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 trimmer is not a coiner.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: the knout is cellulosid. sent2: the stray is a tristearin and is a Tachyglossus. sent3: the knout is a kind of photovoltaic thing that is a kind of a coiner. sent4: the trimmer does baffle embellishment and is anabiotic. sent5: the wrecker is not photovoltaic if the fact that the knout does cruise fortress and is photovoltaic does not hold. sent6: the knout is photovoltaic. sent7: if the knout is a blackjack and it does cruise fortress then the trimmer is not a coiner. sent8: the paddy is both a Orff and a coiner. sent9: the knout is not non-Rousseauan. sent10: the knout is Rousseauan if it is not uninformative. sent11: if the knout is a hypercatalectic and it does spur then it does not cruise fortress. sent12: the knout is photovoltaic and engages embellishment. sent13: something is uninformative if the fact that the fact that it is photovoltaic and it is not uninformative is right is incorrect. sent14: something is a coiner if that it is uninformative is not incorrect. sent15: the knout is translational and Rousseauan. sent16: if the fact that something is uninformative thing that is a kind of a coiner is false it is not uninformative. sent17: if the trimmer is not a kind of a Rhynia it is photovoltaic and is robust. sent18: the knout is not uninformative. sent19: if the fact that the knout does cruise fortress is incorrect that the trimmer is photovoltaic but it is not uninformative is not correct. sent20: the knout does cruise fortress and it is photovoltaic. sent21: if the trimmer is a blackjack and it cruises fortress then the knout is not a coiner. sent22: the knout is a coiner. sent23: the knout cruises swimmer.
|
sent1: {DE}{a} sent2: ({DR}{io} & {GL}{io}) sent3: ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: ({JK}{b} & {FS}{b}) sent5: ¬({B}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{D}{fb} sent6: {D}{a} sent7: ({AA}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent8: ({BJ}{cn} & {C}{cn}) sent9: {AB}{a} sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{a} sent11: ({E}{a} & {F}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent12: ({D}{a} & {AD}{a}) sent13: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{A}x) -> {A}x sent14: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent15: ({EL}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent16: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent17: ¬{AQ}{b} -> ({D}{b} & {GP}{b}) sent18: ¬{A}{a} sent19: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent20: ({B}{a} & {D}{a}) sent21: ({AA}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent22: {C}{a} sent23: {HU}{a}
|
[
"sent20 -> int1: the knout cruises fortress.;"
] |
[
"sent20 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] |
the trimmer is a coiner.
|
{C}{b}
|
[
"sent14 -> int2: if the trimmer is uninformative it is a coiner.; sent13 -> int3: if that the trimmer is photovoltaic but it is not uninformative does not hold then it is uninformative.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the trimmer is not a coiner. ; $context$ = sent1: the knout is cellulosid. sent2: the stray is a tristearin and is a Tachyglossus. sent3: the knout is a kind of photovoltaic thing that is a kind of a coiner. sent4: the trimmer does baffle embellishment and is anabiotic. sent5: the wrecker is not photovoltaic if the fact that the knout does cruise fortress and is photovoltaic does not hold. sent6: the knout is photovoltaic. sent7: if the knout is a blackjack and it does cruise fortress then the trimmer is not a coiner. sent8: the paddy is both a Orff and a coiner. sent9: the knout is not non-Rousseauan. sent10: the knout is Rousseauan if it is not uninformative. sent11: if the knout is a hypercatalectic and it does spur then it does not cruise fortress. sent12: the knout is photovoltaic and engages embellishment. sent13: something is uninformative if the fact that the fact that it is photovoltaic and it is not uninformative is right is incorrect. sent14: something is a coiner if that it is uninformative is not incorrect. sent15: the knout is translational and Rousseauan. sent16: if the fact that something is uninformative thing that is a kind of a coiner is false it is not uninformative. sent17: if the trimmer is not a kind of a Rhynia it is photovoltaic and is robust. sent18: the knout is not uninformative. sent19: if the fact that the knout does cruise fortress is incorrect that the trimmer is photovoltaic but it is not uninformative is not correct. sent20: the knout does cruise fortress and it is photovoltaic. sent21: if the trimmer is a blackjack and it cruises fortress then the knout is not a coiner. sent22: the knout is a coiner. sent23: the knout cruises swimmer. ; $proof$ =
|
sent20 -> int1: the knout cruises fortress.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the impressionist occurs is prevented by that the pelvimetry and the nonobservance happens.
|
({A} & {B}) -> ¬{D}
|
sent1: the meridian occurs and the litany happens. sent2: the engaging slicing happens and the reverse happens. sent3: that the walk-through does not occur is brought about by that not the explication but the impressionistness occurs. sent4: the explication does not occur but the impressionistness happens if the finiteness happens. sent5: the nonobservance happens. sent6: that the baffling quiche occurs is not false. sent7: the fact that the tournament does not occur hold if the Regency occurs and the baffling prodigy happens. sent8: that both the verdict and the assent happens prevents that the gyralness occurs. sent9: if the walk-through does not occur the fact that not the pelvimetry but the nonobservance happens does not hold. sent10: the west happens and the bioassaying occurs. sent11: the engaging slicing occurs if the disappointment and the baffling sterility occurs. sent12: the heaviness happens. sent13: that the extrusiveness occurs is prevented by that both the bioassaying and the confederate occurs. sent14: both the isolating and the meatiness occurs. sent15: the cruising vermiculation occurs. sent16: the extrusiveness does not occur. sent17: that the impressionistness does not occur is triggered by that the walk-through happens and the pelvimetry happens. sent18: if the fact that the pelvimetry does not occur and the nonobservance occurs is not correct the rough happens. sent19: that the monocarboxylicness occurs and the baffling prodigy happens brings about that the perception does not occur.
|
sent1: ({GK} & {HM}) sent2: ({U} & {DR}) sent3: (¬{E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} sent4: {F} -> (¬{E} & {D}) sent5: {B} sent6: {IH} sent7: ({EU} & {AF}) -> ¬{FS} sent8: ({BN} & {EC}) -> ¬{DN} sent9: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & {B}) sent10: ({CD} & {AI}) sent11: ({FE} & {IA}) -> {U} sent12: {IP} sent13: ({AI} & {IO}) -> ¬{CG} sent14: ({Q} & {AD}) sent15: {DF} sent16: ¬{CG} sent17: ({C} & {A}) -> ¬{D} sent18: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) -> {FJ} sent19: ({HO} & {AF}) -> ¬{J}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that both the pelvimetry and the nonobservance occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the pelvimetry occurs.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ({A} & {B}); assump1 -> int1: {A};"
] |
the rough occurs.
|
{FJ}
|
[] | 9 | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the impressionist occurs is prevented by that the pelvimetry and the nonobservance happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the meridian occurs and the litany happens. sent2: the engaging slicing happens and the reverse happens. sent3: that the walk-through does not occur is brought about by that not the explication but the impressionistness occurs. sent4: the explication does not occur but the impressionistness happens if the finiteness happens. sent5: the nonobservance happens. sent6: that the baffling quiche occurs is not false. sent7: the fact that the tournament does not occur hold if the Regency occurs and the baffling prodigy happens. sent8: that both the verdict and the assent happens prevents that the gyralness occurs. sent9: if the walk-through does not occur the fact that not the pelvimetry but the nonobservance happens does not hold. sent10: the west happens and the bioassaying occurs. sent11: the engaging slicing occurs if the disappointment and the baffling sterility occurs. sent12: the heaviness happens. sent13: that the extrusiveness occurs is prevented by that both the bioassaying and the confederate occurs. sent14: both the isolating and the meatiness occurs. sent15: the cruising vermiculation occurs. sent16: the extrusiveness does not occur. sent17: that the impressionistness does not occur is triggered by that the walk-through happens and the pelvimetry happens. sent18: if the fact that the pelvimetry does not occur and the nonobservance occurs is not correct the rough happens. sent19: that the monocarboxylicness occurs and the baffling prodigy happens brings about that the perception does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that both the pelvimetry and the nonobservance occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the pelvimetry occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the busman does cruise Pelagius is right.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: if the Montrachet is not a kind of a deictic and it is not cordless then the busman cruises Pelagius. sent2: the Montrachet is moneyless if the dendrobium is moneyless. sent3: if that something is a kind of non-cordless thing that is not deictic does not hold it does not cruise Pelagius. sent4: if the Montrachet is a newscast but it is not moneyless then the busman is not moneyless. sent5: if something is not a kind of a newscast it is moneyless and is an acknowledgment. sent6: if something does not cruise Pelagius but it is cordless then it is not a kind of a deictic. sent7: the dendrobium is not a newscast if the fact that the acerola is both not an imperative and a Lillie is not correct. sent8: the Montrachet is not a kind of a deictic. sent9: the fact that something is non-cordless thing that is not a deictic is not correct if the fact that it is not moneyless is not wrong.
|
sent1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {C}{b} sent2: {D}{c} -> {D}{a} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent4: ({F}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) sent6: (x): (¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent7: ¬(¬{G}{d} & {H}{d}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent8: ¬{A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x)
|
[] |
[] |
the busman does not cruise Pelagius.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the busman does not cruise Pelagius if the fact that it is not cordless and it is not a deictic is not true.; sent9 -> int2: the fact that the busman is non-cordless thing that is not deictic is incorrect if it is not moneyless.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the busman does cruise Pelagius is right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Montrachet is not a kind of a deictic and it is not cordless then the busman cruises Pelagius. sent2: the Montrachet is moneyless if the dendrobium is moneyless. sent3: if that something is a kind of non-cordless thing that is not deictic does not hold it does not cruise Pelagius. sent4: if the Montrachet is a newscast but it is not moneyless then the busman is not moneyless. sent5: if something is not a kind of a newscast it is moneyless and is an acknowledgment. sent6: if something does not cruise Pelagius but it is cordless then it is not a kind of a deictic. sent7: the dendrobium is not a newscast if the fact that the acerola is both not an imperative and a Lillie is not correct. sent8: the Montrachet is not a kind of a deictic. sent9: the fact that something is non-cordless thing that is not a deictic is not correct if the fact that it is not moneyless is not wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the conceptualization does not occur and the blare does not occur.
|
(¬{C} & ¬{A})
|
sent1: the fact that the fact that the supervision does not occur and the exacerbating does not occur is not false does not hold. sent2: the blare does not occur. sent3: if the chicken occurs then that the conceptualization does not occur and the blare does not occur is false. sent4: the chicken occurs if that the shove-halfpenny occurs hold. sent5: that the cruising eccentricity does not occur triggers that the shove-halfpenny and the astrocyticness occurs. sent6: that the chicken does not occur yields that the blare does not occur. sent7: the chicken does not occur if the exacerbating happens. sent8: that that not the supervision but the exacerbating happens is true is false. sent9: if the fact that the supervision does not occur and the exacerbating does not occur is wrong the chicken does not occur. sent10: if the chicken does not occur then the conceptualization does not occur and the blare does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬{A} sent3: {B} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) sent4: {D} -> {B} sent5: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent6: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} sent7: {AB} -> ¬{B} sent8: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent9: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent10: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & ¬{A})
|
[
"sent9 & sent1 -> int1: the chicken does not occur.; sent10 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent10 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the conceptualization does not occur and the blare does not occur is false.
|
¬(¬{C} & ¬{A})
|
[] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the conceptualization does not occur and the blare does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the fact that the supervision does not occur and the exacerbating does not occur is not false does not hold. sent2: the blare does not occur. sent3: if the chicken occurs then that the conceptualization does not occur and the blare does not occur is false. sent4: the chicken occurs if that the shove-halfpenny occurs hold. sent5: that the cruising eccentricity does not occur triggers that the shove-halfpenny and the astrocyticness occurs. sent6: that the chicken does not occur yields that the blare does not occur. sent7: the chicken does not occur if the exacerbating happens. sent8: that that not the supervision but the exacerbating happens is true is false. sent9: if the fact that the supervision does not occur and the exacerbating does not occur is wrong the chicken does not occur. sent10: if the chicken does not occur then the conceptualization does not occur and the blare does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent1 -> int1: the chicken does not occur.; sent10 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the engaging cyan does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the probation occurs if that the calyptrateness occurs and the probation does not occur is not right. sent2: the Taiwanese does not occur if either the non-associationalness or the umbellateness or both occurs. sent3: the gastroenterostomy does not occur. sent4: the engaging reactivity does not occur or the hemisphericalness occurs or both. sent5: that the substantiating does not occur or the Algerian or both prevents that the baffling stockman happens. sent6: that the suburbanness does not occur is brought about by that the non-endoparasiticness and/or the cruising Nina happens. sent7: the baffling pentameter does not occur or the cytoplasticness happens or both. sent8: the probation happens and/or the engaging glissando occurs. sent9: if the engaging glissando does not occur the engaging cyan happens and the probation occurs. sent10: that the probation does not occur or that the engaging glissando occurs or both prevents the engaging cyan. sent11: that the Bell does not occur or the engaging altocumulus happens or both is not wrong. sent12: that if the engaging glissando does not occur but the probation happens the fact that the outbreak does not occur is not false is not incorrect. sent13: the non-illogicalness and/or the associationalness occurs. sent14: the fact that the engaging glissando does not occur and the nonexistentness does not occur is not incorrect if the baffling sumac does not occur. sent15: that the death does not occur is triggered by that the supination does not occur or the bolero or both. sent16: the engaging discernability brings about that the engaging cyan occurs. sent17: the fact that the malfunctioning does not occur is right. sent18: either the digesting does not occur or the pedunculateness occurs or both.
|
sent1: ¬({D} & ¬{A}) -> {A} sent2: (¬{IP} v {CF}) -> ¬{AH} sent3: ¬{O} sent4: (¬{HQ} v {CJ}) sent5: (¬{CC} v {FL}) -> ¬{GN} sent6: (¬{BH} v {HE}) -> ¬{GA} sent7: (¬{BT} v {AU}) sent8: ({A} v {B}) sent9: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) sent10: (¬{A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent11: (¬{IB} v {AQ}) sent12: (¬{B} & {A}) -> ¬{GR} sent13: (¬{DH} v {IP}) sent14: ¬{H} -> (¬{B} & ¬{E}) sent15: (¬{DI} v {GG}) -> ¬{IE} sent16: {F} -> {C} sent17: ¬{CK} sent18: (¬{FS} v {HO})
|
[] |
[] |
the fact that the outbreak does not occur is not wrong.
|
¬{GR}
|
[] | 7 | 2 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the engaging cyan does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the probation occurs if that the calyptrateness occurs and the probation does not occur is not right. sent2: the Taiwanese does not occur if either the non-associationalness or the umbellateness or both occurs. sent3: the gastroenterostomy does not occur. sent4: the engaging reactivity does not occur or the hemisphericalness occurs or both. sent5: that the substantiating does not occur or the Algerian or both prevents that the baffling stockman happens. sent6: that the suburbanness does not occur is brought about by that the non-endoparasiticness and/or the cruising Nina happens. sent7: the baffling pentameter does not occur or the cytoplasticness happens or both. sent8: the probation happens and/or the engaging glissando occurs. sent9: if the engaging glissando does not occur the engaging cyan happens and the probation occurs. sent10: that the probation does not occur or that the engaging glissando occurs or both prevents the engaging cyan. sent11: that the Bell does not occur or the engaging altocumulus happens or both is not wrong. sent12: that if the engaging glissando does not occur but the probation happens the fact that the outbreak does not occur is not false is not incorrect. sent13: the non-illogicalness and/or the associationalness occurs. sent14: the fact that the engaging glissando does not occur and the nonexistentness does not occur is not incorrect if the baffling sumac does not occur. sent15: that the death does not occur is triggered by that the supination does not occur or the bolero or both. sent16: the engaging discernability brings about that the engaging cyan occurs. sent17: the fact that the malfunctioning does not occur is right. sent18: either the digesting does not occur or the pedunculateness occurs or both. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the padding does not engage ventilation.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
sent1: the fact that the Lippizan is not a kind of a Sinitic but it does clench is not right if it is a caprice. sent2: the Lippizan is a caprice. sent3: the padding does not engage ventilation if there is something such that that it is not Sinitic and it clenches does not hold.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: that the Lippizan is not Sinitic but it does clench is not true.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is not a Sinitic and clenches does not hold.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x); int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the padding does not engage ventilation. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the Lippizan is not a kind of a Sinitic but it does clench is not right if it is a caprice. sent2: the Lippizan is a caprice. sent3: the padding does not engage ventilation if there is something such that that it is not Sinitic and it clenches does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent2 -> int1: that the Lippizan is not Sinitic but it does clench is not true.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is not a Sinitic and clenches does not hold.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the peasanthood does not occur is not wrong.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: if that the peasanthood occurs and the disciplinariness does not occur does not hold then the spanking does not occur. sent2: that the engaging vroom does not occur and the overprotecting does not occur is incorrect if the spanking does not occur. sent3: that the baffling ironed happens is prevented by that the cruciferousness happens. sent4: that the cruising voter does not occur and the appeal does not occur is incorrect. sent5: the peasanthood does not occur if that the cruising voter does not occur and the appealing does not occur is wrong. sent6: the pleochroism does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬({B} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{A} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{HO} & ¬{ED}) sent3: {U} -> ¬{FJ} sent4: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent5: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: ¬{E}
|
[
"sent5 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the engaging vroom does not occur and the overprotecting does not occur is not true.
|
¬(¬{HO} & ¬{ED})
|
[] | 7 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the peasanthood does not occur is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the peasanthood occurs and the disciplinariness does not occur does not hold then the spanking does not occur. sent2: that the engaging vroom does not occur and the overprotecting does not occur is incorrect if the spanking does not occur. sent3: that the baffling ironed happens is prevented by that the cruciferousness happens. sent4: that the cruising voter does not occur and the appeal does not occur is incorrect. sent5: the peasanthood does not occur if that the cruising voter does not occur and the appealing does not occur is wrong. sent6: the pleochroism does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the fin is staphylococcal and it is high-resolution is not true.
|
¬({B}{b} & {A}{b})
|
sent1: the swordtail is a kind of a Lauder. sent2: everything is not a sundress. sent3: the fin is staphylococcal if the tektite cruises debarkation and/or it is not a left-handedness. sent4: the fin is high-resolution. sent5: the fin is staphylococcal if the tektite cruises debarkation. sent6: the fact that something is a kind of staphylococcal thing that is high-resolution is false if it is not a kind of a Lauder. sent7: either the tektite does cruise debarkation or it is not a left-handedness or both. sent8: the swordtail is a kind of a tyrannid if that it is a Lauder is not false. sent9: the tektite is lesser and it is a kind of an adenoid.
|
sent1: {C}{ha} sent2: (x): ¬{E}x sent3: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent4: {A}{b} sent5: {AA}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & {A}x) sent7: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent8: {C}{ha} -> {ED}{ha} sent9: ({DA}{a} & {II}{a})
|
[
"sent3 & sent7 -> int1: the fin is staphylococcal.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent7 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the fin is both staphylococcal and high-resolution is not true.
|
¬({B}{b} & {A}{b})
|
[
"sent6 -> int2: that the fin is staphylococcal and is high-resolution is not true if it is not a Lauder.; sent2 -> int3: the tektite is not a kind of a sundress.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the fin is staphylococcal and it is high-resolution is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the swordtail is a kind of a Lauder. sent2: everything is not a sundress. sent3: the fin is staphylococcal if the tektite cruises debarkation and/or it is not a left-handedness. sent4: the fin is high-resolution. sent5: the fin is staphylococcal if the tektite cruises debarkation. sent6: the fact that something is a kind of staphylococcal thing that is high-resolution is false if it is not a kind of a Lauder. sent7: either the tektite does cruise debarkation or it is not a left-handedness or both. sent8: the swordtail is a kind of a tyrannid if that it is a Lauder is not false. sent9: the tektite is lesser and it is a kind of an adenoid. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent7 -> int1: the fin is staphylococcal.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the homophobe is linguistic and it does baffle reimposition does not hold.
|
¬({A}{a} & {B}{a})
|
sent1: if the homophobe is not a bilingualism but it is a kind of a Ozonium then it does not attitudinize. sent2: the homophobe baffles reimposition. sent3: the homophobe is linguistic. sent4: if there exists something such that it is a bilingualism then the fact that the homophobe is a Ozonium and does not attitudinize does not hold. sent5: there is nothing that is not a dimer but electromagnetic. sent6: everything is not a dimer. sent7: the fact that something is linguistic and it does baffle reimposition is right if it does not attitudinize. sent8: something that is not a dimer is a bilingualism and does twinge. sent9: The reimposition baffles homophobe. sent10: the fact that something is linguistic and it baffles reimposition is not correct if it does not attitudinize.
|
sent1: (¬{D}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (x): {D}x -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {H}x) sent6: (x): ¬{G}x sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent8: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({D}x & {F}x) sent9: {AA}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x)
|
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Turk is linguistic.
|
{A}{bb}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the Turk is linguistic and it does baffle reimposition if it does not attitudinize.; sent8 -> int2: the brewpub is a bilingualism and is a kind of a twinge if it is not a dimer.; sent6 -> int3: the brewpub is not a dimer.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the brewpub is a bilingualism and it does twinge.; int4 -> int5: everything is a kind of a bilingualism and is a twinge.; int5 -> int6: the splint is a kind of a bilingualism and it is a twinge.; int6 -> int7: the splint is a kind of a bilingualism.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that it is a bilingualism.; int8 & sent4 -> int9: the fact that the homophobe is a kind of a Ozonium that does not attitudinize does not hold.;"
] | 10 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the homophobe is linguistic and it does baffle reimposition does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the homophobe is not a bilingualism but it is a kind of a Ozonium then it does not attitudinize. sent2: the homophobe baffles reimposition. sent3: the homophobe is linguistic. sent4: if there exists something such that it is a bilingualism then the fact that the homophobe is a Ozonium and does not attitudinize does not hold. sent5: there is nothing that is not a dimer but electromagnetic. sent6: everything is not a dimer. sent7: the fact that something is linguistic and it does baffle reimposition is right if it does not attitudinize. sent8: something that is not a dimer is a bilingualism and does twinge. sent9: The reimposition baffles homophobe. sent10: the fact that something is linguistic and it baffles reimposition is not correct if it does not attitudinize. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the buffalofish is not considerate and is a daiquiri is wrong.
|
¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
sent1: the salver is not considerate. sent2: the fact that the buffalofish is considerate and is a daiquiri is incorrect if it does not cruise space. sent3: there is something such that it is not immunological. sent4: the fact that the buffalofish is considerate a daiquiri is wrong. sent5: that something is not a dealings but distinct is not right if it is not a tickle. sent6: the space is not a kind of a herald if there exists something such that it cruises space and does not dwindle. sent7: the fire-bush does not cruise space if the synchroflash is immunological. sent8: the buffalofish does not devilize kibbutznik. sent9: there is something such that it is phenotypical thing that is not zenithal. sent10: if there exists something such that it slacks and it is immunological the buffalofish does not cruise space. sent11: the fact that the fact that something is considerate thing that is a kind of a daiquiri is right does not hold if that it does not cruise space is correct. sent12: if something is not exculpatory then that it does not baffle macrotus and is indefinite is incorrect. sent13: something is a slacks but it is not immunological. sent14: the fact that the hack is not an alligator but it is a biotite is not true. sent15: the left is not a daiquiri if something that is an eyed is not an alligator. sent16: the fact that the buffalofish is not a slacks but a provirus is wrong. sent17: if a slacks is not immunological then the buffalofish does not cruise space. sent18: the buffalofish does not cruise shell if there exists something such that it is both not permissible and not vertebrate.
|
sent1: ¬{AA}{k} sent2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent4: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{BG}x -> ¬(¬{IR}x & {CM}x) sent6: (x): ({A}x & ¬{BD}x) -> ¬{DP}{cp} sent7: {B}{b} -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬{JC}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ({DE}x & ¬{BS}x) sent10: (x): ({C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent12: (x): ¬{IJ}x -> ¬(¬{FD}x & {CK}x) sent13: (Ex): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent14: ¬(¬{FP}{ed} & {ET}{ed}) sent15: (x): ({DT}x & ¬{FP}x) -> ¬{AB}{ef} sent16: ¬(¬{C}{aa} & {AS}{aa}) sent17: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent18: (x): ({IO}x & ¬{IF}x) -> ¬{DD}{aa}
|
[
"sent13 & sent17 -> int1: the buffalofish does not cruise space.;"
] |
[
"sent13 & sent17 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa};"
] |
the buffalofish is inconsiderate thing that is a daiquiri.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[] | 6 | 2 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the buffalofish is not considerate and is a daiquiri is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the salver is not considerate. sent2: the fact that the buffalofish is considerate and is a daiquiri is incorrect if it does not cruise space. sent3: there is something such that it is not immunological. sent4: the fact that the buffalofish is considerate a daiquiri is wrong. sent5: that something is not a dealings but distinct is not right if it is not a tickle. sent6: the space is not a kind of a herald if there exists something such that it cruises space and does not dwindle. sent7: the fire-bush does not cruise space if the synchroflash is immunological. sent8: the buffalofish does not devilize kibbutznik. sent9: there is something such that it is phenotypical thing that is not zenithal. sent10: if there exists something such that it slacks and it is immunological the buffalofish does not cruise space. sent11: the fact that the fact that something is considerate thing that is a kind of a daiquiri is right does not hold if that it does not cruise space is correct. sent12: if something is not exculpatory then that it does not baffle macrotus and is indefinite is incorrect. sent13: something is a slacks but it is not immunological. sent14: the fact that the hack is not an alligator but it is a biotite is not true. sent15: the left is not a daiquiri if something that is an eyed is not an alligator. sent16: the fact that the buffalofish is not a slacks but a provirus is wrong. sent17: if a slacks is not immunological then the buffalofish does not cruise space. sent18: the buffalofish does not cruise shell if there exists something such that it is both not permissible and not vertebrate. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 & sent17 -> int1: the buffalofish does not cruise space.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the archdeaconry is diamantine but it is not major is not correct.
|
¬({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})
|
sent1: if the ethernet is a kind of a major that that the archdeaconry is a kind of diamantine thing that is not major is not wrong is not correct. sent2: the madam engages singular. sent3: if the fact that the madam is a kind of a better hold then that the archdeaconry is major and better is not true. sent4: the ethernet is diamantine and/or it is not non-major. sent5: the archdeaconry is a kind of a bloom if the madam is a major. sent6: if the ethernet is a major the fact that the archdeaconry is diamantine and it does major is wrong. sent7: the ethernet majors if the madam does bloom. sent8: if the fact that the madam majors hold then the archdeaconry is diamantine. sent9: the madam betters or it is a bloom or both. sent10: something is both diamantine and not a major if it is better. sent11: the fact that the archdeaconry is a kind of diamantine a major does not hold. sent12: if the fact that the ethernet does devolve is not wrong then the fact that it is not unborn and is a kind of a intercostal is not correct. sent13: the ethernet does devolve. sent14: that if that the madam is both a pompano and postwar is incorrect the archdeaconry does not baffle bombardon hold. sent15: the ethernet is a bloom if the madam is a kind of a major. sent16: if the archdeaconry is better then the madam is a kind of a major. sent17: the madam is either diamantine or a bloom or both. sent18: if something does not baffle bombardon then it is a bloom and is a kind of a better. sent19: if the fact that something is not unborn but it is a intercostal is not true then it is not postwar. sent20: the ethernet is a major if the madam betters.
|
sent1: {C}{c} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent2: {HM}{a} sent3: {A}{a} -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent4: ({D}{c} v {C}{c}) sent5: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: {C}{c} -> ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent7: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} sent8: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent9: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent10: (x): {A}x -> ({D}x & ¬{C}x) sent11: ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent12: {J}{c} -> ¬(¬{H}{c} & {I}{c}) sent13: {J}{c} sent14: ¬({F}{a} & {G}{a}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent15: {C}{a} -> {B}{c} sent16: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent17: ({D}{a} v {B}{a}) sent18: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent19: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {I}x) -> ¬{G}x sent20: {A}{a} -> {C}{c}
|
[
"sent9 & sent20 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that the ethernet does major is right.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent20 & sent7 -> int1: {C}{c}; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the archdeaconry is diamantine but it does not major.
|
({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})
|
[
"sent10 -> int2: the archdeaconry is diamantine and does not major if it does better.; sent18 -> int3: the archdeaconry does bloom and betters if that it does not baffle bombardon hold.; sent19 -> int4: if the fact that the ethernet is non-unborn a intercostal is wrong the fact that it is not postwar is not incorrect.; sent12 & sent13 -> int5: the fact that the ethernet is both not unborn and intercostal does not hold.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the ethernet is not postwar.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it is not postwar.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the archdeaconry is diamantine but it is not major is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the ethernet is a kind of a major that that the archdeaconry is a kind of diamantine thing that is not major is not wrong is not correct. sent2: the madam engages singular. sent3: if the fact that the madam is a kind of a better hold then that the archdeaconry is major and better is not true. sent4: the ethernet is diamantine and/or it is not non-major. sent5: the archdeaconry is a kind of a bloom if the madam is a major. sent6: if the ethernet is a major the fact that the archdeaconry is diamantine and it does major is wrong. sent7: the ethernet majors if the madam does bloom. sent8: if the fact that the madam majors hold then the archdeaconry is diamantine. sent9: the madam betters or it is a bloom or both. sent10: something is both diamantine and not a major if it is better. sent11: the fact that the archdeaconry is a kind of diamantine a major does not hold. sent12: if the fact that the ethernet does devolve is not wrong then the fact that it is not unborn and is a kind of a intercostal is not correct. sent13: the ethernet does devolve. sent14: that if that the madam is both a pompano and postwar is incorrect the archdeaconry does not baffle bombardon hold. sent15: the ethernet is a bloom if the madam is a kind of a major. sent16: if the archdeaconry is better then the madam is a kind of a major. sent17: the madam is either diamantine or a bloom or both. sent18: if something does not baffle bombardon then it is a bloom and is a kind of a better. sent19: if the fact that something is not unborn but it is a intercostal is not true then it is not postwar. sent20: the ethernet is a major if the madam betters. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent20 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that the ethernet does major is right.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the saltine does not baffle minstrel and it does not devilize gamba.
|
(¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b})
|
sent1: the saltine does baffle prothrombinase or does not baffle minstrel or both. sent2: if the saltine does not devilize gamba but it is glottal the ornithine does not baffle minstrel. sent3: the downcast is not a Briton and it is not a knife. sent4: the saltine does not baffle minstrel if the downcast is an emergence and it does engage tipper. sent5: either the ornithine is glottal or it does not baffle prothrombinase or both. sent6: if the ornithine does not baffle prothrombinase then the saltine does not devilize gamba. sent7: the saltine does baffle progenitor and/or does not baffle minstrel. sent8: the saltine does not engage chronometer and is not aquicultural. sent9: if the ornithine is glottal then the saltine does not devilize gamba. sent10: the downcast is not an emergence and does engage tipper. sent11: if the fact that the oriel is not hydrodynamic is not wrong then the ornithine does tint and is not a chap. sent12: the downcast does not baffle prothrombinase if that the ornithine is an emergence hold. sent13: if the downcast is glottal then the ornithine is not an emergence. sent14: the fact that the minstrel is aquicultural and is larval does not hold. sent15: the downcast is not an emergence and does baffle minstrel. sent16: the saltine does not engage tipper if the downcast does not devilize gamba. sent17: if there is something such that it is not larval the allspice is non-inner thing that is a Sisyrinchium. sent18: if the ornithine is glottal the saltine does devilize gamba. sent19: if the downcast does not devilize gamba then the saltine is not an emergence. sent20: the downcast does not devilize gamba. sent21: the fact that the downcast is not a kind of an emergence is true. sent22: if the downcast is not a kind of an emergence and does engage tipper the fact that the saltine does not baffle minstrel is not wrong. sent23: the downcast is not glottal if the ornithine does tint and is not a kind of a chap. sent24: that something does not baffle minstrel and it does not devilize gamba does not hold if it baffles prothrombinase. sent25: the fact that the minstrel is not larval if the fact that the minstrel is not non-aquicultural and not larval is wrong is not incorrect.
|
sent1: ({C}{b} v ¬{B}{b}) sent2: (¬{A}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent3: (¬{EI}{a} & ¬{GM}{a}) sent4: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: ({D}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) sent6: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬{A}{b} sent7: ({JF}{b} v ¬{B}{b}) sent8: (¬{ID}{b} & ¬{L}{b}) sent9: {D}{c} -> ¬{A}{b} sent10: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent11: ¬{G}{d} -> ({F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent12: {AA}{c} -> ¬{C}{a} sent13: {D}{a} -> ¬{AA}{c} sent14: ¬({L}{f} & {J}{f}) sent15: (¬{AA}{a} & {B}{a}) sent16: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{b} sent17: (x): ¬{J}x -> (¬{I}{e} & {H}{e}) sent18: {D}{c} -> {A}{b} sent19: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent20: ¬{A}{a} sent21: ¬{AA}{a} sent22: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent23: ({F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent24: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) sent25: ¬({L}{f} & {J}{f}) -> ¬{J}{f}
|
[
"sent22 & sent10 -> int1: the saltine does not baffle minstrel.; sent5 & sent9 & sent6 -> int2: the saltine does not devilize gamba.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent22 & sent10 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent5 & sent9 & sent6 -> int2: ¬{A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the saltine does not baffle minstrel and it does not devilize gamba is false.
|
¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b})
|
[
"sent24 -> int3: the fact that the saltine does not baffle minstrel and it does not devilize gamba is wrong if it baffles prothrombinase.; sent25 & sent14 -> int4: the minstrel is not larval.; int4 -> int5: something is not larval.; int5 & sent17 -> int6: the allspice is not inner and is a Sisyrinchium.; int6 -> int7: something is not inner but it is a Sisyrinchium.;"
] | 10 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the saltine does not baffle minstrel and it does not devilize gamba. ; $context$ = sent1: the saltine does baffle prothrombinase or does not baffle minstrel or both. sent2: if the saltine does not devilize gamba but it is glottal the ornithine does not baffle minstrel. sent3: the downcast is not a Briton and it is not a knife. sent4: the saltine does not baffle minstrel if the downcast is an emergence and it does engage tipper. sent5: either the ornithine is glottal or it does not baffle prothrombinase or both. sent6: if the ornithine does not baffle prothrombinase then the saltine does not devilize gamba. sent7: the saltine does baffle progenitor and/or does not baffle minstrel. sent8: the saltine does not engage chronometer and is not aquicultural. sent9: if the ornithine is glottal then the saltine does not devilize gamba. sent10: the downcast is not an emergence and does engage tipper. sent11: if the fact that the oriel is not hydrodynamic is not wrong then the ornithine does tint and is not a chap. sent12: the downcast does not baffle prothrombinase if that the ornithine is an emergence hold. sent13: if the downcast is glottal then the ornithine is not an emergence. sent14: the fact that the minstrel is aquicultural and is larval does not hold. sent15: the downcast is not an emergence and does baffle minstrel. sent16: the saltine does not engage tipper if the downcast does not devilize gamba. sent17: if there is something such that it is not larval the allspice is non-inner thing that is a Sisyrinchium. sent18: if the ornithine is glottal the saltine does devilize gamba. sent19: if the downcast does not devilize gamba then the saltine is not an emergence. sent20: the downcast does not devilize gamba. sent21: the fact that the downcast is not a kind of an emergence is true. sent22: if the downcast is not a kind of an emergence and does engage tipper the fact that the saltine does not baffle minstrel is not wrong. sent23: the downcast is not glottal if the ornithine does tint and is not a kind of a chap. sent24: that something does not baffle minstrel and it does not devilize gamba does not hold if it baffles prothrombinase. sent25: the fact that the minstrel is not larval if the fact that the minstrel is not non-aquicultural and not larval is wrong is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent22 & sent10 -> int1: the saltine does not baffle minstrel.; sent5 & sent9 & sent6 -> int2: the saltine does not devilize gamba.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the minimalistness occurs.
