version
stringclasses 1
value | hypothesis
stringlengths 11
215
| hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
39
| context
stringlengths 0
2.9k
| context_formula
stringlengths 0
905
| proofs
sequence | proofs_formula
sequence | negative_hypothesis
stringlengths 15
193
⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
37
⌀ | negative_proofs
sequence | 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 silkscreen is not a cornetfish. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: that the hewer is a rhodonite is not false if there is something such that it does not devote bellyful. sent2: the Exocet does cull supersedure but it does not transfer surffish. sent3: if something is not a kind of a Myrsine then it is a hot-rod and a Uriah. sent4: if the fact that something is not a Javanese and it is not Vedic is false it does devote bellyful. sent5: the hewer transfers roughleg if the dander does transfers roughleg. sent6: the hewer transfers roughleg if the dander is a lilliputian. sent7: if there is something such that it does not devote bellyful then the hewer is a kind of a rhodonite and it is a Javanese. sent8: the hewer is a cornetfish if the silkscreen is a kind of a rhodonite. sent9: if the Exocet is not a sente the dander is a lilliputian and/or it does transfer roughleg. sent10: that something is a rhodonite if it is a paratyphoid is correct. sent11: there is something such that it does not devote bellyful. sent12: if something is a Uriah it is a kind of a paratyphoid. sent13: there is something such that it does devote bellyful. sent14: the hewer is not a kind of a Myrsine. sent15: the Exocet is not a sente if it does cull supersedure and does not transfer surffish. sent16: the hewer is a rhodonite. sent17: the hewer does not grudge sottishness if the fact that the silkscreen is not a kind of a rhodonite but it grudge sottishness is incorrect. sent18: the gleet is a Javanese and it does transfer stumpknocker. sent19: if the hewer is Javanese that the silkscreen is a cornetfish is true. sent20: that something is both non-Javanese and non-Vedic is not true if it does transfer roughleg. | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}{a} sent2: ({N}{d} & ¬{M}{d}) sent3: (x): ¬{L}x -> ({I}x & {H}x) sent4: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) -> {A}x sent5: {F}{c} -> {F}{a} sent6: {J}{c} -> {F}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent8: {B}{b} -> {D}{a} sent9: ¬{K}{d} -> ({J}{c} v {F}{c}) sent10: (x): {G}x -> {B}x sent11: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent12: (x): {H}x -> {G}x sent13: (Ex): {A}x sent14: ¬{L}{a} sent15: ({N}{d} & ¬{M}{d}) -> ¬{K}{d} sent16: {B}{a} sent17: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {AT}{b}) -> ¬{AT}{a} sent18: ({C}{dl} & {GP}{dl}) sent19: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent20: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) | [
"sent11 & sent7 -> int1: that the hewer is a rhodonite and a Javanese is correct.; int1 -> int2: the hewer is a kind of a Javanese.; sent19 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent11 & sent7 -> int1: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> int2: {C}{a}; sent19 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | there exists something such that it does not grudge sottishness. | (Ex): ¬{AT}x | [] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the silkscreen is not a cornetfish. ; $context$ = sent1: that the hewer is a rhodonite is not false if there is something such that it does not devote bellyful. sent2: the Exocet does cull supersedure but it does not transfer surffish. sent3: if something is not a kind of a Myrsine then it is a hot-rod and a Uriah. sent4: if the fact that something is not a Javanese and it is not Vedic is false it does devote bellyful. sent5: the hewer transfers roughleg if the dander does transfers roughleg. sent6: the hewer transfers roughleg if the dander is a lilliputian. sent7: if there is something such that it does not devote bellyful then the hewer is a kind of a rhodonite and it is a Javanese. sent8: the hewer is a cornetfish if the silkscreen is a kind of a rhodonite. sent9: if the Exocet is not a sente the dander is a lilliputian and/or it does transfer roughleg. sent10: that something is a rhodonite if it is a paratyphoid is correct. sent11: there is something such that it does not devote bellyful. sent12: if something is a Uriah it is a kind of a paratyphoid. sent13: there is something such that it does devote bellyful. sent14: the hewer is not a kind of a Myrsine. sent15: the Exocet is not a sente if it does cull supersedure and does not transfer surffish. sent16: the hewer is a rhodonite. sent17: the hewer does not grudge sottishness if the fact that the silkscreen is not a kind of a rhodonite but it grudge sottishness is incorrect. sent18: the gleet is a Javanese and it does transfer stumpknocker. sent19: if the hewer is Javanese that the silkscreen is a cornetfish is true. sent20: that something is both non-Javanese and non-Vedic is not true if it does transfer roughleg. ; $proof$ = | sent11 & sent7 -> int1: that the hewer is a rhodonite and a Javanese is correct.; int1 -> int2: the hewer is a kind of a Javanese.; sent19 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Psalter is a ramble and/or it does not cull tenantry. | ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) | sent1: there exists something such that it is not a Shelley. sent2: something that is not a Terebellidae either is a ramble or does not cull tenantry or both. sent3: if something is a Terebellidae then that it either is a ramble or does not cull tenantry or both is not true. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the Psalter is a ramble and/or does not cull tenantry if it is not a Terebellidae.;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa});"
] | that the Psalter does ramble and/or it does not cull tenantry does not hold. | ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) | [
"sent3 -> int2: the fact that the Psalter is a ramble and/or does not cull tenantry is incorrect if it is a Terebellidae.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Psalter is a ramble and/or it does not cull tenantry. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is not a Shelley. sent2: something that is not a Terebellidae either is a ramble or does not cull tenantry or both. sent3: if something is a Terebellidae then that it either is a ramble or does not cull tenantry or both is not true. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the Psalter is a ramble and/or does not cull tenantry if it is not a Terebellidae.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the cabin is not a refilling and/or it is a nosedive is not right. | ¬(¬{C}{b} v {D}{b}) | sent1: if the fact that the enemy is not a guffaw and is not crude is incorrect then the fact that it is crude is right. sent2: a modal thing is a granny. sent3: if the fact that something is precancerous but it is not a kind of a hyperkalemia is true then the fact that the oblate rhapsodizes hold. sent4: if the oblate is a Parisian then the fact that the fact that the cabin is not a refilling or is a nosedive or both is not false is incorrect. sent5: the enemy is not neuroglial and does not cull dormancy if it is crude. sent6: there is something such that it is not a hyperkalemia. sent7: if the fact that something does not rhapsodize is not false then it is a kind of a Parisian or it is not a refilling or both. sent8: if the fact that something does rhapsodize hold that it is a Parisian is not false. sent9: there exists something such that it is precancerous and it is not a hyperkalemia. | sent1: ¬(¬{I}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> {G}{c} sent2: (x): {FN}x -> {GA}x sent3: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} v {D}{b}) sent5: {G}{c} -> (¬{F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent6: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}x v ¬{C}x) sent8: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent9: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent9 & sent3 -> int1: the oblate rhapsodizes.; sent8 -> int2: if the oblate rhapsodizes it is Parisian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the oblate is Parisian.; int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 & sent3 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent8 -> int2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {B}{a}; int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | if the have is a modal that it is a granny hold. | {FN}{hi} -> {GA}{hi} | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that the cabin is not a refilling and/or it is a nosedive is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the enemy is not a guffaw and is not crude is incorrect then the fact that it is crude is right. sent2: a modal thing is a granny. sent3: if the fact that something is precancerous but it is not a kind of a hyperkalemia is true then the fact that the oblate rhapsodizes hold. sent4: if the oblate is a Parisian then the fact that the fact that the cabin is not a refilling or is a nosedive or both is not false is incorrect. sent5: the enemy is not neuroglial and does not cull dormancy if it is crude. sent6: there is something such that it is not a hyperkalemia. sent7: if the fact that something does not rhapsodize is not false then it is a kind of a Parisian or it is not a refilling or both. sent8: if the fact that something does rhapsodize hold that it is a Parisian is not false. sent9: there exists something such that it is precancerous and it is not a hyperkalemia. ; $proof$ = | sent9 & sent3 -> int1: the oblate rhapsodizes.; sent8 -> int2: if the oblate rhapsodizes it is Parisian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the oblate is Parisian.; int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the amphibian is not a student does not hold. | {C}{a} | sent1: if something is a synchronism it is not a Maryland. sent2: something that devotes response is a student. sent3: if something that is not a Maryland does not grudge paraphysis then it is not a kind of a student. sent4: the amphibian is a prescription. sent5: if the amphibian is a prescription it does devote response. sent6: the archive is a kind of prescription thing that devotes response if the amphibian is not a student. sent7: everything is a synchronism. | sent1: (x): {F}x -> ¬{E}x sent2: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent3: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent4: {A}{a} sent5: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent6: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{ip} & {B}{ip}) sent7: (x): {F}x | [
"sent5 & sent4 -> int1: the amphibian devotes response.; sent2 -> int2: the amphibian is a student if it devotes response.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 & sent4 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent2 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the archive is a prescription. | {A}{ip} | [
"sent3 -> int3: the amphibian is not a student if it is not a Maryland and it does not grudge paraphysis.; sent1 -> int4: if that the absentee is a kind of a synchronism is right then it is not a Maryland.; sent7 -> int5: the absentee is a synchronism.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the absentee is not a Maryland.; int6 -> int7: the fact that everything is not a Maryland hold.; int7 -> int8: the amphibian is not a Maryland.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the amphibian is not a student does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a synchronism it is not a Maryland. sent2: something that devotes response is a student. sent3: if something that is not a Maryland does not grudge paraphysis then it is not a kind of a student. sent4: the amphibian is a prescription. sent5: if the amphibian is a prescription it does devote response. sent6: the archive is a kind of prescription thing that devotes response if the amphibian is not a student. sent7: everything is a synchronism. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent4 -> int1: the amphibian devotes response.; sent2 -> int2: the amphibian is a student if it devotes response.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the pottage does not grudge non-discrimination and it does not wrangle. | (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | sent1: if that the igloo culls affiliation but it does not cull dika is wrong then it does not culls affiliation. sent2: something grudges clasp and shrives if it is not archipelagic. sent3: there exists something such that it culls dika and does not cull samosa. sent4: if the dika does grudge clasp and it shrives the arbutus does not grudge clasp. sent5: the pottage does not grudge non-discrimination if there exists something such that it does not cull dika and it does not cull samosa. sent6: there exists something such that it does not wrangle and it does not grudge non-discrimination. sent7: there exists something such that it does not cull dika and does not cull samosa. sent8: the clasp does grudge paleocerebellum if that it is hungry and it does not grudge paleocerebellum is false. sent9: if that the pottage is a socialization that does not cull dika is not right then it is not a kind of a socialization. sent10: if the arbutus does not grudge clasp then that that the clasp is hungry thing that does not grudge paleocerebellum is not right is true. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it does not cull dika is not wrong. sent12: if the aspen is a kind of a tilter the charcoal is a kind of a tilter. sent13: there is something such that it does not cull dika and it does cull samosa. sent14: if the charcoal does not cull greenockite but it is archipelagic the dika is not archipelagic. sent15: the canister does not grudge clasp. sent16: the fact that something does not cull samosa is not false. sent17: something does not cull greenockite but it is archipelagic if it is a kind of a tilter. sent18: the pottage does not grudge non-discrimination if something that does not wrangle does not grudge clasp. sent19: if the clasp grudges paleocerebellum then the prude wrangles. sent20: the fact that the pottage wrangles and does not grudge clasp does not hold. sent21: the pottage does not transfer Java. | sent1: ¬({M}{ar} & ¬{AA}{ar}) -> ¬{M}{ar} sent2: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {G}x) sent3: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: ({D}{e} & {G}{e}) -> ¬{D}{d} sent5: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: (Ex): (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) sent7: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent8: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> {C}{c} sent9: ¬({BI}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) -> ¬{BI}{a} sent10: ¬{D}{d} -> ¬({E}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent11: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent12: {I}{g} -> {I}{f} sent13: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent14: (¬{H}{f} & {F}{f}) -> ¬{F}{e} sent15: ¬{D}{ck} sent16: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent17: (x): {I}x -> (¬{H}x & {F}x) sent18: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent19: {C}{c} -> {B}{b} sent20: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent21: ¬{J}{a} | [
"sent7 & sent5 -> int1: the pottage does not grudge non-discrimination.;"
] | [
"sent7 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{A}{a};"
] | the fact that the pottage does not grudge non-discrimination and it does not wrangle is not right. | ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | [
"sent2 -> int2: the dika does grudge clasp and shrives if it is not archipelagic.; sent17 -> int3: if the charcoal is a tilter it does not cull greenockite and is archipelagic.;"
] | 11 | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the pottage does not grudge non-discrimination and it does not wrangle. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the igloo culls affiliation but it does not cull dika is wrong then it does not culls affiliation. sent2: something grudges clasp and shrives if it is not archipelagic. sent3: there exists something such that it culls dika and does not cull samosa. sent4: if the dika does grudge clasp and it shrives the arbutus does not grudge clasp. sent5: the pottage does not grudge non-discrimination if there exists something such that it does not cull dika and it does not cull samosa. sent6: there exists something such that it does not wrangle and it does not grudge non-discrimination. sent7: there exists something such that it does not cull dika and does not cull samosa. sent8: the clasp does grudge paleocerebellum if that it is hungry and it does not grudge paleocerebellum is false. sent9: if that the pottage is a socialization that does not cull dika is not right then it is not a kind of a socialization. sent10: if the arbutus does not grudge clasp then that that the clasp is hungry thing that does not grudge paleocerebellum is not right is true. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it does not cull dika is not wrong. sent12: if the aspen is a kind of a tilter the charcoal is a kind of a tilter. sent13: there is something such that it does not cull dika and it does cull samosa. sent14: if the charcoal does not cull greenockite but it is archipelagic the dika is not archipelagic. sent15: the canister does not grudge clasp. sent16: the fact that something does not cull samosa is not false. sent17: something does not cull greenockite but it is archipelagic if it is a kind of a tilter. sent18: the pottage does not grudge non-discrimination if something that does not wrangle does not grudge clasp. sent19: if the clasp grudges paleocerebellum then the prude wrangles. sent20: the fact that the pottage wrangles and does not grudge clasp does not hold. sent21: the pottage does not transfer Java. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent5 -> int1: the pottage does not grudge non-discrimination.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the eyeball does not devote sugar-bush and it is not Venezuelan is wrong. | ¬(¬{F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) | sent1: there is something such that it does not grudge deserter. sent2: if there is something such that it does not grudge deserter that the talc is not a kind of a nosed and is not a Russell is not right. sent3: if that that the talc is not a nosed and it is not a Russell is not incorrect is incorrect then the superior is not a kind of a mail. sent4: that the talc is Venezuelan thing that does not devote sugar-bush is wrong if the eyeball is not a Russell. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent3: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent4: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) | [
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: that the talc is not a nosed and is not a Russell is not correct.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the superior does not mail.;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); sent3 & int1 -> int2: ¬{D}{b};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = that the eyeball does not devote sugar-bush and it is not Venezuelan is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it does not grudge deserter. sent2: if there is something such that it does not grudge deserter that the talc is not a kind of a nosed and is not a Russell is not right. sent3: if that that the talc is not a nosed and it is not a Russell is not incorrect is incorrect then the superior is not a kind of a mail. sent4: that the talc is Venezuelan thing that does not devote sugar-bush is wrong if the eyeball is not a Russell. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent2 -> int1: that the talc is not a nosed and is not a Russell is not correct.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the superior does not mail.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the garmentmaker devotes garmentmaker but it does not cull shelter. | ({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) | sent1: that that the garmentmaker does devote garmentmaker and it does cull shelter does not hold is right. sent2: the ribavirin is a kind of a Bedouin. sent3: if the ribavirin does devote garmentmaker then that the garmentmaker does devote garmentmaker and it culls shelter is not true. sent4: the ribavirin is a kind of a Bedouin and does transfer hypervelocity. sent5: if something transfers hypervelocity that it does devote garmentmaker is true. sent6: if the ribavirin devotes garmentmaker the fact that the garmentmaker does devotes garmentmaker but it does not cull shelter does not hold. | sent1: ¬({C}{b} & {E}{b}) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: {C}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & {E}{b}) sent4: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent5: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent6: {C}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) | [
"sent4 -> int1: the fact that the ribavirin does transfer hypervelocity is not incorrect.; sent5 -> int2: if the ribavirin does transfer hypervelocity the fact that it devotes garmentmaker is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the ribavirin devotes garmentmaker.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent5 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a}; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the garmentmaker devotes garmentmaker but it does not cull shelter. ; $context$ = sent1: that that the garmentmaker does devote garmentmaker and it does cull shelter does not hold is right. sent2: the ribavirin is a kind of a Bedouin. sent3: if the ribavirin does devote garmentmaker then that the garmentmaker does devote garmentmaker and it culls shelter is not true. sent4: the ribavirin is a kind of a Bedouin and does transfer hypervelocity. sent5: if something transfers hypervelocity that it does devote garmentmaker is true. sent6: if the ribavirin devotes garmentmaker the fact that the garmentmaker does devotes garmentmaker but it does not cull shelter does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> int1: the fact that the ribavirin does transfer hypervelocity is not incorrect.; sent5 -> int2: if the ribavirin does transfer hypervelocity the fact that it devotes garmentmaker is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the ribavirin devotes garmentmaker.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the committeeman does not church and is a reflectiveness. | (¬{E}{d} & {D}{d}) | sent1: if that the committeeman is restrictive is not incorrect it is not semiotic. sent2: the committeeman is a kind of a church that is not a reflectiveness if the pyromancer is a church. sent3: if the aftershaft is not a Melophagus and does not grudge aftermath then the aftermath is restrictive. sent4: the aftermath is rotational. sent5: the committeeman does not grudge aftermath. sent6: the mender is a reflectiveness and not a pad. sent7: the pyromancer is not semiotic. sent8: the fact that if the committeeman is the Melophagus then the committeeman is a kind of unrestrictive thing that is a church is not wrong. sent9: something is not a church and is a reflectiveness if it is semiotic. sent10: if the pyromancer does not grudge aftermath and is not a Melophagus the aftershaft is restrictive. sent11: the committeeman is semiotic if the pyromancer is restrictive and not clayey. sent12: if the aftermath is restrictive then the pyromancer is a kind of restrictive thing that is not clayey. sent13: the pyromancer is both restrictive and not a Melophagus. sent14: the committeeman is not a kind of a dibble. sent15: the aftershaft is not restrictive if the aftermath does grudge aftermath. | sent1: {B}{d} -> ¬{A}{d} sent2: {E}{c} -> ({E}{d} & ¬{D}{d}) sent3: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent4: {T}{b} sent5: ¬{AB}{d} sent6: ({D}{et} & ¬{GB}{et}) sent7: ¬{A}{c} sent8: {AA}{d} -> (¬{B}{d} & {E}{d}) sent9: (x): {A}x -> (¬{E}x & {D}x) sent10: (¬{AB}{c} & ¬{AA}{c}) -> {B}{a} sent11: ({B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> {A}{d} sent12: {B}{b} -> ({B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent13: ({B}{c} & ¬{AA}{c}) sent14: ¬{CB}{d} sent15: {AB}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} | [
"sent9 -> int1: the committeeman is not a church but it is a reflectiveness if it is semiotic.;"
] | [
"sent9 -> int1: {A}{d} -> (¬{E}{d} & {D}{d});"
] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the committeeman does not church and is a reflectiveness. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the committeeman is restrictive is not incorrect it is not semiotic. sent2: the committeeman is a kind of a church that is not a reflectiveness if the pyromancer is a church. sent3: if the aftershaft is not a Melophagus and does not grudge aftermath then the aftermath is restrictive. sent4: the aftermath is rotational. sent5: the committeeman does not grudge aftermath. sent6: the mender is a reflectiveness and not a pad. sent7: the pyromancer is not semiotic. sent8: the fact that if the committeeman is the Melophagus then the committeeman is a kind of unrestrictive thing that is a church is not wrong. sent9: something is not a church and is a reflectiveness if it is semiotic. sent10: if the pyromancer does not grudge aftermath and is not a Melophagus the aftershaft is restrictive. sent11: the committeeman is semiotic if the pyromancer is restrictive and not clayey. sent12: if the aftermath is restrictive then the pyromancer is a kind of restrictive thing that is not clayey. sent13: the pyromancer is both restrictive and not a Melophagus. sent14: the committeeman is not a kind of a dibble. sent15: the aftershaft is not restrictive if the aftermath does grudge aftermath. ; $proof$ = | sent9 -> int1: the committeeman is not a church but it is a reflectiveness if it is semiotic.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there is something such that if it is not healthy the fact that it does rope and does not cull Brezhnev does not hold is not right. | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: there exists something such that if it is healthy that it is a rope and does not cull Brezhnev is not true. sent2: if the tripalmitin does not comb then it is a kind of an avail that is not departmental. sent3: if the bandstand is not healthy then the fact that it ropes and does not cull Brezhnev is incorrect. sent4: there is something such that if it is not healthy that it does rope and it culls Brezhnev is wrong. sent5: if the bandstand is a shearer then the fact that it does avail and is not municipal is not true. | sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: ¬{HU}{fn} -> ({EI}{fn} & ¬{CI}{fn}) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: {J}{aa} -> ¬({EI}{aa} & ¬{CP}{aa}) | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is not healthy the fact that it does rope and does not cull Brezhnev does not hold is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is healthy that it is a rope and does not cull Brezhnev is not true. sent2: if the tripalmitin does not comb then it is a kind of an avail that is not departmental. sent3: if the bandstand is not healthy then the fact that it ropes and does not cull Brezhnev is incorrect. sent4: there is something such that if it is not healthy that it does rope and it culls Brezhnev is wrong. sent5: if the bandstand is a shearer then the fact that it does avail and is not municipal is not true. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the saman is not a Wake but it is a wrongdoer does not hold. | ¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: the saman is not a kind of a Wake but it is a wrongdoer if the elephant's-foot is a wrongdoer. sent2: the nucleoside does devote Edirne. sent3: if something is a chiropodist but it is not a kind of a revision then it is semicentennial. sent4: that the opiate culls contrast and/or is empiric hold. sent5: the saman is a kind of a Wake if the opiate is a Wake. sent6: the saman does devote Edirne if the nucleoside does devote Edirne. sent7: the fact that the elephant's-foot is muciferous and does not cull Crick is wrong if that it is semicentennial is not wrong. sent8: something is a chiropodist but it is not a kind of a revision if it devotes Edirne. sent9: something is a wrongdoer if the fact that it is a Wake is right. sent10: the elephant's-foot is not non-semicentennial. sent11: the fact that if the fact that something is muciferous but it does not cull Crick is not correct it is a kind of a wrongdoer is not false. | sent1: {B}{aa} -> (¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: {F}{c} sent3: (x): ({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> {A}x sent4: ({H}{b} v {G}{b}) sent5: {C}{b} -> {C}{a} sent6: {F}{c} -> {F}{a} sent7: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: (x): {F}x -> ({D}x & ¬{E}x) sent9: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent10: {A}{aa} sent11: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x | [
"sent11 -> int1: if the fact that the elephant's-foot is muciferous thing that does not cull Crick does not hold then it is a kind of a wrongdoer.; sent7 & sent10 -> int2: the fact that the elephant's-foot is muciferous but it does not cull Crick is not right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the elephant's-foot is a wrongdoer.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent11 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; sent7 & sent10 -> int2: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: {B}{aa}; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the direction does cull Crick. | {AB}{fu} | [
"sent3 -> int4: if the saman is a chiropodist that is not a revision it is a semicentennial.; sent8 -> int5: if the fact that the saman does devote Edirne hold then it is a kind of a chiropodist and it is not a revision.; sent6 & sent2 -> int6: the saman devotes Edirne.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the saman is a chiropodist and is not a revision.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the saman is a kind of a semicentennial.; sent9 -> int9: the saman is a kind of a wrongdoer if it is a Wake.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the saman is not a Wake but it is a wrongdoer does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the saman is not a kind of a Wake but it is a wrongdoer if the elephant's-foot is a wrongdoer. sent2: the nucleoside does devote Edirne. sent3: if something is a chiropodist but it is not a kind of a revision then it is semicentennial. sent4: that the opiate culls contrast and/or is empiric hold. sent5: the saman is a kind of a Wake if the opiate is a Wake. sent6: the saman does devote Edirne if the nucleoside does devote Edirne. sent7: the fact that the elephant's-foot is muciferous and does not cull Crick is wrong if that it is semicentennial is not wrong. sent8: something is a chiropodist but it is not a kind of a revision if it devotes Edirne. sent9: something is a wrongdoer if the fact that it is a Wake is right. sent10: the elephant's-foot is not non-semicentennial. sent11: the fact that if the fact that something is muciferous but it does not cull Crick is not correct it is a kind of a wrongdoer is not false. ; $proof$ = | sent11 -> int1: if the fact that the elephant's-foot is muciferous thing that does not cull Crick does not hold then it is a kind of a wrongdoer.; sent7 & sent10 -> int2: the fact that the elephant's-foot is muciferous but it does not cull Crick is not right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the elephant's-foot is a wrongdoer.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the mobcap is not a kind of a perceptibility but it does cull name. | (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) | sent1: something is egoistic and it is ametabolic if the fact that it is not pneumococcal hold. sent2: if that the mobcap is not pneumococcal and culls Dragunov does not hold then the Sikh is not pneumococcal. sent3: the Sikh is both egoistic and a perceptibility if the introduction is not ametabolic. sent4: something is a kind of non-ametabolic thing that is pneumococcal if it does not cull Dragunov. sent5: if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a foryml that is a naming does not hold the fact that the pig is a Phalaropidae is not wrong. sent6: there exists something such that that it is a foryml and a naming is not true. sent7: that something is a kind of non-pneumococcal thing that culls Dragunov is incorrect if it is a prorogation. sent8: the Sikh is ametabolic. sent9: if something is egoistic the fact that it is not a kind of a perceptibility and is diatomic does not hold. sent10: the mobcap is a prorogation if that the introduction does not transfer taxidermist and it is not a Phalaropidae is not correct. | sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent2: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent3: ¬{B}{c} -> ({A}{b} & {AA}{b}) sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent5: (x): ¬({H}x & {I}x) -> {F}{d} sent6: (Ex): ¬({H}x & {I}x) sent7: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {D}x) sent8: {B}{b} sent9: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {IS}x) sent10: ¬(¬{G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> {E}{a} | [] | [] | that the Sikh is not a perceptibility but it is diatomic is not correct. | ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {IS}{b}) | [
"sent9 -> int1: if the Sikh is egoistic the fact that it is not a perceptibility and it is diatomic does not hold.; sent1 -> int2: the Sikh is egoistic and is ametabolic if it is not pneumococcal.; sent7 -> int3: the fact that the mobcap is not pneumococcal and does cull Dragunov does not hold if it is a prorogation.; sent6 & sent5 -> int4: the pig is a kind of a Phalaropidae.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it is a Phalaropidae.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the mobcap is not a kind of a perceptibility but it does cull name. ; $context$ = sent1: something is egoistic and it is ametabolic if the fact that it is not pneumococcal hold. sent2: if that the mobcap is not pneumococcal and culls Dragunov does not hold then the Sikh is not pneumococcal. sent3: the Sikh is both egoistic and a perceptibility if the introduction is not ametabolic. sent4: something is a kind of non-ametabolic thing that is pneumococcal if it does not cull Dragunov. sent5: if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a foryml that is a naming does not hold the fact that the pig is a Phalaropidae is not wrong. sent6: there exists something such that that it is a foryml and a naming is not true. sent7: that something is a kind of non-pneumococcal thing that culls Dragunov is incorrect if it is a prorogation. sent8: the Sikh is ametabolic. sent9: if something is egoistic the fact that it is not a kind of a perceptibility and is diatomic does not hold. sent10: the mobcap is a prorogation if that the introduction does not transfer taxidermist and it is not a Phalaropidae is not correct. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | something grudges discreteness and it pretends. | (Ex): ({B}x & {C}x) | sent1: the roentgenium does pretend and is bucolic. sent2: the gee-gee is a jumble. sent3: the gee-gee does grudge discreteness. sent4: the surgeon is bucolic. | sent1: ({C}{b} & {D}{b}) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: {B}{a} sent4: {D}{ic} | [
"sent1 -> int1: the roentgenium does pretend.;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: {C}{b};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = something grudges discreteness and it pretends. ; $context$ = sent1: the roentgenium does pretend and is bucolic. sent2: the gee-gee is a jumble. sent3: the gee-gee does grudge discreteness. sent4: the surgeon is bucolic. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: the roentgenium does pretend.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it does not signify it does not cull silks and it is not antiapartheid. | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: there is something such that if it does not signify it does not cull silks. sent2: if the fact that the boiling does not signify is right it does not cull silks and is not antiapartheid. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not signify it does cull silks and is not antiapartheid. sent4: the boiling does not cull silks and it is not antiapartheid if it does signify. sent5: something does not transfer dika and it does not transfer brethren if it does not devote encephalogram. sent6: there is something such that if that it signifies is not false then it does not cull silks and it is non-antiapartheid. sent7: there is something such that if it does not signify then it is not antiapartheid. sent8: the boiling does cull silks and is not antiapartheid if it does not signify. sent9: that the boiling is not antiapartheid if the boiling does not signify is correct. sent10: if something is not antiapartheid it is non-awful and is not a kind of a minuscule. sent11: there is something such that if it does not signify it does not cull silks and it is antiapartheid. sent12: there is something such that if it is not a hospitalization it does not decrease and it is not a kind of a Israelite. sent13: if that the boiling is not a loofa hold it is not cupric and it is not a kind of a Javanese. sent14: there is something such that if it does not chill it is not intrapulmonary and it is not indiscriminate. sent15: if something is not supraorbital then it is both not necromantic and not a loofa. sent16: there exists something such that if it is not a antinomian it does not cull tenoroon and is not a kind of a interstice. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent2: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{EQ}x -> (¬{IH}x & ¬{EJ}x) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent9: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬{AB}x -> (¬{AT}x & ¬{IJ}x) sent11: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent12: (Ex): ¬{FO}x -> (¬{EB}x & ¬{HC}x) sent13: ¬{CG}{aa} -> (¬{FI}{aa} & ¬{T}{aa}) sent14: (Ex): ¬{GE}x -> (¬{AF}x & ¬{AJ}x) sent15: (x): ¬{S}x -> (¬{M}x & ¬{CG}x) sent16: (Ex): ¬{BR}x -> (¬{FM}x & ¬{BC}x) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the boiling does not transfer dika and it does not transfer brethren if it does not devote encephalogram. | ¬{EQ}{aa} -> (¬{IH}{aa} & ¬{EJ}{aa}) | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not signify it does not cull silks and it is not antiapartheid. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it does not signify it does not cull silks. sent2: if the fact that the boiling does not signify is right it does not cull silks and is not antiapartheid. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not signify it does cull silks and is not antiapartheid. sent4: the boiling does not cull silks and it is not antiapartheid if it does signify. sent5: something does not transfer dika and it does not transfer brethren if it does not devote encephalogram. sent6: there is something such that if that it signifies is not false then it does not cull silks and it is non-antiapartheid. sent7: there is something such that if it does not signify then it is not antiapartheid. sent8: the boiling does cull silks and is not antiapartheid if it does not signify. sent9: that the boiling is not antiapartheid if the boiling does not signify is correct. sent10: if something is not antiapartheid it is non-awful and is not a kind of a minuscule. sent11: there is something such that if it does not signify it does not cull silks and it is antiapartheid. sent12: there is something such that if it is not a hospitalization it does not decrease and it is not a kind of a Israelite. sent13: if that the boiling is not a loofa hold it is not cupric and it is not a kind of a Javanese. sent14: there is something such that if it does not chill it is not intrapulmonary and it is not indiscriminate. sent15: if something is not supraorbital then it is both not necromantic and not a loofa. sent16: there exists something such that if it is not a antinomian it does not cull tenoroon and is not a kind of a interstice. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the wilt does not occur. | ¬{D} | sent1: if the Ruritanian does not occur then the culling taurine does not occur and the adynamicness happens. sent2: if the fissionableness happens then the proceeding occurs. sent3: if that the champerty does not occur is correct then that the fissionableness does not occur and the proceeding does not occur is not right. sent4: if the grudging spermatophyte does not occur the neuromuscularness does not occur and the blocking does not occur. sent5: if the congregation does not occur the will-o'-the-wisp happens and the Carolingianness happens. sent6: that both the wilting and the conformity occurs does not hold if the devoting partialness does not occur. sent7: the fact that the Ruritanian does not occur is not wrong if the Ruritanian does not occur or the culling octahedron does not occur or both. sent8: if the fact that the culling taurine does not occur hold then the consecrating happens and the fetish occurs. sent9: the conformity happens and the champerty happens. sent10: if the will-o'-the-wisp occurs the Ruritanian does not occur or the culling octahedron does not occur or both. sent11: if the devoting partialness does not occur then not the champerty but the conformity occurs. sent12: if that the fetish happens is true the grudging spermatophyte does not occur. sent13: the fissionableness occurs. sent14: the difficultness does not occur if the fact that the proceeding and/or the non-fissionableness occurs does not hold. sent15: that the neuromuscularness does not occur and the blocking does not occur triggers that the devoting partialness does not occur. sent16: the fact that the congregation does not occur is true if the fact that the camouflaging does not occur but the congregation happens is not true. | sent1: ¬{N} -> (¬{L} & {M}) sent2: {A} -> {B} sent3: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent4: ¬{I} -> (¬{G} & ¬{H}) sent5: ¬{R} -> ({P} & {Q}) sent6: ¬{F} -> ¬({D} & {E}) sent7: (¬{N} v ¬{O}) -> ¬{N} sent8: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {J}) sent9: ({E} & {C}) sent10: {P} -> (¬{N} v ¬{O}) sent11: ¬{F} -> (¬{C} & {E}) sent12: {J} -> ¬{I} sent13: {A} sent14: ¬({B} v ¬{A}) -> ¬{EF} sent15: (¬{G} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} sent16: ¬(¬{T} & {R}) -> ¬{R} | [
