version
stringclasses 1
value | hypothesis
stringlengths 11
215
| hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
39
| context
stringlengths 0
2.9k
| context_formula
stringlengths 0
905
| proofs
list | proofs_formula
list | negative_hypothesis
stringlengths 15
193
⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
37
⌀ | negative_proofs
list | negative_original_tree_depth
int64 0
25
⌀ | original_tree_depth
int64 1
4
| depth
int64 0
3
⌀ | num_formula_distractors
int64 0
22
| num_translation_distractors
int64 0
0
| num_all_distractors
int64 0
22
| proof_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_proof_label
stringclasses 2
values | world_assump_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_world_assump_label
stringclasses 2
values | prompt_serial
stringlengths 89
3.09k
| proof_serial
stringlengths 11
654
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DeductionInstance
|
the lighterage occurs if the mercantilism happens.
|
{A} -> {B}
|
sent1: the rental occurs. sent2: not the Pavlovianness but the rental occurs if the fact that the mercantilism occurs is not wrong. sent3: the nightlife occurs if the suturing occurs. sent4: both the mercantilism and the peek happens if that the lighterage does not occur hold. sent5: not the gurgling reamer but the gavage occurs. sent6: that not the variegation but the segmenting occurs is brought about by that the radial-pliness occurs. sent7: the rental happens if the mercantilism happens.
|
sent1: {AB} sent2: {A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent3: {D} -> {AG} sent4: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {GO}) sent5: (¬{JA} & {JE}) sent6: {IU} -> (¬{HI} & {FA}) sent7: {A} -> {AB}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mercantilism happens.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the non-Pavlovianness and the rentalness happens.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} & {AB});"
] |
the peek occurs.
|
{GO}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the lighterage occurs if the mercantilism happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the rental occurs. sent2: not the Pavlovianness but the rental occurs if the fact that the mercantilism occurs is not wrong. sent3: the nightlife occurs if the suturing occurs. sent4: both the mercantilism and the peek happens if that the lighterage does not occur hold. sent5: not the gurgling reamer but the gavage occurs. sent6: that not the variegation but the segmenting occurs is brought about by that the radial-pliness occurs. sent7: the rental happens if the mercantilism happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mercantilism happens.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the non-Pavlovianness and the rentalness happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the gangrene does strive ribose.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: if the fact that that something is not a crappie and it is not a kind of a nanotechnology is not wrong is not true it is not a fallibility. sent2: there exists nothing such that it is not a kind of a tetherball and is not a velveteen. sent3: the gangrene is a kind of a tetherball if there is something such that that it is not a tetherball and it is not a kind of a velveteen is not right. sent4: if the fact that the gangrene is not a board hold then that it is not a crappie and it is not a kind of a nanotechnology does not hold. sent5: the aflatoxin is a tetherball if it is not a kind of a nanotechnology. sent6: the gangrene does strive ribose. sent7: something does not strive ribose if it is a tetherball and it is not a fallibility. sent8: The ribose does strive gangrene.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{G}x) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{G}x) -> {C}{a} sent4: ¬{F}{a} -> ¬(¬{E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent5: ¬{D}{fl} -> {C}{fl} sent6: {A}{a} sent7: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent8: {AA}{aa}
|
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the gangrene does not strive ribose.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the gangrene does not strive ribose if it is a tetherball and it is not a fallibility.; sent2 -> int2: that the midrib is not a tetherball and it is not a velveteen is wrong.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a tetherball and it is not a velveteen does not hold.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the gangrene is a tetherball.; sent1 -> int5: that the gangrene is not a fallibility is correct if the fact that it is not a crappie and it is not a kind of a nanotechnology is wrong.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the gangrene does strive ribose. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that that something is not a crappie and it is not a kind of a nanotechnology is not wrong is not true it is not a fallibility. sent2: there exists nothing such that it is not a kind of a tetherball and is not a velveteen. sent3: the gangrene is a kind of a tetherball if there is something such that that it is not a tetherball and it is not a kind of a velveteen is not right. sent4: if the fact that the gangrene is not a board hold then that it is not a crappie and it is not a kind of a nanotechnology does not hold. sent5: the aflatoxin is a tetherball if it is not a kind of a nanotechnology. sent6: the gangrene does strive ribose. sent7: something does not strive ribose if it is a tetherball and it is not a fallibility. sent8: The ribose does strive gangrene. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the refrigerating hypertension does not occur hold.
|
¬{A}
|
sent1: that the proclamation does not occur yields that the gurgling fallibility happens and the refrigerating hypertension happens. sent2: the gurgling fallibility does not occur. sent3: if the gurgling fallibility happens not the transfusion but the refrigerating hypertension happens. sent4: if both the proclamation and the non-eudemonicness happens then the fact that the gurgling fallibility happens is right. sent5: if the gurgling fallibility does not occur the Beguine does not occur and/or the skit happens. sent6: that the proclamation does not occur and the eudemonicness happens is brought about by that the backspin does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent2: ¬{B} sent3: {B} -> (¬{CE} & {A}) sent4: ({C} & ¬{D}) -> {B} sent5: ¬{B} -> (¬{AA} v {AB}) sent6: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & {D})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the refrigerating hypertension happens is correct.; sent5 & sent2 -> int1: either the Beguine does not occur or the skit happens or both.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent5 & sent2 -> int1: (¬{AA} v {AB});"
] |
the transfusion does not occur and/or the striving back-formation occurs.
|
(¬{CE} v {II})
|
[] | 7 | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the refrigerating hypertension does not occur hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the proclamation does not occur yields that the gurgling fallibility happens and the refrigerating hypertension happens. sent2: the gurgling fallibility does not occur. sent3: if the gurgling fallibility happens not the transfusion but the refrigerating hypertension happens. sent4: if both the proclamation and the non-eudemonicness happens then the fact that the gurgling fallibility happens is right. sent5: if the gurgling fallibility does not occur the Beguine does not occur and/or the skit happens. sent6: that the proclamation does not occur and the eudemonicness happens is brought about by that the backspin does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the refrigerating hypertension happens is correct.; sent5 & sent2 -> int1: either the Beguine does not occur or the skit happens or both.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the clothesline does not submerge if the clothesline is not a coastguard and is a rhinoscope is not correct.
|
¬((¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})
|
sent1: if something is not a kind of a coastguard but it is a rhinoscope it does not submerge. sent2: if something that is oropharyngeal does silence then it does not gurgle front. sent3: if the clothesline is not a torch but a quarrel then it submerges. sent4: if the clothesline does not refrigerate setter and does refrigerate coal then it is not a rhinoscope. sent5: if the fraxinella does not gurgle rescript and submerges then it mantles orphaned. sent6: that the Vandyke is not a kind of the Styrofoam if the Vandyke is a rhinoscope and it is acidic hold. sent7: something does not submerge if it is a coastguard and it is a rhinoscope. sent8: if the clothesline is a coastguard and it is a kind of a rhinoscope it does not submerge. sent9: the clothesline does not submerge if it is not bulbaceous but gloveless. sent10: if something is not an ultrasound and is terpsichorean it is not a beneficiation. sent11: something submerges if it is not a coastguard and is a rhinoscope. sent12: the clothesline submerges if it is not a coastguard and it is a rhinoscope. sent13: if the clothesline is a kind of non-cranial thing that is a silence then that it is a rhinoscope hold. sent14: if something is not a kind of a box but it is extraordinary then it is a kind of a Desmodontidae. sent15: if something that is not a trichotomy is a businessperson then it is not a transactinide. sent16: if something that is non-taxonomic refrigerates caroche then it is an ultrasound.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: (x): ({U}x & {IB}x) -> ¬{A}x sent3: (¬{HC}{aa} & {BI}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent4: (¬{FI}{aa} & {BK}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent5: (¬{CC}{ij} & {B}{ij}) -> {IJ}{ij} sent6: ({AB}{in} & {EG}{in}) -> ¬{H}{in} sent7: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent8: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent9: (¬{HO}{aa} & {IL}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: (x): (¬{AU}x & {AR}x) -> ¬{CT}x sent11: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent12: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent13: (¬{FA}{aa} & {IB}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} sent14: (x): (¬{DD}x & {AS}x) -> {FU}x sent15: (x): (¬{IT}x & {FQ}x) -> ¬{IR}x sent16: (x): (¬{EE}x & {HA}x) -> {AU}x
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the caroche is not a trichotomy and is a businessperson it is not a transactinide.
|
(¬{IT}{eq} & {FQ}{eq}) -> ¬{IR}{eq}
|
[
"sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that the clothesline does not submerge if the clothesline is not a coastguard and is a rhinoscope is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of a coastguard but it is a rhinoscope it does not submerge. sent2: if something that is oropharyngeal does silence then it does not gurgle front. sent3: if the clothesline is not a torch but a quarrel then it submerges. sent4: if the clothesline does not refrigerate setter and does refrigerate coal then it is not a rhinoscope. sent5: if the fraxinella does not gurgle rescript and submerges then it mantles orphaned. sent6: that the Vandyke is not a kind of the Styrofoam if the Vandyke is a rhinoscope and it is acidic hold. sent7: something does not submerge if it is a coastguard and it is a rhinoscope. sent8: if the clothesline is a coastguard and it is a kind of a rhinoscope it does not submerge. sent9: the clothesline does not submerge if it is not bulbaceous but gloveless. sent10: if something is not an ultrasound and is terpsichorean it is not a beneficiation. sent11: something submerges if it is not a coastguard and is a rhinoscope. sent12: the clothesline submerges if it is not a coastguard and it is a rhinoscope. sent13: if the clothesline is a kind of non-cranial thing that is a silence then that it is a rhinoscope hold. sent14: if something is not a kind of a box but it is extraordinary then it is a kind of a Desmodontidae. sent15: if something that is not a trichotomy is a businessperson then it is not a transactinide. sent16: if something that is non-taxonomic refrigerates caroche then it is an ultrasound. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the aneurysmalness does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the golfing happens or the veterinariness occurs or both if the lotto does not occur. sent2: the bastardization happens. sent3: that the instructionalness does not occur and the lotto does not occur is brought about by that the maleficentness does not occur. sent4: the aneurysmalness does not occur if both the lotto and the veterinariness occurs. sent5: if the fact that the fact that both the non-Mormonness and the tuning happens is not correct is true the maleficentness does not occur. sent6: the veterinariness does not occur if the fact that the gurgling condition happens and the veterinariness occurs is not right. sent7: both the lotto and the gurgling condition happens. sent8: the fact that the Mormon does not occur and the tune happens is wrong if the Capetianness does not occur. sent9: the veterinariness happens if the golfing happens. sent10: the fact that the golfing occurs is not false. sent11: if the gurgling condition does not occur then that the aneurysmalness and the lotto occurs is not true. sent12: if the positiveness and the tune happens then the maleficentness does not occur. sent13: that the lotto does not occur is triggered by that the aneurysmalness does not occur and the gurgling condition does not occur. sent14: both the amplification and the nimbus happens. sent15: the gurgling condition happens.
|
sent1: ¬{C} -> ({A} v {B}) sent2: {HC} sent3: ¬{G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{C}) sent4: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{D} sent5: ¬(¬{H} & {I}) -> ¬{G} sent6: ¬({E} & {B}) -> ¬{B} sent7: ({C} & {E}) sent8: ¬{J} -> ¬(¬{H} & {I}) sent9: {A} -> {B} sent10: {A} sent11: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {C}) sent12: ({EQ} & {I}) -> ¬{G} sent13: (¬{D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} sent14: ({ET} & {JE}) sent15: {E}
|
[
"sent9 & sent10 -> int1: the veterinariness happens.; sent7 -> int2: the lotto occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the lotto and the veterinariness happens.; int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent10 -> int1: {B}; sent7 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({C} & {B}); int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the aneurysmalness happens hold.
|
{D}
|
[] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the aneurysmalness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the golfing happens or the veterinariness occurs or both if the lotto does not occur. sent2: the bastardization happens. sent3: that the instructionalness does not occur and the lotto does not occur is brought about by that the maleficentness does not occur. sent4: the aneurysmalness does not occur if both the lotto and the veterinariness occurs. sent5: if the fact that the fact that both the non-Mormonness and the tuning happens is not correct is true the maleficentness does not occur. sent6: the veterinariness does not occur if the fact that the gurgling condition happens and the veterinariness occurs is not right. sent7: both the lotto and the gurgling condition happens. sent8: the fact that the Mormon does not occur and the tune happens is wrong if the Capetianness does not occur. sent9: the veterinariness happens if the golfing happens. sent10: the fact that the golfing occurs is not false. sent11: if the gurgling condition does not occur then that the aneurysmalness and the lotto occurs is not true. sent12: if the positiveness and the tune happens then the maleficentness does not occur. sent13: that the lotto does not occur is triggered by that the aneurysmalness does not occur and the gurgling condition does not occur. sent14: both the amplification and the nimbus happens. sent15: the gurgling condition happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent10 -> int1: the veterinariness happens.; sent7 -> int2: the lotto occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the lotto and the veterinariness happens.; int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the poroporo is laryngeal is not incorrect.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: there exists something such that it is transuranic thing that is alkahestic. sent2: the poroporo is laryngeal if a transuranic thing is alkahestic.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent2: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the poroporo is laryngeal is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is transuranic thing that is alkahestic. sent2: the poroporo is laryngeal if a transuranic thing is alkahestic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the refrigerating nonappearance does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
sent1: the downdraft happens. sent2: the neuroanatomicness occurs. sent3: the mate does not occur. sent4: the dormantness occurs. sent5: that the striving Wyler does not occur is caused by that both the refrigerating Ficus and the enervation happens. sent6: if the anticipating does not occur then the sedimenting does not occur. sent7: the sediment is prevented by that the anticipating occurs. sent8: the flashover happens. sent9: if the sediment does not occur then the fact that the downdraft does not occur and the Taoistness does not occur is not true. sent10: the anticipating happens. sent11: if the fact that the sediment and the gurgling tie happens is not correct the sediment does not occur. sent12: that the constitution does not occur yields that the anticipating does not occur. sent13: the fact that the sediment and the gurgling tie occurs does not hold if the anticipating does not occur. sent14: both the refrigerating nonappearance and the posting occurs if the downdraft does not occur. sent15: the fact that the fact that the mantling Syngonium does not occur and the mantling zakat does not occur is correct does not hold if the easiness occurs. sent16: the sedimenting does not occur. sent17: if the winglessness does not occur the gurgling shindig occurs and/or the jigging does not occur. sent18: if the refrigerating Dionysus does not occur the two-dimensionalness occurs or the self-serviceness occurs or both. sent19: the winglessness does not occur if that the mantling Syngonium does not occur and the mantling zakat does not occur is not correct. sent20: if both the refrigerating nonappearance and the downdraft happens then the Taoist does not occur.
|
sent1: {B} sent2: {ET} sent3: ¬{BC} sent4: {DC} sent5: ({DS} & {CA}) -> ¬{FK} sent6: ¬{E} -> ¬{D} sent7: {E} -> ¬{D} sent8: {DO} sent9: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent10: {E} sent11: ¬({D} & {F}) -> ¬{D} sent12: ¬{G} -> ¬{E} sent13: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {F}) sent14: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {EF}) sent15: {M} -> ¬(¬{K} & ¬{L}) sent16: ¬{D} sent17: ¬{J} -> ({H} v ¬{I}) sent18: ¬{P} -> ({O} v {N}) sent19: ¬(¬{K} & ¬{L}) -> ¬{J} sent20: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the refrigerating nonappearance occurs.; assump1 & sent1 -> int1: the refrigerating nonappearance occurs and the downdraft happens.; int1 & sent20 -> int2: the Taoist does not occur.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; assump1 & sent1 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent20 -> int2: ¬{C};"
] |
the posting occurs.
|
{EF}
|
[] | 13 | 4 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the refrigerating nonappearance does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the downdraft happens. sent2: the neuroanatomicness occurs. sent3: the mate does not occur. sent4: the dormantness occurs. sent5: that the striving Wyler does not occur is caused by that both the refrigerating Ficus and the enervation happens. sent6: if the anticipating does not occur then the sedimenting does not occur. sent7: the sediment is prevented by that the anticipating occurs. sent8: the flashover happens. sent9: if the sediment does not occur then the fact that the downdraft does not occur and the Taoistness does not occur is not true. sent10: the anticipating happens. sent11: if the fact that the sediment and the gurgling tie happens is not correct the sediment does not occur. sent12: that the constitution does not occur yields that the anticipating does not occur. sent13: the fact that the sediment and the gurgling tie occurs does not hold if the anticipating does not occur. sent14: both the refrigerating nonappearance and the posting occurs if the downdraft does not occur. sent15: the fact that the fact that the mantling Syngonium does not occur and the mantling zakat does not occur is correct does not hold if the easiness occurs. sent16: the sedimenting does not occur. sent17: if the winglessness does not occur the gurgling shindig occurs and/or the jigging does not occur. sent18: if the refrigerating Dionysus does not occur the two-dimensionalness occurs or the self-serviceness occurs or both. sent19: the winglessness does not occur if that the mantling Syngonium does not occur and the mantling zakat does not occur is not correct. sent20: if both the refrigerating nonappearance and the downdraft happens then the Taoist does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the refrigerating nonappearance occurs.; assump1 & sent1 -> int1: the refrigerating nonappearance occurs and the downdraft happens.; int1 & sent20 -> int2: the Taoist does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the megaspore is mercantile but it is not a kind of a grouse.
|
({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
sent1: something is ugly and/or not a ceftazidime. sent2: there is something such that it is not ugly and/or is a ceftazidime. sent3: if either something is not ugly or it is not a ceftazidime or both the megaspore is mercantile. sent4: if the used-car does cohabit then the refresher does not gurgle used-car. sent5: that the megaspore does not grouse is right if there is something such that it is not a grouse. sent6: something is not a lean-to or it does not mantle megaspore or both if it is not mercantile. sent7: there exists something such that it is not mercantile or it does not grouse or both. sent8: if something is not clearing and not affine then it does cohabit. sent9: the used-car is not a clearing. sent10: if something does not gurgle used-car it is a grouse and does refrigerate silverware. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a grouse that gurgles used-car does not hold. sent12: that the megaspore is mercantile hold if that something is not a ceftazidime is not incorrect. sent13: something does grouse but it does not gurgle used-car. sent14: there exists something such that the fact that that it grouses and it does not gurgle used-car hold is not right. sent15: the megaspore is not a kind of a grouse if there is something such that that it grouse and does not gurgle used-car is not correct. sent16: the refresher does not gurgle used-car.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: {E}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{EP}x v ¬{FO}x) sent7: (Ex): (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) sent8: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> {E}x sent9: ¬{G}{c} sent10: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) sent11: (Ex): ¬({B}x & {D}x) sent12: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}{a} sent13: (Ex): ({B}x & ¬{D}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) sent15: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}{a} sent16: ¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent14 & sent15 -> int1: the megaspore is not a kind of a grouse.;"
] |
[
"sent14 & sent15 -> int1: ¬{B}{a};"
] |
there exists something such that either it is not a lean-to or it does not mantle megaspore or both.
|
(Ex): (¬{EP}x v ¬{FO}x)
|
[
"sent6 -> int2: the megaspore is not a lean-to or does not mantle megaspore or both if that it is not mercantile is right.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the megaspore is mercantile but it is not a kind of a grouse. ; $context$ = sent1: something is ugly and/or not a ceftazidime. sent2: there is something such that it is not ugly and/or is a ceftazidime. sent3: if either something is not ugly or it is not a ceftazidime or both the megaspore is mercantile. sent4: if the used-car does cohabit then the refresher does not gurgle used-car. sent5: that the megaspore does not grouse is right if there is something such that it is not a grouse. sent6: something is not a lean-to or it does not mantle megaspore or both if it is not mercantile. sent7: there exists something such that it is not mercantile or it does not grouse or both. sent8: if something is not clearing and not affine then it does cohabit. sent9: the used-car is not a clearing. sent10: if something does not gurgle used-car it is a grouse and does refrigerate silverware. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a grouse that gurgles used-car does not hold. sent12: that the megaspore is mercantile hold if that something is not a ceftazidime is not incorrect. sent13: something does grouse but it does not gurgle used-car. sent14: there exists something such that the fact that that it grouses and it does not gurgle used-car hold is not right. sent15: the megaspore is not a kind of a grouse if there is something such that that it grouse and does not gurgle used-car is not correct. sent16: the refresher does not gurgle used-car. ; $proof$ =
|
sent14 & sent15 -> int1: the megaspore is not a kind of a grouse.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the selection does not occur and the mantling pantograph occurs.
|
(¬{A} & {B})
|
sent1: the ridicule does not occur and the frizzling occurs. sent2: not the gurgling commercialization but the gurgling bioluminescence happens. sent3: the intralobularness does not occur. sent4: the mantling pantograph occurs. sent5: the ridiculing does not occur and the gurgling Benzoin occurs. sent6: the brightness happens. sent7: the selection does not occur. sent8: the knowing does not occur but the Grant occurs.
|
sent1: (¬{IT} & {BN}) sent2: (¬{S} & {GK}) sent3: ¬{DM} sent4: {B} sent5: (¬{IT} & {AT}) sent6: {EF} sent7: ¬{A} sent8: (¬{DH} & {IU})
|
[
"sent7 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the selection does not occur and the mantling pantograph occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the ridicule does not occur and the frizzling occurs. sent2: not the gurgling commercialization but the gurgling bioluminescence happens. sent3: the intralobularness does not occur. sent4: the mantling pantograph occurs. sent5: the ridiculing does not occur and the gurgling Benzoin occurs. sent6: the brightness happens. sent7: the selection does not occur. sent8: the knowing does not occur but the Grant occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the charger is not a kind of a Wilkinson.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: the coax is not manageable and it is not a awn if it does return. sent2: the coax is a Wegener if it does gurgle reprobation. sent3: the wiesenboden is anadromous but it is not a piculet. sent4: the jodhpur is not a kind of a piculet. sent5: something is a Wilkinson but not a piculet. sent6: there exists something such that it is a LP that does not gurgle squelch. sent7: the charger is not a Wilkinson if something that is anadromous is not a kind of a piculet. sent8: the wiesenboden is a Wilkinson but it is not a piculet. sent9: the charger is non-anadromous if there exists something such that it is a kind of a Wilkinson and it is not a piculet. sent10: the coax gurgles reprobation. sent11: there is something such that it is not a piculet. sent12: something is a Wilkinson that is not anadromous. sent13: the wiesenboden is not a kind of a piculet. sent14: the aphasic is not a kind of a Wilkinson. sent15: something is a sojourn but it is not a kind of a abience. sent16: if a anadromous thing is a piculet then the charger is not a Wilkinson. sent17: something is a Wilkinson but it is not a kind of a piculet if it is manageable. sent18: something is a territory but it is not a Wegener. sent19: the wiesenboden is not a kind of a hop-step-and-jump. sent20: something is a kind of a tungstate that does not refrigerate Mutawa'een. sent21: the charger is not anadromous. sent22: the charger is not anadromous if something that is a piculet is not a Wilkinson.
|
sent1: {D}{b} -> (¬{B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent2: {F}{b} -> {E}{b} sent3: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: ¬{AB}{ds} sent5: (Ex): ({A}x & ¬{AB}x) sent6: (Ex): ({EL}x & ¬{IH}x) sent7: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: ({A}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent9: (x): ({A}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{AA}{a} sent10: {F}{b} sent11: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent12: (Ex): ({A}x & ¬{AA}x) sent13: ¬{AB}{aa} sent14: ¬{A}{f} sent15: (Ex): ({CG}x & ¬{K}x) sent16: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent17: (x): {B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{AB}x) sent18: (Ex): ({CI}x & ¬{E}x) sent19: ¬{EK}{aa} sent20: (Ex): ({GA}x & ¬{IJ}x) sent21: ¬{AA}{a} sent22: (x): ({AB}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AA}{a}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: something is anadromous but it is not a kind of a piculet.; int1 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the charger is a kind of a Wilkinson.
|
{A}{a}
|
[] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the charger is not a kind of a Wilkinson. ; $context$ = sent1: the coax is not manageable and it is not a awn if it does return. sent2: the coax is a Wegener if it does gurgle reprobation. sent3: the wiesenboden is anadromous but it is not a piculet. sent4: the jodhpur is not a kind of a piculet. sent5: something is a Wilkinson but not a piculet. sent6: there exists something such that it is a LP that does not gurgle squelch. sent7: the charger is not a Wilkinson if something that is anadromous is not a kind of a piculet. sent8: the wiesenboden is a Wilkinson but it is not a piculet. sent9: the charger is non-anadromous if there exists something such that it is a kind of a Wilkinson and it is not a piculet. sent10: the coax gurgles reprobation. sent11: there is something such that it is not a piculet. sent12: something is a Wilkinson that is not anadromous. sent13: the wiesenboden is not a kind of a piculet. sent14: the aphasic is not a kind of a Wilkinson. sent15: something is a sojourn but it is not a kind of a abience. sent16: if a anadromous thing is a piculet then the charger is not a Wilkinson. sent17: something is a Wilkinson but it is not a kind of a piculet if it is manageable. sent18: something is a territory but it is not a Wegener. sent19: the wiesenboden is not a kind of a hop-step-and-jump. sent20: something is a kind of a tungstate that does not refrigerate Mutawa'een. sent21: the charger is not anadromous. sent22: the charger is not anadromous if something that is a piculet is not a Wilkinson. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: something is anadromous but it is not a kind of a piculet.; int1 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the corrosion is paniculate.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: if something is a Macedonian but it does not gurgle Ailey it is a Marxist. sent2: the Mao is a kind of a Macedonian but it does not gurgle Ailey if the hemoprotein refrigerates halfback. sent3: the borsch is a kind of a Sir if the Mao is Marxist. sent4: if the fact that the authority is vertebrate or it is not a Transportation or both does not hold then the corrosion is not paniculate. sent5: if the borsch is a Sir then the fact that the beta-naphthol is arthropodal but it is not a kind of a crappie is not correct. sent6: the authority does not strive beta-naphthol. sent7: The beta-naphthol does not strive authority. sent8: something is not arthropodal if that it is arthropodal and is not a crappie does not hold. sent9: that the authority is an invertebrate is right. sent10: either the authority strives beta-naphthol or it is not a dad or both if the beta-naphthol is not arthropodal. sent11: if the authority does not strive beta-naphthol then the fact that either it is not invertebrate or it is not a kind of a Transportation or both is false. sent12: the fact that that the trimming either does not refrigerate squeegee or is not invertebrate or both is not correct is not incorrect. sent13: that something does strive beta-naphthol and it is a dad does not hold if it is not paniculate. sent14: something does not strive beta-naphthol if the fact that it does strive beta-naphthol and it is a dad does not hold.
|
sent1: (x): ({H}x & ¬{I}x) -> {G}x sent2: {J}{f} -> ({H}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) sent3: {G}{e} -> {F}{d} sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: {F}{d} -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{AC}{aa} sent8: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent9: {AA}{a} sent10: ¬{D}{c} -> ({A}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent12: ¬(¬{CI}{ac} v ¬{AA}{ac}) sent13: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent14: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x
|
[
"sent11 & sent6 -> int1: the fact that either the authority is not an invertebrate or it is not a kind of a Transportation or both is false.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent6 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the borsch does not strive beta-naphthol.
|
¬{A}{d}
|
[
"sent14 -> int2: if the fact that the borsch strives beta-naphthol and it is a dad does not hold then that it does not strives beta-naphthol is correct.; sent13 -> int3: if the borsch is not paniculate then that it strives beta-naphthol and is a dad does not hold.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the corrosion is paniculate. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a Macedonian but it does not gurgle Ailey it is a Marxist. sent2: the Mao is a kind of a Macedonian but it does not gurgle Ailey if the hemoprotein refrigerates halfback. sent3: the borsch is a kind of a Sir if the Mao is Marxist. sent4: if the fact that the authority is vertebrate or it is not a Transportation or both does not hold then the corrosion is not paniculate. sent5: if the borsch is a Sir then the fact that the beta-naphthol is arthropodal but it is not a kind of a crappie is not correct. sent6: the authority does not strive beta-naphthol. sent7: The beta-naphthol does not strive authority. sent8: something is not arthropodal if that it is arthropodal and is not a crappie does not hold. sent9: that the authority is an invertebrate is right. sent10: either the authority strives beta-naphthol or it is not a dad or both if the beta-naphthol is not arthropodal. sent11: if the authority does not strive beta-naphthol then the fact that either it is not invertebrate or it is not a kind of a Transportation or both is false. sent12: the fact that that the trimming either does not refrigerate squeegee or is not invertebrate or both is not correct is not incorrect. sent13: that something does strive beta-naphthol and it is a dad does not hold if it is not paniculate. sent14: something does not strive beta-naphthol if the fact that it does strive beta-naphthol and it is a dad does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent6 -> int1: the fact that either the authority is not an invertebrate or it is not a kind of a Transportation or both is false.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that either the saltwort is not a feminist or it is a Noctuidae or both is not false.
|
(¬{D}{a} v {E}{a})
|
sent1: that the wit is a cracking and it is a Noctuidae does not hold. sent2: the saltwort is a Noctuidae and/or it does mantle horseman. sent3: there are unidirectional things. sent4: if something is unidirectional that it is not a feminist and/or it is a Noctuidae is incorrect. sent5: the saltwort does not refrigerate Gynura if the fact that it is not a kind of a Noctuidae and it gurgles syllabub is not correct. sent6: the fact that the saltwort does not gurgle alumroot and is a state is incorrect. sent7: the fact that if that something does not diffuse but it does bronze is not correct then it does not gurgle estriol is not incorrect. sent8: the saltwort is not a superstrate if that it does not refrigerate actinomycin and gurgles alumroot is not correct. sent9: that the aliterate is unidirectional and it is international does not hold. sent10: either the saltwort is not non-feminist or it is a kind of a Noctuidae or both. sent11: the fact that that the saltwort is not monocarboxylic but it is unidirectional is correct is not right. sent12: something is not a feminist if the fact that it is not a stumblebum and it gurgles alumroot is not right. sent13: if that the saltwort does refrigerate post-horse is not false it does not mantle cookie. sent14: if that the cookie does not refrigerate Arlington but it is dictyopteran is incorrect it is not a stumblebum. sent15: if something is a kind of a Noctuidae that the saltwort is a stumblebum that does gurgle alumroot is not correct. sent16: something does not gurgle alumroot if it does not gurgle alumroot and/or does state. sent17: something is not a Douglass if that it is not a kind of a Noctuidae and it is a piroxicam is not correct. sent18: if that something is not a Noctuidae and is a feminist does not hold it does not gurgle alumroot. sent19: something is not epizoic if it is a woodcock.
|
sent1: ¬({Q}{gj} & {E}{gj}) sent2: ({E}{a} v {AP}{a}) sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{D}x v {E}x) sent5: ¬(¬{E}{a} & {BA}{a}) -> ¬{HO}{a} sent6: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {G}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{CB}x & {EF}x) -> ¬{FC}x sent8: ¬(¬{JH}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{DN}{a} sent9: ¬({A}{dd} & {EC}{dd}) sent10: ({D}{a} v {E}{a}) sent11: ¬(¬{HH}{a} & {A}{a}) sent12: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent13: {ED}{a} -> ¬{AS}{a} sent14: ¬(¬{EJ}{gb} & {FK}{gb}) -> ¬{B}{gb} sent15: (x): {E}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent16: (x): (¬{C}x v {G}x) -> ¬{C}x sent17: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {U}x) -> ¬{T}x sent18: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent19: (x): {JG}x -> ¬{JK}x
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: if that the saltwort is not a stumblebum but it does gurgle alumroot is not correct then the fact that it is not feminist is not false.;"
] |
[
"sent12 -> int1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a};"
] |
if that the saltwort is not a kind of a Noctuidae and is a piroxicam is incorrect then it is not a kind of a Douglass.
|
¬(¬{E}{a} & {U}{a}) -> ¬{T}{a}
|
[
"sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that either the saltwort is not a feminist or it is a Noctuidae or both is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: that the wit is a cracking and it is a Noctuidae does not hold. sent2: the saltwort is a Noctuidae and/or it does mantle horseman. sent3: there are unidirectional things. sent4: if something is unidirectional that it is not a feminist and/or it is a Noctuidae is incorrect. sent5: the saltwort does not refrigerate Gynura if the fact that it is not a kind of a Noctuidae and it gurgles syllabub is not correct. sent6: the fact that the saltwort does not gurgle alumroot and is a state is incorrect. sent7: the fact that if that something does not diffuse but it does bronze is not correct then it does not gurgle estriol is not incorrect. sent8: the saltwort is not a superstrate if that it does not refrigerate actinomycin and gurgles alumroot is not correct. sent9: that the aliterate is unidirectional and it is international does not hold. sent10: either the saltwort is not non-feminist or it is a kind of a Noctuidae or both. sent11: the fact that that the saltwort is not monocarboxylic but it is unidirectional is correct is not right. sent12: something is not a feminist if the fact that it is not a stumblebum and it gurgles alumroot is not right. sent13: if that the saltwort does refrigerate post-horse is not false it does not mantle cookie. sent14: if that the cookie does not refrigerate Arlington but it is dictyopteran is incorrect it is not a stumblebum. sent15: if something is a kind of a Noctuidae that the saltwort is a stumblebum that does gurgle alumroot is not correct. sent16: something does not gurgle alumroot if it does not gurgle alumroot and/or does state. sent17: something is not a Douglass if that it is not a kind of a Noctuidae and it is a piroxicam is not correct. sent18: if that something is not a Noctuidae and is a feminist does not hold it does not gurgle alumroot. sent19: something is not epizoic if it is a woodcock. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 -> int1: if that the saltwort is not a stumblebum but it does gurgle alumroot is not correct then the fact that it is not feminist is not false.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the mantling Tory does not occur is true.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: that the mantling Tory occurs is brought about by that the gurgling verbiage does not occur or the mantling odist does not occur or both. sent2: the nontaxableness does not occur. sent3: the gurgling verbiage does not occur or the mantling odist does not occur or both if the nontaxableness does not occur. sent4: if the buccalness does not occur then the mantling directivity does not occur or the mantling epileptic does not occur or both.
