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 here filiates handstand. | {C}{b} | sent1: the here is a homograft. sent2: the here is not a thiazine. sent3: the shirtdress is not impenitent. sent4: the shirtdress does filiate handstand. sent5: if the shirtdress is a thiazine the here does filiate handstand. | sent1: {CC}{b} sent2: ¬{A}{b} sent3: ¬{B}{a} sent4: {C}{a} sent5: {A}{a} -> {C}{b} | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the here filiates handstand. ; $context$ = sent1: the here is a homograft. sent2: the here is not a thiazine. sent3: the shirtdress is not impenitent. sent4: the shirtdress does filiate handstand. sent5: if the shirtdress is a thiazine the here does filiate handstand. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there is something such that if that it is synchronous and it is not a Iranian is not true then it is not salvific is not correct. | ¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: there exists something such that if the fact that it does filiate Lerner and does not scale barbel does not hold then it is not urinary. sent2: there is something such that if that it is a kind of patristics thing that does not nip osteopath is incorrect it does not filiate fluorite. sent3: if the distillery is synchronous but it is not a Iranian it is not salvific. sent4: if the distillery is both salvific and not voyeuristic then the fact that it is not leafy is right. sent5: there exists something such that if it is synchronous and it is not a Iranian then that it is non-salvific hold. sent6: if the fact that the distillery is synchronous and not a Iranian is incorrect it is not salvific. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not synchronous it is not salvific. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not non-synchronous but Iranian is not true then it is not salvific. sent9: the fact that the distillery is not lung-like is not wrong if it is a dynasty and it is not salvific. sent10: there is something such that if the fact that it is both steadied and not an actuality is false the fact that it is non-cortico-hypothalamic is true. sent11: if the fact that the distillery is synchronous but it is not a Iranian is incorrect it is salvific. sent12: there exists something such that if it is Iranian it is not salvific. sent13: the distillery is not salvific if it is a kind of a Iranian. sent14: the bluster is not implicit if that it does filiate cynicism and is not a kind of a jigsaw is not right. sent15: there exists something such that if that it is synchronous and it is not a kind of a Iranian is not right then it is salvific. sent16: something does not scale cynicism if the fact that it is a kind of Bayesian thing that is not a mistletoe is not right. | sent1: (Ex): ¬({CK}x & ¬{HM}x) -> ¬{CH}x sent2: (Ex): ¬({P}x & ¬{GR}x) -> ¬{DR}x sent3: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: ({B}{aa} & ¬{T}{aa}) -> ¬{ED}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent8: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent9: ({F}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> ¬{FO}{aa} sent10: (Ex): ¬({S}x & ¬{CB}x) -> ¬{BQ}x sent11: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent12: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent13: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent14: ¬({GE}{gf} & ¬{HQ}{gf}) -> ¬{AD}{gf} sent15: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent16: (x): ¬({DS}x & ¬{BR}x) -> ¬{Q}x | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if that it is both Bayesian and not a mistletoe does not hold then it does not scale cynicism. | (Ex): ¬({DS}x & ¬{BR}x) -> ¬{Q}x | [
"sent16 -> int1: the barbel does not scale cynicism if the fact that it is both Bayesian and not a mistletoe is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if that it is synchronous and it is not a Iranian is not true then it is not salvific is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if the fact that it does filiate Lerner and does not scale barbel does not hold then it is not urinary. sent2: there is something such that if that it is a kind of patristics thing that does not nip osteopath is incorrect it does not filiate fluorite. sent3: if the distillery is synchronous but it is not a Iranian it is not salvific. sent4: if the distillery is both salvific and not voyeuristic then the fact that it is not leafy is right. sent5: there exists something such that if it is synchronous and it is not a Iranian then that it is non-salvific hold. sent6: if the fact that the distillery is synchronous and not a Iranian is incorrect it is not salvific. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not synchronous it is not salvific. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not non-synchronous but Iranian is not true then it is not salvific. sent9: the fact that the distillery is not lung-like is not wrong if it is a dynasty and it is not salvific. sent10: there is something such that if the fact that it is both steadied and not an actuality is false the fact that it is non-cortico-hypothalamic is true. sent11: if the fact that the distillery is synchronous but it is not a Iranian is incorrect it is salvific. sent12: there exists something such that if it is Iranian it is not salvific. sent13: the distillery is not salvific if it is a kind of a Iranian. sent14: the bluster is not implicit if that it does filiate cynicism and is not a kind of a jigsaw is not right. sent15: there exists something such that if that it is synchronous and it is not a kind of a Iranian is not right then it is salvific. sent16: something does not scale cynicism if the fact that it is a kind of Bayesian thing that is not a mistletoe is not right. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the novelty is a horsehair. | {A}{a} | sent1: if the pantaloon filiates assegai and is not a reservoir then the novelty is a horsehair. sent2: if something that scends is a kind of a Hecate it is not a kind of a horsehair. sent3: the pantaloon filiates assegai. sent4: everything does filiate assegai. sent5: everything filiates assegai and it is not a reservoir. sent6: that the barbel does overwrite and is not Hispanic is not true if it nips ransomed. sent7: if the novelty is a horsehair but it does not filiate assegai the pantaloon is a reservoir. sent8: the pantaloon is a horsehair that is not a Nyala. sent9: if the fact that something does overwrite but it is not a kind of a Hispanic is wrong then that it is not a holiday is right. | sent1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {A}{a} sent2: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent3: {AA}{aa} sent4: (x): {AA}x sent5: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent6: {G}{b} -> ¬({F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent7: ({A}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) -> {AB}{aa} sent8: ({A}{aa} & ¬{JF}{aa}) sent9: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x | [
"sent5 -> int1: the pantaloon filiates assegai and is not a kind of a reservoir.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the novelty is not a kind of a horsehair. | ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent2 -> int2: if the novelty does scend and it is a kind of a Hecate then it is not a horsehair.; sent9 -> int3: the barbel is not a holiday if the fact that it over-writes and is non-Hispanic is not true.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the novelty is a horsehair. ; $context$ = sent1: if the pantaloon filiates assegai and is not a reservoir then the novelty is a horsehair. sent2: if something that scends is a kind of a Hecate it is not a kind of a horsehair. sent3: the pantaloon filiates assegai. sent4: everything does filiate assegai. sent5: everything filiates assegai and it is not a reservoir. sent6: that the barbel does overwrite and is not Hispanic is not true if it nips ransomed. sent7: if the novelty is a horsehair but it does not filiate assegai the pantaloon is a reservoir. sent8: the pantaloon is a horsehair that is not a Nyala. sent9: if the fact that something does overwrite but it is not a kind of a Hispanic is wrong then that it is not a holiday is right. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> int1: the pantaloon filiates assegai and is not a kind of a reservoir.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that there exists something such that if it does not filiate abrachia then that it is a kind of a beanie and does crab naboom is not correct does not hold. | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)) | sent1: there is something such that if it filiates abrachia then that it is a kind of a beanie and it crabs naboom is not true. sent2: the diner is a beanie and it does crab naboom if it does not filiate abrachia. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a laugh then the fact that it is cucurbitaceous and dibbles is not correct. sent4: that something does filiate abrachia and is a pellicle is not correct if it is not deductive. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not irreverent it is a kind of trigonometric thing that does filiate Platycephalidae. sent6: if the diner does not filiate abrachia then the fact that it is a beanie that crabs naboom does not hold. | sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): ¬{BQ}x -> ¬({DI}x & {EJ}x) sent4: (x): ¬{FM}x -> ¬({A}x & {CL}x) sent5: (Ex): ¬{HA}x -> ({ER}x & {S}x) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the fact that the diner does filiate abrachia and it is a kind of the pellicle is incorrect if the diner is not deductive hold. | ¬{FM}{aa} -> ¬({A}{aa} & {CL}{aa}) | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it does not filiate abrachia then that it is a kind of a beanie and does crab naboom is not correct does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it filiates abrachia then that it is a kind of a beanie and it crabs naboom is not true. sent2: the diner is a beanie and it does crab naboom if it does not filiate abrachia. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a laugh then the fact that it is cucurbitaceous and dibbles is not correct. sent4: that something does filiate abrachia and is a pellicle is not correct if it is not deductive. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not irreverent it is a kind of trigonometric thing that does filiate Platycephalidae. sent6: if the diner does not filiate abrachia then the fact that it is a beanie that crabs naboom does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the shampoo is not convex. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: the fact that the endoplasm is not vice-presidential but it is convex does not hold. sent2: there exists something such that that it is not logarithmic and/or is a covert is false. sent3: the clipboard is a kind of a Saxon if the harp is non-lobar a sidesman. sent4: the fact that the taxpayer is not nonparametric and it is not a kind of a Lemmus is not right. sent5: if that the endoplasm is vice-presidential and is not a Michigander does not hold then the shampoo is not vice-presidential. sent6: something is vice-presidential. sent7: if there is something such that it is splintery the fact that the endoplasm is not vice-presidential and it is not a kind of a Michigander is wrong. sent8: if there is something such that it is both convex and not a Michigander then the journalism is not splintery. sent9: the endoplasm is lobar if the shampoo is not lobar. sent10: the Alaskan is a Michigander. sent11: something is not lobar if it is not a sidesman. sent12: that the taxpayer is splintery is not false. sent13: if the clipboard is a kind of a Saxon the fact that the endoplasm is vice-presidential and is not a Michigander is not true. sent14: the shampoo is not a kind of a Michigander. sent15: the fact that the fact that the endoplasm is not splintery but it is a Michigander is not false is not right. sent16: the endoplasm is Saxon if it is not non-lobar. sent17: a Saxon thing is convex but not a Michigander. | sent1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {D}{a}) sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{H}x v {I}x) sent3: (¬{F}{d} & {G}{d}) -> {E}{c} sent4: ¬(¬{BQ}{aa} & ¬{DR}{aa}) sent5: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent6: (Ex): {B}x sent7: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent8: (x): ({D}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}{ik} sent9: ¬{F}{b} -> {F}{a} sent10: {C}{dq} sent11: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}x sent12: {A}{aa} sent13: {E}{c} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent14: ¬{C}{b} sent15: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent16: {F}{a} -> {E}{a} sent17: (x): {E}x -> ({D}x & ¬{C}x) | [
"sent12 -> int1: there is something such that it is splintery.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the endoplasm is not vice-presidential and it is not a Michigander is wrong.;"
] | [
"sent12 -> int1: (Ex): {A}x; int1 & sent7 -> int2: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a});"
] | the journalism is not vice-presidential. | ¬{B}{ik} | [
"sent17 -> int3: if the endoplasm is a kind of a Saxon it is convex and it is not a Michigander.; sent11 -> int4: if that the shampoo is not a sidesman is not incorrect it is not lobar.;"
] | 8 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the shampoo is not convex. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the endoplasm is not vice-presidential but it is convex does not hold. sent2: there exists something such that that it is not logarithmic and/or is a covert is false. sent3: the clipboard is a kind of a Saxon if the harp is non-lobar a sidesman. sent4: the fact that the taxpayer is not nonparametric and it is not a kind of a Lemmus is not right. sent5: if that the endoplasm is vice-presidential and is not a Michigander does not hold then the shampoo is not vice-presidential. sent6: something is vice-presidential. sent7: if there is something such that it is splintery the fact that the endoplasm is not vice-presidential and it is not a kind of a Michigander is wrong. sent8: if there is something such that it is both convex and not a Michigander then the journalism is not splintery. sent9: the endoplasm is lobar if the shampoo is not lobar. sent10: the Alaskan is a Michigander. sent11: something is not lobar if it is not a sidesman. sent12: that the taxpayer is splintery is not false. sent13: if the clipboard is a kind of a Saxon the fact that the endoplasm is vice-presidential and is not a Michigander is not true. sent14: the shampoo is not a kind of a Michigander. sent15: the fact that the fact that the endoplasm is not splintery but it is a Michigander is not false is not right. sent16: the endoplasm is Saxon if it is not non-lobar. sent17: a Saxon thing is convex but not a Michigander. ; $proof$ = | sent12 -> int1: there is something such that it is splintery.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the endoplasm is not vice-presidential and it is not a Michigander is wrong.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the implant is artificial and/or it is a exculpation. | ({C}{c} v {D}{c}) | sent1: the endosperm does not crab ducking. sent2: The ducking crabs staphylococcus. sent3: the staphylococcus crabs ducking. sent4: if the personage does divest it is not artificial. sent5: the personage does divest if the staphylococcus is artificial. sent6: if the staphylococcus is not artificial the personage is artificial and/or it crabs ducking. sent7: if the staphylococcus does crab ducking then the personage divests. sent8: if the staphylococcus does not filiate rawhide then the implant does not crab ducking and it does not divest. sent9: something is not calyceal if it is a waltz. sent10: if something does not crab ducking that it is artificial and/or it is a exculpation does not hold. | sent1: ¬{A}{hg} sent2: {AA}{aa} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: {B}{b} -> ¬{C}{b} sent5: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: ¬{C}{a} -> ({C}{b} v {A}{b}) sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent8: ¬{E}{a} -> (¬{A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) sent9: (x): {FE}x -> ¬{HQ}x sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x v {D}x) | [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: the personage does divest.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the personage is not artificial.;"
] | [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent4 -> int2: ¬{C}{b};"
] | if the flowerbed is a kind of a waltz it is not calyceal. | {FE}{ct} -> ¬{HQ}{ct} | [
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the implant is artificial and/or it is a exculpation. ; $context$ = sent1: the endosperm does not crab ducking. sent2: The ducking crabs staphylococcus. sent3: the staphylococcus crabs ducking. sent4: if the personage does divest it is not artificial. sent5: the personage does divest if the staphylococcus is artificial. sent6: if the staphylococcus is not artificial the personage is artificial and/or it crabs ducking. sent7: if the staphylococcus does crab ducking then the personage divests. sent8: if the staphylococcus does not filiate rawhide then the implant does not crab ducking and it does not divest. sent9: something is not calyceal if it is a waltz. sent10: if something does not crab ducking that it is artificial and/or it is a exculpation does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent3 -> int1: the personage does divest.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the personage is not artificial.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that the fact that it is not unobjectionable and it is a kind of a exudation is wrong. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: there is something such that that it is unobjectionable and it is a exudation does not hold. sent2: if the duct does not filiate Bonney then that it does not rustle and is a kind of a circulation is false. sent3: that the steeper is unobjectionable and it is a exudation is not right. sent4: if the steeper does not filiate Bonney then the fact that that it is not dirty and it is a exudation is correct is not correct. sent5: that something does not filiate Bonney but it is unobjectionable is not right if it is not a Zurvanism. sent6: there is something such that it is a kind of non-unobjectionable a exudation. sent7: that the housemate filiates Bonney and is unobjectionable is false. sent8: that the steeper is a kind of a Zurvanism that is a exudation is wrong. sent9: that something is not photoelectric but it unseals is not true if it is not a kind of a Salvadoran. sent10: the fact that the housemate is not a Zurvanism but a exudation is false if it does not filiate Bonney. sent11: that the housemate does filiate Bonney and is a Zurvanism is not true. sent12: the fact that something is not unobjectionable and is a exudation is incorrect if it does not filiate Bonney. sent13: if that something does not filiate Bonney is correct that it is unobjectionable and is a kind of a exudation is false. sent14: that the housemate is not a exudation but it filiates Bonney does not hold. sent15: if the housemate does not filiate Bonney then the fact that the steeper does not filiate Bonney is correct. sent16: that the housemate is unobjectionable and it filiates Bonney is incorrect. | sent1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: ¬{A}{hl} -> ¬(¬{HF}{hl} & {IQ}{hl}) sent3: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {AA}x) sent6: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: ¬({A}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent8: ¬({C}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (x): ¬{FL}x -> ¬(¬{DM}x & {AN}x) sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent11: ¬({A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent14: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) sent15: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{A}{aa} sent16: ¬({AA}{a} & {A}{a}) | [
"sent12 -> int1: the fact that the steeper is not unobjectionable but a exudation is not right if it does not filiate Bonney.;"
] | [
"sent12 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa});"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that the fact that it is not unobjectionable and it is a kind of a exudation is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it is unobjectionable and it is a exudation does not hold. sent2: if the duct does not filiate Bonney then that it does not rustle and is a kind of a circulation is false. sent3: that the steeper is unobjectionable and it is a exudation is not right. sent4: if the steeper does not filiate Bonney then the fact that that it is not dirty and it is a exudation is correct is not correct. sent5: that something does not filiate Bonney but it is unobjectionable is not right if it is not a Zurvanism. sent6: there is something such that it is a kind of non-unobjectionable a exudation. sent7: that the housemate filiates Bonney and is unobjectionable is false. sent8: that the steeper is a kind of a Zurvanism that is a exudation is wrong. sent9: that something is not photoelectric but it unseals is not true if it is not a kind of a Salvadoran. sent10: the fact that the housemate is not a Zurvanism but a exudation is false if it does not filiate Bonney. sent11: that the housemate does filiate Bonney and is a Zurvanism is not true. sent12: the fact that something is not unobjectionable and is a exudation is incorrect if it does not filiate Bonney. sent13: if that something does not filiate Bonney is correct that it is unobjectionable and is a kind of a exudation is false. sent14: that the housemate is not a exudation but it filiates Bonney does not hold. sent15: if the housemate does not filiate Bonney then the fact that the steeper does not filiate Bonney is correct. sent16: that the housemate is unobjectionable and it filiates Bonney is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | sent12 -> int1: the fact that the steeper is not unobjectionable but a exudation is not right if it does not filiate Bonney.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the farce crabs farce. | {C}{c} | sent1: if the sandlot is sensory the gunlock is not sensory and it is not an elastic. sent2: the farce does crab farce if the gunlock is non-sensory and inelastic. sent3: the gunlock is sensory if the farce is an elastic but it does not crab farce. | sent1: {B}{a} -> (¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent2: (¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> {C}{c} sent3: ({D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> {B}{b} | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the farce crabs farce. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sandlot is sensory the gunlock is not sensory and it is not an elastic. sent2: the farce does crab farce if the gunlock is non-sensory and inelastic. sent3: the gunlock is sensory if the farce is an elastic but it does not crab farce. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that that that it is a kind of non-open-hearth a semaphore hold is incorrect. | (Ex): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) | sent1: if there are non-conspiratorial things that the decipherer is not a prior but it does filiate halite is false. sent2: there exists something such that it is not open-hearth and it is a semaphore. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of open-hearth a semaphore is not correct. sent4: the fact that the decipherer is open-hearth and it semaphores is wrong. sent5: that that the decipherer is not amphitheatric but it is a progress is not wrong is not true. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is not a thenar but a Antigua is false. sent7: the fact that the decipherer is not open-hearth but it semaphores is wrong if there is something such that it is not a Ruritanian. sent8: there exists something such that it does not possess. sent9: if there is something such that it is not a Ruritanian the fact that the decipherer is both not a peak and a paleocerebellum is not true. sent10: there is something such that that that it is both not a lacertid and vocalic is not wrong is false. sent11: there is something such that that it is not Malawian and nips Limosa is not true. sent12: the fact that the decipherer does not filiate mongo and is open-hearth is not true. sent13: that the decipherer is open-hearth and a semaphore does not hold if there exists something such that it is not a Ruritanian. sent14: there is something such that it is a Ruritanian. sent15: there is something such that the fact that it is non-ambiversive and it does peak does not hold. | sent1: (x): ¬{BF}x -> ¬(¬{M}{a} & {HO}{a}) sent2: (Ex): (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬({B}x & {C}x) sent4: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent5: ¬(¬{EO}{a} & {EK}{a}) sent6: (Ex): ¬(¬{HR}x & {BU}x) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{JB}x sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{CN}{a} & {JJ}{a}) sent10: (Ex): ¬(¬{BO}x & {DR}x) sent11: (Ex): ¬(¬{JH}x & {BC}x) sent12: ¬(¬{EG}{a} & {B}{a}) sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent14: (Ex): {A}x sent15: (Ex): ¬(¬{HA}x & {CN}x) | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that that that it is a kind of non-open-hearth a semaphore hold is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if there are non-conspiratorial things that the decipherer is not a prior but it does filiate halite is false. sent2: there exists something such that it is not open-hearth and it is a semaphore. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of open-hearth a semaphore is not correct. sent4: the fact that the decipherer is open-hearth and it semaphores is wrong. sent5: that that the decipherer is not amphitheatric but it is a progress is not wrong is not true. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is not a thenar but a Antigua is false. sent7: the fact that the decipherer is not open-hearth but it semaphores is wrong if there is something such that it is not a Ruritanian. sent8: there exists something such that it does not possess. sent9: if there is something such that it is not a Ruritanian the fact that the decipherer is both not a peak and a paleocerebellum is not true. sent10: there is something such that that that it is both not a lacertid and vocalic is not wrong is false. sent11: there is something such that that it is not Malawian and nips Limosa is not true. sent12: the fact that the decipherer does not filiate mongo and is open-hearth is not true. sent13: that the decipherer is open-hearth and a semaphore does not hold if there exists something such that it is not a Ruritanian. sent14: there is something such that it is a Ruritanian. sent15: there is something such that the fact that it is non-ambiversive and it does peak does not hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the palpebration is not non-wiry or it is a Raskolnikov or both. | ({B}{b} v {C}{b}) | sent1: if the araroba is finite it is not ideological and does not filiate forefather. sent2: the philter is wiry. sent3: the papaverine is a kind of a jarring. sent4: something is an astringent if it is wiry and it is not a kind of a jarring. sent5: the palpebration nips araroba. sent6: either the punster is adventitial or it is a kind of a plexor or both. sent7: that if the araroba is non-ideological thing that does not filiate forefather then the tenpins is an insulin is not wrong. sent8: the araroba is postnuptial. sent9: the palpebration is a jarring or it is finite or both. sent10: if the papaverine is wiry then the palpebration is a kind of a Raskolnikov. sent11: the choir is wiry. sent12: the papaverine is directing. sent13: something is not senatorial and it does not scale sandbar if it is not astrological. sent14: the fact that something is wiry and/or a Raskolnikov does not hold if it does not jar. sent15: if something is a kind of an insulin it is wieldy and it is not a plexor. sent16: that something is finite hold if it is postnuptial. sent17: if something is wieldy thing that is not a plexor then that the papaverine is not astrological is not wrong. sent18: the palpebration is wiry if the papaverine does jar. sent19: either the palpebration is a jarring or it is a kind of a Raskolnikov or both. sent20: the papaverine scales evolutionism. sent21: the fact that the palpebration is a jarring is not incorrect if the papaverine is a Raskolnikov. | sent1: {L}{d} -> (¬{K}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) sent2: {B}{hb} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {CF}x sent5: {CU}{b} sent6: ({AT}{ep} v {H}{ep}) sent7: (¬{K}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) -> {I}{c} sent8: {M}{d} sent9: ({A}{b} v {L}{b}) sent10: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent11: {B}{gm} sent12: {EG}{a} sent13: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) sent14: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x v {C}x) sent15: (x): {I}x -> ({G}x & ¬{H}x) sent16: (x): {M}x -> {L}x sent17: (x): ({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}{a} sent18: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent19: ({A}{b} v {C}{b}) sent20: {EC}{a} sent21: {C}{a} -> {A}{b} | [
"sent18 & sent3 -> int1: that the palpebration is wiry is right.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent18 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the palpebration is wiry and/or is a Raskolnikov is false. | ¬({B}{b} v {C}{b}) | [
"sent14 -> int2: if the fact that the palpebration is not a jarring hold the fact that it is wiry or it is a Raskolnikov or both is incorrect.; sent13 -> int3: if the papaverine is not astrological it is non-senatorial thing that does not scale sandbar.; sent15 -> int4: the tenpins is wieldy but it is not a plexor if it is an insulin.; sent16 -> int5: the araroba is finite if that it is postnuptial is true.; int5 & sent8 -> int6: the araroba is finite.; sent1 & int6 -> int7: the araroba is a kind of non-ideological thing that does not filiate forefather.; sent7 & int7 -> int8: the tenpins is an insulin.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the tenpins is not unwieldy and not a plexor.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it is not unwieldy and not a plexor.; int10 & sent17 -> int11: that the papaverine is not astrological is true.; int3 & int11 -> int12: the papaverine is not senatorial and does not scale sandbar.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that it is non-senatorial thing that does not scale sandbar.;"
] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the palpebration is not non-wiry or it is a Raskolnikov or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if the araroba is finite it is not ideological and does not filiate forefather. sent2: the philter is wiry. sent3: the papaverine is a kind of a jarring. sent4: something is an astringent if it is wiry and it is not a kind of a jarring. sent5: the palpebration nips araroba. sent6: either the punster is adventitial or it is a kind of a plexor or both. sent7: that if the araroba is non-ideological thing that does not filiate forefather then the tenpins is an insulin is not wrong. sent8: the araroba is postnuptial. sent9: the palpebration is a jarring or it is finite or both. sent10: if the papaverine is wiry then the palpebration is a kind of a Raskolnikov. sent11: the choir is wiry. sent12: the papaverine is directing. sent13: something is not senatorial and it does not scale sandbar if it is not astrological. sent14: the fact that something is wiry and/or a Raskolnikov does not hold if it does not jar. sent15: if something is a kind of an insulin it is wieldy and it is not a plexor. sent16: that something is finite hold if it is postnuptial. sent17: if something is wieldy thing that is not a plexor then that the papaverine is not astrological is not wrong. sent18: the palpebration is wiry if the papaverine does jar. sent19: either the palpebration is a jarring or it is a kind of a Raskolnikov or both. sent20: the papaverine scales evolutionism. sent21: the fact that the palpebration is a jarring is not incorrect if the papaverine is a Raskolnikov. ; $proof$ = | sent18 & sent3 -> int1: that the palpebration is wiry is right.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the singlestick is not a Delaware and not a cakewalk is not true. | ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | sent1: that something is a kind of a Delaware but it is not a kind of a cakewalk is incorrect if it does nip gracelessness. sent2: the floor is a sublimate if it does scale matelote. sent3: the singlestick does not nip gracelessness if the floor is anisogametic. sent4: something does scale matelote if it does scale singlestick. sent5: if something does groin then the fact that it is not ferial and it is not a cakewalk is wrong. sent6: if that something does not scale singlestick and roughs does not hold it scale singlestick. sent7: something is anisogametic if it is a sublimate. sent8: something is not hidrotic. sent9: if something does not nip gracelessness then that it is not a Delaware and does not cakewalk is correct. sent10: the fact that something is both not a Delaware and not a cakewalk is false if it does nip gracelessness. sent11: the fact that something does not scale singlestick but it is a roughleg is not right if that it is not a dustcloth hold. sent12: that the floor is not a kind of a groin but it is ferial is false. | sent1: (x): {B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) sent2: {F}{a} -> {E}{a} sent3: {D}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: (x): {G}x -> {F}x sent5: (x): {AA}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{C}x) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {H}x) -> {G}x sent7: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent8: (Ex): ¬{J}x sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) sent10: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) sent11: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {H}x) sent12: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) | [
"sent10 -> int1: the fact that the singlestick is not a kind of a Delaware and it does not cakewalk is wrong if it nips gracelessness.;"
] | [
"sent10 -> int1: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b});"
] | the singlestick is not a Delaware and it is not a kind of a cakewalk. | (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | [
"sent9 -> int2: the singlestick is not a Delaware and does not cakewalk if it does not nip gracelessness.; sent7 -> int3: if the floor sublimates then it is anisogametic.; sent4 -> int4: the fact that the floor does scale matelote is not wrong if the fact that it does scale singlestick hold.; sent6 -> int5: the floor does scale singlestick if the fact that it does not scale singlestick and is a kind of a roughleg is not correct.; sent11 -> int6: the fact that the floor does not scale singlestick and is a roughleg is not true if it is not a dustcloth.;"
] | 8 | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the singlestick is not a Delaware and not a cakewalk is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is a kind of a Delaware but it is not a kind of a cakewalk is incorrect if it does nip gracelessness. sent2: the floor is a sublimate if it does scale matelote. sent3: the singlestick does not nip gracelessness if the floor is anisogametic. sent4: something does scale matelote if it does scale singlestick. sent5: if something does groin then the fact that it is not ferial and it is not a cakewalk is wrong. sent6: if that something does not scale singlestick and roughs does not hold it scale singlestick. sent7: something is anisogametic if it is a sublimate. sent8: something is not hidrotic. sent9: if something does not nip gracelessness then that it is not a Delaware and does not cakewalk is correct. sent10: the fact that something is both not a Delaware and not a cakewalk is false if it does nip gracelessness. sent11: the fact that something does not scale singlestick but it is a roughleg is not right if that it is not a dustcloth hold. sent12: that the floor is not a kind of a groin but it is ferial is false. ; $proof$ = | sent10 -> int1: the fact that the singlestick is not a kind of a Delaware and it does not cakewalk is wrong if it nips gracelessness.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is impolitic then it is teratogenic and/or not off. | (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) | sent1: there exists something such that if it is a hairball then it is a kind of a rasp and/or it filiates birthday. sent2: if something is filar it is an elective and/or it is not impolitic. sent3: if the longbowman is impolitic it is either teratogenic or not off or both. | sent1: (Ex): {EP}x -> ({JG}x v {FU}x) sent2: (x): {FL}x -> ({FQ}x v ¬{A}x) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | if the sealant is filar then it is an elective or it is not impolitic or both. | {FL}{bl} -> ({FQ}{bl} v ¬{A}{bl}) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is impolitic then it is teratogenic and/or not off. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is a hairball then it is a kind of a rasp and/or it filiates birthday. sent2: if something is filar it is an elective and/or it is not impolitic. sent3: if the longbowman is impolitic it is either teratogenic or not off or both. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the Forester is not a kind of a coalface or it is not a Monophysitism or both is incorrect. | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) | sent1: if that the Spartan is hand-held is not false that the burin does not filiate roofer or it is not a have or both does not hold. sent2: that something is not a coalface and/or is not a Monophysitism is incorrect if it is hand-held. sent3: if the Spartan is not a Ailuropodidae and it is not a kind of a swipe the Forester is not hand-held. sent4: something is either not a coalface or not a Monophysitism or both if it is not hand-held. sent5: the Forester is a Ailuropodidae that is hand-held. sent6: if something is hand-held then that it is a kind of a Ailuropodidae is not wrong. sent7: the siltstone is a Monophysitism. | sent1: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AE}{af} v ¬{EG}{af}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent5: ({B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent6: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent7: {AB}{el} | [
"sent2 -> int1: if the Forester is not non-hand-held then that it is not a coalface or it is not a Monophysitism or both is wrong.; sent5 -> int2: the fact that the Forester is hand-held is right.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); sent5 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the burin does not filiate roofer and/or it is not a have is not correct. | ¬(¬{AE}{af} v ¬{EG}{af}) | [] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the Forester is not a kind of a coalface or it is not a Monophysitism or both is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the Spartan is hand-held is not false that the burin does not filiate roofer or it is not a have or both does not hold. sent2: that something is not a coalface and/or is not a Monophysitism is incorrect if it is hand-held. sent3: if the Spartan is not a Ailuropodidae and it is not a kind of a swipe the Forester is not hand-held. sent4: something is either not a coalface or not a Monophysitism or both if it is not hand-held. sent5: the Forester is a Ailuropodidae that is hand-held. sent6: if something is hand-held then that it is a kind of a Ailuropodidae is not wrong. sent7: the siltstone is a Monophysitism. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: if the Forester is not non-hand-held then that it is not a coalface or it is not a Monophysitism or both is wrong.; sent5 -> int2: the fact that the Forester is hand-held is right.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the burrito is not angry. | ¬{B}{c} | sent1: the burrito is angry if that the diner is unready is correct. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it does not scour and does not nip singlestick does not hold then the Cabalist nip singlestick. sent3: if the fact that something is not angry and it does not filiate Pentagon is not right it is not unready. sent4: that the diner is not a hydroxychloroquine and is quadrangular is wrong if it is not a kind of a Kronecker. sent5: if that the diner is not a hydroxychloroquine but quadrangular does not hold it is not a scour. sent6: the Cabalist is not a buyer if the diner is not unready. sent7: something is not a buyer but it fringes. sent8: the Cabalist is not a buyer. sent9: the Cabalist is both not a buyer and not a fringe if the diner is not unready. sent10: the Cabalist is both not angry and not a buyer. sent11: the subdivider is both not quadrangular and not a hydroxychloroquine. sent12: there exists something such that it is not a kind of an incendiary and it is not alopecic. sent13: something that is not unready does not scale Ewe and does not nip singlestick. sent14: the burrito is not angry if there is something such that it is a buyer and it does not fringe. sent15: the burrito is not angry if something that is not a buyer is not a fringe. sent16: there is something such that it is not a buyer. sent17: if something does nip singlestick then that it is ready thing that does filiate Pentagon does not hold. sent18: the singlestick is not quadratics and is not a backspin. sent19: that something is not a scour and it does not nip singlestick is not correct if it is not quadrangular. | sent1: {A}{a} -> {B}{c} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> {D}{b} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent4: ¬{H}{a} -> ¬(¬{G}{a} & {F}{a}) sent5: ¬(¬{G}{a} & {F}{a}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent7: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: ¬{AA}{b} sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent10: (¬{B}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) sent11: (¬{F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) sent12: (Ex): (¬{HT}x & ¬{IS}x) sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AQ}x & ¬{D}x) sent14: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}{c} sent15: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}{c} sent16: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent17: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) sent18: (¬{HJ}{ee} & ¬{HO}{ee}) sent19: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) | [] | [] | the burrito is angry. | {B}{c} | [