|
{C}
|
sent1: that the minimalistness happens is not incorrect if either the Africanness occurs or the engaging scheelite does not occur or both. sent2: the engaging scheelite does not occur. sent3: that the minimalist does not occur is triggered by that the engaging scheelite happens but the Africanness does not occur.
|
sent1: ({A} v ¬{B}) -> {C} sent2: ¬{B} sent3: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{C}
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the Africanness occurs and/or the engaging scheelite does not occur.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ({A} v ¬{B}); sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the minimalist does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
[] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the minimalistness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the minimalistness happens is not incorrect if either the Africanness occurs or the engaging scheelite does not occur or both. sent2: the engaging scheelite does not occur. sent3: that the minimalist does not occur is triggered by that the engaging scheelite happens but the Africanness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the Africanness occurs and/or the engaging scheelite does not occur.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the politeness does not occur and the cruising Branchiura does not occur is incorrect.
|
¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})
|
sent1: the annotation does not occur if the politeness but not the cruising Branchiura happens. sent2: if the consumption happens then the fact that not the Dominicanness but the indelicateness happens is false. sent3: the headmastership occurs. sent4: the mineralness happens and the agrypnoticness happens if the meniscectomy does not occur. sent5: the Frost does not occur. sent6: the non-annunciatoryness and the headmastership happens. sent7: the fact that the epithelialness but not the consumption occurs is false if the sleepwalking does not occur. sent8: if the engaging Maraco does not occur the headmastership occurs and the indelicateness occurs. sent9: if the fact that the engaging Maraco does not occur and the mineral does not occur is not correct then that the agrypnoticness does not occur hold. sent10: the fact that not the sleepwalking but the epithelialness happens is not true. sent11: that both the indelicateness and the Dominican happens is false. sent12: the annotation does not occur if the politeness does not occur and the cruising Branchiura does not occur. sent13: if the fact that the epithelialness occurs but the consumption does not occur is false the engaging Maraco does not occur. sent14: that the annotation occurs and the annunciatoriness happens leads to that the schlep does not occur. sent15: that the dissuasiveness and the non-papillateness occurs results in that the cruising Sturnus does not occur. sent16: the meniscectomy does not occur if the fact that the somatosensoriness but not the baffling afforestation happens does not hold. sent17: the fact that the ichthyolatry does not occur and the cantillation happens is not correct. sent18: the Dominicanness does not occur if that both the indelicateness and the Dominicanness happens is not true. sent19: the drawing does not occur. sent20: the politeness does not occur. sent21: the Dominicanness occurs if the fact that the agrypnoticness happens hold. sent22: the cruising Branchiura does not occur if that the cruising Branchiura and the headmastership occurs does not hold. sent23: the fact that the engaging Maraco does not occur and the mineral does not occur is wrong if the fact that the meniscectomy does not occur is correct. sent24: that the annotation happens triggers that the impoliteness and the non-annunciatoryness happens.
|
sent1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent2: {I} -> ¬(¬{C} & {E}) sent3: {D} sent4: ¬{L} -> ({G} & {F}) sent5: ¬{EL} sent6: (¬{A} & {D}) sent7: ¬{K} -> ¬({J} & ¬{I}) sent8: ¬{H} -> ({D} & {E}) sent9: ¬(¬{H} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} sent10: ¬(¬{K} & {J}) sent11: ¬({E} & {C}) sent12: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent13: ¬({J} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{H} sent14: ({B} & {A}) -> ¬{AG} sent15: ({CT} & ¬{DP}) -> ¬{S} sent16: ¬({N} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} sent17: ¬(¬{EE} & {FF}) sent18: ¬({E} & {C}) -> ¬{C} sent19: ¬{AM} sent20: ¬{AA} sent21: {F} -> {C} sent22: ¬({AB} & {D}) -> ¬{AB} sent23: ¬{L} -> ¬(¬{H} & ¬{G}) sent24: {B} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{A})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the politeness does not occur and the cruising Branchiura does not occur.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the annotation does not occur.; sent6 -> int2: the annunciatoriness does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the annotation does not occur and the annunciatoriness does not occur.; sent18 & sent11 -> int4: the Dominicanness does not occur.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent12 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent6 -> int2: ¬{A}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{B} & ¬{A}); sent18 & sent11 -> int4: ¬{C};"
] |
the schlep does not occur.
|
¬{AG}
|
[] | 7 | 4 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the politeness does not occur and the cruising Branchiura does not occur is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the annotation does not occur if the politeness but not the cruising Branchiura happens. sent2: if the consumption happens then the fact that not the Dominicanness but the indelicateness happens is false. sent3: the headmastership occurs. sent4: the mineralness happens and the agrypnoticness happens if the meniscectomy does not occur. sent5: the Frost does not occur. sent6: the non-annunciatoryness and the headmastership happens. sent7: the fact that the epithelialness but not the consumption occurs is false if the sleepwalking does not occur. sent8: if the engaging Maraco does not occur the headmastership occurs and the indelicateness occurs. sent9: if the fact that the engaging Maraco does not occur and the mineral does not occur is not correct then that the agrypnoticness does not occur hold. sent10: the fact that not the sleepwalking but the epithelialness happens is not true. sent11: that both the indelicateness and the Dominican happens is false. sent12: the annotation does not occur if the politeness does not occur and the cruising Branchiura does not occur. sent13: if the fact that the epithelialness occurs but the consumption does not occur is false the engaging Maraco does not occur. sent14: that the annotation occurs and the annunciatoriness happens leads to that the schlep does not occur. sent15: that the dissuasiveness and the non-papillateness occurs results in that the cruising Sturnus does not occur. sent16: the meniscectomy does not occur if the fact that the somatosensoriness but not the baffling afforestation happens does not hold. sent17: the fact that the ichthyolatry does not occur and the cantillation happens is not correct. sent18: the Dominicanness does not occur if that both the indelicateness and the Dominicanness happens is not true. sent19: the drawing does not occur. sent20: the politeness does not occur. sent21: the Dominicanness occurs if the fact that the agrypnoticness happens hold. sent22: the cruising Branchiura does not occur if that the cruising Branchiura and the headmastership occurs does not hold. sent23: the fact that the engaging Maraco does not occur and the mineral does not occur is wrong if the fact that the meniscectomy does not occur is correct. sent24: that the annotation happens triggers that the impoliteness and the non-annunciatoryness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the politeness does not occur and the cruising Branchiura does not occur.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the annotation does not occur.; sent6 -> int2: the annunciatoriness does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the annotation does not occur and the annunciatoriness does not occur.; sent18 & sent11 -> int4: the Dominicanness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is non-Muslim thing that is not a squib then it is not a Tussilago.
|
(Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: if something that does not engage baronet is barometric it is non-optative. sent2: if something that is not Muslim is not a kind of a squib then the fact that it is not a kind of a Tussilago is not false. sent3: the whiteface is not a Tussilago if it is not a kind of a Muslim and it is a kind of a squib. sent4: if the Scout is a kind of non-correlational thing that is Muslim then that it is not a Brunanburh is correct. sent5: if the scheelite is not a tape and is not a kind of a amphigory it is not non-Muslim. sent6: something is not a Tussilago if it is not Muslim but a squib. sent7: there is something such that if it is both not Muslim and not a squib then it is a Tussilago. sent8: the whiteface is not a kind of a Tussilago if it is a Muslim that is not a squib. sent9: there exists something such that if it is both not improbable and not a petabyte then it does politicize. sent10: that the utensil is loose hold if it is not a squib and is not a kind of a Crotalus. sent11: if something that is not calendric is mnemonics then it is not a prosimian. sent12: the whiteface is a kind of a Tussilago if it is not Muslim and it is not a kind of a squib. sent13: there is something such that if it is a kind of a Muslim and it is not a squib then it is not a Tussilago. sent14: if something is not a kind of a Muslim and is not a squib then it is a Tussilago. sent15: if something that is a microflora does not baffle Mayflower it is not pyemic.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{EF}x & {IS}x) -> ¬{IA}x sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (¬{EE}{hd} & {AA}{hd}) -> ¬{HL}{hd} sent5: (¬{R}{jj} & ¬{JI}{jj}) -> {AA}{jj} sent6: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent8: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent9: (Ex): (¬{FS}x & ¬{EP}x) -> {HU}x sent10: (¬{AB}{en} & ¬{N}{en}) -> {EO}{en} sent11: (x): (¬{ES}x & {HQ}x) -> ¬{AL}x sent12: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent13: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent14: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent15: (x): ({EA}x & ¬{L}x) -> ¬{AC}x
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the fact that the whiteface is not a Tussilago is not wrong if it is not a Muslim and is not a squib.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is non-Muslim thing that is not a squib then it is not a Tussilago. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that does not engage baronet is barometric it is non-optative. sent2: if something that is not Muslim is not a kind of a squib then the fact that it is not a kind of a Tussilago is not false. sent3: the whiteface is not a Tussilago if it is not a kind of a Muslim and it is a kind of a squib. sent4: if the Scout is a kind of non-correlational thing that is Muslim then that it is not a Brunanburh is correct. sent5: if the scheelite is not a tape and is not a kind of a amphigory it is not non-Muslim. sent6: something is not a Tussilago if it is not Muslim but a squib. sent7: there is something such that if it is both not Muslim and not a squib then it is a Tussilago. sent8: the whiteface is not a kind of a Tussilago if it is a Muslim that is not a squib. sent9: there exists something such that if it is both not improbable and not a petabyte then it does politicize. sent10: that the utensil is loose hold if it is not a squib and is not a kind of a Crotalus. sent11: if something that is not calendric is mnemonics then it is not a prosimian. sent12: the whiteface is a kind of a Tussilago if it is not Muslim and it is not a kind of a squib. sent13: there is something such that if it is a kind of a Muslim and it is not a squib then it is not a Tussilago. sent14: if something is not a kind of a Muslim and is not a squib then it is a Tussilago. sent15: if something that is a microflora does not baffle Mayflower it is not pyemic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the fact that the whiteface is not a Tussilago is not wrong if it is not a Muslim and is not a squib.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Chartist is violent or is a warship or both.
|
({A}{a} v {B}{a})
|
sent1: if something is not a kind of a educationist that it does not engage waterway and it is not a fence-sitter is not correct. sent2: that something is not a fiction is right if that it is not a grainfield and it is not dim is not correct. sent3: there is nothing such that it is violent and it does not cruise porcupine. sent4: if there exists something such that it does not cruise porcupine the Chartist is violent. sent5: if there is something such that the fact that it is violent and not a sensualist does not hold the slapper does cruise porcupine. sent6: if something is not a warship then that it is violent and it is a fiction is wrong. sent7: there is nothing that does cruise porcupine and is not a sensualist. sent8: there exists nothing that is a warship and does not cruise porcupine. sent9: if the froghopper is not a fiction then that the Chartist is violent or it is a warship or both is not correct. sent10: the procarbazine engages waterway if that it does not engages waterway and it is not a fence-sitter is not correct. sent11: if the fact that something is violent and is a fiction is wrong it is not violent. sent12: if there is something such that that it is a kind of a warship that is nonviolent is not correct then the Chartist cruises porcupine. sent13: that something is a Scout but it does not baffle froghopper does not hold if the fact that it is not violent is true. sent14: the slapper is a sensualist if there is something such that that it cruises porcupine and it is not violent is false. sent15: the Chartist cruises porcupine and/or is a crosspiece. sent16: that the Chartist is violent and does not cruise porcupine is wrong.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{H}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent3: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{AA}x) sent4: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {A}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {AA}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent7: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent8: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{AA}x) sent9: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent10: ¬(¬{F}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) -> {F}{c} sent11: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent12: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {AA}{a} sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({GE}x & ¬{AM}x) sent14: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{A}x) -> {AB}{aa} sent15: ({AA}{a} v {DH}{a}) sent16: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{AA}{a})
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the fact that the slapper cruises porcupine but it is not a sensualist is not true.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it cruises porcupine and it is not a sensualist does not hold.;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x);"
] |
that the Chartist is not nonviolent and/or it is a kind of a warship is not true.
|
¬({A}{a} v {B}{a})
|
[
"sent2 -> int3: the froghopper is not a fiction if that it is not a grainfield and not dim is wrong.; sent1 -> int4: the fact that the procarbazine does not engage waterway and is not a fence-sitter is not true if that it is not a kind of a educationist is correct.;"
] | 7 | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Chartist is violent or is a warship or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of a educationist that it does not engage waterway and it is not a fence-sitter is not correct. sent2: that something is not a fiction is right if that it is not a grainfield and it is not dim is not correct. sent3: there is nothing such that it is violent and it does not cruise porcupine. sent4: if there exists something such that it does not cruise porcupine the Chartist is violent. sent5: if there is something such that the fact that it is violent and not a sensualist does not hold the slapper does cruise porcupine. sent6: if something is not a warship then that it is violent and it is a fiction is wrong. sent7: there is nothing that does cruise porcupine and is not a sensualist. sent8: there exists nothing that is a warship and does not cruise porcupine. sent9: if the froghopper is not a fiction then that the Chartist is violent or it is a warship or both is not correct. sent10: the procarbazine engages waterway if that it does not engages waterway and it is not a fence-sitter is not correct. sent11: if the fact that something is violent and is a fiction is wrong it is not violent. sent12: if there is something such that that it is a kind of a warship that is nonviolent is not correct then the Chartist cruises porcupine. sent13: that something is a Scout but it does not baffle froghopper does not hold if the fact that it is not violent is true. sent14: the slapper is a sensualist if there is something such that that it cruises porcupine and it is not violent is false. sent15: the Chartist cruises porcupine and/or is a crosspiece. sent16: that the Chartist is violent and does not cruise porcupine is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: the fact that the slapper cruises porcupine but it is not a sensualist is not true.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it cruises porcupine and it is not a sensualist does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pheasant's-eye is not a counterrevolution.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: the seminarian does not cruise pheasant's-eye or is not a kind of a raceway or both. sent2: something that is not a soil does not cruise Xenicus and does devilize strut. sent3: something is not a counterrevolution and/or does not cruise pheasant's-eye. sent4: the seminarian does cruise pheasant's-eye and/or is not a kind of a raceway. sent5: something is not a kind of a counterrevolution if it does not cruise Xenicus. sent6: if there exists something such that either it does not cruise pheasant's-eye or it is not a kind of a raceway or both the pheasant's-eye is a counterrevolution.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent3: (Ex): (¬{A}x v ¬{AA}x) sent4: ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x sent6: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: something does not cruise pheasant's-eye and/or it is not a raceway.; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the pheasant's-eye is not a counterrevolution.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: the pheasant's-eye is not a counterrevolution if it does not cruise Xenicus.; sent2 -> int3: the pheasant's-eye does not cruise Xenicus but it does devilize strut if that it is not a soil is right.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the pheasant's-eye is not a counterrevolution. ; $context$ = sent1: the seminarian does not cruise pheasant's-eye or is not a kind of a raceway or both. sent2: something that is not a soil does not cruise Xenicus and does devilize strut. sent3: something is not a counterrevolution and/or does not cruise pheasant's-eye. sent4: the seminarian does cruise pheasant's-eye and/or is not a kind of a raceway. sent5: something is not a kind of a counterrevolution if it does not cruise Xenicus. sent6: if there exists something such that either it does not cruise pheasant's-eye or it is not a kind of a raceway or both the pheasant's-eye is a counterrevolution. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: something does not cruise pheasant's-eye and/or it is not a raceway.; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bravo is not a canvas.
|
¬{C}{c}
|
sent1: the oxidase is a canvas if the bravo is a mimosa. sent2: the outcaste is a fragment. sent3: if that the oxidase fragments hold then the bravo is not a canvas. sent4: the bravo is a kind of a mimosa if the oxidase is a canvas. sent5: the oxidase is not non-sulcate or a fragment or both. sent6: something is asynchronous if that it is asynchronous thing that is not Palladian does not hold. sent7: that if something is not a Crax and/or it is not a kind of a committedness then it is not a Crax is right. sent8: the oxidase canvases if the bravo is a kind of a fragment. sent9: the bravo does canvas if that the oxidase is a fragment is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that the oxidase is not ceramic and it is not a mimosa is not correct if the knight-errant is not industrial. sent11: either the oxidase does fragment or it is a mimosa or both. sent12: the knight-errant is not industrial if the rapid is not a Crax and is industrial. sent13: that the oxidase fragments hold if the bravo is a mimosa. sent14: the bravo is a canvas if the oxidase is a mimosa. sent15: the bravo is a fragment if the oxidase does canvas. sent16: if the rapid is asynchronous it is not a Crax and/or it is not a committedness. sent17: the fact that the rapid is not asynchronous and it is not Palladian does not hold. sent18: if the fact that something is not ceramic and not a mimosa is not right it is a mimosa.
|
sent1: {B}{c} -> {C}{a} sent2: {A}{aq} sent3: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{c} sent4: {C}{a} -> {B}{c} sent5: ({AH}{a} v {A}{a}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{I}x) -> {G}x sent7: (x): (¬{F}x v ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent8: {A}{c} -> {C}{a} sent9: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} sent10: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent11: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent12: (¬{F}{d} & {E}{d}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent13: {B}{c} -> {A}{a} sent14: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} sent15: {C}{a} -> {A}{c} sent16: {G}{d} -> (¬{F}{d} v ¬{H}{d}) sent17: ¬(¬{G}{d} & ¬{I}{d}) sent18: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{B}x) -> {B}x
|
[
"sent11 & sent9 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent9 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the bravo does not canvas.
|
¬{C}{c}
|
[
"sent18 -> int1: if that the oxidase is not a ceramic and it is not a kind of a mimosa does not hold then it is a mimosa.; sent7 -> int2: the rapid is not a Crax if either it is not a kind of a Crax or it is not a committedness or both.; sent6 -> int3: if the fact that the rapid is a kind of non-asynchronous thing that is not Palladian is wrong it is asynchronous.; int3 & sent17 -> int4: the rapid is asynchronous.; sent16 & int4 -> int5: the rapid is not a kind of a Crax and/or it is not a committedness.; int2 & int5 -> int6: the rapid is not a Crax.;"
] | 10 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bravo is not a canvas. ; $context$ = sent1: the oxidase is a canvas if the bravo is a mimosa. sent2: the outcaste is a fragment. sent3: if that the oxidase fragments hold then the bravo is not a canvas. sent4: the bravo is a kind of a mimosa if the oxidase is a canvas. sent5: the oxidase is not non-sulcate or a fragment or both. sent6: something is asynchronous if that it is asynchronous thing that is not Palladian does not hold. sent7: that if something is not a Crax and/or it is not a kind of a committedness then it is not a Crax is right. sent8: the oxidase canvases if the bravo is a kind of a fragment. sent9: the bravo does canvas if that the oxidase is a fragment is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that the oxidase is not ceramic and it is not a mimosa is not correct if the knight-errant is not industrial. sent11: either the oxidase does fragment or it is a mimosa or both. sent12: the knight-errant is not industrial if the rapid is not a Crax and is industrial. sent13: that the oxidase fragments hold if the bravo is a mimosa. sent14: the bravo is a canvas if the oxidase is a mimosa. sent15: the bravo is a fragment if the oxidase does canvas. sent16: if the rapid is asynchronous it is not a Crax and/or it is not a committedness. sent17: the fact that the rapid is not asynchronous and it is not Palladian does not hold. sent18: if the fact that something is not ceramic and not a mimosa is not right it is a mimosa. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent9 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the nine is an extraterrestrial.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: if something that is not a Koussevitzky is a carton the lacing does baffle easterner. sent2: if the smallholder is not politics that the polony is zygomatic but it is not a caravan is false. sent3: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of an inverse and/or it is not politics that the smallholder is politics does not hold. sent4: that the nine is a caravan but not extraterrestrial is not true if the head is not politics. sent5: that something is carnal and it is extraterrestrial does not hold if it does not baffle easterner. sent6: the fact that the Opera does devilize Pelagius and/or is not carnal is not correct if the lacing does not baffle easterner. sent7: something is a kind of an extraterrestrial if the fact that either it is carnal or it is not promissory or both does not hold. sent8: that the nine is an extraterrestrial is not incorrect if the fact that either it is carnal or it is promissory or both does not hold. sent9: the lacing does not baffle easterner but it is not non-promissory if the head does caravan. sent10: if the fact that the lacing is carnal and it is an extraterrestrial is incorrect then the nine is not extraterrestrial. sent11: that either the nine baffles easterner or it is non-promissory or both is not correct. sent12: the serial is not an inverse. sent13: the fact that either the nine is carnal or it is not promissory or both is incorrect if the lacing baffles easterner. sent14: the nine is promissory. sent15: something is not a Koussevitzky. sent16: the nine is not a Koussevitzky.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent2: ¬{F}{e} -> ¬({G}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent3: (x): (¬{I}x v ¬{F}x) -> ¬{F}{e} sent4: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬({E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & {D}x) sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({L}{bu} v ¬{B}{bu}) sent7: (x): ¬({B}x v ¬{C}x) -> {D}x sent8: ¬({B}{b} v {C}{b}) -> {D}{b} sent9: {E}{c} -> (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent10: ¬({B}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent11: ¬({A}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) sent12: ¬{I}{f} sent13: {A}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) sent14: {C}{b} sent15: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent16: ¬{AA}{b}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: if the fact that the nine is not non-carnal or is not promissory or both does not hold it is an extraterrestrial.;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: ¬({B}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) -> {D}{b};"
] |
the fact that the nine is not an extraterrestrial is not incorrect.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: the fact that the lacing is carnal and it is extraterrestrial is wrong if it does not baffle easterner.; sent12 -> int3: the serial is not inverse or it is not politics or both.; int3 -> int4: something is not an inverse and/or it is not politics.; int4 & sent3 -> int5: the smallholder is not politics.; sent2 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the fact that the polony is zygomatic but it does not caravan does not hold is right.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that that it is zygomatic and it is not a caravan is incorrect.;"
] | 10 | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the nine is an extraterrestrial. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that is not a Koussevitzky is a carton the lacing does baffle easterner. sent2: if the smallholder is not politics that the polony is zygomatic but it is not a caravan is false. sent3: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of an inverse and/or it is not politics that the smallholder is politics does not hold. sent4: that the nine is a caravan but not extraterrestrial is not true if the head is not politics. sent5: that something is carnal and it is extraterrestrial does not hold if it does not baffle easterner. sent6: the fact that the Opera does devilize Pelagius and/or is not carnal is not correct if the lacing does not baffle easterner. sent7: something is a kind of an extraterrestrial if the fact that either it is carnal or it is not promissory or both does not hold. sent8: that the nine is an extraterrestrial is not incorrect if the fact that either it is carnal or it is promissory or both does not hold. sent9: the lacing does not baffle easterner but it is not non-promissory if the head does caravan. sent10: if the fact that the lacing is carnal and it is an extraterrestrial is incorrect then the nine is not extraterrestrial. sent11: that either the nine baffles easterner or it is non-promissory or both is not correct. sent12: the serial is not an inverse. sent13: the fact that either the nine is carnal or it is not promissory or both is incorrect if the lacing baffles easterner. sent14: the nine is promissory. sent15: something is not a Koussevitzky. sent16: the nine is not a Koussevitzky. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: if the fact that the nine is not non-carnal or is not promissory or both does not hold it is an extraterrestrial.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the gown is not tegular and it does not cruise periscope is false.
|
¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: the gown is a redstart. sent2: if the fact that the upgrade is not an icing is not wrong then it does not engage characteristic and/or is not a redstart. sent3: the fact that the gown is tegular but it does not cruise periscope is not correct. sent4: the gown is non-aphaeretic if it is non-tegular thing that is not a fruition. sent5: if the stenograph is not a Asian the gown is an icing and is not an easterner. sent6: the fact that the gown is not tegular but it cruises periscope is false. sent7: the babysitter is not tegular. sent8: if the gown is not tegular but it does cruise periscope it is not a redstart. sent9: if that something is a mean and a redstart is false it is not literal. sent10: the gown is not a kind of a redstart if it is tegular and it does not cruise periscope. sent11: if the gown is an icing and is not a kind of an easterner then it is not tegular.
|
sent1: {B}{a} sent2: ¬{D}{c} -> (¬{C}{c} v ¬{B}{c}) sent3: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{BJ}{a}) -> ¬{CR}{a} sent5: ¬{F}{d} -> ({D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent7: ¬{AA}{gg} sent8: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: (x): ¬({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{HN}x sent10: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent11: ({D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{a}
|
[] |
[] |
the gown is non-literal.
|
¬{HN}{a}
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: if that the gown means and it is a kind of a redstart is incorrect it is non-literal.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the gown is not tegular and it does not cruise periscope is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the gown is a redstart. sent2: if the fact that the upgrade is not an icing is not wrong then it does not engage characteristic and/or is not a redstart. sent3: the fact that the gown is tegular but it does not cruise periscope is not correct. sent4: the gown is non-aphaeretic if it is non-tegular thing that is not a fruition. sent5: if the stenograph is not a Asian the gown is an icing and is not an easterner. sent6: the fact that the gown is not tegular but it cruises periscope is false. sent7: the babysitter is not tegular. sent8: if the gown is not tegular but it does cruise periscope it is not a redstart. sent9: if that something is a mean and a redstart is false it is not literal. sent10: the gown is not a kind of a redstart if it is tegular and it does not cruise periscope. sent11: if the gown is an icing and is not a kind of an easterner then it is not tegular. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
not the squeal but the engaging localization happens.
|
(¬{C} & {B})
|
sent1: the squeal does not occur if the fact that the squeal happens and the caddie occurs does not hold. sent2: if the overstaying happens then the fact that the entrapment but not the baffling bolero happens is false. sent3: the choralness does not occur but the grouch happens. sent4: the engaging localization happens if that the entrapment happens and the baffling bolero does not occur does not hold. sent5: the thwart does not occur. sent6: the overstaying occurs. sent7: the fact that both the squealing and the caddie happens does not hold if the thwarting does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬({C} & {E}) -> ¬{C} sent2: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: (¬{HC} & {DE}) sent4: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent5: ¬{D} sent6: {A} sent7: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {E})
|
[
"sent2 & sent6 -> int1: that the entrapment occurs but the baffling bolero does not occur is incorrect.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the engaging localization occurs.; sent7 & sent5 -> int3: that the squeal and the caddie occurs does not hold.; sent1 & int3 -> int4: the squeal does not occur.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent6 -> int1: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 & sent4 -> int2: {B}; sent7 & sent5 -> int3: ¬({C} & {E}); sent1 & int3 -> int4: ¬{C}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = not the squeal but the engaging localization happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the squeal does not occur if the fact that the squeal happens and the caddie occurs does not hold. sent2: if the overstaying happens then the fact that the entrapment but not the baffling bolero happens is false. sent3: the choralness does not occur but the grouch happens. sent4: the engaging localization happens if that the entrapment happens and the baffling bolero does not occur does not hold. sent5: the thwart does not occur. sent6: the overstaying occurs. sent7: the fact that both the squealing and the caddie happens does not hold if the thwarting does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent6 -> int1: that the entrapment occurs but the baffling bolero does not occur is incorrect.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the engaging localization occurs.; sent7 & sent5 -> int3: that the squeal and the caddie occurs does not hold.; sent1 & int3 -> int4: the squeal does not occur.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the aim is interoceptive but it is not a kind of a Chinese.
|
({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})
|
sent1: the Mojave does not devilize wing-nut if the fact that the archduke is not Delphic but it does devilize wing-nut is not right. sent2: if there exists something such that it does engage bombardon then that the archduke is a kind of non-Delphic thing that devilizes wing-nut is not true. sent3: something is not a kind of a cloister and/or is not a Trichosurus. sent4: The swipe does not cruise brattice. sent5: the brattice does not cruise swipe. sent6: the fact that the aim is interoceptive and is not a Chinese is false if the brattice does not cruise swipe. sent7: the chateau does engage bombardon. sent8: the pipeline is not a Chinese if there exists something such that it either is not a kind of a cloister or is not a Trichosurus or both. sent9: if something is not a horseback then that either it baffles Megalobatrachus or it cruises swipe or both is incorrect. sent10: the aim is interoceptive if there exists something such that the fact that it baffles Megalobatrachus and/or it does cruise swipe is not correct. sent11: if the Mojave does not devilize wing-nut then the EBV is not a horseback.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{F}{f} & {E}{f}) -> ¬{E}{e} sent2: (x): {I}x -> ¬(¬{F}{f} & {E}{f}) sent3: (Ex): (¬{G}x v ¬{H}x) sent4: ¬{AC}{aa} sent5: ¬{A}{a} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent7: {I}{g} sent8: (x): (¬{G}x v ¬{H}x) -> ¬{AB}{d} sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x v {A}x) sent10: (x): ¬({C}x v {A}x) -> {AA}{b} sent11: ¬{E}{e} -> ¬{D}{c}
|
[
"sent6 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the aim is interoceptive but it is not Chinese.
|
({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: that the EBV baffles Megalobatrachus or it cruises swipe or both is not right if it is not a horseback.; sent7 -> int2: there is something such that it engages bombardon.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the fact that the archduke is not Delphic but it devilizes wing-nut does not hold.; sent1 & int3 -> int4: the Mojave does not devilize wing-nut.; sent11 & int4 -> int5: the EBV is not a horseback.; int1 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the EBV baffles Megalobatrachus and/or does cruise swipe does not hold.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that the fact that it either does baffle Megalobatrachus or cruises swipe or both does not hold.; int7 & sent10 -> int8: the aim is interoceptive.; sent3 & sent8 -> int9: the pipeline is not Chinese.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it is not Chinese.;"
] | 8 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the aim is interoceptive but it is not a kind of a Chinese. ; $context$ = sent1: the Mojave does not devilize wing-nut if the fact that the archduke is not Delphic but it does devilize wing-nut is not right. sent2: if there exists something such that it does engage bombardon then that the archduke is a kind of non-Delphic thing that devilizes wing-nut is not true. sent3: something is not a kind of a cloister and/or is not a Trichosurus. sent4: The swipe does not cruise brattice. sent5: the brattice does not cruise swipe. sent6: the fact that the aim is interoceptive and is not a Chinese is false if the brattice does not cruise swipe. sent7: the chateau does engage bombardon. sent8: the pipeline is not a Chinese if there exists something such that it either is not a kind of a cloister or is not a Trichosurus or both. sent9: if something is not a horseback then that either it baffles Megalobatrachus or it cruises swipe or both is incorrect. sent10: the aim is interoceptive if there exists something such that the fact that it baffles Megalobatrachus and/or it does cruise swipe is not correct. sent11: if the Mojave does not devilize wing-nut then the EBV is not a horseback. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that the fact that it does not uncoil and is crucial is false is false.
|
¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x))
|
sent1: the Esquire cruises slicing and is impermeable. sent2: there exists nothing such that it does uncoil and is crucial. sent3: there exists nothing that does not uncoil and is crucial. sent4: the killer does not baffle perigee if the fact that the copolymer is not a gunmetal and it does not baffle perigee is not true. sent5: if something does not unclasp it is weightless. sent6: that the perigee is not scenic but it does uncoil is not true. sent7: if the killer is scenic then the cannelloni does uncoil. sent8: that the Pawnee does not cruise slicing but it is random does not hold if there is something such that it cruise slicing. sent9: something is scenic and/or it is animalistic if it does not baffle perigee. sent10: the fact that the copolymer is not a gunmetal and does not baffle perigee is incorrect if the armet is weightless. sent11: if the fact that the Pawnee does not cruise slicing but it is random is not right then the armet does not unclasp.
|
sent1: ({H}{f} & {I}{f}) sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> {E}x sent6: ¬(¬{B}{ag} & {AA}{ag}) sent7: {B}{b} -> {AA}{a} sent8: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{H}{e} & {G}{e}) sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x v {A}x) sent10: {E}{d} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent11: ¬(¬{H}{e} & {G}{e}) -> ¬{F}{d}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: that the pantyhose does not uncoil but it is crucial is not true.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the fact that the pantyhose does not uncoil and is a inverter is not false is false.
|
¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {GL}{aa})
|
[
"sent9 -> int2: the killer is scenic and/or it is not non-animalistic if it does not baffle perigee.; sent5 -> int3: if the armet does not unclasp then it is weightless.; sent1 -> int4: the Esquire cruises slicing.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it does cruise slicing.; int5 & sent8 -> int6: that the Pawnee does not cruise slicing and is random does not hold.; sent11 & int6 -> int7: the armet does not unclasp.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the armet is weightless.; sent10 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the fact that the copolymer is not a kind of a gunmetal and it does not baffle perigee is wrong is correct.; sent4 & int9 -> int10: that the killer does not baffle perigee is right.; int2 & int10 -> int11: the killer is scenic and/or it is animalistic.;"
] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that the fact that it does not uncoil and is crucial is false is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the Esquire cruises slicing and is impermeable. sent2: there exists nothing such that it does uncoil and is crucial. sent3: there exists nothing that does not uncoil and is crucial. sent4: the killer does not baffle perigee if the fact that the copolymer is not a gunmetal and it does not baffle perigee is not true. sent5: if something does not unclasp it is weightless. sent6: that the perigee is not scenic but it does uncoil is not true. sent7: if the killer is scenic then the cannelloni does uncoil. sent8: that the Pawnee does not cruise slicing but it is random does not hold if there is something such that it cruise slicing. sent9: something is scenic and/or it is animalistic if it does not baffle perigee. sent10: the fact that the copolymer is not a gunmetal and does not baffle perigee is incorrect if the armet is weightless. sent11: if the fact that the Pawnee does not cruise slicing but it is random is not right then the armet does not unclasp. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: that the pantyhose does not uncoil but it is crucial is not true.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Lippizan does not cruise smuggler.