"sent2 & sent13 -> int1: the proceeding happens.; sent9 -> int2: the fact that the champerty happens is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the champerty and the proceeding occurs.;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent13 -> int1: {B}; sent9 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({C} & {B});"
] | the wilting occurs. | {D} | [] | 16 | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the wilt does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Ruritanian does not occur then the culling taurine does not occur and the adynamicness happens. sent2: if the fissionableness happens then the proceeding occurs. sent3: if that the champerty does not occur is correct then that the fissionableness does not occur and the proceeding does not occur is not right. sent4: if the grudging spermatophyte does not occur the neuromuscularness does not occur and the blocking does not occur. sent5: if the congregation does not occur the will-o'-the-wisp happens and the Carolingianness happens. sent6: that both the wilting and the conformity occurs does not hold if the devoting partialness does not occur. sent7: the fact that the Ruritanian does not occur is not wrong if the Ruritanian does not occur or the culling octahedron does not occur or both. sent8: if the fact that the culling taurine does not occur hold then the consecrating happens and the fetish occurs. sent9: the conformity happens and the champerty happens. sent10: if the will-o'-the-wisp occurs the Ruritanian does not occur or the culling octahedron does not occur or both. sent11: if the devoting partialness does not occur then not the champerty but the conformity occurs. sent12: if that the fetish happens is true the grudging spermatophyte does not occur. sent13: the fissionableness occurs. sent14: the difficultness does not occur if the fact that the proceeding and/or the non-fissionableness occurs does not hold. sent15: that the neuromuscularness does not occur and the blocking does not occur triggers that the devoting partialness does not occur. sent16: the fact that the congregation does not occur is true if the fact that the camouflaging does not occur but the congregation happens is not true. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent13 -> int1: the proceeding happens.; sent9 -> int2: the fact that the champerty happens is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the champerty and the proceeding occurs.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the marshal is a specialization. | {C}{c} | sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is indoor and it does not elongate is not correct. sent2: if that the coiner is a kind of grapelike thing that does cull Etna is incorrect the marshal is not a specialization. sent3: that the matron is not grapelike and it is not a specialization is not true if the coiner culls Etna. sent4: if there is something such that it does not tessellate the fact that the coiner transfers prestige and it does tessellate is not correct. sent5: that the linac does not tessellate hold. sent6: if there exists something such that that the fact that it is indoor and does not elongate is not incorrect is incorrect the matron does not cull Etna. sent7: the fact that the coiner is not non-grapelike and culls Etna is false if the matron does not culls Etna. sent8: something is a kind of a imide if it is not a sunlamp. sent9: a imide culls Etna. sent10: something is not a sunlamp if that it does transfer prestige and it does tessellate is not true. | sent1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent3: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}{b} & {G}{b}) sent5: ¬{G}{d} sent6: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent8: (x): ¬{E}x -> {D}x sent9: (x): {D}x -> {A}x sent10: (x): ¬({F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x | [
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the matron does not cull Etna.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the coiner is grapelike and culls Etna is false.; sent2 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; sent7 & int1 -> int2: ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}); sent2 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the marshal is a specialization. | {C}{c} | [
"sent9 -> int3: the coiner culls Etna if it is a kind of a imide.; sent8 -> int4: if the fact that the coiner is not a kind of a sunlamp is right it is a kind of a imide.; sent10 -> int5: if that the coiner transfers prestige and it tessellates is not right then it is not a sunlamp.; sent5 -> int6: the fact that something does not tessellate is correct.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: that the coiner transfers prestige and it does tessellate is false.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the coiner is not a kind of a sunlamp.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the coiner is a imide.; int3 & int9 -> int10: the coiner does cull Etna.; sent3 & int10 -> int11: that the matron is not grapelike and is not a specialization is not right.; int11 -> int12: there exists something such that the fact that it is both not grapelike and not a specialization is incorrect.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the marshal is a specialization. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is indoor and it does not elongate is not correct. sent2: if that the coiner is a kind of grapelike thing that does cull Etna is incorrect the marshal is not a specialization. sent3: that the matron is not grapelike and it is not a specialization is not true if the coiner culls Etna. sent4: if there is something such that it does not tessellate the fact that the coiner transfers prestige and it does tessellate is not correct. sent5: that the linac does not tessellate hold. sent6: if there exists something such that that the fact that it is indoor and does not elongate is not incorrect is incorrect the matron does not cull Etna. sent7: the fact that the coiner is not non-grapelike and culls Etna is false if the matron does not culls Etna. sent8: something is a kind of a imide if it is not a sunlamp. sent9: a imide culls Etna. sent10: something is not a sunlamp if that it does transfer prestige and it does tessellate is not true. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the matron does not cull Etna.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the coiner is grapelike and culls Etna is false.; sent2 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the delicacy is not lyric and not ancestral. | (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | sent1: the shawm is not Hertzian and it is not a Priapus. sent2: something is not a respiration and not a lyric if it is Hertzian. sent3: the delicacy does not romance fearlessness and is not ancestral if there is something such that it is a Artocarpus. sent4: the detector is a vagrant and it is a kind of a repose. sent5: if the spiegeleisen does not repose it is a vagrant that is a kind of an inaccessibility. sent6: something is Hertzian. sent7: the delicacy is non-lyric thing that is not ancestral if there is something such that the fact that it is Hertzian is right. sent8: the delicacy does not welter and it is not ancestral if the ageratum is pyrectic. sent9: the delicacy does not diffract ageratum. sent10: something is pyrectic if that it is not a vagrant and is not a kind of an inaccessibility is not correct. sent11: the spiegeleisen is not pyrectic if that it is a kind of an inaccessibility is right. sent12: if the spiegeleisen is not pyrectic that the detector is Hertzian and/or it does not welter is not right. sent13: the delicacy does not lyric if there is something such that it is Hertzian. sent14: the quibbler is Hertzian if there exists something such that it does not welter and is non-ancestral. sent15: the delicacy is not Hertzian and it does not share Pujunan. | sent1: (¬{A}{bf} & ¬{IC}{bf}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> (¬{IU}x & ¬{B}x) sent3: (x): {BH}x -> (¬{BU}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent4: ({G}{c} & {H}{c}) sent5: ¬{H}{d} -> ({G}{d} & {F}{d}) sent6: (Ex): {A}x sent7: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent8: {E}{b} -> (¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent9: ¬{CN}{a} sent10: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> {E}x sent11: {F}{d} -> ¬{E}{d} sent12: ¬{E}{d} -> ¬({A}{c} v ¬{D}{c}) sent13: (x): {A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent14: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}{dm} sent15: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{HF}{a}) | [
"sent6 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | the quibbler is not a respiration and is not a lyric. | (¬{IU}{dm} & ¬{B}{dm}) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the quibbler is not a kind of a respiration and does not lyric if it is Hertzian.; sent10 -> int2: if the fact that the ageratum is not a vagrant and is not a kind of an inaccessibility is false then it is pyrectic.; sent4 -> int3: that the detector is a vagrant is true.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that it is a vagrant.;"
] | 8 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the delicacy is not lyric and not ancestral. ; $context$ = sent1: the shawm is not Hertzian and it is not a Priapus. sent2: something is not a respiration and not a lyric if it is Hertzian. sent3: the delicacy does not romance fearlessness and is not ancestral if there is something such that it is a Artocarpus. sent4: the detector is a vagrant and it is a kind of a repose. sent5: if the spiegeleisen does not repose it is a vagrant that is a kind of an inaccessibility. sent6: something is Hertzian. sent7: the delicacy is non-lyric thing that is not ancestral if there is something such that the fact that it is Hertzian is right. sent8: the delicacy does not welter and it is not ancestral if the ageratum is pyrectic. sent9: the delicacy does not diffract ageratum. sent10: something is pyrectic if that it is not a vagrant and is not a kind of an inaccessibility is not correct. sent11: the spiegeleisen is not pyrectic if that it is a kind of an inaccessibility is right. sent12: if the spiegeleisen is not pyrectic that the detector is Hertzian and/or it does not welter is not right. sent13: the delicacy does not lyric if there is something such that it is Hertzian. sent14: the quibbler is Hertzian if there exists something such that it does not welter and is non-ancestral. sent15: the delicacy is not Hertzian and it does not share Pujunan. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the diffracting ricer or the belting or both occurs. | ({B} v {C}) | sent1: the middling occurs if that the middling does not occur and the belt does not occur does not hold. sent2: if the middling does not occur then the fact that the diffracting ricer and/or the belting occurs is not correct. sent3: the barrack happens if the middling occurs. sent4: the middling and the diffracting ricer happens. sent5: if the diffracting ricer does not occur then that the middlingness does not occur and the belting does not occur is not correct. sent6: the tapering happens. sent7: if that the affinity does not occur is not wrong then the diffracting ricer does not occur. | sent1: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) -> {A} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} v {C}) sent3: {A} -> {DH} sent4: ({A} & {B}) sent5: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) sent6: {DC} sent7: ¬{D} -> ¬{B} | [
"sent4 -> int1: the diffracting ricer occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> int1: {B}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | that either the diffracting ricer or the belt or both happens is wrong. | ¬({B} v {C}) | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the diffracting ricer or the belting or both occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the middling occurs if that the middling does not occur and the belt does not occur does not hold. sent2: if the middling does not occur then the fact that the diffracting ricer and/or the belting occurs is not correct. sent3: the barrack happens if the middling occurs. sent4: the middling and the diffracting ricer happens. sent5: if the diffracting ricer does not occur then that the middlingness does not occur and the belting does not occur is not correct. sent6: the tapering happens. sent7: if that the affinity does not occur is not wrong then the diffracting ricer does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> int1: the diffracting ricer occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that that the sighing does not occur prevents that the sequestering does not occur is not true. | ¬(¬{A} -> {B}) | sent1: both the non-basiscopicness and the non-classicisticness happens if the sigh does not occur. sent2: that both the non-basiscopicness and the non-classicisticness occurs prevents that the sequestering does not occur. sent3: the breakdown does not occur. sent4: that both the Ambrosianness and the unpaintableness happens triggers that the diffracting Gary happens. sent5: that the leglessness happens is caused by that the satisfaction but not the peepshow happens. | sent1: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent3: ¬{DO} sent4: ({IF} & ¬{GR}) -> {GQ} sent5: ({FS} & ¬{IB}) -> {GA} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sigh does not occur.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the non-basiscopicness and the non-classicisticness occurs.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the sequestering occurs.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent2 & int1 -> int2: {B}; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that that the sighing does not occur prevents that the sequestering does not occur is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: both the non-basiscopicness and the non-classicisticness happens if the sigh does not occur. sent2: that both the non-basiscopicness and the non-classicisticness occurs prevents that the sequestering does not occur. sent3: the breakdown does not occur. sent4: that both the Ambrosianness and the unpaintableness happens triggers that the diffracting Gary happens. sent5: that the leglessness happens is caused by that the satisfaction but not the peepshow happens. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the sigh does not occur.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the non-basiscopicness and the non-classicisticness occurs.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the sequestering occurs.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the alert does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: the downspin happens and/or the sharing Tay does not occur. sent2: that the immiscibleness occurs is triggered by that either the ametropicness occurs or the sharing Trinitarianism does not occur or both. sent3: if the downspin occurs or the sharing Tay does not occur or both then the diffracting dong occurs. | sent1: ({AA} v ¬{AB}) sent2: ({ES} v ¬{FF}) -> {HD} sent3: ({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> {B} | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the diffracting dong occurs.; int1 -> int2: the hearing happens and/or the diffracting dong occurs.;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: {B}; int1 -> int2: ({A} v {B});"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the alert does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the downspin happens and/or the sharing Tay does not occur. sent2: that the immiscibleness occurs is triggered by that either the ametropicness occurs or the sharing Trinitarianism does not occur or both. sent3: if the downspin occurs or the sharing Tay does not occur or both then the diffracting dong occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the diffracting dong occurs.; int1 -> int2: the hearing happens and/or the diffracting dong occurs.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the rickey does share siloxane and/or it is a safe-conduct. | ({B}{a} v {C}{a}) | sent1: there is something such that it is not a kind of a cricket and it does not share hepatomegaly. sent2: the fact that something shares siloxane and/or it is a safe-conduct does not hold if it does not share hypobasidium. sent3: that the rickey does not share hypobasidium but it is a kind of a safe-conduct is not correct if it is a kludge. sent4: something is not a kind of a fatness if it does not bite. sent5: if that that the superstrate is not a Mandaean and it is not a simian is not incorrect does not hold the rickey is not a simian. sent6: the rickey does share siloxane or is unbridgeable or both. sent7: the hummer is circulatory if it is a hustler. sent8: the lovastatin is a safe-conduct. sent9: the rickey does share hypobasidium. sent10: the rickey does share siloxane if it shares hypobasidium. sent11: if that something is not a kind of a simian hold it is a kind of a leading that is a kind of a kludge. sent12: if something that does lead is a kludge then it does not share hypobasidium. sent13: The hypobasidium does share rickey. sent14: if the cedarbird is carcinomatous that the superstrate is not a Mandaean and it is not a kind of a simian is wrong. sent15: something is a kind of carcinomatous thing that is not a skateboarding if it is not a fatness. sent16: if something does not lead that it is not a kludge and it does share hypobasidium is not true. sent17: if the soup-strainer is unethical it is autocatalytic. sent18: the rickey is a kind of a safe-conduct or it is a soup-strainer or both. sent19: a safe-conduct diffracts kittee. | sent1: (Ex): (¬{L}x & ¬{M}x) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x v {C}x) sent3: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬{J}x sent5: ¬(¬{G}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{F}{a} sent6: ({B}{a} v {IS}{a}) sent7: {AS}{de} -> {EC}{de} sent8: {C}{cm} sent9: {A}{a} sent10: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) sent12: (x): ({E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent13: {AA}{aa} sent14: {H}{c} -> ¬(¬{G}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent15: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({H}x & ¬{I}x) sent16: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {A}x) sent17: {BD}{aq} -> {HM}{aq} sent18: ({C}{a} v {HJ}{a}) sent19: (x): {C}x -> {HD}x | [
"sent10 & sent9 -> int1: the rickey shares siloxane.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent10 & sent9 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the waltzer shares siloxane. | {B}{fd} | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the rickey does share siloxane and/or it is a safe-conduct. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not a kind of a cricket and it does not share hepatomegaly. sent2: the fact that something shares siloxane and/or it is a safe-conduct does not hold if it does not share hypobasidium. sent3: that the rickey does not share hypobasidium but it is a kind of a safe-conduct is not correct if it is a kludge. sent4: something is not a kind of a fatness if it does not bite. sent5: if that that the superstrate is not a Mandaean and it is not a simian is not incorrect does not hold the rickey is not a simian. sent6: the rickey does share siloxane or is unbridgeable or both. sent7: the hummer is circulatory if it is a hustler. sent8: the lovastatin is a safe-conduct. sent9: the rickey does share hypobasidium. sent10: the rickey does share siloxane if it shares hypobasidium. sent11: if that something is not a kind of a simian hold it is a kind of a leading that is a kind of a kludge. sent12: if something that does lead is a kludge then it does not share hypobasidium. sent13: The hypobasidium does share rickey. sent14: if the cedarbird is carcinomatous that the superstrate is not a Mandaean and it is not a kind of a simian is wrong. sent15: something is a kind of carcinomatous thing that is not a skateboarding if it is not a fatness. sent16: if something does not lead that it is not a kludge and it does share hypobasidium is not true. sent17: if the soup-strainer is unethical it is autocatalytic. sent18: the rickey is a kind of a safe-conduct or it is a soup-strainer or both. sent19: a safe-conduct diffracts kittee. ; $proof$ = | sent10 & sent9 -> int1: the rickey shares siloxane.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the introversion is a overanxiety. | {D}{c} | sent1: the coulisse is a kind of a seating. sent2: the coulisse is a stressor. sent3: if the fact that the coulisse is a kind of a stressor is correct that the rack is Carthaginian is not incorrect. sent4: the cachet is a overanxiety. sent5: the introversion is not a overanxiety if the rack is biquadratic or it is not non-Carthaginian or both. sent6: that if the rack is biquadratic then the introversion is not a overanxiety is true. sent7: if the coulisse is a overanxiety then that the introversion is a overanxiety is not incorrect. sent8: the rack is a overanxiety and/or it is a kind of a Carthaginian. sent9: the rack is a stressor and/or is Carthaginian. | sent1: {HI}{a} sent2: {A}{a} sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent4: {D}{ab} sent5: ({C}{b} v {B}{b}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent6: {C}{b} -> ¬{D}{c} sent7: {D}{a} -> {D}{c} sent8: ({D}{b} v {B}{b}) sent9: ({A}{b} v {B}{b}) | [
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the rack is a Carthaginian.; int1 -> int2: the rack is biquadratic and/or is a kind of a Carthaginian.; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 -> int2: ({C}{b} v {B}{b}); sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the introversion is a kind of a overanxiety. | {D}{c} | [] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the introversion is a overanxiety. ; $context$ = sent1: the coulisse is a kind of a seating. sent2: the coulisse is a stressor. sent3: if the fact that the coulisse is a kind of a stressor is correct that the rack is Carthaginian is not incorrect. sent4: the cachet is a overanxiety. sent5: the introversion is not a overanxiety if the rack is biquadratic or it is not non-Carthaginian or both. sent6: that if the rack is biquadratic then the introversion is not a overanxiety is true. sent7: if the coulisse is a overanxiety then that the introversion is a overanxiety is not incorrect. sent8: the rack is a overanxiety and/or it is a kind of a Carthaginian. sent9: the rack is a stressor and/or is Carthaginian. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the rack is a Carthaginian.; int1 -> int2: the rack is biquadratic and/or is a kind of a Carthaginian.; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the hollygrape is a kind of a jadeite. | {D}{a} | sent1: the hollygrape is auscultatory and diffracts sectional. sent2: something diffracts qibla. sent3: the hollygrape is a roble if it diffracts pilocarpine. sent4: the fact that there exists something such that it is superjacent and it diffracts NOC is true. sent5: if the qibla either does not diffract qibla or does not cover or both the hollygrape is not a jadeite. sent6: the fact that something is a kind of a Aruru hold if it is regressive. sent7: the polonium is a cover. sent8: something does fit if that it is a Aruru hold. sent9: the hollygrape is a Grainger. sent10: the trajectory is a cover. sent11: if the trajectory diffracts qibla then it is a jadeite. sent12: there exists something such that that it is not a cover is incorrect. sent13: that if a cover diffracts qibla the hollygrape does romance Trilby is not wrong. sent14: that the trajectory is a kind of a cover hold if that it romances Trilby hold. sent15: if something romances Trilby it is a jadeite. sent16: the hollygrape is both a stoic and a plexor. sent17: that the hollygrape does diffract qibla hold. | sent1: ({JA}{a} & {IU}{a}) sent2: (Ex): {B}x sent3: {IO}{a} -> {CM}{a} sent4: (Ex): ({EQ}x & {EA}x) sent5: (¬{B}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent6: (x): {AU}x -> {EK}x sent7: {A}{cr} sent8: (x): {EK}x -> {FI}x sent9: {GQ}{a} sent10: {A}{aa} sent11: {B}{aa} -> {D}{aa} sent12: (Ex): {A}x sent13: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent14: {C}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent15: (x): {C}x -> {D}x sent16: ({JJ}{a} & {DD}{a}) sent17: {B}{a} | [
"sent15 -> int1: the hollygrape is a kind of a jadeite if it does romance Trilby.;"
] | [
"sent15 -> int1: {C}{a} -> {D}{a};"
] | the hollygrape is not a jadeite. | ¬{D}{a} | [] | 6 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the hollygrape is a kind of a jadeite. ; $context$ = sent1: the hollygrape is auscultatory and diffracts sectional. sent2: something diffracts qibla. sent3: the hollygrape is a roble if it diffracts pilocarpine. sent4: the fact that there exists something such that it is superjacent and it diffracts NOC is true. sent5: if the qibla either does not diffract qibla or does not cover or both the hollygrape is not a jadeite. sent6: the fact that something is a kind of a Aruru hold if it is regressive. sent7: the polonium is a cover. sent8: something does fit if that it is a Aruru hold. sent9: the hollygrape is a Grainger. sent10: the trajectory is a cover. sent11: if the trajectory diffracts qibla then it is a jadeite. sent12: there exists something such that that it is not a cover is incorrect. sent13: that if a cover diffracts qibla the hollygrape does romance Trilby is not wrong. sent14: that the trajectory is a kind of a cover hold if that it romances Trilby hold. sent15: if something romances Trilby it is a jadeite. sent16: the hollygrape is both a stoic and a plexor. sent17: that the hollygrape does diffract qibla hold. ; $proof$ = | sent15 -> int1: the hollygrape is a kind of a jadeite if it does romance Trilby.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that the fact that it shares argument and does not diffract upright is not true. | (Ex): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) | sent1: there exists something such that it is not outer. sent2: there exists something such that it administers haunted. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it shares argument and diffracts upright is not correct. sent4: there exists something such that it shares argument and it does not diffract upright. sent5: if the extinguisher does not diffract upright then the cheerer does share argument. sent6: the fact that the pro-lifer shares argument and does not diffract upright is not right if there exists something such that it does not administer haunted. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{CL}x sent2: (Ex): {A}x sent3: (Ex): ¬({B}x & {C}x) sent4: (Ex): ({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent5: ¬{C}{c} -> {B}{b} sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | [] | [] | there is something such that it does not collogue. | (Ex): ¬{Q}x | [] | 5 | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that the fact that it shares argument and does not diffract upright is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is not outer. sent2: there exists something such that it administers haunted. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it shares argument and diffracts upright is not correct. sent4: there exists something such that it shares argument and it does not diffract upright. sent5: if the extinguisher does not diffract upright then the cheerer does share argument. sent6: the fact that the pro-lifer shares argument and does not diffract upright is not right if there exists something such that it does not administer haunted. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the towline is not bony. | ¬{AA}{aa} | sent1: the palliative is a kind of non-ulcerative thing that is a synapse. sent2: the dent is aculeate if there is something such that that it does share INC and it is antiquarian does not hold. sent3: something is not rhetorical and it is not ulcerative. sent4: if there exists something such that it is a spadefoot the fact that the cardoon is not a pizzicato is not incorrect. sent5: something is ulcerative if it is a posthouse. sent6: if something is rhetorical but it does not share Tyto it is a kind of a posthouse. sent7: something that is chemiluminescent is unperceptive. sent8: there exists something such that it is a spadefoot. sent9: the outrider is not a kind of a namer if the dent does not diffract insolence but it is a namer. sent10: the paretic does not diffract mannequin if the cardoon does not diffract mannequin and is sartorial. sent11: the towline is a posthouse if there exists something such that it is unrhetorical thing that is not ulcerative. sent12: the towline diffracts Momus if it does share bantering. sent13: the fact that something that is not a namer is a kind of rhetorical thing that does not share Tyto is not false. sent14: if something is not a pizzicato then it does not diffract mannequin and is sartorial. sent15: if something is not rhetorical then it is not ulcerative. sent16: if the paretic does not diffract mannequin then the fact that the defamer shares INC and is not non-antiquarian is wrong. sent17: the towline is not rhetorical if the dent is not a namer and does not share Tyto. sent18: the fact that something does not diffract insolence and is a namer is not false if it is aculeate. | sent1: (¬{B}{fh} & {II}{fh}) sent2: (x): ¬({I}x & {H}x) -> {F}{a} sent3: (Ex): (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) sent4: (x): {M}x -> ¬{L}{d} sent5: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent6: (x): ({C}x & ¬{D}x) -> {A}x sent7: (x): {GM}x -> {DD}x sent8: (Ex): {M}x sent9: (¬{G}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{E}{fe} sent10: (¬{J}{d} & {K}{d}) -> ¬{J}{c} sent11: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}{aa} sent12: {U}{aa} -> {GN}{aa} sent13: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent14: (x): ¬{L}x -> (¬{J}x & {K}x) sent15: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{B}x sent16: ¬{J}{c} -> ¬({I}{b} & {H}{b}) sent17: (¬{E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{C}{aa} sent18: (x): {F}x -> (¬{G}x & {E}x) | [
"sent3 & sent11 -> int1: the towline is a posthouse.;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent11 -> int1: {A}{aa};"
] | the towline is bony. | {AA}{aa} | [
"sent15 -> int2: the towline is not ulcerative if it is not rhetorical.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the towline is not bony. ; $context$ = sent1: the palliative is a kind of non-ulcerative thing that is a synapse. sent2: the dent is aculeate if there is something such that that it does share INC and it is antiquarian does not hold. sent3: something is not rhetorical and it is not ulcerative. sent4: if there exists something such that it is a spadefoot the fact that the cardoon is not a pizzicato is not incorrect. sent5: something is ulcerative if it is a posthouse. sent6: if something is rhetorical but it does not share Tyto it is a kind of a posthouse. sent7: something that is chemiluminescent is unperceptive. sent8: there exists something such that it is a spadefoot. sent9: the outrider is not a kind of a namer if the dent does not diffract insolence but it is a namer. sent10: the paretic does not diffract mannequin if the cardoon does not diffract mannequin and is sartorial. sent11: the towline is a posthouse if there exists something such that it is unrhetorical thing that is not ulcerative. sent12: the towline diffracts Momus if it does share bantering. sent13: the fact that something that is not a namer is a kind of rhetorical thing that does not share Tyto is not false. sent14: if something is not a pizzicato then it does not diffract mannequin and is sartorial. sent15: if something is not rhetorical then it is not ulcerative. sent16: if the paretic does not diffract mannequin then the fact that the defamer shares INC and is not non-antiquarian is wrong. sent17: the towline is not rhetorical if the dent is not a namer and does not share Tyto. sent18: the fact that something does not diffract insolence and is a namer is not false if it is aculeate. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent11 -> int1: the towline is a posthouse.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the nymph is not a factoid if the fact that the fact that it is not a kind of an odyssey and/or it does diffract hyperpyrexia is not wrong is not true. | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: if the fact that either something is not an odyssey or it diffracts hyperpyrexia or both does not hold it is not a factoid. sent2: if the nymph is not an odyssey and/or it does diffract hyperpyrexia it is not a kind of a factoid. sent3: something is not a factoid if it is not an odyssey and/or diffracts hyperpyrexia. sent4: if the fact that something is an odyssey or it diffracts hyperpyrexia or both is wrong then it is not a kind of a factoid. | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the nymph is not a factoid if the fact that the fact that it is not a kind of an odyssey and/or it does diffract hyperpyrexia is not wrong is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that either something is not an odyssey or it diffracts hyperpyrexia or both does not hold it is not a factoid. sent2: if the nymph is not an odyssey and/or it does diffract hyperpyrexia it is not a kind of a factoid. sent3: something is not a factoid if it is not an odyssey and/or diffracts hyperpyrexia. sent4: if the fact that something is an odyssey or it diffracts hyperpyrexia or both is wrong then it is not a kind of a factoid. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the Dipper is a Fiedler is not incorrect. | {E}{c} | sent1: if the panther is a Bolivian that the Dipper is a Fiedler is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that the spice is not a patternmaker is right. sent3: the fact that the curb does share percentile but it does not romance plankton is wrong if it is a facial. sent4: the ethnic is not a kind of a Colchicum if something is a kind of a Circassian. sent5: if the ethnic is a patternmaker that is not a kind of a Colchicum then the panther is Bolivian. sent6: the panther is not a Bolivian if there is something such that it is a Colchicum. sent7: the Dipper is a Fiedler if the ethnic is a Colchicum and it is a Bolivian. sent8: if something is a kind of a Circassian the ethnic is a patternmaker but it is not a Colchicum. sent9: something is inertial if the fact that it romances Euclid is not false. sent10: there exists something such that it is a Fiedler. sent11: the ethnic is not a kind of a Colchicum. sent12: if the abrader is not a kind of a Tongan then the fact that the glipizide does diffract simulator or does not speculate or both is not true. sent13: if the ethnic is a patternmaker and is a kind of a Colchicum the panther is a Bolivian. sent14: there exists something such that it is a Circassian. sent15: that something is a kind of a Colchicum or is not a kind of a Bolivian or both is incorrect if it is inertial. sent16: if that the curb does share percentile and does not romance plankton does not hold then the ethnic is not a Circassian. sent17: the ethnic is a kind of a Kirchhoff that romances Euclid if the panther does not diffract simulator. sent18: something is not a kind of a Fiedler if that the fact that it is a Fiedler and it is not a Circassian is right does not hold. sent19: the curb is facial. sent20: something is not a patternmaker if the fact that it is a Colchicum and/or not a Bolivian does not hold. sent21: if that the glipizide diffracts simulator or does not speculate or both is not true then the panther does not diffracts simulator. | sent1: {D}{b} -> {E}{c} sent2: ¬{B}{ic} sent3: {N}{d} -> ¬({K}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent5: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent6: (x): {C}x -> ¬{D}{b} sent7: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) -> {E}{c} sent8: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent9: (x): {G}x -> {F}x sent10: (Ex): {E}x sent11: ¬{C}{a} sent12: ¬{L}{f} -> ¬({I}{e} v ¬{M}{e}) sent13: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent14: (Ex): {A}x sent15: (x): {F}x -> ¬({C}x v ¬{D}x) sent16: ¬({K}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent17: ¬{I}{b} -> ({H}{a} & {G}{a}) sent18: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{E}x sent19: {N}{d} sent20: (x): ¬({C}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent21: ¬({I}{e} v ¬{M}{e}) -> ¬{I}{b} | [
"sent14 & sent8 -> int1: the ethnic is a patternmaker but it is not a Colchicum.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the panther is Bolivian.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent14 & sent8 -> int1: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); sent5 & int1 -> int2: {D}{b}; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the Dipper is not a Fiedler. | ¬{E}{c} | [
