiopod is a Assault but it is not a kind of a strings.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent5 & sent2 -> int2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| null | null | []
| null | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the brachiopod does buzz massage. ; $context$ = sent1: the blockage does uncloak. sent2: the brachiopod uncloaks. sent3: if the brachiopod uncloaks then it is a Assault. sent4: that the brachiopod is both a Assault and not a strings does not hold if it does not buzz massage. sent5: the brachiopod is a Assault and is not a strings if it does uncloak. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the brachiopod does not buzz massage.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the brachiopod is a kind of a Assault that does not string is not right.; sent5 & sent2 -> int2: the brachiopod is a Assault but it is not a kind of a strings.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that something is a dullness is false. | ¬((Ex): {B}x) | sent1: the cacodyl is a hospice if the fact that it either is not a kind of a backstay or is centigrade or both is wrong. sent2: the fact that the haggler is a stop is false. sent3: the communicator is not a Georgian if the fact that the haggler is not a Georgian and does not repress productivity is incorrect. sent4: the communicator is not a due if it is a fathom and/or not Georgian. sent5: the cacodyl is a dullness if the fact that it buzzes strawworm and/or is a kind of a keyboard does not hold. sent6: something is a keyboard. sent7: if the fact that the paint does not disrupt and/or it does lunge phlox is wrong it is a contestee. sent8: the gust does not buzz Pyrrhus if that the townee does not buzz upstart and is not Macedonian does not hold. sent9: the fact that something is not Hellenic but a Clinton is not true if it does not buzz Pyrrhus. sent10: if the cacodyl is a status then the greenroom is a dullness. sent11: the fact that the corporation does not stickle or it is a dullness or both does not hold. sent12: if the cacodyl is a kind of a dullness then the fact that it is not a agateware and/or it lunges dichondra is not right. sent13: the cacodyl does buzz strawworm. sent14: if the cacodyl is a contestee it buzzes strawworm. sent15: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a due then that that the townee does not buzz upstart and it is not a Macedonian is right is not correct. sent16: the fact that the strawworm is not a krill and/or it is a kind of a contestee does not hold. sent17: the cacodyl is a status if the queen is a status. sent18: if the cacodyl is a kind of a contestee the fact that it does not buzz strawworm or it is a keyboard or both is false. sent19: if that the cacodyl does not buzz strawworm or it is a keyboard or both does not hold it is a dullness. sent20: that something is not a kind of a Georgian and it does not repress productivity is not true if it is not a stop. sent21: if something is a dullness then that either it is not a kind of a contestee or it does lunge winceyette or both is false. sent22: the cacodyl is a contestee. | sent1: ¬(¬{DK}{a} v {IQ}{a}) -> {BJ}{a} sent2: ¬{L}{f} sent3: ¬(¬{J}{f} & ¬{M}{f}) -> ¬{J}{e} sent4: ({K}{e} v ¬{J}{e}) -> ¬{I}{e} sent5: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent6: (Ex): {AB}x sent7: ¬(¬{DT}{bf} v {DA}{bf}) -> {A}{bf} sent8: ¬(¬{G}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) sent10: {C}{a} -> {B}{ip} sent11: ¬(¬{GK}{ji} v {B}{ji}) sent12: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{FR}{a} v {AN}{a}) sent13: {AA}{a} sent14: {A}{a} -> {AA}{a} sent15: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬(¬{G}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) sent16: ¬(¬{IE}{ce} v {A}{ce}) sent17: {C}{b} -> {C}{a} sent18: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent19: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent20: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬(¬{J}x & ¬{M}x) sent21: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x v {GG}x) sent22: {A}{a} | [
"sent18 & sent22 -> int1: the fact that the cacodyl does not buzz strawworm and/or it is a keyboard does not hold.; int1 & sent19 -> int2: the cacodyl is a dullness.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent18 & sent22 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); int1 & sent19 -> int2: {B}{a}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the fact that either the greenroom is not a contestee or it does lunge winceyette or both does not hold. | ¬(¬{A}{ip} v {GG}{ip}) | [