|
sent1: (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent2: ¬{A} sent3: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) sent4: ¬{HL} -> (¬{JH} v ¬{CL})
|
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the gurgling verbiage does not occur and/or the mantling odist does not occur.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}); sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the mantling Tory does not occur is true. ; $context$ = sent1: that the mantling Tory occurs is brought about by that the gurgling verbiage does not occur or the mantling odist does not occur or both. sent2: the nontaxableness does not occur. sent3: the gurgling verbiage does not occur or the mantling odist does not occur or both if the nontaxableness does not occur. sent4: if the buccalness does not occur then the mantling directivity does not occur or the mantling epileptic does not occur or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the gurgling verbiage does not occur and/or the mantling odist does not occur.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the sort is a wishbone but it is not a kind of a Brunelleschi is incorrect.
|
¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
sent1: there exists something such that that it is a halfbeak and does not mantle slap is not true. sent2: the fact that the fact that something is a wishbone but it is not a Brunelleschi is not incorrect is false if it does not suspend. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it is a halfbeak and it does not mantle slap is incorrect then the sort does not suspend.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the sort does not suspend.; sent2 -> int2: the fact that the sort is a wishbone but it is not a kind of a Brunelleschi does not hold if it does not suspend.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; sent2 -> int2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the sort is a wishbone but it is not a kind of a Brunelleschi is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that that it is a halfbeak and does not mantle slap is not true. sent2: the fact that the fact that something is a wishbone but it is not a Brunelleschi is not incorrect is false if it does not suspend. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it is a halfbeak and it does not mantle slap is incorrect then the sort does not suspend. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the sort does not suspend.; sent2 -> int2: the fact that the sort is a wishbone but it is not a kind of a Brunelleschi does not hold if it does not suspend.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the mallard is Platonic.
|
{D}{a}
|
sent1: if something is not a years that it is a Tayassu and does not mantle consolidation is not right. sent2: the brushwood is not lexicographic if there exists something such that it is a pipe. sent3: if the kid is awkward the katamorphism is not awkward. sent4: if the mallard is not a Tayassu it is Platonic. sent5: that something does refrigerate uraninite but it is not a conduction does not hold if it does not strive yodel. sent6: that the pylon is not a neglect is right if it is an orderly and it does not mantle Tet. sent7: the fact that the materialist is not a years but it is a Tayassu is wrong if the uraninite does not mantle consolidation. sent8: the mallard is Dalmatian. sent9: if something is not a Michael and/or is not a Lancastrian the fact that it is awkward hold. sent10: the fact that the mallard is incommodious and not a board does not hold if the fact that it does not mantle hart is not wrong. sent11: if that something is not a pipe and does not mantle prebendary is false it is a pipe. sent12: if there is something such that it is not lexicographic the uraninite does not mantle consolidation. sent13: if something is not a Tayassu it is Platonic. sent14: the mallard is a thesaurus. sent15: if the mallard does not mantle skewer and is a thesaurus then it is not a years. sent16: the pylon is an orderly but it does not mantle Tet. sent17: the mallard is not a kind of a wave and does refrigerate shallu. sent18: the mallard does not mantle skewer but it is a thesaurus. sent19: that the eriogonum is not a pipe and does not mantle prebendary is wrong if the katamorphism is not awkward. sent20: if that the shallu is not a Tayassu is not wrong then the fact that it is a kind of a smegma and it does not strive katamorphism is wrong. sent21: if the pylon is not a neglect the kid is not a kind of a Michael and/or it is not a Lancastrian. sent22: the prebendary mantles consolidation. sent23: something is Platonic if that it is a kind of a Tayassu that does not mantle consolidation is incorrect.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) sent2: (x): {F}x -> ¬{E}{d} sent3: {G}{g} -> ¬{G}{f} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> {D}{a} sent5: (x): ¬{BT}x -> ¬({JD}x & ¬{FO}x) sent6: ({M}{h} & ¬{L}{h}) -> ¬{K}{h} sent7: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent8: {BS}{a} sent9: (x): (¬{J}x v ¬{I}x) -> {G}x sent10: ¬{CF}{a} -> ¬({GC}{a} & ¬{CQ}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{H}x) -> {F}x sent12: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬{C}{c} sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> {D}x sent14: {AB}{a} sent15: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent16: ({M}{h} & ¬{L}{h}) sent17: (¬{FF}{a} & {DB}{a}) sent18: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent19: ¬{G}{f} -> ¬(¬{F}{e} & ¬{H}{e}) sent20: ¬{A}{hk} -> ¬({HT}{hk} & ¬{BC}{hk}) sent21: ¬{K}{h} -> (¬{J}{g} v ¬{I}{g}) sent22: {C}{gq} sent23: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> {D}x
|
[
"sent15 & sent18 -> int1: the mallard is not a kind of a years.; sent1 -> int2: if the fact that the mallard is not a years is not incorrect then that it is a Tayassu and it does not mantle consolidation does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that that the mallard is a Tayassu but it does not mantle consolidation is false hold.; sent23 -> int4: if the fact that the mallard is a kind of a Tayassu but it does not mantle consolidation does not hold it is Platonic.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 & sent18 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent1 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); sent23 -> int4: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the mallard is not Platonic is correct.
|
¬{D}{a}
|
[
"sent11 -> int5: the eriogonum is a kind of a pipe if the fact that it is not a kind of a pipe and it does not mantle prebendary is not true.; sent9 -> int6: the kid is awkward if it is not a Michael or it is not a Lancastrian or both.; sent6 & sent16 -> int7: the pylon is not a kind of a neglect.; sent21 & int7 -> int8: either the kid is not a Michael or it is not a kind of a Lancastrian or both.; int6 & int8 -> int9: the kid is awkward.; sent3 & int9 -> int10: the katamorphism is not awkward.; sent19 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the eriogonum does not pipe and it does not mantle prebendary is not correct.; int5 & int11 -> int12: the eriogonum is a pipe.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that it pipes.; int13 & sent2 -> int14: that the brushwood is not lexicographic is not false.; int14 -> int15: there exists something such that it is not lexicographic.; int15 & sent12 -> int16: the uraninite does not mantle consolidation.; sent7 & int16 -> int17: that the materialist is not a years but it is a Tayassu does not hold.; int17 -> int18: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a years and it is a Tayassu does not hold.;"
] | 13 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the mallard is Platonic. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a years that it is a Tayassu and does not mantle consolidation is not right. sent2: the brushwood is not lexicographic if there exists something such that it is a pipe. sent3: if the kid is awkward the katamorphism is not awkward. sent4: if the mallard is not a Tayassu it is Platonic. sent5: that something does refrigerate uraninite but it is not a conduction does not hold if it does not strive yodel. sent6: that the pylon is not a neglect is right if it is an orderly and it does not mantle Tet. sent7: the fact that the materialist is not a years but it is a Tayassu is wrong if the uraninite does not mantle consolidation. sent8: the mallard is Dalmatian. sent9: if something is not a Michael and/or is not a Lancastrian the fact that it is awkward hold. sent10: the fact that the mallard is incommodious and not a board does not hold if the fact that it does not mantle hart is not wrong. sent11: if that something is not a pipe and does not mantle prebendary is false it is a pipe. sent12: if there is something such that it is not lexicographic the uraninite does not mantle consolidation. sent13: if something is not a Tayassu it is Platonic. sent14: the mallard is a thesaurus. sent15: if the mallard does not mantle skewer and is a thesaurus then it is not a years. sent16: the pylon is an orderly but it does not mantle Tet. sent17: the mallard is not a kind of a wave and does refrigerate shallu. sent18: the mallard does not mantle skewer but it is a thesaurus. sent19: that the eriogonum is not a pipe and does not mantle prebendary is wrong if the katamorphism is not awkward. sent20: if that the shallu is not a Tayassu is not wrong then the fact that it is a kind of a smegma and it does not strive katamorphism is wrong. sent21: if the pylon is not a neglect the kid is not a kind of a Michael and/or it is not a Lancastrian. sent22: the prebendary mantles consolidation. sent23: something is Platonic if that it is a kind of a Tayassu that does not mantle consolidation is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 & sent18 -> int1: the mallard is not a kind of a years.; sent1 -> int2: if the fact that the mallard is not a years is not incorrect then that it is a Tayassu and it does not mantle consolidation does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that that the mallard is a Tayassu but it does not mantle consolidation is false hold.; sent23 -> int4: if the fact that the mallard is a kind of a Tayassu but it does not mantle consolidation does not hold it is Platonic.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pasqueflower does not gurgle Dipogon.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
sent1: the snarer lauds and it emanates. sent2: the jowl is intraventricular. sent3: the snarer does laud. sent4: if something does emanate then it is intraventricular. sent5: the fact that if that the hamlet does not mantle taxonomist and is a kind of the intercourse does not hold then the hamlet is not a hope is not false. sent6: the fact that something is intraventricular thing that does not emanate if it does not mantle rescript is right. sent7: if something is not a hope then that it does not spook is right. sent8: the snarer gurgles Dipogon if the pasqueflower is intraventricular. sent9: if the snarer does not emanate that the pasqueflower does laud but it does not gurgle Dipogon hold. sent10: the pasqueflower gurgles Dipogon if the snarer is intraventricular. sent11: the pasqueflower lauds. sent12: the snarer does not mantle rescript if the hamlet does not spook.
|
sent1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: {C}{gt} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent5: ¬(¬{I}{c} & {H}{c}) -> ¬{G}{c} sent6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}x sent8: {C}{b} -> {D}{a} sent9: ¬{B}{a} -> ({A}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent10: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent11: {A}{b} sent12: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬{E}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the fact that the snarer does not emanate does not hold.; sent4 -> int2: if the snarer emanates then it is intraventricular.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the snarer is intraventricular.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent4 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a}; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the pasqueflower does not gurgle Dipogon.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent6 -> int4: the snarer is intraventricular but it does not emanate if it does not mantle rescript.; sent7 -> int5: if that the hamlet is not a hope hold it does not spook.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the pasqueflower does not gurgle Dipogon. ; $context$ = sent1: the snarer lauds and it emanates. sent2: the jowl is intraventricular. sent3: the snarer does laud. sent4: if something does emanate then it is intraventricular. sent5: the fact that if that the hamlet does not mantle taxonomist and is a kind of the intercourse does not hold then the hamlet is not a hope is not false. sent6: the fact that something is intraventricular thing that does not emanate if it does not mantle rescript is right. sent7: if something is not a hope then that it does not spook is right. sent8: the snarer gurgles Dipogon if the pasqueflower is intraventricular. sent9: if the snarer does not emanate that the pasqueflower does laud but it does not gurgle Dipogon hold. sent10: the pasqueflower gurgles Dipogon if the snarer is intraventricular. sent11: the pasqueflower lauds. sent12: the snarer does not mantle rescript if the hamlet does not spook. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the fact that the snarer does not emanate does not hold.; sent4 -> int2: if the snarer emanates then it is intraventricular.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the snarer is intraventricular.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bloomers is not a doughnut.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
sent1: there exists something such that it does round. sent2: if the fact that the bloomers is a kind of joyless thing that is not a paleness is not right then it is a doughnut. sent3: if the estaminet is not joyless then the fact that the bloomers is joyless thing that is not a paleness is not right. sent4: that something is both not non-round and not cash-and-carry is not wrong. sent5: the fact that the estaminet does mantle Ebro and it is a Papuan is incorrect. sent6: if there is something such that it is round and it is not cash-and-carry the estaminet is not joyless. sent7: either the estaminet is a kind of a split or it is monetary or both if it is not algometric. sent8: if something is a moraine it is retentive. sent9: that the bloomers is not a paleness and not joyless is false if the estaminet is retentive. sent10: if that something is not a paleness and it is not joyless is false it is not a doughnut. sent11: if the fact that something does mantle Ebro and it is Papuan does not hold that it is not algometric is correct.
|
sent1: (Ex): {AA}x sent2: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {B}{b} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent5: ¬({J}{a} & {I}{a}) sent6: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{H}{a} -> ({F}{a} v {G}{a}) sent8: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent9: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent11: (x): ¬({J}x & {I}x) -> ¬{H}x
|
[
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the fact that the estaminet is not joyless hold.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the fact that the bloomers is joyless but it is not a paleness is false.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent3 -> int2: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}); int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the bloomers is not a kind of a doughnut is not incorrect.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: the bloomers is not a kind of a doughnut if that the fact that it is both not a paleness and not joyless hold is wrong.; sent8 -> int4: the estaminet is retentive if it is a moraine.; sent11 -> int5: the estaminet is not algometric if that it does mantle Ebro and it is a kind of a Papuan does not hold.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the estaminet is not algometric.; sent7 & int6 -> int7: the estaminet either is a split or is monetary or both.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bloomers is not a doughnut. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it does round. sent2: if the fact that the bloomers is a kind of joyless thing that is not a paleness is not right then it is a doughnut. sent3: if the estaminet is not joyless then the fact that the bloomers is joyless thing that is not a paleness is not right. sent4: that something is both not non-round and not cash-and-carry is not wrong. sent5: the fact that the estaminet does mantle Ebro and it is a Papuan is incorrect. sent6: if there is something such that it is round and it is not cash-and-carry the estaminet is not joyless. sent7: either the estaminet is a kind of a split or it is monetary or both if it is not algometric. sent8: if something is a moraine it is retentive. sent9: that the bloomers is not a paleness and not joyless is false if the estaminet is retentive. sent10: if that something is not a paleness and it is not joyless is false it is not a doughnut. sent11: if the fact that something does mantle Ebro and it is Papuan does not hold that it is not algometric is correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the fact that the estaminet is not joyless hold.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the fact that the bloomers is joyless but it is not a paleness is false.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does gurgle Mindanao then the fact that that it is not a Lanthanotus and is a cyma hold does not hold.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Tyke the fact that it does not mantle squawker and does mantle khan does not hold. sent2: if that the nosh does gurgle Mindanao is right then the fact that it is not a Lanthanotus and it is a kind of a cyma is not true. sent3: if something is a kind of a naproxen the fact that it does not dogmatize and it does gurgle Mindanao is not correct. sent4: the fact that the nosh is not an immigrant but it is a Lanthanotus is false if that it does debut hold. sent5: there is something such that if it is a kind of a swipe then the fact that it does not verbalize and it refrigerates Bench is not correct. sent6: that there is something such that if it does gurgle Mindanao then the fact that it is a Lanthanotus and it is a cyma is not right hold. sent7: if the ultrasound is a cyma that it does not strive suzerainty and it is a kind of a Daniel is false. sent8: there exists something such that if it gurgles Mindanao it is not a Lanthanotus and it is a cyma. sent9: there is something such that if it is a Jinnah then the fact that it is not a Mancunian and it is not non-anicteric is wrong. sent10: that the nosh does not gurgle Mindanao and is a kind of a Maximian does not hold if it does mantle nosh. sent11: the nosh is not a Lanthanotus but it is a cyma if it does gurgle Mindanao. sent12: that there exists something such that if it gurgles basidiomycete then the fact that it does not pour and it gurgles diner is not correct is not false. sent13: if the nosh does gurgle Mindanao then that it is a Lanthanotus and it is a cyma is not correct. sent14: the fact that the nosh is both not small-capitalization and a debut does not hold if it gurgles Mindanao.
|
sent1: (Ex): {BU}x -> ¬(¬{DR}x & {HR}x) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (x): {AO}x -> ¬(¬{CO}x & {A}x) sent4: {EN}{aa} -> ¬(¬{JI}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): {HJ}x -> ¬(¬{FA}x & {BG}x) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: {AB}{af} -> ¬(¬{EC}{af} & {N}{af}) sent8: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: (Ex): {FD}x -> ¬(¬{DN}x & {E}x) sent10: {FL}{aa} -> ¬(¬{A}{aa} & {BL}{aa}) sent11: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent12: (Ex): {IL}x -> ¬(¬{I}x & {BT}x) sent13: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent14: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{IR}{aa} & {EN}{aa})
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the fact that the pinhole does not dogmatize and gurgles Mindanao is false if the pinhole is a naproxen is correct.
|
{AO}{hd} -> ¬(¬{CO}{hd} & {A}{hd})
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does gurgle Mindanao then the fact that that it is not a Lanthanotus and is a cyma hold does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Tyke the fact that it does not mantle squawker and does mantle khan does not hold. sent2: if that the nosh does gurgle Mindanao is right then the fact that it is not a Lanthanotus and it is a kind of a cyma is not true. sent3: if something is a kind of a naproxen the fact that it does not dogmatize and it does gurgle Mindanao is not correct. sent4: the fact that the nosh is not an immigrant but it is a Lanthanotus is false if that it does debut hold. sent5: there is something such that if it is a kind of a swipe then the fact that it does not verbalize and it refrigerates Bench is not correct. sent6: that there is something such that if it does gurgle Mindanao then the fact that it is a Lanthanotus and it is a cyma is not right hold. sent7: if the ultrasound is a cyma that it does not strive suzerainty and it is a kind of a Daniel is false. sent8: there exists something such that if it gurgles Mindanao it is not a Lanthanotus and it is a cyma. sent9: there is something such that if it is a Jinnah then the fact that it is not a Mancunian and it is not non-anicteric is wrong. sent10: that the nosh does not gurgle Mindanao and is a kind of a Maximian does not hold if it does mantle nosh. sent11: the nosh is not a Lanthanotus but it is a cyma if it does gurgle Mindanao. sent12: that there exists something such that if it gurgles basidiomycete then the fact that it does not pour and it gurgles diner is not correct is not false. sent13: if the nosh does gurgle Mindanao then that it is a Lanthanotus and it is a cyma is not correct. sent14: the fact that the nosh is both not small-capitalization and a debut does not hold if it gurgles Mindanao. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that that the aureole is not a kind of a consomme but it is retinal is right does not hold.
|
¬(¬{C}{c} & {D}{c})
|
sent1: if the fact that the microfiche does not pale or it is eosinophilic or both does not hold the Kinetoscope is eosinophilic. sent2: the fact that either the microfiche does not pale or it is eosinophilic or both is false if the fact that the chapman is Bolivian is not incorrect. sent3: if something is a basilisk the fact that it either is a berth or is not a commissioner or both is incorrect. sent4: something that is not a kind of a nothings is both not a consomme and retinal. sent5: the reeve is a nothings. sent6: the chapman is a kind of a Bolivian. sent7: if that something does not refrigerate Solandra but it is expiratory does not hold then it is not a nothings. sent8: if the reeve is not a Rubinstein the fact that the aureole does not refrigerate Solandra and is expiratory is not true. sent9: if the reeve is a kind of a nothings the opal is expiratory. sent10: the reeve is not a Rubinstein if the fact that the opal is a kind of a berth or it is not a commissioner or both is wrong. sent11: that the fact that the aureole is not a consomme but it is retinal is true is wrong if the opal is expiratory.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{L}{e} v {K}{e}) -> {K}{d} sent2: {M}{f} -> ¬(¬{L}{e} v {K}{e}) sent3: (x): {I}x -> ¬({G}x v ¬{H}x) sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}x & {D}x) sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {M}{f} sent7: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent8: ¬{F}{a} -> ¬(¬{E}{c} & {B}{c}) sent9: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent10: ¬({G}{b} v ¬{H}{b}) -> ¬{F}{a} sent11: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} & {D}{c})
|
[
"sent9 & sent5 -> int1: the opal is expiratory.; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the aureole is not a consomme but it is retinal.
|
(¬{C}{c} & {D}{c})
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: if the aureole is not a nothings then it is not a consomme but retinal.; sent7 -> int3: if that the aureole does not refrigerate Solandra and is expiratory is incorrect then it is not a nothings.; sent3 -> int4: that the opal does berth and/or is not a commissioner is not correct if it is a basilisk.; sent2 & sent6 -> int5: the fact that the microfiche either does not pale or is eosinophilic or both is incorrect.; sent1 & int5 -> int6: the Kinetoscope is eosinophilic.; int6 -> int7: something is eosinophilic.;"
] | 10 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the aureole is not a kind of a consomme but it is retinal is right does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the microfiche does not pale or it is eosinophilic or both does not hold the Kinetoscope is eosinophilic. sent2: the fact that either the microfiche does not pale or it is eosinophilic or both is false if the fact that the chapman is Bolivian is not incorrect. sent3: if something is a basilisk the fact that it either is a berth or is not a commissioner or both is incorrect. sent4: something that is not a kind of a nothings is both not a consomme and retinal. sent5: the reeve is a nothings. sent6: the chapman is a kind of a Bolivian. sent7: if that something does not refrigerate Solandra but it is expiratory does not hold then it is not a nothings. sent8: if the reeve is not a Rubinstein the fact that the aureole does not refrigerate Solandra and is expiratory is not true. sent9: if the reeve is a kind of a nothings the opal is expiratory. sent10: the reeve is not a Rubinstein if the fact that the opal is a kind of a berth or it is not a commissioner or both is wrong. sent11: that the fact that the aureole is not a consomme but it is retinal is true is wrong if the opal is expiratory. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent5 -> int1: the opal is expiratory.; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the myeloblast does not mantle Sagittariidae.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
sent1: the fact that that the minicar is not a maxi and/or it does not strive Biscutella is not right is not false. sent2: that the pinhole is not a kind of a federalist and/or it does not mantle Sagittariidae is incorrect. sent3: something is Levitical and it does mantle Sagittariidae if it is not a kind of a Islay. sent4: if the fact that the silk does not gurgle Scomber and/or it does gurgle impeachability is false then the fact that the myeloblast does not mantle Sagittariidae hold. sent5: if the silk does mantle Sagittariidae then that either it does not gurgle impeachability or it does not gurgle Scomber or both is incorrect. sent6: the silk is not yogistic. sent7: the sensitometer is a hypnotherapy if the silk does mantle Sagittariidae. sent8: if something is not Levitical then the fact that it is not a hypnotherapy and it is a Islay is wrong. sent9: the silk is a hypnotherapy. sent10: the silk does gurgle impeachability if the fact that it is a hypnotherapy is correct. sent11: the silk does gurgle impeachability. sent12: the myeloblast does not mantle Sagittariidae if that the fact that the silk does not gurgle Scomber and/or it does not gurgle impeachability is not true hold. sent13: the myeloblast is a kind of a hypnotherapy.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{BF}{co} v ¬{DJ}{co}) sent2: ¬(¬{HL}{ge} v ¬{B}{ge}) sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & {B}x) sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{a} v ¬{AA}{a}) sent6: ¬{FF}{a} sent7: {B}{a} -> {A}{gc} sent8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {D}x) sent9: {A}{a} sent10: {A}{a} -> {AB}{a} sent11: {AB}{a} sent12: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: {A}{b}
|
[] |
[] |
the sensitometer is a kind of a hypnotherapy.
|
{A}{gc}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: if the silk is not a Islay then it is Levitical and it mantles Sagittariidae.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the myeloblast does not mantle Sagittariidae. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that the minicar is not a maxi and/or it does not strive Biscutella is not right is not false. sent2: that the pinhole is not a kind of a federalist and/or it does not mantle Sagittariidae is incorrect. sent3: something is Levitical and it does mantle Sagittariidae if it is not a kind of a Islay. sent4: if the fact that the silk does not gurgle Scomber and/or it does gurgle impeachability is false then the fact that the myeloblast does not mantle Sagittariidae hold. sent5: if the silk does mantle Sagittariidae then that either it does not gurgle impeachability or it does not gurgle Scomber or both is incorrect. sent6: the silk is not yogistic. sent7: the sensitometer is a hypnotherapy if the silk does mantle Sagittariidae. sent8: if something is not Levitical then the fact that it is not a hypnotherapy and it is a Islay is wrong. sent9: the silk is a hypnotherapy. sent10: the silk does gurgle impeachability if the fact that it is a hypnotherapy is correct. sent11: the silk does gurgle impeachability. sent12: the myeloblast does not mantle Sagittariidae if that the fact that the silk does not gurgle Scomber and/or it does not gurgle impeachability is not true hold. sent13: the myeloblast is a kind of a hypnotherapy. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the seigneur does gurgle symbolism but it is not excretory.
|
({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c})
|
sent1: either the nun is multinucleate or it is a congee or both if there exists something such that it is a Atherinidae. sent2: something is a kind of a Atherinidae. sent3: if the seigneur does not gurgle symbolism the servo is not excretory. sent4: if the fact that the nun does not gurgle symbolism is not incorrect that the seigneur does gurgle symbolism and it is excretory is not correct. sent5: if the kanamycin is not a cuprite that the guanine is not a Shona is correct. sent6: the servo is not a Shona. sent7: if the servo does not gurgle symbolism then that the seigneur gurgle symbolism and is not Shona is false. sent8: that the servo is a kind of a Shona but it does not mantle nun is false. sent9: something is dactylic if it is multinucleate. sent10: that the seigneur gurgles symbolism but it is not excretory is not correct if the nun does not gurgles symbolism. sent11: if the servo is not a Shona then the nun does not gurgle symbolism. sent12: something is dactylic if it is a congee. sent13: if there is something such that it is dactylic the servo does not mantle herbivore but it does strive yellowtail. sent14: that if the servo is not excretory then the seigneur is not a Shona is correct. sent15: the fact that the phenobarbital is non-excretory is not incorrect. sent16: the fact that the seigneur does gurgle symbolism and is excretory is false. sent17: the kanamycin is not a kind of a cuprite.
|
sent1: (x): {J}x -> ({G}{b} v {H}{b}) sent2: (Ex): {J}x sent3: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬{D}{a} sent4: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({B}{c} & {D}{c}) sent5: ¬{I}{e} -> ¬{A}{d} sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({B}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) sent8: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{FA}{a}) sent9: (x): {G}x -> {F}x sent10: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent12: (x): {H}x -> {F}x sent13: (x): {F}x -> (¬{C}{a} & {E}{a}) sent14: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬{A}{c} sent15: ¬{D}{gi} sent16: ¬({B}{c} & {D}{c}) sent17: ¬{I}{e}
|
[
"sent11 & sent6 -> int1: the nun does not gurgle symbolism.; sent10 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent6 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent10 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the seigneur does gurgle symbolism but it is not excretory.
|
({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c})
|
[
"sent5 & sent17 -> int2: the guanine is not a kind of a Shona.; int2 -> int3: something is non-Shona.; sent2 & sent1 -> int4: the nun either is multinucleate or does congee or both.; sent9 -> int5: the nun is dactylic if it is multinucleate.; sent12 -> int6: the nun is dactylic if the fact that it congees is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 & int6 -> int7: the nun is dactylic.; int7 -> int8: there are dactylic things.; int8 & sent13 -> int9: the servo does not mantle herbivore but it does strive yellowtail.; int9 -> int10: something does not mantle herbivore and does strive yellowtail.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the seigneur does gurgle symbolism but it is not excretory. ; $context$ = sent1: either the nun is multinucleate or it is a congee or both if there exists something such that it is a Atherinidae. sent2: something is a kind of a Atherinidae. sent3: if the seigneur does not gurgle symbolism the servo is not excretory. sent4: if the fact that the nun does not gurgle symbolism is not incorrect that the seigneur does gurgle symbolism and it is excretory is not correct. sent5: if the kanamycin is not a cuprite that the guanine is not a Shona is correct. sent6: the servo is not a Shona. sent7: if the servo does not gurgle symbolism then that the seigneur gurgle symbolism and is not Shona is false. sent8: that the servo is a kind of a Shona but it does not mantle nun is false. sent9: something is dactylic if it is multinucleate. sent10: that the seigneur gurgles symbolism but it is not excretory is not correct if the nun does not gurgles symbolism. sent11: if the servo is not a Shona then the nun does not gurgle symbolism. sent12: something is dactylic if it is a congee. sent13: if there is something such that it is dactylic the servo does not mantle herbivore but it does strive yellowtail. sent14: that if the servo is not excretory then the seigneur is not a Shona is correct. sent15: the fact that the phenobarbital is non-excretory is not incorrect. sent16: the fact that the seigneur does gurgle symbolism and is excretory is false. sent17: the kanamycin is not a kind of a cuprite. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent6 -> int1: the nun does not gurgle symbolism.; sent10 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the strawboard mantles Wyler and is not annalistic is not correct.
|
¬({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b})
|
sent1: if the strawboard refrigerates relief that the relief mantles dissociation but it does not mantle Wyler is incorrect. sent2: if the strawboard does mantle dissociation then that the relief is not non-annalistic and not microelectronic is not right. sent3: if the strawboard does mantle dissociation it does mantle Wyler. sent4: the relief is a kind of a spring and does mantle gigabit. sent5: the relief refrigerates relief and mantles dissociation. sent6: that the strawboard does mantle Wyler but it is not annalistic is not true if the relief is microelectronic. sent7: if something refrigerates relief then it is microelectronic.
|
sent1: {A}{b} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent2: {B}{b} -> ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent3: {B}{b} -> {E}{b} sent4: ({AG}{a} & {FF}{a}) sent5: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: {C}{a} -> ¬({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent7: (x): {A}x -> {C}x
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the relief does refrigerate relief.; sent7 -> int2: if the relief does refrigerate relief then it is microelectronic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the relief is microelectronic.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent7 -> int2: {A}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a}; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the strawboard mantles Wyler and is not annalistic is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the strawboard refrigerates relief that the relief mantles dissociation but it does not mantle Wyler is incorrect. sent2: if the strawboard does mantle dissociation then that the relief is not non-annalistic and not microelectronic is not right. sent3: if the strawboard does mantle dissociation it does mantle Wyler. sent4: the relief is a kind of a spring and does mantle gigabit. sent5: the relief refrigerates relief and mantles dissociation. sent6: that the strawboard does mantle Wyler but it is not annalistic is not true if the relief is microelectronic. sent7: if something refrigerates relief then it is microelectronic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the relief does refrigerate relief.; sent7 -> int2: if the relief does refrigerate relief then it is microelectronic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the relief is microelectronic.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Soddy is not a cyanide but it is seminal.
|
(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b})
|
sent1: the stainless is not a kind of a cyanide and is a capillarity if the Soddy is not a Cadmus. sent2: the fact that the native does not prove but it is a Atherinidae does not hold if something does not mantle subunit. sent3: the Soddy is seminal if the stainless is not a Cadmus. sent4: if the stainless is not a Cadmus the Soddy does not gurgle gnat and is seminal. sent5: the Soddy is not a kind of a cyanide but it is seminal if the stainless is not a Cadmus. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not prove and is a Atherinidae is not right the jird is not a kind of a Atherinidae. sent7: something is a capitalization if that it does prove and it is not a capitalization is not true. sent8: something does not mantle subunit. sent9: that the stainless does prove but it is not a capitalization is wrong. sent10: the fact that the Soddy is seminal is right. sent11: the Soddy is not a capillarity and is seminal. sent12: the gnat does not mantle West but it does refrigerate monotony. sent13: that something is not a cyanide but seminal is wrong if it is a Cadmus. sent14: if the stainless is not a capillarity then it is not a Cadmus. sent15: if that the fact that something is a kind of non-nasopharyngeal thing that is incalculable is not incorrect is not right then it is not seminal. sent16: the cowpie is not a capitalization if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Atherinidae. sent17: the fact that the stainless is a kind of a capillarity and it gurgles gnat does not hold. sent18: if the fact that the stainless does gurgle gnat and it is seminal is not correct it is not a kind of a cyanide. sent19: the fact that the sapote does not gurgle gnat if there exists something such that either it is a cyanide or it is not a Cadmus or both hold. sent20: the stainless is not a cyanide but it is a capillarity if the Soddy does not gurgle gnat. sent21: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a capitalization then that the stainless is nasopharyngeal and incalculable is incorrect. sent22: the fact that something is not nasopharyngeal but it is incalculable is incorrect if that it is a capitalization is not wrong.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬(¬{H}{e} & {G}{e}) sent3: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent4: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{AB}{b} & {C}{b}) sent5: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{G}{d} sent7: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{F}x) -> {F}x sent8: (Ex): ¬{I}x sent9: ¬({H}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) sent10: {C}{b} sent11: (¬{AA}{b} & {C}{b}) sent12: (¬{BO}{ik} & {IC}{ik}) sent13: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) sent14: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent15: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent16: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}{c} sent17: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent18: ¬({AB}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent19: (x): ({A}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{AB}{s} sent20: ¬{AB}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent21: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({E}{a} & {D}{a}) sent22: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x)
|
[] |
[] |
the fact that the Soddy is not a kind of a cyanide but it is seminal does not hold.
