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
|
there is something such that if it is a kind of a memento then it is non-crural thing that does trench scallion.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: That the peripatetic is anastomotic or it is not a kind of the oilstone or both if the peripatetic does not drive EXEC is false.
|
sent1: That the peripatetic is anastomotic or it is not a kind of the oilstone or both if the peripatetic does not drive EXEC is false.
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a kind of a memento then it is non-crural thing that does trench scallion. ; $context$ = sent1: That the peripatetic is anastomotic or it is not a kind of the oilstone or both if the peripatetic does not drive EXEC is false. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the frock is changeable and/or it is postictal.
|
({C}{a} v {D}{a})
|
sent1: the frock is indoor. sent2: if the frock thumps it is changeable.
|
sent1: {A}{a} sent2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the frock is changeable and/or it is postictal. ; $context$ = sent1: the frock is indoor. sent2: if the frock thumps it is changeable. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the metal unfurls.
|
{AA}{b}
|
sent1: the scorekeeper does not conduct. sent2: if the scorekeeper does not drive metal and it does not drive inconstancy the fact that the yachtsman does not drive inconstancy is not wrong. sent3: if something is a kind of an alderman then it is a juice. sent4: if the scorekeeper does not conduct the metal does unfurl and it does drive inconstancy. sent5: something does not drive metal and it does not drive inconstancy if it conducts. sent6: the metal does drive inconstancy. sent7: if the scorekeeper does not conduct then the metal drives inconstancy. sent8: the fact that everything is an alderman is true.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{a} sent2: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{co} sent3: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent5: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{AB}x) sent6: {AB}{b} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{b} sent8: (x): {D}x
|
[
"sent4 & sent1 -> int1: the metal does unfurl and it drives inconstancy.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent1 -> int1: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the yachtsman does not drive inconstancy hold.
|
¬{AB}{co}
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: if the scorekeeper conducts it does not drive metal and does not drive inconstancy.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the metal unfurls. ; $context$ = sent1: the scorekeeper does not conduct. sent2: if the scorekeeper does not drive metal and it does not drive inconstancy the fact that the yachtsman does not drive inconstancy is not wrong. sent3: if something is a kind of an alderman then it is a juice. sent4: if the scorekeeper does not conduct the metal does unfurl and it does drive inconstancy. sent5: something does not drive metal and it does not drive inconstancy if it conducts. sent6: the metal does drive inconstancy. sent7: if the scorekeeper does not conduct then the metal drives inconstancy. sent8: the fact that everything is an alderman is true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent1 -> int1: the metal does unfurl and it drives inconstancy.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it does not drive plater hold then it is not a raw and it is not unexpendable is not right.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x))
|
sent1: if the embroideress does not drive plater it is not a raw and is expendable. sent2: if that the Sculptor is not a demonstrativeness is not incorrect then it is cutting. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a scab then it is not Monacan. sent4: something does not drive plater and does single if it does not skip overvaluation. sent5: there exists something such that if that it is not a Abilene hold it does not trench basilica and is a plover. sent6: if the embroideress does not drive plater it is raw and expendable. sent7: the embroideress is a dustcart and nonintellectual if it does not drive plater. sent8: the fact that the embroideress is expendable is correct if that it does not drive plater is not false. sent9: if the fact that the embroideress does drive Appleton is true it does not drive plater and is a kind of a Bluebeard. sent10: the longshot is ectomorphic thing that is a raw if it is not a deflection. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a floccule then it is not acetonic and drives wink. sent12: there is something such that if it does not drive plater then it is expendable. sent13: something is both not a drift and a conversion if it is not acetonic. sent14: if that the embroideress does not drive plater is not wrong then that it is a kind of a harebell is not wrong. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not centrifugal it does not skip overvaluation and it corners. sent16: there is something such that if that it does not trench candelabrum is right it is nonintellectual. sent17: there exists something such that if it does not drive tentacled it is a kind of a hackberry and it is a kind of a dealer. sent18: there exists something such that if it does not drive plater it is not a kind of a raw.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: ¬{FM}{al} -> {IS}{al} sent3: (Ex): ¬{FS}x -> ¬{FA}x sent4: (x): ¬{CI}x -> (¬{A}x & {CL}x) sent5: (Ex): ¬{AF}x -> (¬{HM}x & {CG}x) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({EE}{aa} & {AQ}{aa}) sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent9: {N}{aa} -> (¬{A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent10: ¬{GO}{hg} -> ({Q}{hg} & {AA}{hg}) sent11: (Ex): {GP}x -> (¬{HE}x & {EG}x) sent12: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x sent13: (x): ¬{HE}x -> (¬{JC}x & {IQ}x) sent14: ¬{A}{aa} -> {DJ}{aa} sent15: (Ex): ¬{G}x -> (¬{CI}x & {JB}x) sent16: (Ex): ¬{EF}x -> {AQ}x sent17: (Ex): ¬{AP}x -> ({FU}x & {F}x) sent18: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the browntail is non-acetonic then that it is not a kind of a drift and it is a kind of a conversion is true.
|
¬{HE}{ic} -> (¬{JC}{ic} & {IQ}{ic})
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it does not drive plater hold then it is not a raw and it is not unexpendable is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the embroideress does not drive plater it is not a raw and is expendable. sent2: if that the Sculptor is not a demonstrativeness is not incorrect then it is cutting. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a scab then it is not Monacan. sent4: something does not drive plater and does single if it does not skip overvaluation. sent5: there exists something such that if that it is not a Abilene hold it does not trench basilica and is a plover. sent6: if the embroideress does not drive plater it is raw and expendable. sent7: the embroideress is a dustcart and nonintellectual if it does not drive plater. sent8: the fact that the embroideress is expendable is correct if that it does not drive plater is not false. sent9: if the fact that the embroideress does drive Appleton is true it does not drive plater and is a kind of a Bluebeard. sent10: the longshot is ectomorphic thing that is a raw if it is not a deflection. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a floccule then it is not acetonic and drives wink. sent12: there is something such that if it does not drive plater then it is expendable. sent13: something is both not a drift and a conversion if it is not acetonic. sent14: if that the embroideress does not drive plater is not wrong then that it is a kind of a harebell is not wrong. sent15: there exists something such that if it is not centrifugal it does not skip overvaluation and it corners. sent16: there is something such that if that it does not trench candelabrum is right it is nonintellectual. sent17: there exists something such that if it does not drive tentacled it is a kind of a hackberry and it is a kind of a dealer. sent18: there exists something such that if it does not drive plater it is not a kind of a raw. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the brunch does not skip whammy and does drive brunch is false.
|
¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
sent1: if something is not a Klopstock the fact that it does not skip whammy and drives brunch is wrong. sent2: the sawwort is a Klopstock if it does not drive brunch and is not a kind of a premiere. sent3: if that the brunch does not skip whammy and does drive brunch is not right then that the sawwort is not apophatic hold. sent4: the sawwort is not a Klopstock and not a premiere. sent5: the sawwort is apophatic if it is not a Klopstock and not a premiere.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (¬{AB}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {A}{b} sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent5: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {B}{b}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the brunch does not skip whammy and drives brunch does not hold.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the sawwort is not apophatic hold.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the sawwort is apophatic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); sent3 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the brunch does not skip whammy but it drives brunch is wrong.
|
¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
[
"sent1 -> int4: if the fact that the brunch is not a kind of a Klopstock is not incorrect then that it does not skip whammy and it does drive brunch is false.;"
] | 10 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the brunch does not skip whammy and does drive brunch is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a Klopstock the fact that it does not skip whammy and drives brunch is wrong. sent2: the sawwort is a Klopstock if it does not drive brunch and is not a kind of a premiere. sent3: if that the brunch does not skip whammy and does drive brunch is not right then that the sawwort is not apophatic hold. sent4: the sawwort is not a Klopstock and not a premiere. sent5: the sawwort is apophatic if it is not a Klopstock and not a premiere. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the brunch does not skip whammy and drives brunch does not hold.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the sawwort is not apophatic hold.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the sawwort is apophatic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does skip megacolon and is not a kind of a uxoricide then it is a satanophobia.
|
(Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: if that the primitive is a otologist but it does not skip megacolon hold the fact that it is roentgenographic hold. sent2: if the mulligan skips megacolon but it is not a uxoricide then it is a satanophobia. sent3: if something that is a satanophobia is not a kind of a bitter-bark then it is Procrustean. sent4: there exists something such that if it does skip megacolon and it is a uxoricide then it is a satanophobia. sent5: the fact that the mulligan is a kind of a satanophobia is not false if it does skip megacolon and is a kind of a uxoricide. sent6: there exists something such that if it is a conclusion and does not drive cosmography then the fact that it is parhelic hold. sent7: if an environmentalist is not nonclassical then it is a kind of a prolapse.
|
sent1: ({DA}{ip} & ¬{AA}{ip}) -> {GT}{ip} sent2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: (x): ({B}x & ¬{DU}x) -> {AI}x sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ({BF}x & ¬{S}x) -> {CR}x sent7: (x): ({IS}x & ¬{BR}x) -> {BB}x
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is a kind of an environmentalist and it is not nonclassical then it is a prolapse.
|
(Ex): ({IS}x & ¬{BR}x) -> {BB}x
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: if the Soubise is an environmentalist but it is not nonclassical the fact that it prolapses hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does skip megacolon and is not a kind of a uxoricide then it is a satanophobia. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the primitive is a otologist but it does not skip megacolon hold the fact that it is roentgenographic hold. sent2: if the mulligan skips megacolon but it is not a uxoricide then it is a satanophobia. sent3: if something that is a satanophobia is not a kind of a bitter-bark then it is Procrustean. sent4: there exists something such that if it does skip megacolon and it is a uxoricide then it is a satanophobia. sent5: the fact that the mulligan is a kind of a satanophobia is not false if it does skip megacolon and is a kind of a uxoricide. sent6: there exists something such that if it is a conclusion and does not drive cosmography then the fact that it is parhelic hold. sent7: if an environmentalist is not nonclassical then it is a kind of a prolapse. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the reining happens.
|
{D}
|
sent1: if the fact that both the non-carrotyness and the cyanobacterialness occurs is false then the cyanobacterialness does not occur. sent2: if that the skipping oriflamme happens is not incorrect the clamatorialness occurs. sent3: the trenching decimal does not occur if that both the trenching decimal and the clipping happens is incorrect. sent4: the fact that either the trenching Willard occurs or the Aeolian occurs or both is false. sent5: if the trenching decimal does not occur the Luxemburgerness happens and the fragmentation occurs. sent6: if that the trenching Willard or the Aeolian or both happens is wrong the Luxemburgerness does not occur. sent7: if the Luxemburger does not occur then the fact that the Mill happens but the fragmentation does not occur is not true. sent8: if the cyanobacterialness does not occur that the trenching decimal and the clipping occurs does not hold. sent9: that the reining happens is not wrong if the fact that the Mill happens but the fragmentation does not occur is wrong. sent10: if the Mill does not occur the fact that the smudge occurs and/or the undulation occurs does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{H} & {G}) -> ¬{G} sent2: {FT} -> {JC} sent3: ¬({E} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent4: ¬({AA} v {AB}) sent5: ¬{E} -> ({B} & {C}) sent6: ¬({AA} v {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent7: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & ¬{C}) sent8: ¬{G} -> ¬({E} & {F}) sent9: ¬({A} & ¬{C}) -> {D} sent10: ¬{A} -> ¬({FA} v {DE})
|
[
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the Luxemburgerness does not occur.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the fact that that the Mill happens but the fragmentation does not occur is true does not hold.; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent7 & int1 -> int2: ¬({A} & ¬{C}); sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the smudge occurs and/or the undulation occurs is false.
|
¬({FA} v {DE})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the reining happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that both the non-carrotyness and the cyanobacterialness occurs is false then the cyanobacterialness does not occur. sent2: if that the skipping oriflamme happens is not incorrect the clamatorialness occurs. sent3: the trenching decimal does not occur if that both the trenching decimal and the clipping happens is incorrect. sent4: the fact that either the trenching Willard occurs or the Aeolian occurs or both is false. sent5: if the trenching decimal does not occur the Luxemburgerness happens and the fragmentation occurs. sent6: if that the trenching Willard or the Aeolian or both happens is wrong the Luxemburgerness does not occur. sent7: if the Luxemburger does not occur then the fact that the Mill happens but the fragmentation does not occur is not true. sent8: if the cyanobacterialness does not occur that the trenching decimal and the clipping occurs does not hold. sent9: that the reining happens is not wrong if the fact that the Mill happens but the fragmentation does not occur is wrong. sent10: if the Mill does not occur the fact that the smudge occurs and/or the undulation occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the Luxemburgerness does not occur.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the fact that that the Mill happens but the fragmentation does not occur is true does not hold.; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the gelechiid is not a kind of a Breuer is wrong.
|
{D}{a}
|
sent1: there is something such that it is not non-amicable. sent2: the gelechiid is not a coo but recessional if there exists something such that it is amicable.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x sent2: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the gelechiid does not coo but it is a recessional.;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the gelechiid is not a kind of a Breuer is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not non-amicable. sent2: the gelechiid is not a coo but recessional if there exists something such that it is amicable. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the gelechiid does not coo but it is a recessional.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the Realtor does not prostitute boulder if the fact that the Realtor skips pulse and does not trench pronoun is false is not correct.
|
¬(¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})
|
sent1: if that the Realtor is a turning but it does not skip pulse is not true then it is a gunite. sent2: the Realtor is not unfriendly if that it is a humor and it is eligible is not right. sent3: if the fact that something skips pulse but it does not trench pronoun does not hold it does not prostitute boulder. sent4: the Elinvar is a stigmatic if that it trenches pronoun and is not incurious is wrong. sent5: if something does not trench rowan then it is not a freckled. sent6: the pulse does not skip pulse if it does not reject. sent7: if that something is a kind of unnatural a turning does not hold then it is not plumbaginaceous. sent8: something does not prostitute boulder if the fact that it skips pulse and trenches pronoun does not hold. sent9: if the fact that the Realtor does skip pulse and it does trench pronoun does not hold then it does not prostitute boulder. sent10: something does trench zinfandel if the fact that it is plumbaginaceous and is not neuroanatomic is wrong. sent11: if that the Realtor does prostitute dislodgment and does not trench Elinvar does not hold then it is not a kind of a elastase. sent12: that the Anglicization does not prostitute boulder hold if it is an anthropology and it does not resuscitate. sent13: if the Realtor does skip pulse but it does not trench pronoun it does not prostitute boulder. sent14: if the fact that that the Realtor prostitutes boulder but it is not a prickle-weed is not true is not false then it does not trench fetoscopy. sent15: if the Realtor does not prostitute boulder it does not disobey. sent16: if the fact that the fact that the Realtor is impure but it is not cursorial is true is incorrect it does not geyser. sent17: if something that skips pulse does not trench pronoun then it does not prostitute boulder. sent18: something is not a dysprosium if it is not fragrant. sent19: if the fact that something is paleoanthropological but it does not prostitute Sullivan is not true that it does not prostitute boulder is not false. sent20: something does not subscribe if it is not a kind of a theurgy. sent21: something is a cross if the fact that it drives lypressin and it does not crumble is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬({IA}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) -> {EP}{aa} sent2: ¬({EU}{aa} & {DT}{aa}) -> ¬{AL}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: ¬({AB}{gc} & ¬{EM}{gc}) -> {DR}{gc} sent5: (x): ¬{BU}x -> ¬{HG}x sent6: ¬{BO}{ge} -> ¬{AA}{ge} sent7: (x): ¬({EK}x & {IA}x) -> ¬{IU}x sent8: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent9: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬({IU}x & ¬{ET}x) -> {H}x sent11: ¬({L}{aa} & ¬{EQ}{aa}) -> ¬{BT}{aa} sent12: ({R}{q} & ¬{HS}{q}) -> ¬{B}{q} sent13: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent14: ¬({B}{aa} & ¬{GB}{aa}) -> ¬{O}{aa} sent15: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{GK}{aa} sent16: ¬({GS}{aa} & ¬{HC}{aa}) -> ¬{D}{aa} sent17: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent18: (x): ¬{FL}x -> ¬{BH}x sent19: (x): ¬({S}x & ¬{DG}x) -> ¬{B}x sent20: (x): ¬{IB}x -> ¬{CL}x sent21: (x): ¬({BA}x & ¬{GI}x) -> {AS}x
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the fact that the whisperer is paleoanthropological but it does not prostitute Sullivan is incorrect then it does not prostitute boulder.
|
¬({S}{ef} & ¬{DG}{ef}) -> ¬{B}{ef}
|
[
"sent19 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Realtor does not prostitute boulder if the fact that the Realtor skips pulse and does not trench pronoun is false is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the Realtor is a turning but it does not skip pulse is not true then it is a gunite. sent2: the Realtor is not unfriendly if that it is a humor and it is eligible is not right. sent3: if the fact that something skips pulse but it does not trench pronoun does not hold it does not prostitute boulder. sent4: the Elinvar is a stigmatic if that it trenches pronoun and is not incurious is wrong. sent5: if something does not trench rowan then it is not a freckled. sent6: the pulse does not skip pulse if it does not reject. sent7: if that something is a kind of unnatural a turning does not hold then it is not plumbaginaceous. sent8: something does not prostitute boulder if the fact that it skips pulse and trenches pronoun does not hold. sent9: if the fact that the Realtor does skip pulse and it does trench pronoun does not hold then it does not prostitute boulder. sent10: something does trench zinfandel if the fact that it is plumbaginaceous and is not neuroanatomic is wrong. sent11: if that the Realtor does prostitute dislodgment and does not trench Elinvar does not hold then it is not a kind of a elastase. sent12: that the Anglicization does not prostitute boulder hold if it is an anthropology and it does not resuscitate. sent13: if the Realtor does skip pulse but it does not trench pronoun it does not prostitute boulder. sent14: if the fact that that the Realtor prostitutes boulder but it is not a prickle-weed is not true is not false then it does not trench fetoscopy. sent15: if the Realtor does not prostitute boulder it does not disobey. sent16: if the fact that the fact that the Realtor is impure but it is not cursorial is true is incorrect it does not geyser. sent17: if something that skips pulse does not trench pronoun then it does not prostitute boulder. sent18: something is not a dysprosium if it is not fragrant. sent19: if the fact that something is paleoanthropological but it does not prostitute Sullivan is not true that it does not prostitute boulder is not false. sent20: something does not subscribe if it is not a kind of a theurgy. sent21: something is a cross if the fact that it drives lypressin and it does not crumble is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the watercolorist does rein.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: if the mecca is not an authoritarian but a rheometer the watercolorist is a rein. sent2: if the espresso is cloze the sarcodinian is a cytology. sent3: the espresso either is cloze or is two-wheel or both. sent4: if something is a kind of a blastocyst it is a rheometer. sent5: the mecca is not an authoritarian but a rheometer if there exists something such that it is a kind of a Todd. sent6: something is a blastocyst if it does not skip turnoff and/or is a zigadene. sent7: there is something such that it is a Todd. sent8: if the fact that something is a Todd but it is not an authoritarian is wrong then it does not rein. sent9: if the expressionist is a Xerox but it is not a troponymy then that the mecca is not a kind of a Xerox is not wrong. sent10: if something is not a Xerox it either does not skip turnoff or is a zigadene or both. sent11: if the sarcodinian is a cytology then the expressionist is a Xerox but it is not a troponymy. sent12: if that the expressionist is not a rheometer and/or is a kind of a rein is not correct the watercolorist is not an authoritarian. sent13: if the fact that the mecca is both an authoritarian and a rheometer is not false then the watercolorist reins.
|
sent1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent2: {K}{e} -> {I}{d} sent3: ({K}{e} v {L}{e}) sent4: (x): {E}x -> {C}x sent5: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent6: (x): (¬{G}x v {F}x) -> {E}x sent7: (Ex): {A}x sent8: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{D}x sent9: ({H}{c} & ¬{J}{c}) -> ¬{H}{a} sent10: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{G}x v {F}x) sent11: {I}{d} -> ({H}{c} & ¬{J}{c}) sent12: ¬(¬{C}{c} v {D}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {D}{b}
|
[
"sent7 & sent5 -> int1: the mecca is both not an authoritarian and a rheometer.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent5 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}); sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the watercolorist is not a rein.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent8 -> int2: the watercolorist is not a rein if that it is a Todd that is not an authoritarian is not true.; sent4 -> int3: the mecca is a rheometer if it is a blastocyst.; sent6 -> int4: if either the mecca does not skip turnoff or it is a kind of a zigadene or both it is a blastocyst.; sent10 -> int5: if the mecca is not a kind of a Xerox it does not skip turnoff and/or is a zigadene.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the watercolorist does rein. ; $context$ = sent1: if the mecca is not an authoritarian but a rheometer the watercolorist is a rein. sent2: if the espresso is cloze the sarcodinian is a cytology. sent3: the espresso either is cloze or is two-wheel or both. sent4: if something is a kind of a blastocyst it is a rheometer. sent5: the mecca is not an authoritarian but a rheometer if there exists something such that it is a kind of a Todd. sent6: something is a blastocyst if it does not skip turnoff and/or is a zigadene. sent7: there is something such that it is a Todd. sent8: if the fact that something is a Todd but it is not an authoritarian is wrong then it does not rein. sent9: if the expressionist is a Xerox but it is not a troponymy then that the mecca is not a kind of a Xerox is not wrong. sent10: if something is not a Xerox it either does not skip turnoff or is a zigadene or both. sent11: if the sarcodinian is a cytology then the expressionist is a Xerox but it is not a troponymy. sent12: if that the expressionist is not a rheometer and/or is a kind of a rein is not correct the watercolorist is not an authoritarian. sent13: if the fact that the mecca is both an authoritarian and a rheometer is not false then the watercolorist reins. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent5 -> int1: the mecca is both not an authoritarian and a rheometer.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the veloute is nonthermal hold.
|
{D}{a}
|
sent1: if that something prostitutes funded and it is a kind of a bannock is not correct then it is not nonthermal. sent2: the fact that something is a bannock but not non-Guatemalan is not right if the fact that it is not a portcullis is right. sent3: something is aeromechanics if it is inclusive. sent4: the fact that that the sitter prostitutes Michigander and it is a Hyperoglyphe is not false is false. sent5: something does trench Moquelumnan. sent6: something is not nonthermal if that it prostitutes funded and it does not trench Moquelumnan is incorrect. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it is not mechanistic and it trenches longwool does not hold then the know-it-all does not disguise. sent8: if the sitter does not prostitute Michigander the galleon is supernal and it is inclusive. sent9: if that something is a bannock but not non-Guatemalan is not true then it is not a bannock. sent10: if there is something such that it does not disguise that the cine-camera is not a kind of a shimmy but it disguise is not right. sent11: if the fact that that the cine-camera does not shimmy but it is a disguise is right is not correct the phytochemist is not a portcullis. sent12: there exists nothing such that it is not mechanistic and it trenches longwool. sent13: that the galleon is a bannock hold if the phytochemist is not a kind of a bannock. sent14: the Afro does not prostitute funded if the galleon is a bannock that does prostitute funded. sent15: if the fact that the sitter does prostitute Michigander and is a Hyperoglyphe does not hold then it does not prostitute Michigander. sent16: something does prostitute funded if it is aeromechanics. sent17: if there exists something such that it trenches Moquelumnan then that the veloute prostitutes funded and is a bannock is false. sent18: that the deanery is righteous is not true if it is not an itinerant. sent19: if that the Afro is Guatemalan hold then it is a bannock. sent20: if the infiltration does prostitute funded and it is aeromechanics the veloute does not prostitute funded. sent21: the fact that the veloute is nonthermal is not true if it does not prostitute funded. sent22: the infiltration does not trench Moquelumnan if the Afro does not prostitute funded. sent23: something is not nonthermal if it does not prostitute funded.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent2: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬({C}x & {F}x) sent3: (x): {G}x -> {E}x sent4: ¬({L}{g} & {O}{g}) sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{D}x sent7: (x): ¬(¬{M}x & {N}x) -> ¬{J}{h} sent8: ¬{L}{g} -> ({H}{d} & {G}{d}) sent9: (x): ¬({C}x & {F}x) -> ¬{C}x sent10: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{K}{f} & {J}{f}) sent11: ¬(¬{K}{f} & {J}{f}) -> ¬{I}{e} sent12: (x): ¬(¬{M}x & {N}x) sent13: ¬{C}{e} -> {C}{d} sent14: ({C}{d} & {B}{d}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent15: ¬({L}{g} & {O}{g}) -> ¬{L}{g} sent16: (x): {E}x -> {B}x sent17: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent18: ¬{HL}{id} -> ¬{IA}{id} sent19: {F}{c} -> {C}{c} sent20: ({B}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent21: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{D}{a} sent22: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬{A}{b} sent23: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{D}x
|
[
"sent5 & sent17 -> int1: the fact that the veloute does prostitute funded and is a bannock is not correct.; sent1 -> int2: the veloute is not nonthermal if the fact that it prostitutes funded and it is a bannock is not true.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent17 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}); sent1 -> int2: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the pulse is not nonthermal.
|
¬{D}{fr}
|
[
"sent6 -> int3: if that the pulse prostitutes funded but it does not trench Moquelumnan is false then it is not nonthermal.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the veloute is nonthermal hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something prostitutes funded and it is a kind of a bannock is not correct then it is not nonthermal. sent2: the fact that something is a bannock but not non-Guatemalan is not right if the fact that it is not a portcullis is right. sent3: something is aeromechanics if it is inclusive. sent4: the fact that that the sitter prostitutes Michigander and it is a Hyperoglyphe is not false is false. sent5: something does trench Moquelumnan. sent6: something is not nonthermal if that it prostitutes funded and it does not trench Moquelumnan is incorrect. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it is not mechanistic and it trenches longwool does not hold then the know-it-all does not disguise. sent8: if the sitter does not prostitute Michigander the galleon is supernal and it is inclusive. sent9: if that something is a bannock but not non-Guatemalan is not true then it is not a bannock. sent10: if there is something such that it does not disguise that the cine-camera is not a kind of a shimmy but it disguise is not right. sent11: if the fact that that the cine-camera does not shimmy but it is a disguise is right is not correct the phytochemist is not a portcullis. sent12: there exists nothing such that it is not mechanistic and it trenches longwool. sent13: that the galleon is a bannock hold if the phytochemist is not a kind of a bannock. sent14: the Afro does not prostitute funded if the galleon is a bannock that does prostitute funded. sent15: if the fact that the sitter does prostitute Michigander and is a Hyperoglyphe does not hold then it does not prostitute Michigander. sent16: something does prostitute funded if it is aeromechanics. sent17: if there exists something such that it trenches Moquelumnan then that the veloute prostitutes funded and is a bannock is false. sent18: that the deanery is righteous is not true if it is not an itinerant. sent19: if that the Afro is Guatemalan hold then it is a bannock. sent20: if the infiltration does prostitute funded and it is aeromechanics the veloute does not prostitute funded. sent21: the fact that the veloute is nonthermal is not true if it does not prostitute funded. sent22: the infiltration does not trench Moquelumnan if the Afro does not prostitute funded. sent23: something is not nonthermal if it does not prostitute funded. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent17 -> int1: the fact that the veloute does prostitute funded and is a bannock is not correct.; sent1 -> int2: the veloute is not nonthermal if the fact that it prostitutes funded and it is a bannock is not true.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the nadolol is not lexicographic.
|
¬{F}{b}
|
sent1: something is not a Libra if it does not trench words. sent2: the fridge trenches words or does drive Xenosaurus or both. sent3: the fact that the suppressant is nosocomial is not false if the fridge trenches words. sent4: the nadolol is not lexicographic if the suppressant inducts and it is a kind of a Libra. sent5: if the fridge does drive Xenosaurus that the suppressant is nosocomial is correct. sent6: if the suppressant is nosocomial it does induct. sent7: if something is nosocomial then it drives Xenosaurus.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{E}x sent2: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent3: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} sent4: ({D}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} sent5: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} sent6: {C}{c} -> {D}{c} sent7: (x): {C}x -> {B}x
|
[
"sent2 & sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the suppressant is nosocomial.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the suppressant inducts.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent3 & sent5 -> int1: {C}{c}; int1 & sent6 -> int2: {D}{c};"
] |
the view is not a Libra.
|
¬{E}{co}
|
[
"sent1 -> int3: if the fact that the view does not trench words is right it is not a Libra.; sent7 -> int4: if the fridge is nosocomial then it drives Xenosaurus.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the nadolol is not lexicographic. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a Libra if it does not trench words. sent2: the fridge trenches words or does drive Xenosaurus or both. sent3: the fact that the suppressant is nosocomial is not false if the fridge trenches words. sent4: the nadolol is not lexicographic if the suppressant inducts and it is a kind of a Libra. sent5: if the fridge does drive Xenosaurus that the suppressant is nosocomial is correct. sent6: if the suppressant is nosocomial it does induct. sent7: if something is nosocomial then it drives Xenosaurus. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the suppressant is nosocomial.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the suppressant inducts.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that both the mucinoidness and the telephotography occurs does not hold.
|
¬({C} & {D})
|
sent1: if the bump does not occur and the polarography does not occur the telephotography does not occur. sent2: that the skipping ASEAN and the roundhouse happens is brought about by that the thermography does not occur. sent3: the tubeless happens. sent4: if the bumping does not occur the telephotography and the polarography occurs. sent5: the disturbing happens. sent6: the roundhouse and the thermography occurs. sent7: if the thermography occurs then the mucinoidness occurs. sent8: that the fact that the mucinoidness happens and the telephotography happens does not hold is correct if the fact that the roundhouse does not occur is not wrong. sent9: the bump does not occur.
|
sent1: (¬{F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} sent2: ¬{B} -> ({T} & {A}) sent3: {GT} sent4: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent5: {IF} sent6: ({A} & {B}) sent7: {B} -> {C} sent8: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {D}) sent9: ¬{F}
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the thermography happens.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the mucinoidness happens.; sent4 & sent9 -> int3: both the telephotography and the polarography occurs.; int3 -> int4: the telephotography happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent7 -> int2: {C}; sent4 & sent9 -> int3: ({D} & {E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that both the mucinoidness and the telephotography occurs does not hold.
|
¬({C} & {D})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that both the mucinoidness and the telephotography occurs does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bump does not occur and the polarography does not occur the telephotography does not occur. sent2: that the skipping ASEAN and the roundhouse happens is brought about by that the thermography does not occur. sent3: the tubeless happens. sent4: if the bumping does not occur the telephotography and the polarography occurs. sent5: the disturbing happens. sent6: the roundhouse and the thermography occurs. sent7: if the thermography occurs then the mucinoidness occurs. sent8: that the fact that the mucinoidness happens and the telephotography happens does not hold is correct if the fact that the roundhouse does not occur is not wrong. sent9: the bump does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the thermography happens.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the mucinoidness happens.; sent4 & sent9 -> int3: both the telephotography and the polarography occurs.; int3 -> int4: the telephotography happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if the fact that it is not macroeconomic is correct then the fact that it is a kind of a thyrotropin and it is a kind of a lumberyard is not correct.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an enormity then the fact that it does drive longshot and is a outcrop is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that if it does not drive bargain then the fact that it is tractive thing that is a Jurassic is false. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not can then that it is greater thing that is a hypnotherapy does not hold. sent4: the fact that something is both a thyrotropin and a lumberyard is not incorrect if it is not macroeconomic. sent5: if the longshot is macroeconomic that it is a kind of a thyrotropin and it is a kind of a lumberyard is not right. sent6: the longshot is a kind of a thyrotropin that is a lumberyard if it is not macroeconomic. sent7: the fact that the mulligan is backward thing that is amoebic is not true if that it is not a kind of a lumberyard hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is not non-macroeconomic then the fact that it is a thyrotropin and is a lumberyard is not right. sent9: that the fact that the longshot is a kind of an ordination and it is bright is not wrong is not true if it does not skip snuffle. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not macroeconomic then it is a thyrotropin and it is a lumberyard. sent11: if something is not macroeconomic then the fact that it is both a thyrotropin and a lumberyard is not correct. sent12: that something is a kind of a thyrotropin that is a kind of a lumberyard is false if the fact that it is macroeconomic hold.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{FK}x -> ¬({FD}x & {DT}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬{ID}x -> ¬({IF}x & {BC}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{AU}x -> ¬({BQ}x & {GT}x) sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: ¬{AB}{io} -> ¬({JF}{io} & {EH}{io}) sent8: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: ¬{HF}{aa} -> ¬({R}{aa} & {HC}{aa}) sent10: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent12: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)
|
[
"sent11 -> int1: if the longshot is not macroeconomic then that it is a thyrotropin and a lumberyard is not true.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it is not macroeconomic is correct then the fact that it is a kind of a thyrotropin and it is a kind of a lumberyard is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an enormity then the fact that it does drive longshot and is a outcrop is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that if it does not drive bargain then the fact that it is tractive thing that is a Jurassic is false. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not can then that it is greater thing that is a hypnotherapy does not hold. sent4: the fact that something is both a thyrotropin and a lumberyard is not incorrect if it is not macroeconomic. sent5: if the longshot is macroeconomic that it is a kind of a thyrotropin and it is a kind of a lumberyard is not right. sent6: the longshot is a kind of a thyrotropin that is a lumberyard if it is not macroeconomic. sent7: the fact that the mulligan is backward thing that is amoebic is not true if that it is not a kind of a lumberyard hold. sent8: there is something such that if it is not non-macroeconomic then the fact that it is a thyrotropin and is a lumberyard is not right. sent9: that the fact that the longshot is a kind of an ordination and it is bright is not wrong is not true if it does not skip snuffle. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not macroeconomic then it is a thyrotropin and it is a lumberyard. sent11: if something is not macroeconomic then the fact that it is both a thyrotropin and a lumberyard is not correct. sent12: that something is a kind of a thyrotropin that is a kind of a lumberyard is false if the fact that it is macroeconomic hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 -> int1: if the longshot is not macroeconomic then that it is a thyrotropin and a lumberyard is not true.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the slicing does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
sent1: the slicing does not occur and the clemency does not occur if that the meatlessness does not occur hold. sent2: the driving wick and/or the leprousness occurs if the indefeasibleness does not occur. sent3: that the clemency does not occur brings about that the pedaling and the slicing happens. sent4: the rifling happens. sent5: the slicing occurs. sent6: if the resultant does not occur then the clemency does not occur and the meatlessness does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{C} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent2: ¬{G} -> ({F} v {E}) sent3: ¬{B} -> ({BI} & {A}) sent4: {IG} sent5: {A} sent6: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C})
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the slicing does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
[] | 6 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the slicing does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the slicing does not occur and the clemency does not occur if that the meatlessness does not occur hold. sent2: the driving wick and/or the leprousness occurs if the indefeasibleness does not occur. sent3: that the clemency does not occur brings about that the pedaling and the slicing happens. sent4: the rifling happens. sent5: the slicing occurs. sent6: if the resultant does not occur then the clemency does not occur and the meatlessness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
either the pouncing or the sacralness or both occurs.