"sent21 -> int3: the fact that the greenroom is not a contestee and/or does lunge winceyette is false if it is a dullness.; sent9 -> int4: if the gust does not buzz Pyrrhus then the fact that it is non-Hellenic a Clinton does not hold.; sent20 -> int5: if the haggler does not stop then the fact that it is a kind of non-Georgian thing that does not repress productivity does not hold.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: that the fact that the haggler is not a Georgian and it does not repress productivity is not wrong is not right.; sent3 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the communicator is not Georgian is true.; int7 -> int8: the communicator either is a kind of a fathom or is not a Georgian or both.; sent4 & int8 -> int9: that the communicator is not a kind of a due is correct.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it is not due.; int10 & sent15 -> int11: the fact that the townee does not buzz upstart and is not Macedonian is wrong.; sent8 & int11 -> int12: the gust does not buzz Pyrrhus.; int4 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the gust is not Hellenic and is a Clinton is incorrect.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that that it is a kind of non-Hellenic a Clinton is not right.;"
]
| 14 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that something is a dullness is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the cacodyl is a hospice if the fact that it either is not a kind of a backstay or is centigrade or both is wrong. sent2: the fact that the haggler is a stop is false. sent3: the communicator is not a Georgian if the fact that the haggler is not a Georgian and does not repress productivity is incorrect. sent4: the communicator is not a due if it is a fathom and/or not Georgian. sent5: the cacodyl is a dullness if the fact that it buzzes strawworm and/or is a kind of a keyboard does not hold. sent6: something is a keyboard. sent7: if the fact that the paint does not disrupt and/or it does lunge phlox is wrong it is a contestee. sent8: the gust does not buzz Pyrrhus if that the townee does not buzz upstart and is not Macedonian does not hold. sent9: the fact that something is not Hellenic but a Clinton is not true if it does not buzz Pyrrhus. sent10: if the cacodyl is a status then the greenroom is a dullness. sent11: the fact that the corporation does not stickle or it is a dullness or both does not hold. sent12: if the cacodyl is a kind of a dullness then the fact that it is not a agateware and/or it lunges dichondra is not right. sent13: the cacodyl does buzz strawworm. sent14: if the cacodyl is a contestee it buzzes strawworm. sent15: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a due then that that the townee does not buzz upstart and it is not a Macedonian is right is not correct. sent16: the fact that the strawworm is not a krill and/or it is a kind of a contestee does not hold. sent17: the cacodyl is a status if the queen is a status. sent18: if the cacodyl is a kind of a contestee the fact that it does not buzz strawworm or it is a keyboard or both is false. sent19: if that the cacodyl does not buzz strawworm or it is a keyboard or both does not hold it is a dullness. sent20: that something is not a kind of a Georgian and it does not repress productivity is not true if it is not a stop. sent21: if something is a dullness then that either it is not a kind of a contestee or it does lunge winceyette or both is false. sent22: the cacodyl is a contestee. ; $proof$ = | sent18 & sent22 -> int1: the fact that the cacodyl does not buzz strawworm and/or it is a keyboard does not hold.; int1 & sent19 -> int2: the cacodyl is a dullness.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it does repress sialolith then that it does not lunge abalone and is thirsty is not true. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: something does not lunge antihero but it is an aqua if that it does term is correct. sent2: there exists something such that if it dissembles then that it is a spinsterhood and is effervescent is not correct. sent3: if the fact that something is a Paridae hold then the fact that that it calcines and it is a kind of a brazil is not incorrect is incorrect. sent4: there is something such that if it does startle the fact that it is a Celastrus and it is fashionable is not right. sent5: if something is a yobibit that it is not a Celastrus and is a rearguard does not hold. sent6: that something is not a kind of an apostrophe and is British is incorrect if the fact that it is a Tinbergen hold. sent7: that something is nonparticulate and it does repress foster-mother is not true if it is a epitaxy. sent8: that something is non-Prussian and nonreticulate is false if it is fashionable. sent9: the fact that something does not lunge piquet but it is incurious is not right if it lunges guestworker. sent10: if something is bionics then that it is not a kind of a sights and does call is not correct. sent11: that the conferee is a kind of a triage and it does repress sialolith is not right if it is unerect. sent12: that the retainer does hit and it is a baas does not hold if it does lunge abalone. sent13: there is something such that if it does repress sialolith then it does not lunge abalone and is thirsty. sent14: if something is visible the fact that it is an aqua and it is a kind of a socialization is not correct. sent15: if something is not non-umbelliferous then that it is both not a technobabble and edible is not true. sent16: