version
stringclasses 1
value | hypothesis
stringlengths 11
215
| hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
39
| context
stringlengths 0
2.9k
| context_formula
stringlengths 0
905
| proofs
list | proofs_formula
list | negative_hypothesis
stringlengths 15
193
⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
37
⌀ | negative_proofs
list | negative_original_tree_depth
int64 0
25
⌀ | original_tree_depth
int64 1
4
| depth
int64 0
3
⌀ | num_formula_distractors
int64 0
22
| num_translation_distractors
int64 0
0
| num_all_distractors
int64 0
22
| proof_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_proof_label
stringclasses 2
values | world_assump_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_world_assump_label
stringclasses 2
values | prompt_serial
stringlengths 89
3.09k
| proof_serial
stringlengths 11
654
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DeductionInstance
|
the unreliableness does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the jolting and the evaporativeness happens. sent2: the jolting happens. sent3: if the evaporativeness does not occur the reply happens and the jolt happens. sent4: the quarantining happens. sent5: the quarantine results in that the pitching happens. sent6: that the unreliableness does not occur is right if the evaporativeness happens and the pitching occurs.
|
sent1: ({A} & {B}) sent2: {A} sent3: ¬{B} -> ({GK} & {A}) sent4: {E} sent5: {E} -> {C} sent6: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the evaporativeness occurs.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the pitch occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: both the evaporativeness and the pitch happens.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {B}; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B} & {C}); int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
both the reply and the opposing brunt happens.
|
({GK} & {L})
|
[] | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the unreliableness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the jolting and the evaporativeness happens. sent2: the jolting happens. sent3: if the evaporativeness does not occur the reply happens and the jolt happens. sent4: the quarantining happens. sent5: the quarantine results in that the pitching happens. sent6: that the unreliableness does not occur is right if the evaporativeness happens and the pitching occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the evaporativeness occurs.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the pitch occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: both the evaporativeness and the pitch happens.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the co-discoverer is not a seidel.
|
¬{C}{a}
|
sent1: if the fact that the goldstone does saponify and is not indelicate is wrong the atrazine is indelicate. sent2: if the goldstone does not crash deathrate that it does saponify and is not indelicate is not right. sent3: if something that melts inherits then it is not zoonotic. sent4: if something that is indelicate inherits then it is not a seidel. sent5: the co-discoverer inherits. sent6: that the co-discoverer is indelicate is not false. sent7: if the fact that the goldstone does crash deathrate and is intrinsic is not true then it does not crash deathrate.
|
sent1: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> {A}{b} sent2: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬({E}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) sent3: (x): ({IM}x & {B}x) -> ¬{DN}x sent4: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent5: {B}{a} sent6: {A}{a} sent7: ¬({D}{c} & {I}{c}) -> ¬{D}{c}
|
[
"sent6 & sent5 -> int1: the co-discoverer is indelicate and inherits.; sent4 -> int2: the co-discoverer is not a kind of a seidel if it is indelicate and inherits.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent5 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent4 -> int2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the co-discoverer is a seidel.
|
{C}{a}
|
[] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the co-discoverer is not a seidel. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the goldstone does saponify and is not indelicate is wrong the atrazine is indelicate. sent2: if the goldstone does not crash deathrate that it does saponify and is not indelicate is not right. sent3: if something that melts inherits then it is not zoonotic. sent4: if something that is indelicate inherits then it is not a seidel. sent5: the co-discoverer inherits. sent6: that the co-discoverer is indelicate is not false. sent7: if the fact that the goldstone does crash deathrate and is intrinsic is not true then it does not crash deathrate. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent5 -> int1: the co-discoverer is indelicate and inherits.; sent4 -> int2: the co-discoverer is not a kind of a seidel if it is indelicate and inherits.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the chronometer is not unlucky is right.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: the chronometer is not unlucky if something is not unresentful and is not a presentist. sent2: something is not unresentful and it is not a kind of a presentist.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the chronometer is not unlucky is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the chronometer is not unlucky if something is not unresentful and is not a presentist. sent2: something is not unresentful and it is not a kind of a presentist. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the starship is stainable and/or it is a broth is wrong.
|
¬({A}{b} v {C}{b})
|
sent1: the starship is not a kind of a shot. sent2: if something is not a prime or not dissimilar or both it is not a broth. sent3: if the millionairess is not a boat and it is not a psi then it is non-carbocyclic. sent4: if the millionairess does boat but it is not carbocyclic then it is not stainable. sent5: there is nothing such that it is a settle and it is not a prune. sent6: the starship is not stainable. sent7: the starship is proactive and crashes pinch. sent8: the millionairess does crash pinch. sent9: something is not a prime and/or it is not dissimilar if it is not monoecious. sent10: the millionairess does not muff bimillennium if there is something such that it is proactive and it crashes pinch. sent11: if something is not carbocyclic that the starship is stainable and/or it is a broth is not correct. sent12: the millionairess is not monoecious if that it is a kind of a settle that is not a prune is not right. sent13: something is not a parapodium if that it is a kind of non-carbocyclic thing that is not stainable does not hold. sent14: that the fact that something is non-carbocyclic thing that is not stainable is not false is not right if that it is not a broth is true. sent15: if the millionairess is not a broth and it does not muff bimillennium then the LEM is not a broth. sent16: the Brahma is not a broth. sent17: the millionairess is not a psi and it is not a kind of a shellflower. sent18: the fact that the millionairess is not immunodeficient is right.
|
sent1: ¬{HI}{b} sent2: (x): (¬{G}x v ¬{H}x) -> ¬{C}x sent3: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: ({AA}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({K}x & ¬{J}x) sent6: ¬{A}{b} sent7: ({F}{b} & {E}{b}) sent8: {E}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{G}x v ¬{H}x) sent10: (x): ({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}{b} v {C}{b}) sent12: ¬({K}{a} & ¬{J}{a}) -> ¬{I}{a} sent13: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{CC}x sent14: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) sent15: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{C}{iq} sent16: ¬{C}{ed} sent17: (¬{AB}{a} & ¬{FK}{a}) sent18: ¬{BD}{a}
|
[] |
[] |
the starship is stainable and/or it is a broth.
|
({A}{b} v {C}{b})
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: there exists something such that it crashes pinch.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the starship is stainable and/or it is a broth is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the starship is not a kind of a shot. sent2: if something is not a prime or not dissimilar or both it is not a broth. sent3: if the millionairess is not a boat and it is not a psi then it is non-carbocyclic. sent4: if the millionairess does boat but it is not carbocyclic then it is not stainable. sent5: there is nothing such that it is a settle and it is not a prune. sent6: the starship is not stainable. sent7: the starship is proactive and crashes pinch. sent8: the millionairess does crash pinch. sent9: something is not a prime and/or it is not dissimilar if it is not monoecious. sent10: the millionairess does not muff bimillennium if there is something such that it is proactive and it crashes pinch. sent11: if something is not carbocyclic that the starship is stainable and/or it is a broth is not correct. sent12: the millionairess is not monoecious if that it is a kind of a settle that is not a prune is not right. sent13: something is not a parapodium if that it is a kind of non-carbocyclic thing that is not stainable does not hold. sent14: that the fact that something is non-carbocyclic thing that is not stainable is not false is not right if that it is not a broth is true. sent15: if the millionairess is not a broth and it does not muff bimillennium then the LEM is not a broth. sent16: the Brahma is not a broth. sent17: the millionairess is not a psi and it is not a kind of a shellflower. sent18: the fact that the millionairess is not immunodeficient is right. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the urobilinogen does article and is hydroxy it does not refrigerate cholinesterase.
|
({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: the cholinesterase is not profane if it is a Scorpius and it commutes. sent2: something is a mintmark if it is a kind of valent thing that is unmanly. sent3: if the urobilinogen is a Himmler and does refrigerate cholinesterase then it does muff salesman. sent4: the mitten is not an article if it is a kind of a gonioscopy and it is celebratory. sent5: if something is an article and not non-hydroxy then it does refrigerate cholinesterase. sent6: the fact that the urobilinogen refrigerates cholinesterase hold if it is an article and it is hydroxy. sent7: if something that is a Jihadist is a aye-aye then it does not muff Herrick. sent8: a hydroxy article does not refrigerate cholinesterase. sent9: if something opposes grivet and does oppose Sin that it is nonreflective hold. sent10: if the urobilinogen is a mombin that does refrigerate cholinesterase then it is a kind of a arachnoid. sent11: if something that is academic is mediated it is defeasible. sent12: the urobilinogen is not part-time if it is an article and a cobalt.
|
sent1: ({HE}{gt} & {GE}{gt}) -> ¬{GL}{gt} sent2: (x): ({AS}x & {DQ}x) -> {JK}x sent3: ({CA}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> {CO}{aa} sent4: ({FE}{dq} & {R}{dq}) -> ¬{AA}{dq} sent5: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent6: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent7: (x): ({CI}x & {EG}x) -> ¬{EM}x sent8: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent9: (x): ({N}x & {IL}x) -> {A}x sent10: ({GA}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> {BL}{aa} sent11: (x): ({CH}x & {IB}x) -> {EL}x sent12: ({AA}{aa} & {GU}{aa}) -> ¬{GT}{aa}
|
[
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = if the urobilinogen does article and is hydroxy it does not refrigerate cholinesterase. ; $context$ = sent1: the cholinesterase is not profane if it is a Scorpius and it commutes. sent2: something is a mintmark if it is a kind of valent thing that is unmanly. sent3: if the urobilinogen is a Himmler and does refrigerate cholinesterase then it does muff salesman. sent4: the mitten is not an article if it is a kind of a gonioscopy and it is celebratory. sent5: if something is an article and not non-hydroxy then it does refrigerate cholinesterase. sent6: the fact that the urobilinogen refrigerates cholinesterase hold if it is an article and it is hydroxy. sent7: if something that is a Jihadist is a aye-aye then it does not muff Herrick. sent8: a hydroxy article does not refrigerate cholinesterase. sent9: if something opposes grivet and does oppose Sin that it is nonreflective hold. sent10: if the urobilinogen is a mombin that does refrigerate cholinesterase then it is a kind of a arachnoid. sent11: if something that is academic is mediated it is defeasible. sent12: the urobilinogen is not part-time if it is an article and a cobalt. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the muffing entreaty happens.
|
{B}
|
sent1: the muffing entreaty does not occur and the crashing visionary does not occur if the fact that the streptococcalness does not occur is right. sent2: the thyrotoxicness happens. sent3: the thyrotoxicness and the muffing entreaty occurs. sent4: the streptococcalness does not occur if the whisking happens and/or the streptococcalness does not occur. sent5: the bibliolatry occurs. sent6: the muffing entreaty does not occur if the thyrotoxicness does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent2: {A} sent3: ({A} & {B}) sent4: ({F} v ¬{D}) -> ¬{D} sent5: {Q} sent6: ¬{A} -> ¬{B}
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the muffing entreaty does not occur is true.
|
¬{B}
|
[] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the muffing entreaty happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the muffing entreaty does not occur and the crashing visionary does not occur if the fact that the streptococcalness does not occur is right. sent2: the thyrotoxicness happens. sent3: the thyrotoxicness and the muffing entreaty occurs. sent4: the streptococcalness does not occur if the whisking happens and/or the streptococcalness does not occur. sent5: the bibliolatry occurs. sent6: the muffing entreaty does not occur if the thyrotoxicness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the orogeny is not cautious.
|
¬{D}{a}
|
sent1: the fact that the orogeny muffs redeployment and is not cautious is not true if the fact that it is a kind of a show is not false. sent2: something opposes Tourette if the fact that it is actinomorphic and it is not three-dimensional is false. sent3: something is a show. sent4: the fact that the orogeny is a miotic is not correct if the fact that it does oppose Tourette and is brahminic does not hold. sent5: if the fact that something muffs redeployment and it opposes Tourette is not correct then it is not cautious. sent6: if that something does muff redeployment and is not cautious does not hold it is cautious.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{E}x) -> {C}x sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: ¬({C}{a} & {AM}{a}) -> ¬{EK}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent6: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) -> {D}x
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the orogeny is not cautious if that it muffs redeployment and it does oppose Tourette does not hold.;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a};"
] |
the orogeny is cautious.
|
{D}{a}
|
[
"sent6 -> int2: if the fact that the orogeny muffs redeployment and is not cautious is not true the fact that it is cautious is correct.; sent2 -> int3: the orogeny does oppose Tourette if the fact that it is both actinomorphic and not three-dimensional is not true.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the orogeny is not cautious. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the orogeny muffs redeployment and is not cautious is not true if the fact that it is a kind of a show is not false. sent2: something opposes Tourette if the fact that it is actinomorphic and it is not three-dimensional is false. sent3: something is a show. sent4: the fact that the orogeny is a miotic is not correct if the fact that it does oppose Tourette and is brahminic does not hold. sent5: if the fact that something muffs redeployment and it opposes Tourette is not correct then it is not cautious. sent6: if that something does muff redeployment and is not cautious does not hold it is cautious. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the orogeny is not cautious if that it muffs redeployment and it does oppose Tourette does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the wold is not a kind of a gateway.
|
¬{AB}{aa}
|
sent1: that the wold is a choppiness and muffs caldron is wrong. sent2: something refrigerates Satanist and is not a gateway if it is not loyal. sent3: the diapedesis does muff caldron. sent4: if the Satanist is not a Rattigan then the fact that it does not muff caldron and is a choppiness does not hold. sent5: if the rundle is not a kind of a choppiness then the moneran does not refrigerate Satanist and is loyal. sent6: something is a choppiness if it does not refrigerate Satanist. sent7: the wold is not loyal if the fact that it is a choppiness and does muff caldron is false. sent8: if something is not a kind of a choppiness then it is a gateway and loyal.
|
sent1: ¬({B}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: {C}{hk} sent4: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} & {B}{c}) sent5: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {A}{a}) sent6: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {B}x sent7: ¬({B}{aa} & {C}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent8: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({AB}x & {A}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the wold refrigerates Satanist and is not a gateway if it is not loyal.; sent7 & sent1 -> int2: the wold is not loyal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the wold does refrigerate Satanist and is not a gateway.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent7 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the wold is a gateway.
|
{AB}{aa}
|
[
"sent8 -> int4: if the wold is not a choppiness it is a kind of a gateway that is loyal.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the wold is not a kind of a gateway. ; $context$ = sent1: that the wold is a choppiness and muffs caldron is wrong. sent2: something refrigerates Satanist and is not a gateway if it is not loyal. sent3: the diapedesis does muff caldron. sent4: if the Satanist is not a Rattigan then the fact that it does not muff caldron and is a choppiness does not hold. sent5: if the rundle is not a kind of a choppiness then the moneran does not refrigerate Satanist and is loyal. sent6: something is a choppiness if it does not refrigerate Satanist. sent7: the wold is not loyal if the fact that it is a choppiness and does muff caldron is false. sent8: if something is not a kind of a choppiness then it is a gateway and loyal. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the wold refrigerates Satanist and is not a gateway if it is not loyal.; sent7 & sent1 -> int2: the wold is not loyal.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the wold does refrigerate Satanist and is not a gateway.; int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if it is not intrastate it does not refrigerate Petromyzon is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x)
|
sent1: the selvage is not a good-temperedness if it is not a kind of a Arthur. sent2: if the selvage is non-intrastate it does not refrigerate Petromyzon. sent3: there is something such that if it is intrastate it does not refrigerate Petromyzon. sent4: if the selvage is not dysgenics then the fact that it refrigerates Petromyzon hold. sent5: the selvage does not oppose stonefish if it is not an outbreak. sent6: if the Sporozoa is a Islamabad it is not intrastate.
|
sent1: ¬{E}{aa} -> ¬{EN}{aa} sent2: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent3: (Ex): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: ¬{BM}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent5: ¬{FS}{aa} -> ¬{P}{aa} sent6: {DT}{ik} -> ¬{B}{ik}
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is not intrastate it does not refrigerate Petromyzon is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the selvage is not a good-temperedness if it is not a kind of a Arthur. sent2: if the selvage is non-intrastate it does not refrigerate Petromyzon. sent3: there is something such that if it is intrastate it does not refrigerate Petromyzon. sent4: if the selvage is not dysgenics then the fact that it refrigerates Petromyzon hold. sent5: the selvage does not oppose stonefish if it is not an outbreak. sent6: if the Sporozoa is a Islamabad it is not intrastate. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the ascendant is invariable thing that is a grab.
|
({D}{d} & {F}{d})
|
sent1: something is conspecific and is Ambrosian if it does not expire. sent2: that if the knockabout is a palmitin then the spouter is not invariable hold. sent3: if the knockabout is not a palmitin then the spouter does not jag and/or it is a grab. sent4: the generator is not a rush if that there exists something such that the fact that it is both sublingual and not a Messiah does not hold is not incorrect. sent5: the ascendant is invariable and it is a kind of a grab if the knockabout is not invariable. sent6: something does not refrigerate turtle and is a kind of a transamination if it does not muff ascendant. sent7: the aculeus does not oppose record-breaker. sent8: the HA does not expire or does not refrigerate probiotic or both if the Narcissus is a rake-off. sent9: if something is not a kind of a jagged or it does grab or both then it is a grab. sent10: the fact that the aculeus is sublingual but it is not a Messiah is not true if the fact that it does not oppose record-breaker is not incorrect. sent11: there is nothing such that it does muff ascendant and is not a Arecidae. sent12: the spouter is a palmitin or a jagged or both. sent13: if the spouter does jag then the HA is conspecific. sent14: the knockabout does not expire if the HA does not expire or does not refrigerate probiotic or both. sent15: the knockabout is a kind of a jagged if something does not refrigerate turtle but it is a transamination. sent16: the HA is a conspecific if the spouter is a palmitin. sent17: if the fact that something does refrigerate probiotic but it does not expire is not right then it is not invariable. sent18: the farm does not muff ascendant if there is something such that that it does muff ascendant and it is not a Arecidae does not hold. sent19: if that the Togolese is both not a rake-off and a rush is wrong then the Narcissus is a rake-off. sent20: the knockabout is not invariable if the HA is not non-conspecific. sent21: the knockabout is not a palmitin if that something is both non-conspecific and not invariable is not incorrect. sent22: that the Togolese is not a kind of a rake-off but it is a rush does not hold if there is something such that it is not a rush. sent23: that the ascendant is invariable a grab is not right if the spouter is not a palmitin.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({C}x & {E}x) sent2: {A}{b} -> ¬{D}{a} sent3: ¬{A}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} v {F}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬({P}x & ¬{O}x) -> ¬{M}{h} sent5: ¬{D}{b} -> ({D}{d} & {F}{d}) sent6: (x): ¬{L}x -> (¬{I}x & {J}x) sent7: ¬{Q}{j} sent8: {K}{e} -> (¬{G}{c} v ¬{H}{c}) sent9: (x): (¬{B}x v {F}x) -> {F}x sent10: ¬{Q}{j} -> ¬({P}{j} & ¬{O}{j}) sent11: (x): ¬({L}x & ¬{N}x) sent12: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent13: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} sent14: (¬{G}{c} v ¬{H}{c}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent15: (x): (¬{I}x & {J}x) -> {B}{b} sent16: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} sent17: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{D}x sent18: (x): ¬({L}x & ¬{N}x) -> ¬{L}{g} sent19: ¬(¬{K}{f} & {M}{f}) -> {K}{e} sent20: {C}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} sent21: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent22: (x): ¬{M}x -> ¬(¬{K}{f} & {M}{f}) sent23: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({D}{d} & {F}{d})
|
[
"sent12 & sent16 & sent13 -> int1: the HA is a conspecific.; sent20 & int1 -> int2: the knockabout is not invariable.; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent16 & sent13 -> int1: {C}{c}; sent20 & int1 -> int2: ¬{D}{b}; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the spouter grabs.
|
{F}{a}
|
[
"sent9 -> int3: the spouter grabs if it does not jag and/or it is a grabs.; sent17 -> int4: the fact that the ascendant is not invariable is not false if the fact that it does refrigerate probiotic and it does not expire does not hold.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the ascendant is invariable thing that is a grab. ; $context$ = sent1: something is conspecific and is Ambrosian if it does not expire. sent2: that if the knockabout is a palmitin then the spouter is not invariable hold. sent3: if the knockabout is not a palmitin then the spouter does not jag and/or it is a grab. sent4: the generator is not a rush if that there exists something such that the fact that it is both sublingual and not a Messiah does not hold is not incorrect. sent5: the ascendant is invariable and it is a kind of a grab if the knockabout is not invariable. sent6: something does not refrigerate turtle and is a kind of a transamination if it does not muff ascendant. sent7: the aculeus does not oppose record-breaker. sent8: the HA does not expire or does not refrigerate probiotic or both if the Narcissus is a rake-off. sent9: if something is not a kind of a jagged or it does grab or both then it is a grab. sent10: the fact that the aculeus is sublingual but it is not a Messiah is not true if the fact that it does not oppose record-breaker is not incorrect. sent11: there is nothing such that it does muff ascendant and is not a Arecidae. sent12: the spouter is a palmitin or a jagged or both. sent13: if the spouter does jag then the HA is conspecific. sent14: the knockabout does not expire if the HA does not expire or does not refrigerate probiotic or both. sent15: the knockabout is a kind of a jagged if something does not refrigerate turtle but it is a transamination. sent16: the HA is a conspecific if the spouter is a palmitin. sent17: if the fact that something does refrigerate probiotic but it does not expire is not right then it is not invariable. sent18: the farm does not muff ascendant if there is something such that that it does muff ascendant and it is not a Arecidae does not hold. sent19: if that the Togolese is both not a rake-off and a rush is wrong then the Narcissus is a rake-off. sent20: the knockabout is not invariable if the HA is not non-conspecific. sent21: the knockabout is not a palmitin if that something is both non-conspecific and not invariable is not incorrect. sent22: that the Togolese is not a kind of a rake-off but it is a rush does not hold if there is something such that it is not a rush. sent23: that the ascendant is invariable a grab is not right if the spouter is not a palmitin. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent16 & sent13 -> int1: the HA is a conspecific.; sent20 & int1 -> int2: the knockabout is not invariable.; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the wilding is not a kind of a radial.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: if the hodman does muff remise then the undershrub opposes Dactyloscopidae. sent2: the undershrub is radial if that it does not muff remise hold. sent3: the undershrub is blastocoelic and/or it does not retrain. sent4: if the hodman does not expatriate the fact that the wilding muffs remise and it is a radial is not right. sent5: something is reactive or it does not retrain or both if it does not oppose Dactyloscopidae. sent6: the undershrub does not muff remise if the wilding does oppose Dactyloscopidae and is radial. sent7: if something expatriates it muffs remise. sent8: the undershrub does expatriate if it either is blastocoelic or does not retrain or both. sent9: The Dactyloscopidae does oppose wilding.