|
¬{D}{c}
|
sent1: if the fact that the crush does not cruise person and is a perfluorocarbon is false the Lippizan cruises smuggler. sent2: if there is something such that it is both not an inhalation and a Chartreuse then the scrumpy is a fig-bird. sent3: if the scrumpy is a kind of a fig-bird then that the crush does not cruise person and is a kind of a perfluorocarbon is not right. sent4: there exists something such that it is not an inhalation and is a Chartreuse.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) -> {D}{c} sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent3: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent4: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)
|
[
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the scrumpy is a fig-bird hold.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the fact that that the crush does not cruise person and is a perfluorocarbon hold is not true.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent3 & int1 -> int2: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}); sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the Lippizan does not cruise smuggler. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the crush does not cruise person and is a perfluorocarbon is false the Lippizan cruises smuggler. sent2: if there is something such that it is both not an inhalation and a Chartreuse then the scrumpy is a fig-bird. sent3: if the scrumpy is a kind of a fig-bird then that the crush does not cruise person and is a kind of a perfluorocarbon is not right. sent4: there exists something such that it is not an inhalation and is a Chartreuse. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the scrumpy is a fig-bird hold.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the fact that that the crush does not cruise person and is a perfluorocarbon hold is not true.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the mackerel is not campanulate.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: that the oxbow does not baffle retroflection is wrong. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it delivers and it is not campanulate is wrong then the mackerel is campanulate. sent3: the mackerel is not a Somrai and it does not deliver if the methacholine is campanulate. sent4: the methacholine is a kind of a ayah. sent5: if the mackerel is not a Somrai and does not deliver then the cat's-ear is not a Somrai. sent6: if the snuffle is not a Somrai that the screamer is not a Somrai is not incorrect. sent7: everything does not baffle galangal. sent8: the methacholine is not campanulate. sent9: the fact that that something either is a naphthoquinone or is not non-off-street or both is wrong if it does not baffle galangal hold. sent10: the mackerel is a kind of a Somrai. sent11: if the snuffle is not a dashing the screamer is not a Somrai. sent12: the methacholine is a Somrai. sent13: if there is something such that it does not cruise ambulacrum then the snuffle is not a kind of a Somrai and/or does not dash. sent14: the vol-au-vent is retractile. sent15: if the mackerel is campanulate the methacholine is not a Somrai. sent16: the warhorse does not cruise ambulacrum if there exists something such that the fact that it is a naphthoquinone and/or it is off-street is false. sent17: the fact that the mackerel baffles norethynodrel is not wrong. sent18: the fact that the mackerel is not conscious is not incorrect. sent19: the methacholine is fistulous.
|
sent1: {FE}{bh} sent2: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> {A}{a} sent3: {A}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent4: {EU}{b} sent5: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{ee} sent6: ¬{B}{d} -> ¬{B}{c} sent7: (x): ¬{H}x sent8: ¬{A}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({F}x v {G}x) sent10: {B}{a} sent11: ¬{E}{d} -> ¬{B}{c} sent12: {B}{b} sent13: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) sent14: {BN}{ck} sent15: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent16: (x): ¬({F}x v {G}x) -> ¬{D}{e} sent17: {O}{a} sent18: ¬{BC}{a} sent19: {FK}{b}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the mackerel is campanulate is correct.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the methacholine is not a kind of a Somrai is right.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; int1 & sent12 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the mackerel is campanulate.
|
{A}{a}
|
[
"sent7 -> int3: the deadlight does not baffle galangal.; sent9 -> int4: the fact that the deadlight is a naphthoquinone or is off-street or both is wrong if it does not baffle galangal.; int3 & int4 -> int5: that the deadlight is a naphthoquinone and/or it is off-street does not hold.; int5 -> int6: there is nothing such that it is a naphthoquinone and/or it is off-street.; int6 -> int7: that the surgeon is a naphthoquinone or it is off-street or both is incorrect.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that that it is a naphthoquinone and/or it is off-street is not right.; int8 & sent16 -> int9: the fact that the warhorse does not cruise ambulacrum hold.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it does not cruise ambulacrum.; int10 & sent13 -> int11: either the snuffle is not a kind of a Somrai or it is not a dashing or both.; sent11 & int11 & sent6 -> int12: the screamer is not a Somrai.;"
] | 12 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the mackerel is not campanulate. ; $context$ = sent1: that the oxbow does not baffle retroflection is wrong. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it delivers and it is not campanulate is wrong then the mackerel is campanulate. sent3: the mackerel is not a Somrai and it does not deliver if the methacholine is campanulate. sent4: the methacholine is a kind of a ayah. sent5: if the mackerel is not a Somrai and does not deliver then the cat's-ear is not a Somrai. sent6: if the snuffle is not a Somrai that the screamer is not a Somrai is not incorrect. sent7: everything does not baffle galangal. sent8: the methacholine is not campanulate. sent9: the fact that that something either is a naphthoquinone or is not non-off-street or both is wrong if it does not baffle galangal hold. sent10: the mackerel is a kind of a Somrai. sent11: if the snuffle is not a dashing the screamer is not a Somrai. sent12: the methacholine is a Somrai. sent13: if there is something such that it does not cruise ambulacrum then the snuffle is not a kind of a Somrai and/or does not dash. sent14: the vol-au-vent is retractile. sent15: if the mackerel is campanulate the methacholine is not a Somrai. sent16: the warhorse does not cruise ambulacrum if there exists something such that the fact that it is a naphthoquinone and/or it is off-street is false. sent17: the fact that the mackerel baffles norethynodrel is not wrong. sent18: the fact that the mackerel is not conscious is not incorrect. sent19: the methacholine is fistulous. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the mackerel is campanulate is correct.; sent15 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the methacholine is not a kind of a Somrai is right.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the slapper does baffle Acrostichum.
|
{E}{b}
|
sent1: the waitress does not baffle Acrostichum and is grammatical. sent2: that the waitress engages pillar is right. sent3: that the slapper cruises deltoid is correct. sent4: if the fact that the slapper does not canvas but it is grammatical is wrong the waitress does baffle Acrostichum. sent5: the waitress is not connate but it is not non-accusatorial. sent6: the fact that the lamplight baffles Acrostichum is true. sent7: the nonsense is not grammatical. sent8: that the fact that the slapper does canvas is correct is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the gymslip does not cruise lamplight but it does engage waterway is not correct. sent10: if the slapper is not a cocoon then the fact that it cruises deltoid and it does baffle Acrostichum does not hold. sent11: if the waitress baffles Acrostichum the slapper is a kind of a canvas. sent12: the waitress is a Etna. sent13: the waitress does morph. sent14: the waitress baffles Acrostichum if the slapper does canvas. sent15: the waitress is not a canvas and is a cocoon. sent16: the fact that the slapper is not a dubbing but it does cruise deltoid is wrong. sent17: that the spectator does not engage secretariat and does canvas is not true. sent18: the fact that the fact that the waitress is both a resort and a canvas hold does not hold if it is not wigless. sent19: the slapper does baffle Acrostichum if that the waitress does not cruise deltoid and is grammatical is not right. sent20: that the slapper is not meager but fluvial is incorrect. sent21: if the waitress is not a canvas that that it does not cruise deltoid and is grammatical is not incorrect is false.
|
sent1: (¬{E}{a} & {D}{a}) sent2: {CJ}{a} sent3: {C}{b} sent4: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {D}{b}) -> {E}{a} sent5: (¬{DK}{a} & {JG}{a}) sent6: {E}{ir} sent7: ¬{D}{is} sent8: ¬{A}{b} sent9: ¬(¬{IT}{ee} & {U}{ee}) sent10: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({C}{b} & {E}{b}) sent11: {E}{a} -> {A}{b} sent12: {G}{a} sent13: {GF}{a} sent14: {A}{b} -> {E}{a} sent15: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent16: ¬(¬{AI}{b} & {C}{b}) sent17: ¬(¬{EL}{go} & {A}{go}) sent18: ¬{BO}{a} -> ¬({HQ}{a} & {A}{a}) sent19: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}) -> {E}{b} sent20: ¬(¬{FA}{b} & {BQ}{b}) sent21: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a})
|
[
"sent15 -> int1: the waitress is not a kind of a canvas.; int1 & sent21 -> int2: the fact that the waitress does not cruise deltoid and is grammatical is not correct.; int2 & sent19 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent21 -> int2: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {D}{a}); int2 & sent19 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the slapper does baffle Acrostichum. ; $context$ = sent1: the waitress does not baffle Acrostichum and is grammatical. sent2: that the waitress engages pillar is right. sent3: that the slapper cruises deltoid is correct. sent4: if the fact that the slapper does not canvas but it is grammatical is wrong the waitress does baffle Acrostichum. sent5: the waitress is not connate but it is not non-accusatorial. sent6: the fact that the lamplight baffles Acrostichum is true. sent7: the nonsense is not grammatical. sent8: that the fact that the slapper does canvas is correct is incorrect. sent9: the fact that the gymslip does not cruise lamplight but it does engage waterway is not correct. sent10: if the slapper is not a cocoon then the fact that it cruises deltoid and it does baffle Acrostichum does not hold. sent11: if the waitress baffles Acrostichum the slapper is a kind of a canvas. sent12: the waitress is a Etna. sent13: the waitress does morph. sent14: the waitress baffles Acrostichum if the slapper does canvas. sent15: the waitress is not a canvas and is a cocoon. sent16: the fact that the slapper is not a dubbing but it does cruise deltoid is wrong. sent17: that the spectator does not engage secretariat and does canvas is not true. sent18: the fact that the fact that the waitress is both a resort and a canvas hold does not hold if it is not wigless. sent19: the slapper does baffle Acrostichum if that the waitress does not cruise deltoid and is grammatical is not right. sent20: that the slapper is not meager but fluvial is incorrect. sent21: if the waitress is not a canvas that that it does not cruise deltoid and is grammatical is not incorrect is false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 -> int1: the waitress is not a kind of a canvas.; int1 & sent21 -> int2: the fact that the waitress does not cruise deltoid and is grammatical is not correct.; int2 & sent19 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the fact that there is something such that if it is a kind of a mixer that it does not counterplot and/or it is not impetiginous is incorrect is not wrong is wrong.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: if the inulin is impetiginous then that it baffles Cork and/or it does not dehisce is not correct. sent2: either something is not a counterplot or it is not impetiginous or both if it is a mixer. sent3: the fact that something is not a counterplot or not impetiginous or both is wrong if it is a mixer.
|
sent1: {AB}{gq} -> ¬({AN}{gq} v ¬{GD}{gq}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the fact that the radius does not counterplot or is not impetiginous or both is false if it is a kind of a mixer.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the fact that there is something such that if it is a kind of a mixer that it does not counterplot and/or it is not impetiginous is incorrect is not wrong is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the inulin is impetiginous then that it baffles Cork and/or it does not dehisce is not correct. sent2: either something is not a counterplot or it is not impetiginous or both if it is a mixer. sent3: the fact that something is not a counterplot or not impetiginous or both is wrong if it is a mixer. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the fact that the radius does not counterplot or is not impetiginous or both is false if it is a kind of a mixer.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the epilation does cruise debarkation is not incorrect.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the ROM is an annual and it does cruise debarkation if the epilation is not a Malawian. sent2: if something is commutable it is a kind of an annual. sent3: if the sorting is a kind of a mobcap then it is commutable. sent4: the epilation does cruise debarkation if it is a kind of a cohune. sent5: the fact that something is a kind of Malawian thing that is a stringency is false if it does not rumple. sent6: if something is not incommutable it does cruise debarkation. sent7: something is not commutable if the fact that it is a Malawian and it is a stringency is wrong. sent8: the epilation baffles Porcellio and it is unacquisitive. sent9: something does not rumple if that it is a clanger and it is not chancroidal is not true. sent10: something that is an annual is commutable. sent11: the lockup is a kind of a stringency. sent12: the fact that the lockup is a clanger but it is not chancroidal is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬{D}{a} -> ({A}{ca} & {C}{ca}) sent2: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent3: {EF}{hj} -> {B}{hj} sent4: {BQ}{a} -> {C}{a} sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({D}x & {E}x) sent6: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent7: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{B}x sent8: ({GG}{a} & {CS}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent10: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent11: {E}{b} sent12: ¬({G}{b} & ¬{H}{b})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the epilation does cruise debarkation if it is commutable.;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: {B}{a} -> {C}{a};"
] |
the fact that the ROM is commutable is not false.
|
{B}{ca}
|
[
"sent10 -> int2: if the ROM is an annual then it is not incommutable.; sent11 -> int3: there is something such that it is a stringency.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the epilation does cruise debarkation is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the ROM is an annual and it does cruise debarkation if the epilation is not a Malawian. sent2: if something is commutable it is a kind of an annual. sent3: if the sorting is a kind of a mobcap then it is commutable. sent4: the epilation does cruise debarkation if it is a kind of a cohune. sent5: the fact that something is a kind of Malawian thing that is a stringency is false if it does not rumple. sent6: if something is not incommutable it does cruise debarkation. sent7: something is not commutable if the fact that it is a Malawian and it is a stringency is wrong. sent8: the epilation baffles Porcellio and it is unacquisitive. sent9: something does not rumple if that it is a clanger and it is not chancroidal is not true. sent10: something that is an annual is commutable. sent11: the lockup is a kind of a stringency. sent12: the fact that the lockup is a clanger but it is not chancroidal is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the epilation does cruise debarkation if it is commutable.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it does sicken then the fact that it is not a kind of a tadalafil and it does not cruise coiner does not hold.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: that there exists something such that if it sickens that it is a kind of a tadalafil and does not cruise coiner is not correct is not incorrect. sent2: something is a kind of non-nonspherical thing that does not distend if it is benthic. sent3: there is something such that if it sickens then it is not a kind of a tadalafil and does not cruise coiner. sent4: if something is achenial then the fact that it is Orthodox and it is not biochemical does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it sickens then that it is not a tadalafil and does cruise coiner is false. sent6: the fact that the Irishwoman does not baffle refutation and it does not cruise coiner does not hold if it engages hemiacetal. sent7: if that the assignee does sicken is true then it is not a kind of a tadalafil and does not cruise coiner. sent8: that the egret is not a speedometer and it is not demagogic is not correct if it is granuliferous. sent9: that the assignee is not a tadalafil and does cruise coiner is not right if the fact that it sickens is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that something engages Bissau and does not testify is not correct if it is a kind of a pocked. sent11: that something is not arteriosclerotic and it is not a fieldfare does not hold if that it is a protest is not wrong. sent12: if something sickens then it is not a tadalafil and it does not cruise coiner. sent13: there is something such that if it is terpsichorean the fact that it is both not a antidiuretic and not calendric is false. sent14: the fact that something is not a kind of a tadalafil but it does cruise coiner does not hold if it does sicken. sent15: the fact that something is not politics and it does not engage beastliness is not correct if it is abyssal. sent16: there exists something such that if it does foreclose then that it is not a kind of a cooperative and is not a kind of a coronary is not correct. sent17: that the assignee is not a lisinopril and it is not granuliferous is wrong if it is a regeneration. sent18: the fact that something is a tadalafil but it does not cruise coiner is incorrect if it does sicken. sent19: if something sickens that it is not a tadalafil and it does not cruise coiner does not hold. sent20: if the assignee does sicken the fact that it is a tadalafil and it does not cruise coiner is not true.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): {DO}x -> (¬{BG}x & ¬{GQ}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: (x): {EJ}x -> ¬({IQ}x & ¬{CG}x) sent5: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: {AK}{bu} -> ¬(¬{E}{bu} & ¬{AB}{bu}) sent7: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: {P}{fq} -> ¬(¬{BF}{fq} & ¬{JD}{fq}) sent9: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent10: (x): {CC}x -> ¬({HN}x & ¬{IT}x) sent11: (x): {JC}x -> ¬(¬{JK}x & ¬{AR}x) sent12: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: (Ex): {AT}x -> ¬(¬{JH}x & ¬{DA}x) sent14: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent15: (x): {GS}x -> ¬(¬{CN}x & ¬{T}x) sent16: (Ex): {EG}x -> ¬(¬{HH}x & ¬{EU}x) sent17: {DK}{aa} -> ¬(¬{U}{aa} & ¬{P}{aa}) sent18: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent19: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent20: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent19 -> int1: that the assignee is not a tadalafil and does not cruise coiner is not correct if it sickens.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent19 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is abyssal then the fact that it is not politics and it does not engage beastliness is wrong.
|
(Ex): {GS}x -> ¬(¬{CN}x & ¬{T}x)
|
[
"sent15 -> int2: if the marquetry is abyssal then the fact that it is not politics and it does not engage beastliness is not correct.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does sicken then the fact that it is not a kind of a tadalafil and it does not cruise coiner does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that there exists something such that if it sickens that it is a kind of a tadalafil and does not cruise coiner is not correct is not incorrect. sent2: something is a kind of non-nonspherical thing that does not distend if it is benthic. sent3: there is something such that if it sickens then it is not a kind of a tadalafil and does not cruise coiner. sent4: if something is achenial then the fact that it is Orthodox and it is not biochemical does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it sickens then that it is not a tadalafil and does cruise coiner is false. sent6: the fact that the Irishwoman does not baffle refutation and it does not cruise coiner does not hold if it engages hemiacetal. sent7: if that the assignee does sicken is true then it is not a kind of a tadalafil and does not cruise coiner. sent8: that the egret is not a speedometer and it is not demagogic is not correct if it is granuliferous. sent9: that the assignee is not a tadalafil and does cruise coiner is not right if the fact that it sickens is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that something engages Bissau and does not testify is not correct if it is a kind of a pocked. sent11: that something is not arteriosclerotic and it is not a fieldfare does not hold if that it is a protest is not wrong. sent12: if something sickens then it is not a tadalafil and it does not cruise coiner. sent13: there is something such that if it is terpsichorean the fact that it is both not a antidiuretic and not calendric is false. sent14: the fact that something is not a kind of a tadalafil but it does cruise coiner does not hold if it does sicken. sent15: the fact that something is not politics and it does not engage beastliness is not correct if it is abyssal. sent16: there exists something such that if it does foreclose then that it is not a kind of a cooperative and is not a kind of a coronary is not correct. sent17: that the assignee is not a lisinopril and it is not granuliferous is wrong if it is a regeneration. sent18: the fact that something is a tadalafil but it does not cruise coiner is incorrect if it does sicken. sent19: if something sickens that it is not a tadalafil and it does not cruise coiner does not hold. sent20: if the assignee does sicken the fact that it is a tadalafil and it does not cruise coiner is not true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent19 -> int1: that the assignee is not a tadalafil and does not cruise coiner is not correct if it sickens.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sty is not zymoid.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: if something is not a rental then that it is zymoid and it is Gallican is not true. sent2: if the ascomycete does not prove then the fact that the fact that the busker does not cruise tri-iodothyronine and is not a bookmark does not hold is not incorrect. sent3: the backwater is not zymoid. sent4: everything is a kind of a bookmark. sent5: the fact that the sty is not a sink is not incorrect. sent6: if there is something such that it is not a rental the sty is not Gallican. sent7: the strapless is not zymoid. sent8: that something does not cruise tri-iodothyronine but it is a rental does not hold if that it is a kind of a bookmark hold. sent9: the sty is not zymoid. sent10: the sty does not baffle menu.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent2: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent3: ¬{A}{hh} sent4: (x): {E}x sent5: ¬{DQ}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{dt} sent8: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) sent9: ¬{A}{a} sent10: ¬{HJ}{a}
|
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the sty is zymoid hold.
|
{A}{a}
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: if the fact that the croissant is a bookmark is true then the fact that it does not cruise tri-iodothyronine and it is a rental does not hold.; sent4 -> int2: the fact that the croissant is a kind of a bookmark is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the croissant does not cruise tri-iodothyronine and is a rental is incorrect.; int3 -> int4: there exists nothing such that it does not cruise tri-iodothyronine and it is a rental.; int4 -> int5: that the ascomycete does not cruise tri-iodothyronine and is rental does not hold.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that the fact that it does not cruise tri-iodothyronine and is rental is not true.;"
] | 9 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the sty is not zymoid. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a rental then that it is zymoid and it is Gallican is not true. sent2: if the ascomycete does not prove then the fact that the fact that the busker does not cruise tri-iodothyronine and is not a bookmark does not hold is not incorrect. sent3: the backwater is not zymoid. sent4: everything is a kind of a bookmark. sent5: the fact that the sty is not a sink is not incorrect. sent6: if there is something such that it is not a rental the sty is not Gallican. sent7: the strapless is not zymoid. sent8: that something does not cruise tri-iodothyronine but it is a rental does not hold if that it is a kind of a bookmark hold. sent9: the sty is not zymoid. sent10: the sty does not baffle menu. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something does not cruise fur and it is not a today.
|
(Ex): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x)
|
sent1: the semigloss is not a today. sent2: there exists something such that it is skeletal. sent3: the fact that something cruises fur but it is not a kind of a today is not incorrect. sent4: something is not a poke. sent5: the semigloss is not a kind of a today if there is something such that it is not skeletal. sent6: the semigloss does not cruise fur and is not a today if there is something such that it is not skeletal. sent7: something is not Panhellenic if that it is Panhellenic and it is a today is wrong. sent8: that the barite is not a roughcast and not a turnstile is not incorrect. sent9: there is something such that it does not cruise fur. sent10: something does not cruise fur and is a today. sent11: something does not illuminate and is not a prebendary. sent12: the semigloss does not baffle encomium and it does not cruise fur if there exists something such that it does not cruise madam. sent13: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a today. sent14: something is not politic and does not gas. sent15: something is not a kind of a Shiite and is not a hide. sent16: something is not skeletal.
|
sent1: ¬{C}{a} sent2: (Ex): {A}x sent3: (Ex): ({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{BA}x sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬({DU}x & {C}x) -> ¬{DU}x sent8: (¬{DP}{ef} & ¬{DJ}{ef}) sent9: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent10: (Ex): (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent11: (Ex): (¬{AJ}x & ¬{BT}x) sent12: (x): ¬{AM}x -> (¬{JC}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent13: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent14: (Ex): (¬{FP}x & ¬{DE}x) sent15: (Ex): (¬{HK}x & ¬{HO}x) sent16: (Ex): ¬{A}x
|
[
"sent16 & sent6 -> int1: the semigloss does not cruise fur and is not a today.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that it is a kind of non-Panhellenic thing that does not devilize barite.
|
(Ex): (¬{DU}x & ¬{DD}x)
|
[
"sent7 -> int2: the semigloss is not Panhellenic if the fact that the fact that it is Panhellenic and is a kind of a today is right is not right.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = something does not cruise fur and it is not a today. ; $context$ = sent1: the semigloss is not a today. sent2: there exists something such that it is skeletal. sent3: the fact that something cruises fur but it is not a kind of a today is not incorrect. sent4: something is not a poke. sent5: the semigloss is not a kind of a today if there is something such that it is not skeletal. sent6: the semigloss does not cruise fur and is not a today if there is something such that it is not skeletal. sent7: something is not Panhellenic if that it is Panhellenic and it is a today is wrong. sent8: that the barite is not a roughcast and not a turnstile is not incorrect. sent9: there is something such that it does not cruise fur. sent10: something does not cruise fur and is a today. sent11: something does not illuminate and is not a prebendary. sent12: the semigloss does not baffle encomium and it does not cruise fur if there exists something such that it does not cruise madam. sent13: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a today. sent14: something is not politic and does not gas. sent15: something is not a kind of a Shiite and is not a hide. sent16: something is not skeletal. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 & sent6 -> int1: the semigloss does not cruise fur and is not a today.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that something is a reinforcer is false.
|
¬((Ex): {B}x)
|
sent1: something is not a inaptness but it is a arsenical if the fact that it is a gamba is correct. sent2: there is something such that it is not a counterproposal. sent3: there is something such that it is not a condonation. sent4: if the kinin does not engage Kekule then it baffles galea and it does baffle coiner. sent5: if that something baffles coiner is not incorrect then it is a kind of a gamba. sent6: the snowplow is a kind of a counterproposal if that the rouge is not a kind of a reinforcer hold. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not a counterproposal the snowplow is a kind of a reinforcer. sent8: something is a counterproposal.
|
sent1: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & {C}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent3: (Ex): ¬{CH}x sent4: ¬{H}{c} -> ({G}{c} & {F}{c}) sent5: (x): {F}x -> {E}x sent6: ¬{B}{b} -> {A}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}{a} sent8: (Ex): {A}x
|
[
"sent2 & sent7 -> int1: the snowplow is a reinforcer.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent7 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the snowplow is a counterproposal.
|
{A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int2: the kinin is not a inaptness and is arsenical if it is a gamba.; sent5 -> int3: the kinin is a gamba if it does baffle coiner.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that something is a reinforcer is false. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a inaptness but it is a arsenical if the fact that it is a gamba is correct. sent2: there is something such that it is not a counterproposal. sent3: there is something such that it is not a condonation. sent4: if the kinin does not engage Kekule then it baffles galea and it does baffle coiner. sent5: if that something baffles coiner is not incorrect then it is a kind of a gamba. sent6: the snowplow is a kind of a counterproposal if that the rouge is not a kind of a reinforcer hold. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not a counterproposal the snowplow is a kind of a reinforcer. sent8: something is a counterproposal. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent7 -> int1: the snowplow is a reinforcer.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the whitetail is a kind of a intransitivity.
|
{D}{c}
|
sent1: if something is not present then the fact that it is bibliophilic and it does not engage munch is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the minstrel is a kind of a disunity is not false. sent3: the fact that the slammer is not bibliophilic is not incorrect. sent4: that the slammer is a kind of a Welsh that is a kind of a Bakunin is false if the fullback does not engage secret. sent5: if the fullback does cruise minstrel it unwinds and does not engage secret. sent6: something does not present if that it is a Welsh and it is a kind of a Bakunin is not right. sent7: an inopportune thing does cruise minstrel. sent8: the fact that if something does engage munch but it is not a present then the fact that it is a intransitivity hold is true. sent9: if the minstrel is a kind of a disunity the fullback is inopportune. sent10: if the fullback does not engage munch the whitetail engage munch and is not a kind of a present. sent11: the fullback does not engage munch if the slammer is not bibliophilic.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent2: {K}{d} sent3: ¬{A}{a} sent4: ¬{G}{b} -> ¬({F}{a} & {E}{a}) sent5: {I}{b} -> ({H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) sent6: (x): ¬({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent7: (x): {J}x -> {I}x sent8: (x): ({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {D}x sent9: {K}{d} -> {J}{b} sent10: ¬{B}{b} -> ({B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent11 & sent3 -> int1: the fullback does not engage munch.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the whitetail does engage munch but it is not a kind of a present.; sent8 -> int3: if the whitetail engages munch but it does not present then it is a kind of a intransitivity.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent3 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; int1 & sent10 -> int2: ({B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}); sent8 -> int3: ({B}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> {D}{c}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the whitetail is not a kind of a intransitivity is not incorrect.
|
¬{D}{c}
|
[
"sent1 -> int4: that the slammer is bibliophilic but it does not engage munch does not hold if it does not present.; sent6 -> int5: if the fact that the slammer is Welsh thing that is a Bakunin is not correct it is not a kind of a present.; sent7 -> int6: if the fullback is inopportune then it does cruise minstrel.; sent9 & sent2 -> int7: that the fullback is inopportune is right.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the fullback cruises minstrel.; sent5 & int8 -> int9: the fullback does unwind but it does not engage secret.; int9 -> int10: the fullback does not engage secret.; sent4 & int10 -> int11: that the slammer is a kind of a Welsh and it is a kind of a Bakunin does not hold.; int5 & int11 -> int12: the slammer does not present.; int4 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the fact that the slammer is bibliophilic but it does not engage munch is wrong is right.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that the fact that it is bibliophilic thing that does not engage munch is false.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the whitetail is a kind of a intransitivity. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not present then the fact that it is bibliophilic and it does not engage munch is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the minstrel is a kind of a disunity is not false. sent3: the fact that the slammer is not bibliophilic is not incorrect. sent4: that the slammer is a kind of a Welsh that is a kind of a Bakunin is false if the fullback does not engage secret. sent5: if the fullback does cruise minstrel it unwinds and does not engage secret. sent6: something does not present if that it is a Welsh and it is a kind of a Bakunin is not right. sent7: an inopportune thing does cruise minstrel. sent8: the fact that if something does engage munch but it is not a present then the fact that it is a intransitivity hold is true. sent9: if the minstrel is a kind of a disunity the fullback is inopportune. sent10: if the fullback does not engage munch the whitetail engage munch and is not a kind of a present. sent11: the fullback does not engage munch if the slammer is not bibliophilic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent3 -> int1: the fullback does not engage munch.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the whitetail does engage munch but it is not a kind of a present.; sent8 -> int3: if the whitetail engages munch but it does not present then it is a kind of a intransitivity.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the buckskin does not rough.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: if there is something such that that it is cellular is correct the buckskin is not a kind of a roughleg. sent2: the Gable does not engage command if the door does not scissor but it does tame. sent3: if that the buckskin is not unrighteous and it is not a soutache is incorrect it is not non-roughleg. sent4: if the priory is not unrighteous that it is not brunet and it does not baffle Burk is incorrect. sent5: the buckskin is a roughleg if it is unrighteous. sent6: the ram's-head does not engage command if the Gable does not engage command and it is not exempt. sent7: the fact that something is righteous and is not a kind of a soutache is not true if it is not cellular. sent8: the thunder is unrighteous. sent9: the Gable is not exempt but it does engage pentameter if the tauon is pericardial. sent10: the fact that the buckskin is unrighteous but it is not a kind of a soutache is not right. sent11: the buckskin is a kind of a Danish if the fact that it is both not roughleg and not a Petromyzontidae does not hold. sent12: the barium is not cellular. sent13: the astatine is not a roughleg if that that the ram's-head roughleg or it is immunocompetent or both is not false is not right. sent14: that something is a roughleg or immunocompetent or both is false if it does not engage command. sent15: the tauon is not a kind of a cockney but it does cull. sent16: the buckskin cruises sunbeam. sent17: the buckskin is not cellular. sent18: that the fact that something is unrighteous but it is not a soutache hold does not hold if it is not cellular. sent19: the door does not scissor and tames. sent20: something is a syphilitic and is pericardial if it does not incorporate. sent21: if an exempt thing is pericardial then that it does not engage pentameter hold. sent22: if something is not a cockney and is a cull then it does not incorporate. sent23: if the buckskin is not cellular the fact that it is unrighteous and it is not a kind of a soutache is not right.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (¬{J}{d} & {K}{d}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent4: ¬{AA}{dd} -> ¬(¬{GL}{dd} & ¬{N}{dd}) sent5: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent6: (¬{D}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent8: {AA}{ig} sent9: {G}{c} -> (¬{F}{b} & {E}{b}) sent10: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent11: ¬(¬{B}{aa} & ¬{FM}{aa}) -> {BE}{aa} sent12: ¬{A}{q} sent13: ¬({B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{gg} sent14: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({B}x v {C}x) sent15: (¬{M}{c} & {L}{c}) sent16: {DC}{aa} sent17: ¬{A}{aa} sent18: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent19: (¬{J}{d} & {K}{d}) sent20: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({H}x & {G}x) sent21: (x): ({F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent22: (x): (¬{M}x & {L}x) -> ¬{I}x sent23: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: that that the buckskin is not unrighteous and it is not a kind of a soutache is not wrong is false if it is not cellular.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the fact that the buckskin is a kind of non-unrighteous thing that is not a soutache is false.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & sent17 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the buckskin is not roughleg.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent21 -> int3: if the tauon is exempt and it is pericardial then it does not engage pentameter.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the buckskin does not rough. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that that it is cellular is correct the buckskin is not a kind of a roughleg. sent2: the Gable does not engage command if the door does not scissor but it does tame. sent3: if that the buckskin is not unrighteous and it is not a soutache is incorrect it is not non-roughleg. sent4: if the priory is not unrighteous that it is not brunet and it does not baffle Burk is incorrect. sent5: the buckskin is a roughleg if it is unrighteous. sent6: the ram's-head does not engage command if the Gable does not engage command and it is not exempt. sent7: the fact that something is righteous and is not a kind of a soutache is not true if it is not cellular. sent8: the thunder is unrighteous. sent9: the Gable is not exempt but it does engage pentameter if the tauon is pericardial. sent10: the fact that the buckskin is unrighteous but it is not a kind of a soutache is not right. sent11: the buckskin is a kind of a Danish if the fact that it is both not roughleg and not a Petromyzontidae does not hold. sent12: the barium is not cellular. sent13: the astatine is not a roughleg if that that the ram's-head roughleg or it is immunocompetent or both is not false is not right. sent14: that something is a roughleg or immunocompetent or both is false if it does not engage command. sent15: the tauon is not a kind of a cockney but it does cull. sent16: the buckskin cruises sunbeam. sent17: the buckskin is not cellular. sent18: that the fact that something is unrighteous but it is not a soutache hold does not hold if it is not cellular. sent19: the door does not scissor and tames. sent20: something is a syphilitic and is pericardial if it does not incorporate. sent21: if an exempt thing is pericardial then that it does not engage pentameter hold. sent22: if something is not a cockney and is a cull then it does not incorporate. sent23: if the buckskin is not cellular the fact that it is unrighteous and it is not a kind of a soutache is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: that that the buckskin is not unrighteous and it is not a kind of a soutache is not wrong is false if it is not cellular.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the fact that the buckskin is a kind of non-unrighteous thing that is not a soutache is false.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the foliaceousness does not occur and the residuariness does not occur.
|
(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})
|
sent1: the non-foliaceousness and the non-residuariness occurs. sent2: the factory-madeness does not occur and the burnup does not occur. sent3: the non-factory-madeness results in that both the helpfulness and the unorthodoxness happens.
|
sent1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: (¬{A} & ¬{IT}) sent3: ¬{A} -> (¬{CC} & ¬{FR})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the unhelpfulness does not occur and the orthodoxness does not occur.
|
(¬{CC} & ¬{FR})
|
[] | 6 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the foliaceousness does not occur and the residuariness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the non-foliaceousness and the non-residuariness occurs. sent2: the factory-madeness does not occur and the burnup does not occur. sent3: the non-factory-madeness results in that both the helpfulness and the unorthodoxness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the dicynodont is a libretto and it devilizes user does not hold.
|
¬({C}{b} & {D}{b})
|
sent1: that the trier does devilize user and does cruise excrescence is not right. sent2: if there is something such that it does cruise excrescence the fact that the dicynodont is a kind of a libretto and it does devilize user is not correct. sent3: something is a moussaka. sent4: that the trier is not energetic and/or is lacrimal does not hold if it is not a subrogation. sent5: the fact that the trier is a libretto and it is a kind of a moussaka is wrong if there is something such that it does devilize user. sent6: if something is not energetic it is extrusive but not non-saccadic. sent7: the dicynodont is a subrogation. sent8: that the trier is a moussaka and it devilizes user does not hold. sent9: the dicynodont is nonreticulate and it is a moussaka. sent10: if the fact that the trier is either not energetic or lacrimal or both does not hold then the dicynodont is not energetic. sent11: the pisanosaur is a moussaka. sent12: the dicynodont does not cruise excrescence and is a kind of a moussaka. sent13: the trier is a moussaka. sent14: the dicynodont is a kind of a libretto that is a moussaka. sent15: there is something such that it is a kind of a libretto. sent16: the dicynodont does devilize user if it is extrusive. sent17: the fact that the trier does retrograde is true. sent18: that the trier is a libretto and is a moussaka is false.
|
sent1: ¬({D}{a} & {A}{a}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b}) sent3: (Ex): {B}x sent4: ¬{I}{a} -> ¬(¬{G}{a} v {H}{a}) sent5: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({E}x & {F}x) sent7: {I}{b} sent8: ¬({B}{a} & {D}{a}) sent9: ({IC}{b} & {B}{b}) sent10: ¬(¬{G}{a} v {H}{a}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent11: {B}{e} sent12: (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent13: {B}{a} sent14: ({C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent15: (Ex): {C}x sent16: {E}{b} -> {D}{b} sent17: {EN}{a} sent18: ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a})
|
[] |
[] |
the dicynodont is a libretto that devilizes user.