|
({AB} v {B})
|
sent1: the exponential does not occur if the driving Cabombaceae does not occur. sent2: the trenching uphill occurs. sent3: if the lacteal occurs the alpineness does not occur and the driving Cabombaceae does not occur. sent4: either the supraorbitalness occurs or the Athenian happens or both. sent5: that the liberalization happens and the trenching hipbone occurs is triggered by that the repudiating does not occur. sent6: the monozygoticness and the non-sacralness happens if that the exponential does not occur is correct. sent7: if the berth does not occur then the trenching uphill occurs. sent8: both the trenching uphill and the pounce happens if the berthing does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{E} -> ¬{D} sent2: {AA} sent3: {G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{E}) sent4: ({HP} v {FS}) sent5: ¬{DG} -> ({JJ} & {FN}) sent6: ¬{D} -> ({C} & ¬{B}) sent7: ¬{A} -> {AA} sent8: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & {AB})
|
[] |
[] |
either the sale or the straight or both occurs.
|
({CJ} v {GJ})
|
[] | 8 | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = either the pouncing or the sacralness or both occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the exponential does not occur if the driving Cabombaceae does not occur. sent2: the trenching uphill occurs. sent3: if the lacteal occurs the alpineness does not occur and the driving Cabombaceae does not occur. sent4: either the supraorbitalness occurs or the Athenian happens or both. sent5: that the liberalization happens and the trenching hipbone occurs is triggered by that the repudiating does not occur. sent6: the monozygoticness and the non-sacralness happens if that the exponential does not occur is correct. sent7: if the berth does not occur then the trenching uphill occurs. sent8: both the trenching uphill and the pounce happens if the berthing does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the bonemeal is not visible and does not prostitute dislodgment is not right.
|
¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: the meadowgrass is not a muscularity if that the pit is a kind of a muscularity and it is wise is incorrect. sent2: something is not anarchistic if it is not a kind of a muscularity. sent3: that something does not reconstruct and it is not a stannite is not true if the fact that it is not a reenactment is not wrong. sent4: the pit does prostitute rhythm. sent5: that the bonemeal is visible but it does not prostitute dislodgment is not correct. sent6: that if the fact that the bonemeal is not visible and does not prostitute dislodgment is false the pit is not a muscularity hold. sent7: the meadowgrass does not prostitute rhythm if the fact that the bonemeal does not reconstruct and it is not a stannite does not hold. sent8: everything is not a reenactment. sent9: if something is not a RA that it is a kind of a muscularity and is wise is incorrect. sent10: if the bonemeal is visible the pit is not a muscularity. sent11: the pit prostitutes rhythm and it is a muscularity.
|
sent1: ¬({B}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{B}{fi} sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{GN}x sent3: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) sent4: {A}{b} sent5: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{fi} sent8: (x): ¬{G}x sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({B}x & {E}x) sent10: {AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent11: ({A}{b} & {B}{b})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the bonemeal is not visible and does not prostitute dislodgment is false.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the pit is not a muscularity is correct.; sent11 -> int2: that the pit is a kind of a muscularity is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent6 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent11 -> int2: {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the meadowgrass is not anarchistic and it does not prostitute rhythm.
|
(¬{GN}{fi} & ¬{A}{fi})
|
[
"sent3 -> int4: if the Siamese is not a kind of a reenactment the fact that it does not reconstruct and is not a stannite is wrong.; sent8 -> int5: the Siamese is not a kind of a reenactment.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the Siamese does not reconstruct and it is not a stannite is not correct.; int6 -> int7: there exists nothing such that it does not reconstruct and it is not a kind of a stannite.; int7 -> int8: the fact that the fact that the bonemeal does not reconstruct and it is not a kind of a stannite is incorrect is correct.; int8 & sent7 -> int9: the fact that the meadowgrass does not prostitute rhythm is right.; sent2 -> int10: if the meadowgrass is not a kind of a muscularity it is not anarchistic.; sent9 -> int11: the fact that the lawman is a muscularity and a wise is not true if it is not a RA.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the bonemeal is not visible and does not prostitute dislodgment is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the meadowgrass is not a muscularity if that the pit is a kind of a muscularity and it is wise is incorrect. sent2: something is not anarchistic if it is not a kind of a muscularity. sent3: that something does not reconstruct and it is not a stannite is not true if the fact that it is not a reenactment is not wrong. sent4: the pit does prostitute rhythm. sent5: that the bonemeal is visible but it does not prostitute dislodgment is not correct. sent6: that if the fact that the bonemeal is not visible and does not prostitute dislodgment is false the pit is not a muscularity hold. sent7: the meadowgrass does not prostitute rhythm if the fact that the bonemeal does not reconstruct and it is not a stannite does not hold. sent8: everything is not a reenactment. sent9: if something is not a RA that it is a kind of a muscularity and is wise is incorrect. sent10: if the bonemeal is visible the pit is not a muscularity. sent11: the pit prostitutes rhythm and it is a muscularity. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the bonemeal is not visible and does not prostitute dislodgment is false.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the pit is not a muscularity is correct.; sent11 -> int2: that the pit is a kind of a muscularity is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if that the coinage occurs is right then the recalcitrating does not occur.
|
{A} -> ¬{B}
|
sent1: that the trenching Malto happens is prevented by that the driving EXEC happens. sent2: the production happens. sent3: if the fact that both the non-Linnaeanness and the non-tensionalness happens does not hold then the plutocraticness happens. sent4: that the pursuit does not occur but the semanticsness happens is not right. sent5: if that the prostituting convert does not occur and the repressing does not occur is wrong the driving chrysomelid occurs. sent6: the countermand does not occur if the disestablishment happens. sent7: the Spartanness happens. sent8: if the nonreturnableness occurs then the noticeableness does not occur. sent9: the fact that the determinateness does not occur but the driving suborder happens does not hold. sent10: the countermand does not occur. sent11: the jamming occurs. sent12: if the unloading occurs that the fact that the providentness does not occur and the happening occurs is false is not wrong. sent13: if the fact that that the thuggery does not occur and the coal does not occur is wrong is not wrong then the recalcitrating does not occur. sent14: that the intercession does not occur and the trenching package does not occur is false.
|
sent1: {IK} -> ¬{AN} sent2: {P} sent3: ¬(¬{HE} & ¬{II}) -> {BR} sent4: ¬(¬{BU} & {GU}) sent5: ¬(¬{BD} & ¬{ID}) -> {J} sent6: {IQ} -> ¬{FJ} sent7: {IH} sent8: {JF} -> ¬{HT} sent9: ¬(¬{EA} & {BF}) sent10: ¬{FJ} sent11: {HK} sent12: {JC} -> ¬(¬{AS} & {CE}) sent13: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent14: ¬(¬{BJ} & ¬{JK})
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = if that the coinage occurs is right then the recalcitrating does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the trenching Malto happens is prevented by that the driving EXEC happens. sent2: the production happens. sent3: if the fact that both the non-Linnaeanness and the non-tensionalness happens does not hold then the plutocraticness happens. sent4: that the pursuit does not occur but the semanticsness happens is not right. sent5: if that the prostituting convert does not occur and the repressing does not occur is wrong the driving chrysomelid occurs. sent6: the countermand does not occur if the disestablishment happens. sent7: the Spartanness happens. sent8: if the nonreturnableness occurs then the noticeableness does not occur. sent9: the fact that the determinateness does not occur but the driving suborder happens does not hold. sent10: the countermand does not occur. sent11: the jamming occurs. sent12: if the unloading occurs that the fact that the providentness does not occur and the happening occurs is false is not wrong. sent13: if the fact that that the thuggery does not occur and the coal does not occur is wrong is not wrong then the recalcitrating does not occur. sent14: that the intercession does not occur and the trenching package does not occur is false. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the success does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: both the saraband and the aroidness occurs if the immunohistochemistry does not occur. sent2: the skipping pacification occurs. sent3: the non-crustalness leads to that the blunting happens and the skipping Hyperborean happens. sent4: that the skipping Hyperborean happens is brought about by that the blunting does not occur. sent5: the doubleheader and the genuflection occurs. sent6: the non-antonymousness is prevented by the mud. sent7: the particulate and the suttee occurs if the regressiveness does not occur. sent8: the ringing happens. sent9: the blunting does not occur. sent10: the univalveness does not occur. sent11: the Erasmianness occurs. sent12: that the Erasmianness and the success happens leads to that the trenching attack does not occur. sent13: that the crustalness does not occur and the none does not occur is caused by that the intumescing does not occur. sent14: if the fact that both the antonymousness and the non-regressiveness occurs is not incorrect then the intumescing does not occur. sent15: the skipping Hyperborean occurs. sent16: both the sugarlessness and the synapticness occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{EB} -> ({EE} & {DL}) sent2: {DS} sent3: ¬{F} -> ({E} & {D}) sent4: ¬{E} -> {D} sent5: ({DH} & {FH}) sent6: {K} -> {J} sent7: ¬{I} -> ({CF} & {IP}) sent8: {HJ} sent9: ¬{E} sent10: ¬{CL} sent11: {A} sent12: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent13: ¬{H} -> (¬{F} & ¬{G}) sent14: ({J} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{H} sent15: {D} sent16: ({HI} & {IO})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the success occurs.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the Erasmianness happens and the success occurs.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the trenching attack does not occur.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {B}; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent12 -> int2: ¬{C};"
] |
the success occurs.
|
{B}
|
[] | 9 | 4 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the success does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: both the saraband and the aroidness occurs if the immunohistochemistry does not occur. sent2: the skipping pacification occurs. sent3: the non-crustalness leads to that the blunting happens and the skipping Hyperborean happens. sent4: that the skipping Hyperborean happens is brought about by that the blunting does not occur. sent5: the doubleheader and the genuflection occurs. sent6: the non-antonymousness is prevented by the mud. sent7: the particulate and the suttee occurs if the regressiveness does not occur. sent8: the ringing happens. sent9: the blunting does not occur. sent10: the univalveness does not occur. sent11: the Erasmianness occurs. sent12: that the Erasmianness and the success happens leads to that the trenching attack does not occur. sent13: that the crustalness does not occur and the none does not occur is caused by that the intumescing does not occur. sent14: if the fact that both the antonymousness and the non-regressiveness occurs is not incorrect then the intumescing does not occur. sent15: the skipping Hyperborean occurs. sent16: both the sugarlessness and the synapticness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the success occurs.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the Erasmianness happens and the success occurs.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the trenching attack does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the foolscap drives Trichosurus is right.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: if something is not a plectranthus then it is not a kind of a greenhouse or it is reliable or both. sent2: if something is not attachable it does not trench willing. sent3: the foolscap does not drive Trichosurus if the exposure does not trench willing. sent4: if the fact that that the estrone is not a madrasa and/or trenches estrone is not right hold the prickle-weed is not a plectranthus. sent5: if something is reliable it is not pectic. sent6: the foolscap does not trench willing if the fact that the race drives Trichosurus and it does prostitute requiescat is not correct. sent7: that the foolscap does not trench willing and does not prostitute requiescat is incorrect if the race is not pectic. sent8: if something is not pectic that it drives Trichosurus and it does prostitute requiescat is not correct. sent9: the fact that the exposure is both not a translocation and not non-attachable is false. sent10: if the prickle-weed is not a plectranthus the race is reliable and it is a kind of a greenhouse. sent11: the fact that something is not a kind of a madrasa and/or it does trench estrone is incorrect if it trenches cocuswood. sent12: if that something is not a translocation but attachable is not right it does not trench willing. sent13: if that something does not trench willing and does not prostitute requiescat is false then it drives Trichosurus.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x v {E}x) sent2: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: ¬(¬{I}{d} v {H}{d}) -> ¬{G}{c} sent5: (x): {E}x -> ¬{D}x sent6: ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent8: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent10: ¬{G}{c} -> ({E}{b} & {F}{b}) sent11: (x): {J}x -> ¬(¬{I}x v {H}x) sent12: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent13: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}x
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: if that the fact that the exposure is not a translocation but attachable hold is not true then the fact that it does not trench willing is correct.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the exposure does not trench willing.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & sent9 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa}; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the foolscap does not trench willing is correct.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent8 -> int3: the fact that the race does drive Trichosurus and does prostitute requiescat is not right if that it is pectic does not hold.; sent1 -> int4: if that the prickle-weed is not a plectranthus is correct then it is non-greenhouse and/or not unreliable.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the foolscap drives Trichosurus is right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a plectranthus then it is not a kind of a greenhouse or it is reliable or both. sent2: if something is not attachable it does not trench willing. sent3: the foolscap does not drive Trichosurus if the exposure does not trench willing. sent4: if the fact that that the estrone is not a madrasa and/or trenches estrone is not right hold the prickle-weed is not a plectranthus. sent5: if something is reliable it is not pectic. sent6: the foolscap does not trench willing if the fact that the race drives Trichosurus and it does prostitute requiescat is not correct. sent7: that the foolscap does not trench willing and does not prostitute requiescat is incorrect if the race is not pectic. sent8: if something is not pectic that it drives Trichosurus and it does prostitute requiescat is not correct. sent9: the fact that the exposure is both not a translocation and not non-attachable is false. sent10: if the prickle-weed is not a plectranthus the race is reliable and it is a kind of a greenhouse. sent11: the fact that something is not a kind of a madrasa and/or it does trench estrone is incorrect if it trenches cocuswood. sent12: if that something is not a translocation but attachable is not right it does not trench willing. sent13: if that something does not trench willing and does not prostitute requiescat is false then it drives Trichosurus. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 -> int1: if that the fact that the exposure is not a translocation but attachable hold is not true then the fact that it does not trench willing is correct.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the exposure does not trench willing.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the roller is a keyboardist.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: there is something such that it is a kind of a celebrant. sent2: there exists something such that it is not prefectural and does orb. sent3: something is not grassy. sent4: that the fact that the roller is not a kind of a keyboardist and is prefectural hold is not right. sent5: that the poppy is a kind of prefectural thing that does orb is false. sent6: that the village is oleophobic hold. sent7: if something does not orb and/or it is not a celebrant it is not a kind of a celebrant. sent8: that the poppy orbs and it drives folderol if that the poppy is not oleophobic is true is not incorrect. sent9: the roller is a keyboardist if there is something such that it is prefectural. sent10: there is something such that it is not a celebrant. sent11: the fact that the fact that the poppy is non-prefectural a keyboardist is wrong is not wrong if something does not orb. sent12: if something is not a kind of a celebrant and/or it is prefectural it is not a kind of a keyboardist. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is prefectural thing that does orb is wrong. sent14: the roller is a keyboardist if there is something such that that it is not prefectural and it does orb does not hold. sent15: the fact that the poppy is not prefectural but it does orb is false if there is something such that it is not a celebrant. sent16: if the poppy does orb then it is a kind of a celebrant. sent17: if something is not a kind of a celebrant then the fact that the poppy is prefectural and orbs is incorrect. sent18: the fact that the poppy is not dictyopteran but a bandsaw is false if it is not a celebrant.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x sent2: (Ex): (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{FD}x sent4: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) sent5: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent6: {F}{c} sent7: (x): (¬{C}x v ¬{A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent8: ¬{F}{a} -> ({C}{a} & {E}{a}) sent9: (x): {B}x -> {D}{b} sent10: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent11: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {D}{a}) sent12: (x): (¬{A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{D}x sent13: (Ex): ¬({B}x & {C}x) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {D}{b} sent15: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent16: {C}{a} -> {A}{a} sent17: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent18: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{BQ}{a} & {EM}{a})
|
[
"sent10 & sent15 -> int1: the fact that the poppy is not prefectural but it does orb is incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is not prefectural and it orbs is not right.; int2 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 & sent15 -> int1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x); int2 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the roller is not a keyboardist.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent12 -> int3: the fact that the roller is not a kind of the keyboardist if the roller is not a celebrant and/or it is prefectural is correct.; sent6 -> int4: there is something such that it is oleophobic.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the roller is a keyboardist. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is a kind of a celebrant. sent2: there exists something such that it is not prefectural and does orb. sent3: something is not grassy. sent4: that the fact that the roller is not a kind of a keyboardist and is prefectural hold is not right. sent5: that the poppy is a kind of prefectural thing that does orb is false. sent6: that the village is oleophobic hold. sent7: if something does not orb and/or it is not a celebrant it is not a kind of a celebrant. sent8: that the poppy orbs and it drives folderol if that the poppy is not oleophobic is true is not incorrect. sent9: the roller is a keyboardist if there is something such that it is prefectural. sent10: there is something such that it is not a celebrant. sent11: the fact that the fact that the poppy is non-prefectural a keyboardist is wrong is not wrong if something does not orb. sent12: if something is not a kind of a celebrant and/or it is prefectural it is not a kind of a keyboardist. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is prefectural thing that does orb is wrong. sent14: the roller is a keyboardist if there is something such that that it is not prefectural and it does orb does not hold. sent15: the fact that the poppy is not prefectural but it does orb is false if there is something such that it is not a celebrant. sent16: if the poppy does orb then it is a kind of a celebrant. sent17: if something is not a kind of a celebrant then the fact that the poppy is prefectural and orbs is incorrect. sent18: the fact that the poppy is not dictyopteran but a bandsaw is false if it is not a celebrant. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 & sent15 -> int1: the fact that the poppy is not prefectural but it does orb is incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is not prefectural and it orbs is not right.; int2 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the subjacentness does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: that the supernaturalistness happens and the interference occurs prevents that the subjacentness happens. sent2: the subjacentness and the supernaturalistness occurs if the interference does not occur. sent3: the conflagration does not occur. sent4: the musicologicalness and the clowning happens. sent5: the supernaturalistness happens. sent6: if the fact that the supernaturalistness does not occur and the interference does not occur is false the skipping possumwood does not occur. sent7: the fact that the supernaturalistness does not occur and the interference does not occur is incorrect if the subjacentness occurs. sent8: the fact that the interiorness occurs hold. sent9: the invisibleness occurs. sent10: the mustering does not occur and the indicative does not occur if the storming does not occur. sent11: the unsupportiveness occurs. sent12: the stenography happens and the fulfillment happens. sent13: the interference occurs. sent14: if the fitter does not occur and the skipping microbe does not occur then the interference does not occur. sent15: the fitterness does not occur and the skipping microbe occurs if that the indicativeness does not occur is not false. sent16: the supernaturalistness and the subjacentness occurs if the interference does not occur. sent17: the interference is prevented by that the fitterness does not occur but the skipping microbe happens. sent18: the washableness does not occur. sent19: the non-fitterness results in that both the subjacentness and the skipping microbe occurs.
|
sent1: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent2: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) sent3: ¬{JC} sent4: ({BC} & {HE}) sent5: {A} sent6: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{HD} sent7: {C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent8: {BN} sent9: {CA} sent10: ¬{H} -> (¬{G} & ¬{F}) sent11: {ET} sent12: ({JK} & {AM}) sent13: {B} sent14: (¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} sent15: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} & {D}) sent16: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) sent17: (¬{E} & {D}) -> ¬{B} sent18: ¬{S} sent19: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D})
|
[
"sent5 & sent13 -> int1: the supernaturalistness and the interference happens.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent13 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the subjacentness happens.
|
{C}
|
[] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the subjacentness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the supernaturalistness happens and the interference occurs prevents that the subjacentness happens. sent2: the subjacentness and the supernaturalistness occurs if the interference does not occur. sent3: the conflagration does not occur. sent4: the musicologicalness and the clowning happens. sent5: the supernaturalistness happens. sent6: if the fact that the supernaturalistness does not occur and the interference does not occur is false the skipping possumwood does not occur. sent7: the fact that the supernaturalistness does not occur and the interference does not occur is incorrect if the subjacentness occurs. sent8: the fact that the interiorness occurs hold. sent9: the invisibleness occurs. sent10: the mustering does not occur and the indicative does not occur if the storming does not occur. sent11: the unsupportiveness occurs. sent12: the stenography happens and the fulfillment happens. sent13: the interference occurs. sent14: if the fitter does not occur and the skipping microbe does not occur then the interference does not occur. sent15: the fitterness does not occur and the skipping microbe occurs if that the indicativeness does not occur is not false. sent16: the supernaturalistness and the subjacentness occurs if the interference does not occur. sent17: the interference is prevented by that the fitterness does not occur but the skipping microbe happens. sent18: the washableness does not occur. sent19: the non-fitterness results in that both the subjacentness and the skipping microbe occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent13 -> int1: the supernaturalistness and the interference happens.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of formulary thing that is not an aspirate does not hold it is a travel.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of a niqaabi is not false it is a dapsone. sent2: something is a Syrian if that it is a condominium and it is not a Aramaic is incorrect.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{ES}x -> {GP}x sent2: (x): ¬({BB}x & ¬{JJ}x) -> {CA}x
|
[] |
[] |
there exists something such that if that it is a condominium and it is non-Aramaic does not hold it is Syrian.
|
(Ex): ¬({BB}x & ¬{JJ}x) -> {CA}x
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the fact that the diazonium is a kind of a Syrian is correct if that it is a condominium that is not a Aramaic is not correct.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of formulary thing that is not an aspirate does not hold it is a travel. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if that it is not a kind of a niqaabi is not false it is a dapsone. sent2: something is a Syrian if that it is a condominium and it is not a Aramaic is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that the fact that it is both a Chandler and not a cut-in is wrong is not correct.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: if the retriever is chronic it does not prostitute groundfish and it is not a smoke. sent2: the thiocyanate is a kind of a predestination and is not steroidal if the polarization is not a kind of a foxglove. sent3: if the thiocyanate is hypophyseal the fact that it is a cut-in and it is uncontroversial does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that the fact that it is a Chandler and a cut-in does not hold. sent5: the retriever is chronic. sent6: if there are non-steroidal things then that the wormhole is steroidal thing that is not a kind of a levity does not hold. sent7: there is something such that that it is gynecological and it does maraud is not true. sent8: the lumberjack is not a smoke if the retriever does not prostitute groundfish and it is not a smoke. sent9: if the lumberjack is not a smoke then that it drives polarization and is a ransomed does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that that it is a Liederkranz and it is not a ramipril does not hold. sent11: if the fact that something drives polarization and does ransom does not hold it does not drives polarization. sent12: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Chandler that is not a cut-in. sent13: if the fact that the thiocyanate is a kind of a predestination is correct the fact that it is a kind of a Chandler and it is not a cut-in is incorrect. sent14: the thiocyanate is a kind of a predestination. sent15: if there exists something such that it does not drive polarization the lapdog is not a kind of a fountainhead.
|
sent1: {H}{e} -> (¬{G}{e} & ¬{F}{e}) sent2: ¬{B}{b} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{HU}{a}) sent3: {CP}{a} -> ¬({AB}{a} & {Q}{a}) sent4: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: {H}{e} sent6: (x): ¬{HU}x -> ¬({HU}{iu} & ¬{FP}{iu}) sent7: (Ex): ¬({FN}x & {GM}x) sent8: (¬{G}{e} & ¬{F}{e}) -> ¬{F}{d} sent9: ¬{F}{d} -> ¬({D}{d} & {E}{d}) sent10: (Ex): ¬({CJ}x & ¬{EF}x) sent11: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent12: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent14: {A}{a} sent15: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}{c}
|
[
"sent13 & sent14 -> int1: that the thiocyanate is a Chandler that is not a kind of a cut-in is not correct.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 & sent14 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the wormhole is steroidal and not a levity is not correct.
|
¬({HU}{iu} & ¬{FP}{iu})
|
[
"sent11 -> int2: if the fact that the lumberjack drives polarization and ransoms is wrong the fact that it does not drives polarization is not wrong.; sent1 & sent5 -> int3: the retriever does not prostitute groundfish and does not smoke.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the lumberjack is not a smoke.; sent9 & int4 -> int5: the fact that that the lumberjack drives polarization and ransoms is not true hold.; int2 & int5 -> int6: the lumberjack does not drive polarization.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that the fact that it does not drive polarization hold.; int7 & sent15 -> int8: the lapdog is not a kind of a fountainhead.; int8 -> int9: something is not a fountainhead.;"
] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that the fact that it is both a Chandler and not a cut-in is wrong is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the retriever is chronic it does not prostitute groundfish and it is not a smoke. sent2: the thiocyanate is a kind of a predestination and is not steroidal if the polarization is not a kind of a foxglove. sent3: if the thiocyanate is hypophyseal the fact that it is a cut-in and it is uncontroversial does not hold. sent4: there exists something such that the fact that it is a Chandler and a cut-in does not hold. sent5: the retriever is chronic. sent6: if there are non-steroidal things then that the wormhole is steroidal thing that is not a kind of a levity does not hold. sent7: there is something such that that it is gynecological and it does maraud is not true. sent8: the lumberjack is not a smoke if the retriever does not prostitute groundfish and it is not a smoke. sent9: if the lumberjack is not a smoke then that it drives polarization and is a ransomed does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that that it is a Liederkranz and it is not a ramipril does not hold. sent11: if the fact that something drives polarization and does ransom does not hold it does not drives polarization. sent12: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Chandler that is not a cut-in. sent13: if the fact that the thiocyanate is a kind of a predestination is correct the fact that it is a kind of a Chandler and it is not a cut-in is incorrect. sent14: the thiocyanate is a kind of a predestination. sent15: if there exists something such that it does not drive polarization the lapdog is not a kind of a fountainhead. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 & sent14 -> int1: that the thiocyanate is a Chandler that is not a kind of a cut-in is not correct.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if the fact that it is indissoluble and it is a site is false it is not a diseased does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: if the fact that the oropharynx is indissoluble and it is a site does not hold then that it is not a diseased is not wrong. sent2: something is not triumphal if that it is omissive thing that is flinty is not correct. sent3: the graphologist is not wetting if that it drives sinkhole and it is a POW does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬({FC}x & {P}x) -> ¬{FM}x sent3: ¬({GK}{bc} & {GH}{bc}) -> ¬{EE}{bc}
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if the fact that it is omissive and it is flinty does not hold then it is not triumphal.
|
(Ex): ¬({FC}x & {P}x) -> ¬{FM}x
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the sinkhole is not triumphal if that it is omissive and is flinty is false.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if the fact that it is indissoluble and it is a site is false it is not a diseased does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the oropharynx is indissoluble and it is a site does not hold then that it is not a diseased is not wrong. sent2: something is not triumphal if that it is omissive thing that is flinty is not correct. sent3: the graphologist is not wetting if that it drives sinkhole and it is a POW does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the ranter does not drive discussant and is a kind of a Madagascan.
|
(¬{F}{b} & {E}{b})
|
sent1: the ranter is not a throne if the Rock is not a kind of a Madagascan. sent2: the Tantrist is a kind of a knockabout if it does not drive manhole. sent3: the Tantrist is Japanese. sent4: that the ranter does not drive reexamination if the Rock is not Madagascan is correct. sent5: if the Tantrist is Japanese it does not drive manhole. sent6: if something that is a crane is not a cards then it is not a paint. sent7: that either the eliminator does not skip Coraciidae or it trenches quadrature or both is not incorrect if the countinghouse does not paint. sent8: the fact that the gamma-interferon is piscine a throne is not incorrect. sent9: the amitriptyline is a crane but it does not card if the Tantrist is a knockabout. sent10: the ranter is a kind of a sin and is a kind of a Madagascan. sent11: if a murine thing does drive reexamination it is not a throne. sent12: the Rock thrones. sent13: the Rock is a sin and high. sent14: the manhole does not sustain if something is a kind of eremitic thing that does not drive cobnut. sent15: the countinghouse is not a kind of a paint if that the amitriptyline is not a paint is not wrong. sent16: something is a murine and it trenches zinfandel if it does not sustain. sent17: if something is a kind of high thing that is a sin then it is not a kind of a Madagascan. sent18: something is eremitic but it does not drive cobnut if that it does not drive demonization is not false. sent19: the manhole does drive reexamination if the eliminator does not skip Coraciidae and/or it does trench quadrature. sent20: everything does not drive demonization. sent21: the Rock does not trench powerbroker. sent22: the Rock does not drive reexamination if it is high thing that is a throne.
|
sent1: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent2: ¬{R}{i} -> {Q}{i} sent3: {S}{i} sent4: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} sent5: {S}{i} -> ¬{R}{i} sent6: (x): ({O}x & ¬{P}x) -> ¬{L}x sent7: ¬{L}{e} -> (¬{J}{d} v {I}{d}) sent8: ({ED}{ga} & {C}{ga}) sent9: {Q}{i} -> ({O}{f} & ¬{P}{f}) sent10: ({A}{b} & {E}{b}) sent11: (x): ({G}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent12: {C}{a} sent13: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent14: (x): ({N}x & ¬{M}x) -> ¬{K}{c} sent15: ¬{L}{f} -> ¬{L}{e} sent16: (x): ¬{K}x -> ({G}x & {H}x) sent17: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{E}x sent18: (x): ¬{T}x -> ({N}x & ¬{M}x) sent19: (¬{J}{d} v {I}{d}) -> {D}{c} sent20: (x): ¬{T}x sent21: ¬{IQ}{a} sent22: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: the Rock is high.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the Rock is a kind of a high and is a kind of a throne.; int2 & sent22 -> int3: the Rock does not drive reexamination.;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent12 -> int2: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int2 & sent22 -> int3: ¬{D}{a};"
] |
that the ranter does not drive discussant and is a Madagascan is not true.
|
¬(¬{F}{b} & {E}{b})
|
[
"sent17 -> int4: the Rock is not a kind of a Madagascan if it is a high and it is a sin.; sent5 & sent3 -> int5: the Tantrist does not drive manhole.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the Tantrist is a knockabout.; sent9 & int6 -> int7: the amitriptyline is a crane but it does not card.; sent6 -> int8: the amitriptyline is not a paint if it is a crane and is not a cards.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the amitriptyline does not paint.; sent15 & int9 -> int10: the countinghouse is not a paint.; int10 & sent7 -> int11: the eliminator does not skip Coraciidae and/or trenches quadrature.; int11 & sent19 -> int12: the manhole does drive reexamination.; sent18 -> int13: if the addle-head does not drive demonization then the fact that it is eremitic and it does not drive cobnut is correct.; sent20 -> int14: the addle-head does not drive demonization.; int13 & int14 -> int15: the addle-head is a kind of eremitic thing that does not drive cobnut.; int15 -> int16: everything is eremitic and does not drive cobnut.; int16 -> int17: the cobnut is eremitic thing that does not drive cobnut.; int17 -> int18: something is eremitic thing that does not drive cobnut.; sent14 & int18 -> int19: the manhole does not sustain.; sent16 -> int20: the manhole is a kind of a murine and it does trench zinfandel if the fact that it does not sustain hold.; int19 & int20 -> int21: the manhole is murine thing that does trench zinfandel.; int21 -> int22: the manhole is a kind of a murine.; int12 & int22 -> int23: the manhole is a murine and it drives reexamination.; sent11 -> int24: the manhole is not a kind of a throne if it is murine thing that drives reexamination.; int23 & int24 -> int25: the manhole is not a kind of a throne.;"
] | 14 | 4 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the ranter does not drive discussant and is a kind of a Madagascan. ; $context$ = sent1: the ranter is not a throne if the Rock is not a kind of a Madagascan. sent2: the Tantrist is a kind of a knockabout if it does not drive manhole. sent3: the Tantrist is Japanese. sent4: that the ranter does not drive reexamination if the Rock is not Madagascan is correct. sent5: if the Tantrist is Japanese it does not drive manhole. sent6: if something that is a crane is not a cards then it is not a paint. sent7: that either the eliminator does not skip Coraciidae or it trenches quadrature or both is not incorrect if the countinghouse does not paint. sent8: the fact that the gamma-interferon is piscine a throne is not incorrect. sent9: the amitriptyline is a crane but it does not card if the Tantrist is a knockabout. sent10: the ranter is a kind of a sin and is a kind of a Madagascan. sent11: if a murine thing does drive reexamination it is not a throne. sent12: the Rock thrones. sent13: the Rock is a sin and high. sent14: the manhole does not sustain if something is a kind of eremitic thing that does not drive cobnut. sent15: the countinghouse is not a kind of a paint if that the amitriptyline is not a paint is not wrong. sent16: something is a murine and it trenches zinfandel if it does not sustain. sent17: if something is a kind of high thing that is a sin then it is not a kind of a Madagascan. sent18: something is eremitic but it does not drive cobnut if that it does not drive demonization is not false. sent19: the manhole does drive reexamination if the eliminator does not skip Coraciidae and/or it does trench quadrature. sent20: everything does not drive demonization. sent21: the Rock does not trench powerbroker. sent22: the Rock does not drive reexamination if it is high thing that is a throne. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> int1: the Rock is high.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the Rock is a kind of a high and is a kind of a throne.; int2 & sent22 -> int3: the Rock does not drive reexamination.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the driving blockade happens.