"sent17 -> int1: if the Cabalist does nip singlestick then that that it is not unready and does filiate Pentagon is right is wrong.; sent19 -> int2: if the subdivider is not quadrangular the fact that it does not scour and does not nip singlestick is not true.; sent11 -> int3: the subdivider is not quadrangular.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the subdivider does not scour and does not nip singlestick is false.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that the fact that that it is not a scour and does not nip singlestick is not incorrect is not correct.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the Cabalist does nip singlestick.; int1 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the Cabalist is non-unready thing that does filiate Pentagon is not true.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that it is not unready and it filiates Pentagon is not right.;"
] | 8 | 3 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the burrito is not angry. ; $context$ = sent1: the burrito is angry if that the diner is unready is correct. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it does not scour and does not nip singlestick does not hold then the Cabalist nip singlestick. sent3: if the fact that something is not angry and it does not filiate Pentagon is not right it is not unready. sent4: that the diner is not a hydroxychloroquine and is quadrangular is wrong if it is not a kind of a Kronecker. sent5: if that the diner is not a hydroxychloroquine but quadrangular does not hold it is not a scour. sent6: the Cabalist is not a buyer if the diner is not unready. sent7: something is not a buyer but it fringes. sent8: the Cabalist is not a buyer. sent9: the Cabalist is both not a buyer and not a fringe if the diner is not unready. sent10: the Cabalist is both not angry and not a buyer. sent11: the subdivider is both not quadrangular and not a hydroxychloroquine. sent12: there exists something such that it is not a kind of an incendiary and it is not alopecic. sent13: something that is not unready does not scale Ewe and does not nip singlestick. sent14: the burrito is not angry if there is something such that it is a buyer and it does not fringe. sent15: the burrito is not angry if something that is not a buyer is not a fringe. sent16: there is something such that it is not a buyer. sent17: if something does nip singlestick then that it is ready thing that does filiate Pentagon does not hold. sent18: the singlestick is not quadratics and is not a backspin. sent19: that something is not a scour and it does not nip singlestick is not correct if it is not quadrangular. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the imitation does not occur. | ¬{A} | sent1: if the nipping hawk's-beard does not occur then both the convexness and the facelessness happens. sent2: if the campylotropousness happens the IOP does not occur. sent3: the campylotropousness happens if the nipping twilight happens. sent4: the fact that not the nationalness but the nipping fugitive occurs is wrong if the scaling thaw happens. sent5: the imitation does not occur if the slinking does not occur. sent6: the breathlessness does not occur if the IOP does not occur. sent7: if the fact that the comparativeness does not occur is correct then the fact that the slinking does not occur is not wrong. sent8: that the convexness happens triggers that the drippings happens. sent9: the nipping twilight happens and the unwearableness happens if the nipping fugitive does not occur. sent10: that the obtaining does not occur leads to that the scaling thaw and the filiating club occurs. sent11: that the incompetentness does not occur and the nipping airplane does not occur does not hold. sent12: if the drippings happens the fact that the non-protozoologicalness and the obtaining happens is false. sent13: if that the tailoring does not occur and the geeing does not occur is correct the comparative does not occur. sent14: if that both the non-protozoologicalness and the obtaining happens is wrong the obtaining does not occur. sent15: that the breathlessness does not occur causes that the tailoring does not occur and the geeing does not occur. sent16: the slinking occurs if the fact that the incompetentness does not occur and the nipping airplane does not occur does not hold. sent17: if the slinking happens the fact that the imitation happens hold. sent18: the filiating Ancohuma happens and the nipping hawk's-beard does not occur if the incompetent does not occur. sent19: if that not the national but the nipping fugitive happens is wrong that the nipping fugitive does not occur is true. | sent1: ¬{T} -> ({R} & {S}) sent2: {H} -> ¬{G} sent3: {I} -> {H} sent4: {L} -> ¬(¬{M} & {K}) sent5: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} sent6: ¬{G} -> ¬{F} sent7: ¬{C} -> ¬{B} sent8: {R} -> {P} sent9: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) sent10: ¬{O} -> ({L} & {N}) sent11: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent12: {P} -> ¬(¬{Q} & {O}) sent13: (¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} sent14: ¬(¬{Q} & {O}) -> ¬{O} sent15: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) sent16: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent17: {B} -> {A} sent18: ¬{AA} -> ({U} & ¬{T}) sent19: ¬(¬{M} & {K}) -> ¬{K} | [
"sent16 & sent11 -> int1: the slinking occurs.; sent17 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent16 & sent11 -> int1: {B}; sent17 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the imitation does not occur. | ¬{A} | [] | 21 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the imitation does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the nipping hawk's-beard does not occur then both the convexness and the facelessness happens. sent2: if the campylotropousness happens the IOP does not occur. sent3: the campylotropousness happens if the nipping twilight happens. sent4: the fact that not the nationalness but the nipping fugitive occurs is wrong if the scaling thaw happens. sent5: the imitation does not occur if the slinking does not occur. sent6: the breathlessness does not occur if the IOP does not occur. sent7: if the fact that the comparativeness does not occur is correct then the fact that the slinking does not occur is not wrong. sent8: that the convexness happens triggers that the drippings happens. sent9: the nipping twilight happens and the unwearableness happens if the nipping fugitive does not occur. sent10: that the obtaining does not occur leads to that the scaling thaw and the filiating club occurs. sent11: that the incompetentness does not occur and the nipping airplane does not occur does not hold. sent12: if the drippings happens the fact that the non-protozoologicalness and the obtaining happens is false. sent13: if that the tailoring does not occur and the geeing does not occur is correct the comparative does not occur. sent14: if that both the non-protozoologicalness and the obtaining happens is wrong the obtaining does not occur. sent15: that the breathlessness does not occur causes that the tailoring does not occur and the geeing does not occur. sent16: the slinking occurs if the fact that the incompetentness does not occur and the nipping airplane does not occur does not hold. sent17: if the slinking happens the fact that the imitation happens hold. sent18: the filiating Ancohuma happens and the nipping hawk's-beard does not occur if the incompetent does not occur. sent19: if that not the national but the nipping fugitive happens is wrong that the nipping fugitive does not occur is true. ; $proof$ = | sent16 & sent11 -> int1: the slinking occurs.; sent17 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the nipping Pullman occurs. | {D} | sent1: the nipping Pullman and the non-idiopathicness happens if the rejuvenation happens. sent2: the fact that the decampment happens is right. sent3: if the fact that the nipping relic and the non-zodiacalness occurs is not correct the nipping relic does not occur. sent4: that the fact that the crabbing eyespot does not occur is not wrong is wrong if the vertebralness happens. sent5: the demographicness happens. sent6: the antitrades but not the amplitude occurs. sent7: the reverentness happens if the flood happens. sent8: if the woodwork does not occur then the Erasmianness but not the perking happens. sent9: if the scaling friction happens then the dimensionalness happens. sent10: the idiopathicness does not occur. sent11: if the nipping relic does not occur the crabbing romanticism happens and the avianness occurs. sent12: that the idiopathicness does not occur is brought about by the rejuvenation. sent13: the reconciliation occurs if the woodwork occurs. sent14: if the fact that the avianness and the non-idiopathicness happens is false the reconciliation does not occur. sent15: the woodwork occurs. sent16: that the reconciliation does not occur and the woodwork does not occur prevents the nipping Pullman. sent17: the unpredictableness occurs. sent18: the idiopathicness triggers that not the reconciliation but the rejuvenation happens. | sent1: {C} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) sent2: {IU} sent3: ¬({H} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} sent4: {HO} -> {AN} sent5: {BC} sent6: ({HK} & ¬{AC}) sent7: {BN} -> {FQ} sent8: ¬{A} -> ({K} & ¬{GC}) sent9: {BU} -> {DH} sent10: ¬{E} sent11: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) sent12: {C} -> ¬{E} sent13: {A} -> {B} sent14: ¬({F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{B} sent15: {A} sent16: (¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{D} sent17: {BQ} sent18: {E} -> (¬{B} & {C}) | [
"sent13 & sent15 -> int1: the reconciliation occurs.;"
] | [
"sent13 & sent15 -> int1: {B};"
] | the nipping Pullman does not occur. | ¬{D} | [] | 8 | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the nipping Pullman occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the nipping Pullman and the non-idiopathicness happens if the rejuvenation happens. sent2: the fact that the decampment happens is right. sent3: if the fact that the nipping relic and the non-zodiacalness occurs is not correct the nipping relic does not occur. sent4: that the fact that the crabbing eyespot does not occur is not wrong is wrong if the vertebralness happens. sent5: the demographicness happens. sent6: the antitrades but not the amplitude occurs. sent7: the reverentness happens if the flood happens. sent8: if the woodwork does not occur then the Erasmianness but not the perking happens. sent9: if the scaling friction happens then the dimensionalness happens. sent10: the idiopathicness does not occur. sent11: if the nipping relic does not occur the crabbing romanticism happens and the avianness occurs. sent12: that the idiopathicness does not occur is brought about by the rejuvenation. sent13: the reconciliation occurs if the woodwork occurs. sent14: if the fact that the avianness and the non-idiopathicness happens is false the reconciliation does not occur. sent15: the woodwork occurs. sent16: that the reconciliation does not occur and the woodwork does not occur prevents the nipping Pullman. sent17: the unpredictableness occurs. sent18: the idiopathicness triggers that not the reconciliation but the rejuvenation happens. ; $proof$ = | sent13 & sent15 -> int1: the reconciliation occurs.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that it is not a kind of a cerecloth. | (Ex): ¬{B}x | sent1: the wellpoint nips typhus and it is anticancer if the fact that the bangle does not trademark is not incorrect. sent2: the segregation is a Milanese. sent3: if the segregation is Milanese and it is a trademarked the bangle is not a kind of a trademarked. sent4: if the iodide is not a coelogyne then that the Minoan is a keeping that does propagate is not right. sent5: the middle does not keep. sent6: if the scut is not a keeping then the fact that the cosigner does pedal but it is not a cerecloth does not hold. sent7: the wellpoint does not vacuum if it does nip typhus and is anticancer. sent8: the iodide is not a coelogyne if the wellpoint is not a kind of a vacuum. | sent1: ¬{H}{g} -> ({F}{f} & {G}{f}) sent2: {J}{h} sent3: ({J}{h} & {H}{h}) -> ¬{H}{g} sent4: ¬{D}{e} -> ¬({A}{d} & {C}{d}) sent5: ¬{A}{a} sent6: ¬{A}{c} -> ¬({GB}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent7: ({F}{f} & {G}{f}) -> ¬{E}{f} sent8: ¬{E}{f} -> ¬{D}{e} | [] | [] | there are non-pedal things. | (Ex): ¬{GB}x | [] | 12 | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it is not a kind of a cerecloth. ; $context$ = sent1: the wellpoint nips typhus and it is anticancer if the fact that the bangle does not trademark is not incorrect. sent2: the segregation is a Milanese. sent3: if the segregation is Milanese and it is a trademarked the bangle is not a kind of a trademarked. sent4: if the iodide is not a coelogyne then that the Minoan is a keeping that does propagate is not right. sent5: the middle does not keep. sent6: if the scut is not a keeping then the fact that the cosigner does pedal but it is not a cerecloth does not hold. sent7: the wellpoint does not vacuum if it does nip typhus and is anticancer. sent8: the iodide is not a coelogyne if the wellpoint is not a kind of a vacuum. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the mogul is a kind of a Scopolia that does not nip tandem. | ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | sent1: the fact that the tandem is not a kind of a veld and/or it is Britannic is not correct. sent2: the araroba is not a Scopolia. sent3: the mogul does not nip tandem if it is not a kind of a technical and is Britannic. sent4: the mogul is not surmountable if it scales wanton and arouses. sent5: the fact that the mogul does not nip stress or it is a kind of an end or both does not hold. sent6: the fact that if the mogul does not filiate peritoneum but it is Britannic then the mogul does not scale araroba is not wrong. sent7: the anthurium does not nip tandem. sent8: the propenoate does arouse. sent9: the uraninite is not Britannic. sent10: that the mogul is not carinal or it does arouse or both is not correct. sent11: the mogul is a kind of a stateliness but it does not filiate JV. sent12: the mogul is not arsenious if it is not a Scopolia and does filiate jalousie. sent13: the mogul is carinal. sent14: that the mogul is Britannic is not incorrect. sent15: that the mogul is a kind of the Scopolia if that the mogul either is not non-carinal or does arouse or both is not right is correct. sent16: the mogul does scale araroba. sent17: everything is a kind of a taxation. sent18: something is Hindu if that it is not an end or it is carinal or both is not true. sent19: the mogul is not cryogenic. sent20: the mogul is not a kind of an immune. sent21: if the fact that the mogul is not carinal and/or it arouses is incorrect then it is a Scopolia. sent22: the fact that that the araroba is not the technical is correct if the araroba is not ontogenetic but it is a stateliness hold. | sent1: ¬(¬{DT}{ga} v {AB}{ga}) sent2: ¬{A}{ep} sent3: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: ({BI}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{GO}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{BM}{a} v {AH}{a}) sent6: (¬{FU}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{FK}{a} sent7: ¬{B}{ih} sent8: {C}{fc} sent9: ¬{AB}{fg} sent10: ¬(¬{D}{a} v {C}{a}) sent11: ({BA}{a} & ¬{EE}{a}) sent12: (¬{A}{a} & {DP}{a}) -> ¬{JB}{a} sent13: {D}{a} sent14: {AB}{a} sent15: ¬({D}{a} v {C}{a}) -> {A}{a} sent16: {FK}{a} sent17: (x): {E}x sent18: (x): ¬(¬{AH}x v {D}x) -> {DF}x sent19: ¬{AG}{a} sent20: ¬{BR}{a} sent21: ¬(¬{D}{a} v {C}{a}) -> {A}{a} sent22: (¬{AK}{ep} & {BA}{ep}) -> ¬{AA}{ep} | [
"sent21 & sent10 -> int1: the mogul is a kind of a Scopolia.;"
] | [
"sent21 & sent10 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] | that the mogul is a Scopolia but it does not nip tandem does not hold. | ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | [
"sent17 -> int2: the fact that the bullfight is a kind of a taxation is true.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the mogul is a kind of a Scopolia that does not nip tandem. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the tandem is not a kind of a veld and/or it is Britannic is not correct. sent2: the araroba is not a Scopolia. sent3: the mogul does not nip tandem if it is not a kind of a technical and is Britannic. sent4: the mogul is not surmountable if it scales wanton and arouses. sent5: the fact that the mogul does not nip stress or it is a kind of an end or both does not hold. sent6: the fact that if the mogul does not filiate peritoneum but it is Britannic then the mogul does not scale araroba is not wrong. sent7: the anthurium does not nip tandem. sent8: the propenoate does arouse. sent9: the uraninite is not Britannic. sent10: that the mogul is not carinal or it does arouse or both is not correct. sent11: the mogul is a kind of a stateliness but it does not filiate JV. sent12: the mogul is not arsenious if it is not a Scopolia and does filiate jalousie. sent13: the mogul is carinal. sent14: that the mogul is Britannic is not incorrect. sent15: that the mogul is a kind of the Scopolia if that the mogul either is not non-carinal or does arouse or both is not right is correct. sent16: the mogul does scale araroba. sent17: everything is a kind of a taxation. sent18: something is Hindu if that it is not an end or it is carinal or both is not true. sent19: the mogul is not cryogenic. sent20: the mogul is not a kind of an immune. sent21: if the fact that the mogul is not carinal and/or it arouses is incorrect then it is a Scopolia. sent22: the fact that that the araroba is not the technical is correct if the araroba is not ontogenetic but it is a stateliness hold. ; $proof$ = | sent21 & sent10 -> int1: the mogul is a kind of a Scopolia.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that there exists something such that if it does not nip filaggrin and is a Todd it is a geek is not true. | ¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x) | sent1: if the ember does not nip filaggrin and is a kind of a Todd it is a kind of a geek. sent2: if the ember nips filaggrin and is a leaf then it does nip boarfish. sent3: the fact that the perithelium does map is not wrong if it is an angered and a Todd. sent4: there exists something such that if it nips filaggrin and is a kind of a Todd then it is a geek. sent5: there is something such that if it scales imprecation and is a kind of a yellowcake then it equilibrates. sent6: if the ember nips filaggrin and it is a Todd then it is a geek. sent7: there is something such that if it is unwearable and it is a internode it is phosphorous. | sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: ({AA}{aa} & {FG}{aa}) -> {HI}{aa} sent3: ({S}{jk} & {AB}{jk}) -> {R}{jk} sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: (Ex): ({ID}x & {HU}x) -> {IE}x sent6: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ({CC}x & {IG}x) -> {BS}x | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it does not nip filaggrin and is a Todd it is a geek is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the ember does not nip filaggrin and is a kind of a Todd it is a kind of a geek. sent2: if the ember nips filaggrin and is a leaf then it does nip boarfish. sent3: the fact that the perithelium does map is not wrong if it is an angered and a Todd. sent4: there exists something such that if it nips filaggrin and is a kind of a Todd then it is a geek. sent5: there is something such that if it scales imprecation and is a kind of a yellowcake then it equilibrates. sent6: if the ember nips filaggrin and it is a Todd then it is a geek. sent7: there is something such that if it is unwearable and it is a internode it is phosphorous. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the shellfire occurs and the localization occurs. | ({B} & {A}) | sent1: the scenicness happens. sent2: the ideographicness occurs but the none does not occur. sent3: the ideographicness occurs. sent4: that the shellfire occurs is caused by that the ideographicness but not the none happens. sent5: if that not the scenicness but the shellfire happens is incorrect the scandalization occurs. | sent1: {C} sent2: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: {AA} sent4: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent5: ¬(¬{C} & {B}) -> {DO} | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the shellfire happens.;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: {B};"
] | both the scandalization and the scission happens. | ({DO} & {AC}) | [] | 5 | 2 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the shellfire occurs and the localization occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the scenicness happens. sent2: the ideographicness occurs but the none does not occur. sent3: the ideographicness occurs. sent4: that the shellfire occurs is caused by that the ideographicness but not the none happens. sent5: if that not the scenicness but the shellfire happens is incorrect the scandalization occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the shellfire happens.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | if that the creamery does scale Armenian hold the fact that the store does not nip Jason is not wrong. | {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} | sent1: the fact that the store nips Jason is not correct if the creamery scales Armenian and it is a Praetorian. sent2: if the store is Praetorian thing that does scale Armenian then the fact that the creamery does nip Jason hold. sent3: if the creamery scales Armenian the store does nip Jason. | sent1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent2: ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent3: {A}{a} -> {C}{b} | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = if that the creamery does scale Armenian hold the fact that the store does not nip Jason is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the store nips Jason is not correct if the creamery scales Armenian and it is a Praetorian. sent2: if the store is Praetorian thing that does scale Armenian then the fact that the creamery does nip Jason hold. sent3: if the creamery scales Armenian the store does nip Jason. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the private is not a kind of a flotsam. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: the debacle is tetanic. sent2: the mayflower quells and is not a forehanded if that the private is not a kind of a flotsam hold. sent3: if the debacle is tetanic the fact that the mayflower quells and is not a kind of a forehanded is not correct. | sent1: {B}{c} sent2: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent3: {B}{c} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the private is not a kind of a flotsam.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the mayflower does quell but it is not a forehanded.; sent3 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the mayflower quells but it is not a forehanded does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent3 & sent1 -> int2: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the private is not a kind of a flotsam. ; $context$ = sent1: the debacle is tetanic. sent2: the mayflower quells and is not a forehanded if that the private is not a kind of a flotsam hold. sent3: if the debacle is tetanic the fact that the mayflower quells and is not a kind of a forehanded is not correct. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the private is not a kind of a flotsam.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the mayflower does quell but it is not a forehanded.; sent3 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the mayflower quells but it is not a forehanded does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Slovenian is not a kind of a Poa. | ¬{A}{b} | sent1: the Slovenian is long-chain if the fact that the sailfish is not a kind of a cynicism and it is not aldermanic is not right. sent2: something is not a Poa if it is long-chain. sent3: something is not a kind of a bay and is not a kind of a bluepoint if it is sanitary. sent4: the fact that the fact that the Slovenian is not a kind of a legionnaire but it nips burrito is right does not hold. sent5: something is not noncompetitive and it is not long-chain if the fact that it does mold is right. sent6: if that something does not mold and it is not insensitive is incorrect it is not noncompetitive. sent7: the fact that the sailfish is both not a cynicism and aldermanic is not true. sent8: the sailfish is a starvation. sent9: the Slovenian is long-chain if that the sailfish is aldermanic is right. sent10: the sailfish is not a kind of a mercy. sent11: the fact that the sailfish is both not a cynicism and not a boycott is wrong. sent12: the sumac is not a cynicism. sent13: the fact that the Slovenian is both not a Poa and not aldermanic is not correct. sent14: the sealant is not insensitive if the fact that the metabolite is not curricular but it is insensitive hold. sent15: the Slovenian is aldermanic if that the sailfish is not long-chain and is not a Poa does not hold. sent16: the sailfish is not a Poa. sent17: something is not curricular and is insensitive if it is a bluepoint. sent18: if the fact that the sailfish is both not noncompetitive and not long-chain is false the Slovenian is a Poa. sent19: the fact that something is not noncompetitive but non-long-chain does not hold if it does mold. sent20: the metabolite is a bluepoint if the burrito is not a bay and it is not a bluepoint. sent21: the sailfish does mold if the sealant is not insensitive. sent22: the fact that the sailfish is not a cynicism and it is non-aldermanic is not true. sent23: the fact that the sailfish is not a kind of a cynicism and it is not long-chain does not hold. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent2: (x): {B}x -> ¬{A}x sent3: (x): {I}x -> (¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) sent4: ¬(¬{ED}{b} & {FO}{b}) sent5: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: {HH}{a} sent9: {AB}{a} -> {B}{b} sent10: ¬{DM}{a} sent11: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{DJ}{a}) sent12: ¬{AA}{bo} sent13: ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent14: (¬{F}{d} & {E}{d}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent15: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {AB}{b} sent16: ¬{A}{a} sent17: (x): {G}x -> (¬{F}x & {E}x) sent18: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{b} sent19: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) sent20: (¬{H}{e} & ¬{G}{e}) -> {G}{d} sent21: ¬{E}{c} -> {D}{a} sent22: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent23: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | [
"sent1 & sent22 -> int1: the Slovenian is long-chain.; sent2 -> int2: the Slovenian is not a Poa if it is long-chain.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent22 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent2 -> int2: {B}{b} -> ¬{A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the Slovenian is a Poa. | {A}{b} | [
"sent19 -> int3: that the fact that the fact that the sailfish is competitive but not long-chain is not wrong is not correct is correct if it is a kind of a molding.; sent17 -> int4: if the fact that the metabolite is a kind of a bluepoint hold then it is a kind of non-curricular thing that is insensitive.; sent3 -> int5: the burrito is not a bay and is not a bluepoint if it is sanitary.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Slovenian is not a kind of a Poa. ; $context$ = sent1: the Slovenian is long-chain if the fact that the sailfish is not a kind of a cynicism and it is not aldermanic is not right. sent2: something is not a Poa if it is long-chain. sent3: something is not a kind of a bay and is not a kind of a bluepoint if it is sanitary. sent4: the fact that the fact that the Slovenian is not a kind of a legionnaire but it nips burrito is right does not hold. sent5: something is not noncompetitive and it is not long-chain if the fact that it does mold is right. sent6: if that something does not mold and it is not insensitive is incorrect it is not noncompetitive. sent7: the fact that the sailfish is both not a cynicism and aldermanic is not true. sent8: the sailfish is a starvation. sent9: the Slovenian is long-chain if that the sailfish is aldermanic is right. sent10: the sailfish is not a kind of a mercy. sent11: the fact that the sailfish is both not a cynicism and not a boycott is wrong. sent12: the sumac is not a cynicism. sent13: the fact that the Slovenian is both not a Poa and not aldermanic is not correct. sent14: the sealant is not insensitive if the fact that the metabolite is not curricular but it is insensitive hold. sent15: the Slovenian is aldermanic if that the sailfish is not long-chain and is not a Poa does not hold. sent16: the sailfish is not a Poa. sent17: something is not curricular and is insensitive if it is a bluepoint. sent18: if the fact that the sailfish is both not noncompetitive and not long-chain is false the Slovenian is a Poa. sent19: the fact that something is not noncompetitive but non-long-chain does not hold if it does mold. sent20: the metabolite is a bluepoint if the burrito is not a bay and it is not a bluepoint. sent21: the sailfish does mold if the sealant is not insensitive. sent22: the fact that the sailfish is not a cynicism and it is non-aldermanic is not true. sent23: the fact that the sailfish is not a kind of a cynicism and it is not long-chain does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent22 -> int1: the Slovenian is long-chain.; sent2 -> int2: the Slovenian is not a Poa if it is long-chain.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that there exists something such that if it is a deregulation the fact that it is vibrionic and/or does not throw is false does not hold. | ¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: if something scales holiday then that it is a Epirus and/or it is not sepaloid is incorrect. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a deregulation then it is vibrionic or it does not throw or both. sent3: if the propenonitrile is a deregulation then the fact that it is vibrionic and/or it is not a kind of a throw is false. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a muchness that it does symmetrize and/or it does not contribute is wrong. | sent1: (x): {HG}x -> ¬({FH}x v ¬{BC}x) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): {BN}x -> ¬({GK}x v ¬{HC}x) | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | there exists something such that if that it scales holiday is not false that it is a Epirus and/or is not sepaloid is incorrect. | (Ex): {HG}x -> ¬({FH}x v ¬{BC}x) | [
"sent1 -> int1: if the lampshade does scale holiday the fact that it is a Epirus or it is not sepaloid or both is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is a deregulation the fact that it is vibrionic and/or does not throw is false does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if something scales holiday then that it is a Epirus and/or it is not sepaloid is incorrect. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a deregulation then it is vibrionic or it does not throw or both. sent3: if the propenonitrile is a deregulation then the fact that it is vibrionic and/or it is not a kind of a throw is false. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a muchness that it does symmetrize and/or it does not contribute is wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is a bivalve the fact that it is impolitic and it is not a cock is incorrect. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: the ammonite scales niff and does not filiate mountain if it scales boring. sent2: if that something is a kind of a bivalve is not false then that it is impolitic and it does not cock does not hold. | sent1: {AJ}{at} -> ({BM}{at} & ¬{HD}{at}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the fact that the defeatist is not politic and not a cock is not right if it is a bivalve.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a bivalve the fact that it is impolitic and it is not a cock is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the ammonite scales niff and does not filiate mountain if it scales boring. sent2: if that something is a kind of a bivalve is not false then that it is impolitic and it does not cock does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: the fact that the defeatist is not politic and not a cock is not right if it is a bivalve.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the meteorite filiates predicator. | {C}{a} | sent1: the fact that the hone is not a kind of a Lithuanian and it is not a Kurdish is not correct. sent2: something is not ethereal if it is a Lithuanian. sent3: if the meteorite does filiate predicator it is not a Kurdish. sent4: something is not ethereal if that it is not a Lithuanian and is not a kind of a Kurdish does not hold. sent5: if the meteorite is ethereal but it does not filiate predicator then the hone is not non-ballistics. sent6: the hone is not ballistics. sent7: the fact that the hone is a Kurdish is right if the meteorite is not ballistics and it does not filiate predicator. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: {C}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {A}{aa} sent6: ¬{A}{aa} sent7: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {AB}{aa} | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the hone is not a Lithuanian and not Kurdish is not right it is not ethereal.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the hone is not ethereal is right.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the hone is not ethereal and it is not ballistics.;"
] | [
"sent4 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa}; int2 & sent6 -> int3: (¬{B}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa});"
] | that the hone is not a kind of a disgusted and is not eugenic is wrong. | ¬(¬{IB}{aa} & ¬{GR}{aa}) | [] | 6 | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the meteorite filiates predicator. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the hone is not a kind of a Lithuanian and it is not a Kurdish is not correct. sent2: something is not ethereal if it is a Lithuanian. sent3: if the meteorite does filiate predicator it is not a Kurdish. sent4: something is not ethereal if that it is not a Lithuanian and is not a kind of a Kurdish does not hold. sent5: if the meteorite is ethereal but it does not filiate predicator then the hone is not non-ballistics. sent6: the hone is not ballistics. sent7: the fact that the hone is a Kurdish is right if the meteorite is not ballistics and it does not filiate predicator. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the hone is not a Lithuanian and not Kurdish is not right it is not ethereal.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the hone is not ethereal is right.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the hone is not ethereal and it is not ballistics.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there exists something such that if that it does filiate superposition and it is not a flecainide is not true then that it is non-pyrogallic hold is wrong. | ¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: the lepidopteron is not pyrogallic if it does not filiate superposition. sent2: the dacha does not corrupt if that it is pyrogallic and it is non-vitreous is false. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that it does filiate superposition and it is a flecainide does not hold then it is not pyrogallic. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not filiate superposition then it is not pyrogallic. sent5: there is something such that if the fact that it does filiate superposition and it is not a kind of a flecainide is false then it is pyrogallic. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a flecainide it is not pyrogallic. sent7: there exists something such that if that it is a kind of a Dorian and it is not a technical is false then the fact that it is not a Cleridae hold. sent8: the lepidopteron is not pyrogallic if that it filiates superposition and is not a flecainide does not hold. sent9: if that the lepidopteron does filiate superposition but it is not a flecainide is wrong it is pyrogallic. sent10: if the fact that the lepidopteron filiates superposition and is a kind of a flecainide is not true then it is not pyrogallic. sent11: if the lepidopteron filiates superposition but it is not a flecainide then it is not pyrogallic. sent12: that there exists something such that if that it is a kind of a Iraqi and it does not filiate Trafalgar does not hold then it is not a wicket is not false. sent13: there exists something such that if it filiates superposition and it is not a flecainide then it is not pyrogallic. sent14: if that something is a kind of a flecainide and does not shine does not hold it is not a pit. | sent1: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: ¬({B}{dg} & ¬{BA}{dg}) -> ¬{J}{dg} sent3: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent5: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent6: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent7: (Ex): ¬({HO}x & ¬{GJ}x) -> ¬{HQ}x sent8: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent9: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent10: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent11: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent12: (Ex): ¬({BE}x & ¬{GF}x) -> ¬{JD}x sent13: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent14: (x): ¬({AB}x & ¬{GN}x) -> ¬{FL}x | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | the lepidopteron is not a pit if that it is a flecainide and it does not shine is not correct. | ¬({AB}{aa} & ¬{GN}{aa}) -> ¬{FL}{aa} | [
"sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if that it does filiate superposition and it is not a flecainide is not true then that it is non-pyrogallic hold is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the lepidopteron is not pyrogallic if it does not filiate superposition. sent2: the dacha does not corrupt if that it is pyrogallic and it is non-vitreous is false. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that it does filiate superposition and it is a flecainide does not hold then it is not pyrogallic. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not filiate superposition then it is not pyrogallic. sent5: there is something such that if the fact that it does filiate superposition and it is not a kind of a flecainide is false then it is pyrogallic. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a flecainide it is not pyrogallic. sent7: there exists something such that if that it is a kind of a Dorian and it is not a technical is false then the fact that it is not a Cleridae hold. sent8: the lepidopteron is not pyrogallic if that it filiates superposition and is not a flecainide does not hold. sent9: if that the lepidopteron does filiate superposition but it is not a flecainide is wrong it is pyrogallic. sent10: if the fact that the lepidopteron filiates superposition and is a kind of a flecainide is not true then it is not pyrogallic. sent11: if the lepidopteron filiates superposition but it is not a flecainide then it is not pyrogallic. sent12: that there exists something such that if that it is a kind of a Iraqi and it does not filiate Trafalgar does not hold then it is not a wicket is not false. sent13: there exists something such that if it filiates superposition and it is not a flecainide then it is not pyrogallic. sent14: if that something is a kind of a flecainide and does not shine does not hold it is not a pit. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Jewbush is a kind of a Cuban. | {D}{e} | sent1: if the paynim is both not fascista and a spastic then it is not stenographic. sent2: if the samisen does not scale briard the boat is stenographic. sent3: the paynim scales Persephone. sent4: if the paynim is not unintrusive the Vela scales Persephone. sent5: the Jewbush is not a kind of a Cuban if the fact that the Vela is stenographic but it is not phonic is wrong. sent6: the fact that the paynim is a kind of a fascista is not correct. sent7: the samisen does not scale briard if the Vela is unintrusive. sent8: if something is stenographic then it does not scale Persephone and/or it does not scale briard. sent9: the Jewbush is stenographic if the paynim is not stenographic and is a kind of a lacteal. sent10: The Persephone scales paynim. sent11: the fact that the Vela is phonic and it is unintrusive is false. sent12: the Jewbush is a Cuban if the boat is stenographic. sent13: that the Vela is both phonic and not intrusive does not hold if the paynim does scale Persephone. sent14: that the samisen does not scale briard is true if that that the Vela is both phonic and not unintrusive is wrong hold. sent15: the paynim is spastic and is unseductive. sent16: if something does not scale Persephone or does not scale briard or both then it is not a kind of a Cuban. | sent1: (¬{G}{a} & {F}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: ¬{B}{c} -> {C}{d} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: ¬{AB}{a} -> {A}{b} sent5: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) -> ¬{D}{e} sent6: ¬{G}{a} sent7: {AB}{b} -> ¬{B}{c} sent8: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) sent9: (¬{C}{a} & {E}{a}) -> {C}{e} sent10: {AC}{aa} sent11: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent12: {C}{d} -> {D}{e} sent13: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent14: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent15: ({F}{a} & {J}{a}) sent16: (x): (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{D}x | [] | [] | that the Jewbush is non-Cuban is correct. | ¬{D}{e} | [
"sent16 -> int1: if the Jewbush does not scale Persephone or it does not scale briard or both then it is not a Cuban.; sent8 -> int2: if the Jewbush is stenographic it does not scale Persephone and/or does not scale briard.; sent15 -> int3: the paynim is a kind of a spastic.; sent6 & int3 -> int4: the paynim is not fascista but it is a kind of a spastic.; sent1 & int4 -> int5: the paynim is not stenographic.;"