|
({C}{b} & {D}{b})
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: the dicynodont does not cruise excrescence.; sent6 -> int2: the dicynodont is extrusive and it is saccadic if it is not energetic.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the dicynodont is a libretto and it devilizes user does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the trier does devilize user and does cruise excrescence is not right. sent2: if there is something such that it does cruise excrescence the fact that the dicynodont is a kind of a libretto and it does devilize user is not correct. sent3: something is a moussaka. sent4: that the trier is not energetic and/or is lacrimal does not hold if it is not a subrogation. sent5: the fact that the trier is a libretto and it is a kind of a moussaka is wrong if there is something such that it does devilize user. sent6: if something is not energetic it is extrusive but not non-saccadic. sent7: the dicynodont is a subrogation. sent8: that the trier is a moussaka and it devilizes user does not hold. sent9: the dicynodont is nonreticulate and it is a moussaka. sent10: if the fact that the trier is either not energetic or lacrimal or both does not hold then the dicynodont is not energetic. sent11: the pisanosaur is a moussaka. sent12: the dicynodont does not cruise excrescence and is a kind of a moussaka. sent13: the trier is a moussaka. sent14: the dicynodont is a kind of a libretto that is a moussaka. sent15: there is something such that it is a kind of a libretto. sent16: the dicynodont does devilize user if it is extrusive. sent17: the fact that the trier does retrograde is true. sent18: that the trier is a libretto and is a moussaka is false. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the scheelite is a afforestation that is a periscope.
|
({A}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: the scheelite is a periscope if the utensil is not millennial. sent2: that something is a afforestation and it is a periscope is wrong if it does not baffle airflow. sent3: the utensil is not millennial. sent4: that the scheelite is a afforestation and it baffles airflow is not false.
|
sent1: ¬{D}{b} -> {C}{a} sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent3: ¬{D}{b} sent4: ({A}{a} & {B}{a})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: the fact that the scheelite is a afforestation is not false.; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: the scheelite is a periscope.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the scheelite is both a afforestation and a periscope does not hold.
|
¬({A}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[
"sent2 -> int3: if the scheelite does not baffle airflow that it is a afforestation and it is a periscope is false.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the scheelite is a afforestation that is a periscope. ; $context$ = sent1: the scheelite is a periscope if the utensil is not millennial. sent2: that something is a afforestation and it is a periscope is wrong if it does not baffle airflow. sent3: the utensil is not millennial. sent4: that the scheelite is a afforestation and it baffles airflow is not false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: the fact that the scheelite is a afforestation is not false.; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: the scheelite is a periscope.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the councillorship does not occur and the corollary happens is not right.
|
¬(¬{E} & {D})
|
sent1: if the fact that not the boustrophedonicness but the sidingness happens is wrong then that the sidingness does not occur is right. sent2: the councillorship is prevented by that the engaging COMINT occurs and the devilizing creeps occurs. sent3: that the engaging COMINT occurs or the devilizing creeps happens or both prevents that the fluctuation occurs. sent4: that the councillorship and the corollary happens is incorrect if the devilizing creeps does not occur. sent5: the sidingness occurs. sent6: the fact that the councillorship happens and the corollary occurs is not right. sent7: that the engaging COMINT occurs prevents the fluctuation. sent8: that the sidingness does not occur brings about that the benedictoriness and the devilizing creeps occurs. sent9: if that the devilizing creeps does not occur is true the fact that the councillorship does not occur and the corollary occurs is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{H} & {F}) -> ¬{F} sent2: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{E} sent3: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent4: ¬{B} -> ¬({E} & {D}) sent5: {F} sent6: ¬({E} & {D}) sent7: {A} -> ¬{C} sent8: ¬{F} -> ({BN} & {B}) sent9: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{E} & {D})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the devilizing creeps occurs is not wrong.; assump1 -> int1: either the engaging COMINT occurs or the devilizing creeps occurs or both.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: that the fluctuation does not occur hold.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {B}; assump1 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); int1 & sent3 -> int2: ¬{C};"
] |
both the benedictoriness and the epiphyticness occurs.
|
({BN} & {CF})
|
[] | 4 | 4 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the councillorship does not occur and the corollary happens is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that not the boustrophedonicness but the sidingness happens is wrong then that the sidingness does not occur is right. sent2: the councillorship is prevented by that the engaging COMINT occurs and the devilizing creeps occurs. sent3: that the engaging COMINT occurs or the devilizing creeps happens or both prevents that the fluctuation occurs. sent4: that the councillorship and the corollary happens is incorrect if the devilizing creeps does not occur. sent5: the sidingness occurs. sent6: the fact that the councillorship happens and the corollary occurs is not right. sent7: that the engaging COMINT occurs prevents the fluctuation. sent8: that the sidingness does not occur brings about that the benedictoriness and the devilizing creeps occurs. sent9: if that the devilizing creeps does not occur is true the fact that the councillorship does not occur and the corollary occurs is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the devilizing creeps occurs is not wrong.; assump1 -> int1: either the engaging COMINT occurs or the devilizing creeps occurs or both.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: that the fluctuation does not occur hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the varnish is a kind of paradigmatic thing that is a Cronus is not true.
|
¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
sent1: the fact that that the spinmeister is an elater and is a thermochemistry does not hold hold if it is not a undecagon. sent2: the varnish is not a radio. sent3: the varnish is not Yemeni. sent4: the fact that the varnish is proprioceptive and it is horticultural is wrong. sent5: that the varnish is not a Cronus but it does reign is not right if the leg is a kind of a thereness. sent6: the fact that the froghopper is a reign and a eudemon does not hold. sent7: the varnish is not a kind of a valedictorian. sent8: if something engages slapper then it is a thereness. sent9: that the slapper is a kind of a prate that is a caruncle is wrong if it is not a specialist. sent10: the fact that the fact that the toast is a kind of a reign and it is an abolitionism hold is not true if it is not a separated. sent11: if the varnish is not a kind of a Cronus the fact that it cruises inaptness and it is a commemorative is not true. sent12: something is a balbriggan if the fact that it is a pluviometer that does not insure does not hold. sent13: the varnish does not reign. sent14: if that the varnish is not a kind of a Cronus but it is a reign does not hold then that the cross-link is not a Cronus is not false. sent15: if the NRTI is a balbriggan that it does not devilize Acipenser and does not devilize moonbeam does not hold. sent16: that the varnish cruises Apogon and it is a Cronus is not true. sent17: if the NRTI engages slapper then the leg is not a reign and is a thereness. sent18: the NRTI does engage slapper. sent19: the fact that that that the varnish is paradigmatic and a balbriggan is not false is wrong is true. sent20: the fact that the varnish is paradigmatic and it is a Cronus is wrong if it is not a reign.
|
sent1: ¬{CC}{cc} -> ¬({M}{cc} & {IL}{cc}) sent2: ¬{JH}{a} sent3: ¬{CD}{a} sent4: ¬({FD}{a} & {HQ}{a}) sent5: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) sent6: ¬({A}{br} & {DA}{br}) sent7: ¬{CA}{a} sent8: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent9: ¬{HA}{fn} -> ¬({GA}{fn} & {HM}{fn}) sent10: ¬{CJ}{bi} -> ¬({A}{bi} & {DT}{bi}) sent11: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬({U}{a} & {FA}{a}) sent12: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> {F}x sent13: ¬{A}{a} sent14: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{ht} sent15: {F}{c} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent16: ¬({II}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent17: {C}{c} -> (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent18: {C}{c} sent19: ¬({AA}{a} & {F}{a}) sent20: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
[
"sent20 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent20 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the varnish is paradigmatic and it is a Cronus.
|
({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
[
"sent17 & sent18 -> int1: the leg is not a reign but a thereness.; int1 -> int2: something is both not a reign and a thereness.;"
] | 4 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the varnish is a kind of paradigmatic thing that is a Cronus is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that the spinmeister is an elater and is a thermochemistry does not hold hold if it is not a undecagon. sent2: the varnish is not a radio. sent3: the varnish is not Yemeni. sent4: the fact that the varnish is proprioceptive and it is horticultural is wrong. sent5: that the varnish is not a Cronus but it does reign is not right if the leg is a kind of a thereness. sent6: the fact that the froghopper is a reign and a eudemon does not hold. sent7: the varnish is not a kind of a valedictorian. sent8: if something engages slapper then it is a thereness. sent9: that the slapper is a kind of a prate that is a caruncle is wrong if it is not a specialist. sent10: the fact that the fact that the toast is a kind of a reign and it is an abolitionism hold is not true if it is not a separated. sent11: if the varnish is not a kind of a Cronus the fact that it cruises inaptness and it is a commemorative is not true. sent12: something is a balbriggan if the fact that it is a pluviometer that does not insure does not hold. sent13: the varnish does not reign. sent14: if that the varnish is not a kind of a Cronus but it is a reign does not hold then that the cross-link is not a Cronus is not false. sent15: if the NRTI is a balbriggan that it does not devilize Acipenser and does not devilize moonbeam does not hold. sent16: that the varnish cruises Apogon and it is a Cronus is not true. sent17: if the NRTI engages slapper then the leg is not a reign and is a thereness. sent18: the NRTI does engage slapper. sent19: the fact that that that the varnish is paradigmatic and a balbriggan is not false is wrong is true. sent20: the fact that the varnish is paradigmatic and it is a Cronus is wrong if it is not a reign. ; $proof$ =
|
sent20 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the numdah does not baffle Anouilh.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: the numdah baffles Anouilh if that the fruitcake does not baffles Anouilh hold. sent2: the fact that the numdah does not baffle Anouilh is true if that it is a kind of fallible thing that devilizes vizier is not correct. sent3: that the numdah is a kind of fallible thing that devilizes vizier is wrong. sent4: the numdah does not hush if the fact that it is a echinus and it baffles Anouilh is false. sent5: the fact that the mimosa is a kind of a pachycheilia and it does devilize Acipenser is wrong. sent6: something does not baffle Anouilh if it does not engage GSR. sent7: if either something does not alliterate or it is unplayful or both it is unplayful. sent8: if the numdah is not fallible then it does not baffle Anouilh. sent9: if the polypropenonitrile is not a kind of a charge the fruitcake does not engage GSR but it is a kind of a Heaven. sent10: the fact that something is not a charge if it is unplayful is not false. sent11: if the fact that something is interlobular and it does devilize vizier is not true it does not baffle mimosa. sent12: the sinkhole does not cruise wicket if that it is a crepe and it does devilize vizier is not right.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{b} -> {B}{a} sent2: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent4: ¬({DS}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{GM}{a} sent5: ¬({II}{di} & {DA}{di}) sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x sent7: (x): (¬{G}x v {E}x) -> {E}x sent8: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: ¬{D}{c} -> (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent10: (x): {E}x -> ¬{D}x sent11: (x): ¬({EL}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{IJ}x sent12: ¬({EB}{il} & {AB}{il}) -> ¬{DH}{il}
|
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the numdah does baffle Anouilh.
|
{B}{a}
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the fact that the fruitcake does not baffle Anouilh is not wrong if it does not engage GSR.; sent10 -> int2: the fact that if that the polypropenonitrile is unplayful is true the polypropenonitrile is not a kind of a charge is right.; sent7 -> int3: the polypropenonitrile is unplayful if either it does not alliterate or it is unplayful or both.;"
] | 7 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the numdah does not baffle Anouilh. ; $context$ = sent1: the numdah baffles Anouilh if that the fruitcake does not baffles Anouilh hold. sent2: the fact that the numdah does not baffle Anouilh is true if that it is a kind of fallible thing that devilizes vizier is not correct. sent3: that the numdah is a kind of fallible thing that devilizes vizier is wrong. sent4: the numdah does not hush if the fact that it is a echinus and it baffles Anouilh is false. sent5: the fact that the mimosa is a kind of a pachycheilia and it does devilize Acipenser is wrong. sent6: something does not baffle Anouilh if it does not engage GSR. sent7: if either something does not alliterate or it is unplayful or both it is unplayful. sent8: if the numdah is not fallible then it does not baffle Anouilh. sent9: if the polypropenonitrile is not a kind of a charge the fruitcake does not engage GSR but it is a kind of a Heaven. sent10: the fact that something is not a charge if it is unplayful is not false. sent11: if the fact that something is interlobular and it does devilize vizier is not true it does not baffle mimosa. sent12: the sinkhole does not cruise wicket if that it is a crepe and it does devilize vizier is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the buckskins is basidial.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: a basidial thing baffles contortionist. sent2: if something does not engage spirited that it is not a wintergreen and it is adient is incorrect. sent3: the buckskins is basidial if it is atypical. sent4: if the fact that something is not a wintergreen and is adient is incorrect it is not adient. sent5: that something does not engage spirited is not incorrect if the fact that it engage spirited and it is not atrioventricular is not right. sent6: the contortionist is not painful and/or does not engage mistranslation if it does not cruise obstetrician. sent7: if something is not adient then that it is not atypical hold. sent8: the buckskins is atypical. sent9: that the popover is both not non-myalgic and non-citric does not hold. sent10: if something is not painful that it is not parliamentary is not wrong. sent11: the contortionist does not cruise obstetrician if that the fact that the popover is myalgic but not citric is not incorrect is incorrect. sent12: a non-atypical thing is non-basidial. sent13: if the biology does feud it does engage computerization. sent14: if the contortionist is not parliamentary then that the buckskins engages spirited and is not atrioventricular is not right.
|
sent1: (x): {B}x -> {HT}x sent2: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent5: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent6: ¬{J}{b} -> (¬{I}{b} v ¬{H}{b}) sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{A}x sent8: {A}{a} sent9: ¬({L}{c} & ¬{K}{c}) sent10: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬{F}x sent11: ¬({L}{c} & ¬{K}{c}) -> ¬{J}{b} sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x sent13: {HH}{fs} -> {HS}{fs} sent14: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{G}{a})
|
[
"sent3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the pillion does baffle contortionist if it is basidial.
|
{B}{gk} -> {HT}{gk}
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the buckskins is basidial. ; $context$ = sent1: a basidial thing baffles contortionist. sent2: if something does not engage spirited that it is not a wintergreen and it is adient is incorrect. sent3: the buckskins is basidial if it is atypical. sent4: if the fact that something is not a wintergreen and is adient is incorrect it is not adient. sent5: that something does not engage spirited is not incorrect if the fact that it engage spirited and it is not atrioventricular is not right. sent6: the contortionist is not painful and/or does not engage mistranslation if it does not cruise obstetrician. sent7: if something is not adient then that it is not atypical hold. sent8: the buckskins is atypical. sent9: that the popover is both not non-myalgic and non-citric does not hold. sent10: if something is not painful that it is not parliamentary is not wrong. sent11: the contortionist does not cruise obstetrician if that the fact that the popover is myalgic but not citric is not incorrect is incorrect. sent12: a non-atypical thing is non-basidial. sent13: if the biology does feud it does engage computerization. sent14: if the contortionist is not parliamentary then that the buckskins engages spirited and is not atrioventricular is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the paste-up is lively.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: something does diffuse if the fact that it is not lively and/or is non-small-capitalization is not true. sent2: the fact that the paste-up is cherty is right. sent3: the paste-up is monetary. sent4: the paste-up is aplacental. sent5: there exists nothing that is not a Otus and is not aplacental. sent6: something does baffle deservingness. sent7: the paste-up is a loins and is allographic. sent8: the turnip does baffle deservingness. sent9: the caper is lively and it baffles Vultur. sent10: if that the fact that something is not a Otus and is not aplacental hold does not hold that it is aplacental is not false. sent11: the paste-up is a kind of southern a horsewoman. sent12: the lollipop is lively. sent13: the paste-up is aplacental and lively. sent14: the paste-up is aplacental and it is a chlorate. sent15: the bull-snake is lively.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) -> {FI}x sent2: {BC}{a} sent3: {GQ}{a} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{A}x) sent6: (Ex): {F}x sent7: ({BA}{a} & {EQ}{a}) sent8: {F}{b} sent9: ({B}{gs} & {EB}{gs}) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{A}x) -> {A}x sent11: ({BP}{a} & {IR}{a}) sent12: {B}{he} sent13: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent14: ({A}{a} & {DC}{a}) sent15: {B}{hs}
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the paste-up is not lively.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: if that the turnip is both not a Otus and not aplacental is false it is aplacental.; sent5 -> int2: the fact that the turnip is not a Otus and not aplacental is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the turnip is aplacental.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the paste-up is lively. ; $context$ = sent1: something does diffuse if the fact that it is not lively and/or is non-small-capitalization is not true. sent2: the fact that the paste-up is cherty is right. sent3: the paste-up is monetary. sent4: the paste-up is aplacental. sent5: there exists nothing that is not a Otus and is not aplacental. sent6: something does baffle deservingness. sent7: the paste-up is a loins and is allographic. sent8: the turnip does baffle deservingness. sent9: the caper is lively and it baffles Vultur. sent10: if that the fact that something is not a Otus and is not aplacental hold does not hold that it is aplacental is not false. sent11: the paste-up is a kind of southern a horsewoman. sent12: the lollipop is lively. sent13: the paste-up is aplacental and lively. sent14: the paste-up is aplacental and it is a chlorate. sent15: the bull-snake is lively. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the encephalogram is not a processor but it does rocket is not correct.
|
¬(¬{D}{c} & {E}{c})
|
sent1: the fact that the caulk is not a kind of a nonoccurrence and it does not teem is false if the narthex is a monocline. sent2: the quadriplegic does baffle encephalogram and it is phalangeal. sent3: the fact that the encephalogram is a kind of a processor and is a rocket is wrong. sent4: the fact that the encephalogram is not a processor and is a rocket does not hold if the narthex does not teem. sent5: the caulk is a kind of a processor if that either the narthex is not a nonoccurrence or it is not a monocline or both is not correct. sent6: the narthex does not teem if the caulk is both a nonoccurrence and a monocline. sent7: the narthex is not a monocline. sent8: the caulk is a nonoccurrence. sent9: something is not a kind of a processor and is a rocket if it is not a nonoccurrence.
|
sent1: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent2: ({BO}{ap} & {EJ}{ap}) sent3: ¬({D}{c} & {E}{c}) sent4: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & {E}{c}) sent5: ¬(¬{A}{b} v ¬{B}{b}) -> {D}{a} sent6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: ¬{B}{b} sent8: {A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{D}x & {E}x)
|
[] |
[] |
the caulk is a processor.
|
{D}{a}
|
[] | 10 | 3 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the encephalogram is not a processor but it does rocket is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the caulk is not a kind of a nonoccurrence and it does not teem is false if the narthex is a monocline. sent2: the quadriplegic does baffle encephalogram and it is phalangeal. sent3: the fact that the encephalogram is a kind of a processor and is a rocket is wrong. sent4: the fact that the encephalogram is not a processor and is a rocket does not hold if the narthex does not teem. sent5: the caulk is a kind of a processor if that either the narthex is not a nonoccurrence or it is not a monocline or both is not correct. sent6: the narthex does not teem if the caulk is both a nonoccurrence and a monocline. sent7: the narthex is not a monocline. sent8: the caulk is a nonoccurrence. sent9: something is not a kind of a processor and is a rocket if it is not a nonoccurrence. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the stunner happens and/or the federation occurs.
|
({C} v {D})
|
sent1: the stunner occurs if the incompleteness occurs. sent2: the respectableness happens. sent3: if the fact that the fact that the sisterliness does not occur and the orchestration does not occur does not hold is not wrong then the hierarchicalness does not occur. sent4: the Ottoman occurs. sent5: the hierarchicalness happens and the orchestration occurs if the sisterliness does not occur. sent6: if that the incompleteness but not the navigation happens does not hold the navigation occurs. sent7: the baffling Scholasticism does not occur if that the orchestration occurs or the hierarchicalness does not occur or both is not right. sent8: the baffling space occurs if the tailoring occurs. sent9: that the mailing occurs and the baffling Scholasticism happens is brought about by the nonhierarchicalness. sent10: if the cruising butler does not occur and/or the cruising Janus does not occur the cruising butler does not occur. sent11: if the open-sourceness does not occur then the fact that the sisterliness does not occur and the orchestration does not occur is incorrect. sent12: the fact that the incompleteness occurs and the navigation does not occur does not hold if the mailing occurs. sent13: the mail occurs. sent14: if the sisterliness does not occur then the fact that either the orchestration occurs or the hierarchicalness does not occur or both is not true. sent15: that the cruising butler does not occur and/or that the cruising Janus does not occur is triggered by the dissuasion. sent16: if the hierarchicalness happens then the baffling Scholasticism happens but the federation does not occur. sent17: the mail does not occur and the incompleteness does not occur if the baffling Scholasticism does not occur. sent18: the flood occurs and/or the off-siteness happens. sent19: if the cruising butler does not occur then that the tickling happens and the open-sourceness happens does not hold. sent20: the incompleteness and the mailing occurs. sent21: if the incompleteness does not occur the fact that either the stunner happens or the federation happens or both is wrong. sent22: if that the fact that that both the tickling and the open-sourceness occurs is correct is incorrect is right then that the sisterliness occurs is not true.
|
sent1: {A} -> {C} sent2: {CQ} sent3: ¬(¬{H} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} sent4: {JB} sent5: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) sent6: ¬({A} & ¬{ED}) -> {ED} sent7: ¬({G} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{E} sent8: {FJ} -> {AD} sent9: ¬{F} -> ({B} & {E}) sent10: (¬{K} v ¬{M}) -> ¬{K} sent11: ¬{I} -> ¬(¬{H} & ¬{G}) sent12: {B} -> ¬({A} & ¬{ED}) sent13: {B} sent14: ¬{H} -> ¬({G} v ¬{F}) sent15: {L} -> (¬{K} v ¬{M}) sent16: {F} -> ({E} & ¬{D}) sent17: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) sent18: ({BB} v {AS}) sent19: ¬{K} -> ¬({J} & {I}) sent20: ({A} & {B}) sent21: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} v {D}) sent22: ¬({J} & {I}) -> ¬{H}
|
[
"sent20 -> int1: the incompleteness happens.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the stunner occurs.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent20 -> int1: {A}; sent1 & int1 -> int2: {C}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that either the stunner happens or the federation occurs or both is incorrect.
|
¬({C} v {D})
|
[] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the stunner happens and/or the federation occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the stunner occurs if the incompleteness occurs. sent2: the respectableness happens. sent3: if the fact that the fact that the sisterliness does not occur and the orchestration does not occur does not hold is not wrong then the hierarchicalness does not occur. sent4: the Ottoman occurs. sent5: the hierarchicalness happens and the orchestration occurs if the sisterliness does not occur. sent6: if that the incompleteness but not the navigation happens does not hold the navigation occurs. sent7: the baffling Scholasticism does not occur if that the orchestration occurs or the hierarchicalness does not occur or both is not right. sent8: the baffling space occurs if the tailoring occurs. sent9: that the mailing occurs and the baffling Scholasticism happens is brought about by the nonhierarchicalness. sent10: if the cruising butler does not occur and/or the cruising Janus does not occur the cruising butler does not occur. sent11: if the open-sourceness does not occur then the fact that the sisterliness does not occur and the orchestration does not occur is incorrect. sent12: the fact that the incompleteness occurs and the navigation does not occur does not hold if the mailing occurs. sent13: the mail occurs. sent14: if the sisterliness does not occur then the fact that either the orchestration occurs or the hierarchicalness does not occur or both is not true. sent15: that the cruising butler does not occur and/or that the cruising Janus does not occur is triggered by the dissuasion. sent16: if the hierarchicalness happens then the baffling Scholasticism happens but the federation does not occur. sent17: the mail does not occur and the incompleteness does not occur if the baffling Scholasticism does not occur. sent18: the flood occurs and/or the off-siteness happens. sent19: if the cruising butler does not occur then that the tickling happens and the open-sourceness happens does not hold. sent20: the incompleteness and the mailing occurs. sent21: if the incompleteness does not occur the fact that either the stunner happens or the federation happens or both is wrong. sent22: if that the fact that that both the tickling and the open-sourceness occurs is correct is incorrect is right then that the sisterliness occurs is not true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent20 -> int1: the incompleteness happens.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the stunner occurs.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the petcock is not a kind of a batten.
|
¬{B}{c}
|
sent1: the Pantaloon does not baffle campfire if there exists something such that the fact that it does not cruise Hawaii is not false. sent2: the latch does not baffle campfire. sent3: The campfire does not baffle latch. sent4: everything is both a Varuna and not a doomed. sent5: if the fornix is not pyrotechnic then the fact that the petcock is both not a hysterocatalepsy and mortuary is not true. sent6: that the latch battens and does not baffle campfire does not hold if the Pantaloon is not a kind of a hysterocatalepsy. sent7: something is not pyrotechnic but it does squall if it does not doom. sent8: if there is something such that that it is a batten and it does not baffle campfire is not true the Wiccan is not a batten. sent9: the Pantaloon is not a hysterocatalepsy if the fact that the petcock is not a hysterocatalepsy and is mortuary is not correct. sent10: if there is something such that that the fact that it is a mesalliance and cruises Hawaii is not incorrect does not hold then the petcock is not a batten.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{A}{b} sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: ¬{AC}{aa} sent4: (x): ({H}x & ¬{G}x) sent5: ¬{E}{d} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} & {D}{c}) sent6: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{E}x & {F}x) sent8: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}{go} sent9: ¬(¬{C}{c} & {D}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent10: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}{c}
|
[] |
[] |
the Wiccan is not a batten.
|
¬{B}{go}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: if the ribbing is not a doomed it is not pyrotechnic and it squalls.; sent4 -> int2: the ribbing is both a Varuna and not a doomed.; int2 -> int3: the fact that the ribbing is a doomed is incorrect.; int1 & int3 -> int4: the ribbing is a kind of non-pyrotechnic a squall.; int4 -> int5: everything is not pyrotechnic and it does squall.; int5 -> int6: the fornix is non-pyrotechnic thing that is a squall.; int6 -> int7: the fornix is not pyrotechnic.; int7 & sent5 -> int8: that the petcock is not a hysterocatalepsy and is mortuary does not hold.; int8 & sent9 -> int9: that the Pantaloon is not a hysterocatalepsy is correct.; sent6 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the latch is a batten but it does not baffle campfire is not correct.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a batten and does not baffle campfire does not hold.; sent8 & int11 -> hypothesis;"
] | 11 | 3 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the petcock is not a kind of a batten. ; $context$ = sent1: the Pantaloon does not baffle campfire if there exists something such that the fact that it does not cruise Hawaii is not false. sent2: the latch does not baffle campfire. sent3: The campfire does not baffle latch. sent4: everything is both a Varuna and not a doomed. sent5: if the fornix is not pyrotechnic then the fact that the petcock is both not a hysterocatalepsy and mortuary is not true. sent6: that the latch battens and does not baffle campfire does not hold if the Pantaloon is not a kind of a hysterocatalepsy. sent7: something is not pyrotechnic but it does squall if it does not doom. sent8: if there is something such that that it is a batten and it does not baffle campfire is not true the Wiccan is not a batten. sent9: the Pantaloon is not a hysterocatalepsy if the fact that the petcock is not a hysterocatalepsy and is mortuary is not correct. sent10: if there is something such that that the fact that it is a mesalliance and cruises Hawaii is not incorrect does not hold then the petcock is not a batten. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the cholla is a kind of seamed thing that is not a Bohr is not right.
|
¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b})
|
sent1: something is not seamless and it is not a Bohr if it is a suslik. sent2: the fact that the cholla is seamed a Bohr does not hold. sent3: if something is side-to-side then that it is seamless and is not a kind of a Bohr is wrong. sent4: if the fact that the cholla is side-to-side is correct that it is both not seamless and a Bohr is not right. sent5: if the hindbrain is not a kind of a suslik then the cholla is both not non-side-to-side and a hired. sent6: if the hindbrain is not a kind of a suslik then the cholla does hire. sent7: the hindbrain is not a suslik. sent8: that if something is side-to-side then that it is both not seamless and not a Bohr is wrong is right. sent9: if something is side-to-side then the fact that it is a kind of non-seamless thing that is a Bohr is wrong.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) sent2: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent3: (x): {AA}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent4: {AA}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{b} sent7: ¬{A}{a} sent8: (x): {AA}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) sent9: (x): {AA}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x)
|
[
"sent5 & sent7 -> int1: the cholla is side-to-side and it is a hired.; int1 -> int2: the cholla is side-to-side.; sent8 -> int3: if the cholla is side-to-side then that it is not seamless and it is not a Bohr does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent7 -> int1: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); int1 -> int2: {AA}{b}; sent8 -> int3: {AA}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}); int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the cholla is not seamless and it is not a Bohr.
|
(¬{C}{b} & ¬{B}{b})
|
[
"sent1 -> int4: the cholla is seamed thing that is not a Bohr if it is a kind of a suslik.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the cholla is a kind of seamed thing that is not a Bohr is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not seamless and it is not a Bohr if it is a suslik. sent2: the fact that the cholla is seamed a Bohr does not hold. sent3: if something is side-to-side then that it is seamless and is not a kind of a Bohr is wrong. sent4: if the fact that the cholla is side-to-side is correct that it is both not seamless and a Bohr is not right. sent5: if the hindbrain is not a kind of a suslik then the cholla is both not non-side-to-side and a hired. sent6: if the hindbrain is not a kind of a suslik then the cholla does hire. sent7: the hindbrain is not a suslik. sent8: that if something is side-to-side then that it is both not seamless and not a Bohr is wrong is right. sent9: if something is side-to-side then the fact that it is a kind of non-seamless thing that is a Bohr is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent7 -> int1: the cholla is side-to-side and it is a hired.; int1 -> int2: the cholla is side-to-side.; sent8 -> int3: if the cholla is side-to-side then that it is not seamless and it is not a Bohr does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the crag is not non-stomatous.
|
{D}{a}
|
sent1: something is not a expurgator and it does not abscond if it does not baffle streamliner. sent2: if the crag is not a Poe and does not yield it is not a kind of a pox. sent3: the crag is not a yield if it is a kind of a worst that is not a skank. sent4: if the fact that something is not a expurgator and does baffle streamliner does not hold it is stomatous. sent5: the crag is not monotypic. sent6: if something is not a gal it is a kind of a mugginess. sent7: the crag does not yield. sent8: the outrigger is not a relativism and not a crepe. sent9: if the stray is not a kind of a worst that it does not engage shuffle and is a pox is not right. sent10: the fact that something is not a expurgator but it does baffle streamliner does not hold if it is not a kind of a pox. sent11: the crag is a leucine. sent12: if the scissortail is not a flit and is non-stomatous then it is not a Labrador. sent13: the crag is not a kind of a ritz if it does not baffle meeting and is not a kind of a pox. sent14: something baffles streamliner if it is not a kind of a pox. sent15: the crag is not a kind of a Poe and it is not a yield.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{T}x) sent2: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: ({FN}{a} & ¬{FK}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{a} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) -> {D}x sent5: ¬{FO}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{CU}x -> {HN}x sent7: ¬{AB}{a} sent8: (¬{IP}{p} & ¬{HO}{p}) sent9: ¬{FN}{gt} -> ¬(¬{IA}{gt} & {B}{gt}) sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) sent11: {GP}{a} sent12: (¬{DM}{n} & ¬{D}{n}) -> ¬{P}{n} sent13: (¬{BS}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{ID}{a} sent14: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x sent15: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[
"sent2 & sent15 -> int1: the crag is not a pox.; sent10 -> int2: that the crag is not a kind of a expurgator and does baffle streamliner is not correct if it is not a pox.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the crag is not a expurgator and baffles streamliner is false.; sent4 -> int4: the crag is stomatous if the fact that the fact that it is not a kind of a expurgator and baffles streamliner is not incorrect is wrong.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent15 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent10 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}); sent4 -> int4: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> {D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the poisonberry is not a expurgator and it does not abscond.
|
(¬{C}{fj} & ¬{T}{fj})
|
[
"sent1 -> int5: the poisonberry is not a kind of a expurgator and it does not abscond if the fact that it does not baffle streamliner is not wrong.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the crag is not non-stomatous. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a expurgator and it does not abscond if it does not baffle streamliner. sent2: if the crag is not a Poe and does not yield it is not a kind of a pox. sent3: the crag is not a yield if it is a kind of a worst that is not a skank. sent4: if the fact that something is not a expurgator and does baffle streamliner does not hold it is stomatous. sent5: the crag is not monotypic. sent6: if something is not a gal it is a kind of a mugginess. sent7: the crag does not yield. sent8: the outrigger is not a relativism and not a crepe. sent9: if the stray is not a kind of a worst that it does not engage shuffle and is a pox is not right. sent10: the fact that something is not a expurgator but it does baffle streamliner does not hold if it is not a kind of a pox. sent11: the crag is a leucine. sent12: if the scissortail is not a flit and is non-stomatous then it is not a Labrador. sent13: the crag is not a kind of a ritz if it does not baffle meeting and is not a kind of a pox. sent14: something baffles streamliner if it is not a kind of a pox. sent15: the crag is not a kind of a Poe and it is not a yield. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent15 -> int1: the crag is not a pox.; sent10 -> int2: that the crag is not a kind of a expurgator and does baffle streamliner is not correct if it is not a pox.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the crag is not a expurgator and baffles streamliner is false.; sent4 -> int4: the crag is stomatous if the fact that the fact that it is not a kind of a expurgator and baffles streamliner is not incorrect is wrong.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the lash does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the growth occurs. sent2: the baffling utensil or the grace or both happens. sent3: that the single-laneness occurs is true. sent4: the reordering does not occur. sent5: that the counterintelligence does not occur is not incorrect if the batten happens and/or the baffling warmheartedness happens. sent6: the lashing occurs if both the non-equineness and the non-single-laneness happens. sent7: the cruising campfire happens. sent8: if the equineness occurs the lash does not occur. sent9: if the Australasianness and/or the growth happens the sell does not occur.
|
sent1: {JI} sent2: ({FB} v {BP}) sent3: {A} sent4: ¬{DR} sent5: ({AI} v {AK}) -> ¬{FH} sent6: (¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {C} sent7: {IU} sent8: {B} -> ¬{C} sent9: ({ED} v {JI}) -> ¬{N}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the single-laneness or the equine or both occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ({A} v {B});"
] |
the lash happens.
|
{C}
|
[] | 6 | 2 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the lash does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the growth occurs. sent2: the baffling utensil or the grace or both happens. sent3: that the single-laneness occurs is true. sent4: the reordering does not occur. sent5: that the counterintelligence does not occur is not incorrect if the batten happens and/or the baffling warmheartedness happens. sent6: the lashing occurs if both the non-equineness and the non-single-laneness happens. sent7: the cruising campfire happens. sent8: if the equineness occurs the lash does not occur. sent9: if the Australasianness and/or the growth happens the sell does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the single-laneness or the equine or both occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the deterioration utters and it is unacquisitive.
|
({B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: the deterioration is unacquisitive thing that is not non-Balzacian. sent2: if the fact that something is not a goniometer and is unacquisitive is wrong then it is not unacquisitive. sent3: if the deterioration is unreceptive then that it utters hold. sent4: if the fact that the deterioration is not unacquisitive is right the GABA is unreceptive and does utter. sent5: the deterioration is Balzacian. sent6: the fact that the deterioration is not a kind of a goniometer and is unacquisitive is incorrect if that the tongueflower is not Balzacian is correct.
|
sent1: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{ef} & {B}{ef}) sent5: {D}{a} sent6: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{E}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the deterioration is unacquisitive.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {C}{a};"
] |
the GABA utters.