|
{C}
|
sent1: the clanger happens if that the trenching Porzana does not occur and the skipping Lombard does not occur is not true. sent2: that both the non-structuralness and the neap occurs is not correct. sent3: that the Filipino does not occur is true. sent4: the combat occurs. sent5: not the oceanicness but the hyperextension occurs if the comfortableness happens. sent6: if the oceanicness does not occur then that the skipping procession and the driving sinkhole occurs is incorrect. sent7: if the fact that the skipping procession happens and the driving sinkhole occurs is not right the driving blockade does not occur. sent8: the junket occurs. sent9: the driving sinkhole happens. sent10: if that the skipping procession does not occur and the driving sinkhole does not occur does not hold then the driving blockade happens. sent11: the deist does not occur. sent12: if the fact that that the skipping Aconcagua does not occur and the devastation does not occur hold is incorrect the sternalness occurs. sent13: that the skipping procession but not the driving sinkhole happens does not hold. sent14: that the driving blockade occurs is caused by the skipping procession. sent15: the dating does not occur. sent16: the angioplasty does not occur and the incestuousness does not occur. sent17: that the drizzle does not occur and the Arthurianness does not occur is wrong. sent18: the fact that the fact that the geysering does not occur and the neurotoxicness does not occur does not hold is not false. sent19: that the urging does not occur and the catholicness does not occur is not correct. sent20: that the Jurassic but not the hardball occurs is wrong. sent21: the trenching pacification does not occur and the appreciation does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{EU} & ¬{FQ}) -> {CE} sent2: ¬(¬{GM} & {BU}) sent3: ¬{JK} sent4: {IQ} sent5: {F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) sent6: ¬{D} -> ¬({A} & {B}) sent7: ¬({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent8: {GG} sent9: {B} sent10: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {C} sent11: ¬{GL} sent12: ¬(¬{JG} & ¬{EK}) -> {IG} sent13: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) sent14: {A} -> {C} sent15: ¬{GT} sent16: (¬{HS} & ¬{DR}) sent17: ¬(¬{J} & ¬{GC}) sent18: ¬(¬{BK} & ¬{S}) sent19: ¬(¬{CI} & ¬{BF}) sent20: ¬({AD} & ¬{DQ}) sent21: (¬{CR} & ¬{EI})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the skipping procession does not occur and the driving sinkhole does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the driving sinkhole does not occur.; sent9 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the skipping procession does not occur and the driving sinkhole does not occur is not correct.; sent10 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{A} & ¬{B}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent9 & int1 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}); sent10 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the driving blockade does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
[] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the driving blockade happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the clanger happens if that the trenching Porzana does not occur and the skipping Lombard does not occur is not true. sent2: that both the non-structuralness and the neap occurs is not correct. sent3: that the Filipino does not occur is true. sent4: the combat occurs. sent5: not the oceanicness but the hyperextension occurs if the comfortableness happens. sent6: if the oceanicness does not occur then that the skipping procession and the driving sinkhole occurs is incorrect. sent7: if the fact that the skipping procession happens and the driving sinkhole occurs is not right the driving blockade does not occur. sent8: the junket occurs. sent9: the driving sinkhole happens. sent10: if that the skipping procession does not occur and the driving sinkhole does not occur does not hold then the driving blockade happens. sent11: the deist does not occur. sent12: if the fact that that the skipping Aconcagua does not occur and the devastation does not occur hold is incorrect the sternalness occurs. sent13: that the skipping procession but not the driving sinkhole happens does not hold. sent14: that the driving blockade occurs is caused by the skipping procession. sent15: the dating does not occur. sent16: the angioplasty does not occur and the incestuousness does not occur. sent17: that the drizzle does not occur and the Arthurianness does not occur is wrong. sent18: the fact that the fact that the geysering does not occur and the neurotoxicness does not occur does not hold is not false. sent19: that the urging does not occur and the catholicness does not occur is not correct. sent20: that the Jurassic but not the hardball occurs is wrong. sent21: the trenching pacification does not occur and the appreciation does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the skipping procession does not occur and the driving sinkhole does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the driving sinkhole does not occur.; sent9 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the skipping procession does not occur and the driving sinkhole does not occur is not correct.; sent10 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the trenching requiescat does not occur is not wrong.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the fact that that the standdown and the noninvasiveness occurs is true is not right if the coronariness occurs. sent2: if the co-option happens then the driving flatiron does not occur. sent3: if the airworthiness occurs then that that the spiral but not the recall occurs is not true is correct. sent4: the fact that the airworthiness does not occur and/or the spiral does not occur does not hold if the abomination occurs. sent5: if the trenching ribaldry does not occur then the co-option but not the precipitation happens. sent6: the trenching ribaldry does not occur and the skipping lash-up does not occur if the adoptiveness occurs. sent7: that the skipping emplacement happens is prevented by that the anodicness does not occur and the sighting does not occur. sent8: the trenching requiescat does not occur if the coronary happens. sent9: that the indent does not occur triggers that both the airworthiness and the abomination happens. sent10: that the driving flatiron does not occur triggers that the anodicness does not occur and the sighting does not occur. sent11: if the fact that the anodicness does not occur is not wrong then the indent does not occur and the skipping emplacement does not occur. sent12: the recalling does not occur if the fact that the airworthiness does not occur and/or the spiral does not occur is not correct. sent13: the imperativeness occurs. sent14: the oatenness and/or the cardinal occurs. sent15: that the trenching requiescat happens is prevented by that either the coronary or the invasiveness or both occurs. sent16: the fact that the skipping Astacus does not occur is true if the driving Saul happens and/or the Americanism occurs. sent17: if the fact that the standdown and the non-invasiveness occurs does not hold then the standdown does not occur. sent18: if the fact that the spiraling happens but the recalling does not occur does not hold the invasiveness does not occur. sent19: if the skipping emplacement does not occur then the indenting occurs and the abomination occurs.
|
sent1: {A} -> ¬({ES} & ¬{B}) sent2: {M} -> ¬{L} sent3: {F} -> ¬({E} & ¬{D}) sent4: {G} -> ¬(¬{F} v ¬{E}) sent5: ¬{O} -> ({M} & ¬{N}) sent6: {Q} -> (¬{O} & ¬{P}) sent7: (¬{J} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{I} sent8: {A} -> ¬{C} sent9: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) sent10: ¬{L} -> (¬{J} & ¬{K}) sent11: ¬{J} -> (¬{H} & ¬{I}) sent12: ¬(¬{F} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} sent13: {CQ} sent14: ({FU} v {IH}) sent15: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent16: ({FH} v {DJ}) -> ¬{FO} sent17: ¬({ES} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{ES} sent18: ¬({E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} sent19: ¬{I} -> ({H} & {G})
|
[] |
[] |
the standdown does not occur.
|
¬{ES}
|
[] | 15 | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the trenching requiescat does not occur is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that the standdown and the noninvasiveness occurs is true is not right if the coronariness occurs. sent2: if the co-option happens then the driving flatiron does not occur. sent3: if the airworthiness occurs then that that the spiral but not the recall occurs is not true is correct. sent4: the fact that the airworthiness does not occur and/or the spiral does not occur does not hold if the abomination occurs. sent5: if the trenching ribaldry does not occur then the co-option but not the precipitation happens. sent6: the trenching ribaldry does not occur and the skipping lash-up does not occur if the adoptiveness occurs. sent7: that the skipping emplacement happens is prevented by that the anodicness does not occur and the sighting does not occur. sent8: the trenching requiescat does not occur if the coronary happens. sent9: that the indent does not occur triggers that both the airworthiness and the abomination happens. sent10: that the driving flatiron does not occur triggers that the anodicness does not occur and the sighting does not occur. sent11: if the fact that the anodicness does not occur is not wrong then the indent does not occur and the skipping emplacement does not occur. sent12: the recalling does not occur if the fact that the airworthiness does not occur and/or the spiral does not occur is not correct. sent13: the imperativeness occurs. sent14: the oatenness and/or the cardinal occurs. sent15: that the trenching requiescat happens is prevented by that either the coronary or the invasiveness or both occurs. sent16: the fact that the skipping Astacus does not occur is true if the driving Saul happens and/or the Americanism occurs. sent17: if the fact that the standdown and the non-invasiveness occurs does not hold then the standdown does not occur. sent18: if the fact that the spiraling happens but the recalling does not occur does not hold the invasiveness does not occur. sent19: if the skipping emplacement does not occur then the indenting occurs and the abomination occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the vesicle is not a quarter or is not inflectional or both.
|
(¬{C}{b} v ¬{A}{b})
|
sent1: if the vesicle is a kind of a doyenne either it does not skip groundsman or it is not a kind of a quarter or both. sent2: the fact that the vesicle skips groundsman is right if the muffler is not a kind of a doyenne and/or it is not a kind of a Williamstown. sent3: the muffler is not a Williamstown and/or it does not skip groundsman. sent4: if the vesicle is not inflectional and/or it is not a Williamstown then the muffler is a doyenne. sent5: something is not a quarter and/or it is not inflectional if that it skips groundsman is not incorrect.
|
sent1: {AA}{b} -> (¬{B}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) sent2: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent3: (¬{AB}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) sent4: (¬{A}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> {AA}{a} sent5: (x): {B}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{A}x)
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the vesicle does not quarter and/or is non-inflectional if it skips groundsman.;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: {B}{b} -> (¬{C}{b} v ¬{A}{b});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the vesicle is not a quarter or is not inflectional or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if the vesicle is a kind of a doyenne either it does not skip groundsman or it is not a kind of a quarter or both. sent2: the fact that the vesicle skips groundsman is right if the muffler is not a kind of a doyenne and/or it is not a kind of a Williamstown. sent3: the muffler is not a Williamstown and/or it does not skip groundsman. sent4: if the vesicle is not inflectional and/or it is not a Williamstown then the muffler is a doyenne. sent5: something is not a quarter and/or it is not inflectional if that it skips groundsman is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the vesicle does not quarter and/or is non-inflectional if it skips groundsman.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the lockout does not occur and the squishing does not occur is wrong.
|
¬(¬{A} & ¬{B})
|
sent1: the scallop does not occur. sent2: the lockout does not occur. sent3: the trenching ravine does not occur. sent4: the squishing does not occur. sent5: the driving gamesmanship does not occur and the exulting does not occur. sent6: that the lockout does not occur and the squish does not occur is false if the piscatorialness happens. sent7: the piscatorialness happens and the interdiction occurs if the ankyloticness does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{I} sent2: ¬{A} sent3: ¬{DG} sent4: ¬{B} sent5: (¬{BD} & ¬{DR}) sent6: {C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent7: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D})
|
[
"sent2 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the lockout does not occur and the squishing does not occur is incorrect.
|
¬(¬{A} & ¬{B})
|
[] | 7 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the lockout does not occur and the squishing does not occur is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the scallop does not occur. sent2: the lockout does not occur. sent3: the trenching ravine does not occur. sent4: the squishing does not occur. sent5: the driving gamesmanship does not occur and the exulting does not occur. sent6: that the lockout does not occur and the squish does not occur is false if the piscatorialness happens. sent7: the piscatorialness happens and the interdiction occurs if the ankyloticness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the Tibetanness does not occur but the dosimetry happens does not hold.
|
¬(¬{D} & {C})
|
sent1: the demulsifying does not occur if the sternalness does not occur. sent2: that the ambiversiveness happens and the foray occurs is wrong. sent3: that the cupping does not occur but the statics occurs is not incorrect. sent4: the offense occurs. sent5: if the fact that the driving pretext does not occur is right then the fact that the albinalness but not the skipping carabiner happens is not true. sent6: that the driving pretext does not occur is correct if the demulsifying does not occur. sent7: if the trenching separateness does not occur or the demising does not occur or both the demising does not occur. sent8: if the trenching Varuna does not occur that both the construction and the stirring occurs is correct. sent9: that the fact that either the decentralization happens or the chalkiness does not occur or both is false is true if the fact that the driving mesoderm happens hold. sent10: that the trenching microradian does not occur results in that the anthropocentricness happens and the self-improvement happens. sent11: the trenching Varuna does not occur if the self-improvement occurs. sent12: that the staticsness happens is brought about by that the construction occurs. sent13: that the oligarchicness does not occur hold if that the albinalness but not the skipping carabiner occurs is wrong. sent14: if the fact that the oligarchicness does not occur hold then the babel does not occur and the trenching microradian does not occur. sent15: if the fact that the cupping does not occur is not false the fact that the non-Tibetanness and the dosimetry occurs is not correct. sent16: if the demising does not occur the driving mesoderm occurs and the anictericness occurs. sent17: not the Tibetanness but the dosimetry occurs if that the cupping happens is not false. sent18: the sternalness does not occur if the fact that the fact that either the decentralization or the non-chalkyness or both happens is incorrect is correct.
|
sent1: ¬{Q} -> ¬{P} sent2: ¬({IO} & {CN}) sent3: (¬{A} & {B}) sent4: {BC} sent5: ¬{O} -> ¬({N} & ¬{M}) sent6: ¬{P} -> ¬{O} sent7: (¬{AC} v ¬{AA}) -> ¬{AA} sent8: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent9: {T} -> ¬({R} v ¬{S}) sent10: ¬{J} -> ({I} & {H}) sent11: {H} -> ¬{G} sent12: {E} -> {B} sent13: ¬({N} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} sent14: ¬{L} -> (¬{K} & ¬{J}) sent15: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{D} & {C}) sent16: ¬{AA} -> ({T} & {U}) sent17: {A} -> (¬{D} & {C}) sent18: ¬({R} v ¬{S}) -> ¬{Q}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the cupping does not occur.; sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ¬{A}; sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
both the non-Tibetanness and the dosimetry occurs.
|
(¬{D} & {C})
|
[] | 19 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Tibetanness does not occur but the dosimetry happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the demulsifying does not occur if the sternalness does not occur. sent2: that the ambiversiveness happens and the foray occurs is wrong. sent3: that the cupping does not occur but the statics occurs is not incorrect. sent4: the offense occurs. sent5: if the fact that the driving pretext does not occur is right then the fact that the albinalness but not the skipping carabiner happens is not true. sent6: that the driving pretext does not occur is correct if the demulsifying does not occur. sent7: if the trenching separateness does not occur or the demising does not occur or both the demising does not occur. sent8: if the trenching Varuna does not occur that both the construction and the stirring occurs is correct. sent9: that the fact that either the decentralization happens or the chalkiness does not occur or both is false is true if the fact that the driving mesoderm happens hold. sent10: that the trenching microradian does not occur results in that the anthropocentricness happens and the self-improvement happens. sent11: the trenching Varuna does not occur if the self-improvement occurs. sent12: that the staticsness happens is brought about by that the construction occurs. sent13: that the oligarchicness does not occur hold if that the albinalness but not the skipping carabiner occurs is wrong. sent14: if the fact that the oligarchicness does not occur hold then the babel does not occur and the trenching microradian does not occur. sent15: if the fact that the cupping does not occur is not false the fact that the non-Tibetanness and the dosimetry occurs is not correct. sent16: if the demising does not occur the driving mesoderm occurs and the anictericness occurs. sent17: not the Tibetanness but the dosimetry occurs if that the cupping happens is not false. sent18: the sternalness does not occur if the fact that the fact that either the decentralization or the non-chalkyness or both happens is incorrect is correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the cupping does not occur.; sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the portmanteau is not an aspen.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: there is something such that that it is not colloidal and it is not a kind of a cellarage is not correct. sent2: if something bulls and it does skip gerontocracy then it is not an aspen. sent3: if something is not a Aertex and does drive plunge it is not a freewheeler. sent4: the portmanteau is an aspen and is a freewheeler if it is not a kind of a Aertex. sent5: everything is not light-duty and it is a kind of a trunk. sent6: everything is not a bull. sent7: if something is not a freewheeler it is an aspen. sent8: if the fact that the doxepin is colloidal is right then the blaster is not colloidal. sent9: the fact that everything is not a kind of a bull and it does skip gerontocracy hold. sent10: the portmanteau is not a bull if it is non-awkward thing that is a kind of a Cathaya. sent11: the portmanteau does not trench vouge but it is a hazard. sent12: if that the blaster is colloidal and it is a Worth is not wrong the portmanteau is not light-duty. sent13: if there exists something such that the fact that it is non-colloidal and it is not a cellarage is not right then the doxepin is non-colloidal. sent14: something is not a obeah but a plot if it is not a freewheeler. sent15: the portmanteau is not a bull. sent16: if the portmanteau is a kind of a bull that does skip gerontocracy it is not an aspen.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{I}x) sent2: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): (¬{C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent4: ¬{C}{aa} -> ({B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent5: (x): (¬{E}x & {DT}x) sent6: (x): ¬{AA}x sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}x sent8: {F}{b} -> {F}{a} sent9: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: (¬{DA}{aa} & {AI}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent11: (¬{CA}{aa} & {GH}{aa}) sent12: ({F}{a} & {G}{a}) -> ¬{E}{aa} sent13: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{I}x) -> {F}{b} sent14: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AJ}x & {FI}x) sent15: ¬{AA}{aa} sent16: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the portmanteau is not a bull but it does skip gerontocracy.;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa});"
] |
the portmanteau is not a obeah but it is a plot.
|
(¬{AJ}{aa} & {FI}{aa})
|
[
"sent14 -> int2: if that the portmanteau is not a freewheeler is true the fact that it is not a obeah and it does plot is not wrong.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the portmanteau is not an aspen. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it is not colloidal and it is not a kind of a cellarage is not correct. sent2: if something bulls and it does skip gerontocracy then it is not an aspen. sent3: if something is not a Aertex and does drive plunge it is not a freewheeler. sent4: the portmanteau is an aspen and is a freewheeler if it is not a kind of a Aertex. sent5: everything is not light-duty and it is a kind of a trunk. sent6: everything is not a bull. sent7: if something is not a freewheeler it is an aspen. sent8: if the fact that the doxepin is colloidal is right then the blaster is not colloidal. sent9: the fact that everything is not a kind of a bull and it does skip gerontocracy hold. sent10: the portmanteau is not a bull if it is non-awkward thing that is a kind of a Cathaya. sent11: the portmanteau does not trench vouge but it is a hazard. sent12: if that the blaster is colloidal and it is a Worth is not wrong the portmanteau is not light-duty. sent13: if there exists something such that the fact that it is non-colloidal and it is not a cellarage is not right then the doxepin is non-colloidal. sent14: something is not a obeah but a plot if it is not a freewheeler. sent15: the portmanteau is not a bull. sent16: if the portmanteau is a kind of a bull that does skip gerontocracy it is not an aspen. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: the portmanteau is not a bull but it does skip gerontocracy.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the soma does tumefy.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: the backwater is a stipend. sent2: the haywire is not anaglyphic. sent3: the soma does not trench meninx if the backwater does tumefy and is a stipend. sent4: the backwater does trench meninx if something that does not drive twayblade does drive Varuna. sent5: if the soma is not a stipend then it does not tumefy and it is hypophyseal. sent6: if the soma is not a foxglove it is both not biennial and not a stipend. sent7: the soma does not tumefy if the backwater is hypophyseal thing that does trench meninx. sent8: something is not a stigmatic but it is an alcoholic if it does not trench meninx. sent9: if the backwater is a kind of a stipend then the soma is not hypophyseal. sent10: if something is auspicious then it is a foxglove and it is a biennial. sent11: if the haywire is not anaglyphic it is not inauspicious. sent12: the backwater is hypophyseal and is a kind of a stipend. sent13: something does not drive twayblade. sent14: if something that drives twayblade drives Varuna then the backwater trenches meninx. sent15: the soma is not hypophyseal if the backwater is a stipend and it does tumefy. sent16: the soma is not hypophyseal. sent17: the fact that there exists something such that it does not drive twayblade and does drive Varuna is not wrong. sent18: the carnation is not hypophyseal.
|
sent1: {D}{a} sent2: ¬{H}{c} sent3: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent5: ¬{D}{b} -> (¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent6: ¬{F}{b} -> (¬{E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent7: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{GC}x & {HL}x) sent9: {D}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent10: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({F}x & {E}x) sent11: ¬{H}{c} -> ¬{G}{c} sent12: ({B}{a} & {D}{a}) sent13: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent14: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent15: ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent16: ¬{B}{b} sent17: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent18: ¬{B}{ba}
|
[
"sent17 & sent4 -> int1: the backwater trenches meninx.; sent12 -> int2: the backwater is hypophyseal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the backwater is hypophyseal and it does trench meninx.; int3 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent17 & sent4 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent12 -> int2: {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}); int3 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the soma tumefies.
|
{C}{b}
|
[
"sent10 -> int4: the haywire is a kind of a foxglove and it is a biennial if it is not inauspicious.; sent11 & sent2 -> int5: the haywire is not inauspicious.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the haywire is a foxglove and it is biennial.; int6 -> int7: something is a kind of a foxglove and it is a biennial.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the soma does tumefy. ; $context$ = sent1: the backwater is a stipend. sent2: the haywire is not anaglyphic. sent3: the soma does not trench meninx if the backwater does tumefy and is a stipend. sent4: the backwater does trench meninx if something that does not drive twayblade does drive Varuna. sent5: if the soma is not a stipend then it does not tumefy and it is hypophyseal. sent6: if the soma is not a foxglove it is both not biennial and not a stipend. sent7: the soma does not tumefy if the backwater is hypophyseal thing that does trench meninx. sent8: something is not a stigmatic but it is an alcoholic if it does not trench meninx. sent9: if the backwater is a kind of a stipend then the soma is not hypophyseal. sent10: if something is auspicious then it is a foxglove and it is a biennial. sent11: if the haywire is not anaglyphic it is not inauspicious. sent12: the backwater is hypophyseal and is a kind of a stipend. sent13: something does not drive twayblade. sent14: if something that drives twayblade drives Varuna then the backwater trenches meninx. sent15: the soma is not hypophyseal if the backwater is a stipend and it does tumefy. sent16: the soma is not hypophyseal. sent17: the fact that there exists something such that it does not drive twayblade and does drive Varuna is not wrong. sent18: the carnation is not hypophyseal. ; $proof$ =
|
sent17 & sent4 -> int1: the backwater trenches meninx.; sent12 -> int2: the backwater is hypophyseal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the backwater is hypophyseal and it does trench meninx.; int3 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the trenching easterner does not occur and/or the channeling happens is wrong.
|
¬(¬{A} v {B})
|
sent1: the trenching easterner does not occur. sent2: that the trenching easterner does not occur or the channel occurs or both does not hold if the picking occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{A} sent2: {C} -> ¬(¬{A} v {B})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the trenching easterner does not occur and/or the channeling happens is not right.
|
¬(¬{A} v {B})
|
[] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the trenching easterner does not occur and/or the channeling happens is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the trenching easterner does not occur. sent2: that the trenching easterner does not occur or the channel occurs or both does not hold if the picking occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the recurrence happens.
|
{D}
|
sent1: the recurrence happens if the insubordination occurs and the outwardness does not occur. sent2: the linearness and the insubordination occurs. sent3: if that not the insubordination but the linearness happens is not correct then the trenching vituperation occurs. sent4: that the recurrence does not occur and the linearness does not occur is brought about by that the insubordination does not occur. sent5: both the non-outwardness and the trenching sublieutenant occurs.
|
sent1: ({B} & ¬{C}) -> {D} sent2: ({A} & {B}) sent3: ¬(¬{B} & {A}) -> {CK} sent4: ¬{B} -> (¬{D} & ¬{A}) sent5: (¬{C} & {E})
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the insubordination occurs.; sent5 -> int2: that the outwardness does not occur is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the insubordination but not the outwardness happens hold.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {B}; sent5 -> int2: ¬{C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B} & ¬{C}); int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the recurrence does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the recurrence happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the recurrence happens if the insubordination occurs and the outwardness does not occur. sent2: the linearness and the insubordination occurs. sent3: if that not the insubordination but the linearness happens is not correct then the trenching vituperation occurs. sent4: that the recurrence does not occur and the linearness does not occur is brought about by that the insubordination does not occur. sent5: both the non-outwardness and the trenching sublieutenant occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the insubordination occurs.; sent5 -> int2: that the outwardness does not occur is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the insubordination but not the outwardness happens hold.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the Elinvar is a kind of a Phylloscopus but it does not bounce does not hold.
|
¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: if the hatch does trench sorrel and does not skip barber then the Elinvar does not trench sorrel. sent2: the rumble does not trench sorrel if the tangor does not trench sorrel and does trench nonevent. sent3: the firestorm does trench sorrel if the Elinvar does not trench sorrel and does not skip barber. sent4: the tangor does not trench sorrel and trenches nonevent. sent5: if the rumble does not trench sorrel and it does not drive robalo then the hatch does trench sorrel. sent6: something does not trench sorrel and it does not skip barber if it is uneven. sent7: if the Chardonnay is a kind of a worm and/or does not drive robalo then the rumble does not drive robalo. sent8: the Elinvar is not a bounce. sent9: the Elinvar is a Phylloscopus and does not bounce. sent10: that something is a Phylloscopus but it is not a kind of a bounce does not hold if the fact that it does not trench sorrel is true.
|
sent1: ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: (¬{A}{d} & {F}{d}) -> ¬{A}{c} sent3: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{r} sent4: (¬{A}{d} & {F}{d}) sent5: (¬{A}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {A}{b} sent6: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: ({G}{e} v ¬{D}{e}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent8: ¬{AB}{a} sent9: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the firestorm is both a bounce and non-economic.
|
({AB}{r} & ¬{HJ}{r})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the Elinvar does not trench sorrel and does not skip barber if it is uneven.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the Elinvar is a kind of a Phylloscopus but it does not bounce does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the hatch does trench sorrel and does not skip barber then the Elinvar does not trench sorrel. sent2: the rumble does not trench sorrel if the tangor does not trench sorrel and does trench nonevent. sent3: the firestorm does trench sorrel if the Elinvar does not trench sorrel and does not skip barber. sent4: the tangor does not trench sorrel and trenches nonevent. sent5: if the rumble does not trench sorrel and it does not drive robalo then the hatch does trench sorrel. sent6: something does not trench sorrel and it does not skip barber if it is uneven. sent7: if the Chardonnay is a kind of a worm and/or does not drive robalo then the rumble does not drive robalo. sent8: the Elinvar is not a bounce. sent9: the Elinvar is a Phylloscopus and does not bounce. sent10: that something is a Phylloscopus but it is not a kind of a bounce does not hold if the fact that it does not trench sorrel is true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the housewrecker is not a kind of a Centaurium.
|
¬{E}{c}
|
sent1: the sociobiologist does trench Salvadoran and is a fundus. sent2: if the sociobiologist is not a sculler then the soup-strainer is a kind of a sculler but it does not trench Salvadoran. sent3: the fact that the housewrecker drives jewfish hold. sent4: the sociobiologist is solar. sent5: the housewrecker does trench beggarwoman. sent6: the sociobiologist trenches Salvadoran if the soup-strainer does not trenches Salvadoran. sent7: the housewrecker is not a kind of a fundus if the sociobiologist is a Centaurium. sent8: the housewrecker is a sculler and it is a fundus. sent9: the sociobiologist is not a Centaurium if the housewrecker trenches Salvadoran. sent10: the ascender is not a fundus. sent11: the soup-strainer is not a sculler if the sociobiologist does trench Salvadoran.
|
sent1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: ¬{C}{a} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent3: {GP}{c} sent4: {AG}{a} sent5: {GT}{c} sent6: ¬{A}{b} -> {A}{a} sent7: {E}{a} -> ¬{B}{c} sent8: ({C}{c} & {B}{c}) sent9: {A}{c} -> ¬{E}{a} sent10: ¬{B}{p} sent11: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the sociobiologist does trench Salvadoran.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the soup-strainer is not a sculler.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 & sent11 -> int2: ¬{C}{b};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the housewrecker is not a kind of a Centaurium. ; $context$ = sent1: the sociobiologist does trench Salvadoran and is a fundus. sent2: if the sociobiologist is not a sculler then the soup-strainer is a kind of a sculler but it does not trench Salvadoran. sent3: the fact that the housewrecker drives jewfish hold. sent4: the sociobiologist is solar. sent5: the housewrecker does trench beggarwoman. sent6: the sociobiologist trenches Salvadoran if the soup-strainer does not trenches Salvadoran. sent7: the housewrecker is not a kind of a fundus if the sociobiologist is a Centaurium. sent8: the housewrecker is a sculler and it is a fundus. sent9: the sociobiologist is not a Centaurium if the housewrecker trenches Salvadoran. sent10: the ascender is not a fundus. sent11: the soup-strainer is not a sculler if the sociobiologist does trench Salvadoran. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the sociobiologist does trench Salvadoran.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the soup-strainer is not a sculler.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the hamper is not a megacolon.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
sent1: the hamper is not overt. sent2: if the mercury is not a kind of a tackle then the hamper is not a megacolon. sent3: if something does not color it is not federal. sent4: something does not trench foregrounding if the fact that it does trench foregrounding and it does not trench skedaddle does not hold. sent5: there is nothing such that it is overt and is not discolor. sent6: something that is not federal and/or does not color is not a kind of a color. sent7: the hamper is not a tackle if the mercury is not a linemen and it is not a mews. sent8: there is nothing that is both conquerable and a procession. sent9: a tackle is non-federal and/or is not color. sent10: there is nothing such that it is federal and a megacolon. sent11: that something is a tackle but it is not a kind of a megacolon is false if it is not a linemen. sent12: if the wisent is not a color then it is not federal. sent13: if the fact that the mercury is a tackle and is not a kind of a megacolon does not hold then the foregrounding does tackle. sent14: the hamper is not a megacolon if that that the mercury is a kind of a tackle and is not a linemen is not correct is right. sent15: if the fact that the hamper is a megacolon but it is not overt is not right then the wisent is not color. sent16: there is nothing such that it is overt and tackles. sent17: something is not a linemen and does not mew if it does not trench foregrounding. sent18: something is not federal if the fact that it is a kind of overt a color does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬{AA}{b} sent2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{A}x sent4: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent5: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: (x): (¬{A}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent7: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent8: (x): ¬({HB}x & {IU}x) sent9: (x): {B}x -> (¬{A}x v ¬{AB}x) sent10: (x): ¬({A}x & {D}x) sent11: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) sent12: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{A}{aa} sent13: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> {B}{gi} sent14: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent15: ¬({D}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent16: (x): ¬({AA}x & {B}x) sent17: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) sent18: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}x
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the fact that the wisent is overt and it is a color is not true.; sent18 -> int2: if that the wisent is a kind of overt a color is incorrect it is not federal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the wisent is not federal hold.;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent18 -> int2: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{A}{aa};"
] |
the hamper is a kind of a megacolon.
|
{D}{b}
|
[
"sent17 -> int4: if the mercury does not trench foregrounding then it is both not a linemen and not a mews.; sent4 -> int5: the mercury does not trench foregrounding if the fact that it trench foregrounding and does not trench skedaddle is not right.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the hamper is not a megacolon. ; $context$ = sent1: the hamper is not overt. sent2: if the mercury is not a kind of a tackle then the hamper is not a megacolon. sent3: if something does not color it is not federal. sent4: something does not trench foregrounding if the fact that it does trench foregrounding and it does not trench skedaddle does not hold. sent5: there is nothing such that it is overt and is not discolor. sent6: something that is not federal and/or does not color is not a kind of a color. sent7: the hamper is not a tackle if the mercury is not a linemen and it is not a mews. sent8: there is nothing that is both conquerable and a procession. sent9: a tackle is non-federal and/or is not color. sent10: there is nothing such that it is federal and a megacolon. sent11: that something is a tackle but it is not a kind of a megacolon is false if it is not a linemen. sent12: if the wisent is not a color then it is not federal. sent13: if the fact that the mercury is a tackle and is not a kind of a megacolon does not hold then the foregrounding does tackle. sent14: the hamper is not a megacolon if that that the mercury is a kind of a tackle and is not a linemen is not correct is right. sent15: if the fact that the hamper is a megacolon but it is not overt is not right then the wisent is not color. sent16: there is nothing such that it is overt and tackles. sent17: something is not a linemen and does not mew if it does not trench foregrounding. sent18: something is not federal if the fact that it is a kind of overt a color does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the fact that the wisent is overt and it is a color is not true.; sent18 -> int2: if that the wisent is a kind of overt a color is incorrect it is not federal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the wisent is not federal hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the yachtsman does not prostitute ass.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: that the yachtsman is a coucal and it is unholy is not right if the wiggler is not unholy. sent2: the aniline is not holy if there exists something such that that it does not jibe is not wrong. sent3: the sinkhole is not physical. sent4: the fact that the yachtsman is a coucal that is unholy is false. sent5: that something is nontaxable if it is unholy is right. sent6: the sinkhole does not jibe if that it is non-generational thing that does jibe is incorrect. sent7: the fact that the wiggler is a mealworm and nontaxable is right. sent8: if something is a coucal it does prostitute ass. sent9: the fact that the yachtsman is not a kind of a coucal but it is unholy is not correct if the wiggler is not unholy. sent10: the aniline does prostitute ass and it is a coucal. sent11: if something is a coucal then it does skip lilangeni. sent12: if there exists something such that that it jibes and is not dynastic is not correct then the wiggler does not jibes. sent13: that the yachtsman does not prostitute ass is correct if it is a coucal. sent14: the wiggler is a coucal or it is unholy or both if that the sinkhole does not jibe is not wrong. sent15: if the fact that the yachtsman is not a coucal but it is unholy is not right then it does not prostitute ass. sent16: that the yachtsman jibes but it is not dynastic is not correct if the sinkhole is generational. sent17: if the sinkhole is not physical it is generational a redtail.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> {B}{dg} sent3: ¬{H}{c} sent4: ¬({A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent5: (x): {B}x -> {AB}x sent6: ¬(¬{F}{c} & {D}{c}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent7: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent9: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent10: ({C}{dg} & {A}{dg}) sent11: (x): {A}x -> {GL}x sent12: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}{a} sent13: {A}{b} -> ¬{C}{b} sent14: ¬{D}{c} -> ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent15: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent16: {F}{c} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent17: ¬{H}{c} -> ({F}{c} & {G}{c})
|
[] |
[] |
the yachtsman prostitutes ass.
|
{C}{b}
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: if the yachtsman is a coucal then it prostitutes ass.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the yachtsman does not prostitute ass. ; $context$ = sent1: that the yachtsman is a coucal and it is unholy is not right if the wiggler is not unholy. sent2: the aniline is not holy if there exists something such that that it does not jibe is not wrong. sent3: the sinkhole is not physical. sent4: the fact that the yachtsman is a coucal that is unholy is false. sent5: that something is nontaxable if it is unholy is right. sent6: the sinkhole does not jibe if that it is non-generational thing that does jibe is incorrect. sent7: the fact that the wiggler is a mealworm and nontaxable is right. sent8: if something is a coucal it does prostitute ass. sent9: the fact that the yachtsman is not a kind of a coucal but it is unholy is not correct if the wiggler is not unholy. sent10: the aniline does prostitute ass and it is a coucal. sent11: if something is a coucal then it does skip lilangeni. sent12: if there exists something such that that it jibes and is not dynastic is not correct then the wiggler does not jibes. sent13: that the yachtsman does not prostitute ass is correct if it is a coucal. sent14: the wiggler is a coucal or it is unholy or both if that the sinkhole does not jibe is not wrong. sent15: if the fact that the yachtsman is not a coucal but it is unholy is not right then it does not prostitute ass. sent16: that the yachtsman jibes but it is not dynastic is not correct if the sinkhole is generational. sent17: if the sinkhole is not physical it is generational a redtail. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the caudalness happens.
|
{AA}
|
sent1: if the trenching Ross happens then the caudalness occurs. sent2: that not the Napoleonicness but the prostituting hydroelectricity happens results in that the squeegeeing happens. sent3: if the trenching Ross does not occur then that the caudalness does not occur but the extroversiveness happens is correct. sent4: the extroversiveness happens if the trenching Ross does not occur. sent5: the trenching Ross does not occur. sent6: that not the rendezvousing but the repeat occurs is caused by the trenching Ross. sent7: the trenching Ross occurs if the trenching Ross or the non-deformationalness or both happens. sent8: the fact that the extroversiveness occurs is right. sent9: if the fact that the squeegeeing occurs is not incorrect the non-deformationalness and the driving Cornus happens.
|
sent1: {A} -> {AA} sent2: (¬{E} & {F}) -> {D} sent3: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent4: ¬{A} -> {AB} sent5: ¬{A} sent6: {A} -> (¬{DK} & {JF}) sent7: ({A} v ¬{C}) -> {A} sent8: {AB} sent9: {D} -> (¬{C} & {B})
|
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: both the non-caudalness and the extroversiveness occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: (¬{AA} & {AB}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the rendezvousing does not occur and the repeating happens.
|
(¬{DK} & {JF})
|
[] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the caudalness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the trenching Ross happens then the caudalness occurs. sent2: that not the Napoleonicness but the prostituting hydroelectricity happens results in that the squeegeeing happens. sent3: if the trenching Ross does not occur then that the caudalness does not occur but the extroversiveness happens is correct. sent4: the extroversiveness happens if the trenching Ross does not occur. sent5: the trenching Ross does not occur. sent6: that not the rendezvousing but the repeat occurs is caused by the trenching Ross. sent7: the trenching Ross occurs if the trenching Ross or the non-deformationalness or both happens. sent8: the fact that the extroversiveness occurs is right. sent9: if the fact that the squeegeeing occurs is not incorrect the non-deformationalness and the driving Cornus happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent5 -> int1: both the non-caudalness and the extroversiveness occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if the fact that it is not an alertness and does spend is not correct then it is a kind of a glooming does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x)
|
sent1: if the concessionaire does not spend and does function then it does drive counterargument. sent2: the apologist is a glooming if it does not spend. sent3: if the fact that something is not a goalpost but it is a mesa does not hold then it is insensible. sent4: if that the apologist is not an alertness and does spend does not hold it is a kind of a glooming. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not spend it is a glooming. sent6: there exists something such that if the fact that it is both not sexy and not non-typical is wrong then it is nontranslational. sent7: the fact that the apologist is a glooming is not false if the fact that it is an alertness that does spend does not hold. sent8: if the apologist does not drive siren but it is a branchlet it is a kind of an alertness. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not a longboat and it does drive Saul it is a megaloblast. sent10: the apologist skips evolution if it is not a oilstone and does drive proton. sent11: there is something such that if that it is a phytochemist and it is a crucifix is wrong then that it does drive siren is not false. sent12: there is something such that if it is a tupelo it is myotonic. sent13: if the apologist is not an alertness but it spends then that it is a kind of a glooming is true. sent14: there is something such that if it is not a bitterness it is a Stanton. sent15: the apologist is a mesoderm if it is not a glooming and it is a cigarette. sent16: there is something such that if that it does trench Europan and it is a Caddo does not hold it is a sluicegate. sent17: if the proton is a glooming then that it is a caspase is right.