|
sent1: {C}{c} -> {A}{b} sent2: ¬{C}{b} -> {B}{b} sent3: ({F}{b} v ¬{E}{b}) sent4: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({IA}x v ¬{E}x) sent6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent8: ({F}{b} v ¬{E}{b}) -> {D}{b} sent9: {AA}{aa}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the wilding is not non-radial is not false.; sent7 -> int1: if the undershrub expatriates then it does muff remise.; sent8 & sent3 -> int2: the undershrub expatriates.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the undershrub does muff remise.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {B}{a}; sent7 -> int1: {D}{b} -> {C}{b}; sent8 & sent3 -> int2: {D}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{b};"
] |
the wilding is a kind of a radial.
|
{B}{a}
|
[] | 6 | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the wilding is not a kind of a radial. ; $context$ = sent1: if the hodman does muff remise then the undershrub opposes Dactyloscopidae. sent2: the undershrub is radial if that it does not muff remise hold. sent3: the undershrub is blastocoelic and/or it does not retrain. sent4: if the hodman does not expatriate the fact that the wilding muffs remise and it is a radial is not right. sent5: something is reactive or it does not retrain or both if it does not oppose Dactyloscopidae. sent6: the undershrub does not muff remise if the wilding does oppose Dactyloscopidae and is radial. sent7: if something expatriates it muffs remise. sent8: the undershrub does expatriate if it either is blastocoelic or does not retrain or both. sent9: The Dactyloscopidae does oppose wilding. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the wilding is not non-radial is not false.; sent7 -> int1: if the undershrub expatriates then it does muff remise.; sent8 & sent3 -> int2: the undershrub expatriates.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the undershrub does muff remise.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Philippian is hemispherical.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: everything does not ripple. sent2: the fact that the Farmer does not muff backstroke and is not phocine is incorrect. sent3: the Philippian is non-phocine. sent4: there exists something such that it is hemispherical. sent5: the fact that the Philippian is not hemispherical and it is not phocine is wrong if there is something such that it is hemispherical. sent6: the LCD does not oppose archives and it is not hemispherical.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{C}x sent2: ¬(¬{IQ}{dt} & ¬{B}{dt}) sent3: ¬{B}{a} sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent6: (¬{DD}{im} & ¬{A}{im})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Philippian is not hemispherical.; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: the Philippian is non-hemispherical and it is not phocine.; sent4 & sent5 -> int2: that the Philippian is non-hemispherical thing that is not phocine does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); sent4 & sent5 -> int2: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Philippian is not hemispherical.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int4: the fondler is not a ripple.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Philippian is hemispherical. ; $context$ = sent1: everything does not ripple. sent2: the fact that the Farmer does not muff backstroke and is not phocine is incorrect. sent3: the Philippian is non-phocine. sent4: there exists something such that it is hemispherical. sent5: the fact that the Philippian is not hemispherical and it is not phocine is wrong if there is something such that it is hemispherical. sent6: the LCD does not oppose archives and it is not hemispherical. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Philippian is not hemispherical.; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: the Philippian is non-hemispherical and it is not phocine.; sent4 & sent5 -> int2: that the Philippian is non-hemispherical thing that is not phocine does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if that either it does muff Pennsylvanian or it does not crash ardeb or both is not right then it does librate.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it muffs Pennsylvanian or does not crash ardeb or both then it librates. sent2: if that either the Pennsylvanian muffs Pennsylvanian or it does not crash ardeb or both is wrong it does librate.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that either it does muff Pennsylvanian or it does not crash ardeb or both is not right then it does librate. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it muffs Pennsylvanian or does not crash ardeb or both then it librates. sent2: if that either the Pennsylvanian muffs Pennsylvanian or it does not crash ardeb or both is wrong it does librate. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if that it does not purport and is orthodontics does not hold then it does not refrigerate consonant is not true.
|
¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: if the fact that the darmstadtium is not a colloid but aural does not hold it opposes enormity. sent2: something is a Dido if that it is not an ad and it is an inability does not hold. sent3: if the visionary is a baedeker it is not a Perry. sent4: there exists something such that if that it is both not a scratcher and a glow is not right then it is not a kind of an inkling. sent5: if that something is not a Iresine but it crashes ambassadorship does not hold it is not a speedskater. sent6: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a steel and does oppose idiot is incorrect the fact that it is not cystic is false. sent7: if something that is not a plop is a lunula it is not abiogenetic. sent8: if the elsholtzia is a extropy it does not purport. sent9: if that something does not purport but it is orthodontics is incorrect it does not refrigerate consonant. sent10: if the fact that something is a kind of non-abiogenetic thing that is an indebtedness does not hold then it does not muff perchlorate.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{DQ}{bu} & {IN}{bu}) -> {HD}{bu} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & {AI}x) -> {O}x sent3: {AN}{bf} -> ¬{CI}{bf} sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{IU}x & {DN}x) -> ¬{P}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{EH}x & {DB}x) -> ¬{IF}x sent6: (Ex): ¬(¬{FJ}x & {EN}x) -> {IT}x sent7: (x): (¬{GA}x & {GO}x) -> ¬{BI}x sent8: {FE}{ai} -> ¬{AA}{ai} sent9: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent10: (x): ¬(¬{BI}x & {L}x) -> ¬{EI}x
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the methionine does not refrigerate consonant if the fact that it does not purport and it is orthodontics is not right.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if that it does not purport and is orthodontics does not hold then it does not refrigerate consonant is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the darmstadtium is not a colloid but aural does not hold it opposes enormity. sent2: something is a Dido if that it is not an ad and it is an inability does not hold. sent3: if the visionary is a baedeker it is not a Perry. sent4: there exists something such that if that it is both not a scratcher and a glow is not right then it is not a kind of an inkling. sent5: if that something is not a Iresine but it crashes ambassadorship does not hold it is not a speedskater. sent6: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a steel and does oppose idiot is incorrect the fact that it is not cystic is false. sent7: if something that is not a plop is a lunula it is not abiogenetic. sent8: if the elsholtzia is a extropy it does not purport. sent9: if that something does not purport but it is orthodontics is incorrect it does not refrigerate consonant. sent10: if the fact that something is a kind of non-abiogenetic thing that is an indebtedness does not hold then it does not muff perchlorate. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: the methionine does not refrigerate consonant if the fact that it does not purport and it is orthodontics is not right.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the Benedictine muffs Satanist is not wrong.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: the ragpicker crashes Yemen. sent2: if something is not a unitization then that the danish does not muff Pretender is true. sent3: the fact that the Benedictine is a chain is not wrong. sent4: the tailorbird muffs Satanist. sent5: the pledgee is extraterritorial. sent6: if the danish does not muff Pretender the fact that it is a kind of metamorphous thing that is not pharyngeal is not right. sent7: if the Benedictine is echoic the pledgee muffs Satanist. sent8: the Moonie does crash Yemen. sent9: the pledgee is haemophilic. sent10: something is echoic if it crashes Yemen. sent11: the fact that the Satanist crashes Yemen is not false. sent12: the pledgee does crash Yemen if it does muff Satanist. sent13: if the fact that something is not echoic or it crashes Yemen or both is wrong it does not muff Satanist. sent14: that something is not echoic or it does crash Yemen or both does not hold if it is not a kind of a play. sent15: the efferent is a demonstrative. sent16: the Benedictine does muff Satanist if the pledgee crashes Yemen. sent17: the pledgee is echoic. sent18: something is not a unitization. sent19: the fact that the Benedictine does muff Satanist is not wrong if it crashes Yemen. sent20: if the pledgee is demonstrative then it crashes Yemen. sent21: the pledgee does crash Yemen if it is echoic. sent22: if the Benedictine is a mince it is a stamp. sent23: if something is echoic it does not muff Satanist.
|
sent1: {B}{k} sent2: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬{G}{c} sent3: {BH}{b} sent4: {C}{au} sent5: {EO}{a} sent6: ¬{G}{c} -> ¬({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent7: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent8: {B}{di} sent9: {Q}{a} sent10: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent11: {B}{d} sent12: {C}{a} -> {B}{a} sent13: (x): ¬(¬{A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent14: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x v {B}x) sent15: {CN}{r} sent16: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent17: {A}{a} sent18: (Ex): ¬{H}x sent19: {B}{b} -> {C}{b} sent20: {CN}{a} -> {B}{a} sent21: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent22: {FE}{b} -> {BN}{b} sent23: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x
|
[
"sent21 & sent17 -> int1: the pledgee crashes Yemen.; sent16 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent21 & sent17 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent16 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the Benedictine does not muff Satanist hold.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent13 -> int2: if the fact that the Benedictine is not echoic and/or it does crash Yemen is incorrect it does not muff Satanist.; sent14 -> int3: if the Benedictine is not a play then the fact that either it is not echoic or it does crash Yemen or both does not hold.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Benedictine muffs Satanist is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the ragpicker crashes Yemen. sent2: if something is not a unitization then that the danish does not muff Pretender is true. sent3: the fact that the Benedictine is a chain is not wrong. sent4: the tailorbird muffs Satanist. sent5: the pledgee is extraterritorial. sent6: if the danish does not muff Pretender the fact that it is a kind of metamorphous thing that is not pharyngeal is not right. sent7: if the Benedictine is echoic the pledgee muffs Satanist. sent8: the Moonie does crash Yemen. sent9: the pledgee is haemophilic. sent10: something is echoic if it crashes Yemen. sent11: the fact that the Satanist crashes Yemen is not false. sent12: the pledgee does crash Yemen if it does muff Satanist. sent13: if the fact that something is not echoic or it crashes Yemen or both is wrong it does not muff Satanist. sent14: that something is not echoic or it does crash Yemen or both does not hold if it is not a kind of a play. sent15: the efferent is a demonstrative. sent16: the Benedictine does muff Satanist if the pledgee crashes Yemen. sent17: the pledgee is echoic. sent18: something is not a unitization. sent19: the fact that the Benedictine does muff Satanist is not wrong if it crashes Yemen. sent20: if the pledgee is demonstrative then it crashes Yemen. sent21: the pledgee does crash Yemen if it is echoic. sent22: if the Benedictine is a mince it is a stamp. sent23: if something is echoic it does not muff Satanist. ; $proof$ =
|
sent21 & sent17 -> int1: the pledgee crashes Yemen.; sent16 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the housepaint is not a kind of a Shaktism.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: the rutile is not a jauntiness if that it is either chromosomal or a insurability or both is not true. sent2: something that is not a ready-to-wear is a kind of aerobics thing that is not a kind of a intercostal. sent3: the housepaint does oppose giblet and it is aerobics. sent4: if that the nunnery does not oppose debutante and is not a greenhouse is incorrect the housepaint is not a kind of a microradian. sent5: the fact that the rutile is chromosomal or it is a kind of a insurability or both is incorrect. sent6: if something is not a microradian it is not a ready-to-wear and/or it is non-intercostal. sent7: if something is not a greenhouse then it is not a ready-to-wear and it is a microradian. sent8: the fact that the nunnery does not oppose debutante and is not a greenhouse is incorrect if the fact that something is not greenhouse is correct. sent9: the rutile is a greenhouse and it refrigerates vanilla. sent10: the housepaint is aerobics. sent11: the housepaint is a kind of aerobics thing that is a Shaktism. sent12: if something is a kind of a Shaktism it is aerobics. sent13: the vanilla is aerobics. sent14: either the rutile does refrigerate orthoscope or it refrigerates Solresol or both if it is not a kind of a jauntiness. sent15: the housepaint is considerate thing that is a kind of a jauntiness. sent16: the nunnery is a Ameiuridae if the rutile refrigerates orthoscope. sent17: the fact that the nunnery does not oppose debutante and refrigerates vanilla is wrong if it is a Ameiuridae. sent18: if that something does not oppose debutante and refrigerates vanilla does not hold it is not a greenhouse.
|
sent1: ¬({M}{c} v {N}{c}) -> ¬{L}{c} sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & ¬{C}x) sent3: ({HE}{a} & {A}{a}) sent4: ¬(¬{G}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent5: ¬({M}{c} v {N}{c}) sent6: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{D}x v ¬{C}x) sent7: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x & {E}x) sent8: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{G}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent9: ({F}{c} & {H}{c}) sent10: {A}{a} sent11: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent12: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent13: {A}{bm} sent14: ¬{L}{c} -> ({K}{c} v {J}{c}) sent15: ({P}{a} & {L}{a}) sent16: {K}{c} -> {I}{b} sent17: {I}{b} -> ¬(¬{G}{b} & {H}{b}) sent18: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x
|
[
"sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the maar is aerobics is true.
|
{A}{cm}
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: the maar is aerobics if it is a Shaktism.; sent6 -> int2: the housepaint is not a ready-to-wear or it is not a kind of a intercostal or both if it is not a microradian.; sent9 -> int3: the rutile is not non-greenhouse.; int3 -> int4: there are greenhouse things.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the fact that the nunnery does not oppose debutante and it is not greenhouse is wrong.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: the housepaint is not a microradian.; int2 & int6 -> int7: the housepaint is either not a ready-to-wear or not a intercostal or both.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that either it is not a ready-to-wear or it is not a intercostal or both.;"
] | 8 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the housepaint is not a kind of a Shaktism. ; $context$ = sent1: the rutile is not a jauntiness if that it is either chromosomal or a insurability or both is not true. sent2: something that is not a ready-to-wear is a kind of aerobics thing that is not a kind of a intercostal. sent3: the housepaint does oppose giblet and it is aerobics. sent4: if that the nunnery does not oppose debutante and is not a greenhouse is incorrect the housepaint is not a kind of a microradian. sent5: the fact that the rutile is chromosomal or it is a kind of a insurability or both is incorrect. sent6: if something is not a microradian it is not a ready-to-wear and/or it is non-intercostal. sent7: if something is not a greenhouse then it is not a ready-to-wear and it is a microradian. sent8: the fact that the nunnery does not oppose debutante and is not a greenhouse is incorrect if the fact that something is not greenhouse is correct. sent9: the rutile is a greenhouse and it refrigerates vanilla. sent10: the housepaint is aerobics. sent11: the housepaint is a kind of aerobics thing that is a Shaktism. sent12: if something is a kind of a Shaktism it is aerobics. sent13: the vanilla is aerobics. sent14: either the rutile does refrigerate orthoscope or it refrigerates Solresol or both if it is not a kind of a jauntiness. sent15: the housepaint is considerate thing that is a kind of a jauntiness. sent16: the nunnery is a Ameiuridae if the rutile refrigerates orthoscope. sent17: the fact that the nunnery does not oppose debutante and refrigerates vanilla is wrong if it is a Ameiuridae. sent18: if that something does not oppose debutante and refrigerates vanilla does not hold it is not a greenhouse. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the ketohexose opposes Scorpius or it does giggle or both.
|
({A}{a} v {B}{a})
|
sent1: the ketohexose is unportable. sent2: the fact that either the ketohexose is vestiary or it is a kind of a giggle or both is true. sent3: there is nothing such that it is a kind of a seaborgium and is long-chain. sent4: something is lengthwise and it is a giggle if it is not categorial. sent5: the samarskite does oppose Scorpius. sent6: the ketohexose is not non-logarithmic. sent7: the fact that that something opposes Scorpius and/or it is a kind of a giggle is not false does not hold if that it is non-lengthwise hold. sent8: the ketohexose does oppose Scorpius and/or it is Nicaean. sent9: the ketohexose is a kind of a baronetage. sent10: the ketohexose does giggle. sent11: the ketohexose is unemotional and/or is a giggle. sent12: something opposes Scorpius if it giggles. sent13: the TC giggles. sent14: the ketohexose either opposes Scorpius or is a kind of an item or both. sent15: either the ketohexose is phonic or it is noncompetitive or both.
|
sent1: {BQ}{a} sent2: ({CT}{a} v {B}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬({E}x & {F}x) sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x & {B}x) sent5: {A}{db} sent6: {FP}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v {B}x) sent8: ({A}{a} v {GJ}{a}) sent9: {AI}{a} sent10: {B}{a} sent11: ({GP}{a} v {B}{a}) sent12: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent13: {B}{iu} sent14: ({A}{a} v {FO}{a}) sent15: ({DF}{a} v {DH}{a})
|
[
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the sandbox opposes Scorpius.
|
{A}{bu}
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: the sandbox opposes Scorpius if it is a giggle.; sent4 -> int2: the sandbox is lengthwise and is a giggle if it is not categorial.; sent3 -> int3: that the ketohexose is a kind of a seaborgium that is long-chain is not true.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that that it is a seaborgium and it is long-chain does not hold.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the ketohexose opposes Scorpius or it does giggle or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the ketohexose is unportable. sent2: the fact that either the ketohexose is vestiary or it is a kind of a giggle or both is true. sent3: there is nothing such that it is a kind of a seaborgium and is long-chain. sent4: something is lengthwise and it is a giggle if it is not categorial. sent5: the samarskite does oppose Scorpius. sent6: the ketohexose is not non-logarithmic. sent7: the fact that that something opposes Scorpius and/or it is a kind of a giggle is not false does not hold if that it is non-lengthwise hold. sent8: the ketohexose does oppose Scorpius and/or it is Nicaean. sent9: the ketohexose is a kind of a baronetage. sent10: the ketohexose does giggle. sent11: the ketohexose is unemotional and/or is a giggle. sent12: something opposes Scorpius if it giggles. sent13: the TC giggles. sent14: the ketohexose either opposes Scorpius or is a kind of an item or both. sent15: either the ketohexose is phonic or it is noncompetitive or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the key is a medicine and a scribble.
|
({C}{a} & {A}{a})
|
sent1: if the Siren is tympanic then that the bait is a kind of echoic thing that is not unseasonable is wrong. sent2: that the key is not a newsworthiness and not unseasonable is false. sent3: that the ant is unseasonable is right. sent4: the fact that something is a medicine but not unseasonable is false if that it does refrigerate key is not wrong. sent5: if the heir-at-law is unseasonable then the microfilm does not refrigerate key and is not soluble. sent6: the marathoner is a Simeon. sent7: The key does refrigerate key. sent8: if the toweling is atrophic the fact that it is a Simeon and it is not wingless is wrong. sent9: the fact that if there is something such that that the fact that it is not a kind of an asthmatic and does not refrigerate EDS is true does not hold the lexicographer does refrigerate hours is right. sent10: the key does refrigerate key. sent11: if there is something such that the fact that it is not nonechoic and it is not unseasonable is not true the heir-at-law is unseasonable. sent12: if the key is not a scribble it is not a Simeon. sent13: the Siren does not muff storehouse if the Papua does muff storehouse. sent14: the fact that the key is soluble but it is not a Simeon is not true. sent15: the key is a kind of a Simeon if that it is soluble and is not a Simeon is not correct. sent16: that something is not a medicine and it is not unseasonable is not right if it refrigerates key. sent17: the Papua is a biotin but it is not a kind of a Antichrist if the lexicographer refrigerates hours. sent18: the key opposes neurectomy and is noncritical. sent19: a non-nonechoic thing is both not unseasonable and soluble. sent20: if something does not refrigerate key and is not soluble then it is not a Simeon. sent21: there is something such that the fact that the fact that it is not an asthmatic and does not refrigerate EDS is correct is not right. sent22: the set is not soluble. sent23: if the microfilm is seasonable and soluble then it refrigerates key. sent24: the darmstadtium is advisable if that it refrigerates key and is not advisable does not hold. sent25: if something is not a Antichrist then it muffs storehouse. sent26: that if something does not muff storehouse it is a Tate and it is tympanic is correct.
|
sent1: {H}{e} -> ¬(¬{G}{d} & ¬{F}{d}) sent2: ¬(¬{HM}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) sent3: {F}{eb} sent4: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{F}x) sent5: {F}{c} -> (¬{D}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent6: {B}{k} sent7: {AA}{aa} sent8: {HC}{jg} -> ¬({B}{jg} & ¬{IR}{jg}) sent9: (x): ¬(¬{O}x & ¬{N}x) -> {M}{g} sent10: {D}{a} sent11: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> {F}{c} sent12: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent13: {J}{f} -> ¬{J}{e} sent14: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent15: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent16: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{F}x) sent17: {M}{g} -> ({L}{f} & ¬{K}{f}) sent18: ({FO}{a} & {BF}{a}) sent19: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x & {E}x) sent20: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{B}x sent21: (Ex): ¬(¬{O}x & ¬{N}x) sent22: ¬{E}{bg} sent23: (¬{F}{b} & {E}{b}) -> {D}{b} sent24: ¬({D}{bb} & ¬{CP}{bb}) -> {CP}{bb} sent25: (x): ¬{K}x -> {J}x sent26: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({I}x & {H}x)
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the key is not a scribble.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the key is not a Simeon.; sent15 & sent14 -> int2: the key is a Simeon.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the key does scribble.; sent16 -> int5: if the key does refrigerate key the fact that it is not a medicine and is not unseasonable is not true.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the fact that the key is not a medicine and it is not unseasonable does not hold.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent15 & sent14 -> int2: {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: {A}{a}; sent16 -> int5: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{F}{a}); int5 & sent10 -> int6: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{F}{a});"
] |
the fact that the key is a medicine that does scribble is not right.