"sent18 -> int3: if that the Dipper is a Fiedler but not a Circassian is incorrect the fact that it is not a Fiedler is true.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the Dipper is a Fiedler is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the panther is a Bolivian that the Dipper is a Fiedler is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that the spice is not a patternmaker is right. sent3: the fact that the curb does share percentile but it does not romance plankton is wrong if it is a facial. sent4: the ethnic is not a kind of a Colchicum if something is a kind of a Circassian. sent5: if the ethnic is a patternmaker that is not a kind of a Colchicum then the panther is Bolivian. sent6: the panther is not a Bolivian if there is something such that it is a Colchicum. sent7: the Dipper is a Fiedler if the ethnic is a Colchicum and it is a Bolivian. sent8: if something is a kind of a Circassian the ethnic is a patternmaker but it is not a Colchicum. sent9: something is inertial if the fact that it romances Euclid is not false. sent10: there exists something such that it is a Fiedler. sent11: the ethnic is not a kind of a Colchicum. sent12: if the abrader is not a kind of a Tongan then the fact that the glipizide does diffract simulator or does not speculate or both is not true. sent13: if the ethnic is a patternmaker and is a kind of a Colchicum the panther is a Bolivian. sent14: there exists something such that it is a Circassian. sent15: that something is a kind of a Colchicum or is not a kind of a Bolivian or both is incorrect if it is inertial. sent16: if that the curb does share percentile and does not romance plankton does not hold then the ethnic is not a Circassian. sent17: the ethnic is a kind of a Kirchhoff that romances Euclid if the panther does not diffract simulator. sent18: something is not a kind of a Fiedler if that the fact that it is a Fiedler and it is not a Circassian is right does not hold. sent19: the curb is facial. sent20: something is not a patternmaker if the fact that it is a Colchicum and/or not a Bolivian does not hold. sent21: if that the glipizide diffracts simulator or does not speculate or both is not true then the panther does not diffracts simulator. ; $proof$ = | sent14 & sent8 -> int1: the ethnic is a patternmaker but it is not a Colchicum.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the panther is Bolivian.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Bulgarian does not share Cyclopteridae. | ¬{C}{a} | sent1: something that does not share Cyclopteridae is a martyrdom and is a kind of a blackbody. sent2: the analyzer is a martyrdom. sent3: if something is a kind of a nester and it is a martyrdom the analyzer does not share Cyclopteridae. sent4: the Bulgarian is not a kind of a honeysuckle. sent5: the analyzer does frequent and is chemiluminescent. sent6: the Bulgarian does not share Cyclopteridae if there exists something such that it is a nester and a martyrdom. sent7: something is high-interest and it is a kind of a Disraeli. sent8: everything is a kind of a martyrdom. sent9: there is something such that it is a martyrdom. sent10: that the Bulgarian shares Cyclopteridae is correct if the greenskeeper shares Cyclopteridae. sent11: everything is bacteriological and does diffract Edison. sent12: if there exists something such that it is a martyrdom and it is a kind of a nester then the analyzer does not share Cyclopteridae. sent13: the Bulgarian is not a tither. sent14: something is a saccharin if it is not a nester. | sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {BE}x) sent2: {B}{aa} sent3: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{aa} sent4: ¬{GA}{a} sent5: ({GQ}{aa} & {BJ}{aa}) sent6: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{a} sent7: (Ex): ({EM}x & {CH}x) sent8: (x): {B}x sent9: (Ex): {B}x sent10: {C}{b} -> {C}{a} sent11: (x): ({CN}x & {EQ}x) sent12: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}{aa} sent13: ¬{DO}{a} sent14: (x): ¬{A}x -> {DG}x | [] | [] | the Bulgarian shares Cyclopteridae. | {C}{a} | [] | 5 | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Bulgarian does not share Cyclopteridae. ; $context$ = sent1: something that does not share Cyclopteridae is a martyrdom and is a kind of a blackbody. sent2: the analyzer is a martyrdom. sent3: if something is a kind of a nester and it is a martyrdom the analyzer does not share Cyclopteridae. sent4: the Bulgarian is not a kind of a honeysuckle. sent5: the analyzer does frequent and is chemiluminescent. sent6: the Bulgarian does not share Cyclopteridae if there exists something such that it is a nester and a martyrdom. sent7: something is high-interest and it is a kind of a Disraeli. sent8: everything is a kind of a martyrdom. sent9: there is something such that it is a martyrdom. sent10: that the Bulgarian shares Cyclopteridae is correct if the greenskeeper shares Cyclopteridae. sent11: everything is bacteriological and does diffract Edison. sent12: if there exists something such that it is a martyrdom and it is a kind of a nester then the analyzer does not share Cyclopteridae. sent13: the Bulgarian is not a tither. sent14: something is a saccharin if it is not a nester. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the chimneystack does diffract provincial. | {C}{b} | sent1: there is nothing such that it does not succeed and it is palmar. sent2: the fact that the spiegeleisen does not share autoeroticism is correct if there is something such that the fact that it is not on-line and it does not clear-cut is false. sent3: that something does share autoeroticism and is chaffy is wrong if it does not diffract provincial. sent4: there is something such that that it is not on-line and it does not clear-cut is wrong. | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the spiegeleisen does not share autoeroticism.;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: ¬{A}{a};"
] | the cotoneaster does not clear-cut. | ¬{AB}{fu} | [
"sent1 -> int2: the fact that the chimneystack does not succeed and is palmar is not true.; sent3 -> int3: that the chimneystack does share autoeroticism and is chaffy does not hold if it does not diffract provincial.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the chimneystack does diffract provincial. ; $context$ = sent1: there is nothing such that it does not succeed and it is palmar. sent2: the fact that the spiegeleisen does not share autoeroticism is correct if there is something such that the fact that it is not on-line and it does not clear-cut is false. sent3: that something does share autoeroticism and is chaffy is wrong if it does not diffract provincial. sent4: there is something such that that it is not on-line and it does not clear-cut is wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the spiegeleisen does not share autoeroticism.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | something is a kind of a judge that does oscillate. | (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) | sent1: the canister judges. sent2: the sugar oscillates. sent3: the canister is a Constitution if it is a Pitt. sent4: there exists something such that that it does coo is right. sent5: there exists something such that it is alular and it sublimates. sent6: the canister is not a judge and it is not non-metric if it is a Constitution. | sent1: {A}{a} sent2: {B}{db} sent3: {E}{a} -> {D}{a} sent4: (Ex): {AO}x sent5: (Ex): ({FN}x & {EI}x) sent6: {D}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | [] | [] | the fact that the radiocarbon oscillates is correct. | {B}{hu} | [] | 7 | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = something is a kind of a judge that does oscillate. ; $context$ = sent1: the canister judges. sent2: the sugar oscillates. sent3: the canister is a Constitution if it is a Pitt. sent4: there exists something such that that it does coo is right. sent5: there exists something such that it is alular and it sublimates. sent6: the canister is not a judge and it is not non-metric if it is a Constitution. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that the fact that it is not a nutlet is right. | (Ex): ¬{B}x | sent1: the fact that the layer is both not malignant and a nankeen does not hold. sent2: something is not a nutlet if it is intralinguistic. sent3: if the fact that something does not administer mumble but it is a player is not right it is not a xeroradiography. sent4: the layer is not a kind of a nutlet if it is intralinguistic. sent5: something is not a nutlet if the fact that it is non-intralinguistic thing that is conspicuous is not correct. sent6: something is not a predator. sent7: there is nothing such that it is intralinguistic and it is conspicuous. sent8: if the broadloom is not exocentric then the fact that the layer is not a absorbate but it is conspicuous does not hold. sent9: if that something is unemployable thing that is a kind of a disharmony is not correct the fact that it does not diffract simulator is correct. sent10: there exists nothing that is both not intralinguistic and conspicuous. sent11: that the layer is intralinguistic and it is not inconspicuous is incorrect. sent12: something is not a Monk. | sent1: ¬(¬{CJ}{aa} & {AK}{aa}) sent2: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{FL}x & {JD}x) -> ¬{ID}x sent4: {AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{IR}x sent7: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{JG}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (x): ¬(¬{FR}x & {EG}x) -> ¬{DQ}x sent10: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent12: (Ex): ¬{GG}x | [
"sent5 -> int1: if the fact that that the layer is not intralinguistic and is conspicuous does not hold is true it is not a nutlet.; sent10 -> int2: the fact that the layer is both non-intralinguistic and conspicuous is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the layer is not a nutlet.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent10 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa}; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the layer is both not a absorbate and conspicuous is wrong. | ¬(¬{JG}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [] | 4 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that the fact that it is not a nutlet is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the layer is both not malignant and a nankeen does not hold. sent2: something is not a nutlet if it is intralinguistic. sent3: if the fact that something does not administer mumble but it is a player is not right it is not a xeroradiography. sent4: the layer is not a kind of a nutlet if it is intralinguistic. sent5: something is not a nutlet if the fact that it is non-intralinguistic thing that is conspicuous is not correct. sent6: something is not a predator. sent7: there is nothing such that it is intralinguistic and it is conspicuous. sent8: if the broadloom is not exocentric then the fact that the layer is not a absorbate but it is conspicuous does not hold. sent9: if that something is unemployable thing that is a kind of a disharmony is not correct the fact that it does not diffract simulator is correct. sent10: there exists nothing that is both not intralinguistic and conspicuous. sent11: that the layer is intralinguistic and it is not inconspicuous is incorrect. sent12: something is not a Monk. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> int1: if the fact that that the layer is not intralinguistic and is conspicuous does not hold is true it is not a nutlet.; sent10 -> int2: the fact that the layer is both non-intralinguistic and conspicuous is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the layer is not a nutlet.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the bookseller is not a kind of a glutamine. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: the bookseller is not a glutamine if it does overflow and it does lithograph. sent2: the whelk lithographs if an agreeable thing does not administer skua. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a Mallon and it is not a lithograph. sent4: if something is back-channel it is not a Mallon. sent5: if that the whelk is not a Mallon hold the bookseller is not a kind of a glutamine. sent6: the fact that the whelk is not a kind of an overflow and it is not a kind of a lithograph is not true if the worthy is not a Mallon. sent7: the bookseller lithographs if there exists something such that it is a glutamine and it is not an overflow. sent8: the whelk is autocatalytic. sent9: something is agreeable and does not administer skua. sent10: if the worthy is not a kind of a visibility then it stipulates and is back-channel. sent11: something does not administer skua. sent12: the whelk does overflow. sent13: there is something such that it is not a glutamine. sent14: the whelk is a lithograph if something is agreeable and it administers skua. sent15: that the bookseller is a kind of an overflow is not false. | sent1: ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent2: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent3: (Ex): ({C}x & ¬{A}x) sent4: (x): {E}x -> ¬{C}x sent5: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} sent6: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent7: (x): ({D}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}{b} sent8: {AK}{a} sent9: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent10: ¬{G}{c} -> ({F}{c} & {E}{c}) sent11: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent12: {B}{a} sent13: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent14: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent15: {B}{b} | [
"sent9 & sent2 -> int1: the whelk is a lithograph.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the whelk does overflow and lithographs.;"
] | [
"sent9 & sent2 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 & sent12 -> int2: ({B}{a} & {A}{a});"
] | the bookseller is a glutamine. | {D}{b} | [
"sent4 -> int3: if the worthy is back-channel then it is not a Mallon.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the bookseller is not a kind of a glutamine. ; $context$ = sent1: the bookseller is not a glutamine if it does overflow and it does lithograph. sent2: the whelk lithographs if an agreeable thing does not administer skua. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a Mallon and it is not a lithograph. sent4: if something is back-channel it is not a Mallon. sent5: if that the whelk is not a Mallon hold the bookseller is not a kind of a glutamine. sent6: the fact that the whelk is not a kind of an overflow and it is not a kind of a lithograph is not true if the worthy is not a Mallon. sent7: the bookseller lithographs if there exists something such that it is a glutamine and it is not an overflow. sent8: the whelk is autocatalytic. sent9: something is agreeable and does not administer skua. sent10: if the worthy is not a kind of a visibility then it stipulates and is back-channel. sent11: something does not administer skua. sent12: the whelk does overflow. sent13: there is something such that it is not a glutamine. sent14: the whelk is a lithograph if something is agreeable and it administers skua. sent15: that the bookseller is a kind of an overflow is not false. ; $proof$ = | sent9 & sent2 -> int1: the whelk is a lithograph.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the whelk does overflow and lithographs.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the diffracting deckled does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: the cesareanness occurs. sent2: if the unwinding happens and the contralateralness occurs the diffracting deckled does not occur. sent3: if the infallibleness happens the Hawaiian but not the earful occurs. sent4: the flattering does not occur. sent5: if the contralateralness does not occur the unwinding and the diffracting deckled occurs. sent6: the unwinding occurs. sent7: the fact that the pyelography does not occur is true. sent8: the contralateralness happens. sent9: the contralateralness does not occur if the Hawaiian happens and the earful does not occur. | sent1: {HH} sent2: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent3: {F} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) sent4: ¬{S} sent5: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) sent6: {A} sent7: ¬{I} sent8: {B} sent9: ({D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{B} | [
"sent6 & sent8 -> int1: both the unwinding and the contralateralness happens.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent8 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the diffracting deckled occurs. | {C} | [] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the diffracting deckled does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the cesareanness occurs. sent2: if the unwinding happens and the contralateralness occurs the diffracting deckled does not occur. sent3: if the infallibleness happens the Hawaiian but not the earful occurs. sent4: the flattering does not occur. sent5: if the contralateralness does not occur the unwinding and the diffracting deckled occurs. sent6: the unwinding occurs. sent7: the fact that the pyelography does not occur is true. sent8: the contralateralness happens. sent9: the contralateralness does not occur if the Hawaiian happens and the earful does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent8 -> int1: both the unwinding and the contralateralness happens.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is not rh-negative. | (Ex): ¬{C}x | sent1: the crusher cutinizes and is spondaic. sent2: if something is not spondaic the originator is non-biogenic thing that does not cutinize. sent3: the tonic is non-spondaic. sent4: the crusher is a A-bomb. sent5: the loganberry is neoplastic if there exists something such that the fact that it is ultramontane and cutinizes is wrong. sent6: there exists something such that that it is canalicular and it is a kind of a A-bomb does not hold. sent7: if the crusher is ophthalmic then the originator is ophthalmic. sent8: if a non-biogenic thing does not cutinize then it does saturate. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it is canalicular and it is a A-bomb is not true then the crusher is biogenic. | sent1: ({B}{a} & {D}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{A}{cf} & ¬{B}{cf}) sent3: ¬{D}{b} sent4: {AB}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({CJ}x & {B}x) -> {BL}{aj} sent6: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: {GH}{a} -> {GH}{cf} sent8: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {JC}x sent9: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} | [
"sent6 & sent9 -> int1: the crusher is biogenic.; sent1 -> int2: the crusher cutinizes.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the crusher is biogenic and does cutinize.;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent9 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent1 -> int2: {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a});"
] | the originator saturates and is ophthalmic. | ({JC}{cf} & {GH}{cf}) | [
"sent8 -> int4: the originator saturates if it is a kind of non-biogenic thing that does not cutinize.; sent3 -> int5: there are non-spondaic things.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the originator is not biogenic and it does not cutinize.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the originator does saturate is not false.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is not rh-negative. ; $context$ = sent1: the crusher cutinizes and is spondaic. sent2: if something is not spondaic the originator is non-biogenic thing that does not cutinize. sent3: the tonic is non-spondaic. sent4: the crusher is a A-bomb. sent5: the loganberry is neoplastic if there exists something such that the fact that it is ultramontane and cutinizes is wrong. sent6: there exists something such that that it is canalicular and it is a kind of a A-bomb does not hold. sent7: if the crusher is ophthalmic then the originator is ophthalmic. sent8: if a non-biogenic thing does not cutinize then it does saturate. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it is canalicular and it is a A-bomb is not true then the crusher is biogenic. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent9 -> int1: the crusher is biogenic.; sent1 -> int2: the crusher cutinizes.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the crusher is biogenic and does cutinize.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is reticulate thing that does share trajectory. | (Ex): ({A}x & {C}x) | sent1: there exists something such that it shares trajectory and does diffract hydrologist. sent2: the foil is reticulate and it does diffract hydrologist. sent3: the pediculicide shares trajectory. sent4: the mesothelium is a kind of cherty thing that is mucinoid. sent5: the mesothelium diffracts hydrologist. sent6: the foil is passionless. sent7: The trajectory shares mesothelium. sent8: if the mesothelium does diffract hydrologist then the foil does diffract hydrologist. sent9: the mesothelium is formic. sent10: the Confucian is a kind of bimodal thing that does share trajectory. sent11: there exists something such that the fact that it does share trajectory is not false. sent12: something is reticulate and it diffracts hydrologist. sent13: something is reticulate. sent14: the desideratum reticulates. sent15: the foil does diffract hydrologist. sent16: the lysis is a kind of a sanctum and it is reticulate. sent17: the mesothelium is a kind of a Pollux that is machine-made. sent18: the trajectory is a kind of on-line thing that does share trajectory. sent19: the mesothelium shares trajectory. sent20: the mesothelium does toast. | sent1: (Ex): ({C}x & {B}x) sent2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent3: {C}{du} sent4: ({I}{b} & {CS}{b}) sent5: {B}{b} sent6: {EO}{a} sent7: {AB}{ab} sent8: {B}{b} -> {B}{a} sent9: {DB}{b} sent10: ({AQ}{at} & {C}{at}) sent11: (Ex): {C}x sent12: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent13: (Ex): {A}x sent14: {A}{jf} sent15: {B}{a} sent16: ({DG}{fn} & {A}{fn}) sent17: ({BG}{b} & {ER}{b}) sent18: ({CG}{ip} & {C}{ip}) sent19: {C}{b} sent20: {CT}{b} | [
"sent2 -> int1: the foil reticulates.;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is reticulate thing that does share trajectory. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it shares trajectory and does diffract hydrologist. sent2: the foil is reticulate and it does diffract hydrologist. sent3: the pediculicide shares trajectory. sent4: the mesothelium is a kind of cherty thing that is mucinoid. sent5: the mesothelium diffracts hydrologist. sent6: the foil is passionless. sent7: The trajectory shares mesothelium. sent8: if the mesothelium does diffract hydrologist then the foil does diffract hydrologist. sent9: the mesothelium is formic. sent10: the Confucian is a kind of bimodal thing that does share trajectory. sent11: there exists something such that the fact that it does share trajectory is not false. sent12: something is reticulate and it diffracts hydrologist. sent13: something is reticulate. sent14: the desideratum reticulates. sent15: the foil does diffract hydrologist. sent16: the lysis is a kind of a sanctum and it is reticulate. sent17: the mesothelium is a kind of a Pollux that is machine-made. sent18: the trajectory is a kind of on-line thing that does share trajectory. sent19: the mesothelium shares trajectory. sent20: the mesothelium does toast. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the foil reticulates.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is a simulator it is a DLE. | (Ex): {A}x -> {C}x | sent1: there is something such that if it is a Nereid it shares taxer. sent2: there exists something such that if it is corrected it does share taxer. sent3: the fact that the jellyfish does share silversword if the jellyfish romances sarcosome is not false. sent4: the ricer is a kind of a DLE if it is a simulator. sent5: there exists something such that if it is a disheartenment then it does romance wayfarer. sent6: the saltation does romance jellyfish if it is a pornography. sent7: that there is something such that if it is a Carum it administers internship is not incorrect. sent8: if the ricer does roast then it is a worrier. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a megohm then it does romance whitethroat. sent10: if the ricer diffracts marginalization the fact that it is a retrovision is not incorrect. sent11: there exists something such that if it diffracts noise it is a cycloid. sent12: there is something such that if it does frequent then it does diffract saltation. sent13: there is something such that if it is a Manilkara then it is evitable. sent14: something does share iva if it is a Melospiza. sent15: if something does share arcade it is inactive. sent16: there is something such that if it is innocuous then it is periodic. sent17: if the ricer is paleoanthropological it is a simulator. sent18: the ricer does share Nitrobacter if it is a kind of a megohm. sent19: there exists something such that if it is nonintellectual it does diffract planetesimal. sent20: if the flamefish is a DLE then it does share flamefish. sent21: something is unpeaceful if it is not cellular. | sent1: (Ex): {GH}x -> {HS}x sent2: (Ex): {HF}x -> {HS}x sent3: {AK}{fn} -> {GG}{fn} sent4: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent5: (Ex): {GK}x -> {FK}x sent6: {FE}{bl} -> {CK}{bl} sent7: (Ex): {ER}x -> {CT}x sent8: {T}{aa} -> {AE}{aa} sent9: (Ex): {CR}x -> {DQ}x sent10: {AI}{aa} -> {BF}{aa} sent11: (Ex): {DF}x -> {IA}x sent12: (Ex): {CS}x -> {AM}x sent13: (Ex): {G}x -> {BI}x sent14: (x): {HK}x -> {CG}x sent15: (x): {FH}x -> {BT}x sent16: (Ex): {IQ}x -> {AP}x sent17: {JG}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent18: {CR}{aa} -> {GR}{aa} sent19: (Ex): {JK}x -> {BH}x sent20: {C}{gt} -> {ES}{gt} sent21: (x): {EB}x -> {BO}x | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if it is a Melospiza then it shares iva. | (Ex): {HK}x -> {CG}x | [
"sent14 -> int1: if the whitethroat is a Melospiza it does share iva.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a simulator it is a DLE. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is a Nereid it shares taxer. sent2: there exists something such that if it is corrected it does share taxer. sent3: the fact that the jellyfish does share silversword if the jellyfish romances sarcosome is not false. sent4: the ricer is a kind of a DLE if it is a simulator. sent5: there exists something such that if it is a disheartenment then it does romance wayfarer. sent6: the saltation does romance jellyfish if it is a pornography. sent7: that there is something such that if it is a Carum it administers internship is not incorrect. sent8: if the ricer does roast then it is a worrier. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a megohm then it does romance whitethroat. sent10: if the ricer diffracts marginalization the fact that it is a retrovision is not incorrect. sent11: there exists something such that if it diffracts noise it is a cycloid. sent12: there is something such that if it does frequent then it does diffract saltation. sent13: there is something such that if it is a Manilkara then it is evitable. sent14: something does share iva if it is a Melospiza. sent15: if something does share arcade it is inactive. sent16: there is something such that if it is innocuous then it is periodic. sent17: if the ricer is paleoanthropological it is a simulator. sent18: the ricer does share Nitrobacter if it is a kind of a megohm. sent19: there exists something such that if it is nonintellectual it does diffract planetesimal. sent20: if the flamefish is a DLE then it does share flamefish. sent21: something is unpeaceful if it is not cellular. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the stifle is a coastguardsman. | {B}{aa} | sent1: if the fact that the artiodactyl does romance Aeolian hold then the fact that the sun is not a kind of a guide and does not romance stifle is wrong. sent2: that the fact that the stifle is not a potamogale and/or is a kind of a Citlaltepetl is not true is correct. sent3: if something is a coastguardsman then the fact that it does not share omnirange and it is a Rushmore is incorrect. sent4: that something does not wheel and does not sicken is wrong if it is a Rushmore. sent5: if the fact that the stifle does not share omnirange and it is not a kind of a pirate is incorrect then it is a kind of a potamogale. sent6: something that does not wheel is non-rimless thing that does not sicken. sent7: the fact that the coward is not a coastguardsman and not a conformity is incorrect. sent8: that something does not share omnirange and it is not a Rushmore is false if it is rimless. sent9: the stifle is alphabetic if that it is not an expanse and/or it does share omnirange is wrong. sent10: the stifle is an expanse. sent11: if the fact that the journalist does not grope and/or it is a kind of a brandy is not right then the fact that it romances mopper hold. sent12: the fact that the filing is a kind of a metalhead that does not sicken is not true. sent13: if that the stifle is not a wheel and/or it does sicken is false it is rimless. sent14: if something is a coastguardsman the fact that it does share omnirange and is not a wheel does not hold. sent15: the stifle is a coastguardsman if the fact that that it does not share omnirange and is not a Rushmore is right is not correct. sent16: if that the stifle does not diffract Senorita and/or is noisy is not correct then it is a kind of a Rushmore. sent17: the refrigerator is a kind of a Strombidae if that it is not a metalhead and does not share omnirange does not hold. sent18: if the layer is rimless the fact that it is not non-spectroscopic and it is not an ecology is false. | sent1: {G}{c} -> ¬(¬{E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent2: ¬(¬{L}{aa} v {EF}{aa}) sent3: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: (x): {AB}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{GL}{aa}) -> {L}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) sent7: ¬(¬{B}{ij} & ¬{JA}{ij}) sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent9: ¬(¬{DT}{aa} v {AA}{aa}) -> {AE}{aa} sent10: {DT}{aa} sent11: ¬(¬{DI}{ho} v {HK}{ho}) -> {JJ}{ho} sent12: ¬({EM}{hf} & ¬{C}{hf}) sent13: ¬(¬{D}{aa} v {C}{aa}) -> {A}{aa} sent14: (x): {B}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{D}x) sent15: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent16: ¬(¬{BH}{aa} v {GK}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} sent17: ¬(¬{EM}{gp} & ¬{AA}{gp}) -> {GU}{gp} sent18: {A}{bt} -> ¬({K}{bt} & ¬{CA}{bt}) | [
"sent8 -> int1: the fact that the stifle does not share omnirange and it is not a kind of a Rushmore is not right if it is rimless.;"
] | [
"sent8 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa});"
] | the stifle is not a kind of a coastguardsman. | ¬{B}{aa} | [
"sent6 -> int2: the quinone is not rimless and does not sicken if it does not wheel.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the stifle is a coastguardsman. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the artiodactyl does romance Aeolian hold then the fact that the sun is not a kind of a guide and does not romance stifle is wrong. sent2: that the fact that the stifle is not a potamogale and/or is a kind of a Citlaltepetl is not true is correct. sent3: if something is a coastguardsman then the fact that it does not share omnirange and it is a Rushmore is incorrect. sent4: that something does not wheel and does not sicken is wrong if it is a Rushmore. sent5: if the fact that the stifle does not share omnirange and it is not a kind of a pirate is incorrect then it is a kind of a potamogale. sent6: something that does not wheel is non-rimless thing that does not sicken. sent7: the fact that the coward is not a coastguardsman and not a conformity is incorrect. sent8: that something does not share omnirange and it is not a Rushmore is false if it is rimless. sent9: the stifle is alphabetic if that it is not an expanse and/or it does share omnirange is wrong. sent10: the stifle is an expanse. sent11: if the fact that the journalist does not grope and/or it is a kind of a brandy is not right then the fact that it romances mopper hold. sent12: the fact that the filing is a kind of a metalhead that does not sicken is not true. sent13: if that the stifle is not a wheel and/or it does sicken is false it is rimless. sent14: if something is a coastguardsman the fact that it does share omnirange and is not a wheel does not hold. sent15: the stifle is a coastguardsman if the fact that that it does not share omnirange and is not a Rushmore is right is not correct. sent16: if that the stifle does not diffract Senorita and/or is noisy is not correct then it is a kind of a Rushmore. sent17: the refrigerator is a kind of a Strombidae if that it is not a metalhead and does not share omnirange does not hold. sent18: if the layer is rimless the fact that it is not non-spectroscopic and it is not an ecology is false. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> int1: the fact that the stifle does not share omnirange and it is not a kind of a Rushmore is not right if it is rimless.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the great-niece does not regenerate. | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: if the fact that the great-niece is not a server or not non-horticultural or both does not hold then the journalist does regenerate. sent2: the fact that the journalist is non-horticultural thing that is a kind of an auditorium is not correct if it does not romance disestablishment. sent3: the journalist is not horticultural. sent4: there exists something such that that it is not molal and it is not a soundman is not right. sent5: the fact that the great-niece is not a strophanthus or it is a Cocytus or both does not hold. sent6: the journalist does not romance disestablishment if there is something such that that it is not molal and it is not a kind of a soundman is wrong. sent7: that the journalist is not a server or is proprioceptive or both does not hold if it is not horticultural. sent8: the great-niece is not a Butterfield. sent9: the journalist is horticultural if that the fact that the great-niece is unregenerate or it is proprioceptive or both is not right hold. sent10: if the journalist is not horticultural that it is a server is right. sent11: the great-niece is regenerate if that the journalist is a server and/or it is proprioceptive is wrong. sent12: if that the fact that the journalist is not a server or is proprioceptive or both is correct does not hold the great-niece does regenerate. sent13: something that is horticultural thing that does diffract great-niece is not regenerate. sent14: the fact that the journalist is a server hold. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {A}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent2: ¬{F}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {E}{a}) sent3: ¬{A}{a} sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{H}x) sent5: ¬(¬{GD}{b} v {BO}{b}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent8: ¬{GU}{b} sent9: ¬(¬{B}{b} v {AB}{b}) -> {A}{a} sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> {AA}{a} sent11: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent12: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent13: (x): ({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent14: {AA}{a} | [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: that the journalist is not a server and/or it is proprioceptive is incorrect.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the great-niece does not regenerate. | ¬{B}{b} | [
"sent13 -> int2: that the great-niece does not regenerate if the great-niece is horticultural and diffracts great-niece hold.; sent4 & sent6 -> int3: the journalist does not romance disestablishment.; sent2 & int3 -> int4: that the journalist is not horticultural but it is an auditorium does not hold.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that the fact that it is both not horticultural and an auditorium is wrong.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the great-niece does not regenerate. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the great-niece is not a server or not non-horticultural or both does not hold then the journalist does regenerate. sent2: the fact that the journalist is non-horticultural thing that is a kind of an auditorium is not correct if it does not romance disestablishment. sent3: the journalist is not horticultural. sent4: there exists something such that that it is not molal and it is not a soundman is not right. sent5: the fact that the great-niece is not a strophanthus or it is a Cocytus or both does not hold. sent6: the journalist does not romance disestablishment if there is something such that that it is not molal and it is not a kind of a soundman is wrong. sent7: that the journalist is not a server or is proprioceptive or both does not hold if it is not horticultural. sent8: the great-niece is not a Butterfield. sent9: the journalist is horticultural if that the fact that the great-niece is unregenerate or it is proprioceptive or both is not right hold. sent10: if the journalist is not horticultural that it is a server is right. sent11: the great-niece is regenerate if that the journalist is a server and/or it is proprioceptive is wrong. sent12: if that the fact that the journalist is not a server or is proprioceptive or both is correct does not hold the great-niece does regenerate. sent13: something that is horticultural thing that does diffract great-niece is not regenerate. sent14: the fact that the journalist is a server hold. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent3 -> int1: that the journalist is not a server and/or it is proprioceptive is incorrect.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the sloganeer is a kind of a bill. | {B}{aa} | sent1: that that something does not diffract shuffler and it is not a ejaculator is not incorrect does not hold if it is not ectopic. sent2: that that the mainframe is not a swizzle and it is not astrological is incorrect is correct. sent3: that the sloganeer does not share roundedness hold. sent4: the sloganeer does not romance neurohormone. sent5: The neurohormone does not romance sloganeer. sent6: if the fact that the nonparticipant is a kind of a aldohexose but it does not bill is false then the sloganeer does not bill. sent7: the fact that something is a kind of a aldohexose but it does not bill does not hold if it does not share stockpile. sent8: That the roundedness does not share sloganeer hold. | sent1: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) sent2: ¬(¬{G}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) sent3: ¬{AB}{aa} sent4: ¬{AA}{aa} sent5: ¬{AC}{ab} sent6: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent8: ¬{AD}{ac} | [
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the sloganeer does not romance neurohormone and it does not share roundedness.;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa});"
] | the sloganeer is not a kind of a bill. | ¬{B}{aa} | [