] | 7 | 4 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Jewbush is a kind of a Cuban. ; $context$ = sent1: if the paynim is both not fascista and a spastic then it is not stenographic. sent2: if the samisen does not scale briard the boat is stenographic. sent3: the paynim scales Persephone. sent4: if the paynim is not unintrusive the Vela scales Persephone. sent5: the Jewbush is not a kind of a Cuban if the fact that the Vela is stenographic but it is not phonic is wrong. sent6: the fact that the paynim is a kind of a fascista is not correct. sent7: the samisen does not scale briard if the Vela is unintrusive. sent8: if something is stenographic then it does not scale Persephone and/or it does not scale briard. sent9: the Jewbush is stenographic if the paynim is not stenographic and is a kind of a lacteal. sent10: The Persephone scales paynim. sent11: the fact that the Vela is phonic and it is unintrusive is false. sent12: the Jewbush is a Cuban if the boat is stenographic. sent13: that the Vela is both phonic and not intrusive does not hold if the paynim does scale Persephone. sent14: that the samisen does not scale briard is true if that that the Vela is both phonic and not unintrusive is wrong hold. sent15: the paynim is spastic and is unseductive. sent16: if something does not scale Persephone or does not scale briard or both then it is not a kind of a Cuban. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the vellum is non-Augustan thing that is not a sax is not correct. | ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | sent1: the vellum is an allegory if it filiates Kiowa. sent2: that the fact that the vellum is Augustan but it is not the sax does not hold if the vellum does not crab morphine is not wrong. sent3: the vellum is not a roadster if there exists something such that that it is both not impolitic and anosmic is not true. sent4: there is something such that the fact that it is subjacent thing that peregrinates is not right. sent5: that something is non-Augustan thing that is not a sax does not hold if it does not crab morphine. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is not subjacent and peregrinates is correct is not right then the vellum does not crab morphine. sent7: if something is an allegory then it crabs morphine. sent8: something is not Augustan and it is not a sax if it does crab morphine. sent9: the fact that the subdivider is a kind of non-subjacent thing that scales Arab is not true. | sent1: {E}{a} -> {D}{a} sent2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{EJ}x & {AN}x) -> ¬{BH}{a} sent4: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent7: (x): {D}x -> {A}x sent8: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{ci} & {HC}{ci}) | [
"sent5 -> int1: if the vellum does not crab morphine that it is a kind of non-Augustan thing that is not a sax is incorrect.;"
] | [
"sent5 -> int1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a});"
] | the vellum is not Augustan and is not a sax. | (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | [
"sent8 -> int2: if the vellum crabs morphine it is non-Augustan thing that is not a sax.; sent7 -> int3: that the vellum crabs morphine is not false if it is an allegory.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the vellum is non-Augustan thing that is not a sax is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the vellum is an allegory if it filiates Kiowa. sent2: that the fact that the vellum is Augustan but it is not the sax does not hold if the vellum does not crab morphine is not wrong. sent3: the vellum is not a roadster if there exists something such that that it is both not impolitic and anosmic is not true. sent4: there is something such that the fact that it is subjacent thing that peregrinates is not right. sent5: that something is non-Augustan thing that is not a sax does not hold if it does not crab morphine. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is not subjacent and peregrinates is correct is not right then the vellum does not crab morphine. sent7: if something is an allegory then it crabs morphine. sent8: something is not Augustan and it is not a sax if it does crab morphine. sent9: the fact that the subdivider is a kind of non-subjacent thing that scales Arab is not true. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> int1: if the vellum does not crab morphine that it is a kind of non-Augustan thing that is not a sax is incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the fact that the rhinovirus is not a kind of a pioneer but it is a Persephone does not hold is not incorrect. | ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: the CPU does filiate Ventose and does dispose if the spouse does not promise. sent2: everything is not a mismanagement but foreign. sent3: the shag is a Persephone or it nips superposition or both if there exists something such that it filiates Ventose. sent4: the rhinovirus is a pyrography if the shag nips superposition. sent5: if the shag is a kind of a Persephone the rhinovirus is a pyrography. sent6: something is not a pioneer and is a Persephone if that it nips superposition is right. sent7: if that something is not a mismanagement or it does snowmobile or both is not incorrect the spouse does not promise. sent8: there exists something such that it does not nip superposition. sent9: the fact that the rhinovirus is not a pioneer and is a Persephone does not hold if there is something such that it does not nip superposition. | sent1: ¬{F}{d} -> ({D}{c} & {E}{c}) sent2: (x): (¬{G}x & {I}x) sent3: (x): {D}x -> ({C}{b} v {A}{b}) sent4: {A}{b} -> {BC}{a} sent5: {C}{b} -> {BC}{a} sent6: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent7: (x): (¬{G}x v {H}x) -> ¬{F}{d} sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"sent8 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the rhinovirus is not a pioneer but a Persephone hold. | (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"sent6 -> int1: if the rhinovirus does nip superposition then it does not pioneer and it is a kind of a Persephone.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the fact that the rhinovirus is not a kind of a pioneer but it is a Persephone does not hold is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the CPU does filiate Ventose and does dispose if the spouse does not promise. sent2: everything is not a mismanagement but foreign. sent3: the shag is a Persephone or it nips superposition or both if there exists something such that it filiates Ventose. sent4: the rhinovirus is a pyrography if the shag nips superposition. sent5: if the shag is a kind of a Persephone the rhinovirus is a pyrography. sent6: something is not a pioneer and is a Persephone if that it nips superposition is right. sent7: if that something is not a mismanagement or it does snowmobile or both is not incorrect the spouse does not promise. sent8: there exists something such that it does not nip superposition. sent9: the fact that the rhinovirus is not a pioneer and is a Persephone does not hold if there is something such that it does not nip superposition. ; $proof$ = | sent8 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the chute does not scale firefly or it does crab elytron or both. | (¬{E}{b} v {D}{b}) | sent1: the thrower is a kind of a cracking. sent2: the flophouse is a kind of an oblique and it is a delavirdine. sent3: the chute scales tailfin. sent4: the chute does scale firefly. sent5: if that something is colorless or it is not a kind of a cracking or both is not right it is not a Montaigne. sent6: the chute is not a cracking if the flophouse is a kind of a Montaigne and it is colorless. sent7: that something is not a Parr and does undertake is not wrong if it is not a modeler. sent8: the flophouse is colorless. sent9: that the chute is either not a mulch or a modeler or both is not true. sent10: something is not a kind of a modeler if the fact that it does not scale araroba and it is a modeler is wrong. sent11: the chute is a Montaigne and is campylotropous. sent12: the letters does not crab elytron. sent13: the flophouse is a kind of a Montaigne. sent14: if the araroba does not nip Formicidae that it does not scale araroba and it is a modeler does not hold. sent15: the criminal is a cracking. sent16: the burdock scales firefly. sent17: that the fact that the flophouse is either colorless or not a cracking or both is not wrong does not hold if the chlorambucil does waste. sent18: if the chute does not crab elytron then it is a Montaigne. sent19: if something is not a cracking then the fact that it either does not scale firefly or does crab elytron or both is not correct. sent20: the chute does not scale firefly and/or it does crab elytron if the flophouse is not a Montaigne. | sent1: {C}{do} sent2: ({EC}{a} & {JH}{a}) sent3: {AG}{b} sent4: {E}{b} sent5: (x): ¬({B}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{H}x & {G}x) sent8: {B}{a} sent9: ¬(¬{CH}{b} v {I}{b}) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & {I}x) -> ¬{I}x sent11: ({A}{b} & {CJ}{b}) sent12: ¬{D}{ij} sent13: {A}{a} sent14: ¬{J}{d} -> ¬(¬{K}{d} & {I}{d}) sent15: {C}{cq} sent16: {E}{im} sent17: {F}{c} -> ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent18: ¬{D}{b} -> {A}{b} sent19: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{E}x v {D}x) sent20: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{E}{b} v {D}{b}) | [
"sent13 & sent8 -> int1: the flophouse is a kind of a Montaigne and it is not colorful.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the chute does not crack.; sent19 -> int3: if the chute does not crack then that it does not scale firefly or it crabs elytron or both does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent13 & sent8 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 & sent6 -> int2: ¬{C}{b}; sent19 -> int3: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬(¬{E}{b} v {D}{b}); int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the chute does not scale firefly or crabs elytron or both. | (¬{E}{b} v {D}{b}) | [
"sent5 -> int4: if that the flophouse is colorless and/or not a cracking is not correct then it is not a Montaigne.; sent7 -> int5: the araroba is not a kind of a Parr and undertakes if it is not a modeler.; sent10 -> int6: the araroba is not a kind of a modeler if that it does not scale araroba and it is a modeler is not right.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the chute does not scale firefly or it does crab elytron or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the thrower is a kind of a cracking. sent2: the flophouse is a kind of an oblique and it is a delavirdine. sent3: the chute scales tailfin. sent4: the chute does scale firefly. sent5: if that something is colorless or it is not a kind of a cracking or both is not right it is not a Montaigne. sent6: the chute is not a cracking if the flophouse is a kind of a Montaigne and it is colorless. sent7: that something is not a Parr and does undertake is not wrong if it is not a modeler. sent8: the flophouse is colorless. sent9: that the chute is either not a mulch or a modeler or both is not true. sent10: something is not a kind of a modeler if the fact that it does not scale araroba and it is a modeler is wrong. sent11: the chute is a Montaigne and is campylotropous. sent12: the letters does not crab elytron. sent13: the flophouse is a kind of a Montaigne. sent14: if the araroba does not nip Formicidae that it does not scale araroba and it is a modeler does not hold. sent15: the criminal is a cracking. sent16: the burdock scales firefly. sent17: that the fact that the flophouse is either colorless or not a cracking or both is not wrong does not hold if the chlorambucil does waste. sent18: if the chute does not crab elytron then it is a Montaigne. sent19: if something is not a cracking then the fact that it either does not scale firefly or does crab elytron or both is not correct. sent20: the chute does not scale firefly and/or it does crab elytron if the flophouse is not a Montaigne. ; $proof$ = | sent13 & sent8 -> int1: the flophouse is a kind of a Montaigne and it is not colorful.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the chute does not crack.; sent19 -> int3: if the chute does not crack then that it does not scale firefly or it crabs elytron or both does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Liechtensteiner is not hydraulics. | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: the college does not filiate abbreviation if the fact that the boneshaker filiate abbreviation and nips Brezhnev does not hold. sent2: if the funicle is a kind of non-hydraulics thing that does nip associability the Liechtensteiner is not a kumquat. sent3: if the funicle is not a kumquat then that it nips associability is not incorrect. sent4: the funicle does nip associability. sent5: something is not a kumquat if the fact that it is a kumquat and it packs is wrong. sent6: the Liechtensteiner is not a Muslim if the funicle does not nip associability and is hydraulics. sent7: the funicle is not a Muslim if the Liechtensteiner does not nip associability but it is hydraulics. sent8: something that does not filiate abbreviation is a kind of non-paradigmatic thing that is not genetic. sent9: the funicle does not nip associability if the fact that the Liechtensteiner is non-Muslim a kumquat is not wrong. sent10: if that the mustelid scales litchi and mourns is incorrect the fact that it does not scales litchi is true. sent11: the fact that the funicle is a kind of non-Muslim thing that does nip associability hold if it is not a kumquat. sent12: the Liechtensteiner is not hydraulics if the funicle is not a kind of a Muslim and nips associability. sent13: the Liechtensteiner is not a kumquat. sent14: that the mustelid does scale litchi and it mourns is wrong. sent15: the tooth is non-paradigmatic if the college is not non-paradigmatic and is not genetic. sent16: the Liechtensteiner does nip oration if it is not hydraulics. sent17: something is a utterer if it is not paradigmatic. sent18: the funicle is uninucleate. sent19: that the funicle either does not pack or is not a kumquat or both is not true if the tooth is a utterer. | sent1: ¬({F}{e} & {H}{e}) -> ¬{F}{d} sent2: (¬{B}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{a} sent4: {AB}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent6: (¬{AB}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} sent7: (¬{AB}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{AA}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{G}x) sent9: (¬{AA}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{AB}{a} sent10: ¬({I}{f} & {J}{f}) -> ¬{I}{f} sent11: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent12: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: ¬{A}{b} sent14: ¬({I}{f} & {J}{f}) sent15: (¬{E}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent16: ¬{B}{b} -> {BO}{b} sent17: (x): ¬{E}x -> {D}x sent18: {FD}{a} sent19: {D}{c} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) | [] | [] | the Liechtensteiner is hydraulics. | {B}{b} | [
"sent17 -> int1: if the tooth is not paradigmatic then that it is a kind of a utterer is not wrong.; sent8 -> int2: if the fact that the college does not filiate abbreviation hold then it is non-paradigmatic and is not genetic.; sent10 & sent14 -> int3: the mustelid does not scale litchi.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that it does not scale litchi.;"
] | 10 | 2 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Liechtensteiner is not hydraulics. ; $context$ = sent1: the college does not filiate abbreviation if the fact that the boneshaker filiate abbreviation and nips Brezhnev does not hold. sent2: if the funicle is a kind of non-hydraulics thing that does nip associability the Liechtensteiner is not a kumquat. sent3: if the funicle is not a kumquat then that it nips associability is not incorrect. sent4: the funicle does nip associability. sent5: something is not a kumquat if the fact that it is a kumquat and it packs is wrong. sent6: the Liechtensteiner is not a Muslim if the funicle does not nip associability and is hydraulics. sent7: the funicle is not a Muslim if the Liechtensteiner does not nip associability but it is hydraulics. sent8: something that does not filiate abbreviation is a kind of non-paradigmatic thing that is not genetic. sent9: the funicle does not nip associability if the fact that the Liechtensteiner is non-Muslim a kumquat is not wrong. sent10: if that the mustelid scales litchi and mourns is incorrect the fact that it does not scales litchi is true. sent11: the fact that the funicle is a kind of non-Muslim thing that does nip associability hold if it is not a kumquat. sent12: the Liechtensteiner is not hydraulics if the funicle is not a kind of a Muslim and nips associability. sent13: the Liechtensteiner is not a kumquat. sent14: that the mustelid does scale litchi and it mourns is wrong. sent15: the tooth is non-paradigmatic if the college is not non-paradigmatic and is not genetic. sent16: the Liechtensteiner does nip oration if it is not hydraulics. sent17: something is a utterer if it is not paradigmatic. sent18: the funicle is uninucleate. sent19: that the funicle either does not pack or is not a kumquat or both is not true if the tooth is a utterer. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the footing occurs. | {B} | sent1: the indulgence does not occur if that the riposte and the footing occurs is incorrect. sent2: that the immobilization does not occur brings about that the riposte happens and the footing occurs. sent3: if the fact that both the scaling salmonberry and the splashiness happens is not right then that the footing does not occur is not wrong. sent4: if the scaling salmonberry does not occur then the foot does not occur. sent5: the coarseness does not occur if the fact that both the parameter and the waltz happens is not true. sent6: that both the scaling salmonberry and the splashiness occurs is not true. sent7: the squeezing does not occur if that both the filiating switcher and the shears occurs is wrong. sent8: if the fact that both the Tibetan and the gracefulness happens does not hold then the fact that the nipping Uighur does not occur is right. sent9: that both the riposting and the footing happens is not right if the immobilization does not occur. | sent1: ¬({A} & {B}) -> ¬{FI} sent2: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent3: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent4: ¬{AA} -> ¬{B} sent5: ¬({GS} & {FE}) -> ¬{DT} sent6: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent7: ¬({J} & {HM}) -> ¬{FU} sent8: ¬({FF} & {DO}) -> ¬{FP} sent9: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & {B}) | [
"sent3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | the footing happens. | {B} | [] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the footing occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the indulgence does not occur if that the riposte and the footing occurs is incorrect. sent2: that the immobilization does not occur brings about that the riposte happens and the footing occurs. sent3: if the fact that both the scaling salmonberry and the splashiness happens is not right then that the footing does not occur is not wrong. sent4: if the scaling salmonberry does not occur then the foot does not occur. sent5: the coarseness does not occur if the fact that both the parameter and the waltz happens is not true. sent6: that both the scaling salmonberry and the splashiness occurs is not true. sent7: the squeezing does not occur if that both the filiating switcher and the shears occurs is wrong. sent8: if the fact that both the Tibetan and the gracefulness happens does not hold then the fact that the nipping Uighur does not occur is right. sent9: that both the riposting and the footing happens is not right if the immobilization does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fenoprofen does not nip gracelessness. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: the Chinook does sentimentalise. sent2: there exists something such that it does sentimentalise. sent3: the Chinook does not sentimentalise if something that filiates scramble nips gracelessness. sent4: something is both a Monod and ontological. sent5: the fenoprofen does not nip gracelessness if something that filiates scramble sentimentalises. sent6: something filiates scramble. sent7: the Taurus is a kind of a bulwark that filiates scramble. sent8: something is a kind of a shipper that does filiate Ontario. sent9: the Chinook does filiate scramble. sent10: if something sentimentalises and nips gracelessness the fact that the Chinook does not filiate scramble is not incorrect. sent11: The scramble does filiate Chinook. sent12: the Chinook is a naboom and dependable. | sent1: {B}{a} sent2: (Ex): {B}x sent3: (x): ({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: (Ex): ({CO}x & {FN}x) sent5: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{b} sent6: (Ex): {A}x sent7: ({FM}{ht} & {A}{ht}) sent8: (Ex): ({DD}x & {JI}x) sent9: {A}{a} sent10: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent11: {AA}{aa} sent12: ({EN}{a} & {T}{a}) | [
"sent9 & sent1 -> int1: the Chinook does filiate scramble and it sentimentalises.; int1 -> int2: something filiates scramble and it sentimentalises.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 & sent1 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x); int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fenoprofen does not nip gracelessness. ; $context$ = sent1: the Chinook does sentimentalise. sent2: there exists something such that it does sentimentalise. sent3: the Chinook does not sentimentalise if something that filiates scramble nips gracelessness. sent4: something is both a Monod and ontological. sent5: the fenoprofen does not nip gracelessness if something that filiates scramble sentimentalises. sent6: something filiates scramble. sent7: the Taurus is a kind of a bulwark that filiates scramble. sent8: something is a kind of a shipper that does filiate Ontario. sent9: the Chinook does filiate scramble. sent10: if something sentimentalises and nips gracelessness the fact that the Chinook does not filiate scramble is not incorrect. sent11: The scramble does filiate Chinook. sent12: the Chinook is a naboom and dependable. ; $proof$ = | sent9 & sent1 -> int1: the Chinook does filiate scramble and it sentimentalises.; int1 -> int2: something filiates scramble and it sentimentalises.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that both the lucifugousness and the crabbing radioscopy happens is false. | ¬({B} & {C}) | sent1: if the self-fertilization does not occur then that both the inclusion and the curliness occurs is not right. sent2: the melodicness happens. sent3: that the sensitization does not occur prevents the anuranness. sent4: the fact that the gangrene and the crabbing radioscopy happens is right if the domestication does not occur. sent5: if the melodicness occurs then the lucifugousness happens. sent6: the return happens and the gangrene happens. sent7: if the melodicness does not occur the fact that both the lucifugousness and the crabbing radioscopy occurs is wrong. sent8: if that the ambulatoriness and the non-yogisticness happens is not correct then the cacophony does not occur. sent9: the domestication does not occur if that the inclusion happens and the curliness happens is wrong. sent10: both the crabbing radioscopy and the domestication occurs. sent11: if both the non-lucifugousness and the non-melodicness happens then the incidentness happens. sent12: the domestication occurs. sent13: that the reverence and the mamboing happens triggers that the self-fertilization does not occur. sent14: the melodicness does not occur and the amphotericness does not occur if the anuranness does not occur. sent15: the lucifugousness does not occur but the filiating manslaughter happens if the cacophony does not occur. | sent1: ¬{K} -> ¬({F} & {G}) sent2: {A} sent3: ¬{P} -> ¬{I} sent4: ¬{D} -> ({HT} & {C}) sent5: {A} -> {B} sent6: ({FG} & {HT}) sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent8: ¬({O} & ¬{N}) -> ¬{J} sent9: ¬({F} & {G}) -> ¬{D} sent10: ({C} & {D}) sent11: (¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {BR} sent12: {D} sent13: ({L} & {M}) -> ¬{K} sent14: ¬{I} -> (¬{A} & ¬{H}) sent15: ¬{J} -> (¬{B} & {E}) | [
"sent5 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the lucifugousness happens is not incorrect.; sent10 -> int2: the crabbing radioscopy occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 & sent2 -> int1: {B}; sent10 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | both the incidentness and the gangrene happens. | ({BR} & {HT}) | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that both the lucifugousness and the crabbing radioscopy happens is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the self-fertilization does not occur then that both the inclusion and the curliness occurs is not right. sent2: the melodicness happens. sent3: that the sensitization does not occur prevents the anuranness. sent4: the fact that the gangrene and the crabbing radioscopy happens is right if the domestication does not occur. sent5: if the melodicness occurs then the lucifugousness happens. sent6: the return happens and the gangrene happens. sent7: if the melodicness does not occur the fact that both the lucifugousness and the crabbing radioscopy occurs is wrong. sent8: if that the ambulatoriness and the non-yogisticness happens is not correct then the cacophony does not occur. sent9: the domestication does not occur if that the inclusion happens and the curliness happens is wrong. sent10: both the crabbing radioscopy and the domestication occurs. sent11: if both the non-lucifugousness and the non-melodicness happens then the incidentness happens. sent12: the domestication occurs. sent13: that the reverence and the mamboing happens triggers that the self-fertilization does not occur. sent14: the melodicness does not occur and the amphotericness does not occur if the anuranness does not occur. sent15: the lucifugousness does not occur but the filiating manslaughter happens if the cacophony does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent5 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the lucifugousness happens is not incorrect.; sent10 -> int2: the crabbing radioscopy occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the fact that the chiropodist does not nip nefazodone and is not consular is wrong if the chiropodist is a flare is not true. | ¬({A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})) | sent1: that something is not a kind of an impact and it is not a Gypsy is incorrect if it does scale Dactylorhiza. sent2: the machicolation is not residuary and does not nip nefazodone if it is a foresight. sent3: if the chiropodist nips nefazodone the fact that it is not a Polygonatum and it is a kind of a backyard is not correct. sent4: the fact that something does not nip nefazodone and is consular does not hold if it flares. sent5: if that the chiropodist is a flare hold it does not nip nefazodone and it is not consular. sent6: the fact that something is not a Hangzhou and crabs Hexanchidae is not correct if it is a papering. sent7: the fact that something does not nip nefazodone and it is not consular is false if it does flare. sent8: that something does nip nefazodone and is not consular does not hold if it does flare. sent9: if something is alimentative that the fact that it is not a Eurotium and it filiates lemon is right does not hold. sent10: the fact that the chiropodist does nip nefazodone and is not consular is incorrect if it does flare. sent11: that the fact that something does not filiate chiropodist and it does not filiate farmstead hold is wrong if it is a Stoicism. sent12: that the setting is a Stoicism and is not consular is not right if it is a kind of a lygaeid. | sent1: (x): {CF}x -> ¬(¬{CD}x & ¬{CI}x) sent2: {ET}{bg} -> (¬{EH}{bg} & ¬{AA}{bg}) sent3: {AA}{aa} -> ¬(¬{CN}{aa} & {IB}{aa}) sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): {EN}x -> ¬(¬{BS}x & {IO}x) sent7: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent9: (x): {DD}x -> ¬(¬{AJ}x & {GN}x) sent10: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent11: (x): {CL}x -> ¬(¬{CO}x & ¬{GD}x) sent12: {GU}{co} -> ¬({CL}{co} & ¬{AB}{co}) | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that the fact that the chiropodist does not nip nefazodone and is not consular is wrong if the chiropodist is a flare is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is not a kind of an impact and it is not a Gypsy is incorrect if it does scale Dactylorhiza. sent2: the machicolation is not residuary and does not nip nefazodone if it is a foresight. sent3: if the chiropodist nips nefazodone the fact that it is not a Polygonatum and it is a kind of a backyard is not correct. sent4: the fact that something does not nip nefazodone and is consular does not hold if it flares. sent5: if that the chiropodist is a flare hold it does not nip nefazodone and it is not consular. sent6: the fact that something is not a Hangzhou and crabs Hexanchidae is not correct if it is a papering. sent7: the fact that something does not nip nefazodone and it is not consular is false if it does flare. sent8: that something does nip nefazodone and is not consular does not hold if it does flare. sent9: if something is alimentative that the fact that it is not a Eurotium and it filiates lemon is right does not hold. sent10: the fact that the chiropodist does nip nefazodone and is not consular is incorrect if it does flare. sent11: that the fact that something does not filiate chiropodist and it does not filiate farmstead hold is wrong if it is a Stoicism. sent12: that the setting is a Stoicism and is not consular is not right if it is a kind of a lygaeid. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fuchsia is not a kind of a pantie. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: if something is a kind of non-single a pantie it does channelize. sent2: if the decipherer channelizes the fuchsia is an abnormality. sent3: something that is not impolite either is not single or is not a pantie or both. sent4: if something does not nip Uighur and pins then it is animalistic. sent5: the decipherer is a kind of a arachnoid. sent6: something is not a pantie if it is a single. sent7: if something does not scale OPV but it is an abnormality it is a kind of a single. sent8: something is a single if that it is single thing that is impolite does not hold. sent9: the decipherer channelizes. sent10: if that something does not channelize and it is not a kind of a pantie does not hold then it is a pantie. sent11: the fact that the fuchsia does not channelize and is not a pantie does not hold if the decipherer is a single. sent12: something is not a dioon if the fact that it is a Joliot hold. sent13: something is not single if it channelizes. sent14: if the fact that the decipherer does not ingrain is true then the fact that it is not a kind of a single and it is impolite is false. sent15: if there exists something such that it does not channelize the oligarch does not sprout but it is an abnormality. sent16: the fuchsia does not scale OPV and is an abnormality if the decipherer does channelize. | sent1: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {A}x sent2: {A}{a} -> {AB}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) sent4: (x): (¬{DA}x & {EN}x) -> {DI}x sent5: {CH}{a} sent6: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent8: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {D}x) -> {B}x sent9: {A}{a} sent10: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}x sent11: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent12: (x): {HH}x -> ¬{BI}x sent13: (x): {A}x -> ¬{B}x sent14: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {D}{a}) sent15: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AS}{hg} & {AB}{hg}) sent16: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) | [
"sent16 & sent9 -> int1: the fuchsia does not scale OPV but it is an abnormality.; sent7 -> int2: the fuchsia is a single if it does not scale OPV and it is an abnormality.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fuchsia is a single.; sent6 -> int4: the fact that the fuchsia is not a pantie is not wrong if it is a single.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent16 & sent9 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); sent7 -> int2: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {B}{b}; sent6 -> int4: {B}{b} -> ¬{C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fuchsia is a kind of a pantie. | {C}{b} | [
"sent10 -> int5: if the fact that that the fuchsia does not channelize and is not a pantie is not false does not hold then it is a pantie.; sent8 -> int6: the decipherer singles if that it is both not singles and impolite is not true.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fuchsia is not a kind of a pantie. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a kind of non-single a pantie it does channelize. sent2: if the decipherer channelizes the fuchsia is an abnormality. sent3: something that is not impolite either is not single or is not a pantie or both. sent4: if something does not nip Uighur and pins then it is animalistic. sent5: the decipherer is a kind of a arachnoid. sent6: something is not a pantie if it is a single. sent7: if something does not scale OPV but it is an abnormality it is a kind of a single. sent8: something is a single if that it is single thing that is impolite does not hold. sent9: the decipherer channelizes. sent10: if that something does not channelize and it is not a kind of a pantie does not hold then it is a pantie. sent11: the fact that the fuchsia does not channelize and is not a pantie does not hold if the decipherer is a single. sent12: something is not a dioon if the fact that it is a Joliot hold. sent13: something is not single if it channelizes. sent14: if the fact that the decipherer does not ingrain is true then the fact that it is not a kind of a single and it is impolite is false. sent15: if there exists something such that it does not channelize the oligarch does not sprout but it is an abnormality. sent16: the fuchsia does not scale OPV and is an abnormality if the decipherer does channelize. ; $proof$ = | sent16 & sent9 -> int1: the fuchsia does not scale OPV but it is an abnormality.; sent7 -> int2: the fuchsia is a single if it does not scale OPV and it is an abnormality.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fuchsia is a single.; sent6 -> int4: the fact that the fuchsia is not a pantie is not wrong if it is a single.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the chaining occurs and/or the avuncularness occurs. | ({C} v {D}) | sent1: if that the cercarialness happens is not incorrect then the chaining happens. sent2: if the javelin occurs that both the seriousness and the non-omissiveness occurs does not hold. sent3: that the cercarialness occurs is not wrong if the fact that both the scaling containerful and the non-pessimisticness happens is not true. sent4: the impureness happens. sent5: if the impureness happens that the scaling containerful and the pessimisticness occurs does not hold. | sent1: {B} -> {C} sent2: {GH} -> ¬({EQ} & ¬{HD}) sent3: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent4: {A} sent5: {A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the chaining occurs and/or the avuncularness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the cercarialness happens is not incorrect then the chaining happens. sent2: if the javelin occurs that both the seriousness and the non-omissiveness occurs does not hold. sent3: that the cercarialness occurs is not wrong if the fact that both the scaling containerful and the non-pessimisticness happens is not true. sent4: the impureness happens. sent5: if the impureness happens that the scaling containerful and the pessimisticness occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the watercolorist is not a safebreaker or not a heuristic or both is incorrect. | ¬(¬{C}{c} v ¬{A}{c}) | sent1: the fact that the watercolorist is not starchy or it is not a kind of a safebreaker or both does not hold. sent2: the Sind is a heuristic. sent3: if the fact that the syconium is extinct and is not illegible is not right the debacle is not illegible. sent4: something is not a safebreaker or is not a heuristic or both if it is not starchy. sent5: if the debacle is not starchy then the fact that the watercolorist is not a kind of a safebreaker or is not heuristic or both does not hold. sent6: the antlion does not supple. sent7: if the antlion is a Zoroastrian and supples then the debacle is not starchy. sent8: the fact that the antlion is not starchy or it is not heuristic or both is not correct if the watercolorist does not supple. sent9: the watercolorist is a Zoroastrian and is not a metrification. sent10: if the debacle is not starchy the watercolorist is a safebreaker. sent11: the fact that the fact that something is usual but it is not starchy is not false is not right if it is a encephalogram. sent12: the antlion is a kind of a Zoroastrian but it does not supple. sent13: if the debacle is not illegible then the antlion is a encephalogram and is a Bahamian. sent14: the fact that the watercolorist does not supple or it is not a Zoroastrian or both does not hold if the antlion is not a safebreaker. sent15: that the debacle either is not a safebreaker or is not a heuristic or both does not hold if the watercolorist is not starchy. sent16: if the syconium does not filiate Eisenstein then it crowds. sent17: if something crowds that it is a kind of a imbrication is correct. sent18: the debacle is a kind of a heuristic. sent19: if something is a imbrication then that it is extinct and it is not illegible is not right. sent20: the debacle does not supple. sent21: the watercolorist is not starchy if the fact that the antlion is not unusual but starchy is not true. | sent1: ¬(¬{B}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) sent2: {A}{aa} sent3: ¬({H}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{A}x) sent5: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} v ¬{A}{c}) sent6: ¬{AB}{a} sent7: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent8: ¬{AB}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) sent9: ({AA}{c} & ¬{DH}{c}) sent10: ¬{B}{b} -> {C}{c} sent11: (x): {D}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{B}x) sent12: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent13: ¬{G}{b} -> ({D}{a} & {F}{a}) sent14: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{c} v ¬{AA}{c}) sent15: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent16: ¬{K}{d} -> {J}{d} sent17: (x): {J}x -> {I}x sent18: {A}{b} sent19: (x): {I}x -> ¬({H}x & ¬{G}x) sent20: ¬{AB}{b} sent21: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{c} | [] | [] | the watercolorist is not a kind of a safebreaker and/or is not a heuristic. | (¬{C}{c} v ¬{A}{c}) | [
"sent4 -> int1: the watercolorist is not a safebreaker and/or it is not a heuristic if it is not starchy.; sent11 -> int2: the fact that the antlion is usual and is not starchy is not correct if it is a encephalogram.; sent19 -> int3: if the syconium is a kind of a imbrication that it is both extinct and not illegible is not true.; sent17 -> int4: the syconium is a imbrication if the fact that it crowds is true.;"
] | 9 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the watercolorist is not a safebreaker or not a heuristic or both is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the watercolorist is not starchy or it is not a kind of a safebreaker or both does not hold. sent2: the Sind is a heuristic. sent3: if the fact that the syconium is extinct and is not illegible is not right the debacle is not illegible. sent4: something is not a safebreaker or is not a heuristic or both if it is not starchy. sent5: if the debacle is not starchy then the fact that the watercolorist is not a kind of a safebreaker or is not heuristic or both does not hold. sent6: the antlion does not supple. sent7: if the antlion is a Zoroastrian and supples then the debacle is not starchy. sent8: the fact that the antlion is not starchy or it is not heuristic or both is not correct if the watercolorist does not supple. sent9: the watercolorist is a Zoroastrian and is not a metrification. sent10: if the debacle is not starchy the watercolorist is a safebreaker. sent11: the fact that the fact that something is usual but it is not starchy is not false is not right if it is a encephalogram. sent12: the antlion is a kind of a Zoroastrian but it does not supple. sent13: if the debacle is not illegible then the antlion is a encephalogram and is a Bahamian. sent14: the fact that the watercolorist does not supple or it is not a Zoroastrian or both does not hold if the antlion is not a safebreaker. sent15: that the debacle either is not a safebreaker or is not a heuristic or both does not hold if the watercolorist is not starchy. sent16: if the syconium does not filiate Eisenstein then it crowds. sent17: if something crowds that it is a kind of a imbrication is correct. sent18: the debacle is a kind of a heuristic. sent19: if something is a imbrication then that it is extinct and it is not illegible is not right. sent20: the debacle does not supple. sent21: the watercolorist is not starchy if the fact that the antlion is not unusual but starchy is not true. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the guitar is incompressible. | {B}{a} | sent1: that the guitar does nip scaling and is a OPV does not hold. sent2: if that the guitar is a OPV that nips heaume is false then it is not incompressible. sent3: if the fact that that the guitar does apologize and does till is not true hold then it is not noninfectious. sent4: if that something nips theatrical and it is a regosol does not hold then it does not nip heaume. sent5: if that the sunchoke is not a prince's-feather is not incorrect that it does scale cowrie and it is noninfectious is incorrect. sent6: the fact that the guitar is a kind of a OPV and it nips heaume is wrong. sent7: the fact that the guitar is a kind of a Bohemian that nips heaume is not true. sent8: the fact that the guitar is incompressible and it is dispensable is incorrect. sent9: if that the anesthesiologist is qualitative and it is amoristic does not hold it is not a Prussian. sent10: the sluicegate does not nip heaume. sent11: the guitar is not incompressible if it does not nip heaume. | sent1: ¬({BS}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent2: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: ¬({ES}{a} & {GN}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: (x): ¬({GS}x & {GR}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent5: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬({D}{c} & {A}{c}) sent6: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent7: ¬({FQ}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: ¬({B}{a} & {HJ}{a}) sent9: ¬({DF}{eg} & {GE}{eg}) -> ¬{DH}{eg} sent10: ¬{AB}{hs} sent11: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} | [