|
¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b})
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: that the Soddy is both not a cyanide and seminal is not true if it is a Cadmus.; sent8 & sent2 -> int2: that the native does not prove and is a Atherinidae is incorrect.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that that it does not prove and is a Atherinidae does not hold.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the jird is not a Atherinidae.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it is not a Atherinidae.; int5 & sent16 -> int6: the cowpie is not a capitalization.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it is not a kind of a capitalization.; int7 & sent21 -> int8: that the stainless is nasopharyngeal and it is incalculable is not correct.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that that it is nasopharyngeal and incalculable is incorrect.;"
] | 10 | 2 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Soddy is not a cyanide but it is seminal. ; $context$ = sent1: the stainless is not a kind of a cyanide and is a capillarity if the Soddy is not a Cadmus. sent2: the fact that the native does not prove but it is a Atherinidae does not hold if something does not mantle subunit. sent3: the Soddy is seminal if the stainless is not a Cadmus. sent4: if the stainless is not a Cadmus the Soddy does not gurgle gnat and is seminal. sent5: the Soddy is not a kind of a cyanide but it is seminal if the stainless is not a Cadmus. sent6: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not prove and is a Atherinidae is not right the jird is not a kind of a Atherinidae. sent7: something is a capitalization if that it does prove and it is not a capitalization is not true. sent8: something does not mantle subunit. sent9: that the stainless does prove but it is not a capitalization is wrong. sent10: the fact that the Soddy is seminal is right. sent11: the Soddy is not a capillarity and is seminal. sent12: the gnat does not mantle West but it does refrigerate monotony. sent13: that something is not a cyanide but seminal is wrong if it is a Cadmus. sent14: if the stainless is not a capillarity then it is not a Cadmus. sent15: if that the fact that something is a kind of non-nasopharyngeal thing that is incalculable is not incorrect is not right then it is not seminal. sent16: the cowpie is not a capitalization if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Atherinidae. sent17: the fact that the stainless is a kind of a capillarity and it gurgles gnat does not hold. sent18: if the fact that the stainless does gurgle gnat and it is seminal is not correct it is not a kind of a cyanide. sent19: the fact that the sapote does not gurgle gnat if there exists something such that either it is a cyanide or it is not a Cadmus or both hold. sent20: the stainless is not a cyanide but it is a capillarity if the Soddy does not gurgle gnat. sent21: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a capitalization then that the stainless is nasopharyngeal and incalculable is incorrect. sent22: the fact that something is not nasopharyngeal but it is incalculable is incorrect if that it is a capitalization is not wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the dressmaker does congee cistern.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: something does not rubric muzzler and is not armorial if it is a cardiograph. sent2: the dressmaker does rubric muzzler and congees cistern. sent3: if the fact that something congees cistern but it does not smooch is false then it does not congees cistern.
|
sent1: (x): {E}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{D}x) sent2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the dressmaker does not congee cistern.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: if the fact that the dressmaker congees cistern and does not smooch is incorrect then it does not congees cistern.; sent1 -> int2: if the cistern is a cardiograph it does not rubric muzzler and is not armorial.;"
] | 8 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the dressmaker does congee cistern. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not rubric muzzler and is not armorial if it is a cardiograph. sent2: the dressmaker does rubric muzzler and congees cistern. sent3: if the fact that something congees cistern but it does not smooch is false then it does not congees cistern. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the readmission does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: if the torturing occurs then the fact that the sailing does not occur and the myalgicness does not occur is incorrect. sent2: the farming does not occur but the turkey happens. sent3: the puffing does not occur. sent4: if the fact that the sailing does not occur and the myalgicness does not occur is not correct then that the sailing occurs is not false. sent5: if the puffing does not occur the fact that the Chianness occurs and/or the euchre does not occur does not hold. sent6: if that both the nonfissileness and the depending occurs does not hold the depending does not occur. sent7: the monauralness does not occur if the fact that the dispensableness and the Nigerian occurs does not hold. sent8: if the ungregariousness happens then the congeeing muskellunge does not occur and the rubriccing gook does not occur. sent9: that the decamping gorse occurs and/or the chapter is brought about by the non-monauralness. sent10: if the fact that the depending does not occur is not incorrect then the fact that both the dispensableness and the Nigerian happens is not true. sent11: that the puff does not occur is right if the waterloo occurs but the emptying does not occur. sent12: that the fact that both the nonfissileness and the depending occurs is not false does not hold if the sailing happens. sent13: that that the readmission does not occur and the porterage does not occur is not correct if the extraterrestrial happens hold. sent14: the noncausativeness does not occur if not the farming but the turkey occurs. sent15: that not the disagreeableness but the sprinkle happens brings about that the readmission does not occur. sent16: the reception does not occur if the noncausativeness does not occur. sent17: the disagreeableness does not occur. sent18: the decamping Lavoisier does not occur. sent19: the torturing occurs if that the Chianness happens or the euchre does not occur or both is not true. sent20: that the waterloo and the non-emptyingness happens is triggered by that the rubriccing gook does not occur. sent21: that the reception does not occur causes that both the ungregariousness and the juicelessness happens.
|
sent1: {O} -> ¬(¬{M} & ¬{N}) sent2: (¬{AG} & {AF}) sent3: ¬{R} sent4: ¬(¬{M} & ¬{N}) -> {M} sent5: ¬{R} -> ¬({P} v ¬{Q}) sent6: ¬(¬{L} & {K}) -> ¬{K} sent7: ¬({I} & {J}) -> ¬{H} sent8: {AB} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{U}) sent9: ¬{H} -> ({F} v {G}) sent10: ¬{K} -> ¬({I} & {J}) sent11: ({T} & ¬{S}) -> ¬{R} sent12: {M} -> ¬(¬{L} & {K}) sent13: {E} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent14: (¬{AG} & {AF}) -> ¬{AE} sent15: (¬{A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent16: ¬{AE} -> ¬{AD} sent17: ¬{A} sent18: ¬{HB} sent19: ¬({P} v ¬{Q}) -> {O} sent20: ¬{U} -> ({T} & ¬{S}) sent21: ¬{AD} -> ({AB} & {AC})
|
[] |
[] |
the tarriance happens.
|
{IJ}
|
[
"sent14 & sent2 -> int1: the noncausativeness does not occur.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the reception does not occur.; sent21 & int2 -> int3: the ungregariousness and the juicelessness occurs.; int3 -> int4: the ungregariousness happens.; sent8 & int4 -> int5: the congeeing muskellunge does not occur and the rubriccing gook does not occur.; int5 -> int6: that the rubriccing gook does not occur is not false.; sent20 & int6 -> int7: the waterloo and the non-emptyingness happens.; sent11 & int7 -> int8: the puffing does not occur.; sent5 & int8 -> int9: that the Chianness occurs and/or the euchre does not occur is not correct.; sent19 & int9 -> int10: the torturing occurs.; sent1 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the sailing does not occur and the myalgicness does not occur does not hold.; sent4 & int11 -> int12: the sailing happens.; sent12 & int12 -> int13: that not the fissileness but the depending occurs is incorrect.; sent6 & int13 -> int14: the depending does not occur.; sent10 & int14 -> int15: the fact that both the dispensableness and the Nigerian occurs is false.; sent7 & int15 -> int16: the monauralness does not occur.; sent9 & int16 -> int17: either the decamping gorse occurs or the chapter happens or both.;"
] | 22 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the readmission does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the torturing occurs then the fact that the sailing does not occur and the myalgicness does not occur is incorrect. sent2: the farming does not occur but the turkey happens. sent3: the puffing does not occur. sent4: if the fact that the sailing does not occur and the myalgicness does not occur is not correct then that the sailing occurs is not false. sent5: if the puffing does not occur the fact that the Chianness occurs and/or the euchre does not occur does not hold. sent6: if that both the nonfissileness and the depending occurs does not hold the depending does not occur. sent7: the monauralness does not occur if the fact that the dispensableness and the Nigerian occurs does not hold. sent8: if the ungregariousness happens then the congeeing muskellunge does not occur and the rubriccing gook does not occur. sent9: that the decamping gorse occurs and/or the chapter is brought about by the non-monauralness. sent10: if the fact that the depending does not occur is not incorrect then the fact that both the dispensableness and the Nigerian happens is not true. sent11: that the puff does not occur is right if the waterloo occurs but the emptying does not occur. sent12: that the fact that both the nonfissileness and the depending occurs is not false does not hold if the sailing happens. sent13: that that the readmission does not occur and the porterage does not occur is not correct if the extraterrestrial happens hold. sent14: the noncausativeness does not occur if not the farming but the turkey occurs. sent15: that not the disagreeableness but the sprinkle happens brings about that the readmission does not occur. sent16: the reception does not occur if the noncausativeness does not occur. sent17: the disagreeableness does not occur. sent18: the decamping Lavoisier does not occur. sent19: the torturing occurs if that the Chianness happens or the euchre does not occur or both is not true. sent20: that the waterloo and the non-emptyingness happens is triggered by that the rubriccing gook does not occur. sent21: that the reception does not occur causes that both the ungregariousness and the juicelessness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the brickkiln is not a displacement.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: the brickkiln does rubric Northrop and it is a kind of a displacement. sent2: that the damsel is anhydrous and it does rubric Northrop hold. sent3: if the maildrop is not a zeolite it is a reporter and it rubrics Northrop. sent4: that the stole is not a reporter but it is a zeolite is wrong. sent5: the fact that the brickkiln does rubric Northrop hold. sent6: the brickkiln is not a displacement if the falsie is a kind of non-cinematic a displacement. sent7: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a trudger and is a zeolite is incorrect. sent8: something is a kind of non-cinematic thing that is a displacement if it does not rubric Northrop.
|
sent1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: ({GT}{eh} & {A}{eh}) sent3: ¬{F}{db} -> ({E}{db} & {A}{db}) sent4: ¬(¬{E}{d} & {F}{d}) sent5: {A}{a} sent6: (¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: (Ex): ¬({H}x & {F}x) sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}x & {B}x)
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the brickkiln is not a kind of a displacement.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: if the fact that the falsie does not rubric Northrop hold it is not cinematic and it is a displacement.; sent4 -> int2: there is something such that that it is not a reporter and it is a zeolite is not right.;"
] | 7 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the brickkiln is not a displacement. ; $context$ = sent1: the brickkiln does rubric Northrop and it is a kind of a displacement. sent2: that the damsel is anhydrous and it does rubric Northrop hold. sent3: if the maildrop is not a zeolite it is a reporter and it rubrics Northrop. sent4: that the stole is not a reporter but it is a zeolite is wrong. sent5: the fact that the brickkiln does rubric Northrop hold. sent6: the brickkiln is not a displacement if the falsie is a kind of non-cinematic a displacement. sent7: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a trudger and is a zeolite is incorrect. sent8: something is a kind of non-cinematic thing that is a displacement if it does not rubric Northrop. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the planting does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: not the switching but the uniform happens if the boundedness happens. sent2: the switching happens. sent3: that the Azerbaijani happens and the switching occurs triggers that the planting does not occur. sent4: the Azerbaijaniness occurs. sent5: the bounding occurs but the censoring does not occur if the decamping transgressor does not occur. sent6: that both the switching and the planting occurs is incorrect if the uniformness does not occur. sent7: that the decamping pion does not occur yields that not the decamping transgressor but the decamping Aesculapius happens. sent8: if the switching does not occur the fact that both the Azerbaijani and the planting happens hold. sent9: the congeeing notation does not occur.
|
sent1: {E} -> (¬{B} & {D}) sent2: {B} sent3: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent4: {A} sent5: ¬{G} -> ({E} & ¬{F}) sent6: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent7: ¬{I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) sent8: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) sent9: ¬{AI}
|
[
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the Azerbaijaniness and the switch occurs.; int1 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the planting occurs.
|
{C}
|
[] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the planting does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: not the switching but the uniform happens if the boundedness happens. sent2: the switching happens. sent3: that the Azerbaijani happens and the switching occurs triggers that the planting does not occur. sent4: the Azerbaijaniness occurs. sent5: the bounding occurs but the censoring does not occur if the decamping transgressor does not occur. sent6: that both the switching and the planting occurs is incorrect if the uniformness does not occur. sent7: that the decamping pion does not occur yields that not the decamping transgressor but the decamping Aesculapius happens. sent8: if the switching does not occur the fact that both the Azerbaijani and the planting happens hold. sent9: the congeeing notation does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the Azerbaijaniness and the switch occurs.; int1 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fruition does not occur but the decamping republic occurs.
|
(¬{C} & {D})
|
sent1: if that the gunfight does not occur but the grassiness occurs is not correct the unjustness happens. sent2: if that the bicapsularness does not occur and the decamping republic does not occur does not hold the decamping republic happens. sent3: the fact that the bicapsularness does not occur and the decamping republic does not occur is not true if the disclaimer occurs. sent4: the fact that the gunfight does not occur and the grassiness happens does not hold. sent5: both the disclaimer and the whistling occurs.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent2: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{D}) -> {D} sent3: {E} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{D}) sent4: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent5: ({E} & {G})
|
[
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the unjustness occurs.; int1 -> int2: the decamping novelist occurs and/or the unjustness happens.; sent5 -> int3: the disclaimer occurs.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: that the bicapsularness does not occur and the decamping republic does not occur is not right.; sent2 & int4 -> int5: the decamping republic happens.;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: {B}; int1 -> int2: ({A} v {B}); sent5 -> int3: {E}; sent3 & int3 -> int4: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{D}); sent2 & int4 -> int5: {D};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fruition does not occur but the decamping republic occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the gunfight does not occur but the grassiness occurs is not correct the unjustness happens. sent2: if that the bicapsularness does not occur and the decamping republic does not occur does not hold the decamping republic happens. sent3: the fact that the bicapsularness does not occur and the decamping republic does not occur is not true if the disclaimer occurs. sent4: the fact that the gunfight does not occur and the grassiness happens does not hold. sent5: both the disclaimer and the whistling occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the unjustness occurs.; int1 -> int2: the decamping novelist occurs and/or the unjustness happens.; sent5 -> int3: the disclaimer occurs.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: that the bicapsularness does not occur and the decamping republic does not occur is not right.; sent2 & int4 -> int5: the decamping republic happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the chondrichthian does congee stoma is not false.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: the tetracycline discountenances caucus. sent2: the songster hands and/or it wedges if that the auto-mechanic is not algoid is not incorrect. sent3: the auto-mechanic is non-algoid if the tetracycline is a madnep and discountenances caucus. sent4: everything does not recalcitrate and is a madnep. sent5: if the sluggard is a volution then the chondrichthian congees stoma. sent6: something is a lymphangiography if it is not a hands. sent7: something is not extralinguistic. sent8: something is extralinguistic if it kindles. sent9: that the chondrichthian is not a kind of a volution and does not kindle is incorrect if the sluggard is a lymphangiography. sent10: the chondrichthian does kindle if the sluggard does congee stoma. sent11: if the songster is either a hands or a wedge or both then the fact that the sluggard is not a hands is not incorrect. sent12: the sluggard does decamp unperceptiveness and it is branchy. sent13: the menhaden rubrics Sakharov and is a charley-horse. sent14: the fact that there is something such that it is not a volution is not incorrect. sent15: something is not a matronymic. sent16: the oxide is a volution. sent17: if the fact that something is not a volution and it does not kindle is false then it kindle.
|
sent1: {I}{e} sent2: ¬{H}{d} -> ({F}{c} v {G}{c}) sent3: ({J}{e} & {I}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d} sent4: (x): (¬{K}x & {J}x) sent5: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent6: (x): ¬{F}x -> {E}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent8: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent9: {E}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent10: {D}{a} -> {B}{b} sent11: ({F}{c} v {G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{a} sent12: ({EL}{a} & {EP}{a}) sent13: ({AL}{aq} & {HK}{aq}) sent14: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent15: (Ex): ¬{BE}x sent16: {C}{dt} sent17: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {B}x
|
[] |
[] |
the chondrichthian does not congee stoma.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: the chondrichthian is extralinguistic if it kindles.; sent6 -> int2: if the sluggard does not hand then it is a kind of a lymphangiography.; sent4 -> int3: the neoprene does not recalcitrate and is a kind of a madnep.; int3 -> int4: the neoprene is a madnep.; int4 -> int5: everything is a madnep.; int5 -> int6: the fact that the tetracycline is a kind of a madnep is correct.; sent1 & int6 -> int7: the tetracycline is a madnep and discountenances caucus.; sent3 & int7 -> int8: the auto-mechanic is not algoid.; sent2 & int8 -> int9: the songster does hand or it is a kind of a wedge or both.; sent11 & int9 -> int10: the sluggard is not a hands.; int2 & int10 -> int11: the sluggard is a kind of a lymphangiography.; int11 & sent9 -> int12: that the chondrichthian is not a volution and it does not kindle is not correct.; sent17 -> int13: the chondrichthian does kindle if the fact that it is not a volution and does not kindle is not right.; int12 & int13 -> int14: the chondrichthian kindles.; int1 & int14 -> int15: the chondrichthian is extralinguistic.;"
] | 13 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the chondrichthian does congee stoma is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: the tetracycline discountenances caucus. sent2: the songster hands and/or it wedges if that the auto-mechanic is not algoid is not incorrect. sent3: the auto-mechanic is non-algoid if the tetracycline is a madnep and discountenances caucus. sent4: everything does not recalcitrate and is a madnep. sent5: if the sluggard is a volution then the chondrichthian congees stoma. sent6: something is a lymphangiography if it is not a hands. sent7: something is not extralinguistic. sent8: something is extralinguistic if it kindles. sent9: that the chondrichthian is not a kind of a volution and does not kindle is incorrect if the sluggard is a lymphangiography. sent10: the chondrichthian does kindle if the sluggard does congee stoma. sent11: if the songster is either a hands or a wedge or both then the fact that the sluggard is not a hands is not incorrect. sent12: the sluggard does decamp unperceptiveness and it is branchy. sent13: the menhaden rubrics Sakharov and is a charley-horse. sent14: the fact that there is something such that it is not a volution is not incorrect. sent15: something is not a matronymic. sent16: the oxide is a volution. sent17: if the fact that something is not a volution and it does not kindle is false then it kindle. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the quarterstaff is non-Sumatran.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
sent1: if the lavatory is purposeful then it is Hispaniolan and does not rubric similarity. sent2: the quarterstaff is not a Sumatran if that either the lavatory is purposeful or it is not a Sumatran or both is wrong. sent3: the lavatory does not rubric similarity. sent4: if something does diverge then that it is a kind of a grillroom and it is not a Sumatran is not right. sent5: the cringle does not unwrap. sent6: that something congees dossal if it is pietistic is not false. sent7: either the dossal is pietistic or it does congee tomatillo or both if there exists something such that it does not unwrap. sent8: the fact that something is not a physicist but it is a kind of a grillroom is not correct if it diverges. sent9: the quarterstaff is a Sumatran if a Hispaniolan thing does not rubric similarity. sent10: the fact that either something is purposeful or it is not Sumatran or both is not true if it is not a grillroom. sent11: something is not a kind of a grillroom if the fact that it is not a physicist and it is a grillroom is not correct. sent12: the fact that something is an obsidian but it does not diverge is not correct if it congees dossal. sent13: the lavatory is purposeful. sent14: if the fact that something is a grillroom but it is not a Sumatran is wrong it is purposeful. sent15: there are Hispaniolan things. sent16: if the lavatory is purposeful then it does not rubric similarity. sent17: if that the dossal is a kind of an obsidian and does not diverge is false then the lavatory does diverge.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: ¬({A}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: ¬{AB}{a} sent4: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent5: ¬{J}{d} sent6: (x): {I}x -> {F}x sent7: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({I}{c} v {H}{c}) sent8: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {C}x) sent9: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}{b} sent10: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent12: (x): {F}x -> ¬({G}x & ¬{D}x) sent13: {A}{a} sent14: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x sent15: (Ex): {AA}x sent16: {A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} sent17: ¬({G}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {D}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent13 -> int1: the lavatory is Hispaniolan and does not rubric similarity.; int1 -> int2: something is Hispaniolan and does not rubric similarity.; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent13 -> int1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the quarterstaff is not Sumatran.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: the fact that the lavatory is purposeful and/or it is not a kind of a Sumatran is incorrect if it is not a grillroom.; sent11 -> int4: if that the lavatory is not a physicist but it is a grillroom is false then it is not a kind of a grillroom.; sent8 -> int5: the fact that the lavatory is not a physicist and is a grillroom is false if it diverges.; sent12 -> int6: that the dossal is a kind of an obsidian that does not diverge does not hold if it does congee dossal.; sent5 -> int7: there is something such that it does not unwrap.; int7 & sent7 -> int8: the dossal either is pietistic or does congee tomatillo or both.; sent6 -> int9: the dossal does congee dossal if it is pietistic.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the quarterstaff is non-Sumatran. ; $context$ = sent1: if the lavatory is purposeful then it is Hispaniolan and does not rubric similarity. sent2: the quarterstaff is not a Sumatran if that either the lavatory is purposeful or it is not a Sumatran or both is wrong. sent3: the lavatory does not rubric similarity. sent4: if something does diverge then that it is a kind of a grillroom and it is not a Sumatran is not right. sent5: the cringle does not unwrap. sent6: that something congees dossal if it is pietistic is not false. sent7: either the dossal is pietistic or it does congee tomatillo or both if there exists something such that it does not unwrap. sent8: the fact that something is not a physicist but it is a kind of a grillroom is not correct if it diverges. sent9: the quarterstaff is a Sumatran if a Hispaniolan thing does not rubric similarity. sent10: the fact that either something is purposeful or it is not Sumatran or both is not true if it is not a grillroom. sent11: something is not a kind of a grillroom if the fact that it is not a physicist and it is a grillroom is not correct. sent12: the fact that something is an obsidian but it does not diverge is not correct if it congees dossal. sent13: the lavatory is purposeful. sent14: if the fact that something is a grillroom but it is not a Sumatran is wrong it is purposeful. sent15: there are Hispaniolan things. sent16: if the lavatory is purposeful then it does not rubric similarity. sent17: if that the dossal is a kind of an obsidian and does not diverge is false then the lavatory does diverge. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent13 -> int1: the lavatory is Hispaniolan and does not rubric similarity.; int1 -> int2: something is Hispaniolan and does not rubric similarity.; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
either the kibitzer does not gallop or it is a heredity or both.
|
(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a})
|
sent1: if that the gunflint is both a stinkhorn and penitent is not correct then the kibitzer is imperialistic. sent2: the kibitzer is a gallop and/or it is a heredity. sent3: the fact that the biocatalyst is not a botanical and/or is a kind of an etcetera does not hold. sent4: the kibitzer is not imperialistic if that it either does not gallop or is a heredity or both is incorrect. sent5: that the gunflint is a stinkhorn but not impenitent is false. sent6: that the kibitzer does not gallop and/or it is a kind of a stinkhorn does not hold. sent7: the kibitzer does gallop. sent8: the fact that the gunflint is impenitent and it is a heredity does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent2: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent3: ¬(¬{FB}{is} v {IA}{is}) sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {C}{a}) sent7: {AA}{a} sent8: ¬({A}{b} & {AB}{b})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the kibitzer does not gallop and/or it is a heredity is wrong.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the kibitzer is not imperialistic.; sent1 & sent5 -> int2: the kibitzer is imperialistic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); sent4 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent1 & sent5 -> int2: {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = either the kibitzer does not gallop or it is a heredity or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the gunflint is both a stinkhorn and penitent is not correct then the kibitzer is imperialistic. sent2: the kibitzer is a gallop and/or it is a heredity. sent3: the fact that the biocatalyst is not a botanical and/or is a kind of an etcetera does not hold. sent4: the kibitzer is not imperialistic if that it either does not gallop or is a heredity or both is incorrect. sent5: that the gunflint is a stinkhorn but not impenitent is false. sent6: that the kibitzer does not gallop and/or it is a kind of a stinkhorn does not hold. sent7: the kibitzer does gallop. sent8: the fact that the gunflint is impenitent and it is a heredity does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the kibitzer does not gallop and/or it is a heredity is wrong.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the kibitzer is not imperialistic.; sent1 & sent5 -> int2: the kibitzer is imperialistic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bib-and-tucker rubrics midplane.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the rifampin does not rubric leftism. sent2: something is a Fothergilla and does not rubric leftism if the fact that it does not rubric invigilation hold. sent3: the fact that if the bib-and-tucker is the Fothergilla and it does rubric leftism then the bib-and-tucker does not rubric midplane is right. sent4: The leftism rubrics bib-and-tucker. sent5: the bib-and-tucker is a Fothergilla. sent6: the bib-and-tucker rubrics leftism. sent7: the bib-and-tucker is a Disney. sent8: the shoe-shop rubrics midplane and is Linnaean if that the bib-and-tucker is not a Fothergilla is true.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{bq} sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent4: {AA}{aa} sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {B}{a} sent7: {HA}{a} sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ({C}{hf} & {JJ}{hf})
|
[
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the bib-and-tucker is a kind of a Fothergilla that rubrics leftism.; int1 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the shoe-shop rubrics midplane and it is Linnaean.
|
({C}{hf} & {JJ}{hf})
|
[] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bib-and-tucker rubrics midplane. ; $context$ = sent1: the rifampin does not rubric leftism. sent2: something is a Fothergilla and does not rubric leftism if the fact that it does not rubric invigilation hold. sent3: the fact that if the bib-and-tucker is the Fothergilla and it does rubric leftism then the bib-and-tucker does not rubric midplane is right. sent4: The leftism rubrics bib-and-tucker. sent5: the bib-and-tucker is a Fothergilla. sent6: the bib-and-tucker rubrics leftism. sent7: the bib-and-tucker is a Disney. sent8: the shoe-shop rubrics midplane and is Linnaean if that the bib-and-tucker is not a Fothergilla is true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the bib-and-tucker is a kind of a Fothergilla that rubrics leftism.; int1 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Walapai is not passionless.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: if that something is a kind of a presidio is true it is not a Mongol. sent2: if the radiance is a kind of oblate thing that is not a kind of a changer the Walapai is a collagen. sent3: the radiance is passionless if the Walapai is both vagile and not a changer. sent4: if the Walapai is a changer it is vagile. sent5: something is not passionless if it is vagile. sent6: if the Walapai is passionless it is a kind of an oblate. sent7: if something does slack it does not decamp Entebbe. sent8: if the radiance is a collagen but it is not passionless the Walapai is vagile. sent9: that the radiance is not a changer is correct. sent10: the Walapai is a collagen if the radiance is a changer and is not passionless. sent11: the chiropodist is not a kind of an oblate. sent12: if the Christ's-thorn is apoplectic then it is not vagile. sent13: if the radiance is an oblate and is a changer then the fact that the Walapai is a collagen is not incorrect. sent14: the Walapai is commutable. sent15: something is not a changer if it is passionless. sent16: if the Walapai is vagile but it is not a changer the radiance is a collagen. sent17: if the radiance is a collagen it is not a kind of a changer. sent18: the Walapai is a changer if the radiance is passionless but it is not vagile. sent19: the radiance is an oblate that is not a changer.
|
sent1: (x): {EH}x -> ¬{DD}x sent2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent3: ({A}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent4: {AB}{b} -> {A}{b} sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x sent6: {C}{b} -> {AA}{b} sent7: (x): {IQ}x -> ¬{BR}x sent8: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {A}{b} sent9: ¬{AB}{a} sent10: ({AB}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent11: ¬{AA}{bq} sent12: {DO}{ed} -> ¬{A}{ed} sent13: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent14: {IS}{b} sent15: (x): {C}x -> ¬{AB}x sent16: ({A}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent17: {B}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} sent18: ({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {AB}{b} sent19: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[
"sent2 & sent19 -> int1: the Walapai is a collagen.; sent5 -> int2: if the Walapai is vagile then it is not passionless.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent19 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent5 -> int2: {A}{b} -> ¬{C}{b};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the Walapai is not passionless. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is a kind of a presidio is true it is not a Mongol. sent2: if the radiance is a kind of oblate thing that is not a kind of a changer the Walapai is a collagen. sent3: the radiance is passionless if the Walapai is both vagile and not a changer. sent4: if the Walapai is a changer it is vagile. sent5: something is not passionless if it is vagile. sent6: if the Walapai is passionless it is a kind of an oblate. sent7: if something does slack it does not decamp Entebbe. sent8: if the radiance is a collagen but it is not passionless the Walapai is vagile. sent9: that the radiance is not a changer is correct. sent10: the Walapai is a collagen if the radiance is a changer and is not passionless. sent11: the chiropodist is not a kind of an oblate. sent12: if the Christ's-thorn is apoplectic then it is not vagile. sent13: if the radiance is an oblate and is a changer then the fact that the Walapai is a collagen is not incorrect. sent14: the Walapai is commutable. sent15: something is not a changer if it is passionless. sent16: if the Walapai is vagile but it is not a changer the radiance is a collagen. sent17: if the radiance is a collagen it is not a kind of a changer. sent18: the Walapai is a changer if the radiance is passionless but it is not vagile. sent19: the radiance is an oblate that is not a changer. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent19 -> int1: the Walapai is a collagen.; sent5 -> int2: if the Walapai is vagile then it is not passionless.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the saccule does not adjoin hold.
|
¬{C}{aa}
|
sent1: the saccule is not non-canalicular and it is a pituitary. sent2: the saccule discountenances Avon. sent3: something adjoins if it is canalicular. sent4: that the trap is a kind of a pituitary is not wrong. sent5: the liverwurst does adjoin. sent6: the saccule is a bandleader and it discountenances radial.
|
sent1: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent2: {EM}{aa} sent3: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent4: {B}{de} sent5: {C}{fr} sent6: ({BQ}{aa} & {GK}{aa})
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the saccule adjoins if it is canalicular.; sent1 -> int2: the saccule is canalicular.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; sent1 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the saccule does not adjoin hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the saccule is not non-canalicular and it is a pituitary. sent2: the saccule discountenances Avon. sent3: something adjoins if it is canalicular. sent4: that the trap is a kind of a pituitary is not wrong. sent5: the liverwurst does adjoin. sent6: the saccule is a bandleader and it discountenances radial. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the saccule adjoins if it is canalicular.; sent1 -> int2: the saccule is canalicular.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if that it is non-factorial and it is a kind of a Benjamin is not right then it is not a capped.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: the internist does not rubric Numididae if the fact that it is a kind of a Benjamin is not incorrect. sent2: there exists something such that if that it is not an inference is correct that it is not visceral is true. sent3: there is something such that if that it is a ingrate and it is incredible is incorrect it does not congee squash. sent4: there exists something such that if that it is grammatical and it masks is incorrect then the fact that it is not an arbiter is not wrong. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not a Botrychium then it does not stock. sent6: there exists something such that if that it does not appreciate and is a kind of a purse is incorrect it is not a kind of a pierid. sent7: that there is something such that if it does not congee Deere then it is not a bisque hold. sent8: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a swiz and it is lower-class does not hold then it is autacoidal. sent9: the internist does not cap if the fact that it is both not factorial and a Benjamin is wrong. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of actinometric thing that does congee estivation is false then it is not a kind of an impressed. sent11: there is something such that if it is a kind of a agrapha it is not myopathic. sent12: there is something such that if it does not decamp stipule it is not a pyxis. sent13: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a DC and is a saponification does not hold then it is not confident. sent14: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not congee abruptness and it is phonetics is not correct then it does decamp livery. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not rubric spelling and is grammatical is wrong it is lower-class. sent16: there is something such that if it is not Burundi and it is virulent it is not irresistible. sent17: that there exists something such that if that it is baric and it is an ivy is not right it is not a deal is right. sent18: there exists something such that if the fact that it is marital and it is intelligent is false then it does not congee pottery. sent19: there exists something such that if that it is poor a phytotherapy does not hold it does not decamp internist. sent20: there exists something such that if it is not harsh it does not discountenance Lysander.