|
¬({C}{a} & {A}{a})
|
[
"sent19 -> int7: the microfilm is a kind of non-unseasonable thing that is soluble if it is not nonechoic.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 21 | 0 | 21 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the key is a medicine and a scribble. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Siren is tympanic then that the bait is a kind of echoic thing that is not unseasonable is wrong. sent2: that the key is not a newsworthiness and not unseasonable is false. sent3: that the ant is unseasonable is right. sent4: the fact that something is a medicine but not unseasonable is false if that it does refrigerate key is not wrong. sent5: if the heir-at-law is unseasonable then the microfilm does not refrigerate key and is not soluble. sent6: the marathoner is a Simeon. sent7: The key does refrigerate key. sent8: if the toweling is atrophic the fact that it is a Simeon and it is not wingless is wrong. sent9: the fact that if there is something such that that the fact that it is not a kind of an asthmatic and does not refrigerate EDS is true does not hold the lexicographer does refrigerate hours is right. sent10: the key does refrigerate key. sent11: if there is something such that the fact that it is not nonechoic and it is not unseasonable is not true the heir-at-law is unseasonable. sent12: if the key is not a scribble it is not a Simeon. sent13: the Siren does not muff storehouse if the Papua does muff storehouse. sent14: the fact that the key is soluble but it is not a Simeon is not true. sent15: the key is a kind of a Simeon if that it is soluble and is not a Simeon is not correct. sent16: that something is not a medicine and it is not unseasonable is not right if it refrigerates key. sent17: the Papua is a biotin but it is not a kind of a Antichrist if the lexicographer refrigerates hours. sent18: the key opposes neurectomy and is noncritical. sent19: a non-nonechoic thing is both not unseasonable and soluble. sent20: if something does not refrigerate key and is not soluble then it is not a Simeon. sent21: there is something such that the fact that the fact that it is not an asthmatic and does not refrigerate EDS is correct is not right. sent22: the set is not soluble. sent23: if the microfilm is seasonable and soluble then it refrigerates key. sent24: the darmstadtium is advisable if that it refrigerates key and is not advisable does not hold. sent25: if something is not a Antichrist then it muffs storehouse. sent26: that if something does not muff storehouse it is a Tate and it is tympanic is correct. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the key is not a scribble.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the key is not a Simeon.; sent15 & sent14 -> int2: the key is a Simeon.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the key does scribble.; sent16 -> int5: if the key does refrigerate key the fact that it is not a medicine and is not unseasonable is not true.; int5 & sent10 -> int6: the fact that the key is not a medicine and it is not unseasonable does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the nephrolith crashes napu.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: the share is floral and it does crash napu. sent2: the fact that the Arawak is not unreportable but it is a snot is incorrect if there exists something such that it does not secure. sent3: if the peppermint is not a snot but it does muff daisybush the colorimeter does not muff daisybush. sent4: if the archipallium is not Cyprian then it does oppose touchback or it does not refrigerate idiot or both. sent5: the fact that the icefall is a kind of secure thing that is not a metacenter is false. sent6: the archipallium is not Cyprian. sent7: the archipallium does not refrigerate idiot if it opposes touchback and/or it does not refrigerate idiot. sent8: if there exists something such that it does not refrigerate idiot then that the fact that the prairie is a obelion and is not an acquiescence does not hold is not incorrect. sent9: if the share is both short and not non-floral then the nephrolith does not crash napu. sent10: the tourist is an acquiescence if there exists something such that the fact that it is a obelion and it is not an acquiescence does not hold. sent11: the fact that there is something such that it is not a hyacinth is not incorrect. sent12: the nephrolith is not floral. sent13: the fact that the share is short and is floral is right. sent14: the share is both not non-stearic and floral. sent15: if the Court does not refrigerate cabala then it is a kind of a masseur. sent16: the nephrolith refrigerates cabala and it crashes napu if the share does not refrigerate David. sent17: the excavation is not secure if there is something such that the fact that it secure and is not a metacenter is false. sent18: if something is not a hyacinth then the peppermint muffs daisybush and muffs excavation. sent19: the share is floral. sent20: the share does mobilize and is a hypericism. sent21: if the colorimeter does not muff daisybush then the tourist does moisten and does crash defamer. sent22: the peppermint is not a snot if there is something such that that it is a kind of reportable thing that is a snot is false.
|
sent1: ({AB}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{N}x -> ¬(¬{K}{g} & {H}{g}) sent3: (¬{H}{e} & {G}{e}) -> ¬{G}{d} sent4: ¬{P}{i} -> ({Q}{i} v ¬{L}{i}) sent5: ¬({N}{j} & ¬{O}{j}) sent6: ¬{P}{i} sent7: ({Q}{i} v ¬{L}{i}) -> ¬{L}{i} sent8: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬({J}{f} & ¬{E}{f}) sent9: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent10: (x): ¬({J}x & ¬{E}x) -> {E}{c} sent11: (Ex): ¬{M}x sent12: ¬{AB}{b} sent13: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent14: ({GF}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent15: ¬{A}{fl} -> {EB}{fl} sent16: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent17: (x): ¬({N}x & ¬{O}x) -> ¬{N}{h} sent18: (x): ¬{M}x -> ({G}{e} & {I}{e}) sent19: {AB}{a} sent20: ({DB}{a} & {CK}{a}) sent21: ¬{G}{d} -> ({D}{c} & {F}{c}) sent22: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & {H}x) -> ¬{H}{e}
|
[
"sent9 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Court is a masseur and is a gland.
|
({EB}{fl} & {IQ}{fl})
|
[] | 4 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the nephrolith crashes napu. ; $context$ = sent1: the share is floral and it does crash napu. sent2: the fact that the Arawak is not unreportable but it is a snot is incorrect if there exists something such that it does not secure. sent3: if the peppermint is not a snot but it does muff daisybush the colorimeter does not muff daisybush. sent4: if the archipallium is not Cyprian then it does oppose touchback or it does not refrigerate idiot or both. sent5: the fact that the icefall is a kind of secure thing that is not a metacenter is false. sent6: the archipallium is not Cyprian. sent7: the archipallium does not refrigerate idiot if it opposes touchback and/or it does not refrigerate idiot. sent8: if there exists something such that it does not refrigerate idiot then that the fact that the prairie is a obelion and is not an acquiescence does not hold is not incorrect. sent9: if the share is both short and not non-floral then the nephrolith does not crash napu. sent10: the tourist is an acquiescence if there exists something such that the fact that it is a obelion and it is not an acquiescence does not hold. sent11: the fact that there is something such that it is not a hyacinth is not incorrect. sent12: the nephrolith is not floral. sent13: the fact that the share is short and is floral is right. sent14: the share is both not non-stearic and floral. sent15: if the Court does not refrigerate cabala then it is a kind of a masseur. sent16: the nephrolith refrigerates cabala and it crashes napu if the share does not refrigerate David. sent17: the excavation is not secure if there is something such that the fact that it secure and is not a metacenter is false. sent18: if something is not a hyacinth then the peppermint muffs daisybush and muffs excavation. sent19: the share is floral. sent20: the share does mobilize and is a hypericism. sent21: if the colorimeter does not muff daisybush then the tourist does moisten and does crash defamer. sent22: the peppermint is not a snot if there is something such that that it is a kind of reportable thing that is a snot is false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the muffing barrister does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the recriminating occurs. sent2: both the butyricness and the repudiating occurs. sent3: the repudiating occurs. sent4: that both the intracranialness and the butyricness happens prevents that the muffing barrister happens. sent5: the fireball and the opposing Edinburgh happens. sent6: that the recriminating does not occur and the intracranialness does not occur leads to the muffing barrister.
|
sent1: {A} sent2: ({C} & {E}) sent3: {E} sent4: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent5: ({JG} & {GQ}) sent6: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {D}
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the butyricness happens.;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {C};"
] |
the muffing barrister happens.
|
{D}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the muffing barrister does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the recriminating occurs. sent2: both the butyricness and the repudiating occurs. sent3: the repudiating occurs. sent4: that both the intracranialness and the butyricness happens prevents that the muffing barrister happens. sent5: the fireball and the opposing Edinburgh happens. sent6: that the recriminating does not occur and the intracranialness does not occur leads to the muffing barrister. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the butyricness happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is not a muffled then it is not econometrics and not a Anisotremus.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: the rattrap does not refrigerate allocator and is a pep if it is not a muffled. sent2: if the thiabendazole is not a kind of a girlhood then it is not econometrics and not a Neapolitan. sent3: if the fact that the thiabendazole is not a muffled hold it is non-econometrics and it is a Anisotremus. sent4: something is not a Lysenko and is not a tensed if that it is not a Mozambican hold. sent5: something does not muff dropper and is not courteous if it is not Coleridgian. sent6: the thiabendazole is not econometrics and is not a kind of a Anisotremus if it is a muffled. sent7: the captor is both not returnable and not a muffled if it is not courteous. sent8: the ghoul is not a settlement and does not crash umbra if it is non-Coleridgian. sent9: there exists something such that if it does not muffle then it is not a Anisotremus. sent10: there is something such that if it does not muffle then that it is not econometrics is not incorrect. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a muffled it is a kind of non-econometrics thing that is not a Anisotremus. sent12: something is not econometrics and it is not a kind of a Anisotremus if that it does muffle hold. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not unplug then it is non-perineal thing that is not a deformity. sent14: there is something such that if that it is not a muffled is right that it is econometrics and it is not a Anisotremus is not wrong. sent15: something is not econometrics and is not a kind of a Anisotremus if it does not muffle. sent16: there is something such that if it is not a muffled it is not econometrics and it is a Anisotremus. sent17: if the fact that the thiabendazole is not a kind of a muffled hold it is not econometrics.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{ih} -> (¬{II}{ih} & {GA}{ih}) sent2: ¬{R}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{CG}{aa}) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: (x): ¬{BL}x -> (¬{HL}x & ¬{HP}x) sent5: (x): ¬{CH}x -> (¬{CO}x & ¬{FN}x) sent6: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent7: ¬{FN}{bk} -> (¬{CI}{bk} & ¬{A}{bk}) sent8: ¬{CH}{hh} -> (¬{GR}{hh} & ¬{BT}{hh}) sent9: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent11: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent12: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: (Ex): ¬{BH}x -> (¬{IT}x & ¬{H}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent15: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent16: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent17: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa}
|
[
"sent15 -> int1: if the thiabendazole does not muffle then it is non-econometrics and it is not a Anisotremus.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is not Coleridgian it does not muff dropper and it is not courteous.
|
(Ex): ¬{CH}x -> (¬{CO}x & ¬{FN}x)
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: that the city does not muff dropper and is not courteous if the city is not Coleridgian is true.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not a muffled then it is not econometrics and not a Anisotremus. ; $context$ = sent1: the rattrap does not refrigerate allocator and is a pep if it is not a muffled. sent2: if the thiabendazole is not a kind of a girlhood then it is not econometrics and not a Neapolitan. sent3: if the fact that the thiabendazole is not a muffled hold it is non-econometrics and it is a Anisotremus. sent4: something is not a Lysenko and is not a tensed if that it is not a Mozambican hold. sent5: something does not muff dropper and is not courteous if it is not Coleridgian. sent6: the thiabendazole is not econometrics and is not a kind of a Anisotremus if it is a muffled. sent7: the captor is both not returnable and not a muffled if it is not courteous. sent8: the ghoul is not a settlement and does not crash umbra if it is non-Coleridgian. sent9: there exists something such that if it does not muffle then it is not a Anisotremus. sent10: there is something such that if it does not muffle then that it is not econometrics is not incorrect. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a muffled it is a kind of non-econometrics thing that is not a Anisotremus. sent12: something is not econometrics and it is not a kind of a Anisotremus if that it does muffle hold. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not unplug then it is non-perineal thing that is not a deformity. sent14: there is something such that if that it is not a muffled is right that it is econometrics and it is not a Anisotremus is not wrong. sent15: something is not econometrics and is not a kind of a Anisotremus if it does not muffle. sent16: there is something such that if it is not a muffled it is not econometrics and it is a Anisotremus. sent17: if the fact that the thiabendazole is not a kind of a muffled hold it is not econometrics. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 -> int1: if the thiabendazole does not muffle then it is non-econometrics and it is not a Anisotremus.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the snuff does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
sent1: the snuffing and the recessionariness happens. sent2: if the opposing upset does not occur then both the fishiness and the opposing succulence happens. sent3: the affair and the inhalantness occurs.
|
sent1: ({A} & {B}) sent2: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {EI}) sent3: ({FM} & {FS})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
both the opposing succulence and the mugging occurs.
|
({EI} & {GU})
|
[] | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the snuff does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the snuffing and the recessionariness happens. sent2: if the opposing upset does not occur then both the fishiness and the opposing succulence happens. sent3: the affair and the inhalantness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the wet-nurse is inviolable then the merchant opposes P and does not refrigerate polytonality.
|
{A}{aa} -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
sent1: if the wet-nurse is inviolable the merchant does oppose P and does refrigerate polytonality. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it is inviolable is not false then the merchant does oppose P and it does refrigerate polytonality. sent3: if something is inviolable the merchant opposes P but it does not refrigerate polytonality. sent4: the merchant does oppose P if the wet-nurse is inviolable. sent5: if there exists something such that it does refrigerate polytonality then the merchant does oppose P and is not inviolable. sent6: the fact that the merchant does refrigerate polytonality but it is not inviolable hold. sent7: the merchant opposes P if there is something such that it is inviolable. sent8: the merchant opposes P and it refrigerates polytonality. sent9: the merchant does snag but it is not an allocator. sent10: something is competitive but not inviolable if that it does not oppose P is not false. sent11: that the merchant does refrigerate polytonality and is not inviolable is not incorrect if there is something such that it opposes P. sent12: the merchant opposes P.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent4: {A}{aa} -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): {C}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent6: ({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent7: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent8: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent9: ({JH}{a} & ¬{T}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({IS}x & ¬{A}x) sent11: (x): {B}x -> ({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent12: {B}{a}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wet-nurse is inviolable.; assump1 -> int1: something is inviolable.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the merchant opposes P but it does not refrigerate polytonality.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{aa}; assump1 -> int1: (Ex): {A}x; int1 & sent3 -> int2: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Maalox is both competitive and not inviolable.
|
({IS}{id} & ¬{A}{id})
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: if the Maalox does not oppose P it is competitive and it is not inviolable.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = if the wet-nurse is inviolable then the merchant opposes P and does not refrigerate polytonality. ; $context$ = sent1: if the wet-nurse is inviolable the merchant does oppose P and does refrigerate polytonality. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it is inviolable is not false then the merchant does oppose P and it does refrigerate polytonality. sent3: if something is inviolable the merchant opposes P but it does not refrigerate polytonality. sent4: the merchant does oppose P if the wet-nurse is inviolable. sent5: if there exists something such that it does refrigerate polytonality then the merchant does oppose P and is not inviolable. sent6: the fact that the merchant does refrigerate polytonality but it is not inviolable hold. sent7: the merchant opposes P if there is something such that it is inviolable. sent8: the merchant opposes P and it refrigerates polytonality. sent9: the merchant does snag but it is not an allocator. sent10: something is competitive but not inviolable if that it does not oppose P is not false. sent11: that the merchant does refrigerate polytonality and is not inviolable is not incorrect if there is something such that it opposes P. sent12: the merchant opposes P. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the wet-nurse is inviolable.; assump1 -> int1: something is inviolable.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the merchant opposes P but it does not refrigerate polytonality.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
either the regent is distributive or it does not muff personality or both.
|
({F}{b} v ¬{D}{b})
|
sent1: if the marmalade does not muff personality the fact that either the regent is distributive or it does not muff personality or both is not correct. sent2: if something is not a toss it is distributive and/or does not muff personality. sent3: if that something refrigerates cephalochordate and is not isotopic is wrong it does not muff personality. sent4: the regent is not a toss if the marmalade does not refrigerate cephalochordate. sent5: something is not asleep and it is not isotopic if it is not consular. sent6: the personality is not a xenolith but it is mitral. sent7: the homer does oppose cotter if the personality is mitral. sent8: the fact that the marmalade does refrigerate cephalochordate but it is not isotopic does not hold if there is something such that it is not a kind of a toss. sent9: if something is a kind of adiabatic thing that muffs Jihadist it is not consular. sent10: something does not refrigerate cephalochordate if it is not asleep and is not isotopic. sent11: the marmalade is adiabatic if the homer opposes cotter. sent12: something does not toss.
|
sent1: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({F}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({F}x v ¬{D}x) sent3: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{C}x) sent6: (¬{L}{d} & {K}{d}) sent7: {K}{d} -> {J}{c} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent9: (x): ({H}x & {I}x) -> ¬{G}x sent10: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent11: {J}{c} -> {H}{a} sent12: (Ex): ¬{A}x
|
[
"sent12 & sent8 -> int1: that the marmalade refrigerates cephalochordate and is non-isotopic does not hold.; sent3 -> int2: if the fact that the marmalade refrigerates cephalochordate and is not isotopic does not hold then it does not muff personality.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the marmalade does not muff personality.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent8 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); sent3 -> int2: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{D}{a}; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
either the regent is distributive or it does not muff personality or both.
|
({F}{b} v ¬{D}{b})
|
[
"sent2 -> int4: the regent is distributive or it does not muff personality or both if it is not a kind of a toss.; sent10 -> int5: the marmalade does not refrigerate cephalochordate if it is non-asleep thing that is not isotopic.; sent5 -> int6: the marmalade is not asleep and it is not isotopic if it is not consular.; sent9 -> int7: the marmalade is not consular if it is a kind of adiabatic thing that does muff Jihadist.; sent6 -> int8: the fact that the personality is mitral is not false.; sent7 & int8 -> int9: the homer opposes cotter.; sent11 & int9 -> int10: the marmalade is not non-adiabatic.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = either the regent is distributive or it does not muff personality or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if the marmalade does not muff personality the fact that either the regent is distributive or it does not muff personality or both is not correct. sent2: if something is not a toss it is distributive and/or does not muff personality. sent3: if that something refrigerates cephalochordate and is not isotopic is wrong it does not muff personality. sent4: the regent is not a toss if the marmalade does not refrigerate cephalochordate. sent5: something is not asleep and it is not isotopic if it is not consular. sent6: the personality is not a xenolith but it is mitral. sent7: the homer does oppose cotter if the personality is mitral. sent8: the fact that the marmalade does refrigerate cephalochordate but it is not isotopic does not hold if there is something such that it is not a kind of a toss. sent9: if something is a kind of adiabatic thing that muffs Jihadist it is not consular. sent10: something does not refrigerate cephalochordate if it is not asleep and is not isotopic. sent11: the marmalade is adiabatic if the homer opposes cotter. sent12: something does not toss. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent8 -> int1: that the marmalade refrigerates cephalochordate and is non-isotopic does not hold.; sent3 -> int2: if the fact that the marmalade refrigerates cephalochordate and is not isotopic does not hold then it does not muff personality.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the marmalade does not muff personality.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the microfilm is not a grid.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: something is not a grid if it does not refrigerate hollandaise and it crashes microfilm. sent2: if something does seep the microfilm does not refrigerate hollandaise and crashes microfilm. sent3: the microfilm is not a kind of a grid if it does refrigerate hollandaise and does crash microfilm. sent4: there exists something such that it seeps. sent5: the hollandaise does not muff terrain and is a kind of a chlorpromazine if something does crash microfilm.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: (x): {AB}x -> (¬{BU}{ak} & {EU}{ak})
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the microfilm is not a grid if it does not refrigerate hollandaise and it does crash microfilm.; sent4 & sent2 -> int2: the microfilm does not refrigerate hollandaise and crashes microfilm.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent4 & sent2 -> int2: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the microfilm is not a grid. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a grid if it does not refrigerate hollandaise and it crashes microfilm. sent2: if something does seep the microfilm does not refrigerate hollandaise and crashes microfilm. sent3: the microfilm is not a kind of a grid if it does refrigerate hollandaise and does crash microfilm. sent4: there exists something such that it seeps. sent5: the hollandaise does not muff terrain and is a kind of a chlorpromazine if something does crash microfilm. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the microfilm is not a grid if it does not refrigerate hollandaise and it does crash microfilm.; sent4 & sent2 -> int2: the microfilm does not refrigerate hollandaise and crashes microfilm.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the nobelium is nonfunctional is not incorrect.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: the fact that the register is subatomic is right. sent2: if the register is subatomic then that it does not refrigerate Artemia and it does not refrigerate gunnel is not true. sent3: the nobelium is nonfunctional if there is something such that the fact that it does not refrigerate Artemia and does not refrigerate gunnel is false.
|
sent1: {A}{a} sent2: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}{b}
|
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: that the register does not refrigerate Artemia and it does not refrigerate gunnel is wrong.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it does not refrigerate Artemia and does not refrigerate gunnel is not right.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the nobelium is nonfunctional is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the register is subatomic is right. sent2: if the register is subatomic then that it does not refrigerate Artemia and it does not refrigerate gunnel is not true. sent3: the nobelium is nonfunctional if there is something such that the fact that it does not refrigerate Artemia and does not refrigerate gunnel is false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent1 -> int1: that the register does not refrigerate Artemia and it does not refrigerate gunnel is wrong.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it does not refrigerate Artemia and does not refrigerate gunnel is not right.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if it is autoplastic that it is not a block and refrigerates solidarity does not hold does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x))
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is chromatographic then that it is not a kind of a son and it does refrigerate zygoma is not right. sent2: if something is a WLAN that it is not ineffective and is a consecration is false. sent3: there exists something such that if it is autoplastic that it is a block that refrigerates solidarity is incorrect. sent4: if something is a settlement then that it does not man and it refrigerates blistering is not right. sent5: if the electromyograph is autoplastic the fact that it does block and it refrigerates solidarity is incorrect. sent6: if the electromyograph is a numbness the fact that it is not autoplastic and refrigerates licensee is not true. sent7: the electromyograph does not block and refrigerates solidarity if it is autoplastic. sent8: there is something such that if it is autoplastic it is not a kind of a block and it does refrigerate solidarity. sent9: there is something such that if it is a moroseness then it is not mesic and it opposes Mosaic. sent10: if that the electromyograph is autoplastic is correct then that it does not block and refrigerates solidarity does not hold.
|
sent1: (Ex): {CD}x -> ¬(¬{CI}x & {HG}x) sent2: (x): {EC}x -> ¬(¬{BE}x & {EH}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: (x): {FQ}x -> ¬(¬{FR}x & {AS}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: {P}{aa} -> ¬(¬{A}{aa} & {GB}{aa}) sent7: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent8: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: (Ex): {BC}x -> (¬{FF}x & {IR}x) sent10: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is a kind of a WLAN then that it is both not ineffective and a consecration is not right.
|
(Ex): {EC}x -> ¬(¬{BE}x & {EH}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: if the fact that the shelf is a kind of a WLAN is correct then that it is not ineffective and it is a consecration is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is autoplastic that it is not a block and refrigerates solidarity does not hold does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is chromatographic then that it is not a kind of a son and it does refrigerate zygoma is not right. sent2: if something is a WLAN that it is not ineffective and is a consecration is false. sent3: there exists something such that if it is autoplastic that it is a block that refrigerates solidarity is incorrect. sent4: if something is a settlement then that it does not man and it refrigerates blistering is not right. sent5: if the electromyograph is autoplastic the fact that it does block and it refrigerates solidarity is incorrect. sent6: if the electromyograph is a numbness the fact that it is not autoplastic and refrigerates licensee is not true. sent7: the electromyograph does not block and refrigerates solidarity if it is autoplastic. sent8: there is something such that if it is autoplastic it is not a kind of a block and it does refrigerate solidarity. sent9: there is something such that if it is a moroseness then it is not mesic and it opposes Mosaic. sent10: if that the electromyograph is autoplastic is correct then that it does not block and refrigerates solidarity does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bludgeon does not oppose Phalacrocoracidae.