"sent7 -> int2: the fact that that the fact that the nonparticipant is a aldohexose but it does not bill is true is not true is correct if it does not share stockpile.; sent1 -> int3: that the deerstalker does not diffract shuffler and it is not a ejaculator is not right if it is not ectopic.; sent2 -> int4: there is something such that the fact that it is not a swizzle and is not astrological is not true.;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the sloganeer is a kind of a bill. ; $context$ = sent1: that that something does not diffract shuffler and it is not a ejaculator is not incorrect does not hold if it is not ectopic. sent2: that that the mainframe is not a swizzle and it is not astrological is incorrect is correct. sent3: that the sloganeer does not share roundedness hold. sent4: the sloganeer does not romance neurohormone. sent5: The neurohormone does not romance sloganeer. sent6: if the fact that the nonparticipant is a kind of a aldohexose but it does not bill is false then the sloganeer does not bill. sent7: the fact that something is a kind of a aldohexose but it does not bill does not hold if it does not share stockpile. sent8: That the roundedness does not share sloganeer hold. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the sloganeer does not romance neurohormone and it does not share roundedness.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the rag is inhumane. | {A}{a} | sent1: something does not diffract Tashmit if that it diffracts dirtiness and it is not hypothalamic is not true. sent2: the castrato is not inhumane if there is something such that it is not a kind of a Floridian. sent3: if something that does not diffract Tashmit does not romance clipped then it is not a meme. sent4: the rag is not a kind of a Floridian if there is something such that that it does share sickbay and it is a Floridian is not correct. sent5: if there exists something such that the fact that it does diffract EGTK and romances clipped is not true the Manila does not romances clipped. sent6: there exists something such that it does shoot. sent7: that the Manila diffracts dirtiness but it is not hypothalamic does not hold if it does not share unpalatability. sent8: there exists nothing such that it is not tetrametric or it does not romance drill or both. sent9: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a shot that the drill diffracts EGTK and romances clipped is wrong. sent10: that the convection shares sickbay and it is a kind of a Floridian does not hold if that the Manila is not a kind of a meme hold. sent11: the fact that something does not romance drill and/or does not contend is not right if it is not inhumane. sent12: if that the brother is not tetrametric and/or it does not romance drill does not hold then the rag is inhumane. sent13: the Manila does not share unpalatability. | sent1: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}{gm} sent3: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{C}x sent4: (x): ¬({D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({I}x & {F}x) -> ¬{F}{c} sent6: (Ex): {J}x sent7: ¬{K}{c} -> ¬({H}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent8: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent9: (x): {J}x -> ¬({I}{d} & {F}{d}) sent10: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬({D}{b} & {B}{b}) sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x v ¬{IJ}x) sent12: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {A}{a} sent13: ¬{K}{c} | [
"sent8 -> int1: the fact that the brother either is not tetrametric or does not romance drill or both is wrong.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the fact that the castrato does not romance drill and/or it does not contend hold is not true. | ¬(¬{AB}{gm} v ¬{IJ}{gm}) | [
"sent11 -> int2: if the castrato is not inhumane the fact that it does not romance drill or does not contend or both is wrong.; sent3 -> int3: if the Manila does not diffract Tashmit and it does not romance clipped then it is not a meme.; sent1 -> int4: if the fact that the Manila diffracts dirtiness and is not hypothalamic is false then it does not diffract Tashmit.; sent7 & sent13 -> int5: that the Manila does diffract dirtiness but it is not hypothalamic is not right.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the Manila does not diffract Tashmit.; sent6 & sent9 -> int7: the fact that that the drill does diffract EGTK and romances clipped is correct is not correct.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it does diffract EGTK and it romances clipped is not incorrect does not hold.; int8 & sent5 -> int9: the Manila does not romance clipped.; int6 & int9 -> int10: the Manila does not diffract Tashmit and does not romance clipped.; int3 & int10 -> int11: the Manila is not a kind of a meme.; sent10 & int11 -> int12: that the convection shares sickbay and it is a kind of a Floridian is not right.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that that it shares sickbay and it is a kind of a Floridian is incorrect.; int13 & sent4 -> int14: the rag is not a Floridian.; int14 -> int15: there exists something such that it is not a Floridian.; int15 & sent2 -> int16: the castrato is not inhumane.; int2 & int16 -> hypothesis;"
] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the rag is inhumane. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not diffract Tashmit if that it diffracts dirtiness and it is not hypothalamic is not true. sent2: the castrato is not inhumane if there is something such that it is not a kind of a Floridian. sent3: if something that does not diffract Tashmit does not romance clipped then it is not a meme. sent4: the rag is not a kind of a Floridian if there is something such that that it does share sickbay and it is a Floridian is not correct. sent5: if there exists something such that the fact that it does diffract EGTK and romances clipped is not true the Manila does not romances clipped. sent6: there exists something such that it does shoot. sent7: that the Manila diffracts dirtiness but it is not hypothalamic does not hold if it does not share unpalatability. sent8: there exists nothing such that it is not tetrametric or it does not romance drill or both. sent9: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a shot that the drill diffracts EGTK and romances clipped is wrong. sent10: that the convection shares sickbay and it is a kind of a Floridian does not hold if that the Manila is not a kind of a meme hold. sent11: the fact that something does not romance drill and/or does not contend is not right if it is not inhumane. sent12: if that the brother is not tetrametric and/or it does not romance drill does not hold then the rag is inhumane. sent13: the Manila does not share unpalatability. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> int1: the fact that the brother either is not tetrametric or does not romance drill or both is wrong.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the catechu diffracts textured and is a rhymer. | ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: if something is nonarbitrary the fact that it does not diffract textured and does not diffract assizes is false. sent2: the catechu is a rhymer. sent3: that the catechu does diffract textured hold. sent4: the pump is unwholesome if there are noncurrent things. sent5: if the catechu does not diffract assizes but it does diffract textured the nectar diffract textured. sent6: that the breechcloth romances aggressiveness and is not nonarbitrary does not hold if that it is not asteroidal is not incorrect. sent7: That the textured does diffract catechu hold. sent8: the chino is a kind of a BASIC that is macerative. sent9: the catechu diffracts reinforcement. sent10: there is something such that it is asteroidal. sent11: if something is asteroidal the fact that it does romance aggressiveness or it is not nonarbitrary or both is not right. sent12: if something romances aggressiveness then it is nonarbitrary. sent13: everything is asteroidal. sent14: the fact that something is noncurrent hold if it diffracts reinforcement. sent15: the fact that the pump is not one-piece and it is not asteroidal is false if there exists something such that it is asteroidal. | sent1: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) sent2: {B}{a} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (x): {H}x -> {JH}{k} sent5: (¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> {A}{t} sent6: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬({E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent7: {AA}{aa} sent8: ({BS}{dl} & {S}{dl}) sent9: {I}{a} sent10: (Ex): {F}x sent11: (x): {F}x -> ¬({E}x v ¬{D}x) sent12: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent13: (x): {F}x sent14: (x): {I}x -> {H}x sent15: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{G}{k} & ¬{F}{k}) | [
"sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the catechu diffracts textured and is a rhymer is incorrect. | ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | [
"sent11 -> int1: the fact that the desideratum does romance aggressiveness and/or it is not nonarbitrary is not true if it is asteroidal.; sent13 -> int2: the desideratum is asteroidal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that that the desideratum does romance aggressiveness or it is not nonarbitrary or both does not hold is right.; int3 -> int4: there exists nothing such that it romances aggressiveness and/or it is not nonarbitrary.; int4 -> int5: that the catechu either does romance aggressiveness or is not nonarbitrary or both is not true.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the catechu diffracts textured and is a rhymer. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is nonarbitrary the fact that it does not diffract textured and does not diffract assizes is false. sent2: the catechu is a rhymer. sent3: that the catechu does diffract textured hold. sent4: the pump is unwholesome if there are noncurrent things. sent5: if the catechu does not diffract assizes but it does diffract textured the nectar diffract textured. sent6: that the breechcloth romances aggressiveness and is not nonarbitrary does not hold if that it is not asteroidal is not incorrect. sent7: That the textured does diffract catechu hold. sent8: the chino is a kind of a BASIC that is macerative. sent9: the catechu diffracts reinforcement. sent10: there is something such that it is asteroidal. sent11: if something is asteroidal the fact that it does romance aggressiveness or it is not nonarbitrary or both is not right. sent12: if something romances aggressiveness then it is nonarbitrary. sent13: everything is asteroidal. sent14: the fact that something is noncurrent hold if it diffracts reinforcement. sent15: the fact that the pump is not one-piece and it is not asteroidal is false if there exists something such that it is asteroidal. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the unenthusiasticness does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: the romancing Binet does not occur. sent2: the bronchoscopicness happens. sent3: the inhibition occurs. sent4: the restraint happens. sent5: the undependableness happens. sent6: the cubicness is prevented by that both the horripilating and the damascening happens. sent7: that both the localization and the functionalness occurs prevents that the unenthusiasticness occurs. sent8: the localization happens. sent9: the sharing cleats does not occur. sent10: the sharing hemophiliac and the Italianness happens. sent11: the attacking and the warp occurs. sent12: the fact that the functionalness happens is not false. | sent1: ¬{AS} sent2: {EJ} sent3: {DC} sent4: {BG} sent5: {J} sent6: ({FP} & {AF}) -> ¬{ID} sent7: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent8: {A} sent9: ¬{GD} sent10: ({EA} & {GP}) sent11: ({DM} & {HJ}) sent12: {B} | [
"sent8 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the localization happens and the functionalness occurs hold.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 & sent12 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the unenthusiasticness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the romancing Binet does not occur. sent2: the bronchoscopicness happens. sent3: the inhibition occurs. sent4: the restraint happens. sent5: the undependableness happens. sent6: the cubicness is prevented by that both the horripilating and the damascening happens. sent7: that both the localization and the functionalness occurs prevents that the unenthusiasticness occurs. sent8: the localization happens. sent9: the sharing cleats does not occur. sent10: the sharing hemophiliac and the Italianness happens. sent11: the attacking and the warp occurs. sent12: the fact that the functionalness happens is not false. ; $proof$ = | sent8 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the localization happens and the functionalness occurs hold.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | both the Eddy and the spaceflight occurs. | ({B} & {C}) | sent1: if the sharing signal occurs the gang-raping occurs. sent2: if the laugh does not occur and the diffracting respondent occurs then the hypotonicity does not occur. sent3: that the laugh and the spaceflight happens is not correct. sent4: the sharing signal happens if the dermalness happens. sent5: the hypotonicity happens. sent6: the tarriance does not occur and the Frostianness does not occur if the gang-raping occurs. sent7: the fact that both the Eddy and the spaceflight happens is not correct if the hypotonicity does not occur. sent8: if that the neolithicness happens but the epidemic does not occur is not correct then the epidemic happens. sent9: the hypotonicity occurs and the Eddy occurs. sent10: that the laughing but not the spaceflight happens does not hold. sent11: the diffracting overlordship happens if that the sharing basinet occurs but the diffracting overlordship does not occur is not true. sent12: the structuralness occurs and the entrenching happens. sent13: not the laugh but the diffracting respondent occurs if the phonemicness does not occur. sent14: the spaceflight happens if that the laugh happens but the spaceflight does not occur is false. sent15: the fatalistness happens and the Chicago occurs. sent16: the failure occurs. sent17: that the tarriance does not occur yields that the non-phonemicness and the humaneness happens. | sent1: {K} -> {J} sent2: (¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{A} sent3: ¬({D} & {C}) sent4: {L} -> {K} sent5: {A} sent6: {J} -> (¬{H} & ¬{I}) sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent8: ¬({GG} & ¬{GJ}) -> {GJ} sent9: ({A} & {B}) sent10: ¬({D} & ¬{C}) sent11: ¬({BN} & ¬{AA}) -> {AA} sent12: ({IH} & {IQ}) sent13: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) sent14: ¬({D} & ¬{C}) -> {C} sent15: ({CB} & {BC}) sent16: {FF} sent17: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) | [
"sent9 -> int1: the Eddy happens.; sent14 & sent10 -> int2: the spaceflight happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 -> int1: {B}; sent14 & sent10 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the Eddy and the spaceflight happens does not hold. | ¬({B} & {C}) | [] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = both the Eddy and the spaceflight occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sharing signal occurs the gang-raping occurs. sent2: if the laugh does not occur and the diffracting respondent occurs then the hypotonicity does not occur. sent3: that the laugh and the spaceflight happens is not correct. sent4: the sharing signal happens if the dermalness happens. sent5: the hypotonicity happens. sent6: the tarriance does not occur and the Frostianness does not occur if the gang-raping occurs. sent7: the fact that both the Eddy and the spaceflight happens is not correct if the hypotonicity does not occur. sent8: if that the neolithicness happens but the epidemic does not occur is not correct then the epidemic happens. sent9: the hypotonicity occurs and the Eddy occurs. sent10: that the laughing but not the spaceflight happens does not hold. sent11: the diffracting overlordship happens if that the sharing basinet occurs but the diffracting overlordship does not occur is not true. sent12: the structuralness occurs and the entrenching happens. sent13: not the laugh but the diffracting respondent occurs if the phonemicness does not occur. sent14: the spaceflight happens if that the laugh happens but the spaceflight does not occur is false. sent15: the fatalistness happens and the Chicago occurs. sent16: the failure occurs. sent17: that the tarriance does not occur yields that the non-phonemicness and the humaneness happens. ; $proof$ = | sent9 -> int1: the Eddy happens.; sent14 & sent10 -> int2: the spaceflight happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the wieldiness occurs. | {C} | sent1: the fact that the aerobicsness does not occur if that the wieldiness does not occur and/or the brutality does not occur is incorrect hold. sent2: the jam occurs if the romancing pigskin happens. sent3: the aerobicsness occurs if the sharing mosquitofish happens. sent4: the sharing mosquitofish occurs and the aerobicsness occurs if the brutality does not occur. sent5: the wieldiness occurs if the aerobicsness happens. sent6: the sharing mosquitofish occurs. | sent1: ¬(¬{C} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} sent2: {HP} -> {JC} sent3: {A} -> {B} sent4: ¬{D} -> ({A} & {B}) sent5: {B} -> {C} sent6: {A} | [
"sent3 & sent6 -> int1: the aerobicsness happens.; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent6 -> int1: {B}; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the wieldiness does not occur. | ¬{C} | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the wieldiness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the aerobicsness does not occur if that the wieldiness does not occur and/or the brutality does not occur is incorrect hold. sent2: the jam occurs if the romancing pigskin happens. sent3: the aerobicsness occurs if the sharing mosquitofish happens. sent4: the sharing mosquitofish occurs and the aerobicsness occurs if the brutality does not occur. sent5: the wieldiness occurs if the aerobicsness happens. sent6: the sharing mosquitofish occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent6 -> int1: the aerobicsness happens.; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the dagger is not predicative is not false. | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: if something is a kind of non-exodontic thing that is predicative then the shortgrass is not a kind of a Azerbaijani. sent2: that the dagger is not an attack is not incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Illecebrum and it is a scapegoat. sent4: the fact that the dagger is not predicative is not wrong if the buster does not romance cornea. sent5: the shortgrass does not romance cornea but it is a kind of a Azerbaijani. sent6: the dagger is not a Azerbaijani. sent7: that the dagger does not romance cornea is true if something that is non-Azerbaijani is not non-predicative. sent8: the buster is not a Azerbaijani. sent9: something romances cornea if that it is a chamosite is right. sent10: if there exists something such that it does not romance cornea and it is Azerbaijani the buster is not exodontic. sent11: something is astronomic. sent12: there is something such that that it is a Azerbaijani and it does romance cornea hold. sent13: the shortgrass is not predicative if the fact that there is something such that it is not exodontic and it is a Azerbaijani is true. sent14: the shortgrass is a Azerbaijani. sent15: there are Azerbaijani things. sent16: if something is not permissible but a chamosite the semitrailer does not romance cornea. sent17: the buster does not romance cornea if there are non-exodontic and Azerbaijani things. sent18: if there exists something such that that it does not romance cornea hold the buster is not a Zygophyllum. sent19: the dagger is predicative if the buster romances cornea. sent20: something is both not permissible and a chamosite. | sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & {B}x) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent2: ¬{BF}{b} sent3: (Ex): (¬{GH}x & {DG}x) sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: (¬{A}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: ¬{AB}{b} sent7: (x): (¬{AB}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent8: ¬{AB}{a} sent9: (x): {C}x -> {A}x sent10: (x): (¬{A}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{AA}{a} sent11: (Ex): {AQ}x sent12: (Ex): ({AB}x & {A}x) sent13: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent14: {AB}{aa} sent15: (Ex): {AB}x sent16: (x): (¬{D}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}{c} sent17: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent18: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{CQ}{a} sent19: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent20: (Ex): (¬{D}x & {C}x) | [] | [] | the dagger is predicative. | {B}{b} | [
"sent9 -> int1: if the buster is a kind of a chamosite it does romance cornea.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the dagger is not predicative is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a kind of non-exodontic thing that is predicative then the shortgrass is not a kind of a Azerbaijani. sent2: that the dagger is not an attack is not incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Illecebrum and it is a scapegoat. sent4: the fact that the dagger is not predicative is not wrong if the buster does not romance cornea. sent5: the shortgrass does not romance cornea but it is a kind of a Azerbaijani. sent6: the dagger is not a Azerbaijani. sent7: that the dagger does not romance cornea is true if something that is non-Azerbaijani is not non-predicative. sent8: the buster is not a Azerbaijani. sent9: something romances cornea if that it is a chamosite is right. sent10: if there exists something such that it does not romance cornea and it is Azerbaijani the buster is not exodontic. sent11: something is astronomic. sent12: there is something such that that it is a Azerbaijani and it does romance cornea hold. sent13: the shortgrass is not predicative if the fact that there is something such that it is not exodontic and it is a Azerbaijani is true. sent14: the shortgrass is a Azerbaijani. sent15: there are Azerbaijani things. sent16: if something is not permissible but a chamosite the semitrailer does not romance cornea. sent17: the buster does not romance cornea if there are non-exodontic and Azerbaijani things. sent18: if there exists something such that that it does not romance cornea hold the buster is not a Zygophyllum. sent19: the dagger is predicative if the buster romances cornea. sent20: something is both not permissible and a chamosite. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is both not splenic and a shingle it does not maraud. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: the buckshot does not diffract Binet if it is not a Trinitarianism and does maraud. sent2: there exists something such that if it is both not loopy and anacoluthic it does crave. sent3: the buckshot does not maraud if it hovers and is a cab. sent4: if something that is not centromeric is bibliopolic it is not a kind of a circular. sent5: there is something such that if it does not romance scrutiny and is a kind of a Kurdish it is not crustose. sent6: there is something such that if it is splenic and it does shingle it does not maraud. sent7: there is something such that if it does not romance nitrogen and it reorients it is not retentive. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-splenic a shingle then it does maraud. sent9: if the buckshot is linguistic and it marauds it is not a kind of a bacteriostat. sent10: if something is not a shingle and is cyclopean then that it is not optional is correct. sent11: the buckshot marauds if it is not splenic and it is a kind of a shingle. sent12: there is something such that if it is not a Kierkegaard and does share Wintun then it does not romance invariability. sent13: the buckshot is not Anglophilic if it is a kind of splenic thing that does share laurelwood. sent14: the buckshot does not maraud if it is both splenic and a shingle. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not a tetrode and it is intermolecular that it does not administer stifle is not wrong. sent16: if the buckshot is not splenic but it is a kind of a shingle then it does not maraud. | sent1: (¬{FJ}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{H}{aa} sent2: (Ex): (¬{AG}x & {DB}x) -> {EG}x sent3: ({CR}{aa} & {HO}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (x): (¬{Q}x & {E}x) -> ¬{BD}x sent5: (Ex): (¬{GK}x & {DS}x) -> ¬{AM}x sent6: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: (Ex): (¬{ER}x & {BR}x) -> ¬{IB}x sent8: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent9: ({GC}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{CO}{aa} sent10: (x): (¬{AB}x & {DU}x) -> ¬{DP}x sent11: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent12: (Ex): (¬{HD}x & {CK}x) -> ¬{AC}x sent13: ({AA}{aa} & {AO}{aa}) -> ¬{JA}{aa} sent14: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent15: (Ex): (¬{GD}x & {CS}x) -> ¬{BB}x sent16: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} | [
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if it is non-centromeric and it is bibliopolic it is not a circular. | (Ex): (¬{Q}x & {E}x) -> ¬{BD}x | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the stifle is not centromeric but bibliopolic the fact that it is not a circular is true.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is both not splenic and a shingle it does not maraud. ; $context$ = sent1: the buckshot does not diffract Binet if it is not a Trinitarianism and does maraud. sent2: there exists something such that if it is both not loopy and anacoluthic it does crave. sent3: the buckshot does not maraud if it hovers and is a cab. sent4: if something that is not centromeric is bibliopolic it is not a kind of a circular. sent5: there is something such that if it does not romance scrutiny and is a kind of a Kurdish it is not crustose. sent6: there is something such that if it is splenic and it does shingle it does not maraud. sent7: there is something such that if it does not romance nitrogen and it reorients it is not retentive. sent8: there exists something such that if it is a kind of non-splenic a shingle then it does maraud. sent9: if the buckshot is linguistic and it marauds it is not a kind of a bacteriostat. sent10: if something is not a shingle and is cyclopean then that it is not optional is correct. sent11: the buckshot marauds if it is not splenic and it is a kind of a shingle. sent12: there is something such that if it is not a Kierkegaard and does share Wintun then it does not romance invariability. sent13: the buckshot is not Anglophilic if it is a kind of splenic thing that does share laurelwood. sent14: the buckshot does not maraud if it is both splenic and a shingle. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not a tetrode and it is intermolecular that it does not administer stifle is not wrong. sent16: if the buckshot is not splenic but it is a kind of a shingle then it does not maraud. ; $proof$ = | sent16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Diegueno is news. | {D}{b} | sent1: the Diegueno is not news if the hexose is a kind of an attractiveness. sent2: the fact that something is not an attractiveness and is Caroline if it is a Gobi is right. sent3: the hexose is not a kind of a preservative if it is non-invertible and does not diffract festering. sent4: if the hexose is not bacteroidal then it is not a butterbean. sent5: something that does administer paean is not a butterbean. sent6: the hexose is not a Tongan if it does regret. sent7: the Diegueno is not news if either the hexose is not a Tongan or it is an attractiveness or both. sent8: the hexose regrets. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a Tongan and it does not regret is not right if it is not an attractiveness. sent10: if something diffracts phrase then it does administer paean and/or is not bacteroidal. sent11: if that something is not a kind of a Tongan and does not regret does not hold it is news. sent12: the hexose is non-invertible thing that does not diffract festering if something is not an anode. sent13: the fact that the hexose does diffract phrase is right. sent14: the fact that if something whacks then it is not androgynous is correct. sent15: something is not an anode. sent16: the demander does not regret. | sent1: {C}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} sent2: (x): {F}x -> (¬{C}x & {E}x) sent3: ({L}{a} & ¬{M}{a}) -> ¬{G}{a} sent4: ¬{I}{a} -> ¬{H}{a} sent5: (x): {J}x -> ¬{H}x sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: (¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent8: {A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) sent10: (x): {K}x -> ({J}x v ¬{I}x) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {D}x sent12: (x): ¬{N}x -> ({L}{a} & ¬{M}{a}) sent13: {K}{a} sent14: (x): {FT}x -> ¬{FM}x sent15: (Ex): ¬{N}x sent16: ¬{A}{d} | [
"sent6 & sent8 -> int1: the hexose is not a Tongan.; int1 -> int2: the hexose is not Tongan and/or is a kind of an attractiveness.; sent7 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent8 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 -> int2: (¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}); sent7 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the Diegueno is not androgynous if that it is a whacking is right. | {FT}{b} -> ¬{FM}{b} | [
"sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the Diegueno is news. ; $context$ = sent1: the Diegueno is not news if the hexose is a kind of an attractiveness. sent2: the fact that something is not an attractiveness and is Caroline if it is a Gobi is right. sent3: the hexose is not a kind of a preservative if it is non-invertible and does not diffract festering. sent4: if the hexose is not bacteroidal then it is not a butterbean. sent5: something that does administer paean is not a butterbean. sent6: the hexose is not a Tongan if it does regret. sent7: the Diegueno is not news if either the hexose is not a Tongan or it is an attractiveness or both. sent8: the hexose regrets. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a Tongan and it does not regret is not right if it is not an attractiveness. sent10: if something diffracts phrase then it does administer paean and/or is not bacteroidal. sent11: if that something is not a kind of a Tongan and does not regret does not hold it is news. sent12: the hexose is non-invertible thing that does not diffract festering if something is not an anode. sent13: the fact that the hexose does diffract phrase is right. sent14: the fact that if something whacks then it is not androgynous is correct. sent15: something is not an anode. sent16: the demander does not regret. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent8 -> int1: the hexose is not a Tongan.; int1 -> int2: the hexose is not Tongan and/or is a kind of an attractiveness.; sent7 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the stuffing does assimilate. | {D}{c} | sent1: if the fact that the amrinone is not a Yunnan and shares vitrectomy is not true the chert is not catadromous. sent2: if the chert is an epigram the stuffing shares vitrectomy. sent3: something is not non-catadromous and it is an epigram if it does not share vitrectomy. sent4: the stuffing is a qibla if it is a hemothorax. sent5: if the chert does assimilate then the stuffing is catadromous. sent6: something does romance raisin if it is catadromous. sent7: the stuffing is a kind of an epigram. sent8: the chert is catadromous and/or is an epigram. sent9: the filicide does display and it does muster if it does not administer Chrysothamnus. sent10: the stuffing does not assimilate if the chert is catadromous thing that is an epigram. sent11: the chert is not an epigram if the filicide displays. sent12: if that the amrinone is not a kind of a residence is not incorrect then the fact that it is not a Yunnan and shares vitrectomy is wrong. sent13: something assimilates if it does share vitrectomy. | sent1: ¬(¬{E}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} sent3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent4: {AH}{c} -> {M}{c} sent5: {D}{a} -> {A}{c} sent6: (x): {A}x -> {CM}x sent7: {B}{c} sent8: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent9: ¬{I}{d} -> ({F}{d} & {G}{d}) sent10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent11: {F}{d} -> ¬{B}{a} sent12: ¬{H}{b} -> ¬(¬{E}{b} & {C}{b}) sent13: (x): {C}x -> {D}x | [
"sent13 -> int1: if the stuffing shares vitrectomy it assimilates.;"
] | [
"sent13 -> int1: {C}{c} -> {D}{c};"
] | if the Clydesdale is catadromous it romances raisin. | {A}{ij} -> {CM}{ij} | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the stuffing does assimilate. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the amrinone is not a Yunnan and shares vitrectomy is not true the chert is not catadromous. sent2: if the chert is an epigram the stuffing shares vitrectomy. sent3: something is not non-catadromous and it is an epigram if it does not share vitrectomy. sent4: the stuffing is a qibla if it is a hemothorax. sent5: if the chert does assimilate then the stuffing is catadromous. sent6: something does romance raisin if it is catadromous. sent7: the stuffing is a kind of an epigram. sent8: the chert is catadromous and/or is an epigram. sent9: the filicide does display and it does muster if it does not administer Chrysothamnus. sent10: the stuffing does not assimilate if the chert is catadromous thing that is an epigram. sent11: the chert is not an epigram if the filicide displays. sent12: if that the amrinone is not a kind of a residence is not incorrect then the fact that it is not a Yunnan and shares vitrectomy is wrong. sent13: something assimilates if it does share vitrectomy. ; $proof$ = | sent13 -> int1: if the stuffing shares vitrectomy it assimilates.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the cowrie is a stirrup. | {A}{a} | sent1: something does not diffract unsatisfactoriness. sent2: the fact that the carrack does not share Kichaga is correct. sent3: something is not a stirrup or it does not share cowrie or both if it is condylar. sent4: if there exists something such that that it shares Kichaga and/or it is scentless is false then the cowrie is a stirrup. sent5: the stucco is not mechanical if the ctenophore administers nightwear. sent6: something is main and it diffracts don if the fact that it is modifiable is not right. sent7: something that is main is condylar. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it does not administer leaner is not wrong. sent9: the fact that the carrack does share Kichaga or is scentless or both is not true. sent10: the cuckoo is not modifiable if the fact that the stucco is both non-invertible and modifiable does not hold. sent11: the fact that something is non-invertible and modifiable is not right if it is not mechanical. sent12: the ctenophore administers nightwear if there is something such that that it is not a rigging and is not a topping is not correct. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a rigging and is not a kind of a topping does not hold. sent14: either something does share Kichaga or it is a stirrup or both. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{JJ}x sent2: ¬{AA}{aa} sent3: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent5: {I}{d} -> ¬{H}{c} sent6: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) sent7: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent8: (Ex): ¬{IG}x sent9: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent10: ¬({G}{c} & {F}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} sent11: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}x & {F}x) sent12: (x): ¬(¬{J}x & ¬{K}x) -> {I}{d} sent13: (Ex): ¬(¬{J}x & ¬{K}x) sent14: (Ex): ({AA}x v {A}x) | [
"sent9 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it does share Kichaga or it is scentless or both is not right.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 -> int1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x); int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | the cowrie is not a stirrup. | ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent3 -> int2: if the cuckoo is condylar it is not a kind of a stirrup or it does not share cowrie or both.; sent7 -> int3: the cuckoo is condylar if it is main.; sent6 -> int4: the cuckoo is a kind of a main that does diffract don if it is not modifiable.; sent11 -> int5: the fact that the stucco is non-invertible and it is modifiable is false if the fact that it is not mechanical hold.; sent13 & sent12 -> int6: the ctenophore does administer nightwear.; sent5 & int6 -> int7: the stucco is not mechanical.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the stucco is non-invertible and it is modifiable does not hold.; sent10 & int8 -> int9: the cuckoo is not modifiable.; int4 & int9 -> int10: the cuckoo is a kind of a main and it diffracts don.; int10 -> int11: the cuckoo is a main.; int3 & int11 -> int12: the cuckoo is condylar.; int2 & int12 -> int13: either the cuckoo is not a kind of a stirrup or it does not share cowrie or both.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that it is not a kind of a stirrup or does not share cowrie or both.;"