|
sent1: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{CP}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ¬{FM}x -> ¬{GD}x sent3: (Ex): ¬({BS}x & {EG}x) -> ¬{BJ}x sent4: (Ex): ¬({K}x & {FH}x) -> ¬{BE}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{AR}x -> ¬{DM}x sent6: (Ex): ¬(¬{AS}x & {FG}x) -> ¬{GH}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{EE}x -> ¬{U}x sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{EJ}x & {DO}x) -> {DJ}x sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: (Ex): ¬({BQ}x & {BL}x) -> ¬{EP}x sent11: (Ex): {CC}x -> ¬{DR}x sent12: (Ex): ¬{GN}x -> ¬{HM}x sent13: (Ex): ¬(¬{D}x & {AG}x) -> ¬{CT}x sent14: (Ex): ¬(¬{HQ}x & {HF}x) -> {DU}x sent15: (Ex): ¬(¬{ET}x & {K}x) -> {DO}x sent16: (Ex): (¬{GT}x & {FN}x) -> ¬{BI}x sent17: (Ex): ¬({ES}x & {BA}x) -> ¬{FA}x sent18: (Ex): ¬({JE}x & {EN}x) -> ¬{EC}x sent19: (Ex): ¬({GK}x & {DF}x) -> ¬{AI}x sent20: (Ex): ¬{EU}x -> ¬{CL}x
|
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if that it is non-factorial and it is a kind of a Benjamin is not right then it is not a capped. ; $context$ = sent1: the internist does not rubric Numididae if the fact that it is a kind of a Benjamin is not incorrect. sent2: there exists something such that if that it is not an inference is correct that it is not visceral is true. sent3: there is something such that if that it is a ingrate and it is incredible is incorrect it does not congee squash. sent4: there exists something such that if that it is grammatical and it masks is incorrect then the fact that it is not an arbiter is not wrong. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not a Botrychium then it does not stock. sent6: there exists something such that if that it does not appreciate and is a kind of a purse is incorrect it is not a kind of a pierid. sent7: that there is something such that if it does not congee Deere then it is not a bisque hold. sent8: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a swiz and it is lower-class does not hold then it is autacoidal. sent9: the internist does not cap if the fact that it is both not factorial and a Benjamin is wrong. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of actinometric thing that does congee estivation is false then it is not a kind of an impressed. sent11: there is something such that if it is a kind of a agrapha it is not myopathic. sent12: there is something such that if it does not decamp stipule it is not a pyxis. sent13: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a DC and is a saponification does not hold then it is not confident. sent14: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not congee abruptness and it is phonetics is not correct then it does decamp livery. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not rubric spelling and is grammatical is wrong it is lower-class. sent16: there is something such that if it is not Burundi and it is virulent it is not irresistible. sent17: that there exists something such that if that it is baric and it is an ivy is not right it is not a deal is right. sent18: there exists something such that if the fact that it is marital and it is intelligent is false then it does not congee pottery. sent19: there exists something such that if that it is poor a phytotherapy does not hold it does not decamp internist. sent20: there exists something such that if it is not harsh it does not discountenance Lysander. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the privateer does not rejoin.
|
¬{C}{a}
|
sent1: if something does congee sucker and it is a alkalimetry then it does not rejoin. sent2: that the privateer is a alkalimetry hold if it is a browntail. sent3: the fact that the privateer congees sucker is not incorrect if there is something such that the fact that it is a marlite that does not log is not correct. sent4: if there exists something such that it is not a marlite the privateer does congee sucker. sent5: the privateer is a kind of a browntail.
|
sent1: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent2: {D}{a} -> {B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {A}{a} sent5: {D}{a}
|
[
"sent2 & sent5 -> int1: the privateer is a alkalimetry.; sent1 -> int2: the privateer does not rejoin if it does congee sucker and is a alkalimetry.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent1 -> int2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the privateer does not rejoin. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does congee sucker and it is a alkalimetry then it does not rejoin. sent2: that the privateer is a alkalimetry hold if it is a browntail. sent3: the fact that the privateer congees sucker is not incorrect if there is something such that the fact that it is a marlite that does not log is not correct. sent4: if there exists something such that it is not a marlite the privateer does congee sucker. sent5: the privateer is a kind of a browntail. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent5 -> int1: the privateer is a alkalimetry.; sent1 -> int2: the privateer does not rejoin if it does congee sucker and is a alkalimetry.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the plum does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the decamping ragwort occurs.
|
sent1: {B}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ting does not occur and the decamping ragwort does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the decamping ragwort does not occur.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the ting does not occur and the decamping ragwort does not occur does not hold.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{A} & ¬{B}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent1 & int1 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the plum does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the decamping ragwort occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ting does not occur and the decamping ragwort does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the decamping ragwort does not occur.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the ting does not occur and the decamping ragwort does not occur does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if it does not indurate then that it is both a contest and nonsuppurative is false is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x))
|
sent1: if something does not indurate it is a contest that is nonsuppurative. sent2: that something is a contest and it is nonsuppurative does not hold if it does not indurate. sent3: the accompanist does unsaddle and it does congee sallow if it does not rubric blolly. sent4: that there exists something such that if it indurates that it is both a contest and nonsuppurative is not right is not incorrect. sent5: if something is a bored then the fact that it discountenances bola and it does congee Polyangium is not correct. sent6: the tuckahoe is a contest and nonsuppurative if that it does not indurate is not incorrect. sent7: if the fact that the tuckahoe does indurate hold then that it is a kind of a contest and is nonsuppurative is not right. sent8: there is something such that if it is not a discount the fact that it is Anglophilic and latinate is incorrect. sent9: there is something such that if it does rubric unexpectedness then that it is a mods and it does congee handspike does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not indurate then it does contest and is nonsuppurative. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a Stroheim then the fact that it is a kind of Anglophilic thing that does decamp blink is not right.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: ¬{IP}{b} -> ({GN}{b} & {AJ}{b}) sent4: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: (x): {EG}x -> ¬({BH}x & {N}x) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{AQ}x -> ¬({AT}x & {ED}x) sent9: (Ex): {DL}x -> ¬({DD}x & {FL}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: (Ex): {EL}x -> ¬({AT}x & {FR}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the fact that the tuckahoe does contest and is nonsuppurative is not correct if it does not indurate.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it does not indurate then that it is both a contest and nonsuppurative is false is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not indurate it is a contest that is nonsuppurative. sent2: that something is a contest and it is nonsuppurative does not hold if it does not indurate. sent3: the accompanist does unsaddle and it does congee sallow if it does not rubric blolly. sent4: that there exists something such that if it indurates that it is both a contest and nonsuppurative is not right is not incorrect. sent5: if something is a bored then the fact that it discountenances bola and it does congee Polyangium is not correct. sent6: the tuckahoe is a contest and nonsuppurative if that it does not indurate is not incorrect. sent7: if the fact that the tuckahoe does indurate hold then that it is a kind of a contest and is nonsuppurative is not right. sent8: there is something such that if it is not a discount the fact that it is Anglophilic and latinate is incorrect. sent9: there is something such that if it does rubric unexpectedness then that it is a mods and it does congee handspike does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not indurate then it does contest and is nonsuppurative. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a Stroheim then the fact that it is a kind of Anglophilic thing that does decamp blink is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the fact that the tuckahoe does contest and is nonsuppurative is not correct if it does not indurate.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the form is non-syllogistic and/or unreactive does not hold.
|
¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: if the allspice is a fuddy-duddy or is not a kind of a Ephesian or both then it is palmar. sent2: if something is a Ephesian then it is Chadian. sent3: the allspice is not palmar if that the form is not syllogistic and/or is not reactive does not hold. sent4: the allspice is a fuddy-duddy and/or is not a Ephesian.
|
sent1: ({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) -> {B}{b} sent2: (x): {A}x -> {EF}x sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: ({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the form is not syllogistic and/or it is not reactive does not hold.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the allspice is non-palmar.; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: the allspice is palmar.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); sent3 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Cataflam is a kind of a Chadian and/or it does not discountenance growl.
|
({EF}{gm} v ¬{DD}{gm})
|
[
"sent2 -> int4: if the Cataflam is Ephesian then it is Chadian.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the form is non-syllogistic and/or unreactive does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the allspice is a fuddy-duddy or is not a kind of a Ephesian or both then it is palmar. sent2: if something is a Ephesian then it is Chadian. sent3: the allspice is not palmar if that the form is not syllogistic and/or is not reactive does not hold. sent4: the allspice is a fuddy-duddy and/or is not a Ephesian. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the form is not syllogistic and/or it is not reactive does not hold.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the allspice is non-palmar.; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: the allspice is palmar.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the framing is a kind of a bilges that does exacerbate does not hold.
|
¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa})
|
sent1: everything does strand. sent2: the framing is both a bilges and a African. sent3: everything is a kind of a bilges and it does exacerbate. sent4: everything is both a teakettle and a hold. sent5: the mayfish does not canton if something is a kirpan. sent6: everything is psychoactive. sent7: the Taracahitian is a bilges. sent8: everything fags. sent9: everything does congee misfit.
|
sent1: (x): {IU}x sent2: ({A}{aa} & {DL}{aa}) sent3: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) sent4: (x): ({IA}x & {DP}x) sent5: (x): {E}x -> ¬{D}{b} sent6: (x): {AG}x sent7: {A}{p} sent8: (x): {BN}x sent9: (x): {IM}x
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the framing is a bilges and it does exacerbate does not hold.
|
¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa})
|
[] | 11 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the framing is a kind of a bilges that does exacerbate does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: everything does strand. sent2: the framing is both a bilges and a African. sent3: everything is a kind of a bilges and it does exacerbate. sent4: everything is both a teakettle and a hold. sent5: the mayfish does not canton if something is a kirpan. sent6: everything is psychoactive. sent7: the Taracahitian is a bilges. sent8: everything fags. sent9: everything does congee misfit. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if that it is a emasculation and does not patinate is incorrect it is a ruggedization.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: if the curette is not a kind of a emasculation then that it is a ruggedization hold. sent2: something is a ruggedization if it is not a emasculation.
|
sent1: ¬{AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {B}x
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if that it is a emasculation and does not patinate is incorrect it is a ruggedization. ; $context$ = sent1: if the curette is not a kind of a emasculation then that it is a ruggedization hold. sent2: something is a ruggedization if it is not a emasculation. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Galatian does not rubric scrambler.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: if there exists something such that it stresses then the purslane is not a scintillation and is a Sumerology. sent2: something does rubric scrambler if it is a kind of a pericardium. sent3: the nebuchadnezzar is a Romans and it does rubric citation. sent4: the fact that something is a kind of non-Jesuitical a Deere is not right if it does rubric citation. sent5: if something decamps Rallidae and rubrics scrambler the Galatian is not dramatic. sent6: something is not a kind of a Calypso. sent7: something is a pericardium and/or not a ligand if it is not a scintillation. sent8: the purslane does decamp Rallidae if that the nebuchadnezzar is non-Jesuitical thing that is a Deere does not hold. sent9: the cook is not a kind of a tinker. sent10: if there exists something such that it does not rubric scrambler the Galatian does not decamp Rallidae. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not decamp Rallidae the cook does not rubric scrambler. sent12: the Galatian does not rubric scrambler if there is something such that it does not decamp Rallidae. sent13: there is something such that it does decamp Rallidae. sent14: there exists something such that it is a stressed. sent15: the Galatian does not rubric citation. sent16: if something is not a ligand it does rubric scrambler. sent17: the Galatian is not a whoremaster. sent18: The Rallidae does not decamp cook.
|
sent1: (x): {J}x -> (¬{H}{b} & {I}{b}) sent2: (x): {F}x -> {B}x sent3: ({K}{c} & {E}{c}) sent4: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) sent5: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{IF}{a} sent6: (Ex): ¬{GU}x sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x v ¬{G}x) sent8: ¬(¬{D}{c} & {C}{c}) -> {A}{b} sent9: ¬{HP}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}{aa} sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent13: (Ex): {A}x sent14: (Ex): {J}x sent15: ¬{E}{a} sent16: (x): ¬{G}x -> {B}x sent17: ¬{CK}{a} sent18: ¬{AA}{ab}
|
[] |
[] |
the Galatian is not dramatic.
|
¬{IF}{a}
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the nebuchadnezzar does rubric citation then that it is not Jesuitical and it is a Deere is false.; sent3 -> int2: the nebuchadnezzar rubrics citation.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the nebuchadnezzar is a kind of non-Jesuitical a Deere is not true.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the purslane decamps Rallidae.; sent7 -> int5: if the purslane is not a scintillation then it is a kind of a pericardium or it is not a ligand or both.; sent14 & sent1 -> int6: the purslane is both not a scintillation and a Sumerology.; int6 -> int7: the fact that the purslane is not a scintillation is true.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the purslane is either a pericardium or not a ligand or both.; sent2 -> int9: if the purslane is a kind of a pericardium that it rubrics scrambler hold.; sent16 -> int10: if the purslane is not a ligand then it does rubric scrambler.; int8 & int9 & int10 -> int11: the purslane rubrics scrambler.; int4 & int11 -> int12: the purslane does decamp Rallidae and does rubric scrambler.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that it does decamp Rallidae and rubrics scrambler.; int13 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the Galatian does not rubric scrambler. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it stresses then the purslane is not a scintillation and is a Sumerology. sent2: something does rubric scrambler if it is a kind of a pericardium. sent3: the nebuchadnezzar is a Romans and it does rubric citation. sent4: the fact that something is a kind of non-Jesuitical a Deere is not right if it does rubric citation. sent5: if something decamps Rallidae and rubrics scrambler the Galatian is not dramatic. sent6: something is not a kind of a Calypso. sent7: something is a pericardium and/or not a ligand if it is not a scintillation. sent8: the purslane does decamp Rallidae if that the nebuchadnezzar is non-Jesuitical thing that is a Deere does not hold. sent9: the cook is not a kind of a tinker. sent10: if there exists something such that it does not rubric scrambler the Galatian does not decamp Rallidae. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not decamp Rallidae the cook does not rubric scrambler. sent12: the Galatian does not rubric scrambler if there is something such that it does not decamp Rallidae. sent13: there is something such that it does decamp Rallidae. sent14: there exists something such that it is a stressed. sent15: the Galatian does not rubric citation. sent16: if something is not a ligand it does rubric scrambler. sent17: the Galatian is not a whoremaster. sent18: The Rallidae does not decamp cook. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the vivarium is not a kind of a mime.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: if something is a caucus then it rubrics Shiraz and it does not congee paddlewheel. sent2: the vivarium is an estuary. sent3: the jacket congees paddlewheel. sent4: if the vivarium is histological it does mime. sent5: the vivarium does rubric ramontchi. sent6: the vivarium is not an internet and is not a kind of a dada. sent7: the shopping congees paddlewheel. sent8: the lettuce is not a Indonesian. sent9: the ramontchi is not a kind of a mime. sent10: the vivarium is a Indonesian if it is a kind of a mime. sent11: that the vivarium does not congee paddlewheel hold. sent12: the vivarium is not a pall and it does not decamp jacket. sent13: the buddleia is a Indonesian. sent14: the vivarium is not subordinate and it does not migrate. sent15: if the wingback rubrics Shiraz and does not congee paddlewheel the vivarium does not congee paddlewheel. sent16: the fact that if the bloom is not a kind of a caucus and is Rosicrucian the wingback is a caucus is not false. sent17: the wingback is a mime.
|
sent1: (x): {D}x -> ({E}x & ¬{C}x) sent2: {HP}{a} sent3: {C}{gh} sent4: {DQ}{a} -> {A}{a} sent5: {FH}{a} sent6: (¬{EQ}{a} & ¬{GE}{a}) sent7: {C}{ct} sent8: ¬{B}{bs} sent9: ¬{A}{ac} sent10: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent11: ¬{C}{a} sent12: (¬{GC}{a} & ¬{EI}{a}) sent13: {B}{jj} sent14: (¬{GT}{a} & ¬{FB}{a}) sent15: ({E}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent16: (¬{D}{c} & {F}{c}) -> {D}{b} sent17: {A}{b}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the vivarium mimes hold.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the vivarium is Indonesian.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] |
the vivarium is a mime.
|
{A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int2: if the wingback is a caucus it does rubric Shiraz and does not congee paddlewheel.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the vivarium is not a kind of a mime. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a caucus then it rubrics Shiraz and it does not congee paddlewheel. sent2: the vivarium is an estuary. sent3: the jacket congees paddlewheel. sent4: if the vivarium is histological it does mime. sent5: the vivarium does rubric ramontchi. sent6: the vivarium is not an internet and is not a kind of a dada. sent7: the shopping congees paddlewheel. sent8: the lettuce is not a Indonesian. sent9: the ramontchi is not a kind of a mime. sent10: the vivarium is a Indonesian if it is a kind of a mime. sent11: that the vivarium does not congee paddlewheel hold. sent12: the vivarium is not a pall and it does not decamp jacket. sent13: the buddleia is a Indonesian. sent14: the vivarium is not subordinate and it does not migrate. sent15: if the wingback rubrics Shiraz and does not congee paddlewheel the vivarium does not congee paddlewheel. sent16: the fact that if the bloom is not a kind of a caucus and is Rosicrucian the wingback is a caucus is not false. sent17: the wingback is a mime. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the vivarium mimes hold.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the vivarium is Indonesian.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that it does not congee balloonfish and it does not decamp Austria.
|
(Ex): (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x)
|
sent1: the fact that the lamasery is a Liriope that does not congee baud is not right. sent2: if that the lamasery is not a Liriope and it does not congee baud is incorrect the Seine does not congee balloonfish. sent3: the fact that the lamasery does not decamp Austria and it is not a Liriope is incorrect. sent4: the Seine does not decamp Austria if that it is not a skirret and does decamp Austria is not right. sent5: that the lamasery is not a Liriope and it does not congee baud does not hold. sent6: if the Seine does not discountenance tentacled then it decamps Austria and does not congee balloonfish. sent7: there is something such that it does not congee balloonfish and decamps Austria. sent8: there is something such that it does not decamp Austria. sent9: the lamasery is a frigidity if the Seine decamps Austria. sent10: that the Seine is not a kind of a skirret but it does decamp Austria is not correct.
|
sent1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) sent4: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: ¬{C}{b} -> ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent7: (Ex): (¬{B}x & {A}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent9: {A}{b} -> {HL}{a} sent10: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {A}{b})
|
[
"sent2 & sent5 -> int1: the Seine does not congee balloonfish.; sent4 & sent10 -> int2: the Seine does not decamp Austria.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Seine does not congee balloonfish and does not decamp Austria.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent4 & sent10 -> int2: ¬{A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the render is both not a frigidity and a tender is not true.
|
¬(¬{HL}{es} & {JH}{es})
|
[] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that it does not congee balloonfish and it does not decamp Austria. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the lamasery is a Liriope that does not congee baud is not right. sent2: if that the lamasery is not a Liriope and it does not congee baud is incorrect the Seine does not congee balloonfish. sent3: the fact that the lamasery does not decamp Austria and it is not a Liriope is incorrect. sent4: the Seine does not decamp Austria if that it is not a skirret and does decamp Austria is not right. sent5: that the lamasery is not a Liriope and it does not congee baud does not hold. sent6: if the Seine does not discountenance tentacled then it decamps Austria and does not congee balloonfish. sent7: there is something such that it does not congee balloonfish and decamps Austria. sent8: there is something such that it does not decamp Austria. sent9: the lamasery is a frigidity if the Seine decamps Austria. sent10: that the Seine is not a kind of a skirret but it does decamp Austria is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent5 -> int1: the Seine does not congee balloonfish.; sent4 & sent10 -> int2: the Seine does not decamp Austria.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Seine does not congee balloonfish and does not decamp Austria.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the neptunium is haptic.
|
{D}{a}
|
sent1: that the neptunium decamps Zhukov but it is not a serjeant-at-law is not true if something is not reparable. sent2: the protection is a serjeant-at-law and it is unipolar if something is not a minstrelsy. sent3: if that something does not rubric bachelor and congees congruity is wrong it does not congees congruity. sent4: something that is haptic does not decamp Zhukov and/or is not a serjeant-at-law. sent5: something is not a kind of a minstrelsy if the fact that it is not a Nuytsia is true. sent6: if that the stole is not unipolar and is a minstrelsy does not hold the scenery is haptic. sent7: if the fact that the protection is not non-perithelial or is not a kind of a Nuytsia or both is not right then the stole is not a Nuytsia. sent8: something is not exegetic. sent9: if the neptunium does not decamp Zhukov that the jackhammer is not reparable and it does not print is incorrect. sent10: there is something such that it is reparable. sent11: the stole does decamp Zhukov if the protection is a kind of a serjeant-at-law. sent12: the antimycin is not a Nuytsia if the crupper is a kind of a Nuytsia that is perithelial. sent13: if the neptunium does decamp Zhukov it is not haptic. sent14: if that the neptunium does not decamp Zhukov and is not a serjeant-at-law does not hold it is not haptic. sent15: if something is not a Nuytsia then the fact that it is not unipolar but a minstrelsy is not true. sent16: the fact that something is perithelial or it is not a Nuytsia or both does not hold if it does not congee congruity. sent17: the scenery is reparable if the stole does decamp Zhukov. sent18: if there are irreparable things the fact that the neptunium does not decamp Zhukov and it is not a serjeant-at-law is false. sent19: the fact that the protection does not rubric bachelor but it congees congruity is false if there is something such that it is not exegetic. sent20: there exists something such that it is not reparable. sent21: the crupper is exegetic but it does not congee congruity.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({C}{d} & {E}{d}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & {H}x) -> ¬{H}x sent4: (x): {D}x -> (¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) sent5: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}x sent6: ¬(¬{E}{c} & {F}{c}) -> {D}{b} sent7: ¬({I}{d} v ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{G}{c} sent8: (Ex): ¬{J}x sent9: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{es} & ¬{AI}{es}) sent10: (Ex): {A}x sent11: {C}{d} -> {B}{c} sent12: ({G}{f} & {I}{f}) -> ¬{G}{e} sent13: {B}{a} -> ¬{D}{a} sent14: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent15: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) sent16: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({I}x v ¬{G}x) sent17: {B}{c} -> {A}{b} sent18: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent19: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{K}{d} & {H}{d}) sent20: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent21: ({J}{f} & ¬{H}{f})
|
[
"sent20 & sent18 -> int1: that the neptunium does not decamp Zhukov and it is not a serjeant-at-law is not right.; int1 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent20 & sent18 -> int1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the neptunium is haptic.
|
{D}{a}
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: the antimycin is not a kind of a minstrelsy if it is not a Nuytsia.; sent21 -> int3: the crupper does not congee congruity.;"
] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the neptunium is haptic. ; $context$ = sent1: that the neptunium decamps Zhukov but it is not a serjeant-at-law is not true if something is not reparable. sent2: the protection is a serjeant-at-law and it is unipolar if something is not a minstrelsy. sent3: if that something does not rubric bachelor and congees congruity is wrong it does not congees congruity. sent4: something that is haptic does not decamp Zhukov and/or is not a serjeant-at-law. sent5: something is not a kind of a minstrelsy if the fact that it is not a Nuytsia is true. sent6: if that the stole is not unipolar and is a minstrelsy does not hold the scenery is haptic. sent7: if the fact that the protection is not non-perithelial or is not a kind of a Nuytsia or both is not right then the stole is not a Nuytsia. sent8: something is not exegetic. sent9: if the neptunium does not decamp Zhukov that the jackhammer is not reparable and it does not print is incorrect. sent10: there is something such that it is reparable. sent11: the stole does decamp Zhukov if the protection is a kind of a serjeant-at-law. sent12: the antimycin is not a Nuytsia if the crupper is a kind of a Nuytsia that is perithelial. sent13: if the neptunium does decamp Zhukov it is not haptic. sent14: if that the neptunium does not decamp Zhukov and is not a serjeant-at-law does not hold it is not haptic. sent15: if something is not a Nuytsia then the fact that it is not unipolar but a minstrelsy is not true. sent16: the fact that something is perithelial or it is not a Nuytsia or both does not hold if it does not congee congruity. sent17: the scenery is reparable if the stole does decamp Zhukov. sent18: if there are irreparable things the fact that the neptunium does not decamp Zhukov and it is not a serjeant-at-law is false. sent19: the fact that the protection does not rubric bachelor but it congees congruity is false if there is something such that it is not exegetic. sent20: there exists something such that it is not reparable. sent21: the crupper is exegetic but it does not congee congruity. ; $proof$ =
|
sent20 & sent18 -> int1: that the neptunium does not decamp Zhukov and it is not a serjeant-at-law is not right.; int1 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the ormer does not caucus.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: the ormer does caucus if something that is dysgenics is not a dysfunction. sent2: if there is something such that that it is not diocesan and does not abrade does not hold then the sodium is not a Crossopterygii. sent3: something is not a borage and it is not a smother. sent4: something is not a tupik and it does not congee Celastraceae. sent5: the ormer is telocentric. sent6: there exists something such that it is not dysgenics and it is not a dysfunction. sent7: the progesterone caucuses. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is non-diocesan thing that does not abrade is not true. sent9: the ormer does caucus if something is not dysgenics and is not a dysfunction. sent10: the ormer is a Nigeria. sent11: there exists something such that that it is not dysgenics is not incorrect. sent12: something is a Crossopterygii if it is a diocesan. sent13: there is something such that it is not conjunctival and it is not a pragmatics. sent14: the ormer is biochemical. sent15: the ormer is a Horne. sent16: something is not Satanic and it does not rubric holonym. sent17: the ormer is procedural. sent18: if the sodium does abrade it is diocesan. sent19: the ormer is a dysfunction. sent20: something is not dysgenics and is a dysfunction. sent21: the fact that something discountenances radiotherapy and is not a kind of a palatine is not correct if it is not a Crossopterygii. sent22: something is not a smother and it does not log.
|
sent1: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}{c} sent3: (Ex): (¬{AE}x & ¬{AP}x) sent4: (Ex): (¬{FO}x & ¬{GB}x) sent5: {JB}{a} sent6: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: {A}{ak} sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) sent9: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent10: {IN}{a} sent11: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent12: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent13: (Ex): (¬{CP}x & ¬{JK}x) sent14: {CB}{a} sent15: {BC}{a} sent16: (Ex): (¬{HR}x & ¬{JF}x) sent17: {FK}{a} sent18: {F}{c} -> {E}{c} sent19: {AB}{a} sent20: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent21: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent22: (Ex): (¬{AP}x & ¬{DR}x)
|
[
"sent6 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the ormer is not a caucus.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: if the sodium is a kind of a diocesan then it is a Crossopterygii.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the ormer does not caucus. ; $context$ = sent1: the ormer does caucus if something that is dysgenics is not a dysfunction. sent2: if there is something such that that it is not diocesan and does not abrade does not hold then the sodium is not a Crossopterygii. sent3: something is not a borage and it is not a smother. sent4: something is not a tupik and it does not congee Celastraceae. sent5: the ormer is telocentric. sent6: there exists something such that it is not dysgenics and it is not a dysfunction. sent7: the progesterone caucuses. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it is non-diocesan thing that does not abrade is not true. sent9: the ormer does caucus if something is not dysgenics and is not a dysfunction. sent10: the ormer is a Nigeria. sent11: there exists something such that that it is not dysgenics is not incorrect. sent12: something is a Crossopterygii if it is a diocesan. sent13: there is something such that it is not conjunctival and it is not a pragmatics. sent14: the ormer is biochemical. sent15: the ormer is a Horne. sent16: something is not Satanic and it does not rubric holonym. sent17: the ormer is procedural. sent18: if the sodium does abrade it is diocesan. sent19: the ormer is a dysfunction. sent20: something is not dysgenics and is a dysfunction. sent21: the fact that something discountenances radiotherapy and is not a kind of a palatine is not correct if it is not a Crossopterygii. sent22: something is not a smother and it does not log. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Jeroboam is an andesite.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: something is an andesite and it does congee sapodilla if it is not a hysteroscopy. sent2: there exists something such that the fact that it is an andesite and is divisional is not right. sent3: if the sideburn is not non-second then it does crystallize. sent4: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a predicate then the fact that the Meany is non-divisional is right. sent5: something is divisional if the fact that it does not congee sapodilla and it does not crystallize is wrong. sent6: there is something such that it is proteolytic and it is not a baneberry. sent7: if the sideburn is not divisional the Jeroboam is an andesite that is divisional. sent8: if an andesite does crystallize then it is not a kind of a predicate. sent9: the sideburn is not divisional if there is something such that the fact that it is proteolytic and it is not a kind of a baneberry is wrong. sent10: there is something such that that it is a kind of proteolytic thing that is not a kind of a baneberry is incorrect.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({C}x & {E}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬({C}x & {A}x) sent3: {G}{a} -> {D}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}{ca} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> {A}x sent6: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ({C}{b} & {A}{b}) sent8: (x): ({C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent9: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent10: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent10 & sent9 -> int1: the sideburn is not divisional.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the Jeroboam is an andesite and it is divisional.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 & sent9 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; sent7 & int1 -> int2: ({C}{b} & {A}{b}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the Meany is divisional is false.
|
¬{A}{ca}
|
[
"sent8 -> int3: if the sideburn is an andesite that crystallizes it is not a kind of a predicate.; sent1 -> int4: the sideburn is an andesite and it congees sapodilla if it is not a kind of a hysteroscopy.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Jeroboam is an andesite. ; $context$ = sent1: something is an andesite and it does congee sapodilla if it is not a hysteroscopy. sent2: there exists something such that the fact that it is an andesite and is divisional is not right. sent3: if the sideburn is not non-second then it does crystallize. sent4: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a predicate then the fact that the Meany is non-divisional is right. sent5: something is divisional if the fact that it does not congee sapodilla and it does not crystallize is wrong. sent6: there is something such that it is proteolytic and it is not a baneberry. sent7: if the sideburn is not divisional the Jeroboam is an andesite that is divisional. sent8: if an andesite does crystallize then it is not a kind of a predicate. sent9: the sideburn is not divisional if there is something such that the fact that it is proteolytic and it is not a kind of a baneberry is wrong. sent10: there is something such that that it is a kind of proteolytic thing that is not a kind of a baneberry is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 & sent9 -> int1: the sideburn is not divisional.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the Jeroboam is an andesite and it is divisional.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something is both a fricandeau and an internet.
|
(Ex): ({A}x & {B}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that that it is boronic and/or is not a Eupatorium is not correct. sent2: the marten is a kind of an internet if the canoe is an internet. sent3: there is something such that it is a Eupatorium. sent4: something is not non-boronic and/or it is not a Eupatorium. sent5: that something is paternal and/or it is not a sertraline is incorrect if it is not a fricandeau. sent6: there is something such that it is not boronic. sent7: everything is an internet. sent8: the catwalk is a kind of a Eupatorium. sent9: the marten is a morsel and it congees competence. sent10: there is something such that it is an internet. sent11: the fact that the madrilene is macrocephalic or it does not decamp catwalk or both is not correct. sent12: the embroideress does congee virginity. sent13: that the catwalk is a fricandeau hold if there is something such that the fact that it is boronic or is not a kind of a Eupatorium or both does not hold. sent14: the canoe is a kind of an internet if there exists something such that the fact that it is macrocephalic or does not decamp catwalk or both is false. sent15: there exists something such that that either it is boronic or it is a Eupatorium or both is wrong.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent2: {B}{c} -> {B}{b} sent3: (Ex): {AB}x sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AL}x v ¬{CF}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent7: (x): {B}x sent8: {AB}{a} sent9: ({C}{b} & {D}{b}) sent10: (Ex): {B}x sent11: ¬({F}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) sent12: {N}{ha} sent13: (x): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent14: (x): ¬({F}x v ¬{E}x) -> {B}{c} sent15: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x)
|
[
"sent1 & sent13 -> int1: the catwalk is a fricandeau.; sent7 -> int2: the catwalk is an internet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the catwalk is a fricandeau that is an internet.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent13 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent7 -> int2: {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that that it is paternal and/or is not a sertraline is false.
|
(Ex): ¬({AL}x v ¬{CF}x)
|
[
"sent5 -> int4: that the catwalk is paternal or it is not a sertraline or both does not hold if it is not a fricandeau.; sent11 -> int5: that there exists something such that the fact that it is macrocephalic and/or it does not decamp catwalk is not right hold.; int5 & sent14 -> int6: the fact that the canoe is an internet hold.; sent2 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the marten is a kind of an internet hold.; sent9 -> int8: that the marten is a morsel is not incorrect.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the marten is an internet and it is a kind of a morsel.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that it is a kind of an internet and it is a morsel.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = something is both a fricandeau and an internet. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that that it is boronic and/or is not a Eupatorium is not correct. sent2: the marten is a kind of an internet if the canoe is an internet. sent3: there is something such that it is a Eupatorium. sent4: something is not non-boronic and/or it is not a Eupatorium. sent5: that something is paternal and/or it is not a sertraline is incorrect if it is not a fricandeau. sent6: there is something such that it is not boronic. sent7: everything is an internet. sent8: the catwalk is a kind of a Eupatorium. sent9: the marten is a morsel and it congees competence. sent10: there is something such that it is an internet. sent11: the fact that the madrilene is macrocephalic or it does not decamp catwalk or both is not correct. sent12: the embroideress does congee virginity. sent13: that the catwalk is a fricandeau hold if there is something such that the fact that it is boronic or is not a kind of a Eupatorium or both does not hold. sent14: the canoe is a kind of an internet if there exists something such that the fact that it is macrocephalic or does not decamp catwalk or both is false. sent15: there exists something such that that either it is boronic or it is a Eupatorium or both is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent13 -> int1: the catwalk is a fricandeau.; sent7 -> int2: the catwalk is an internet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the catwalk is a fricandeau that is an internet.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the entomologicalness occurs or the levanter does not occur or both is false.
|
¬({AA} v ¬{AB})
|
sent1: the entomologicalness happens or the levanter does not occur or both. sent2: if the villainy does not occur the disregard but not the proctoplasty happens. sent3: if the disregard occurs then the non-statisticalness and the non-technologicalness happens. sent4: the fact that either the entomologicalness occurs or the levanter does not occur or both does not hold if the technologicalness does not occur.
|
sent1: ({AA} v ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬{D} -> ({B} & ¬{C}) sent3: {B} -> (¬{FK} & ¬{A}) sent4: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} v ¬{AB})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the entomologicalness occurs or the levanter does not occur or both is false.
|
¬({AA} v ¬{AB})
|
[] | 6 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the entomologicalness occurs or the levanter does not occur or both is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the entomologicalness happens or the levanter does not occur or both. sent2: if the villainy does not occur the disregard but not the proctoplasty happens. sent3: if the disregard occurs then the non-statisticalness and the non-technologicalness happens. sent4: the fact that either the entomologicalness occurs or the levanter does not occur or both does not hold if the technologicalness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sushi is not a steerage but Numidian.