|
{B}{ef}
|
[
"sent2 -> int2: the deterioration is not unacquisitive if that it is not a goniometer and it is unacquisitive is wrong.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the deterioration utters and it is unacquisitive. ; $context$ = sent1: the deterioration is unacquisitive thing that is not non-Balzacian. sent2: if the fact that something is not a goniometer and is unacquisitive is wrong then it is not unacquisitive. sent3: if the deterioration is unreceptive then that it utters hold. sent4: if the fact that the deterioration is not unacquisitive is right the GABA is unreceptive and does utter. sent5: the deterioration is Balzacian. sent6: the fact that the deterioration is not a kind of a goniometer and is unacquisitive is incorrect if that the tongueflower is not Balzacian is correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the deterioration is unacquisitive.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if that the fact that it does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair is not false is not right then it is not a hodman.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: the taster is not a hodman if the fact that it does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair does not hold. sent2: there exists something such that if that it does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair does not hold then the fact that it is a hodman hold. sent3: the taster is not a hodman if the fact that it cruises clozapine is correct. sent4: there exists something such that if it cruises clozapine then it is not a hodman. sent5: if that the taster is not an insulation and is a hodman is not correct it is not dermal. sent6: if that the caramel does not cruise Monday and it does not engage quiche is incorrect it does not inflate. sent7: the taster is not a caster if that it does not devilize averageness and it does not engage flair is false. sent8: there is something such that if it does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair then it is not a hodman. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it does cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair is not true then it is not a hodman. sent10: if the fact that something is not a regnellidium and is not a moneygrubber is not right it is not alienable. sent11: if the fact that the taster does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair is wrong then it is a kind of a hodman.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: {AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (Ex): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent5: ¬(¬{FH}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{BS}{aa} sent6: ¬(¬{EN}{ij} & ¬{JH}{ij}) -> ¬{CS}{ij} sent7: ¬(¬{BR}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{ER}{aa} sent8: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent10: (x): ¬(¬{CJ}x & ¬{IJ}x) -> ¬{CE}x sent11: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if the fact that it is not a regnellidium and it is not a kind of a moneygrubber is wrong then it is not alienable.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{CJ}x & ¬{IJ}x) -> ¬{CE}x
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: the cacique is not alienable if that it is not a regnellidium and it is not a kind of a moneygrubber is not correct.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that the fact that it does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair is not false is not right then it is not a hodman. ; $context$ = sent1: the taster is not a hodman if the fact that it does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair does not hold. sent2: there exists something such that if that it does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair does not hold then the fact that it is a hodman hold. sent3: the taster is not a hodman if the fact that it cruises clozapine is correct. sent4: there exists something such that if it cruises clozapine then it is not a hodman. sent5: if that the taster is not an insulation and is a hodman is not correct it is not dermal. sent6: if that the caramel does not cruise Monday and it does not engage quiche is incorrect it does not inflate. sent7: the taster is not a caster if that it does not devilize averageness and it does not engage flair is false. sent8: there is something such that if it does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair then it is not a hodman. sent9: there is something such that if the fact that it does cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair is not true then it is not a hodman. sent10: if the fact that something is not a regnellidium and is not a moneygrubber is not right it is not alienable. sent11: if the fact that the taster does not cruise clozapine and it does not engage flair is wrong then it is a kind of a hodman. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the HRT does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: if the tetrametricness does not occur then both the drilling and the HRT happens. sent2: the conceiving does not occur if the cruising Pygmy occurs. sent3: the fact that the stocking and the non-polarographicness happens does not hold if the drilling happens. sent4: that the drilling occurs is correct. sent5: if the fact that not the nonpsychoactiveness but the drilling happens is not correct the nonpsychoactiveness happens. sent6: the HRT does not occur if the polarographicness happens. sent7: that the engaging Acrostichum occurs and the baffling amnion happens is wrong if the cruising assibilation happens. sent8: the engaging cellar does not occur if the physiotherapy happens. sent9: the fact that the stocks occurs and the polarographicness happens does not hold if the drill occurs. sent10: the fact that the association happens and the vertical occurs does not hold. sent11: that the grouping does not occur is triggered by that the rum does not occur. sent12: that the hollering and the verticalness happens is not correct. sent13: that the leonineness and the mud happens is not correct. sent14: that the stocking and the polarographicness happens is incorrect. sent15: the cruising Yerevan does not occur if the joylessness happens. sent16: the baffling Calliope happens. sent17: that the nonpsychoactiveness does not occur and the drill occurs is not true if the HRT occurs. sent18: if the grouping does not occur the fact that the engaging cellar and the physiotherapy happens is not correct. sent19: if the engaging cellar does not occur then the HRT happens and the tetrametricness happens. sent20: the wronging does not occur if the fact that the neurogenicness happens is not wrong. sent21: the australopithecine does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent2: {R} -> ¬{GP} sent3: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent4: {A} sent5: ¬(¬{GG} & {A}) -> {GG} sent6: {AB} -> ¬{B} sent7: {DQ} -> ¬({AF} & {BI}) sent8: {E} -> ¬{D} sent9: {A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent10: ¬({EQ} & {GO}) sent11: ¬{G} -> ¬{F} sent12: ¬({IK} & {GO}) sent13: ¬({FB} & {BE}) sent14: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent15: {DK} -> ¬{BH} sent16: {FO} sent17: {B} -> ¬(¬{GG} & {A}) sent18: ¬{F} -> ¬({D} & {E}) sent19: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) sent20: {IG} -> ¬{EP} sent21: ¬{DS}
|
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: that the stocking but not the polarographicness occurs is incorrect.;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB});"
] |
the nonpsychoactiveness happens.
|
{GG}
|
[] | 9 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the HRT does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the tetrametricness does not occur then both the drilling and the HRT happens. sent2: the conceiving does not occur if the cruising Pygmy occurs. sent3: the fact that the stocking and the non-polarographicness happens does not hold if the drilling happens. sent4: that the drilling occurs is correct. sent5: if the fact that not the nonpsychoactiveness but the drilling happens is not correct the nonpsychoactiveness happens. sent6: the HRT does not occur if the polarographicness happens. sent7: that the engaging Acrostichum occurs and the baffling amnion happens is wrong if the cruising assibilation happens. sent8: the engaging cellar does not occur if the physiotherapy happens. sent9: the fact that the stocks occurs and the polarographicness happens does not hold if the drill occurs. sent10: the fact that the association happens and the vertical occurs does not hold. sent11: that the grouping does not occur is triggered by that the rum does not occur. sent12: that the hollering and the verticalness happens is not correct. sent13: that the leonineness and the mud happens is not correct. sent14: that the stocking and the polarographicness happens is incorrect. sent15: the cruising Yerevan does not occur if the joylessness happens. sent16: the baffling Calliope happens. sent17: that the nonpsychoactiveness does not occur and the drill occurs is not true if the HRT occurs. sent18: if the grouping does not occur the fact that the engaging cellar and the physiotherapy happens is not correct. sent19: if the engaging cellar does not occur then the HRT happens and the tetrametricness happens. sent20: the wronging does not occur if the fact that the neurogenicness happens is not wrong. sent21: the australopithecine does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent4 -> int1: that the stocking but not the polarographicness occurs is incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the devilizing Soave does not occur and the assimilating does not occur.
|
(¬{C} & ¬{D})
|
sent1: the temperament happens. sent2: the engaging netball brings about that not the assimilating but the engaging cellar happens. sent3: the fact that the engaging cellar happens hold if the engaging netball occurs. sent4: the fact that the devilizing Soave does not occur and the assimilating does not occur is wrong if the temperament does not occur. sent5: the engaging netball happens. sent6: the cruising briefing occurs.
|
sent1: {A} sent2: {F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) sent3: {F} -> {E} sent4: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent5: {F} sent6: {B}
|
[
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the temperament and the cruising briefing happens.; sent2 & sent5 -> int2: the assimilating does not occur and the engaging cellar occurs.; int2 -> int3: the fact that the assimilating does not occur is correct.;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent2 & sent5 -> int2: (¬{D} & {E}); int2 -> int3: ¬{D};"
] |
that the devilizing Soave does not occur and the assimilating does not occur is not right.
|
¬(¬{C} & ¬{D})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the devilizing Soave does not occur and the assimilating does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the temperament happens. sent2: the engaging netball brings about that not the assimilating but the engaging cellar happens. sent3: the fact that the engaging cellar happens hold if the engaging netball occurs. sent4: the fact that the devilizing Soave does not occur and the assimilating does not occur is wrong if the temperament does not occur. sent5: the engaging netball happens. sent6: the cruising briefing occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the temperament and the cruising briefing happens.; sent2 & sent5 -> int2: the assimilating does not occur and the engaging cellar occurs.; int2 -> int3: the fact that the assimilating does not occur is correct.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Oxonian is kafkaesque.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the ape does devilize chauvinism if the pop does devilize chauvinism and/or it is not a barrator. sent2: the toothbrush does absolve if the exerciser devilizes chauvinism. sent3: the highbrow does engage source if there exists something such that the fact that it does deliver and it does not engage source is not right. sent4: if something is not a kind of a Coluber it is both a brave and a stickleback. sent5: if something does devilize chauvinism it absolves. sent6: there exists something such that that it does deliver and it does not engage source is incorrect. sent7: if the Oxonian does absolve then the parang does not cruise bibliopole and it is not a kind of a constipation. sent8: there exists something such that it does absolve. sent9: the pop does devilize chauvinism and/or it is not a barrator if the fact that the pen is a kind of a brave is not incorrect. sent10: something is kafkaesque if it absolves. sent11: if the toothbrush does absolve the Oxonian absolve. sent12: the fact that if there exists something such that it absolves then the Oxonian does not devilize chauvinism and it is not kafkaesque is not false. sent13: the exerciser devilizes chauvinism if the ape devilizes chauvinism.
|
sent1: ({B}{e} v ¬{D}{e}) -> {B}{d} sent2: {B}{c} -> {A}{b} sent3: (x): ¬({K}x & ¬{I}x) -> {I}{h} sent4: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({E}x & {F}x) sent5: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent6: (Ex): ¬({K}x & ¬{I}x) sent7: {A}{a} -> (¬{IQ}{ht} & ¬{J}{ht}) sent8: (Ex): {A}x sent9: {E}{f} -> ({B}{e} v ¬{D}{e}) sent10: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent11: {A}{b} -> {A}{a} sent12: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent13: {B}{d} -> {B}{c}
|
[
"sent8 & sent12 -> int1: the Oxonian does not devilize chauvinism and it is not kafkaesque.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent12 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the parang does not cruise bibliopole and is not a kind of a constipation.
|
(¬{IQ}{ht} & ¬{J}{ht})
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: the Oxonian absolves if it devilizes chauvinism.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Oxonian is kafkaesque. ; $context$ = sent1: the ape does devilize chauvinism if the pop does devilize chauvinism and/or it is not a barrator. sent2: the toothbrush does absolve if the exerciser devilizes chauvinism. sent3: the highbrow does engage source if there exists something such that the fact that it does deliver and it does not engage source is not right. sent4: if something is not a kind of a Coluber it is both a brave and a stickleback. sent5: if something does devilize chauvinism it absolves. sent6: there exists something such that that it does deliver and it does not engage source is incorrect. sent7: if the Oxonian does absolve then the parang does not cruise bibliopole and it is not a kind of a constipation. sent8: there exists something such that it does absolve. sent9: the pop does devilize chauvinism and/or it is not a barrator if the fact that the pen is a kind of a brave is not incorrect. sent10: something is kafkaesque if it absolves. sent11: if the toothbrush does absolve the Oxonian absolve. sent12: the fact that if there exists something such that it absolves then the Oxonian does not devilize chauvinism and it is not kafkaesque is not false. sent13: the exerciser devilizes chauvinism if the ape devilizes chauvinism. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent12 -> int1: the Oxonian does not devilize chauvinism and it is not kafkaesque.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is not a goniometer and it is a Cassiope then it heterodynes.
|
(Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: that there is something such that if it is not an armrest and it is cervine then it is a height hold. sent2: the coke engages Cronus if it is both not a Cassiope and deflationary. sent3: there exists something such that if it does fluoresce and is sociolinguistic that it is a misappropriation is right. sent4: if the coke is not a goniometer but it is a Cassiope then it is heterodyne. sent5: if the coke does not heterodyne but it does wear then it cruises shuffle. sent6: the fact that there is something such that if it is not a RH and it is spartan it corrupts is true. sent7: the coke does cruise stickleback if it is a goniometer that engages sackbut. sent8: something is counterclockwise if it is not monocarpic and does hydroplane. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not custard-like and it is a grief it cruises psychopathology. sent10: the brushwood is cervine if it is raptorial and it is a Cassiope. sent11: that the coke is a kind of a goniometer is correct if it is not puritanical and it is manly. sent12: if the stickleback does baffle wyvern and it is a Cassiope then it corrupts. sent13: the fact that the coke does cruise wicket if the coke is a kind of a goniometer that does engage chrysomelid hold. sent14: that there exists something such that if it is not gymnastics and it does baffle algorithm it is a Barrymore is not incorrect. sent15: if the sorting is a Duse and it is a kind of a grief it is a goniometer. sent16: if the coke is auditory and a goniometer then it does baffle topside. sent17: if the coke is rotary and it is a Cassiope it does engage pantry.
|
sent1: (Ex): (¬{HU}x & {BJ}x) -> {CI}x sent2: (¬{AB}{aa} & {FK}{aa}) -> {FT}{aa} sent3: (Ex): ({EC}x & {FP}x) -> {BB}x sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (¬{B}{aa} & {DN}{aa}) -> {IL}{aa} sent6: (Ex): (¬{EK}x & {CO}x) -> {DI}x sent7: ({AA}{aa} & {AU}{aa}) -> {HF}{aa} sent8: (x): (¬{HN}x & {DM}x) -> {CK}x sent9: (Ex): (¬{BH}x & {BF}x) -> {IC}x sent10: ({BE}{jf} & {AB}{jf}) -> {BJ}{jf} sent11: (¬{BQ}{aa} & {AE}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} sent12: ({ID}{fc} & {AB}{fc}) -> {DI}{fc} sent13: ({AA}{aa} & {AK}{aa}) -> {GH}{aa} sent14: (Ex): (¬{BA}x & {CD}x) -> {CB}x sent15: ({M}{iq} & {BF}{iq}) -> {AA}{iq} sent16: ({IG}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> {IH}{aa} sent17: ({DD}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {DO}{aa}
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if it is not monocarpic and it does hydroplane it is counterclockwise.
|
(Ex): (¬{HN}x & {DM}x) -> {CK}x
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: if the redcoat is not monocarpic and hydroplanes then it is counterclockwise.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not a goniometer and it is a Cassiope then it heterodynes. ; $context$ = sent1: that there is something such that if it is not an armrest and it is cervine then it is a height hold. sent2: the coke engages Cronus if it is both not a Cassiope and deflationary. sent3: there exists something such that if it does fluoresce and is sociolinguistic that it is a misappropriation is right. sent4: if the coke is not a goniometer but it is a Cassiope then it is heterodyne. sent5: if the coke does not heterodyne but it does wear then it cruises shuffle. sent6: the fact that there is something such that if it is not a RH and it is spartan it corrupts is true. sent7: the coke does cruise stickleback if it is a goniometer that engages sackbut. sent8: something is counterclockwise if it is not monocarpic and does hydroplane. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not custard-like and it is a grief it cruises psychopathology. sent10: the brushwood is cervine if it is raptorial and it is a Cassiope. sent11: that the coke is a kind of a goniometer is correct if it is not puritanical and it is manly. sent12: if the stickleback does baffle wyvern and it is a Cassiope then it corrupts. sent13: the fact that the coke does cruise wicket if the coke is a kind of a goniometer that does engage chrysomelid hold. sent14: that there exists something such that if it is not gymnastics and it does baffle algorithm it is a Barrymore is not incorrect. sent15: if the sorting is a Duse and it is a kind of a grief it is a goniometer. sent16: if the coke is auditory and a goniometer then it does baffle topside. sent17: if the coke is rotary and it is a Cassiope it does engage pantry. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the cruising entity does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: the fulfillment does not occur if the fact that that the non-mesicness and the prowling occurs is not wrong does not hold. sent2: that not the cruising chou but the coo happens does not hold if the pigment happens. sent3: the watering does not occur if that both the vulnerableness and the watering happens is not true. sent4: if the ambulation does not occur the fact that not the invulnerableness but the watering happens is not true. sent5: the demonstrativeness does not occur or the concordance does not occur or both if the fluorescing does not occur. sent6: if that the decoupling does not occur is not incorrect then the culdoscopy does not occur. sent7: the fact that not the mesicness but the prowl occurs does not hold if that the watering does not occur is not false. sent8: the stocking does not occur and the ambulation does not occur if the recce happens. sent9: that the exhaust and the recce occurs is caused by that the baffling custard does not occur. sent10: that the baffling custard does not occur is caused by either that the demonstrativeness does not occur or that the concordance does not occur or both. sent11: that the fulfillment does not occur triggers that the cruising entity happens and the pigment occurs. sent12: that the decoupling happens is prevented by that the cruising myxomycete does not occur and/or the non-thyrotoxicness. sent13: that the cruising entity happens is prevented by that the pigmenting does not occur. sent14: that the fluorescing happens is prevented by that the culdoscopy does not occur but the baffling meadowgrass happens.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{C} sent2: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent3: ¬(¬{H} & {F}) -> ¬{F} sent4: ¬{G} -> ¬(¬{H} & {F}) sent5: ¬{O} -> (¬{N} v ¬{M}) sent6: ¬{R} -> ¬{Q} sent7: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{D} & {E}) sent8: {J} -> (¬{I} & ¬{G}) sent9: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {J}) sent10: (¬{N} v ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} sent11: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent12: (¬{S} v ¬{T}) -> ¬{R} sent13: ¬{A} -> ¬{B} sent14: (¬{Q} & {P}) -> ¬{O}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the pigment happens.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that that the cruising chou does not occur and the coo happens hold is incorrect.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB});"
] |
the cruising entity occurs.
|
{B}
|
[] | 17 | 4 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the cruising entity does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fulfillment does not occur if the fact that that the non-mesicness and the prowling occurs is not wrong does not hold. sent2: that not the cruising chou but the coo happens does not hold if the pigment happens. sent3: the watering does not occur if that both the vulnerableness and the watering happens is not true. sent4: if the ambulation does not occur the fact that not the invulnerableness but the watering happens is not true. sent5: the demonstrativeness does not occur or the concordance does not occur or both if the fluorescing does not occur. sent6: if that the decoupling does not occur is not incorrect then the culdoscopy does not occur. sent7: the fact that not the mesicness but the prowl occurs does not hold if that the watering does not occur is not false. sent8: the stocking does not occur and the ambulation does not occur if the recce happens. sent9: that the exhaust and the recce occurs is caused by that the baffling custard does not occur. sent10: that the baffling custard does not occur is caused by either that the demonstrativeness does not occur or that the concordance does not occur or both. sent11: that the fulfillment does not occur triggers that the cruising entity happens and the pigment occurs. sent12: that the decoupling happens is prevented by that the cruising myxomycete does not occur and/or the non-thyrotoxicness. sent13: that the cruising entity happens is prevented by that the pigmenting does not occur. sent14: that the fluorescing happens is prevented by that the culdoscopy does not occur but the baffling meadowgrass happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the pigment happens.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that that the cruising chou does not occur and the coo happens hold is incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the patriarch does not engage Abel.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: that the lower does not engage Scott and it is not prenuptial is not right if the branchlet is a trillium. sent2: the arithmetician engages Abel and it is a negative if there exists something such that it is not a resin. sent3: something is a pueblo if the fact that it is athletic is right. sent4: if there exists something such that it is not a Yemen then the patriarch does engage Abel and does ventilate. sent5: the fallout is not an optometry if the fact that the saddlecloth is macaronic but it is not pericardial is not false. sent6: the patriarch is infinite and it is metabolic. sent7: if the inflow does not engage Friedan the saddlecloth is macaronic and is non-pericardial. sent8: the patriarch does ventilate. sent9: something does not engage Abel if it is not a Yemen. sent10: if something does not perfect the fact that it is reportable and it ventilates does not hold. sent11: the fact that something engages wonderer and is not a trillium does not hold if it is not an optometry. sent12: the drumstick is a porcupine. sent13: there exists something such that it is not a Yemen. sent14: if the drumstick is a porcupine then the Moselle is not non-athletic. sent15: the inflow does not engage Friedan if something is a kind of a pueblo. sent16: if the fact that the lower does not engage Scott and it is not prenuptial is incorrect the megalopolis is not perfect. sent17: the poler ventilates. sent18: the branchlet is a kind of a trillium if there is something such that that it engages wonderer and it is not a kind of a trillium is incorrect.
|
sent1: {H}{d} -> ¬(¬{F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent2: (x): ¬{GB}x -> ({B}{bl} & {FI}{bl}) sent3: (x): {O}x -> {N}x sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent5: ({L}{f} & ¬{K}{f}) -> ¬{J}{e} sent6: ({DM}{a} & {CS}{a}) sent7: ¬{M}{g} -> ({L}{f} & ¬{K}{f}) sent8: {C}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x sent10: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({D}x & {C}x) sent11: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬({I}x & ¬{H}x) sent12: {P}{i} sent13: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent14: {P}{i} -> {O}{h} sent15: (x): {N}x -> ¬{M}{g} sent16: ¬(¬{F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent17: {C}{df} sent18: (x): ¬({I}x & ¬{H}x) -> {H}{d}
|
[
"sent13 & sent4 -> int1: the patriarch does engage Abel and does ventilate.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 & sent4 -> int1: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the patriarch does not engage Abel.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent9 -> int2: if the fact that the patriarch is not a kind of a Yemen is correct it does not engage Abel.; sent10 -> int3: if the megalopolis does not perfect the fact that it is reportable and it ventilates is incorrect.; sent11 -> int4: if the fallout is not an optometry the fact that it engages wonderer and is not a trillium is not true.; sent3 -> int5: the Moselle is a pueblo if it is athletic.; sent14 & sent12 -> int6: the Moselle is athletic.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the Moselle is a kind of a pueblo.; int7 -> int8: something is a kind of a pueblo.; int8 & sent15 -> int9: the fact that the inflow does not engage Friedan is right.; sent7 & int9 -> int10: the saddlecloth is not non-macaronic and not pericardial.; sent5 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the fallout is not an optometry is not incorrect.; int4 & int11 -> int12: the fact that the fallout engages wonderer but it is not a trillium is incorrect.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it does engage wonderer and it is not a trillium hold is not right.; int13 & sent18 -> int14: the branchlet is a trillium.; sent1 & int14 -> int15: that the lower does not engage Scott and is not prenuptial does not hold.; sent16 & int15 -> int16: the megalopolis is imperfect.; int3 & int16 -> int17: that the megalopolis is reportable and it ventilates is not correct.; int17 -> int18: there exists something such that that it is reportable and it ventilates is false.;"
] | 15 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the patriarch does not engage Abel. ; $context$ = sent1: that the lower does not engage Scott and it is not prenuptial is not right if the branchlet is a trillium. sent2: the arithmetician engages Abel and it is a negative if there exists something such that it is not a resin. sent3: something is a pueblo if the fact that it is athletic is right. sent4: if there exists something such that it is not a Yemen then the patriarch does engage Abel and does ventilate. sent5: the fallout is not an optometry if the fact that the saddlecloth is macaronic but it is not pericardial is not false. sent6: the patriarch is infinite and it is metabolic. sent7: if the inflow does not engage Friedan the saddlecloth is macaronic and is non-pericardial. sent8: the patriarch does ventilate. sent9: something does not engage Abel if it is not a Yemen. sent10: if something does not perfect the fact that it is reportable and it ventilates does not hold. sent11: the fact that something engages wonderer and is not a trillium does not hold if it is not an optometry. sent12: the drumstick is a porcupine. sent13: there exists something such that it is not a Yemen. sent14: if the drumstick is a porcupine then the Moselle is not non-athletic. sent15: the inflow does not engage Friedan if something is a kind of a pueblo. sent16: if the fact that the lower does not engage Scott and it is not prenuptial is incorrect the megalopolis is not perfect. sent17: the poler ventilates. sent18: the branchlet is a kind of a trillium if there is something such that that it engages wonderer and it is not a kind of a trillium is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 & sent4 -> int1: the patriarch does engage Abel and does ventilate.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the readout is a tug-of-war if the inoculator is a praetorium.
|
{A}{a} -> {C}{c}
|
sent1: the readout does engage Cinclus. sent2: that the inoculator does engage Cinclus is right. sent3: if the feathertop is a tug-of-war then the fact that the readout engages Cinclus is not wrong. sent4: if the feathertop is a praetorium the inoculator engages Cinclus. sent5: that the inoculator does baffle hawfinch is not incorrect. sent6: the game engages Cinclus. sent7: the inoculator is a praetorium if the feathertop is a tug-of-war. sent8: if the inoculator is a tug-of-war the readout is a kind of a praetorium. sent9: the feathertop is a kind of a tug-of-war if the readout engages Cinclus. sent10: if the inoculator does engage Cinclus then the feathertop is a kind of a praetorium. sent11: the feathertop engages Cinclus if the inoculator is a praetorium. sent12: if the readout caulks the inoculator is a praetorium. sent13: the inoculator is a kind of a tug-of-war if the readout is a praetorium.
|
sent1: {B}{c} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: {C}{b} -> {B}{c} sent4: {A}{b} -> {B}{a} sent5: {GP}{a} sent6: {B}{el} sent7: {C}{b} -> {A}{a} sent8: {C}{a} -> {A}{c} sent9: {B}{c} -> {C}{b} sent10: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} sent11: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent12: {FM}{c} -> {A}{a} sent13: {A}{c} -> {C}{a}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the inoculator is a praetorium.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the feathertop does engage Cinclus.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the readout is a tug-of-war if the inoculator is a praetorium. ; $context$ = sent1: the readout does engage Cinclus. sent2: that the inoculator does engage Cinclus is right. sent3: if the feathertop is a tug-of-war then the fact that the readout engages Cinclus is not wrong. sent4: if the feathertop is a praetorium the inoculator engages Cinclus. sent5: that the inoculator does baffle hawfinch is not incorrect. sent6: the game engages Cinclus. sent7: the inoculator is a praetorium if the feathertop is a tug-of-war. sent8: if the inoculator is a tug-of-war the readout is a kind of a praetorium. sent9: the feathertop is a kind of a tug-of-war if the readout engages Cinclus. sent10: if the inoculator does engage Cinclus then the feathertop is a kind of a praetorium. sent11: the feathertop engages Cinclus if the inoculator is a praetorium. sent12: if the readout caulks the inoculator is a praetorium. sent13: the inoculator is a kind of a tug-of-war if the readout is a praetorium. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the inoculator is a praetorium.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the feathertop does engage Cinclus.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the tractiveness does not occur and the congratulation does not occur is wrong.
|
¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})
|
sent1: not the disservice but the clemency occurs if the cruising Volgaic does not occur. sent2: if that the curettage does not occur is true then the fact that the disservice does not occur but the clemency occurs is wrong. sent3: the cruising Volgaic does not occur if the tractiveness does not occur and the congratulation does not occur. sent4: that the provocation occurs but the cruising racketeering does not occur does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & {A}) sent2: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{C} & {A}) sent3: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent4: ¬({E} & ¬{F})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tractiveness does not occur and the congratulation does not occur.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the cruising Volgaic does not occur.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: not the disservice but the clemency occurs.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent3 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; int1 & sent1 -> int2: (¬{C} & {A});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the tractiveness does not occur and the congratulation does not occur is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: not the disservice but the clemency occurs if the cruising Volgaic does not occur. sent2: if that the curettage does not occur is true then the fact that the disservice does not occur but the clemency occurs is wrong. sent3: the cruising Volgaic does not occur if the tractiveness does not occur and the congratulation does not occur. sent4: that the provocation occurs but the cruising racketeering does not occur does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the tractiveness does not occur and the congratulation does not occur.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the cruising Volgaic does not occur.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: not the disservice but the clemency occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the dumpcart is a sundress.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: if the dumpcart is not a Ameiuridae then it is not a kind of a binding and it is genital. sent2: something does engage cellulose if it does water. sent3: if something is genital then it is a sundress. sent4: the dumpcart is non-low-tech. sent5: if the bacteriochlorophyll is not icosahedral and it does not engage incrustation then the doorstop does not engage incrustation. sent6: if that something is a binding is not false it is a sundress. sent7: the bacteriochlorophyll is not icosahedral and it does not engage incrustation. sent8: the staplegun is not low-tech but a guidebook if it is not genital. sent9: the dumpcart cruises secret. sent10: the pottle is not a kind of a numeral and does engage earmark. sent11: the doorstop is not a kind of a sundress. sent12: the nobelium is not genital but it is Romansh. sent13: if something is a metropolitan the fact that it does engage cellulose is not incorrect. sent14: if the largemouth is a faun then the ultramarine is a ilium. sent15: if the dumpcart is not a Ameiuridae it is not a binding. sent16: if something is a raise then it does cruise parfait. sent17: the splat whooshes if it does engage cellulose. sent18: if the doorstop does not engage incrustation the splat is a metropolitan or it waters or both. sent19: if the ultramarine is a ilium then the stitcher is not a kind of a Ameiuridae or it does not baffle wyvern or both. sent20: the dumpcart is a kind of a wonder. sent21: that the slapstick binds is not false. sent22: the dumpcart is not a Ameiuridae.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent2: (x): {I}x -> {H}x sent3: (x): {AB}x -> {B}x sent4: ¬{DU}{a} sent5: (¬{M}{h} & ¬{K}{h}) -> ¬{K}{g} sent6: (x): {AA}x -> {B}x sent7: (¬{M}{h} & ¬{K}{h}) sent8: ¬{AB}{co} -> (¬{DU}{co} & {HJ}{co}) sent9: {EH}{a} sent10: (¬{O}{dh} & {FD}{dh}) sent11: ¬{B}{g} sent12: (¬{AB}{id} & {DM}{id}) sent13: (x): {J}x -> {H}x sent14: {E}{d} -> {D}{c} sent15: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} sent16: (x): {BD}x -> {HE}x sent17: {H}{f} -> {F}{f} sent18: ¬{K}{g} -> ({J}{f} v {I}{f}) sent19: {D}{c} -> (¬{A}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) sent20: {AI}{a} sent21: {AA}{ed} sent22: ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent22 -> int1: the dumpcart is not a kind of a binding and is genital.; int1 -> int2: the dumpcart is genital.; sent3 -> int3: the dumpcart is a sundress if it is genital.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent22 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: {AB}{a}; sent3 -> int3: {AB}{a} -> {B}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the dumpcart is not a sundress.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent5 & sent7 -> int4: that the doorstop does engage incrustation is false.; sent18 & int4 -> int5: the splat is a metropolitan and/or it is a kind of a waterdog.; sent13 -> int6: the splat engages cellulose if it is metropolitan.; sent2 -> int7: the splat engages cellulose if it is a waterdog.; int5 & int6 & int7 -> int8: the splat does engage cellulose.; sent17 & int8 -> int9: the splat does whoosh.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it does whoosh.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the dumpcart is a sundress. ; $context$ = sent1: if the dumpcart is not a Ameiuridae then it is not a kind of a binding and it is genital. sent2: something does engage cellulose if it does water. sent3: if something is genital then it is a sundress. sent4: the dumpcart is non-low-tech. sent5: if the bacteriochlorophyll is not icosahedral and it does not engage incrustation then the doorstop does not engage incrustation. sent6: if that something is a binding is not false it is a sundress. sent7: the bacteriochlorophyll is not icosahedral and it does not engage incrustation. sent8: the staplegun is not low-tech but a guidebook if it is not genital. sent9: the dumpcart cruises secret. sent10: the pottle is not a kind of a numeral and does engage earmark. sent11: the doorstop is not a kind of a sundress. sent12: the nobelium is not genital but it is Romansh. sent13: if something is a metropolitan the fact that it does engage cellulose is not incorrect. sent14: if the largemouth is a faun then the ultramarine is a ilium. sent15: if the dumpcart is not a Ameiuridae it is not a binding. sent16: if something is a raise then it does cruise parfait. sent17: the splat whooshes if it does engage cellulose. sent18: if the doorstop does not engage incrustation the splat is a metropolitan or it waters or both. sent19: if the ultramarine is a ilium then the stitcher is not a kind of a Ameiuridae or it does not baffle wyvern or both. sent20: the dumpcart is a kind of a wonder. sent21: that the slapstick binds is not false. sent22: the dumpcart is not a Ameiuridae. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent22 -> int1: the dumpcart is not a kind of a binding and is genital.; int1 -> int2: the dumpcart is genital.; sent3 -> int3: the dumpcart is a sundress if it is genital.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
both the baffling shell and the non-ink-jetness happens.
|
({D} & ¬{E})
|
sent1: the incorporealness but not the Nativity occurs. sent2: the deposing does not occur and the baffling Godard does not occur if the equivocating does not occur. sent3: the baffling Protestantism happens if that the mend occurs hold. sent4: the bark but not the engaging academicianship occurs. sent5: if the deposing happens the baffling shell occurs. sent6: the coloring happens. sent7: the baffling shell occurs. sent8: if the hedgehoping does not occur that both the baffling shell and the non-ink-jetness happens is false. sent9: the hedgehoping happens. sent10: the deposing does not occur and the scalicness does not occur if the baffling Godard occurs. sent11: if the hedgehoping occurs the scalicness occurs. sent12: the unexchangeableness causes that the veinalness but not the cruising Kekule occurs. sent13: the engaging cheapskate happens. sent14: if the alvineness happens the dedication occurs. sent15: the baffling shell and the non-ink-jetness happens if the deposing occurs. sent16: the fact that the engaging temporariness happens is not false. sent17: the fact that the engaging maxwell does not occur and the veinalness does not occur does not hold if the volatilizing does not occur. sent18: the polymorphemicness occurs. sent19: if the fact that the juiciness occurs and the volatilizing happens is not true the volatilizing does not occur. sent20: if that the engaging maxwell does not occur and the veinalness does not occur is wrong the equivocating does not occur. sent21: if the scalicness occurs then the deposing happens.
|
sent1: ({O} & ¬{GT}) sent2: ¬{G} -> (¬{C} & ¬{F}) sent3: {HB} -> {GA} sent4: ({BH} & ¬{EP}) sent5: {C} -> {D} sent6: {CC} sent7: {D} sent8: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} & ¬{E}) sent9: {A} sent10: {F} -> (¬{C} & ¬{B}) sent11: {A} -> {B} sent12: {II} -> ({H} & ¬{DL}) sent13: {CH} sent14: {FU} -> {IP} sent15: {C} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) sent16: {AF} sent17: ¬{J} -> ¬(¬{I} & ¬{H}) sent18: {FC} sent19: ¬({K} & {J}) -> ¬{J} sent20: ¬(¬{I} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{G} sent21: {B} -> {C}
|
[
"sent11 & sent9 -> int1: the scalicness happens.; sent21 & int1 -> int2: that the deposing happens is correct.; sent15 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent9 -> int1: {B}; sent21 & int1 -> int2: {C}; sent15 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that both the baffling shell and the non-ink-jetness occurs does not hold.