"sent2 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | if the fact that the T-bar nips theatrical and it is a regosol is false it does not nip heaume. | ¬({GS}{p} & {GR}{p}) -> ¬{AB}{p} | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the guitar is incompressible. ; $context$ = sent1: that the guitar does nip scaling and is a OPV does not hold. sent2: if that the guitar is a OPV that nips heaume is false then it is not incompressible. sent3: if the fact that that the guitar does apologize and does till is not true hold then it is not noninfectious. sent4: if that something nips theatrical and it is a regosol does not hold then it does not nip heaume. sent5: if that the sunchoke is not a prince's-feather is not incorrect that it does scale cowrie and it is noninfectious is incorrect. sent6: the fact that the guitar is a kind of a OPV and it nips heaume is wrong. sent7: the fact that the guitar is a kind of a Bohemian that nips heaume is not true. sent8: the fact that the guitar is incompressible and it is dispensable is incorrect. sent9: if that the anesthesiologist is qualitative and it is amoristic does not hold it is not a Prussian. sent10: the sluicegate does not nip heaume. sent11: the guitar is not incompressible if it does not nip heaume. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is ripe and is not a Finnish is wrong then it is not a analphabet is not incorrect is wrong. | ¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: the sandarac is not a kind of a analphabet if it is not ripe. sent2: the sandarac is not a analphabet if it is ripe and it is not a kind of a Finnish. sent3: if the fact that the mebendazole is a Holocene but it is not Finnish is not right then it is not subjacent. sent4: something is non-germfree if the fact that it is algebraic but not subjacent does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if that it is both not non-ripe and not non-Finnish is not right then it is not a analphabet. sent6: the sandarac is not a analphabet if the fact that that it is ripe a Finnish hold does not hold. sent7: if a ripe thing is not a Finnish then it is not a analphabet. sent8: the sandarac is a analphabet if the fact that it is ripe thing that is not a Finnish is false. sent9: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a Guy and does not submerge is not true it does not affiliate. sent10: there is something such that if it is ripe and it is not a Finnish then it is not a kind of a analphabet. sent11: if that something is an anthrax that is not relativistic does not hold it does not adjoin. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Finnish then it is not a kind of a analphabet. sent13: if the fact that something is ripe but it is not a Finnish does not hold then that it is a analphabet is not false. sent14: if the fact that the sandarac is mini but it is not a behavior is incorrect then it does not scale sandarac. sent15: there is something such that if the fact that it is both ripe and not Finnish is false it is a kind of a analphabet. sent16: there exists something such that if it is not ripe then it is not a analphabet. sent17: something is not a analphabet if that it is ripe and it is not a Finnish is wrong. sent18: there exists something such that if that the fact that it is a dracaena and it is not important is not false does not hold it is not a cholecystectomy. | sent1: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: ¬({AE}{r} & ¬{AB}{r}) -> ¬{HC}{r} sent4: (x): ¬({ID}x & ¬{HC}x) -> ¬{IC}x sent5: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent8: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬({ES}x & ¬{HO}x) -> ¬{S}x sent10: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent11: (x): ¬({AS}x & ¬{U}x) -> ¬{DR}x sent12: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent13: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent14: ¬({DA}{aa} & ¬{JI}{aa}) -> ¬{AC}{aa} sent15: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent16: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent17: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent18: (Ex): ¬({DO}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{HF}x | [
"sent17 -> int1: the sandarac is not a analphabet if the fact that it is ripe and it is not a Finnish does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent17 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if that it is algebraic thing that is not subjacent does not hold then it is not germfree. | (Ex): ¬({ID}x & ¬{HC}x) -> ¬{IC}x | [
"sent4 -> int2: the cooper is not germfree if that it is algebraic and not subjacent does not hold.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is ripe and is not a Finnish is wrong then it is not a analphabet is not incorrect is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the sandarac is not a kind of a analphabet if it is not ripe. sent2: the sandarac is not a analphabet if it is ripe and it is not a kind of a Finnish. sent3: if the fact that the mebendazole is a Holocene but it is not Finnish is not right then it is not subjacent. sent4: something is non-germfree if the fact that it is algebraic but not subjacent does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if that it is both not non-ripe and not non-Finnish is not right then it is not a analphabet. sent6: the sandarac is not a analphabet if the fact that that it is ripe a Finnish hold does not hold. sent7: if a ripe thing is not a Finnish then it is not a analphabet. sent8: the sandarac is a analphabet if the fact that it is ripe thing that is not a Finnish is false. sent9: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a Guy and does not submerge is not true it does not affiliate. sent10: there is something such that if it is ripe and it is not a Finnish then it is not a kind of a analphabet. sent11: if that something is an anthrax that is not relativistic does not hold it does not adjoin. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Finnish then it is not a kind of a analphabet. sent13: if the fact that something is ripe but it is not a Finnish does not hold then that it is a analphabet is not false. sent14: if the fact that the sandarac is mini but it is not a behavior is incorrect then it does not scale sandarac. sent15: there is something such that if the fact that it is both ripe and not Finnish is false it is a kind of a analphabet. sent16: there exists something such that if it is not ripe then it is not a analphabet. sent17: something is not a analphabet if that it is ripe and it is not a Finnish is wrong. sent18: there exists something such that if that the fact that it is a dracaena and it is not important is not false does not hold it is not a cholecystectomy. ; $proof$ = | sent17 -> int1: the sandarac is not a analphabet if the fact that it is ripe and it is not a Finnish does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the continent is a hydrosphere and does crab kaph. | ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) | sent1: the fact that the ununbium is a hydrosphere and it is far is not right. sent2: if the continent is not far that the ununbium is a hydrosphere and does crab kaph is not right. sent3: the fact that the ununbium is a kind of a pravastatin that is a kind of a bitterwood does not hold. sent4: if the ununbium is not far the fact that the continent is a hydrosphere and crabs kaph is not correct. sent5: the ununbium is not far. sent6: the fact that the ununbium is a kind of far thing that is a kind of a hydrosphere does not hold if the continent does not crab kaph. sent7: the ununbium is not a hydrosphere. sent8: the fact that the cloakroom is sadistic and does heat is wrong. sent9: the fact that the ununbium does not crab kaph is correct. | sent1: ¬({AA}{a} & {A}{a}) sent2: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: ¬({B}{a} & {EM}{a}) sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent5: ¬{A}{a} sent6: ¬{AB}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent7: ¬{AA}{a} sent8: ¬({CJ}{fj} & {U}{fj}) sent9: ¬{AB}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the continent is a hydrosphere and does crab kaph. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the ununbium is a hydrosphere and it is far is not right. sent2: if the continent is not far that the ununbium is a hydrosphere and does crab kaph is not right. sent3: the fact that the ununbium is a kind of a pravastatin that is a kind of a bitterwood does not hold. sent4: if the ununbium is not far the fact that the continent is a hydrosphere and crabs kaph is not correct. sent5: the ununbium is not far. sent6: the fact that the ununbium is a kind of far thing that is a kind of a hydrosphere does not hold if the continent does not crab kaph. sent7: the ununbium is not a hydrosphere. sent8: the fact that the cloakroom is sadistic and does heat is wrong. sent9: the fact that the ununbium does not crab kaph is correct. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the propagandistness happens and the segue does not occur. | ({C} & ¬{D}) | sent1: that the propagandistness but not the seguing happens is wrong if the allogeneicness occurs. sent2: the allogeneicness happens if the reacting occurs. sent3: if the fundamentalist happens then the fact that the blocking does not occur and the segue does not occur is not right. sent4: the reacting occurs. sent5: that the allogeneicness happens is prevented by that the propagandist does not occur. | sent1: {B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent2: {A} -> {B} sent3: {F} -> ¬(¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent4: {A} sent5: ¬{C} -> ¬{B} | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the allogeneicness occurs.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: {B}; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the hunt occurs. | {GI} | [] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the propagandistness happens and the segue does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the propagandistness but not the seguing happens is wrong if the allogeneicness occurs. sent2: the allogeneicness happens if the reacting occurs. sent3: if the fundamentalist happens then the fact that the blocking does not occur and the segue does not occur is not right. sent4: the reacting occurs. sent5: that the allogeneicness happens is prevented by that the propagandist does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the allogeneicness occurs.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the bittercress is a kind of viviparous thing that does scour. | ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: the duct is entozoic if the milldam is a kind of a brickwork. sent2: that the telescope is a sacrificer and leaning does not hold if it is not a temporal. sent3: that something is not a kind of a stammerer and is not a brickwork is incorrect if it is not a Nilsson. sent4: the bittercress is non-fugal. sent5: something is a brickwork if the fact that it is not a kind of a stammerer and it is not a brickwork is not right. sent6: if that the Moloch is a kind of an encounter and/or it does not filiate aeschynanthus does not hold the bittercress is non-urceolate. sent7: the fact that the bittercress is not urceolate is right. sent8: the bittercress is not urceolate and it does not filiate aeschynanthus. sent9: that something is both viviparous and a scours is incorrect if it does not filiate aeschynanthus. sent10: the institution is non-attachable and non-urceolate. sent11: if that the fact that the cigar does nip twilight and it is a Nilsson hold is wrong then the milldam is not a Nilsson. sent12: the bittercress is not a epigastrium. sent13: that the Moloch does encounter or it does not filiate aeschynanthus or both is false if the duct is entozoic. sent14: the evacuee is not a kind of an impact. | sent1: {G}{d} -> {F}{c} sent2: ¬{AH}{m} -> ¬({EJ}{m} & {HS}{m}) sent3: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{G}x) sent4: ¬{DH}{a} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{G}x) -> {G}x sent6: ¬({E}{b} v ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} sent8: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({D}x & {C}x) sent10: (¬{FM}{fk} & ¬{A}{fk}) sent11: ¬({K}{e} & {H}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d} sent12: ¬{GD}{a} sent13: {F}{c} -> ¬({E}{b} v ¬{B}{b}) sent14: ¬{J}{f} | [
"sent8 -> int1: the bittercress does not filiate aeschynanthus.; sent9 -> int2: that the bittercress is viviparous and is a scours is not right if it does not filiate aeschynanthus.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent9 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the bittercress is viviparous thing that is a scours. | ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"sent5 -> int3: the milldam is a kind of a brickwork if the fact that it is not a stammerer and is not a brickwork does not hold.; sent3 -> int4: the fact that the fact that the milldam is not a stammerer and it is not a brickwork hold is wrong if it is not a kind of a Nilsson.; sent14 -> int5: there is something such that it does not impact.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the bittercress is a kind of viviparous thing that does scour. ; $context$ = sent1: the duct is entozoic if the milldam is a kind of a brickwork. sent2: that the telescope is a sacrificer and leaning does not hold if it is not a temporal. sent3: that something is not a kind of a stammerer and is not a brickwork is incorrect if it is not a Nilsson. sent4: the bittercress is non-fugal. sent5: something is a brickwork if the fact that it is not a kind of a stammerer and it is not a brickwork is not right. sent6: if that the Moloch is a kind of an encounter and/or it does not filiate aeschynanthus does not hold the bittercress is non-urceolate. sent7: the fact that the bittercress is not urceolate is right. sent8: the bittercress is not urceolate and it does not filiate aeschynanthus. sent9: that something is both viviparous and a scours is incorrect if it does not filiate aeschynanthus. sent10: the institution is non-attachable and non-urceolate. sent11: if that the fact that the cigar does nip twilight and it is a Nilsson hold is wrong then the milldam is not a Nilsson. sent12: the bittercress is not a epigastrium. sent13: that the Moloch does encounter or it does not filiate aeschynanthus or both is false if the duct is entozoic. sent14: the evacuee is not a kind of an impact. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> int1: the bittercress does not filiate aeschynanthus.; sent9 -> int2: that the bittercress is viviparous and is a scours is not right if it does not filiate aeschynanthus.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Gujarati is not a Jihadist. | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: the Gujarati is a kind of a acatalectic. sent2: the Gujarati does nip trumpetfish. sent3: the glume is a kind of an inferiority. sent4: the Gujarati is trigonometric. sent5: that the sweep is chalybeate and does recreate is not correct. sent6: the Gujarati is a kind of an inferiority and it is concentric. sent7: the papaverine is antennal thing that is a Jihadist. sent8: the ultracentrifugation is a kind of a Jihadist. sent9: the Gujarati is a Jihadist and it is an inferiority. sent10: if the bungler does not recreate then it is an inferiority and it is unpreventable. sent11: if an inferiority is unpreventable then it is not a kind of a Jihadist. sent12: if the sweep is an inferiority the Gujarati is a kind of an inferiority. sent13: the bungler does not recreate if there exists something such that that it is chalybeate and does recreate is false. sent14: that the sweep is an inferiority is true if that the matchbox is not chalybeate and it is not a kind of an inferiority is not true. sent15: that the matchbox is not chalybeate and is not an inferiority is wrong if it dematerializes. sent16: the juvenescence is a Jihadist and it is a Megalonychidae. sent17: the Gujarati is an inferiority. sent18: the tourtiere is an inferiority. sent19: the matchbox does dematerialize. sent20: the Gujarati is an inferiority and it does crab Ashkhabad. sent21: that the dictator is a kind of an inferiority hold. | sent1: {IJ}{a} sent2: {BM}{a} sent3: {B}{jd} sent4: {JJ}{a} sent5: ¬({E}{b} & {D}{b}) sent6: ({B}{a} & {FF}{a}) sent7: ({IN}{ai} & {A}{ai}) sent8: {A}{ca} sent9: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent10: ¬{D}{m} -> ({B}{m} & {C}{m}) sent11: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent12: {B}{b} -> {B}{a} sent13: (x): ¬({E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}{m} sent14: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> {B}{b} sent15: {G}{c} -> ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) sent16: ({A}{is} & {FP}{is}) sent17: {B}{a} sent18: {B}{cg} sent19: {G}{c} sent20: ({B}{a} & {AT}{a}) sent21: {B}{gh} | [
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | the bungler is an inferiority and it is a Alexandrian. | ({B}{m} & {AS}{m}) | [
"sent5 -> int1: there is something such that that it is chalybeate and it recreates is not right.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: that the bungler does not recreate is right.; sent10 & int2 -> int3: the bungler is an inferiority that is unpreventable.; int3 -> int4: the bungler is an inferiority.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Gujarati is not a Jihadist. ; $context$ = sent1: the Gujarati is a kind of a acatalectic. sent2: the Gujarati does nip trumpetfish. sent3: the glume is a kind of an inferiority. sent4: the Gujarati is trigonometric. sent5: that the sweep is chalybeate and does recreate is not correct. sent6: the Gujarati is a kind of an inferiority and it is concentric. sent7: the papaverine is antennal thing that is a Jihadist. sent8: the ultracentrifugation is a kind of a Jihadist. sent9: the Gujarati is a Jihadist and it is an inferiority. sent10: if the bungler does not recreate then it is an inferiority and it is unpreventable. sent11: if an inferiority is unpreventable then it is not a kind of a Jihadist. sent12: if the sweep is an inferiority the Gujarati is a kind of an inferiority. sent13: the bungler does not recreate if there exists something such that that it is chalybeate and does recreate is false. sent14: that the sweep is an inferiority is true if that the matchbox is not chalybeate and it is not a kind of an inferiority is not true. sent15: that the matchbox is not chalybeate and is not an inferiority is wrong if it dematerializes. sent16: the juvenescence is a Jihadist and it is a Megalonychidae. sent17: the Gujarati is an inferiority. sent18: the tourtiere is an inferiority. sent19: the matchbox does dematerialize. sent20: the Gujarati is an inferiority and it does crab Ashkhabad. sent21: that the dictator is a kind of an inferiority hold. ; $proof$ = | sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the cyborg is not inexpedient and it is not a deaf-mutism is correct. | (¬{F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) | sent1: if the fiefdom is part-time and it is a kind of an oral the fact that it does not scissor hold. sent2: if the fiefdom does not scissor then the fact that the cyborg is not a kind of a deaf-mutism is right. sent3: the fiefdom clarions. sent4: that the fiefdom nips dynamics is right. sent5: That the dynamics nips fiefdom is right. sent6: if the cyborg nips dynamics and does scissor then it is not a deaf-mutism. sent7: if the fiefdom does not scissor then the cyborg is expedient thing that is not a deaf-mutism. sent8: the fiefdom is part-time. | sent1: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent2: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬{E}{b} sent3: {CB}{a} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: {AA}{aa} sent6: ({A}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent7: ¬{D}{a} -> (¬{F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent8: {C}{a} | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the cyborg is not inexpedient and it is not a deaf-mutism is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fiefdom is part-time and it is a kind of an oral the fact that it does not scissor hold. sent2: if the fiefdom does not scissor then the fact that the cyborg is not a kind of a deaf-mutism is right. sent3: the fiefdom clarions. sent4: that the fiefdom nips dynamics is right. sent5: That the dynamics nips fiefdom is right. sent6: if the cyborg nips dynamics and does scissor then it is not a deaf-mutism. sent7: if the fiefdom does not scissor then the cyborg is expedient thing that is not a deaf-mutism. sent8: the fiefdom is part-time. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the decorator does not scale QCD and is a kind of a sheepherder. | (¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) | sent1: if something is cherty and it scales examen then it does not filiate reflection. sent2: that the crotch is not cherty but seasonable is not right. sent3: that something is non-metric and it is a crassness is wrong if it does filiate reflection. sent4: if the decipherer does not scale crotch then that it is useful and it is a kind of a isometrics is not true. sent5: something is not homiletics but it is cherty if it is not a kind of a isometrics. sent6: the decorator is not a crassness but a sheepherder. sent7: the fact that the syncopator does not scale QCD and filiates sandbar is false. sent8: the tanka is incontestable. sent9: that the tanka does filiate reflection and it scales forty-niner does not hold. sent10: the fact that the tanka is non-metric and a crassness is not right if it filiates reflection. sent11: if that the decorator does filiate reflection hold the fact that it is not a kind of a crassness and it scales QCD is not right. sent12: the decorator is a sheepherder if the tanka is cherty. sent13: the fact that if the decorator is the sheepherder then the fact that the decorator does not filiate reflection and is non-metric is not correct hold. sent14: that the decorator does not scale QCD but it is a sheepherder is wrong if the swearer does not filiate reflection. sent15: that something is not non-metric but it is a crassness is false if the fact that it does filiate reflection is not false. sent16: if the decipherer is both not homiletics and cherty the swearer is cherty. sent17: the fact that the tanka filiates reflection is not incorrect. sent18: the decorator scales QCD if that it is both not non-metric and not non-cherty does not hold. sent19: that the tanka is not non-metric but it is a sheepherder is right. sent20: the tanka does scale QCD. sent21: The fact that the reflection filiates tanka is not incorrect. sent22: something is not a isometrics if the fact that it is useful and it is isometrics does not hold. sent23: the decorator does not scale QCD but it is a kind of a sheepherder if the tanka is cherty. sent24: the tanka is a kind of non-cherty a sheepherder if the decorator is non-metric. | sent1: (x): ({B}x & {E}x) -> ¬{A}x sent2: ¬(¬{B}{u} & {GO}{u}) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: ¬{H}{c} -> ¬({I}{c} & {F}{c}) sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{G}x & {B}x) sent6: (¬{AB}{a} & {D}{a}) sent7: ¬(¬{C}{e} & {GT}{e}) sent8: {HO}{aa} sent9: ¬({A}{aa} & {IQ}{aa}) sent10: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent11: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {C}{a}) sent12: {B}{aa} -> {D}{a} sent13: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent14: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent15: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent16: (¬{G}{c} & {B}{c}) -> {B}{b} sent17: {A}{aa} sent18: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {B}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent19: (¬{AA}{aa} & {D}{aa}) sent20: {C}{aa} sent21: {AC}{ab} sent22: (x): ¬({I}x & {F}x) -> ¬{F}x sent23: {B}{aa} -> (¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent24: {AA}{a} -> (¬{B}{aa} & {D}{aa}) | [
"sent15 -> int1: if the tanka filiates reflection the fact that it is not non-metric and it is a crassness is not correct.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: that the fact that the tanka is a kind of non-non-metric a crassness is false is not false.;"
] | [
"sent15 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & sent17 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa});"
] | that the decorator does not scale QCD but it is a sheepherder is not true. | ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) | [
"sent1 -> int3: that the swearer does not filiate reflection is not incorrect if it is cherty thing that does scale examen.; sent5 -> int4: the decipherer is not homiletics but it is cherty if it is not a kind of a isometrics.; sent22 -> int5: if that the decipherer is both useful and isometrics does not hold then it is not a kind of a isometrics.;"
] | 7 | 4 | null | 21 | 0 | 21 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the decorator does not scale QCD and is a kind of a sheepherder. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is cherty and it scales examen then it does not filiate reflection. sent2: that the crotch is not cherty but seasonable is not right. sent3: that something is non-metric and it is a crassness is wrong if it does filiate reflection. sent4: if the decipherer does not scale crotch then that it is useful and it is a kind of a isometrics is not true. sent5: something is not homiletics but it is cherty if it is not a kind of a isometrics. sent6: the decorator is not a crassness but a sheepherder. sent7: the fact that the syncopator does not scale QCD and filiates sandbar is false. sent8: the tanka is incontestable. sent9: that the tanka does filiate reflection and it scales forty-niner does not hold. sent10: the fact that the tanka is non-metric and a crassness is not right if it filiates reflection. sent11: if that the decorator does filiate reflection hold the fact that it is not a kind of a crassness and it scales QCD is not right. sent12: the decorator is a sheepherder if the tanka is cherty. sent13: the fact that if the decorator is the sheepherder then the fact that the decorator does not filiate reflection and is non-metric is not correct hold. sent14: that the decorator does not scale QCD but it is a sheepherder is wrong if the swearer does not filiate reflection. sent15: that something is not non-metric but it is a crassness is false if the fact that it does filiate reflection is not false. sent16: if the decipherer is both not homiletics and cherty the swearer is cherty. sent17: the fact that the tanka filiates reflection is not incorrect. sent18: the decorator scales QCD if that it is both not non-metric and not non-cherty does not hold. sent19: that the tanka is not non-metric but it is a sheepherder is right. sent20: the tanka does scale QCD. sent21: The fact that the reflection filiates tanka is not incorrect. sent22: something is not a isometrics if the fact that it is useful and it is isometrics does not hold. sent23: the decorator does not scale QCD but it is a kind of a sheepherder if the tanka is cherty. sent24: the tanka is a kind of non-cherty a sheepherder if the decorator is non-metric. ; $proof$ = | sent15 -> int1: if the tanka filiates reflection the fact that it is not non-metric and it is a crassness is not correct.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: that the fact that the tanka is a kind of non-non-metric a crassness is false is not false.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the prick is a kind of a Tanzanian. | {C}{a} | sent1: the prick is playful. sent2: if the prick is unfavorable it does filiate clothesline. sent3: the still is Tanzanian if the knower is a lymphangiography. sent4: the prick is a ballet. sent5: that the sky does filiate Sand hold. sent6: there exists something such that that it is exponential is not false. sent7: the fact that the prick is a kind of an esteem hold. sent8: if something is not favorable it is a Tanzanian. sent9: if that the Sinanthropus is a mogul is right it is a complex. sent10: there exists something such that it is a lymphangiography. sent11: if the singlestick is a lymphangiography it filiates wave. sent12: there exists something such that it is a circumvention. sent13: the fact that something does nip singlestick is correct. sent14: if something is unfavorable then the prick does scale knower. sent15: the still filiates sailing-race. sent16: something that is a kind of a Numidian is bismuthal. sent17: something that filiates clothesline does nip Attlee. sent18: the still is a semigloss. sent19: if the fact that something is a jockey is not false then it is Nordic. sent20: the paramyxovirus is unfavorable. | sent1: {BT}{a} sent2: {B}{a} -> {CP}{a} sent3: {A}{c} -> {C}{b} sent4: {FC}{a} sent5: {EL}{iu} sent6: (Ex): {EO}x sent7: {GO}{a} sent8: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent9: {GS}{id} -> {T}{id} sent10: (Ex): {A}x sent11: {A}{m} -> {BB}{m} sent12: (Ex): {AI}x sent13: (Ex): {ER}x sent14: (x): {B}x -> {FA}{a} sent15: {E}{b} sent16: (x): {CM}x -> {GE}x sent17: (x): {CP}x -> {EJ}x sent18: {D}{b} sent19: (x): {HN}x -> {CL}x sent20: {B}{da} | [
"sent8 -> int1: if the prick is unfavorable it is a kind of a Tanzanian.;"
] | [
"sent8 -> int1: {B}{a} -> {C}{a};"
] | the prick is not a kind of a Tanzanian. | ¬{C}{a} | [] | 6 | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the prick is a kind of a Tanzanian. ; $context$ = sent1: the prick is playful. sent2: if the prick is unfavorable it does filiate clothesline. sent3: the still is Tanzanian if the knower is a lymphangiography. sent4: the prick is a ballet. sent5: that the sky does filiate Sand hold. sent6: there exists something such that that it is exponential is not false. sent7: the fact that the prick is a kind of an esteem hold. sent8: if something is not favorable it is a Tanzanian. sent9: if that the Sinanthropus is a mogul is right it is a complex. sent10: there exists something such that it is a lymphangiography. sent11: if the singlestick is a lymphangiography it filiates wave. sent12: there exists something such that it is a circumvention. sent13: the fact that something does nip singlestick is correct. sent14: if something is unfavorable then the prick does scale knower. sent15: the still filiates sailing-race. sent16: something that is a kind of a Numidian is bismuthal. sent17: something that filiates clothesline does nip Attlee. sent18: the still is a semigloss. sent19: if the fact that something is a jockey is not false then it is Nordic. sent20: the paramyxovirus is unfavorable. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> int1: if the prick is unfavorable it is a kind of a Tanzanian.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the cupcake is non-unidimensional thing that does not filiate gibibit does not hold. | ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | sent1: something does nip Arab and does not filiate gibibit if it does not scale clothesline. sent2: if that the fingernail is not a kind of a warrant but it does wet does not hold then the cupcake does not nip Arab. sent3: the fact that the cupcake does not filiate gibibit and it is not wetting is wrong. sent4: the fact that the cupcake is not unidimensional and filiates gibibit is not correct. sent5: that the cupcake does not nip Arab hold if the fingernail is a warrant. sent6: if the votary mines then that the fingernail mines is not wrong. sent7: that the fingernail is both not unidimensional and wetting is incorrect. sent8: if something is unidimensional that it is toned and is a executability is not correct. sent9: the fact that the cupcake nips Arab and does not filiate gibibit is false if it is not wetting. sent10: the fact that something does nip Arab and it scales clothesline is false if it is not a mined. sent11: the votary is a mined. sent12: if that the fingernail does nip Arab and it scales clothesline is not correct then it does not nip Arab. sent13: that the cupcake is unidimensional and does not filiate gibibit does not hold. sent14: the fingernail scales cornhusking if that it does not scales cornhusking and is a cross-classification is wrong. sent15: if the cupcake does not nip Arab then that it is non-unidimensional thing that does filiate gibibit does not hold. sent16: if the fingernail is not wetting then that that it does not filiate gibibit and does not nip Arab is true is wrong. sent17: that the fingernail is a warrant and it wets is incorrect. sent18: the fingernail is not unidimensional if the cupcake is not a warrant. sent19: if a mined scales cornhusking it does not scale clothesline. sent20: that the fingernail is not a warrant but wetting is not correct. sent21: that the fingernail does not filiate gibibit if the cupcake is not wetting hold. | sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent4: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent5: {AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent6: {E}{c} -> {E}{a} sent7: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{IE}x & {BN}x) sent9: ¬{AB}{b} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent10: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({B}x & {D}x) sent11: {E}{c} sent12: ¬({B}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent13: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent14: ¬(¬{F}{a} & {G}{a}) -> {F}{a} sent15: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent16: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent17: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent18: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬{A}{a} sent19: (x): ({E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent20: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent21: ¬{AB}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} | [
"sent2 & sent20 -> int1: the cupcake does not nip Arab.;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent20 -> int1: ¬{B}{b};"
] | the fact that the cupcake is not toneless but a executability is wrong. | ¬(¬{IE}{b} & {BN}{b}) | [
"sent8 -> int2: if the cupcake is unidimensional then that it is a kind of toned thing that is a kind of a executability is wrong.; sent1 -> int3: the fingernail does nip Arab and does not filiate gibibit if it does not scale clothesline.; sent19 -> int4: the fingernail does not scale clothesline if it is a kind of a mined that scales cornhusking.; sent6 & sent11 -> int5: the fingernail is a mined.;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the cupcake is non-unidimensional thing that does not filiate gibibit does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: something does nip Arab and does not filiate gibibit if it does not scale clothesline. sent2: if that the fingernail is not a kind of a warrant but it does wet does not hold then the cupcake does not nip Arab. sent3: the fact that the cupcake does not filiate gibibit and it is not wetting is wrong. sent4: the fact that the cupcake is not unidimensional and filiates gibibit is not correct. sent5: that the cupcake does not nip Arab hold if the fingernail is a warrant. sent6: if the votary mines then that the fingernail mines is not wrong. sent7: that the fingernail is both not unidimensional and wetting is incorrect. sent8: if something is unidimensional that it is toned and is a executability is not correct. sent9: the fact that the cupcake nips Arab and does not filiate gibibit is false if it is not wetting. sent10: the fact that something does nip Arab and it scales clothesline is false if it is not a mined. sent11: the votary is a mined. sent12: if that the fingernail does nip Arab and it scales clothesline is not correct then it does not nip Arab. sent13: that the cupcake is unidimensional and does not filiate gibibit does not hold. sent14: the fingernail scales cornhusking if that it does not scales cornhusking and is a cross-classification is wrong. sent15: if the cupcake does not nip Arab then that it is non-unidimensional thing that does filiate gibibit does not hold. sent16: if the fingernail is not wetting then that that it does not filiate gibibit and does not nip Arab is true is wrong. sent17: that the fingernail is a warrant and it wets is incorrect. sent18: the fingernail is not unidimensional if the cupcake is not a warrant. sent19: if a mined scales cornhusking it does not scale clothesline. sent20: that the fingernail is not a warrant but wetting is not correct. sent21: that the fingernail does not filiate gibibit if the cupcake is not wetting hold. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent20 -> int1: the cupcake does not nip Arab.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the serine is not algometric. | ¬{C}{a} | sent1: the fact that something is both a Zurvanism and not non-algometric is right if it is not a kind of a clunch. sent2: if something is not calyceal that it is not Tibetan but a honk is not true. sent3: the serine is a Zurvanism if something is not a exudation and it is not an exit. sent4: if a clunch is a kind of a Zurvanism it is not algometric. sent5: the baguet is unwomanly. sent6: something is a taxation if it is a Zurvanism. sent7: the archil is algometric. sent8: if the matchlock scales nogging but it does not scale Marchantia the frontierswoman is not natural. sent9: the matchlock is political if the hearthstone crabs oration. sent10: the serine is not a clunch if the archil filiates Zola. sent11: the serine does filiate evolutionism. sent12: if that the fact that the vermifuge is non-Tibetan a honk is not false is not right the Congolese does honk. sent13: if there exists something such that the fact that it is unwomanly is right the nepotist is not a kind of a elecampane but it is not non-aponeurotic. sent14: there exists something such that it is not an exit. sent15: the fact that the bolometer is not a Zurvanism hold. sent16: if the Congolese is a honk that the archil does filiate Zola is true. sent17: if something is algometric the cardinalfish is a postponement and a clunch. sent18: if that something is loyal and it is calyceal is wrong it is not calyceal. sent19: if the frontierswoman is not a natural then that the vermifuge is a kind of loyal thing that is calyceal does not hold. sent20: the napery is not a loonie if something that is not a elecampane is aponeurotic. sent21: the serine is not a exudation. sent22: there is something such that it is not a exudation and it is not an exit. sent23: if something is political it does scale nogging and it does not scale Marchantia. | sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {C}x) sent2: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent5: {Q}{j} sent6: (x): {A}x -> {GS}x sent7: {C}{b} sent8: ({K}{f} & ¬{J}{f}) -> ¬{H}{e} sent9: {M}{g} -> {L}{f} sent10: {D}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} sent11: {FE}{a} sent12: ¬(¬{F}{d} & {E}{d}) -> {E}{c} sent13: (x): {Q}x -> (¬{P}{i} & {O}{i}) sent14: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent15: ¬{A}{ib} sent16: {E}{c} -> {D}{b} sent17: (x): {C}x -> ({DQ}{eu} & {B}{eu}) sent18: (x): ¬({I}x & {G}x) -> ¬{G}x sent19: ¬{H}{e} -> ¬({I}{d} & {G}{d}) sent20: (x): (¬{P}x & {O}x) -> ¬{N}{h} sent21: ¬{AA}{a} sent22: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent23: (x): {L}x -> ({K}x & ¬{J}x) | [
"sent22 & sent3 -> int1: the serine is a kind of a Zurvanism.; sent4 -> int2: the serine is not algometric if the fact that it is a clunch and it is a Zurvanism hold.;"
] | [
"sent22 & sent3 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent4 -> int2: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a};"
] | the cardinalfish is a postponement and it is a kind of a taxation. | ({DQ}{eu} & {GS}{eu}) | [
"sent7 -> int3: something is not non-algometric.; int3 & sent17 -> int4: the cardinalfish is a kind of a postponement and is a clunch.; int4 -> int5: the cardinalfish is a kind of a postponement.; sent6 -> int6: the cardinalfish is a taxation if it is a Zurvanism.;"
] | 4 | 3 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the serine is not algometric. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is both a Zurvanism and not non-algometric is right if it is not a kind of a clunch. sent2: if something is not calyceal that it is not Tibetan but a honk is not true. sent3: the serine is a Zurvanism if something is not a exudation and it is not an exit. sent4: if a clunch is a kind of a Zurvanism it is not algometric. sent5: the baguet is unwomanly. sent6: something is a taxation if it is a Zurvanism. sent7: the archil is algometric. sent8: if the matchlock scales nogging but it does not scale Marchantia the frontierswoman is not natural. sent9: the matchlock is political if the hearthstone crabs oration. sent10: the serine is not a clunch if the archil filiates Zola. sent11: the serine does filiate evolutionism. sent12: if that the fact that the vermifuge is non-Tibetan a honk is not false is not right the Congolese does honk. sent13: if there exists something such that the fact that it is unwomanly is right the nepotist is not a kind of a elecampane but it is not non-aponeurotic. sent14: there exists something such that it is not an exit. sent15: the fact that the bolometer is not a Zurvanism hold. sent16: if the Congolese is a honk that the archil does filiate Zola is true. sent17: if something is algometric the cardinalfish is a postponement and a clunch. sent18: if that something is loyal and it is calyceal is wrong it is not calyceal. sent19: if the frontierswoman is not a natural then that the vermifuge is a kind of loyal thing that is calyceal does not hold. sent20: the napery is not a loonie if something that is not a elecampane is aponeurotic. sent21: the serine is not a exudation. sent22: there is something such that it is not a exudation and it is not an exit. sent23: if something is political it does scale nogging and it does not scale Marchantia. ; $proof$ = | sent22 & sent3 -> int1: the serine is a kind of a Zurvanism.; sent4 -> int2: the serine is not algometric if the fact that it is a clunch and it is a Zurvanism hold.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the agrypnoticness occurs. | {C} | sent1: that the non-agrypnoticness and the non-epithelialness occurs is incorrect if the uptick does not occur. sent2: if that the agrypnoticness does not occur and the epithelialness does not occur is incorrect the agrypnoticness occurs. sent3: that the uptick happens is caused by that not the nipping embryo but the megillah occurs. sent4: that the scaling tonsil does not occur results in that both the election and the off-streetness occurs. sent5: the fact that the epithelialness does not occur hold if that the uptick occurs is not wrong. sent6: not the nipping embryo but the megillah occurs. sent7: that the uptick does not occur and the inaudibleness does not occur is triggered by that the election occurs. sent8: if the epithelialness does not occur then the agrypnoticness does not occur. | sent1: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) sent2: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) -> {C} sent3: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent4: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent5: {B} -> ¬{A} sent6: (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent7: {E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{D}) sent8: ¬{A} -> ¬{C} | [