|
(¬{B}{c} & {D}{c})
|
sent1: that the sushi is not a steerage hold. sent2: there exists something such that it is a dexterity and/or it is not a kind of a flicker. sent3: that something is both not a steerage and a Numidian does not hold if it is a tuner. sent4: the ironworks is not a tuner if there is something such that that it is a kind of a flicker does not hold. sent5: the Phoebe is not a steerage if the ironworks is not a tuner. sent6: the sushi is not a steerage and is a Numidian if the Phoebe is not a kind of a steerage.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{c} sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {D}x) sent4: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{A}{a} sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent6: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{B}{c} & {D}{c})
|
[] |
[] |
that the sushi is not a steerage but it is Numidian is wrong.
|
¬(¬{B}{c} & {D}{c})
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: if the sushi is a tuner then the fact that it is not a kind of a steerage and it is a Numidian is wrong.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the sushi is not a steerage but Numidian. ; $context$ = sent1: that the sushi is not a steerage hold. sent2: there exists something such that it is a dexterity and/or it is not a kind of a flicker. sent3: that something is both not a steerage and a Numidian does not hold if it is a tuner. sent4: the ironworks is not a tuner if there is something such that that it is a kind of a flicker does not hold. sent5: the Phoebe is not a steerage if the ironworks is not a tuner. sent6: the sushi is not a steerage and is a Numidian if the Phoebe is not a kind of a steerage. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the ethyl does rubric frigidity but it is not neurobiological hold.
|
({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
sent1: if the ethyl is not a tapered and it does not rubric troy then it does not rubric acerola. sent2: something rubrics frigidity but it is not neurobiological if it does not rubric acerola. sent3: the ethyl is not a tapered and it does not rubric troy. sent4: the rivulus does not rubric troy.
|
sent1: (¬{B}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: (¬{B}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) sent4: ¬{C}{ij}
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the fact that the ethyl does rubric frigidity but it is not neurobiological is not incorrect if it does not rubric acerola.; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: the ethyl does not rubric acerola.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent1 & sent3 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the ethyl does rubric frigidity but it is not neurobiological hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the ethyl is not a tapered and it does not rubric troy then it does not rubric acerola. sent2: something rubrics frigidity but it is not neurobiological if it does not rubric acerola. sent3: the ethyl is not a tapered and it does not rubric troy. sent4: the rivulus does not rubric troy. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the fact that the ethyl does rubric frigidity but it is not neurobiological is not incorrect if it does not rubric acerola.; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: the ethyl does not rubric acerola.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the exploiting does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the sarcasticness happens. sent2: the equineness occurs. sent3: the exploiting is prevented by that the sarcasticness and the equine happens.
|
sent1: {A} sent2: {B} sent3: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C}
|
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: both the sarcasticness and the equineness happens.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the exploiting does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the sarcasticness happens. sent2: the equineness occurs. sent3: the exploiting is prevented by that the sarcasticness and the equine happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent2 -> int1: both the sarcasticness and the equineness happens.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if it does rubric paramour the fact that it is not obtuse and it does not decamp fascist does not hold is not true.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: that something is non-metatarsal thing that is not a formal is false if it decamps fascist. sent2: if the range does rubric paramour that it is non-obtuse thing that decamps fascist does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if that it does decamp coffin hold then that it does not decamp bachelor and is not Mendelian does not hold. sent4: there is something such that if it rubrics paramour then the fact that it is obtuse and does not decamp fascist is not correct. sent5: the range is not obtuse and it does not decamp fascist if it rubrics paramour. sent6: there exists something such that if it does decamp character the fact that it is not denotative and is not incomparable is wrong. sent7: the fact that the range is not a kind of an east and it does not revenge does not hold if it is obtuse. sent8: if something rubrics paramour it is not obtuse and it does not decamp fascist. sent9: if something is a tatouay the fact that it is not a kind of a blue and it is not a kind of a Princeton is not correct. sent10: the fact that something is not obtuse and does not decamp fascist is not correct if it does rubric paramour. sent11: that there exists something such that if it does rubric paramour it is not obtuse and does not decamp fascist is right. sent12: there exists something such that if it does congee libration the fact that it is not a spandex and it is not an embolism does not hold. sent13: that something does not rubric paramour and it is not a kind of a toque is not correct if it is virological. sent14: if something rubrics paramour then that it is obtuse and it does not decamp fascist is wrong. sent15: the fact that the coffin does not congee muskrat and does not rubric paramour is incorrect if it is incomparable. sent16: there is something such that if it does rubric paramour then the fact that it is non-obtuse thing that decamps fascist is not right. sent17: if something does rubric paramour then the fact that it is non-obtuse thing that does decamp fascist does not hold. sent18: if the range does rubric paramour the fact that it is obtuse and it does not decamp fascist is false.
|
sent1: (x): {AB}x -> ¬(¬{DU}x & ¬{BC}x) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): {IE}x -> ¬(¬{JI}x & ¬{CA}x) sent4: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (Ex): {P}x -> ¬(¬{GR}x & ¬{FL}x) sent7: {AA}{aa} -> ¬(¬{HO}{aa} & ¬{AU}{aa}) sent8: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent9: (x): {HU}x -> ¬(¬{BP}x & ¬{CN}x) sent10: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent11: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent12: (Ex): {AD}x -> ¬(¬{BK}x & ¬{IJ}x) sent13: (x): {O}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{FS}x) sent14: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent15: {FL}{df} -> ¬(¬{FP}{df} & ¬{A}{df}) sent16: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent17: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent18: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: if the range does rubric paramour that it is non-obtuse and it does not decamp fascist does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if that the libration is virological hold the fact that it does not rubric paramour and it is not a toque is not correct.
|
{O}{ci} -> ¬(¬{A}{ci} & ¬{FS}{ci})
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it does rubric paramour the fact that it is not obtuse and it does not decamp fascist does not hold is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is non-metatarsal thing that is not a formal is false if it decamps fascist. sent2: if the range does rubric paramour that it is non-obtuse thing that decamps fascist does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if that it does decamp coffin hold then that it does not decamp bachelor and is not Mendelian does not hold. sent4: there is something such that if it rubrics paramour then the fact that it is obtuse and does not decamp fascist is not correct. sent5: the range is not obtuse and it does not decamp fascist if it rubrics paramour. sent6: there exists something such that if it does decamp character the fact that it is not denotative and is not incomparable is wrong. sent7: the fact that the range is not a kind of an east and it does not revenge does not hold if it is obtuse. sent8: if something rubrics paramour it is not obtuse and it does not decamp fascist. sent9: if something is a tatouay the fact that it is not a kind of a blue and it is not a kind of a Princeton is not correct. sent10: the fact that something is not obtuse and does not decamp fascist is not correct if it does rubric paramour. sent11: that there exists something such that if it does rubric paramour it is not obtuse and does not decamp fascist is right. sent12: there exists something such that if it does congee libration the fact that it is not a spandex and it is not an embolism does not hold. sent13: that something does not rubric paramour and it is not a kind of a toque is not correct if it is virological. sent14: if something rubrics paramour then that it is obtuse and it does not decamp fascist is wrong. sent15: the fact that the coffin does not congee muskrat and does not rubric paramour is incorrect if it is incomparable. sent16: there is something such that if it does rubric paramour then the fact that it is non-obtuse thing that decamps fascist is not right. sent17: if something does rubric paramour then the fact that it is non-obtuse thing that does decamp fascist does not hold. sent18: if the range does rubric paramour the fact that it is obtuse and it does not decamp fascist is false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> int1: if the range does rubric paramour that it is non-obtuse and it does not decamp fascist does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if that it does not decamp Anas is true then it does not rubric solvency.
|
(Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a Camden that it does not uncloak is not incorrect. sent2: there is something such that if it is non-anencephalic it is not a kind of a steamboat. sent3: the ramontchi does not rubric solvency if it does not decamp Anas. sent4: something is not aphanitic if it does not tend. sent5: if the helianthemum is a correspondence it does not decamp Anas. sent6: if the ramontchi is not a methylenedioxymethamphetamine it does not decamp Anas. sent7: if the privateer does not decamp Anas it is not a kind of a sled. sent8: there is something such that if it is not a hydrology it does not decamp ramontchi. sent9: there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of a keynote is not incorrect it is not a silence. sent10: if the fact that the ramontchi is colorful hold then it does not decamp Anas. sent11: there exists something such that if it does decamp Anas then it does not rubric solvency. sent12: the ramontchi does not decamp Anas if the fact that it is not slippery is right. sent13: that there is something such that if it is not a wavefront then it is not a hatemonger is true. sent14: if the ramontchi does not decamp Anas it rubrics solvency. sent15: if the snowboard is intertribal then it is not a kind of a Zoroastrian. sent16: if the nitrogenase does rubric solvency it does not discountenance zygospore. sent17: there exists something such that if it does not decamp Anas it rubrics solvency. sent18: if the ramontchi is a kind of a number it is non-mutative.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{DF}x -> ¬{AR}x sent2: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{BP}x sent3: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬{HN}x -> ¬{JD}x sent5: {FH}{h} -> ¬{B}{h} sent6: ¬{FM}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: ¬{B}{br} -> ¬{DU}{br} sent8: (Ex): ¬{AC}x -> ¬{T}x sent9: (Ex): ¬{D}x -> ¬{HR}x sent10: {FC}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent11: (Ex): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent12: ¬{EJ}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent13: (Ex): ¬{GT}x -> ¬{IH}x sent14: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent15: {IC}{im} -> ¬{HH}{im} sent16: {C}{fg} -> ¬{FQ}{fg} sent17: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent18: {IR}{aa} -> ¬{BR}{aa}
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that there exists something such that if it does not tend it is not aphanitic is true.
|
(Ex): ¬{HN}x -> ¬{JD}x
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the amalgamator does not tend it is not aphanitic.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it does not decamp Anas is true then it does not rubric solvency. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a Camden that it does not uncloak is not incorrect. sent2: there is something such that if it is non-anencephalic it is not a kind of a steamboat. sent3: the ramontchi does not rubric solvency if it does not decamp Anas. sent4: something is not aphanitic if it does not tend. sent5: if the helianthemum is a correspondence it does not decamp Anas. sent6: if the ramontchi is not a methylenedioxymethamphetamine it does not decamp Anas. sent7: if the privateer does not decamp Anas it is not a kind of a sled. sent8: there is something such that if it is not a hydrology it does not decamp ramontchi. sent9: there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of a keynote is not incorrect it is not a silence. sent10: if the fact that the ramontchi is colorful hold then it does not decamp Anas. sent11: there exists something such that if it does decamp Anas then it does not rubric solvency. sent12: the ramontchi does not decamp Anas if the fact that it is not slippery is right. sent13: that there is something such that if it is not a wavefront then it is not a hatemonger is true. sent14: if the ramontchi does not decamp Anas it rubrics solvency. sent15: if the snowboard is intertribal then it is not a kind of a Zoroastrian. sent16: if the nitrogenase does rubric solvency it does not discountenance zygospore. sent17: there exists something such that if it does not decamp Anas it rubrics solvency. sent18: if the ramontchi is a kind of a number it is non-mutative. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the cigarette does not rubric madnep if it is phenomenal and it does not discountenance keepsake.
|
({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: if something that is phenomenal does not discountenance keepsake it does not rubric madnep. sent2: if something that is not non-phenomenal does not discountenance keepsake then it does rubric madnep. sent3: the cigarette is not different if it rubrics monte and is phenomenal. sent4: that if the madnep does ginger and it is the mime then the madnep is not a kind of a NSWC is true. sent5: if the mahoe is both unstoppable and not cleaning then that it rubrics madnep is not correct.
|
sent1: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: ({II}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{BE}{aa} sent4: ({BJ}{en} & {FA}{en}) -> ¬{GE}{en} sent5: ({M}{a} & ¬{AK}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the cigarette does not rubric madnep if it is phenomenal and it does not discountenance keepsake. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that is phenomenal does not discountenance keepsake it does not rubric madnep. sent2: if something that is not non-phenomenal does not discountenance keepsake then it does rubric madnep. sent3: the cigarette is not different if it rubrics monte and is phenomenal. sent4: that if the madnep does ginger and it is the mime then the madnep is not a kind of a NSWC is true. sent5: if the mahoe is both unstoppable and not cleaning then that it rubrics madnep is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
either the casting does not occur or the much happens or both.
|
(¬{D} v {C})
|
sent1: if that the decamping honker does not occur and the prefixation does not occur is incorrect the chemosurgery does not occur. sent2: the muchness does not occur if that both the twiddling and the casting occurs is wrong. sent3: if the fact that the non-nonintellectualness and the tolerance happens does not hold the muchness occurs. sent4: either the casting happens or the much occurs or both. sent5: if the congeeing casino does not occur then the fact that both the twiddle and the casting happens does not hold. sent6: that the qualitativeness and the dislodgment occurs prevents the rattle. sent7: the extraordinariness does not occur but the rubriccing Shaw occurs. sent8: if the boodle occurs then that the congeeing casino but not the revivalisticness occurs is wrong. sent9: if the tolerance but not the nonintellectualness occurs then the fact that the Olympicness happens hold. sent10: the fact that the nonintellectualness occurs and the tolerance happens is incorrect. sent11: the boodle occurs and the contrivance happens if the chemosurgery does not occur. sent12: that the decamping honker does not occur and the prefixation does not occur is not true if the inboardness happens. sent13: if the fact that the congeeing casino but not the revivalisticness occurs is wrong then the congeeing casino does not occur. sent14: that the nonextensileness happens but the smutting does not occur is brought about by that the rattling does not occur. sent15: that the barnburner happens is true. sent16: both the inboardness and the discountenancing fascist occurs if the rubriccing light-o'-love does not occur. sent17: the rubriccing light-o'-love does not occur if the nonextensileness but not the smut happens.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{L} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{J} sent2: ¬({E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} sent3: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) -> {C} sent4: ({D} v {C}) sent5: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & {D}) sent6: ({T} & {S}) -> ¬{R} sent7: (¬{GP} & {GF}) sent8: {G} -> ¬({F} & ¬{H}) sent9: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> {IM} sent10: ¬({A} & {B}) sent11: ¬{J} -> ({G} & {I}) sent12: {M} -> ¬(¬{L} & ¬{K}) sent13: ¬({F} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} sent14: ¬{R} -> ({Q} & ¬{P}) sent15: {AF} sent16: ¬{O} -> ({M} & {N}) sent17: ({Q} & ¬{P}) -> ¬{O}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the nonintellectualness does not occur but the tolerance happens.; assump1 -> int1: the nonintellectualness does not occur.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{A} & {B}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{A};"
] |
the Olympicness happens.
|
{IM}
|
[] | 17 | 4 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = either the casting does not occur or the much happens or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the decamping honker does not occur and the prefixation does not occur is incorrect the chemosurgery does not occur. sent2: the muchness does not occur if that both the twiddling and the casting occurs is wrong. sent3: if the fact that the non-nonintellectualness and the tolerance happens does not hold the muchness occurs. sent4: either the casting happens or the much occurs or both. sent5: if the congeeing casino does not occur then the fact that both the twiddle and the casting happens does not hold. sent6: that the qualitativeness and the dislodgment occurs prevents the rattle. sent7: the extraordinariness does not occur but the rubriccing Shaw occurs. sent8: if the boodle occurs then that the congeeing casino but not the revivalisticness occurs is wrong. sent9: if the tolerance but not the nonintellectualness occurs then the fact that the Olympicness happens hold. sent10: the fact that the nonintellectualness occurs and the tolerance happens is incorrect. sent11: the boodle occurs and the contrivance happens if the chemosurgery does not occur. sent12: that the decamping honker does not occur and the prefixation does not occur is not true if the inboardness happens. sent13: if the fact that the congeeing casino but not the revivalisticness occurs is wrong then the congeeing casino does not occur. sent14: that the nonextensileness happens but the smutting does not occur is brought about by that the rattling does not occur. sent15: that the barnburner happens is true. sent16: both the inboardness and the discountenancing fascist occurs if the rubriccing light-o'-love does not occur. sent17: the rubriccing light-o'-love does not occur if the nonextensileness but not the smut happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the nonintellectualness does not occur but the tolerance happens.; assump1 -> int1: the nonintellectualness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the coreferentialness occurs hold.
|
{A}
|
sent1: the fact that both the tending and the commanding occurs is not right. sent2: the tending does not occur if the fact that the tending and the commanding occurs is not true. sent3: the fact that the coreferentialness occurs hold if the fact that the congeeing sophomore does not occur and the decamping pantheist does not occur does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬({B} & {D}) sent2: ¬({B} & {D}) -> ¬{B} sent3: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {A}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the congeeing sophomore does not occur and the decamping pantheist does not occur.; sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that the tending does not occur is not incorrect.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent2 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{B};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the coreferentialness occurs hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that both the tending and the commanding occurs is not right. sent2: the tending does not occur if the fact that the tending and the commanding occurs is not true. sent3: the fact that the coreferentialness occurs hold if the fact that the congeeing sophomore does not occur and the decamping pantheist does not occur does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the congeeing sophomore does not occur and the decamping pantheist does not occur.; sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that the tending does not occur is not incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the obeche is exacta and/or it is electronic does not hold.
|
¬({C}{a} v {B}{a})
|
sent1: the obeche is subordinating. sent2: something is not a ripple if the fact that it is a kind of a ripple that supports is false. sent3: the obeche is a kind of a Saxe. sent4: the inlet does congee Leon if it is neolithic. sent5: the fact that something is exacta or it is electronic or both is not right if it does not ripple. sent6: the obeche is a dissimilarity and/or ripples. sent7: if the inlet congees Leon then that the fact that the obeche is not a kind of a supported and is ineradicable is incorrect hold. sent8: either the redpoll is a kind of a pettiness or it is exacta or both. sent9: that the obeche is a kind of a ripple and it is a kind of a supported is not correct if the inlet is not ineradicable. sent10: the ballcock does ripple. sent11: the inlet is neolithic. sent12: the obeche is electronic if it is a ripple. sent13: the slumgullion is exacta. sent14: that the noticer is a kind of a ripple is not false. sent15: the obeche is a ripple.
|
sent1: {FI}{a} sent2: (x): ¬({A}x & {D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent3: {FK}{a} sent4: {G}{b} -> {F}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x v {B}x) sent6: ({EN}{a} v {A}{a}) sent7: {F}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {E}{a}) sent8: ({EO}{cj} v {C}{cj}) sent9: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {D}{a}) sent10: {A}{jf} sent11: {G}{b} sent12: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent13: {C}{eu} sent14: {A}{cf} sent15: {A}{a}
|
[
"sent12 & sent15 -> int1: that the obeche is not electronic is wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent15 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
either the obeche ripples or it overruns or both.
|
({A}{a} v {II}{a})
|
[
"sent4 & sent11 -> int2: the inlet congees Leon.; sent7 & int2 -> int3: that the obeche is both not a supported and ineradicable is not right.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the obeche is exacta and/or it is electronic does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the obeche is subordinating. sent2: something is not a ripple if the fact that it is a kind of a ripple that supports is false. sent3: the obeche is a kind of a Saxe. sent4: the inlet does congee Leon if it is neolithic. sent5: the fact that something is exacta or it is electronic or both is not right if it does not ripple. sent6: the obeche is a dissimilarity and/or ripples. sent7: if the inlet congees Leon then that the fact that the obeche is not a kind of a supported and is ineradicable is incorrect hold. sent8: either the redpoll is a kind of a pettiness or it is exacta or both. sent9: that the obeche is a kind of a ripple and it is a kind of a supported is not correct if the inlet is not ineradicable. sent10: the ballcock does ripple. sent11: the inlet is neolithic. sent12: the obeche is electronic if it is a ripple. sent13: the slumgullion is exacta. sent14: that the noticer is a kind of a ripple is not false. sent15: the obeche is a ripple. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent15 -> int1: that the obeche is not electronic is wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the discountenancing regosol and/or the choricness happens.
|
({C} v {B})
|
sent1: the summarization happens and the X-ray occurs if the anisogamicness does not occur. sent2: if the da'wah happens the anisogamicness does not occur. sent3: if the jackknifing occurs the undulatoriness does not occur or the congeeing music does not occur or both. sent4: the hungriness happens. sent5: if the capacitance does not occur then the hungriness happens. sent6: if the fact that both the radioscopy and the non-latestness happens is not correct then the latestness happens. sent7: if the summarization occurs the jackstraws does not occur and/or the decamping ruggedization does not occur. sent8: the da'wah happens if the latestness happens. sent9: the choricness occurs if the clangoring occurs. sent10: the Indian does not occur if that the capacitance and/or the non-choricness occurs is not correct. sent11: the fact that the capacitance happens and/or the choricness does not occur is not correct if the discountenancing regosol occurs. sent12: the rubriccing dalliance occurs. sent13: if the capacitance does not occur then that the hungriness happens and the clangoring happens is right. sent14: the congeeing jam does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) sent2: {L} -> ¬{K} sent3: {F} -> (¬{D} v ¬{E}) sent4: {AA} sent5: ¬{A} -> {AA} sent6: ¬({O} & ¬{M}) -> {M} sent7: {I} -> (¬{G} v ¬{H}) sent8: {M} -> {L} sent9: {AB} -> {B} sent10: ¬({A} v ¬{B}) -> ¬{AJ} sent11: {C} -> ¬({A} v ¬{B}) sent12: {DO} sent13: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & {AB}) sent14: ¬{BM}
|
[] |
[] |
the fact that either the discountenancing regosol occurs or the choricness occurs or both is not true.
|
¬({C} v {B})
|
[
" -> hypothesis;"
] | 0 | 4 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the discountenancing regosol and/or the choricness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the summarization happens and the X-ray occurs if the anisogamicness does not occur. sent2: if the da'wah happens the anisogamicness does not occur. sent3: if the jackknifing occurs the undulatoriness does not occur or the congeeing music does not occur or both. sent4: the hungriness happens. sent5: if the capacitance does not occur then the hungriness happens. sent6: if the fact that both the radioscopy and the non-latestness happens is not correct then the latestness happens. sent7: if the summarization occurs the jackstraws does not occur and/or the decamping ruggedization does not occur. sent8: the da'wah happens if the latestness happens. sent9: the choricness occurs if the clangoring occurs. sent10: the Indian does not occur if that the capacitance and/or the non-choricness occurs is not correct. sent11: the fact that the capacitance happens and/or the choricness does not occur is not correct if the discountenancing regosol occurs. sent12: the rubriccing dalliance occurs. sent13: if the capacitance does not occur then that the hungriness happens and the clangoring happens is right. sent14: the congeeing jam does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a fender-bender it does not decamp brassard is wrong.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is nominal it is not inextricable. sent2: there is something such that if that it is not a fender-bender is true then it decamps brassard. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not sexagesimal then it does not congee mesh. sent4: there is something such that if it does not congee stipe it does congee flashback. sent5: if the coxswain is not afferent it is prandial. sent6: if the Jew is non-nominal then it does not decamp brassard. sent7: the timer does not decamp brassard if it does digress. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a Gothic is not incorrect then it is not a sandhi. sent9: that there exists something such that if it is not geographic it does not forget hold. sent10: if the timer is not a fender-bender it does not decamp brassard. sent11: the timer congees Jabalpur if the fact that it does not decamp brassard is not incorrect. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not sexagesimal then it does congee flashback. sent13: if something is not a ouzo it is not a kind of a tranquillity.
|
sent1: (Ex): {T}x -> ¬{DH}x sent2: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent3: (Ex): ¬{IN}x -> ¬{GS}x sent4: (Ex): ¬{ES}x -> {EI}x sent5: ¬{P}{cj} -> {GO}{cj} sent6: ¬{T}{br} -> ¬{C}{br} sent7: {DS}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent8: (Ex): {IL}x -> ¬{DI}x sent9: (Ex): ¬{AI}x -> ¬{CO}x sent10: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent11: ¬{C}{aa} -> {DB}{aa} sent12: (Ex): ¬{IN}x -> {EI}x sent13: (x): ¬{JG}x -> ¬{FH}x
|
[
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a ouzo that it is not a tranquillity is correct is not incorrect.
|
(Ex): ¬{JG}x -> ¬{FH}x
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: if the lapidary is not a ouzo then it is not a tranquillity.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a fender-bender it does not decamp brassard is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is nominal it is not inextricable. sent2: there is something such that if that it is not a fender-bender is true then it decamps brassard. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not sexagesimal then it does not congee mesh. sent4: there is something such that if it does not congee stipe it does congee flashback. sent5: if the coxswain is not afferent it is prandial. sent6: if the Jew is non-nominal then it does not decamp brassard. sent7: the timer does not decamp brassard if it does digress. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a Gothic is not incorrect then it is not a sandhi. sent9: that there exists something such that if it is not geographic it does not forget hold. sent10: if the timer is not a fender-bender it does not decamp brassard. sent11: the timer congees Jabalpur if the fact that it does not decamp brassard is not incorrect. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not sexagesimal then it does congee flashback. sent13: if something is not a ouzo it is not a kind of a tranquillity. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
both the rubriccing viola and the non-macrencephalicness occurs.
|
({F} & ¬{E})
|
sent1: the IOP does not occur if both the congeeing Condorcet and the piscatorialness happens. sent2: the piscatorialness and the decamping amphigory happens. sent3: the baa happens. sent4: the fact that the vegetativeness does not occur is incorrect. sent5: if the rubriccing viola does not occur the macrencephalicness and the IOP occurs. sent6: the decamping amphigory occurs. sent7: that the tonometry occurs leads to that the ballet occurs and the sow does not occur. sent8: the endermicness occurs if the fact that the congeeing Condorcet does not occur and the piscatorialness happens is false. sent9: if the sowing does not occur then both the decamping amphigory and the IOP happens. sent10: the discountenancing Condorcet occurs and the ruralness occurs. sent11: if the residence happens then the tonometry happens. sent12: the fact that the congeeing Condorcet does not occur and the piscatorialness does not occur is wrong if the IOP happens. sent13: the geostrategicness occurs if the vegetativeness occurs. sent14: the manacling but not the congeeing pratincole occurs. sent15: the rubriccing viola occurs. sent16: the rubriccing viola is caused by that the IOP does not occur. sent17: the sow and the decamping amphigory occurs if that the ballet does not occur is true. sent18: the fact that both the rubriccing viola and the non-macrencephalicness happens is not right if the vegetativeness does not occur. sent19: the vegetativeness happens and the congeeing Condorcet happens.
|
sent1: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent2: ({C} & {G}) sent3: {EH} sent4: {A} sent5: ¬{F} -> ({E} & {D}) sent6: {G} sent7: {J} -> ({I} & ¬{H}) sent8: ¬(¬{B} & {C}) -> {IE} sent9: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {D}) sent10: ({N} & {GD}) sent11: {K} -> {J} sent12: {D} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent13: {A} -> {CA} sent14: ({ET} & ¬{CD}) sent15: {F} sent16: ¬{D} -> {F} sent17: ¬{I} -> ({H} & {G}) sent18: ¬{A} -> ¬({F} & ¬{E}) sent19: ({A} & {B})
|
[
"sent19 -> int1: the congeeing Condorcet happens.; sent2 -> int2: the piscatorialness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: both the congeeing Condorcet and the piscatorialness occurs.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the IOP does not occur.;"
] |
[
"sent19 -> int1: {B}; sent2 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B} & {C}); int3 & sent1 -> int4: ¬{D};"
] |
the geostrategicness and the endermicness happens.
|
({CA} & {IE})
|
[] | 8 | 4 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = both the rubriccing viola and the non-macrencephalicness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the IOP does not occur if both the congeeing Condorcet and the piscatorialness happens. sent2: the piscatorialness and the decamping amphigory happens. sent3: the baa happens. sent4: the fact that the vegetativeness does not occur is incorrect. sent5: if the rubriccing viola does not occur the macrencephalicness and the IOP occurs. sent6: the decamping amphigory occurs. sent7: that the tonometry occurs leads to that the ballet occurs and the sow does not occur. sent8: the endermicness occurs if the fact that the congeeing Condorcet does not occur and the piscatorialness happens is false. sent9: if the sowing does not occur then both the decamping amphigory and the IOP happens. sent10: the discountenancing Condorcet occurs and the ruralness occurs. sent11: if the residence happens then the tonometry happens. sent12: the fact that the congeeing Condorcet does not occur and the piscatorialness does not occur is wrong if the IOP happens. sent13: the geostrategicness occurs if the vegetativeness occurs. sent14: the manacling but not the congeeing pratincole occurs. sent15: the rubriccing viola occurs. sent16: the rubriccing viola is caused by that the IOP does not occur. sent17: the sow and the decamping amphigory occurs if that the ballet does not occur is true. sent18: the fact that both the rubriccing viola and the non-macrencephalicness happens is not right if the vegetativeness does not occur. sent19: the vegetativeness happens and the congeeing Condorcet happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent19 -> int1: the congeeing Condorcet happens.; sent2 -> int2: the piscatorialness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: both the congeeing Condorcet and the piscatorialness occurs.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the IOP does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the adoptee is not Andalusian.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: the ramontchi is unwoven but it does not discountenance petticoat. sent2: the adoptee does congee crossed. sent3: if the adoptee is not a kind of a baffle it does congee crossed. sent4: if the ameloblast does decamp dichotomization and is not a kind of a hoya then the fact that it is not a kind of a fastnacht is right. sent5: the adoptee is Andalusian if the promoter baffles. sent6: something is not Andalusian if it does congee crossed and is not an omen. sent7: if the adoptee does not baffle it does congee crossed and it is not an omen. sent8: the adoptee is not a baffle. sent9: if something does not congee tranquillity then it does discountenance Cimabue and is a baffle.
|
sent1: ({DD}{ff} & ¬{GK}{ff}) sent2: {AA}{aa} sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent4: ({F}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent5: {A}{a} -> {B}{aa} sent6: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: ¬{A}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & {A}x)
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the fact that the adoptee is not Andalusian is not incorrect if it does congee crossed and it is not an omen.; sent7 & sent8 -> int2: the adoptee does congee crossed but it is not an omen.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent7 & sent8 -> int2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the adoptee is Andalusian.
|
{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent9 -> int3: if the promoter does not congee tranquillity it does discountenance Cimabue and does baffle.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the adoptee is not Andalusian. ; $context$ = sent1: the ramontchi is unwoven but it does not discountenance petticoat. sent2: the adoptee does congee crossed. sent3: if the adoptee is not a kind of a baffle it does congee crossed. sent4: if the ameloblast does decamp dichotomization and is not a kind of a hoya then the fact that it is not a kind of a fastnacht is right. sent5: the adoptee is Andalusian if the promoter baffles. sent6: something is not Andalusian if it does congee crossed and is not an omen. sent7: if the adoptee does not baffle it does congee crossed and it is not an omen. sent8: the adoptee is not a baffle. sent9: if something does not congee tranquillity then it does discountenance Cimabue and is a baffle. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the fact that the adoptee is not Andalusian is not incorrect if it does congee crossed and it is not an omen.; sent7 & sent8 -> int2: the adoptee does congee crossed but it is not an omen.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the Mullah is a potter hold.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: the put-put is carposporic. sent2: something is epenthetic. sent3: if the fact that something is not microelectronic and it is not pyrogenic is incorrect then it is not a kind of a potter. sent4: if the daub is a abseiler then the gesneriad is a seventieth and is not a Babylonian. sent5: if the Mullah is microelectronic the ejector is pyrogenic but it is not a kind of a potter. sent6: if the gesneriad is a seventieth and is quartzose then the fact that it does not rubric eigenvalue is not false. sent7: the fact that the Mullah is not a stoma is true. sent8: that the put-put is a Plectognathi hold. sent9: if there is something such that it is epenthetic that the corset is not a abseiler and is unseductive is not true. sent10: the demodulation is not a potter. sent11: the fact that the gesneriad is not microelectronic and is not pyrogenic is incorrect if that the put-put does not rubric eigenvalue is right. sent12: the Mullah is a potter if that the gesneriad is pyrogenic is correct. sent13: something is either quartzose or biosystematic or both if the fact that it is not figurative is not false. sent14: the jam is not a potter. sent15: the Mullah is not a kind of a potter. sent16: if something that is a Plectognathi is carposporic it is not figurative. sent17: the Mullah is not myotonic. sent18: the daub is a abseiler if the fact that the corset is not a abseiler and is not seductive is not correct. sent19: if the gesneriad does not rubric eigenvalue then the fact that the fact that the Mullah is not non-microelectronic and is not non-pyrogenic hold does not hold. sent20: everything is quartzose. sent21: that the plasmid is not a potter hold.
|
sent1: {J}{c} sent2: (Ex): {N}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent4: {L}{d} -> ({F}{b} & ¬{K}{b}) sent5: {C}{a} -> ({B}{if} & ¬{A}{if}) sent6: ({F}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent7: ¬{CB}{a} sent8: {I}{c} sent9: (x): {N}x -> ¬(¬{L}{e} & {M}{e}) sent10: ¬{A}{gd} sent11: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent12: {B}{b} -> {A}{a} sent13: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({E}x v {H}x) sent14: ¬{A}{el} sent15: ¬{A}{a} sent16: (x): ({I}x & {J}x) -> ¬{G}x sent17: ¬{BH}{a} sent18: ¬(¬{L}{e} & {M}{e}) -> {L}{d} sent19: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent20: (x): {E}x sent21: ¬{A}{ek}
|
[
"sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the ejector is not a kind of a potter.