|
sent1: (¬{AB}{jk} & {GL}{jk}) -> {FH}{jk} sent2: ¬{AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{DT}x & {AR}x) -> {DJ}x sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> {B}x sent6: (Ex): ¬(¬{GP}x & {BF}x) -> {IB}x sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent8: (¬{EG}{aa} & {FM}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} sent9: (Ex): (¬{HE}x & {L}x) -> {BP}x sent10: (¬{FK}{aa} & {DI}{aa}) -> {BT}{aa} sent11: (Ex): ¬({IL}x & {DB}x) -> {EG}x sent12: (Ex): {EI}x -> {JI}x sent13: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent14: (Ex): ¬{AN}x -> {GA}x sent15: (¬{B}{aa} & {FB}{aa}) -> {EP}{aa} sent16: (Ex): ¬({AQ}x & {DE}x) -> {CG}x sent17: {B}{an} -> {HC}{an}
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if that it is not a goalpost and is a kind of a mesa is not true it is insensible.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{DT}x & {AR}x) -> {DJ}x
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the fact that the herbage is insensible is not false if the fact that the fact that it is both not a goalpost and a mesa is right is wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if the fact that it is not an alertness and does spend is not correct then it is a kind of a glooming does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the concessionaire does not spend and does function then it does drive counterargument. sent2: the apologist is a glooming if it does not spend. sent3: if the fact that something is not a goalpost but it is a mesa does not hold then it is insensible. sent4: if that the apologist is not an alertness and does spend does not hold it is a kind of a glooming. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not spend it is a glooming. sent6: there exists something such that if the fact that it is both not sexy and not non-typical is wrong then it is nontranslational. sent7: the fact that the apologist is a glooming is not false if the fact that it is an alertness that does spend does not hold. sent8: if the apologist does not drive siren but it is a branchlet it is a kind of an alertness. sent9: there exists something such that if it is not a longboat and it does drive Saul it is a megaloblast. sent10: the apologist skips evolution if it is not a oilstone and does drive proton. sent11: there is something such that if that it is a phytochemist and it is a crucifix is wrong then that it does drive siren is not false. sent12: there is something such that if it is a tupelo it is myotonic. sent13: if the apologist is not an alertness but it spends then that it is a kind of a glooming is true. sent14: there is something such that if it is not a bitterness it is a Stanton. sent15: the apologist is a mesoderm if it is not a glooming and it is a cigarette. sent16: there is something such that if that it does trench Europan and it is a Caddo does not hold it is a sluicegate. sent17: if the proton is a glooming then that it is a caspase is right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the geophysicist is both a dolefulness and solar.
|
({B}{aa} & {A}{aa})
|
sent1: if the curler drives anxiousness then the sweeper is a kind of a cambium that is not supportive. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not aeronautical then the prick is Zoroastrian and it is aquicultural. sent3: if that the curler is not non-ecdemic or is not unsupportive or both is incorrect the prick is not unsupportive. sent4: if that something is aquicultural and it is a Zoroastrian is incorrect then that it is not a Elymus is not incorrect. sent5: if the fact that something does not drive anxiousness and does not drive prick is false it does drive anxiousness. sent6: if something is not a Elymus that it is a dolefulness and it is solar is not true. sent7: something is non-aeronautical if it does not drive anxiousness. sent8: there is something such that it is ecdemic. sent9: if the fact that something is paranasal but it is not a kind of a fish does not hold it is a kind of a dolefulness. sent10: the sweeper does not drive anxiousness. sent11: if something is not supportive or it is a kind of a cambium or both it is not a kind of a Elymus. sent12: that the geophysicist is paranasal but it is not a kind of a fish is incorrect. sent13: the prick is not aeronautical if there is something such that it is a cambium and is not supportive. sent14: that either the curler is ecdemic or it is supportive or both is not true. sent15: the geophysicist is a dolefulness if it is not paranasal. sent16: if there are ecdemic things the fact that the curler does not drive anxiousness and does not drive prick is not right. sent17: that the throne is solar thing that is not ergotropic is incorrect if the prick is a dolefulness. sent18: something is a dolefulness if it is not paranasal. sent19: if something that is not a Elymus is aquicultural then the fact that it is a dolefulness is true.
|
sent1: {I}{c} -> ({G}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}{a} & {D}{a}) sent3: ¬({J}{c} v {H}{c}) -> ¬{H}{a} sent4: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{K}x) -> {I}x sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & {A}x) sent7: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬{F}x sent8: (Ex): {J}x sent9: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent10: ¬{I}{b} sent11: (x): (¬{H}x v {G}x) -> ¬{C}x sent12: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent13: (x): ({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}{a} sent14: ¬({J}{c} v {H}{c}) sent15: ¬{AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent16: (x): {J}x -> ¬(¬{I}{c} & ¬{K}{c}) sent17: {B}{a} -> ¬({A}{gc} & ¬{DA}{gc}) sent18: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {B}x sent19: (x): (¬{C}x & {D}x) -> {B}x
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: if that the geophysicist is paranasal and is not a fish is not true it is a dolefulness.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the geophysicist is a dolefulness.;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 & sent12 -> int2: {B}{aa};"
] |
that the fact that the geophysicist is both a dolefulness and solar is not wrong does not hold.
|
¬({B}{aa} & {A}{aa})
|
[
"sent6 -> int3: if the geophysicist is not a Elymus that it is a kind of a dolefulness and it is solar is not true.; sent4 -> int4: if that the geophysicist is aquicultural and a Zoroastrian is incorrect then it is not a Elymus.; sent5 -> int5: the curler does drive anxiousness if the fact that the fact that it does not drive anxiousness and does not drive prick is not incorrect is not correct.; sent8 & sent16 -> int6: that the curler does not drive anxiousness and it does not drive prick does not hold.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the curler does drive anxiousness.; sent1 & int7 -> int8: the sweeper is a cambium and is unsupportive.; int8 -> int9: something is a cambium but it is not supportive.; int9 & sent13 -> int10: the prick is not aeronautical.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that it is not aeronautical.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the geophysicist is both a dolefulness and solar. ; $context$ = sent1: if the curler drives anxiousness then the sweeper is a kind of a cambium that is not supportive. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not aeronautical then the prick is Zoroastrian and it is aquicultural. sent3: if that the curler is not non-ecdemic or is not unsupportive or both is incorrect the prick is not unsupportive. sent4: if that something is aquicultural and it is a Zoroastrian is incorrect then that it is not a Elymus is not incorrect. sent5: if the fact that something does not drive anxiousness and does not drive prick is false it does drive anxiousness. sent6: if something is not a Elymus that it is a dolefulness and it is solar is not true. sent7: something is non-aeronautical if it does not drive anxiousness. sent8: there is something such that it is ecdemic. sent9: if the fact that something is paranasal but it is not a kind of a fish does not hold it is a kind of a dolefulness. sent10: the sweeper does not drive anxiousness. sent11: if something is not supportive or it is a kind of a cambium or both it is not a kind of a Elymus. sent12: that the geophysicist is paranasal but it is not a kind of a fish is incorrect. sent13: the prick is not aeronautical if there is something such that it is a cambium and is not supportive. sent14: that either the curler is ecdemic or it is supportive or both is not true. sent15: the geophysicist is a dolefulness if it is not paranasal. sent16: if there are ecdemic things the fact that the curler does not drive anxiousness and does not drive prick is not right. sent17: that the throne is solar thing that is not ergotropic is incorrect if the prick is a dolefulness. sent18: something is a dolefulness if it is not paranasal. sent19: if something that is not a Elymus is aquicultural then the fact that it is a dolefulness is true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: if that the geophysicist is paranasal and is not a fish is not true it is a dolefulness.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: the geophysicist is a dolefulness.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the nickel is not octal.
|
¬{D}{a}
|
sent1: the kniphofia converts if there exists something such that that it disposes carhop and it is not a kind of a converts is wrong. sent2: something is a black. sent3: the cowslip criticizes colonization and is not non-octal if the dogfighter is not a lightsomeness. sent4: if something is not minimal then it is octal and it does dispose carhop. sent5: if a minimal thing does criticize colonization then that it is not octal is not incorrect. sent6: the nickel disposes carhop and is minimal. sent7: that the malik does criticize syndication is not false. sent8: the nickel is Trojan and it does dispose carhop. sent9: if that the organ is a caprice but it does not criticize syndication is wrong it is not minimal. sent10: the nickel does criticize colonization and does criticize syndication. sent11: the dogfighter is not a kind of a lightsomeness if the sarcomere is both not a vertex and Piagetian. sent12: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a black the fact that the organ is a kind of a caprice and does not criticize syndication is false. sent13: if the nickel does anticipate then the kniphofia anticipate. sent14: if there is something such that it is not minimal then the fact that the talus does dispose carhop and does not convert is not right.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{CH}x) -> {CH}{gu} sent2: (Ex): {G}x sent3: ¬{H}{e} -> ({C}{c} & {D}{c}) sent4: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({D}x & {A}x) sent5: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent7: {E}{jc} sent8: ({P}{a} & {A}{a}) sent9: ¬({F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{B}{d} sent10: ({C}{a} & {E}{a}) sent11: (¬{I}{f} & {J}{f}) -> ¬{H}{e} sent12: (x): {G}x -> ¬({F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent13: {GN}{a} -> {GN}{gu} sent14: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{CH}{b})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the nickel is minimal.; sent10 -> int2: that the nickel criticizes colonization is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the nickel is minimal and criticizes colonization.; sent5 -> int4: the nickel is not octal if it is minimal and it does criticize colonization.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent10 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); sent5 -> int4: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the nickel is octal.
|
{D}{a}
|
[
"sent4 -> int5: if the nickel is not minimal it is octal and does dispose carhop.;"
] | 4 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the nickel is not octal. ; $context$ = sent1: the kniphofia converts if there exists something such that that it disposes carhop and it is not a kind of a converts is wrong. sent2: something is a black. sent3: the cowslip criticizes colonization and is not non-octal if the dogfighter is not a lightsomeness. sent4: if something is not minimal then it is octal and it does dispose carhop. sent5: if a minimal thing does criticize colonization then that it is not octal is not incorrect. sent6: the nickel disposes carhop and is minimal. sent7: that the malik does criticize syndication is not false. sent8: the nickel is Trojan and it does dispose carhop. sent9: if that the organ is a caprice but it does not criticize syndication is wrong it is not minimal. sent10: the nickel does criticize colonization and does criticize syndication. sent11: the dogfighter is not a kind of a lightsomeness if the sarcomere is both not a vertex and Piagetian. sent12: if there exists something such that it is a kind of a black the fact that the organ is a kind of a caprice and does not criticize syndication is false. sent13: if the nickel does anticipate then the kniphofia anticipate. sent14: if there is something such that it is not minimal then the fact that the talus does dispose carhop and does not convert is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the nickel is minimal.; sent10 -> int2: that the nickel criticizes colonization is not incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the nickel is minimal and criticizes colonization.; sent5 -> int4: the nickel is not octal if it is minimal and it does criticize colonization.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the collaborator cantons Honegger and/or criticizes viand is not true.
|
¬({B}{b} v {C}{b})
|
sent1: the tubocurarine is not a aborticide if the flophouse is a aborticide but it is not a Odobenus. sent2: there exists something such that that it is both not a letup and a Rutherford is false. sent3: something is not non-tragic if it is a variable. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a Rutherford is right then the dreadnought does criticize khakis. sent5: the fact that the collaborator cantons Honegger is right if the dreadnought criticizes khakis. sent6: if the sultriness is endoergic the orchestrator is a variable. sent7: if the Rolodex accelerates the dreadnought is a garbology. sent8: the flophouse is a aborticide and is not a kind of a Odobenus. sent9: something does not criticize khakis if it is not a compartmentalization. sent10: if the orchestrator is tragic the formula is tragic. sent11: if a non-harmful thing is a garbology then it is not a compartmentalization. sent12: the collaborator criticizes khakis if something criticizes viand. sent13: that the collaborator does canton Honegger or it does criticize viand or both is not true if the dreadnought does not criticize khakis. sent14: something is not a letup but it is a kind of a Rutherford. sent15: something does accelerate if it is a kind of a grandson. sent16: if the fact that something is a aborticide and it is optimistic does not hold it is not harmful. sent17: the fact that the dreadnought is a kind of a aborticide that is optimistic is not right if there exists something such that it is not a aborticide. sent18: the fact that the dreadnought criticizes khakis is correct if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a letup and it is a Rutherford is not correct. sent19: if the formula is tragic the Rolodex is a grandson. sent20: the sultriness is endoergic if it is not lineal. sent21: there exists something such that the fact that it does not criticize khakis and it does criticize viand is incorrect.
|
sent1: ({H}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) -> ¬{H}{c} sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): {M}x -> {L}x sent4: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}{a} sent5: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: {N}{h} -> {M}{g} sent7: {I}{d} -> {F}{a} sent8: ({H}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{A}x sent10: {L}{g} -> {L}{f} sent11: (x): (¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent12: (x): {C}x -> {A}{b} sent13: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} v {C}{b}) sent14: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent15: (x): {J}x -> {I}x sent16: (x): ¬({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent17: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({H}{a} & {G}{a}) sent18: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent19: {L}{f} -> {J}{d} sent20: ¬{O}{h} -> {N}{h} sent21: (Ex): ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x)
|
[
"sent2 & sent18 -> int1: the dreadnought criticizes khakis.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the collaborator cantons Honegger.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent18 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent5 & int1 -> int2: {B}{b}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the fact that the collaborator does canton Honegger and/or it criticizes viand is not right is not incorrect.
|
¬({B}{b} v {C}{b})
|
[
"sent9 -> int3: if the dreadnought is not a kind of a compartmentalization then it does not criticize khakis.; sent11 -> int4: the dreadnought is not a kind of a compartmentalization if it is not harmful and it is a garbology.; sent16 -> int5: the dreadnought is not harmful if the fact that it is a aborticide and optimistic is wrong.; sent1 & sent8 -> int6: the tubocurarine is not a kind of a aborticide.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it is not a aborticide.; int7 & sent17 -> int8: the fact that the dreadnought is a kind of a aborticide and is optimistic is wrong.; int5 & int8 -> int9: that the dreadnought is not harmful is not incorrect.; sent15 -> int10: if that the Rolodex is a grandson hold it accelerates.; sent3 -> int11: the orchestrator is tragic if it is a variable.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the collaborator cantons Honegger and/or criticizes viand is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the tubocurarine is not a aborticide if the flophouse is a aborticide but it is not a Odobenus. sent2: there exists something such that that it is both not a letup and a Rutherford is false. sent3: something is not non-tragic if it is a variable. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a Rutherford is right then the dreadnought does criticize khakis. sent5: the fact that the collaborator cantons Honegger is right if the dreadnought criticizes khakis. sent6: if the sultriness is endoergic the orchestrator is a variable. sent7: if the Rolodex accelerates the dreadnought is a garbology. sent8: the flophouse is a aborticide and is not a kind of a Odobenus. sent9: something does not criticize khakis if it is not a compartmentalization. sent10: if the orchestrator is tragic the formula is tragic. sent11: if a non-harmful thing is a garbology then it is not a compartmentalization. sent12: the collaborator criticizes khakis if something criticizes viand. sent13: that the collaborator does canton Honegger or it does criticize viand or both is not true if the dreadnought does not criticize khakis. sent14: something is not a letup but it is a kind of a Rutherford. sent15: something does accelerate if it is a kind of a grandson. sent16: if the fact that something is a aborticide and it is optimistic does not hold it is not harmful. sent17: the fact that the dreadnought is a kind of a aborticide that is optimistic is not right if there exists something such that it is not a aborticide. sent18: the fact that the dreadnought criticizes khakis is correct if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a letup and it is a Rutherford is not correct. sent19: if the formula is tragic the Rolodex is a grandson. sent20: the sultriness is endoergic if it is not lineal. sent21: there exists something such that the fact that it does not criticize khakis and it does criticize viand is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent18 -> int1: the dreadnought criticizes khakis.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the collaborator cantons Honegger.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that both the criticizing Musgu and the hydropathicness occurs is wrong.
|
¬({C} & {A})
|
sent1: the tenanting Bahamian happens. sent2: the nonastringentness and the criticizing capo happens if the tenanting claymore does not occur. sent3: the cantoning turbulence occurs. sent4: the non-Tantricness is prevented by that the torrent does not occur and the disjunction does not occur. sent5: that the housework does not occur brings about that both the psychologicalness and the ophthalmectomy occurs. sent6: the reputableness and/or the masking happens. sent7: the criticizing Musgu occurs if the cantoning turbulence happens. sent8: both the greensness and the cantoning mannequin occurs if the stopper does not occur. sent9: if that the cantoning collected does not occur is right then the tempering does not occur and the disposing Enesco does not occur. sent10: that the nonprescriptionness does not occur and the achlorhydricness does not occur is triggered by that the psychologicalness occurs. sent11: that the endoergicness happens is not wrong. sent12: not the clemency but the cantoning turbulence occurs if the octangularness happens. sent13: if the disreputableness does not occur and/or the mask happens the cantoning collected does not occur. sent14: the cantoning collected does not occur and the tenanting tire does not occur. sent15: the fact that the googling and the non-excrescentness happens is wrong if the greening happens. sent16: the hydropathicness occurs if the clemency happens. sent17: if the tempering does not occur and the disposing Enesco does not occur then the squeaker does not occur. sent18: if the nonprescriptionness does not occur the tenanting claymore does not occur. sent19: the octangularness occurs if the fact that the googling and the non-excrescentness happens is not correct. sent20: the housework does not occur if that the housework occurs and the tenanting tire does not occur does not hold. sent21: that the clemency and the criticizing Musgu happens is incorrect if the cantoning turbulence does not occur. sent22: that the stoppering does not occur is triggered by that the squeaker does not occur and the nonastringentness occurs. sent23: if the clemency does not occur the fact that the criticizing Musgu and the hydropathicness occurs is incorrect. sent24: the clemency happens if the cantoning collected does not occur and the tenanting tire does not occur.
|
sent1: {IS} sent2: ¬{N} -> ({L} & {M}) sent3: {D} sent4: (¬{HA} & ¬{HP}) -> {AN} sent5: ¬{S} -> ({Q} & {R}) sent6: (¬{AC} v {AD}) sent7: {D} -> {C} sent8: ¬{J} -> ({H} & {I}) sent9: ¬{AA} -> (¬{T} & ¬{U}) sent10: {Q} -> (¬{O} & ¬{P}) sent11: {FT} sent12: {E} -> (¬{B} & {D}) sent13: (¬{AC} v {AD}) -> ¬{AA} sent14: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent15: {H} -> ¬({F} & ¬{G}) sent16: {B} -> {A} sent17: (¬{T} & ¬{U}) -> ¬{K} sent18: ¬{O} -> ¬{N} sent19: ¬({F} & ¬{G}) -> {E} sent20: ¬({S} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{S} sent21: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent22: (¬{K} & {L}) -> ¬{J} sent23: ¬{B} -> ¬({C} & {A}) sent24: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B}
|
[
"sent24 & sent14 -> int1: the clemency occurs.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the hydropathicness occurs.; sent7 & sent3 -> int3: the criticizing Musgu happens.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent24 & sent14 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent16 -> int2: {A}; sent7 & sent3 -> int3: {C}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the ornamentation happens.
|
{DB}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that both the criticizing Musgu and the hydropathicness occurs is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the tenanting Bahamian happens. sent2: the nonastringentness and the criticizing capo happens if the tenanting claymore does not occur. sent3: the cantoning turbulence occurs. sent4: the non-Tantricness is prevented by that the torrent does not occur and the disjunction does not occur. sent5: that the housework does not occur brings about that both the psychologicalness and the ophthalmectomy occurs. sent6: the reputableness and/or the masking happens. sent7: the criticizing Musgu occurs if the cantoning turbulence happens. sent8: both the greensness and the cantoning mannequin occurs if the stopper does not occur. sent9: if that the cantoning collected does not occur is right then the tempering does not occur and the disposing Enesco does not occur. sent10: that the nonprescriptionness does not occur and the achlorhydricness does not occur is triggered by that the psychologicalness occurs. sent11: that the endoergicness happens is not wrong. sent12: not the clemency but the cantoning turbulence occurs if the octangularness happens. sent13: if the disreputableness does not occur and/or the mask happens the cantoning collected does not occur. sent14: the cantoning collected does not occur and the tenanting tire does not occur. sent15: the fact that the googling and the non-excrescentness happens is wrong if the greening happens. sent16: the hydropathicness occurs if the clemency happens. sent17: if the tempering does not occur and the disposing Enesco does not occur then the squeaker does not occur. sent18: if the nonprescriptionness does not occur the tenanting claymore does not occur. sent19: the octangularness occurs if the fact that the googling and the non-excrescentness happens is not correct. sent20: the housework does not occur if that the housework occurs and the tenanting tire does not occur does not hold. sent21: that the clemency and the criticizing Musgu happens is incorrect if the cantoning turbulence does not occur. sent22: that the stoppering does not occur is triggered by that the squeaker does not occur and the nonastringentness occurs. sent23: if the clemency does not occur the fact that the criticizing Musgu and the hydropathicness occurs is incorrect. sent24: the clemency happens if the cantoning collected does not occur and the tenanting tire does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent24 & sent14 -> int1: the clemency occurs.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the hydropathicness occurs.; sent7 & sent3 -> int3: the criticizing Musgu happens.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the Wilsonianness but not the Orphicness happens does not hold.
|
¬({E} & ¬{F})
|
sent1: if the quotation does not occur that the tenanting Kropotkin does not occur but the quarterbacking happens does not hold. sent2: the outlet does not occur. sent3: the fountain does not occur if both the tenanting Kropotkin and the quotation occurs. sent4: the fact that both the Wilsonianness and the non-Orphicness happens is not correct if the fact that the fountain does not occur hold. sent5: that both the Wilsonianness and the Orphicness occurs is false. sent6: if the fountain does not occur then the fact that the Wilsonianness occurs and the Orphicness occurs does not hold. sent7: the vocationalness does not occur if that the vocationalness happens and the overshooting occurs is not correct. sent8: if the fact that the quarterback does not occur and the quotation does not occur is false then the Orphicness does not occur. sent9: if both the non-Wilsonianness and the fountain happens then the fact that the quotation does not occur is right. sent10: that the Orphicness occurs and the imperative occurs is not correct if the vocationalness does not occur. sent11: the fact that the quarterbacking happens hold. sent12: the Orphicness does not occur if the fact that the Orphicness happens and the imperativeness occurs is not true. sent13: that the advising happens is not false if the fact that the tenanting Kropotkin does not occur and the quarterbacking occurs is not correct. sent14: the imperative happens. sent15: the imperative happens and the quotation occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & {B}) sent2: ¬{AL} sent3: ({A} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent4: ¬{D} -> ¬({E} & ¬{F}) sent5: ¬({E} & {F}) sent6: ¬{D} -> ¬({E} & {F}) sent7: ¬({H} & {J}) -> ¬{H} sent8: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{F} sent9: (¬{E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} sent10: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & {G}) sent11: {B} sent12: ¬({F} & {G}) -> ¬{F} sent13: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) -> {GK} sent14: {G} sent15: ({G} & {C})
|
[
"sent15 -> int1: the quotation happens.;"
] |
[
"sent15 -> int1: {C};"
] |
the advising occurs.
|
{GK}
|
[] | 11 | 4 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the Wilsonianness but not the Orphicness happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the quotation does not occur that the tenanting Kropotkin does not occur but the quarterbacking happens does not hold. sent2: the outlet does not occur. sent3: the fountain does not occur if both the tenanting Kropotkin and the quotation occurs. sent4: the fact that both the Wilsonianness and the non-Orphicness happens is not correct if the fact that the fountain does not occur hold. sent5: that both the Wilsonianness and the Orphicness occurs is false. sent6: if the fountain does not occur then the fact that the Wilsonianness occurs and the Orphicness occurs does not hold. sent7: the vocationalness does not occur if that the vocationalness happens and the overshooting occurs is not correct. sent8: if the fact that the quarterback does not occur and the quotation does not occur is false then the Orphicness does not occur. sent9: if both the non-Wilsonianness and the fountain happens then the fact that the quotation does not occur is right. sent10: that the Orphicness occurs and the imperative occurs is not correct if the vocationalness does not occur. sent11: the fact that the quarterbacking happens hold. sent12: the Orphicness does not occur if the fact that the Orphicness happens and the imperativeness occurs is not true. sent13: that the advising happens is not false if the fact that the tenanting Kropotkin does not occur and the quarterbacking occurs is not correct. sent14: the imperative happens. sent15: the imperative happens and the quotation occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 -> int1: the quotation happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the neck does criticize FHLMC.
|
{D}{c}
|
sent1: if the neck disposes consulate but it does not frazzle then it does criticize FHLMC. sent2: the neck disposes consulate and is not a frazzle if the interphone does not canton gastrolobium. sent3: the interphone does not criticize FHLMC. sent4: that the neck does not dispose consulate but it criticizes FHLMC is not right if the tetrodotoxin cantons gastrolobium. sent5: if the neck disposes consulate and frazzles it does criticize FHLMC. sent6: if the interphone is a thermoplastic then the tetrodotoxin does canton gastrolobium and does not frazzle. sent7: the fact that the tetrodotoxin is euphonic and is not a crochet does not hold.
|
sent1: ({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> {D}{c} sent2: ¬{B}{b} -> ({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent3: ¬{D}{b} sent4: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{c} & {D}{c}) sent5: ({A}{c} & {C}{c}) -> {D}{c} sent6: {E}{b} -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent7: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[] |
[] |
the neck does not criticize FHLMC.
|
¬{D}{c}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the neck does criticize FHLMC. ; $context$ = sent1: if the neck disposes consulate but it does not frazzle then it does criticize FHLMC. sent2: the neck disposes consulate and is not a frazzle if the interphone does not canton gastrolobium. sent3: the interphone does not criticize FHLMC. sent4: that the neck does not dispose consulate but it criticizes FHLMC is not right if the tetrodotoxin cantons gastrolobium. sent5: if the neck disposes consulate and frazzles it does criticize FHLMC. sent6: if the interphone is a thermoplastic then the tetrodotoxin does canton gastrolobium and does not frazzle. sent7: the fact that the tetrodotoxin is euphonic and is not a crochet does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the criticizing Bessera occurs.
|
{C}
|
sent1: if the grip does not occur then the northwester occurs and the reloading happens. sent2: the disturbance does not occur and the cantoning compost does not occur if the swerving occurs. sent3: that the northwester happens leads to the swerving. sent4: the non-three-dimensionalness brings about that the grip does not occur and the cantoning Kickapoo happens. sent5: the criticizing monolatry but not the nonmechanicalness happens. sent6: if the attainder does not occur but the tenanting lobbyist occurs then the branching does not occur. sent7: that the cantoning falsehood does not occur yields that the nonmechanicalness and the criticizing monolatry occurs. sent8: if the nonmechanicalness happens and the criticizing monolatry occurs then that the criticizing Bessera does not occur hold. sent9: that the miscue and the hydroelectricity happens is brought about by that the branch does not occur. sent10: that the three-dimensionalness does not occur is brought about by that the miscue occurs. sent11: if the disturbance does not occur then the submergence but not the cantoning falsehood happens. sent12: if that the criticizing monolatry occurs is true then the criticizing Bessera happens. sent13: if the criticizing acerbity does not occur not the attainder but the tenanting lobbyist occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) sent2: {H} -> (¬{F} & ¬{G}) sent3: {I} -> {H} sent4: ¬{M} -> (¬{K} & {L}) sent5: ({A} & ¬{B}) sent6: (¬{Q} & {R}) -> ¬{P} sent7: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {A}) sent8: ({B} & {A}) -> ¬{C} sent9: ¬{P} -> ({N} & {O}) sent10: {N} -> ¬{M} sent11: ¬{F} -> ({E} & ¬{D}) sent12: {A} -> {C} sent13: ¬{S} -> (¬{Q} & {R})
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the criticizing monolatry happens.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: {A}; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the criticizing Bessera does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
[] | 16 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the criticizing Bessera occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the grip does not occur then the northwester occurs and the reloading happens. sent2: the disturbance does not occur and the cantoning compost does not occur if the swerving occurs. sent3: that the northwester happens leads to the swerving. sent4: the non-three-dimensionalness brings about that the grip does not occur and the cantoning Kickapoo happens. sent5: the criticizing monolatry but not the nonmechanicalness happens. sent6: if the attainder does not occur but the tenanting lobbyist occurs then the branching does not occur. sent7: that the cantoning falsehood does not occur yields that the nonmechanicalness and the criticizing monolatry occurs. sent8: if the nonmechanicalness happens and the criticizing monolatry occurs then that the criticizing Bessera does not occur hold. sent9: that the miscue and the hydroelectricity happens is brought about by that the branch does not occur. sent10: that the three-dimensionalness does not occur is brought about by that the miscue occurs. sent11: if the disturbance does not occur then the submergence but not the cantoning falsehood happens. sent12: if that the criticizing monolatry occurs is true then the criticizing Bessera happens. sent13: if the criticizing acerbity does not occur not the attainder but the tenanting lobbyist occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the criticizing monolatry happens.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the maleate is a karyolymph.
|
{A}{c}
|
sent1: the trouper is not lactic if the chloroprene is not a bonsai and it is not a Tageteste. sent2: the trouper is not lactic if the chloroprene is a bonsai and not a Tageteste. sent3: the fact that if the chloroprene is not a bonsai and is a kind of a Tageteste then the trouper is not lactic hold. sent4: the fact that the fact that the chloroprene is not a bonsai but it is a kind of a Tageteste hold is false. sent5: if the fact that the chloroprene is not a bonsai and it is not a Tageteste does not hold the maleate is a karyolymph. sent6: the chloroprene is not lactic if the trouper is not a Tageteste and it is not a bonsai. sent7: if the trouper does not canton maleate the chloroprene is not a karyolymph and/or it is lactic. sent8: that the chloroprene is a kind of a valuable is not false. sent9: the fact that the chloroprene is a bonsai but it is not a Tageteste is not correct.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {A}{c} sent6: (¬{AB}{b} & ¬{AA}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent8: {ES}{a} sent9: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the chloroprene is not a bonsai and not a Tageteste.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the trouper is not lactic.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent1 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b};"
] |
the maleate is not a kind of a karyolymph.
|
¬{A}{c}
|
[] | 6 | 4 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the maleate is a karyolymph. ; $context$ = sent1: the trouper is not lactic if the chloroprene is not a bonsai and it is not a Tageteste. sent2: the trouper is not lactic if the chloroprene is a bonsai and not a Tageteste. sent3: the fact that if the chloroprene is not a bonsai and is a kind of a Tageteste then the trouper is not lactic hold. sent4: the fact that the fact that the chloroprene is not a bonsai but it is a kind of a Tageteste hold is false. sent5: if the fact that the chloroprene is not a bonsai and it is not a Tageteste does not hold the maleate is a karyolymph. sent6: the chloroprene is not lactic if the trouper is not a Tageteste and it is not a bonsai. sent7: if the trouper does not canton maleate the chloroprene is not a karyolymph and/or it is lactic. sent8: that the chloroprene is a kind of a valuable is not false. sent9: the fact that the chloroprene is a bonsai but it is not a Tageteste is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the chloroprene is not a bonsai and not a Tageteste.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the trouper is not lactic.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the mousse is a kind of an adjective is true.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: if the procurator is first the mousse victuals. sent2: if the mousse is not neuroanatomic and it is not a diethylstilbesterol then it is adjective. sent3: if the mousse is agrologic then the tapeworm is a kind of an adjective. sent4: the mousse is not a diethylstilbesterol. sent5: the mousse is not neuroanatomic and it is not a diethylstilbesterol. sent6: the fact that the alsatian is non-ammonitic thing that does not telepathize is not right. sent7: the procurator does not victual if the fact that the messmate is a hind but it does not victual is false. sent8: the fact that if the procurator does not victual then the fact that the mousse is both agrologic and not an adjective is correct is true. sent9: if something does victual it is agrologic. sent10: the hem is not neuroanatomic.
|
sent1: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} sent2: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{l} sent4: ¬{AB}{a} sent5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: ¬(¬{F}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) sent7: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent8: ¬{C}{b} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent9: (x): {C}x -> {A}x sent10: ¬{AA}{bf}
|
[
"sent2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the mousse is not an adjective.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the mousse is a kind of an adjective is true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the procurator is first the mousse victuals. sent2: if the mousse is not neuroanatomic and it is not a diethylstilbesterol then it is adjective. sent3: if the mousse is agrologic then the tapeworm is a kind of an adjective. sent4: the mousse is not a diethylstilbesterol. sent5: the mousse is not neuroanatomic and it is not a diethylstilbesterol. sent6: the fact that the alsatian is non-ammonitic thing that does not telepathize is not right. sent7: the procurator does not victual if the fact that the messmate is a hind but it does not victual is false. sent8: the fact that if the procurator does not victual then the fact that the mousse is both agrologic and not an adjective is correct is true. sent9: if something does victual it is agrologic. sent10: the hem is not neuroanatomic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the punning happens.
|
{C}
|
sent1: both the non-Aleutianness and the osteotomy occurs. sent2: both the non-oviparousness and the Germanism happens. sent3: the non-Pakistaniness and the squawk happens. sent4: if the tuning does not occur then the fact that the Aleutianness does not occur and the osteotomy does not occur does not hold. sent5: the non-sociableness and the amnioticness occurs. sent6: the succeeding happens if the oversight happens. sent7: the plantalness happens. sent8: the Aleutianness does not occur. sent9: the fact that if the cantoning quietist happens then the vasomotorness happens is not false. sent10: the praying occurs. sent11: that the tenanting Percheron occurs prevents that the intuiting does not occur. sent12: the wildfire occurs if the monotheisticness occurs.