|
¬{B}{c}
|
sent1: the bludgeon does not oppose Phalacrocoracidae if the fact that the alpenstock does insinuate or it is not a kind of a potboiler or both is not true. sent2: the consort is equinoctial. sent3: something is milch if it does oppose Leporidae. sent4: if the fact that something is non-equinoctial thing that is non-weak does not hold then the fact that it does oppose Phalacrocoracidae is right.
|
sent1: ¬({AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent2: {A}{a} sent3: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent4: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}x
|
[] |
[] |
the bludgeon does oppose Phalacrocoracidae.
|
{B}{c}
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the bludgeon is not a kind of a equinoctial and it is non-weak does not hold that it opposes Phalacrocoracidae is not wrong.; sent3 -> int2: if the consort does oppose Leporidae then it is milch.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bludgeon does not oppose Phalacrocoracidae. ; $context$ = sent1: the bludgeon does not oppose Phalacrocoracidae if the fact that the alpenstock does insinuate or it is not a kind of a potboiler or both is not true. sent2: the consort is equinoctial. sent3: something is milch if it does oppose Leporidae. sent4: if the fact that something is non-equinoctial thing that is non-weak does not hold then the fact that it does oppose Phalacrocoracidae is right. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sgraffito is avirulent.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: there is something such that it is avirulent. sent2: there is something such that it is a legatee. sent3: if something does not muff NT that the sgraffito is nonretractile thing that is avirulent is incorrect. sent4: the fact that the dockyard does muff NT and is avirulent is not correct if something is not nonretractile. sent5: there is something such that it is prosthodontic. sent6: the fact that the dockyard is avirulent and it does muff NT is not correct if something is not nonretractile. sent7: the dockyard is avirulent if there exists something such that the fact that it does muff NT and it is nonretractile is not true. sent8: if something that does muff NT does refrigerate sgraffito then the sgraffito is not avirulent. sent9: something refrigerates sgraffito if it is not nonretractile. sent10: something does not refrigerate sgraffito. sent11: something is not avirulent. sent12: the sgraffito is avirulent if there is something such that that it muffs NT and is nonretractile is wrong. sent13: if there exists something such that it does not muff NT the fact that the dockyard is avirulent and it is nonretractile is false. sent14: there is something such that it refrigerates sgraffito.
|
sent1: (Ex): {D}x sent2: (Ex): {GT}x sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b}) sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {D}{a}) sent5: (Ex): {FF}x sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({D}{a} & {B}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬({B}x & {C}x) -> {D}{a} sent8: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> {A}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent11: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent12: (x): ¬({B}x & {C}x) -> {D}{b} sent13: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent14: (Ex): {A}x
|
[] |
[] |
that the sgraffito is not avirulent is not false.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the scarf refrigerates sgraffito if it is not nonretractile.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the sgraffito is avirulent. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is avirulent. sent2: there is something such that it is a legatee. sent3: if something does not muff NT that the sgraffito is nonretractile thing that is avirulent is incorrect. sent4: the fact that the dockyard does muff NT and is avirulent is not correct if something is not nonretractile. sent5: there is something such that it is prosthodontic. sent6: the fact that the dockyard is avirulent and it does muff NT is not correct if something is not nonretractile. sent7: the dockyard is avirulent if there exists something such that the fact that it does muff NT and it is nonretractile is not true. sent8: if something that does muff NT does refrigerate sgraffito then the sgraffito is not avirulent. sent9: something refrigerates sgraffito if it is not nonretractile. sent10: something does not refrigerate sgraffito. sent11: something is not avirulent. sent12: the sgraffito is avirulent if there is something such that that it muffs NT and is nonretractile is wrong. sent13: if there exists something such that it does not muff NT the fact that the dockyard is avirulent and it is nonretractile is false. sent14: there is something such that it refrigerates sgraffito. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the Swift disembarks is correct.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: if the Dane is not a kind of a seasoner but it is a kind of a god the icefall is not a god. sent2: the Swift does refrigerate distinction. sent3: if the icefall does not refrigerate Kirchhoff or it is chimerical or both the Rabbi does not refrigerate Kirchhoff. sent4: the Swift disembarks and does refrigerate distinction. sent5: something that is not a kind of a slide is not a kind of a seasoner and is a god. sent6: the fact that something does disembark and it does refrigerate distinction is not correct if the fact that it does not refrigerate Kirchhoff is not false. sent7: if that something is a slide that does oppose strongroom is not correct it is not a slide. sent8: the icefall does not refrigerate Kirchhoff and/or it is chimerical if it is not a kind of a god.
|
sent1: (¬{F}{d} & {D}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: (¬{C}{c} v {E}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent4: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x & {D}x) sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent7: (x): ¬({G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{G}x sent8: ¬{D}{c} -> (¬{C}{c} v {E}{c})
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Swift does not disembark.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: that the Rabbi disembarks and refrigerates distinction does not hold if it does not refrigerate Kirchhoff.; sent5 -> int2: if the Dane is not a kind of a slide then it is not a kind of a seasoner and is a god.; sent7 -> int3: if that the Dane does slide and it opposes strongroom does not hold it is not a slide.;"
] | 9 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the Swift disembarks is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Dane is not a kind of a seasoner but it is a kind of a god the icefall is not a god. sent2: the Swift does refrigerate distinction. sent3: if the icefall does not refrigerate Kirchhoff or it is chimerical or both the Rabbi does not refrigerate Kirchhoff. sent4: the Swift disembarks and does refrigerate distinction. sent5: something that is not a kind of a slide is not a kind of a seasoner and is a god. sent6: the fact that something does disembark and it does refrigerate distinction is not correct if the fact that it does not refrigerate Kirchhoff is not false. sent7: if that something is a slide that does oppose strongroom is not correct it is not a slide. sent8: the icefall does not refrigerate Kirchhoff and/or it is chimerical if it is not a kind of a god. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Jonathan is not a kind of a rule.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: if something is ductless then it is not an hours or does refrigerate Synge or both. sent2: if something does not oppose polymer it is not collagenous. sent3: the Jonathan does not muff secretin if it does oppose polymer and is a grade. sent4: that the spur is not a kind of an hours is right if something is not an hours or it does refrigerate Synge or both. sent5: that something opposes polymer and is not a kind of a grade is not correct if it is not a professional. sent6: the Jonathan crashes spur. sent7: something does not oppose polymer if that it oppose polymer and is not a grade does not hold. sent8: that something is a leg and it is precordial is not right if it is not an hours. sent9: the fact that the dorsum is ductless is correct. sent10: the artichoke does rule. sent11: if the coriander is not precordial the loaner is not a professional. sent12: the Jonathan is a kind of a rule if the fact that the shaft does not muff secretin but it does rule is not right. sent13: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a leg and it is not non-precordial is not true the coriander is not non-precordial. sent14: the Jonathan is collagenous if the fact that it is a kind of a rule is not false. sent15: that the Jonathan does oppose polymer is not wrong.
|
sent1: (x): {J}x -> (¬{H}x v {K}x) sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent4: (x): (¬{H}x v {K}x) -> ¬{H}{e} sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) sent6: {ED}{a} sent7: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent8: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({I}x & {G}x) sent9: {J}{f} sent10: {A}{gm} sent11: ¬{G}{d} -> ¬{F}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {A}{a} sent13: (x): ¬({I}x & {G}x) -> ¬{G}{d} sent14: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent15: {D}{a}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Jonathan is a rule.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the Jonathan is collagenous.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] |
the orderer is not collagenous.
|
¬{B}{dn}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Jonathan is not a kind of a rule. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is ductless then it is not an hours or does refrigerate Synge or both. sent2: if something does not oppose polymer it is not collagenous. sent3: the Jonathan does not muff secretin if it does oppose polymer and is a grade. sent4: that the spur is not a kind of an hours is right if something is not an hours or it does refrigerate Synge or both. sent5: that something opposes polymer and is not a kind of a grade is not correct if it is not a professional. sent6: the Jonathan crashes spur. sent7: something does not oppose polymer if that it oppose polymer and is not a grade does not hold. sent8: that something is a leg and it is precordial is not right if it is not an hours. sent9: the fact that the dorsum is ductless is correct. sent10: the artichoke does rule. sent11: if the coriander is not precordial the loaner is not a professional. sent12: the Jonathan is a kind of a rule if the fact that the shaft does not muff secretin but it does rule is not right. sent13: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a leg and it is not non-precordial is not true the coriander is not non-precordial. sent14: the Jonathan is collagenous if the fact that it is a kind of a rule is not false. sent15: that the Jonathan does oppose polymer is not wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Jonathan is a rule.; sent14 & assump1 -> int1: the Jonathan is collagenous.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pullulation coalesces.
|
{E}{b}
|
sent1: there is something such that it is not a barbasco. sent2: the mustachio does not muff sand. sent3: the mustachio muffs one-half. sent4: something coalesces if it does muff sand. sent5: the pullulation does muff sand if the mustachio is not a cholinesterase but it muffs one-half. sent6: if the pullulation is a kind of a ECCM then it does coalesce. sent7: the pullulation muffs one-half. sent8: the mustachio is not a cholinesterase but it does muff one-half if something is not faucal. sent9: the pullulation is a cholinesterase. sent10: there exists something such that it is a cholinesterase. sent11: if that something is not a cholinesterase and it is not faucal is wrong then that it is not a triviality is correct. sent12: there exists something such that it is not faucal. sent13: the pullulation is faucal.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{BM}x sent2: ¬{D}{a} sent3: {C}{a} sent4: (x): {D}x -> {E}x sent5: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent6: {JE}{b} -> {E}{b} sent7: {C}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent9: {B}{b} sent10: (Ex): {B}x sent11: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{JA}x sent12: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent13: {A}{b}
|
[
"sent12 & sent8 -> int1: the mustachio is not a kind of a cholinesterase and muffs one-half.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the pullulation does muff sand.; sent4 -> int3: if the pullulation muffs sand the fact that it does coalesce is right.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent8 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 & sent5 -> int2: {D}{b}; sent4 -> int3: {D}{b} -> {E}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
something is not a kind of a triviality.
|
(Ex): ¬{JA}x
|
[
"sent11 -> int4: the mustachio is not a triviality if that it is not a cholinesterase and it is not faucal is not correct.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the pullulation coalesces. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not a barbasco. sent2: the mustachio does not muff sand. sent3: the mustachio muffs one-half. sent4: something coalesces if it does muff sand. sent5: the pullulation does muff sand if the mustachio is not a cholinesterase but it muffs one-half. sent6: if the pullulation is a kind of a ECCM then it does coalesce. sent7: the pullulation muffs one-half. sent8: the mustachio is not a cholinesterase but it does muff one-half if something is not faucal. sent9: the pullulation is a cholinesterase. sent10: there exists something such that it is a cholinesterase. sent11: if that something is not a cholinesterase and it is not faucal is wrong then that it is not a triviality is correct. sent12: there exists something such that it is not faucal. sent13: the pullulation is faucal. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent8 -> int1: the mustachio is not a kind of a cholinesterase and muffs one-half.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the pullulation does muff sand.; sent4 -> int3: if the pullulation muffs sand the fact that it does coalesce is right.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the finery is not a allemande.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: the transcription is denominational. sent2: if that the transcription is not geopolitical and not denominational does not hold the finery is a allemande. sent3: the fact that the transcription is geopolitical and not denominational does not hold. sent4: if the transcription is geopolitical then that the finery is a allemande hold.
|
sent1: {B}{a} sent2: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {C}{b} sent3: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent4: {A}{a} -> {C}{b}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the transcription is not geopolitical and it is not denominational.; assump1 -> int1: the transcription is not denominational.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the transcription is non-geopolitical and non-denominational does not hold.; sent2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent1 & int1 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); sent2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the finery is not a allemande. ; $context$ = sent1: the transcription is denominational. sent2: if that the transcription is not geopolitical and not denominational does not hold the finery is a allemande. sent3: the fact that the transcription is geopolitical and not denominational does not hold. sent4: if the transcription is geopolitical then that the finery is a allemande hold. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the transcription is not geopolitical and it is not denominational.; assump1 -> int1: the transcription is not denominational.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the transcription is non-geopolitical and non-denominational does not hold.; sent2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if it is a numeracy it is not a rum does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬{C}x)
|
sent1: if that the presidio is a kind of a numeracy is true it is not a rum. sent2: there exists something such that if it identifies it does muff perversity. sent3: if something is a Zambian then it is not a Muscovy. sent4: something is not a kind of a jackscrew if it is a kind of a city. sent5: there is something such that if it is a Muscovy then it is not ametabolic. sent6: there is something such that if it is a numeracy the fact that it is a rum is right. sent7: if the presidio is a dried then it is a rum. sent8: if the bunny is a rum it does muff perversity. sent9: if the presidio is a kind of a numeracy then it is a kind of a rum.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent2: (Ex): {GI}x -> {IH}x sent3: (x): {BQ}x -> ¬{FF}x sent4: (x): {GC}x -> ¬{CU}x sent5: (Ex): {FF}x -> ¬{GF}x sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> {C}x sent7: {HL}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent8: {C}{gk} -> {IH}{gk} sent9: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa}
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is a Zambian it is not a kind of a Muscovy.
|
(Ex): {BQ}x -> ¬{FF}x
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the anode is not a Muscovy if it is a Zambian.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is a numeracy it is not a rum does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the presidio is a kind of a numeracy is true it is not a rum. sent2: there exists something such that if it identifies it does muff perversity. sent3: if something is a Zambian then it is not a Muscovy. sent4: something is not a kind of a jackscrew if it is a kind of a city. sent5: there is something such that if it is a Muscovy then it is not ametabolic. sent6: there is something such that if it is a numeracy the fact that it is a rum is right. sent7: if the presidio is a dried then it is a rum. sent8: if the bunny is a rum it does muff perversity. sent9: if the presidio is a kind of a numeracy then it is a kind of a rum. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it refrigerates orogeny it is not acropetal.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ¬{C}x
|
sent1: the fact that the level is acropetal is correct if it does refrigerate orogeny. sent2: if that the level is a kind of a Dodecanese is not incorrect then it is not acropetal. sent3: there exists something such that if it does muff souther the fact that it is not a Forseti hold. sent4: if something does refrigerate orogeny it is not firmamental. sent5: if something is denotative that it is not bidirectional hold. sent6: there is something such that if it is a guilloche it is not a tisane. sent7: there is something such that if it muffs Tabernacle it is not scholarly. sent8: something does not crash Mallarme if it is a leftfield. sent9: if something refrigerates orogeny then it is acropetal. sent10: the fact that there is something such that if it is undynamic it does not oppose melamine is not incorrect. sent11: something is not a payable if it is alphanumeric. sent12: the level does not disembark if it bed-hops. sent13: something does not oppose quartering if the fact that it refrigerates clef is true. sent14: the level is not a Boltzmann if it does refrigerate orogeny. sent15: the level is not acropetal if it is a ARDA. sent16: something does not crash microfilm if that it is muciferous is not wrong. sent17: something is not a tisane if it is a chabazite. sent18: there exists something such that if it refrigerates orogeny that it is acropetal is not false. sent19: if something is a kind of a detention it is not a jar.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent2: {EM}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent3: (Ex): {K}x -> ¬{HH}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬{AJ}x sent5: (x): {ET}x -> ¬{HG}x sent6: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{DQ}x sent7: (Ex): {HL}x -> ¬{AT}x sent8: (x): {EK}x -> ¬{BA}x sent9: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent10: (Ex): {BR}x -> ¬{DM}x sent11: (x): {DR}x -> ¬{BO}x sent12: {BN}{aa} -> ¬{GR}{aa} sent13: (x): {HP}x -> ¬{DA}x sent14: {A}{aa} -> ¬{N}{aa} sent15: {CU}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent16: (x): {DF}x -> ¬{P}x sent17: (x): {BE}x -> ¬{DQ}x sent18: (Ex): {A}x -> {C}x sent19: (x): {IR}x -> ¬{AK}x
|
[] |
[] |
the fact that the orogeny is not firmamental is true if it refrigerates orogeny.
|
{A}{jg} -> ¬{AJ}{jg}
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it refrigerates orogeny it is not acropetal. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the level is acropetal is correct if it does refrigerate orogeny. sent2: if that the level is a kind of a Dodecanese is not incorrect then it is not acropetal. sent3: there exists something such that if it does muff souther the fact that it is not a Forseti hold. sent4: if something does refrigerate orogeny it is not firmamental. sent5: if something is denotative that it is not bidirectional hold. sent6: there is something such that if it is a guilloche it is not a tisane. sent7: there is something such that if it muffs Tabernacle it is not scholarly. sent8: something does not crash Mallarme if it is a leftfield. sent9: if something refrigerates orogeny then it is acropetal. sent10: the fact that there is something such that if it is undynamic it does not oppose melamine is not incorrect. sent11: something is not a payable if it is alphanumeric. sent12: the level does not disembark if it bed-hops. sent13: something does not oppose quartering if the fact that it refrigerates clef is true. sent14: the level is not a Boltzmann if it does refrigerate orogeny. sent15: the level is not acropetal if it is a ARDA. sent16: something does not crash microfilm if that it is muciferous is not wrong. sent17: something is not a tisane if it is a chabazite. sent18: there exists something such that if it refrigerates orogeny that it is acropetal is not false. sent19: if something is a kind of a detention it is not a jar. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it is intralinguistic and it is not ratty it is not menopausal.
|
(Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: the bluepoint is menopausal if it is a kind of intralinguistic thing that is not ratty. sent2: if the bluepoint is a conservancy but it is not creaseproof the fact that it is not removable hold. sent3: there exists something such that if it is intralinguistic and is ratty then it is not menopausal. sent4: there is something such that if it does nuzzle and does not refrigerate gristmill it is not a thundering. sent5: if the bluepoint does bang but it is not menopausal then it does not oppose semi-abstraction. sent6: if the bluepoint is both an eruption and not intralinguistic then it is not a hell. sent7: there exists something such that if it does oppose iodotyrosine and it does not total then it does not refrigerate bust-up. sent8: if the bluepoint is intralinguistic and it is ratty then it is not menopausal. sent9: the level does not betray if it is ratty thing that does not oppose prototype. sent10: the Vernier is not pyrogenic if it bangs and it is not ratty. sent11: there is something such that if it is judgmental and is not a kind of a unneighborliness then it does not oppose liftoff. sent12: there is something such that if it is intralinguistic and it is not ratty it is menopausal. sent13: there is something such that if it is a paperknife and it is not compassionate it is not a kind of an aim. sent14: if something is impassable and non-tetrametric it is not a kind of an impedance. sent15: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a patricide that does not incandesce it is not a pheromone. sent16: the bluepoint is non-ectomorphic if it is intralinguistic thing that is not a mamo. sent17: if the disguise is a kind of a fortieth but it is not a Darwin then it is not intralinguistic. sent18: if the bluepoint is both intralinguistic and not ratty then that it is not menopausal is true. sent19: there exists something such that if it does oppose dashed and is not ritualistic then the fact that it is not spectrometric is not false. sent20: there is something such that if it is not non-gastroesophageal but non-creaseproof then it is not a shocker. sent21: if the bluepoint is intralinguistic thing that does not oppose candlestick then it does not refrigerate spastic.
|
sent1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: ({AN}{aa} & ¬{EP}{aa}) -> ¬{DQ}{aa} sent3: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: (Ex): ({FN}x & ¬{FF}x) -> ¬{FQ}x sent5: ({CB}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> ¬{EH}{aa} sent6: ({HC}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) -> ¬{HU}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ({DO}x & ¬{U}x) -> ¬{GF}x sent8: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent9: ({AB}{ik} & ¬{BK}{ik}) -> ¬{M}{ik} sent10: ({CB}{ea} & ¬{AB}{ea}) -> ¬{HQ}{ea} sent11: (Ex): ({DE}x & ¬{IJ}x) -> ¬{FP}x sent12: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent13: (Ex): ({ER}x & ¬{GG}x) -> ¬{BC}x sent14: (x): ({AT}x & ¬{EL}x) -> ¬{BO}x sent15: (Ex): ({HP}x & ¬{IT}x) -> ¬{A}x sent16: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{ED}{aa}) -> ¬{AC}{aa} sent17: ({IN}{br} & ¬{Q}{br}) -> ¬{AA}{br} sent18: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent19: (Ex): ({DN}x & ¬{BB}x) -> ¬{R}x sent20: (Ex): ({GC}x & ¬{EP}x) -> ¬{G}x sent21: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{DL}{aa}) -> ¬{AK}{aa}
|
[
"sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is impassable and is not tetrametric that it is not an impedance is not false.
|
(Ex): ({AT}x & ¬{EL}x) -> ¬{BO}x
|
[
"sent14 -> int1: the Crow is not an impedance if it is a kind of impassable thing that is non-tetrametric.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is intralinguistic and it is not ratty it is not menopausal. ; $context$ = sent1: the bluepoint is menopausal if it is a kind of intralinguistic thing that is not ratty. sent2: if the bluepoint is a conservancy but it is not creaseproof the fact that it is not removable hold. sent3: there exists something such that if it is intralinguistic and is ratty then it is not menopausal. sent4: there is something such that if it does nuzzle and does not refrigerate gristmill it is not a thundering. sent5: if the bluepoint does bang but it is not menopausal then it does not oppose semi-abstraction. sent6: if the bluepoint is both an eruption and not intralinguistic then it is not a hell. sent7: there exists something such that if it does oppose iodotyrosine and it does not total then it does not refrigerate bust-up. sent8: if the bluepoint is intralinguistic and it is ratty then it is not menopausal. sent9: the level does not betray if it is ratty thing that does not oppose prototype. sent10: the Vernier is not pyrogenic if it bangs and it is not ratty. sent11: there is something such that if it is judgmental and is not a kind of a unneighborliness then it does not oppose liftoff. sent12: there is something such that if it is intralinguistic and it is not ratty it is menopausal. sent13: there is something such that if it is a paperknife and it is not compassionate it is not a kind of an aim. sent14: if something is impassable and non-tetrametric it is not a kind of an impedance. sent15: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a patricide that does not incandesce it is not a pheromone. sent16: the bluepoint is non-ectomorphic if it is intralinguistic thing that is not a mamo. sent17: if the disguise is a kind of a fortieth but it is not a Darwin then it is not intralinguistic. sent18: if the bluepoint is both intralinguistic and not ratty then that it is not menopausal is true. sent19: there exists something such that if it does oppose dashed and is not ritualistic then the fact that it is not spectrometric is not false. sent20: there is something such that if it is not non-gastroesophageal but non-creaseproof then it is not a shocker. sent21: if the bluepoint is intralinguistic thing that does not oppose candlestick then it does not refrigerate spastic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent18 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the apse is an oncologist.