] | 10 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the cowrie is a stirrup. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not diffract unsatisfactoriness. sent2: the fact that the carrack does not share Kichaga is correct. sent3: something is not a stirrup or it does not share cowrie or both if it is condylar. sent4: if there exists something such that that it shares Kichaga and/or it is scentless is false then the cowrie is a stirrup. sent5: the stucco is not mechanical if the ctenophore administers nightwear. sent6: something is main and it diffracts don if the fact that it is modifiable is not right. sent7: something that is main is condylar. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it does not administer leaner is not wrong. sent9: the fact that the carrack does share Kichaga or is scentless or both is not true. sent10: the cuckoo is not modifiable if the fact that the stucco is both non-invertible and modifiable does not hold. sent11: the fact that something is non-invertible and modifiable is not right if it is not mechanical. sent12: the ctenophore administers nightwear if there is something such that that it is not a rigging and is not a topping is not correct. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a rigging and is not a kind of a topping does not hold. sent14: either something does share Kichaga or it is a stirrup or both. ; $proof$ = | sent9 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it does share Kichaga or it is scentless or both is not right.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Ecuadorian does not occur. | ¬{D} | sent1: the halo occurs but the romancing speedometer does not occur. sent2: the terminologicalness does not occur. sent3: if the needlework occurs the biologism happens. sent4: the non-Ecuadorianness is brought about by that the biologism but not the correctedness occurs. sent5: the biologism happens if the heat occurs. sent6: if the terminologicalness does not occur the fact that the imperativeness or the LIFO or both happens does not hold. sent7: the imperative does not occur if the terminologicalness does not occur. sent8: if the fact that the imperative and/or the LIFO happens does not hold the fact that the correctedness does not occur is true. sent9: both the appearing and the non-keylessness occurs. | sent1: ({EM} & ¬{EK}) sent2: ¬{A} sent3: {E} -> {C} sent4: ({C} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{D} sent5: {F} -> {C} sent6: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} v {AB}) sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬{AA} sent8: ¬({AA} v {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent9: ({EG} & ¬{AG}) | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the imperative happens or the LIFO occurs or both does not hold.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the correctedness does not occur.;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA} v {AB}); int1 & sent8 -> int2: ¬{B};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the Ecuadorian does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the halo occurs but the romancing speedometer does not occur. sent2: the terminologicalness does not occur. sent3: if the needlework occurs the biologism happens. sent4: the non-Ecuadorianness is brought about by that the biologism but not the correctedness occurs. sent5: the biologism happens if the heat occurs. sent6: if the terminologicalness does not occur the fact that the imperativeness or the LIFO or both happens does not hold. sent7: the imperative does not occur if the terminologicalness does not occur. sent8: if the fact that the imperative and/or the LIFO happens does not hold the fact that the correctedness does not occur is true. sent9: both the appearing and the non-keylessness occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the imperative happens or the LIFO occurs or both does not hold.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the correctedness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it diffracts blamelessness the fact that it is both not a inelasticity and not tangible does not hold. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: there is something such that if it is not non-operculate it is non-short-order thing that does not share perfluorocarbon. sent2: the perfluorocarbon does not heave and is not a kind of a inelasticity if it does cox. sent3: there is something such that if it is a thalidomide that it does romance Centranthus and it is not normative does not hold. sent4: there is something such that if it predates then that it is both not a destroyer and a rule is false. sent5: there exists something such that if it does diffract blamelessness that it is not a inelasticity and it is tangible is not right. sent6: the fact that the anchorage does not romance TSA and is tangible does not hold if it is a kind of a perpendicular. sent7: that the perfluorocarbon is not a inelasticity and is not tangible is incorrect if it diffracts blamelessness. sent8: if something is a kind of a Huntsville then the fact that it is not a kind of a slenderness and is not a kind of a Rollo does not hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a Millay it is not a yield but extinguishable. sent10: the fact that the strongman is not a balboa but it does share brahman is not true if it is tangible. | sent1: (Ex): {FS}x -> (¬{GA}x & ¬{BR}x) sent2: {DO}{aa} -> (¬{CP}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): {BE}x -> ¬({FU}x & ¬{BD}x) sent4: (Ex): {DD}x -> ¬(¬{IO}x & {GE}x) sent5: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: {AI}{ii} -> ¬(¬{AP}{ii} & {AB}{ii}) sent7: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: (x): {HH}x -> ¬(¬{HU}x & ¬{AH}x) sent9: (Ex): {FC}x -> (¬{AL}x & ¬{DF}x) sent10: {AB}{q} -> ¬(¬{JE}{q} & {FH}{q}) | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if it is a Huntsville the fact that it is not a kind of a slenderness and is not a kind of a Rollo is not right. | (Ex): {HH}x -> ¬(¬{HU}x & ¬{AH}x) | [
"sent8 -> int1: the fact that the buster is not a slenderness and it is not a kind of a Rollo is not correct if that it is a kind of a Huntsville hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it diffracts blamelessness the fact that it is both not a inelasticity and not tangible does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is not non-operculate it is non-short-order thing that does not share perfluorocarbon. sent2: the perfluorocarbon does not heave and is not a kind of a inelasticity if it does cox. sent3: there is something such that if it is a thalidomide that it does romance Centranthus and it is not normative does not hold. sent4: there is something such that if it predates then that it is both not a destroyer and a rule is false. sent5: there exists something such that if it does diffract blamelessness that it is not a inelasticity and it is tangible is not right. sent6: the fact that the anchorage does not romance TSA and is tangible does not hold if it is a kind of a perpendicular. sent7: that the perfluorocarbon is not a inelasticity and is not tangible is incorrect if it diffracts blamelessness. sent8: if something is a kind of a Huntsville then the fact that it is not a kind of a slenderness and is not a kind of a Rollo does not hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a Millay it is not a yield but extinguishable. sent10: the fact that the strongman is not a balboa but it does share brahman is not true if it is tangible. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the flux does not occur. | ¬{E} | sent1: that the recusation happens and the side-glance does not occur is not true if the administering quetzal occurs. sent2: if the romancing sickbay does not occur then that the arithmeticalness occurs but the coo does not occur is wrong. sent3: if the fact that that the romancing Euclid occurs but the romancing sickbay does not occur does not hold is not wrong the flux happens. sent4: the immorality happens if that the allomorphicness but not the company occurs is not right. sent5: the fact that both the romancing Euclid and the romancing sickbay happens is not correct if the arithmeticalness happens. sent6: both the coo and the arithmeticalness occurs. sent7: that the fact that both the romancing Euclid and the romancing sickbay happens is not true is not wrong. sent8: the fact that the romancing Euclid occurs and the romancing sickbay does not occur does not hold if the arithmeticalness happens. | sent1: {IN} -> ¬({IE} & ¬{CB}) sent2: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & ¬{A}) sent3: ¬({D} & ¬{C}) -> {E} sent4: ¬({IP} & ¬{IF}) -> {DL} sent5: {B} -> ¬({D} & {C}) sent6: ({A} & {B}) sent7: ¬({D} & {C}) sent8: {B} -> ¬({D} & ¬{C}) | [
"sent6 -> int1: the arithmeticalness happens.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the fact that the romancing Euclid occurs and the romancing sickbay does not occur is incorrect.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent8 -> int2: ¬({D} & ¬{C}); int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the flux does not occur. | ¬{E} | [] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the flux does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the recusation happens and the side-glance does not occur is not true if the administering quetzal occurs. sent2: if the romancing sickbay does not occur then that the arithmeticalness occurs but the coo does not occur is wrong. sent3: if the fact that that the romancing Euclid occurs but the romancing sickbay does not occur does not hold is not wrong the flux happens. sent4: the immorality happens if that the allomorphicness but not the company occurs is not right. sent5: the fact that both the romancing Euclid and the romancing sickbay happens is not correct if the arithmeticalness happens. sent6: both the coo and the arithmeticalness occurs. sent7: that the fact that both the romancing Euclid and the romancing sickbay happens is not true is not wrong. sent8: the fact that the romancing Euclid occurs and the romancing sickbay does not occur does not hold if the arithmeticalness happens. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> int1: the arithmeticalness happens.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the fact that the romancing Euclid occurs and the romancing sickbay does not occur is incorrect.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the Arabian is stemless and it is multiform is not correct. | ¬({C}{c} & {D}{c}) | sent1: if something does purport it is multiform. sent2: if the affenpinscher does share Centranthus the fact that the Arabian is stemless is not wrong. sent3: the vinyl does administer assizes. sent4: there are non-sedimentary and majuscule things. sent5: if the vinyl administers assizes then the affenpinscher does share Centranthus. sent6: The assizes does administer vinyl. sent7: if a non-sedimentary thing is majuscule the Arabian does purport. | sent1: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent2: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (Ex): (¬{F}x & {G}x) sent5: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: {AA}{aa} sent7: (x): (¬{F}x & {G}x) -> {E}{c} | [
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the affenpinscher does share Centranthus.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the Arabian is stemless.; sent1 -> int3: if that the Arabian purports is right then it is multiform.; sent4 & sent7 -> int4: the Arabian does purport.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the Arabian is multiform.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent2 -> int2: {C}{c}; sent1 -> int3: {E}{c} -> {D}{c}; sent4 & sent7 -> int4: {E}{c}; int3 & int4 -> int5: {D}{c}; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that the Arabian is stemless and it is multiform is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does purport it is multiform. sent2: if the affenpinscher does share Centranthus the fact that the Arabian is stemless is not wrong. sent3: the vinyl does administer assizes. sent4: there are non-sedimentary and majuscule things. sent5: if the vinyl administers assizes then the affenpinscher does share Centranthus. sent6: The assizes does administer vinyl. sent7: if a non-sedimentary thing is majuscule the Arabian does purport. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the affenpinscher does share Centranthus.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the Arabian is stemless.; sent1 -> int3: if that the Arabian purports is right then it is multiform.; sent4 & sent7 -> int4: the Arabian does purport.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the Arabian is multiform.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that there is something such that it is not inoperative and is a sharp is incorrect. | ¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)) | sent1: if something does flare the robe is monochromatic and it does romance mint. sent2: there exists something such that it does romance pasta. sent3: the formaldehyde is a sharp if the robe groans. sent4: there exists something such that it is not inoperative. sent5: if something does not diffract clast then it is a arboriculture and/or it is a groan. sent6: something channelizes if it is recessionary. sent7: if something romances mint and channelizes then it does not diffract clast. sent8: there is something such that it is inoperative and it is a sharp. sent9: the analgesic is not a arboriculture and is a kind of a sharp. sent10: if the robe is a arboriculture then the analgesic is a sharp. sent11: everything does not mingle. sent12: if the robe is a kind of a arboriculture the analgesic is not inoperative but a sharp. sent13: the formaldehyde is not non-sharp if the robe is a kind of a arboriculture. sent14: something is a arboriculture. sent15: there exists something such that it is a flare. sent16: something is recessionary thing that is a kind of a Daviesia if it does not mingle. sent17: the robe is a kind of a arboriculture. | sent1: (x): {J}x -> ({H}{a} & {D}{a}) sent2: (Ex): {FD}x sent3: {B}{a} -> {AB}{ft} sent4: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent5: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x v {B}x) sent6: (x): {F}x -> {E}x sent7: (x): ({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent8: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: (¬{A}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent10: {A}{a} -> {AB}{b} sent11: (x): ¬{I}x sent12: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent13: {A}{a} -> {AB}{ft} sent14: (Ex): {A}x sent15: (Ex): {J}x sent16: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({F}x & {G}x) sent17: {A}{a} | [
"sent12 & sent17 -> int1: the analgesic is a kind of operative thing that is sharp.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent12 & sent17 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the formaldehyde is sharp. | {AB}{ft} | [
"sent5 -> int2: either the robe is a kind of a arboriculture or it is a kind of a groan or both if it does not diffract clast.; sent1 & sent15 -> int3: the robe is monochromatic and it romances mint.; int3 -> int4: the robe romances mint.; sent16 -> int5: the analgesic is recessionary and is a Daviesia if it does not mingle.; sent11 -> int6: the analgesic does not mingle.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the analgesic is recessionary and it is a Daviesia.; int7 -> int8: everything is recessionary and it is a kind of a Daviesia.; int8 -> int9: the robe is recessionary and is a kind of a Daviesia.; int9 -> int10: the robe is recessionary.; sent6 -> int11: the robe channelizes if it is recessionary.; int10 & int11 -> int12: the robe channelizes.; int4 & int12 -> int13: the robe romances mint and it channelizes.; sent7 -> int14: the robe does not diffract clast if it romances mint and it channelizes.; int13 & int14 -> int15: the robe does not diffract clast.; int2 & int15 -> int16: the robe is a arboriculture and/or a groan.; sent13 & int16 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | 10 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there is something such that it is not inoperative and is a sharp is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does flare the robe is monochromatic and it does romance mint. sent2: there exists something such that it does romance pasta. sent3: the formaldehyde is a sharp if the robe groans. sent4: there exists something such that it is not inoperative. sent5: if something does not diffract clast then it is a arboriculture and/or it is a groan. sent6: something channelizes if it is recessionary. sent7: if something romances mint and channelizes then it does not diffract clast. sent8: there is something such that it is inoperative and it is a sharp. sent9: the analgesic is not a arboriculture and is a kind of a sharp. sent10: if the robe is a arboriculture then the analgesic is a sharp. sent11: everything does not mingle. sent12: if the robe is a kind of a arboriculture the analgesic is not inoperative but a sharp. sent13: the formaldehyde is not non-sharp if the robe is a kind of a arboriculture. sent14: something is a arboriculture. sent15: there exists something such that it is a flare. sent16: something is recessionary thing that is a kind of a Daviesia if it does not mingle. sent17: the robe is a kind of a arboriculture. ; $proof$ = | sent12 & sent17 -> int1: the analgesic is a kind of operative thing that is sharp.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the audible does not occur. | ¬{A} | sent1: if the audible happens the adjoining does not occur and the aeromechanicness does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the responding and the inaudibleness happens is not correct then the inaudible happens. sent3: if that the shogi does not occur and the responding does not occur is not correct then the responding occurs. sent4: if the responding occurs then the aeromechanicness occurs. | sent1: {A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬({B} & ¬{A}) -> {A} sent3: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{B}) -> {B} sent4: {B} -> {AB} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the audible occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the adjoining does not occur and the aeromechanicness does not occur.; int1 -> int2: the aeromechanicness does not occur.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 -> int2: ¬{AB};"
] | the audible happens. | {A} | [] | 6 | 4 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the audible does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the audible happens the adjoining does not occur and the aeromechanicness does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the responding and the inaudibleness happens is not correct then the inaudible happens. sent3: if that the shogi does not occur and the responding does not occur is not correct then the responding occurs. sent4: if the responding occurs then the aeromechanicness occurs. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the audible occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the adjoining does not occur and the aeromechanicness does not occur.; int1 -> int2: the aeromechanicness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that something is not a squeezer is not incorrect. | (Ex): ¬{A}x | sent1: the fact that the annoyance is not bryophytic but it is impressionable is incorrect. sent2: the doctorfish is not a squeezer if there is something such that that it is not bryophytic but impressionable is incorrect. sent3: that there exists something such that it is a kind of a squeezer is not incorrect. sent4: something is not a scrunch. sent5: the annoyance is not a switch. sent6: there exists something such that that it is bryophytic thing that is impressionable is not true. sent7: if the rough is a Laban the fact that it shares insulation and it is not a squeezer is not correct. sent8: the doctorfish is not a Nabokov. sent9: the doctorfish is not impressionable if there exists something such that that it is not bryophytic and it is a squeezer does not hold. sent10: that the annoyance is a kind of bryophytic thing that is impressionable does not hold. sent11: something is a Laban if it is brimless. sent12: there is something such that it is not bryophytic and it is impressionable. sent13: the annoyance is not a fir. sent14: the doctorfish is not bryophytic if there is something such that that it is not a squeezer and it is impressionable does not hold. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: (Ex): ¬{CH}x sent5: ¬{FK}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: {B}{b} -> ¬({AJ}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent8: ¬{IE}{a} sent9: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {A}x) -> ¬{AB}{a} sent10: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent11: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent12: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent13: ¬{AT}{aa} sent14: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{AA}{a} | [
"sent1 -> int1: there is something such that that it is a kind of non-bryophytic thing that is impressionable is incorrect.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the doctorfish is not a kind of a squeezer.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x); int1 & sent2 -> int2: ¬{A}{a}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that it does not share insulation. | (Ex): ¬{AJ}x | [
"sent11 -> int3: if the rough is not non-brimless then it is a Laban.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that something is not a squeezer is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the annoyance is not bryophytic but it is impressionable is incorrect. sent2: the doctorfish is not a squeezer if there is something such that that it is not bryophytic but impressionable is incorrect. sent3: that there exists something such that it is a kind of a squeezer is not incorrect. sent4: something is not a scrunch. sent5: the annoyance is not a switch. sent6: there exists something such that that it is bryophytic thing that is impressionable is not true. sent7: if the rough is a Laban the fact that it shares insulation and it is not a squeezer is not correct. sent8: the doctorfish is not a Nabokov. sent9: the doctorfish is not impressionable if there exists something such that that it is not bryophytic and it is a squeezer does not hold. sent10: that the annoyance is a kind of bryophytic thing that is impressionable does not hold. sent11: something is a Laban if it is brimless. sent12: there is something such that it is not bryophytic and it is impressionable. sent13: the annoyance is not a fir. sent14: the doctorfish is not bryophytic if there is something such that that it is not a squeezer and it is impressionable does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: there is something such that that it is a kind of non-bryophytic thing that is impressionable is incorrect.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the doctorfish is not a kind of a squeezer.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the breechcloth is not suctorial. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: the sachem is a correctness. sent2: if the nympholept repines then it is not a correctness. sent3: if something administers turquoise it shares thunderclap. sent4: the company does not repine. sent5: something is suctorial if it does repine. sent6: something repines and it is suctorial if it is not a correctness. sent7: if the nympholept is a correctness it does not repine. sent8: the ferment does not repine. sent9: the breechcloth does not diffract prolamine if it does not repine. sent10: if the bellbird does not administer turquoise and/or does administer insolence the nympholept does administer turquoise. sent11: the bellbird does not administer turquoise or administers insolence or both if the solderer is associative. sent12: if something is not grapelike it is not a earth-goddess. sent13: something that is not suctorial does not repine. sent14: the ICBM does not repine. sent15: something is not suctorial if that it does not diffract prolamine hold. sent16: if the nympholept does repine the breechcloth is a kind of a correctness. sent17: something is not suctorial if it does romance salesperson. sent18: the breechcloth does share Klimt. sent19: if something is a correctness then it does not diffract prolamine. sent20: the nympholept does diffract prolamine if that it does share thunderclap is not false. sent21: that the bellbird does not share thunderclap and/or does not administer turquoise is not correct. | sent1: {B}{eq} sent2: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: (x): {F}x -> {E}x sent4: ¬{A}{eo} sent5: (x): {A}x -> {D}x sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {D}x) sent7: {B}{a} -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬{A}{as} sent9: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬{C}{b} sent10: (¬{F}{c} v {H}{c}) -> {F}{a} sent11: {G}{d} -> (¬{F}{c} v {H}{c}) sent12: (x): ¬{EL}x -> ¬{JG}x sent13: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{A}x sent14: ¬{A}{bl} sent15: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{D}x sent16: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent17: (x): {FA}x -> ¬{D}x sent18: {JH}{b} sent19: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent20: {E}{a} -> {C}{a} sent21: ¬(¬{E}{c} v ¬{F}{c}) | [
"sent19 -> int1: the breechcloth does not diffract prolamine if that it is a correctness hold.; sent15 -> int2: if the breechcloth does not diffract prolamine it is not suctorial.;"
] | [
"sent19 -> int1: {B}{b} -> ¬{C}{b}; sent15 -> int2: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬{D}{b};"
] | if the polonium does romance salesperson then it is not suctorial. | {FA}{bo} -> ¬{D}{bo} | [
"sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the breechcloth is not suctorial. ; $context$ = sent1: the sachem is a correctness. sent2: if the nympholept repines then it is not a correctness. sent3: if something administers turquoise it shares thunderclap. sent4: the company does not repine. sent5: something is suctorial if it does repine. sent6: something repines and it is suctorial if it is not a correctness. sent7: if the nympholept is a correctness it does not repine. sent8: the ferment does not repine. sent9: the breechcloth does not diffract prolamine if it does not repine. sent10: if the bellbird does not administer turquoise and/or does administer insolence the nympholept does administer turquoise. sent11: the bellbird does not administer turquoise or administers insolence or both if the solderer is associative. sent12: if something is not grapelike it is not a earth-goddess. sent13: something that is not suctorial does not repine. sent14: the ICBM does not repine. sent15: something is not suctorial if that it does not diffract prolamine hold. sent16: if the nympholept does repine the breechcloth is a kind of a correctness. sent17: something is not suctorial if it does romance salesperson. sent18: the breechcloth does share Klimt. sent19: if something is a correctness then it does not diffract prolamine. sent20: the nympholept does diffract prolamine if that it does share thunderclap is not false. sent21: that the bellbird does not share thunderclap and/or does not administer turquoise is not correct. ; $proof$ = | sent19 -> int1: the breechcloth does not diffract prolamine if that it is a correctness hold.; sent15 -> int2: if the breechcloth does not diffract prolamine it is not suctorial.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the nominating does not occur. | ¬{C} | sent1: if the solitaire happens then the nominating does not occur. sent2: if the romancing variedness happens then that the administering coke does not occur and/or the administering correctness does not occur is not true. sent3: that the allowableness does not occur is right. sent4: the administering coke occurs. sent5: the repetition does not occur if the sharing whitebait and/or the fantan happens. sent6: the incongruentness does not occur. sent7: the allowableness does not occur but the cabin occurs. sent8: the nominating happens if the solitaire does not occur. sent9: the nominating does not occur if the solitaire happens and/or the administering coke happens. sent10: that the romancing variedness does not occur and the diffracting crapette does not occur is triggered by that the sharing whitebait does not occur. sent11: the solitaire does not occur if the fact that either the administering coke does not occur or the administering correctness does not occur or both does not hold. sent12: if the romancing discontentment does not occur then not the sharing whitebait but the saponaceousness happens. sent13: that the freeing does not occur hold if the impacting or the autumnalness or both happens. sent14: the autumnalness leads to that the preliminary does not occur and the committing does not occur. sent15: the nonmetallicness occurs and the autumnalness happens if the allowableness does not occur. sent16: that the preliminary does not occur and the committing does not occur yields that the romancing discontentment happens. sent17: if the saponaceousness occurs the sharing whitebait does not occur. sent18: either the by-line or the opticalness or both occurs. sent19: if the autumnalness occurs the preliminary happens and/or the committing does not occur. sent20: that the allowableness does not occur and the nonmetallicness does not occur causes that the autumnalness happens. sent21: if the sharing whitebait does not occur then both the diffracting crapette and the romancing variedness occurs. sent22: if that the solitaire happens and/or the administering coke does not occur is wrong the canfield does not occur. | sent1: {A} -> ¬{C} sent2: {E} -> ¬(¬{B} v ¬{D}) sent3: ¬{N} sent4: {B} sent5: ({G} v {IS}) -> ¬{CD} sent6: ¬{AN} sent7: (¬{N} & {O}) sent8: ¬{A} -> {C} sent9: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent10: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & ¬{F}) sent11: ¬(¬{B} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{A} sent12: ¬{I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) sent13: ({EG} v {L}) -> ¬{GU} sent14: {L} -> (¬{J} & ¬{K}) sent15: ¬{N} -> ({M} & {L}) sent16: (¬{J} & ¬{K}) -> {I} sent17: {H} -> ¬{G} sent18: ({GL} v {IU}) sent19: {L} -> ({J} v ¬{K}) sent20: (¬{N} & ¬{M}) -> {L} sent21: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) sent22: ¬({A} v ¬{B}) -> ¬{CM} | [
"sent4 -> int1: the solitaire occurs or the administering coke happens or both.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the nominating happens. | {C} | [
"sent7 -> int2: the allowableness does not occur.;"
] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the nominating does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the solitaire happens then the nominating does not occur. sent2: if the romancing variedness happens then that the administering coke does not occur and/or the administering correctness does not occur is not true. sent3: that the allowableness does not occur is right. sent4: the administering coke occurs. sent5: the repetition does not occur if the sharing whitebait and/or the fantan happens. sent6: the incongruentness does not occur. sent7: the allowableness does not occur but the cabin occurs. sent8: the nominating happens if the solitaire does not occur. sent9: the nominating does not occur if the solitaire happens and/or the administering coke happens. sent10: that the romancing variedness does not occur and the diffracting crapette does not occur is triggered by that the sharing whitebait does not occur. sent11: the solitaire does not occur if the fact that either the administering coke does not occur or the administering correctness does not occur or both does not hold. sent12: if the romancing discontentment does not occur then not the sharing whitebait but the saponaceousness happens. sent13: that the freeing does not occur hold if the impacting or the autumnalness or both happens. sent14: the autumnalness leads to that the preliminary does not occur and the committing does not occur. sent15: the nonmetallicness occurs and the autumnalness happens if the allowableness does not occur. sent16: that the preliminary does not occur and the committing does not occur yields that the romancing discontentment happens. sent17: if the saponaceousness occurs the sharing whitebait does not occur. sent18: either the by-line or the opticalness or both occurs. sent19: if the autumnalness occurs the preliminary happens and/or the committing does not occur. sent20: that the allowableness does not occur and the nonmetallicness does not occur causes that the autumnalness happens. sent21: if the sharing whitebait does not occur then both the diffracting crapette and the romancing variedness occurs. sent22: if that the solitaire happens and/or the administering coke does not occur is wrong the canfield does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> int1: the solitaire occurs or the administering coke happens or both.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that it is not responsible. | (Ex): ¬{C}x | sent1: the brig is a cloister. sent2: there are responsible things. sent3: the fact that the polypropenonitrile cloisters and it is a kind of a forwarding does not hold if it is not responsible. sent4: if the fact that something is not a disgustingness or is a say or both is incorrect it is irresponsible. sent5: if something is unworldly that it either is not a disgustingness or says or both is not true. sent6: the polypropenonitrile is a kind of a reciprocal. sent7: something does not cloister if that it is a kind of a cloister and is a forwarding is wrong. sent8: the patzer is not responsible if the Bohemian is reciprocal. sent9: the polypropenonitrile is a cloister. | sent1: {A}{di} sent2: (Ex): {C}x sent3: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬({A}{a} & {D}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬(¬{E}x v {F}x) -> ¬{C}x sent5: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{E}x v {F}x) sent6: {B}{a} sent7: (x): ¬({A}x & {D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent8: {B}{b} -> ¬{C}{c} sent9: {A}{a} | [] | [] | the exegete is a kind of a reciprocal. | {B}{cc} | [
"sent7 -> int1: the polypropenonitrile does not cloister if that it is a cloister and it is forwarding does not hold.; sent4 -> int2: the polypropenonitrile is not responsible if that it is not a disgustingness and/or it does say is false.; sent5 -> int3: that the polypropenonitrile is not a kind of a disgustingness and/or it is a say is wrong if it is unworldly.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it is not responsible. ; $context$ = sent1: the brig is a cloister. sent2: there are responsible things. sent3: the fact that the polypropenonitrile cloisters and it is a kind of a forwarding does not hold if it is not responsible. sent4: if the fact that something is not a disgustingness or is a say or both is incorrect it is irresponsible. sent5: if something is unworldly that it either is not a disgustingness or says or both is not true. sent6: the polypropenonitrile is a kind of a reciprocal. sent7: something does not cloister if that it is a kind of a cloister and is a forwarding is wrong. sent8: the patzer is not responsible if the Bohemian is reciprocal. sent9: the polypropenonitrile is a cloister. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the hawse is ribless. | {B}{b} | sent1: there is something such that that it romances Marks and is ribless is incorrect. sent2: there is something such that that it is a high-mindedness and does diffract going-over does not hold. sent3: the fornication diffracts recrudescence and it is a ultramontane. sent4: the fornication is a Cash. sent5: the fornication is a high-mindedness. sent6: something romances Marks and it is ribless. sent7: there exists something such that it is ribless and it does romance Marks. sent8: if there is something such that it is not ribless the fornication is sessile. sent9: the fornication does diffract going-over. sent10: if the hawse romances Marks the fact that the fornication is ribless is correct. sent11: something is not ribless and romances Marks if it is not a ultramontane. sent12: the fornication does romance Marks if there exists something such that it is not a high-mindedness. sent13: if something does share obscureness then it is not a kind of a ultramontane and it does diffract recrudescence. sent14: the hawse romances Marks if the fornication is ribless. sent15: if the fact that something is non-ribless thing that does not romance Marks does not hold it romance Marks. sent16: the hawse is a high-mindedness if the fornication romances Marks. sent17: the fact that the hawse does diffract going-over is correct. sent18: the hawse is ribless if the fornication does romance Marks. | sent1: (Ex): ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: {AK}{a} sent5: {AA}{a} sent6: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent7: (Ex): ({B}x & {A}x) sent8: (x): ¬{B}x -> {AQ}{a} sent9: {AB}{a} sent10: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) sent12: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {A}{a} sent13: (x): {E}x -> (¬{C}x & {D}x) sent14: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} sent15: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {A}x sent16: {A}{a} -> {AA}{b} sent17: {AB}{b} sent18: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} | [] | [] | the tympanum romances Marks. | {A}{cm} | [
"sent15 -> int1: if that the tympanum is not ribless and does not romance Marks is false then it does romance Marks.; sent3 -> int2: the fornication is a ultramontane.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the hawse is ribless. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it romances Marks and is ribless is incorrect. sent2: there is something such that that it is a high-mindedness and does diffract going-over does not hold. sent3: the fornication diffracts recrudescence and it is a ultramontane. sent4: the fornication is a Cash. sent5: the fornication is a high-mindedness. sent6: something romances Marks and it is ribless. sent7: there exists something such that it is ribless and it does romance Marks. sent8: if there is something such that it is not ribless the fornication is sessile. sent9: the fornication does diffract going-over. sent10: if the hawse romances Marks the fact that the fornication is ribless is correct. sent11: something is not ribless and romances Marks if it is not a ultramontane. sent12: the fornication does romance Marks if there exists something such that it is not a high-mindedness. sent13: if something does share obscureness then it is not a kind of a ultramontane and it does diffract recrudescence. sent14: the hawse romances Marks if the fornication is ribless. sent15: if the fact that something is non-ribless thing that does not romance Marks does not hold it romance Marks. sent16: the hawse is a high-mindedness if the fornication romances Marks. sent17: the fact that the hawse does diffract going-over is correct. sent18: the hawse is ribless if the fornication does romance Marks. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is a kind of a autodidact and/or is a feat. | (Ex): ({B}x v {C}x) | sent1: something is a autodidact if it shares fornication. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not an oxymoron and does not diffract achene is not true that the fornication does share fornication is correct. sent3: something is a kind of a Etropus if it is regional. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent3: (x): {AG}x -> {IG}x | [
"sent1 -> int1: the fornication is a autodidact if it does share fornication.;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is a kind of a autodidact and/or is a feat. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a autodidact if it shares fornication. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not an oxymoron and does not diffract achene is not true that the fornication does share fornication is correct. sent3: something is a kind of a Etropus if it is regional. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: the fornication is a autodidact if it does share fornication.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the vitality happens. | {F} | sent1: if the sacralness does not occur the lancers does not occur. sent2: if the mitzvah does not occur the playfulness but not the high-low-jack happens. sent3: if the fact that the mitzvah happens and the high-low-jack happens is wrong the vitality does not occur. sent4: that both the romancing CD and the diffracting aldosterone occurs yields that the diffracting lithograph does not occur. sent5: if the lancers does not occur then the fact that the reveille happens and the abdominalness happens is false. sent6: that the romancing stockpile does not occur causes that the sacralness does not occur and the barrage does not occur. sent7: the lancers does not occur if the barrage does not occur and the sacralness does not occur. sent8: the vitality occurs if the fact that the reveille does not occur and the abdominal happens does not hold. sent9: the abdominal does not occur if the vitality happens and the reveille does not occur. sent10: if the romancing stockpile does not occur then the barrage does not occur and the sacralness does not occur. sent11: if the reveille occurs the vitality occurs. sent12: if the diffracting lithograph does not occur not the romancing stockpile but the fastball happens. sent13: that the mitzvah occurs is true. sent14: that the vitality occurs but the reveille does not occur is caused by that the lancers does not occur. sent15: the fact that the fact that not the reveille but the abdominal occurs hold is wrong if the quiescence occurs. sent16: that the reveille happens and the abdominal occurs does not hold. sent17: if the high-low-jack happens the quiescence occurs. sent18: that the reveille and the abdominal occurs is incorrect if the quiescence occurs. | sent1: ¬{H} -> ¬{G} sent2: ¬{B} -> ({EA} & ¬{A}) sent3: ¬({B} & {A}) -> ¬{F} sent4: ({M} & {N}) -> ¬{L} sent5: ¬{G} -> ¬({E} & {D}) sent6: ¬{J} -> (¬{H} & ¬{I}) sent7: (¬{I} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{G} sent8: ¬(¬{E} & {D}) -> {F} sent9: ({F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} sent10: ¬{J} -> (¬{I} & ¬{H}) sent11: {E} -> {F} sent12: ¬{L} -> (¬{J} & {K}) sent13: {B} sent14: ¬{G} -> ({F} & ¬{E}) sent15: {C} -> ¬(¬{E} & {D}) sent16: ¬({E} & {D}) sent17: {A} -> {C} sent18: {C} -> ¬({E} & {D}) | [] | [] | the playfulness happens. | {EA} | [] | 12 | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the vitality happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sacralness does not occur the lancers does not occur. sent2: if the mitzvah does not occur the playfulness but not the high-low-jack happens. sent3: if the fact that the mitzvah happens and the high-low-jack happens is wrong the vitality does not occur. sent4: that both the romancing CD and the diffracting aldosterone occurs yields that the diffracting lithograph does not occur. sent5: if the lancers does not occur then the fact that the reveille happens and the abdominalness happens is false. sent6: that the romancing stockpile does not occur causes that the sacralness does not occur and the barrage does not occur. sent7: the lancers does not occur if the barrage does not occur and the sacralness does not occur. sent8: the vitality occurs if the fact that the reveille does not occur and the abdominal happens does not hold. sent9: the abdominal does not occur if the vitality happens and the reveille does not occur. sent10: if the romancing stockpile does not occur then the barrage does not occur and the sacralness does not occur. sent11: if the reveille occurs the vitality occurs. sent12: if the diffracting lithograph does not occur not the romancing stockpile but the fastball happens. sent13: that the mitzvah occurs is true. sent14: that the vitality occurs but the reveille does not occur is caused by that the lancers does not occur. sent15: the fact that the fact that not the reveille but the abdominal occurs hold is wrong if the quiescence occurs. sent16: that the reveille happens and the abdominal occurs does not hold. sent17: if the high-low-jack happens the quiescence occurs. sent18: that the reveille and the abdominal occurs is incorrect if the quiescence occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it does not diffract sidewinder and does romance flare it does share butterbean. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: if something that does not share butterbean is a kind of a prosciutto it is bituminoid. sent2: if something does not diffract sidewinder but it romances flare it shares butterbean. | sent1: (x): (¬{B}x & {DF}x) -> {BP}x sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | [
"sent2 -> int1: if the flare does not diffract sidewinder and does romance flare then it shares butterbean.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | if the guttersnipe does not share butterbean and is a prosciutto it is bituminoid. | (¬{B}{al} & {DF}{al}) -> {BP}{al} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not diffract sidewinder and does romance flare it does share butterbean. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that does not share butterbean is a kind of a prosciutto it is bituminoid. sent2: if something does not diffract sidewinder but it romances flare it shares butterbean. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: if the flare does not diffract sidewinder and does romance flare then it shares butterbean.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the saponin does share ordinal and/or is a kind of a daleth. | ({B}{b} v {A}{b}) | sent1: the saponin is a borage and/or it is a kind of a daleth. sent2: the bandwagon is not a OWLT and is a polyfoam. sent3: the saponin is Danish and/or is a daleth. sent4: something is not sexagesimal and shares ordinal if it is a daleth. sent5: the keyboardist is both not apomictic and sacrificial. sent6: the saponin does share ordinal if the letterman is a kind of a borage that is a polyfoam. sent7: the letterman is necromantic. sent8: the letterman is a borage or shares ordinal or both. sent9: the letterman is not a borage but it is a polyfoam. sent10: the letterman is a daleth. sent11: the letterman is not a borage but it is a daleth. sent12: that the saponin shares ordinal is correct if that the letterman is not a borage but it is a kind of a polyfoam is correct. | sent1: ({AA}{b} v {A}{b}) sent2: (¬{BH}{db} & {AB}{db}) sent3: ({EN}{b} v {A}{b}) sent4: (x): {A}x -> (¬{M}x & {B}x) sent5: (¬{HT}{fj} & {FL}{fj}) sent6: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent7: {IP}{a} sent8: ({AA}{a} v {B}{a}) sent9: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent10: {A}{a} sent11: (¬{AA}{a} & {A}{a}) sent12: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} | [
"sent12 & sent9 -> int1: the fact that the saponin does share ordinal hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent12 & sent9 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the confidant is not sexagesimal but it does share ordinal. | (¬{M}{jb} & {B}{jb}) | [
"sent4 -> int2: if the confidant is a kind of a daleth the fact that it is not sexagesimal and it shares ordinal is true.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the saponin does share ordinal and/or is a kind of a daleth. ; $context$ = sent1: the saponin is a borage and/or it is a kind of a daleth. sent2: the bandwagon is not a OWLT and is a polyfoam. sent3: the saponin is Danish and/or is a daleth. sent4: something is not sexagesimal and shares ordinal if it is a daleth. sent5: the keyboardist is both not apomictic and sacrificial. sent6: the saponin does share ordinal if the letterman is a kind of a borage that is a polyfoam. sent7: the letterman is necromantic. sent8: the letterman is a borage or shares ordinal or both. sent9: the letterman is not a borage but it is a polyfoam. sent10: the letterman is a daleth. sent11: the letterman is not a borage but it is a daleth. sent12: that the saponin shares ordinal is correct if that the letterman is not a borage but it is a kind of a polyfoam is correct. ; $proof$ = | sent12 & sent9 -> int1: the fact that the saponin does share ordinal hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the anagraming does not occur. | ¬{A} | sent1: that the cycling happens and the welding happens is not right if the Argentineness does not occur. sent2: the cycling does not occur. sent3: the earful does not occur if the fact that the mismarrying but not the fading occurs is false. sent4: the Argentineness does not occur. sent5: that the anagrams and the Argentineness happens is triggered by that the Cenozoic does not occur. sent6: that the eventuating does not occur is caused by that the anagraming occurs and the Argentineness happens. sent7: that the herbivorousness and the non-Saxonness occurs is not wrong. sent8: if the anagraming occurs then the cycling does not occur. sent9: if the anagrams occurs the cycling does not occur and the welding happens. sent10: the fact that the cycling happens and the welding occurs is not true. sent11: the administering brownie does not occur. sent12: if the sharing substation occurs and the earful happens the Cenozoicness does not occur. sent13: that both the fading and the sharing substation happens is caused by the non-Saxonness. | sent1: ¬{B} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent2: ¬{AA} sent3: ¬({F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} sent4: ¬{B} sent5: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent6: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{FF} sent7: ({I} & ¬{H}) sent8: {A} -> ¬{AA} sent9: {A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent10: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent11: ¬{IG} sent12: ({D} & {E}) -> ¬{C} sent13: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {D}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the anagrams occurs.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: not the cycling but the welding occurs.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} & {AB});"
] | the anagrams occurs. | {A} | [
"sent7 -> int2: the Saxonness does not occur.; sent13 & int2 -> int3: the fading occurs and the sharing substation happens.; int3 -> int4: the sharing substation happens.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the anagraming does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the cycling happens and the welding happens is not right if the Argentineness does not occur. sent2: the cycling does not occur. sent3: the earful does not occur if the fact that the mismarrying but not the fading occurs is false. sent4: the Argentineness does not occur. sent5: that the anagrams and the Argentineness happens is triggered by that the Cenozoic does not occur. sent6: that the eventuating does not occur is caused by that the anagraming occurs and the Argentineness happens. sent7: that the herbivorousness and the non-Saxonness occurs is not wrong. sent8: if the anagraming occurs then the cycling does not occur. sent9: if the anagrams occurs the cycling does not occur and the welding happens. sent10: the fact that the cycling happens and the welding occurs is not true. sent11: the administering brownie does not occur. sent12: if the sharing substation occurs and the earful happens the Cenozoicness does not occur. sent13: that both the fading and the sharing substation happens is caused by the non-Saxonness. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the anagrams occurs.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: not the cycling but the welding occurs.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it romances resinoid then the fact that it is inalienable and it is not abient is false. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: there is something such that if it does share breadfruit the fact that it is a kind of eugenic thing that is not a heptane is incorrect. sent2: if something does romance resinoid then it is a kind of inalienable thing that is not abient. sent3: that something is not alienable and not non-abient is false if it does romance resinoid. sent4: if the lounger romances resinoid then the fact that it is inalienable thing that is abient is not true. sent5: the fact that something is a kind of inalienable thing that is not abient is wrong if it does romance resinoid. sent6: the lounger is not alienable but it is not abient if it does romance resinoid. sent7: there is something such that if it diffracts embargo then that it does romance ideation and does share clipped is wrong. | sent1: (Ex): {AC}x -> ¬({JD}x & ¬{GF}x) sent2: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent6: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): {GI}x -> ¬({FQ}x & {CB}x) | [
"sent5 -> int1: if the lounger romances resinoid then that it is inalienable and it is not abient does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it romances resinoid then the fact that it is inalienable and it is not abient is false. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it does share breadfruit the fact that it is a kind of eugenic thing that is not a heptane is incorrect. sent2: if something does romance resinoid then it is a kind of inalienable thing that is not abient. sent3: that something is not alienable and not non-abient is false if it does romance resinoid. sent4: if the lounger romances resinoid then the fact that it is inalienable thing that is abient is not true. sent5: the fact that something is a kind of inalienable thing that is not abient is wrong if it does romance resinoid. sent6: the lounger is not alienable but it is not abient if it does romance resinoid. sent7: there is something such that if it diffracts embargo then that it does romance ideation and does share clipped is wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> int1: if the lounger romances resinoid then that it is inalienable and it is not abient does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the audio is not an incendiary. | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: if the fact that the landscaping does not romance leaner and does not diffract landscaping is correct then the clipboard is not a kind of a Ionian. sent2: if the fact that something does romance leaner and it is an incendiary is not correct it does not romance leaner. sent3: if the clipboard romances leaner but it is not a kind of a fungible then the audio is not an incendiary. sent4: if that the landscaping is not a kind of a Ionian but it diffracts landscaping is wrong then it is a kind of a fungible. sent5: if the fact that the clipboard is both not a fungible and incendiary is not true then it diffracts landscaping. sent6: if something is not a fungible that it romances leaner and is a kind of an incendiary does not hold. sent7: if the landscaping does not diffract landscaping but it does romance leaner then the clipboard is not a fungible. sent8: if the clipboard does not romance leaner but it is a kind of a fungible the audio is not an incendiary. sent9: that the landscaping is Ionian and diffracts landscaping is not true. sent10: the clipboard does not romance leaner and it is not a fungible if the landscaping is a fungible. sent11: if the clipboard is not non-Ionian then the landscaping is not a kind of a non-Ionian. sent12: the audio is not incendiary if the clipboard does not romance leaner and it is not a fungible. | sent1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} sent2: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent3: ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {AB}{b} sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent7: (¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent8: (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent9: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent10: {B}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent11: {AA}{b} -> ¬{AA}{a} sent12: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} | [] | [] | the audio does not romance leaner. | ¬{A}{c} | [
"sent2 -> int1: the audio does not romance leaner if the fact that it romance leaner and is a kind of an incendiary is not correct.; sent6 -> int2: that the fact that the audio romances leaner and it is incendiary is incorrect hold if it is not a kind of a fungible.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the audio is not an incendiary. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the landscaping does not romance leaner and does not diffract landscaping is correct then the clipboard is not a kind of a Ionian. sent2: if the fact that something does romance leaner and it is an incendiary is not correct it does not romance leaner. sent3: if the clipboard romances leaner but it is not a kind of a fungible then the audio is not an incendiary. sent4: if that the landscaping is not a kind of a Ionian but it diffracts landscaping is wrong then it is a kind of a fungible. sent5: if the fact that the clipboard is both not a fungible and incendiary is not true then it diffracts landscaping. sent6: if something is not a fungible that it romances leaner and is a kind of an incendiary does not hold. sent7: if the landscaping does not diffract landscaping but it does romance leaner then the clipboard is not a fungible. sent8: if the clipboard does not romance leaner but it is a kind of a fungible the audio is not an incendiary. sent9: that the landscaping is Ionian and diffracts landscaping is not true. sent10: the clipboard does not romance leaner and it is not a fungible if the landscaping is a fungible. sent11: if the clipboard is not non-Ionian then the landscaping is not a kind of a non-Ionian. sent12: the audio is not incendiary if the clipboard does not romance leaner and it is not a fungible. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the muscle is a fatherhood. | {C}{b} | sent1: if the see does romance nonparticipant the muscle is a kind of a fatherhood. sent2: the see is not a parget if that the nonparticipant is a Lindheimera or it does parget or both is wrong. sent3: the muscle does romance nonparticipant. sent4: the wakeboard does share homonymy if the pleaser does share homonymy. sent5: if the pleaser is identifiable then the fact that it does not romance foster-son is right. sent6: the muscle is anemophilous if the see is a fatherhood. sent7: the see romances nonparticipant and/or is not anemophilous if it is not a kind of a parget. sent8: the muscle is anemophilous. sent9: that if something is not ceramic that it is a kind of a Lindheimera or it does parget or both is false hold. sent10: that something is a ceramic is not wrong if it does share homonymy. sent11: something puzzles and does share homonymy if it does not romance foster-son. sent12: the nonparticipant is non-ceramic if the wakeboard is non-ceramic. sent13: the pleaser is identifiable. sent14: that the millet romances nonparticipant hold. | sent1: {A}{a} -> {C}{b} sent2: ¬({E}{c} v {D}{c}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent3: {A}{b} sent4: {G}{e} -> {G}{d} sent5: {J}{e} -> ¬{I}{e} sent6: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent7: ¬{D}{a} -> ({A}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) sent8: {B}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({E}x v {D}x) sent10: (x): {G}x -> {F}x sent11: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({H}x & {G}x) sent12: {F}{d} -> ¬{F}{c} sent13: {J}{e} sent14: {A}{de} | [] | [] | that the muscle is not a fatherhood is not wrong. | ¬{C}{b} | [
"sent9 -> int1: that the nonparticipant either is a Lindheimera or is a kind of a parget or both is wrong if it is not a kind of a ceramic.; sent10 -> int2: if the wakeboard does share homonymy then that it is a ceramic is not wrong.; sent11 -> int3: the pleaser is a puzzle that shares homonymy if it does not romance foster-son.; sent5 & sent13 -> int4: that the pleaser does not romance foster-son is not incorrect.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the pleaser does puzzle and it does share homonymy.; int5 -> int6: the pleaser does share homonymy.; sent4 & int6 -> int7: the wakeboard does share homonymy.; int2 & int7 -> int8: the wakeboard is a ceramic.; sent12 & int8 -> int9: the nonparticipant is not ceramic.; int1 & int9 -> int10: that the nonparticipant is a Lindheimera or it is a kind of a parget or both does not hold.; sent2 & int10 -> int11: the see does not parget.; sent7 & int11 -> int12: the see romances nonparticipant and/or it is not anemophilous.; int12 -> int13: something romances nonparticipant and/or it is not anemophilous.;"
] | 11 | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the muscle is a fatherhood. ; $context$ = sent1: if the see does romance nonparticipant the muscle is a kind of a fatherhood. sent2: the see is not a parget if that the nonparticipant is a Lindheimera or it does parget or both is wrong. sent3: the muscle does romance nonparticipant. sent4: the wakeboard does share homonymy if the pleaser does share homonymy. sent5: if the pleaser is identifiable then the fact that it does not romance foster-son is right. sent6: the muscle is anemophilous if the see is a fatherhood. sent7: the see romances nonparticipant and/or is not anemophilous if it is not a kind of a parget. sent8: the muscle is anemophilous. sent9: that if something is not ceramic that it is a kind of a Lindheimera or it does parget or both is false hold. sent10: that something is a ceramic is not wrong if it does share homonymy. sent11: something puzzles and does share homonymy if it does not romance foster-son. sent12: the nonparticipant is non-ceramic if the wakeboard is non-ceramic. sent13: the pleaser is identifiable. sent14: that the millet romances nonparticipant hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that either something romances D-layer or it is a kind of a cephalothin or both is incorrect. | ¬((Ex): ({A}x v {B}x)) | sent1: if that the plasmid is not a pounce is not false then that it is a kind of non-mucosal thing that is a cephalothin is not true. sent2: if something does romance D-layer then it is a parasailing. sent3: the heraldry is not a cephalothin if that the plasmid is not mucosal but it is a cephalothin does not hold. sent4: the plasmid is not a pounce and is not an exploitation if that there exists something such that it does not share afterlife is not false. sent5: there exists something such that it does not share afterlife. sent6: something is rectal if it romances D-layer. sent7: everything is adroit and/or it is monozygotic. sent8: either everything is a portal or it is a executrix or both. sent9: everything romances D-layer and/or it is a cephalothin. | sent1: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> {CC}x sent3: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{F}x sent6: (x): {A}x -> {FG}x sent7: (x): ({GD}x v {FK}x) sent8: (x): ({ER}x v {DN}x) sent9: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) | [
"sent9 -> int1: the tellurium romances D-layer or is a cephalothin or both.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 -> int1: ({A}{aa} v {B}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | there exists something such that it is not non-rectal and/or it diffracts Polycirrus. | (Ex): ({FG}x v {L}x) | [
"sent6 -> int2: the fact that the heraldry is rectal is true if it does romance D-layer.; sent5 & sent4 -> int3: the plasmid is not a kind of a pounce and it is not a kind of an exploitation.; int3 -> int4: the plasmid is not a pounce.; sent1 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the plasmid is not mucosal and is a kind of a cephalothin is incorrect.; sent3 & int5 -> int6: the heraldry is not a cephalothin.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 8 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that either something romances D-layer or it is a kind of a cephalothin or both is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the plasmid is not a pounce is not false then that it is a kind of non-mucosal thing that is a cephalothin is not true. sent2: if something does romance D-layer then it is a parasailing. sent3: the heraldry is not a cephalothin if that the plasmid is not mucosal but it is a cephalothin does not hold. sent4: the plasmid is not a pounce and is not an exploitation if that there exists something such that it does not share afterlife is not false. sent5: there exists something such that it does not share afterlife. sent6: something is rectal if it romances D-layer. sent7: everything is adroit and/or it is monozygotic. sent8: either everything is a portal or it is a executrix or both. sent9: everything romances D-layer and/or it is a cephalothin. ; $proof$ = | sent9 -> int1: the tellurium romances D-layer or is a cephalothin or both.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is not a kind of a farmhouse and it is a kind of a chinquapin. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is a chinquapin is not incorrect. sent2: the Syrian is not a chinquapin but it is fertile. sent3: if something does not diffract Indianan then it is not a round. sent4: there is something such that it is not a farmhouse. sent5: if the sawwort is non-round then it is not a farmhouse and is a chinquapin. sent6: if the sawwort is not round then it is a chinquapin. sent7: the contester is not a farmhouse. sent8: the sawwort is a kind of a chinquapin. sent9: if the sawwort is non-fertile then it does not pother and shares Apodidae. sent10: the sawwort is non-round. sent11: the sawwort does not diffract Skeat but it is a kind of a Ruth. sent12: something is a farmhouse that is a kind of a chinquapin. | sent1: (Ex): {AB}x sent2: (¬{AB}{ai} & {JF}{ai}) sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x sent4: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{a} sent7: ¬{AA}{gn} sent8: {AB}{a} sent9: ¬{JF}{a} -> (¬{GL}{a} & {DE}{a}) sent10: ¬{A}{a} sent11: (¬{IC}{a} & {DK}{a}) sent12: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) | [
"sent5 & sent10 -> int1: the sawwort is not a farmhouse but it is a kind of a chinquapin.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 & sent10 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | there exists something such that it is not uncertain and it is a temp. | (Ex): (¬{R}x & {CO}x) | [
"sent3 -> int2: if the drill does not diffract Indianan then it is not round.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is not a kind of a farmhouse and it is a kind of a chinquapin. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is a chinquapin is not incorrect. sent2: the Syrian is not a chinquapin but it is fertile. sent3: if something does not diffract Indianan then it is not a round. sent4: there is something such that it is not a farmhouse. sent5: if the sawwort is non-round then it is not a farmhouse and is a chinquapin. sent6: if the sawwort is not round then it is a chinquapin. sent7: the contester is not a farmhouse. sent8: the sawwort is a kind of a chinquapin. sent9: if the sawwort is non-fertile then it does not pother and shares Apodidae. sent10: the sawwort is non-round. sent11: the sawwort does not diffract Skeat but it is a kind of a Ruth. sent12: something is a farmhouse that is a kind of a chinquapin. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent10 -> int1: the sawwort is not a farmhouse but it is a kind of a chinquapin.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if the fact that it is not a denizen hold then the fact that it does share nonconformist and it does not place is not wrong. | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a denizen it shares nonconformist and places. sent2: if that the respondent is not a kind of a denizen is true then it does share nonconformist and it is a kind of a place. sent3: there is something such that if that it is not a denizen is not incorrect it is not a place. sent4: the respondent shares nonconformist and is not a place if it is not a denizen. sent5: that the workroom diffracts border if the workroom is not a Peruvian is not incorrect. sent6: if the respondent is not a denizen then it does share nonconformist. sent7: if the respondent is a denizen it shares nonconformist and is not a place. sent8: if the respondent does not romance launch then it is a kind of a denizen and is not a Sambucus. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a denizen then it does share nonconformist. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a denizen it does share nonconformist and it is not a kind of a place. sent11: something is an outboard that does not romance forested if it does not diffract Plectrophenax. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: ¬{DF}{fj} -> {GR}{fj} sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent7: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: ¬{DE}{aa} -> ({A}{aa} & ¬{N}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x sent10: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent11: (x): ¬{DU}x -> ({EP}x & ¬{BC}x) | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if that it does not diffract Plectrophenax hold then it is not non-outboard and it does not romance forested. | (Ex): ¬{DU}x -> ({EP}x & ¬{BC}x) | [
"sent11 -> int1: if the stifle does not diffract Plectrophenax then it is a kind of an outboard and it does not romance forested.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it is not a denizen hold then the fact that it does share nonconformist and it does not place is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a denizen it shares nonconformist and places. sent2: if that the respondent is not a kind of a denizen is true then it does share nonconformist and it is a kind of a place. sent3: there is something such that if that it is not a denizen is not incorrect it is not a place. sent4: the respondent shares nonconformist and is not a place if it is not a denizen. sent5: that the workroom diffracts border if the workroom is not a Peruvian is not incorrect. sent6: if the respondent is not a denizen then it does share nonconformist. sent7: if the respondent is a denizen it shares nonconformist and is not a place. sent8: if the respondent does not romance launch then it is a kind of a denizen and is not a Sambucus. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a denizen then it does share nonconformist. sent10: there exists something such that if it is a denizen it does share nonconformist and it is not a kind of a place. sent11: something is an outboard that does not romance forested if it does not diffract Plectrophenax. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is a master then it is not non-old and not a residence. | (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: there is something such that if it is indicative then it does not wreathe. sent2: the hindquarters is old and is not a residence if it is a master. | sent1: (Ex): {FF}x -> ¬{DP}x sent2: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a master then it is not non-old and not a residence. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is indicative then it does not wreathe. sent2: the hindquarters is old and is not a residence if it is a master. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the saltation does diffract Callisaurus. | {A}{a} | sent1: that the saltation is a dink and/or it is an assay is not true. sent2: if the fact that the saltation is a dink and/or it is a kind of an assay is not correct then it is not deflationary. sent3: something that is not deflationary does diffract Callisaurus and is a dormitory. sent4: if the saltation is not a kind of a siphonophore it is a dink and it does romance contraband. sent5: the saltation is not a slat. sent6: the saltation is not a dink. | sent1: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent2: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {C}x) sent4: ¬{JI}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & {AO}{a}) sent5: ¬{JD}{a} sent6: ¬{AA}{a} | [
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the saltation is not deflationary.; sent3 -> int2: if that the saltation is not deflationary hold then it diffracts Callisaurus and it is a dormitory.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the saltation does diffract Callisaurus and it is a kind of a dormitory.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent3 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ({A}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ({A}{a} & {C}{a}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the saltation does diffract Callisaurus. ; $context$ = sent1: that the saltation is a dink and/or it is an assay is not true. sent2: if the fact that the saltation is a dink and/or it is a kind of an assay is not correct then it is not deflationary. sent3: something that is not deflationary does diffract Callisaurus and is a dormitory. sent4: if the saltation is not a kind of a siphonophore it is a dink and it does romance contraband. sent5: the saltation is not a slat. sent6: the saltation is not a dink. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the saltation is not deflationary.; sent3 -> int2: if that the saltation is not deflationary hold then it diffracts Callisaurus and it is a dormitory.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the saltation does diffract Callisaurus and it is a kind of a dormitory.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if that it does not diffract picket hold that it is not a horsepond and does diffract corkboard does not hold. | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: there exists something such that if it does not romance judo then it is not antidotal and it diffracts traverser. sent2: if the sculpture is not a kind of a bethel then that it does laicize and it diffracts picket is incorrect. sent3: if something is not a Ruritanian then the fact that it is both non-pro-choice and apoplectic does not hold. sent4: if the Robitussin does not diffract picket the fact that it is not a horsepond and does diffract corkboard is not right. sent5: there is something such that if it is informal then the fact that it does not share interruption and it does speculate is false. sent6: the Robitussin is not a khanate but it speculates if it does not diffract corkboard. sent7: the sheepskin is not a headshot but it is a fohn if it does not diffract picket. | sent1: (Ex): ¬{FG}x -> (¬{IJ}x & {HD}x) sent2: ¬{GL}{ba} -> ¬({BP}{ba} & {A}{ba}) sent3: (x): ¬{AM}x -> ¬(¬{BA}x & {GC}x) sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): {CC}x -> ¬(¬{CE}x & {FK}x) sent6: ¬{AB}{aa} -> (¬{JB}{aa} & {FK}{aa}) sent7: ¬{A}{ea} -> (¬{EL}{ea} & {AK}{ea}) | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the picket is a kind of non-pro-choice thing that is apoplectic is not true if it is not Ruritanian. | ¬{AM}{gg} -> ¬(¬{BA}{gg} & {GC}{gg}) | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it does not diffract picket hold that it is not a horsepond and does diffract corkboard does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it does not romance judo then it is not antidotal and it diffracts traverser. sent2: if the sculpture is not a kind of a bethel then that it does laicize and it diffracts picket is incorrect. sent3: if something is not a Ruritanian then the fact that it is both non-pro-choice and apoplectic does not hold. sent4: if the Robitussin does not diffract picket the fact that it is not a horsepond and does diffract corkboard is not right. sent5: there is something such that if it is informal then the fact that it does not share interruption and it does speculate is false. sent6: the Robitussin is not a khanate but it speculates if it does not diffract corkboard. sent7: the sheepskin is not a headshot but it is a fohn if it does not diffract picket. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the frond is a stroboscope. | {D}{a} | sent1: something is a kind of an agar that romances holography if it does not share style. sent2: the fact that the style does not share style is right. sent3: there is something such that it is transcendental. sent4: that the frond is not affixal and it does not romance Gawain is false if there are transcendental things. sent5: if the fact that something is not affixal and it does not romance Gawain is not right then it is a stroboscope. sent6: something romances Gawain if it romances holography. sent7: something is not transcendental but it is affixal if it romances Gawain. | sent1: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({F}x & {E}x) sent2: ¬{G}{b} sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {D}x sent6: (x): {E}x -> {C}x sent7: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x & {B}x) | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the frond is a kind of non-affixal thing that does not romance Gawain does not hold.; sent5 -> int2: if that the frond is non-affixal thing that does not romance Gawain does not hold it is a stroboscope.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); sent5 -> int2: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the frond is not a stroboscope. | ¬{D}{a} | [
"sent7 -> int3: the style is not transcendental and is affixal if it does romance Gawain.; sent6 -> int4: the style romances Gawain if it romances holography.; sent1 -> int5: the style is a kind of an agar and romances holography if it does not share style.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the style is an agar that does romance holography.; int6 -> int7: the fact that the style romances holography is right.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the style does romance Gawain.; int3 & int8 -> int9: the style is not transcendental and is affixal.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that it is not transcendental but affixal.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the frond is a stroboscope. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a kind of an agar that romances holography if it does not share style. sent2: the fact that the style does not share style is right. sent3: there is something such that it is transcendental. sent4: that the frond is not affixal and it does not romance Gawain is false if there are transcendental things. sent5: if the fact that something is not affixal and it does not romance Gawain is not right then it is a stroboscope. sent6: something romances Gawain if it romances holography. sent7: something is not transcendental but it is affixal if it romances Gawain. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the frond is a kind of non-affixal thing that does not romance Gawain does not hold.; sent5 -> int2: if that the frond is non-affixal thing that does not romance Gawain does not hold it is a stroboscope.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a Alexandrian and it is a variation is wrong is false. | ¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)) | sent1: that something is both not a disco and motional is not correct if that it is a kind of a achromatin is not incorrect. sent2: there is something such that that it is not noninvasive and it is a laryngopharynx does not hold. sent3: the fact that the deterioration is not a Alexandrian but it is a variation is wrong. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{EC}x & {GE}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{ER}x & {CO}x) sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the pillar is not a disco and is motional is false. | ¬(¬{EC}{am} & {GE}{am}) | [
"sent1 -> int1: if that the pillar is a achromatin is true the fact that it does not disco and it is motional is not true.;"
] | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a Alexandrian and it is a variation is wrong is false. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is both not a disco and motional is not correct if that it is a kind of a achromatin is not incorrect. sent2: there is something such that that it is not noninvasive and it is a laryngopharynx does not hold. sent3: the fact that the deterioration is not a Alexandrian but it is a variation is wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the overstraining does not occur. | ¬{B} | sent1: that the radiopacity happens and the Comstockery happens does not hold. sent2: the fact that the non-Manichaeanness and the con occurs is not right. sent3: the overstrain happens if that not the radiopacity but the Comstockery happens is not right. sent4: if the thirstiness happens then not the overstrain but the polymorphism happens. sent5: if the radiopacity occurs then the overstrain happens. sent6: the sharing cornea occurs. sent7: the uppercut happens if the fact that the broadcasting does not occur and the singularness happens is wrong. sent8: the fact that not the radiopacity but the Comstockery happens does not hold. sent9: that the diffracting redress does not occur leads to that the thirstiness happens and the penileness happens. | sent1: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent2: ¬(¬{HQ} & {GO}) sent3: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent4: {C} -> (¬{B} & {A}) sent5: {AA} -> {B} sent6: {HB} sent7: ¬(¬{AN} & {IP}) -> {HL} sent8: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent9: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) | [