"sent3 & sent6 -> int1: the uptick happens.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the epithelialness does not occur.; sent8 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 & sent6 -> int1: {B}; sent5 & int1 -> int2: ¬{A}; sent8 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the agrypnoticness happens. | {C} | [] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the agrypnoticness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the non-agrypnoticness and the non-epithelialness occurs is incorrect if the uptick does not occur. sent2: if that the agrypnoticness does not occur and the epithelialness does not occur is incorrect the agrypnoticness occurs. sent3: that the uptick happens is caused by that not the nipping embryo but the megillah occurs. sent4: that the scaling tonsil does not occur results in that both the election and the off-streetness occurs. sent5: the fact that the epithelialness does not occur hold if that the uptick occurs is not wrong. sent6: not the nipping embryo but the megillah occurs. sent7: that the uptick does not occur and the inaudibleness does not occur is triggered by that the election occurs. sent8: if the epithelialness does not occur then the agrypnoticness does not occur. ; $proof$ = | sent3 & sent6 -> int1: the uptick happens.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the epithelialness does not occur.; sent8 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the accompaniment quirks. | {A}{a} | sent1: the athenaeum is not a quirk if something is non-likable thing that is not a prefab. sent2: the accompaniment is not a quirk if something that is a prefab is not likable. sent3: the athenaeum is not a prefab and is not likable. sent4: the accompaniment does not quirk if there is something such that it is not a kind of a prefab and is non-likable. | sent1: (x): (¬{AB}x & ¬{AA}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent2: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent3 -> int1: something is not a kind of a prefab and it is not likable.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> int1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the accompaniment quirks. ; $context$ = sent1: the athenaeum is not a quirk if something is non-likable thing that is not a prefab. sent2: the accompaniment is not a quirk if something that is a prefab is not likable. sent3: the athenaeum is not a prefab and is not likable. sent4: the accompaniment does not quirk if there is something such that it is not a kind of a prefab and is non-likable. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> int1: something is not a kind of a prefab and it is not likable.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the encaustic is a Hindustani. | {A}{a} | sent1: the adesite does not lengthen. sent2: if the encaustic is a kind of a Hindustani then the adesite lengthens. sent3: the elements is a kind of a Hindustani. sent4: that something is Hindustani is true if it does lengthen. | sent1: ¬{B}{b} sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent3: {A}{dd} sent4: (x): {B}x -> {A}x | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the encaustic is a Hindustani is not wrong.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the adesite lengthens.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent1 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the encaustic is a Hindustani. | {A}{a} | [
"sent4 -> int3: if the encaustic lengthens then it is a Hindustani.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the encaustic is a Hindustani. ; $context$ = sent1: the adesite does not lengthen. sent2: if the encaustic is a kind of a Hindustani then the adesite lengthens. sent3: the elements is a kind of a Hindustani. sent4: that something is Hindustani is true if it does lengthen. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the encaustic is a Hindustani is not wrong.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the adesite lengthens.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it does not miscarry and is not proprietary then it does not nip Townsend. | (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: the prick does not nip Townsend if the fact that it does not miscarry and it is not proprietary is true. sent2: the prick does nip Townsend if it does not miscarry and is not proprietary. sent3: if that something does not shift and it does not escalate is right it does not scale prick. | sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: (x): (¬{DT}x & ¬{FJ}x) -> ¬{FK}x | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of a shifting and it does not escalate is not false then it does not scale prick. | (Ex): (¬{DT}x & ¬{FJ}x) -> ¬{FK}x | [
"sent3 -> int1: the fact that the perithecium does not scale prick is not false if it is not a kind of a shifting and it does not escalate.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not miscarry and is not proprietary then it does not nip Townsend. ; $context$ = sent1: the prick does not nip Townsend if the fact that it does not miscarry and it is not proprietary is true. sent2: the prick does nip Townsend if it does not miscarry and is not proprietary. sent3: if that something does not shift and it does not escalate is right it does not scale prick. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the heraldry is not existent. | ¬{D}{a} | sent1: the fact that that the heraldry is not existent is not incorrect if the heraldry is a kind of a gone and it is a Araneae is true. sent2: there is something such that it is not a glaciation. sent3: the scatophagy is not a Lutheran if it does not filiate exteroception and is a gone. sent4: if something is not an undress but it burls that it does not nip airship is not wrong. sent5: there exists something such that it is a glaciation. sent6: the heraldry is not a kind of a seaplane. sent7: the heraldry is not a gone if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a glaciation. sent8: something does not scale polysemy if it is both not a claim and hadal. sent9: something is not logogrammatic if it does not nip Marciano and it is a carol. sent10: something is existent if that it is a kind of a glaciation is right. sent11: the heraldry is not a gone. sent12: if something that is a gone is a Araneae then it is not existent. sent13: if something is non-gone thing that is a Araneae it is not existent. sent14: something is a kind of a glaciation if it is a gone. sent15: if the heraldry does not straighten and is a Araneae then it does not carol. | sent1: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent2: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent3: (¬{DQ}{bi} & {B}{bi}) -> ¬{P}{bi} sent4: (x): (¬{GG}x & {FP}x) -> ¬{IR}x sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: ¬{JJ}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent8: (x): (¬{BA}x & {AE}x) -> ¬{DB}x sent9: (x): (¬{CQ}x & {EN}x) -> ¬{DH}x sent10: (x): {A}x -> {D}x sent11: ¬{B}{a} sent12: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent13: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent14: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent15: (¬{AU}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{EN}{a} | [
"sent13 -> int1: the fact that if the heraldry is non-gone the Araneae the heraldry is nonexistent hold.;"
] | [
"sent13 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a};"
] | the heraldry is existent. | {D}{a} | [
"sent10 -> int2: if the heraldry is a glaciation then it is existent.; sent14 -> int3: if the heraldry is not non-gone then it is a glaciation.;"
] | 4 | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the heraldry is not existent. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that the heraldry is not existent is not incorrect if the heraldry is a kind of a gone and it is a Araneae is true. sent2: there is something such that it is not a glaciation. sent3: the scatophagy is not a Lutheran if it does not filiate exteroception and is a gone. sent4: if something is not an undress but it burls that it does not nip airship is not wrong. sent5: there exists something such that it is a glaciation. sent6: the heraldry is not a kind of a seaplane. sent7: the heraldry is not a gone if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a glaciation. sent8: something does not scale polysemy if it is both not a claim and hadal. sent9: something is not logogrammatic if it does not nip Marciano and it is a carol. sent10: something is existent if that it is a kind of a glaciation is right. sent11: the heraldry is not a gone. sent12: if something that is a gone is a Araneae then it is not existent. sent13: if something is non-gone thing that is a Araneae it is not existent. sent14: something is a kind of a glaciation if it is a gone. sent15: if the heraldry does not straighten and is a Araneae then it does not carol. ; $proof$ = | sent13 -> int1: the fact that if the heraldry is non-gone the Araneae the heraldry is nonexistent hold.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the briber is a heartbreaker. | {D}{b} | sent1: if there exists something such that it nips hypocrisy that the briber is a conciliation and/or is not a heartbreaker is incorrect. sent2: that the musculature nips Stromateidae is right if the harmonium does nips Stromateidae. sent3: the briber is not a kind of a heartbreaker if the fact that either the outlier nips hypocrisy or it is not a conciliation or both is false. sent4: there exists nothing such that it is non-multilingual and/or it scales Cotacachi. sent5: if that either the harmonium is not multilingual or it does scale Cotacachi or both is false then it is not skinless. sent6: the outlier is a conciliation if something is micropylar. sent7: if that either the outlier nips hypocrisy or it is a conciliation or both is not correct then the briber is not a heartbreaker. sent8: if something is not skinless it does nip Stromateidae and does scale spinelessness. sent9: there are micropylar things. sent10: the fact that the carbonyl is a kind of a heartbreaker that is a conciliation does not hold if the schorl does not scale dynamics. sent11: the carbonyl scales dynamics if the schorl does conspire. sent12: if that something nips Stromateidae but it does not conspire is not right it does not scale dynamics. sent13: if something scales dynamics it is a conciliation. sent14: the schorl does conspire if the farce nips Stromateidae. sent15: if the fist is not micropylar and does not nip hypocrisy then the outlier is a heartbreaker. sent16: if the musculature does nip Stromateidae the farce nip Stromateidae. sent17: the outlier is a conciliation. sent18: if the fist nips hypocrisy then the outlier is micropylar. sent19: if something is micropylar then the fact that the outlier nips hypocrisy or it is not a conciliation or both does not hold. sent20: if the outlier is a heartbreaker the briber is a heartbreaker. sent21: either the fist scales dynamics or it is starchless or both if there exists something such that it scales dynamics. sent22: the fact that the briber is starchless and/or it is not a lygaeid is false if that the outlier is micropylar hold. | sent1: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) sent2: {H}{h} -> {H}{g} sent3: ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{L}x v {K}x) sent5: ¬(¬{L}{h} v {K}{h}) -> ¬{J}{h} sent6: (x): {A}x -> {C}{a} sent7: ¬({B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({H}x & {I}x) sent9: (Ex): {A}x sent10: ¬{F}{e} -> ¬({D}{d} & {C}{d}) sent11: {G}{e} -> {F}{d} sent12: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent13: (x): {F}x -> {C}x sent14: {H}{f} -> {G}{e} sent15: (¬{A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> {D}{a} sent16: {H}{g} -> {H}{f} sent17: {C}{a} sent18: {B}{c} -> {A}{a} sent19: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent20: {D}{a} -> {D}{b} sent21: (x): {F}x -> ({F}{c} v {E}{c}) sent22: {A}{a} -> ¬({E}{b} v ¬{EJ}{b}) | [
"sent9 & sent19 -> int1: the fact that the outlier nips hypocrisy or is not a conciliation or both is false.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent9 & sent19 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}); sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the briber is starchless or is not a lygaeid or both is false. | ¬({E}{b} v ¬{EJ}{b}) | [
"sent12 -> int2: if the fact that the schorl does nip Stromateidae and does not conspire is not right then it does not scale dynamics.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the briber is a heartbreaker. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it nips hypocrisy that the briber is a conciliation and/or is not a heartbreaker is incorrect. sent2: that the musculature nips Stromateidae is right if the harmonium does nips Stromateidae. sent3: the briber is not a kind of a heartbreaker if the fact that either the outlier nips hypocrisy or it is not a conciliation or both is false. sent4: there exists nothing such that it is non-multilingual and/or it scales Cotacachi. sent5: if that either the harmonium is not multilingual or it does scale Cotacachi or both is false then it is not skinless. sent6: the outlier is a conciliation if something is micropylar. sent7: if that either the outlier nips hypocrisy or it is a conciliation or both is not correct then the briber is not a heartbreaker. sent8: if something is not skinless it does nip Stromateidae and does scale spinelessness. sent9: there are micropylar things. sent10: the fact that the carbonyl is a kind of a heartbreaker that is a conciliation does not hold if the schorl does not scale dynamics. sent11: the carbonyl scales dynamics if the schorl does conspire. sent12: if that something nips Stromateidae but it does not conspire is not right it does not scale dynamics. sent13: if something scales dynamics it is a conciliation. sent14: the schorl does conspire if the farce nips Stromateidae. sent15: if the fist is not micropylar and does not nip hypocrisy then the outlier is a heartbreaker. sent16: if the musculature does nip Stromateidae the farce nip Stromateidae. sent17: the outlier is a conciliation. sent18: if the fist nips hypocrisy then the outlier is micropylar. sent19: if something is micropylar then the fact that the outlier nips hypocrisy or it is not a conciliation or both does not hold. sent20: if the outlier is a heartbreaker the briber is a heartbreaker. sent21: either the fist scales dynamics or it is starchless or both if there exists something such that it scales dynamics. sent22: the fact that the briber is starchless and/or it is not a lygaeid is false if that the outlier is micropylar hold. ; $proof$ = | sent9 & sent19 -> int1: the fact that the outlier nips hypocrisy or is not a conciliation or both is false.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Lascar is not a kind of a Larousse. | ¬{B}{c} | sent1: if the fact that the viper is not nonrepetitive and nips Ondaatje is not correct the Lascar is not a Larousse. sent2: the viper is not a millwright. sent3: the Lascar is a Larousse and it is a kind of a millwright if the outsole is not a sized. sent4: the xanthomonad does filiate Gerbillus. sent5: the outsole is not a millwright. sent6: a millwright is a kind of a Larousse. sent7: the Lascar is not a Larousse if the viper does not nip Ondaatje. sent8: the fact that the milcher nips Ondaatje and is a sweeper does not hold. sent9: if the xanthomonad does filiate Gerbillus then that the viper is not a Montana and is canonic is false. sent10: that the viper is orchestral and it is a sized does not hold if the xanthomonad is non-bibliotics. sent11: if the outsole is not bibliotics the Lascar is a sized and it is orchestral. sent12: if something does filiate Gerbillus that it is both not a Montana and not non-canonic does not hold. sent13: the distillery does filiate Gerbillus. sent14: the fact that the outsole is both not nonrepetitive and a millwright is false. sent15: that the viper is not a Larousse but it nips Ondaatje does not hold if the fact that the Lascar is not nonrepetitive is not wrong. sent16: if the outsole is not a kind of a millwright the fact that the viper is not nonrepetitive but it nips Ondaatje does not hold. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent2: ¬{A}{b} sent3: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{c} & {A}{c}) sent4: {H}{d} sent5: ¬{A}{a} sent6: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent7: ¬{AB}{b} -> ¬{B}{c} sent8: ¬({AB}{gk} & {EJ}{gk}) sent9: {H}{d} -> ¬(¬{G}{b} & {F}{b}) sent10: ¬{E}{d} -> ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent11: ¬{E}{a} -> ({C}{c} & {D}{c}) sent12: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {F}x) sent13: {H}{e} sent14: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {A}{a}) sent15: ¬{AA}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent16: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) | [
"sent16 & sent5 -> int1: that the viper is not nonrepetitive but it nips Ondaatje is not right.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent16 & sent5 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the Lascar is a Larousse. | {B}{c} | [
"sent12 -> int2: if the distillery does filiate Gerbillus that it is not a Montana and it is canonic is not right.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the fact that the distillery is not a kind of a Montana and is canonic is not correct.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that that it is not a Montana and it is canonic does not hold.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Lascar is not a kind of a Larousse. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the viper is not nonrepetitive and nips Ondaatje is not correct the Lascar is not a Larousse. sent2: the viper is not a millwright. sent3: the Lascar is a Larousse and it is a kind of a millwright if the outsole is not a sized. sent4: the xanthomonad does filiate Gerbillus. sent5: the outsole is not a millwright. sent6: a millwright is a kind of a Larousse. sent7: the Lascar is not a Larousse if the viper does not nip Ondaatje. sent8: the fact that the milcher nips Ondaatje and is a sweeper does not hold. sent9: if the xanthomonad does filiate Gerbillus then that the viper is not a Montana and is canonic is false. sent10: that the viper is orchestral and it is a sized does not hold if the xanthomonad is non-bibliotics. sent11: if the outsole is not bibliotics the Lascar is a sized and it is orchestral. sent12: if something does filiate Gerbillus that it is both not a Montana and not non-canonic does not hold. sent13: the distillery does filiate Gerbillus. sent14: the fact that the outsole is both not nonrepetitive and a millwright is false. sent15: that the viper is not a Larousse but it nips Ondaatje does not hold if the fact that the Lascar is not nonrepetitive is not wrong. sent16: if the outsole is not a kind of a millwright the fact that the viper is not nonrepetitive but it nips Ondaatje does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent16 & sent5 -> int1: that the viper is not nonrepetitive but it nips Ondaatje is not right.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the organza is a kind of allophonic thing that does filiate tattler. | ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) | sent1: if the microeconomist is not a slant that the guesser does filiate self-knowledge but it is not a treat is incorrect. sent2: the desperate is not a kind of a self-starter if there exists something such that the fact that that it is a self-starter and does not filiate specialization is not false is wrong. sent3: if the fomite is allophonic thing that is a kind of a ravigote the T-bar is not allophonic. sent4: the organza filiates tattler. sent5: if something is hemodynamics and/or it is not admissible then it is not a slant. sent6: the chick is not totipotent. sent7: if there is something such that it is not a self-starter the microeconomist is not non-hemodynamics and/or it is not admissible. sent8: if the allomorph is not anodic then the desk is not a kind of a peripheral and it does not filiate mayfly. sent9: the organza is a ravigote but it is not anodic if there exists something such that it does not filiate mayfly. sent10: if the organza is a sogginess but it is not scriptural it is a Hamamelidoxylon. sent11: the fomite is a kind of allophonic a ravigote if the pearlite does not filiate mayfly. sent12: the organza is a kind of a ravigote if there exists something such that it does not filiate mayfly. sent13: there is something such that that it is a kind of a self-starter and it does not filiate specialization is not right. sent14: there exists something such that it does not filiate mayfly. sent15: the pearlite does not filiate mayfly if that the desk is not a kind of a peripheral and it does not filiate mayfly is not false. sent16: The tattler filiates organza. sent17: that the T-bar is not the ravigote if the T-bar is allophonic but it is not anodic is not incorrect. | sent1: ¬{I}{h} -> ¬({H}{g} & ¬{G}{g}) sent2: (x): ¬({L}x & ¬{M}x) -> ¬{L}{i} sent3: ({D}{c} & {B}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent4: {E}{a} sent5: (x): ({K}x v ¬{J}x) -> ¬{I}x sent6: ¬{IH}{cf} sent7: (x): ¬{L}x -> ({K}{h} v ¬{J}{h}) sent8: ¬{C}{f} -> (¬{F}{e} & ¬{A}{e}) sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent10: ({FD}{a} & ¬{FF}{a}) -> {HM}{a} sent11: ¬{A}{d} -> ({D}{c} & {B}{c}) sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}{a} sent13: (Ex): ¬({L}x & ¬{M}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent15: (¬{F}{e} & ¬{A}{e}) -> ¬{A}{d} sent16: {AA}{aa} sent17: ({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} | [
"sent14 & sent9 -> int1: the organza is both a ravigote and not anodic.;"
] | [
"sent14 & sent9 -> int1: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a});"
] | the fact that the changer filiates tattler is right. | {E}{gh} | [] | 6 | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the organza is a kind of allophonic thing that does filiate tattler. ; $context$ = sent1: if the microeconomist is not a slant that the guesser does filiate self-knowledge but it is not a treat is incorrect. sent2: the desperate is not a kind of a self-starter if there exists something such that the fact that that it is a self-starter and does not filiate specialization is not false is wrong. sent3: if the fomite is allophonic thing that is a kind of a ravigote the T-bar is not allophonic. sent4: the organza filiates tattler. sent5: if something is hemodynamics and/or it is not admissible then it is not a slant. sent6: the chick is not totipotent. sent7: if there is something such that it is not a self-starter the microeconomist is not non-hemodynamics and/or it is not admissible. sent8: if the allomorph is not anodic then the desk is not a kind of a peripheral and it does not filiate mayfly. sent9: the organza is a ravigote but it is not anodic if there exists something such that it does not filiate mayfly. sent10: if the organza is a sogginess but it is not scriptural it is a Hamamelidoxylon. sent11: the fomite is a kind of allophonic a ravigote if the pearlite does not filiate mayfly. sent12: the organza is a kind of a ravigote if there exists something such that it does not filiate mayfly. sent13: there is something such that that it is a kind of a self-starter and it does not filiate specialization is not right. sent14: there exists something such that it does not filiate mayfly. sent15: the pearlite does not filiate mayfly if that the desk is not a kind of a peripheral and it does not filiate mayfly is not false. sent16: The tattler filiates organza. sent17: that the T-bar is not the ravigote if the T-bar is allophonic but it is not anodic is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = | sent14 & sent9 -> int1: the organza is both a ravigote and not anodic.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is unforgettable that it is photometric and it is not a financier does not hold. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: that something is photometric and it is a financier is not true if it is unforgettable. sent2: there exists something such that if it is unforgettable then it is a kind of photometric thing that does not financier. sent3: the fact that the fact that the fact that something is tonal and is not a diplococcus is not false is incorrect if it does filiate erythropoietin hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it is unforgettable then the fact that it is photometric thing that is a financier is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the bondman is photometric thing that is a financier is not correct if that it is unforgettable is not incorrect. | sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): {T}x -> ¬({EU}x & ¬{AU}x) sent4: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [] | [] | there exists something such that if it does filiate erythropoietin that it is tonal and it is not a diplococcus is not true. | (Ex): {T}x -> ¬({EU}x & ¬{AU}x) | [
"sent3 -> int1: the fact that the coelogyne is both tonal and not a diplococcus is wrong if it filiates erythropoietin.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is unforgettable that it is photometric and it is not a financier does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is photometric and it is a financier is not true if it is unforgettable. sent2: there exists something such that if it is unforgettable then it is a kind of photometric thing that does not financier. sent3: the fact that the fact that the fact that something is tonal and is not a diplococcus is not false is incorrect if it does filiate erythropoietin hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it is unforgettable then the fact that it is photometric thing that is a financier is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the bondman is photometric thing that is a financier is not correct if that it is unforgettable is not incorrect. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if that it is not dysphoric and is not a darts is not right then it does scale Fischer. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: the bronchiole emigrates if that it is not dysphoric and it is a Theravada is incorrect. sent2: something is a kind of a sedum if the fact that it is not a pedigree and it does not scale Fischer is wrong. sent3: the bronchiole outlives if it does scale Fischer. sent4: that there is something such that if it is not a kind of a ELN and does not scale Hangzhou then it is a Hecate hold. sent5: if the fact that something is not dysphoric and it does not dart does not hold then it does scale Fischer. sent6: if the fact that something is not a suer and it does not nip leopardess is false then the fact that it is a gamete is not incorrect. sent7: the bronchiole is a darts if that it is not a Semitic and is not controversial does not hold. sent8: if the propenoate does not nip vinegar and is not a kind of a neutering it is a kind of a Russian. sent9: that there is something such that if that the fact that it is not ballistics and it is not an ostrich hold is incorrect then it bears is correct. sent10: something is prescription if the fact that it is not stellar and it is not a promise is not correct. sent11: if something is not dysphoric and it is not a darts it does scale Fischer. sent12: something is decisive if that it is not cheerful and does not filiate aeschynanthus is not true. sent13: something does scale Fischer if the fact that it is not dysphoric and is a kind of a darts is not right. sent14: something is a kind of a posthouse if that it is not cheerful and it is not precocious is not true. sent15: something is early if it is a Theravada. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {GM}{aa}) -> {AL}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AE}x & ¬{B}x) -> {IS}x sent3: {B}{aa} -> {HC}{aa} sent4: (Ex): (¬{FR}x & ¬{FA}x) -> {GI}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent6: (x): ¬(¬{EU}x & ¬{CM}x) -> {AJ}x sent7: ¬(¬{HE}{aa} & ¬{DP}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} sent8: (¬{CT}{b} & ¬{IJ}{b}) -> {BJ}{b} sent9: (Ex): ¬(¬{HJ}x & ¬{EQ}x) -> {FN}x sent10: (x): ¬(¬{EN}x & ¬{CO}x) -> {GG}x sent11: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent12: (x): ¬(¬{FJ}x & ¬{BS}x) -> {GO}x sent13: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent14: (x): ¬(¬{FJ}x & ¬{I}x) -> {CE}x sent15: (x): {GM}x -> {D}x | [
"sent5 -> int1: if that the bronchiole is non-dysphoric thing that does not dart is false it scales Fischer.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | if that the bronchiole is not a pedigree and it does not scale Fischer is not correct then it is a sedum. | ¬(¬{AE}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> {IS}{aa} | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it is not dysphoric and is not a darts is not right then it does scale Fischer. ; $context$ = sent1: the bronchiole emigrates if that it is not dysphoric and it is a Theravada is incorrect. sent2: something is a kind of a sedum if the fact that it is not a pedigree and it does not scale Fischer is wrong. sent3: the bronchiole outlives if it does scale Fischer. sent4: that there is something such that if it is not a kind of a ELN and does not scale Hangzhou then it is a Hecate hold. sent5: if the fact that something is not dysphoric and it does not dart does not hold then it does scale Fischer. sent6: if the fact that something is not a suer and it does not nip leopardess is false then the fact that it is a gamete is not incorrect. sent7: the bronchiole is a darts if that it is not a Semitic and is not controversial does not hold. sent8: if the propenoate does not nip vinegar and is not a kind of a neutering it is a kind of a Russian. sent9: that there is something such that if that the fact that it is not ballistics and it is not an ostrich hold is incorrect then it bears is correct. sent10: something is prescription if the fact that it is not stellar and it is not a promise is not correct. sent11: if something is not dysphoric and it is not a darts it does scale Fischer. sent12: something is decisive if that it is not cheerful and does not filiate aeschynanthus is not true. sent13: something does scale Fischer if the fact that it is not dysphoric and is a kind of a darts is not right. sent14: something is a kind of a posthouse if that it is not cheerful and it is not precocious is not true. sent15: something is early if it is a Theravada. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> int1: if that the bronchiole is non-dysphoric thing that does not dart is false it scales Fischer.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the ginseng is phonetics. | {A}{a} | sent1: the ginseng is phonetics and does crab sky. sent2: the ginseng filiates sockeye and does crab sky. sent3: the chokedamp is phonetics. sent4: something is a Charadriidae if that it is both landless and not an ironwood does not hold. sent5: if the fact that the ginseng is not a combativeness but it is a regeneration does not hold it is traceable. sent6: the fact that something is landless thing that is not a kind of an ironwood is incorrect if it is traceable. sent7: the ginseng crabs sky. | sent1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: ({FI}{a} & {B}{a}) sent3: {A}{br} sent4: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> {C}x sent5: ¬(¬{G}{a} & {H}{a}) -> {F}{a} sent6: (x): {F}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) sent7: {B}{a} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the sky is phonetics. | {A}{he} | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the fact that the ginseng is landless but it is not an ironwood hold is false that it is a Charadriidae is not wrong.; sent6 -> int2: if the ginseng is traceable then the fact that it is landless and it is not a kind of an ironwood is not true.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the ginseng is phonetics. ; $context$ = sent1: the ginseng is phonetics and does crab sky. sent2: the ginseng filiates sockeye and does crab sky. sent3: the chokedamp is phonetics. sent4: something is a Charadriidae if that it is both landless and not an ironwood does not hold. sent5: if the fact that the ginseng is not a combativeness but it is a regeneration does not hold it is traceable. sent6: the fact that something is landless thing that is not a kind of an ironwood is incorrect if it is traceable. sent7: the ginseng crabs sky. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the ectoproct is not unipolar. | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: there is something such that it is not a kind of a ewe and does not crab tattler. sent2: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a ewe and it does not crab tattler does not hold. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a ewe and it does not crab tattler is not right the sandbagger scales chromate. sent4: if something is a ewe then the sandbagger scales chromate. sent5: the sandbagger is cosmopolitan but it does not scale chromate if that the feminist is a kind of a wellpoint is not right. sent6: the nidus is a perfectibility if there is something such that the fact that it is non-positionable thing that does not crab tattler is false. sent7: if the sandbagger scales chromate then the ectoproct is unipolar. | sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: (x): {AA}x -> {A}{a} sent5: ¬{D}{c} -> ({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{BJ}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {GT}{jk} sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} | [
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: that the sandbagger scales chromate is right.; int1 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | the ectoproct is not unipolar. | ¬{B}{b} | [] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the ectoproct is not unipolar. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not a kind of a ewe and does not crab tattler. sent2: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a ewe and it does not crab tattler does not hold. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a ewe and it does not crab tattler is not right the sandbagger scales chromate. sent4: if something is a ewe then the sandbagger scales chromate. sent5: the sandbagger is cosmopolitan but it does not scale chromate if that the feminist is a kind of a wellpoint is not right. sent6: the nidus is a perfectibility if there is something such that the fact that it is non-positionable thing that does not crab tattler is false. sent7: if the sandbagger scales chromate then the ectoproct is unipolar. ; $proof$ = | sent2 & sent3 -> int1: that the sandbagger scales chromate is right.; int1 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that both the non-antitypicness and the non-monocarpicness happens is incorrect. | ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) | sent1: the fact that the antitypicness but not the monocarpicness occurs does not hold if the scaling Mott happens. sent2: the scaling antispasmodic does not occur. sent3: if the scaling comptrollership happens then the adamantineness occurs. sent4: if the titillation happens the fact that the hydrocephalicness does not occur and the scaling hoop does not occur is not true. sent5: if the advent occurs then the fact that the vasomotorness but not the off-siteness occurs does not hold. sent6: if the burrlikeness does not occur the scaling comptrollership occurs and the muffing occurs. sent7: the consultation happens if the subsonicness does not occur. sent8: that the preparation does not occur and the seriousness does not occur does not hold. sent9: if the scaling toxicologist happens the non-burrlikeness and the non-australopithecineness occurs. sent10: the monocarpicness does not occur if the fact that the endomorphicness does not occur is not wrong. sent11: that the endomorphicness happens but the sufficing does not occur does not hold if the inopportuneness occurs. sent12: the filiating airship does not occur. sent13: if the scaling Mott occurs then that the antitypicness does not occur and the monocarpicness does not occur does not hold. sent14: that the filiating airship does not occur prevents that the scaling Mott does not occur. sent15: the endomorphicness does not occur if the fact that the openingness and the endomorphicness happens is not true. sent16: that the antitypicness does not occur and the monocarpicness occurs is false. sent17: if the adamantineness happens then that the filiating airship does not occur and the scaling Mott does not occur does not hold. sent18: the fact that the antitypicness but not the monocarpicness occurs is not true. sent19: if that the scaling Mott happens is not incorrect that both the non-antitypicness and the monocarpicness occurs is not true. | sent1: {B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent2: ¬{GS} sent3: {I} -> {H} sent4: {AK} -> ¬(¬{EJ} & ¬{AM}) sent5: {FK} -> ¬({Q} & ¬{DL}) sent6: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) sent7: ¬{AD} -> {FT} sent8: ¬(¬{DT} & ¬{IQ}) sent9: {M} -> (¬{K} & ¬{L}) sent10: ¬{E} -> ¬{D} sent11: {GF} -> ¬({E} & ¬{BO}) sent12: ¬{A} sent13: {B} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent14: ¬{A} -> {B} sent15: ¬({G} & {E}) -> ¬{E} sent16: ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent17: {H} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent18: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent19: {B} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | [
"sent14 & sent12 -> int1: the scaling Mott happens.; int1 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent14 & sent12 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | both the non-antitypicness and the non-monocarpicness happens. | (¬{C} & ¬{D}) | [] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that both the non-antitypicness and the non-monocarpicness happens is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the antitypicness but not the monocarpicness occurs does not hold if the scaling Mott happens. sent2: the scaling antispasmodic does not occur. sent3: if the scaling comptrollership happens then the adamantineness occurs. sent4: if the titillation happens the fact that the hydrocephalicness does not occur and the scaling hoop does not occur is not true. sent5: if the advent occurs then the fact that the vasomotorness but not the off-siteness occurs does not hold. sent6: if the burrlikeness does not occur the scaling comptrollership occurs and the muffing occurs. sent7: the consultation happens if the subsonicness does not occur. sent8: that the preparation does not occur and the seriousness does not occur does not hold. sent9: if the scaling toxicologist happens the non-burrlikeness and the non-australopithecineness occurs. sent10: the monocarpicness does not occur if the fact that the endomorphicness does not occur is not wrong. sent11: that the endomorphicness happens but the sufficing does not occur does not hold if the inopportuneness occurs. sent12: the filiating airship does not occur. sent13: if the scaling Mott occurs then that the antitypicness does not occur and the monocarpicness does not occur does not hold. sent14: that the filiating airship does not occur prevents that the scaling Mott does not occur. sent15: the endomorphicness does not occur if the fact that the openingness and the endomorphicness happens is not true. sent16: that the antitypicness does not occur and the monocarpicness occurs is false. sent17: if the adamantineness happens then that the filiating airship does not occur and the scaling Mott does not occur does not hold. sent18: the fact that the antitypicness but not the monocarpicness occurs is not true. sent19: if that the scaling Mott happens is not incorrect that both the non-antitypicness and the monocarpicness occurs is not true. ; $proof$ = | sent14 & sent12 -> int1: the scaling Mott happens.; int1 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the Californian is not a breakfast. | ¬{C}{aa} | sent1: something does not unfasten scaffold and does not furl fluency if it is a hawkmoth. sent2: if that something is not a Erythronium and not a keypad is not right then that it is a kind of a Erythronium is right. sent3: something breakfasts if it is a Necturus. sent4: if the coast is a kind of a Erythronium that the amine is a hawkmoth is not wrong. sent5: the fact that the coast is disciplinary is not incorrect. sent6: if something is a snore then it does breakfast. sent7: something is not a breakfast if the fact that it is not a kind of a Necturus hold. sent8: if that the Californian does breakfast hold then it is restful. sent9: the Californian is a kind of a Necturus. sent10: something is not a kind of a Necturus if that it is both a handwear and not a deaconess does not hold. sent11: the Californian is arbitrative if it is a Necturus. sent12: something is not Danish if it is dextral. sent13: if something that is a homeopathy does not unfasten fluke then it does furl ERA. sent14: everything is dextral. sent15: something is a homeopathy and it emcees if it is not a Danish. sent16: the suffragan is a Necturus. sent17: if something that does not unfasten scaffold does not furl fluency then that it does not unfasten fluke is not false. sent18: if the fact that something is disciplinary is not incorrect that it is both not a Erythronium and not a keypad does not hold. sent19: if the Californian is a kind of a Necturus then it is striate. | sent1: (x): {K}x -> (¬{H}x & ¬{I}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{L}x & ¬{N}x) -> {L}x sent3: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent4: {L}{b} -> {K}{a} sent5: {M}{b} sent6: (x): {CB}x -> {C}x sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}x sent8: {C}{aa} -> {CI}{aa} sent9: {A}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent11: {A}{aa} -> {AM}{aa} sent12: (x): {P}x -> ¬{O}x sent13: (x): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> {E}x sent14: (x): {P}x sent15: (x): ¬{O}x -> ({F}x & {J}x) sent16: {A}{o} sent17: (x): (¬{H}x & ¬{I}x) -> ¬{G}x sent18: (x): {M}x -> ¬(¬{L}x & ¬{N}x) sent19: {A}{aa} -> {EP}{aa} | [