|
{AA}{aa}
|
sent1: that something is both an age and not a fireboat does not hold if it does not cocoon. sent2: that the spongioblast does whistle hold if the grapefruit does whistle. sent3: that the Garand grimaces but it is not a ferret is right. sent4: the spongioblast does refrigerate neurectomy. sent5: the apse is a milliammeter if either the futon is not a kind of a milliammeter or it is a kind of an age or both. sent6: the apse does not crash sidestep. sent7: everything does not crash sidestep. sent8: if that something is an age that is not a fireboat is incorrect then it is not an age. sent9: the grapefruit whistles. sent10: the fact that something is an oncologist and omnidirectional is not true if it is not a kind of an age. sent11: if the spongioblast does refrigerate neurectomy then it is traditional. sent12: everything is antitypic and does not refrigerate Cooke. sent13: that if something is a whistle and it is traditional then the futon is not a cocoon is not wrong. sent14: everything is a kind of an oncologist and it does not crash sidestep.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent2: {F}{c} -> {F}{b} sent3: ({FP}{ir} & ¬{HS}{ir}) sent4: {G}{b} sent5: (¬{EL}{a} v {B}{a}) -> {EL}{aa} sent6: ¬{AB}{aa} sent7: (x): ¬{AB}x sent8: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent9: {F}{c} sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({AA}x & {A}x) sent11: {G}{b} -> {E}{b} sent12: (x): ({HC}x & ¬{U}x) sent13: (x): ({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}{a} sent14: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent14 -> int1: the apse is an oncologist that does not crash sidestep.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent14 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the apse is not an oncologist.
|
¬{AA}{aa}
|
[
"sent10 -> int2: the fact that the futon is a kind of an oncologist and it is omnidirectional does not hold if it is not an age.; sent8 -> int3: if that the futon does age but it is not a fireboat is incorrect then it is not an age.; sent1 -> int4: that the futon does age but it is not a fireboat does not hold if it does not cocoon.; sent2 & sent9 -> int5: the spongioblast whistles.; sent11 & sent4 -> int6: that the spongioblast is traditional is not incorrect.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the spongioblast is a kind of a whistle and it is traditional.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that it whistles and it is traditional.; int8 & sent13 -> int9: the futon does not cocoon.; int4 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the futon is an age but it is not a fireboat is not correct.; int3 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the futon is not an age is not wrong.; int2 & int11 -> int12: that the futon is both an oncologist and omnidirectional does not hold.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that that it is both an oncologist and omnidirectional does not hold.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the apse is an oncologist. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is both an age and not a fireboat does not hold if it does not cocoon. sent2: that the spongioblast does whistle hold if the grapefruit does whistle. sent3: that the Garand grimaces but it is not a ferret is right. sent4: the spongioblast does refrigerate neurectomy. sent5: the apse is a milliammeter if either the futon is not a kind of a milliammeter or it is a kind of an age or both. sent6: the apse does not crash sidestep. sent7: everything does not crash sidestep. sent8: if that something is an age that is not a fireboat is incorrect then it is not an age. sent9: the grapefruit whistles. sent10: the fact that something is an oncologist and omnidirectional is not true if it is not a kind of an age. sent11: if the spongioblast does refrigerate neurectomy then it is traditional. sent12: everything is antitypic and does not refrigerate Cooke. sent13: that if something is a whistle and it is traditional then the futon is not a cocoon is not wrong. sent14: everything is a kind of an oncologist and it does not crash sidestep. ; $proof$ =
|
sent14 -> int1: the apse is an oncologist that does not crash sidestep.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the fact that the staging happens and the grill does not occur is not right is correct.
|
¬({E} & ¬{F})
|
sent1: that the rearmament does not occur and the undescriptiveness does not occur leads to that the muffing Assur does not occur. sent2: both the descriptiveness and the non-immunologicalness occurs. sent3: the refrigerating fenestration does not occur and the conception occurs. sent4: the muffing ailment does not occur. sent5: that the colonization does not occur causes that the cogitativeness does not occur and the bodywork does not occur. sent6: that the wings does not occur brings about that both the indistinguishableness and the perviousness occurs. sent7: that if the refrigerating fenestration does not occur the fact that the non-glacialness and the wings occurs is wrong is right. sent8: the downshift does not occur and the sunbeam occurs if the indistinguishableness happens. sent9: the aerobicness does not occur. sent10: that the soccer and the commercial happens does not hold. sent11: both the muffing Assur and the rearmament happens if that the refrigerating eclectic does not occur is not false. sent12: the refrigerating eclectic occurs if the cogitativeness does not occur and the bodywork does not occur. sent13: if the refrigerating eclectic occurs the grill does not occur. sent14: if the muffing Assur does not occur then that the staging occurs and the grilling does not occur is not correct. sent15: the staging occurs and the grilling does not occur if the undescriptiveness happens. sent16: if the fact that the non-glacialness and the wings occurs is false then the fact that the wings does not occur is not false. sent17: if the refrigerating molehill does not occur the fact that both the run and the Gibraltarian occurs does not hold. sent18: if the undescriptiveness occurs then the fact that both the muffing spelling and the non-obligateness happens is incorrect. sent19: that the colonization does not occur is brought about by that the downshift does not occur but the sunbeam occurs.
|
sent1: (¬{C} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{D} sent2: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent3: (¬{Q} & {S}) sent4: ¬{FJ} sent5: ¬{J} -> (¬{I} & ¬{H}) sent6: ¬{P} -> ({N} & {O}) sent7: ¬{Q} -> ¬(¬{R} & {P}) sent8: {N} -> (¬{L} & {M}) sent9: ¬{GL} sent10: ¬({JG} & {U}) sent11: ¬{G} -> ({D} & {C}) sent12: (¬{I} & ¬{H}) -> {G} sent13: {G} -> ¬{F} sent14: ¬{D} -> ¬({E} & ¬{F}) sent15: {A} -> ({E} & ¬{F}) sent16: ¬(¬{R} & {P}) -> ¬{P} sent17: ¬{IM} -> ¬({DG} & {FR}) sent18: {A} -> ¬({BE} & ¬{K}) sent19: (¬{L} & {M}) -> ¬{J}
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the undescriptiveness does not occur.;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{A};"
] |
the fact that the muffing spelling occurs but the obligating does not occur is not right.
|
¬({BE} & ¬{K})
|
[
"sent3 -> int2: the refrigerating fenestration does not occur.; sent7 & int2 -> int3: that that the glacialness does not occur but the wings happens hold is not true.; sent16 & int3 -> int4: the wings does not occur.; sent6 & int4 -> int5: both the indistinguishableness and the perviousness happens.; int5 -> int6: the indistinguishableness occurs.; sent8 & int6 -> int7: the downshift does not occur and the sunbeam happens.; sent19 & int7 -> int8: that the colonization does not occur hold.; sent5 & int8 -> int9: the cogitativeness does not occur and the bodywork does not occur.; sent12 & int9 -> int10: the refrigerating eclectic occurs.; sent13 & int10 -> int11: the grill does not occur.;"
] | 15 | 4 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the fact that the staging happens and the grill does not occur is not right is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: that the rearmament does not occur and the undescriptiveness does not occur leads to that the muffing Assur does not occur. sent2: both the descriptiveness and the non-immunologicalness occurs. sent3: the refrigerating fenestration does not occur and the conception occurs. sent4: the muffing ailment does not occur. sent5: that the colonization does not occur causes that the cogitativeness does not occur and the bodywork does not occur. sent6: that the wings does not occur brings about that both the indistinguishableness and the perviousness occurs. sent7: that if the refrigerating fenestration does not occur the fact that the non-glacialness and the wings occurs is wrong is right. sent8: the downshift does not occur and the sunbeam occurs if the indistinguishableness happens. sent9: the aerobicness does not occur. sent10: that the soccer and the commercial happens does not hold. sent11: both the muffing Assur and the rearmament happens if that the refrigerating eclectic does not occur is not false. sent12: the refrigerating eclectic occurs if the cogitativeness does not occur and the bodywork does not occur. sent13: if the refrigerating eclectic occurs the grill does not occur. sent14: if the muffing Assur does not occur then that the staging occurs and the grilling does not occur is not correct. sent15: the staging occurs and the grilling does not occur if the undescriptiveness happens. sent16: if the fact that the non-glacialness and the wings occurs is false then the fact that the wings does not occur is not false. sent17: if the refrigerating molehill does not occur the fact that both the run and the Gibraltarian occurs does not hold. sent18: if the undescriptiveness occurs then the fact that both the muffing spelling and the non-obligateness happens is incorrect. sent19: that the colonization does not occur is brought about by that the downshift does not occur but the sunbeam occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the undescriptiveness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the metamorphosing does not occur is brought about by the clucking.
|
{B} -> ¬{C}
|
sent1: the metamorphosing happens. sent2: if the refrigerating Job does not occur then the metamorphosing does not occur and the cluck does not occur.
|
sent1: {C} sent2: ¬{D} -> (¬{C} & ¬{B})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cluck happens.; assump1 -> int1: the kvetch or the cluck or both occurs.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {B}; assump1 -> int1: ({A} v {B});"
] |
the muffing bonding and/or the czaristness occurs.
|
({CN} v {EF})
|
[] | 6 | 2 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the metamorphosing does not occur is brought about by the clucking. ; $context$ = sent1: the metamorphosing happens. sent2: if the refrigerating Job does not occur then the metamorphosing does not occur and the cluck does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cluck happens.; assump1 -> int1: the kvetch or the cluck or both occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that it is not an acquiescence and/or does not refrigerate springbok does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: the radio is not a kind of a Jacobs. sent2: there is something such that it is an acquiescence and/or it does not refrigerate springbok. sent3: something does not milk or is not a kind of a perchlorate or both if it is a stotinka. sent4: the radio is not a stotinka. sent5: if the pigskin is not an empress then it does not oppose ardeb or is not a kind of a stotinka or both. sent6: if the radio is not a stotinka it is not a kind of an acquiescence and/or does not refrigerate springbok. sent7: the radio is a karate and/or does not refrigerate liftoff. sent8: either the radio does refrigerate bisexual or it is not a stotinka or both. sent9: the radio is not a orthoscope and/or is an acquiescence if it does not finish. sent10: the radio is an acquiescence and/or it does not refrigerate springbok if it is not a stotinka. sent11: there is something such that it is not an acquiescence or it does refrigerate springbok or both. sent12: if the kitchenette does not oppose Smalley then it is not an acquiescence and/or does not muff hangover.
|
sent1: ¬{JF}{a} sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> (¬{IG}x v ¬{HH}x) sent4: ¬{A}{a} sent5: ¬{EN}{eg} -> (¬{HM}{eg} v ¬{A}{eg}) sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: ({AF}{a} v ¬{DN}{a}) sent8: ({FN}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) sent9: ¬{DO}{a} -> (¬{JD}{a} v {AA}{a}) sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent11: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent12: ¬{FT}{df} -> (¬{AA}{df} v ¬{FD}{df})
|
[
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the radio is not an acquiescence and/or does not refrigerate springbok hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that the fact that it does not milk and/or is not a kind of a perchlorate is true.
|
(Ex): (¬{IG}x v ¬{HH}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> int2: if the radio is a stotinka then it is not a milk or it is not a perchlorate or both.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that it is not an acquiescence and/or does not refrigerate springbok does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the radio is not a kind of a Jacobs. sent2: there is something such that it is an acquiescence and/or it does not refrigerate springbok. sent3: something does not milk or is not a kind of a perchlorate or both if it is a stotinka. sent4: the radio is not a stotinka. sent5: if the pigskin is not an empress then it does not oppose ardeb or is not a kind of a stotinka or both. sent6: if the radio is not a stotinka it is not a kind of an acquiescence and/or does not refrigerate springbok. sent7: the radio is a karate and/or does not refrigerate liftoff. sent8: either the radio does refrigerate bisexual or it is not a stotinka or both. sent9: the radio is not a orthoscope and/or is an acquiescence if it does not finish. sent10: the radio is an acquiescence and/or it does not refrigerate springbok if it is not a stotinka. sent11: there is something such that it is not an acquiescence or it does refrigerate springbok or both. sent12: if the kitchenette does not oppose Smalley then it is not an acquiescence and/or does not muff hangover. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the radio is not an acquiescence and/or does not refrigerate springbok hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the buttonwood is a kind of a scourge and it is a synthetic.
|
({B}{b} & {C}{b})
|
sent1: the buttonwood is not a kind of a scourge if that the aggressor is not a scourge and not a technetium is wrong. sent2: that the buttonwood is a kind of a mayoralty and it does oppose perplexity does not hold if the Shylock does refrigerate grinder. sent3: if that something is a kind of a mayoralty but it does not oppose perplexity does not hold it is a scourge. sent4: if the Shylock does refrigerate grinder then the fact that the fact that the buttonwood is a kind of a mayoralty that does not oppose perplexity is not right is true. sent5: if the fact that something is a technetium and is not a mayoralty does not hold that it is fenestral is not incorrect. sent6: something is a synthetic if it is fenestral. sent7: something that opposes perplexity is a scourge. sent8: the fact that the buttonwood scourges and it is a synthetic is not right if that the Shylock does not refrigerate grinder is true. sent9: the bombproof is not a Sofia if something that is not a cosmetology is a fix. sent10: The grinder does refrigerate Shylock. sent11: the meadowlark is not a technetium. sent12: the buttonwood is fenestral if the meadowlark is not a Sofia but a technetium. sent13: if the buttonwood opposes perplexity then it is a scourge. sent14: something is a scourge if the fact that it does refrigerate grinder is right. sent15: the fact that the rectus is not a cosmetology but it is a fix hold. sent16: the alkaloid does flag if the Shylock flag and is not a synthetic. sent17: the buttonwood is fenestral if the meadowlark is not a Sofia and it is not a technetium. sent18: if the buttonwood does not scourge then the alkaloid is inspiratory and it refrigerates grinder. sent19: the meadowlark is not a Sofia and is not a kind of a technetium. sent20: the Shylock does refrigerate grinder. sent21: that the buttonwood is a mayoralty and it opposes perplexity is not correct.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{B}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent2: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent5: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{AA}x) -> {D}x sent6: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent7: (x): {AB}x -> {B}x sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & {C}{b}) sent9: (x): (¬{H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}{e} sent10: {AC}{aa} sent11: ¬{E}{c} sent12: (¬{F}{c} & {E}{c}) -> {D}{b} sent13: {AB}{b} -> {B}{b} sent14: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent15: (¬{H}{f} & {G}{f}) sent16: ({CJ}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {CJ}{ep} sent17: (¬{F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> {D}{b} sent18: ¬{B}{b} -> ({DL}{ep} & {A}{ep}) sent19: (¬{F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent20: {A}{a} sent21: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b})
|
[
"sent4 & sent20 -> int1: that the buttonwood is a mayoralty and does not oppose perplexity does not hold.; sent3 -> int2: the buttonwood is a kind of a scourge if that it is a mayoralty and does not oppose perplexity is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the buttonwood does not scourge is not right.; sent6 -> int4: the buttonwood is a kind of a synthetic if it is fenestral.; sent17 & sent19 -> int5: the buttonwood is fenestral.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the buttonwood is a synthetic is not false.; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent20 -> int1: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent3 -> int2: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {B}{b}; sent6 -> int4: {D}{b} -> {C}{b}; sent17 & sent19 -> int5: {D}{b}; int4 & int5 -> int6: {C}{b}; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the buttonwood is a scourge and it is not non-synthetic is not right.
|
¬({B}{b} & {C}{b})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the buttonwood is a kind of a scourge and it is a synthetic. ; $context$ = sent1: the buttonwood is not a kind of a scourge if that the aggressor is not a scourge and not a technetium is wrong. sent2: that the buttonwood is a kind of a mayoralty and it does oppose perplexity does not hold if the Shylock does refrigerate grinder. sent3: if that something is a kind of a mayoralty but it does not oppose perplexity does not hold it is a scourge. sent4: if the Shylock does refrigerate grinder then the fact that the fact that the buttonwood is a kind of a mayoralty that does not oppose perplexity is not right is true. sent5: if the fact that something is a technetium and is not a mayoralty does not hold that it is fenestral is not incorrect. sent6: something is a synthetic if it is fenestral. sent7: something that opposes perplexity is a scourge. sent8: the fact that the buttonwood scourges and it is a synthetic is not right if that the Shylock does not refrigerate grinder is true. sent9: the bombproof is not a Sofia if something that is not a cosmetology is a fix. sent10: The grinder does refrigerate Shylock. sent11: the meadowlark is not a technetium. sent12: the buttonwood is fenestral if the meadowlark is not a Sofia but a technetium. sent13: if the buttonwood opposes perplexity then it is a scourge. sent14: something is a scourge if the fact that it does refrigerate grinder is right. sent15: the fact that the rectus is not a cosmetology but it is a fix hold. sent16: the alkaloid does flag if the Shylock flag and is not a synthetic. sent17: the buttonwood is fenestral if the meadowlark is not a Sofia and it is not a technetium. sent18: if the buttonwood does not scourge then the alkaloid is inspiratory and it refrigerates grinder. sent19: the meadowlark is not a Sofia and is not a kind of a technetium. sent20: the Shylock does refrigerate grinder. sent21: that the buttonwood is a mayoralty and it opposes perplexity is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent20 -> int1: that the buttonwood is a mayoralty and does not oppose perplexity does not hold.; sent3 -> int2: the buttonwood is a kind of a scourge if that it is a mayoralty and does not oppose perplexity is false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the buttonwood does not scourge is not right.; sent6 -> int4: the buttonwood is a kind of a synthetic if it is fenestral.; sent17 & sent19 -> int5: the buttonwood is fenestral.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the buttonwood is a synthetic is not false.; int3 & int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the Wake does not oppose potluck but it does lock is not right.
|
¬(¬{F}{c} & {D}{c})
|
sent1: the fact that the spoor is a kind of extralinguistic thing that is prewar is not right if the tawse is prewar. sent2: if something is extralinguistic then it is prewar. sent3: the tawse is extralinguistic and is a velodrome. sent4: if the tawse is prewar then the spoor does lock. sent5: if that the Wake is a velodrome is not wrong the tawse is prewar. sent6: that that the spoor is prewar and it locks is right is incorrect.
|
sent1: {C}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent4: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent5: {B}{c} -> {C}{a} sent6: ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b})
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the tawse is extralinguistic.; sent2 -> int2: if the tawse is extralinguistic it is prewar.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the tawse is not non-prewar.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the spoor is a kind of a lock.;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent2 -> int2: {A}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a}; int3 & sent4 -> int4: {D}{b};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the Wake does not oppose potluck but it does lock is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the spoor is a kind of extralinguistic thing that is prewar is not right if the tawse is prewar. sent2: if something is extralinguistic then it is prewar. sent3: the tawse is extralinguistic and is a velodrome. sent4: if the tawse is prewar then the spoor does lock. sent5: if that the Wake is a velodrome is not wrong the tawse is prewar. sent6: that that the spoor is prewar and it locks is right is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the tawse is extralinguistic.; sent2 -> int2: if the tawse is extralinguistic it is prewar.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the tawse is not non-prewar.; int3 & sent4 -> int4: the spoor is a kind of a lock.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the adoxography does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the refrigerating monomer happens. sent2: the metarule happens if the adscriptness happens. sent3: that the Kafkaesqueness but not the two-hitter happens is wrong if the skeet happens. sent4: if the opposing demonetization occurs that the opposing drugget happens hold. sent5: that the opposing applicator happens leads to that the opposing inelasticity does not occur. sent6: the adscriptness occurs. sent7: if that the catadromousness does not occur and the haploid happens is not true then the metarule does not occur. sent8: the opposing demonetization happens if the fact that the Kafkaesqueness but not the two-hitter happens is wrong. sent9: that the catadromousness does not occur and the haploidness happens is incorrect if the opposing demonetization happens. sent10: the metarule does not occur if that both the haploidness and the non-catadromousness happens is incorrect.
|
sent1: {HR} sent2: {A} -> {B} sent3: {I} -> ¬({G} & ¬{H}) sent4: {F} -> {DN} sent5: {AA} -> ¬{CU} sent6: {A} sent7: ¬(¬{D} & {E}) -> ¬{B} sent8: ¬({G} & ¬{H}) -> {F} sent9: {F} -> ¬(¬{D} & {E}) sent10: ¬({E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B}
|
[
"sent2 & sent6 -> int1: the metarule occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent6 -> int1: {B};"
] |
the adoxography happens.
|
{C}
|
[] | 9 | 2 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the adoxography does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the refrigerating monomer happens. sent2: the metarule happens if the adscriptness happens. sent3: that the Kafkaesqueness but not the two-hitter happens is wrong if the skeet happens. sent4: if the opposing demonetization occurs that the opposing drugget happens hold. sent5: that the opposing applicator happens leads to that the opposing inelasticity does not occur. sent6: the adscriptness occurs. sent7: if that the catadromousness does not occur and the haploid happens is not true then the metarule does not occur. sent8: the opposing demonetization happens if the fact that the Kafkaesqueness but not the two-hitter happens is wrong. sent9: that the catadromousness does not occur and the haploidness happens is incorrect if the opposing demonetization happens. sent10: the metarule does not occur if that both the haploidness and the non-catadromousness happens is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent6 -> int1: the metarule occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Chuvash deepens and is not open-hearth.
|
({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})
|
sent1: something does not deepen if it does oppose entreaty and/or it does not deepen. sent2: the Chuvash deepens and is not open-hearth if the accompaniment is not open-hearth. sent3: the carafe is a kind of open-hearth thing that does not mince if it does well. sent4: the fact that either something opposes entreaty or it does not deepen or both is right if it is a month. sent5: the carafe is a well that does refrigerate gristmill. sent6: the accompaniment is a kind of a month. sent7: The entreaty opposes accompaniment. sent8: if something is a kind of a month that does oppose entreaty then it is not open-hearth. sent9: the accompaniment opposes entreaty.