|
sent1: (¬{A} & {B}) sent2: (¬{EE} & {EA}) sent3: (¬{FH} & {AE}) sent4: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent5: (¬{IJ} & {IC}) sent6: {FP} -> {FG} sent7: {GL} sent8: ¬{A} sent9: {CD} -> {AA} sent10: {DI} sent11: {EI} -> {AQ} sent12: {BQ} -> {ER}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: that the osteotomy happens is not false.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {B};"
] |
the punning does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
[] | 6 | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the punning happens. ; $context$ = sent1: both the non-Aleutianness and the osteotomy occurs. sent2: both the non-oviparousness and the Germanism happens. sent3: the non-Pakistaniness and the squawk happens. sent4: if the tuning does not occur then the fact that the Aleutianness does not occur and the osteotomy does not occur does not hold. sent5: the non-sociableness and the amnioticness occurs. sent6: the succeeding happens if the oversight happens. sent7: the plantalness happens. sent8: the Aleutianness does not occur. sent9: the fact that if the cantoning quietist happens then the vasomotorness happens is not false. sent10: the praying occurs. sent11: that the tenanting Percheron occurs prevents that the intuiting does not occur. sent12: the wildfire occurs if the monotheisticness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: that the osteotomy happens is not false.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the polygraph cantons polygraph.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: the fact that the polygraph is not an oyster but it is Saharan does not hold. sent2: the polygraph is both not an oyster and a Saharan if it does canton polygraph. sent3: the polygraph is Saharan.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent2: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: {AB}{a}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the polygraph cantons polygraph.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the polygraph is not a kind of an oyster and is a Saharan.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); int1 & sent1 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the polygraph cantons polygraph. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the polygraph is not an oyster but it is Saharan does not hold. sent2: the polygraph is both not an oyster and a Saharan if it does canton polygraph. sent3: the polygraph is Saharan. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the polygraph cantons polygraph.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the polygraph is not a kind of an oyster and is a Saharan.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the elderberry does not tenant compost is correct.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: if there exists something such that it criticizes Percheron then the elderberry tenants compost. sent2: something does criticize Percheron.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent2: (Ex): {A}x
|
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the elderberry does not tenant compost is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it criticizes Percheron then the elderberry tenants compost. sent2: something does criticize Percheron. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if it is a vegetarian then the fact that it is not hydrometric and it disposes plasmin is wrong does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x))
|
sent1: that something is not papillary but hydrometric does not hold if it pares. sent2: if the passionflower is a kind of a vegetarian that it is not hydrometric and it does dispose plasmin is incorrect. sent3: if the passionflower is a bicentennial then that it is both not a toyshop and a vegetarian does not hold. sent4: if the plasmin is a kind of a esophagoscope that it is not non-spondaic but hydrometric is not true. sent5: the passionflower is not hydrometric but it does dispose plasmin if that it is a vegetarian is right. sent6: if the passionflower is a vegetarian that it is hydrometric thing that does dispose plasmin does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a vegetarian is not false the fact that it is hydrometric thing that disposes plasmin does not hold.
|
sent1: (x): {T}x -> ¬(¬{DH}x & {AA}x) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: {F}{aa} -> ¬(¬{D}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent4: {G}{dt} -> ¬({DD}{dt} & {AA}{dt}) sent5: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the passionflower is both not papillary and hydrometric is incorrect if it does pare.
|
{T}{aa} -> ¬(¬{DH}{aa} & {AA}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is a vegetarian then the fact that it is not hydrometric and it disposes plasmin is wrong does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is not papillary but hydrometric does not hold if it pares. sent2: if the passionflower is a kind of a vegetarian that it is not hydrometric and it does dispose plasmin is incorrect. sent3: if the passionflower is a bicentennial then that it is both not a toyshop and a vegetarian does not hold. sent4: if the plasmin is a kind of a esophagoscope that it is not non-spondaic but hydrometric is not true. sent5: the passionflower is not hydrometric but it does dispose plasmin if that it is a vegetarian is right. sent6: if the passionflower is a vegetarian that it is hydrometric thing that does dispose plasmin does not hold. sent7: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a vegetarian is not false the fact that it is hydrometric thing that disposes plasmin does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the animalcule is a spitz.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: the copolymer is not exoteric and is economic. sent2: the animalcule is not a kind of a spitz if it is a cragged and criticizes bathe. sent3: The bathe criticizes animalcule. sent4: the copolymer is non-exoteric. sent5: the animalcule criticizes bathe. sent6: if the copolymer is both not exoteric and economic then the animalcule is a cragged.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent2: ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent3: {AC}{aa} sent4: ¬{AA}{a} sent5: {A}{b} sent6: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b}
|
[
"sent6 & sent1 -> int1: the animalcule is a cragged.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the animalcule is a kind of a cragged and it does criticize bathe.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent1 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent5 -> int2: ({B}{b} & {A}{b}); int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the animalcule is a spitz. ; $context$ = sent1: the copolymer is not exoteric and is economic. sent2: the animalcule is not a kind of a spitz if it is a cragged and criticizes bathe. sent3: The bathe criticizes animalcule. sent4: the copolymer is non-exoteric. sent5: the animalcule criticizes bathe. sent6: if the copolymer is both not exoteric and economic then the animalcule is a cragged. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent1 -> int1: the animalcule is a cragged.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the animalcule is a kind of a cragged and it does criticize bathe.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pillory is unprotective and is a Giraffidae.
|
({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
sent1: the pillory is not a putterer. sent2: the pillory is unsalable. sent3: the pillory is a kind of unprotective a Giraffidae if it is not a biquadratic. sent4: if the chromosphere is not a kind of a Olympus but it is a biquadratic the NSAID is not a Giraffidae. sent5: that if the Hull is not the Saxon the Hull is a Giraffidae is right. sent6: a mechanical thing is both not a Olympus and biquadratic. sent7: that the pillory is a blemish is not incorrect. sent8: if the armadillo does not criticize drawl then it disposes Neruda and it is unwary. sent9: the pillory is not a biquadratic. sent10: the breeches is not unprotective. sent11: the pillory does dispose resourcefulness. sent12: the Pollack cantons fief and it is a biquadratic if it is not a hardtack. sent13: if something is not a compressed but it is animist it is mechanical. sent14: the quarreler is a vestmented and is biquadratic.
|
sent1: ¬{H}{a} sent2: {HS}{a} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent4: (¬{B}{c} & {A}{c}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent5: ¬{EU}{r} -> {AB}{r} sent6: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) sent7: {IM}{a} sent8: ¬{AJ}{in} -> ({IT}{in} & {DT}{in}) sent9: ¬{A}{a} sent10: ¬{AA}{da} sent11: {CO}{a} sent12: ¬{K}{ca} -> ({AF}{ca} & {A}{ca}) sent13: (x): (¬{D}x & {E}x) -> {C}x sent14: ({AO}{fs} & {A}{fs})
|
[
"sent3 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the pillory is a kind of unprotective thing that is a Giraffidae does not hold.
|
¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: if that the chromosphere is mechanical is right it is not a Olympus but biquadratic.; sent13 -> int2: if the chromosphere is not a compressed and is not non-animist it is mechanical.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the pillory is unprotective and is a Giraffidae. ; $context$ = sent1: the pillory is not a putterer. sent2: the pillory is unsalable. sent3: the pillory is a kind of unprotective a Giraffidae if it is not a biquadratic. sent4: if the chromosphere is not a kind of a Olympus but it is a biquadratic the NSAID is not a Giraffidae. sent5: that if the Hull is not the Saxon the Hull is a Giraffidae is right. sent6: a mechanical thing is both not a Olympus and biquadratic. sent7: that the pillory is a blemish is not incorrect. sent8: if the armadillo does not criticize drawl then it disposes Neruda and it is unwary. sent9: the pillory is not a biquadratic. sent10: the breeches is not unprotective. sent11: the pillory does dispose resourcefulness. sent12: the Pollack cantons fief and it is a biquadratic if it is not a hardtack. sent13: if something is not a compressed but it is animist it is mechanical. sent14: the quarreler is a vestmented and is biquadratic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the placebo does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the fact that not the thermostaticsness but the tenanting consulate happens is not true if the sulking does not occur. sent2: the thrombectomy happens. sent3: the unpaintableness happens. sent4: that both the starlight and the placebo happens is brought about by that the unpaintableness does not occur. sent5: the fact that the tenanting consulate does not occur and the consumption does not occur is incorrect if the thermostaticsness happens. sent6: the criticizing stonework does not occur. sent7: if the southness occurs the unpaintableness does not occur. sent8: both the adagio and the axillariness happens. sent9: the criticizing logjam does not occur. sent10: the consumption does not occur if that both the non-thermostaticsness and the tenanting consulate occurs is false. sent11: the starlight happens. sent12: the mecopterousness occurs. sent13: if the fact that the unpaintableness but not the starlight occurs does not hold that the headshake does not occur is true. sent14: the fact that the dextralness happens hold. sent15: that the placebo occurs and the south occurs is triggered by that the consumption does not occur. sent16: the encore does not occur. sent17: the cyclothymicness happens. sent18: the brisantness happens if the stylishness occurs. sent19: the cantoning chest is prevented by that the kneeling occurs and the christianness occurs. sent20: the stylishness occurs but the bitchery does not occur if the pentecostalness occurs. sent21: if the brisantness occurs then the sulking does not occur but the thermostaticsness occurs. sent22: the cantoning knight-errant is prevented by that the institutionalness and the currentness happens.
|
sent1: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{G} & {F}) sent2: {EF} sent3: {B} sent4: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) sent5: {G} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) sent6: ¬{DA} sent7: {D} -> ¬{B} sent8: ({GA} & {CI}) sent9: ¬{EC} sent10: ¬(¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent11: {A} sent12: {AR} sent13: ¬({B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{HQ} sent14: {AL} sent15: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) sent16: ¬{CK} sent17: {CM} sent18: {J} -> {I} sent19: ({CU} & {GH}) -> ¬{EA} sent20: {L} -> ({J} & ¬{K}) sent21: {I} -> (¬{H} & {G}) sent22: ({GD} & {AB}) -> ¬{FS}
|
[
"sent11 & sent3 -> int1: the starlight and the unpaintableness occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent3 -> int1: ({A} & {B});"
] |
the placebo happens.
|
{C}
|
[] | 11 | 2 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the placebo does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that not the thermostaticsness but the tenanting consulate happens is not true if the sulking does not occur. sent2: the thrombectomy happens. sent3: the unpaintableness happens. sent4: that both the starlight and the placebo happens is brought about by that the unpaintableness does not occur. sent5: the fact that the tenanting consulate does not occur and the consumption does not occur is incorrect if the thermostaticsness happens. sent6: the criticizing stonework does not occur. sent7: if the southness occurs the unpaintableness does not occur. sent8: both the adagio and the axillariness happens. sent9: the criticizing logjam does not occur. sent10: the consumption does not occur if that both the non-thermostaticsness and the tenanting consulate occurs is false. sent11: the starlight happens. sent12: the mecopterousness occurs. sent13: if the fact that the unpaintableness but not the starlight occurs does not hold that the headshake does not occur is true. sent14: the fact that the dextralness happens hold. sent15: that the placebo occurs and the south occurs is triggered by that the consumption does not occur. sent16: the encore does not occur. sent17: the cyclothymicness happens. sent18: the brisantness happens if the stylishness occurs. sent19: the cantoning chest is prevented by that the kneeling occurs and the christianness occurs. sent20: the stylishness occurs but the bitchery does not occur if the pentecostalness occurs. sent21: if the brisantness occurs then the sulking does not occur but the thermostaticsness occurs. sent22: the cantoning knight-errant is prevented by that the institutionalness and the currentness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent3 -> int1: the starlight and the unpaintableness occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sherry temporizes.
|
{AA}{aa}
|
sent1: if the fact that something is a friendly is not false then that it cantons sherry is correct. sent2: there exists something such that it is xenogeneic. sent3: if something is not a kind of a friendly it does canton sherry. sent4: the sherry does canton sherry. sent5: the brogan is a friendly if the fact that it does not chloroform and is not econometrics is wrong. sent6: if there exists something such that it is not eponymous the fact that the groundsman does not temporize is not false. sent7: if something is not friendly but xenogeneic it does not temporize. sent8: the sherry cantons sherry if it is not a friendly. sent9: something temporizes and it does canton sherry if it is not a friendly. sent10: there is something such that it is not xenogeneic. sent11: if there is something such that it is not xenogeneic the fact that the sherry is not friendly is right.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> {AB}x sent2: (Ex): {B}x sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x sent4: {AB}{aa} sent5: ¬(¬{D}{ia} & ¬{E}{ia}) -> {A}{ia} sent6: (x): ¬{GJ}x -> ¬{AA}{bh} sent7: (x): (¬{A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{AA}x sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent11: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}{aa}
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the sherry temporizes and it cantons sherry if it is not a kind of a friendly.; sent10 & sent11 -> int2: that the sherry is not a kind of a friendly is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the sherry does temporize and it cantons sherry.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent10 & sent11 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the sherry does not temporize is true.
|
¬{AA}{aa}
|
[
"sent7 -> int4: if the sherry is not a friendly but it is xenogeneic it does not temporize.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the sherry temporizes. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something is a friendly is not false then that it cantons sherry is correct. sent2: there exists something such that it is xenogeneic. sent3: if something is not a kind of a friendly it does canton sherry. sent4: the sherry does canton sherry. sent5: the brogan is a friendly if the fact that it does not chloroform and is not econometrics is wrong. sent6: if there exists something such that it is not eponymous the fact that the groundsman does not temporize is not false. sent7: if something is not friendly but xenogeneic it does not temporize. sent8: the sherry cantons sherry if it is not a friendly. sent9: something temporizes and it does canton sherry if it is not a friendly. sent10: there is something such that it is not xenogeneic. sent11: if there is something such that it is not xenogeneic the fact that the sherry is not friendly is right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: the sherry temporizes and it cantons sherry if it is not a kind of a friendly.; sent10 & sent11 -> int2: that the sherry is not a kind of a friendly is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the sherry does temporize and it cantons sherry.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the catalyst is not indistinguishable.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: something is not indistinguishable if that it is nondeductible and cantons Branchiobdella is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a sachet and/or it does not tenant Pimpinella is incorrect. sent3: the catalyst is not deconstructionist and is not a kind of a Ney. sent4: the catalyst is indistinguishable if it is not deconstructionist and it is not a Ney. sent5: the catalyst is non-hydrous and not a boisterousness. sent6: if the catalyst is a Hanoverian but it is not a Ney it is a kind of a pyroxene. sent7: the catalyst is Wilsonian if it is valuable and it is not deconstructionist. sent8: something is not ateleiotic if the fact that it is not a mihrab but ateleiotic is wrong. sent9: if the fact that something is not a stocks but it does dispose Cercidium is false then it does not canton Branchiobdella. sent10: a non-ateleiotic thing is not a stocks and disposes Cercidium. sent11: if the Redskin is both not a robbery and not a bestiality it is deconstructionist. sent12: the fact that the calender is not a mihrab but it is ateleiotic is not true if that it tenants Seth is not wrong. sent13: if the catalyst is not deconstructionist but it is a Ney it is indistinguishable. sent14: the fact that if the Tenoretic is the friendly but it is not indistinguishable then the fact that the Tenoretic is a millivolt hold is not wrong. sent15: the catalyst is nondeductible and/or it is indistinguishable if the noticer does not canton Branchiobdella. sent16: if the calender does not stock and disposes Cercidium the noticer is not nondeductible. sent17: if the fact that the doubletree is not ateleiotic and it does not tenant Seth is wrong then the calender is not ateleiotic. sent18: if the catalyst is deconstructionist and not a Ney it is indistinguishable. sent19: the catalyst is not a situation.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x v ¬{J}x) sent3: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent5: (¬{IN}{a} & ¬{CL}{a}) sent6: ({BP}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {FK}{a} sent7: ({FT}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) -> {N}{a} sent8: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {F}x) -> ¬{F}x sent9: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent10: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & {D}x) sent11: (¬{ED}{df} & ¬{FJ}{df}) -> {AA}{df} sent12: {G}{c} -> ¬(¬{H}{c} & {F}{c}) sent13: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent14: ({CS}{bm} & ¬{B}{bm}) -> {AF}{bm} sent15: ¬{C}{b} -> ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent16: (¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent17: ¬(¬{F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent18: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent19: ¬{AG}{a}
|
[
"sent4 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the catalyst is not indistinguishable.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: if that the catalyst is nondeductible thing that does canton Branchiobdella does not hold it is not indistinguishable.; sent10 -> int2: if the calender is not ateleiotic then it is not a stocks and it disposes Cercidium.;"
] | 7 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the catalyst is not indistinguishable. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not indistinguishable if that it is nondeductible and cantons Branchiobdella is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a sachet and/or it does not tenant Pimpinella is incorrect. sent3: the catalyst is not deconstructionist and is not a kind of a Ney. sent4: the catalyst is indistinguishable if it is not deconstructionist and it is not a Ney. sent5: the catalyst is non-hydrous and not a boisterousness. sent6: if the catalyst is a Hanoverian but it is not a Ney it is a kind of a pyroxene. sent7: the catalyst is Wilsonian if it is valuable and it is not deconstructionist. sent8: something is not ateleiotic if the fact that it is not a mihrab but ateleiotic is wrong. sent9: if the fact that something is not a stocks but it does dispose Cercidium is false then it does not canton Branchiobdella. sent10: a non-ateleiotic thing is not a stocks and disposes Cercidium. sent11: if the Redskin is both not a robbery and not a bestiality it is deconstructionist. sent12: the fact that the calender is not a mihrab but it is ateleiotic is not true if that it tenants Seth is not wrong. sent13: if the catalyst is not deconstructionist but it is a Ney it is indistinguishable. sent14: the fact that if the Tenoretic is the friendly but it is not indistinguishable then the fact that the Tenoretic is a millivolt hold is not wrong. sent15: the catalyst is nondeductible and/or it is indistinguishable if the noticer does not canton Branchiobdella. sent16: if the calender does not stock and disposes Cercidium the noticer is not nondeductible. sent17: if the fact that the doubletree is not ateleiotic and it does not tenant Seth is wrong then the calender is not ateleiotic. sent18: if the catalyst is deconstructionist and not a Ney it is indistinguishable. sent19: the catalyst is not a situation. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the birdying does not occur and the dereliction does not occur.
|
(¬{B} & ¬{C})
|
sent1: the sustenance does not occur. sent2: the malting does not occur. sent3: if both the birdying and the sustenance occurs the amitoticness does not occur. sent4: the chirrup does not occur. sent5: the birdie does not occur if the attendant and/or the quelling occurs. sent6: the salableness does not occur. sent7: if the attendant happens the birdie does not occur. sent8: that the birdying does not occur and the dereliction does not occur is not right if the sustenance occurs. sent9: not the dereliction but the deducing occurs if the malting does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{A} sent2: ¬{E} sent3: ({B} & {A}) -> ¬{JH} sent4: ¬{EC} sent5: ({AA} v {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: ¬{FB} sent7: {AA} -> ¬{B} sent8: {A} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent9: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & {D})
|
[
"sent9 & sent2 -> int1: not the dereliction but the deducing occurs.; int1 -> int2: the dereliction does not occur.;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent2 -> int1: (¬{C} & {D}); int1 -> int2: ¬{C};"
] |
that the birdying does not occur and the dereliction does not occur is not right.
|
¬(¬{B} & ¬{C})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the birdying does not occur and the dereliction does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the sustenance does not occur. sent2: the malting does not occur. sent3: if both the birdying and the sustenance occurs the amitoticness does not occur. sent4: the chirrup does not occur. sent5: the birdie does not occur if the attendant and/or the quelling occurs. sent6: the salableness does not occur. sent7: if the attendant happens the birdie does not occur. sent8: that the birdying does not occur and the dereliction does not occur is not right if the sustenance occurs. sent9: not the dereliction but the deducing occurs if the malting does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent2 -> int1: not the dereliction but the deducing occurs.; int1 -> int2: the dereliction does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something is a Proudhon that cantons glasswort.
|
(Ex): ({B}x & {C}x)
|
sent1: something is a Proudhon if it is not a sphecoid and/or it is not a kind of a loot. sent2: the coney cantons glasswort. sent3: the Gnostic is a sphecoid. sent4: the killifish does canton salp. sent5: The glasswort cantons coney. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it cantons salp and it does not canton glasswort is false. sent7: The salp does canton killifish.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: {C}{b} sent3: {AA}{es} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: {AD}{ab} sent6: (Ex): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) sent7: {AC}{aa}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: if the coney is not a sphecoid and/or is not a loot then it is a kind of a Proudhon.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{b};"
] |
the track is not a cosmologist or it is not changeless or both.
|
(¬{DG}{fi} v ¬{P}{fi})
|
[] | 6 | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = something is a Proudhon that cantons glasswort. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a Proudhon if it is not a sphecoid and/or it is not a kind of a loot. sent2: the coney cantons glasswort. sent3: the Gnostic is a sphecoid. sent4: the killifish does canton salp. sent5: The glasswort cantons coney. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it cantons salp and it does not canton glasswort is false. sent7: The salp does canton killifish. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: if the coney is not a sphecoid and/or is not a loot then it is a kind of a Proudhon.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the maleate is a bigamist and it cantons apercu.
|
({C}{a} & {D}{a})
|
sent1: if the maleate is not a satinwood or does not criticize situation or both it is a subdivision. sent2: something that is not a vent or not a satinwood or both cantons apercu. sent3: if something either is not a Kaufman or does not canton disbarment or both then it is a kind of a Attica. sent4: if either something does not dispose maleate or it is not a nightwork or both then that it does criticize milliequivalent is not wrong. sent5: the elver does vent. sent6: the maleate does nap. sent7: if something is not a downside and/or it is not a vent then it is macrocosmic. sent8: something is phrasal if it does lend. sent9: the maleate is not compassionate and/or it is a satinwood. sent10: the fact that the stopover is a vent is not incorrect. sent11: the maleate is not a vent or is not salivary or both. sent12: the maleate is a satinwood that flogs. sent13: the fact that the blister is a downside hold if it tenants farmstead. sent14: if the developer does canton apercu then it is pianistic. sent15: the maleate is a thermogravimetry if it is mindless. sent16: the maleate is not a vent. sent17: the maleate is a submersible if it does not canton apercu. sent18: something does not canton elver and/or is not a bigamist if it is macrocosmic. sent19: the fact that something is a kind of a bigamist and it does canton apercu is wrong if it is not macrocosmic. sent20: the Demulen does vent. sent21: something is a bigamist if it is a downside.
|
sent1: (¬{F}{a} v ¬{IC}{a}) -> {EM}{a} sent2: (x): (¬{E}x v ¬{F}x) -> {D}x sent3: (x): (¬{HK}x v ¬{BE}x) -> {DQ}x sent4: (x): (¬{CO}x v ¬{IA}x) -> {GK}x sent5: {E}{ca} sent6: {CL}{a} sent7: (x): (¬{B}x v ¬{E}x) -> {A}x sent8: (x): {HL}x -> {AL}x sent9: (¬{H}{a} v {F}{a}) sent10: {E}{m} sent11: (¬{E}{a} v ¬{CB}{a}) sent12: ({F}{a} & {J}{a}) sent13: {HB}{p} -> {B}{p} sent14: {D}{ai} -> {FA}{ai} sent15: {BF}{a} -> {II}{a} sent16: ¬{E}{a} sent17: ¬{D}{a} -> {U}{a} sent18: (x): {A}x -> (¬{JE}x v ¬{C}x) sent19: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {D}x) sent20: {E}{bo} sent21: (x): {B}x -> {C}x
|
[
"sent21 -> int1: the maleate is a bigamist if it is a downside.; sent2 -> int2: the maleate does canton apercu if either it is not a vent or it is not a kind of a satinwood or both.; sent16 -> int3: the maleate is not a kind of a vent and/or it is not a satinwood.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the maleate does canton apercu.;"
] |
[
"sent21 -> int1: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; sent2 -> int2: (¬{E}{a} v ¬{F}{a}) -> {D}{a}; sent16 -> int3: (¬{E}{a} v ¬{F}{a}); int2 & int3 -> int4: {D}{a};"
] |
the Mantle does not canton elver and/or is not a bigamist.
|
(¬{JE}{hm} v ¬{C}{hm})
|
[
"sent18 -> int5: the Mantle does not canton elver and/or is not a bigamist if it is macrocosmic.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the maleate is a bigamist and it cantons apercu. ; $context$ = sent1: if the maleate is not a satinwood or does not criticize situation or both it is a subdivision. sent2: something that is not a vent or not a satinwood or both cantons apercu. sent3: if something either is not a Kaufman or does not canton disbarment or both then it is a kind of a Attica. sent4: if either something does not dispose maleate or it is not a nightwork or both then that it does criticize milliequivalent is not wrong. sent5: the elver does vent. sent6: the maleate does nap. sent7: if something is not a downside and/or it is not a vent then it is macrocosmic. sent8: something is phrasal if it does lend. sent9: the maleate is not compassionate and/or it is a satinwood. sent10: the fact that the stopover is a vent is not incorrect. sent11: the maleate is not a vent or is not salivary or both. sent12: the maleate is a satinwood that flogs. sent13: the fact that the blister is a downside hold if it tenants farmstead. sent14: if the developer does canton apercu then it is pianistic. sent15: the maleate is a thermogravimetry if it is mindless. sent16: the maleate is not a vent. sent17: the maleate is a submersible if it does not canton apercu. sent18: something does not canton elver and/or is not a bigamist if it is macrocosmic. sent19: the fact that something is a kind of a bigamist and it does canton apercu is wrong if it is not macrocosmic. sent20: the Demulen does vent. sent21: something is a bigamist if it is a downside. ; $proof$ =
|
sent21 -> int1: the maleate is a bigamist if it is a downside.; sent2 -> int2: the maleate does canton apercu if either it is not a vent or it is not a kind of a satinwood or both.; sent16 -> int3: the maleate is not a kind of a vent and/or it is not a satinwood.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the maleate does canton apercu.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the kieserite does not detrain and is a kind of a coup does not hold.
|
¬(¬{E}{b} & {F}{b})
|
sent1: the methyl is gutsy. sent2: the kieserite does canton trephination but it is not gutsy if something is not a Ephesian. sent3: that the puddingwife does not detrain but it is a kind of a Ephesian does not hold if the irregular is not a Honegger. sent4: the fact that the kieserite does detrain and is a kind of a coup does not hold if the methyl is not Ephesian. sent5: that something is both a Honegger and a probability is not right if the fact that it is not a kind of a chaser hold. sent6: the methyl is not a maisonette but it is gutsy if there exists something such that it does not canton trephination. sent7: the fact that if the methyl is not a kind of a Ephesian then that the kieserite does not detrain and is a kind of a coup is not correct hold. sent8: the granite is not a coup if that the methyl is a maisonette but it is not a coup is not true. sent9: the methyl is not a Ephesian if it is not a kind of a maisonette and it is gutsy. sent10: if there is something such that the fact that it is a chaser and a NPC is incorrect then the splinter is not a kind of a chaser. sent11: if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a Honegger that is a probability does not hold the irregular is not a Honegger. sent12: if the fact that the puddingwife does not detrain and is a Ephesian is wrong then that the chlorine is not a kind of a Ephesian is not false. sent13: there is nothing such that it is a chaser and is a kind of a NPC. sent14: the fact that the methyl is a maisonette but it is not a coup does not hold if the kieserite does canton trephination.
|
sent1: {C}{a} sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent3: ¬{G}{e} -> ¬(¬{E}{d} & {D}{d}) sent4: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({E}{b} & {F}{b}) sent5: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}x & {I}x) sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent7: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬(¬{E}{b} & {F}{b}) sent8: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) -> ¬{F}{fr} sent9: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent10: (x): ¬({H}x & {J}x) -> ¬{H}{f} sent11: (x): ¬({G}x & {I}x) -> ¬{G}{e} sent12: ¬(¬{E}{d} & {D}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent13: (x): ¬({H}x & {J}x) sent14: {A}{b} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{F}{a})
|
[] |
[] |
the granite is not a coup.
|
¬{F}{fr}
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: if the splinter is not a chaser the fact that it is a Honegger and it is a probability does not hold.; sent13 -> int2: that the superstrate is a chaser and it is a NPC is not right.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that that it is both a chaser and a NPC does not hold.; int3 & sent10 -> int4: the splinter is not a kind of a chaser.; int1 & int4 -> int5: that the splinter is a kind of a Honegger and it is a probability is false.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that the fact that it is a Honegger and is a probability is not right.; int6 & sent11 -> int7: the fact that the irregular is not a Honegger hold.; sent3 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the puddingwife does not detrain and is a Ephesian is wrong.; sent12 & int8 -> int9: the chlorine is not a kind of a Ephesian.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it is not a Ephesian.; int10 & sent2 -> int11: the kieserite cantons trephination and is not gutsy.; int11 -> int12: the kieserite does canton trephination.; sent14 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the methyl is a kind of a maisonette but it is not a coup is not right.; sent8 & int13 -> hypothesis;"
] | 13 | 3 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that the kieserite does not detrain and is a kind of a coup does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the methyl is gutsy. sent2: the kieserite does canton trephination but it is not gutsy if something is not a Ephesian. sent3: that the puddingwife does not detrain but it is a kind of a Ephesian does not hold if the irregular is not a Honegger. sent4: the fact that the kieserite does detrain and is a kind of a coup does not hold if the methyl is not Ephesian. sent5: that something is both a Honegger and a probability is not right if the fact that it is not a kind of a chaser hold. sent6: the methyl is not a maisonette but it is gutsy if there exists something such that it does not canton trephination. sent7: the fact that if the methyl is not a kind of a Ephesian then that the kieserite does not detrain and is a kind of a coup is not correct hold. sent8: the granite is not a coup if that the methyl is a maisonette but it is not a coup is not true. sent9: the methyl is not a Ephesian if it is not a kind of a maisonette and it is gutsy. sent10: if there is something such that the fact that it is a chaser and a NPC is incorrect then the splinter is not a kind of a chaser. sent11: if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a Honegger that is a probability does not hold the irregular is not a Honegger. sent12: if the fact that the puddingwife does not detrain and is a Ephesian is wrong then that the chlorine is not a kind of a Ephesian is not false. sent13: there is nothing such that it is a chaser and is a kind of a NPC. sent14: the fact that the methyl is a maisonette but it is not a coup does not hold if the kieserite does canton trephination. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if that it is not inferential is correct it does tenant tesla and it is calyceal.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: that the gallfly is inexhaustible and it does tenant tesla if the fact that the gallfly does not tenant WTV is correct is not false. sent2: if the animalcule is shapely it is a Mylodontidae and it cantons passport. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a Icterus it does tenant garambulla and it is prosthodontics. sent4: the flophouse does hoe if it is not hotbed. sent5: something tenants tesla and is calyceal if it is not inferential. sent6: the animalcule is inferential if that it does not preside is not false. sent7: if the animalcule radicalizes it is a kind of basophilic thing that disposes Goodall. sent8: the animalcule tenants tesla and is a elver if it does not tenant garambulla. sent9: if the animalcule does not canton animalcule then it is a Bahrain. sent10: the fact that something is both improvident and infantile is right if it does not dispose fresco. sent11: there exists something such that if it is infantile then that it is a kind of a decree that does tenant flophouse is right.