|
¬({D} & ¬{E})
|
[] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = both the baffling shell and the non-ink-jetness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the incorporealness but not the Nativity occurs. sent2: the deposing does not occur and the baffling Godard does not occur if the equivocating does not occur. sent3: the baffling Protestantism happens if that the mend occurs hold. sent4: the bark but not the engaging academicianship occurs. sent5: if the deposing happens the baffling shell occurs. sent6: the coloring happens. sent7: the baffling shell occurs. sent8: if the hedgehoping does not occur that both the baffling shell and the non-ink-jetness happens is false. sent9: the hedgehoping happens. sent10: the deposing does not occur and the scalicness does not occur if the baffling Godard occurs. sent11: if the hedgehoping occurs the scalicness occurs. sent12: the unexchangeableness causes that the veinalness but not the cruising Kekule occurs. sent13: the engaging cheapskate happens. sent14: if the alvineness happens the dedication occurs. sent15: the baffling shell and the non-ink-jetness happens if the deposing occurs. sent16: the fact that the engaging temporariness happens is not false. sent17: the fact that the engaging maxwell does not occur and the veinalness does not occur does not hold if the volatilizing does not occur. sent18: the polymorphemicness occurs. sent19: if the fact that the juiciness occurs and the volatilizing happens is not true the volatilizing does not occur. sent20: if that the engaging maxwell does not occur and the veinalness does not occur is wrong the equivocating does not occur. sent21: if the scalicness occurs then the deposing happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent9 -> int1: the scalicness happens.; sent21 & int1 -> int2: that the deposing happens is correct.; sent15 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is a mizzenmast it does not engage O and does cruise Newport.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is drupaceous then it is not a girasol and entrains. sent2: there exists something such that if it does engage jaded it is not Gregorian and is rational. sent3: there is something such that if it cruises Monday it is not a girasol and is a acervulus. sent4: the vermiculation is not a kind of a cartilaginification but it does engage O if it does cruise vermiculation. sent5: that there is something such that if it baffles Christology it is not a averageness and is a cloudberry is not wrong. sent6: there exists something such that if that it is not patriarchal does not hold it is expedient thing that cruises debarkation. sent7: the fact that the microbe does not baffle benzyl but it does engage O is not wrong if it withholds. sent8: if the microbe is a mizzenmast then it does not engage O. sent9: if something is heedless it is not a taxonomist and it cruises Newport. sent10: the microbe is not a kind of a mizzenmast and is testaceous if it engages intern. sent11: if that the pudendum is drupaceous is not false it does not cruise Newport and it does auspicate. sent12: the distance is not a classicism but it does engage O if it is emphysematous. sent13: the microbe does not engage O but it cruises Newport if it is a kind of a mizzenmast. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Robespierre then it does not slog and does devilize kibbutznik. sent15: the microbe is not identifiable but it is a licentiousness if that it cruises Vultur hold. sent16: there is something such that if that it is a mizzenmast hold it does not engage O. sent17: there is something such that if it is a mizzenmast it engages O and it cruises Newport. sent18: the propenonitrile is both not a bestowal and a mizzenmast if that it baffles areca hold. sent19: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a mizzenmast is not incorrect it does cruise Newport.
|
sent1: (Ex): {DJ}x -> (¬{JA}x & {GJ}x) sent2: (Ex): {DD}x -> (¬{DT}x & {GM}x) sent3: (Ex): {CJ}x -> (¬{JA}x & {DE}x) sent4: {EE}{l} -> (¬{CA}{l} & {AA}{l}) sent5: (Ex): {FN}x -> (¬{CS}x & {AS}x) sent6: (Ex): {I}x -> (¬{DP}x & {GT}x) sent7: {DI}{aa} -> (¬{EH}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) sent8: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent9: (x): {IJ}x -> (¬{FE}x & {AB}x) sent10: {GE}{aa} -> (¬{A}{aa} & {FR}{aa}) sent11: {DJ}{fd} -> (¬{AB}{fd} & {IO}{fd}) sent12: {HF}{bn} -> (¬{IQ}{bn} & {AA}{bn}) sent13: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent14: (Ex): {AE}x -> (¬{FG}x & {R}x) sent15: {HP}{aa} -> (¬{BG}{aa} & {U}{aa}) sent16: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent17: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent18: {DQ}{ag} -> (¬{HG}{ag} & {A}{ag}) sent19: (Ex): {A}x -> {AB}x
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the idolizer is heedless then that it is not a kind of a taxonomist and does cruise Newport is correct.
|
{IJ}{cj} -> (¬{FE}{cj} & {AB}{cj})
|
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a mizzenmast it does not engage O and does cruise Newport. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is drupaceous then it is not a girasol and entrains. sent2: there exists something such that if it does engage jaded it is not Gregorian and is rational. sent3: there is something such that if it cruises Monday it is not a girasol and is a acervulus. sent4: the vermiculation is not a kind of a cartilaginification but it does engage O if it does cruise vermiculation. sent5: that there is something such that if it baffles Christology it is not a averageness and is a cloudberry is not wrong. sent6: there exists something such that if that it is not patriarchal does not hold it is expedient thing that cruises debarkation. sent7: the fact that the microbe does not baffle benzyl but it does engage O is not wrong if it withholds. sent8: if the microbe is a mizzenmast then it does not engage O. sent9: if something is heedless it is not a taxonomist and it cruises Newport. sent10: the microbe is not a kind of a mizzenmast and is testaceous if it engages intern. sent11: if that the pudendum is drupaceous is not false it does not cruise Newport and it does auspicate. sent12: the distance is not a classicism but it does engage O if it is emphysematous. sent13: the microbe does not engage O but it cruises Newport if it is a kind of a mizzenmast. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Robespierre then it does not slog and does devilize kibbutznik. sent15: the microbe is not identifiable but it is a licentiousness if that it cruises Vultur hold. sent16: there is something such that if that it is a mizzenmast hold it does not engage O. sent17: there is something such that if it is a mizzenmast it engages O and it cruises Newport. sent18: the propenonitrile is both not a bestowal and a mizzenmast if that it baffles areca hold. sent19: there is something such that if that it is a kind of a mizzenmast is not incorrect it does cruise Newport. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the baffling Heterodon does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the parasiticness occurs. sent2: the fact that the appealableness and the proteinaceousness occurs is wrong. sent3: that the fencing does not occur and the placebo does not occur is not right. sent4: if that the radiating does not occur and the doublesness does not occur is not true the fact that the doublesness happens hold. sent5: the placebo occurs if that the fencing does not occur and the placebo does not occur is incorrect. sent6: that the setup does not occur and the pardonableness does not occur brings about that the fencing does not occur. sent7: the engaging harmonization occurs. sent8: the ontologicalness occurs. sent9: the fact that the fact that the engaging rhodopsin happens but the engaging Democrat does not occur does not hold is not wrong. sent10: the beats does not occur. sent11: that the cruising placeman happens but the puppetry does not occur is not correct. sent12: that the isolating occurs and the placebo occurs brings about that the baffling Heterodon does not occur. sent13: if the proteinaceousness occurs the isolating occurs. sent14: the fact that not the fencing but the placebo occurs is not true. sent15: both the baffling Heterodon and the placebo happens if the isolating does not occur. sent16: the isolating does not occur if that not the setup but the isolating happens does not hold. sent17: that both the appealableness and the non-proteinaceousness occurs is wrong.
|
sent1: {DQ} sent2: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent3: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{A}) sent4: ¬(¬{EN} & ¬{BE}) -> {BE} sent5: ¬(¬{D} & ¬{A}) -> {A} sent6: (¬{E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} sent7: {BH} sent8: {GO} sent9: ¬({AO} & ¬{H}) sent10: ¬{CD} sent11: ¬({FG} & ¬{BS}) sent12: ({B} & {A}) -> ¬{C} sent13: {AB} -> {B} sent14: ¬(¬{D} & {A}) sent15: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) sent16: ¬(¬{E} & {B}) -> ¬{B} sent17: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB})
|
[
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the placebo occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: {A};"
] |
the baffling Heterodon happens.
|
{C}
|
[] | 7 | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the baffling Heterodon does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the parasiticness occurs. sent2: the fact that the appealableness and the proteinaceousness occurs is wrong. sent3: that the fencing does not occur and the placebo does not occur is not right. sent4: if that the radiating does not occur and the doublesness does not occur is not true the fact that the doublesness happens hold. sent5: the placebo occurs if that the fencing does not occur and the placebo does not occur is incorrect. sent6: that the setup does not occur and the pardonableness does not occur brings about that the fencing does not occur. sent7: the engaging harmonization occurs. sent8: the ontologicalness occurs. sent9: the fact that the fact that the engaging rhodopsin happens but the engaging Democrat does not occur does not hold is not wrong. sent10: the beats does not occur. sent11: that the cruising placeman happens but the puppetry does not occur is not correct. sent12: that the isolating occurs and the placebo occurs brings about that the baffling Heterodon does not occur. sent13: if the proteinaceousness occurs the isolating occurs. sent14: the fact that not the fencing but the placebo occurs is not true. sent15: both the baffling Heterodon and the placebo happens if the isolating does not occur. sent16: the isolating does not occur if that not the setup but the isolating happens does not hold. sent17: that both the appealableness and the non-proteinaceousness occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the placebo occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something is a Kentish or it does sob or both.
|
(Ex): ({B}x v {C}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that it does impend or it cruises headliner or both. sent2: the headliner is a kind of a Kentish if it is macroeconomics.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({AH}x v {CG}x) sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = something is a Kentish or it does sob or both. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it does impend or it cruises headliner or both. sent2: the headliner is a kind of a Kentish if it is macroeconomics. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the vulvarness but not the baffling olive happens is wrong.
|
¬({C} & ¬{D})
|
sent1: the circulation occurs. sent2: the imagining happens. sent3: that the scene does not occur or the cruising Tartu does not occur or both is incorrect. sent4: the alluding or the non-sameness or both happens. sent5: the mercantileness happens. sent6: the fact that the iconolatry does not occur or the cosmologicness does not occur or both is incorrect. sent7: that that the chyliferousness but not the circulation happens is correct is not true if the fact that the baffling Dominic occurs hold. sent8: that the disqualification but not the baffling hooker happens is false if the devilizing excrescence happens. sent9: the cruising glochidium does not occur and/or the engaging Papeete does not occur. sent10: the fact that the vulvarness happens and the baffling olive does not occur is not correct if the cosmologicness happens. sent11: the tarsalness happens.
|
sent1: {DK} sent2: {FP} sent3: ¬(¬{AS} v ¬{FG}) sent4: ({CI} v ¬{ID}) sent5: {BD} sent6: ¬(¬{A} v ¬{B}) sent7: {IJ} -> ¬({AP} & ¬{DK}) sent8: {G} -> ¬({HD} & ¬{CQ}) sent9: (¬{AJ} v ¬{EP}) sent10: {B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent11: {GQ}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the cosmologicness does not occur hold.; assump1 -> int1: the iconolatry does not occur and/or the cosmologicness does not occur.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the cosmologicness happens.; sent10 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬{B}; assump1 -> int1: (¬{A} v ¬{B}); int1 & sent6 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: {B}; sent10 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the vulvarness but not the baffling olive happens is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the circulation occurs. sent2: the imagining happens. sent3: that the scene does not occur or the cruising Tartu does not occur or both is incorrect. sent4: the alluding or the non-sameness or both happens. sent5: the mercantileness happens. sent6: the fact that the iconolatry does not occur or the cosmologicness does not occur or both is incorrect. sent7: that that the chyliferousness but not the circulation happens is correct is not true if the fact that the baffling Dominic occurs hold. sent8: that the disqualification but not the baffling hooker happens is false if the devilizing excrescence happens. sent9: the cruising glochidium does not occur and/or the engaging Papeete does not occur. sent10: the fact that the vulvarness happens and the baffling olive does not occur is not correct if the cosmologicness happens. sent11: the tarsalness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the cosmologicness does not occur hold.; assump1 -> int1: the iconolatry does not occur and/or the cosmologicness does not occur.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the cosmologicness happens.; sent10 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bottle happens if the Beethovenianness occurs.
|
{A} -> {B}
|
sent1: the proposing happens but the overflight does not occur. sent2: that the black-and-whiteness happens is brought about by that the pervaporation but not the infiltration happens. sent3: the inelasticness is prevented by the Beethovenianness. sent4: that the cruising commonness does not occur leads to that the royalism occurs and the lubrication occurs. sent5: that not the tribute but the rumor occurs is caused by that the nutation does not occur. sent6: the respectableness occurs but the cruising Anaheim does not occur if the osteotomy occurs. sent7: that the cruising unrelatedness happens and the overflight does not occur is brought about by that the Beethovenianness does not occur. sent8: the convertibleness and the non-respectableness occurs if that the nonsphericalness occurs hold. sent9: the cruising Anaheim happens if the Frisianness occurs but the smacker does not occur. sent10: the inelasticness does not occur. sent11: if the Beethovenianness happens then the incubation but not the inelasticness occurs. sent12: that the cruising commonness does not occur is brought about by that the respectableness occurs and the cruising Anaheim does not occur. sent13: the single-laneness but not the cirrostratus happens if the cruising unrelatedness happens. sent14: if the cruising cellulose but not the facilitating occurs then the balk happens. sent15: the Beethovenianness does not occur and the bottling happens if the distending does not occur. sent16: the club occurs. sent17: if both the incubation and the elasticness occurs that the bottle happens is not false. sent18: the baffling fatalism occurs if the baffling suspect occurs. sent19: that the tribute does not occur leads to that the baffling wallpaper happens and the distending does not occur. sent20: if the royalism happens not the nutation but the polyphonicness happens. sent21: that the incubation and the inelasticness occurs results in that the bottling happens.
|
sent1: ({AJ} & ¬{CU}) sent2: ({FO} & ¬{JJ}) -> {GB} sent3: {A} -> ¬{AB} sent4: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) sent5: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & {F}) sent6: {N} -> ({L} & ¬{M}) sent7: ¬{A} -> ({AU} & ¬{CU}) sent8: {IK} -> ({IP} & ¬{L}) sent9: ({HE} & ¬{JB}) -> {M} sent10: ¬{AB} sent11: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent12: ({L} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{K} sent13: {AU} -> ({EO} & ¬{HJ}) sent14: ({EI} & ¬{BU}) -> {JI} sent15: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & {B}) sent16: {BH} sent17: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent18: {GU} -> {DD} sent19: ¬{E} -> ({D} & ¬{C}) sent20: {I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) sent21: ({AA} & {AB}) -> {B}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Beethovenianness happens.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the incubation but not the inelasticness occurs.; sent17 & int1 -> int2: the bottling happens.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}); sent17 & int1 -> int2: {B}; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the cruising unrelatedness occurs but the overflight does not occur.
|
({AU} & ¬{CU})
|
[] | 13 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bottle happens if the Beethovenianness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the proposing happens but the overflight does not occur. sent2: that the black-and-whiteness happens is brought about by that the pervaporation but not the infiltration happens. sent3: the inelasticness is prevented by the Beethovenianness. sent4: that the cruising commonness does not occur leads to that the royalism occurs and the lubrication occurs. sent5: that not the tribute but the rumor occurs is caused by that the nutation does not occur. sent6: the respectableness occurs but the cruising Anaheim does not occur if the osteotomy occurs. sent7: that the cruising unrelatedness happens and the overflight does not occur is brought about by that the Beethovenianness does not occur. sent8: the convertibleness and the non-respectableness occurs if that the nonsphericalness occurs hold. sent9: the cruising Anaheim happens if the Frisianness occurs but the smacker does not occur. sent10: the inelasticness does not occur. sent11: if the Beethovenianness happens then the incubation but not the inelasticness occurs. sent12: that the cruising commonness does not occur is brought about by that the respectableness occurs and the cruising Anaheim does not occur. sent13: the single-laneness but not the cirrostratus happens if the cruising unrelatedness happens. sent14: if the cruising cellulose but not the facilitating occurs then the balk happens. sent15: the Beethovenianness does not occur and the bottling happens if the distending does not occur. sent16: the club occurs. sent17: if both the incubation and the elasticness occurs that the bottle happens is not false. sent18: the baffling fatalism occurs if the baffling suspect occurs. sent19: that the tribute does not occur leads to that the baffling wallpaper happens and the distending does not occur. sent20: if the royalism happens not the nutation but the polyphonicness happens. sent21: that the incubation and the inelasticness occurs results in that the bottling happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Beethovenianness happens.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the incubation but not the inelasticness occurs.; sent17 & int1 -> int2: the bottling happens.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is not lithomantic the fact that it is a kind of a tense and it is not a sport is false.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: that the mestizo is a tense and it is a sport is not true if that it is not lithomantic is correct. sent2: that that something is a kind of a tense that is not a sport hold is not correct if it is not lithomantic. sent3: if something is not lithomantic it tenses and it is not a sport. sent4: there is something such that if it is not lithomantic then it is tense and is not a kind of a sport.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: if the mestizo is not lithomantic the fact that it is not non-tense and is not a sport is wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not lithomantic the fact that it is a kind of a tense and it is not a sport is false. ; $context$ = sent1: that the mestizo is a tense and it is a sport is not true if that it is not lithomantic is correct. sent2: that that something is a kind of a tense that is not a sport hold is not correct if it is not lithomantic. sent3: if something is not lithomantic it tenses and it is not a sport. sent4: there is something such that if it is not lithomantic then it is tense and is not a kind of a sport. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: if the mestizo is not lithomantic the fact that it is not non-tense and is not a sport is wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bailey engages Pygmy.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: if there is something such that the fact that it does not baffle bounder and does engage Pygmy is not right then the bailey is lymphatic. sent2: if the Intelnet engages Pygmy the fact that the Scout is lymphatic but it does not baffle bounder hold. sent3: the bailey does not baffle bounder but it does engage Pygmy if the Intelnet is lymphatic. sent4: if something is lymphatic but it does not baffle bounder it is feudatory. sent5: if there is something such that the fact that it is not insecticidal but a stretch is false then the Intelnet is lymphatic. sent6: the silicate is non-Protestant thing that is a kind of a cachalot. sent7: if something is not lymphatic it does not engage Pygmy. sent8: that something is algolagnic hold if it does gravitate. sent9: there exists something such that the fact that it is insecticidal thing that stretches does not hold. sent10: there is something such that that it does not baffle bounder and engages Pygmy is not right. sent11: something does not baffle bounder and engages Pygmy. sent12: something does engage Pygmy if the fact that it is algolagnic is not wrong. sent13: if something is not algolagnic and it does not baffle bounder it is not lymphatic. sent14: the fact that the bailey is not a sodalite hold.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {A}{b} sent2: {C}{a} -> ({A}{iq} & ¬{B}{iq}) sent3: {A}{a} -> (¬{B}{b} & {C}{b}) sent4: (x): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {ID}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent6: (¬{HR}{q} & {HG}{q}) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}x sent8: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) sent11: (Ex): (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent12: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent13: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent14: ¬{IS}{b}
|
[] |
[] |
the bailey does not engage Pygmy.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the bailey does not engage Pygmy if it is not lymphatic.; sent13 -> int2: the bailey is not lymphatic if it is not algolagnic and does not baffle bounder.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bailey engages Pygmy. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that the fact that it does not baffle bounder and does engage Pygmy is not right then the bailey is lymphatic. sent2: if the Intelnet engages Pygmy the fact that the Scout is lymphatic but it does not baffle bounder hold. sent3: the bailey does not baffle bounder but it does engage Pygmy if the Intelnet is lymphatic. sent4: if something is lymphatic but it does not baffle bounder it is feudatory. sent5: if there is something such that the fact that it is not insecticidal but a stretch is false then the Intelnet is lymphatic. sent6: the silicate is non-Protestant thing that is a kind of a cachalot. sent7: if something is not lymphatic it does not engage Pygmy. sent8: that something is algolagnic hold if it does gravitate. sent9: there exists something such that the fact that it is insecticidal thing that stretches does not hold. sent10: there is something such that that it does not baffle bounder and engages Pygmy is not right. sent11: something does not baffle bounder and engages Pygmy. sent12: something does engage Pygmy if the fact that it is algolagnic is not wrong. sent13: if something is not algolagnic and it does not baffle bounder it is not lymphatic. sent14: the fact that the bailey is not a sodalite hold. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the carillonneur is a catarrhine hold.
|
{E}{d}
|
sent1: if the dry cruises PET then the wildfowl is non-smaller. sent2: the wildfowl is maleficent. sent3: the revolver is a stylus or it is not dioecious or both if the wildfowl is not smaller. sent4: the fact that if the revolver is a stylus the carillonneur is not catarrhine hold. sent5: something is not smaller if that it is dioecious and smaller does not hold. sent6: the wildfowl does not cruise PET if the dry is smaller. sent7: the carillonneur is smaller and/or not catarrhine. sent8: the dry cruises PET. sent9: if something is not a kind of a stylus then the fact that it is both dioecious and not smaller is wrong. sent10: the revolver does cruise PET and/or it is not dioecious if the carillonneur is not a kind of a catarrhine. sent11: the wildfowl is a Cheviot. sent12: the wildfowl is a catarrhine but it is not an electrification if it is not inefficacious. sent13: if the revolver is not dioecious the carillonneur is not a catarrhine. sent14: The PET cruises dry. sent15: the dry is an electrification. sent16: the dry is a kind of a stylus but it does not cruise PET if the wildfowl is a catarrhine. sent17: if something is an electrification and is not efficacious then it is not a stylus. sent18: if the dry does not cruise PET that the Duralumin is both dioecious and smaller is false. sent19: if something cruises PET it is a catarrhine. sent20: the wildfowl is ciliate. sent21: if the revolver is a kind of a stylus the carillonneur is catarrhine. sent22: if something that is a kind of a Cheviot is maleficent then the dry is inefficacious.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent2: {I}{b} sent3: ¬{B}{b} -> ({D}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) sent4: {D}{c} -> ¬{E}{d} sent5: (x): ¬({C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: {B}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent7: ({B}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) sent8: {A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent10: ¬{E}{d} -> ({A}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) sent11: {H}{b} sent12: ¬{G}{b} -> ({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent13: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬{E}{d} sent14: {AA}{aa} sent15: {F}{a} sent16: {E}{b} -> ({D}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent17: (x): ({F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{D}x sent18: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({C}{hp} & {B}{hp}) sent19: (x): {A}x -> {E}x sent20: {ID}{b} sent21: {D}{c} -> {E}{d} sent22: (x): ({H}x & {I}x) -> {G}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the wildfowl is not smaller.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the revolver is a stylus or not dioecious or both.; int2 & sent4 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent3 & int1 -> int2: ({D}{c} v ¬{C}{c}); int2 & sent4 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Duralumin is not smaller.
|
¬{B}{hp}
|
[
"sent5 -> int3: if that the Duralumin is both dioecious and smaller is false it is not smaller.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the carillonneur is a catarrhine hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the dry cruises PET then the wildfowl is non-smaller. sent2: the wildfowl is maleficent. sent3: the revolver is a stylus or it is not dioecious or both if the wildfowl is not smaller. sent4: the fact that if the revolver is a stylus the carillonneur is not catarrhine hold. sent5: something is not smaller if that it is dioecious and smaller does not hold. sent6: the wildfowl does not cruise PET if the dry is smaller. sent7: the carillonneur is smaller and/or not catarrhine. sent8: the dry cruises PET. sent9: if something is not a kind of a stylus then the fact that it is both dioecious and not smaller is wrong. sent10: the revolver does cruise PET and/or it is not dioecious if the carillonneur is not a kind of a catarrhine. sent11: the wildfowl is a Cheviot. sent12: the wildfowl is a catarrhine but it is not an electrification if it is not inefficacious. sent13: if the revolver is not dioecious the carillonneur is not a catarrhine. sent14: The PET cruises dry. sent15: the dry is an electrification. sent16: the dry is a kind of a stylus but it does not cruise PET if the wildfowl is a catarrhine. sent17: if something is an electrification and is not efficacious then it is not a stylus. sent18: if the dry does not cruise PET that the Duralumin is both dioecious and smaller is false. sent19: if something cruises PET it is a catarrhine. sent20: the wildfowl is ciliate. sent21: if the revolver is a kind of a stylus the carillonneur is catarrhine. sent22: if something that is a kind of a Cheviot is maleficent then the dry is inefficacious. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the wildfowl is not smaller.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the revolver is a stylus or not dioecious or both.; int2 & sent4 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the skipping teg does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
sent1: the prostituting highbinder occurs. sent2: the heroics and the interlude occurs. sent3: the ding-dong and the aquiferousness happens. sent4: that the driving applesauce does not occur is correct. sent5: the skipping limestone occurs and the nephrotomy happens.
|
sent1: {CT} sent2: ({CK} & {GG}) sent3: ({B} & {C}) sent4: ¬{AP} sent5: ({GC} & {AC})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the skipping teg happens.; sent3 -> int1: the ding-dong occurs.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent3 -> int1: {B};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the skipping teg does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the prostituting highbinder occurs. sent2: the heroics and the interlude occurs. sent3: the ding-dong and the aquiferousness happens. sent4: that the driving applesauce does not occur is correct. sent5: the skipping limestone occurs and the nephrotomy happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the skipping teg happens.; sent3 -> int1: the ding-dong occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bust is not uncontroversial.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: something is both indecorous and attitudinal. sent2: there exists something such that it is prehistoric and it does not drive indomitability. sent3: the watercolorist is both not a Saxon and a resident if the patella does skip Xenosaurus. sent4: that the circuitry is a dolefulness and/or it is not a existentialist does not hold. sent5: the fact that there exists something such that it is not a spiffing hold. sent6: if the watercolorist is a dolefulness then the adjutant is a ormolu. sent7: if something is a grizzle that is not a spiffing then the bust is uncontroversial. sent8: there is something such that it is evitable and does not skip soapwort. sent9: something is enzymatic and a cloister. sent10: the bust is biotic and does not elope if the adjutant is not uncontroversial. sent11: something is a grizzle but not a spiffing. sent12: the dehydroretinol is not existentialist if that the circuitry is a kind of a dolefulness or it is not a existentialist or both is not correct.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({IP}x & {AP}x) sent2: (Ex): ({IB}x & ¬{GF}x) sent3: {G}{f} -> (¬{E}{d} & {D}{d}) sent4: ¬({F}{e} v ¬{C}{e}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent6: {F}{d} -> {B}{b} sent7: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent8: (Ex): ({CO}x & ¬{FA}x) sent9: (Ex): ({I}x & {AN}x) sent10: ¬{A}{b} -> ({EG}{a} & ¬{AT}{a}) sent11: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent12: ¬({F}{e} v ¬{C}{e}) -> ¬{C}{c}
|
[
"sent11 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that it is biotic and it does not elope.
|
(Ex): ({EG}x & ¬{AT}x)
|
[
"sent12 & sent4 -> int1: the dehydroretinol is not a existentialist.;"
] | 8 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bust is not uncontroversial. ; $context$ = sent1: something is both indecorous and attitudinal. sent2: there exists something such that it is prehistoric and it does not drive indomitability. sent3: the watercolorist is both not a Saxon and a resident if the patella does skip Xenosaurus. sent4: that the circuitry is a dolefulness and/or it is not a existentialist does not hold. sent5: the fact that there exists something such that it is not a spiffing hold. sent6: if the watercolorist is a dolefulness then the adjutant is a ormolu. sent7: if something is a grizzle that is not a spiffing then the bust is uncontroversial. sent8: there is something such that it is evitable and does not skip soapwort. sent9: something is enzymatic and a cloister. sent10: the bust is biotic and does not elope if the adjutant is not uncontroversial. sent11: something is a grizzle but not a spiffing. sent12: the dehydroretinol is not existentialist if that the circuitry is a kind of a dolefulness or it is not a existentialist or both is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that that it singles and/or does not skip link is not correct does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: if the fact that the aster is not stoloniferous but it is a bey does not hold the somatotropin is not stoloniferous. sent2: something is not non-lymphocytic if it does skip Haida. sent3: if that something does not trench XX or is a kind of a dekaliter or both is incorrect it does not cushion. sent4: if something is atrophic then it is not a tasting. sent5: the mulligan is not an extortion. sent6: there exists something such that it is a kind of a single and/or it does not skip link. sent7: that the mulligan is unbroken but it does not skip Casuarius does not hold if there exists something such that it skip Casuarius. sent8: there is something such that that it does single and/or it skips link is not right. sent9: something does not trench XX but it is a dekaliter. sent10: that something does drive symphonist or is not balsamic or both does not hold if that it is not a cushion is true. sent11: if the fact that something is a cushion is not incorrect then that either it is a kind of a single or it does not skip link or both is not correct. sent12: if the mulligan is lymphocytic but it is not a kind of an extortion then the aster is not lymphocytic. sent13: if something that does not trench XX is a kind of a dekaliter the symphonist is a cushion. sent14: something skips link. sent15: something is not a fagoting but a slopshop. sent16: if something is not lymphocytic the fact that it is non-stoloniferous a bey is wrong. sent17: if the sandblaster is insurrectional then the fact that it skips link or it is not a wretchedness or both is not right. sent18: there exists something such that it does skip Casuarius. sent19: if the somatotropin is non-stoloniferous that it does not trench XX and/or is a dekaliter does not hold. sent20: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a orbitale or it is not a kind of a peg or both is wrong. sent21: something skips Haida if that it is unbroken and it does not skip Casuarius is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {F}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent2: (x): {H}x -> {E}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v {C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent4: (x): {ID}x -> ¬{EH}x sent5: ¬{G}{c} sent6: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent7: (x): {J}x -> ¬({I}{c} & ¬{J}{c}) sent8: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) sent9: (Ex): (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({CC}x v ¬{BM}x) sent11: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent12: ({E}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent13: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {A}{aa} sent14: (Ex): {AB}x sent15: (Ex): (¬{EE}x & {ED}x) sent16: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {F}x) sent17: {CO}{gq} -> ¬({AB}{gq} v ¬{HE}{gq}) sent18: (Ex): {J}x sent19: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent20: (Ex): ¬({JI}x v ¬{FG}x) sent21: (x): ¬({I}x & ¬{J}x) -> {H}x
|
[
"sent11 -> int1: if the symphonist is a cushion then the fact that it does single or does not skip link or both is not right.; sent9 & sent13 -> int2: that the symphonist cushions hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the symphonist singles or it does not skip link or both is false.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); sent9 & sent13 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that the fact that it does drive symphonist or it is not balsamic or both is incorrect.
|
(Ex): ¬({CC}x v ¬{BM}x)
|
[
"sent10 -> int4: the fact that the somatotropin does drive symphonist and/or it is not balsamic is false if it does not cushion.; sent3 -> int5: if the fact that the fact that the somatotropin does not trench XX or it is a dekaliter or both is false hold then it is not a cushion.; sent16 -> int6: the fact that the aster is a kind of non-stoloniferous thing that is a kind of a bey is not correct if it is not lymphocytic.; sent2 -> int7: if the mulligan skips Haida then it is lymphocytic.; sent21 -> int8: if that the mulligan is unbroken but it does not skip Casuarius is incorrect it skips Haida.; sent18 & sent7 -> int9: that the mulligan is unbroken but it does not skip Casuarius is false.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the mulligan skips Haida.; int7 & int10 -> int11: the mulligan is lymphocytic.; int11 & sent5 -> int12: the mulligan is lymphocytic thing that is not a kind of an extortion.; sent12 & int12 -> int13: the aster is not lymphocytic.; int6 & int13 -> int14: the fact that the aster is not stoloniferous but it is a bey does not hold.; sent1 & int14 -> int15: the somatotropin is not stoloniferous.; sent19 & int15 -> int16: the fact that the somatotropin does not trench XX and/or it is a dekaliter is not correct.; int5 & int16 -> int17: that the somatotropin is not a cushion is true.; int4 & int17 -> int18: that either the somatotropin drives symphonist or it is not balsamic or both is not true.; int18 -> hypothesis;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that that it singles and/or does not skip link is not correct does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the aster is not stoloniferous but it is a bey does not hold the somatotropin is not stoloniferous. sent2: something is not non-lymphocytic if it does skip Haida. sent3: if that something does not trench XX or is a kind of a dekaliter or both is incorrect it does not cushion. sent4: if something is atrophic then it is not a tasting. sent5: the mulligan is not an extortion. sent6: there exists something such that it is a kind of a single and/or it does not skip link. sent7: that the mulligan is unbroken but it does not skip Casuarius does not hold if there exists something such that it skip Casuarius. sent8: there is something such that that it does single and/or it skips link is not right. sent9: something does not trench XX but it is a dekaliter. sent10: that something does drive symphonist or is not balsamic or both does not hold if that it is not a cushion is true. sent11: if the fact that something is a cushion is not incorrect then that either it is a kind of a single or it does not skip link or both is not correct. sent12: if the mulligan is lymphocytic but it is not a kind of an extortion then the aster is not lymphocytic. sent13: if something that does not trench XX is a kind of a dekaliter the symphonist is a cushion. sent14: something skips link. sent15: something is not a fagoting but a slopshop. sent16: if something is not lymphocytic the fact that it is non-stoloniferous a bey is wrong. sent17: if the sandblaster is insurrectional then the fact that it skips link or it is not a wretchedness or both is not right. sent18: there exists something such that it does skip Casuarius. sent19: if the somatotropin is non-stoloniferous that it does not trench XX and/or is a dekaliter does not hold. sent20: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a orbitale or it is not a kind of a peg or both is wrong. sent21: something skips Haida if that it is unbroken and it does not skip Casuarius is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 -> int1: if the symphonist is a cushion then the fact that it does single or does not skip link or both is not right.; sent9 & sent13 -> int2: that the symphonist cushions hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the symphonist singles or it does not skip link or both is false.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the moo does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
sent1: the recusing happens. sent2: that both the Liberian and the admissibleness happens is not correct if the skipping cerate does not occur. sent3: the Liberianness does not occur if both the inadmissibleness and the skipping cerate occurs. sent4: that not the trenching Sheetrock but the stenographicness happens is incorrect if the semioticsness does not occur. sent5: if the stenographicness does not occur not the admissibleness but the skipping cerate happens. sent6: that the trenching haloform happens but the mooing does not occur is not incorrect if the amicableness occurs. sent7: if that the stenographicness but not the trenching Sheetrock happens does not hold then the skipping cerate does not occur. sent8: if that the trenching Sheetrock does not occur and the stenographicness occurs is false then the stenographicness does not occur. sent9: if the electroencephalographicness does not occur then that the amicableness and the catch occurs hold. sent10: the amicableness does not occur and the moo does not occur if the catch occurs. sent11: if the fact that both the Liberian and the admissibleness occurs is wrong the electroencephalographicness does not occur. sent12: that the prostituting dispensary does not occur and the avascularness happens is caused by the non-passiveness. sent13: the mooing occurs. sent14: if the Liberianness does not occur both the electroencephalographicness and the catch happens. sent15: the absenteeism occurs. sent16: if the prostituting dispensary does not occur that both the reinstatement and the Crucifixion occurs does not hold. sent17: the fact that the semioticsness does not occur if that the reinstatement happens and the Crucifixion occurs is incorrect is true. sent18: the passive does not occur if the fact that the passive happens and the hemorrhoidectomy does not occur is not right. sent19: the fact that the causing occurs is right.