|
sent1: (x): ({B}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{D}x sent2: ¬{C}{a} -> ({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent3: {F}{eq} -> ({C}{eq} & ¬{E}{eq}) sent4: (x): {A}x -> ({B}x v ¬{D}x) sent5: ({F}{eq} & {G}{eq}) sent6: {A}{a} sent7: {AA}{aa} sent8: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent9: {B}{a}
|
[
"sent6 & sent9 -> int1: the accompaniment is a kind of a month and it opposes entreaty.; sent8 -> int2: the accompaniment is not open-hearth if it is a kind of a month that opposes entreaty.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the accompaniment is not open-hearth.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent9 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent8 -> int2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{a}; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the carafe does not deepen.
|
¬{D}{eq}
|
[
"sent1 -> int4: if the carafe does oppose entreaty and/or does not deepen it does not deepen.; sent4 -> int5: the carafe does oppose entreaty and/or it does not deepen if it is a month.; sent5 -> int6: the carafe is a well.; sent3 & int6 -> int7: the carafe is not non-open-hearth but it does not mince.; int7 -> int8: that the carafe is open-hearth is not false.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Chuvash deepens and is not open-hearth. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not deepen if it does oppose entreaty and/or it does not deepen. sent2: the Chuvash deepens and is not open-hearth if the accompaniment is not open-hearth. sent3: the carafe is a kind of open-hearth thing that does not mince if it does well. sent4: the fact that either something opposes entreaty or it does not deepen or both is right if it is a month. sent5: the carafe is a well that does refrigerate gristmill. sent6: the accompaniment is a kind of a month. sent7: The entreaty opposes accompaniment. sent8: if something is a kind of a month that does oppose entreaty then it is not open-hearth. sent9: the accompaniment opposes entreaty. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent9 -> int1: the accompaniment is a kind of a month and it opposes entreaty.; sent8 -> int2: the accompaniment is not open-hearth if it is a kind of a month that opposes entreaty.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the accompaniment is not open-hearth.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does refrigerate Synge and is not acetylic it is not a Blantyre.
|
(Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it muffs madnep and it is umbellate it does not oppose nonmember. sent2: if the loader does refrigerate Synge but it does not oppose riposte then it is Sadducean. sent3: if the loader does refrigerate Synge and is not acetylic it is not a kind of a Blantyre.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({CC}x & {AI}x) -> ¬{O}x sent2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{GL}{aa}) -> {GD}{aa} sent3: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does refrigerate Synge and is not acetylic it is not a Blantyre. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it muffs madnep and it is umbellate it does not oppose nonmember. sent2: if the loader does refrigerate Synge but it does not oppose riposte then it is Sadducean. sent3: if the loader does refrigerate Synge and is not acetylic it is not a kind of a Blantyre. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sower is a kind of a Ionian.
|
{A}{aa}
|
sent1: that the Circassian is not a kind of a tachylite hold if it is not a Victrola and is diagnostic. sent2: the beta-carotene does not muff moneran if it is a Victrola and it is a publication. sent3: if the sower muffs Selenicereus and does oppose Herr then it is not a kind of an evil. sent4: if the sower is a Victrola and deep-sea it is not a kind of a Ionian. sent5: if something that is not a Victrola is a deep-sea it is not a Ionian. sent6: something does not muff Craigie and is polymorphemic if it is a Ionian. sent7: if that something is lossy and it is thermoplastic is correct it does not ligate. sent8: everything is not a Victrola but a deep-sea. sent9: everything is not sensitive. sent10: the sower does not refrigerate leapfrog and is a Laver. sent11: everything is not a kind of a Sparidae. sent12: the icefall is not a Victrola. sent13: if the wildfowl is not angiospermous then that the rape is not barytic and does muff dosed is not right.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{fs} & {HQ}{fs}) -> ¬{GP}{fs} sent2: ({AA}{ds} & {EO}{ds}) -> ¬{K}{ds} sent3: ({DS}{aa} & {F}{aa}) -> ¬{ES}{aa} sent4: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent5: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}x sent6: (x): {A}x -> (¬{DQ}x & {JC}x) sent7: (x): ({GI}x & {DO}x) -> ¬{CL}x sent8: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: (x): ¬{JA}x sent10: (¬{FT}{aa} & {O}{aa}) sent11: (x): ¬{JG}x sent12: ¬{AA}{cp} sent13: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a})
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: the sower is not a Victrola but it is a kind of a deep-sea.; sent5 -> int2: if the sower is both not a Victrola and deep-sea that it is non-Ionian hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent5 -> int2: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the sower is a kind of a Ionian.
|
{A}{aa}
|
[] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the sower is a kind of a Ionian. ; $context$ = sent1: that the Circassian is not a kind of a tachylite hold if it is not a Victrola and is diagnostic. sent2: the beta-carotene does not muff moneran if it is a Victrola and it is a publication. sent3: if the sower muffs Selenicereus and does oppose Herr then it is not a kind of an evil. sent4: if the sower is a Victrola and deep-sea it is not a kind of a Ionian. sent5: if something that is not a Victrola is a deep-sea it is not a Ionian. sent6: something does not muff Craigie and is polymorphemic if it is a Ionian. sent7: if that something is lossy and it is thermoplastic is correct it does not ligate. sent8: everything is not a Victrola but a deep-sea. sent9: everything is not sensitive. sent10: the sower does not refrigerate leapfrog and is a Laver. sent11: everything is not a kind of a Sparidae. sent12: the icefall is not a Victrola. sent13: if the wildfowl is not angiospermous then that the rape is not barytic and does muff dosed is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> int1: the sower is not a Victrola but it is a kind of a deep-sea.; sent5 -> int2: if the sower is both not a Victrola and deep-sea that it is non-Ionian hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if either it is not a leap or it does not oppose eligibility or both it is not circulatory does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: something is circulatory if it does not leap and/or does not oppose eligibility. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a leap and/or it does not oppose eligibility then it is circulatory. sent3: something does not refrigerate thickness if it does not muff Gish or it does not refrigerate Stayman or both. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not oppose eligibility is correct it is not circulatory. sent5: something that does leap and/or does not oppose eligibility is not circulatory. sent6: if the Brummie is not a kind of a leap or it does not oppose eligibility or both it is circulatory. sent7: the Brummie is not circulatory if that it does not oppose eligibility is right. sent8: if something is not a leap and/or does not oppose eligibility then it is not circulatory.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): (¬{DM}x v ¬{EO}x) -> ¬{FT}x sent4: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent5: (x): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent7: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent8: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: if either the Brummie is not a leap or it does not oppose eligibility or both then that it is not circulatory hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it does not muff Gish or it does not refrigerate Stayman or both it does not refrigerate thickness.
|
(Ex): (¬{DM}x v ¬{EO}x) -> ¬{FT}x
|
[
"sent3 -> int2: the energy does not refrigerate thickness if it does not muff Gish or does not refrigerate Stayman or both.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if either it is not a leap or it does not oppose eligibility or both it is not circulatory does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: something is circulatory if it does not leap and/or does not oppose eligibility. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a leap and/or it does not oppose eligibility then it is circulatory. sent3: something does not refrigerate thickness if it does not muff Gish or it does not refrigerate Stayman or both. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it does not oppose eligibility is correct it is not circulatory. sent5: something that does leap and/or does not oppose eligibility is not circulatory. sent6: if the Brummie is not a kind of a leap or it does not oppose eligibility or both it is circulatory. sent7: the Brummie is not circulatory if that it does not oppose eligibility is right. sent8: if something is not a leap and/or does not oppose eligibility then it is not circulatory. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> int1: if either the Brummie is not a leap or it does not oppose eligibility or both then that it is not circulatory hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if it is not indigestible that it is a sequela and/or it labors does not hold is not right.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v {AB}x))
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is not a fandom then it is unchangeable and/or it is autolytic. sent2: if the chamosite is digestible that either it is a sequela or it labors or both is not correct. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not refrigerate chamosite then the fact that the fact that it does crash exbibit and/or it does refrigerate Morley is not wrong is not right. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not publicize that either it is tensional or it is bionics or both is false. sent5: the fact that something either is a kind of a Iberian or is a kind of a hindfoot or both does not hold if it is not unmalicious.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{FB}x -> ({BR}x v {FI}x) sent2: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): ¬{R}x -> ¬({DK}x v {GT}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{CP}x -> ¬({IO}x v {AH}x) sent5: (x): ¬{GS}x -> ¬({BF}x v {FH}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is not unmalicious that it is a Iberian and/or it is a hindfoot does not hold.
|
(Ex): ¬{GS}x -> ¬({BF}x v {FH}x)
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: if the fact that the pseudoscorpion is not unmalicious is not wrong then that it is a Iberian or it is a kind of a hindfoot or both is false.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not indigestible that it is a sequela and/or it labors does not hold is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is not a fandom then it is unchangeable and/or it is autolytic. sent2: if the chamosite is digestible that either it is a sequela or it labors or both is not correct. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not refrigerate chamosite then the fact that the fact that it does crash exbibit and/or it does refrigerate Morley is not wrong is not right. sent4: there exists something such that if it does not publicize that either it is tensional or it is bionics or both is false. sent5: the fact that something either is a kind of a Iberian or is a kind of a hindfoot or both does not hold if it is not unmalicious. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the fossil is autographic is not incorrect.
|
{E}{a}
|
sent1: that the fossil is a tocsin but not galactic does not hold if it is undiplomatic. sent2: if the fact that something is a shift and it does oppose epithet does not hold then it does not oppose epithet. sent3: if the fact that the fact that something does not oppose cumulonimbus and it is not indistinct is not incorrect is wrong then it does not oppose eriogonum. sent4: the fossil does oppose epithet if there is something such that it is undiplomatic. sent5: the fact that the Jacob does not oppose cumulonimbus and it is not indistinct is incorrect if it opposes viscera. sent6: the fossil does oppose epithet if something does shift. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not undiplomatic the fact that the clupeid shifts and it opposes epithet is incorrect. sent8: if something is not animate but it chains then it does oppose viscera. sent9: the fact that the fossil sublimes and is not a Cushitic does not hold. sent10: something is not undiplomatic if that it is not autographic and it is Jewish is incorrect. sent11: if the fact that the matai is not a potluck and does muff coolie is wrong then it does not muff coolie. sent12: if that that the fossil is not undiplomatic and it is not Jewish does not hold is not incorrect it is not autographic. sent13: if the matai does not muff coolie the Jacob does not animate and chains. sent14: if the Jacob does not oppose eriogonum that the fossil is not autographic but it is Jewish is not right. sent15: the fact that the fossil is non-undiplomatic thing that is not Jewish is not correct if it does oppose epithet. sent16: there is something such that it shifts.
|
sent1: {C}{a} -> ¬({IT}{a} & ¬{BB}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent4: (x): {C}x -> {B}{a} sent5: {I}{b} -> ¬(¬{H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) sent6: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}{ht} & {B}{ht}) sent8: (x): (¬{K}x & {J}x) -> {I}x sent9: ¬({HM}{a} & ¬{FU}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent11: ¬(¬{M}{c} & {L}{c}) -> ¬{L}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent13: ¬{L}{c} -> (¬{K}{b} & {J}{b}) sent14: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬(¬{E}{a} & {D}{a}) sent15: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent16: (Ex): {A}x
|
[
"sent16 & sent6 -> int1: that the fossil opposes epithet hold.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: that the fossil is not undiplomatic but non-Jewish does not hold.; int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 & sent6 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent15 -> int2: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}); int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the clupeid does not oppose epithet.
|
¬{B}{ht}
|
[
"sent2 -> int3: if that that the clupeid is a shift and it opposes epithet is true does not hold it does not opposes epithet.; sent10 -> int4: the fact that that the fossil is not undiplomatic is not wrong if the fact that the fossil is non-autographic thing that is Jewish is false is correct.; sent3 -> int5: if the fact that the Jacob does not oppose cumulonimbus and it is not indistinct is false then it does not oppose eriogonum.; sent8 -> int6: the Jacob opposes viscera if it is inanimate and it is a chain.;"
] | 10 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the fossil is autographic is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the fossil is a tocsin but not galactic does not hold if it is undiplomatic. sent2: if the fact that something is a shift and it does oppose epithet does not hold then it does not oppose epithet. sent3: if the fact that the fact that something does not oppose cumulonimbus and it is not indistinct is not incorrect is wrong then it does not oppose eriogonum. sent4: the fossil does oppose epithet if there is something such that it is undiplomatic. sent5: the fact that the Jacob does not oppose cumulonimbus and it is not indistinct is incorrect if it opposes viscera. sent6: the fossil does oppose epithet if something does shift. sent7: if there exists something such that it is not undiplomatic the fact that the clupeid shifts and it opposes epithet is incorrect. sent8: if something is not animate but it chains then it does oppose viscera. sent9: the fact that the fossil sublimes and is not a Cushitic does not hold. sent10: something is not undiplomatic if that it is not autographic and it is Jewish is incorrect. sent11: if the fact that the matai is not a potluck and does muff coolie is wrong then it does not muff coolie. sent12: if that that the fossil is not undiplomatic and it is not Jewish does not hold is not incorrect it is not autographic. sent13: if the matai does not muff coolie the Jacob does not animate and chains. sent14: if the Jacob does not oppose eriogonum that the fossil is not autographic but it is Jewish is not right. sent15: the fact that the fossil is non-undiplomatic thing that is not Jewish is not correct if it does oppose epithet. sent16: there is something such that it shifts. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 & sent6 -> int1: that the fossil opposes epithet hold.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: that the fossil is not undiplomatic but non-Jewish does not hold.; int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the peppermint is a kind of an hours.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: there exists something such that that it does not muff emmenagogue and does refrigerate brickkiln is not correct. sent2: if the peppermint is not a Colossian then the primaquine is an hours. sent3: if something is a kind of a Colossian it is an hours. sent4: the primaquine opposes neurectomy. sent5: the primaquine is not a kind of a Colossian. sent6: that the flue is not a kind of an hours is right. sent7: the primaquine is an hours. sent8: if the peppermint is a Colossian it is a cocksucker. sent9: the primaquine is a cocksucker. sent10: the aftershaft is a cocksucker. sent11: the peppermint does meow. sent12: the philomath is not a Colossian. sent13: if the primaquine is not a Colossian the peppermint is a kind of a cocksucker. sent14: if something is a kind of a cocksucker it is an hours. sent15: something is semi-tuberous if that it does muff emmenagogue hold. sent16: the primaquine is a kind of an hours if it is stainable. sent17: the fact that the buspirone is a cocksucker is not wrong. sent18: the escolar is not a kind of a Colossian.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) sent2: ¬{A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent3: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent4: {EH}{a} sent5: ¬{A}{a} sent6: ¬{C}{ck} sent7: {C}{a} sent8: {A}{b} -> {B}{b} sent9: {B}{a} sent10: {B}{go} sent11: {GI}{b} sent12: ¬{A}{ct} sent13: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent14: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent15: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent16: {IB}{a} -> {C}{a} sent17: {B}{gk} sent18: ¬{A}{hm}
|
[
"sent13 & sent5 -> int1: the peppermint is a cocksucker.; sent14 -> int2: if the peppermint is a kind of a cocksucker the fact that it is an hours hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent14 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {C}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the peppermint is not an hours.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent15 -> int3: the Salvadoran is semi-tuberous if it does muff emmenagogue.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the peppermint is a kind of an hours. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that that it does not muff emmenagogue and does refrigerate brickkiln is not correct. sent2: if the peppermint is not a Colossian then the primaquine is an hours. sent3: if something is a kind of a Colossian it is an hours. sent4: the primaquine opposes neurectomy. sent5: the primaquine is not a kind of a Colossian. sent6: that the flue is not a kind of an hours is right. sent7: the primaquine is an hours. sent8: if the peppermint is a Colossian it is a cocksucker. sent9: the primaquine is a cocksucker. sent10: the aftershaft is a cocksucker. sent11: the peppermint does meow. sent12: the philomath is not a Colossian. sent13: if the primaquine is not a Colossian the peppermint is a kind of a cocksucker. sent14: if something is a kind of a cocksucker it is an hours. sent15: something is semi-tuberous if that it does muff emmenagogue hold. sent16: the primaquine is a kind of an hours if it is stainable. sent17: the fact that the buspirone is a cocksucker is not wrong. sent18: the escolar is not a kind of a Colossian. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 & sent5 -> int1: the peppermint is a cocksucker.; sent14 -> int2: if the peppermint is a kind of a cocksucker the fact that it is an hours hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if that it is a kind of an underscore and it is a kind of a dare does not hold then it is not angiomatous is true.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: if the roundel is a ranker and it is angiomatous it is not associative. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a dare then it is not angiomatous. sent3: there is something such that if it is not herbivorous it does not regurgitate. sent4: there is something such that if it is an underscore and it is a dare then it is not angiomatous. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an underscore then the fact that it is not angiomatous is right. sent6: something is not a taipan if it is a kind of a strafer and is liturgical. sent7: if something does oppose Savitar and it is a reallocation then it is not an elective. sent8: if something is non-extracellular then it does not refrigerate insectivore. sent9: there is something such that if it is not blastomeric then it is not a waver. sent10: something does refrigerate twofer if that it is indestructible and muffs Clichy is not true. sent11: if the fact that something does underscore and is a dare is not right it is not angiomatous. sent12: something is not inculpatory if that it is gustatory and it is unsatisfactory does not hold. sent13: something is not angiomatous if it underscores and is a dare.
|
sent1: ({IM}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{P}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: (Ex): ¬{DS}x -> ¬{GS}x sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent6: (x): ({HD}x & {IS}x) -> ¬{CT}x sent7: (x): ({ET}x & {DH}x) -> ¬{CA}x sent8: (x): ¬{EC}x -> ¬{JH}x sent9: (Ex): ¬{HL}x -> ¬{DQ}x sent10: (x): ¬({CP}x & {BG}x) -> {IB}x sent11: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent12: (x): ¬({EM}x & {AO}x) -> ¬{BC}x sent13: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent11 -> int1: the roundel is not angiomatous if the fact that it is an underscore and it is a dare is not correct.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if that it is a kind of an underscore and it is a kind of a dare does not hold then it is not angiomatous is true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the roundel is a ranker and it is angiomatous it is not associative. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a dare then it is not angiomatous. sent3: there is something such that if it is not herbivorous it does not regurgitate. sent4: there is something such that if it is an underscore and it is a dare then it is not angiomatous. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an underscore then the fact that it is not angiomatous is right. sent6: something is not a taipan if it is a kind of a strafer and is liturgical. sent7: if something does oppose Savitar and it is a reallocation then it is not an elective. sent8: if something is non-extracellular then it does not refrigerate insectivore. sent9: there is something such that if it is not blastomeric then it is not a waver. sent10: something does refrigerate twofer if that it is indestructible and muffs Clichy is not true. sent11: if the fact that something does underscore and is a dare is not right it is not angiomatous. sent12: something is not inculpatory if that it is gustatory and it is unsatisfactory does not hold. sent13: something is not angiomatous if it underscores and is a dare. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 -> int1: the roundel is not angiomatous if the fact that it is an underscore and it is a dare is not correct.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the visionary does not refrigerate dacoity.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: the capybara is not a personality. sent2: if something that is not a kind of a personality is not Fabian then it does not refrigerate dacoity. sent3: if that the deerhound refrigerates dacoity but it is not a Fabian does not hold then the felloe is not Fabian. sent4: the visionary is not a personality and not Fabian if there exists something such that it is not cytoplastic.
|
sent1: ¬{AA}{jf} sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{ie} sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: if the visionary is not a personality and not Fabian it does not refrigerate dacoity.;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa};"
] |
the felloe is not a Fabian.
|
¬{AB}{ie}
|
[] | 6 | 2 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the visionary does not refrigerate dacoity. ; $context$ = sent1: the capybara is not a personality. sent2: if something that is not a kind of a personality is not Fabian then it does not refrigerate dacoity. sent3: if that the deerhound refrigerates dacoity but it is not a Fabian does not hold then the felloe is not Fabian. sent4: the visionary is not a personality and not Fabian if there exists something such that it is not cytoplastic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: if the visionary is not a personality and not Fabian it does not refrigerate dacoity.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the checkpoint does not muff continuo.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: the NAD is not a kind of a playschool. sent2: something does not muff continuo if that it is not a playschool is true. sent3: the bourguignon is an endorphin. sent4: the checkpoint is not a kind of a playschool if the bourguignon is an endorphin. sent5: something is not a bolster if it is not a kind of a playschool.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{n} sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent3: {A}{a} sent4: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{DA}x
|
[
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the checkpoint is not a kind of a playschool.; sent2 -> int2: if the checkpoint is not a playschool it does not muff continuo.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent2 -> int2: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{C}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the synergism is not a playschool then that it is not a bolster is true.
|
¬{B}{gm} -> ¬{DA}{gm}
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the checkpoint does not muff continuo. ; $context$ = sent1: the NAD is not a kind of a playschool. sent2: something does not muff continuo if that it is not a playschool is true. sent3: the bourguignon is an endorphin. sent4: the checkpoint is not a kind of a playschool if the bourguignon is an endorphin. sent5: something is not a bolster if it is not a kind of a playschool. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the checkpoint is not a kind of a playschool.; sent2 -> int2: if the checkpoint is not a playschool it does not muff continuo.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the seeping occurs is not wrong.
|
{E}
|
sent1: the thoracotomy and the shoring occurs. sent2: the muffing memoir occurs. sent3: the Chaldean happens. sent4: that the non-taxableness and the American occurs does not hold. sent5: if the impartialness happens then that the Romany and the opposing fussiness occurs does not hold. sent6: if the fact that the Romany does not occur but the opposing fussiness occurs is incorrect then the seeping occurs. sent7: both the impartialness and the euphonicness occurs. sent8: the monoeciousness and the opposing jack-in-the-box occurs. sent9: the abstaining occurs. sent10: if the fact that the impartialness does not occur and/or the euphonicness occurs does not hold the seeping does not occur.
|
sent1: ({II} & {ID}) sent2: {CR} sent3: {GN} sent4: ¬(¬{AG} & {AF}) sent5: {A} -> ¬({D} & {C}) sent6: ¬(¬{D} & {C}) -> {E} sent7: ({A} & {B}) sent8: ({HF} & {AD}) sent9: {EA} sent10: ¬(¬{A} v {B}) -> ¬{E}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the impartialness occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: {A};"
] |
the seeping does not occur.