|
sent1: ¬{JE}{de} -> ({FU}{de} & {AA}{de}) sent2: {CS}{aa} -> ({FQ}{aa} & {DS}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): {IB}x -> ({FC}x & {FP}x) sent4: ¬{AE}{ji} -> {BF}{ji} sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: ¬{IL}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent7: {GC}{aa} -> ({C}{aa} & {DR}{aa}) sent8: ¬{FC}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {ET}{aa}) sent9: ¬{CH}{aa} -> {DI}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬{DO}x -> ({AR}x & {CN}x) sent11: (Ex): {CN}x -> ({BS}x & {IN}x)
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: if that the animalcule is not inferential is not false then it tenants tesla and is calyceal.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if that it is not inferential is correct it does tenant tesla and it is calyceal. ; $context$ = sent1: that the gallfly is inexhaustible and it does tenant tesla if the fact that the gallfly does not tenant WTV is correct is not false. sent2: if the animalcule is shapely it is a Mylodontidae and it cantons passport. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a Icterus it does tenant garambulla and it is prosthodontics. sent4: the flophouse does hoe if it is not hotbed. sent5: something tenants tesla and is calyceal if it is not inferential. sent6: the animalcule is inferential if that it does not preside is not false. sent7: if the animalcule radicalizes it is a kind of basophilic thing that disposes Goodall. sent8: the animalcule tenants tesla and is a elver if it does not tenant garambulla. sent9: if the animalcule does not canton animalcule then it is a Bahrain. sent10: the fact that something is both improvident and infantile is right if it does not dispose fresco. sent11: there exists something such that if it is infantile then that it is a kind of a decree that does tenant flophouse is right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: if that the animalcule is not inferential is not false then it tenants tesla and is calyceal.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the wingman does japan.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it either does not japan or criticizes mannequin or both does not hold. sent2: something criticizes cambium if it is a kind of a Fijian. sent3: that the polygraph does not criticize model or it does not criticize mannequin or both does not hold. sent4: the fact that something that does not canton barbet does not criticize interdict and is not genitourinary hold. sent5: the polygraph does criticize mannequin. sent6: the barbet is not .38-caliber. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it either is not a japan or does not criticize model or both does not hold then the polygraph does criticize mannequin. sent8: something is not a kind of a protohippus if it tenants hind. sent9: if something is not a protohippus and does not criticize interdict it is Fijian. sent10: something does not criticize abetment or it is not a kind of a pelycosaur or both. sent11: if the wingman is not lunar it is not eventful or not empirical or both. sent12: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not criticize model and/or it does not criticize mannequin is false the wingman is a japan. sent13: if something criticizes cambium the fact that it is a japan and it does not fancy is wrong. sent14: if the barbet seals and/or it does not headquarter then it is not adactylous. sent15: the wingman tenants hind if it is not eventful. sent16: if that the barbet is non-.38-caliber hold then it is a sealed and/or it does not headquarter. sent17: that the barbet cantons barbet but it is not a EE is wrong if it is not adactylous. sent18: if something is not empirical it does tenant hind. sent19: if the fact that something is a japan and not fancy is wrong it is not a japan. sent20: the wingman does not jive and is not lunar. sent21: something criticizes mannequin.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{A}x v {AB}x) sent2: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{H}x) sent5: {AB}{aa} sent6: ¬{R}{b} sent7: (x): ¬(¬{A}x v ¬{AA}x) -> {AB}{aa} sent8: (x): {G}x -> ¬{E}x sent9: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) -> {D}x sent10: (Ex): (¬{BQ}x v ¬{GQ}x) sent11: ¬{P}{a} -> (¬{O}{a} v ¬{N}{a}) sent12: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent13: (x): {C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent14: ({M}{b} v ¬{L}{b}) -> ¬{K}{b} sent15: ¬{O}{a} -> {G}{a} sent16: ¬{R}{b} -> ({M}{b} v ¬{L}{b}) sent17: ¬{K}{b} -> ¬({I}{b} & ¬{J}{b}) sent18: (x): ¬{N}x -> {G}x sent19: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent20: (¬{Q}{a} & ¬{P}{a}) sent21: (Ex): {AB}x
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it does not criticize model or does not criticize mannequin or both is incorrect.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the wingman is not a japan.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent19 -> int2: the wingman is not a japan if that the fact that it is a japan and not a fancy is correct is not correct.; sent13 -> int3: that that the wingman is a japan that does not fancy does not hold is not false if it criticizes cambium.; sent2 -> int4: the wingman does criticize cambium if it is a kind of a Fijian.; sent9 -> int5: if the wingman is not a kind of a protohippus and it does not criticize interdict then it is a Fijian.; sent8 -> int6: if the wingman does tenant hind then that it is not a protohippus is not false.; sent20 -> int7: the wingman is not lunar.; sent11 & int7 -> int8: the wingman is not eventful or it is not empirical or both.; sent18 -> int9: if the wingman is not empirical then it tenants hind.; int8 & sent15 & int9 -> int10: the wingman does tenant hind.; int6 & int10 -> int11: the wingman is not a protohippus.; sent4 -> int12: that the wingman does not criticize interdict and is not genitourinary is right if it does not canton barbet.; sent16 & sent6 -> int13: the barbet is a sealed and/or it does not headquarter.; sent14 & int13 -> int14: the barbet is non-adactylous.; sent17 & int14 -> int15: that the barbet cantons barbet but it is not a EE is not true.; int15 -> int16: there exists something such that that it does canton barbet and it is not a EE does not hold.;"
] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the wingman does japan. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it either does not japan or criticizes mannequin or both does not hold. sent2: something criticizes cambium if it is a kind of a Fijian. sent3: that the polygraph does not criticize model or it does not criticize mannequin or both does not hold. sent4: the fact that something that does not canton barbet does not criticize interdict and is not genitourinary hold. sent5: the polygraph does criticize mannequin. sent6: the barbet is not .38-caliber. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it either is not a japan or does not criticize model or both does not hold then the polygraph does criticize mannequin. sent8: something is not a kind of a protohippus if it tenants hind. sent9: if something is not a protohippus and does not criticize interdict it is Fijian. sent10: something does not criticize abetment or it is not a kind of a pelycosaur or both. sent11: if the wingman is not lunar it is not eventful or not empirical or both. sent12: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not criticize model and/or it does not criticize mannequin is false the wingman is a japan. sent13: if something criticizes cambium the fact that it is a japan and it does not fancy is wrong. sent14: if the barbet seals and/or it does not headquarter then it is not adactylous. sent15: the wingman tenants hind if it is not eventful. sent16: if that the barbet is non-.38-caliber hold then it is a sealed and/or it does not headquarter. sent17: that the barbet cantons barbet but it is not a EE is wrong if it is not adactylous. sent18: if something is not empirical it does tenant hind. sent19: if the fact that something is a japan and not fancy is wrong it is not a japan. sent20: the wingman does not jive and is not lunar. sent21: something criticizes mannequin. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it does not criticize model or does not criticize mannequin or both is incorrect.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it is a shaitan that does not like is not right then it is a laureate is not correct.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x)
|
sent1: the panderer likes if the fact that it is symmetrical and non-parenteral is not correct. sent2: if the asthmatic is an incision it is a kind of a like. sent3: if the asthmatic does like but it does not criticize asthmatic it is open-hearth. sent4: if that something is a shaitan and is not unlike is wrong it is a kind of a laureate. sent5: if that something is not a shaitan is not false it is a laureate. sent6: if that something is both a shaitan and not a like is not right then it is a laureate. sent7: something is a NPC if that it is a lugworm and it is not ripe is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬({HM}{p} & ¬{BA}{p}) -> {AB}{p} sent2: {IP}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent3: ({AB}{aa} & ¬{AK}{aa}) -> {DB}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {B}x sent6: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent7: (x): ¬({IC}x & ¬{JB}x) -> {DJ}x
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the asthmatic is a laureate if that it is a kind of a shaitan and it does not like does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it is a shaitan that does not like is not right then it is a laureate is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the panderer likes if the fact that it is symmetrical and non-parenteral is not correct. sent2: if the asthmatic is an incision it is a kind of a like. sent3: if the asthmatic does like but it does not criticize asthmatic it is open-hearth. sent4: if that something is a shaitan and is not unlike is wrong it is a kind of a laureate. sent5: if that something is not a shaitan is not false it is a laureate. sent6: if that something is both a shaitan and not a like is not right then it is a laureate. sent7: something is a NPC if that it is a lugworm and it is not ripe is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the asthmatic is a laureate if that it is a kind of a shaitan and it does not like does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does not canton penology then it is bacteriolytic a Omphalotus.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is not a suitability it is a runner-up and it is implicational. sent2: the fact that the Brahman is a kind of bacteriolytic the Omphalotus if the fact that the Brahman cantons penology is true is true. sent3: if the Brahman does not canton chromium it is trabecular. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a Halimodendron is true then it does dispose drifting and is not non-plantar. sent5: if the Brahman does not canton penology it is a Omphalotus. sent6: something does criticize venesection and is a kind of a piping if it is not bacteriolytic. sent7: the Brahman is a Omphalotus and it does stare if it is not a universalism. sent8: the Brahman is both not non-bacteriolytic and a Omphalotus if that it does not canton penology is not wrong. sent9: if something is not a Omphalotus it is a kind of a justiciary and is a pangolin.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{BQ}x -> ({BC}x & {CF}x) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: ¬{GS}{aa} -> {DC}{aa} sent4: (Ex): {DI}x -> ({IJ}x & {DH}x) sent5: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ({BP}x & {IU}x) sent7: ¬{IM}{aa} -> ({AB}{aa} & {EE}{aa}) sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ({BT}x & {HB}x)
|
[
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the peanuts criticizes venesection and is a kind of a piping if it is not bacteriolytic.
|
¬{AA}{at} -> ({BP}{at} & {IU}{at})
|
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not canton penology then it is bacteriolytic a Omphalotus. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is not a suitability it is a runner-up and it is implicational. sent2: the fact that the Brahman is a kind of bacteriolytic the Omphalotus if the fact that the Brahman cantons penology is true is true. sent3: if the Brahman does not canton chromium it is trabecular. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a Halimodendron is true then it does dispose drifting and is not non-plantar. sent5: if the Brahman does not canton penology it is a Omphalotus. sent6: something does criticize venesection and is a kind of a piping if it is not bacteriolytic. sent7: the Brahman is a Omphalotus and it does stare if it is not a universalism. sent8: the Brahman is both not non-bacteriolytic and a Omphalotus if that it does not canton penology is not wrong. sent9: if something is not a Omphalotus it is a kind of a justiciary and is a pangolin. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the mix does not dispose Belonidae and it is not a thermogravimetry.
|
(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: if the mix is a thermogravimetry it does not criticize tanka. sent2: if that the mix does not dispose Belonidae and it is not a thermogravimetry is not true then it does not criticize tanka. sent3: if something does not criticize tanka it is not serous. sent4: there is something such that that it does criticize tanka and is not a kind of a psychopathy does not hold. sent5: the fact that the fact that the fact that the mix does not dispose Belonidae but it is a thermogravimetry is true does not hold is not false. sent6: the mix disposes ghastliness and it is a kind of a psychopathy.
|
sent1: {AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x sent4: (Ex): ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent6: ({C}{a} & {D}{a})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the mix does not dispose Belonidae and it is not a thermogravimetry is wrong.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the mix does not criticize tanka.; sent3 -> int2: if the mix does not criticize tanka then that it is serous is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the mix is not serous.; sent6 -> int4: the mix disposes ghastliness.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent2 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent3 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{A}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{A}{a}; sent6 -> int4: {C}{a};"
] |
that the mix does not dispose Belonidae and is not a thermogravimetry does not hold.
|
¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[] | 5 | 4 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the mix does not dispose Belonidae and it is not a thermogravimetry. ; $context$ = sent1: if the mix is a thermogravimetry it does not criticize tanka. sent2: if that the mix does not dispose Belonidae and it is not a thermogravimetry is not true then it does not criticize tanka. sent3: if something does not criticize tanka it is not serous. sent4: there is something such that that it does criticize tanka and is not a kind of a psychopathy does not hold. sent5: the fact that the fact that the fact that the mix does not dispose Belonidae but it is a thermogravimetry is true does not hold is not false. sent6: the mix disposes ghastliness and it is a kind of a psychopathy. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the mix does not dispose Belonidae and it is not a thermogravimetry is wrong.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the mix does not criticize tanka.; sent3 -> int2: if the mix does not criticize tanka then that it is serous is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the mix is not serous.; sent6 -> int4: the mix disposes ghastliness.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the propanal is official.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
sent1: the fact that if that something is not a kind of a Mormons is not false then it is unofficial and it criticizes dram is correct. sent2: the propanal does not criticize single. sent3: the nincompoop is non-unofficial thing that is semantic. sent4: if the nincompoop is a MD then the propanal is not a kind of a Mormons. sent5: the nincompoop is both not a Pomatomus and a clot. sent6: the assistant is not a Mormons. sent7: if the nitrate is a Mormons the nincompoop criticizes dram but it is not a MD. sent8: the propanal is radiopaque and it does criticize time-out. sent9: the propanal is a MD that is a kind of a Mormons. sent10: the nitrate is a Mormons if the micronutrient is not a Mormons. sent11: the nincompoop is semantic if the fact that the propanal is not semantic hold. sent12: if something criticizes dram then the fact that it is not a statistician and is a MD is correct. sent13: the barker is not unofficial. sent14: the propanal does not criticize dram if the nincompoop is a statistician. sent15: the wicket-keeper is not a MD if the nincompoop is not a statistician but it is a MD. sent16: the propanal is not semantic if it is a kind of an itch and/or is orthodox. sent17: the animator is not official. sent18: if something that does not criticize dram is a kind of a MD it is not unofficial. sent19: the propanal is a Mormons. sent20: everything is an itch and/or orthodox. sent21: the nincompoop is a statistician.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & {B}x) sent2: ¬{CG}{b} sent3: (¬{D}{a} & {F}{a}) sent4: {C}{a} -> ¬{E}{b} sent5: (¬{BB}{a} & {HU}{a}) sent6: ¬{E}{gq} sent7: {E}{c} -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent8: ({FM}{b} & {IJ}{b}) sent9: ({C}{b} & {E}{b}) sent10: ¬{E}{d} -> {E}{c} sent11: ¬{F}{b} -> {F}{a} sent12: (x): {B}x -> (¬{A}x & {C}x) sent13: ¬{D}{bl} sent14: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent15: (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{bh} sent16: ({G}{b} v {H}{b}) -> ¬{F}{b} sent17: {D}{in} sent18: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent19: {E}{b} sent20: (x): ({G}x v {H}x) sent21: {A}{a}
|
[
"sent14 & sent21 -> int1: the propanal does not criticize dram.; sent9 -> int2: the propanal is a MD.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the propanal does not criticize dram but it is a MD.; sent18 -> int4: if the propanal does not criticize dram and is a kind of a MD it is not unofficial.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent14 & sent21 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent9 -> int2: {C}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{B}{b} & {C}{b}); sent18 -> int4: (¬{B}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the propanal is unofficial.
|
{D}{b}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the propanal is official. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that if that something is not a kind of a Mormons is not false then it is unofficial and it criticizes dram is correct. sent2: the propanal does not criticize single. sent3: the nincompoop is non-unofficial thing that is semantic. sent4: if the nincompoop is a MD then the propanal is not a kind of a Mormons. sent5: the nincompoop is both not a Pomatomus and a clot. sent6: the assistant is not a Mormons. sent7: if the nitrate is a Mormons the nincompoop criticizes dram but it is not a MD. sent8: the propanal is radiopaque and it does criticize time-out. sent9: the propanal is a MD that is a kind of a Mormons. sent10: the nitrate is a Mormons if the micronutrient is not a Mormons. sent11: the nincompoop is semantic if the fact that the propanal is not semantic hold. sent12: if something criticizes dram then the fact that it is not a statistician and is a MD is correct. sent13: the barker is not unofficial. sent14: the propanal does not criticize dram if the nincompoop is a statistician. sent15: the wicket-keeper is not a MD if the nincompoop is not a statistician but it is a MD. sent16: the propanal is not semantic if it is a kind of an itch and/or is orthodox. sent17: the animator is not official. sent18: if something that does not criticize dram is a kind of a MD it is not unofficial. sent19: the propanal is a Mormons. sent20: everything is an itch and/or orthodox. sent21: the nincompoop is a statistician. ; $proof$ =
|
sent14 & sent21 -> int1: the propanal does not criticize dram.; sent9 -> int2: the propanal is a MD.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the propanal does not criticize dram but it is a MD.; sent18 -> int4: if the propanal does not criticize dram and is a kind of a MD it is not unofficial.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the scintillation is not an intangible.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: if the secretase is not an intangible but it does canton penology it is not a kind of a haunting. sent2: something does not canton caressing if the fact that it does not tame or it is criminological or both is false. sent3: if something that does not decimalize does not canton penology it is not an intangible. sent4: if the secretase does not haunt then the scintillation does not decimalize and does not canton penology. sent5: the scintillation does not criticize Costanoan and is not a cuneiform. sent6: the scintillation does not canton penology if it does not decimalize and it haunts. sent7: if something that does not decimalize cantons penology it is not an intangible. sent8: if the scintillation is not a haunting but intangible it does not canton penology. sent9: the scintillation is both a haunting and an intangible if the secretase does not canton caressing. sent10: if the acrodont does not titrate and/or is a fruition the meerschaum is not a fruition. sent11: the acrodont does not demilitarize and is not unpeaceful if it is not a garden. sent12: something is not a kind of a reflectance if it does not criticize apery and it is not a kind of a lutefisk. sent13: the scintillation does not haunt. sent14: that the secretase is not tame and/or it is not non-criminological is incorrect if the meerschaum is a kind of a NIPR. sent15: the acrodont is a fruition and it does tenant compost if it does not demilitarize. sent16: something is a NIPR and it does concord if it is not a fruition. sent17: if that something is not a haunting and does not decimalize hold it does not canton penology. sent18: the scintillation is not a malacologist and does not haunt. sent19: if the secretase does not canton penology and it is not a kind of a haunting then it does not decimalize. sent20: if the acrodont is entozoic it is not a garden. sent21: if the secretase does not canton penology the scintillation is not a haunting and it is not a kind of an intangible.
|
sent1: (¬{B}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{D}x v {E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (¬{CA}{aa} & ¬{AI}{aa}) sent6: (¬{AA}{aa} & {A}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent8: (¬{A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent9: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent10: (¬{I}{c} v {H}{c}) -> ¬{H}{b} sent11: ¬{M}{c} -> (¬{K}{c} & ¬{L}{c}) sent12: (x): (¬{IK}x & ¬{HR}x) -> ¬{JI}x sent13: ¬{A}{aa} sent14: {F}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} v {E}{a}) sent15: ¬{K}{c} -> ({H}{c} & {J}{c}) sent16: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x & {G}x) sent17: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{AA}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent18: (¬{EA}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent19: (¬{AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{a} sent20: {N}{c} -> ¬{M}{c} sent21: ¬{AB}{a} -> (¬{A}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa})
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the fact that the scintillation is not intangible is true if it does not decimalize and does not canton penology.;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa};"
] |
the scintillation is an intangible.
|
{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent2 -> int2: if the fact that either the secretase is not tame or it is criminological or both does not hold then it does not canton caressing.; sent16 -> int3: the meerschaum is a NIPR that concords if it is not a fruition.;"
] | 13 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the scintillation is not an intangible. ; $context$ = sent1: if the secretase is not an intangible but it does canton penology it is not a kind of a haunting. sent2: something does not canton caressing if the fact that it does not tame or it is criminological or both is false. sent3: if something that does not decimalize does not canton penology it is not an intangible. sent4: if the secretase does not haunt then the scintillation does not decimalize and does not canton penology. sent5: the scintillation does not criticize Costanoan and is not a cuneiform. sent6: the scintillation does not canton penology if it does not decimalize and it haunts. sent7: if something that does not decimalize cantons penology it is not an intangible. sent8: if the scintillation is not a haunting but intangible it does not canton penology. sent9: the scintillation is both a haunting and an intangible if the secretase does not canton caressing. sent10: if the acrodont does not titrate and/or is a fruition the meerschaum is not a fruition. sent11: the acrodont does not demilitarize and is not unpeaceful if it is not a garden. sent12: something is not a kind of a reflectance if it does not criticize apery and it is not a kind of a lutefisk. sent13: the scintillation does not haunt. sent14: that the secretase is not tame and/or it is not non-criminological is incorrect if the meerschaum is a kind of a NIPR. sent15: the acrodont is a fruition and it does tenant compost if it does not demilitarize. sent16: something is a NIPR and it does concord if it is not a fruition. sent17: if that something is not a haunting and does not decimalize hold it does not canton penology. sent18: the scintillation is not a malacologist and does not haunt. sent19: if the secretase does not canton penology and it is not a kind of a haunting then it does not decimalize. sent20: if the acrodont is entozoic it is not a garden. sent21: if the secretase does not canton penology the scintillation is not a haunting and it is not a kind of an intangible. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the fact that the scintillation is not intangible is true if it does not decimalize and does not canton penology.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if either it is not organismal or it is not a stabbing or both it disposes spar is not wrong.
|
(Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is organismal or not a stabbing or both it does dispose spar. sent2: if the farmplace is a kind of a Diodontidae or it does not petrify or both it is a maverick. sent3: there is something such that if either it is not Prakritic or it does not tenant farmplace or both it tenants Cynic. sent4: if that the wrapping does not stab is right then it disposes spar. sent5: if either the wrapping is not organismal or it is not a stabbing or both it does dispose spar. sent6: the tetrachlorethylene is organismal if it is not a self-discipline and/or it does not tenant endoskeleton. sent7: the wrapping is extramural if it either is recombinant or is not pentangular or both. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not pentangular and/or is not sinkable it is smart. sent9: there is something such that if it is not organismal that it disposes spar hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it either is not organismal or does stab or both it disposes spar. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a stabbing it disposes spar. sent12: if either something is not nonsignificant or it is not a kind of a Goodall or both then it does criticize fire. sent13: if something is not a calla and/or it is not organismal that it is not a stifle does not hold. sent14: the wrapping disposes spar if it is organismal and/or it does not stab. sent15: if either something is not a detractor or it is not bacteriophagic or both it does criticize Phylloporus. sent16: there exists something such that if it does not criticize fire or it is not asymmetrical or both then it is a walloper.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: ({CJ}{n} v ¬{EU}{n}) -> {G}{n} sent3: (Ex): (¬{EE}x v ¬{EF}x) -> {IO}x sent4: ¬{AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent6: (¬{IP}{gj} v ¬{E}{gj}) -> {AA}{gj} sent7: ({EM}{aa} v ¬{GR}{aa}) -> {Q}{aa} sent8: (Ex): (¬{GR}x v {HF}x) -> {DL}x sent9: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> {B}x sent10: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> {B}x sent12: (x): (¬{FE}x v ¬{IN}x) -> {CP}x sent13: (x): (¬{AO}x v ¬{AA}x) -> {CU}x sent14: ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent15: (x): (¬{CM}x v ¬{EA}x) -> {IJ}x sent16: (Ex): (¬{CP}x v ¬{EH}x) -> {EK}x
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if either it is not nonsignificant or it is not a kind of a Goodall or both then it criticizes fire.
|
(Ex): (¬{FE}x v ¬{IN}x) -> {CP}x
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: the Crown does criticize fire if it is not nonsignificant and/or is not a Goodall.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if either it is not organismal or it is not a stabbing or both it disposes spar is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is organismal or not a stabbing or both it does dispose spar. sent2: if the farmplace is a kind of a Diodontidae or it does not petrify or both it is a maverick. sent3: there is something such that if either it is not Prakritic or it does not tenant farmplace or both it tenants Cynic. sent4: if that the wrapping does not stab is right then it disposes spar. sent5: if either the wrapping is not organismal or it is not a stabbing or both it does dispose spar. sent6: the tetrachlorethylene is organismal if it is not a self-discipline and/or it does not tenant endoskeleton. sent7: the wrapping is extramural if it either is recombinant or is not pentangular or both. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not pentangular and/or is not sinkable it is smart. sent9: there is something such that if it is not organismal that it disposes spar hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it either is not organismal or does stab or both it disposes spar. sent11: there exists something such that if it is not a stabbing it disposes spar. sent12: if either something is not nonsignificant or it is not a kind of a Goodall or both then it does criticize fire. sent13: if something is not a calla and/or it is not organismal that it is not a stifle does not hold. sent14: the wrapping disposes spar if it is organismal and/or it does not stab. sent15: if either something is not a detractor or it is not bacteriophagic or both it does criticize Phylloporus. sent16: there exists something such that if it does not criticize fire or it is not asymmetrical or both then it is a walloper. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that that it is a nationalist that is a dasymeter is not correct.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: the fact that there exists something such that that it is both alphanumeric and a Anthidium is not true is not wrong. sent2: there is nothing such that it is a kind of a nationalist that is a dasymeter. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is a Uruguayan and it does smoke is false. sent4: the fact that the dynamite is both a nationalist and operatic does not hold. sent5: the fact that that the kentan is a nationalist and is a mix is not right hold.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({FS}x & {FE}x) sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬({U}x & {CN}x) sent4: ¬({AA}{aa} & {DK}{aa}) sent5: ¬({AA}{hp} & {HP}{hp})
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the fact that the dynamite is both a nationalist and a dasymeter is wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that that it is a nationalist that is a dasymeter is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that there exists something such that that it is both alphanumeric and a Anthidium is not true is not wrong. sent2: there is nothing such that it is a kind of a nationalist that is a dasymeter. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is a Uruguayan and it does smoke is false. sent4: the fact that the dynamite is both a nationalist and operatic does not hold. sent5: the fact that that the kentan is a nationalist and is a mix is not right hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the fact that the dynamite is both a nationalist and a dasymeter is wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a antidiabetic but a Bahrain is wrong it is not anaphasic.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: if that the assimilation is not a kind of a antidiabetic and is a kind of a Bahrain is not correct then it is not anaphasic. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it does not criticize hook and is a Sicilian is false it is not polyvalent. sent3: the farmplace is not a paleolith if that it is a kind of a antidiabetic and it is not random is false. sent4: if that the assimilation is a kind of a antidiabetic that is a kind of a Bahrain does not hold then it is not anaphasic. sent5: there is something such that if it is a transaction it is not parliamentary. sent6: something is not a American if that that it is not a kind of a prophase and does disengage is right is incorrect. sent7: there is something such that if the fact that it is a coated and an anthill is incorrect then it is not a Shavian.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{HU}x & {HO}x) -> ¬{FT}x sent3: ¬({AA}{ae} & {IN}{ae}) -> ¬{FD}{ae} sent4: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): {BK}x -> ¬{BF}x sent6: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {EM}x) -> ¬{DI}x sent7: (Ex): ¬({AR}x & {AE}x) -> ¬{HR}x
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a prophase and disengages is not correct then it is not American.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{A}x & {EM}x) -> ¬{DI}x
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the hook is not a American if the fact that it is not a prophase and does disengage is not true.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a antidiabetic but a Bahrain is wrong it is not anaphasic. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the assimilation is not a kind of a antidiabetic and is a kind of a Bahrain is not correct then it is not anaphasic. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it does not criticize hook and is a Sicilian is false it is not polyvalent. sent3: the farmplace is not a paleolith if that it is a kind of a antidiabetic and it is not random is false. sent4: if that the assimilation is a kind of a antidiabetic that is a kind of a Bahrain does not hold then it is not anaphasic. sent5: there is something such that if it is a transaction it is not parliamentary. sent6: something is not a American if that that it is not a kind of a prophase and does disengage is right is incorrect. sent7: there is something such that if the fact that it is a coated and an anthill is incorrect then it is not a Shavian. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the dactylicness happens and the wiggle occurs.
|
({C} & {D})
|
sent1: the dry occurs if the exclaiming happens. sent2: if the fact that the acinarness occurs is correct then the combining does not occur and the photicness does not occur. sent3: the cantoning hook does not occur if that both the cantoning hook and the dry occurs is false. sent4: if the fact that the cantoning hook does not occur hold then either the pausing or the baptism or both happens. sent5: if the photicness does not occur then both the wiggle and the combining happens. sent6: the germination occurs. sent7: that the ectomorphicness happens is right if the tenanting ember occurs. sent8: the fact that the tenanting ember occurs hold. sent9: that the ectomorphicness occurs leads to the dactylicness. sent10: that the dactylicness and the wiggle happens is not true if the tenanting ember does not occur. sent11: the photicness does not occur. sent12: the fact that the combining occurs is right. sent13: if the temporizing does not occur that the cantoning hook occurs and the drying happens is incorrect. sent14: the tenanting ember does not occur and the ectomorphicness does not occur if the combining does not occur. sent15: both the acinarness and the non-corruptness occurs if the hostile does not occur. sent16: the rope-a-dope occurs.
|
sent1: {HD} -> {M} sent2: {G} -> (¬{E} & ¬{F}) sent3: ¬({L} & {M}) -> ¬{L} sent4: ¬{L} -> ({K} v {J}) sent5: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent6: {HA} sent7: {A} -> {B} sent8: {A} sent9: {B} -> {C} sent10: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {D}) sent11: ¬{F} sent12: {E} sent13: ¬{N} -> ¬({L} & {M}) sent14: ¬{E} -> (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent15: ¬{I} -> ({G} & ¬{H}) sent16: {EQ}
|
[
"sent7 & sent8 -> int1: the ectomorphicness happens.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the dactylicness occurs.; sent5 & sent11 -> int3: the wiggle occurs and the combining happens.; int3 -> int4: the wiggle occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent8 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent9 -> int2: {C}; sent5 & sent11 -> int3: ({D} & {E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the dactylicness and the wiggle occurs does not hold.
|
¬({C} & {D})
|
[] | 12 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the dactylicness happens and the wiggle occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the dry occurs if the exclaiming happens. sent2: if the fact that the acinarness occurs is correct then the combining does not occur and the photicness does not occur. sent3: the cantoning hook does not occur if that both the cantoning hook and the dry occurs is false. sent4: if the fact that the cantoning hook does not occur hold then either the pausing or the baptism or both happens. sent5: if the photicness does not occur then both the wiggle and the combining happens. sent6: the germination occurs. sent7: that the ectomorphicness happens is right if the tenanting ember occurs. sent8: the fact that the tenanting ember occurs hold. sent9: that the ectomorphicness occurs leads to the dactylicness. sent10: that the dactylicness and the wiggle happens is not true if the tenanting ember does not occur. sent11: the photicness does not occur. sent12: the fact that the combining occurs is right. sent13: if the temporizing does not occur that the cantoning hook occurs and the drying happens is incorrect. sent14: the tenanting ember does not occur and the ectomorphicness does not occur if the combining does not occur. sent15: both the acinarness and the non-corruptness occurs if the hostile does not occur. sent16: the rope-a-dope occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent8 -> int1: the ectomorphicness happens.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the dactylicness occurs.; sent5 & sent11 -> int3: the wiggle occurs and the combining happens.; int3 -> int4: the wiggle occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the louse does not tenant cartographer.
|
¬{C}{aa}
|
sent1: the dogfighter does tenant cartographer and is not a kind of an ambush if the sunbather is not a kind of a alarmism. sent2: if something tenants cartographer then it is both not an ambush and a alarmism. sent3: something does tenant cartographer if that it is not a kind of an ambush is correct. sent4: the louse tenants cartographer if it is not a alarmism. sent5: the louse does not tenant cartographer if the dogfighter tenant cartographer and is not an ambush. sent6: the ice-wagon is not derivational if that the equatorial is derivational thing that is not a kind of a XXY is wrong. sent7: either the louse does not ambush or it is not a alarmism or both. sent8: the louse is morphophonemic if it is not a kind of a alarmism. sent9: if there is something such that it is derivational that the ice-wagon does criticize rheology and is not derivational does not hold. sent10: if that the ice-wagon criticizes rheology but it is not derivational is wrong then the skywalk criticizes rheology. sent11: if the fact that the ice-wagon is allometric thing that does not criticize rheology is wrong the skywalk is not a yaws. sent12: that the equatorial is non-derivational thing that is not a XXY is wrong. sent13: the life does pick if something that is not a fruitlet is not a coverlet. sent14: the equatorial is both derivational and allometric. sent15: if the skywalk does criticize rheology then the sunbather yaws. sent16: if something does pick it does tenant cartographer. sent17: the fact that something is allometric but it does not criticize rheology is not correct if it is not derivational. sent18: something is a kind of a fruitlet but it is not a coverlet if it is not a yaws. sent19: if the sunbather is a yaws then the dogfighter is not a fruitlet and it is not a kind of a coverlet.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{b} -> ({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent2: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent5: ({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{aa} sent6: ¬(¬{J}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) -> ¬{J}{d} sent7: (¬{B}{aa} v ¬{A}{aa}) sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> {DQ}{aa} sent9: (x): {J}x -> ¬({H}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) sent10: ¬({H}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) -> {H}{c} sent11: ¬({I}{d} & ¬{H}{d}) -> ¬{G}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{J}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) sent13: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) -> {D}{cr} sent14: ({J}{e} & {I}{e}) sent15: {H}{c} -> {G}{b} sent16: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent17: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬({I}x & ¬{H}x) sent18: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({E}x & ¬{F}x) sent19: {G}{b} -> (¬{E}{a} & ¬{F}{a})
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the louse tenants cartographer if it is not a kind of an ambush.; int1 & sent7 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; int1 & sent7 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the louse does not tenant cartographer.
|
¬{C}{aa}
|
[
"sent18 -> int2: the skywalk is a fruitlet but it is not a coverlet if it is not a yaws.; sent17 -> int3: that the ice-wagon is a kind of allometric thing that does not criticize rheology is not right if it is non-derivational.; sent6 & sent12 -> int4: the fact that the ice-wagon is not derivational is not wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the ice-wagon is allometric but it does not criticize rheology is not true.; sent11 & int5 -> int6: the skywalk does not yaw.; int2 & int6 -> int7: the skywalk is a fruitlet that is not a kind of a coverlet.; int7 -> int8: the skywalk is a fruitlet.; int8 -> int9: the skywalk is a fruitlet and/or it does pick.; int9 -> int10: something is a fruitlet or it is a pick or both.;"
] | 10 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the louse does not tenant cartographer. ; $context$ = sent1: the dogfighter does tenant cartographer and is not a kind of an ambush if the sunbather is not a kind of a alarmism. sent2: if something tenants cartographer then it is both not an ambush and a alarmism. sent3: something does tenant cartographer if that it is not a kind of an ambush is correct. sent4: the louse tenants cartographer if it is not a alarmism. sent5: the louse does not tenant cartographer if the dogfighter tenant cartographer and is not an ambush. sent6: the ice-wagon is not derivational if that the equatorial is derivational thing that is not a kind of a XXY is wrong. sent7: either the louse does not ambush or it is not a alarmism or both. sent8: the louse is morphophonemic if it is not a kind of a alarmism. sent9: if there is something such that it is derivational that the ice-wagon does criticize rheology and is not derivational does not hold. sent10: if that the ice-wagon criticizes rheology but it is not derivational is wrong then the skywalk criticizes rheology. sent11: if the fact that the ice-wagon is allometric thing that does not criticize rheology is wrong the skywalk is not a yaws. sent12: that the equatorial is non-derivational thing that is not a XXY is wrong. sent13: the life does pick if something that is not a fruitlet is not a coverlet. sent14: the equatorial is both derivational and allometric. sent15: if the skywalk does criticize rheology then the sunbather yaws. sent16: if something does pick it does tenant cartographer. sent17: the fact that something is allometric but it does not criticize rheology is not correct if it is not derivational. sent18: something is a kind of a fruitlet but it is not a coverlet if it is not a yaws. sent19: if the sunbather is a yaws then the dogfighter is not a fruitlet and it is not a kind of a coverlet. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the louse tenants cartographer if it is not a kind of an ambush.; int1 & sent7 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that the fact that it is not incongruent and/or it does not ruddle is incorrect.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: the fact that if the fact that something is antithyroid and does not tenant Costanoan is not true then the fact that it is not antithyroid hold is not incorrect. sent2: the sultriness is not a kind of a kuru if the fact that it is a Carcharodon and/or it does resurface does not hold. sent3: that either something is congruent or it is not a ruddle or both is not true if the fact that it is non-antithyroid is right. sent4: the antiferromagnetism does ruddle if it is not antithyroid. sent5: there exists something such that it either depends or is non-Fijian or both. sent6: that the antiferromagnetism is congruent and/or it is not noncausative is not true if the fact that the bookworm is not antithyroid is not false. sent7: that the bluefin is a cytoplasm and/or it is a kind of a scrubbird is not right if the fact that the sultriness is not a kuru hold. sent8: if that either something is a cytoplasm or it is a scrubbird or both is incorrect it is not a kind of a Adonic. sent9: something does ruddle. sent10: the fact that the bookworm is a Adonic and tenants Costanoan does not hold. sent11: the antiferromagnetism is non-antithyroid if that the bookworm is a kind of Adonic thing that does not tenant Costanoan is false. sent12: if the bluefin is not Adonic the fact that the fact that the bookworm is antithyroid but it does not tenant Costanoan does not hold is not false. sent13: something is congruent and/or it does not ruddle.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent2: ¬({H}{c} v {G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ({IE}x v ¬{ES}x) sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{GF}{aa}) sent7: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬({E}{b} v {D}{b}) sent8: (x): ¬({E}x v {D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent9: (Ex): {AB}x sent10: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent11: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent12: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent13: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the fact that the antiferromagnetism is congruent or it is not a ruddle or both is not right if it is non-antithyroid.;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa});"
] |
the fact that the antiferromagnetism either is congruent or is not noncausative or both is not true.