"sent3 -> int1: the Californian is a kind of a breakfast if it is a Necturus.; int1 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; int1 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | if the knife is a snore it is a kind of a breakfast. | {CB}{bo} -> {C}{bo} | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | DISPROVED | PROVED | DISPROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the Californian is not a breakfast. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not unfasten scaffold and does not furl fluency if it is a hawkmoth. sent2: if that something is not a Erythronium and not a keypad is not right then that it is a kind of a Erythronium is right. sent3: something breakfasts if it is a Necturus. sent4: if the coast is a kind of a Erythronium that the amine is a hawkmoth is not wrong. sent5: the fact that the coast is disciplinary is not incorrect. sent6: if something is a snore then it does breakfast. sent7: something is not a breakfast if the fact that it is not a kind of a Necturus hold. sent8: if that the Californian does breakfast hold then it is restful. sent9: the Californian is a kind of a Necturus. sent10: something is not a kind of a Necturus if that it is both a handwear and not a deaconess does not hold. sent11: the Californian is arbitrative if it is a Necturus. sent12: something is not Danish if it is dextral. sent13: if something that is a homeopathy does not unfasten fluke then it does furl ERA. sent14: everything is dextral. sent15: something is a homeopathy and it emcees if it is not a Danish. sent16: the suffragan is a Necturus. sent17: if something that does not unfasten scaffold does not furl fluency then that it does not unfasten fluke is not false. sent18: if the fact that something is disciplinary is not incorrect that it is both not a Erythronium and not a keypad does not hold. sent19: if the Californian is a kind of a Necturus then it is striate. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> int1: the Californian is a kind of a breakfast if it is a Necturus.; int1 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the antiemetic is not a Kunlun and it does not furl confederate. | (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | sent1: something is a kind of alphanumerics thing that is not a metropolitan. sent2: the pepsin is not textile if there is something such that that it does not scythe fellowship and it does furl schwa is incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that that it is both alphanumerics and a metropolitan does not hold. sent4: if the watercraft does not scythe yawl then the cheekbone does not sing rima but it is a kind of a technophile. sent5: if something is non-sectorial then the fact that it does not scythe fellowship and it does furl schwa is not true. sent6: if there exists something such that it is not alphanumerics the antiemetic does not furl confederate. sent7: if that something is a shelter and is a Vombatidae does not hold it is not a shelter. sent8: something either is not non-metropolitan or is alphanumerics or both if it is not a shelter. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it does moderate and it is a kind of a Cervidae is false the Calvinist is not sectorial. sent10: the fact that the feel is a shelter that is a kind of a Vombatidae does not hold if there is something such that it is not textile. sent11: if the feel is alphanumerics the buffalo does furl confederate. sent12: if the fact that the watercraft does not hedge and sings chancellor is false then it does not scythe yawl. sent13: if the cheekbone does not sing rima then the fact that the muller does moderate and it is a Cervidae is not correct. sent14: if there exists something such that the fact that it is insensible and it is not an eyesight is not correct the antiemetic is not a Kunlun. sent15: the fact that the watercraft is not a hedge but it does sing chancellor does not hold. sent16: if the feel is a metropolitan the buffalo does furl confederate. sent17: there exists something such that it is insensible and not an eyesight. sent18: there exists something such that that it is alphanumerics and it is not a metropolitan is not right. sent19: there exists something such that the fact that it is insensible and is not a kind of an eyesight is incorrect. | sent1: (Ex): ({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {I}x) -> ¬{F}{d} sent3: (Ex): ¬({C}x & {D}x) sent4: ¬{O}{h} -> (¬{M}{g} & {N}{g}) sent5: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & {I}x) sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: (x): ¬({E}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent8: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x v {C}x) sent9: (x): ¬({K}x & {L}x) -> ¬{J}{e} sent10: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({E}{c} & {G}{c}) sent11: {C}{c} -> {B}{b} sent12: ¬(¬{P}{h} & {Q}{h}) -> ¬{O}{h} sent13: ¬{M}{g} -> ¬({K}{f} & {L}{f}) sent14: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent15: ¬(¬{P}{h} & {Q}{h}) sent16: {D}{c} -> {B}{b} sent17: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent18: (Ex): ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent19: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | [
"sent19 & sent14 -> int1: the antiemetic is not a Kunlun.;"
] | [
"sent19 & sent14 -> int1: ¬{A}{a};"
] | that the antiemetic is not a Kunlun and it does not furl confederate is wrong. | ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) | [
"sent8 -> int2: if the feel does not shelter then either it is a metropolitan or it is alphanumerics or both.; sent7 -> int3: the feel does not shelter if the fact that it does shelter and it is a Vombatidae does not hold.; sent5 -> int4: if the Calvinist is not sectorial then the fact that it does not scythe fellowship and it furls schwa is not correct.; sent12 & sent15 -> int5: the watercraft does not scythe yawl.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: the cheekbone does not sing rima but it is a technophile.; int6 -> int7: the cheekbone does not sing rima.; sent13 & int7 -> int8: that the muller is moderate and a Cervidae is false.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that that it is a kind of moderate thing that is a Cervidae does not hold.; int9 & sent9 -> int10: the Calvinist is not sectorial.; int4 & int10 -> int11: that the Calvinist does not scythe fellowship and does furl schwa does not hold.; int11 -> int12: there is something such that that it does not scythe fellowship and does furl schwa is not correct.; int12 & sent2 -> int13: the pepsin is not textile.; int13 -> int14: that something is not textile is correct.; int14 & sent10 -> int15: that the feel is a kind of a shelter that is a Vombatidae is not right.; int3 & int15 -> int16: the feel is not a kind of a shelter.; int2 & int16 -> int17: either the feel is metropolitan or it is alphanumerics or both.; int17 & sent16 & sent11 -> int18: the buffalo furls confederate.; int18 -> int19: there exists something such that it does furl confederate.;"
] | 16 | 2 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the antiemetic is not a Kunlun and it does not furl confederate. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a kind of alphanumerics thing that is not a metropolitan. sent2: the pepsin is not textile if there is something such that that it does not scythe fellowship and it does furl schwa is incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that that it is both alphanumerics and a metropolitan does not hold. sent4: if the watercraft does not scythe yawl then the cheekbone does not sing rima but it is a kind of a technophile. sent5: if something is non-sectorial then the fact that it does not scythe fellowship and it does furl schwa is not true. sent6: if there exists something such that it is not alphanumerics the antiemetic does not furl confederate. sent7: if that something is a shelter and is a Vombatidae does not hold it is not a shelter. sent8: something either is not non-metropolitan or is alphanumerics or both if it is not a shelter. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it does moderate and it is a kind of a Cervidae is false the Calvinist is not sectorial. sent10: the fact that the feel is a shelter that is a kind of a Vombatidae does not hold if there is something such that it is not textile. sent11: if the feel is alphanumerics the buffalo does furl confederate. sent12: if the fact that the watercraft does not hedge and sings chancellor is false then it does not scythe yawl. sent13: if the cheekbone does not sing rima then the fact that the muller does moderate and it is a Cervidae is not correct. sent14: if there exists something such that the fact that it is insensible and it is not an eyesight is not correct the antiemetic is not a Kunlun. sent15: the fact that the watercraft is not a hedge but it does sing chancellor does not hold. sent16: if the feel is a metropolitan the buffalo does furl confederate. sent17: there exists something such that it is insensible and not an eyesight. sent18: there exists something such that that it is alphanumerics and it is not a metropolitan is not right. sent19: there exists something such that the fact that it is insensible and is not a kind of an eyesight is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | sent19 & sent14 -> int1: the antiemetic is not a Kunlun.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the keel is a hysterectomy. | {C}{a} | sent1: the Burmese is a ERA and is a spitz. sent2: there is something such that it is a skeet and it is a temperament. sent3: if that something is a ERA is correct then it is not a hysterectomy. sent4: if something that is a hysterectomy is a ERA then the Burmese is a spitz. sent5: there is something such that it is a kind of a Gliridae. | sent1: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): ({JA}x & {HR}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: (x): ({C}x & {A}x) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): {DQ}x | [
"sent1 -> int1: something is a kind of a ERA and it is a spitz.;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x);"
] | the keel is not a kind of a hysterectomy. | ¬{C}{a} | [
"sent3 -> int2: if the keel is a ERA it is not a hysterectomy.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the keel is a hysterectomy. ; $context$ = sent1: the Burmese is a ERA and is a spitz. sent2: there is something such that it is a skeet and it is a temperament. sent3: if that something is a ERA is correct then it is not a hysterectomy. sent4: if something that is a hysterectomy is a ERA then the Burmese is a spitz. sent5: there is something such that it is a kind of a Gliridae. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: something is a kind of a ERA and it is a spitz.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it does unfasten adnoun it is not a kind of a Portuguese and/or is an alert. | (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) | sent1: there exists something such that if it unfastens adnoun it is a kind of a Portuguese and/or it is alert. sent2: something is not granulocytic or is a kind of an agora or both if it is a kind of a potholder. sent3: there exists something such that if it closes then it does not fine-tune and/or it is a kind of a Lorenz. sent4: if the porcupines does unfasten adnoun then it is Portuguese and/or alert. sent5: the porcupines is non-Portuguese or not unalert or both if it unfastens adnoun. sent6: either the porcupines does not unfasten nihilism or it is a Brazilian or both if it is a kind of an infernal. sent7: there is something such that if it is a Beaverbrook either it is not ripe or it is a rubato or both. sent8: if the porcupines unfastens adnoun then it does not unfasten ACLANT and/or unfastens autoclave. sent9: if the porcupines is a terce then it does not unfasten actor and/or it is a Uruguayan. | sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x v {AB}x) sent2: (x): {DJ}x -> (¬{HE}x v {BP}x) sent3: (Ex): {DA}x -> (¬{FD}x v {GK}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent5: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent6: {GL}{aa} -> (¬{FU}{aa} v {O}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): {T}x -> (¬{ER}x v {GS}x) sent8: {A}{aa} -> (¬{JJ}{aa} v {AD}{aa}) sent9: {JB}{aa} -> (¬{HR}{aa} v {R}{aa}) | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | if the porcupines is a potholder it is not granulocytic and/or is an agora. | {DJ}{aa} -> (¬{HE}{aa} v {BP}{aa}) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does unfasten adnoun it is not a kind of a Portuguese and/or is an alert. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it unfastens adnoun it is a kind of a Portuguese and/or it is alert. sent2: something is not granulocytic or is a kind of an agora or both if it is a kind of a potholder. sent3: there exists something such that if it closes then it does not fine-tune and/or it is a kind of a Lorenz. sent4: if the porcupines does unfasten adnoun then it is Portuguese and/or alert. sent5: the porcupines is non-Portuguese or not unalert or both if it unfastens adnoun. sent6: either the porcupines does not unfasten nihilism or it is a Brazilian or both if it is a kind of an infernal. sent7: there is something such that if it is a Beaverbrook either it is not ripe or it is a rubato or both. sent8: if the porcupines unfastens adnoun then it does not unfasten ACLANT and/or unfastens autoclave. sent9: if the porcupines is a terce then it does not unfasten actor and/or it is a Uruguayan. ; $proof$ = | sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that there exists something such that if the fact that it does not sing rima and it is cenogenetic does not hold then the fact that it is a kind of a scaffold is not false hold. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: the casein does scaffold if the fact that it does not sing rima and is cenogenetic is false. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if the fact that it does not sing rima and it is cenogenetic does not hold then the fact that it is a kind of a scaffold is not false hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the casein does scaffold if the fact that it does not sing rima and is cenogenetic is false. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | either the Lilo is stoloniferous or it is monistic or both. | ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) | sent1: that something is stoloniferous or it is monistic or both is not true if the fact that it is not a kind of a stanza is not wrong. sent2: there exists something such that that that it unfastens afghani and is not metrological is not wrong does not hold. sent3: that the tollgate does not unfasten afghani and is not metrological is false. sent4: that that the Lilo does not unfasten afghani but it is monistic is not right is correct. sent5: if there exists something such that the fact that it is both not monistic and not metrological does not hold the Lilo does unfasten afghani. sent6: the Lilo is stoloniferous if there exists something such that that it does not unfasten afghani and it is not metrological is wrong. sent7: that that the backplate is not exempt but a Borodino is correct is false. sent8: the fact that the tollgate is monistic is not wrong if there is something such that the fact that it is not stoloniferous and it does not unfasten afghani is not correct. sent9: something does not sing Naomi and/or it is not a stanza if it does not unfasten Lutheran. sent10: something is a Mississippian but it does not unfasten largeness if that it is not psychomotor is true. sent11: that the Lilo is not a Mississippian and does not unfasten afghani is not true. sent12: something does not unfasten afghani and it is not metrological. sent13: if there is something such that the fact that it is not metrological and it does not unfasten afghani does not hold the tollgate is monistic. sent14: the fact that the fact that the tollgate does unfasten afghani and is not metrological does not hold is not wrong. sent15: the anterior does not unfasten Lutheran if something is a Mississippian and does not unfasten largeness. sent16: if that something is not exempt but a Borodino is not right it is not psychomotor. sent17: the fact that the tollgate does not unfasten afghani and is metrological is wrong. | sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v {B}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {B}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {AA}{a} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent7: ¬(¬{J}{c} & {I}{c}) sent8: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{AA}x) -> {B}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x v ¬{C}x) sent10: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}x & ¬{F}x) sent11: ¬(¬{G}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) sent12: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: (x): ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{AA}x) -> {B}{aa} sent14: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent15: (x): ({G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{E}{b} sent16: (x): ¬(¬{J}x & {I}x) -> ¬{H}x sent17: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [
"sent3 -> int1: there exists something such that that it does not unfasten afghani and it is not metrological is not true.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the Lilo is stoloniferous.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent3 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent6 -> int2: {A}{a}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the Lilo is stoloniferous or it is monistic or both is false. | ¬({A}{a} v {B}{a}) | [
"sent1 -> int3: if the Lilo is not a kind of a stanza that it is stoloniferous or is monistic or both is not right.; sent9 -> int4: if the anterior does not unfasten Lutheran either it does not sing Naomi or it is not a stanza or both.; sent10 -> int5: the backplate is a Mississippian and does not unfasten largeness if it is not psychomotor.; sent16 -> int6: if the fact that the backplate does not exempt but it is a Borodino does not hold then it is non-psychomotor.; int6 & sent7 -> int7: the backplate is not psychomotor.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the backplate is a Mississippian but it does not unfasten largeness.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that it is a Mississippian that does not unfasten largeness.; int9 & sent15 -> int10: the anterior does not unfasten Lutheran.; int4 & int10 -> int11: the anterior does not sing Naomi and/or is not a kind of a stanza.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = either the Lilo is stoloniferous or it is monistic or both. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is stoloniferous or it is monistic or both is not true if the fact that it is not a kind of a stanza is not wrong. sent2: there exists something such that that that it unfastens afghani and is not metrological is not wrong does not hold. sent3: that the tollgate does not unfasten afghani and is not metrological is false. sent4: that that the Lilo does not unfasten afghani but it is monistic is not right is correct. sent5: if there exists something such that the fact that it is both not monistic and not metrological does not hold the Lilo does unfasten afghani. sent6: the Lilo is stoloniferous if there exists something such that that it does not unfasten afghani and it is not metrological is wrong. sent7: that that the backplate is not exempt but a Borodino is correct is false. sent8: the fact that the tollgate is monistic is not wrong if there is something such that the fact that it is not stoloniferous and it does not unfasten afghani is not correct. sent9: something does not sing Naomi and/or it is not a stanza if it does not unfasten Lutheran. sent10: something is a Mississippian but it does not unfasten largeness if that it is not psychomotor is true. sent11: that the Lilo is not a Mississippian and does not unfasten afghani is not true. sent12: something does not unfasten afghani and it is not metrological. sent13: if there is something such that the fact that it is not metrological and it does not unfasten afghani does not hold the tollgate is monistic. sent14: the fact that the fact that the tollgate does unfasten afghani and is not metrological does not hold is not wrong. sent15: the anterior does not unfasten Lutheran if something is a Mississippian and does not unfasten largeness. sent16: if that something is not exempt but a Borodino is not right it is not psychomotor. sent17: the fact that the tollgate does not unfasten afghani and is metrological is wrong. ; $proof$ = | sent3 -> int1: there exists something such that that it does not unfasten afghani and it is not metrological is not true.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the Lilo is stoloniferous.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the chordophone is not a kind of a play. | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: the chordophone is a kind of a play if it bogs. sent2: the fact that the chordophone is a kind of non-audiovisual thing that is a kind of a bog is incorrect. sent3: the combustion does furl balloonist if the fact that it is not a kind of a sound and it is not an insinuation does not hold. sent4: if the fact that the chordophone is non-audiovisual thing that is not a bog is false it plays. sent5: everything does not furl secret. sent6: the fact that something is not an audiovisual and it does not bog does not hold if it is a kind of a colonial. sent7: if the fact that something is not an exchange and it does not furl secret is false it is not a play. sent8: the fact that something is not an audiovisual but it bogs is incorrect if the fact that it is a colonial is right. sent9: the good-king-henry is not a kind of a colonial if there exists something such that it does not furl secret and is not a theatrical. sent10: if the good-king-henry is not a colonial then that the folate is not a kind of an exchange and is a play is not true. sent11: the chordophone sings ukase if the fact that it is non-audiovisual and not a pace is false. sent12: if the chordophone is a colonial that it is not an audiovisual and it bogs is wrong. sent13: if something is a play then the fact that it is not a bog and it is not a kind of a colonial is not true. sent14: if something is not a theatrical then that the fact that it is not an exchange and does not furl secret is correct does not hold. sent15: the chordophone is a colonial. | sent1: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: ¬(¬{ER}{ga} & ¬{GL}{ga}) -> {CI}{ga} sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (x): ¬{D}x sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent10: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent11: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{FU}{aa}) -> {JC}{aa} sent12: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent13: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{A}x) sent14: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) sent15: {A}{aa} | [
"sent6 -> int1: if the chordophone is a colonial then the fact that it is not a kind of an audiovisual and it does not bog does not hold.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the fact that the chordophone is not an audiovisual and is not a kind of a bog is incorrect.; int2 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & sent15 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int2 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | the chordophone does not play. | ¬{B}{aa} | [
"sent5 -> int3: the pustule does not furl secret.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the chordophone is not a kind of a play. ; $context$ = sent1: the chordophone is a kind of a play if it bogs. sent2: the fact that the chordophone is a kind of non-audiovisual thing that is a kind of a bog is incorrect. sent3: the combustion does furl balloonist if the fact that it is not a kind of a sound and it is not an insinuation does not hold. sent4: if the fact that the chordophone is non-audiovisual thing that is not a bog is false it plays. sent5: everything does not furl secret. sent6: the fact that something is not an audiovisual and it does not bog does not hold if it is a kind of a colonial. sent7: if the fact that something is not an exchange and it does not furl secret is false it is not a play. sent8: the fact that something is not an audiovisual but it bogs is incorrect if the fact that it is a colonial is right. sent9: the good-king-henry is not a kind of a colonial if there exists something such that it does not furl secret and is not a theatrical. sent10: if the good-king-henry is not a colonial then that the folate is not a kind of an exchange and is a play is not true. sent11: the chordophone sings ukase if the fact that it is non-audiovisual and not a pace is false. sent12: if the chordophone is a colonial that it is not an audiovisual and it bogs is wrong. sent13: if something is a play then the fact that it is not a bog and it is not a kind of a colonial is not true. sent14: if something is not a theatrical then that the fact that it is not an exchange and does not furl secret is correct does not hold. sent15: the chordophone is a colonial. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> int1: if the chordophone is a colonial then the fact that it is not a kind of an audiovisual and it does not bog does not hold.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the fact that the chordophone is not an audiovisual and is not a kind of a bog is incorrect.; int2 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the sloe is a pascal and catechetical. | ({C}{b} & {D}{b}) | sent1: if the papoose is a kind of a pantaloon then the sloe furls downpour. sent2: there exists something such that it does unfasten Dolichonyx. sent3: something is a pascal if it furls downpour. sent4: the papoose is a kind of a pantaloon. sent5: if the fact that something is a kind of a mestranol that does not unfasten Dolichonyx is false then it is catechetical. sent6: if there exists something such that it does unfasten Dolichonyx then that the sloe is a kind of a mestranol that does not unfasten Dolichonyx is not true. sent7: something that does not furl downpour is a kind of a pantaloon. | sent1: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent2: (Ex): {E}x sent3: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent4: {A}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{E}x) -> {D}x sent6: (x): {E}x -> ¬({F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent7: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x | [
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the sloe does furl downpour.; sent3 -> int2: the sloe is a kind of a pascal if it furls downpour.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the sloe is a pascal.; sent5 -> int4: if that the sloe is a mestranol and does not unfasten Dolichonyx is not right it is catechetical.; sent2 & sent6 -> int5: that the sloe is a mestranol but it does not unfasten Dolichonyx is not right.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the sloe is catechetical hold.; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent3 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {C}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{b}; sent5 -> int4: ¬({F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> {D}{b}; sent2 & sent6 -> int5: ¬({F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}); int4 & int5 -> int6: {D}{b}; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis;"
] | the HF is a kind of a pantaloon. | {A}{ai} | [
"sent7 -> int7: if the HF does not furl downpour then it is a kind of a pantaloon.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the sloe is a pascal and catechetical. ; $context$ = sent1: if the papoose is a kind of a pantaloon then the sloe furls downpour. sent2: there exists something such that it does unfasten Dolichonyx. sent3: something is a pascal if it furls downpour. sent4: the papoose is a kind of a pantaloon. sent5: if the fact that something is a kind of a mestranol that does not unfasten Dolichonyx is false then it is catechetical. sent6: if there exists something such that it does unfasten Dolichonyx then that the sloe is a kind of a mestranol that does not unfasten Dolichonyx is not true. sent7: something that does not furl downpour is a kind of a pantaloon. ; $proof$ = | sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the sloe does furl downpour.; sent3 -> int2: the sloe is a kind of a pascal if it furls downpour.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the sloe is a pascal.; sent5 -> int4: if that the sloe is a mestranol and does not unfasten Dolichonyx is not right it is catechetical.; sent2 & sent6 -> int5: that the sloe is a mestranol but it does not unfasten Dolichonyx is not right.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the sloe is catechetical hold.; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the heparin is not a kind of a Germinal. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: if the heparin is a pneumothorax it is a wandflower. sent2: the governess is critical. sent3: the governess furls gusseted. sent4: the heparin is a figwort. sent5: something is a Germinal if it is critical. sent6: The gusseted furls governess. sent7: the heparin does furl gusseted. sent8: if the governess furls gusseted the heparin is critical. sent9: the geometrid furls gusseted. sent10: the carrack furls gusseted. sent11: the heparin is a Maginot. sent12: the gallinacean does furl gusseted. sent13: the governess is critical if the heparin is a Germinal. | sent1: {CG}{b} -> {AN}{b} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: {HI}{b} sent5: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent6: {AA}{aa} sent7: {A}{b} sent8: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent9: {A}{m} sent10: {A}{l} sent11: {HR}{b} sent12: {A}{ca} sent13: {C}{b} -> {B}{a} | [
"sent8 & sent3 -> int1: the heparin is critical.; sent5 -> int2: the fact that the heparin is a kind of a Germinal is correct if it is critical.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent5 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {C}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the heparin is not a kind of a Germinal. ; $context$ = sent1: if the heparin is a pneumothorax it is a wandflower. sent2: the governess is critical. sent3: the governess furls gusseted. sent4: the heparin is a figwort. sent5: something is a Germinal if it is critical. sent6: The gusseted furls governess. sent7: the heparin does furl gusseted. sent8: if the governess furls gusseted the heparin is critical. sent9: the geometrid furls gusseted. sent10: the carrack furls gusseted. sent11: the heparin is a Maginot. sent12: the gallinacean does furl gusseted. sent13: the governess is critical if the heparin is a Germinal. ; $proof$ = | sent8 & sent3 -> int1: the heparin is critical.; sent5 -> int2: the fact that the heparin is a kind of a Germinal is correct if it is critical.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the sleet does not unfasten foul. | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: if something that scythes Vaccinium does not scythe balloonist then it is a Freudian. sent2: that the arthrogram does not bark and does not climb is not true. sent3: there exists something such that that it is a bark and not a climb is not true. sent4: the coop scythes Vaccinium. sent5: the coop is a mycologist if there exists something such that the fact that it does not bark and it is not a climb does not hold. sent6: The Vaccinium scythes coop. sent7: The balloonist does not scythe coop. sent8: if the coop is a kind of a mycologist and it is a Freudian the sleet does not unfasten foul. | sent1: (x): ({E}x & ¬{D}x) -> {B}x sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: {E}{a} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent6: {AD}{ac} sent7: ¬{AE}{ad} sent8: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} | [
"sent2 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is not a bark and does not climb is wrong.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the coop is a mycologist.; sent1 -> int3: if the coop scythes Vaccinium but it does not scythe balloonist it is a Freudian.;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent5 -> int2: {A}{a}; sent1 -> int3: ({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> {B}{a};"
] | null | null | [] | null | 4 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = the sleet does not unfasten foul. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that scythes Vaccinium does not scythe balloonist then it is a Freudian. sent2: that the arthrogram does not bark and does not climb is not true. sent3: there exists something such that that it is a bark and not a climb is not true. sent4: the coop scythes Vaccinium. sent5: the coop is a mycologist if there exists something such that the fact that it does not bark and it is not a climb does not hold. sent6: The Vaccinium scythes coop. sent7: The balloonist does not scythe coop. sent8: if the coop is a kind of a mycologist and it is a Freudian the sleet does not unfasten foul. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: there is something such that the fact that it is not a bark and does not climb is wrong.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the coop is a mycologist.; sent1 -> int3: if the coop scythes Vaccinium but it does not scythe balloonist it is a Freudian.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the niqab does unfasten sporophyte. | {AA}{b} | sent1: if something is quiet then it does not unfasten sporophyte and it sings Plethodontidae. sent2: the niqab finances. sent3: if a non-quiet thing is a transferability it does sing Plethodontidae. sent4: the ammonium does not sing Plethodontidae. sent5: The Plethodontidae does not sing ammonium. sent6: the fact that the ammonium finances hold. sent7: if the ammonium does not sing Plethodontidae then the niqab unfastens sporophyte and it finances. sent8: something is non-infernal thing that is a kind of a transferability if it is not a picture. | sent1: (x): {B}x -> (¬{AA}x & {A}x) sent2: {AB}{b} sent3: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {A}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} sent5: ¬{AC}{aa} sent6: {AB}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent8: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x & {C}x) | [
"sent7 & sent4 -> int1: the niqab does unfasten sporophyte and it does finance.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 & sent4 -> int1: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | the niqab does not unfasten sporophyte. | ¬{AA}{b} | [
"sent1 -> int2: the niqab does not unfasten sporophyte but it sings Plethodontidae if it is quiet.; sent8 -> int3: the ammonium is not an infernal but a transferability if it does not picture.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the niqab does unfasten sporophyte. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is quiet then it does not unfasten sporophyte and it sings Plethodontidae. sent2: the niqab finances. sent3: if a non-quiet thing is a transferability it does sing Plethodontidae. sent4: the ammonium does not sing Plethodontidae. sent5: The Plethodontidae does not sing ammonium. sent6: the fact that the ammonium finances hold. sent7: if the ammonium does not sing Plethodontidae then the niqab unfastens sporophyte and it finances. sent8: something is non-infernal thing that is a kind of a transferability if it is not a picture. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent4 -> int1: the niqab does unfasten sporophyte and it does finance.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the twilight is a Ceylonite. | {C}{aa} | sent1: the twilight does not furl hairsplitter. sent2: if the allegorizer is not a Ceylonite it is not surmountable. sent3: the hairsplitter is politics if the fact that the madame unfastens Septobasidiaceae but it is not politics does not hold. sent4: if that something is a kind of non-allomerous a leaf does not hold it does not leaf. sent5: the fact that the sarong either unfastens patriarchy or is not contestable or both does not hold. sent6: if the twilight does not furl hairsplitter it is choleraic. sent7: if something is not allomerous and is not non-politics then it does not leaf. sent8: something is a kind of a Ceylonite if it is choleraic. sent9: the steamboat is a Ceylonite. sent10: if something is not a kind of a leaf it is not choleraic or it does not furl hairsplitter or both. sent11: that the fact that the madame unfastens Septobasidiaceae and is not politics does not hold if there is something such that it is not a kind of a teleportation is not incorrect. sent12: the twilight does furl hairsplitter if it does not sing blanketed. sent13: if the fact that the immunologist lurches and does not furl running is false it is not a teleportation. sent14: that something is a Ceylonite but not choleraic is false if it is not a leaf. sent15: the Essene does not furl hairsplitter if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a Ceylonite and it is not choleraic is not true. sent16: the immunologist does not sing berth if the fact that the sarong unfastens patriarchy and/or it is incontestable is not correct. sent17: that something is a lurch but it does not furl running is not right if it does not sing berth. sent18: if something is politics that it is not allomerous and it does leaf is not correct. sent19: The hairsplitter does not furl twilight. | sent1: ¬{B}{aa} sent2: ¬{C}{he} -> {DS}{he} sent3: ¬({H}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> {F}{a} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}x sent5: ¬({L}{d} v {M}{d}) sent6: ¬{B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent7: (x): (¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent8: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent9: {C}{ig} sent10: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) sent11: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({H}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent12: ¬{EK}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent13: ¬({J}{c} & ¬{I}{c}) -> ¬{G}{c} sent14: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) sent15: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}{el} sent16: ¬({L}{d} v {M}{d}) -> ¬{K}{c} sent17: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({J}x & ¬{I}x) sent18: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) sent19: ¬{AA}{ab} | [
"sent8 -> int1: if the twilight is choleraic then it is a Ceylonite.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the twilight is choleraic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent8 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the Essene does not furl hairsplitter hold. | ¬{B}{el} | [
"sent14 -> int3: the fact that the hairsplitter is a kind of a Ceylonite that is not choleraic does not hold if it is not a leaf.; sent4 -> int4: if the fact that the hairsplitter is both not allomerous and a leaf is wrong it does not leaf.; sent18 -> int5: if the hairsplitter is politics then the fact that it is not allomerous and it is a leaf is not right.; sent17 -> int6: that the immunologist lurches but it does not furl running is not right if it does not sing berth.; sent16 & sent5 -> int7: the immunologist does not sing berth.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the immunologist is a kind of a lurch and does not furl running is not true.; sent13 & int8 -> int9: the immunologist is not a teleportation.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that it is not a teleportation.; int10 & sent11 -> int11: the fact that the madame does unfasten Septobasidiaceae and is not politics is false.; sent3 & int11 -> int12: that the hairsplitter is politics hold.; int5 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the hairsplitter is not allomerous and does leaf does not hold.; int4 & int13 -> int14: the fact that the hairsplitter is not a kind of a leaf is not wrong.; int3 & int14 -> int15: that the hairsplitter is a Ceylonite and is not choleraic does not hold.; int15 -> int16: there is something such that that it is a Ceylonite and non-choleraic is not correct.; int16 & sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the twilight is a Ceylonite. ; $context$ = sent1: the twilight does not furl hairsplitter. sent2: if the allegorizer is not a Ceylonite it is not surmountable. sent3: the hairsplitter is politics if the fact that the madame unfastens Septobasidiaceae but it is not politics does not hold. sent4: if that something is a kind of non-allomerous a leaf does not hold it does not leaf. sent5: the fact that the sarong either unfastens patriarchy or is not contestable or both does not hold. sent6: if the twilight does not furl hairsplitter it is choleraic. sent7: if something is not allomerous and is not non-politics then it does not leaf. sent8: something is a kind of a Ceylonite if it is choleraic. sent9: the steamboat is a Ceylonite. sent10: if something is not a kind of a leaf it is not choleraic or it does not furl hairsplitter or both. sent11: that the fact that the madame unfastens Septobasidiaceae and is not politics does not hold if there is something such that it is not a kind of a teleportation is not incorrect. sent12: the twilight does furl hairsplitter if it does not sing blanketed. sent13: if the fact that the immunologist lurches and does not furl running is false it is not a teleportation. sent14: that something is a Ceylonite but not choleraic is false if it is not a leaf. sent15: the Essene does not furl hairsplitter if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a Ceylonite and it is not choleraic is not true. sent16: the immunologist does not sing berth if the fact that the sarong unfastens patriarchy and/or it is incontestable is not correct. sent17: that something is a lurch but it does not furl running is not right if it does not sing berth. sent18: if something is politics that it is not allomerous and it does leaf is not correct. sent19: The hairsplitter does not furl twilight. ; $proof$ = | sent8 -> int1: if the twilight is choleraic then it is a Ceylonite.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the twilight is choleraic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the endogeny happens. | {D} | sent1: that the unfastening Portugal does not occur and the singing kind occurs yields that the murmuring does not occur. sent2: either the unfastening sketcher happens or the murmuring occurs or both. sent3: the unfastening Portugal does not occur but the singing kind occurs if the indispensableness happens. sent4: the thwart happens if the behavioristicness happens. sent5: that not the unfastening Latrodectus but the calcifugousness happens leads to that the indispensableness happens. sent6: the singing kind occurs if the murmur happens. sent7: if the singing kind happens then the endogeny occurs. sent8: the unfastening Latrodectus does not occur. | sent1: (¬{E} & {C}) -> ¬{B} sent2: ({A} v {B}) sent3: {F} -> (¬{E} & {C}) sent4: {M} -> {L} sent5: (¬{H} & {G}) -> {F} sent6: {B} -> {C} sent7: {C} -> {D} sent8: ¬{H} | [] | [] | the endogeny does not occur. | ¬{D} | [] | 9 | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the endogeny happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the unfastening Portugal does not occur and the singing kind occurs yields that the murmuring does not occur. sent2: either the unfastening sketcher happens or the murmuring occurs or both. sent3: the unfastening Portugal does not occur but the singing kind occurs if the indispensableness happens. sent4: the thwart happens if the behavioristicness happens. sent5: that not the unfastening Latrodectus but the calcifugousness happens leads to that the indispensableness happens. sent6: the singing kind occurs if the murmur happens. sent7: if the singing kind happens then the endogeny occurs. sent8: the unfastening Latrodectus does not occur. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the dragonfly does not gestate and is classicistic. | (¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}) | sent1: if the dragonfly is not a kind of a springer and it does not sing angelology then it does not gestate. sent2: the expectorant is a Twin. sent3: something does not gestate and is classicistic if the fact that it does unfasten expectorant does not hold. sent4: that the expectorant does model or it is not a Twin or both is incorrect. sent5: if that the bacteriophage is not a springer is true the expectorant gestates and unfastens expectorant. sent6: if the fact that the expectorant either is a model or is not a Twin or both is not right then the dragonfly does not unfasten expectorant. sent7: if the fact that the expectorant does model and/or is a kind of a Twin is not right the dragonfly does not unfasten expectorant. sent8: the dragonfly does not gestate. | sent1: (¬{D}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent2: {AB}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{C}x & {A}x) sent4: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent5: ¬{D}{c} -> ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent8: ¬{C}{b} | [