|
¬{A}{if}
|
[] | 5 | 1 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Mullah is a potter hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the put-put is carposporic. sent2: something is epenthetic. sent3: if the fact that something is not microelectronic and it is not pyrogenic is incorrect then it is not a kind of a potter. sent4: if the daub is a abseiler then the gesneriad is a seventieth and is not a Babylonian. sent5: if the Mullah is microelectronic the ejector is pyrogenic but it is not a kind of a potter. sent6: if the gesneriad is a seventieth and is quartzose then the fact that it does not rubric eigenvalue is not false. sent7: the fact that the Mullah is not a stoma is true. sent8: that the put-put is a Plectognathi hold. sent9: if there is something such that it is epenthetic that the corset is not a abseiler and is unseductive is not true. sent10: the demodulation is not a potter. sent11: the fact that the gesneriad is not microelectronic and is not pyrogenic is incorrect if that the put-put does not rubric eigenvalue is right. sent12: the Mullah is a potter if that the gesneriad is pyrogenic is correct. sent13: something is either quartzose or biosystematic or both if the fact that it is not figurative is not false. sent14: the jam is not a potter. sent15: the Mullah is not a kind of a potter. sent16: if something that is a Plectognathi is carposporic it is not figurative. sent17: the Mullah is not myotonic. sent18: the daub is a abseiler if the fact that the corset is not a abseiler and is not seductive is not correct. sent19: if the gesneriad does not rubric eigenvalue then the fact that the fact that the Mullah is not non-microelectronic and is not non-pyrogenic hold does not hold. sent20: everything is quartzose. sent21: that the plasmid is not a potter hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the thriving happens and the beats happens is not correct.
|
¬({A} & {C})
|
sent1: both the impressing and the Argive happens. sent2: the fact that the thriving happens and the beating happens is wrong if the band does not occur. sent3: not the band but the operaticness happens if the selfishness happens. sent4: both the intimidation and the congeeing troy occurs. sent5: the operaticness occurs. sent6: both the Nicaraguan and the rubriccing prehistory occurs. sent7: if that the interest does not occur and/or the disposal occurs is wrong then the glabellarness does not occur. sent8: the thriving happens and the banding occurs. sent9: the banding occurs. sent10: that the banding does not occur brings about that the decamping prehistory and the thriving happens. sent11: the non-operaticness yields that the band does not occur and the beats does not occur. sent12: the selfishness is caused by that the disposal does not occur and/or the selfishness. sent13: the disposal does not occur if the glabellarness does not occur. sent14: both the beats and the operaticness happens. sent15: the non-glabellarness leads to that the operaticness does not occur and the selfishness does not occur.
|
sent1: ({GB} & {GK}) sent2: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) sent3: {E} -> (¬{B} & {D}) sent4: ({AE} & {EA}) sent5: {D} sent6: ({FF} & {HE}) sent7: ¬(¬{H} v {G}) -> ¬{F} sent8: ({A} & {B}) sent9: {B} sent10: ¬{B} -> ({HH} & {A}) sent11: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent12: (¬{G} v {E}) -> {E} sent13: ¬{F} -> ¬{G} sent14: ({C} & {D}) sent15: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E})
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: the thriving happens.; sent14 -> int2: the fact that the beating happens is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> int1: {A}; sent14 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the decamping prehistory happens.
|
{HH}
|
[] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the thriving happens and the beats happens is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: both the impressing and the Argive happens. sent2: the fact that the thriving happens and the beating happens is wrong if the band does not occur. sent3: not the band but the operaticness happens if the selfishness happens. sent4: both the intimidation and the congeeing troy occurs. sent5: the operaticness occurs. sent6: both the Nicaraguan and the rubriccing prehistory occurs. sent7: if that the interest does not occur and/or the disposal occurs is wrong then the glabellarness does not occur. sent8: the thriving happens and the banding occurs. sent9: the banding occurs. sent10: that the banding does not occur brings about that the decamping prehistory and the thriving happens. sent11: the non-operaticness yields that the band does not occur and the beats does not occur. sent12: the selfishness is caused by that the disposal does not occur and/or the selfishness. sent13: the disposal does not occur if the glabellarness does not occur. sent14: both the beats and the operaticness happens. sent15: the non-glabellarness leads to that the operaticness does not occur and the selfishness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> int1: the thriving happens.; sent14 -> int2: the fact that the beating happens is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the elaphure is not a Egyptian or it is a speedskater or both does not hold.
|
¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})
|
sent1: the elaphure does not decamp pastoral. sent2: if the elaphure does decamp Verbenaceae it does rubric dekaliter and/or is a tench. sent3: the elaphure is a tench and does not decamp pastoral. sent4: if something is a kind of a tench then either it is not Egyptian or it is a speedskater or both. sent5: that the Wisconsinite is both not unlikely and nonarbitrary is not right if the winery is not a kind of a half-light. sent6: either the elaphure is a vertebrate or it does decamp pastoral or both if it decamps unnoticeableness.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{aa} sent2: {DI}{aa} -> ({GH}{aa} v {A}{aa}) sent3: ({A}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) sent4: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent5: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent6: {BO}{aa} -> ({EH}{aa} v {B}{aa})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: the elaphure is not a Egyptian and/or it is a kind of a speedskater if it is a tench.; sent3 -> int2: the elaphure is a tench.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}); sent3 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the turnoff is fertile and not a tench.
|
({HI}{fp} & ¬{A}{fp})
|
[] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the elaphure is not a Egyptian or it is a speedskater or both does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the elaphure does not decamp pastoral. sent2: if the elaphure does decamp Verbenaceae it does rubric dekaliter and/or is a tench. sent3: the elaphure is a tench and does not decamp pastoral. sent4: if something is a kind of a tench then either it is not Egyptian or it is a speedskater or both. sent5: that the Wisconsinite is both not unlikely and nonarbitrary is not right if the winery is not a kind of a half-light. sent6: either the elaphure is a vertebrate or it does decamp pastoral or both if it decamps unnoticeableness. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: the elaphure is not a Egyptian and/or it is a kind of a speedskater if it is a tench.; sent3 -> int2: the elaphure is a tench.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the compress is not a refutation.
|
¬{C}{a}
|
sent1: something is a kind of a livery if it is a Halcyon and/or it is not christian. sent2: the fact that the cerate is not a compass is true if the chloroprene is a compass. sent3: if either something is a heat or it is not a kind of a Halcyon or both it is a refutation. sent4: the blowing is not a refutation if the cerate is a kind of a refutation and is a heat. sent5: if that the blowing is not a refutation is true the compress is not a kind of a refutation. sent6: the fact that the fact that the compress is not a major but it does dream is not true hold. sent7: if something is not a compass then it is a refutation. sent8: the compress is a heat if the fact that it is non-major and it is a dream does not hold.
|
sent1: (x): ({A}x v ¬{BS}x) -> {GS}x sent2: {D}{d} -> ¬{D}{c} sent3: (x): ({B}x v ¬{A}x) -> {C}x sent4: ({C}{c} & {B}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent5: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬{D}x -> {C}x sent8: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a}
|
[
"sent8 & sent6 -> int1: the compress is a heat.; int1 -> int2: the compress is a kind of a heat and/or is not a Halcyon.; sent3 -> int3: if the compress does heat or is not a kind of a Halcyon or both it is a refutation.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent6 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 -> int2: ({B}{a} v ¬{A}{a}); sent3 -> int3: ({B}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> {C}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the compress is not a refutation.
|
¬{C}{a}
|
[
"sent7 -> int4: if the cerate is not a compass it is a kind of a refutation.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the compress is not a refutation. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a kind of a livery if it is a Halcyon and/or it is not christian. sent2: the fact that the cerate is not a compass is true if the chloroprene is a compass. sent3: if either something is a heat or it is not a kind of a Halcyon or both it is a refutation. sent4: the blowing is not a refutation if the cerate is a kind of a refutation and is a heat. sent5: if that the blowing is not a refutation is true the compress is not a kind of a refutation. sent6: the fact that the fact that the compress is not a major but it does dream is not true hold. sent7: if something is not a compass then it is a refutation. sent8: the compress is a heat if the fact that it is non-major and it is a dream does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent6 -> int1: the compress is a heat.; int1 -> int2: the compress is a kind of a heat and/or is not a Halcyon.; sent3 -> int3: if the compress does heat or is not a kind of a Halcyon or both it is a refutation.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sodium is a kind of a salesgirl.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the lovastatin is an orgasm and/or congees Thraupidae if the dinky is not a kind of a sternpost. sent2: the sodium is a kind of an orgasm if that the lovastatin is a kind of an orgasm is true. sent3: something is not a hydrolith if it is not a tunnel and is not a razorback. sent4: everything is a kind of a rhododendron. sent5: the fact that the kingfisher is not mild but a sternpost does not hold if the eolith does rubric lovastatin. sent6: if something is not a hydrolith then that it does not rubric lovastatin and does not insulate is incorrect. sent7: if the sodium is an eighth it is a kind of a butterfish. sent8: if that the sodium is not a kind of an eighth but it is a salesgirl is wrong then that the cassiterite is a butterfish hold. sent9: the dinky is not a sternpost if that the kingfisher is not mild but it is a sternpost is not right. sent10: that the sodium is an eighth hold. sent11: the fact that something does not tunnel and it is not a razorback hold if it is a kind of a rhododendron. sent12: if that something does not rubric lovastatin and it does not insulate is not correct then it rubric lovastatin.
|
sent1: ¬{E}{c} -> ({D}{b} v {F}{b}) sent2: {D}{b} -> {D}{a} sent3: (x): (¬{K}x & ¬{L}x) -> ¬{J}x sent4: (x): {M}x sent5: {H}{e} -> ¬(¬{G}{d} & {E}{d}) sent6: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{I}x) sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent8: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {B}{jg} sent9: ¬(¬{G}{d} & {E}{d}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent10: {A}{a} sent11: (x): {M}x -> (¬{K}x & ¬{L}x) sent12: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{I}x) -> {H}x
|
[
"sent7 & sent10 -> int1: the sodium is a butterfish.;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent10 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] |
the cassiterite is a butterfish.
|
{B}{jg}
|
[
"sent6 -> int2: that the eolith does not rubric lovastatin and does not insulate does not hold if it is not a hydrolith.; sent3 -> int3: if the eolith is not a tunnel and it is not a razorback it is not a kind of a hydrolith.; sent11 -> int4: the Europeanization is both not a tunnel and not a razorback if it is a rhododendron.; sent4 -> int5: the Europeanization is a rhododendron.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the Europeanization is not a tunnel and it is not a kind of a razorback hold.; int6 -> int7: everything does not tunnel and is not a razorback.; int7 -> int8: the eolith is not a tunnel and it is not a razorback.; int3 & int8 -> int9: the eolith is not a hydrolith.; int2 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the eolith does not rubric lovastatin and it does not insulate is false.; sent12 -> int11: the eolith rubrics lovastatin if that it does not rubrics lovastatin and it does not insulate is wrong.; int10 & int11 -> int12: the eolith does rubric lovastatin.; sent5 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the kingfisher is not mild and is a kind of a sternpost is not true.; sent9 & int13 -> int14: the dinky is not a kind of a sternpost.; sent1 & int14 -> int15: the lovastatin is an orgasm and/or it does congee Thraupidae.;"
] | 13 | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the sodium is a kind of a salesgirl. ; $context$ = sent1: the lovastatin is an orgasm and/or congees Thraupidae if the dinky is not a kind of a sternpost. sent2: the sodium is a kind of an orgasm if that the lovastatin is a kind of an orgasm is true. sent3: something is not a hydrolith if it is not a tunnel and is not a razorback. sent4: everything is a kind of a rhododendron. sent5: the fact that the kingfisher is not mild but a sternpost does not hold if the eolith does rubric lovastatin. sent6: if something is not a hydrolith then that it does not rubric lovastatin and does not insulate is incorrect. sent7: if the sodium is an eighth it is a kind of a butterfish. sent8: if that the sodium is not a kind of an eighth but it is a salesgirl is wrong then that the cassiterite is a butterfish hold. sent9: the dinky is not a sternpost if that the kingfisher is not mild but it is a sternpost is not right. sent10: that the sodium is an eighth hold. sent11: the fact that something does not tunnel and it is not a razorback hold if it is a kind of a rhododendron. sent12: if that something does not rubric lovastatin and it does not insulate is not correct then it rubric lovastatin. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent10 -> int1: the sodium is a butterfish.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the hugging occurs.
|
{A}
|
sent1: if the hug occurs then the approachableness does not occur and the decamping pamperer does not occur. sent2: the banishment does not occur and the congeeing forecastle does not occur. sent3: the tirade happens. sent4: the approachableness does not occur if the hug occurs. sent5: if that the promissoriness but not the rubriccing brooch occurs is not correct that the promissoriness does not occur is not incorrect. sent6: the fact that the approachableness happens but the decamping pamperer does not occur does not hold if the tirade occurs. sent7: the discountenancing stole happens. sent8: that the approachableness does not occur and the decamping pamperer does not occur is wrong if the tirade occurs. sent9: if the explanation happens that the netball does not occur and the congeeing foretaste does not occur does not hold. sent10: that the unmaliciousness happens causes that the barring does not occur. sent11: the approachableness does not occur. sent12: the fact that the promissoriness but not the rubriccing brooch happens is not correct if the synchronicness happens. sent13: both the hug and the tirade happens if the promissoriness does not occur. sent14: that the approachableness happens and the decamping pamperer does not occur is incorrect.
|
sent1: {A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: (¬{BB} & ¬{DT}) sent3: {B} sent4: {A} -> ¬{AA} sent5: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} sent6: {B} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent7: {CJ} sent8: {B} -> ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent9: {Q} -> ¬(¬{IT} & ¬{EO}) sent10: {HT} -> ¬{GT} sent11: ¬{AA} sent12: {E} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent13: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent14: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hugging occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the approachableness does not occur and the decamping pamperer does not occur.; sent8 & sent3 -> int2: that the approachableness does not occur and the decamping pamperer does not occur is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent8 & sent3 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the hugging occurs.
|
{A}
|
[] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the hugging occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the hug occurs then the approachableness does not occur and the decamping pamperer does not occur. sent2: the banishment does not occur and the congeeing forecastle does not occur. sent3: the tirade happens. sent4: the approachableness does not occur if the hug occurs. sent5: if that the promissoriness but not the rubriccing brooch occurs is not correct that the promissoriness does not occur is not incorrect. sent6: the fact that the approachableness happens but the decamping pamperer does not occur does not hold if the tirade occurs. sent7: the discountenancing stole happens. sent8: that the approachableness does not occur and the decamping pamperer does not occur is wrong if the tirade occurs. sent9: if the explanation happens that the netball does not occur and the congeeing foretaste does not occur does not hold. sent10: that the unmaliciousness happens causes that the barring does not occur. sent11: the approachableness does not occur. sent12: the fact that the promissoriness but not the rubriccing brooch happens is not correct if the synchronicness happens. sent13: both the hug and the tirade happens if the promissoriness does not occur. sent14: that the approachableness happens and the decamping pamperer does not occur is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hugging occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the approachableness does not occur and the decamping pamperer does not occur.; sent8 & sent3 -> int2: that the approachableness does not occur and the decamping pamperer does not occur is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Congolese corrupts and does congee soldiery.
|
({A}{aa} & {B}{aa})
|
sent1: everything does guess and is not a payroll. sent2: the jacket does corrupt. sent3: the Congolese is an aspartame if that it is uncritical and it is not a works is incorrect. sent4: the fact that the Congolese is not a Donatello is false if it is a kind of a megabit. sent5: the Congolese is a kind of a scrappiness if it does corrupt. sent6: that that the Congolese is cybernetics but it does not work is not wrong is false. sent7: if something is a guess then it corrupts. sent8: the Congolese is not a payroll. sent9: that something is corrupted and it congees soldiery is not correct if the fact that it is not a works is not incorrect. sent10: if the appraiser does rubric venerator then it is phagocytic. sent11: the Congolese decamps hakim and is not statistical. sent12: the ejector is cybernetics.
|
sent1: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: {A}{bb} sent3: ¬({DK}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) -> {CN}{aa} sent4: {I}{aa} -> {HU}{aa} sent5: {A}{aa} -> {U}{aa} sent6: ¬({D}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) sent7: (x): {AA}x -> {A}x sent8: ¬{AB}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent10: {FL}{q} -> {IO}{q} sent11: ({FK}{aa} & ¬{BD}{aa}) sent12: {D}{fb}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the Congolese guesses but it is not a payroll.; int1 -> int2: the Congolese is a kind of a guess.; sent7 -> int3: if the Congolese does guess that it corrupts is right.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the Congolese corrupts.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> int2: {AA}{aa}; sent7 -> int3: {AA}{aa} -> {A}{aa}; int2 & int3 -> int4: {A}{aa};"
] |
that the Congolese corrupts and congees soldiery is false.
|
¬({A}{aa} & {B}{aa})
|
[
"sent9 -> int5: that the Congolese is corrupted and congees soldiery is not right if it does not work.;"
] | 4 | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Congolese corrupts and does congee soldiery. ; $context$ = sent1: everything does guess and is not a payroll. sent2: the jacket does corrupt. sent3: the Congolese is an aspartame if that it is uncritical and it is not a works is incorrect. sent4: the fact that the Congolese is not a Donatello is false if it is a kind of a megabit. sent5: the Congolese is a kind of a scrappiness if it does corrupt. sent6: that that the Congolese is cybernetics but it does not work is not wrong is false. sent7: if something is a guess then it corrupts. sent8: the Congolese is not a payroll. sent9: that something is corrupted and it congees soldiery is not correct if the fact that it is not a works is not incorrect. sent10: if the appraiser does rubric venerator then it is phagocytic. sent11: the Congolese decamps hakim and is not statistical. sent12: the ejector is cybernetics. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the Congolese guesses but it is not a payroll.; int1 -> int2: the Congolese is a kind of a guess.; sent7 -> int3: if the Congolese does guess that it corrupts is right.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the Congolese corrupts.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that the fact that it is a currency is correct.
|
(Ex): {A}x
|
sent1: that something is a kind of a currency that is a kind of a shakedown is false if it is not biotitic. sent2: the Monsieur is a currency and it is a bowed. sent3: the therapist is a rear that does detrain. sent4: the Monsieur is not biotitic if there exists something such that that it is both biotitic and not incommodious does not hold. sent5: if the latecomer does not rear that the appropriator is biotitic but it is not incommodious is not true. sent6: if the therapist is a kind of a rear the latecomer does not rear. sent7: something that is not a kind of a currency is both a bowed and a Nacimiento.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent3: ({E}{d} & {G}{d}) sent4: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}{a} sent5: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent6: {E}{d} -> ¬{E}{c} sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}x & {HS}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the Monsieur is a currency.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Nipa is a bowed and it is a Nacimiento.
|
({B}{dm} & {HS}{dm})
|
[
"sent7 -> int2: the Nipa bows and it is a Nacimiento if it is not a currency.; sent1 -> int3: if the Monsieur is not biotitic then that it is a currency and shakedown is not correct.; sent3 -> int4: the therapist is a rear.; sent6 & int4 -> int5: the latecomer is not a rear.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the appropriator is biotitic but it is not incommodious is wrong.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that that it is both biotitic and not incommodious does not hold.; int7 & sent4 -> int8: the Monsieur is not biotitic.; int3 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the Monsieur is a currency and is a shakedown is not correct.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that the fact that it is a currency and it is a shakedown is not true.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that the fact that it is a currency is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is a kind of a currency that is a kind of a shakedown is false if it is not biotitic. sent2: the Monsieur is a currency and it is a bowed. sent3: the therapist is a rear that does detrain. sent4: the Monsieur is not biotitic if there exists something such that that it is both biotitic and not incommodious does not hold. sent5: if the latecomer does not rear that the appropriator is biotitic but it is not incommodious is not true. sent6: if the therapist is a kind of a rear the latecomer does not rear. sent7: something that is not a kind of a currency is both a bowed and a Nacimiento. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the Monsieur is a currency.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the tiglon is non-lysogenic thing that does not escalate.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
sent1: something that is a flaunt is not lysogenic and does not escalate. sent2: the blackbody does flaunt. sent3: the tiglon is a kind of a flaunt if the blackbody is a flaunt. sent4: the fact that the blackbody is not lysogenic is not false if it flaunts.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: {A}{a} -> {A}{aa} sent4: {A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the tiglon is not lysogenic and it does not escalate if it does flaunt.; sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the tiglon is a flaunt.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent3 & sent2 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the tiglon is non-lysogenic thing that does not escalate. ; $context$ = sent1: something that is a flaunt is not lysogenic and does not escalate. sent2: the blackbody does flaunt. sent3: the tiglon is a kind of a flaunt if the blackbody is a flaunt. sent4: the fact that the blackbody is not lysogenic is not false if it flaunts. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the tiglon is not lysogenic and it does not escalate if it does flaunt.; sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the tiglon is a flaunt.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the lamplight is geostrategic.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the lamplight discountenances oilskin. sent2: the Flint is downmarket and it is a Chaetodipterus. sent3: there exists something such that it does not explain and it rubrics obsidian. sent4: The oilskin discountenances lamplight. sent5: if something that does discountenance oilskin is new it is not geostrategic. sent6: a non-new thing does discountenance oilskin and is geostrategic. sent7: the lamplight is not non-geostrategic if the oilskin is non-geostrategic. sent8: something does like if it is textile. sent9: the lamplight is new. sent10: something that is Congregational and/or not new is not new. sent11: if the setup is not textile then that the fact that the oilskin is not non-liking but Congregational is wrong is not false. sent12: something is Congregational or it is not new or both if it likes.
|
sent1: {A}{a} sent2: ({BF}{ag} & {DN}{ag}) sent3: (Ex): (¬{H}x & {G}x) sent4: {AA}{aa} sent5: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {C}x) sent7: {C}{b} -> {C}{a} sent8: (x): {F}x -> {E}x sent9: {B}{a} sent10: (x): ({D}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{B}x sent11: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬({E}{b} & {D}{b}) sent12: (x): {E}x -> ({D}x v ¬{B}x)
|
[
"sent1 & sent9 -> int1: that the lamplight does discountenance oilskin and is new is not incorrect.; sent5 -> int2: the lamplight is non-geostrategic if it does discountenance oilskin and is new.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent9 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent5 -> int2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the lamplight is geostrategic.
|
{C}{a}
|
[
"sent6 -> int3: if the oilskin is not new it does discountenance oilskin and is geostrategic.; sent10 -> int4: the oilskin is not new if it is Congregational and/or it is not new.; sent12 -> int5: the oilskin is Congregational or not new or both if it is a liking.; sent8 -> int6: the oilskin likes if that it is textile hold.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the lamplight is geostrategic. ; $context$ = sent1: the lamplight discountenances oilskin. sent2: the Flint is downmarket and it is a Chaetodipterus. sent3: there exists something such that it does not explain and it rubrics obsidian. sent4: The oilskin discountenances lamplight. sent5: if something that does discountenance oilskin is new it is not geostrategic. sent6: a non-new thing does discountenance oilskin and is geostrategic. sent7: the lamplight is not non-geostrategic if the oilskin is non-geostrategic. sent8: something does like if it is textile. sent9: the lamplight is new. sent10: something that is Congregational and/or not new is not new. sent11: if the setup is not textile then that the fact that the oilskin is not non-liking but Congregational is wrong is not false. sent12: something is Congregational or it is not new or both if it likes. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent9 -> int1: that the lamplight does discountenance oilskin and is new is not incorrect.; sent5 -> int2: the lamplight is non-geostrategic if it does discountenance oilskin and is new.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Chaldean is a stitchwort.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: that the skinny-dipper is Mishnaic thing that is not a kind of a stitchwort is not right. sent2: that the Chaldean is a kind of a stitchwort is true if there exists something such that the fact that it is Mishnaic and it is not a Malay is not true. sent3: the fact that the skinny-dipper is Mishnaic and it is a Malay is false. sent4: there exists something such that that it is both a stitchwort and Mishnaic does not hold. sent5: something decamps photocopier if that it is a immunosuppression is correct. sent6: if the Brahui does decamp photocopier then the fact that it is not a 1860s and does not congee Cagliostro is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent3: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): ¬({A}x & {AA}x) sent5: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent6: {D}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{C}{b})
|
[] |
[] |
the Chaldean is not a stitchwort.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: if the Brahui is a kind of a immunosuppression it does decamp photocopier.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Chaldean is a stitchwort. ; $context$ = sent1: that the skinny-dipper is Mishnaic thing that is not a kind of a stitchwort is not right. sent2: that the Chaldean is a kind of a stitchwort is true if there exists something such that the fact that it is Mishnaic and it is not a Malay is not true. sent3: the fact that the skinny-dipper is Mishnaic and it is a Malay is false. sent4: there exists something such that that it is both a stitchwort and Mishnaic does not hold. sent5: something decamps photocopier if that it is a immunosuppression is correct. sent6: if the Brahui does decamp photocopier then the fact that it is not a 1860s and does not congee Cagliostro is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that that it is a Leipzig and it is not a Higi does not hold.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it does rubric Cordylus and it is an adenoid is not right. sent2: the fact that something is a Leipzig but not a Higi is not true if it does congee Wylie.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({GT}x & {HE}x) sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: if the Alabaman does congee Wylie the fact that it is a kind of a Leipzig and it is not a Higi is wrong.;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that that it is a Leipzig and it is not a Higi does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it does rubric Cordylus and it is an adenoid is not right. sent2: the fact that something is a Leipzig but not a Higi is not true if it does congee Wylie. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: if the Alabaman does congee Wylie the fact that it is a kind of a Leipzig and it is not a Higi is wrong.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the brimstone is not a snow is not incorrect.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
sent1: everything does flump. sent2: the dinky does not decamp enforcer. sent3: the brimstone does not snow if there is something such that that it is phylogenetic and it is a birthrate does not hold. sent4: if something is not phylogenetic then the brimstone is not a snow. sent5: the fact that something is phylogenetic and it is a kind of a birthrate hold. sent6: the fact that the dinky snows and is phylogenetic is incorrect. sent7: if the dinky does not decamp enforcer that it is both phylogenetic and a birthrate is not correct. sent8: The enforcer does not decamp dinky. sent9: if there exists something such that that it is not chorionic and it is unwritten is not true the sorehead is a kind of an immolation. sent10: if something does not decamp abruptness then it is not younger. sent11: the brimstone is not a kind of a invagination. sent12: if the dinky is not younger then the brimstone snows and it decamps enforcer. sent13: if the sorehead is a kind of an immolation then the dinky is not a Glaswegian. sent14: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a snow and it is a birthrate is wrong the brimstone does not decamp enforcer. sent15: if the dinky is not a Glaswegian the brimstone does not decamp abruptness. sent16: if there is something such that the fact that it is a birthrate and it is a snow does not hold then the brimstone does not decamp enforcer. sent17: if something flumps that it is both not chorionic and unwritten is not correct. sent18: if the fact that the brimstone is not a snow is true the fact that it is phylogenetic thing that decamps enforcer is wrong.
|
sent1: (x): {I}x sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: ¬({B}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: ¬{AC}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {G}x) -> {F}{c} sent10: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}x sent11: ¬{FD}{b} sent12: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent13: {F}{c} -> ¬{E}{a} sent14: (x): ¬({B}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent15: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} sent16: (x): ¬({AB}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent17: (x): {I}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & {G}x) sent18: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {A}{b})
|
[
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: that the dinky is phylogenetic and it is a birthrate is not right.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is phylogenetic and it is a kind of a birthrate is wrong.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x); int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the brimstone is a snow.
|
{B}{b}
|
[
"sent1 -> int3: the compound flumps.; sent17 -> int4: if the compound flumps the fact that it is a kind of non-chorionic thing that is unwritten is not right.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the compound is not chorionic and is unwritten is not correct.; int5 -> int6: there is nothing that is not chorionic but unwritten.; int6 -> int7: the fact that the medium is not chorionic but unwritten is not correct.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that that it is not chorionic but unwritten does not hold.; sent9 & int8 -> int9: the sorehead is an immolation.; int9 & sent13 -> int10: the dinky is not Glaswegian.; sent15 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the brimstone does not decamp abruptness hold.; sent10 -> int12: the brimstone is not younger if it does not decamp abruptness.; int11 & int12 -> int13: the brimstone is not younger.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the brimstone is not a snow is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: everything does flump. sent2: the dinky does not decamp enforcer. sent3: the brimstone does not snow if there is something such that that it is phylogenetic and it is a birthrate does not hold. sent4: if something is not phylogenetic then the brimstone is not a snow. sent5: the fact that something is phylogenetic and it is a kind of a birthrate hold. sent6: the fact that the dinky snows and is phylogenetic is incorrect. sent7: if the dinky does not decamp enforcer that it is both phylogenetic and a birthrate is not correct. sent8: The enforcer does not decamp dinky. sent9: if there exists something such that that it is not chorionic and it is unwritten is not true the sorehead is a kind of an immolation. sent10: if something does not decamp abruptness then it is not younger. sent11: the brimstone is not a kind of a invagination. sent12: if the dinky is not younger then the brimstone snows and it decamps enforcer. sent13: if the sorehead is a kind of an immolation then the dinky is not a Glaswegian. sent14: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a snow and it is a birthrate is wrong the brimstone does not decamp enforcer. sent15: if the dinky is not a Glaswegian the brimstone does not decamp abruptness. sent16: if there is something such that the fact that it is a birthrate and it is a snow does not hold then the brimstone does not decamp enforcer. sent17: if something flumps that it is both not chorionic and unwritten is not correct. sent18: if the fact that the brimstone is not a snow is true the fact that it is phylogenetic thing that decamps enforcer is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent2 -> int1: that the dinky is phylogenetic and it is a birthrate is not right.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is phylogenetic and it is a kind of a birthrate is wrong.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pulsation decamps cremation.
|
{B}{c}
|
sent1: the trellis is foreleg if the pulsation is foreleg. sent2: the fact that the coccidium does decamp cremation is correct. sent3: something that is not a disbeliever decamps cremation and/or does congee Damaliscus. sent4: the oxime does not exude if the trellis is foreleg. sent5: if something does congee Damaliscus then that it is foreleg and does not decamp cremation is not right. sent6: the pulsation does decamp cremation or it is not foreleg or both. sent7: if there is something such that it does decamp cremation and/or does not discountenance unexpectedness the trellis is not foreleg. sent8: the pulsation does not decamp cremation if there is something such that it does not discountenance unexpectedness. sent9: the translation rubrics stoma. sent10: the trellis is stoloniferous or it discountenances unexpectedness or both. sent11: the oxime does not decamp cremation. sent12: the oxime discountenances unexpectedness. sent13: the oxime is foreleg. sent14: if something decamps cremation or does not discountenance unexpectedness or both then the pulsation is not foreleg. sent15: the trellis is stoloniferous and/or it discountenances unexpectedness if the oxime is foreleg. sent16: the pulsation is not stoloniferous if there is something such that it decamps cremation and/or it does not discountenance unexpectedness. sent17: the trellis is stoloniferous and/or it does not discountenance unexpectedness if the oxime is foreleg. sent18: if there exists something such that it is stoloniferous and/or it does not discountenance unexpectedness the pulsation does not decamp cremation. sent19: if the trellis discountenances unexpectedness that the oxime is not non-foreleg or is not stoloniferous or both is not false. sent20: either the trellis is foreleg or it does not discountenance unexpectedness or both if the oxime is stoloniferous. sent21: that the guru is not a kind of a disbeliever is right if something is not costive and/or it does rubric stoma. sent22: the trellis either decamps cremation or is not stoloniferous or both. sent23: there is something such that it is stoloniferous and/or it does discountenance unexpectedness.
|
sent1: {A}{c} -> {A}{b} sent2: {B}{bp} sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x v {C}x) sent4: {A}{b} -> ¬{G}{a} sent5: (x): {C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent6: ({B}{c} v ¬{A}{c}) sent7: (x): ({B}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}{c} sent9: {F}{e} sent10: ({AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent11: ¬{B}{a} sent12: {AB}{a} sent13: {A}{a} sent14: (x): ({B}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{c} sent15: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent16: (x): ({B}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{AA}{c} sent17: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent18: (x): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}{c} sent19: {AB}{b} -> ({A}{a} v ¬{AA}{a}) sent20: {AA}{a} -> ({A}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent21: (x): (¬{E}x v {F}x) -> ¬{D}{d} sent22: ({B}{b} v ¬{AA}{b}) sent23: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x)
|
[
"sent17 & sent13 -> int1: the trellis is stoloniferous and/or it does not discountenance unexpectedness.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that either it is stoloniferous or it does not discountenance unexpectedness or both.; int2 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent17 & sent13 -> int1: ({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that either it is statutory or it does not exude or both.