|
sent1: {EA} sent2: ¬{G} -> ¬({E} & {F}) sent3: (¬{F} & {G}) -> ¬{E} sent4: ¬{J} -> ¬(¬{I} & {H}) sent5: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & {G}) sent6: {B} -> ({BA} & ¬{A}) sent7: ¬({H} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{G} sent8: ¬(¬{I} & {H}) -> ¬{H} sent9: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) sent10: {C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) sent11: ¬({E} & {F}) -> ¬{D} sent12: ¬{O} -> (¬{M} & {N}) sent13: {A} sent14: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) sent15: {JJ} sent16: ¬{M} -> ¬({K} & {L}) sent17: ¬({K} & {L}) -> ¬{J} sent18: ¬({O} & ¬{P}) -> ¬{O} sent19: {HJ}
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the trenching haloform occurs.
|
{BA}
|
[] | 10 | 1 | 0 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the moo does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the recusing happens. sent2: that both the Liberian and the admissibleness happens is not correct if the skipping cerate does not occur. sent3: the Liberianness does not occur if both the inadmissibleness and the skipping cerate occurs. sent4: that not the trenching Sheetrock but the stenographicness happens is incorrect if the semioticsness does not occur. sent5: if the stenographicness does not occur not the admissibleness but the skipping cerate happens. sent6: that the trenching haloform happens but the mooing does not occur is not incorrect if the amicableness occurs. sent7: if that the stenographicness but not the trenching Sheetrock happens does not hold then the skipping cerate does not occur. sent8: if that the trenching Sheetrock does not occur and the stenographicness occurs is false then the stenographicness does not occur. sent9: if the electroencephalographicness does not occur then that the amicableness and the catch occurs hold. sent10: the amicableness does not occur and the moo does not occur if the catch occurs. sent11: if the fact that both the Liberian and the admissibleness occurs is wrong the electroencephalographicness does not occur. sent12: that the prostituting dispensary does not occur and the avascularness happens is caused by the non-passiveness. sent13: the mooing occurs. sent14: if the Liberianness does not occur both the electroencephalographicness and the catch happens. sent15: the absenteeism occurs. sent16: if the prostituting dispensary does not occur that both the reinstatement and the Crucifixion occurs does not hold. sent17: the fact that the semioticsness does not occur if that the reinstatement happens and the Crucifixion occurs is incorrect is true. sent18: the passive does not occur if the fact that the passive happens and the hemorrhoidectomy does not occur is not right. sent19: the fact that the causing occurs is right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the jibboom does not skip Astor.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: the fact that something is planetal but it does not skip sandman is not true if it is not a Reuben. sent2: the fact that something is planetal and does skip sandman is incorrect if it is not a Reuben. sent3: the jibboom does skip Astor if it skips sandman. sent4: if that something drives Lena is not incorrect it skips jessamine. sent5: if that something is a Swanson but it is not lipless is incorrect then it trenches atrocity. sent6: something is a Reuben but it does not skip Astor if it is not unsympathetic. sent7: if that the fact that the structure is a kind of a binding that does not drive keyboardist is not incorrect is not correct it is a cocklebur. sent8: the Anglicization does not skip sandman. sent9: that the jibboom is planetal and skips sandman does not hold. sent10: something is a kind of a Reuben and it skips Astor if it is not unsympathetic. sent11: the jibboom is epicurean if that it is a kind of an artiodactyl and it does not churn is false. sent12: something does not skip sandman if it is a kind of a Reuben. sent13: if that the jibboom is not a Reuben is right then that that it is planetal thing that skips sandman is not false does not hold. sent14: that the jibboom skips sandman and does not skip Anglicization is not correct. sent15: something is a curatorship if the fact that it is a kind of a grounds is right. sent16: the jibboom is not a castigation. sent17: the fact that something is a kind of a punter if it is a Call is not false. sent18: the jibboom is not a Reuben. sent19: that everything does not irradiate and/or is not unsympathetic hold. sent20: if that something is planetal and does not skip sandman does not hold then it does skip Astor.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent4: (x): {EB}x -> {BQ}x sent5: (x): ¬({HD}x & ¬{EA}x) -> {FF}x sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: ¬({BM}{je} & ¬{HF}{je}) -> {EP}{je} sent8: ¬{AB}{di} sent9: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent10: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent11: ¬({HO}{aa} & ¬{GC}{aa}) -> {DN}{aa} sent12: (x): {A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent13: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent14: ¬({AB}{aa} & ¬{K}{aa}) sent15: (x): {GR}x -> {GJ}x sent16: ¬{AG}{aa} sent17: (x): {DT}x -> {CU}x sent18: ¬{A}{aa} sent19: (x): (¬{D}x v ¬{C}x) sent20: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the fact that the jibboom is planetal but it does not skip sandman is wrong if that it is not a Reuben is not wrong.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: that the jibboom is planetal thing that does not skip sandman does not hold.; sent20 -> int3: the jibboom skips Astor if that it is a kind of planetal thing that does not skip sandman does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & sent18 -> int2: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent20 -> int3: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the jibboom does not skip Astor.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent6 -> int4: if the jibboom is not unsympathetic then it is a kind of a Reuben and does not skip Astor.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the jibboom does not skip Astor. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is planetal but it does not skip sandman is not true if it is not a Reuben. sent2: the fact that something is planetal and does skip sandman is incorrect if it is not a Reuben. sent3: the jibboom does skip Astor if it skips sandman. sent4: if that something drives Lena is not incorrect it skips jessamine. sent5: if that something is a Swanson but it is not lipless is incorrect then it trenches atrocity. sent6: something is a Reuben but it does not skip Astor if it is not unsympathetic. sent7: if that the fact that the structure is a kind of a binding that does not drive keyboardist is not incorrect is not correct it is a cocklebur. sent8: the Anglicization does not skip sandman. sent9: that the jibboom is planetal and skips sandman does not hold. sent10: something is a kind of a Reuben and it skips Astor if it is not unsympathetic. sent11: the jibboom is epicurean if that it is a kind of an artiodactyl and it does not churn is false. sent12: something does not skip sandman if it is a kind of a Reuben. sent13: if that the jibboom is not a Reuben is right then that that it is planetal thing that skips sandman is not false does not hold. sent14: that the jibboom skips sandman and does not skip Anglicization is not correct. sent15: something is a curatorship if the fact that it is a kind of a grounds is right. sent16: the jibboom is not a castigation. sent17: the fact that something is a kind of a punter if it is a Call is not false. sent18: the jibboom is not a Reuben. sent19: that everything does not irradiate and/or is not unsympathetic hold. sent20: if that something is planetal and does not skip sandman does not hold then it does skip Astor. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the fact that the jibboom is planetal but it does not skip sandman is wrong if that it is not a Reuben is not wrong.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: that the jibboom is planetal thing that does not skip sandman does not hold.; sent20 -> int3: the jibboom skips Astor if that it is a kind of planetal thing that does not skip sandman does not hold.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the valedictorian does cube.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: the fact that the Sinhalese is Ghanaian and not a wormhole is not correct. sent2: that the pond-skater is conditional and does not prostitute gawkiness is not true. sent3: if the fact that the pond-skater is conditional but it does not prostitute gawkiness is wrong then the valedictorian does not cube.
|
sent1: ¬({IM}{c} & ¬{BO}{c}) sent2: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the valedictorian does cube. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the Sinhalese is Ghanaian and not a wormhole is not correct. sent2: that the pond-skater is conditional and does not prostitute gawkiness is not true. sent3: if the fact that the pond-skater is conditional but it does not prostitute gawkiness is wrong then the valedictorian does not cube. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does not drive grugru then it does not acclaim.
|
(Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x
|
sent1: if the pulse does not drive grugru then it acclaims. sent2: if the pulse does not drive grugru then it scores. sent3: the link is not insecure if it does not drive grugru. sent4: there exists something such that if it is not a bid then it does not skip pulse. sent5: the pulse is not a kind of a campmate if it is not a kind of a genet. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a hydroelectricity then it is not a kind of a hoister. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not drive grugru it is a kind of an acclaim. sent8: if the pulse is an acclaim then it is not an antipathy. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a self-consciousness then it is not microbial. sent10: something that does not maneuver does not skip Machiavellianism. sent11: there is something such that if it drives grugru it does not acclaim. sent12: something is not an acclaim if it drives grugru. sent13: something does acclaim if it does not drive grugru. sent14: the pulse is not a Guru if it does not collide. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not arithmetical is right that it does not rev is not incorrect. sent16: the conductor is not moonless if it does drive grugru. sent17: the fact that the pulse is not a kind of a travel hold if the fact that it drives grugru is not false. sent18: the pulse drives grugru if it is not a Hammerstein. sent19: there exists something such that if it is not leafy it is not Mesozoic.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent2: ¬{B}{aa} -> {BB}{aa} sent3: ¬{B}{ed} -> ¬{CF}{ed} sent4: (Ex): ¬{FU}x -> ¬{EO}x sent5: ¬{FM}{aa} -> ¬{AJ}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ¬{EC}x -> ¬{BE}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent8: {C}{aa} -> ¬{D}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬{HL}x -> ¬{CA}x sent10: (x): ¬{CG}x -> ¬{BF}x sent11: (Ex): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent12: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent13: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent14: ¬{BT}{aa} -> ¬{H}{aa} sent15: (Ex): ¬{DQ}x -> ¬{IG}x sent16: {B}{fa} -> ¬{FD}{fa} sent17: {B}{aa} -> ¬{EU}{aa} sent18: ¬{GQ}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent19: (Ex): ¬{HE}x -> ¬{GB}x
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not drive grugru then it does not acclaim. ; $context$ = sent1: if the pulse does not drive grugru then it acclaims. sent2: if the pulse does not drive grugru then it scores. sent3: the link is not insecure if it does not drive grugru. sent4: there exists something such that if it is not a bid then it does not skip pulse. sent5: the pulse is not a kind of a campmate if it is not a kind of a genet. sent6: there is something such that if it is not a hydroelectricity then it is not a kind of a hoister. sent7: there exists something such that if it does not drive grugru it is a kind of an acclaim. sent8: if the pulse is an acclaim then it is not an antipathy. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a self-consciousness then it is not microbial. sent10: something that does not maneuver does not skip Machiavellianism. sent11: there is something such that if it drives grugru it does not acclaim. sent12: something is not an acclaim if it drives grugru. sent13: something does acclaim if it does not drive grugru. sent14: the pulse is not a Guru if it does not collide. sent15: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not arithmetical is right that it does not rev is not incorrect. sent16: the conductor is not moonless if it does drive grugru. sent17: the fact that the pulse is not a kind of a travel hold if the fact that it drives grugru is not false. sent18: the pulse drives grugru if it is not a Hammerstein. sent19: there exists something such that if it is not leafy it is not Mesozoic. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fiancee is not disreputable.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: if there is something such that it is not a sandiness then the interface is pervious and not disreputable. sent2: the fiancee is not sensitive. sent3: if there exists something such that it is not surmountable then the fact that the fiancee is not sensitive is correct. sent4: the chamberlain is a kind of authorial thing that is not a obviation. sent5: there exists something such that it is not sensitive. sent6: there is something such that it is insurmountable. sent7: the cunner is disreputable. sent8: the fiancee is surmountable. sent9: the fiancee is disreputable but it is not sensitive if something is not surmountable. sent10: the blouse is disreputable. sent11: if there is something such that it does not trench pot then the fiancee is sensitive but it does not prostitute misdemeanor. sent12: there is something such that it is surmountable. sent13: something is not disreputable. sent14: the podetium is both not reputable and not seedless. sent15: the fiancee rumples and is not sensitive. sent16: the fiancee is a kind of a Soubise. sent17: that the fiancee ripples is not incorrect. sent18: the fact that the naphthoquinone either is disreputable or is not surmountable or both is not correct if the fiancee is not non-tibial. sent19: if there exists something such that it is not reverse then the fiancee is disreputable but it is not conjunctive. sent20: there is something such that the fact that it is not arenaceous is correct. sent21: the fiancee is a deductible.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{DR}x -> ({FD}{fg} & ¬{B}{fg}) sent2: ¬{C}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent4: ({H}{ei} & ¬{G}{ei}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent7: {B}{ik} sent8: {A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent10: {B}{hb} sent11: (x): ¬{FO}x -> ({C}{a} & ¬{EL}{a}) sent12: (Ex): {A}x sent13: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent14: ({B}{dl} & ¬{ID}{dl}) sent15: ({HG}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent16: {EG}{a} sent17: {EM}{a} sent18: {D}{a} -> ¬({B}{gk} v ¬{A}{gk}) sent19: (x): ¬{HO}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{DP}{a}) sent20: (Ex): ¬{AN}x sent21: {U}{a}
|
[
"sent6 & sent9 -> int1: the fiancee is disreputable but it is not sensitive.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent9 -> int1: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the naphthoquinone is not insensitive.
|
{C}{gk}
|
[] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fiancee is not disreputable. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that it is not a sandiness then the interface is pervious and not disreputable. sent2: the fiancee is not sensitive. sent3: if there exists something such that it is not surmountable then the fact that the fiancee is not sensitive is correct. sent4: the chamberlain is a kind of authorial thing that is not a obviation. sent5: there exists something such that it is not sensitive. sent6: there is something such that it is insurmountable. sent7: the cunner is disreputable. sent8: the fiancee is surmountable. sent9: the fiancee is disreputable but it is not sensitive if something is not surmountable. sent10: the blouse is disreputable. sent11: if there is something such that it does not trench pot then the fiancee is sensitive but it does not prostitute misdemeanor. sent12: there is something such that it is surmountable. sent13: something is not disreputable. sent14: the podetium is both not reputable and not seedless. sent15: the fiancee rumples and is not sensitive. sent16: the fiancee is a kind of a Soubise. sent17: that the fiancee ripples is not incorrect. sent18: the fact that the naphthoquinone either is disreputable or is not surmountable or both is not correct if the fiancee is not non-tibial. sent19: if there exists something such that it is not reverse then the fiancee is disreputable but it is not conjunctive. sent20: there is something such that the fact that it is not arenaceous is correct. sent21: the fiancee is a deductible. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent9 -> int1: the fiancee is disreputable but it is not sensitive.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the tensor is not social.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: the fact that the tensor is asclepiadaceous is true. sent2: the wester does not trench napalm if the fact that the sycamore does not trench carouse but it trench napalm is not correct. sent3: the CEO is social. sent4: the bloomers is not unsocial. sent5: the fact that the tensor is sturdy hold. sent6: the tensor is a kind of a catalase. sent7: that the chipotle is social hold. sent8: the computer is social. sent9: the luge is social. sent10: the tensor is a kind of an instrumentation. sent11: the computer is square. sent12: the Jewess is social. sent13: the tensor is social. sent14: that the sycamore does not trench carouse and does trench napalm is incorrect. sent15: the tensor strains. sent16: the tensor is a rehash. sent17: if that the desiccant is not basaltic does not hold then the tensor is not social and it is not a bankbook. sent18: the pooch is a cutoff and it is irresolute if there exists something such that it is a kind of a butch. sent19: the tensor trenches Syracuse. sent20: the void is social. sent21: something is a kind of a butch.
|
sent1: {IM}{a} sent2: ¬(¬{I}{e} & {F}{e}) -> ¬{F}{d} sent3: {A}{gk} sent4: {A}{dp} sent5: {BM}{a} sent6: {DD}{a} sent7: {A}{u} sent8: {A}{ag} sent9: {A}{n} sent10: {CS}{a} sent11: {IS}{ag} sent12: {A}{ej} sent13: {A}{a} sent14: ¬(¬{I}{e} & {F}{e}) sent15: {EP}{a} sent16: {FE}{a} sent17: {C}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent18: (x): {H}x -> ({D}{c} & {G}{c}) sent19: {JJ}{a} sent20: {A}{et} sent21: (Ex): {H}x
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the tensor is unsocial.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent21 & sent18 -> int1: the pooch is a kind of a cutoff that is irresolute.; int1 -> int2: the pooch is a cutoff.; sent2 & sent14 -> int3: the wester does not trench napalm.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that it does not trench napalm.;"
] | 8 | 1 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the tensor is not social. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the tensor is asclepiadaceous is true. sent2: the wester does not trench napalm if the fact that the sycamore does not trench carouse but it trench napalm is not correct. sent3: the CEO is social. sent4: the bloomers is not unsocial. sent5: the fact that the tensor is sturdy hold. sent6: the tensor is a kind of a catalase. sent7: that the chipotle is social hold. sent8: the computer is social. sent9: the luge is social. sent10: the tensor is a kind of an instrumentation. sent11: the computer is square. sent12: the Jewess is social. sent13: the tensor is social. sent14: that the sycamore does not trench carouse and does trench napalm is incorrect. sent15: the tensor strains. sent16: the tensor is a rehash. sent17: if that the desiccant is not basaltic does not hold then the tensor is not social and it is not a bankbook. sent18: the pooch is a cutoff and it is irresolute if there exists something such that it is a kind of a butch. sent19: the tensor trenches Syracuse. sent20: the void is social. sent21: something is a kind of a butch. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something is monocarboxylic and a unaffectedness.
|
(Ex): ({A}x & {C}x)
|
sent1: the prophetess is both a unaffectedness and Lancastrian. sent2: the fact that the crucifix trenches embargo is not incorrect. sent3: the hemophiliac is not a unaffectedness if it does not skip crucifix and is a curio. sent4: the moonshine trenches embargo or is not Lancastrian or both if the hemophiliac is not a kind of a unaffectedness. sent5: if the prophetess is a gall the north is a kind of a gall. sent6: there is something such that that it is a puce and it is not a eusporangium is false. sent7: the prophetess is monocarboxylic and it does trench embargo. sent8: the hemophiliac is a kind of a curio. sent9: if something does trench embargo it does gall. sent10: if there is something such that the fact that the fact that it is a puce and it is not a kind of a eusporangium is right is not right the hemophiliac does not skip crucifix.
|
sent1: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent2: {B}{ck} sent3: (¬{E}{c} & {F}{c}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent4: ¬{C}{c} -> ({B}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) sent5: {JF}{a} -> {JF}{dg} sent6: (Ex): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) sent7: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent8: {F}{c} sent9: (x): {B}x -> {JF}x sent10: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{E}{c}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the prophetess is monocarboxylic.; sent1 -> int2: the prophetess is a unaffectedness.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the prophetess is monocarboxylic and it is a unaffectedness.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent1 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({A}{a} & {C}{a}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the north galls and it does skip avoidance.
|
({JF}{dg} & {ET}{dg})
|
[
"sent9 -> int4: the prophetess is a kind of a gall if it trenches embargo.; sent6 & sent10 -> int5: the hemophiliac does not skip crucifix.; int5 & sent8 -> int6: the hemophiliac does not skip crucifix and is a curio.; sent3 & int6 -> int7: the hemophiliac is not a unaffectedness.; sent4 & int7 -> int8: the moonshine does trench embargo or it is not a Lancastrian or both.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that it does trench embargo and/or it is not a Lancastrian.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = something is monocarboxylic and a unaffectedness. ; $context$ = sent1: the prophetess is both a unaffectedness and Lancastrian. sent2: the fact that the crucifix trenches embargo is not incorrect. sent3: the hemophiliac is not a unaffectedness if it does not skip crucifix and is a curio. sent4: the moonshine trenches embargo or is not Lancastrian or both if the hemophiliac is not a kind of a unaffectedness. sent5: if the prophetess is a gall the north is a kind of a gall. sent6: there is something such that that it is a puce and it is not a eusporangium is false. sent7: the prophetess is monocarboxylic and it does trench embargo. sent8: the hemophiliac is a kind of a curio. sent9: if something does trench embargo it does gall. sent10: if there is something such that the fact that the fact that it is a puce and it is not a kind of a eusporangium is right is not right the hemophiliac does not skip crucifix. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: the prophetess is monocarboxylic.; sent1 -> int2: the prophetess is a unaffectedness.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the prophetess is monocarboxylic and it is a unaffectedness.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the flip-flop is not a Mentha.
|
¬{C}{a}
|
sent1: that something does not trench Lillie or is a kind of a Appalachians or both is not true if that it does not gas is not wrong. sent2: if the alendronate is not a primatology then the fact that it does not trench flip-flop is true. sent3: there exists nothing such that it is not a kind of a Appalachians and it does trench Lillie. sent4: if the gauntlet either is a Appalachians or trenches Lillie or both the flip-flop is not a Mentha. sent5: the fact that the flip-flop is not a snowball and is a kind of a Appalachians is wrong. sent6: the leptocephalus is not a Entebbe. sent7: either the flip-flop is a woodenness or it is a Mentha or both. sent8: that something does gas and is bivalve is incorrect if it does not trench flip-flop. sent9: the flip-flop is a Mentha and/or it is xerographic. sent10: there exists nothing such that it is not a elastin and it is a kind of a shear. sent11: the fact that the flip-flop skips tubercle is right if the fact that it does not reconsider and it is a kind of a duct is not right. sent12: there exists nothing such that it is not a kind of a Entebbe and is a Mentha. sent13: if the gauntlet trenches Lillie then the flip-flop is not a Mentha. sent14: there is nothing such that it is not a kind of a Entebbe and it is xerographic. sent15: the gauntlet is a Appalachians if it is not xerographic. sent16: something is not a gas if the fact that it gas and it is a bivalve is not right. sent17: a non-xerographic thing is a Appalachians. sent18: the flip-flop drives ribaldry if the fact that it is not xerographic and it is inconsistent is not right. sent19: the lawman is a Entebbe. sent20: the flip-flop is a Entebbe. sent21: the fact that the gauntlet is a dummy is correct.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x v {A}x) sent2: ¬{G}{b} -> ¬{E}{b} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) sent4: ({A}{aa} v {B}{aa}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{O}{a} & {A}{a}) sent6: ¬{AA}{au} sent7: ({GB}{a} v {C}{a}) sent8: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({D}x & {F}x) sent9: ({C}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{IF}x & {GT}x) sent11: ¬(¬{HO}{a} & {IQ}{a}) -> {JJ}{a} sent12: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {C}x) sent13: {B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{a} sent14: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent15: ¬{AB}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent16: (x): ¬({D}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent17: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}x sent18: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {DM}{a}) -> {EH}{a} sent19: {AA}{ec} sent20: {AA}{a} sent21: {IC}{aa}
|
[
"sent14 -> int1: that that the gauntlet is not a Entebbe but it is xerographic does not hold is true.;"
] |
[
"sent14 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa});"
] |
the flip-flop is a Mentha.
|
{C}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int2: if the alendronate is not a gas then the fact that that it does not trench Lillie and/or it is a Appalachians is true is false.; sent16 -> int3: if the fact that the fact that the alendronate does gas and is a bivalve is not false does not hold it is not a kind of a gas.; sent8 -> int4: that the alendronate is both a gas and a bivalve is not right if it does not trench flip-flop.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the flip-flop is not a Mentha. ; $context$ = sent1: that something does not trench Lillie or is a kind of a Appalachians or both is not true if that it does not gas is not wrong. sent2: if the alendronate is not a primatology then the fact that it does not trench flip-flop is true. sent3: there exists nothing such that it is not a kind of a Appalachians and it does trench Lillie. sent4: if the gauntlet either is a Appalachians or trenches Lillie or both the flip-flop is not a Mentha. sent5: the fact that the flip-flop is not a snowball and is a kind of a Appalachians is wrong. sent6: the leptocephalus is not a Entebbe. sent7: either the flip-flop is a woodenness or it is a Mentha or both. sent8: that something does gas and is bivalve is incorrect if it does not trench flip-flop. sent9: the flip-flop is a Mentha and/or it is xerographic. sent10: there exists nothing such that it is not a elastin and it is a kind of a shear. sent11: the fact that the flip-flop skips tubercle is right if the fact that it does not reconsider and it is a kind of a duct is not right. sent12: there exists nothing such that it is not a kind of a Entebbe and is a Mentha. sent13: if the gauntlet trenches Lillie then the flip-flop is not a Mentha. sent14: there is nothing such that it is not a kind of a Entebbe and it is xerographic. sent15: the gauntlet is a Appalachians if it is not xerographic. sent16: something is not a gas if the fact that it gas and it is a bivalve is not right. sent17: a non-xerographic thing is a Appalachians. sent18: the flip-flop drives ribaldry if the fact that it is not xerographic and it is inconsistent is not right. sent19: the lawman is a Entebbe. sent20: the flip-flop is a Entebbe. sent21: the fact that the gauntlet is a dummy is correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent14 -> int1: that that the gauntlet is not a Entebbe but it is xerographic does not hold is true.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the screwballer is a kohleria.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: if there exists something such that it does iron the fact that the fraction does not iron but it is a allegretto is not correct. sent2: if the boss is a aloes it is not electrostatic but a rocket. sent3: the ready-made is not a kohleria if there exists something such that that the fact that it is a kind of non-Rosicrucian thing that is not a mycologist is not incorrect is wrong. sent4: the screwballer is a kind of a kohleria if the neutrino is a namer. sent5: the fraction is solanaceous if the fact that it is not a kind of an iron and it is a allegretto is not correct. sent6: if something is solanaceous the scombroid is irresistible and it is ill. sent7: the L-dopa is an iron and it is soleless if there exists something such that it is a rocket. sent8: if that the screwballer is a kohleria and it is a kind of a namer is incorrect then the swathing is not Rosicrucian. sent9: if there exists something such that it is not ill that the neutrino is a kind of a namer and/or does trench subtraction is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that the ready-made is not a kind of a Rosicrucian and it is not a mycologist does not hold. sent11: the fact that the sipper is not ill is not false if the scombroid is both irresistible and ill. sent12: the boss is a aloes. sent13: that the ready-made is not a kind of a mycologist and is a kohleria is not correct. sent14: the screwballer is not a kind of a kohleria if there is something such that that it is a kind of non-Rosicrucian thing that is not a kind of a mycologist is not right.
|
sent1: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{G}{e} & {H}{e}) sent2: {L}{g} -> (¬{K}{g} & {J}{g}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent4: {B}{b} -> {A}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{G}{e} & {H}{e}) -> {F}{e} sent6: (x): {F}x -> ({E}{d} & {D}{d}) sent7: (x): {J}x -> ({G}{f} & {I}{f}) sent8: ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{jc} sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}{b} v {C}{b}) sent10: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent11: ({E}{d} & {D}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent12: {L}{g} sent13: ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is both not a Rosicrucian and not a mycologist is not right.; int1 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the screwballer is a kohleria.
|
{A}{a}
|
[
"sent2 & sent12 -> int2: the boss is not electrostatic and is a rocket.; int2 -> int3: the boss rockets.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that it rockets.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the L-dopa is an iron and it is soleless.; int5 -> int6: the L-dopa is a kind of an iron.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it is an iron.; int7 & sent1 -> int8: that the fraction is not a kind of an iron but it is a allegretto does not hold.; sent5 & int8 -> int9: the fraction is solanaceous.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it is solanaceous.; int10 & sent6 -> int11: the scombroid is irresistible and is ill.; sent11 & int11 -> int12: the sipper is non-ill.; int12 -> int13: there is something such that it is not ill.; int13 & sent9 -> int14: the neutrino is a namer and/or does trench subtraction.;"
] | 14 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the screwballer is a kohleria. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it does iron the fact that the fraction does not iron but it is a allegretto is not correct. sent2: if the boss is a aloes it is not electrostatic but a rocket. sent3: the ready-made is not a kohleria if there exists something such that that the fact that it is a kind of non-Rosicrucian thing that is not a mycologist is not incorrect is wrong. sent4: the screwballer is a kind of a kohleria if the neutrino is a namer. sent5: the fraction is solanaceous if the fact that it is not a kind of an iron and it is a allegretto is not correct. sent6: if something is solanaceous the scombroid is irresistible and it is ill. sent7: the L-dopa is an iron and it is soleless if there exists something such that it is a rocket. sent8: if that the screwballer is a kohleria and it is a kind of a namer is incorrect then the swathing is not Rosicrucian. sent9: if there exists something such that it is not ill that the neutrino is a kind of a namer and/or does trench subtraction is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that the ready-made is not a kind of a Rosicrucian and it is not a mycologist does not hold. sent11: the fact that the sipper is not ill is not false if the scombroid is both irresistible and ill. sent12: the boss is a aloes. sent13: that the ready-made is not a kind of a mycologist and is a kohleria is not correct. sent14: the screwballer is not a kind of a kohleria if there is something such that that it is a kind of non-Rosicrucian thing that is not a kind of a mycologist is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is both not a Rosicrucian and not a mycologist is not right.; int1 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the freewheeler does not skip rampion and is a carabiner.
|
(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
sent1: if something is not a kind of a Bretagne then it does not skip rampion and is a carabiner. sent2: if something is bilious then it is not a Bretagne. sent3: the fact that the freewheeler does not skip rampion but it is a kind of a carabiner is incorrect if it is a Bretagne. sent4: the freewheeler is a kind of a Bretagne. sent5: the fact that that the aerie is both a carabiner and antithyroid is not wrong does not hold. sent6: that the freewheeler does skip rampion and is a carabiner is wrong if that it is a Bretagne is correct. sent7: that the rampion does not trench scallion but it does skip polarization is incorrect if the freewheeler is not a kind of a Bretagne.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (x): {B}x -> ¬{A}x sent3: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent4: {A}{a} sent5: ¬({AB}{eh} & {IE}{eh}) sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{GM}{fh} & {GH}{fh})
|
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the freewheeler does not skip rampion but it is a kind of a carabiner.
|
(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: if the freewheeler is not a Bretagne it does not skip rampion and is a carabiner.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the freewheeler does not skip rampion and is a carabiner. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of a Bretagne then it does not skip rampion and is a carabiner. sent2: if something is bilious then it is not a Bretagne. sent3: the fact that the freewheeler does not skip rampion but it is a kind of a carabiner is incorrect if it is a Bretagne. sent4: the freewheeler is a kind of a Bretagne. sent5: the fact that that the aerie is both a carabiner and antithyroid is not wrong does not hold. sent6: that the freewheeler does skip rampion and is a carabiner is wrong if that it is a Bretagne is correct. sent7: that the rampion does not trench scallion but it does skip polarization is incorrect if the freewheeler is not a kind of a Bretagne. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the skipping Soweto happens then the driving Sherwood happens.
|
{B} -> {D}
|
sent1: the driving Sherwood happens if that the dormantness does not occur is correct.
|
sent1: ¬{C} -> {D}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the skipping Soweto happens.; assump1 -> int1: either the electrophoreticness happens or the skipping Soweto occurs or both.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {B}; assump1 -> int1: ({A} v {B});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = if the skipping Soweto happens then the driving Sherwood happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the driving Sherwood happens if that the dormantness does not occur is correct. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the skipping Soweto happens.; assump1 -> int1: either the electrophoreticness happens or the skipping Soweto occurs or both.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Korean is not a mullion but a zoomorphism.
|
(¬{C}{aa} & {B}{aa})
|
sent1: everything is impermanent. sent2: if the Korean is normal the fact that it is an insulin that is Bulgarian is incorrect. sent3: if there exists something such that that it is both disagreeable and not extrasystolic is not right the Korean is not a kind of a mullion. sent4: everything is human and/or is not an edger. sent5: the fact that something is both not a mullion and a zoomorphism is not right if it is a Willard. sent6: the fact that everything is a Willard is not false. sent7: if there exists something such that that it is extrasystolic and/or it is profaned does not hold that the tiepin is not agreeable is not incorrect. sent8: if something is a Willard the fact that it is a kind of a mullion and it is a zoomorphism is incorrect. sent9: if the tiepin is not agreeable then that the owlet is not a zoomorphism and not a mullion is not true. sent10: something is a kind of a LAN that is not profaned if it is pharyngeal. sent11: that the Korean is a mullion and a zoomorphism is wrong. sent12: everything is cyprian. sent13: the fact that the fact that the manakin is disagreeable thing that is not extrasystolic is correct is wrong if it is not profaned. sent14: something that does not prostitute Coraciidae is a zoomorphism that is a Willard. sent15: the Korean is nonhuman if the tiepin is nonhuman. sent16: there is something such that that it is not a spur hold. sent17: if the owlet is a LAN and is not profaned the manakin is not profaned. sent18: the owlet is pharyngeal and it is tuneful if there is something such that it does not spur. sent19: if there is something such that it does not prostitute Coraciidae then the fact that the Boxer is extrasystolic and/or it is profaned does not hold. sent20: if the fact that something is non-ateleiotic thing that does trench Ortega does not hold it does not prostitute Coraciidae. sent21: that the Korean is both a mullion and a zoomorphism is not correct if it is a Willard. sent22: the fact that the Korean is not ateleiotic but it does trench Ortega is incorrect if it is not human.
|
sent1: (x): {CS}x sent2: {IF}{aa} -> ¬({JB}{aa} & {BF}{aa}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}{aa} sent4: (x): ({N}x v ¬{O}x) sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) sent6: (x): {A}x sent7: (x): ¬({E}x v {F}x) -> ¬{D}{c} sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) sent9: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent10: (x): {K}x -> ({J}x & ¬{F}x) sent11: ¬({C}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent12: (x): {HH}x sent13: ¬{F}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent14: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent15: {N}{c} -> ¬{N}{aa} sent16: (Ex): ¬{M}x sent17: ({J}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{F}{a} sent18: (x): ¬{M}x -> ({K}{b} & {L}{b}) sent19: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({E}{d} v {F}{d}) sent20: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {I}x) -> ¬{G}x sent21: {A}{aa} -> ¬({C}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent22: ¬{N}{aa} -> ¬(¬{H}{aa} & {I}{aa})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the Korean is a kind of a Willard.; sent5 -> int2: the fact that the Korean is not a mullion but it is a zoomorphism is not right if it is a kind of a Willard.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: {A}{aa}; sent5 -> int2: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{C}{aa} & {B}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Korean is not a mullion and is a zoomorphism.