if the foster-mother does repress sialolith it does not lunge abalone and it is thirsty. sent17: if something is a kind of a hit it does not retract and it is not non-British. | sent1: (x): {HO}x -> (¬{FC}x & {CQ}x) sent2: (Ex): {AU}x -> ¬({EF}x & {AN}x) sent3: (x): {FG}x -> ¬({BR}x & {EH}x) sent4: (Ex): {HE}x -> ¬({AL}x & {BH}x) sent5: (x): {EI}x -> ¬(¬{AL}x & {AP}x) sent6: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{J}x & {CR}x) sent7: (x): {N}x -> ¬({AH}x & {FO}x) sent8: (x): {BH}x -> ¬(¬{BS}x & {JA}x) sent9: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{CO}x & {BG}x) sent10: (x): {BT}x -> ¬(¬{BA}x & {DB}x) sent11: {AE}{hf} -> ¬({D}{hf} & {A}{hf}) sent12: {AA}{hc} -> ¬({JF}{hc} & {CK}{hc}) sent13: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent14: (x): {AS}x -> ¬({CQ}x & {GT}x) sent15: (x): {IJ}x -> ¬(¬{EJ}x & {FJ}x) sent16: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent17: (x): {JF}x -> (¬{IM}x & {CR}x) | []
| []
| null | null | []
| null | 2 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does repress sialolith then that it does not lunge abalone and is thirsty is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not lunge antihero but it is an aqua if that it does term is correct. sent2: there exists something such that if it dissembles then that it is a spinsterhood and is effervescent is not correct. sent3: if the fact that something is a Paridae hold then the fact that that it calcines and it is a kind of a brazil is not incorrect is incorrect. sent4: there is something such that if it does startle the fact that it is a Celastrus and it is fashionable is not right. sent5: if something is a yobibit that it is not a Celastrus and is a rearguard does not hold. sent6: that something is not a kind of an apostrophe and is British is incorrect if the fact that it is a Tinbergen hold. sent7: that something is nonparticulate and it does repress foster-mother is not true if it is a epitaxy. sent8: that something is non-Prussian and nonreticulate is false if it is fashionable. sent9: the fact that something does not lunge piquet but it is incurious is not right if it lunges guestworker. sent10: if something is bionics then that it is not a kind of a sights and does call is not correct. sent11: that the conferee is a kind of a triage and it does repress sialolith is not right if it is unerect. sent12: that the retainer does hit and it is a baas does not hold if it does lunge abalone. sent13: there is something such that if it does repress sialolith then it does not lunge abalone and is thirsty. sent14: if something is visible the fact that it is an aqua and it is a kind of a socialization is not correct. sent15: if something is not non-umbelliferous then that it is both not a technobabble and edible is not true. sent16: if the foster-mother does repress sialolith it does not lunge abalone and it is thirsty. sent17: if something is a kind of a hit it does not retract and it is not non-British. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the name is ideographic. | {A}{a} | sent1: the benzofuran is a kind of a Chancellorsville but it is not worsted. sent2: everything does not barrel. sent3: everything does disobey and it does not worst. sent4: the fact that the benzofuran is not a ply is correct. sent5: the name is non-ideographic if something that does not repress fiance is a Stalinization. sent6: everything is not worsted. sent7: if the benzofuran does disobey and is not worsted then that the name is ideographic is true. sent8: the name is ideographic if the benzofuran does disobey and is worsted. sent9: the benzofuran is non-worsted. | sent1: ({IN}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬{E}x sent3: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: ¬{JH}{aa} sent5: (x): (¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{AB}x sent7: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {A}{a} sent8: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {A}{a} sent9: ¬{AB}{aa} | [
"sent3 -> int1: the benzofuran does disobey but it is not a kind of a worsted.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent3 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the name is not ideographic. | ¬{A}{a} | []
| 8 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the name is ideographic. ; $context$ = sent1: the benzofuran is a kind of a Chancellorsville but it is not worsted. sent2: everything does not barrel. sent3: everything does disobey and it does not worst. sent4: the fact that the benzofuran is not a ply is correct. sent5: the name is non-ideographic if something that does not repress fiance is a Stalinization. sent6: everything is not worsted. sent7: if the benzofuran does disobey and is not worsted then that the name is ideographic is true. sent8: the name is ideographic if the benzofuran does disobey and is worsted. sent9: the benzofuran is non-worsted. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> int1: the benzofuran does disobey but it is not a kind of a worsted.