premise
stringlengths 923
1.41k
| hypothesis
stringlengths 11
33
| label
stringclasses 4
values |
|---|---|---|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Chad is elegant.
|
entailment
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Maddox is famous.
|
self_contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Otis is famous.
|
neutral
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Walter is similar.
|
entailment
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Walter is famous.
|
self_contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Walter is not similar.
|
contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Theodore is elegant.
|
neutral
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Maddox is loyal.
|
neutral
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Walter is latter.
|
self_contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Theodore is not elegant.
|
neutral
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Walter is not famous.
|
self_contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Chad is hungry.
|
entailment
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Maddox is not latter.
|
contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Chad is loyal.
|
contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Theodore is not latter.
|
contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Walter is elegant.
|
entailment
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Chad is famous.
|
self_contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Chad is not elegant.
|
contradiction
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Alfred is not latter.
|
neutral
|
Maddox is latter.
Maddox is not elegant.
Chad is not loyal.
Theodore is similar.
Ramsey is not loyal.
Chad is elegant.
Otis is not similar.
Walter is latter.
Chad is hungry.
Ramsey is elegant.
Walter is elegant.
Ramsey is famous.It can be concluded that Chad is not latter once knowing that Maddox is not elegant and Walter is similar.
All not latter people are similar.
It can be concluded that Alfred is similar once knowing that Maddox is latter and Maddox is hungry.
Someone who is eithor not loyal or famous is always hungry.
If there is someone who is not loyal, then Maddox is not famous.
If someone is both elegant and not latter, then he is not loyal.
Someone is not famous and not latter if and only if he is elegant.
As long as someone is not latter, he is famous and not loyal.
All not elegant people are famous.
If Ramsey is not loyal, then Theodore is latter.
Otis being similar is equivalent to Alfred being not latter.
If there is at least one people who is loyal or similar, then Chad is not famous.
|
Maddox is latter.
|
entailment
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Kent is not psychological.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Luna is desperate.
|
entailment
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Kendrick is not concerned.
|
contradiction
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Kendrick is desperate.
|
neutral
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Joshua is not additional.
|
contradiction
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Luna is additional.
|
entailment
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Kendrick is not desperate.
|
neutral
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Kent is psychological.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Gabriel is psychological.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Kent is not every.
|
entailment
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Luna is not concerned.
|
contradiction
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Joshua is desperate.
|
entailment
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Kent is additional.
|
entailment
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Joshua is not desperate.
|
contradiction
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Luna is not every.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Kendrick is not large.
|
neutral
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Gabriel is large.
|
neutral
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Gabriel is not psychological.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Todd is concerned.
|
neutral
|
Gabriel is psychological.
Joshua is additional.
Kent is not large.
Kent is not psychological.
Kent is not every.
Luna is additional.
Luna is desperate.
Kent is additional.
Gabriel is desperate.
Kendrick is concerned.
Luna is every.
Joshua is desperate.If Marshall is not additional, then Gabriel is not concerned and Luna is not desperate, and vice versa.
Kendrick being not additional and Gabriel being desperate are equivalent to Kendrick being not large and Kendrick being not psychological.
If someone who is every is also desperate, then he is concerned.
All desperate people are not psychological.
If there is at least one people who is additional, then Kent is psychological.
If Luna is not desperate, then Gabriel is not large, and vice versa.
If someone is either large or not additional, then he is concerned and psychological.
Someone being additional is equivalent to being not every.
If there is someone who is either not every or large, then Gabriel is not concerned.
Gabriel is psychological if and only if Luna is every.
If Kent is not additional and Marshall is not every, then Luna is psychological.
If Todd is desperate, then Joshua is not large and Joshua is psychological.
|
Luna is not desperate.
|
contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Stanley is not cotton.
|
contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Norman is not competitive.
|
contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Mila is competitive.
|
contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Mila is not cotton.
|
contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Kingsley is not impartial.
|
entailment
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Mila is sticky.
|
self_contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Sidney is not cotton.
|
neutral
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Norman is competitive.
|
entailment
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Sidney is competitive.
|
neutral
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Mila is careful.
|
self_contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Stanley is not competitive.
|
entailment
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Kingsley is careful.
|
contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Kingsley is cotton.
|
self_contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Graham is cotton.
|
neutral
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
|
self_contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Mila is not impartial.
|
neutral
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Sidney is not repulsive.
|
neutral
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Mila is cotton.
|
entailment
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Norman is not repulsive.
|
self_contradiction
|
Kingsley is not cotton.
Kingsley is not impartial.
Brian is not impartial.
Norman is impartial.
Brian is not cotton.
Stanley is careful.
Norman is competitive.
Mila is careful.
Stanley is cotton.
Sidney is sticky.
Brian is careful.