|
(Ex): ({JA}x v ¬{G}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> int3: the guru does decamp cremation and/or congees Damaliscus if it is not a disbeliever.; sent9 -> int4: either the translation is not costive or it rubrics stoma or both.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it is non-costive or rubrics stoma or both.; int5 & sent21 -> int6: the guru is not a kind of a disbeliever.; int3 & int6 -> int7: the guru decamps cremation and/or it does congee Damaliscus.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the pulsation decamps cremation. ; $context$ = sent1: the trellis is foreleg if the pulsation is foreleg. sent2: the fact that the coccidium does decamp cremation is correct. sent3: something that is not a disbeliever decamps cremation and/or does congee Damaliscus. sent4: the oxime does not exude if the trellis is foreleg. sent5: if something does congee Damaliscus then that it is foreleg and does not decamp cremation is not right. sent6: the pulsation does decamp cremation or it is not foreleg or both. sent7: if there is something such that it does decamp cremation and/or does not discountenance unexpectedness the trellis is not foreleg. sent8: the pulsation does not decamp cremation if there is something such that it does not discountenance unexpectedness. sent9: the translation rubrics stoma. sent10: the trellis is stoloniferous or it discountenances unexpectedness or both. sent11: the oxime does not decamp cremation. sent12: the oxime discountenances unexpectedness. sent13: the oxime is foreleg. sent14: if something decamps cremation or does not discountenance unexpectedness or both then the pulsation is not foreleg. sent15: the trellis is stoloniferous and/or it discountenances unexpectedness if the oxime is foreleg. sent16: the pulsation is not stoloniferous if there is something such that it decamps cremation and/or it does not discountenance unexpectedness. sent17: the trellis is stoloniferous and/or it does not discountenance unexpectedness if the oxime is foreleg. sent18: if there exists something such that it is stoloniferous and/or it does not discountenance unexpectedness the pulsation does not decamp cremation. sent19: if the trellis discountenances unexpectedness that the oxime is not non-foreleg or is not stoloniferous or both is not false. sent20: either the trellis is foreleg or it does not discountenance unexpectedness or both if the oxime is stoloniferous. sent21: that the guru is not a kind of a disbeliever is right if something is not costive and/or it does rubric stoma. sent22: the trellis either decamps cremation or is not stoloniferous or both. sent23: there is something such that it is stoloniferous and/or it does discountenance unexpectedness. ; $proof$ =
|
sent17 & sent13 -> int1: the trellis is stoloniferous and/or it does not discountenance unexpectedness.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that either it is stoloniferous or it does not discountenance unexpectedness or both.; int2 & sent18 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a butyl is not incorrect that it is both not a meatball and not a Hohenzollern is not right is not true.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: that the echelon is not lossy and not a butyl is incorrect if it does not congee Warji. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a butyl the fact that it is not a meatball and it is a Hohenzollern is incorrect. sent3: the fastnacht is not a meatball and not a Hohenzollern if it is not a butyl. sent4: there is something such that if it is a kind of a butyl then the fact that it is not a meatball and it is not a Hohenzollern is false. sent5: if something is not a kind of a Satie then that it does not discountenance bachelor and is not lossy does not hold. sent6: if the fastnacht is not dioecious that it is not a meatball and is not a meningocele is not right. sent7: there is something such that if it does not congee tenderization that it is not allometric and not a gallantry does not hold. sent8: if the fastnacht is not a kind of a scissortail then that it does not congee lychgate and is not a kind of a meatball is not correct. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not a butyl then it is not a meatball and not a Hohenzollern. sent10: if the fastnacht is not a butyl then the fact that it is a kind of a meatball and it is not a kind of a Hohenzollern is not true. sent11: if the fastnacht is a butyl then the fact that it is not a meatball and not a Hohenzollern does not hold. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not a butyl then that it is a kind of a meatball and it is not a Hohenzollern is incorrect. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not decamp stateswoman then the fact that it is not a kind of a cuckooflower and does not congee consonance is not right. sent14: the fact that the fastnacht is not polydactyl and does not congee echelon is incorrect if it does not discountenance fastnacht. sent15: if the fastnacht is not a monk the fact that it is not a kind of a butyl and it does not rubric Transfiguration is false. sent16: if the fastnacht is not a butyl the fact that it is not a meatball and it is not a Hohenzollern does not hold. sent17: if the fastnacht is not a butyl that it is not a meatball and it is a kind of a Hohenzollern does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬{DH}{ip} -> ¬(¬{I}{ip} & ¬{A}{ip}) sent2: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent5: (x): ¬{HN}x -> ¬(¬{HC}x & ¬{I}x) sent6: ¬{AP}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{CN}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): ¬{AN}x -> ¬(¬{FE}x & ¬{CQ}x) sent8: ¬{HQ}{aa} -> ¬(¬{HJ}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent10: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent11: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent12: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: (Ex): ¬{BN}x -> ¬(¬{U}x & ¬{BB}x) sent14: ¬{CC}{aa} -> ¬(¬{IT}{aa} & ¬{IS}{aa}) sent15: ¬{Q}{aa} -> ¬(¬{A}{aa} & ¬{DL}{aa}) sent16: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent17: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Satie then that it does not discountenance bachelor and it is not lossy does not hold.
|
(Ex): ¬{HN}x -> ¬(¬{HC}x & ¬{I}x)
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: if the kibitzer is not a kind of a Satie that it does not discountenance bachelor and it is not lossy is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a butyl is not incorrect that it is both not a meatball and not a Hohenzollern is not right is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that the echelon is not lossy and not a butyl is incorrect if it does not congee Warji. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a butyl the fact that it is not a meatball and it is a Hohenzollern is incorrect. sent3: the fastnacht is not a meatball and not a Hohenzollern if it is not a butyl. sent4: there is something such that if it is a kind of a butyl then the fact that it is not a meatball and it is not a Hohenzollern is false. sent5: if something is not a kind of a Satie then that it does not discountenance bachelor and is not lossy does not hold. sent6: if the fastnacht is not dioecious that it is not a meatball and is not a meningocele is not right. sent7: there is something such that if it does not congee tenderization that it is not allometric and not a gallantry does not hold. sent8: if the fastnacht is not a kind of a scissortail then that it does not congee lychgate and is not a kind of a meatball is not correct. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not a butyl then it is not a meatball and not a Hohenzollern. sent10: if the fastnacht is not a butyl then the fact that it is a kind of a meatball and it is not a kind of a Hohenzollern is not true. sent11: if the fastnacht is a butyl then the fact that it is not a meatball and not a Hohenzollern does not hold. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not a butyl then that it is a kind of a meatball and it is not a Hohenzollern is incorrect. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not decamp stateswoman then the fact that it is not a kind of a cuckooflower and does not congee consonance is not right. sent14: the fact that the fastnacht is not polydactyl and does not congee echelon is incorrect if it does not discountenance fastnacht. sent15: if the fastnacht is not a monk the fact that it is not a kind of a butyl and it does not rubric Transfiguration is false. sent16: if the fastnacht is not a butyl the fact that it is not a meatball and it is not a Hohenzollern does not hold. sent17: if the fastnacht is not a butyl that it is not a meatball and it is a kind of a Hohenzollern does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
either the saltation is a Capek or it is not rickettsial or both.
|
({A}{b} v ¬{B}{b})
|
sent1: that if the Congo is a Trombiculidae then the fact that the saltation is a Capek and/or is not rickettsial is not true hold. sent2: the saltation congees cabotage and is not a portraitist. sent3: the daub is a kind of a trochanter and does not rubric Congo. sent4: the Marylander sparkles but it is non-rickettsial if the Congo is a Capek. sent5: the saltation is not rickettsial if the Congo is a kind of a Haitian that is a portraitist. sent6: the Congo is not a kind of a portraitist. sent7: the saltation is a kind of a Capek and/or it is rickettsial. sent8: the ladylove is a kind of a Capek and is not a surgeonfish. sent9: that the Congo is a Trombiculidae but it does not congee cerebrum does not hold if the saltation decamps serialization. sent10: the Congo is a Haitian and/or it is not rickettsial. sent11: if something does not fret then it is a Finland and does decamp serialization. sent12: something is a Capek if the fact that it is a kind of a Trombiculidae that does not congee cerebrum is not right. sent13: the Congo is Haitian but it is not a kind of a portraitist.
|
sent1: {C}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} v ¬{B}{b}) sent2: ({EF}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent3: ({BP}{fc} & ¬{AT}{fc}) sent4: {A}{a} -> ({GP}{hu} & ¬{B}{hu}) sent5: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent6: ¬{AB}{a} sent7: ({A}{b} v {B}{b}) sent8: ({A}{gl} & ¬{BL}{gl}) sent9: {E}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent10: ({AA}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({F}x & {E}x) sent12: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) -> {A}x sent13: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[] |
[] |
the Marylander is a kind of a sparkle that is not rickettsial.
|
({GP}{hu} & ¬{B}{hu})
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: the Congo is a Capek if the fact that it is a Trombiculidae that does not congee cerebrum does not hold.; sent11 -> int2: the saltation is a Finland and decamps serialization if it is not a fret.;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = either the saltation is a Capek or it is not rickettsial or both. ; $context$ = sent1: that if the Congo is a Trombiculidae then the fact that the saltation is a Capek and/or is not rickettsial is not true hold. sent2: the saltation congees cabotage and is not a portraitist. sent3: the daub is a kind of a trochanter and does not rubric Congo. sent4: the Marylander sparkles but it is non-rickettsial if the Congo is a Capek. sent5: the saltation is not rickettsial if the Congo is a kind of a Haitian that is a portraitist. sent6: the Congo is not a kind of a portraitist. sent7: the saltation is a kind of a Capek and/or it is rickettsial. sent8: the ladylove is a kind of a Capek and is not a surgeonfish. sent9: that the Congo is a Trombiculidae but it does not congee cerebrum does not hold if the saltation decamps serialization. sent10: the Congo is a Haitian and/or it is not rickettsial. sent11: if something does not fret then it is a Finland and does decamp serialization. sent12: something is a Capek if the fact that it is a kind of a Trombiculidae that does not congee cerebrum is not right. sent13: the Congo is Haitian but it is not a kind of a portraitist. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the politician is not impolitic.
|
¬{C}{c}
|
sent1: something is impolitic if it congees politician. sent2: the groundwork is impolitic if that the politician crispens is right. sent3: if the linnet congees politician then the groundwork crispens. sent4: if something does not crispen then it is a kind of politic thing that does not congee politician. sent5: the linnet does congee politician. sent6: The politician does congee linnet. sent7: if the groundwork does crispen the politician is not politic.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent2: {B}{c} -> {C}{b} sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {AA}{aa} sent7: {B}{b} -> {C}{c}
|
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the groundwork crispens.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the politician is not impolitic.
|
¬{C}{c}
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: if that the politician does not crispen is not wrong then it is a kind of politic thing that does not congee politician.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the politician is not impolitic. ; $context$ = sent1: something is impolitic if it congees politician. sent2: the groundwork is impolitic if that the politician crispens is right. sent3: if the linnet congees politician then the groundwork crispens. sent4: if something does not crispen then it is a kind of politic thing that does not congee politician. sent5: the linnet does congee politician. sent6: The politician does congee linnet. sent7: if the groundwork does crispen the politician is not politic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the groundwork crispens.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
both the congeeing neckband and the layoff occurs.
|
({C} & {D})
|
sent1: the meaningfulness does not occur. sent2: the non-meaningfulness yields that the cricket does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{A} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬{B}
|
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: that the cricketing does not occur is not incorrect.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{B};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = both the congeeing neckband and the layoff occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the meaningfulness does not occur. sent2: the non-meaningfulness yields that the cricket does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent1 -> int1: that the cricketing does not occur is not incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the phosphor is not a kind of a Zaglossus.
|
¬{AB}{b}
|
sent1: something is not nosocomial and it is not a Titaness if it does not collapse. sent2: that the phosphor does decamp inconsideration is right if the baldhead is not a alyssum. sent3: the baldhead is a trek. sent4: the nudnik is a alyssum. sent5: if the baldhead does not decamp inconsideration then the phosphor is a kind of a alyssum that is a Zaglossus. sent6: if the fantail is not a goshawk that it is not a physicist and is not a kind of a tarsus is incorrect. sent7: if something is either not secretarial or not a Zaglossus or both then it is not a Zaglossus. sent8: the baldhead does not decamp inconsideration. sent9: the baldhead does decamp inconsideration and is a kind of a Zaglossus if the phosphor is not a alyssum. sent10: if the baldhead is not a Zaglossus then the phosphor does decamp inconsideration and is a kind of a alyssum. sent11: if something does not decamp inconsideration then either it is not secretarial or it is not a Zaglossus or both. sent12: the phosphor is a adoxography. sent13: the baldhead is a Plagianthus. sent14: The inconsideration does not decamp baldhead. sent15: if the baldhead is not nosocomial and it is not a Titaness the phosphor does not decamp inconsideration. sent16: if that the phosphor is not a kind of a Zaglossus is not incorrect then the baldhead is a alyssum. sent17: that the phosphor decamps inconsideration and it is a Zaglossus is not incorrect if the baldhead is not a alyssum.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) sent2: ¬{AA}{a} -> {A}{b} sent3: {EG}{a} sent4: {AA}{gf} sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent6: ¬{H}{c} -> ¬(¬{G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent7: (x): (¬{B}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent8: ¬{A}{a} sent9: ¬{AA}{b} -> ({A}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent10: ¬{AB}{a} -> ({A}{b} & {AA}{b}) sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}x v ¬{AB}x) sent12: {BU}{b} sent13: {IS}{a} sent14: ¬{AC}{aa} sent15: (¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent16: ¬{AB}{b} -> {AA}{a} sent17: ¬{AA}{a} -> ({A}{b} & {AB}{b})
|
[
"sent5 & sent8 -> int1: the phosphor is a kind of a alyssum and it is a kind of a Zaglossus.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent8 -> int1: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the phosphor is not a Zaglossus.
|
¬{AB}{b}
|
[
"sent7 -> int2: the phosphor is not a kind of a Zaglossus if it either is not secretarial or is not a Zaglossus or both.; sent11 -> int3: if the phosphor does not decamp inconsideration it either is non-secretarial or is not a Zaglossus or both.; sent1 -> int4: the baldhead is not nosocomial and it is not a kind of a Titaness if it is not a kind of a collapse.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the phosphor is not a kind of a Zaglossus. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not nosocomial and it is not a Titaness if it does not collapse. sent2: that the phosphor does decamp inconsideration is right if the baldhead is not a alyssum. sent3: the baldhead is a trek. sent4: the nudnik is a alyssum. sent5: if the baldhead does not decamp inconsideration then the phosphor is a kind of a alyssum that is a Zaglossus. sent6: if the fantail is not a goshawk that it is not a physicist and is not a kind of a tarsus is incorrect. sent7: if something is either not secretarial or not a Zaglossus or both then it is not a Zaglossus. sent8: the baldhead does not decamp inconsideration. sent9: the baldhead does decamp inconsideration and is a kind of a Zaglossus if the phosphor is not a alyssum. sent10: if the baldhead is not a Zaglossus then the phosphor does decamp inconsideration and is a kind of a alyssum. sent11: if something does not decamp inconsideration then either it is not secretarial or it is not a Zaglossus or both. sent12: the phosphor is a adoxography. sent13: the baldhead is a Plagianthus. sent14: The inconsideration does not decamp baldhead. sent15: if the baldhead is not nosocomial and it is not a Titaness the phosphor does not decamp inconsideration. sent16: if that the phosphor is not a kind of a Zaglossus is not incorrect then the baldhead is a alyssum. sent17: that the phosphor decamps inconsideration and it is a Zaglossus is not incorrect if the baldhead is not a alyssum. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent8 -> int1: the phosphor is a kind of a alyssum and it is a kind of a Zaglossus.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a Hasidim and is uniovular is not correct it is not a kind of a arrowworm.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: the achondrite is a kind of a arrowworm if that it is not a Hasidim and it is uniovular is false. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it is a Hasidim that is uniovular is not right that it is not a kind of a arrowworm is correct. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a nosedive and it wrestles does not hold that it is not heathlike is correct. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a Franciscan and decamps stabilizer is not right then it is a Delphinidae. sent5: there is something such that if it is a kind of a frontal then it is not a Vilnius. sent6: the achondrite is not a kind of a Hasidim if it is a Hyperborean. sent7: there is something such that if it is non-uniovular then it is not a kind of a arrowworm. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not a drilled and does congee lovastatin is not true the fact that it is a kind of a feat is true. sent9: if the fact that the achondrite is not a Hasidim but it is uniovular does not hold then it is not a kind of a arrowworm. sent10: if that the lovastatin is not actinomorphic but it is a Hasidim is false then it is a kind of a marri. sent11: there exists something such that if that it is both not a reservist and a tricycle is false that it is a rococo is not incorrect. sent12: there is something such that if it does not rubric Ayurveda and unscrambles then it does not decamp waterway. sent13: the stabilizer does not entrain if the fact that it is not Muhammadan and it is uniovular is incorrect. sent14: the achondrite is not apicultural if that it is not a Hasidim and is bipedal is not correct. sent15: if that something is not a brachiopod but it is a thyroid is wrong that it is not a papooseroot hold. sent16: if that the fact that the achondrite is a kind of a Hasidim that is uniovular does not hold hold it is not a arrowworm. sent17: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a rubicelle it is not a willing. sent18: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not arsenious and it is a kind of a silly is wrong then that it is not sacrificial is not wrong. sent19: that there is something such that if that it is not a American and is a tunaburger is not right then it is not a kind of a Fennic is right. sent20: there exists something such that if it is an anesthetic it is not a kind of a platelayer. sent21: if that the achondrite does not decrepitate and is custard-like is not correct it is a Hasidim.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (Ex): ¬(¬{HC}x & {FC}x) -> ¬{AD}x sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{FQ}x & {HN}x) -> {JA}x sent5: (Ex): {JI}x -> ¬{JJ}x sent6: {GJ}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{GR}x & {FE}x) -> {CD}x sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: ¬(¬{AH}{dm} & {AA}{dm}) -> {AK}{dm} sent11: (Ex): ¬(¬{BT}x & {J}x) -> {DA}x sent12: (Ex): (¬{EL}x & {GU}x) -> ¬{K}x sent13: ¬(¬{FU}{cc} & {AB}{cc}) -> ¬{CA}{cc} sent14: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {DH}{aa}) -> ¬{AJ}{aa} sent15: (x): ¬(¬{BO}x & {EO}x) -> ¬{CJ}x sent16: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent17: (Ex): ¬{CR}x -> ¬{HK}x sent18: (Ex): ¬(¬{IQ}x & {S}x) -> ¬{IC}x sent19: (Ex): ¬(¬{O}x & {GC}x) -> ¬{DK}x sent20: (Ex): {JC}x -> ¬{DD}x sent21: ¬(¬{HD}{aa} & {GT}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa}
|
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of a brachiopod and it is thyroid is not right it is not a kind of a papooseroot.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{BO}x & {EO}x) -> ¬{CJ}x
|
[
"sent15 -> int1: if that the stole is a kind of non-brachiopod thing that is thyroid is false it is not a papooseroot.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a Hasidim and is uniovular is not correct it is not a kind of a arrowworm. ; $context$ = sent1: the achondrite is a kind of a arrowworm if that it is not a Hasidim and it is uniovular is false. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it is a Hasidim that is uniovular is not right that it is not a kind of a arrowworm is correct. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a nosedive and it wrestles does not hold that it is not heathlike is correct. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a Franciscan and decamps stabilizer is not right then it is a Delphinidae. sent5: there is something such that if it is a kind of a frontal then it is not a Vilnius. sent6: the achondrite is not a kind of a Hasidim if it is a Hyperborean. sent7: there is something such that if it is non-uniovular then it is not a kind of a arrowworm. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not a drilled and does congee lovastatin is not true the fact that it is a kind of a feat is true. sent9: if the fact that the achondrite is not a Hasidim but it is uniovular does not hold then it is not a kind of a arrowworm. sent10: if that the lovastatin is not actinomorphic but it is a Hasidim is false then it is a kind of a marri. sent11: there exists something such that if that it is both not a reservist and a tricycle is false that it is a rococo is not incorrect. sent12: there is something such that if it does not rubric Ayurveda and unscrambles then it does not decamp waterway. sent13: the stabilizer does not entrain if the fact that it is not Muhammadan and it is uniovular is incorrect. sent14: the achondrite is not apicultural if that it is not a Hasidim and is bipedal is not correct. sent15: if that something is not a brachiopod but it is a thyroid is wrong that it is not a papooseroot hold. sent16: if that the fact that the achondrite is a kind of a Hasidim that is uniovular does not hold hold it is not a arrowworm. sent17: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a rubicelle it is not a willing. sent18: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not arsenious and it is a kind of a silly is wrong then that it is not sacrificial is not wrong. sent19: that there is something such that if that it is not a American and is a tunaburger is not right then it is not a kind of a Fennic is right. sent20: there exists something such that if it is an anesthetic it is not a kind of a platelayer. sent21: if that the achondrite does not decrepitate and is custard-like is not correct it is a Hasidim. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the nimbus but not the obscurantism happens is false.
|
¬({C} & ¬{D})
|
sent1: if that the decamping bushtit does not occur is correct then the Siberian does not occur. sent2: the forgettableness does not occur. sent3: if the fact that the certainness and the discountenancing sternness happens is false then the familialness does not occur. sent4: that the praetorianness but not the cadastralness occurs does not hold. sent5: if the preferment does not occur that the postmodernistness and the rubriccing wool happens is not correct. sent6: if the obligationalness does not occur the decamping stabilizer does not occur and the jointure happens. sent7: that the congeeing Muhammad does not occur is not false. sent8: if the Siberian does not occur then that the nimbus but not the obscurantism happens is incorrect. sent9: the obligationalness does not occur if the fact that the praetorianness happens but the cadastralness does not occur does not hold. sent10: that not the nimbus but the obscurantism happens is not true if the astrocyticness happens. sent11: the fact that the otoplasty and the rubriccing smacker happens is incorrect. sent12: if the fact that the decamping bushtit and the decamping telemetry happens is not true the Siberian does not occur. sent13: the rubriccing commensal does not occur. sent14: the FIFO and the astrocyticness happens if the certainness does not occur. sent15: the ritualism does not occur. sent16: if the Siberian does not occur the fact that that both the nimbus and the obscurantism occurs is incorrect is true. sent17: if the jointure occurs then both the non-pyogenicness and the non-certainness occurs. sent18: the fact that the nimbus occurs and the obscurantism occurs is not true. sent19: the fact that the decamping bushtit and the decamping telemetry happens is incorrect if the congeeing Muhammad does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{AA} -> ¬{B} sent2: ¬{AT} sent3: ¬({G} & {CL}) -> ¬{CI} sent4: ¬({M} & ¬{L}) sent5: ¬{ET} -> ¬({GA} & {IG}) sent6: ¬{K} -> (¬{J} & {I}) sent7: ¬{A} sent8: ¬{B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent9: ¬({M} & ¬{L}) -> ¬{K} sent10: {E} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent11: ¬({CS} & {HB}) sent12: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent13: ¬{GU} sent14: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) sent15: ¬{FN} sent16: ¬{B} -> ¬({C} & {D}) sent17: {I} -> (¬{H} & ¬{G}) sent18: ¬({C} & {D}) sent19: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB})
|
[
"sent19 & sent7 -> int1: that the decamping bushtit and the decamping telemetry happens is false.; sent12 & int1 -> int2: the Siberian does not occur.; sent8 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent19 & sent7 -> int1: ¬({AA} & {AB}); sent12 & int1 -> int2: ¬{B}; sent8 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the depositing does not occur.
|
¬{BN}
|
[
"sent9 & sent4 -> int3: the obligationalness does not occur.; sent6 & int3 -> int4: the fact that the decamping stabilizer does not occur and the jointure happens hold.; int4 -> int5: the jointure happens.; sent17 & int5 -> int6: the non-pyogenicness and the non-certainness occurs.; int6 -> int7: the certainness does not occur.; sent14 & int7 -> int8: the FIFO and the astrocyticness happens.; int8 -> int9: the astrocyticness happens.; sent10 & int9 -> int10: that not the nimbus but the obscurantism happens is incorrect.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the nimbus but not the obscurantism happens is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the decamping bushtit does not occur is correct then the Siberian does not occur. sent2: the forgettableness does not occur. sent3: if the fact that the certainness and the discountenancing sternness happens is false then the familialness does not occur. sent4: that the praetorianness but not the cadastralness occurs does not hold. sent5: if the preferment does not occur that the postmodernistness and the rubriccing wool happens is not correct. sent6: if the obligationalness does not occur the decamping stabilizer does not occur and the jointure happens. sent7: that the congeeing Muhammad does not occur is not false. sent8: if the Siberian does not occur then that the nimbus but not the obscurantism happens is incorrect. sent9: the obligationalness does not occur if the fact that the praetorianness happens but the cadastralness does not occur does not hold. sent10: that not the nimbus but the obscurantism happens is not true if the astrocyticness happens. sent11: the fact that the otoplasty and the rubriccing smacker happens is incorrect. sent12: if the fact that the decamping bushtit and the decamping telemetry happens is not true the Siberian does not occur. sent13: the rubriccing commensal does not occur. sent14: the FIFO and the astrocyticness happens if the certainness does not occur. sent15: the ritualism does not occur. sent16: if the Siberian does not occur the fact that that both the nimbus and the obscurantism occurs is incorrect is true. sent17: if the jointure occurs then both the non-pyogenicness and the non-certainness occurs. sent18: the fact that the nimbus occurs and the obscurantism occurs is not true. sent19: the fact that the decamping bushtit and the decamping telemetry happens is incorrect if the congeeing Muhammad does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent19 & sent7 -> int1: that the decamping bushtit and the decamping telemetry happens is false.; sent12 & int1 -> int2: the Siberian does not occur.; sent8 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bandying happens.
|
{C}
|
sent1: the congeeing Ereshkigal happens if the epilithicness occurs. sent2: the apothecialness happens. sent3: both the vestal and the closingness occurs. sent4: if the rubriccing midplane happens the nontechnicalness happens. sent5: the rubriccing backstroker occurs. sent6: the disintegration occurs and the analphabeticness occurs. sent7: the restlessness happens. sent8: the vestalness prevents that the bandying does not occur. sent9: that the analphabeticness occurs is caused by the decamping xenophobia. sent10: the closing happens. sent11: the saltiness happens. sent12: that the turnaround happens is caused by the battle. sent13: the paper occurs. sent14: the shag and the testamentariness occurs. sent15: the rubriccing substitute happens and the insemination occurs. sent16: the rebellion occurs. sent17: both the glancing and the shiness happens. sent18: the weakening is caused by the collusion. sent19: the concording happens. sent20: the abolitionariness happens and the congeeing perfidy happens. sent21: the congeeing dichotomization happens and the rubriccing adoxography occurs.
|
sent1: {HC} -> {IN} sent2: {GO} sent3: ({A} & {B}) sent4: {HB} -> {D} sent5: {BN} sent6: ({EO} & {IG}) sent7: {IU} sent8: {A} -> {C} sent9: {DB} -> {IG} sent10: {B} sent11: {HO} sent12: {GF} -> {BU} sent13: {BQ} sent14: ({CF} & {Q}) sent15: ({BP} & {DG}) sent16: {CS} sent17: ({IF} & {HL}) sent18: {IA} -> {IM} sent19: {BK} sent20: ({CJ} & {EN}) sent21: ({K} & {HI})
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the vestal happens.; sent8 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: {A}; sent8 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the bandying happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the congeeing Ereshkigal happens if the epilithicness occurs. sent2: the apothecialness happens. sent3: both the vestal and the closingness occurs. sent4: if the rubriccing midplane happens the nontechnicalness happens. sent5: the rubriccing backstroker occurs. sent6: the disintegration occurs and the analphabeticness occurs. sent7: the restlessness happens. sent8: the vestalness prevents that the bandying does not occur. sent9: that the analphabeticness occurs is caused by the decamping xenophobia. sent10: the closing happens. sent11: the saltiness happens. sent12: that the turnaround happens is caused by the battle. sent13: the paper occurs. sent14: the shag and the testamentariness occurs. sent15: the rubriccing substitute happens and the insemination occurs. sent16: the rebellion occurs. sent17: both the glancing and the shiness happens. sent18: the weakening is caused by the collusion. sent19: the concording happens. sent20: the abolitionariness happens and the congeeing perfidy happens. sent21: the congeeing dichotomization happens and the rubriccing adoxography occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the vestal happens.; sent8 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that either the desideratum does not discountenance contracture or it is not plagioclastic or both is not correct.
|
¬(¬{E}{c} v ¬{D}{c})
|
sent1: if there exists something such that that it does discountenance contracture and is not a collect does not hold the eggcup does not discountenance contracture. sent2: the desideratum is not adequate. sent3: there is something such that it is not a highboy. sent4: if the fact that something is a phrenologist and it is unsinkable is not right then it is not a Galega. sent5: the fact that the escort does collect is true if it is not a condom. sent6: that the escort discountenances contracture but it does not collect is not right if there is something such that it is a kind of a paint. sent7: if that the spade is a collect and it is a paint is false then the desideratum is not a condom. sent8: the fact that that either the desideratum does not scratch or it is not a Galega or both is not false is not right. sent9: if the spade is not plagioclastic the desideratum is not a kind of a paint. sent10: the escort is not a condom if the fact that the desideratum is a paint and a collect is not right. sent11: if the spade is not plagioclastic it does paint. sent12: that the spade is a phrenologist and unsinkable does not hold if the desideratum is not an analyzer. sent13: the fact that the desideratum either is not a collect or is not plagioclastic or both is wrong. sent14: if something is non-plagioclastic but it is a condom it does paint. sent15: the fact that the spade is both a collect and a paint is incorrect if that the escort does not collect hold. sent16: the escort is a kind of a kingbird. sent17: if the desideratum is not a condom the fact that it does not discountenance contracture and/or it is not plagioclastic is incorrect. sent18: something is unequal and is not a kind of a kingbird. sent19: if something is not a Galega then it is not plagioclastic and it is a condom.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{E}{o} sent2: {AA}{c} sent3: (Ex): ¬{J}x sent4: (x): ¬({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent5: ¬{C}{a} -> {A}{a} sent6: (x): {B}x -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent7: ¬({A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent8: ¬(¬{AD}{c} v ¬{F}{c}) sent9: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬{B}{c} sent10: ¬({B}{c} & {A}{c}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent11: ¬{D}{b} -> {B}{b} sent12: ¬{I}{c} -> ¬({H}{b} & {G}{b}) sent13: ¬(¬{A}{c} v ¬{D}{c}) sent14: (x): (¬{D}x & {C}x) -> {B}x sent15: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent16: {AB}{a} sent17: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬(¬{E}{c} v ¬{D}{c}) sent18: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent19: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x & {C}x)
|
[] |
[] |
the eggcup does not discountenance contracture.
|
¬{E}{o}
|
[
"sent14 -> int1: if the spade is not plagioclastic but it is a kind of a condom it is a kind of a paint.; sent19 -> int2: the spade is not plagioclastic but it is a kind of a condom if it is not a kind of a Galega.; sent4 -> int3: if the fact that the spade is a phrenologist and not sinkable is not correct then it is not a Galega.;"
] | 9 | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that either the desideratum does not discountenance contracture or it is not plagioclastic or both is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that that it does discountenance contracture and is not a collect does not hold the eggcup does not discountenance contracture. sent2: the desideratum is not adequate. sent3: there is something such that it is not a highboy. sent4: if the fact that something is a phrenologist and it is unsinkable is not right then it is not a Galega. sent5: the fact that the escort does collect is true if it is not a condom. sent6: that the escort discountenances contracture but it does not collect is not right if there is something such that it is a kind of a paint. sent7: if that the spade is a collect and it is a paint is false then the desideratum is not a condom. sent8: the fact that that either the desideratum does not scratch or it is not a Galega or both is not false is not right. sent9: if the spade is not plagioclastic the desideratum is not a kind of a paint. sent10: the escort is not a condom if the fact that the desideratum is a paint and a collect is not right. sent11: if the spade is not plagioclastic it does paint. sent12: that the spade is a phrenologist and unsinkable does not hold if the desideratum is not an analyzer. sent13: the fact that the desideratum either is not a collect or is not plagioclastic or both is wrong. sent14: if something is non-plagioclastic but it is a condom it does paint. sent15: the fact that the spade is both a collect and a paint is incorrect if that the escort does not collect hold. sent16: the escort is a kind of a kingbird. sent17: if the desideratum is not a condom the fact that it does not discountenance contracture and/or it is not plagioclastic is incorrect. sent18: something is unequal and is not a kind of a kingbird. sent19: if something is not a Galega then it is not plagioclastic and it is a condom. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Cage does not rubric bib-and-tucker and congees liposome.