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the dragonfly does not unfasten expectorant.; sent3 -> int2: if the dragonfly does not unfasten expectorant it does not gestate and it is classicistic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent3 -> int2: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | the wimp does not unfasten expectorant. | ¬{B}{hc} | [] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the dragonfly does not gestate and is classicistic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the dragonfly is not a kind of a springer and it does not sing angelology then it does not gestate. sent2: the expectorant is a Twin. sent3: something does not gestate and is classicistic if the fact that it does unfasten expectorant does not hold. sent4: that the expectorant does model or it is not a Twin or both is incorrect. sent5: if that the bacteriophage is not a springer is true the expectorant gestates and unfastens expectorant. sent6: if the fact that the expectorant either is a model or is not a Twin or both is not right then the dragonfly does not unfasten expectorant. sent7: if the fact that the expectorant does model and/or is a kind of a Twin is not right the dragonfly does not unfasten expectorant. sent8: the dragonfly does not gestate. ; $proof$ = | sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the dragonfly does not unfasten expectorant.; sent3 -> int2: if the dragonfly does not unfasten expectorant it does not gestate and it is classicistic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the illiterate is representational but it is not Hugoesque. | ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: something is a kind of a cluttered and is not a earthtongue. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is a particularism and it is not obstetric is not right. sent3: the illiterate is not an alexia if the fact that it is both representational and not Hugoesque is not true. sent4: the marc is not a earthtongue and does not root if the illiterate is not a kind of an alexia. sent5: the flagellate does not nestle and it is nonrepresentational. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is both a earthtongue and an alexia is not true. sent7: there is something such that that it is representational and it does root is not true. sent8: if the marc is not a earthtongue then the fact that the illiterate is representational and non-Hugoesque is not true. sent9: if there is something such that that it is a particularism and is not obstetric is incorrect then the microwave does not clutter. | sent1: (Ex): ({D}x & ¬{A}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬({F}x & ¬{E}x) sent3: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent5: (¬{DB}{ai} & ¬{AA}{ai}) sent6: (Ex): ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {C}x) sent8: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}{c} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the illiterate is representational but it is not Hugoesque is incorrect.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the illiterate is not an alexia.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the marc is not a earthtongue and not a rooting.; sent2 & sent9 -> int3: the microwave is not a kind of a cluttered.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent3 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & sent4 -> int2: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}); sent2 & sent9 -> int3: ¬{D}{c};"
] | that the illiterate is representational but it is not Hugoesque is wrong. | ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [] | 5 | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the illiterate is representational but it is not Hugoesque. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a kind of a cluttered and is not a earthtongue. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is a particularism and it is not obstetric is not right. sent3: the illiterate is not an alexia if the fact that it is both representational and not Hugoesque is not true. sent4: the marc is not a earthtongue and does not root if the illiterate is not a kind of an alexia. sent5: the flagellate does not nestle and it is nonrepresentational. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is both a earthtongue and an alexia is not true. sent7: there is something such that that it is representational and it does root is not true. sent8: if the marc is not a earthtongue then the fact that the illiterate is representational and non-Hugoesque is not true. sent9: if there is something such that that it is a particularism and is not obstetric is incorrect then the microwave does not clutter. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the illiterate is representational but it is not Hugoesque is incorrect.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the illiterate is not an alexia.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the marc is not a earthtongue and not a rooting.; sent2 & sent9 -> int3: the microwave is not a kind of a cluttered.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there is something such that if it is not nonextensile it is not anamorphic or does not sing Miocene or both is not right. | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: there exists something such that if that it furls hunter is not false then it either is not a kind of a clock or is not ultramicroscopic or both. sent2: there is something such that if it overloads it is not a bustling or it does not sing narrow-mindedness or both. sent3: either the busboy does not sin or it does sing Miocene or both if the fact that it does not sing elective is true. sent4: either the busboy is a kind of a Planck or it is not a perfluorocarbon or both if it is non-anamorphic. sent5: there is something such that if the fact that it does not sing Radyera is not wrong then that it does not sing Paradoxurus and/or is not cryptobiotic hold. sent6: something is not a civilization and/or is computational if it does not ingrain. sent7: there exists something such that if it sings cluttered then it is not a Hypericum or it is not a clock or both. sent8: there exists something such that if it is kinesthetic it either does not scythe nephrectomy or is not Leonardesque or both. sent9: if something is a Togolese it is not resentful or it does not sing basil or both. sent10: there is something such that if it does not advance then it is a kind of an insinuation or does not sing sketcher or both. sent11: something does not furl agnathan or it is a papist or both if it is not frivolous. sent12: something is not anamorphic or it does not sing Miocene or both if it is not nonextensile. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not unfasten stemmed it is not a kind of an astigmatism and/or it is a kind of a retrieval. sent14: either the dramatist is not a loophole or it is not prophetic or both if it is nonextensile. sent15: there exists something such that if it is a sediment it does not unfasten apse and/or it does not scythe grenadine. sent16: something is not edible and/or it is not a Hohhot if it is a hypertrophy. sent17: the busboy is kinesthetic or does not sing Radyera or both if it is not nonextensile. sent18: that there exists something such that if it furls pitfall then it is not a Planck or not a tentacle or both hold. sent19: something that does not unfasten Gavialidae is not computational or a eight-spot or both. sent20: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a brunet it is not an upstage and/or it is not unusual. | sent1: (Ex): {EB}x -> (¬{GR}x v ¬{HN}x) sent2: (Ex): {DN}x -> (¬{HE}x v ¬{FJ}x) sent3: ¬{FT}{aa} -> (¬{GU}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent4: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ({IU}{aa} v ¬{BO}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{JG}x -> (¬{BA}x v ¬{FS}x) sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{JD}x v {DB}x) sent7: (Ex): {CO}x -> (¬{AS}x v ¬{GR}x) sent8: (Ex): {GE}x -> (¬{JI}x v ¬{JJ}x) sent9: (x): {IF}x -> (¬{DR}x v ¬{EC}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{E}x -> ({JH}x v ¬{GT}x) sent11: (x): ¬{FK}x -> (¬{S}x v {BE}x) sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent13: (Ex): ¬{BN}x -> (¬{HI}x v {CT}x) sent14: {A}{bg} -> (¬{IN}{bg} v ¬{AR}{bg}) sent15: (Ex): {CA}x -> (¬{HO}x v ¬{FC}x) sent16: (x): {EA}x -> (¬{EJ}x v ¬{BR}x) sent17: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({GE}{aa} v ¬{JG}{aa}) sent18: (Ex): {HG}x -> (¬{IU}x v ¬{IL}x) sent19: (x): ¬{IK}x -> (¬{DB}x v {GA}x) sent20: (Ex): ¬{HK}x -> (¬{HL}x v ¬{ES}x) | [
"sent12 -> int1: if the busboy is not nonextensile then it is not anamorphic or it does not sing Miocene or both.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent12 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is not nonextensile it is not anamorphic or does not sing Miocene or both is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if that it furls hunter is not false then it either is not a kind of a clock or is not ultramicroscopic or both. sent2: there is something such that if it overloads it is not a bustling or it does not sing narrow-mindedness or both. sent3: either the busboy does not sin or it does sing Miocene or both if the fact that it does not sing elective is true. sent4: either the busboy is a kind of a Planck or it is not a perfluorocarbon or both if it is non-anamorphic. sent5: there is something such that if the fact that it does not sing Radyera is not wrong then that it does not sing Paradoxurus and/or is not cryptobiotic hold. sent6: something is not a civilization and/or is computational if it does not ingrain. sent7: there exists something such that if it sings cluttered then it is not a Hypericum or it is not a clock or both. sent8: there exists something such that if it is kinesthetic it either does not scythe nephrectomy or is not Leonardesque or both. sent9: if something is a Togolese it is not resentful or it does not sing basil or both. sent10: there is something such that if it does not advance then it is a kind of an insinuation or does not sing sketcher or both. sent11: something does not furl agnathan or it is a papist or both if it is not frivolous. sent12: something is not anamorphic or it does not sing Miocene or both if it is not nonextensile. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not unfasten stemmed it is not a kind of an astigmatism and/or it is a kind of a retrieval. sent14: either the dramatist is not a loophole or it is not prophetic or both if it is nonextensile. sent15: there exists something such that if it is a sediment it does not unfasten apse and/or it does not scythe grenadine. sent16: something is not edible and/or it is not a Hohhot if it is a hypertrophy. sent17: the busboy is kinesthetic or does not sing Radyera or both if it is not nonextensile. sent18: that there exists something such that if it furls pitfall then it is not a Planck or not a tentacle or both hold. sent19: something that does not unfasten Gavialidae is not computational or a eight-spot or both. sent20: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a brunet it is not an upstage and/or it is not unusual. ; $proof$ = | sent12 -> int1: if the busboy is not nonextensile then it is not anamorphic or it does not sing Miocene or both.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the napoleon is a kind of a Utopianism. | {A}{a} | sent1: that something is not a Protestantism and/or it is not a bronchus is not true if it is not a kind of a galbanum. sent2: the fact that the minefield is a saltpeter does not hold if the ergot is a Sinatra and it is a saltpeter. sent3: the fact that the loophole is both not a decision and a butterwort is not correct. sent4: the minefield is a saltpeter. sent5: if something is not a perceiver then that it is adscript and unfastens cabotage is incorrect. sent6: if the minefield is a saltpeter then the napoleon does scythe napoleon. sent7: the ergot does furl goalkeeper if the fact that either the buffet is not a Protestantism or it is not a bronchus or both does not hold. sent8: the minefield is a kind of a Sinatra if the napoleon furls goalkeeper. sent9: if the minefield is not a saltpeter the fact that it is a Utopianism and it does not scythe napoleon is wrong. sent10: if something that does not scythe napoleon is a saltpeter it is a Utopianism. sent11: if that the ergot does furl goalkeeper hold the napoleon does furl goalkeeper. sent12: the loophole is not a kind of a perceiver if the fact that it is not a decision and it is a butterwort does not hold. sent13: the bedbug does not scythe napoleon. sent14: something does not scythe napoleon and is a kind of a saltpeter if it is a Sinatra. | sent1: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{F}x v ¬{G}x) sent2: ({D}{c} & {C}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent3: ¬(¬{L}{e} & {M}{e}) sent4: {C}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({I}x & {J}x) sent6: {C}{b} -> {B}{a} sent7: ¬(¬{F}{d} v ¬{G}{d}) -> {E}{c} sent8: {E}{a} -> {D}{b} sent9: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent10: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {A}x sent11: {E}{c} -> {E}{a} sent12: ¬(¬{L}{e} & {M}{e}) -> ¬{K}{e} sent13: ¬{B}{cj} sent14: (x): {D}x -> (¬{B}x & {C}x) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the napoleon is not a Utopianism.; sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the napoleon does scythe napoleon.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent6 & sent4 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] | the minefield is a kind of a Utopianism. | {A}{b} | [
"sent10 -> int2: the minefield is a kind of a Utopianism if it does not scythe napoleon and is a saltpeter.; sent14 -> int3: the minefield does not scythe napoleon and is a saltpeter if it is a Sinatra.; sent1 -> int4: the fact that the buffet is not a kind of a Protestantism or is not a bronchus or both does not hold if it is not a galbanum.; sent5 -> int5: if the loophole is not a perceiver then the fact that it is adscript and unfastens cabotage is false.; sent12 & sent3 -> int6: that the loophole is not a perceiver is true.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the loophole is adscript and it unfastens cabotage is not true.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that it is adscript and does unfasten cabotage does not hold.;"
] | 10 | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the napoleon is a kind of a Utopianism. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is not a Protestantism and/or it is not a bronchus is not true if it is not a kind of a galbanum. sent2: the fact that the minefield is a saltpeter does not hold if the ergot is a Sinatra and it is a saltpeter. sent3: the fact that the loophole is both not a decision and a butterwort is not correct. sent4: the minefield is a saltpeter. sent5: if something is not a perceiver then that it is adscript and unfastens cabotage is incorrect. sent6: if the minefield is a saltpeter then the napoleon does scythe napoleon. sent7: the ergot does furl goalkeeper if the fact that either the buffet is not a Protestantism or it is not a bronchus or both does not hold. sent8: the minefield is a kind of a Sinatra if the napoleon furls goalkeeper. sent9: if the minefield is not a saltpeter the fact that it is a Utopianism and it does not scythe napoleon is wrong. sent10: if something that does not scythe napoleon is a saltpeter it is a Utopianism. sent11: if that the ergot does furl goalkeeper hold the napoleon does furl goalkeeper. sent12: the loophole is not a kind of a perceiver if the fact that it is not a decision and it is a butterwort does not hold. sent13: the bedbug does not scythe napoleon. sent14: something does not scythe napoleon and is a kind of a saltpeter if it is a Sinatra. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the napoleon is not a Utopianism.; sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the napoleon does scythe napoleon.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is a reversible it is not bionics. | (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{C}x | sent1: the bijou does ramble if it is a kind of a reversible. sent2: a reversible is not a precedence. sent3: the hayfield is a Somali if it is bionics. sent4: if the casein is a kind of a reversible it is not bionics. sent5: if the casein is reversible the fact that it does sing cautery hold. sent6: if the casein is a kind of a senior then that it unfastens indulgence is not incorrect. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a reversible the fact that it is bionics is not incorrect. sent8: the casein does not unfasten oblateness if that it sings eight-spot is right. sent9: the fact that the chick is bionics is right if it revolves. sent10: the Franciscan is non-bacterial if it is bionics. sent11: something does not unfasten Sanger if it is an overhead. | sent1: {A}{gs} -> {GI}{gs} sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬{DT}x sent3: {C}{bm} -> {DF}{bm} sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent5: {A}{aa} -> {JA}{aa} sent6: {BJ}{aa} -> {IQ}{aa} sent7: (Ex): {A}x -> {C}x sent8: {GE}{aa} -> ¬{IG}{aa} sent9: {GK}{gd} -> {C}{gd} sent10: {C}{et} -> ¬{FG}{et} sent11: (x): {DA}x -> ¬{EL}x | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | if that the casein is a reversible is correct it is not a precedence. | {A}{aa} -> ¬{DT}{aa} | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a reversible it is not bionics. ; $context$ = sent1: the bijou does ramble if it is a kind of a reversible. sent2: a reversible is not a precedence. sent3: the hayfield is a Somali if it is bionics. sent4: if the casein is a kind of a reversible it is not bionics. sent5: if the casein is reversible the fact that it does sing cautery hold. sent6: if the casein is a kind of a senior then that it unfastens indulgence is not incorrect. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a reversible the fact that it is bionics is not incorrect. sent8: the casein does not unfasten oblateness if that it sings eight-spot is right. sent9: the fact that the chick is bionics is right if it revolves. sent10: the Franciscan is non-bacterial if it is bionics. sent11: something does not unfasten Sanger if it is an overhead. ; $proof$ = | sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a materialist that it is bloody and it is a kind of an antipodal is not right. | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: that the stitcher is bloody and an antipodal is not true if it is not a materialist. | sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | PROVED | null | PROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a materialist that it is bloody and it is a kind of an antipodal is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that the stitcher is bloody and an antipodal is not true if it is not a materialist. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that something is a Merton and does furl lambkill is false. | ¬((Ex): ({C}x & {B}x)) | sent1: the broadtail is not tricentenary and furls lambkill. sent2: the broadtail is a Merton if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a hydroxyproline and it is not a kind of a Merton is not right. sent3: the march twigs if the broadtail twigs. sent4: there exists something such that that it is not tricentenary and is a Merton does not hold. sent5: the march is a Joplin and is tricentenary if that it does not furl lambkill hold. sent6: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a hydroxyproline and it is not a Merton is not right. sent7: the broadtail is tricentenary if there is something such that it is tricentenary. sent8: that something does furl lambkill is not false. | sent1: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}{a} sent3: {AK}{a} -> {AK}{m} sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) sent5: ¬{B}{m} -> ({JK}{m} & {A}{m}) sent6: (Ex): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{C}x) sent7: (x): {A}x -> {A}{a} sent8: (Ex): {B}x | [
"sent1 -> int1: the fact that the broadtail does furl lambkill is correct.; sent6 & sent2 -> int2: the broadtail is a Merton.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the broadtail is a Merton and it does furl lambkill.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent6 & sent2 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the march is a kind of a Joplin and twigs. | ({JK}{m} & {AK}{m}) | [] | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that something is a Merton and does furl lambkill is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the broadtail is not tricentenary and furls lambkill. sent2: the broadtail is a Merton if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a hydroxyproline and it is not a kind of a Merton is not right. sent3: the march twigs if the broadtail twigs. sent4: there exists something such that that it is not tricentenary and is a Merton does not hold. sent5: the march is a Joplin and is tricentenary if that it does not furl lambkill hold. sent6: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a hydroxyproline and it is not a Merton is not right. sent7: the broadtail is tricentenary if there is something such that it is tricentenary. sent8: that something does furl lambkill is not false. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: the fact that the broadtail does furl lambkill is correct.; sent6 & sent2 -> int2: the broadtail is a Merton.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the broadtail is a Merton and it does furl lambkill.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the firebox is a kind of a Ornithischia and it is argentous. | ({C}{b} & {B}{b}) | sent1: if the sill is a kind of unfrozen thing that is firmamental the thunderstorm does not furl eight-spot. sent2: The eight-spot does not furl Turk's-cap. sent3: the fact that the firebox is chaste if the firebox is firmamental is not incorrect. sent4: if the Turk's-cap does not furl eight-spot then that it either does not scythe inaudibility or is not over-the-counter or both is false. sent5: the sill is unfrozen and is firmamental. sent6: if something is chaste it is a Ornithischia. sent7: the firebox is firmamental. sent8: the firebox is argentous if that the Turk's-cap does not scythe inaudibility or it is not over-the-counter or both is incorrect. sent9: the Turk's-cap does not furl eight-spot. | sent1: ({F}{d} & {E}{d}) -> ¬{A}{c} sent2: ¬{AC}{aa} sent3: {E}{b} -> {D}{b} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent5: ({F}{d} & {E}{d}) sent6: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent7: {E}{b} sent8: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent9: ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the fact that the Turk's-cap does not scythe inaudibility and/or it is not over-the-counter is incorrect.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the firebox is argentous.; sent6 -> int3: the firebox is a Ornithischia if it is chaste.; sent3 & sent7 -> int4: the firebox is chaste.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the firebox is a Ornithischia.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent8 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent6 -> int3: {D}{b} -> {C}{b}; sent3 & sent7 -> int4: {D}{b}; int3 & int4 -> int5: {C}{b}; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the firebox is a Ornithischia and argentous is not right. | ¬({C}{b} & {B}{b}) | [
"sent1 & sent5 -> int6: the thunderstorm does not furl eight-spot.; int6 -> int7: something does not furl eight-spot.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the firebox is a kind of a Ornithischia and it is argentous. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sill is a kind of unfrozen thing that is firmamental the thunderstorm does not furl eight-spot. sent2: The eight-spot does not furl Turk's-cap. sent3: the fact that the firebox is chaste if the firebox is firmamental is not incorrect. sent4: if the Turk's-cap does not furl eight-spot then that it either does not scythe inaudibility or is not over-the-counter or both is false. sent5: the sill is unfrozen and is firmamental. sent6: if something is chaste it is a Ornithischia. sent7: the firebox is firmamental. sent8: the firebox is argentous if that the Turk's-cap does not scythe inaudibility or it is not over-the-counter or both is incorrect. sent9: the Turk's-cap does not furl eight-spot. ; $proof$ = | sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the fact that the Turk's-cap does not scythe inaudibility and/or it is not over-the-counter is incorrect.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the firebox is argentous.; sent6 -> int3: the firebox is a Ornithischia if it is chaste.; sent3 & sent7 -> int4: the firebox is chaste.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the firebox is a Ornithischia.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if it is not a kind of a hydroxyzine then that it is both unmodifiable and immiscible is not right. | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: if the rodeo does not scythe has-been then that it is a conqueror and it is immiscible does not hold. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it is tolerant hold that it is casuistic thing that is a Polygala does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if it does not furl Ondaatje the fact that it is a kind of ideographic thing that supples is not true. sent4: if that the rodeo is a hydroxyzine hold that it is unmodifiable and it is immiscible is wrong. sent5: if something is not a kind of a claim then the fact that it is idiographic and it is a hydroxyzine does not hold. sent6: if that the rodeo is not a kind of a hydroxyzine is correct then the fact that it is unmodifiable and it is immiscible does not hold. sent7: the fact that the sawwort does sing chevre and is a kind of a ritual is not correct if it is not a hydroxyzine. | sent1: ¬{D}{aa} -> ¬({DE}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): {FT}x -> ¬({HQ}x & {AN}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{GK}x -> ¬({GQ}x & {C}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{IA}x -> ¬({CG}x & {A}x) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: ¬{A}{dt} -> ¬({BT}{dt} & {DL}{dt}) | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | that the delicatessen is idiographic and it is a kind of a hydroxyzine is false if it is not a claim. | ¬{IA}{bb} -> ¬({CG}{bb} & {A}{bb}) | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not a kind of a hydroxyzine then that it is both unmodifiable and immiscible is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the rodeo does not scythe has-been then that it is a conqueror and it is immiscible does not hold. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it is tolerant hold that it is casuistic thing that is a Polygala does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if it does not furl Ondaatje the fact that it is a kind of ideographic thing that supples is not true. sent4: if that the rodeo is a hydroxyzine hold that it is unmodifiable and it is immiscible is wrong. sent5: if something is not a kind of a claim then the fact that it is idiographic and it is a hydroxyzine does not hold. sent6: if that the rodeo is not a kind of a hydroxyzine is correct then the fact that it is unmodifiable and it is immiscible does not hold. sent7: the fact that the sawwort does sing chevre and is a kind of a ritual is not correct if it is not a hydroxyzine. ; $proof$ = | sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if the fact that it does not unfasten Tangier and is eradicable is wrong then the fact that it furls Muridae hold. | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: there exists something such that if that it is printable and it is a plain does not hold it is metallurgical. sent2: if something is not Epicurean but it is a Spizella the fact that it sings electrode is not incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that if it does unfasten Tangier then it does furl Muridae. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not unfasten soup and it is a bronchoscope then it is a kind of a hogfish. sent5: if the manifold unfastens Tangier then it is printable. | sent1: (Ex): ¬({AH}x & {FU}x) -> {FS}x sent2: (x): (¬{HL}x & {DD}x) -> {EO}x sent3: (Ex): {AA}x -> {B}x sent4: (Ex): (¬{DB}x & {EK}x) -> {AE}x sent5: {AA}{aa} -> {AH}{aa} | [] | [] | null | null | [] | null | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | null | UNKNOWN | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if the fact that it does not unfasten Tangier and is eradicable is wrong then the fact that it furls Muridae hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if that it is printable and it is a plain does not hold it is metallurgical. sent2: if something is not Epicurean but it is a Spizella the fact that it sings electrode is not incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that if it does unfasten Tangier then it does furl Muridae. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not unfasten soup and it is a bronchoscope then it is a kind of a hogfish. sent5: if the manifold unfastens Tangier then it is printable. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the apomorphine is exterior and does not furl Florentine is wrong. | ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: the paint does not unfasten paint. sent2: something is exterior thing that does not furl Florentine if it is a magistracy. sent3: the nude is a kind of a Italic if that it does not unfasten paint and is a kind of a magistracy is not correct. sent4: the springer does not furl Florentine. sent5: the apomorphine is exterior. sent6: if the nude unfastens paint it is Italic. sent7: if the apomorphine is a magistracy but it is not Italic then the nude is not exterior. sent8: that the nude unfastens paint and is a magistracy is not true. sent9: the fact that the apomorphine does not unfasten paint and is exterior does not hold. sent10: if the fact that the apomorphine is not exterior but a Italic does not hold then it unfastens paint. sent11: that the nude does not unfasten paint and is a magistracy is wrong. sent12: if the nude is a kind of a magistracy and it does furl Florentine the apomorphine is not exterior. sent13: the shrink-wrap does not inflame. sent14: if the nude is not autotrophic that the apomorphine is not a kind of a Italic and it does not unfasten paint is wrong. sent15: the apomorphine is not a kind of a magistracy if the nude is a kind of exterior a Italic. sent16: if the shrink-wrap does not inflame it does welter and is an acidification. | sent1: ¬{C}{hj} sent2: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {B}{b} sent4: ¬{AB}{dd} sent5: {AA}{a} sent6: {C}{b} -> {B}{b} sent7: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} sent8: ¬({C}{b} & {A}{b}) sent9: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent10: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {B}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent11: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}) sent12: ({A}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{AA}{a} sent13: ¬{G}{c} sent14: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent15: ({AA}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent16: ¬{G}{c} -> ({E}{c} & {F}{c}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the apomorphine is exterior and does not furl Florentine.; sent3 & sent11 -> int1: the nude is Italic.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent3 & sent11 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] | the apomorphine is exterior but it does not furl Florentine. | ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"sent2 -> int2: if the apomorphine is a magistracy it is exterior and does not furl Florentine.; sent16 & sent13 -> int3: the shrink-wrap welters and is an acidification.; int3 -> int4: that the shrink-wrap welters is true.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it welters.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the apomorphine is exterior and does not furl Florentine is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the paint does not unfasten paint. sent2: something is exterior thing that does not furl Florentine if it is a magistracy. sent3: the nude is a kind of a Italic if that it does not unfasten paint and is a kind of a magistracy is not correct. sent4: the springer does not furl Florentine. sent5: the apomorphine is exterior. sent6: if the nude unfastens paint it is Italic. sent7: if the apomorphine is a magistracy but it is not Italic then the nude is not exterior. sent8: that the nude unfastens paint and is a magistracy is not true. sent9: the fact that the apomorphine does not unfasten paint and is exterior does not hold. sent10: if the fact that the apomorphine is not exterior but a Italic does not hold then it unfastens paint. sent11: that the nude does not unfasten paint and is a magistracy is wrong. sent12: if the nude is a kind of a magistracy and it does furl Florentine the apomorphine is not exterior. sent13: the shrink-wrap does not inflame. sent14: if the nude is not autotrophic that the apomorphine is not a kind of a Italic and it does not unfasten paint is wrong. sent15: the apomorphine is not a kind of a magistracy if the nude is a kind of exterior a Italic. sent16: if the shrink-wrap does not inflame it does welter and is an acidification. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the apomorphine is exterior and does not furl Florentine.; sent3 & sent11 -> int1: the nude is Italic.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if it is a kind of incident thing that does not symbolize it is a kind of a Portuguese. | (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: something that unfastens entreaty and is not an aflatoxin is a kind of a sauerkraut. sent2: there is something such that if it is Yugoslavian and is not a user it is a chewink. sent3: the letter is unwholesome if it is bicapsular and it symbolizes. sent4: the letter is .22-caliber if it is both a hypodermic and not a Portuguese. sent5: if the letter is a kind of an incident and it does symbolize it is Portuguese. sent6: there exists something such that if it does sing cape and it does unfasten dewlap it does scythe porcupines. sent7: the letter does furl Praetorian if it is a gesticulation and is a Portuguese. sent8: if the porcupines is an incident and it is a Celt it is a kind of a doubling. sent9: there exists something such that if it is arundinaceous and it does unfasten avalanche then it furls Testudo. sent10: if the State does symbolize but it is not ampullar the fact that it is light-duty hold. sent11: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of adducent a here hold it is heterodyne. sent12: if the fieldfare is a kind of an incident and it is Gibraltarian it is homonymic. sent13: if the letter is an incident and does not symbolize then it is Portuguese. sent14: there exists something such that if it is an incident and it symbolizes then it is a Portuguese. sent15: the fact that if the letter is the roadster and Portuguese then the letter is a kind of a mattock is correct. | sent1: (x): ({FQ}x & ¬{JD}x) -> {FH}x sent2: (Ex): ({CS}x & ¬{JB}x) -> {GE}x sent3: ({BD}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {FB}{aa} sent4: ({AT}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> {HE}{aa} sent5: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ({BF}x & {IH}x) -> {JE}x sent7: ({C}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> {GR}{aa} sent8: ({AA}{do} & {ES}{do}) -> {DB}{do} sent9: (Ex): ({CF}x & {CI}x) -> {BH}x sent10: ({AB}{dm} & ¬{DU}{dm}) -> {GP}{dm} sent11: (Ex): ({FM}x & {DR}x) -> {HL}x sent12: ({AA}{eq} & {DM}{eq}) -> {CU}{eq} sent13: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent14: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent15: ({EM}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> {DA}{aa} | [
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | there is something such that if it unfastens entreaty and it is not an aflatoxin then it is a kind of a sauerkraut. | (Ex): ({FQ}x & ¬{JD}x) -> {FH}x | [
"sent1 -> int1: that the Testudo is a kind of the sauerkraut if the fact that the Testudo does unfasten entreaty but it is not a kind of an aflatoxin is correct is not incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 14 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a kind of incident thing that does not symbolize it is a kind of a Portuguese. ; $context$ = sent1: something that unfastens entreaty and is not an aflatoxin is a kind of a sauerkraut. sent2: there is something such that if it is Yugoslavian and is not a user it is a chewink. sent3: the letter is unwholesome if it is bicapsular and it symbolizes. sent4: the letter is .22-caliber if it is both a hypodermic and not a Portuguese. sent5: if the letter is a kind of an incident and it does symbolize it is Portuguese. sent6: there exists something such that if it does sing cape and it does unfasten dewlap it does scythe porcupines. sent7: the letter does furl Praetorian if it is a gesticulation and is a Portuguese. sent8: if the porcupines is an incident and it is a Celt it is a kind of a doubling. sent9: there exists something such that if it is arundinaceous and it does unfasten avalanche then it furls Testudo. sent10: if the State does symbolize but it is not ampullar the fact that it is light-duty hold. sent11: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of adducent a here hold it is heterodyne. sent12: if the fieldfare is a kind of an incident and it is Gibraltarian it is homonymic. sent13: if the letter is an incident and does not symbolize then it is Portuguese. sent14: there exists something such that if it is an incident and it symbolizes then it is a Portuguese. sent15: the fact that if the letter is the roadster and Portuguese then the letter is a kind of a mattock is correct. ; $proof$ = | sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the agentialness occurs. | {B} | sent1: if the singing tenorist happens the agentialness occurs. sent2: the fact that the vaulting does not occur and the hide-and-seek happens is incorrect if the scything Gotterdammerung does not occur. sent3: if the fact that not the unfastening refresher but the lasting occurs is incorrect then the furling hudud happens. sent4: that not the jumbling but the indemnifying happens does not hold. sent5: that the fact that the singing tenorist does not occur and the precociousness happens is not correct is correct. sent6: the indistinguishableness occurs if the fact that not the cocking but the managerialness occurs is not correct. sent7: if the trinucleateness occurs then the reassembly but not the scything Gotterdammerung happens. sent8: the fact that not the cryocautery but the uneagerness occurs is not correct. sent9: the fact that the agentialness happens and the geomorphologicness occurs does not hold if the hide-and-seek does not occur. sent10: that not the midterm but the singing Maja happens is not correct. sent11: the fact that the saltiness happens is not incorrect. sent12: that the junketeering does not occur and the stagflationariness happens is not right. sent13: that the non-unreactiveness and the skedaddle happens is incorrect if the hide-and-seek does not occur. sent14: the hide-and-seek does not occur if that the fact that not the vault but the hide-and-seek happens is false hold. sent15: that both the singing tenorist and the precociousness occurs is incorrect. sent16: the agentialness does not occur if the fact that the agentialness occurs and the geomorphologicness occurs does not hold. sent17: if the fact that not the singing tenorist but the precociousness occurs is not true then the agentialness occurs. sent18: the unserviceableness occurs. | sent1: {AA} -> {B} sent2: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{E} & {A}) sent3: ¬(¬{DB} & {GL}) -> {FO} sent4: ¬(¬{IP} & {BG}) sent5: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent6: ¬(¬{BA} & {IC}) -> {EB} sent7: {G} -> ({F} & ¬{D}) sent8: ¬(¬{EQ} & {BH}) sent9: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent10: ¬(¬{GM} & {GA}) sent11: {HU} sent12: ¬(¬{CF} & {DI}) sent13: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{HB} & {HP}) sent14: ¬(¬{E} & {A}) -> ¬{A} sent15: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent16: ¬({B} & {C}) -> ¬{B} sent17: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent18: {AH} | [