Kingsley is not careful.Brian being not repulsive and Kingsley being not sticky imply that Norman is impartial.
If Kingsley is repulsive or Kingsley is not cotton, then Norman is sticky.
If Kingsley is careful and Norman is impartial, then Stanley is not repulsive.
It can be concluded that Stanley is impartial once knowing that Stanley is careful or Stanley is not sticky.
Someone being both cotton and not sticky is equivalent to being not careful.
If someone is sticky and not competitive, then he is careful, and vice versa.
If someone is not sticky, then he is repulsive.
Graham being not competitive implies that Brian is impartial and Mila is repulsive.
If there is someone who is not sticky, then Norman is repulsive and Mila is not careful.
It can be concluded that Stanley is cotton once knowing that Stanley is not repulsive and Norman is not impartial.
If Stanley is not impartial or Norman is sticky, then Norman is not repulsive.
Someone who is not competitive is always careful.
|
Kingsley is not sticky.
|
entailment
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Phineas is sharp.
|
entailment
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Phineas is not unusual.
|
entailment
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Shamus is sharp.
|
entailment
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Louis is brave.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Norris is troubled.
|
neutral
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Louis is not troubled.
|
contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Phineas is unusual.
|
contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Stanley is brave.
|
contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Gilbert is troubled.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Stanley is troubled.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Gilbert is not unusual.
|
neutral
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Stuart is not brave.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Shamus is not consistent.
|
entailment
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Stuart is not unusual.
|
contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Phineas is timid.
|
contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Phineas is not consistent.
|
neutral
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Stuart is not consistent.
|
neutral
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Shamus is troubled.
|
entailment
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Stuart is not timid.
|
self_contradiction
|
Gilbert is troubled.
Stuart is timid.
Norris is brave.
Louis is sharp.
Stuart is unusual.
Louis is brave.
Stanley is sharp.
Phineas is not unusual.
Stanley is not troubled.
Louis is unusual.
Gilbert is brave.
Stanley is not timid.If someone is timid or he is not unusual, then he is sharp.
If Louis is not unusual, then Phineas is not consistent and Shamus is sharp.
If there is someone who is both not troubled and not timid, then Louis is not brave.
As long as someone is either sharp or not consistent, he is not brave and not timid.
If there is someone who is timid, then Stuart is brave.
If someone is not unusual, then he is not brave.
Stanley being sharp is equivalent to Gilbert being not troubled.
Someone who is eithor not timid or not unusual is always troubled.
Someone is unusual and not sharp if and only if he is not timid and consistent.
If everyone is not sharp or timid, then Norris is unusual.
It can be concluded that Shamus is not consistent and Shamus is brave once knowing that Phineas is sharp.
If there is someone who is either not brave or sharp, then Shamus is not timid and Shamus is not unusual.
|
Norris is not timid.
|
neutral
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Travis is not cute.
|
neutral
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Travis is cute.
|
neutral
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Chatwin is not helpful.
|
contradiction
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Arlen is charming.
|
self_contradiction
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Chatwin is charming.
|
neutral
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Vicki is not crazy.
|
contradiction
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Chatwin is not lively.
|
entailment
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Travis is lively.
|
contradiction
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Arlen is not cute.
|
self_contradiction
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Vicki is not lively.
|
self_contradiction
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Vicki is ugly.
|
contradiction
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Amery is cute.
|
entailment
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Robyn is charming.
|
entailment
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Vicki is not charming.
|
entailment
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Travis is not helpful.
|
neutral
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Arlen is not lively.
|
entailment
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Arlen is cute.
|
self_contradiction
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Amery is not lively.
|
neutral
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Arlen is ugly.
|
contradiction
|
Chatwin is helpful.
Robyn is not crazy.
Robyn is charming.
Vicki is not charming.
Amery is helpful.
Chatwin is not lively.
Robyn is not ugly.
Arlen is not charming.
Travis is not ugly.
Travis is not lively.
Vicki is lively.
Amery is cute.If someone is not helpful, then he is not crazy, and vice versa.
Someone is not lively and not charming if and only if he is not cute and not ugly.
If there is someone who is crazy, then Arlen is charming.
Someone being both crazy and not ugly is equivalent to being not lively and cute.
All not crazy people are not lively.
It can be concluded that Vicki is crazy once knowing that Lester is helpful and Lester is not charming.
If there is someone who is either not lively or helpful, then Robyn is not ugly.
If there is someone who is ugly, then Arlen is not charming.
It can be concluded that Robyn is helpful and Arlen is cute once knowing that Chatwin is not crazy.
If there is someone who is either charming or cute, then Travis is not ugly.
If Arlen is lively, then Lester is crazy.
If someone is crazy and not lively, then he is not charming, and vice versa.
|
Arlen is not charming.
|
self_contradiction
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.