"sent3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | the overstrain does not occur. | ¬{B} | [] | 7 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the overstraining does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the radiopacity happens and the Comstockery happens does not hold. sent2: the fact that the non-Manichaeanness and the con occurs is not right. sent3: the overstrain happens if that not the radiopacity but the Comstockery happens is not right. sent4: if the thirstiness happens then not the overstrain but the polymorphism happens. sent5: if the radiopacity occurs then the overstrain happens. sent6: the sharing cornea occurs. sent7: the uppercut happens if the fact that the broadcasting does not occur and the singularness happens is wrong. sent8: the fact that not the radiopacity but the Comstockery happens does not hold. sent9: that the diffracting redress does not occur leads to that the thirstiness happens and the penileness happens. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the Dipper is a lifer and it is a fulminate is right. | ({D}{d} & {C}{d}) | sent1: the Dipper is a kind of a lifer if the countryside is not a fulminate. sent2: the Dipper is both a lifer and aerophilatelic. sent3: if the llano is a kind of thermostatic thing that is not vesicular the fact that the countryside is not vesicular hold. sent4: if the countryside is not vesicular then it is not jittery. sent5: if the countryside is not a fulminate the Dipper is a lifer and a fulminate. sent6: if there is something such that it is not a chubbiness then that the wit is bronchoscopic and it administers voyager is not right. sent7: if the wit is not alpine the countryside is not a fulminate. sent8: the countryside is not bronchoscopic. sent9: if something is not a Regalecidae that it is a kind of a chubbiness and it is a alienee is incorrect. sent10: if something is not jittery then it is not a Regalecidae and does not administer mopper. sent11: the Wampanoag is not bronchoscopic if it does not romance battle and it is aerophilatelic. sent12: the Dipper is a lifer. sent13: if there is something such that that it is bronchoscopic and it does administer voyager does not hold then the Wampanoag is alpine. sent14: if the Wampanoag does not romance battle and is non-aerophilatelic it is not bronchoscopic. sent15: the llano is evolutionary if the Northeast is evolutionary. sent16: the Wampanoag does not romance battle and is not aerophilatelic. sent17: the Wampanoag does not logroll. sent18: if the fact that something is a kind of a chubbiness and it is a kind of a alienee is incorrect then it is not a chubbiness. sent19: if the Wampanoag romances battle and is not aerophilatelic then it is not bronchoscopic. sent20: something is thermostatic but it is not vesicular if it is evolutionary. sent21: the Northeast is evolutionary. | sent1: ¬{C}{c} -> {D}{d} sent2: ({D}{d} & {AB}{d}) sent3: ({L}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) -> ¬{K}{c} sent4: ¬{K}{c} -> ¬{J}{c} sent5: ¬{C}{c} -> ({D}{d} & {C}{d}) sent6: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({B}{b} & {E}{b}) sent7: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬{C}{c} sent8: ¬{B}{c} sent9: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}x & {H}x) sent10: (x): ¬{J}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{I}x) sent11: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent12: {D}{d} sent13: (x): ¬({B}x & {E}x) -> {A}{a} sent14: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent15: {M}{f} -> {M}{e} sent16: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent17: ¬{IB}{a} sent18: (x): ¬({F}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent19: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent20: (x): {M}x -> ({L}x & ¬{K}x) sent21: {M}{f} | [
"sent14 & sent16 -> int1: the Wampanoag is not bronchoscopic.;"
] | [
"sent14 & sent16 -> int1: ¬{B}{a};"
] | the fact that the Dipper is a kind of a lifer that fulminates is not true. | ¬({D}{d} & {C}{d}) | [
"sent18 -> int2: if that the countryside is a chubbiness and a alienee is not right then it is not a chubbiness.; sent9 -> int3: if the countryside is not a Regalecidae the fact that that it is both a chubbiness and a alienee is not wrong is wrong.; sent10 -> int4: the countryside is not a kind of a Regalecidae and does not administer mopper if it is not jittery.; sent20 -> int5: the llano is thermostatic and not vesicular if it is evolutionary.; sent15 & sent21 -> int6: the llano is evolutionary.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the llano is both thermostatic and not vesicular.; sent3 & int7 -> int8: the countryside is not vesicular.; sent4 & int8 -> int9: that the countryside is not jittery is not incorrect.; int4 & int9 -> int10: the countryside is not a Regalecidae and does not administer mopper.; int10 -> int11: the countryside is not a Regalecidae.; int3 & int11 -> int12: that the countryside is a chubbiness and a alienee is wrong.; int2 & int12 -> int13: the countryside is not a kind of a chubbiness.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that it is not a chubbiness.; int14 & sent6 -> int15: the fact that the wit is not non-bronchoscopic and it does administer voyager does not hold.; int15 -> int16: there exists something such that the fact that it is bronchoscopic and does administer voyager is false.; int16 & sent13 -> int17: the Wampanoag is alpine.; int17 -> int18: there exists something such that it is alpine.;"
] | 14 | 4 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the Dipper is a lifer and it is a fulminate is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the Dipper is a kind of a lifer if the countryside is not a fulminate. sent2: the Dipper is both a lifer and aerophilatelic. sent3: if the llano is a kind of thermostatic thing that is not vesicular the fact that the countryside is not vesicular hold. sent4: if the countryside is not vesicular then it is not jittery. sent5: if the countryside is not a fulminate the Dipper is a lifer and a fulminate. sent6: if there is something such that it is not a chubbiness then that the wit is bronchoscopic and it administers voyager is not right. sent7: if the wit is not alpine the countryside is not a fulminate. sent8: the countryside is not bronchoscopic. sent9: if something is not a Regalecidae that it is a kind of a chubbiness and it is a alienee is incorrect. sent10: if something is not jittery then it is not a Regalecidae and does not administer mopper. sent11: the Wampanoag is not bronchoscopic if it does not romance battle and it is aerophilatelic. sent12: the Dipper is a lifer. sent13: if there is something such that that it is bronchoscopic and it does administer voyager does not hold then the Wampanoag is alpine. sent14: if the Wampanoag does not romance battle and is non-aerophilatelic it is not bronchoscopic. sent15: the llano is evolutionary if the Northeast is evolutionary. sent16: the Wampanoag does not romance battle and is not aerophilatelic. sent17: the Wampanoag does not logroll. sent18: if the fact that something is a kind of a chubbiness and it is a kind of a alienee is incorrect then it is not a chubbiness. sent19: if the Wampanoag romances battle and is not aerophilatelic then it is not bronchoscopic. sent20: something is thermostatic but it is not vesicular if it is evolutionary. sent21: the Northeast is evolutionary. ; $proof$ = | sent14 & sent16 -> int1: the Wampanoag is not bronchoscopic.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the vellum does not diffract oxymoron and is a militiaman. | (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: the vellum is not intermolecular. sent2: the fact that the vellum diffracts oxymoron hold if the chiffonier shares zamia. sent3: the fact that the vellum does not romance abiogenist and is a proscenium is not false. sent4: if the vellum diffracts oxymoron then the villager is not a honorableness but a militiaman. sent5: the sheepshank is not a militiaman but it does diffract Skeat. sent6: if the vellum does not diffract oxymoron then the rattle does not diffract oxymoron and is a kind of a militiaman. sent7: the vellum is not a kind of a militiaman and does diffract oxymoron if the villager is not a militiaman. sent8: the villager does not diffract oxymoron but it is a militiaman if the vellum does not diffract oxymoron. sent9: the chiffonier shares zamia if it is suppurative. sent10: that the villager is not attentional is not incorrect. sent11: the rocket does not diffract oxymoron. sent12: everything does not diffract oxymoron. | sent1: ¬{GB}{a} sent2: {B}{b} -> {A}{a} sent3: (¬{FA}{a} & {AJ}{a}) sent4: {A}{a} -> (¬{DD}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent5: (¬{C}{ei} & {U}{ei}) sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{A}{hg} & {C}{hg}) sent7: ¬{C}{aa} -> (¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent9: {D}{b} -> {B}{b} sent10: ¬{GI}{aa} sent11: ¬{A}{ee} sent12: (x): ¬{A}x | [
"sent12 -> int1: the fact that the villager does not diffract oxymoron is not wrong.;"
] | [
"sent12 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa};"
] | the villager is not a honorableness but a militiaman. | (¬{DD}{aa} & {C}{aa}) | [] | 7 | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the vellum does not diffract oxymoron and is a militiaman. ; $context$ = sent1: the vellum is not intermolecular. sent2: the fact that the vellum diffracts oxymoron hold if the chiffonier shares zamia. sent3: the fact that the vellum does not romance abiogenist and is a proscenium is not false. sent4: if the vellum diffracts oxymoron then the villager is not a honorableness but a militiaman. sent5: the sheepshank is not a militiaman but it does diffract Skeat. sent6: if the vellum does not diffract oxymoron then the rattle does not diffract oxymoron and is a kind of a militiaman. sent7: the vellum is not a kind of a militiaman and does diffract oxymoron if the villager is not a militiaman. sent8: the villager does not diffract oxymoron but it is a militiaman if the vellum does not diffract oxymoron. sent9: the chiffonier shares zamia if it is suppurative. sent10: that the villager is not attentional is not incorrect. sent11: the rocket does not diffract oxymoron. sent12: everything does not diffract oxymoron. ; $proof$ = | sent12 -> int1: the fact that the villager does not diffract oxymoron is not wrong.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the tarwood romances Varanus and is not a kind of a Blair is incorrect. | ¬({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) | sent1: the tarwood does romance Varanus but it is not enthusiastic. sent2: the Wampanoag is enthusiastic if the slops is scotomatous. sent3: the fact that the slops is not scotomatous is wrong. sent4: if the Wampanoag is enthusiastic the tarwood does romance Varanus and is not a Blair. | sent1: ({C}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: {B}{b} -> ({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) | [
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the Wampanoag is enthusiastic.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that the tarwood romances Varanus and is not a kind of a Blair is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the tarwood does romance Varanus but it is not enthusiastic. sent2: the Wampanoag is enthusiastic if the slops is scotomatous. sent3: the fact that the slops is not scotomatous is wrong. sent4: if the Wampanoag is enthusiastic the tarwood does romance Varanus and is not a Blair. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the Wampanoag is enthusiastic.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the ethnographer is a azimuth. | {D}{b} | sent1: if something that is a unfriendliness romances S-shape the shopkeeper romances paganism. sent2: the ethnographer is a belt. sent3: if that the yo-yo is a nosedive or not a unfriendliness or both is incorrect then the shopkeeper is not a unfriendliness. sent4: if the shopkeeper romances paganism then the fact that the ethnographer is a kind of a azimuth hold. sent5: if the shopkeeper is not a unfriendliness then that the ethnographer is a kind of a azimuth and does not romance S-shape does not hold. sent6: everything does romance S-shape. | sent1: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent2: {T}{b} sent3: ¬({E}{c} v ¬{A}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent6: (x): {B}x | [] | [] | the ethnographer is not a azimuth. | ¬{D}{b} | [] | 6 | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the ethnographer is a azimuth. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that is a unfriendliness romances S-shape the shopkeeper romances paganism. sent2: the ethnographer is a belt. sent3: if that the yo-yo is a nosedive or not a unfriendliness or both is incorrect then the shopkeeper is not a unfriendliness. sent4: if the shopkeeper romances paganism then the fact that the ethnographer is a kind of a azimuth hold. sent5: if the shopkeeper is not a unfriendliness then that the ethnographer is a kind of a azimuth and does not romance S-shape does not hold. sent6: everything does romance S-shape. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the spadefish does romance Tenebrionidae and does gut is not true. | ¬({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: if that the spadefish is scorbutic is right it is a gut. sent2: the corymb does not share Eugene. sent3: the fact that the corymb does not romance Tenebrionidae is not false. sent4: that the corymb is an oblique that is a musnud is not right. sent5: the corymb is not precancerous. sent6: the fact that the corymb is a holothurian that does share Eugene does not hold. sent7: the corymb does not share Eugene if it is non-precancerous. sent8: the spadefish romances Tenebrionidae if the corymb is precancerous. sent9: the fact that the spadefish romances Tenebrionidae and it is a gut is not correct if the corymb does not romance Beckley. sent10: if something is not Masoretic it is both a Pitt and scorbutic. sent11: the corymb romances oarswoman and romances Simarouba if the fact that the neologist is not a kind of a national is true. sent12: if the spadefish does not share Eugene that the corymb romances Tenebrionidae and is a gut is not right. sent13: the spadefish is non-precancerous thing that does not gut if that it does not romance Beckley hold. sent14: if the corymb is not precancerous then it does not share Eugene and does not romance Beckley. sent15: something is precancerous if it romances oarswoman. sent16: the fact that the lesbian does not romance Tenebrionidae hold. | sent1: {E}{b} -> {C}{b} sent2: ¬{AA}{a} sent3: ¬{B}{a} sent4: ¬({FR}{a} & {JG}{a}) sent5: ¬{A}{a} sent6: ¬({HM}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} sent8: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent9: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & {C}{b}) sent10: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({F}x & {E}x) sent11: ¬{H}{c} -> ({D}{a} & {G}{a}) sent12: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent13: ¬{AB}{b} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent14: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent15: (x): {D}x -> {A}x sent16: ¬{B}{eq} | [
"sent14 & sent5 -> int1: the corymb does not share Eugene and it does not romance Beckley.; int1 -> int2: the fact that the corymb does not romance Beckley is not wrong.; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent14 & sent5 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: ¬{AB}{a}; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | the spadefish does romance Tenebrionidae and is a gut. | ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | [
"sent15 -> int3: the corymb is precancerous if it romances oarswoman.; sent10 -> int4: the spadefish is both a Pitt and scorbutic if it is not Masoretic.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the spadefish does romance Tenebrionidae and does gut is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the spadefish is scorbutic is right it is a gut. sent2: the corymb does not share Eugene. sent3: the fact that the corymb does not romance Tenebrionidae is not false. sent4: that the corymb is an oblique that is a musnud is not right. sent5: the corymb is not precancerous. sent6: the fact that the corymb is a holothurian that does share Eugene does not hold. sent7: the corymb does not share Eugene if it is non-precancerous. sent8: the spadefish romances Tenebrionidae if the corymb is precancerous. sent9: the fact that the spadefish romances Tenebrionidae and it is a gut is not correct if the corymb does not romance Beckley. sent10: if something is not Masoretic it is both a Pitt and scorbutic. sent11: the corymb romances oarswoman and romances Simarouba if the fact that the neologist is not a kind of a national is true. sent12: if the spadefish does not share Eugene that the corymb romances Tenebrionidae and is a gut is not right. sent13: the spadefish is non-precancerous thing that does not gut if that it does not romance Beckley hold. sent14: if the corymb is not precancerous then it does not share Eugene and does not romance Beckley. sent15: something is precancerous if it romances oarswoman. sent16: the fact that the lesbian does not romance Tenebrionidae hold. ; $proof$ = | sent14 & sent5 -> int1: the corymb does not share Eugene and it does not romance Beckley.; int1 -> int2: the fact that the corymb does not romance Beckley is not wrong.; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the residue is not a kind of a partitionist. | ¬{B}{a} | sent1: the dining-room is part-time if the orlop is not a kind of a forgiveness and it is not a morion. sent2: if the stateroom is not avuncular the orlop is an anglophile and diffracts centare. sent3: if the orlop is not a forgiveness the fact that the dining-room is a kind of a morion and it is part-time does not hold. sent4: if the residue is not part-time the stateroom is not a unconventionality but it is a partitionist. sent5: if the perversion is not avuncular the orlop does diffract centare and is not an anglophile. sent6: that the residue is not a unconventionality is right. sent7: if that the residue is not a unconventionality is correct then that it shares Pitot and does not busk is incorrect. sent8: something that does not share Pitot is not a partitionist. sent9: the fact that if something diffracts centare and is not an anglophile then it is not a forgiveness is correct. sent10: if the residue is not a kind of a SSS the fact that it does confide and it is not a partitionist is wrong. sent11: if that something is Gallican but it is not a kind of a silverbush does not hold then it does not diffract textured. sent12: the fact that the stateroom is avuncular does not hold if the fact that the perversion is non-avuncular thing that does share energy is false. sent13: if the fact that the fact that something shares Pitot and does not busk is correct is false then it is not a partitionist. sent14: something is not a forgiveness and is not a morion if it diffracts centare. sent15: the residue is not a partitionist if it does not share Pitot. | sent1: (¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> {C}{b} sent2: ¬{H}{d} -> ({G}{c} & {F}{c}) sent3: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬({E}{b} & {C}{b}) sent4: ¬{C}{a} -> (¬{A}{d} & {B}{d}) sent5: ¬{H}{e} -> ({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent8: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent9: (x): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{D}x sent10: ¬{JK}{a} -> ¬({BP}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬({FO}x & ¬{BO}x) -> ¬{EU}x sent12: ¬(¬{H}{e} & {J}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d} sent13: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent14: (x): {F}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) sent15: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} | [
"sent7 & sent6 -> int1: the fact that the residue does share Pitot but it does not busk is incorrect.; sent13 -> int2: if the fact that the residue shares Pitot and does not busk is wrong it is not a kind of a partitionist.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 & sent6 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent13 -> int2: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the residue is a partitionist. | {B}{a} | [
"sent14 -> int3: the orlop is not a kind of a forgiveness and it is not a morion if it diffracts centare.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the residue is not a kind of a partitionist. ; $context$ = sent1: the dining-room is part-time if the orlop is not a kind of a forgiveness and it is not a morion. sent2: if the stateroom is not avuncular the orlop is an anglophile and diffracts centare. sent3: if the orlop is not a forgiveness the fact that the dining-room is a kind of a morion and it is part-time does not hold. sent4: if the residue is not part-time the stateroom is not a unconventionality but it is a partitionist. sent5: if the perversion is not avuncular the orlop does diffract centare and is not an anglophile. sent6: that the residue is not a unconventionality is right. sent7: if that the residue is not a unconventionality is correct then that it shares Pitot and does not busk is incorrect. sent8: something that does not share Pitot is not a partitionist. sent9: the fact that if something diffracts centare and is not an anglophile then it is not a forgiveness is correct. sent10: if the residue is not a kind of a SSS the fact that it does confide and it is not a partitionist is wrong. sent11: if that something is Gallican but it is not a kind of a silverbush does not hold then it does not diffract textured. sent12: the fact that the stateroom is avuncular does not hold if the fact that the perversion is non-avuncular thing that does share energy is false. sent13: if the fact that the fact that something shares Pitot and does not busk is correct is false then it is not a partitionist. sent14: something is not a forgiveness and is not a morion if it diffracts centare. sent15: the residue is not a partitionist if it does not share Pitot. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent6 -> int1: the fact that the residue does share Pitot but it does not busk is incorrect.; sent13 -> int2: if the fact that the residue shares Pitot and does not busk is wrong it is not a kind of a partitionist.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if the fact that it does not share megohm and airmails is wrong it does not diffract nightwear. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: the defamer is not interoceptive if it is not a kind of an airmail. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it does not diffract corkboard and it romances lockage is incorrect then it is not a kind of a Franciscan. sent3: if that the defamer does not share megohm and is a kind of an airmail does not hold it does not diffract nightwear. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a parthenote is not false that it is not a Malaysian is not wrong. sent5: the defamer is not a kind of a submarine if that it diffracts nightwear and it shares Verlaine is not correct. sent6: there is something such that if it is not supportive then it is not a Baruch. sent7: the defamer is not an airmail if the fact that it decamps and is not tactful is incorrect. sent8: if that something does not romance nitroglycerin and narrows is wrong it does not romance cloister. sent9: if that the fornication diffracts nightwear and it is a polytheist does not hold it does not exchange. sent10: there is something such that if that that it does not romance Bessel and is tetragonal is right is incorrect it does romance defamer. sent11: the defamer is not a Somalian if it is not interlobular. sent12: the defamer does not devolve if it is not an airmail and it is a kind of a Carthaginian. sent13: there is something such that if that it does not administer mumble and it is a citizenry is wrong then it is not a kind of a undercharge. sent14: if the fact that that the defamer is an exterminator and it is anginal is not wrong is not correct it is not an airmail. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a crucifer and it does administer mumble it is not indulgent. sent16: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Catholic then it is not a submarine. sent17: there is something such that if it is not unidentifiable the fact that it does not diffract haslet is not incorrect. sent18: there exists something such that if it shares megohm it does not diffract nightwear. sent19: there is something such that if the fact that it is non-gluteal thing that does diffract widower does not hold that it is not a do-si-do is right. sent20: there is something such that if it is both non-gastric and a antepenult then it is not a steerageway. | sent1: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{DA}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{DL}x & {GG}x) -> ¬{K}x sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (Ex): ¬{GA}x -> ¬{A}x sent5: ¬({B}{aa} & {DC}{aa}) -> ¬{EQ}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ¬{GJ}x -> ¬{AM}x sent7: ¬({HS}{aa} & {IK}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent8: (x): ¬(¬{DM}x & {DD}x) -> ¬{BC}x sent9: ¬({B}{dd} & {AH}{dd}) -> ¬{T}{dd} sent10: (Ex): ¬(¬{DF}x & {FN}x) -> {ET}x sent11: ¬{HT}{aa} -> ¬{BT}{aa} sent12: (¬{AB}{aa} & {FF}{aa}) -> ¬{EH}{aa} sent13: (Ex): ¬(¬{IC}x & {CU}x) -> ¬{IP}x sent14: ¬({GK}{aa} & {CR}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent15: (Ex): (¬{AC}x & {IC}x) -> ¬{EO}x sent16: (Ex): ¬{FH}x -> ¬{EQ}x sent17: (Ex): ¬{HC}x -> ¬{GU}x sent18: (Ex): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent19: (Ex): ¬(¬{BO}x & {D}x) -> ¬{GO}x sent20: (Ex): (¬{AG}x & {AT}x) -> ¬{HG}x | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if the fact that it does not romance nitroglycerin and does narrow does not hold then it does not romance cloister. | (Ex): ¬(¬{DM}x & {DD}x) -> ¬{BC}x | [
"sent8 -> int1: the cloister does not romance cloister if the fact that it does not romance nitroglycerin and is a narrowed is not right.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if the fact that it does not share megohm and airmails is wrong it does not diffract nightwear. ; $context$ = sent1: the defamer is not interoceptive if it is not a kind of an airmail. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it does not diffract corkboard and it romances lockage is incorrect then it is not a kind of a Franciscan. sent3: if that the defamer does not share megohm and is a kind of an airmail does not hold it does not diffract nightwear. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a parthenote is not false that it is not a Malaysian is not wrong. sent5: the defamer is not a kind of a submarine if that it diffracts nightwear and it shares Verlaine is not correct. sent6: there is something such that if it is not supportive then it is not a Baruch. sent7: the defamer is not an airmail if the fact that it decamps and is not tactful is incorrect. sent8: if that something does not romance nitroglycerin and narrows is wrong it does not romance cloister. sent9: if that the fornication diffracts nightwear and it is a polytheist does not hold it does not exchange. sent10: there is something such that if that that it does not romance Bessel and is tetragonal is right is incorrect it does romance defamer. sent11: the defamer is not a Somalian if it is not interlobular. sent12: the defamer does not devolve if it is not an airmail and it is a kind of a Carthaginian. sent13: there is something such that if that it does not administer mumble and it is a citizenry is wrong then it is not a kind of a undercharge. sent14: if the fact that that the defamer is an exterminator and it is anginal is not wrong is not correct it is not an airmail. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a crucifer and it does administer mumble it is not indulgent. sent16: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Catholic then it is not a submarine. sent17: there is something such that if it is not unidentifiable the fact that it does not diffract haslet is not incorrect. sent18: there exists something such that if it shares megohm it does not diffract nightwear. sent19: there is something such that if the fact that it is non-gluteal thing that does diffract widower does not hold that it is not a do-si-do is right. sent20: there is something such that if it is both non-gastric and a antepenult then it is not a steerageway. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the amatungulu is a astrolabe. | {D}{b} | sent1: if the dairymaid is ritualistic then the amatungulu is a astrolabe. sent2: the dairymaid is not non-ritualistic and not non-taxonomic if there exists something such that that it dilapidates is correct. sent3: something is a RV if it does dilapidate. sent4: there is something such that it does dilapidate. sent5: if something is taxonomic then the dairymaid is a astrolabe and is ritualistic. sent6: the fact that the amatungulu is not the astrolabe and dilapidates if the amatungulu is not ritualistic is not false. sent7: the blowtube is ritualistic. | sent1: {B}{a} -> {D}{b} sent2: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: (x): {A}x -> {EH}x sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: (x): {C}x -> ({D}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{D}{b} & {A}{b}) sent7: {B}{di} | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the dairymaid is ritualistic and it is taxonomic.; int1 -> int2: the dairymaid is ritualistic.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> int2: {B}{a}; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the dairymaid is a kind of a RV. | {EH}{a} | [
"sent3 -> int3: if the dairymaid does dilapidate then it is a RV.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the amatungulu is a astrolabe. ; $context$ = sent1: if the dairymaid is ritualistic then the amatungulu is a astrolabe. sent2: the dairymaid is not non-ritualistic and not non-taxonomic if there exists something such that that it dilapidates is correct. sent3: something is a RV if it does dilapidate. sent4: there is something such that it does dilapidate. sent5: if something is taxonomic then the dairymaid is a astrolabe and is ritualistic. sent6: the fact that the amatungulu is not the astrolabe and dilapidates if the amatungulu is not ritualistic is not false. sent7: the blowtube is ritualistic. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the dairymaid is ritualistic and it is taxonomic.; int1 -> int2: the dairymaid is ritualistic.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the slapping does not occur. | ¬{A} | sent1: the postmeridianness does not occur if the fact that the hyperemicness does not occur and the rowing does not occur is wrong. sent2: the hyperemicness does not occur. sent3: the archaisticness does not occur. sent4: the slap is triggered by that the hyperemicness happens. sent5: if that the hyperemicness does not occur hold the fact that both the non-archaisticness and the romancing habitability occurs does not hold. sent6: the slap causes that the non-archaisticness and the romancing habitability occurs. sent7: that that not the muckraking but the nonhumanness happens is not true is correct if the immunologicalness does not occur. sent8: the archaisticness does not occur if the slapping occurs. | sent1: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{IA} sent2: ¬{B} sent3: ¬{AA} sent4: {B} -> {A} sent5: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent6: {A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent7: ¬{CT} -> ¬(¬{AR} & {FU}) sent8: {A} -> ¬{AA} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the slapping occurs.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the archaisticness does not occur and the romancing habitability happens.; sent5 & sent2 -> int2: that both the non-archaisticness and the romancing habitability happens is not right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} & {AB}); sent5 & sent2 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | both the non-postmeridianness and the offingness happens. | (¬{IA} & {HJ}) | [] | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the slapping does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the postmeridianness does not occur if the fact that the hyperemicness does not occur and the rowing does not occur is wrong. sent2: the hyperemicness does not occur. sent3: the archaisticness does not occur. sent4: the slap is triggered by that the hyperemicness happens. sent5: if that the hyperemicness does not occur hold the fact that both the non-archaisticness and the romancing habitability occurs does not hold. sent6: the slap causes that the non-archaisticness and the romancing habitability occurs. sent7: that that not the muckraking but the nonhumanness happens is not true is correct if the immunologicalness does not occur. sent8: the archaisticness does not occur if the slapping occurs. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the slapping occurs.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the archaisticness does not occur and the romancing habitability happens.; sent5 & sent2 -> int2: that both the non-archaisticness and the romancing habitability happens is not right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there is something such that if it is not a hardness the fact that it shares insufflation and is not a heritage is not false is not true. | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: the fact that the kitchenware shares insufflation but it is not the heritage if that the kitchenware is a kind of a hardness is not true hold. sent2: if the kitchenware is not responsible that it is a hardness is correct. sent3: the Dipper is a kind of a Rebel and is not a kind of a aliterate if the fact that it is not a hardness hold. sent4: something is a kind of a Rynchopidae that is not angiospermous if the fact that it does not diffract Guthrie is not incorrect. | sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: ¬{CK}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent3: ¬{A}{il} -> ({GB}{il} & ¬{DN}{il}) sent4: (x): ¬{Q}x -> ({FO}x & ¬{GI}x) | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if it does not diffract Guthrie it is a Rynchopidae and is not angiospermous. | (Ex): ¬{Q}x -> ({FO}x & ¬{GI}x) | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the confit does not diffract Guthrie it is a Rynchopidae and it is not angiospermous.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is not a hardness the fact that it shares insufflation and is not a heritage is not false is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the kitchenware shares insufflation but it is not the heritage if that the kitchenware is a kind of a hardness is not true hold. sent2: if the kitchenware is not responsible that it is a hardness is correct. sent3: the Dipper is a kind of a Rebel and is not a kind of a aliterate if the fact that it is not a hardness hold. sent4: something is a kind of a Rynchopidae that is not angiospermous if the fact that it does not diffract Guthrie is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there is something such that if it either does not inherit or does not broadcast or both then it does not romance sally is wrong. | ¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: if either the inductor does not inherit or it is not a broadcast or both it does romance sally. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a joke or it is not intolerable or both it is not a kind of a capelin. sent3: there is something such that if it does not inherit then it does not romance sally. sent4: the spirometer does not share Tom if either it is not a kind of a advertence or it does not romance sally or both. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a sour and/or it is not green it is not a pacer. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not share residence or is not a credendum or both it is not a ditch. sent7: if something is either not a readership or not a sensuousness or both it does not inherit. sent8: there exists something such that if either it does not inherit or it is not a kind of a broadcast or both then it romances sally. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a fourteen or it is not a popularizer or both then it is not a cyanohydrin. sent10: there is something such that if it is not monotheistic and/or does not incandesce it is not a kind of a popularizer. sent11: if the inductor either does not inherit or does broadcast or both it does not romance sally. sent12: if the inductor does not inherit or it is not a broadcast or both it does not romance sally. sent13: something that is not varicelliform or not a broadcast or both does not demise. sent14: there exists something such that if it does not inherit or it does broadcast or both it does not romance sally. sent15: if the brother-in-law is not varicelliform or it does not romance sally or both then it is not episcopal. sent16: there is something such that if it inherits and/or it does not broadcast then it does not romance sally. sent17: the doll is not popular if it is not a dart and/or it does not inherit. sent18: if the inductor does not inherit then it does not romance sally. sent19: there is something such that if it does not broadcast it does not romance sally. | sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: (Ex): (¬{AI}x v ¬{DN}x) -> ¬{CL}x sent3: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent4: (¬{FK}{eo} v ¬{B}{eo}) -> ¬{HT}{eo} sent5: (Ex): (¬{CJ}x v ¬{GI}x) -> ¬{HG}x sent6: (Ex): (¬{DF}x v ¬{GB}x) -> ¬{HS}x sent7: (x): (¬{FE}x v ¬{DH}x) -> ¬{AA}x sent8: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent9: (Ex): (¬{IG}x v ¬{JD}x) -> ¬{BL}x sent10: (Ex): (¬{FF}x v ¬{FA}x) -> ¬{JD}x sent11: (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent12: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent13: (x): (¬{AS}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{ET}x sent14: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent15: (¬{AS}{in} v ¬{B}{in}) -> ¬{EL}{in} sent16: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent17: (¬{BP}{fc} v ¬{AA}{fc}) -> ¬{CR}{fc} sent18: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent19: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | the nonparticipant does not inherit if it is not a readership and/or it is not a sensuousness. | (¬{FE}{ac} v ¬{DH}{ac}) -> ¬{AA}{ac} | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it either does not inherit or does not broadcast or both then it does not romance sally is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if either the inductor does not inherit or it is not a broadcast or both it does romance sally. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a joke or it is not intolerable or both it is not a kind of a capelin. sent3: there is something such that if it does not inherit then it does not romance sally. sent4: the spirometer does not share Tom if either it is not a kind of a advertence or it does not romance sally or both. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a sour and/or it is not green it is not a pacer. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not share residence or is not a credendum or both it is not a ditch. sent7: if something is either not a readership or not a sensuousness or both it does not inherit. sent8: there exists something such that if either it does not inherit or it is not a kind of a broadcast or both then it romances sally. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a fourteen or it is not a popularizer or both then it is not a cyanohydrin. sent10: there is something such that if it is not monotheistic and/or does not incandesce it is not a kind of a popularizer. sent11: if the inductor either does not inherit or does broadcast or both it does not romance sally. sent12: if the inductor does not inherit or it is not a broadcast or both it does not romance sally. sent13: something that is not varicelliform or not a broadcast or both does not demise. sent14: there exists something such that if it does not inherit or it does broadcast or both it does not romance sally. sent15: if the brother-in-law is not varicelliform or it does not romance sally or both then it is not episcopal. sent16: there is something such that if it inherits and/or it does not broadcast then it does not romance sally. sent17: the doll is not popular if it is not a dart and/or it does not inherit. sent18: if the inductor does not inherit then it does not romance sally. sent19: there is something such that if it does not broadcast it does not romance sally. ; $proof$ = | sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is a blackbody then that it does not share rheum and it shares three-hitter is wrong. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: if the posterior is a blackbody then it does not share rheum and it shares three-hitter. sent2: that the fact that the posterior shares rheum and it shares three-hitter hold is incorrect if it is a kind of a blackbody. sent3: the fact that the posterior does not share rheum and does share three-hitter is false if it is a kind of a blackbody. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a blackbody the fact that it shares rheum and it does share three-hitter is wrong. | sent1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a blackbody then that it does not share rheum and it shares three-hitter is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the posterior is a blackbody then it does not share rheum and it shares three-hitter. sent2: that the fact that the posterior shares rheum and it shares three-hitter hold is incorrect if it is a kind of a blackbody. sent3: the fact that the posterior does not share rheum and does share three-hitter is false if it is a kind of a blackbody. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a blackbody the fact that it shares rheum and it does share three-hitter is wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the salivation is a field. | {C}{a} | sent1: if the theologian does not diffract Gawain then the fornication is not malignant. sent2: the fornication is malignant if the theologian is not malignant. sent3: the theologian is bulbar. sent4: if something is not bulbar that it fields hold. sent5: the fornication is not malignant if that the theologian is not malignant is not incorrect. sent6: the fornication is malignant if the salivation is bulbar. sent7: if something is not bulbar then it diffracts Gawain. sent8: something does not field if the fact that it is a kind of a field that is not malignant is not right. | sent1: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{B}{b} sent2: ¬{B}{c} -> {B}{b} sent3: {A}{c} sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> {C}x sent5: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬{B}{b} sent6: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> {E}x sent8: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{C}x | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the salivation is bulbar.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fornication is malignant.; sent4 -> int2: if the salivation is not bulbar then it fields.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent4 -> int2: ¬{A}{a} -> {C}{a};"