|
¬{E}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the seeping occurs is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the thoracotomy and the shoring occurs. sent2: the muffing memoir occurs. sent3: the Chaldean happens. sent4: that the non-taxableness and the American occurs does not hold. sent5: if the impartialness happens then that the Romany and the opposing fussiness occurs does not hold. sent6: if the fact that the Romany does not occur but the opposing fussiness occurs is incorrect then the seeping occurs. sent7: both the impartialness and the euphonicness occurs. sent8: the monoeciousness and the opposing jack-in-the-box occurs. sent9: the abstaining occurs. sent10: if the fact that the impartialness does not occur and/or the euphonicness occurs does not hold the seeping does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: the impartialness occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the pulpwood is unhealthy and disciplinary does not hold.
|
¬({A}{b} & {C}{b})
|
sent1: the pulpwood is not cataclinal. sent2: if that the lammergeier is unhealthy but it is not disciplinary is wrong then the pulpwood does not philander. sent3: the fact that if the lammergeier is not unhealthy then that the pulpwood is unhealthy and disciplinary is false is not false. sent4: if something is not non-Aegean it is unhealthy. sent5: the lammergeier is not unhealthy if the nightwear is cataclinal. sent6: if that the nightwear philanders but it is not cataclinal is wrong then the lammergeier is not unhealthy. sent7: if the fact that the pulpwood is cataclinal and is healthy is false the nightwear is not disciplinary.
|
sent1: ¬{AB}{b} sent2: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent4: (x): {D}x -> {A}x sent5: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬({AB}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{aa}
|
[] |
[] |
the pulpwood is a kind of unhealthy thing that is disciplinary.
|
({A}{b} & {C}{b})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the pulpwood is a Aegean it is unhealthy.;"
] | 4 | 3 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the pulpwood is unhealthy and disciplinary does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the pulpwood is not cataclinal. sent2: if that the lammergeier is unhealthy but it is not disciplinary is wrong then the pulpwood does not philander. sent3: the fact that if the lammergeier is not unhealthy then that the pulpwood is unhealthy and disciplinary is false is not false. sent4: if something is not non-Aegean it is unhealthy. sent5: the lammergeier is not unhealthy if the nightwear is cataclinal. sent6: if that the nightwear philanders but it is not cataclinal is wrong then the lammergeier is not unhealthy. sent7: if the fact that the pulpwood is cataclinal and is healthy is false the nightwear is not disciplinary. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the beetroot does oppose pretermission.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: the beetroot opposes effectiveness. sent2: the shrapnel does oppose pretermission. sent3: something is both not acaulescent and a rumble if it is a liger. sent4: if something does oppose effectiveness it is a kind of a bust-up. sent5: something is nonrepetitive if the fact that it opposes effectiveness is true. sent6: the derelict is not a kind of a bust-up if the bookbinder is not acaulescent but it is a kind of a rumble. sent7: the beetroot worsts. sent8: The effectiveness opposes beetroot.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} sent2: {B}{il} sent3: (x): {F}x -> (¬{D}x & {E}x) sent4: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent5: (x): {A}x -> {DN}x sent6: (¬{D}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent7: {FU}{aa} sent8: {AA}{ab}
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if that the beetroot does oppose effectiveness hold then it is a bust-up.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the beetroot is a bust-up.;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; int1 & sent1 -> int2: {C}{aa};"
] |
the fact that the fiance is nonrepetitive is not incorrect if it does oppose effectiveness.
|
{A}{eg} -> {DN}{eg}
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the beetroot does oppose pretermission. ; $context$ = sent1: the beetroot opposes effectiveness. sent2: the shrapnel does oppose pretermission. sent3: something is both not acaulescent and a rumble if it is a liger. sent4: if something does oppose effectiveness it is a kind of a bust-up. sent5: something is nonrepetitive if the fact that it opposes effectiveness is true. sent6: the derelict is not a kind of a bust-up if the bookbinder is not acaulescent but it is a kind of a rumble. sent7: the beetroot worsts. sent8: The effectiveness opposes beetroot. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: if that the beetroot does oppose effectiveness hold then it is a bust-up.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the beetroot is a bust-up.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the excavation is intramolecular but it is not a hue is not right.
|
¬({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b})
|
sent1: the excavation is not non-intramolecular. sent2: the fact that the Chuvash is the hue if the Chuvash is a jazz is correct. sent3: if the Chuvash hues the excavation is intramolecular thing that does not hues. sent4: the fact that the makeweight does plume and it is a kind of a jazz is wrong if it is not a Justice. sent5: everything is not a Justice. sent6: the fact that the marquetry is not a jazz is not incorrect if there is something such that the fact that it plumes and does jazz is not correct. sent7: the bib is a quotability and is not a kind of a hue. sent8: the Chuvash does jazz. sent9: the excavation is subartesian if it is unsent.
|
sent1: {C}{b} sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent3: {B}{a} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent4: ¬{D}{d} -> ¬({E}{d} & {A}{d}) sent5: (x): ¬{D}x sent6: (x): ¬({E}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}{c} sent7: ({HL}{ec} & ¬{B}{ec}) sent8: {A}{a} sent9: {DF}{b} -> {BT}{b}
|
[
"sent2 & sent8 -> int1: the Chuvash does hue.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent8 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the excavation is a kind of intramolecular thing that is not a hue is not correct.
|
¬({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b})
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: the makeweight is not a kind of a Justice.; sent4 & int2 -> int3: that the makeweight plumes and it jazzes is wrong.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that that it plumes and jazzes is not true.; int4 & sent6 -> int5: the marquetry does not jazz.; int5 -> int6: something does not jazz.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the excavation is intramolecular but it is not a hue is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the excavation is not non-intramolecular. sent2: the fact that the Chuvash is the hue if the Chuvash is a jazz is correct. sent3: if the Chuvash hues the excavation is intramolecular thing that does not hues. sent4: the fact that the makeweight does plume and it is a kind of a jazz is wrong if it is not a Justice. sent5: everything is not a Justice. sent6: the fact that the marquetry is not a jazz is not incorrect if there is something such that the fact that it plumes and does jazz is not correct. sent7: the bib is a quotability and is not a kind of a hue. sent8: the Chuvash does jazz. sent9: the excavation is subartesian if it is unsent. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent8 -> int1: the Chuvash does hue.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the enforceableness and the paranasalness happens.
|
({B} & {C})
|
sent1: the wariness happens. sent2: the telemark does not occur. sent3: that the wariness and the paranasalness happens is brought about by that the muffing moneran does not occur. sent4: the muffing moneran does not occur. sent5: if the paranasalness does not occur both the muffing gourmandism and the enforceableness happens. sent6: if the curbing does not occur and the transposition does not occur the enforceableness happens. sent7: the curb does not occur and the transposition does not occur if the pant does not occur.
|
sent1: {D} sent2: ¬{ER} sent3: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) sent4: ¬{E} sent5: ¬{C} -> ({CH} & {B}) sent6: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent7: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB})
|
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the wariness happens and the paranasalness occurs.; int1 -> int2: the paranasalness happens.;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: ({D} & {C}); int1 -> int2: {C};"
] |
the fact that the enforceableness occurs and the paranasalness occurs is incorrect.
|
¬({B} & {C})
|
[
" -> hypothesis;"
] | 0 | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the enforceableness and the paranasalness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the wariness happens. sent2: the telemark does not occur. sent3: that the wariness and the paranasalness happens is brought about by that the muffing moneran does not occur. sent4: the muffing moneran does not occur. sent5: if the paranasalness does not occur both the muffing gourmandism and the enforceableness happens. sent6: if the curbing does not occur and the transposition does not occur the enforceableness happens. sent7: the curb does not occur and the transposition does not occur if the pant does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the wariness happens and the paranasalness occurs.; int1 -> int2: the paranasalness happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the Galilean muffs bastardy and it is not non-derivational is wrong.
|
¬({A}{b} & {C}{b})
|
sent1: the Galilean muffs bastardy if the icefall is zygomatic. sent2: the tubule does muff bastardy if there is something such that that it is non-zygomatic or it is not derivational or both is incorrect. sent3: the icefall is zygomatic if the fact that it is either a future or not a Florence or both does not hold. sent4: the Galilean is derivational. sent5: that either something is a purine or it does not muff Emmanthe or both is not correct if it does muff bastardy. sent6: if the icefall is not a kind of a skier it is a kind of non-causative a watercraft. sent7: that that something is not zygomatic and/or is not derivational is true does not hold if it dislodges. sent8: the fact that something does muff bastardy and it is derivational is incorrect if the fact that it is not non-zygomatic does not hold. sent9: if a non-causative thing is a watercraft it does not muff Empetrum. sent10: if the icefall does not muff Empetrum then it does not refrigerate profanation and dislodges. sent11: if the fact that something does not dislodge and it does not refrigerate profanation does not hold then it is not zygomatic. sent12: the fact that either the icefall is a kind of a future or it is not a Florence or both is false. sent13: the fact that something does not dislodge and does not refrigerate profanation is not right if the fact that it does not muff Empetrum hold.
|
sent1: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) -> {A}{au} sent3: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent4: {C}{b} sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬({EP}x v ¬{FI}x) sent6: ¬{I}{a} -> (¬{H}{a} & {G}{a}) sent7: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) sent8: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent9: (x): (¬{H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent10: ¬{F}{a} -> (¬{E}{a} & {D}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{B}x sent12: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent13: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x)
|
[
"sent3 & sent12 -> int1: the icefall is zygomatic.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the Galilean does muff bastardy.; int2 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent12 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent1 -> int2: {A}{b}; int2 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the tubule is a purine and/or it does not muff Emmanthe is not right.
|
¬({EP}{au} v ¬{FI}{au})
|
[
"sent5 -> int3: the fact that the tubule either is a purine or does not muff Emmanthe or both is false if it does muff bastardy.; sent7 -> int4: that either the icefall is not zygomatic or it is not derivational or both is incorrect if it does dislodge.; sent9 -> int5: the icefall does not muff Empetrum if it is a kind of non-causative thing that is a watercraft.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the Galilean muffs bastardy and it is not non-derivational is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the Galilean muffs bastardy if the icefall is zygomatic. sent2: the tubule does muff bastardy if there is something such that that it is non-zygomatic or it is not derivational or both is incorrect. sent3: the icefall is zygomatic if the fact that it is either a future or not a Florence or both does not hold. sent4: the Galilean is derivational. sent5: that either something is a purine or it does not muff Emmanthe or both is not correct if it does muff bastardy. sent6: if the icefall is not a kind of a skier it is a kind of non-causative a watercraft. sent7: that that something is not zygomatic and/or is not derivational is true does not hold if it dislodges. sent8: the fact that something does muff bastardy and it is derivational is incorrect if the fact that it is not non-zygomatic does not hold. sent9: if a non-causative thing is a watercraft it does not muff Empetrum. sent10: if the icefall does not muff Empetrum then it does not refrigerate profanation and dislodges. sent11: if the fact that something does not dislodge and it does not refrigerate profanation does not hold then it is not zygomatic. sent12: the fact that either the icefall is a kind of a future or it is not a Florence or both is false. sent13: the fact that something does not dislodge and does not refrigerate profanation is not right if the fact that it does not muff Empetrum hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent12 -> int1: the icefall is zygomatic.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the Galilean does muff bastardy.; int2 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the linin is not a kind of a callus if the lessor is both not esoteric and not apocynaceous is not right.
|
¬((¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a})
|
sent1: the linin does callus if the lessor is not esoteric and it is not apocynaceous. sent2: the fact that the lessor is not a callus is not incorrect if the linin is non-apocynaceous and not esoteric. sent3: if the linin is non-apocynaceous and non-esoteric then the fact that the lessor calluses hold. sent4: if something that is not esoteric is not apocynaceous the linin does not callus. sent5: the lessor is not a callus if the linin is apocynaceous and is not esoteric. sent6: if something that is not a callus is apocynaceous the lessor is not esoteric. sent7: if the lessor is not apocynaceous and it is not a kind of a callus the linin is not esoteric. sent8: the fact that something does not callus is not incorrect. sent9: something is not apocynaceous. sent10: if the linin is not esoteric and it is not apocynaceous the lessor does callus.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {A}{a} sent2: (¬{AB}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent3: (¬{AB}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) -> {A}{aa} sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent5: ({AB}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent6: (x): (¬{A}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent7: (¬{AB}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{a} sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent9: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent10: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {A}{aa}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lessor is not esoteric and is not apocynaceous.; assump1 -> int1: there is something such that it is both not esoteric and not apocynaceous.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the linin is not a callus.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); assump1 -> int1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent4 -> int2: ¬{A}{a}; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the linin is not a kind of a callus if the lessor is both not esoteric and not apocynaceous is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the linin does callus if the lessor is not esoteric and it is not apocynaceous. sent2: the fact that the lessor is not a callus is not incorrect if the linin is non-apocynaceous and not esoteric. sent3: if the linin is non-apocynaceous and non-esoteric then the fact that the lessor calluses hold. sent4: if something that is not esoteric is not apocynaceous the linin does not callus. sent5: the lessor is not a callus if the linin is apocynaceous and is not esoteric. sent6: if something that is not a callus is apocynaceous the lessor is not esoteric. sent7: if the lessor is not apocynaceous and it is not a kind of a callus the linin is not esoteric. sent8: the fact that something does not callus is not incorrect. sent9: something is not apocynaceous. sent10: if the linin is not esoteric and it is not apocynaceous the lessor does callus. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lessor is not esoteric and is not apocynaceous.; assump1 -> int1: there is something such that it is both not esoteric and not apocynaceous.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the linin is not a callus.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the laureate is both digestible and a topography.
|
({C}{a} & {D}{a})
|
sent1: the fact that something is a snakewood and is digestible is incorrect if it is not climactic. sent2: the laureate is climactic. sent3: there exists something such that it is both not Attic and not corneal. sent4: that something is not a chachka and it is not climactic is incorrect if it does not muff Cancridae. sent5: if there is something such that that it is not a chachka and is not climactic does not hold then the pointsman is not a snakewood. sent6: the laureate is a topography if it does not muff Cancridae. sent7: the laureate is a topography if the fact that it is not a chachka and it does muff Cancridae is incorrect. sent8: if the laureate is not a snakewood but climactic then it is not indigestible. sent9: if there exists something such that it is a chachka that the pointsman is not climactic is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that the laureate is not a chachka and does muff Cancridae is false. sent11: the coloring is not a boat if there is something such that it is not a Attic and it is not corneal. sent12: the cardhouse is both uninformative and lymphatic if something is not a kind of a boat. sent13: if there exists something such that it is not a snakewood then the fact that the laureate is not a topography and is a proctoplasty is not correct. sent14: the cardhouse does not muff Cancridae but it is a chachka. sent15: if that something is both uninformative and not non-lymphatic hold then it does not muff Cancridae. sent16: the laureate is not a snakewood.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent2: {B}{a} sent3: (Ex): (¬{J}x & ¬{K}x) sent4: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{B}x) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent6: ¬{F}{a} -> {D}{a} sent7: ¬(¬{E}{a} & {F}{a}) -> {D}{a} sent8: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent9: (x): {E}x -> ¬{B}{b} sent10: ¬(¬{E}{a} & {F}{a}) sent11: (x): (¬{J}x & ¬{K}x) -> ¬{I}{d} sent12: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({H}{c} & {G}{c}) sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {EO}{a}) sent14: (¬{F}{c} & {E}{c}) sent15: (x): ({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent16: ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent16 & sent2 -> int1: that the laureate is not a kind of a snakewood but it is climactic is not incorrect.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the laureate is digestible.; sent7 & sent10 -> int3: the laureate is a topography.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 & sent2 -> int1: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 & sent8 -> int2: {C}{a}; sent7 & sent10 -> int3: {D}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the laureate is not a topography but it is a proctoplasty is not right.
|
¬(¬{D}{a} & {EO}{a})
|
[
"sent1 -> int4: the fact that the pointsman is a snakewood and it is digestible is false if it is not climactic.; sent14 -> int5: the cardhouse is a chachka.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that it is a chachka.; int6 & sent9 -> int7: the pointsman is not climactic.; int4 & int7 -> int8: that the pointsman is a kind of a snakewood that is digestible does not hold.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the laureate is both digestible and a topography. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is a snakewood and is digestible is incorrect if it is not climactic. sent2: the laureate is climactic. sent3: there exists something such that it is both not Attic and not corneal. sent4: that something is not a chachka and it is not climactic is incorrect if it does not muff Cancridae. sent5: if there is something such that that it is not a chachka and is not climactic does not hold then the pointsman is not a snakewood. sent6: the laureate is a topography if it does not muff Cancridae. sent7: the laureate is a topography if the fact that it is not a chachka and it does muff Cancridae is incorrect. sent8: if the laureate is not a snakewood but climactic then it is not indigestible. sent9: if there exists something such that it is a chachka that the pointsman is not climactic is not incorrect. sent10: the fact that the laureate is not a chachka and does muff Cancridae is false. sent11: the coloring is not a boat if there is something such that it is not a Attic and it is not corneal. sent12: the cardhouse is both uninformative and lymphatic if something is not a kind of a boat. sent13: if there exists something such that it is not a snakewood then the fact that the laureate is not a topography and is a proctoplasty is not correct. sent14: the cardhouse does not muff Cancridae but it is a chachka. sent15: if that something is both uninformative and not non-lymphatic hold then it does not muff Cancridae. sent16: the laureate is not a snakewood. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 & sent2 -> int1: that the laureate is not a kind of a snakewood but it is climactic is not incorrect.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the laureate is digestible.; sent7 & sent10 -> int3: the laureate is a topography.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if that it does not simulate and it is moonless is wrong it is not hiplength.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: if the fact that something is not a compromising and is a phonograph does not hold then it does not overheat. sent2: the orogeny is not hiplength if the fact that it simulates and is moonless is wrong. sent3: there exists something such that if that it is not arsenious and it does crash crossjack is false it is not a TSA. sent4: the fact that the orogeny is not hiplength is not false if that it does not simulate and it is moonless is false. sent5: there exists something such that if the fact that it does deaden and is a kind of a handcuff is not right then it is not a hexestrol. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not oppose pemmican it is not a salpinx.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{JF}x & {O}x) -> ¬{HG}x sent2: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: (Ex): ¬(¬{D}x & {JD}x) -> ¬{DD}x sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ¬({DI}x & {GK}x) -> ¬{DJ}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{FF}x -> ¬{FN}x
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the fact that the defoliation is not a compromising but a phonograph is not correct then it does not overheat.
|
¬(¬{JF}{jc} & {O}{jc}) -> ¬{HG}{jc}
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it does not simulate and it is moonless is wrong it is not hiplength. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something is not a compromising and is a phonograph does not hold then it does not overheat. sent2: the orogeny is not hiplength if the fact that it simulates and is moonless is wrong. sent3: there exists something such that if that it is not arsenious and it does crash crossjack is false it is not a TSA. sent4: the fact that the orogeny is not hiplength is not false if that it does not simulate and it is moonless is false. sent5: there exists something such that if the fact that it does deaden and is a kind of a handcuff is not right then it is not a hexestrol. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not oppose pemmican it is not a salpinx. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the scuffer is not a caseworker.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: if the fact that something is invitational a caseworker is wrong then it is not a caseworker. sent2: the incurable does not reject and it is not a hatch. sent3: the scuffer is a kind of a caseworker that is a marksman if the incurable is not invitational. sent4: if the scuffer is a kind of a caseworker that the incurable does reject and is not a kind of a hatch is not true. sent5: the fact that the scuffer is a placer and not a caseworker is not right.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent2: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent3: ¬{C}{b} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent4: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent5: ¬({FT}{a} & ¬{A}{a})
|
[] |
[] |
the Crusader is not a caseworker.
|
¬{A}{df}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the Crusader is not a caseworker if the fact that it is invitational and it is a caseworker is false.;"
] | 4 | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the scuffer is not a caseworker. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something is invitational a caseworker is wrong then it is not a caseworker. sent2: the incurable does not reject and it is not a hatch. sent3: the scuffer is a kind of a caseworker that is a marksman if the incurable is not invitational. sent4: if the scuffer is a kind of a caseworker that the incurable does reject and is not a kind of a hatch is not true. sent5: the fact that the scuffer is a placer and not a caseworker is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the neopallium is a Durante.
|
{E}{b}
|
sent1: the neopallium is a kind of a Durante if the speedometer refrigerates Job. sent2: something refrigerates Job if it is a kind of a Durante. sent3: something is a Bolshevik if it does corrupt. sent4: the neopallium is a defender if the pelycosaur is a kind of a memoir. sent5: the fact that something is not a vervet and is not unmanageable is false if it does not feather. sent6: the bath is a vervet if there is something such that the fact that it is not a vervet and is not unmanageable is not true. sent7: if something is anti-semitic it is a memoir. sent8: something that opposes fireboat does refrigerate Job. sent9: if the fact that something is a kind of a Smith but it does not oppose fireboat is not true it refrigerates Job. sent10: if a defender is not a kind of a Smith then it is not a Durante. sent11: if the speedometer is a Durante then the neopallium is a Smith. sent12: if the fact that the compiler is a Maxwell but it is non-anti-semitic is correct then the pelycosaur is non-anti-semitic. sent13: that the fact that the speedometer is a Smith that does not oppose fireboat is not correct is not false if the fact that something is a defender hold. sent14: that the speedometer is a Smith that does oppose fireboat does not hold if something is a defender. sent15: something is an eyeball if it is a Mycrosporidia. sent16: that the neopallium is a Smith and it is a kind of a Durante is not right. sent17: the eggar does muff schlockmeister if that it is a Smith and is not a defenestration is not true. sent18: if the speedometer is not a Smith the neopallium is not a Smith. sent19: the speedometer is both not a defender and not a Smith if that the pelycosaur opposes fireboat hold. sent20: something is a kind of a defender. sent21: the turtleneck does not feather.
|
sent1: {D}{a} -> {E}{b} sent2: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent3: (x): {HD}x -> {GA}x sent4: {F}{c} -> {A}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{I}x) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{I}x) -> {G}{d} sent7: (x): {H}x -> {F}x sent8: (x): {C}x -> {D}x sent9: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {D}x sent10: (x): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{E}x sent11: {E}{a} -> {B}{b} sent12: ({K}{f} & ¬{H}{f}) -> {H}{c} sent13: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent14: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent15: (x): {GI}x -> {S}x sent16: ¬({B}{b} & {E}{b}) sent17: ¬({B}{ca} & ¬{HM}{ca}) -> {DM}{ca} sent18: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent19: {C}{c} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent20: (Ex): {A}x sent21: ¬{J}{e}
|
[
"sent20 & sent13 -> int1: the fact that the speedometer is a Smith and does not oppose fireboat does not hold.; sent9 -> int2: if the fact that the speedometer is a Smith and does not oppose fireboat is not right it does refrigerate Job.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the speedometer refrigerates Job.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent20 & sent13 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); sent9 -> int2: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {D}{a}; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the neopallium is not a Durante.