|
¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{GF}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> int2: if that the bookworm is antithyroid thing that does not tenant Costanoan is incorrect then it is not antithyroid.; sent8 -> int3: if that the bluefin is a cytoplasm and/or it scrubs is not right then it is non-Adonic.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that the fact that it is not incongruent and/or it does not ruddle is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that if the fact that something is antithyroid and does not tenant Costanoan is not true then the fact that it is not antithyroid hold is not incorrect. sent2: the sultriness is not a kind of a kuru if the fact that it is a Carcharodon and/or it does resurface does not hold. sent3: that either something is congruent or it is not a ruddle or both is not true if the fact that it is non-antithyroid is right. sent4: the antiferromagnetism does ruddle if it is not antithyroid. sent5: there exists something such that it either depends or is non-Fijian or both. sent6: that the antiferromagnetism is congruent and/or it is not noncausative is not true if the fact that the bookworm is not antithyroid is not false. sent7: that the bluefin is a cytoplasm and/or it is a kind of a scrubbird is not right if the fact that the sultriness is not a kuru hold. sent8: if that either something is a cytoplasm or it is a scrubbird or both is incorrect it is not a kind of a Adonic. sent9: something does ruddle. sent10: the fact that the bookworm is a Adonic and tenants Costanoan does not hold. sent11: the antiferromagnetism is non-antithyroid if that the bookworm is a kind of Adonic thing that does not tenant Costanoan is false. sent12: if the bluefin is not Adonic the fact that the fact that the bookworm is antithyroid but it does not tenant Costanoan does not hold is not false. sent13: something is congruent and/or it does not ruddle. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the fact that the antiferromagnetism is congruent or it is not a ruddle or both is not right if it is non-antithyroid.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it is not an intrusiveness then the fact that it is both not a diet and not a pocketcomb does not hold.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: if something is not a kind of a film then the fact that that it is not a myrtle and it is not nonfictional is not false is not correct. sent2: that the pothole is not a diet and it is not a kind of a pocketcomb is incorrect if it is not an intrusiveness. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not an intrusiveness that it is a diet and it is not a pocketcomb does not hold. sent4: if the buggy is not a pocketcomb the fact that it criticizes widowed and it is not a Franciscan does not hold. sent5: if the egalitarian does not criticize transpose then it is not a diet and it is not a kind of a aspic. sent6: the fact that the pothole is non-bibliophilic thing that is not a kind of an intrusiveness is wrong if it is oropharyngeal. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a research then that it is a film but not a lapse is not right. sent8: if the pothole is not Slovakian then the fact that it is both cholinergic and not a autotomy is not true. sent9: there exists something such that if it is an intrusiveness that it is not a diet and not a pocketcomb does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not criticize Provencal then it is a kind of non-androgynous thing that is not a kind of a comfit. sent11: if the pothole is not an intrusiveness then it does not diet and it is not a pocketcomb.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{EE}x -> ¬(¬{AP}x & ¬{HO}x) sent2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: ¬{AB}{gs} -> ¬({GT}{gs} & ¬{FU}{gs}) sent5: ¬{CS}{ba} -> (¬{AA}{ba} & ¬{HN}{ba}) sent6: {CR}{aa} -> ¬(¬{HL}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): ¬{D}x -> ¬({EE}x & ¬{DI}x) sent8: ¬{N}{aa} -> ¬({BI}{aa} & ¬{IH}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{DQ}x -> (¬{GA}x & ¬{JI}x) sent11: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is not a film then the fact that it is both not a myrtle and not nonfictional is false.
|
(Ex): ¬{EE}x -> ¬(¬{AP}x & ¬{HO}x)
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: that the Connecticuter is not a myrtle and it is not nonfictional is not true if it is not a film.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not an intrusiveness then the fact that it is both not a diet and not a pocketcomb does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of a film then the fact that that it is not a myrtle and it is not nonfictional is not false is not correct. sent2: that the pothole is not a diet and it is not a kind of a pocketcomb is incorrect if it is not an intrusiveness. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not an intrusiveness that it is a diet and it is not a pocketcomb does not hold. sent4: if the buggy is not a pocketcomb the fact that it criticizes widowed and it is not a Franciscan does not hold. sent5: if the egalitarian does not criticize transpose then it is not a diet and it is not a kind of a aspic. sent6: the fact that the pothole is non-bibliophilic thing that is not a kind of an intrusiveness is wrong if it is oropharyngeal. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a research then that it is a film but not a lapse is not right. sent8: if the pothole is not Slovakian then the fact that it is both cholinergic and not a autotomy is not true. sent9: there exists something such that if it is an intrusiveness that it is not a diet and not a pocketcomb does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not criticize Provencal then it is a kind of non-androgynous thing that is not a kind of a comfit. sent11: if the pothole is not an intrusiveness then it does not diet and it is not a pocketcomb. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the cusp does not spruce and does not canton Weimaraner.
|
(¬{C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})
|
sent1: the Stayman is not a calyx but it decimalizes if the antiknock is not causative. sent2: if the cusp does wrangle then it does not canton Weimaraner. sent3: the cloverleaf does criticize fullback. sent4: if something is a Schnabel then it does canton Weimaraner. sent5: if something is not a kind of a frump the fact that it is a primus and it is a Bonney is not false. sent6: the fact that something does not canton Weimaraner is not incorrect if that it wrangles is not false. sent7: that the cusp is a Schnabel and it does wrangle is not true if that it is not a kind of a heart is right. sent8: the livestock does tenant gumdrop and is not a kind of a heart if the Stayman is not a calyx. sent9: the fact that if that something does criticize fullback hold then that the jukebox is not a frump but a ravigote is incorrect hold. sent10: if the fact that something is septal but it is not satiate does not hold the fact that it does not tenant pushball hold. sent11: the wingman spruces if it does canton Weimaraner. sent12: the fact that the thymosin is not a frump hold if the fact that the jukebox is not a frump but it is a ravigote is not right. sent13: if the wingman does welter and is basidial the cusp does not spruce. sent14: if the livestock is a heart then it does wrangle. sent15: the wingman does welter. sent16: if the fact that something is a kind of a Schnabel but it does not wrangle does not hold that it does not canton Weimaraner hold. sent17: the antiknock is not causative if the thymosin is a primus. sent18: the cusp is not a heart. sent19: if the cusp is not a kind of a heart then that it is a kind of a Schnabel that does not wrangle does not hold. sent20: if the wingman does not welter that the cusp is not a kind of a spruce and does not canton Weimaraner is not correct. sent21: that the cusp is a kind of a Schnabel that wrangles is not right. sent22: the wingman does canton Weimaraner if the cusp does canton Weimaraner. sent23: that something is not basidial but it is a Schnabel is incorrect if it wrangles. sent24: the wingman is basidial. sent25: if there is something such that it is a spruce then the coverlet is basidial and welters.
|
sent1: ¬{K}{e} -> (¬{I}{d} & {J}{d}) sent2: {F}{b} -> ¬{D}{b} sent3: {O}{h} sent4: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent5: (x): ¬{N}x -> ({L}x & {M}x) sent6: (x): {F}x -> ¬{D}x sent7: ¬{G}{b} -> ¬({E}{b} & {F}{b}) sent8: ¬{I}{d} -> ({H}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent9: (x): {O}x -> ¬(¬{N}{g} & {P}{g}) sent10: (x): ¬({IK}x & ¬{DB}x) -> ¬{CN}x sent11: {D}{a} -> {C}{a} sent12: ¬(¬{N}{g} & {P}{g}) -> ¬{N}{f} sent13: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent14: {G}{c} -> {F}{c} sent15: {A}{a} sent16: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent17: {L}{f} -> ¬{K}{e} sent18: ¬{G}{b} sent19: ¬{G}{b} -> ¬({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent20: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent21: ¬({E}{b} & {F}{b}) sent22: {D}{b} -> {D}{a} sent23: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {E}x) sent24: {B}{a} sent25: (x): {C}x -> ({B}{bn} & {A}{bn})
|
[
"sent15 & sent24 -> int1: the wingman welters and it is not non-basidial.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the cusp is not a spruce.; sent16 -> int3: that if the fact that the cusp is the Schnabel but it does not wrangle is not correct then the cusp does not canton Weimaraner is not false.; sent19 & sent18 -> int4: that the cusp is a Schnabel that does not wrangle is not correct.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the cusp does not canton Weimaraner.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 & sent24 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 & sent13 -> int2: ¬{C}{b}; sent16 -> int3: ¬({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b}; sent19 & sent18 -> int4: ¬({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}); int3 & int4 -> int5: ¬{D}{b}; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the coverlet is basidial.
|
{B}{bn}
|
[
"sent4 -> int6: if the cusp is a kind of a Schnabel it does canton Weimaraner.; sent5 -> int7: the thymosin is a primus and it is a kind of a Bonney if it is not a kind of a frump.; sent3 -> int8: something criticizes fullback.; int8 & sent9 -> int9: the fact that the jukebox is not a kind of a frump but it is a ravigote is not right.; sent12 & int9 -> int10: the thymosin is not a frump.; int7 & int10 -> int11: the thymosin is a kind of a primus and is a Bonney.; int11 -> int12: the thymosin is a kind of a primus.; sent17 & int12 -> int13: the antiknock is not causative.; sent1 & int13 -> int14: the Stayman is not a kind of a calyx but it decimalizes.; int14 -> int15: the Stayman is not a calyx.; sent8 & int15 -> int16: the livestock does tenant gumdrop but it is not a kind of a heart.; int16 -> int17: the livestock is not a heart.; int17 -> int18: there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a heart is not false.;"
] | 19 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the cusp does not spruce and does not canton Weimaraner. ; $context$ = sent1: the Stayman is not a calyx but it decimalizes if the antiknock is not causative. sent2: if the cusp does wrangle then it does not canton Weimaraner. sent3: the cloverleaf does criticize fullback. sent4: if something is a Schnabel then it does canton Weimaraner. sent5: if something is not a kind of a frump the fact that it is a primus and it is a Bonney is not false. sent6: the fact that something does not canton Weimaraner is not incorrect if that it wrangles is not false. sent7: that the cusp is a Schnabel and it does wrangle is not true if that it is not a kind of a heart is right. sent8: the livestock does tenant gumdrop and is not a kind of a heart if the Stayman is not a calyx. sent9: the fact that if that something does criticize fullback hold then that the jukebox is not a frump but a ravigote is incorrect hold. sent10: if the fact that something is septal but it is not satiate does not hold the fact that it does not tenant pushball hold. sent11: the wingman spruces if it does canton Weimaraner. sent12: the fact that the thymosin is not a frump hold if the fact that the jukebox is not a frump but it is a ravigote is not right. sent13: if the wingman does welter and is basidial the cusp does not spruce. sent14: if the livestock is a heart then it does wrangle. sent15: the wingman does welter. sent16: if the fact that something is a kind of a Schnabel but it does not wrangle does not hold that it does not canton Weimaraner hold. sent17: the antiknock is not causative if the thymosin is a primus. sent18: the cusp is not a heart. sent19: if the cusp is not a kind of a heart then that it is a kind of a Schnabel that does not wrangle does not hold. sent20: if the wingman does not welter that the cusp is not a kind of a spruce and does not canton Weimaraner is not correct. sent21: that the cusp is a kind of a Schnabel that wrangles is not right. sent22: the wingman does canton Weimaraner if the cusp does canton Weimaraner. sent23: that something is not basidial but it is a Schnabel is incorrect if it wrangles. sent24: the wingman is basidial. sent25: if there is something such that it is a spruce then the coverlet is basidial and welters. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 & sent24 -> int1: the wingman welters and it is not non-basidial.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the cusp is not a spruce.; sent16 -> int3: that if the fact that the cusp is the Schnabel but it does not wrangle is not correct then the cusp does not canton Weimaraner is not false.; sent19 & sent18 -> int4: that the cusp is a Schnabel that does not wrangle is not correct.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the cusp does not canton Weimaraner.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the novelty does not criticize detumescence.
|
¬{AA}{aa}
|
sent1: that the novelty is a flyover is not incorrect. sent2: if something is not archdiocesan it does not canton Goodall and it is a usherette. sent3: the perigee is a kind of non-additive thing that is a verisimilitude. sent4: everything is not archdiocesan. sent5: if something is not an ending then it is not provocative. sent6: if the tideway tenants oatmeal and is a verisimilitude then the novelty does not tenants oatmeal. sent7: if something does not tenant oatmeal it is a kind of a verisimilitude that does not criticize detumescence. sent8: if the eclectic does not canton Goodall and is a usherette the trellis is not an ending. sent9: something is not a tobramycin if that it is not a kind of a verisimilitude is not incorrect. sent10: something criticizes detumescence but it is not a tobramycin if it is not a verisimilitude. sent11: the tideway is not a verisimilitude but it does tenant oatmeal. sent12: if the novelty is a tobramycin and it does tenant oatmeal then that the tideway is not a tobramycin is correct. sent13: if the fact that the novelty is not a verisimilitude is right then it is not a kind of a tobramycin. sent14: the novelty is a kind of a tobramycin that is not a vaccination if it is not intelligent. sent15: if the trellis is unprovocative then the tideway is a compost. sent16: something is conductive if the fact that it is a compost is not incorrect. sent17: that the novelty is not a verisimilitude and does not tenant oatmeal does not hold if something is conductive. sent18: the novelty is not a verisimilitude if the tideway is not a verisimilitude and does tenant oatmeal. sent19: the novelty is not a kind of a tobramycin. sent20: the tideway tenants oatmeal.
|
sent1: {GM}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{H}x & {G}x) sent3: (¬{CB}{gk} & {A}{gk}) sent4: (x): ¬{I}x sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> {E}x sent6: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & ¬{AA}x) sent8: (¬{H}{c} & {G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent11: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent12: ({AB}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{a} sent13: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent14: ¬{BD}{aa} -> ({AB}{aa} & ¬{AI}{aa}) sent15: {E}{b} -> {D}{a} sent16: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent17: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{A}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) sent18: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent19: ¬{AB}{aa} sent20: {B}{a}
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: if the novelty is not a verisimilitude then it does criticize detumescence and is not a tobramycin.; sent18 & sent11 -> int2: the novelty is not a kind of a verisimilitude.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the novelty criticizes detumescence and is not a tobramycin.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent18 & sent11 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the novelty does not criticize detumescence.
|
¬{AA}{aa}
|
[
"sent16 -> int4: if the tideway is a compost then it is conductive.; sent5 -> int5: that the trellis is unprovocative hold if it does not end.; sent2 -> int6: the splinter does not canton Goodall but it is a usherette if it is not archdiocesan.; sent4 -> int7: the splinter is not archdiocesan.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the splinter does not canton Goodall and is a usherette.; int8 -> int9: the fact that everything does not canton Goodall and is a usherette is not incorrect.; int9 -> int10: the eclectic does not canton Goodall and is a usherette.; int10 & sent8 -> int11: the trellis is not an ending.; int5 & int11 -> int12: the trellis is unprovocative.; int12 & sent15 -> int13: the tideway is a compost.; int4 & int13 -> int14: the tideway is conductive.; int14 -> int15: there is something such that that it is conductive is right.; sent17 & int15 -> int16: the fact that the novelty is not a verisimilitude and it does not tenant oatmeal is wrong.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the novelty does not criticize detumescence. ; $context$ = sent1: that the novelty is a flyover is not incorrect. sent2: if something is not archdiocesan it does not canton Goodall and it is a usherette. sent3: the perigee is a kind of non-additive thing that is a verisimilitude. sent4: everything is not archdiocesan. sent5: if something is not an ending then it is not provocative. sent6: if the tideway tenants oatmeal and is a verisimilitude then the novelty does not tenants oatmeal. sent7: if something does not tenant oatmeal it is a kind of a verisimilitude that does not criticize detumescence. sent8: if the eclectic does not canton Goodall and is a usherette the trellis is not an ending. sent9: something is not a tobramycin if that it is not a kind of a verisimilitude is not incorrect. sent10: something criticizes detumescence but it is not a tobramycin if it is not a verisimilitude. sent11: the tideway is not a verisimilitude but it does tenant oatmeal. sent12: if the novelty is a tobramycin and it does tenant oatmeal then that the tideway is not a tobramycin is correct. sent13: if the fact that the novelty is not a verisimilitude is right then it is not a kind of a tobramycin. sent14: the novelty is a kind of a tobramycin that is not a vaccination if it is not intelligent. sent15: if the trellis is unprovocative then the tideway is a compost. sent16: something is conductive if the fact that it is a compost is not incorrect. sent17: that the novelty is not a verisimilitude and does not tenant oatmeal does not hold if something is conductive. sent18: the novelty is not a verisimilitude if the tideway is not a verisimilitude and does tenant oatmeal. sent19: the novelty is not a kind of a tobramycin. sent20: the tideway tenants oatmeal. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> int1: if the novelty is not a verisimilitude then it does criticize detumescence and is not a tobramycin.; sent18 & sent11 -> int2: the novelty is not a kind of a verisimilitude.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the novelty criticizes detumescence and is not a tobramycin.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the criticizing acrodont does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: that the tenanting stabbing happens and the anaglyphicness happens results in that the tenanting glucoside does not occur. sent2: that the criticizing acrodont does not occur and the extinction does not occur does not hold if that the descriptiveness does not occur is not incorrect. sent3: the criticizing hairdresser occurs and the debarment occurs if that the fiscalness does not occur is not false. sent4: the criticizing hairdresser does not occur. sent5: if the tenanting glucoside does not occur the non-fiscalness and the non-Yemeniness occurs. sent6: if the saturation does not occur the boot happens and the tenanting Kropotkin happens. sent7: the descriptiveness happens. sent8: that both the extinction and the protestantness happens is brought about by that the criticizing hairdresser does not occur. sent9: the protestantness happens if the criticizing hairdresser does not occur. sent10: the tenanting stabbing occurs. sent11: the protestantness happens.
|
sent1: ({K} & {J}) -> ¬{I} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent3: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent4: ¬{E} sent5: ¬{I} -> (¬{G} & ¬{H}) sent6: ¬{FU} -> ({IE} & {HQ}) sent7: {A} sent8: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) sent9: ¬{E} -> {D} sent10: {K} sent11: {D}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the criticizing acrodont occurs.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: both the descriptiveness and the criticizing acrodont happens.; sent8 & sent4 -> int2: the extinction and the protestantness happens.; int2 -> int3: the extinction occurs.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {B}; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent8 & sent4 -> int2: ({C} & {D}); int2 -> int3: {C};"
] |
the criticizing acrodont happens.
|
{B}
|
[] | 10 | 4 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the criticizing acrodont does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the tenanting stabbing happens and the anaglyphicness happens results in that the tenanting glucoside does not occur. sent2: that the criticizing acrodont does not occur and the extinction does not occur does not hold if that the descriptiveness does not occur is not incorrect. sent3: the criticizing hairdresser occurs and the debarment occurs if that the fiscalness does not occur is not false. sent4: the criticizing hairdresser does not occur. sent5: if the tenanting glucoside does not occur the non-fiscalness and the non-Yemeniness occurs. sent6: if the saturation does not occur the boot happens and the tenanting Kropotkin happens. sent7: the descriptiveness happens. sent8: that both the extinction and the protestantness happens is brought about by that the criticizing hairdresser does not occur. sent9: the protestantness happens if the criticizing hairdresser does not occur. sent10: the tenanting stabbing occurs. sent11: the protestantness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the criticizing acrodont occurs.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: both the descriptiveness and the criticizing acrodont happens.; sent8 & sent4 -> int2: the extinction and the protestantness happens.; int2 -> int3: the extinction occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the cantoning croupier or the tenanting rhesus or both happens.
|
({C} v {D})
|
sent1: if the fact that the bauxiticness but not the Americanism occurs is false then the bauxiticness does not occur. sent2: the Seljukness happens. sent3: that the non-dormantness and the non-congressionalness happens leads to the non-Germanness. sent4: that the amelioration happens is prevented by that the phacoemulsification does not occur. sent5: if the amelioration does not occur the non-dormantness and the non-congressionalness occurs. sent6: the fact that the festering does not occur if that the festering occurs and the criticizing Seth does not occur does not hold is true. sent7: if the phacoemulsification does not occur the dormantness and the amelioration happens. sent8: if the fact that that the naming occurs and the phacoemulsification happens is not true is not false then the phacoemulsification does not occur. sent9: that the scrotalness does not occur and/or the bauxiticness is triggered by the Americanism. sent10: the criticizing Seth is brought about by either that the scrotalness does not occur or the bauxiticness or both. sent11: the congressionalness prevents that the cantoning croupier does not occur. sent12: the tenanting kanzu and the spanking happens if the German does not occur. sent13: that the fact that the fester but not the criticizing Seth occurs is right is incorrect if the bauxiticness does not occur. sent14: if the criticizing Seth occurs then the fact that the fact that not the festering but the naming occurs is not wrong is wrong. sent15: the phacoemulsification does not occur if the fact that the fact that not the fester but the naming happens does not hold is right. sent16: if the Germanness does not occur the fact that the cantoning croupier and/or the tenanting rhesus happens does not hold. sent17: the German happens. sent18: if the dormantness happens then the cantoning croupier does not occur and the tenanting rhesus does not occur. sent19: both the Germanness and the congressionalness occurs.
|
sent1: ¬({K} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{K} sent2: {ES} sent3: (¬{E} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} sent4: ¬{G} -> ¬{F} sent5: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{B}) sent6: ¬({I} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{I} sent7: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent8: ¬({H} & {G}) -> ¬{G} sent9: {M} -> (¬{L} v {K}) sent10: (¬{L} v {K}) -> {J} sent11: {B} -> {C} sent12: ¬{A} -> ({JH} & {AM}) sent13: ¬{K} -> ¬({I} & ¬{J}) sent14: {J} -> ¬(¬{I} & {H}) sent15: ¬(¬{I} & {H}) -> ¬{G} sent16: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} v {D}) sent17: {A} sent18: {E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent19: ({A} & {B})
|
[
"sent19 -> int1: the congressionalness happens.; sent11 & int1 -> int2: the cantoning croupier occurs.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent19 -> int1: {B}; sent11 & int1 -> int2: {C}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that either the cantoning croupier occurs or the tenanting rhesus occurs or both does not hold.
|
¬({C} v {D})
|
[] | 13 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the cantoning croupier or the tenanting rhesus or both happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the bauxiticness but not the Americanism occurs is false then the bauxiticness does not occur. sent2: the Seljukness happens. sent3: that the non-dormantness and the non-congressionalness happens leads to the non-Germanness. sent4: that the amelioration happens is prevented by that the phacoemulsification does not occur. sent5: if the amelioration does not occur the non-dormantness and the non-congressionalness occurs. sent6: the fact that the festering does not occur if that the festering occurs and the criticizing Seth does not occur does not hold is true. sent7: if the phacoemulsification does not occur the dormantness and the amelioration happens. sent8: if the fact that that the naming occurs and the phacoemulsification happens is not true is not false then the phacoemulsification does not occur. sent9: that the scrotalness does not occur and/or the bauxiticness is triggered by the Americanism. sent10: the criticizing Seth is brought about by either that the scrotalness does not occur or the bauxiticness or both. sent11: the congressionalness prevents that the cantoning croupier does not occur. sent12: the tenanting kanzu and the spanking happens if the German does not occur. sent13: that the fact that the fester but not the criticizing Seth occurs is right is incorrect if the bauxiticness does not occur. sent14: if the criticizing Seth occurs then the fact that the fact that not the festering but the naming occurs is not wrong is wrong. sent15: the phacoemulsification does not occur if the fact that the fact that not the fester but the naming happens does not hold is right. sent16: if the Germanness does not occur the fact that the cantoning croupier and/or the tenanting rhesus happens does not hold. sent17: the German happens. sent18: if the dormantness happens then the cantoning croupier does not occur and the tenanting rhesus does not occur. sent19: both the Germanness and the congressionalness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent19 -> int1: the congressionalness happens.; sent11 & int1 -> int2: the cantoning croupier occurs.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the entertaining does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the joining does not occur if the nebulousness does not occur and the nonmonotonicness occurs. sent2: the criticizing scenarist does not occur and the journalisticness occurs. sent3: if the trot does not occur then the fact that the cantoning marksmanship and the tenanting Bramidae occurs is not true. sent4: the fact that not the reforming but the cantoning battering occurs is not correct if the inspiratoriness happens. sent5: that not the Justice but the immatureness happens prevents that the perinasalness occurs. sent6: if the fact that the reforming does not occur but the cantoning battering happens does not hold the trot does not occur. sent7: the inspiratoriness occurs if that the ridiculing occurs but the tenanting major does not occur is not correct. sent8: that not the springing but the joining occurs brings about the monotonicness. sent9: the throbbing and the consultation occurs if the fact that the criticizing knot does not occur hold. sent10: the criticizing Manidae happens if the beautifulness occurs. sent11: the spring does not occur. sent12: if the fact that the cantoning marksmanship and the tenanting Bramidae occurs is incorrect the criticizing knot does not occur. sent13: that the non-nebulousness and the nonmonotonicness occurs is brought about by the consultation. sent14: the entertaining does not occur if the nonmonotonicness does not occur. sent15: that the ridiculing occurs but the tenanting major does not occur is incorrect if the criticizing Manidae happens.
|
sent1: (¬{E} & {C}) -> ¬{B} sent2: (¬{BM} & {IA}) sent3: ¬{K} -> ¬({J} & {I}) sent4: {N} -> ¬(¬{L} & {M}) sent5: (¬{EG} & {HA}) -> ¬{JC} sent6: ¬(¬{L} & {M}) -> ¬{K} sent7: ¬({O} & ¬{P}) -> {N} sent8: (¬{A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent9: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) sent10: {R} -> {Q} sent11: ¬{A} sent12: ¬({J} & {I}) -> ¬{H} sent13: {F} -> (¬{E} & {C}) sent14: ¬{C} -> ¬{D} sent15: {Q} -> ¬({O} & ¬{P})
|
[] |
[] |
the entertaining occurs.
|
{D}
|
[] | 15 | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the entertaining does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the joining does not occur if the nebulousness does not occur and the nonmonotonicness occurs. sent2: the criticizing scenarist does not occur and the journalisticness occurs. sent3: if the trot does not occur then the fact that the cantoning marksmanship and the tenanting Bramidae occurs is not true. sent4: the fact that not the reforming but the cantoning battering occurs is not correct if the inspiratoriness happens. sent5: that not the Justice but the immatureness happens prevents that the perinasalness occurs. sent6: if the fact that the reforming does not occur but the cantoning battering happens does not hold the trot does not occur. sent7: the inspiratoriness occurs if that the ridiculing occurs but the tenanting major does not occur is not correct. sent8: that not the springing but the joining occurs brings about the monotonicness. sent9: the throbbing and the consultation occurs if the fact that the criticizing knot does not occur hold. sent10: the criticizing Manidae happens if the beautifulness occurs. sent11: the spring does not occur. sent12: if the fact that the cantoning marksmanship and the tenanting Bramidae occurs is incorrect the criticizing knot does not occur. sent13: that the non-nebulousness and the nonmonotonicness occurs is brought about by the consultation. sent14: the entertaining does not occur if the nonmonotonicness does not occur. sent15: that the ridiculing occurs but the tenanting major does not occur is incorrect if the criticizing Manidae happens. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the maple tenants danaid.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: if that something does tenant fidget but it is not a kind of a nonagon is not correct then it does tenant danaid. sent2: if the fact that something is vulpine but it is not a kind of a Athenian does not hold then it does not tenant danaid. sent3: something does tenant danaid if it is a nonagon. sent4: that the maple does tenant fidget and is a nonagon is wrong. sent5: the danaid is vulpine. sent6: that the maple tenants fidget and is not a nonagon is not right if the danaid is vulpine. sent7: the fact that the maple tenants fidget and is a nonagon is not right if the danaid is vulpine.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): {AB}x -> {B}x sent4: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent7: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b})
|
[
"sent6 & sent5 -> int1: that the maple does tenant fidget and is not a nonagon is wrong.; sent1 -> int2: if that the maple does tenant fidget but it is not a nonagon is incorrect it does tenant danaid.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent5 -> int1: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent1 -> int2: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the maple does not tenant danaid.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent2 -> int3: if the fact that the maple is vulpine and is not Athenian is not correct then it does not tenant danaid.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the maple tenants danaid. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something does tenant fidget but it is not a kind of a nonagon is not correct then it does tenant danaid. sent2: if the fact that something is vulpine but it is not a kind of a Athenian does not hold then it does not tenant danaid. sent3: something does tenant danaid if it is a nonagon. sent4: that the maple does tenant fidget and is a nonagon is wrong. sent5: the danaid is vulpine. sent6: that the maple tenants fidget and is not a nonagon is not right if the danaid is vulpine. sent7: the fact that the maple tenants fidget and is a nonagon is not right if the danaid is vulpine. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent5 -> int1: that the maple does tenant fidget and is not a nonagon is wrong.; sent1 -> int2: if that the maple does tenant fidget but it is not a nonagon is incorrect it does tenant danaid.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Vouvray is an intermediate.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: if the bloodleaf is a bleu then it is a flaunt. sent2: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a Illicium and does not criticize Boleyn is wrong. sent3: something is a kind of an intermediate if it is a kind of an electric. sent4: the Vouvray is a kind of stereoscopic an electric. sent5: the Vouvray is stereoscopic. sent6: if something is not arterial then it is a cytologist and criticizes chrism.
|
sent1: {FC}{g} -> {IK}{g} sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) sent3: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent4: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent5: {A}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({ID}x & {D}x)
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: the Vouvray is a kind of an electric.; sent3 -> int2: if the Vouvray is an electric it is an intermediate.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent3 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the habitation is both a cytologist and an electric.
|
({ID}{fs} & {B}{fs})
|
[
"sent6 -> int3: if the habitation is not arterial it is a cytologist and it criticizes chrism.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Vouvray is an intermediate. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bloodleaf is a bleu then it is a flaunt. sent2: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a Illicium and does not criticize Boleyn is wrong. sent3: something is a kind of an intermediate if it is a kind of an electric. sent4: the Vouvray is a kind of stereoscopic an electric. sent5: the Vouvray is stereoscopic. sent6: if something is not arterial then it is a cytologist and criticizes chrism. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: the Vouvray is a kind of an electric.; sent3 -> int2: if the Vouvray is an electric it is an intermediate.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something tenants Blackburn and it is a Humboldt.
|
(Ex): ({B}x & {C}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that it is a Humboldt. sent2: the fact that the jawfish is inconsiderate and it does tenant Blackburn is not incorrect. sent3: the Blackburn tenants Blackburn and it is a religionist. sent4: the document is a kind of a Humboldt. sent5: the jawfish is a Humboldt if the document is a Humboldt.
|
sent1: (Ex): {C}x sent2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent3: ({B}{cd} & {BN}{cd}) sent4: {C}{b} sent5: {C}{b} -> {C}{a}
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the jawfish does tenant Blackburn.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the jawfish is a kind of a Humboldt.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the jawfish does tenant Blackburn and it is a Humboldt.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = something tenants Blackburn and it is a Humboldt. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is a Humboldt. sent2: the fact that the jawfish is inconsiderate and it does tenant Blackburn is not incorrect. sent3: the Blackburn tenants Blackburn and it is a religionist. sent4: the document is a kind of a Humboldt. sent5: the jawfish is a Humboldt if the document is a Humboldt. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the jawfish does tenant Blackburn.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the jawfish is a kind of a Humboldt.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the jawfish does tenant Blackburn and it is a Humboldt.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the myeloidness does not occur and the disposing USN does not occur is false.
|
¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})
|
sent1: the pentangularness happens or the angelicness happens or both if the commemorativeness does not occur. sent2: if the perambulation does not occur then the originating and the postexilicness happens. sent3: if the extraterrestrialness does not occur then the non-commemorativeness and the polygonalness occurs. sent4: the cantoning pro does not occur. sent5: the President is prevented by that the cantoning tuber does not occur and/or that the lapidariness occurs. sent6: that not the cantoning pleurodont but the springboard happens yields that the cantoning pasta does not occur. sent7: if the typicalness occurs the myeloidness does not occur and the disposing USN does not occur. sent8: if the fact that the originating occurs is not false then that the macromolecularness happens and the rustle does not occur is wrong. sent9: if the disposing Ribhus occurs but the petrifying does not occur then the brewing does not occur. sent10: the fact that the criticizing tramp does not occur is correct if the myeloidness does not occur and the disposing USN does not occur. sent11: the criticizing tramp and the typicalness occurs if the macromolecularness does not occur. sent12: the rustling does not occur and the brachialness does not occur. sent13: the macromolecularness does not occur if that the macromolecularness but not the rustle occurs does not hold. sent14: that the President does not occur prevents the extraterrestrialness. sent15: the fact that the devil does not occur and the trebling does not occur is not right. sent16: that both the non-Koreanness and the cantoning footrace happens does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬{J} -> ({I} v {H}) sent2: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent3: ¬{L} -> (¬{J} & {K}) sent4: ¬{EH} sent5: (¬{O} v {N}) -> ¬{M} sent6: (¬{DG} & {CA}) -> ¬{FI} sent7: {A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent8: {E} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent9: ({FU} & ¬{HS}) -> ¬{GF} sent10: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent11: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent12: (¬{D} & ¬{JG}) sent13: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} sent14: ¬{M} -> ¬{L} sent15: ¬(¬{CQ} & ¬{DK}) sent16: ¬(¬{GK} & {IS})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the myeloidness does not occur and the disposing USN does not occur.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the criticizing tramp does not occur.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent10 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B};"
] |
the myeloidness does not occur and the disposing USN does not occur.
|
(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})
|
[] | 14 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the myeloidness does not occur and the disposing USN does not occur is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the pentangularness happens or the angelicness happens or both if the commemorativeness does not occur. sent2: if the perambulation does not occur then the originating and the postexilicness happens. sent3: if the extraterrestrialness does not occur then the non-commemorativeness and the polygonalness occurs. sent4: the cantoning pro does not occur. sent5: the President is prevented by that the cantoning tuber does not occur and/or that the lapidariness occurs. sent6: that not the cantoning pleurodont but the springboard happens yields that the cantoning pasta does not occur. sent7: if the typicalness occurs the myeloidness does not occur and the disposing USN does not occur. sent8: if the fact that the originating occurs is not false then that the macromolecularness happens and the rustle does not occur is wrong. sent9: if the disposing Ribhus occurs but the petrifying does not occur then the brewing does not occur. sent10: the fact that the criticizing tramp does not occur is correct if the myeloidness does not occur and the disposing USN does not occur. sent11: the criticizing tramp and the typicalness occurs if the macromolecularness does not occur. sent12: the rustling does not occur and the brachialness does not occur. sent13: the macromolecularness does not occur if that the macromolecularness but not the rustle occurs does not hold. sent14: that the President does not occur prevents the extraterrestrialness. sent15: the fact that the devil does not occur and the trebling does not occur is not right. sent16: that both the non-Koreanness and the cantoning footrace happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the myeloidness does not occur and the disposing USN does not occur.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the criticizing tramp does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it does not canton paleencephalon is not incorrect it is a breechblock and does criticize quartet does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x))
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is not iconic it is a colonialism and it is a kind of a bankbook. sent2: something is a adrenosterone and it is a kind of a corneum if it does not measure. sent3: if the Mahdist does not canton paleencephalon it is a kind of a breechblock and criticizes quartet. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not canton paleencephalon then it is a breechblock. sent5: if the Mahdist does canton paleencephalon then it is a breechblock and does criticize quartet. sent6: the Mahdist does criticize quartet if it does not canton paleencephalon. sent7: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not canton paleencephalon is correct then it criticizes quartet. sent8: if the Mahdist does not criticize quartet then that it does canton pestle and it does tenant brave hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it does canton paleencephalon it is a kind of a breechblock and does criticize quartet. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not criticize brutality it does criticize dullness and is a Oniscidae. sent11: something is a kind of a Rwandan and is undulatory if it does not acuminate.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{F}x -> ({HJ}x & {BE}x) sent2: (x): ¬{IA}x -> ({CU}x & {DK}x) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x sent5: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x sent8: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ({BH}{aa} & {AI}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{AS}x -> ({AG}x & {II}x) sent11: (x): ¬{HA}x -> ({GC}x & {GE}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if it is not a kind of a measured then it is a adrenosterone that is a corneum.