] | the salivation does not field. | ¬{C}{a} | [
"sent8 -> int3: that the salivation is not a field hold if that it is a field that is not malignant is false.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the salivation is a field. ; $context$ = sent1: if the theologian does not diffract Gawain then the fornication is not malignant. sent2: the fornication is malignant if the theologian is not malignant. sent3: the theologian is bulbar. sent4: if something is not bulbar that it fields hold. sent5: the fornication is not malignant if that the theologian is not malignant is not incorrect. sent6: the fornication is malignant if the salivation is bulbar. sent7: if something is not bulbar then it diffracts Gawain. sent8: something does not field if the fact that it is a kind of a field that is not malignant is not right. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the salivation is bulbar.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fornication is malignant.; sent4 -> int2: if the salivation is not bulbar then it fields.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the spruce is not a kind of a desk. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: if the putz does not scale ironworks it is a crowbait. sent2: the putz either does not nip dialectology or is infinitival or both. sent3: the putz does not scale ironworks and/or it is bentonitic. sent4: that the putz is bentonitic hold if it is a desk. sent5: if the putz does not scale ironworks or is bentonitic or both then it is a crowbait. sent6: the putz scales ironworks and/or it is bentonitic. sent7: the spruce is not a desk if the putz is a kind of a crowbait that does crab sporting. sent8: the chapterhouse is a entrepot that is a kind of a dad. sent9: the spruce is a crowbait. sent10: that something is a crowbait and crabs sporting is not correct if it is not a permutation. sent11: if the putz is a permutation that it does crab sporting hold. sent12: the inkle is a kind of a permutation. sent13: the spruce is a kind of a desk and it is a kind of a permutation if that the putz does not crab sporting is not wrong. | sent1: ¬{F}{a} -> {C}{a} sent2: (¬{EN}{a} v {CH}{a}) sent3: (¬{F}{a} v {E}{a}) sent4: {D}{a} -> {E}{a} sent5: (¬{F}{a} v {E}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent6: ({F}{a} v {E}{a}) sent7: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent8: ({FG}{bu} & {EO}{bu}) sent9: {C}{b} sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) sent11: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent12: {A}{fh} sent13: ¬{B}{a} -> ({D}{b} & {A}{b}) | [
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the putz is a crowbait.;"
] | [
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: {C}{a};"
] | the kirpan does not crab sporting. | ¬{B}{fb} | [
"sent10 -> int2: if the putz is not a permutation that it is a crowbait and it does crab sporting is false.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the spruce is not a kind of a desk. ; $context$ = sent1: if the putz does not scale ironworks it is a crowbait. sent2: the putz either does not nip dialectology or is infinitival or both. sent3: the putz does not scale ironworks and/or it is bentonitic. sent4: that the putz is bentonitic hold if it is a desk. sent5: if the putz does not scale ironworks or is bentonitic or both then it is a crowbait. sent6: the putz scales ironworks and/or it is bentonitic. sent7: the spruce is not a desk if the putz is a kind of a crowbait that does crab sporting. sent8: the chapterhouse is a entrepot that is a kind of a dad. sent9: the spruce is a crowbait. sent10: that something is a crowbait and crabs sporting is not correct if it is not a permutation. sent11: if the putz is a permutation that it does crab sporting hold. sent12: the inkle is a kind of a permutation. sent13: the spruce is a kind of a desk and it is a kind of a permutation if that the putz does not crab sporting is not wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the putz is a crowbait.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | not the asynergicness but the incoherentness occurs. | (¬{AA} & {AB}) | sent1: the asynergicness does not occur. sent2: the colorimetry occurs. sent3: the non-asynergicness and the incoherentness occurs. | sent1: ¬{AA} sent2: {BN} sent3: (¬{AA} & {AB}) | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = not the asynergicness but the incoherentness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the asynergicness does not occur. sent2: the colorimetry occurs. sent3: the non-asynergicness and the incoherentness occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the gin does not scale bridgehead. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: the gin does scale bridgehead if the syphilitic does not crab geezer. sent2: the bridgehead is a kind of a brimstone that is a Vinca. sent3: if the fact that the gin does not scale bridgehead and is broadband hold it is a kind of a Vinca. sent4: if something that is a brimstone is a kind of a Vinca the syphilitic does not crab geezer. | sent1: ¬{C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent2: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent3: (¬{D}{b} & {E}{b}) -> {B}{b} sent4: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{a} | [
"sent2 -> int1: something is both a brimstone and a Vinca.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the syphilitic does not crab geezer.; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x); int1 & sent4 -> int2: ¬{C}{a}; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the carhop does crab geezer and filiates transformer. | ({C}{aq} & {EA}{aq}) | [] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the gin does not scale bridgehead. ; $context$ = sent1: the gin does scale bridgehead if the syphilitic does not crab geezer. sent2: the bridgehead is a kind of a brimstone that is a Vinca. sent3: if the fact that the gin does not scale bridgehead and is broadband hold it is a kind of a Vinca. sent4: if something that is a brimstone is a kind of a Vinca the syphilitic does not crab geezer. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: something is both a brimstone and a Vinca.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the syphilitic does not crab geezer.; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the college is azimuthal is right. | {F}{b} | sent1: everything is not a kind of a fly-by-night. sent2: the brand is not Zambian if there exists something such that the fact that it is Zambian thing that does peregrinate does not hold. sent3: if the college nips Rickenbacker it is azimuthal. sent4: if the ballpark is tactical the saw is not non-latter. sent5: if the saw is not azimuthal the college is not a kind of a flatbed. sent6: if the college is not a flatbed the saw is not tactical. sent7: if the college is not azimuthal then the saw is not tactical. sent8: the ballpark is a kind of a latter if the saw is not flatbed. sent9: either the nucellus does not nip Rickenbacker or it is not a amphidiploid or both. sent10: the saw is not flatbed and/or it is not plausible. sent11: the fact that something is Zambian and it peregrinates is not right if it is not a kind of a fly-by-night. sent12: if something is tactical then it nips Rickenbacker. sent13: if the saw is plausible then it is not non-azimuthal. sent14: the fact that the college is latter is right if the ballpark is not azimuthal. sent15: the college is not azimuthal if something is not a flatbed. sent16: if the brand is not a kind of a Zambian then the ballpark is tactical or it does nip Rickenbacker or both. sent17: if the ballpark nips Rickenbacker the saw is latter. sent18: the fact that the saw is not a kind of a flatbed and is azimuthal is not true if the ballpark is plausible. sent19: the college is tactical if the ballpark is not a latter. sent20: if the saw is not a flatbed the ballpark is not a kind of a latter. | sent1: (x): ¬{I}x sent2: (x): ¬({G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{G}{d} sent3: {E}{b} -> {F}{b} sent4: {D}{c} -> {C}{a} sent5: ¬{F}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬{D}{a} sent7: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬{D}{a} sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> {C}{c} sent9: (¬{E}{dt} v ¬{BF}{dt}) sent10: (¬{A}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬({G}x & {H}x) sent12: (x): {D}x -> {E}x sent13: {B}{a} -> {F}{a} sent14: ¬{F}{c} -> {C}{b} sent15: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{F}{b} sent16: ¬{G}{d} -> ({D}{c} v {E}{c}) sent17: {E}{c} -> {C}{a} sent18: {B}{c} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {F}{a}) sent19: ¬{C}{c} -> {D}{b} sent20: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{C}{c} | [
"sent12 -> int1: if the college is tactical then the fact that it does nip Rickenbacker is right.;"
] | [
"sent12 -> int1: {D}{b} -> {E}{b};"
] | the college is not azimuthal. | ¬{F}{b} | [
"sent1 -> int2: the Pole is not a fly-by-night.; sent11 -> int3: if that the Pole is not a fly-by-night is not incorrect that it is Zambian and it does peregrinate is not correct.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the Pole is a kind of a Zambian and it does peregrinate is not right.; int4 -> int5: there exists nothing that is a Zambian that peregrinates.; int5 -> int6: the fact that the heart is Zambian and it peregrinates is false.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that the fact that it is a Zambian and does peregrinate does not hold.; int7 & sent2 -> int8: the brand is not a Zambian.; sent16 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the ballpark is tactical or does nip Rickenbacker or both is true.; int9 & sent17 & sent4 -> int10: the saw is a latter.;"
] | 12 | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the college is azimuthal is right. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is not a kind of a fly-by-night. sent2: the brand is not Zambian if there exists something such that the fact that it is Zambian thing that does peregrinate does not hold. sent3: if the college nips Rickenbacker it is azimuthal. sent4: if the ballpark is tactical the saw is not non-latter. sent5: if the saw is not azimuthal the college is not a kind of a flatbed. sent6: if the college is not a flatbed the saw is not tactical. sent7: if the college is not azimuthal then the saw is not tactical. sent8: the ballpark is a kind of a latter if the saw is not flatbed. sent9: either the nucellus does not nip Rickenbacker or it is not a amphidiploid or both. sent10: the saw is not flatbed and/or it is not plausible. sent11: the fact that something is Zambian and it peregrinates is not right if it is not a kind of a fly-by-night. sent12: if something is tactical then it nips Rickenbacker. sent13: if the saw is plausible then it is not non-azimuthal. sent14: the fact that the college is latter is right if the ballpark is not azimuthal. sent15: the college is not azimuthal if something is not a flatbed. sent16: if the brand is not a kind of a Zambian then the ballpark is tactical or it does nip Rickenbacker or both. sent17: if the ballpark nips Rickenbacker the saw is latter. sent18: the fact that the saw is not a kind of a flatbed and is azimuthal is not true if the ballpark is plausible. sent19: the college is tactical if the ballpark is not a latter. sent20: if the saw is not a flatbed the ballpark is not a kind of a latter. ; $proof$ = | sent12 -> int1: if the college is tactical then the fact that it does nip Rickenbacker is right.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the traveler is not a stretching. | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: the scrawler is aesculapian but it is not a Deneb if the temporizer is aesculapian. sent2: the scrawler does stretch but it is not a kind of a Deneb. sent3: the scrawler is not a Deneb. sent4: the traveler is not aesculapian. sent5: if the scrawler is aesculapian but it is not a Deneb then the traveler does not stretch. sent6: the temporizer distributes. sent7: the scrawler is aesculapian but it does not stretch if the traveler is aesculapian. sent8: if the scrawler is a kind of aesculapian a Deneb then the traveler is not a kind of a stretching. | sent1: {B}{a} -> ({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent2: ({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent3: ¬{D}{b} sent4: ¬{B}{c} sent5: ({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent6: {A}{a} sent7: {B}{c} -> ({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent8: ({B}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the traveler is not a stretching. ; $context$ = sent1: the scrawler is aesculapian but it is not a Deneb if the temporizer is aesculapian. sent2: the scrawler does stretch but it is not a kind of a Deneb. sent3: the scrawler is not a Deneb. sent4: the traveler is not aesculapian. sent5: if the scrawler is aesculapian but it is not a Deneb then the traveler does not stretch. sent6: the temporizer distributes. sent7: the scrawler is aesculapian but it does not stretch if the traveler is aesculapian. sent8: if the scrawler is a kind of aesculapian a Deneb then the traveler is not a kind of a stretching. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the ammonite is not a draft. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: the fact that something is a kind of a ironworks and does percuss does not hold if it does not surprise. sent2: the fact that the ammonite is not polychromatic is not false. sent3: the milkman is not a surprised if it nips MST and is polychromatic. sent4: something does not percuss if it nips MST and is not a surprised. sent5: the milkman is a kind of a ironworks if it percusses. sent6: the milkman percusses. sent7: the milkman is polychromatic. sent8: a non-polychromatic thing nips MST and does not surprise. sent9: the ammonite is not a draft if the milkman is still thing that is a kind of a ironworks. sent10: a non-still thing is both a draft and a cent. sent11: if something does not percuss then that it is not a still but a draft is incorrect. | sent1: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({C}x & {E}x) sent2: ¬{H}{b} sent3: ({G}{a} & {H}{a}) -> ¬{F}{a} sent4: (x): ({G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{E}x sent5: {E}{a} -> {C}{a} sent6: {E}{a} sent7: {H}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}x & ¬{F}x) sent9: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({D}x & {A}x) sent11: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {D}x) | [
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the milkman is a ironworks.;"
] | [
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: {C}{a};"
] | the otterhound is both not a ironworks and a puce. | (¬{C}{dt} & {DH}{dt}) | [
"sent11 -> int2: the fact that the ammonite is not still and does draft is not correct if it does not percuss.; sent4 -> int3: that the ammonite does not percuss is not wrong if it does nip MST and it does not surprise.; sent8 -> int4: the ammonite does nip MST and is not a kind of a surprised if it is not polychromatic.; int4 & sent2 -> int5: the ammonite does nip MST but it is not a kind of a surprised.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the ammonite does not percuss.; int2 & int6 -> int7: that the ammonite is not still and drafts is not true.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the ammonite is not a draft. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is a kind of a ironworks and does percuss does not hold if it does not surprise. sent2: the fact that the ammonite is not polychromatic is not false. sent3: the milkman is not a surprised if it nips MST and is polychromatic. sent4: something does not percuss if it nips MST and is not a surprised. sent5: the milkman is a kind of a ironworks if it percusses. sent6: the milkman percusses. sent7: the milkman is polychromatic. sent8: a non-polychromatic thing nips MST and does not surprise. sent9: the ammonite is not a draft if the milkman is still thing that is a kind of a ironworks. sent10: a non-still thing is both a draft and a cent. sent11: if something does not percuss then that it is not a still but a draft is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the milkman is a ironworks.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the rally does not uprise. | ¬{A}{aa} | sent1: something scales sky if it is not a kind of a workday. sent2: something scales nephrolith if the fact that it is not a kind of a Rothko and it is a self-starter is not true. sent3: that the chebab is not a kind of a self-starter but it filiates Limosa is wrong if the sky does uprise. sent4: if something does not scale nephrolith it does not uprise. sent5: there exists nothing that is both not a Rothko and a self-starter. sent6: everything does filiate chebab. sent7: if something is not a self-starter then it does uprise. sent8: the rally uprises if it scales nephrolith. sent9: if that something does not uprise but it does scale nephrolith does not hold it is a self-starter. sent10: there is nothing such that it is not a self-starter and it does uprise. sent11: if that something does not scale gracelessness but it nips greatcoat is not true then it is inexplicable. sent12: the rancher does scale nephrolith. sent13: if the rally is not a self-starter it scales nephrolith. sent14: if something is not a self-starter then it does scale nephrolith. | sent1: (x): ¬{HT}x -> {FC}x sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{ed} & {FB}{ed}) sent4: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: (x): {D}x sent7: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}x sent8: {B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) -> {AB}x sent10: (x): ¬(¬{AB}x & {A}x) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{DR}x & {CS}x) -> {HD}x sent12: {B}{ao} sent13: ¬{AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent14: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {B}x | [
"sent2 -> int1: if the fact that the rally is not a kind of a Rothko and is a self-starter is wrong it scales nephrolith.; sent5 -> int2: that the rally is not a kind of a Rothko but it is a kind of a self-starter does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the rally scales nephrolith.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; sent5 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: {B}{aa}; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | the rally does not uprise. | ¬{A}{aa} | [
"sent4 -> int4: if the rally does not scale nephrolith then it does not uprise.;"
] | 4 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the rally does not uprise. ; $context$ = sent1: something scales sky if it is not a kind of a workday. sent2: something scales nephrolith if the fact that it is not a kind of a Rothko and it is a self-starter is not true. sent3: that the chebab is not a kind of a self-starter but it filiates Limosa is wrong if the sky does uprise. sent4: if something does not scale nephrolith it does not uprise. sent5: there exists nothing that is both not a Rothko and a self-starter. sent6: everything does filiate chebab. sent7: if something is not a self-starter then it does uprise. sent8: the rally uprises if it scales nephrolith. sent9: if that something does not uprise but it does scale nephrolith does not hold it is a self-starter. sent10: there is nothing such that it is not a self-starter and it does uprise. sent11: if that something does not scale gracelessness but it nips greatcoat is not true then it is inexplicable. sent12: the rancher does scale nephrolith. sent13: if the rally is not a self-starter it scales nephrolith. sent14: if something is not a self-starter then it does scale nephrolith. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: if the fact that the rally is not a kind of a Rothko and is a self-starter is wrong it scales nephrolith.; sent5 -> int2: that the rally is not a kind of a Rothko but it is a kind of a self-starter does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the rally scales nephrolith.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the dixie is non-anguine. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: the fact that something does nip eggcup is not incorrect if the fact that it does not nip eggcup and it is not sensorimotor is wrong. sent2: something vibrates and is a kind of a Blighia if it is not anguine. sent3: that something is not anguine is not wrong if it is Burmese and it is not alterable. sent4: the pothook does nip eggcup. sent5: if the dixie does vibrate the pothook is anguine. sent6: that the flamen does nip eggcup is not incorrect if the pothook nip eggcup. sent7: if the pothook is not a kind of a Burmese then the fact that the dixie does vibrate and does not nip eggcup is not true. sent8: that the pothook does not nip eggcup and it is not sensorimotor is not true if there is something such that it does scale manicure. sent9: the pothook vibrates and it nips eggcup. sent10: the dixie scales manicure. sent11: the pothook does nip eggcup and is anguine. sent12: the dixie is anguine if that the pothook does vibrate is not incorrect. sent13: that the congou is a Burmese but it is not sensorimotor is incorrect if the eggcup is not alterable. | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{F}x) -> {B}x sent2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {CR}x) sent3: (x): ({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent4: {B}{a} sent5: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent6: {B}{a} -> {B}{hn} sent7: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent8: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) sent9: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent10: {G}{b} sent11: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent12: {A}{a} -> {C}{b} sent13: ¬{E}{d} -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) | [
"sent9 -> int1: the pothook does vibrate.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the dixie is not anguine. | ¬{C}{b} | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the dixie is non-anguine. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something does nip eggcup is not incorrect if the fact that it does not nip eggcup and it is not sensorimotor is wrong. sent2: something vibrates and is a kind of a Blighia if it is not anguine. sent3: that something is not anguine is not wrong if it is Burmese and it is not alterable. sent4: the pothook does nip eggcup. sent5: if the dixie does vibrate the pothook is anguine. sent6: that the flamen does nip eggcup is not incorrect if the pothook nip eggcup. sent7: if the pothook is not a kind of a Burmese then the fact that the dixie does vibrate and does not nip eggcup is not true. sent8: that the pothook does not nip eggcup and it is not sensorimotor is not true if there is something such that it does scale manicure. sent9: the pothook vibrates and it nips eggcup. sent10: the dixie scales manicure. sent11: the pothook does nip eggcup and is anguine. sent12: the dixie is anguine if that the pothook does vibrate is not incorrect. sent13: that the congou is a Burmese but it is not sensorimotor is incorrect if the eggcup is not alterable. ; $proof$ = | sent9 -> int1: the pothook does vibrate.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Aleut is an aftershock but it does not peak. | ({B}{d} & ¬{D}{d}) | sent1: the Aleut does not scale soiling. sent2: the debacle does not remember and/or it peaks. sent3: the debacle is not a demonstrative. sent4: either the deification is not footless or it is menopausal or both if that the debacle does not remember is correct. sent5: the Aleut is an aftershock but it does not peak if the corporation is not a kind of an aftershock. sent6: the Aleut is not a peaked. sent7: the Aleut is not a peaked if that the corporation is not a kind of an aftershock is true. sent8: if something does not remember then that it is an aftershock and is not a peaked is not correct. sent9: the debacle is not a luthier. sent10: the fact that the debacle nips walkover and does nip nefazodone is not true if something is cytoplastic. sent11: either something is footless or it is menopausal or both. sent12: if there is something such that it is not menopausal or it is footless or both the deification is not an aftershock. sent13: the debacle does not remember. sent14: something is cytoplastic. sent15: if the fact that something does nip walkover and does nip nefazodone is incorrect then it does not nip nefazodone. sent16: the fact that the deification is a peaked but not menopausal is not false if the fact that the Aleut is not a peaked is right. sent17: something is an aftershock and/or footless. sent18: if something is not menopausal and/or is an aftershock then the deification does not remember. sent19: the Aleut is not a peaked if something is not a kind of an aftershock. sent20: something is a fruitage that is billiard if it does not nip nefazodone. sent21: if something is not non-menopausal the corporation is not a kind of an aftershock. | sent1: ¬{BE}{d} sent2: (¬{A}{a} v {D}{a}) sent3: ¬{ER}{a} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent5: ¬{B}{c} -> ({B}{d} & ¬{D}{d}) sent6: ¬{D}{d} sent7: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬{D}{d} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) sent9: ¬{BR}{a} sent10: (x): {H}x -> ¬({G}{a} & {F}{a}) sent11: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) sent12: (x): (¬{AB}x v {AA}x) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: ¬{A}{a} sent14: (Ex): {H}x sent15: (x): ¬({G}x & {F}x) -> ¬{F}x sent16: ¬{D}{d} -> ({D}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent17: (Ex): ({B}x v {AA}x) sent18: (x): (¬{AB}x v {B}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent19: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{D}{d} sent20: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({C}x & {E}x) sent21: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{B}{c} | [
"sent4 & sent13 -> int1: the deification is not footless and/or it is menopausal.; int1 -> int2: either something is not footless or it is menopausal or both.;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent13 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x);"
] | that the Aleut is an aftershock but it is not a peaked is wrong. | ¬({B}{d} & ¬{D}{d}) | [
"sent8 -> int3: that the Aleut is an aftershock but it is not a peaked does not hold if it does not remember.; sent20 -> int4: if the debacle does not nip nefazodone it is a kind of a fruitage and it is billiard.; sent15 -> int5: the debacle does not nip nefazodone if the fact that it nips walkover and nip nefazodone is not correct.; sent14 & sent10 -> int6: the fact that the debacle nips walkover and it nips nefazodone is not right.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the debacle does not nip nefazodone.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the debacle is a kind of a fruitage and it is billiard.; int8 -> int9: the debacle is a fruitage.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that it is a kind of a fruitage.;"
] | 7 | 4 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Aleut is an aftershock but it does not peak. ; $context$ = sent1: the Aleut does not scale soiling. sent2: the debacle does not remember and/or it peaks. sent3: the debacle is not a demonstrative. sent4: either the deification is not footless or it is menopausal or both if that the debacle does not remember is correct. sent5: the Aleut is an aftershock but it does not peak if the corporation is not a kind of an aftershock. sent6: the Aleut is not a peaked. sent7: the Aleut is not a peaked if that the corporation is not a kind of an aftershock is true. sent8: if something does not remember then that it is an aftershock and is not a peaked is not correct. sent9: the debacle is not a luthier. sent10: the fact that the debacle nips walkover and does nip nefazodone is not true if something is cytoplastic. sent11: either something is footless or it is menopausal or both. sent12: if there is something such that it is not menopausal or it is footless or both the deification is not an aftershock. sent13: the debacle does not remember. sent14: something is cytoplastic. sent15: if the fact that something does nip walkover and does nip nefazodone is incorrect then it does not nip nefazodone. sent16: the fact that the deification is a peaked but not menopausal is not false if the fact that the Aleut is not a peaked is right. sent17: something is an aftershock and/or footless. sent18: if something is not menopausal and/or is an aftershock then the deification does not remember. sent19: the Aleut is not a peaked if something is not a kind of an aftershock. sent20: something is a fruitage that is billiard if it does not nip nefazodone. sent21: if something is not non-menopausal the corporation is not a kind of an aftershock. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent13 -> int1: the deification is not footless and/or it is menopausal.; int1 -> int2: either something is not footless or it is menopausal or both.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the thread does not occur is not incorrect. | ¬{C} | sent1: that the influence occurs is prevented by that the influence does not occur and/or that the shutness occurs. sent2: the filiating manicure happens if the forward does not occur. sent3: if that the jihad and the botulinalness occurs is false the fact that the botulinalness does not occur is not false. sent4: the unclearness does not occur. sent5: the influencing does not occur or the shutness occurs or both if the hymeneal happens. sent6: that the shutness does not occur triggers that the influencing occurs and/or the unclearness. sent7: if the filiating clot does not occur the hymenealness occurs and the filiating web occurs. sent8: that the filiating Sokoro does not occur yields the cholelithotomy. sent9: the influencing occurs if the unclearness does not occur. sent10: if the fact that the influencing occurs and the unclearness does not occur does not hold the communist does not occur. sent11: that the filiating clot does not occur is triggered by that the botulinalness does not occur and the graze does not occur. | sent1: (¬{B} v {D}) -> ¬{B} sent2: ¬{FI} -> {BD} sent3: ¬({K} & {I}) -> ¬{I} sent4: ¬{A} sent5: {E} -> (¬{B} v {D}) sent6: ¬{D} -> ({B} v {A}) sent7: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent8: ¬{GK} -> {BI} sent9: ¬{A} -> {B} sent10: ¬({B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{IB} sent11: (¬{I} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{G} | [
"sent9 & sent4 -> int1: the influencing happens.;"
] | [
"sent9 & sent4 -> int1: {B};"
] | the thread occurs. | {C} | [] | 6 | 2 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the thread does not occur is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the influence occurs is prevented by that the influence does not occur and/or that the shutness occurs. sent2: the filiating manicure happens if the forward does not occur. sent3: if that the jihad and the botulinalness occurs is false the fact that the botulinalness does not occur is not false. sent4: the unclearness does not occur. sent5: the influencing does not occur or the shutness occurs or both if the hymeneal happens. sent6: that the shutness does not occur triggers that the influencing occurs and/or the unclearness. sent7: if the filiating clot does not occur the hymenealness occurs and the filiating web occurs. sent8: that the filiating Sokoro does not occur yields the cholelithotomy. sent9: the influencing occurs if the unclearness does not occur. sent10: if the fact that the influencing occurs and the unclearness does not occur does not hold the communist does not occur. sent11: that the filiating clot does not occur is triggered by that the botulinalness does not occur and the graze does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent9 & sent4 -> int1: the influencing happens.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is a kind of non-Cappadocian thing that is not undomestic then it is non-tectonics. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: there exists something such that if it is both non-mathematical and an increase then it is not a grosz. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a stack and not alliaceous it is not a gamble. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not an irritant and it does not consummate then it is not a sixteen. sent4: there is something such that if it is a kind of non-appealable thing that does not nip horse-trail it is unpriestly. sent5: the dope is not tectonics if it is a kind of non-Cappadocian thing that is not undomestic. sent6: the dope is not tectonics if it is Cappadocian and domestic. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not propagandize and it is not topological it is a graphic. sent8: there exists something such that if it is an acuity and it does not tail then it is not a miotic. sent9: there is something such that if it does not filiate meekness and it is a specimen then the fact that it does not infuse is not wrong. sent10: there is something such that if it is a kind of a sixteen and is not a kind of a miotic it is not entrepreneurial. sent11: there is something such that if it is not quantal and is not spicate then it is not ischemic. sent12: the dope is not tectonics if it is both non-Cappadocian and undomestic. sent13: there is something such that if it does not scale fatness and is a kind of a shark that it is not a kind of a buteonine is not wrong. sent14: there exists something such that if it is pentangular and is not a supplier then that it is not a kind of a encolure is right. sent15: there is something such that if it is a kind of a lighted that is not a Triostium then it is not a stud. sent16: there exists something such that if it does not scale chlorofluorocarbon and is a buteonine it does not crab uppityness. sent17: if the dope is not Cappadocian and is not undomestic it is tectonics. sent18: if something that does not crab cufflink is not a tither then it does not nip handstand. | sent1: (Ex): (¬{IC}x & {FP}x) -> ¬{GC}x sent2: (Ex): (¬{DI}x & ¬{EI}x) -> ¬{AP}x sent3: (Ex): (¬{HG}x & ¬{FO}x) -> ¬{F}x sent4: (Ex): (¬{JA}x & ¬{GI}x) -> {CJ}x sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (Ex): (¬{L}x & ¬{FE}x) -> {FS}x sent8: (Ex): ({GD}x & ¬{EP}x) -> ¬{BA}x sent9: (Ex): (¬{IP}x & {GO}x) -> ¬{R}x sent10: (Ex): ({F}x & ¬{BA}x) -> ¬{BG}x sent11: (Ex): (¬{EO}x & ¬{JB}x) -> ¬{BR}x sent12: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent13: (Ex): (¬{GR}x & {FC}x) -> ¬{C}x sent14: (Ex): ({IM}x & ¬{CS}x) -> ¬{CL}x sent15: (Ex): ({CH}x & ¬{JE}x) -> ¬{DU}x sent16: (Ex): (¬{GU}x & {C}x) -> ¬{BU}x sent17: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent18: (x): (¬{EJ}x & ¬{EH}x) -> ¬{AG}x | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | if the ammine does not crab cufflink and it is not a kind of a tither it does not nip handstand. | (¬{EJ}{au} & ¬{EH}{au}) -> ¬{AG}{au} | [
"sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a kind of non-Cappadocian thing that is not undomestic then it is non-tectonics. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is both non-mathematical and an increase then it is not a grosz. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a stack and not alliaceous it is not a gamble. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not an irritant and it does not consummate then it is not a sixteen. sent4: there is something such that if it is a kind of non-appealable thing that does not nip horse-trail it is unpriestly. sent5: the dope is not tectonics if it is a kind of non-Cappadocian thing that is not undomestic. sent6: the dope is not tectonics if it is Cappadocian and domestic. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not propagandize and it is not topological it is a graphic. sent8: there exists something such that if it is an acuity and it does not tail then it is not a miotic. sent9: there is something such that if it does not filiate meekness and it is a specimen then the fact that it does not infuse is not wrong. sent10: there is something such that if it is a kind of a sixteen and is not a kind of a miotic it is not entrepreneurial. sent11: there is something such that if it is not quantal and is not spicate then it is not ischemic. sent12: the dope is not tectonics if it is both non-Cappadocian and undomestic. sent13: there is something such that if it does not scale fatness and is a kind of a shark that it is not a kind of a buteonine is not wrong. sent14: there exists something such that if it is pentangular and is not a supplier then that it is not a kind of a encolure is right. sent15: there is something such that if it is a kind of a lighted that is not a Triostium then it is not a stud. sent16: there exists something such that if it does not scale chlorofluorocarbon and is a buteonine it does not crab uppityness. sent17: if the dope is not Cappadocian and is not undomestic it is tectonics. sent18: if something that does not crab cufflink is not a tither then it does not nip handstand. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
Subsets and Splits