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that that it is a kind of a blot that does not smile fringe is false. | (Ex): ¬({E}x & ¬{D}x) | sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is a blot and does smile fringe is incorrect. sent2: the coneflower is crustal. sent3: that something is a blot that does smile fringe is wrong if it is a jester. sent4: that the antiflatulent is a blot and it smiles fringe is not true if it is a jester. sent5: if that the antiflatulent is a kind of a gravure is right the fact that it smiles fringe and is not a jester is wrong. sent6: if the antiflatulent is a gravure then the pustule is a jester. sent7: if the coneflower is crustal then the pustule is a gravure. sent8: if something is not crustal then the fact that it is a kind of a camachile and it is not a symbolization is wrong. sent9: the fact that something does blot and does not smile fringe is wrong if it is a jester. sent10: there is something such that it is a kind of a blot and does not smile fringe. sent11: that the antiflatulent is a kind of a blot that does smile fringe does not hold. sent12: the fact that something is a gravure and it is crustal is not correct if that it smiles fringe hold. sent13: if the fact that the pustule is a blot but it is not psychotherapeutic is false then it does not smile fringe. | sent1: (Ex): ¬({E}x & {D}x) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: (x): {C}x -> ¬({E}x & {D}x) sent4: {C}{c} -> ¬({E}{c} & {D}{c}) sent5: {B}{c} -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent6: {B}{c} -> {C}{b} sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({BE}x & ¬{EP}x) sent9: (x): {C}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{D}x) sent10: (Ex): ({E}x & ¬{D}x) sent11: ¬({E}{c} & {D}{c}) sent12: (x): {D}x -> ¬({B}x & {A}x) sent13: ¬({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b} | [
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: the pustule is a kind of a gravure.; sent9 -> int2: the fact that the antiflatulent does blot but it does not smile fringe does not hold if it is a kind of a jester.;"
]
| [
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent9 -> int2: {C}{c} -> ¬({E}{c} & ¬{D}{c});"
]
| that the tetrose is a camachile and is not a symbolization is not right. | ¬({BE}{de} & ¬{EP}{de}) | [
"sent8 -> int3: the fact that the tetrose is a camachile but it is not a symbolization is not right if it is not crustal.;"
]
| 6 | 4 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that that it is a kind of a blot that does not smile fringe is false. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is a blot and does smile fringe is incorrect. sent2: the coneflower is crustal. sent3: that something is a blot that does smile fringe is wrong if it is a jester. sent4: that the antiflatulent is a blot and it smiles fringe is not true if it is a jester. sent5: if that the antiflatulent is a kind of a gravure is right the fact that it smiles fringe and is not a jester is wrong. sent6: if the antiflatulent is a gravure then the pustule is a jester. sent7: if the coneflower is crustal then the pustule is a gravure. sent8: if something is not crustal then the fact that it is a kind of a camachile and it is not a symbolization is wrong. sent9: the fact that something does blot and does not smile fringe is wrong if it is a jester. sent10: there is something such that it is a kind of a blot and does not smile fringe. sent11: that the antiflatulent is a kind of a blot that does smile fringe does not hold. sent12: the fact that something is a gravure and it is crustal is not correct if that it smiles fringe hold. sent13: if the fact that the pustule is a blot but it is not psychotherapeutic is false then it does not smile fringe. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent2 -> int1: the pustule is a kind of a gravure.; sent9 -> int2: the fact that the antiflatulent does blot but it does not smile fringe does not hold if it is a kind of a jester.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the chalaza does foreclose. | {D}{b} | sent1: the fact that the Protropin does repress pulasan but it does not foreclose does not hold. sent2: the Protropin is a lowercase. sent3: something forecloses if that it represses pulasan and is not sedimentary is wrong. sent4: if the Protropin does not repress pulasan then the fact that the chalaza does repress pulasan and is not sedimentary is not correct. sent5: a Bombyliidae does not buzz Socinian. sent6: if something is not sedimentary the fact that it is not a lowercase and it represses pulasan is false. sent7: that the Protropin does not repress pulasan if the Protropin is a kind of a lowercase hold. sent8: the fact that the knee-high does not repress pulasan is not incorrect. sent9: something forecloses if it is sedimentary. | sent1: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {D}x sent4: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent5: (x): {CB}x -> ¬{JF}x sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) sent7: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent8: ¬{B}{co} sent9: (x): {C}x -> {D}x | [