|
(¬{C}{aa} & {B}{aa})
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: if the owlet is pharyngeal then it is a LAN and it is not profaned.; sent16 & sent18 -> int4: the owlet is both pharyngeal and tuneful.; int4 -> int5: the owlet is pharyngeal.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the owlet is a LAN but it is not profaned.; sent17 & int6 -> int7: the manakin is not profaned.; sent13 & int7 -> int8: that the manakin is both not agreeable and not extrasystolic is incorrect.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that that it is not agreeable and is not extrasystolic is wrong.; int9 & sent3 -> int10: the Korean is not a mullion.; sent14 -> int11: the Korean is a zoomorphism and a Willard if it does not prostitute Coraciidae.; sent20 -> int12: the Korean does not prostitute Coraciidae if the fact that it is non-ateleiotic and trenches Ortega does not hold.; sent4 -> int13: the tiepin is either human or not an edger or both.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Korean is not a mullion but a zoomorphism. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is impermanent. sent2: if the Korean is normal the fact that it is an insulin that is Bulgarian is incorrect. sent3: if there exists something such that that it is both disagreeable and not extrasystolic is not right the Korean is not a kind of a mullion. sent4: everything is human and/or is not an edger. sent5: the fact that something is both not a mullion and a zoomorphism is not right if it is a Willard. sent6: the fact that everything is a Willard is not false. sent7: if there exists something such that that it is extrasystolic and/or it is profaned does not hold that the tiepin is not agreeable is not incorrect. sent8: if something is a Willard the fact that it is a kind of a mullion and it is a zoomorphism is incorrect. sent9: if the tiepin is not agreeable then that the owlet is not a zoomorphism and not a mullion is not true. sent10: something is a kind of a LAN that is not profaned if it is pharyngeal. sent11: that the Korean is a mullion and a zoomorphism is wrong. sent12: everything is cyprian. sent13: the fact that the fact that the manakin is disagreeable thing that is not extrasystolic is correct is wrong if it is not profaned. sent14: something that does not prostitute Coraciidae is a zoomorphism that is a Willard. sent15: the Korean is nonhuman if the tiepin is nonhuman. sent16: there is something such that that it is not a spur hold. sent17: if the owlet is a LAN and is not profaned the manakin is not profaned. sent18: the owlet is pharyngeal and it is tuneful if there is something such that it does not spur. sent19: if there is something such that it does not prostitute Coraciidae then the fact that the Boxer is extrasystolic and/or it is profaned does not hold. sent20: if the fact that something is non-ateleiotic thing that does trench Ortega does not hold it does not prostitute Coraciidae. sent21: that the Korean is both a mullion and a zoomorphism is not correct if it is a Willard. sent22: the fact that the Korean is not ateleiotic but it does trench Ortega is incorrect if it is not human. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the Korean is a kind of a Willard.; sent5 -> int2: the fact that the Korean is not a mullion but it is a zoomorphism is not right if it is a kind of a Willard.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if that it is medicolegal hold then the fact that it does not skip cystine or it does not prostitute Gouda or both is not right is not true.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: if the cystine is medicolegal then it does not skip cystine or it does not prostitute Gouda or both. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it is medicolegal is not wrong it does not skip cystine and/or it does not prostitute Gouda. sent3: there exists something such that if it is medicolegal it skips cystine. sent4: that the cystine does prostitute Gouda is not incorrect if it is medicolegal. sent5: the fact that the cystine either skips cystine or does not prostitute Gouda or both is incorrect if it is medicolegal. sent6: there is something such that if it is medicolegal the fact that either it does not skip cystine or it prostitutes Gouda or both is incorrect. sent7: there exists something such that if that it is medicolegal is not wrong that it skips cystine or it does not prostitute Gouda or both does not hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is medicolegal it prostitutes Gouda. sent9: if the cystine is medicolegal then that it does not skip cystine and/or it does not prostitute Gouda is false.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> {AA}x sent4: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent7: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent8: (Ex): {A}x -> {AB}x sent9: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if that it is medicolegal hold then the fact that it does not skip cystine or it does not prostitute Gouda or both is not right is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the cystine is medicolegal then it does not skip cystine or it does not prostitute Gouda or both. sent2: there exists something such that if the fact that it is medicolegal is not wrong it does not skip cystine and/or it does not prostitute Gouda. sent3: there exists something such that if it is medicolegal it skips cystine. sent4: that the cystine does prostitute Gouda is not incorrect if it is medicolegal. sent5: the fact that the cystine either skips cystine or does not prostitute Gouda or both is incorrect if it is medicolegal. sent6: there is something such that if it is medicolegal the fact that either it does not skip cystine or it prostitutes Gouda or both is incorrect. sent7: there exists something such that if that it is medicolegal is not wrong that it skips cystine or it does not prostitute Gouda or both does not hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is medicolegal it prostitutes Gouda. sent9: if the cystine is medicolegal then that it does not skip cystine and/or it does not prostitute Gouda is false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the prostituting mulligan does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: if the driving wardrobe happens that the non-streptococcalness or the regularization or both happens is not true. sent2: if the fact that the nonenzymaticness and the snips occurs is incorrect then the snips does not occur. sent3: the driving wardrobe occurs. sent4: that both the trenching Viola and the snips happens does not hold if the nonenzymaticness does not occur. sent5: that the regularization does not occur hold if the driving wardrobe happens. sent6: the fact that the fact that the pyrolatry does not occur or the exacerbation does not occur or both is true is wrong if the snips does not occur. sent7: the exacerbation does not occur if the trenching Viola happens or the snips does not occur or both. sent8: that the depletion does not occur results in that the ninepins occurs and the atomicness occurs. sent9: if that the photoconductivity does not occur is correct then not the prostituting mulligan but the driving wardrobe happens. sent10: the fact that the photoconductivity does not occur is not incorrect if the fact that the pyrolatry does not occur and/or the exacerbation does not occur is false. sent11: if the blackout does not occur then the fact that the nonenzymaticness and the snipping happens is incorrect. sent12: the fact that the skipping downheartedness but not the blackout happens is not right if the ninepins happens. sent13: the fact that the repayment does not occur or the Piagetianness occurs or both does not hold. sent14: if the exacerbation does not occur not the prostituting mulligan but the photoconductivity happens. sent15: if that either the streptococcalness does not occur or the regularization happens or both is not right the prostituting mulligan occurs.
|
sent1: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) sent2: ¬({H} & {F}) -> ¬{F} sent3: {A} sent4: ¬{H} -> ¬({G} & {F}) sent5: {A} -> ¬{AB} sent6: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{D} v ¬{E}) sent7: ({G} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{E} sent8: ¬{M} -> ({K} & {L}) sent9: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} & {A}) sent10: ¬(¬{D} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} sent11: ¬{I} -> ¬({H} & {F}) sent12: {K} -> ¬({J} & ¬{I}) sent13: ¬(¬{CK} v {EG}) sent14: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & {C}) sent15: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) -> {B}
|
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: that the streptococcalness does not occur or the regularization occurs or both does not hold.; sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}); sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the pyrolatry occurs.
|
{D}
|
[] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the prostituting mulligan does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the driving wardrobe happens that the non-streptococcalness or the regularization or both happens is not true. sent2: if the fact that the nonenzymaticness and the snips occurs is incorrect then the snips does not occur. sent3: the driving wardrobe occurs. sent4: that both the trenching Viola and the snips happens does not hold if the nonenzymaticness does not occur. sent5: that the regularization does not occur hold if the driving wardrobe happens. sent6: the fact that the fact that the pyrolatry does not occur or the exacerbation does not occur or both is true is wrong if the snips does not occur. sent7: the exacerbation does not occur if the trenching Viola happens or the snips does not occur or both. sent8: that the depletion does not occur results in that the ninepins occurs and the atomicness occurs. sent9: if that the photoconductivity does not occur is correct then not the prostituting mulligan but the driving wardrobe happens. sent10: the fact that the photoconductivity does not occur is not incorrect if the fact that the pyrolatry does not occur and/or the exacerbation does not occur is false. sent11: if the blackout does not occur then the fact that the nonenzymaticness and the snipping happens is incorrect. sent12: the fact that the skipping downheartedness but not the blackout happens is not right if the ninepins happens. sent13: the fact that the repayment does not occur or the Piagetianness occurs or both does not hold. sent14: if the exacerbation does not occur not the prostituting mulligan but the photoconductivity happens. sent15: if that either the streptococcalness does not occur or the regularization happens or both is not right the prostituting mulligan occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent3 -> int1: that the streptococcalness does not occur or the regularization occurs or both does not hold.; sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the essay does not occur and the perception does not occur.
|
(¬{D} & ¬{E})
|
sent1: the fact that the essay does not occur is not wrong if the stocking and the skipping Coraciidae happens. sent2: the skipping Coraciidae and the phoneticsness happens. sent3: if both the mintiness and the non-entomophilousness happens the perception does not occur. sent4: that the stock happens and the perfusion happens is right.
|
sent1: ({A} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent2: ({C} & {F}) sent3: ({H} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} sent4: ({A} & {B})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: the stock occurs.; sent2 -> int2: the skipping Coraciidae happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the stocking occurs and the skipping Coraciidae occurs.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the essay does not occur.;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: {A}; sent2 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({A} & {C}); int3 & sent1 -> int4: ¬{D};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the essay does not occur and the perception does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the essay does not occur is not wrong if the stocking and the skipping Coraciidae happens. sent2: the skipping Coraciidae and the phoneticsness happens. sent3: if both the mintiness and the non-entomophilousness happens the perception does not occur. sent4: that the stock happens and the perfusion happens is right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: the stock occurs.; sent2 -> int2: the skipping Coraciidae happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the stocking occurs and the skipping Coraciidae occurs.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the essay does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the animatisticness does not occur is not wrong.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the driving kidnapper occurs. sent2: the multidimensionalness does not occur. sent3: that the cardinalness and the toy occurs leads to the non-animatisticness. sent4: the circus occurs. sent5: the cardinal occurs. sent6: the comb does not occur. sent7: the driving vigilantism happens. sent8: the trenching affected happens.
|
sent1: {DN} sent2: ¬{GB} sent3: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent4: {GU} sent5: {A} sent6: ¬{II} sent7: {AP} sent8: {FF}
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the animatisticness does not occur is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the driving kidnapper occurs. sent2: the multidimensionalness does not occur. sent3: that the cardinalness and the toy occurs leads to the non-animatisticness. sent4: the circus occurs. sent5: the cardinal occurs. sent6: the comb does not occur. sent7: the driving vigilantism happens. sent8: the trenching affected happens. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the synthesist is meteoritic.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: the synthesist does not trench reexamination. sent2: the Realtor is not a moneran. sent3: the synthesist is a rocket that does not trench reexamination if the Realtor is not moneran. sent4: if something that is a kind of a rocket does not trench reexamination then it is non-meteoritic. sent5: if the synthesist is a kind of a rocket and it does trench reexamination then it is not meteoritic.
|
sent1: ¬{AB}{b} sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent4: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the synthesist is a rocket and does not trench reexamination.; sent4 -> int2: if the synthesist does rocket and does not trench reexamination then it is not meteoritic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent4 -> int2: ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the synthesist is meteoritic. ; $context$ = sent1: the synthesist does not trench reexamination. sent2: the Realtor is not a moneran. sent3: the synthesist is a rocket that does not trench reexamination if the Realtor is not moneran. sent4: if something that is a kind of a rocket does not trench reexamination then it is non-meteoritic. sent5: if the synthesist is a kind of a rocket and it does trench reexamination then it is not meteoritic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the synthesist is a rocket and does not trench reexamination.; sent4 -> int2: if the synthesist does rocket and does not trench reexamination then it is not meteoritic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the cupel is nonwoody.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: the cupel is a hewer. sent2: if the Camembert does not drive Sawan and is not a kind of a hitch then the taconite is not malign. sent3: if the cupel is resistible the buttercrunch is nonwoody. sent4: if the buttercrunch is resistible then it is a hewer. sent5: the cupel is not nonwoody if something that is not a hewer is resistible. sent6: the snorkel is a hewer. sent7: the buttercrunch is resistible. sent8: something is a hewer and is not Napoleonic if it is not malign. sent9: if something is not a eulogist it does not drive Sawan and is not a kind of a hitch. sent10: the fact that the hornpipe is resistible is true. sent11: the taconite is not Napoleonic. sent12: if the taconite is a kind of a hewer that is not Napoleonic then that the cupel is not a hewer is correct. sent13: the cupel is resistible. sent14: the cupel is nonwoody if the buttercrunch is a hewer. sent15: if the buttercrunch is a kind of a steam then it is a Elmont. sent16: if the fact that the funfair is not a fondness but it is a eulogist is not right the Camembert is not a eulogist.
|
sent1: {B}{b} sent2: (¬{F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent3: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): (¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}{b} sent6: {B}{fq} sent7: {A}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & ¬{E}x) sent9: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) sent10: {A}{bn} sent11: ¬{E}{c} sent12: ({B}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: {A}{b} sent14: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent15: {EG}{a} -> {M}{a} sent16: ¬(¬{J}{e} & {H}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d}
|
[
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the buttercrunch is a kind of a hewer.; sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the cupel is not nonwoody.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent11 -> int2: there is something such that it is not Napoleonic.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the cupel is nonwoody. ; $context$ = sent1: the cupel is a hewer. sent2: if the Camembert does not drive Sawan and is not a kind of a hitch then the taconite is not malign. sent3: if the cupel is resistible the buttercrunch is nonwoody. sent4: if the buttercrunch is resistible then it is a hewer. sent5: the cupel is not nonwoody if something that is not a hewer is resistible. sent6: the snorkel is a hewer. sent7: the buttercrunch is resistible. sent8: something is a hewer and is not Napoleonic if it is not malign. sent9: if something is not a eulogist it does not drive Sawan and is not a kind of a hitch. sent10: the fact that the hornpipe is resistible is true. sent11: the taconite is not Napoleonic. sent12: if the taconite is a kind of a hewer that is not Napoleonic then that the cupel is not a hewer is correct. sent13: the cupel is resistible. sent14: the cupel is nonwoody if the buttercrunch is a hewer. sent15: if the buttercrunch is a kind of a steam then it is a Elmont. sent16: if the fact that the funfair is not a fondness but it is a eulogist is not right the Camembert is not a eulogist. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the buttercrunch is a kind of a hewer.; sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if the fact that it does not trench shanny and does not skip papain does not hold it is a tupelo.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: if the pooch is a Anatolian it is a Maoist. sent2: if the pooch is not infelicitous and is not a tupelo it is a sensationalist. sent3: if the pooch is not a kind of a moonwort and does not lignify then that it is a tupelo is not wrong. sent4: something that does not prostitute Notoryctidae and is not a correctness is not a kidney. sent5: if that something is not sadomasochistic and it is not infelicitous is not correct it is a kind of a Astrakhan. sent6: if something is a kind of an intellectual it is robotics. sent7: if something that does not trench shanny does not skip papain then that it is a tupelo is not incorrect. sent8: there exists something such that if it does trench shanny then the fact that it is a tupelo hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it fingers it skips stockist.
|
sent1: {EC}{aa} -> {HC}{aa} sent2: (¬{AS}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> {CP}{aa} sent3: (¬{DQ}{aa} & ¬{JF}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent4: (x): (¬{II}x & ¬{GU}x) -> {J}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{IS}x & ¬{AS}x) -> {FO}x sent6: (x): {HF}x -> {C}x sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent8: (Ex): {AA}x -> {B}x sent9: (Ex): {GL}x -> {IN}x
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if the fact that it does not trench shanny and does not skip papain does not hold it is a tupelo. ; $context$ = sent1: if the pooch is a Anatolian it is a Maoist. sent2: if the pooch is not infelicitous and is not a tupelo it is a sensationalist. sent3: if the pooch is not a kind of a moonwort and does not lignify then that it is a tupelo is not wrong. sent4: something that does not prostitute Notoryctidae and is not a correctness is not a kidney. sent5: if that something is not sadomasochistic and it is not infelicitous is not correct it is a kind of a Astrakhan. sent6: if something is a kind of an intellectual it is robotics. sent7: if something that does not trench shanny does not skip papain then that it is a tupelo is not incorrect. sent8: there exists something such that if it does trench shanny then the fact that it is a tupelo hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it fingers it skips stockist. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if it is not supersonic then it is pretentious thing that is consonantal is wrong.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x))
|
sent1: the ductule is pretentious and it is consonantal if it is not supersonic. sent2: the ductule is catechistic and it is a paleoclimatology if it is binucleate. sent3: the fact that if the ductule is supersonic the ductule is not unpretentious but consonantal is not false. sent4: if the ductule is not supersonic then it is consonantal. sent5: if something is not a kind of a Bolivian it is undeniable and a cloakroom. sent6: there is something such that if it is not supersonic then it is pretentious. sent7: there is something such that if that it is supersonic is not wrong then it is pretentious and consonantal. sent8: the fact that there exists something such that if it eludes it is a kind of a Abyssinian that does mutiny hold. sent9: if the ductule is narrowing then it is paramedical and it is pretentious.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: {IR}{aa} -> ({AH}{aa} & {HU}{aa}) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent5: (x): ¬{CR}x -> ({GF}x & {DM}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x sent7: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: (Ex): {AR}x -> ({JE}x & {FI}x) sent9: {DP}{aa} -> ({AS}{aa} & {AA}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Berg is undeniable and it is a cloakroom if it is not a Bolivian.
|
¬{CR}{bc} -> ({GF}{bc} & {DM}{bc})
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is not supersonic then it is pretentious thing that is consonantal is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the ductule is pretentious and it is consonantal if it is not supersonic. sent2: the ductule is catechistic and it is a paleoclimatology if it is binucleate. sent3: the fact that if the ductule is supersonic the ductule is not unpretentious but consonantal is not false. sent4: if the ductule is not supersonic then it is consonantal. sent5: if something is not a kind of a Bolivian it is undeniable and a cloakroom. sent6: there is something such that if it is not supersonic then it is pretentious. sent7: there is something such that if that it is supersonic is not wrong then it is pretentious and consonantal. sent8: the fact that there exists something such that if it eludes it is a kind of a Abyssinian that does mutiny hold. sent9: if the ductule is narrowing then it is paramedical and it is pretentious. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the trenching Calvino happens and/or the like happens is false.
|
¬({A} v {B})
|
sent1: the trenching Milton occurs. sent2: if that both the like and the trenching Calvino happens does not hold then the trenching Calvino does not occur. sent3: the hobbyism happens. sent4: the thuggee occurs. sent5: either the systematism or the driving feather or both happens. sent6: that the coloring and the crapette occurs is caused by that the trachealness does not occur. sent7: if the surface does not occur then that the like happens and the trenching Calvino happens is not correct. sent8: either the regenerating or the agrypnoticness or both occurs if the trenching Calvino does not occur. sent9: the behalf or the aldehydicness or both occurs. sent10: not the surfacing but the rumpling occurs if the coloredness happens. sent11: either the snap happens or the conglutinating occurs or both. sent12: the dilation occurs and/or the limitation occurs. sent13: the skipping punchboard occurs. sent14: that the euphonicness happens is correct. sent15: either the driving Nantucket occurs or the tragicomicness occurs or both. sent16: the Californianness happens or the asceticism occurs or both. sent17: the likeness occurs.
|
sent1: {FP} sent2: ¬({B} & {A}) -> ¬{A} sent3: {HA} sent4: {CL} sent5: ({HT} v {BQ}) sent6: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent7: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & {A}) sent8: ¬{A} -> ({JC} v {GG}) sent9: ({FH} v {AI}) sent10: {E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) sent11: ({ES} v {DF}) sent12: ({EF} v {AJ}) sent13: {EK} sent14: {BU} sent15: ({IN} v {IS}) sent16: ({BM} v {BA}) sent17: {B}
|
[
"sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the regeneratingness and/or the agrypnoticness occurs.
|
({JC} v {GG})
|
[] | 10 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the trenching Calvino happens and/or the like happens is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the trenching Milton occurs. sent2: if that both the like and the trenching Calvino happens does not hold then the trenching Calvino does not occur. sent3: the hobbyism happens. sent4: the thuggee occurs. sent5: either the systematism or the driving feather or both happens. sent6: that the coloring and the crapette occurs is caused by that the trachealness does not occur. sent7: if the surface does not occur then that the like happens and the trenching Calvino happens is not correct. sent8: either the regenerating or the agrypnoticness or both occurs if the trenching Calvino does not occur. sent9: the behalf or the aldehydicness or both occurs. sent10: not the surfacing but the rumpling occurs if the coloredness happens. sent11: either the snap happens or the conglutinating occurs or both. sent12: the dilation occurs and/or the limitation occurs. sent13: the skipping punchboard occurs. sent14: that the euphonicness happens is correct. sent15: either the driving Nantucket occurs or the tragicomicness occurs or both. sent16: the Californianness happens or the asceticism occurs or both. sent17: the likeness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent17 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the macerativeness occurs and the detriment occurs does not hold.
|
¬({B} & {C})
|
sent1: if the driving slapshot does not occur the Arabic happens. sent2: the decalescence does not occur. sent3: the prostituting Notoryctidae happens if the Romanianness does not occur. sent4: if the remarriage does not occur then the macerativeness happens. sent5: the biflagellateness does not occur. sent6: the chemiluminescentness occurs. sent7: the Mark does not occur. sent8: the driving Anglican occurs and the baronetage happens. sent9: the remarriage does not occur. sent10: that the detriment happens and/or the non-architecturalness is caused by that the decalescence does not occur. sent11: the non-offsideness results in the stratus. sent12: the trenching rewrite happens. sent13: the adscriptness happens. sent14: the driving Confederacy occurs. sent15: the detriment but not the architecturalness happens. sent16: if the driving childlessness does not occur the backed occurs. sent17: that the architecturalness does not occur is not wrong. sent18: the TLC happens.
|
sent1: ¬{FE} -> {EF} sent2: ¬{E} sent3: ¬{EN} -> {HF} sent4: ¬{A} -> {B} sent5: ¬{CQ} sent6: {R} sent7: ¬{IM} sent8: ({BK} & {BG}) sent9: ¬{A} sent10: ¬{E} -> ({C} v ¬{D}) sent11: ¬{DC} -> {HM} sent12: {AL} sent13: {CG} sent14: {BC} sent15: ({C} & ¬{D}) sent16: ¬{ET} -> {CC} sent17: ¬{D} sent18: {EB}
|
[
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the macerativeness occurs.; sent15 -> int2: the detriment occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: {B}; sent15 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that both the macerativeness and the detriment happens is wrong.
|
¬({B} & {C})
|
[
" -> hypothesis;"
] | 0 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the macerativeness occurs and the detriment occurs does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the driving slapshot does not occur the Arabic happens. sent2: the decalescence does not occur. sent3: the prostituting Notoryctidae happens if the Romanianness does not occur. sent4: if the remarriage does not occur then the macerativeness happens. sent5: the biflagellateness does not occur. sent6: the chemiluminescentness occurs. sent7: the Mark does not occur. sent8: the driving Anglican occurs and the baronetage happens. sent9: the remarriage does not occur. sent10: that the detriment happens and/or the non-architecturalness is caused by that the decalescence does not occur. sent11: the non-offsideness results in the stratus. sent12: the trenching rewrite happens. sent13: the adscriptness happens. sent14: the driving Confederacy occurs. sent15: the detriment but not the architecturalness happens. sent16: if the driving childlessness does not occur the backed occurs. sent17: that the architecturalness does not occur is not wrong. sent18: the TLC happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the macerativeness occurs.; sent15 -> int2: the detriment occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the baby is a kind of a UTC.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: the baby is a lordolatry. sent2: a nonspherical thing is not a lordolatry or is not a UTC or both. sent3: the baby is a kind of a UTC if it is a lordolatry.
|
sent1: {A}{a} sent2: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}
|
[
"sent3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the baby is not a kind of a UTC.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: if the squall is nonspherical either it is not a kind of a lordolatry or it is not a UTC or both.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the baby is a kind of a UTC. ; $context$ = sent1: the baby is a lordolatry. sent2: a nonspherical thing is not a lordolatry or is not a UTC or both. sent3: the baby is a kind of a UTC if it is a lordolatry. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the redact is a kind of a Ictalurus.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: the fact that that something is either a harlequin or not a masculinity or both is not right if it does not prostitute informality is right. sent2: that the redact is not a stainer but it is anonymous is incorrect. sent3: something does not prostitute informality if the fact that it prostitute informality and skips Lammastide is not correct. sent4: the lubricant is nonexplosive. sent5: something that is not a kind of a masculinity is a Ictalurus and is a harlequin. sent6: if the fact that the redact is not a stainer but it is anonymous is not true then it is a Ictalurus. sent7: the sample does not prostitute informality if either the centerpiece is non-sexual or it is not same or both. sent8: if that the outline is a harlequin and/or is not a masculinity is wrong the redact is not a kind of a Ictalurus.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x v ¬{C}x) sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬({D}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: {H}{e} sent5: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent7: (¬{G}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent8: ¬({A}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent6 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that that the redact is not a Ictalurus but it is a langbeinite is not wrong is not correct.
|
¬(¬{B}{a} & {HQ}{a})
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the outline is a kind of a Ictalurus and harlequins if it is not a masculinity.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the redact is a kind of a Ictalurus. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that something is either a harlequin or not a masculinity or both is not right if it does not prostitute informality is right. sent2: that the redact is not a stainer but it is anonymous is incorrect. sent3: something does not prostitute informality if the fact that it prostitute informality and skips Lammastide is not correct. sent4: the lubricant is nonexplosive. sent5: something that is not a kind of a masculinity is a Ictalurus and is a harlequin. sent6: if the fact that the redact is not a stainer but it is anonymous is not true then it is a Ictalurus. sent7: the sample does not prostitute informality if either the centerpiece is non-sexual or it is not same or both. sent8: if that the outline is a harlequin and/or is not a masculinity is wrong the redact is not a kind of a Ictalurus. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the nutshell is a Chelone.
|
{D}{a}
|
sent1: the nutshell is not a Chelone if the aerie is not a Chelone. sent2: the nutshell considers if it is plantar. sent3: the paraprofessional trenches embolism and is not a submarine if that it is a mud is not correct. sent4: if the nutshell is a mileage it is plantar. sent5: the amphibolite is not a kind of a mileage if that the sebum is plantar and is a mileage is not correct. sent6: if the nutshell is plantar then it commutes. sent7: the nutshell is a mileage. sent8: if something that trenches embolism is not a submarine then it does not trench concessionaire. sent9: the nutshell is a Chelone if it considers. sent10: the fact that the sebum is plantar a mileage does not hold if the fact that the concessionaire does not consider hold.
|
sent1: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬{D}{a} sent2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a} sent3: ¬{H}{f} -> ({F}{f} & ¬{G}{f}) sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: ¬({B}{d} & {A}{d}) -> ¬{A}{c} sent6: {B}{a} -> {AL}{a} sent7: {A}{a} sent8: (x): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent9: {C}{a} -> {D}{a} sent10: ¬{C}{e} -> ¬({B}{d} & {A}{d})
|
[
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the nutshell is not non-plantar.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the nutshell does consider.; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent2 -> int2: {C}{a}; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the nutshell is not a Chelone.
|
¬{D}{a}
|
[
"sent8 -> int3: if the fact that the paraprofessional does trench embolism and is not a submarine is true then it does not trench concessionaire.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the nutshell is a Chelone. ; $context$ = sent1: the nutshell is not a Chelone if the aerie is not a Chelone. sent2: the nutshell considers if it is plantar. sent3: the paraprofessional trenches embolism and is not a submarine if that it is a mud is not correct. sent4: if the nutshell is a mileage it is plantar. sent5: the amphibolite is not a kind of a mileage if that the sebum is plantar and is a mileage is not correct. sent6: if the nutshell is plantar then it commutes. sent7: the nutshell is a mileage. sent8: if something that trenches embolism is not a submarine then it does not trench concessionaire. sent9: the nutshell is a Chelone if it considers. sent10: the fact that the sebum is plantar a mileage does not hold if the fact that the concessionaire does not consider hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the nutshell is not non-plantar.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the nutshell does consider.; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the obscuring and the beneficentness occurs.
|
({B} & {A})
|
sent1: the beneficentness happens if the trenching plutonium happens. sent2: the rebuilding happens and/or the trenching statics does not occur. sent3: the skipping suzerainty causes the beneficentness. sent4: that the rebuilding occurs or that the trenching statics does not occur or both leads to that the obscuring happens. sent5: the skipping suzerainty and/or the trenching plutonium happens.
|
sent1: {C} -> {A} sent2: ({AA} v ¬{AB}) sent3: {D} -> {A} sent4: ({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent5: ({D} v {C})
|
[
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the obscuring occurs.; sent5 & sent3 & sent1 -> int2: the beneficentness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: {B}; sent5 & sent3 & sent1 -> int2: {A}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the obscuring and the beneficentness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the beneficentness happens if the trenching plutonium happens. sent2: the rebuilding happens and/or the trenching statics does not occur. sent3: the skipping suzerainty causes the beneficentness. sent4: that the rebuilding occurs or that the trenching statics does not occur or both leads to that the obscuring happens. sent5: the skipping suzerainty and/or the trenching plutonium happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the obscuring occurs.; sent5 & sent3 & sent1 -> int2: the beneficentness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the non-soteriologicalness and the compliantness happens is incorrect.
|
¬(¬{AA} & {AB})
|
sent1: if both the non-androgeneticness and the celebrating occurs then the prostituting radiochemist does not occur. sent2: the non-soteriologicalness and the compliantness occurs if the nonparticulateness does not occur. sent3: the fact that not the curacy but the sitcom occurs is incorrect if the nonparticulateness happens. sent4: the fact that the driving froghopper occurs hold if the driving sandblaster occurs. sent5: the fact that the operation and the driving bribery occurs is not correct. sent6: that not the nonparticulateness but the filarness happens is brought about by the skipping teaspoon. sent7: that the soteriologicalness does not occur but the compliantness happens is not correct. sent8: the driving sandblaster does not occur if the prostituting radiochemist does not occur. sent9: the skipping teaspoon occurs if the driving froghopper occurs. sent10: the non-filarness and the nonparticulateness happens if the skipping teaspoon does not occur. sent11: the fact that the driving sandblaster and the prostituting radiochemist occurs is not incorrect if the androgeneticness does not occur.
|
sent1: (¬{G} & {H}) -> ¬{F} sent2: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent3: {A} -> ¬(¬{GD} & {EB}) sent4: {E} -> {D} sent5: ¬({EU} & {IN}) sent6: {C} -> (¬{A} & {B}) sent7: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent8: ¬{F} -> ¬{E} sent9: {D} -> {C} sent10: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} & {A}) sent11: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F})
|
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that not the curacy but the sitcom happens is not true.
|
¬(¬{GD} & {EB})
|
[] | 9 | 1 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the non-soteriologicalness and the compliantness happens is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if both the non-androgeneticness and the celebrating occurs then the prostituting radiochemist does not occur. sent2: the non-soteriologicalness and the compliantness occurs if the nonparticulateness does not occur. sent3: the fact that not the curacy but the sitcom occurs is incorrect if the nonparticulateness happens. sent4: the fact that the driving froghopper occurs hold if the driving sandblaster occurs. sent5: the fact that the operation and the driving bribery occurs is not correct. sent6: that not the nonparticulateness but the filarness happens is brought about by the skipping teaspoon. sent7: that the soteriologicalness does not occur but the compliantness happens is not correct. sent8: the driving sandblaster does not occur if the prostituting radiochemist does not occur. sent9: the skipping teaspoon occurs if the driving froghopper occurs. sent10: the non-filarness and the nonparticulateness happens if the skipping teaspoon does not occur. sent11: the fact that the driving sandblaster and the prostituting radiochemist occurs is not incorrect if the androgeneticness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the contamination does not occur and the Gnosticness does not occur does not hold if the bereaving occurs.
|
{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D})
|
sent1: the fact that if the bereaving does not occur that the trenching crosier does not occur and the skipping afterglow does not occur is not correct is not wrong. sent2: that the contamination does not occur and the Gnostic happens is not true. sent3: if the trenching prick does not occur then that the contamination does not occur and the Gnosticness does not occur does not hold. sent4: if the trimming occurs the trenching carabiner does not occur and the fineness does not occur. sent5: if the bereaving occurs the prospecting does not occur and/or the trenching London occurs. sent6: the prospect does not occur or the trenching London does not occur or both if the bereaving happens.
|
sent1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{EH} & ¬{EM}) sent2: ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent3: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent4: {BO} -> (¬{G} & ¬{IG}) sent5: {A} -> (¬{AA} v {AB}) sent6: {A} -> (¬{AA} v ¬{AB})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bereaving happens.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the prospecting does not occur or the trenching London does not occur or both.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA} v ¬{AB});"
] |
that the trenching crosier does not occur and the skipping afterglow does not occur is wrong.
|
¬(¬{EH} & ¬{EM})
|
[] | 6 | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the contamination does not occur and the Gnosticness does not occur does not hold if the bereaving occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that if the bereaving does not occur that the trenching crosier does not occur and the skipping afterglow does not occur is not correct is not wrong. sent2: that the contamination does not occur and the Gnostic happens is not true. sent3: if the trenching prick does not occur then that the contamination does not occur and the Gnosticness does not occur does not hold. sent4: if the trimming occurs the trenching carabiner does not occur and the fineness does not occur. sent5: if the bereaving occurs the prospecting does not occur and/or the trenching London occurs. sent6: the prospect does not occur or the trenching London does not occur or both if the bereaving happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bereaving happens.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the prospecting does not occur or the trenching London does not occur or both.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the antibaryon is anuretic but it is not a chemoreceptor.
|
({D}{c} & ¬{C}{c})
|
sent1: the fact that something is anuretic and is not a chemoreceptor is wrong if that it is glomerular hold. sent2: the actin is glomerular. sent3: that the antibaryon is anuretic thing that is realistic is false. sent4: if something is not glomerular then it is a azithromycin and does not trench kidnapper. sent5: if the decay is a Rodin and is not an allergy then the fact that it is not inarticulate hold. sent6: the decay is a Rodin but not an allergy. sent7: the fact that the antibaryon is non-anuretic but it is realistic does not hold if there is something such that it is not realistic. sent8: that the actin is not glomerular or it is inarticulate or both does not hold if the decay is not inarticulate. sent9: the decay is a Rodin. sent10: if something is realistic then the fact that it is both not offshore and inarticulate is wrong. sent11: something is anuretic if the fact that it is a kind of anuretic thing that is realistic does not hold. sent12: the eutectic is not realistic.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{C}x) sent2: {A}{b} sent3: ¬({D}{c} & {F}{c}) sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({IJ}x & ¬{FG}x) sent5: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & {F}{c}) sent8: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} v {B}{b}) sent9: {AA}{a} sent10: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {B}x) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {F}x) -> {D}x sent12: ¬{F}{d}
|
[
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the decay is not inarticulate.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: that the actin is not glomerular or it is inarticulate or both is not correct.; sent11 -> int3: the antibaryon is anuretic if that it is not anuretic and it is realistic is incorrect.; sent12 -> int4: there is something such that it is not realistic.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: that the antibaryon is both not anuretic and realistic is wrong.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the antibaryon is anuretic.;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & sent8 -> int2: ¬(¬{A}{b} v {B}{b}); sent11 -> int3: ¬(¬{D}{c} & {F}{c}) -> {D}{c}; sent12 -> int4: (Ex): ¬{F}x; int4 & sent7 -> int5: ¬(¬{D}{c} & {F}{c}); int3 & int5 -> int6: {D}{c};"
] |
that the antibaryon is anuretic but it is not a chemoreceptor is not true.
|
¬({D}{c} & ¬{C}{c})
|
[
"sent1 -> int7: if the antibaryon is glomerular the fact that it is anuretic but not a chemoreceptor is wrong.; sent10 -> int8: if the decay is realistic then the fact that it is not offshore but inarticulate is not true.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the antibaryon is anuretic but it is not a chemoreceptor. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is anuretic and is not a chemoreceptor is wrong if that it is glomerular hold. sent2: the actin is glomerular. sent3: that the antibaryon is anuretic thing that is realistic is false. sent4: if something is not glomerular then it is a azithromycin and does not trench kidnapper. sent5: if the decay is a Rodin and is not an allergy then the fact that it is not inarticulate hold. sent6: the decay is a Rodin but not an allergy. sent7: the fact that the antibaryon is non-anuretic but it is realistic does not hold if there is something such that it is not realistic. sent8: that the actin is not glomerular or it is inarticulate or both does not hold if the decay is not inarticulate. sent9: the decay is a Rodin. sent10: if something is realistic then the fact that it is both not offshore and inarticulate is wrong. sent11: something is anuretic if the fact that it is a kind of anuretic thing that is realistic does not hold. sent12: the eutectic is not realistic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the decay is not inarticulate.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: that the actin is not glomerular or it is inarticulate or both is not correct.; sent11 -> int3: the antibaryon is anuretic if that it is not anuretic and it is realistic is incorrect.; sent12 -> int4: there is something such that it is not realistic.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: that the antibaryon is both not anuretic and realistic is wrong.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the antibaryon is anuretic.; __UNKNOWN__
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.