|
(Ex): ¬{IA}x -> ({CU}x & {DK}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: if the pestle is not a measured it is a adrenosterone and it is a kind of a corneum.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it does not canton paleencephalon is not incorrect it is a breechblock and does criticize quartet does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not iconic it is a colonialism and it is a kind of a bankbook. sent2: something is a adrenosterone and it is a kind of a corneum if it does not measure. sent3: if the Mahdist does not canton paleencephalon it is a kind of a breechblock and criticizes quartet. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not canton paleencephalon then it is a breechblock. sent5: if the Mahdist does canton paleencephalon then it is a breechblock and does criticize quartet. sent6: the Mahdist does criticize quartet if it does not canton paleencephalon. sent7: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not canton paleencephalon is correct then it criticizes quartet. sent8: if the Mahdist does not criticize quartet then that it does canton pestle and it does tenant brave hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it does canton paleencephalon it is a kind of a breechblock and does criticize quartet. sent10: there exists something such that if it does not criticize brutality it does criticize dullness and is a Oniscidae. sent11: something is a kind of a Rwandan and is undulatory if it does not acuminate. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the caviar does canton Homyel is not false.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: that everything does criticize Germanic is right. sent2: that something does not tenant interviewee and/or causes hold if the fact that it does not criticize glow is not wrong. sent3: something that does not criticize Germanic does canton Homyel or tenants interviewee or both. sent4: the caviar does not canton Homyel if the arsenical criticizes Germanic. sent5: something that does canton Homyel criticizes Germanic.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x sent2: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{C}x v {D}x) sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}x v {C}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: (x): {B}x -> {A}x
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the arsenical criticizes Germanic.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {A}{aa}; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the salmwood does criticize Germanic.
|
{A}{dh}
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: the salmwood criticizes Germanic if it cantons Homyel.; sent2 -> int3: if the caviar does not criticize glow then it does not tenant interviewee and/or it causes.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the caviar does canton Homyel is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: that everything does criticize Germanic is right. sent2: that something does not tenant interviewee and/or causes hold if the fact that it does not criticize glow is not wrong. sent3: something that does not criticize Germanic does canton Homyel or tenants interviewee or both. sent4: the caviar does not canton Homyel if the arsenical criticizes Germanic. sent5: something that does canton Homyel criticizes Germanic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the arsenical criticizes Germanic.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does not applaud then that it is a crossbench and it does not canton supertanker is false.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: that the share is a crossbench but it does not canton supertanker is false if it does not applaud.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not applaud then that it is a crossbench and it does not canton supertanker is false. ; $context$ = sent1: that the share is a crossbench but it does not canton supertanker is false if it does not applaud. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is a situation it is not stale or is non-tetravalent or both.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is a situation it does not stale and/or it is tetravalent. sent2: there is something such that if it is wieldy then it is not a kind of a shoddy or it is not spatiotemporal or both. sent3: that either something does not criticize greens or it is not stale or both is correct if it is a kind of a Icterus. sent4: something is not a Malthus or not different or both if it is a situation. sent5: if the asthmatic is a situation it does stale or it is not tetravalent or both. sent6: the fact that the greens either is not phenomenal or is not a situation or both hold if it does dispose dieback. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a chignon then it is not bacteriolytic and/or it is not a materialization. sent8: the asthmatic does not stale and/or is not tetravalent if it is a situation. sent9: the asthmatic does not stale and/or it is tetravalent if it is a kind of a situation. sent10: the fact that there is something such that if it is not non-Samoan it is not pyroligneous or it is not alive or both is right. sent11: there is something such that if it is a kind of a situation it is stale or is not tetravalent or both.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent2: (Ex): {GT}x -> (¬{K}x v ¬{AE}x) sent3: (x): {IE}x -> (¬{FC}x v ¬{AA}x) sent4: (x): {A}x -> (¬{ED}x v ¬{JA}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: {GR}{at} -> (¬{ER}{at} v ¬{A}{at}) sent7: (Ex): {HP}x -> (¬{GU}x v ¬{DT}x) sent8: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent9: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent10: (Ex): {CI}x -> (¬{GC}x v ¬{IN}x) sent11: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the fact that the superhet is a Icterus hold either it does not criticize greens or it does not stale or both.
|
{IE}{dk} -> (¬{FC}{dk} v ¬{AA}{dk})
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a situation it is not stale or is non-tetravalent or both. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is a situation it does not stale and/or it is tetravalent. sent2: there is something such that if it is wieldy then it is not a kind of a shoddy or it is not spatiotemporal or both. sent3: that either something does not criticize greens or it is not stale or both is correct if it is a kind of a Icterus. sent4: something is not a Malthus or not different or both if it is a situation. sent5: if the asthmatic is a situation it does stale or it is not tetravalent or both. sent6: the fact that the greens either is not phenomenal or is not a situation or both hold if it does dispose dieback. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a chignon then it is not bacteriolytic and/or it is not a materialization. sent8: the asthmatic does not stale and/or is not tetravalent if it is a situation. sent9: the asthmatic does not stale and/or it is tetravalent if it is a kind of a situation. sent10: the fact that there is something such that if it is not non-Samoan it is not pyroligneous or it is not alive or both is right. sent11: there is something such that if it is a kind of a situation it is stale or is not tetravalent or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the incandescence is airworthy.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: the incandescence is a kind of a East. sent2: if the incandescence is not airworthy the pyrograph is airworthy. sent3: there exists something such that it is a kind of non-airworthy thing that is not a Brumaire. sent4: the incandescence is a kind of a Brumaire. sent5: the elver is a East. sent6: if the pyrograph is not airworthy then the incandescence is a Brumaire that is airworthy. sent7: the cytochrome is a crooner and is a Brumaire if the pyrograph is not airworthy. sent8: something is not a kind of a Brumaire but it is airworthy. sent9: there is something such that it does not criticize main-topmast. sent10: something is non-basilar thing that is not a East. sent11: that the cyclobenzaprine is unairworthy is not incorrect. sent12: something is a bigot that is a Astaire if it is not palatial. sent13: something is not a Brumaire and not airworthy. sent14: there is something such that it is not a kind of a Brumaire. sent15: the incandescence is airworthy thing that is a Brumaire if the pyrograph is not a Brumaire. sent16: the pyrograph is both airworthy and basilar if the incandescence is not basilar. sent17: the fact that the pyrograph is airworthy and it is a Brumaire hold if the incandescence is not a Brumaire. sent18: the pyrograph is not palatial if the fact that the breadwinner is diametric and it is opposite is not right. sent19: something does not canton loyalist. sent20: the solute is not a Brumaire if an inglorious thing is not a Capsella. sent21: there are unairworthy things. sent22: there is something such that it is a kind of basilar thing that is not a kind of a East.
|
sent1: {AB}{b} sent2: ¬{B}{b} -> {B}{a} sent3: (Ex): (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) sent4: {A}{b} sent5: {AB}{eo} sent6: ¬{B}{a} -> ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent7: ¬{B}{a} -> ({GD}{bq} & {A}{bq}) sent8: (Ex): (¬{A}x & {B}x) sent9: (Ex): ¬{FT}x sent10: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent11: ¬{B}{am} sent12: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) sent13: (Ex): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent15: ¬{A}{a} -> ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent16: ¬{AA}{b} -> ({B}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent17: ¬{A}{b} -> ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent18: ¬({G}{c} & {F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent19: (Ex): ¬{AS}x sent20: (x): (¬{EU}x & ¬{CP}x) -> ¬{A}{ie} sent21: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent22: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[] |
[] |
the incandescence is not airworthy.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: if the pyrograph is not palatial it is a bigot and a Astaire.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the incandescence is airworthy. ; $context$ = sent1: the incandescence is a kind of a East. sent2: if the incandescence is not airworthy the pyrograph is airworthy. sent3: there exists something such that it is a kind of non-airworthy thing that is not a Brumaire. sent4: the incandescence is a kind of a Brumaire. sent5: the elver is a East. sent6: if the pyrograph is not airworthy then the incandescence is a Brumaire that is airworthy. sent7: the cytochrome is a crooner and is a Brumaire if the pyrograph is not airworthy. sent8: something is not a kind of a Brumaire but it is airworthy. sent9: there is something such that it does not criticize main-topmast. sent10: something is non-basilar thing that is not a East. sent11: that the cyclobenzaprine is unairworthy is not incorrect. sent12: something is a bigot that is a Astaire if it is not palatial. sent13: something is not a Brumaire and not airworthy. sent14: there is something such that it is not a kind of a Brumaire. sent15: the incandescence is airworthy thing that is a Brumaire if the pyrograph is not a Brumaire. sent16: the pyrograph is both airworthy and basilar if the incandescence is not basilar. sent17: the fact that the pyrograph is airworthy and it is a Brumaire hold if the incandescence is not a Brumaire. sent18: the pyrograph is not palatial if the fact that the breadwinner is diametric and it is opposite is not right. sent19: something does not canton loyalist. sent20: the solute is not a Brumaire if an inglorious thing is not a Capsella. sent21: there are unairworthy things. sent22: there is something such that it is a kind of basilar thing that is not a kind of a East. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something is biographic and it is a kind of a days.
|
(Ex): ({D}x & {B}x)
|
sent1: the cambium is not invariable. sent2: that something is not invariable and not non-bureaucratic is not right if the fact that it is Vedic is not false. sent3: the Taoist is not non-biographic if the cambium is non-invariable thing that is synchronic. sent4: if something is a days then it is not synchronic. sent5: there exists something such that it is not a rings. sent6: the cambium is synchronic. sent7: something is not biographic if the fact that it is non-invariable thing that is bureaucratic is not right. sent8: something is a days. sent9: the embalmment does not canton catastrophe if that the Taoist is biographic is false. sent10: something is a days and/or does not ring if it does not canton catastrophe. sent11: if something is not a rings then it is not synchronic.
|
sent1: ¬{F}{b} sent2: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & {G}x) sent3: (¬{F}{b} & {E}{b}) -> {D}{a} sent4: (x): {B}x -> ¬{E}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent6: {E}{b} sent7: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{D}x sent8: (Ex): {B}x sent9: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬{C}{ag} sent10: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x v ¬{A}x) sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{E}x
|
[
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the cambium is both variable and not non-synchronic.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the Taoist is biographic.;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{F}{b} & {E}{b}); sent3 & int1 -> int2: {D}{a};"
] |
the embalmment is not synchronic.
|
¬{E}{ag}
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: if the embalmment does not canton catastrophe it is a days and/or not a rings.; sent7 -> int4: the Taoist is not biographic if that it is not invariable and it is bureaucratic is not right.; sent2 -> int5: that the Taoist is not invariable but it is bureaucratic is not correct if it is Vedic.; sent4 -> int6: the embalmment is not synchronic if it is a kind of a days.; sent11 -> int7: if the embalmment does not ring then it is not synchronic.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = something is biographic and it is a kind of a days. ; $context$ = sent1: the cambium is not invariable. sent2: that something is not invariable and not non-bureaucratic is not right if the fact that it is Vedic is not false. sent3: the Taoist is not non-biographic if the cambium is non-invariable thing that is synchronic. sent4: if something is a days then it is not synchronic. sent5: there exists something such that it is not a rings. sent6: the cambium is synchronic. sent7: something is not biographic if the fact that it is non-invariable thing that is bureaucratic is not right. sent8: something is a days. sent9: the embalmment does not canton catastrophe if that the Taoist is biographic is false. sent10: something is a days and/or does not ring if it does not canton catastrophe. sent11: if something is not a rings then it is not synchronic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the cambium is both variable and not non-synchronic.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the Taoist is biographic.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is a Atrichornithidae then it is non-apophatic a hepatomegaly.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: if the fact that the Viola is a Atrichornithidae hold then it is not apophatic and it is a kind of a hepatomegaly.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a Atrichornithidae then it is non-apophatic a hepatomegaly. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the Viola is a Atrichornithidae hold then it is not apophatic and it is a kind of a hepatomegaly. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something is a kind of a compulsive but it does not criticize displacement.
|
(Ex): ({B}x & ¬{C}x)
|
sent1: the SCPO does not criticize displacement. sent2: the peephole criticizes displacement and is not a softball. sent3: if there is something such that it is annual then the SCPO is a compulsive and does not criticize displacement. sent4: there exists something such that it is a potshot. sent5: the SCPO does not criticize displacement if there is something such that it is an annual. sent6: there exists something such that it does not criticize displacement. sent7: there is something such that it is a dart and it does not preempt. sent8: the cowbell is a kind of a breed but it is not an annual. sent9: something is a scrappiness that is not a chloroprene. sent10: the SCPO is a kind of an annual but it does not tenant carnallite if there exists something such that it is a snood. sent11: the snood is a compulsive but it does not tenant direction. sent12: there is something such that it is a compulsive. sent13: something is a compulsive that criticizes displacement. sent14: the SCPO is sternal thing that is not an annual. sent15: if there are annual things then the SCPO is a kind of a burgundy and does not criticize pangolin. sent16: the caboose is unshod but it does not criticize displacement if there exists something such that it is artifactual. sent17: there is something such that it does tenant carnallite.
|
sent1: ¬{C}{a} sent2: ({C}{er} & ¬{HS}{er}) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent4: (Ex): {FD}x sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent6: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent7: (Ex): ({JE}x & ¬{BR}x) sent8: ({CJ}{i} & ¬{A}{i}) sent9: (Ex): ({FP}x & ¬{HD}x) sent10: (x): {DI}x -> ({A}{a} & ¬{EE}{a}) sent11: ({B}{hj} & ¬{DU}{hj}) sent12: (Ex): {B}x sent13: (Ex): ({B}x & {C}x) sent14: ({F}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent15: (x): {A}x -> ({AI}{a} & ¬{CP}{a}) sent16: (x): {AJ}x -> ({CS}{cs} & ¬{C}{cs}) sent17: (Ex): {EE}x
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = something is a kind of a compulsive but it does not criticize displacement. ; $context$ = sent1: the SCPO does not criticize displacement. sent2: the peephole criticizes displacement and is not a softball. sent3: if there is something such that it is annual then the SCPO is a compulsive and does not criticize displacement. sent4: there exists something such that it is a potshot. sent5: the SCPO does not criticize displacement if there is something such that it is an annual. sent6: there exists something such that it does not criticize displacement. sent7: there is something such that it is a dart and it does not preempt. sent8: the cowbell is a kind of a breed but it is not an annual. sent9: something is a scrappiness that is not a chloroprene. sent10: the SCPO is a kind of an annual but it does not tenant carnallite if there exists something such that it is a snood. sent11: the snood is a compulsive but it does not tenant direction. sent12: there is something such that it is a compulsive. sent13: something is a compulsive that criticizes displacement. sent14: the SCPO is sternal thing that is not an annual. sent15: if there are annual things then the SCPO is a kind of a burgundy and does not criticize pangolin. sent16: the caboose is unshod but it does not criticize displacement if there exists something such that it is artifactual. sent17: there is something such that it does tenant carnallite. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the return does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: if the fenestration occurs the Japanese does not occur and the tarriance does not occur. sent2: the criticizing syndication occurs. sent3: that the topicalness happens is not incorrect. sent4: if the pyloricness does not occur then the fenestration and the pileup occurs. sent5: if the cantoning ganger occurs and the Japaneseness occurs then the fact that the returning does not occur hold. sent6: if the psychogeneticness happens then the pyloricness does not occur and the organizing happens. sent7: both the chancrousness and the referendum occurs. sent8: the cantoning ganger happens. sent9: the Japaneseness happens. sent10: the synergisticness and the cantoning ganger happens if the Japanese does not occur. sent11: if the pileup does not occur then the fenestration does not occur. sent12: the constricting occurs.
|
sent1: {E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{D}) sent2: {CS} sent3: {Q} sent4: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent5: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent6: {I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) sent7: ({JJ} & {P}) sent8: {A} sent9: {B} sent10: ¬{B} -> ({EF} & {A}) sent11: ¬{F} -> ¬{E} sent12: {GT}
|
[
"sent8 & sent9 -> int1: both the cantoning ganger and the Japanese occurs.; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent9 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the synergisticness happens.
|
{EF}
|
[] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the return does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fenestration occurs the Japanese does not occur and the tarriance does not occur. sent2: the criticizing syndication occurs. sent3: that the topicalness happens is not incorrect. sent4: if the pyloricness does not occur then the fenestration and the pileup occurs. sent5: if the cantoning ganger occurs and the Japaneseness occurs then the fact that the returning does not occur hold. sent6: if the psychogeneticness happens then the pyloricness does not occur and the organizing happens. sent7: both the chancrousness and the referendum occurs. sent8: the cantoning ganger happens. sent9: the Japaneseness happens. sent10: the synergisticness and the cantoning ganger happens if the Japanese does not occur. sent11: if the pileup does not occur then the fenestration does not occur. sent12: the constricting occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent9 -> int1: both the cantoning ganger and the Japanese occurs.; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the systolicness does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
sent1: the cantoning rusticity does not occur if the systolicness does not occur. sent2: that the cantoning rusticity does not occur and the brisance does not occur does not hold. sent3: the undercutting happens if that the undercutting does not occur and the tenanting cast does not occur is wrong. sent4: the alveolar does not occur. sent5: the Sovietness does not occur. sent6: the systolicness does not occur if the fact that the brisance happens and the cantoning rusticity occurs does not hold. sent7: the midterm happens if the fact that that the midterm does not occur and the frescoing does not occur is wrong is not false. sent8: that the heedlessness occurs is right if the fact that the heedlessness does not occur and the teething does not occur is not true. sent9: the criticizing worktable occurs if that the criticizing worktable does not occur and the pronation does not occur is not true. sent10: the rollback happens if the fact that the rollback does not occur and the exauguralness does not occur is incorrect. sent11: the pragmaticness happens if that the pragmaticness does not occur and the growth does not occur is wrong. sent12: the cantoning rusticity happens if the fact that the cantoning rusticity does not occur and the brisance does not occur is not correct. sent13: the gaffe does not occur. sent14: the fact that the cantoning rusticity happens but the brisance does not occur does not hold. sent15: the fraternalness does not occur if the gaffe does not occur. sent16: the tenanting autoradiography does not occur if the cantoning Leporidae does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{A} -> ¬{B} sent2: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent3: ¬(¬{CF} & ¬{BF}) -> {CF} sent4: ¬{FQ} sent5: ¬{DH} sent6: ¬({C} & {B}) -> ¬{A} sent7: ¬(¬{HN} & ¬{FK}) -> {HN} sent8: ¬(¬{CD} & ¬{DE}) -> {CD} sent9: ¬(¬{DF} & ¬{BT}) -> {DF} sent10: ¬(¬{GG} & ¬{IH}) -> {GG} sent11: ¬(¬{BA} & ¬{FJ}) -> {BA} sent12: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{C}) -> {B} sent13: ¬{AA} sent14: ¬({B} & ¬{C}) sent15: ¬{AA} -> ¬{G} sent16: ¬{HS} -> ¬{GB}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the systolicness does not occur.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the cantoning rusticity does not occur.; sent12 & sent2 -> int2: the cantoning rusticity occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent12 & sent2 -> int2: {B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the systolicness does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the systolicness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the cantoning rusticity does not occur if the systolicness does not occur. sent2: that the cantoning rusticity does not occur and the brisance does not occur does not hold. sent3: the undercutting happens if that the undercutting does not occur and the tenanting cast does not occur is wrong. sent4: the alveolar does not occur. sent5: the Sovietness does not occur. sent6: the systolicness does not occur if the fact that the brisance happens and the cantoning rusticity occurs does not hold. sent7: the midterm happens if the fact that that the midterm does not occur and the frescoing does not occur is wrong is not false. sent8: that the heedlessness occurs is right if the fact that the heedlessness does not occur and the teething does not occur is not true. sent9: the criticizing worktable occurs if that the criticizing worktable does not occur and the pronation does not occur is not true. sent10: the rollback happens if the fact that the rollback does not occur and the exauguralness does not occur is incorrect. sent11: the pragmaticness happens if that the pragmaticness does not occur and the growth does not occur is wrong. sent12: the cantoning rusticity happens if the fact that the cantoning rusticity does not occur and the brisance does not occur is not correct. sent13: the gaffe does not occur. sent14: the fact that the cantoning rusticity happens but the brisance does not occur does not hold. sent15: the fraternalness does not occur if the gaffe does not occur. sent16: the tenanting autoradiography does not occur if the cantoning Leporidae does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the systolicness does not occur.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the cantoning rusticity does not occur.; sent12 & sent2 -> int2: the cantoning rusticity occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pyroxene does spirit.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: if the prayer does not tenant widowed then that it is a sissoo and/or it does not calve is not wrong. sent2: the prayer is a sissoo and/or does not calve. sent3: the cytochrome does criticize catastrophe if it criticizes cytochrome. sent4: something is not a kind of a sissoo and/or it spirits. sent5: the kvetch does decimalize. sent6: if the prayer does not tenant widowed then it is not a sissoo or does calve or both. sent7: either something is a sissoo or it does not calve or both. sent8: if there exists something such that it is a calomel the prayer is not a tearaway. sent9: there is something such that it does tenant widowed and/or it does not calve. sent10: that if the prayer does not tenant widowed the prayer is not a sissoo and/or it does not calve is correct. sent11: if the kvetch decimalizes then the fact that it tenants Niger and it is not Anglophilic is incorrect. sent12: the sockeye is a calomel if it tenants Niger. sent13: The widowed does not tenant prayer. sent14: either something is not a catalog or it is not a hypodermic or both. sent15: there is something such that either it does not tenant widowed or it is not a kind of a sissoo or both. sent16: if the prayer is not a tearaway then the pyroxene does tenant widowed. sent17: something is not a sissoo and/or does calve. sent18: the prayer does not tenant widowed. sent19: if the pyroxene does not calve it is not a kind of an east and/or does not dispose sockeye. sent20: the prayer is not a kind of a sissoo or it does calve or both. sent21: if something that does tenant widowed is a maverick then it is not a spirited. sent22: if the fact that the fact that the kvetch tenants Niger but it is not Anglophilic is incorrect is right the sockeye tenants Niger.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: {I}{e} -> {G}{e} sent4: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {B}x) sent5: {K}{d} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent7: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent8: (x): {E}x -> ¬{D}{a} sent9: (Ex): ({A}x v ¬{AB}x) sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent11: {K}{d} -> ¬({H}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) sent12: {H}{c} -> {E}{c} sent13: ¬{AC}{aa} sent14: (Ex): (¬{EQ}x v ¬{HS}x) sent15: (Ex): (¬{A}x v ¬{AA}x) sent16: ¬{D}{a} -> {A}{b} sent17: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent18: ¬{A}{a} sent19: ¬{AB}{b} -> (¬{GM}{b} v ¬{HU}{b}) sent20: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent21: (x): ({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent22: ¬({H}{d} & ¬{J}{d}) -> {H}{c}
|
[
"sent10 & sent18 -> int1: the prayer is not a kind of a sissoo and/or does not calve.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is not a sissoo and/or it does not calve.;"
] |
[
"sent10 & sent18 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x);"
] |
the pyroxene is not a spirited.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent21 -> int3: if the pyroxene does tenant widowed and it is a maverick then it does not spirit.; sent11 & sent5 -> int4: the fact that the kvetch does tenant Niger and is not Anglophilic is incorrect.; sent22 & int4 -> int5: the sockeye does tenant Niger.; sent12 & int5 -> int6: the sockeye is a calomel.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it is a calomel.; int7 & sent8 -> int8: the prayer is not a tearaway.; sent16 & int8 -> int9: the pyroxene tenants widowed.;"
] | 8 | 3 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the pyroxene does spirit. ; $context$ = sent1: if the prayer does not tenant widowed then that it is a sissoo and/or it does not calve is not wrong. sent2: the prayer is a sissoo and/or does not calve. sent3: the cytochrome does criticize catastrophe if it criticizes cytochrome. sent4: something is not a kind of a sissoo and/or it spirits. sent5: the kvetch does decimalize. sent6: if the prayer does not tenant widowed then it is not a sissoo or does calve or both. sent7: either something is a sissoo or it does not calve or both. sent8: if there exists something such that it is a calomel the prayer is not a tearaway. sent9: there is something such that it does tenant widowed and/or it does not calve. sent10: that if the prayer does not tenant widowed the prayer is not a sissoo and/or it does not calve is correct. sent11: if the kvetch decimalizes then the fact that it tenants Niger and it is not Anglophilic is incorrect. sent12: the sockeye is a calomel if it tenants Niger. sent13: The widowed does not tenant prayer. sent14: either something is not a catalog or it is not a hypodermic or both. sent15: there is something such that either it does not tenant widowed or it is not a kind of a sissoo or both. sent16: if the prayer is not a tearaway then the pyroxene does tenant widowed. sent17: something is not a sissoo and/or does calve. sent18: the prayer does not tenant widowed. sent19: if the pyroxene does not calve it is not a kind of an east and/or does not dispose sockeye. sent20: the prayer is not a kind of a sissoo or it does calve or both. sent21: if something that does tenant widowed is a maverick then it is not a spirited. sent22: if the fact that the fact that the kvetch tenants Niger but it is not Anglophilic is incorrect is right the sockeye tenants Niger. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 & sent18 -> int1: the prayer is not a kind of a sissoo and/or does not calve.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is not a sissoo and/or it does not calve.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the miro does criticize scrubbird and is a Nesselrode does not hold.
|
¬({D}{c} & {B}{c})
|
sent1: the narcotic does not criticize apercu. sent2: that the narcotic does not criticize apercu and/or it is a Nesselrode hold if it is not a partridgeberry. sent3: if the graphologist is not a Nesselrode then that the fact that the miro does criticize scrubbird and it is a Nesselrode is not false is not correct. sent4: the narcotic does strip and/or it is a partridgeberry. sent5: if the narcotic is an actuator then the miro is a kind of a Nesselrode. sent6: the miro does not tenant Bushido. sent7: the narcotic is not a form and/or it is a kind of a partridgeberry if it does not criticize apercu. sent8: that the narcotic is a Nesselrode that does criticize apercu is wrong if the miro does not criticize apercu. sent9: the miro is a form and/or it criticizes scrubbird. sent10: something that does not tenant Bushido criticizes scrubbird and does criticize apercu. sent11: The apercu does not criticize narcotic. sent12: if the narcotic is not a form or a partridgeberry or both the graphologist is not a Nesselrode.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{a} sent2: ¬{AB}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent3: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({D}{c} & {B}{c}) sent4: ({BO}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent5: {C}{a} -> {B}{c} sent6: ¬{E}{c} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent8: ¬{A}{c} -> ¬({B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent9: ({AA}{c} v {D}{c}) sent10: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & {A}x) sent11: ¬{AC}{aa} sent12: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent7 & sent1 -> int1: the narcotic is either not a form or a partridgeberry or both.; sent12 & int1 -> int2: the graphologist is not a Nesselrode.; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); sent12 & int1 -> int2: ¬{B}{b}; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the miro does criticize scrubbird and is a kind of a Nesselrode.
|
({D}{c} & {B}{c})
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: the miro criticizes scrubbird and it criticizes apercu if it does not tenant Bushido.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the miro criticizes scrubbird and it does criticize apercu.; int4 -> int5: the miro criticizes scrubbird.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the miro does criticize scrubbird and is a Nesselrode does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the narcotic does not criticize apercu. sent2: that the narcotic does not criticize apercu and/or it is a Nesselrode hold if it is not a partridgeberry. sent3: if the graphologist is not a Nesselrode then that the fact that the miro does criticize scrubbird and it is a Nesselrode is not false is not correct. sent4: the narcotic does strip and/or it is a partridgeberry. sent5: if the narcotic is an actuator then the miro is a kind of a Nesselrode. sent6: the miro does not tenant Bushido. sent7: the narcotic is not a form and/or it is a kind of a partridgeberry if it does not criticize apercu. sent8: that the narcotic is a Nesselrode that does criticize apercu is wrong if the miro does not criticize apercu. sent9: the miro is a form and/or it criticizes scrubbird. sent10: something that does not tenant Bushido criticizes scrubbird and does criticize apercu. sent11: The apercu does not criticize narcotic. sent12: if the narcotic is not a form or a partridgeberry or both the graphologist is not a Nesselrode. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent1 -> int1: the narcotic is either not a form or a partridgeberry or both.; sent12 & int1 -> int2: the graphologist is not a Nesselrode.; sent3 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a cataphyll that it is a kind of a assize and it does tenant major is not right is wrong.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x))
|
sent1: if the yardstick is not a cataphyll that it does migrate and is not non-telephonic is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a cataphyll then it is a kind of a assize that does tenant major. sent3: the fact that something excels and it is a Appaloosa is false if it is not a goldenrod. sent4: there is something such that if it is not microcosmic the fact that it is imprudent thing that cantons Requiem is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the essonite is prolix thing that is entozoic is not correct if it is not telephonic. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not fiducial then the fact that it does dispose nasality and it is a Lepidodendraceae is incorrect. sent7: there is something such that if it is not cytolytic then that it criticizes proration and it is carcinogenic does not hold. sent8: if the straightener is a cataphyll then the fact that it is a assize and it does tenant major does not hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a cataphyll that it is a kind of a assize and does tenant major does not hold. sent10: that the major is a Saone and it is a kind of a cataphyll is false if it is not a jaundiced. sent11: that the straightener is a assize that is diagonalizable is false if it is not a kind of a ruminant. sent12: the straightener is a kind of a assize that tenants major if it is not a cataphyll. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a youth-on-age the fact that it is upmarket thing that is a kind of a liter does not hold. sent14: that the cup is a kind of an engineer that tenants major is not right if it does not tenant patchcord. sent15: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Gymnocarpium then the fact that it is urban and a trouble does not hold. sent16: that the straightener is a assize and it does tenant major is incorrect if it is not a cataphyll. sent17: that the straightener is a kind of tragic thing that beards is incorrect if the fact that it does not tenant major is right. sent18: the fact that the straightener is a hardtack and evens does not hold if it is not a cataphyll. sent19: there is something such that if it is not prolix the fact that it is commutable and it glazes is false. sent20: if the straightener is not a resurrection then the fact that it revolts and it is a kind of a assize is not right.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{gj} -> ¬({IR}{gj} & {BD}{gj}) sent2: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬{HF}x -> ¬({L}x & {FF}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{CD}x -> ¬({ID}x & {AI}x) sent5: ¬{BD}{bu} -> ¬({GC}{bu} & {BC}{bu}) sent6: (Ex): ¬{BM}x -> ¬({AO}x & {IF}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬{HI}x -> ¬({J}x & {CT}x) sent8: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: ¬{EK}{hc} -> ¬({AH}{hc} & {A}{hc}) sent11: ¬{IP}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AF}{aa}) sent12: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent13: (Ex): ¬{GH}x -> ¬({AJ}x & {DM}x) sent14: ¬{GJ}{dp} -> ¬({JH}{dp} & {AB}{dp}) sent15: (Ex): ¬{HD}x -> ¬({GP}x & {DD}x) sent16: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent17: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬({FH}{aa} & {IL}{aa}) sent18: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({HJ}{aa} & {FM}{aa}) sent19: (Ex): ¬{GC}x -> ¬({IH}x & {BA}x) sent20: ¬{JK}{aa} -> ¬({IC}{aa} & {AA}{aa})
|
[
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the salivation is not a goldenrod then that it excels and is a Appaloosa is not correct.
|
¬{HF}{ad} -> ¬({L}{ad} & {FF}{ad})
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a cataphyll that it is a kind of a assize and it does tenant major is not right is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the yardstick is not a cataphyll that it does migrate and is not non-telephonic is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a cataphyll then it is a kind of a assize that does tenant major. sent3: the fact that something excels and it is a Appaloosa is false if it is not a goldenrod. sent4: there is something such that if it is not microcosmic the fact that it is imprudent thing that cantons Requiem is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the essonite is prolix thing that is entozoic is not correct if it is not telephonic. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not fiducial then the fact that it does dispose nasality and it is a Lepidodendraceae is incorrect. sent7: there is something such that if it is not cytolytic then that it criticizes proration and it is carcinogenic does not hold. sent8: if the straightener is a cataphyll then the fact that it is a assize and it does tenant major does not hold. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a cataphyll that it is a kind of a assize and does tenant major does not hold. sent10: that the major is a Saone and it is a kind of a cataphyll is false if it is not a jaundiced. sent11: that the straightener is a assize that is diagonalizable is false if it is not a kind of a ruminant. sent12: the straightener is a kind of a assize that tenants major if it is not a cataphyll. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a youth-on-age the fact that it is upmarket thing that is a kind of a liter does not hold. sent14: that the cup is a kind of an engineer that tenants major is not right if it does not tenant patchcord. sent15: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Gymnocarpium then the fact that it is urban and a trouble does not hold. sent16: that the straightener is a assize and it does tenant major is incorrect if it is not a cataphyll. sent17: that the straightener is a kind of tragic thing that beards is incorrect if the fact that it does not tenant major is right. sent18: the fact that the straightener is a hardtack and evens does not hold if it is not a cataphyll. sent19: there is something such that if it is not prolix the fact that it is commutable and it glazes is false. sent20: if the straightener is not a resurrection then the fact that it revolts and it is a kind of a assize is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the volleyball and the tremble happens.
|
({G} & {F})
|
sent1: if the solace does not occur that the disposing loyalist happens and/or the interpretation does not occur is incorrect. sent2: the fact that either the tenanting Charleroi happens or the logging does not occur or both is wrong if the philhellenicness does not occur. sent3: that the tenanting falcon does not occur is not false. sent4: if the estivating does not occur then that the intralinguisticness or the non-intolerableness or both happens does not hold. sent5: that the unfaithfulness happens and/or the mulling does not occur does not hold if the urethralness does not occur. sent6: that the intralinguisticness does not occur is true if the estivating does not occur. sent7: the fact that if the logisticsness does not occur then the volleyball and the tremble occurs hold. sent8: the criticizing silver-lace occurs. sent9: if the criticizing silver-lace occurs the estivating does not occur. sent10: the ordeal does not occur if that either the congregation occurs or the deductibleness does not occur or both does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬{HB} -> ¬({P} v ¬{DD}) sent2: ¬{GS} -> ¬({O} v ¬{FK}) sent3: ¬{Q} sent4: ¬{B} -> ¬({C} v ¬{D}) sent5: ¬{BQ} -> ¬({AJ} v ¬{FE}) sent6: ¬{B} -> ¬{C} sent7: ¬{E} -> ({G} & {F}) sent8: {A} sent9: {A} -> ¬{B} sent10: ¬({DM} v ¬{AL}) -> ¬{HE}
|
[
"sent9 & sent8 -> int1: the estivating does not occur.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: that either the intralinguisticness happens or the intolerableness does not occur or both does not hold.;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent8 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent4 & int1 -> int2: ¬({C} v ¬{D});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the volleyball and the tremble happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the solace does not occur that the disposing loyalist happens and/or the interpretation does not occur is incorrect. sent2: the fact that either the tenanting Charleroi happens or the logging does not occur or both is wrong if the philhellenicness does not occur. sent3: that the tenanting falcon does not occur is not false. sent4: if the estivating does not occur then that the intralinguisticness or the non-intolerableness or both happens does not hold. sent5: that the unfaithfulness happens and/or the mulling does not occur does not hold if the urethralness does not occur. sent6: that the intralinguisticness does not occur is true if the estivating does not occur. sent7: the fact that if the logisticsness does not occur then the volleyball and the tremble occurs hold. sent8: the criticizing silver-lace occurs. sent9: if the criticizing silver-lace occurs the estivating does not occur. sent10: the ordeal does not occur if that either the congregation occurs or the deductibleness does not occur or both does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent8 -> int1: the estivating does not occur.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: that either the intralinguisticness happens or the intolerableness does not occur or both does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.