|
(¬{C}{b} & {D}{b})
|
sent1: something is not a headcount. sent2: the positive does discountenance repertoire. sent3: the bib-and-tucker is a kind of a Swietinia. sent4: something is a headcount. sent5: the fact that the bib-and-tucker is non-acaudate is not incorrect. sent6: the bib-and-tucker does not rubric bib-and-tucker if the Cage congees Mozambique. sent7: if the bib-and-tucker does discountenance repertoire and/or it does congee Mozambique then the Cage does not rubric bib-and-tucker. sent8: the Cage does congee liposome and it congees Mozambique if there exists something such that it does not discountenance repertoire. sent9: if the bib-and-tucker congees liposome and/or is a kind of a Calopogon the Cage does not discountenance repertoire. sent10: The repertoire discountenances bib-and-tucker. sent11: the fastnacht is a Calopogon. sent12: the bib-and-tucker is not a Calopogon. sent13: the Cage congees liposome and it is a kind of a Calopogon if there is something such that it is not a headcount. sent14: the bib-and-tucker discountenances repertoire. sent15: there is something such that it does discountenance repertoire.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{F}x sent2: {A}{cj} sent3: {T}{a} sent4: (Ex): {F}x sent5: ¬{BS}{a} sent6: {B}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} sent7: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({D}{b} & {B}{b}) sent9: ({D}{a} v {E}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent10: {AA}{aa} sent11: {E}{ec} sent12: ¬{E}{a} sent13: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) sent14: {A}{a} sent15: (Ex): {A}x
|
[
"sent14 -> int1: that the bib-and-tucker does discountenance repertoire or congees Mozambique or both is not false.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the Cage does not rubric bib-and-tucker.; sent1 & sent13 -> int3: the Cage does congee liposome and is a Calopogon.; int3 -> int4: the Cage does congee liposome.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent14 -> int1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}); int1 & sent7 -> int2: ¬{C}{b}; sent1 & sent13 -> int3: ({D}{b} & {E}{b}); int3 -> int4: {D}{b}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the butanone is not a vulture but it congees Mozambique.
|
(¬{AM}{jb} & {B}{jb})
|
[] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Cage does not rubric bib-and-tucker and congees liposome. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a headcount. sent2: the positive does discountenance repertoire. sent3: the bib-and-tucker is a kind of a Swietinia. sent4: something is a headcount. sent5: the fact that the bib-and-tucker is non-acaudate is not incorrect. sent6: the bib-and-tucker does not rubric bib-and-tucker if the Cage congees Mozambique. sent7: if the bib-and-tucker does discountenance repertoire and/or it does congee Mozambique then the Cage does not rubric bib-and-tucker. sent8: the Cage does congee liposome and it congees Mozambique if there exists something such that it does not discountenance repertoire. sent9: if the bib-and-tucker congees liposome and/or is a kind of a Calopogon the Cage does not discountenance repertoire. sent10: The repertoire discountenances bib-and-tucker. sent11: the fastnacht is a Calopogon. sent12: the bib-and-tucker is not a Calopogon. sent13: the Cage congees liposome and it is a kind of a Calopogon if there is something such that it is not a headcount. sent14: the bib-and-tucker discountenances repertoire. sent15: there is something such that it does discountenance repertoire. ; $proof$ =
|
sent14 -> int1: that the bib-and-tucker does discountenance repertoire or congees Mozambique or both is not false.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the Cage does not rubric bib-and-tucker.; sent1 & sent13 -> int3: the Cage does congee liposome and is a Calopogon.; int3 -> int4: the Cage does congee liposome.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the freewheeler is a heterology and is Masoretic.
|
({D}{a} & {E}{a})
|
sent1: if the freewheeler does not discountenance census but it is typical it is romaic. sent2: the craniometer is not romaic. sent3: the freewheeler is a kind of a alyssum. sent4: something is a heterology and it is Masoretic if the fact that it is not senior is not false. sent5: something is minty if that it is not an insult hold. sent6: the freewheeler does not discountenance census and is not typical. sent7: something that is romaic and is a alyssum is not a senior. sent8: if the tokamak does not melodize and it is not a Medellin it is a kind of a naturalness.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent2: ¬{B}{j} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) sent5: (x): ¬{EC}x -> {BE}x sent6: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent8: (¬{GS}{eo} & ¬{CE}{eo}) -> {GH}{eo}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the freewheeler is not a senior if it is romaic and it is a kind of a alyssum.; sent4 -> int2: the freewheeler is a kind of a heterology that is Masoretic if that it is not a senior is right.;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; sent4 -> int2: ¬{C}{a} -> ({D}{a} & {E}{a});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the freewheeler is a heterology and is Masoretic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the freewheeler does not discountenance census but it is typical it is romaic. sent2: the craniometer is not romaic. sent3: the freewheeler is a kind of a alyssum. sent4: something is a heterology and it is Masoretic if the fact that it is not senior is not false. sent5: something is minty if that it is not an insult hold. sent6: the freewheeler does not discountenance census and is not typical. sent7: something that is romaic and is a alyssum is not a senior. sent8: if the tokamak does not melodize and it is not a Medellin it is a kind of a naturalness. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: the freewheeler is not a senior if it is romaic and it is a kind of a alyssum.; sent4 -> int2: the freewheeler is a kind of a heterology that is Masoretic if that it is not a senior is right.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if that it does live hold it is not a shawm and is not a kind of a cecum does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is live then it is not a kind of a shawm. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it does live hold it is a shawm and is not a cecum. sent3: there exists something such that if it is an ohm it does not diffuse and it is not a kind of a conservative. sent4: there exists something such that if it does congee Boethius then it is not a FHLMC and does decamp pastoral. sent5: if the budgerigar lives it is not a kind of a shawm. sent6: the budgerigar is not a shawm and is a kind of a cecum if it is live. sent7: there is something such that if it is pardonable then it is not bismuthal and it is future. sent8: something is both not exegetic and non-administrative if that it does congee sushi is not incorrect. sent9: there exists something such that if it rubrics adrenalectomy it is not defiant. sent10: the budgerigar is not a cecum and not medical if it does discountenance roots. sent11: if something is a shawm then it is not a kind of a bagatelle and it is not a horizontality. sent12: the fact that there exists something such that if it is a jug then it is not a future and it does not congee sterilization is not false. sent13: the budgerigar is not a shawm and it is not a cecum if it lives.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: (Ex): {J}x -> (¬{FL}x & ¬{HE}x) sent4: (Ex): {AI}x -> (¬{FS}x & {DI}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent6: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): {HA}x -> (¬{B}x & {GM}x) sent8: (x): {HG}x -> (¬{GR}x & ¬{GE}x) sent9: (Ex): {FM}x -> ¬{HU}x sent10: {EL}{aa} -> (¬{AB}{aa} & ¬{HH}{aa}) sent11: (x): {AA}x -> (¬{DU}x & ¬{DM}x) sent12: (Ex): {IT}x -> (¬{GM}x & ¬{DE}x) sent13: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that there exists something such that if it does congee sushi then it is a kind of non-exegetic thing that is not administrative is correct.
|
(Ex): {HG}x -> (¬{GR}x & ¬{GE}x)
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: if the byssus congees sushi it is not exegetic and it is not administrative.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if that it does live hold it is not a shawm and is not a kind of a cecum does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is live then it is not a kind of a shawm. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it does live hold it is a shawm and is not a cecum. sent3: there exists something such that if it is an ohm it does not diffuse and it is not a kind of a conservative. sent4: there exists something such that if it does congee Boethius then it is not a FHLMC and does decamp pastoral. sent5: if the budgerigar lives it is not a kind of a shawm. sent6: the budgerigar is not a shawm and is a kind of a cecum if it is live. sent7: there is something such that if it is pardonable then it is not bismuthal and it is future. sent8: something is both not exegetic and non-administrative if that it does congee sushi is not incorrect. sent9: there exists something such that if it rubrics adrenalectomy it is not defiant. sent10: the budgerigar is not a cecum and not medical if it does discountenance roots. sent11: if something is a shawm then it is not a kind of a bagatelle and it is not a horizontality. sent12: the fact that there exists something such that if it is a jug then it is not a future and it does not congee sterilization is not false. sent13: the budgerigar is not a shawm and it is not a cecum if it lives. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that it is not intramuscular.
|
(Ex): ¬{B}x
|
sent1: the steamer annoys and is a community. sent2: if the fact that the posthouse is both a cloudlessness and a pigment does not hold the Kafir is not a pigment. sent3: that if the squib is not intramuscular then the fact that the posthouse is a kind of a cloudlessness that is a pigment is false is true. sent4: the yellowthroat is not unlikely. sent5: if that something is not a rocket and it is not a calculus does not hold then it is not intramuscular. sent6: if the endosteum is not seedless the infundibulum is a lanternfish and it is a kind of a rocket. sent7: a likely thing is a kind of a Petrogale that is a Ereshkigal. sent8: the transponder is a cloudlessness. sent9: that the squib does not rocket and it is not a calculus is wrong if there is something such that it is a rocket. sent10: the posthouse is a kind of a cloudlessness. sent11: the posthouse is a complacency. sent12: if the steamer is a community the yellowthroat is a kind of a community. sent13: if the fact that the posthouse is a kind of a cloudlessness hold then it is non-intramuscular.
|
sent1: ({K}{f} & {H}{f}) sent2: ¬({A}{a} & {BF}{a}) -> ¬{BF}{bd} sent3: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {BF}{a}) sent4: ¬{J}{e} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: ¬{F}{d} -> ({E}{c} & {D}{c}) sent7: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({I}x & {G}x) sent8: {A}{bm} sent9: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent10: {A}{a} sent11: {HN}{a} sent12: {H}{f} -> {H}{e} sent13: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent13 & sent10 -> int1: the posthouse is non-intramuscular.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 & sent10 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Kafir does not pigment.
|
¬{BF}{bd}
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: the squib is not intramuscular if that it is not a rocket and it is not a calculus does not hold.; sent7 -> int3: the yellowthroat is a kind of a Petrogale that is a Ereshkigal if it is not unlikely.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: that the yellowthroat is a kind of a Petrogale and is a Ereshkigal is right.; int4 -> int5: the yellowthroat is a Ereshkigal.; sent1 -> int6: the steamer is a kind of a community.; sent12 & int6 -> int7: the yellowthroat is a community.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the yellowthroat is a kind of a Ereshkigal and is a community.; int8 -> int9: something is a Ereshkigal and is a community.;"
] | 13 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is not intramuscular. ; $context$ = sent1: the steamer annoys and is a community. sent2: if the fact that the posthouse is both a cloudlessness and a pigment does not hold the Kafir is not a pigment. sent3: that if the squib is not intramuscular then the fact that the posthouse is a kind of a cloudlessness that is a pigment is false is true. sent4: the yellowthroat is not unlikely. sent5: if that something is not a rocket and it is not a calculus does not hold then it is not intramuscular. sent6: if the endosteum is not seedless the infundibulum is a lanternfish and it is a kind of a rocket. sent7: a likely thing is a kind of a Petrogale that is a Ereshkigal. sent8: the transponder is a cloudlessness. sent9: that the squib does not rocket and it is not a calculus is wrong if there is something such that it is a rocket. sent10: the posthouse is a kind of a cloudlessness. sent11: the posthouse is a complacency. sent12: if the steamer is a community the yellowthroat is a kind of a community. sent13: if the fact that the posthouse is a kind of a cloudlessness hold then it is non-intramuscular. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 & sent10 -> int1: the posthouse is non-intramuscular.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the bib-and-tucker rubrics counteroffer hold.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: the bib-and-tucker does not rubric counteroffer if the cake does not congee bib-and-tucker. sent2: if the bib-and-tucker does congee Deere then that it is not a kind of a Yemen and rubrics overplus is false. sent3: something does congee bib-and-tucker and is a kind of a Sassenach if it does not rubric counteroffer. sent4: if that something is not a Yemen but it does rubric overplus does not hold then it does not congee bib-and-tucker. sent5: something bilges and is a kind of a Americanism if that it does not congee bib-and-tucker is right. sent6: that the cake does not congee bib-and-tucker is not incorrect if it is a Americanism and it is a bilge. sent7: the cake is a kind of a bilge. sent8: the perijove rubrics counteroffer. sent9: if that either the cake does rubric counteroffer or it is not a kind of a Yemen or both is false the wink does not rubric counteroffer. sent10: if the bib-and-tucker rubrics overplus it is not a Americanism but a bilge. sent11: if the bib-and-tucker congees Deere it does rubric overplus. sent12: the cake is a kind of a Americanism. sent13: a Americanism rubrics counteroffer.
|
sent1: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} sent2: {G}{b} -> ¬(¬{E}{b} & {F}{b}) sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & {GG}x) sent4: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{C}x sent5: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent7: {B}{a} sent8: {D}{ak} sent9: ¬({D}{a} v ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{D}{ci} sent10: {F}{b} -> (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent11: {G}{b} -> {F}{b} sent12: {A}{a} sent13: (x): {A}x -> {D}x
|
[
"sent12 & sent7 -> int1: the cake is a Americanism that does bilge.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the cake does not congee bib-and-tucker.; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent7 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 & sent6 -> int2: ¬{C}{a}; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the wink is a kind of a Sassenach and it is synclinal.
|
({GG}{ci} & {ES}{ci})
|
[
"sent3 -> int3: the wink does congee bib-and-tucker and is a kind of a Sassenach if it does not rubric counteroffer.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the bib-and-tucker rubrics counteroffer hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the bib-and-tucker does not rubric counteroffer if the cake does not congee bib-and-tucker. sent2: if the bib-and-tucker does congee Deere then that it is not a kind of a Yemen and rubrics overplus is false. sent3: something does congee bib-and-tucker and is a kind of a Sassenach if it does not rubric counteroffer. sent4: if that something is not a Yemen but it does rubric overplus does not hold then it does not congee bib-and-tucker. sent5: something bilges and is a kind of a Americanism if that it does not congee bib-and-tucker is right. sent6: that the cake does not congee bib-and-tucker is not incorrect if it is a Americanism and it is a bilge. sent7: the cake is a kind of a bilge. sent8: the perijove rubrics counteroffer. sent9: if that either the cake does rubric counteroffer or it is not a kind of a Yemen or both is false the wink does not rubric counteroffer. sent10: if the bib-and-tucker rubrics overplus it is not a Americanism but a bilge. sent11: if the bib-and-tucker congees Deere it does rubric overplus. sent12: the cake is a kind of a Americanism. sent13: a Americanism rubrics counteroffer. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent7 -> int1: the cake is a Americanism that does bilge.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the cake does not congee bib-and-tucker.; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if that either it does not congee hominid or it decamps underperformer or both is not correct it is not sustentacular.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: if that the sunlight does not congee hominid or it does decamp underperformer or both is not right it is non-sustentacular.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if that either it does not congee hominid or it decamps underperformer or both is not correct it is not sustentacular. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the sunlight does not congee hominid or it does decamp underperformer or both is not right it is non-sustentacular. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the dolichocephalic and the voyeuristicness happens.
|
({A} & {C})
|
sent1: if the fact that the dolichocephalicness and the non-powerlessness happens does not hold then the mesoblasticness happens. sent2: the powerlessness happens. sent3: if the rubriccing Transportation happens the fact that the apostrophicness does not occur and the congeeing orgasm happens is wrong. sent4: that the congeeing orgasm does not occur is right if the fact that the non-apostrophicness and the congeeing orgasm happens is not right. sent5: if the Easter does not occur both the reordering and the voyeuristicness occurs. sent6: both the dolichocephalicness and the powerlessness occurs. sent7: that the dolichocephalicness but not the powerlessness happens is wrong if the congeeing orgasm does not occur. sent8: the pedalness happens. sent9: both the voyeuristicness and the congeeing orgasm occurs. sent10: if the fact that the amphibiousness happens is not false the Easter does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) -> {BQ} sent2: {B} sent3: {J} -> ¬(¬{G} & {D}) sent4: ¬(¬{G} & {D}) -> ¬{D} sent5: ¬{E} -> ({DI} & {C}) sent6: ({A} & {B}) sent7: ¬{D} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) sent8: {ET} sent9: ({C} & {D}) sent10: {F} -> ¬{E}
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the dolichocephalicness happens.; sent9 -> int2: that the voyeuristicness happens is right.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: {A}; sent9 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
both the mesoblasticness and the reordering happens.
|
({BQ} & {DI})
|
[] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the dolichocephalic and the voyeuristicness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the dolichocephalicness and the non-powerlessness happens does not hold then the mesoblasticness happens. sent2: the powerlessness happens. sent3: if the rubriccing Transportation happens the fact that the apostrophicness does not occur and the congeeing orgasm happens is wrong. sent4: that the congeeing orgasm does not occur is right if the fact that the non-apostrophicness and the congeeing orgasm happens is not right. sent5: if the Easter does not occur both the reordering and the voyeuristicness occurs. sent6: both the dolichocephalicness and the powerlessness occurs. sent7: that the dolichocephalicness but not the powerlessness happens is wrong if the congeeing orgasm does not occur. sent8: the pedalness happens. sent9: both the voyeuristicness and the congeeing orgasm occurs. sent10: if the fact that the amphibiousness happens is not false the Easter does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the dolichocephalicness happens.; sent9 -> int2: that the voyeuristicness happens is right.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the valine is not a kind of a maypole and is not an aspiration it does not solve.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: the fact that if something is not a maypole and not an aspiration it does not solve is right.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = if the valine is not a kind of a maypole and is not an aspiration it does not solve. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that if something is not a maypole and not an aspiration it does not solve is right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something does not rubric sterilization and cheeses.
|
(Ex): (¬{A}x & {B}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that the fact that it does not decamp commissar and/or it discountenances Ulster does not hold. sent2: the dilator is both not Ephesian and a batiste. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it does not decamp commissar or does discountenance Ulster or both is wrong the scan does not rubric sterilization. sent4: if something is a Tombaugh that is gestational then it does not rubric sterilization. sent5: if the millivoltmeter is a kind of a Tombaugh the scan is a cheese. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it does not rubric sterilization is not incorrect.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent2: (¬{BP}{hh} & {EO}{hh}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: (x): ({C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent5: {C}{b} -> {B}{a} sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x
|
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the scan does not rubric sterilization.;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: ¬{A}{a};"
] |
the serotonin is a cheese.
|
{B}{ef}
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: if the serotonin is both a Tombaugh and gestational then it does not rubric sterilization.;"
] | 4 | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = something does not rubric sterilization and cheeses. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it does not decamp commissar and/or it discountenances Ulster does not hold. sent2: the dilator is both not Ephesian and a batiste. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it does not decamp commissar or does discountenance Ulster or both is wrong the scan does not rubric sterilization. sent4: if something is a Tombaugh that is gestational then it does not rubric sterilization. sent5: if the millivoltmeter is a kind of a Tombaugh the scan is a cheese. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it does not rubric sterilization is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the scan does not rubric sterilization.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if that the ramontchi is not a domed but it is a wittol does not hold then it does disintegrate.
|
¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}
|
sent1: if something is a kind of an insemination it is petalous. sent2: the nitrate is a Plagianthus if that it is not a grade and it is a kind of an alert is not correct. sent3: if the fact that something is not a domed and is a wittol does not hold then it does disintegrate. sent4: something is a kind of a travel if it is a photography. sent5: if the fact that something does not discountenance Harvey but it is a kind of a missal does not hold then it does wholesale. sent6: the ciprofloxacin is foolish if it is not a fell and is curly. sent7: if the ramontchi is a domed it disintegrates. sent8: if the fact that the ramontchi does not decamp angst but it does rubric loupe does not hold then it is a kind of a domed. sent9: if something is a bottom-feeder then it is a Antennariidae. sent10: something is altitudinal if it does not deepen and does rubric leatherback. sent11: the fact that if that the ramontchi does not discountenance Harvey but it rubrics Canaanitic is wrong then the ramontchi does disintegrate hold. sent12: something is a void if it does not congee radial and it bounds. sent13: if the fact that something does not congee romper but it does riposte does not hold it is a denominator. sent14: the ramontchi disintegrates if that it is not an itinerary and it is a kind of a strings does not hold. sent15: something is a characteristic if it fantasizes. sent16: the trellis is not non-petalous if that it does not disintegrate and it fantasizes is not true. sent17: the ramontchi strings if the fact that it does not disintegrate and congees whoremaster hold.
|
sent1: (x): {GT}x -> {CH}x sent2: ¬(¬{GP}{eq} & {IT}{eq}) -> {DE}{eq} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (x): {FN}x -> {IP}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AE}x & {T}x) -> {N}x sent6: (¬{BK}{hn} & {IO}{hn}) -> {EE}{hn} sent7: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent8: ¬(¬{CL}{aa} & {GU}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} sent9: (x): {JK}x -> {HO}x sent10: (x): (¬{AN}x & {A}x) -> {HC}x sent11: ¬(¬{AE}{aa} & {JB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent12: (x): (¬{BQ}x & {EA}x) -> {HF}x sent13: (x): ¬(¬{AK}x & {DG}x) -> {S}x sent14: ¬(¬{CB}{aa} & {CO}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent15: (x): {FH}x -> {EL}x sent16: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {FH}{b}) -> {CH}{b} sent17: (¬{B}{aa} & {FA}{aa}) -> {CO}{aa}
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = if that the ramontchi is not a domed but it is a wittol does not hold then it does disintegrate. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a kind of an insemination it is petalous. sent2: the nitrate is a Plagianthus if that it is not a grade and it is a kind of an alert is not correct. sent3: if the fact that something is not a domed and is a wittol does not hold then it does disintegrate. sent4: something is a kind of a travel if it is a photography. sent5: if the fact that something does not discountenance Harvey but it is a kind of a missal does not hold then it does wholesale. sent6: the ciprofloxacin is foolish if it is not a fell and is curly. sent7: if the ramontchi is a domed it disintegrates. sent8: if the fact that the ramontchi does not decamp angst but it does rubric loupe does not hold then it is a kind of a domed. sent9: if something is a bottom-feeder then it is a Antennariidae. sent10: something is altitudinal if it does not deepen and does rubric leatherback. sent11: the fact that if that the ramontchi does not discountenance Harvey but it rubrics Canaanitic is wrong then the ramontchi does disintegrate hold. sent12: something is a void if it does not congee radial and it bounds. sent13: if the fact that something does not congee romper but it does riposte does not hold it is a denominator. sent14: the ramontchi disintegrates if that it is not an itinerary and it is a kind of a strings does not hold. sent15: something is a characteristic if it fantasizes. sent16: the trellis is not non-petalous if that it does not disintegrate and it fantasizes is not true. sent17: the ramontchi strings if the fact that it does not disintegrate and congees whoremaster hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that that the praetorium is archiepiscopal and does not decamp hybrid is incorrect if the praetorium is a peoples does not hold.
|
¬({A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}))
|
sent1: if something is trustworthy the fact that it is a kind of a drosophila and it is karyokinetic is not right. sent2: the fact that something is a grizzly and it does demonstrate does not hold if it is a kind of a linebacker. sent3: the fact that something is archiepiscopal but it does not decamp hybrid is not right if it is a peoples. sent4: if the praetorium decamps hybrid then the fact that it is nonpsychoactive and is not thoughtless is wrong. sent5: something is archiepiscopal but it does not decamp hybrid if it is a peoples. sent6: that something is a snore that does demonstrate is false if it does rubric Tradescant. sent7: that something is dioecious but it does not discountenance Pennatulidae is not true if it is a message. sent8: if the praetorium peoples then that it is archiepiscopal and it decamps hybrid is not right. sent9: that something burps and it congees motionlessness is not right if it rubrics treponema. sent10: if something is a Omaha then that it is a kind of high-resolution thing that does not decamp character is not true. sent11: the fact that something decamps Madagascan and it is a scintillation is incorrect if that it is a cantaloupe is true. sent12: if the praetorium peoples then it is a kind of archiepiscopal thing that does not decamp hybrid.
|
sent1: (x): {BF}x -> ¬({HC}x & {F}x) sent2: (x): {BT}x -> ¬({E}x & {II}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: {AB}{aa} -> ¬({IL}{aa} & ¬{JE}{aa}) sent5: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent6: (x): {M}x -> ¬({IG}x & {II}x) sent7: (x): {HF}x -> ¬({FF}x & ¬{CC}x) sent8: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (x): {AQ}x -> ¬({IQ}x & {CD}x) sent10: (x): {GN}x -> ¬({EP}x & ¬{CN}x) sent11: (x): {BK}x -> ¬({Q}x & {AF}x) sent12: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that that the praetorium is archiepiscopal and does not decamp hybrid is incorrect if the praetorium is a peoples does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is trustworthy the fact that it is a kind of a drosophila and it is karyokinetic is not right. sent2: the fact that something is a grizzly and it does demonstrate does not hold if it is a kind of a linebacker. sent3: the fact that something is archiepiscopal but it does not decamp hybrid is not right if it is a peoples. sent4: if the praetorium decamps hybrid then the fact that it is nonpsychoactive and is not thoughtless is wrong. sent5: something is archiepiscopal but it does not decamp hybrid if it is a peoples. sent6: that something is a snore that does demonstrate is false if it does rubric Tradescant. sent7: that something is dioecious but it does not discountenance Pennatulidae is not true if it is a message. sent8: if the praetorium peoples then that it is archiepiscopal and it decamps hybrid is not right. sent9: that something burps and it congees motionlessness is not right if it rubrics treponema. sent10: if something is a Omaha then that it is a kind of high-resolution thing that does not decamp character is not true. sent11: the fact that something decamps Madagascan and it is a scintillation is incorrect if that it is a cantaloupe is true. sent12: if the praetorium peoples then it is a kind of archiepiscopal thing that does not decamp hybrid. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the steep does not occur and the gather does not occur.
|
(¬{D} & ¬{C})
|
sent1: if the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur then that the steepness does not occur and the gathering does not occur is wrong. sent2: the devolution does not occur. sent3: the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur and the rubriccing polytonality does not occur. sent4: that both the decamping tawniness and the non-contralateralness occurs is incorrect if the constantness does not occur. sent5: if the dulling does not occur the fact that the non-obstetricsness and the non-commonsness happens is incorrect. sent6: that the steepness occurs but the gather does not occur is incorrect if the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur. sent7: the rubriccing albinism does not occur. sent8: the fluoridation does not occur. sent9: if the migrating does not occur then the fact that the operableness does not occur and the Down does not occur is not correct. sent10: the fact that the decamping contracture does not occur and the abidance does not occur does not hold. sent11: the steep does not occur if the fact that the rubriccing polytonality happens and/or the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur is not false. sent12: that the weapon does not occur and the visceralness does not occur is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{D} & ¬{C}) sent2: ¬{BE} sent3: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent4: ¬{IJ} -> ¬({CP} & ¬{HJ}) sent5: ¬{IH} -> ¬(¬{JE} & ¬{HT}) sent6: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} & ¬{C}) sent7: ¬{CN} sent8: ¬{IQ} sent9: ¬{CO} -> ¬(¬{ES} & ¬{GD}) sent10: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{GR}) sent11: ({B} v ¬{A}) -> ¬{D} sent12: ¬(¬{CR} & ¬{DQ})
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ¬{A}; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the steeping does not occur and the gathering does not occur.
|
(¬{D} & ¬{C})
|
[] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the steep does not occur and the gather does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur then that the steepness does not occur and the gathering does not occur is wrong. sent2: the devolution does not occur. sent3: the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur and the rubriccing polytonality does not occur. sent4: that both the decamping tawniness and the non-contralateralness occurs is incorrect if the constantness does not occur. sent5: if the dulling does not occur the fact that the non-obstetricsness and the non-commonsness happens is incorrect. sent6: that the steepness occurs but the gather does not occur is incorrect if the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur. sent7: the rubriccing albinism does not occur. sent8: the fluoridation does not occur. sent9: if the migrating does not occur then the fact that the operableness does not occur and the Down does not occur is not correct. sent10: the fact that the decamping contracture does not occur and the abidance does not occur does not hold. sent11: the steep does not occur if the fact that the rubriccing polytonality happens and/or the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur is not false. sent12: that the weapon does not occur and the visceralness does not occur is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the rubriccing Gomorrah does not occur.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pensioner is both not a clarion and not a Didelphidae.
|
(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
sent1: a non-eusporangiate thing is a slapper and is a Didelphidae. sent2: if something is both Gauguinesque and chelonian then it is not a kind of a Didelphidae. sent3: everything is Gauguinesque and it is a chelonian. sent4: something engages blogger if it is a clarion. sent5: the slapper does engage strafe. sent6: the pensioner is not conjunctival. sent7: if the slapper is not a kind of a Didelphidae the pensioner is both not a clarion and not a Didelphidae.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({FO}x & {B}x) sent2: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: (x): {A}x -> {DE}x sent5: {AE}{aa} sent6: ¬{GK}{a} sent7: ¬{B}{aa} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the slapper is not a Didelphidae if it is Gauguinesque and it is chelonian.; sent3 -> int2: the slapper is Gauguinesque and it is a chelonian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the slapper is not a Didelphidae.; int3 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent3 -> int2: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa}; int3 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
everything engages blogger and is a slapper.
|
(x): ({DE}x & {FO}x)
|
[
"sent4 -> int4: if the pensioner clarions it engages blogger.; sent1 -> int5: the pensioner is a slapper and it is a Didelphidae if it is not eusporangiate.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the pensioner is both not a clarion and not a Didelphidae. ; $context$ = sent1: a non-eusporangiate thing is a slapper and is a Didelphidae. sent2: if something is both Gauguinesque and chelonian then it is not a kind of a Didelphidae. sent3: everything is Gauguinesque and it is a chelonian. sent4: something engages blogger if it is a clarion. sent5: the slapper does engage strafe. sent6: the pensioner is not conjunctival. sent7: if the slapper is not a kind of a Didelphidae the pensioner is both not a clarion and not a Didelphidae. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the slapper is not a Didelphidae if it is Gauguinesque and it is chelonian.; sent3 -> int2: the slapper is Gauguinesque and it is a chelonian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the slapper is not a Didelphidae.; int3 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it does not engage mission the fact that it does not syllogize and it does not baffle molarity is not true.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: the fact that the muffin cruises proconsulship and does not baffle molarity is incorrect if it is not a kind of a mouth. sent2: if that the muffin does not engage mission is not wrong the fact that it does not syllogize and does not baffle molarity is not correct. sent3: the fact that something is not aerophilatelic and is not variolar is incorrect if that it is not a kibbutznik is not wrong. sent4: if the spell-checker does not factor then that it syllogizes and it is not consular is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a clue then that it is not a naphthoquinone and it does not baffle scholiast does not hold. sent6: there is something such that if it does not engage mission that it does syllogize and it does not baffle molarity is not right.
|
sent1: ¬{FO}{aa} -> ¬({CR}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: (x): ¬{CJ}x -> ¬(¬{BT}x & ¬{GT}x) sent4: ¬{EE}{fi} -> ¬({AA}{fi} & ¬{BM}{fi}) sent5: (Ex): {CS}x -> ¬(¬{CQ}x & ¬{HQ}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a kibbutznik that it is both not aerophilatelic and not variolar is false.
|
(Ex): ¬{CJ}x -> ¬(¬{BT}x & ¬{GT}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the fact that the Coue is not aerophilatelic and not variolar is incorrect if it is not a kibbutznik.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not engage mission the fact that it does not syllogize and it does not baffle molarity is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the muffin cruises proconsulship and does not baffle molarity is incorrect if it is not a kind of a mouth. sent2: if that the muffin does not engage mission is not wrong the fact that it does not syllogize and does not baffle molarity is not correct. sent3: the fact that something is not aerophilatelic and is not variolar is incorrect if that it is not a kibbutznik is not wrong. sent4: if the spell-checker does not factor then that it syllogizes and it is not consular is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a clue then that it is not a naphthoquinone and it does not baffle scholiast does not hold. sent6: there is something such that if it does not engage mission that it does syllogize and it does not baffle molarity is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the mephobarbital does not engage Kekule or does not cruise primate or both is incorrect.
|
¬(¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b})
|
sent1: the nectar is a kind of a prescription. sent2: that the mephobarbital does not cruise primate or is not prescription or both does not hold if the nectar does engage Kekule. sent3: if something is not a prescription the fact that either it does not engage Kekule or it does not cruise primate or both is not false. sent4: the mephobarbital does engage Kekule. sent5: the fact that the conidium is non-inadequate thing that is a prescription is false. sent6: the mephobarbital does engage Kekule if the nectar is a kind of a prescription. sent7: the fact that either the mephobarbital does not engage Kekule or it does not cruise primate or both is not true if the nectar is a kind of a prescription. sent8: if that something does not engage Cronus and is a prescription does not hold it is not a kind of a prescription.
|
sent1: {A}{a} sent2: {AA}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent4: {AA}{b} sent5: ¬(¬{D}{c} & {A}{c}) sent6: {A}{a} -> {AA}{b} sent7: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent8: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x
|
[
"sent7 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the mephobarbital does not engage Kekule and/or does not cruise primate.
|
(¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b})
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: either the mephobarbital does not engage Kekule or it does not cruise primate or both if it is not prescription.; sent8 -> int2: if the fact that the mephobarbital does not engage Cronus and is a kind of a prescription does not hold it is not prescription.; sent5 -> int3: there is something such that the fact that it is adequate and it is a prescription does not hold.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the mephobarbital does not engage Kekule or does not cruise primate or both is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the nectar is a kind of a prescription. sent2: that the mephobarbital does not cruise primate or is not prescription or both does not hold if the nectar does engage Kekule. sent3: if something is not a prescription the fact that either it does not engage Kekule or it does not cruise primate or both is not false. sent4: the mephobarbital does engage Kekule. sent5: the fact that the conidium is non-inadequate thing that is a prescription is false. sent6: the mephobarbital does engage Kekule if the nectar is a kind of a prescription. sent7: the fact that either the mephobarbital does not engage Kekule or it does not cruise primate or both is not true if the nectar is a kind of a prescription. sent8: if that something does not engage Cronus and is a prescription does not hold it is not a kind of a prescription. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.