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: the Protropin does not repress pulasan.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the chalaza represses pulasan but it is not sedimentary is incorrect.; sent3 -> int3: that the chalaza does not foreclose is false if that it does repress pulasan and it is not sedimentary does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| [
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & sent4 -> int2: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}); sent3 -> int3: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {D}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
]
| the chalaza does not foreclose. | ¬{D}{b} | [
"sent6 -> int4: that the Protropin is not a lowercase but it represses pulasan is not true if it is not sedimentary.;"
]
| 5 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the chalaza does foreclose. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the Protropin does repress pulasan but it does not foreclose does not hold. sent2: the Protropin is a lowercase. sent3: something forecloses if that it represses pulasan and is not sedimentary is wrong. sent4: if the Protropin does not repress pulasan then the fact that the chalaza does repress pulasan and is not sedimentary is not correct. sent5: a Bombyliidae does not buzz Socinian. sent6: if something is not sedimentary the fact that it is not a lowercase and it represses pulasan is false. sent7: that the Protropin does not repress pulasan if the Protropin is a kind of a lowercase hold. sent8: the fact that the knee-high does not repress pulasan is not incorrect. sent9: something forecloses if it is sedimentary. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent2 -> int1: the Protropin does not repress pulasan.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the chalaza represses pulasan but it is not sedimentary is incorrect.; sent3 -> int3: that the chalaza does not foreclose is false if that it does repress pulasan and it is not sedimentary does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the kohleria is an amnesty. | {C}{a} | sent1: if that the fact that the kohleria is not a kind of a Lowell and it does not shear is not right is not incorrect it is an amnesty. sent2: the kohleria is not a Lowell. sent3: something is not noncrystalline if it is Neanderthal or is not noncrystalline or both. sent4: something is a shearing and it is a misanthropy if it does not crumble. sent5: if something is a Lowell it is a kind of an amnesty. sent6: if the rod is noncrystalline it does not crumble. sent7: something is not a shearing and is not a kind of a Lowell if it is a misanthropy. sent8: the blackbeetle is not an amnesty. sent9: that the kohleria is a Lowell but it is not a shearing is wrong. sent10: if the kohleria is a Lowell it is an amnesty. sent11: that the jeep is a kind of a misanthropy that crumbles hold if the lumen is crystalline. | sent1: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): ({H}x v ¬{F}x) -> ¬{F}x sent4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({B}x & {D}x) sent5: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent6: {F}{au} -> ¬{E}{au} sent7: (x): {D}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) sent8: ¬{C}{be} sent9: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent10: {A}{a} -> {C}{a} sent11: ¬{F}{c} -> ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kohleria is not a Lowell and not a shearing.; assump1 -> int1: the kohleria is not a shearing.;"
]
| [
"void -> assump1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a};"
]
| the kohleria does not amnesty. | ¬{C}{a} | [
"sent7 -> int2: the jeep is not a shearing and not a Lowell if it is a misanthropy.; sent3 -> int3: if the lumen is Neanderthal and/or it is not noncrystalline then it is not noncrystalline.;"
]
| 7 | 3 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the kohleria is an amnesty. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the fact that the kohleria is not a kind of a Lowell and it does not shear is not right is not incorrect it is an amnesty. sent2: the kohleria is not a Lowell. sent3: something is not noncrystalline if it is Neanderthal or is not noncrystalline or both. sent4: something is a shearing and it is a misanthropy if it does not crumble. sent5: if something is a Lowell it is a kind of an amnesty. sent6: if the rod is noncrystalline it does not crumble. sent7: something is not a shearing and is not a kind of a Lowell if it is a misanthropy. sent8: the blackbeetle is not an amnesty. sent9: that the kohleria is a Lowell but it is not a shearing is wrong. sent10: if the kohleria is a Lowell it is an amnesty. sent11: that the jeep is a kind of a misanthropy that crumbles hold if the lumen is crystalline. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kohleria is not a Lowell and not a shearing.; assump1 -> int1: the kohleria is not a shearing.; __UNKNOWN__ |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.