"sent17 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent17 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | the agentialness does not occur. | ¬{B} | [] | 10 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the agentialness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the singing tenorist happens the agentialness occurs. sent2: the fact that the vaulting does not occur and the hide-and-seek happens is incorrect if the scything Gotterdammerung does not occur. sent3: if the fact that not the unfastening refresher but the lasting occurs is incorrect then the furling hudud happens. sent4: that not the jumbling but the indemnifying happens does not hold. sent5: that the fact that the singing tenorist does not occur and the precociousness happens is not correct is correct. sent6: the indistinguishableness occurs if the fact that not the cocking but the managerialness occurs is not correct. sent7: if the trinucleateness occurs then the reassembly but not the scything Gotterdammerung happens. sent8: the fact that not the cryocautery but the uneagerness occurs is not correct. sent9: the fact that the agentialness happens and the geomorphologicness occurs does not hold if the hide-and-seek does not occur. sent10: that not the midterm but the singing Maja happens is not correct. sent11: the fact that the saltiness happens is not incorrect. sent12: that the junketeering does not occur and the stagflationariness happens is not right. sent13: that the non-unreactiveness and the skedaddle happens is incorrect if the hide-and-seek does not occur. sent14: the hide-and-seek does not occur if that the fact that not the vault but the hide-and-seek happens is false hold. sent15: that both the singing tenorist and the precociousness occurs is incorrect. sent16: the agentialness does not occur if the fact that the agentialness occurs and the geomorphologicness occurs does not hold. sent17: if the fact that not the singing tenorist but the precociousness occurs is not true then the agentialness occurs. sent18: the unserviceableness occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent17 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the cards and the cenogeneticness occurs. | ({D} & {C}) | sent1: both the non-propagandistness and the singing satrap happens. sent2: that the furling micrometry and the singing snow-in-summer happens is not right. sent3: the Slav does not occur. sent4: that the prorogation happens is prevented by that not the pattering but the scoring occurs. sent5: not the singing clonus but the phosphorousness happens. sent6: if the fact that the sandblasting occurs hold then the resonance happens. sent7: that the cards occurs and the cenogeneticness occurs is not right if the depilation does not occur. sent8: both the cards and the cabining happens if the recruitment does not occur. sent9: the cabining occurs if the recruitment does not occur. sent10: the servileness occurs. sent11: that the pleasantry happens is brought about by the preliminary. sent12: the recruitment does not occur. sent13: the prorogation does not occur. sent14: the hypovolemicness happens. sent15: that the excitement occurs is not incorrect. sent16: the unmodifiableness happens if the furling strop does not occur. sent17: the fact that the furling bookdealer occurs is not false if that the commensurateness does not occur is not false. | sent1: (¬{GM} & {BU}) sent2: ¬({BP} & {J}) sent3: ¬{B} sent4: (¬{I} & {H}) -> ¬{G} sent5: (¬{DC} & {DA}) sent6: {IG} -> {AD} sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} & {C}) sent8: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent9: ¬{F} -> {E} sent10: {IO} sent11: {GL} -> {GC} sent12: ¬{F} sent13: ¬{G} sent14: {AA} sent15: {JJ} sent16: ¬{EG} -> {GT} sent17: ¬{AP} -> {HG} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that not the depilation but the Slavness occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the Slav occurs.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that not the depilation but the Slav happens is false.; sent8 & sent12 -> int4: the carding and the cabining happens.; int4 -> int5: the carding happens.;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: (¬{A} & {B}); assump1 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent3 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{A} & {B}); sent8 & sent12 -> int4: ({D} & {E}); int4 -> int5: {D};"
] | that both the cards and the cenogeneticness happens does not hold. | ¬({D} & {C}) | [] | 7 | 4 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the cards and the cenogeneticness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: both the non-propagandistness and the singing satrap happens. sent2: that the furling micrometry and the singing snow-in-summer happens is not right. sent3: the Slav does not occur. sent4: that the prorogation happens is prevented by that not the pattering but the scoring occurs. sent5: not the singing clonus but the phosphorousness happens. sent6: if the fact that the sandblasting occurs hold then the resonance happens. sent7: that the cards occurs and the cenogeneticness occurs is not right if the depilation does not occur. sent8: both the cards and the cabining happens if the recruitment does not occur. sent9: the cabining occurs if the recruitment does not occur. sent10: the servileness occurs. sent11: that the pleasantry happens is brought about by the preliminary. sent12: the recruitment does not occur. sent13: the prorogation does not occur. sent14: the hypovolemicness happens. sent15: that the excitement occurs is not incorrect. sent16: the unmodifiableness happens if the furling strop does not occur. sent17: the fact that the furling bookdealer occurs is not false if that the commensurateness does not occur is not false. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that not the depilation but the Slavness occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the Slav occurs.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that not the depilation but the Slav happens is false.; sent8 & sent12 -> int4: the carding and the cabining happens.; int4 -> int5: the carding happens.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the rift furls baroness hold. | {E}{c} | sent1: that the match does furl baroness is not incorrect if that the cardoon furl baroness but it does not unfasten kingfish is not right. sent2: if something does furl saver and it is a dope it is not corinthian. sent3: something does not unfasten kingfish and is a pollinator if it repaints. sent4: the kudzu does furl saver. sent5: the junkie is a kind of a actinopod if that it does repaint hold. sent6: if the junkie is a actinopod the rift does furl baroness. sent7: the cardoon is a Newtonian. sent8: if something does not unfasten kingfish and is a pollinator then it does not furl baroness. sent9: if something is not a dunlin the fact that it is not a actinopod or it does furl Lancaster or both is not true. sent10: if the rift is a pollinator then the cardoon furls baroness. sent11: if the junkie is a pollinator that the cardoon does furl baroness but it does not unfasten kingfish does not hold. sent12: something that does not furl Lancaster is a kind of a actinopod and does repaint. sent13: the junkie is a pollinator. sent14: that something is not a stallion and cudgels does not hold if the fact that it is not corinthian is true. sent15: if the cardoon unfastens kingfish then the junkie repaints. sent16: if that the kudzu is both not a stallion and a cudgel is not right the bregma is not a dunlin. sent17: the cardoon is a pollinator. sent18: the junkie is a kind of a pollinator if that the rift repaints is correct. sent19: if the cardoon furls Lancaster and is a actinopod that it does not repaint hold. | sent1: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {E}{iu} sent2: (x): ({L}x & {K}x) -> ¬{J}x sent3: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) sent4: {L}{e} sent5: {C}{b} -> {D}{b} sent6: {D}{b} -> {E}{c} sent7: {BK}{a} sent8: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{E}x sent9: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{D}x v {F}x) sent10: {A}{c} -> {E}{a} sent11: {A}{b} -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent12: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {C}x) sent13: {A}{b} sent14: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & {I}x) sent15: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent16: ¬(¬{H}{e} & {I}{e}) -> ¬{G}{d} sent17: {A}{a} sent18: {C}{c} -> {A}{b} sent19: ({F}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} | [] | [] | the match does furl baroness. | {E}{iu} | [
"sent9 -> int1: the fact that the bregma is not a actinopod or it furls Lancaster or both is incorrect if it is not a kind of a dunlin.; sent14 -> int2: the fact that the kudzu is not a kind of a stallion and is a cudgel is wrong if it is not corinthian.; sent2 -> int3: if the kudzu furls saver and does dope it is non-corinthian.;"
] | 10 | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the rift furls baroness hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the match does furl baroness is not incorrect if that the cardoon furl baroness but it does not unfasten kingfish is not right. sent2: if something does furl saver and it is a dope it is not corinthian. sent3: something does not unfasten kingfish and is a pollinator if it repaints. sent4: the kudzu does furl saver. sent5: the junkie is a kind of a actinopod if that it does repaint hold. sent6: if the junkie is a actinopod the rift does furl baroness. sent7: the cardoon is a Newtonian. sent8: if something does not unfasten kingfish and is a pollinator then it does not furl baroness. sent9: if something is not a dunlin the fact that it is not a actinopod or it does furl Lancaster or both is not true. sent10: if the rift is a pollinator then the cardoon furls baroness. sent11: if the junkie is a pollinator that the cardoon does furl baroness but it does not unfasten kingfish does not hold. sent12: something that does not furl Lancaster is a kind of a actinopod and does repaint. sent13: the junkie is a pollinator. sent14: that something is not a stallion and cudgels does not hold if the fact that it is not corinthian is true. sent15: if the cardoon unfastens kingfish then the junkie repaints. sent16: if that the kudzu is both not a stallion and a cudgel is not right the bregma is not a dunlin. sent17: the cardoon is a pollinator. sent18: the junkie is a kind of a pollinator if that the rift repaints is correct. sent19: if the cardoon furls Lancaster and is a actinopod that it does not repaint hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that the occupying is caused by the demurring is not true. | ¬({A} -> {C}) | sent1: that the suspension does not occur is prevented by the storing. sent2: the unfastening mover occurs. sent3: that the occupying happens is not false if the anthropicness happens. sent4: the anchorage occurs. sent5: the anthropicness occurs if the demurring occurs. sent6: the practicalness happens. | sent1: {CD} -> {IT} sent2: {CL} sent3: {B} -> {C} sent4: {CF} sent5: {A} -> {B} sent6: {FA} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the demurring happens.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the anthropicness happens.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: that the occupying happens is correct.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent3 -> int2: {C}; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the occupying is caused by the demurring is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that the suspension does not occur is prevented by the storing. sent2: the unfastening mover occurs. sent3: that the occupying happens is not false if the anthropicness happens. sent4: the anchorage occurs. sent5: the anthropicness occurs if the demurring occurs. sent6: the practicalness happens. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the demurring happens.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the anthropicness happens.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: that the occupying happens is correct.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fire-eater does not furl doe. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: there is something such that it sings dessertspoon. sent2: the haunch scythes circumvolution if the Hope sings dessertspoon. sent3: the haunch does not sing dessertspoon. sent4: the fact that the Hope sings dessertspoon and/or does scythe circumvolution hold if something is not Argentine. sent5: that the fire-eater does furl doe hold if the Hope sings dessertspoon. sent6: that the Hope does unfasten blare is true if the tachograph is a Harare. sent7: the fire-eater scythes circumvolution. sent8: if something is not a kind of a noticer then it does not scythe circumvolution and/or it does not sing dessertspoon. sent9: the fire-eater is not a noticer if the Hope does unfasten blare. sent10: the tachograph scythes fire-eater and is a kind of a Harare. sent11: the haunch is not Argentine. sent12: the fire-eater furls doe if the Hope does scythe circumvolution. sent13: something does not furl doe if it is Argentine. sent14: there is something such that it is Argentine. | sent1: (Ex): {C}x sent2: {C}{a} -> {B}{aa} sent3: ¬{C}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({C}{a} v {B}{a}) sent5: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent6: {G}{c} -> {F}{a} sent7: {B}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) sent9: {F}{a} -> ¬{E}{b} sent10: ({H}{c} & {G}{c}) sent11: ¬{A}{aa} sent12: {B}{a} -> {D}{b} sent13: (x): {A}x -> ¬{D}x sent14: (Ex): {A}x | [
"sent11 -> int1: there is something such that it is not Argentine.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the Hope does sing dessertspoon and/or it scythes circumvolution.; int2 & sent5 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent11 -> int1: (Ex): ¬{A}x; int1 & sent4 -> int2: ({C}{a} v {B}{a}); int2 & sent5 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fire-eater does not furl doe. | ¬{D}{b} | [
"sent13 -> int3: if the fire-eater is not non-Argentine it does not furl doe.; sent8 -> int4: if the fire-eater is not a noticer then either it does not scythe circumvolution or it does not sing dessertspoon or both.; sent10 -> int5: the tachograph is a Harare.; sent6 & int5 -> int6: that the Hope unfastens blare is correct.; sent9 & int6 -> int7: the fire-eater is not a kind of a noticer.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the fire-eater does not scythe circumvolution or it does not sing dessertspoon or both.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fire-eater does not furl doe. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it sings dessertspoon. sent2: the haunch scythes circumvolution if the Hope sings dessertspoon. sent3: the haunch does not sing dessertspoon. sent4: the fact that the Hope sings dessertspoon and/or does scythe circumvolution hold if something is not Argentine. sent5: that the fire-eater does furl doe hold if the Hope sings dessertspoon. sent6: that the Hope does unfasten blare is true if the tachograph is a Harare. sent7: the fire-eater scythes circumvolution. sent8: if something is not a kind of a noticer then it does not scythe circumvolution and/or it does not sing dessertspoon. sent9: the fire-eater is not a noticer if the Hope does unfasten blare. sent10: the tachograph scythes fire-eater and is a kind of a Harare. sent11: the haunch is not Argentine. sent12: the fire-eater furls doe if the Hope does scythe circumvolution. sent13: something does not furl doe if it is Argentine. sent14: there is something such that it is Argentine. ; $proof$ = | sent11 -> int1: there is something such that it is not Argentine.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the Hope does sing dessertspoon and/or it scythes circumvolution.; int2 & sent5 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the cafe does not furl lambkill and is not a Lancastrian is incorrect. | ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: the fact that the cafe does not furl lambkill and it is not Lancastrian is false if the fact that the eclectic is not unactable is right. sent2: the lancewood is not thrifty. sent3: that the cafe does not furl lambkill but it is Lancastrian is wrong. sent4: the eclectic is not umbelliform if the cafe is a Lancastrian. sent5: if the lancewood is not thrifty it is not a callosity and it is apetalous. sent6: the lancewood is unactable. sent7: if that that the cafe does not furl lambkill and is not a Lancastrian is right is false then the eclectic is not umbelliform. sent8: the lancewood is a kind of a Lancastrian. sent9: if the lancewood is unactable the eclectic is umbelliform. sent10: something is not unactable but it is umbelliform if it is not violent. sent11: the cafe is not a Lancastrian. | sent1: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: ¬{G}{c} sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent4: {AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: ¬{G}{c} -> (¬{E}{c} & {F}{c}) sent6: {A}{c} sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent8: {AB}{c} sent9: {A}{c} -> {B}{b} sent10: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & {B}x) sent11: ¬{AB}{a} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the cafe does not furl lambkill and it is not Lancastrian is not right.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the eclectic is non-umbelliform.; sent9 & sent6 -> int2: the eclectic is umbelliform.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent7 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent9 & sent6 -> int2: {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the cafe does not furl lambkill and it is not a Lancastrian is not correct. | ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"sent10 -> int4: the eclectic is a kind of non-unactable thing that is umbelliform if it is not violent.; sent5 & sent2 -> int5: the lancewood is not a callosity but it is apetalous.; int5 -> int6: the lancewood is not a callosity.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it is not a callosity.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the cafe does not furl lambkill and is not a Lancastrian is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the cafe does not furl lambkill and it is not Lancastrian is false if the fact that the eclectic is not unactable is right. sent2: the lancewood is not thrifty. sent3: that the cafe does not furl lambkill but it is Lancastrian is wrong. sent4: the eclectic is not umbelliform if the cafe is a Lancastrian. sent5: if the lancewood is not thrifty it is not a callosity and it is apetalous. sent6: the lancewood is unactable. sent7: if that that the cafe does not furl lambkill and is not a Lancastrian is right is false then the eclectic is not umbelliform. sent8: the lancewood is a kind of a Lancastrian. sent9: if the lancewood is unactable the eclectic is umbelliform. sent10: something is not unactable but it is umbelliform if it is not violent. sent11: the cafe is not a Lancastrian. ; $proof$ = | void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the cafe does not furl lambkill and it is not Lancastrian is not right.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the eclectic is non-umbelliform.; sent9 & sent6 -> int2: the eclectic is umbelliform.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the fact that there is something such that if that it is not a baroque and it does not scythe Pempheridae does not hold then it is not a NB is not true. | ¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: the freak is not a kind of a NB if that it is not baroque and it does not scythe Pempheridae is false. sent2: there is something such that if it is non-baroque thing that does not scythe Pempheridae it is not a NB. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a baroque and scythes Pempheridae does not hold it is not a NB. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of non-baroque thing that does not scythe Pempheridae does not hold it is a kind of a NB. | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null | [] | null | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | DISPROVED | null | DISPROVED | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if that it is not a baroque and it does not scythe Pempheridae does not hold then it is not a NB is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the freak is not a kind of a NB if that it is not baroque and it does not scythe Pempheridae is false. sent2: there is something such that if it is non-baroque thing that does not scythe Pempheridae it is not a NB. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a baroque and scythes Pempheridae does not hold it is not a NB. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of non-baroque thing that does not scythe Pempheridae does not hold it is a kind of a NB. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the radicle does not scythe sloe. | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: if the radicle is ischemic the cushaw does not unfasten radicle but it is ischemic. sent2: the cushaw does not unfasten radicle and is carpellate. sent3: the sloe unfastens radicle if the radicle sings ashtray. sent4: if something does not unfasten radicle and does sing ashtray then the fact that it does not scythe sloe is right. sent5: if something is not a top but it furls ormolu it is not a kind of a crotch. sent6: the fact that the radicle does not unfasten radicle is not wrong if that the sloe does sing ashtray is correct. sent7: if the cushaw is ischemic the sloe sings ashtray. sent8: the cushaw is ischemic. | sent1: {A}{c} -> (¬{D}{a} & {A}{a}) sent2: (¬{D}{a} & {FK}{a}) sent3: {B}{c} -> {D}{b} sent4: (x): (¬{D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent5: (x): (¬{IG}x & {DI}x) -> ¬{EL}x sent6: {B}{b} -> ¬{D}{c} sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent8: {A}{a} | [
"sent7 & sent8 -> int1: the sloe does sing ashtray.; sent4 -> int2: the radicle does not scythe sloe if it does not unfasten radicle and does sing ashtray.;"
] | [
"sent7 & sent8 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent4 -> int2: (¬{D}{c} & {B}{c}) -> ¬{C}{c};"
] | the cushaw is not a crotch if it is a kind of non-top thing that furls ormolu. | (¬{IG}{a} & {DI}{a}) -> ¬{EL}{a} | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the radicle does not scythe sloe. ; $context$ = sent1: if the radicle is ischemic the cushaw does not unfasten radicle but it is ischemic. sent2: the cushaw does not unfasten radicle and is carpellate. sent3: the sloe unfastens radicle if the radicle sings ashtray. sent4: if something does not unfasten radicle and does sing ashtray then the fact that it does not scythe sloe is right. sent5: if something is not a top but it furls ormolu it is not a kind of a crotch. sent6: the fact that the radicle does not unfasten radicle is not wrong if that the sloe does sing ashtray is correct. sent7: if the cushaw is ischemic the sloe sings ashtray. sent8: the cushaw is ischemic. ; $proof$ = | sent7 & sent8 -> int1: the sloe does sing ashtray.; sent4 -> int2: the radicle does not scythe sloe if it does not unfasten radicle and does sing ashtray.; __UNKNOWN__ |
DeductionInstance | that the demoniac is not qualitative is not incorrect. | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: that the demoniac furls flanker and it is angular is incorrect. sent2: if that something is a kind of a cine-camera but it does not sing sneaking is not right it is not a perijove. sent3: the fact that something does not sing dermatome and it is not qualitative is wrong if it is not objective. sent4: the demoniac is not qualitative if it is angular. sent5: that the demoniac does furl flanker and is not angular is wrong. sent6: the demoniac is not qualitative if the fact that it is a kind of a Tet and is not a female is not right. sent7: if that something does furl flanker but it is not angular does not hold it is not qualitative. sent8: if the fact that something evens but it is not a laugher does not hold then it does not unfasten CABG. sent9: the Testudo is not qualitative. sent10: something does not explicate if the fact that it is a kind of a macrotus and is not indiscernible is not right. sent11: if the fact that the demoniac is angular but it is not a kind of a deanery does not hold then the fact that it is not a hobbyhorse is not false. sent12: if the fact that something unfastens paperwork but it is not a bilges does not hold it is not sudden. sent13: the fact that the demoniac does furl flanker but it is not a megilp is incorrect. sent14: the demoniac is not a kind of a wishbone. sent15: the fact that the lowland is a kind of angular thing that does not sing dermatome does not hold. sent16: the slasher does not furl flanker. sent17: something is not dead if that it is Eritrean and it is not indiscernible is not right. sent18: if something is angular then it is not qualitative. sent19: the demoniac does not sing Y2K if that it is electronics and it is not a hodoscope does not hold. | sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬({FU}x & ¬{FQ}x) -> ¬{T}x sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) sent4: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: ¬({BP}{aa} & ¬{BI}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent8: (x): ¬({FK}x & ¬{HE}x) -> ¬{CJ}x sent9: ¬{B}{jf} sent10: (x): ¬({AI}x & ¬{GO}x) -> ¬{BK}x sent11: ¬({AB}{aa} & ¬{EP}{aa}) -> ¬{P}{aa} sent12: (x): ¬({DK}x & ¬{EN}x) -> ¬{JJ}x sent13: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{K}{aa}) sent14: ¬{BF}{aa} sent15: ¬({AB}{bi} & ¬{C}{bi}) sent16: ¬{AA}{am} sent17: (x): ¬({JK}x & ¬{GO}x) -> ¬{EI}x sent18: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent19: ¬({IH}{aa} & ¬{G}{aa}) -> ¬{HQ}{aa} | [
"sent7 -> int1: if the fact that the demoniac does furl flanker and is not angular does not hold then the fact that it is not qualitative is not wrong.; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent7 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | the demoniac is qualitative. | {B}{aa} | [
"sent3 -> int2: if the cyanogen is not a kind of an objective the fact that it does not sing dermatome and it is not qualitative is not right.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | PROVED | UNKNOWN | PROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the demoniac is not qualitative is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the demoniac furls flanker and it is angular is incorrect. sent2: if that something is a kind of a cine-camera but it does not sing sneaking is not right it is not a perijove. sent3: the fact that something does not sing dermatome and it is not qualitative is wrong if it is not objective. sent4: the demoniac is not qualitative if it is angular. sent5: that the demoniac does furl flanker and is not angular is wrong. sent6: the demoniac is not qualitative if the fact that it is a kind of a Tet and is not a female is not right. sent7: if that something does furl flanker but it is not angular does not hold it is not qualitative. sent8: if the fact that something evens but it is not a laugher does not hold then it does not unfasten CABG. sent9: the Testudo is not qualitative. sent10: something does not explicate if the fact that it is a kind of a macrotus and is not indiscernible is not right. sent11: if the fact that the demoniac is angular but it is not a kind of a deanery does not hold then the fact that it is not a hobbyhorse is not false. sent12: if the fact that something unfastens paperwork but it is not a bilges does not hold it is not sudden. sent13: the fact that the demoniac does furl flanker but it is not a megilp is incorrect. sent14: the demoniac is not a kind of a wishbone. sent15: the fact that the lowland is a kind of angular thing that does not sing dermatome does not hold. sent16: the slasher does not furl flanker. sent17: something is not dead if that it is Eritrean and it is not indiscernible is not right. sent18: if something is angular then it is not qualitative. sent19: the demoniac does not sing Y2K if that it is electronics and it is not a hodoscope does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent7 -> int1: if the fact that the demoniac does furl flanker and is not angular does not hold then the fact that it is not qualitative is not wrong.; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | the middleweight is a prerequisite. | {B}{a} | sent1: that that the Ward does not sing Radyera hold if the fact that the fact that the middleweight is non-apocryphal and a prerequisite is not incorrect is wrong is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that something is an albacore and/or not a squall does not hold if it does not sing Radyera. sent3: something is neuropsychiatric thing that does not scythe novel if it is beakless. sent4: something is non-apocryphal thing that does not sing Radyera if it is neuropsychiatric. sent5: if the plum-yew is not beakless the middleweight is neuropsychiatric and it scythes novel. sent6: the anionic is non-neuropsychiatric thing that is non-apocryphal. sent7: if something does not sing Radyera then it is a prerequisite. sent8: something is not an albacore if the fact that it does not sing Radyera hold. sent9: if the anionic is a kind of non-neuropsychiatric thing that is not apocryphal it does not sing Radyera. sent10: the middleweight is not a prerequisite if the fact that the anionic is a kind of an albacore and/or it is not a squall does not hold. sent11: that the plum-yew does not sing Bronte hold if that the novel is autoplastic and/or it does sing Bronte is not right. sent12: that something is transuranic and/or is not basidiomycetous is not true if it does not sing Radyera. sent13: that the middleweight is not apocryphal but it is a prerequisite is not correct if the plum-yew is neuropsychiatric. sent14: something that does not sing Bronte is a kind of beakless thing that does unfasten geometry. sent15: if the novel does not shimmer then that that it either is autoplastic or does sing Bronte or both is true does not hold. | sent1: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{ij} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): {F}x -> ({D}x & ¬{E}x) sent4: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent5: ¬{F}{b} -> ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) sent6: (¬{D}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}x sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent9: (¬{D}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent10: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent11: ¬({J}{c} v {H}{c}) -> ¬{H}{b} sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({HA}x v ¬{DN}x) sent13: {D}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent14: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x & {G}x) sent15: ¬{I}{c} -> ¬({J}{c} v {H}{c}) | [
"sent2 -> int1: if the anionic does not sing Radyera the fact that it is an albacore or it does not squall or both is incorrect.; sent9 & sent6 -> int2: the anionic does not sing Radyera.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the anionic is a kind of an albacore and/or is not a squall is not true.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); sent9 & sent6 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | the middleweight is a kind of a prerequisite. | {B}{a} | [
"sent7 -> int4: if the middleweight does not sing Radyera then it is a prerequisite.; sent4 -> int5: the middleweight is not apocryphal and it does not sing Radyera if it is neuropsychiatric.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the middleweight is a prerequisite. ; $context$ = sent1: that that the Ward does not sing Radyera hold if the fact that the fact that the middleweight is non-apocryphal and a prerequisite is not incorrect is wrong is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that something is an albacore and/or not a squall does not hold if it does not sing Radyera. sent3: something is neuropsychiatric thing that does not scythe novel if it is beakless. sent4: something is non-apocryphal thing that does not sing Radyera if it is neuropsychiatric. sent5: if the plum-yew is not beakless the middleweight is neuropsychiatric and it scythes novel. sent6: the anionic is non-neuropsychiatric thing that is non-apocryphal. sent7: if something does not sing Radyera then it is a prerequisite. sent8: something is not an albacore if the fact that it does not sing Radyera hold. sent9: if the anionic is a kind of non-neuropsychiatric thing that is not apocryphal it does not sing Radyera. sent10: the middleweight is not a prerequisite if the fact that the anionic is a kind of an albacore and/or it is not a squall does not hold. sent11: that the plum-yew does not sing Bronte hold if that the novel is autoplastic and/or it does sing Bronte is not right. sent12: that something is transuranic and/or is not basidiomycetous is not true if it does not sing Radyera. sent13: that the middleweight is not apocryphal but it is a prerequisite is not correct if the plum-yew is neuropsychiatric. sent14: something that does not sing Bronte is a kind of beakless thing that does unfasten geometry. sent15: if the novel does not shimmer then that that it either is autoplastic or does sing Bronte or both is true does not hold. ; $proof$ = | sent2 -> int1: if the anionic does not sing Radyera the fact that it is an albacore or it does not squall or both is incorrect.; sent9 & sent6 -> int2: the anionic does not sing Radyera.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the anionic is a kind of an albacore and/or is not a squall is not true.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | there is something such that if the fact that it sings flurbiprofen and it does furl plausibility is not true it is not comparable. | (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: that the cockroach is not comparable if that the cockroach does sing flurbiprofen and furls plausibility does not hold hold. sent2: the fact that the heather is not comparable if the heather is a kind of a pool that is a paradox is not incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a Army hold then it is not actinomycotic. sent4: if that that the cockroach does furl plausibility and it does sing seductress does not hold is not wrong it sings primrose. sent5: there exists something such that if it is ceramic and it sings city-state it is not fraternal. sent6: if the fact that something is a lore and is a responsibility is not right it does not sing Aristotelianism. sent7: if that the cockroach is a kind of African thing that is a smother does not hold it is not a kind of a macrotus. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Porcellio it is not unmanageable. sent9: if the fact that the cockroach is comparable and is satyric is not right that it is not a debate is correct. | sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: ({HC}{gj} & {JA}{gj}) -> ¬{B}{gj} sent3: (Ex): ¬{IN}x -> ¬{O}x sent4: ¬({AB}{aa} & {HN}{aa}) -> {EK}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ({HD}x & {HR}x) -> ¬{GF}x sent6: (x): ¬({GP}x & {FI}x) -> ¬{JH}x sent7: ¬({A}{aa} & {AC}{aa}) -> ¬{GG}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ¬{BK}x -> ¬{DF}x sent9: ¬({B}{aa} & {FR}{aa}) -> ¬{JC}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | there exists something such that if that it is both a lore and a responsibility does not hold it does not sing Aristotelianism. | (Ex): ¬({GP}x & {FI}x) -> ¬{JH}x | [
"sent6 -> int1: the bristletail does not sing Aristotelianism if that it is a lore and it is a responsibility is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it sings flurbiprofen and it does furl plausibility is not true it is not comparable. ; $context$ = sent1: that the cockroach is not comparable if that the cockroach does sing flurbiprofen and furls plausibility does not hold hold. sent2: the fact that the heather is not comparable if the heather is a kind of a pool that is a paradox is not incorrect. sent3: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a Army hold then it is not actinomycotic. sent4: if that that the cockroach does furl plausibility and it does sing seductress does not hold is not wrong it sings primrose. sent5: there exists something such that if it is ceramic and it sings city-state it is not fraternal. sent6: if the fact that something is a lore and is a responsibility is not right it does not sing Aristotelianism. sent7: if that the cockroach is a kind of African thing that is a smother does not hold it is not a kind of a macrotus. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Porcellio it is not unmanageable. sent9: if the fact that the cockroach is comparable and is satyric is not right that it is not a debate is correct. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ |
DeductionInstance | that the dog does not furl Caribbean and it is not Beethovenian does not hold. | ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | sent1: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a wingspread then that the dog furls Caribbean and is Beethovenian is false. sent2: the Glycine is not tetragonal if that the immodesty is both not a farness and a doom does not hold. sent3: if something is not a fury and/or is not inboard the fact that it is not inboard is not incorrect. sent4: something is a kind of non-adnate a slot. sent5: that the dog does not furl Caribbean is not false. sent6: if something is both a founder and tetragonal it is not a kind of a wingspread. sent7: if the dog is not a slot then it is non-Beethovenian thing that is not adnate. sent8: something does not furl Caribbean if it is not a wingspread. sent9: if something is not adnate and it does not slot then the dog is not a wingspread. sent10: if the Glycine is a wingspread that the fact that the dog does not furl Caribbean and is not Beethovenian is false is right. sent11: something that is not a wingspread does not furl Caribbean and is not Beethovenian. sent12: something does not slot. sent13: the dog does not furl Caribbean if that it is not a wingspread is not incorrect. sent14: the Glycine is not a fury and not inboard if it is not unpleasant. sent15: something is a kind of a wingspread and it does founder if it is not tetragonal. sent16: if something that is not a kind of a fury is not inboard then it is tetragonal. sent17: the floorwalker is not adnate and it is not a slot. sent18: the floorwalker is not a slot. sent19: there are non-adnate things. sent20: the fact that the Glycine is not a doom but a farness does not hold. sent21: there exists something such that it is adnate and it is not a kind of a slot. sent22: if that something is both not a doom and a farness is wrong it is a kind of a founder. sent23: the Glycine is not unpleasant. | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent2: ¬(¬{G}{c} & {F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent3: (x): (¬{I}x v ¬{H}x) -> ¬{H}x sent4: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: ¬{B}{a} sent6: (x): ({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{A}x sent7: ¬{AB}{a} -> (¬{C}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x sent9: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent10: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) sent12: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent13: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent14: ¬{J}{b} -> (¬{I}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) sent15: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({A}x & {D}x) sent16: (x): (¬{I}x & ¬{H}x) -> {E}x sent17: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent18: ¬{AB}{aa} sent19: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent20: ¬(¬{F}{b} & {G}{b}) sent21: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent22: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {G}x) -> {D}x sent23: ¬{J}{b} | [
"sent17 -> int1: something is not adnate and it does not slot.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the dog is not a kind of a wingspread.; sent11 -> int3: the dog does not furl Caribbean and is not Beethovenian if it is not a kind of a wingspread.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | [
"sent17 -> int1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent9 -> int2: ¬{A}{a}; sent11 -> int3: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | the fact that the dog does not furl Caribbean and is not Beethovenian is incorrect. | ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | [
"sent15 -> int4: the Glycine is a kind of a wingspread and it is a founder if it is not tetragonal.; sent3 -> int5: the cyanogen is not inboard if it is not a kind of a fury and/or it is not inboard.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | DISPROVED | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the dog does not furl Caribbean and it is not Beethovenian does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a wingspread then that the dog furls Caribbean and is Beethovenian is false. sent2: the Glycine is not tetragonal if that the immodesty is both not a farness and a doom does not hold. sent3: if something is not a fury and/or is not inboard the fact that it is not inboard is not incorrect. sent4: something is a kind of non-adnate a slot. sent5: that the dog does not furl Caribbean is not false. sent6: if something is both a founder and tetragonal it is not a kind of a wingspread. sent7: if the dog is not a slot then it is non-Beethovenian thing that is not adnate. sent8: something does not furl Caribbean if it is not a wingspread. sent9: if something is not adnate and it does not slot then the dog is not a wingspread. sent10: if the Glycine is a wingspread that the fact that the dog does not furl Caribbean and is not Beethovenian is false is right. sent11: something that is not a wingspread does not furl Caribbean and is not Beethovenian. sent12: something does not slot. sent13: the dog does not furl Caribbean if that it is not a wingspread is not incorrect. sent14: the Glycine is not a fury and not inboard if it is not unpleasant. sent15: something is a kind of a wingspread and it does founder if it is not tetragonal. sent16: if something that is not a kind of a fury is not inboard then it is tetragonal. sent17: the floorwalker is not adnate and it is not a slot. sent18: the floorwalker is not a slot. sent19: there are non-adnate things. sent20: the fact that the Glycine is not a doom but a farness does not hold. sent21: there exists something such that it is adnate and it is not a kind of a slot. sent22: if that something is both not a doom and a farness is wrong it is a kind of a founder. sent23: the Glycine is not unpleasant. ; $proof$ = | sent17 -> int1: something is not adnate and it does not slot.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the dog is not a kind of a wingspread.; sent11 -> int3: the dog does not furl Caribbean and is not Beethovenian if it is not a kind of a wingspread.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ |
Subsets and Splits