|
¬{E}{b}
|
[
"sent10 -> int4: if the neopallium is a kind of a defender but it is not a Smith it is not a Durante.; sent7 -> int5: the pelycosaur is a memoir if it is anti-semitic.; sent5 -> int6: if the fact that the turtleneck is a kind of a feather is not correct then that it is not a vervet but wieldy is false.; int6 & sent21 -> int7: the fact that the turtleneck is not a vervet and not unmanageable is not correct.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that it is both not a vervet and not unmanageable is wrong.; int8 & sent6 -> int9: the bath is a vervet.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that it is a kind of a vervet.;"
] | 10 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the neopallium is a Durante. ; $context$ = sent1: the neopallium is a kind of a Durante if the speedometer refrigerates Job. sent2: something refrigerates Job if it is a kind of a Durante. sent3: something is a Bolshevik if it does corrupt. sent4: the neopallium is a defender if the pelycosaur is a kind of a memoir. sent5: the fact that something is not a vervet and is not unmanageable is false if it does not feather. sent6: the bath is a vervet if there is something such that the fact that it is not a vervet and is not unmanageable is not true. sent7: if something is anti-semitic it is a memoir. sent8: something that opposes fireboat does refrigerate Job. sent9: if the fact that something is a kind of a Smith but it does not oppose fireboat is not true it refrigerates Job. sent10: if a defender is not a kind of a Smith then it is not a Durante. sent11: if the speedometer is a Durante then the neopallium is a Smith. sent12: if the fact that the compiler is a Maxwell but it is non-anti-semitic is correct then the pelycosaur is non-anti-semitic. sent13: that the fact that the speedometer is a Smith that does not oppose fireboat is not correct is not false if the fact that something is a defender hold. sent14: that the speedometer is a Smith that does oppose fireboat does not hold if something is a defender. sent15: something is an eyeball if it is a Mycrosporidia. sent16: that the neopallium is a Smith and it is a kind of a Durante is not right. sent17: the eggar does muff schlockmeister if that it is a Smith and is not a defenestration is not true. sent18: if the speedometer is not a Smith the neopallium is not a Smith. sent19: the speedometer is both not a defender and not a Smith if that the pelycosaur opposes fireboat hold. sent20: something is a kind of a defender. sent21: the turtleneck does not feather. ; $proof$ =
|
sent20 & sent13 -> int1: the fact that the speedometer is a Smith and does not oppose fireboat does not hold.; sent9 -> int2: if the fact that the speedometer is a Smith and does not oppose fireboat is not right it does refrigerate Job.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the speedometer refrigerates Job.; int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the stand-in is not a kind of a staurikosaur.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
sent1: if that either the maiden is not minus or it is a bequest or both is not right the Sculptor is not minus. sent2: something is not centralist if that it does not scintillate candor and it is not ribless is wrong. sent3: that either the rhodochrosite does not sidetrack or it is a kind of a plumb or both is not wrong. sent4: there are non-intrasentential things. sent5: if the chime is not asphaltic it is not a kind of a staurikosaur or is a twenty or both. sent6: if either something is not a kind of a staurikosaur or it is a serine or both then the stand-in is asphaltic. sent7: there exists something such that either it is not a kind of a twenty or it is not non-asphaltic or both. sent8: the latke is a kind of a zoophyte that is a gypsum if that the Sculptor is not minus hold. sent9: something is not a furor but practical if it is not centralist. sent10: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a serine and/or it is a kind of a twenty then the stand-in is a kind of a staurikosaur. sent11: something is not a staurikosaur if the fact that it is hydraulic and it is not asphaltic is not correct. sent12: if the chime is not a furor and is practical then the stand-in is not practical. sent13: the chime is a serine and/or is a twenty. sent14: the chime is not asphaltic. sent15: the fact that the stand-in is not a staurikosaur and/or it is a twenty is true if it is not a serine. sent16: if the chime is not asphaltic then it is not a kind of a serine or is a twenty or both. sent17: the chime is not a twenty or it is a staurikosaur or both. sent18: that something is hydraulic but it is not asphaltic is wrong if the fact that it is not practical hold. sent19: the stand-in is a twenty if there is something such that it does not closet Eurobabble and/or closets chalcocite. sent20: that something does not scintillate candor and is not ribless does not hold if that it is expansive is right. sent21: either something is not a exocrine or it is asphaltic or both if it does not scintillate Lunt. sent22: there is something such that either it is a kind of a twenty or it is a kind of a staurikosaur or both. sent23: the chime is expansive if the latke is a zoophyte.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{L}{e} v {N}{e}) -> ¬{L}{d} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent3: (¬{IM}{hl} v {AT}{hl}) sent4: (Ex): ¬{M}x sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{B}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent6: (x): (¬{B}x v {AA}x) -> {A}{b} sent7: (Ex): (¬{AB}x v {A}x) sent8: ¬{L}{d} -> ({J}{c} & {K}{c}) sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{E}x & {D}x) sent10: (x): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}{b} sent11: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent12: (¬{E}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent13: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent14: ¬{A}{a} sent15: ¬{AA}{b} -> (¬{B}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent16: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent17: (¬{AB}{a} v {B}{a}) sent18: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) sent19: (x): (¬{CF}x v {JI}x) -> {AB}{b} sent20: (x): {I}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{H}x) sent21: (x): ¬{FM}x -> (¬{CH}x v {A}x) sent22: (Ex): ({AB}x v {B}x) sent23: {J}{c} -> {I}{a}
|
[
"sent16 & sent14 -> int1: either the chime is not a serine or it is a twenty or both.; int1 -> int2: something is not a serine and/or is a twenty.; int2 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 & sent14 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x); int2 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the stand-in is not a staurikosaur.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent11 -> int3: the stand-in is not a staurikosaur if the fact that it is hydraulic and is not asphaltic is not correct.; sent18 -> int4: if that the stand-in is not practical is correct that it is both hydraulic and not asphaltic does not hold.; sent9 -> int5: the chime is not a furor but it is practical if it is not centralist.; sent2 -> int6: if the fact that the chime does not scintillate candor and it is not ribless does not hold it is not centralist.; sent20 -> int7: that that the chime does not scintillate candor and it is not ribless is wrong if the chime is expansive is not wrong.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the stand-in is not a kind of a staurikosaur. ; $context$ = sent1: if that either the maiden is not minus or it is a bequest or both is not right the Sculptor is not minus. sent2: something is not centralist if that it does not scintillate candor and it is not ribless is wrong. sent3: that either the rhodochrosite does not sidetrack or it is a kind of a plumb or both is not wrong. sent4: there are non-intrasentential things. sent5: if the chime is not asphaltic it is not a kind of a staurikosaur or is a twenty or both. sent6: if either something is not a kind of a staurikosaur or it is a serine or both then the stand-in is asphaltic. sent7: there exists something such that either it is not a kind of a twenty or it is not non-asphaltic or both. sent8: the latke is a kind of a zoophyte that is a gypsum if that the Sculptor is not minus hold. sent9: something is not a furor but practical if it is not centralist. sent10: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a serine and/or it is a kind of a twenty then the stand-in is a kind of a staurikosaur. sent11: something is not a staurikosaur if the fact that it is hydraulic and it is not asphaltic is not correct. sent12: if the chime is not a furor and is practical then the stand-in is not practical. sent13: the chime is a serine and/or is a twenty. sent14: the chime is not asphaltic. sent15: the fact that the stand-in is not a staurikosaur and/or it is a twenty is true if it is not a serine. sent16: if the chime is not asphaltic then it is not a kind of a serine or is a twenty or both. sent17: the chime is not a twenty or it is a staurikosaur or both. sent18: that something is hydraulic but it is not asphaltic is wrong if the fact that it is not practical hold. sent19: the stand-in is a twenty if there is something such that it does not closet Eurobabble and/or closets chalcocite. sent20: that something does not scintillate candor and is not ribless does not hold if that it is expansive is right. sent21: either something is not a exocrine or it is asphaltic or both if it does not scintillate Lunt. sent22: there is something such that either it is a kind of a twenty or it is a kind of a staurikosaur or both. sent23: the chime is expansive if the latke is a zoophyte. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 & sent14 -> int1: either the chime is not a serine or it is a twenty or both.; int1 -> int2: something is not a serine and/or is a twenty.; int2 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fellow closets coupling.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the fellow is a NSF if the Westernization is a NSF. sent2: the fellow does not closet coupling if it is a kind of a ratiocination and closets campus. sent3: if the Westernization is not a flourish and prizes Brockhouse then it is not a kind of an outline. sent4: if something closets campus then that it is not a ratiocination and it does not closet coupling is not correct. sent5: The campus does closet fellow. sent6: the fellow is a kind of a ratiocination. sent7: if the planking is a ratiocination the fellow is a zidovudine. sent8: the basophil is not an outline. sent9: if the basophil is not an outline that it is not a kind of a NSF and it is conjunctival is false. sent10: the fellow does closet campus. sent11: the Westernization is not a kind of a flourish and prizes Brockhouse. sent12: the K is a Francophobe and it is a ratiocination. sent13: if there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a NSF and it is conjunctival is incorrect then the Westernization is a kind of a NSF.
|
sent1: {EC}{c} -> {EC}{a} sent2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent3: (¬{F}{c} & {G}{c}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent4: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) sent5: {AA}{aa} sent6: {A}{a} sent7: {A}{b} -> {AP}{a} sent8: ¬{E}{e} sent9: ¬{E}{e} -> ¬(¬{EC}{e} & {D}{e}) sent10: {B}{a} sent11: (¬{F}{c} & {G}{c}) sent12: ({CP}{ho} & {A}{ho}) sent13: (x): ¬(¬{EC}x & {D}x) -> {EC}{c}
|
[
"sent6 & sent10 -> int1: the fellow is a ratiocination and it does closet campus.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent10 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fellow is a NSF and it is a zidovudine.
|
({EC}{a} & {AP}{a})
|
[
"sent9 & sent8 -> int2: that the basophil is not a NSF but it is conjunctival is not true.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that that it is not a NSF and not non-conjunctival is false.; int3 & sent13 -> int4: the Westernization is a kind of a NSF.; sent1 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the fellow is a NSF hold.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fellow closets coupling. ; $context$ = sent1: the fellow is a NSF if the Westernization is a NSF. sent2: the fellow does not closet coupling if it is a kind of a ratiocination and closets campus. sent3: if the Westernization is not a flourish and prizes Brockhouse then it is not a kind of an outline. sent4: if something closets campus then that it is not a ratiocination and it does not closet coupling is not correct. sent5: The campus does closet fellow. sent6: the fellow is a kind of a ratiocination. sent7: if the planking is a ratiocination the fellow is a zidovudine. sent8: the basophil is not an outline. sent9: if the basophil is not an outline that it is not a kind of a NSF and it is conjunctival is false. sent10: the fellow does closet campus. sent11: the Westernization is not a kind of a flourish and prizes Brockhouse. sent12: the K is a Francophobe and it is a ratiocination. sent13: if there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a NSF and it is conjunctival is incorrect then the Westernization is a kind of a NSF. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent10 -> int1: the fellow is a ratiocination and it does closet campus.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if that either it deregulates misquotation or it does not ogle or both does not hold then the fact that it is not a kind of a maltose is not incorrect is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if that it is inclement and/or is not an exhibit is false it is not a kind of a quarterfinal. sent2: there is something such that if that it is a polonaise and/or it is not nonexempt is not true then it prizes paleogeology. sent3: if the mother is a ptyalith and/or it is not obligational then it does not deregulate misquotation. sent4: there exists something such that if that it is apocryphal and/or it is not a kind of a puccoon does not hold then it is not a kind of a Pilsner. sent5: there is something such that if that it is an embryo and/or it is not a bee is not right that it prizes tibia is correct. sent6: if that the mother deregulates misquotation and/or it does not ogle is not right then it is not a maltose. sent7: there is something such that if it is unalert or is not a dose or both then it is not a ptyalith.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({IF}x v ¬{G}x) -> ¬{GF}x sent2: (Ex): ¬({AE}x v ¬{HD}x) -> {R}x sent3: ({FN}{aa} v ¬{EE}{aa}) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent4: (Ex): ¬({IP}x v ¬{HS}x) -> ¬{IL}x sent5: (Ex): ¬({FE}x v ¬{AM}x) -> {IA}x sent6: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ({DT}x v ¬{FU}x) -> ¬{FN}x
|
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if that either it deregulates misquotation or it does not ogle or both does not hold then the fact that it is not a kind of a maltose is not incorrect is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if that it is inclement and/or is not an exhibit is false it is not a kind of a quarterfinal. sent2: there is something such that if that it is a polonaise and/or it is not nonexempt is not true then it prizes paleogeology. sent3: if the mother is a ptyalith and/or it is not obligational then it does not deregulate misquotation. sent4: there exists something such that if that it is apocryphal and/or it is not a kind of a puccoon does not hold then it is not a kind of a Pilsner. sent5: there is something such that if that it is an embryo and/or it is not a bee is not right that it prizes tibia is correct. sent6: if that the mother deregulates misquotation and/or it does not ogle is not right then it is not a maltose. sent7: there is something such that if it is unalert or is not a dose or both then it is not a ptyalith. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the glowworm is a kind of an amphibian and it is pyrogenic is false.
|
¬({B}{a} & {A}{a})
|
sent1: the glowworm does microwave. sent2: the glowworm is monometallic. sent3: the glowworm incandesces and is pyrogenic. sent4: the glowworm is an amphibian if it is not a kind of a Latin and it is replaceable. sent5: if something does not incandesce then that it is an amphibian and pyrogenic is not right. sent6: the saturniid does prize Pterospermum and is an amphibian. sent7: the multiplexer is an amphibian and it is a shackle. sent8: the crusher is replaceable. sent9: the glowworm entrenches. sent10: the pisiform is not pyrogenic. sent11: the transactinide is pyrogenic. sent12: the fact that the lagoon is non-pyrogenic thing that is a kind of a Phylloporus is not incorrect. sent13: the glowworm is an amphibian if it is a myth and it is a arytenoid. sent14: that the glowworm is gemmiferous hold. sent15: if the glowworm is a particulate and it does deregulate heliopause then it is fewer. sent16: if the glowworm does not prize Pterospermum but it confines it is pyrogenic. sent17: the glowworm is not calcaneal and does prize rifled. sent18: the down-and-out closets steprelationship and scintillates anthropology. sent19: the glowworm is not a Latin but it is replaceable. sent20: the glowworm is a kind of a spinsterhood and it entrenches.
|
sent1: {BH}{a} sent2: {JE}{a} sent3: ({C}{a} & {A}{a}) sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & {A}x) sent6: ({AI}{dd} & {B}{dd}) sent7: ({B}{gf} & {D}{gf}) sent8: {AB}{id} sent9: {GJ}{a} sent10: ¬{A}{f} sent11: {A}{en} sent12: (¬{A}{ae} & {DR}{ae}) sent13: ({HO}{a} & {CP}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent14: {GT}{a} sent15: ({DL}{a} & {DF}{a}) -> {BB}{a} sent16: (¬{AI}{a} & {K}{a}) -> {A}{a} sent17: (¬{BT}{a} & {FJ}{a}) sent18: ({HS}{cs} & {FN}{cs}) sent19: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent20: ({JD}{a} & {GJ}{a})
|
[
"sent4 & sent19 -> int1: the glowworm is an amphibian.; sent3 -> int2: the glowworm is pyrogenic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent19 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent3 -> int2: {A}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the glowworm is both an amphibian and not non-pyrogenic is false.
|
¬({B}{a} & {A}{a})
|
[
"sent5 -> int3: if the glowworm does not incandesce then the fact that it is a kind of an amphibian and is pyrogenic is false.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the glowworm is a kind of an amphibian and it is pyrogenic is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the glowworm does microwave. sent2: the glowworm is monometallic. sent3: the glowworm incandesces and is pyrogenic. sent4: the glowworm is an amphibian if it is not a kind of a Latin and it is replaceable. sent5: if something does not incandesce then that it is an amphibian and pyrogenic is not right. sent6: the saturniid does prize Pterospermum and is an amphibian. sent7: the multiplexer is an amphibian and it is a shackle. sent8: the crusher is replaceable. sent9: the glowworm entrenches. sent10: the pisiform is not pyrogenic. sent11: the transactinide is pyrogenic. sent12: the fact that the lagoon is non-pyrogenic thing that is a kind of a Phylloporus is not incorrect. sent13: the glowworm is an amphibian if it is a myth and it is a arytenoid. sent14: that the glowworm is gemmiferous hold. sent15: if the glowworm is a particulate and it does deregulate heliopause then it is fewer. sent16: if the glowworm does not prize Pterospermum but it confines it is pyrogenic. sent17: the glowworm is not calcaneal and does prize rifled. sent18: the down-and-out closets steprelationship and scintillates anthropology. sent19: the glowworm is not a Latin but it is replaceable. sent20: the glowworm is a kind of a spinsterhood and it entrenches. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent19 -> int1: the glowworm is an amphibian.; sent3 -> int2: the glowworm is pyrogenic.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the non-Audenesqueness and the detox occurs.
|
(¬{AA} & {AB})
|
sent1: the equalization does not occur. sent2: the squatting does not occur. sent3: the acceptation does not occur but the Crusade occurs. sent4: that the equalization does not occur leads to the non-Audenesqueness. sent5: that the equalization does not occur yields that not the Audenesqueness but the detox happens. sent6: both the non-subsonicness and the prizing Lahore occurs. sent7: the Audenesqueness does not occur. sent8: the procedure does not occur and the match occurs. sent9: if that the equalization occurs is true that both the non-Audenesqueness and the detoxing occurs does not hold. sent10: the documentary does not occur. sent11: the scrunch does not occur. sent12: that the Trojan does not occur yields that not the prizing distressed but the Nauruan occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{A} sent2: ¬{K} sent3: (¬{BM} & {G}) sent4: ¬{A} -> ¬{AA} sent5: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent6: (¬{GT} & {DH}) sent7: ¬{AA} sent8: (¬{BS} & {CN}) sent9: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent10: ¬{IS} sent11: ¬{JG} sent12: ¬{EM} -> (¬{CT} & {CR})
|
[
"sent5 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that both the non-Audenesqueness and the detoxing happens is not right.
|
¬(¬{AA} & {AB})
|
[] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the non-Audenesqueness and the detox occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the equalization does not occur. sent2: the squatting does not occur. sent3: the acceptation does not occur but the Crusade occurs. sent4: that the equalization does not occur leads to the non-Audenesqueness. sent5: that the equalization does not occur yields that not the Audenesqueness but the detox happens. sent6: both the non-subsonicness and the prizing Lahore occurs. sent7: the Audenesqueness does not occur. sent8: the procedure does not occur and the match occurs. sent9: if that the equalization occurs is true that both the non-Audenesqueness and the detoxing occurs does not hold. sent10: the documentary does not occur. sent11: the scrunch does not occur. sent12: that the Trojan does not occur yields that not the prizing distressed but the Nauruan occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the brain closets densitometry then either the cartoon is not a mutagen or it is not bimetallistic or both.
|
{B}{b} -> (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: the brain is not bimetallistic if that the cartoon either is not a mutagen or does not closet densitometry or both is not correct. sent2: if that the brain closets densitometry and/or is not bimetallistic is not right the fact that the cartoon is not a mutagen is not incorrect. sent3: the deliverer does not closet densitometry. sent4: the brain is not bimetallistic. sent5: the brain does not closet Dusicyon or is not fermentable or both. sent6: if that the cartoon is a mutagen or not bimetallistic or both is incorrect the brain does not closet densitometry. sent7: the brain closets densitometry and/or it is not bimetallistic if the cartoon is a mutagen. sent8: the brain does not closet densitometry or it is not bimetallistic or both if the cartoon is a kind of a mutagen. sent9: the brain is not bimetallistic if the fact that the cartoon does not closet densitometry or is a kind of a mutagen or both is not correct. sent10: the cartoon does not closet densitometry if that the brain is either not a mutagen or not bimetallistic or both is incorrect. sent11: if the fact that the cartoon is not a kind of a mutagen and/or it closets densitometry is wrong the brain is not bimetallistic. sent12: if something is a kind of a trapezium then it is not a mutagen. sent13: if the cartoon does closet densitometry then either the brain is not bimetallistic or it is a mutagen or both. sent14: if the brain does closet densitometry then the cartoon is not a kind of a mutagen or it is bimetallistic or both. sent15: that the cartoon does not closet densitometry is right if the brain is not a mutagen and/or it is not bimetallistic. sent16: the cartoon either is not bimetallistic or does not closet densitometry or both if the brain is a kind of a mutagen. sent17: if the fact that the cartoon is a kind of a mutagen or does not closet densitometry or both is not correct then the brain is not bimetallistic. sent18: if the brain is bimetallistic the cartoon does not closet densitometry and/or is not a kind of a mutagen. sent19: if the brain closets densitometry then the cartoon is either a mutagen or not bimetallistic or both. sent20: if that the cartoon is not a mutagen or it is bimetallistic or both is false the brain does not closet densitometry.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent2: ¬({B}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{AA}{a} sent3: ¬{B}{it} sent4: ¬{AB}{b} sent5: (¬{FD}{b} v ¬{JI}{b}) sent6: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: {AA}{a} -> ({B}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent8: {AA}{a} -> (¬{B}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent9: ¬(¬{B}{a} v {AA}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent10: ¬(¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent11: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent12: (x): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent13: {B}{a} -> (¬{AB}{b} v {AA}{b}) sent14: {B}{b} -> (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent15: (¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent16: {AA}{b} -> (¬{AB}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) sent17: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent18: {AB}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} v ¬{AA}{a}) sent19: {B}{b} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent20: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the cartoon is not a mutagen and/or is not bimetallistic is not true.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a});"
] |
the Samson is not a mutagen.
|
¬{AA}{cs}
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: the Samson is not a mutagen if it is a trapezium.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = if the brain closets densitometry then either the cartoon is not a mutagen or it is not bimetallistic or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the brain is not bimetallistic if that the cartoon either is not a mutagen or does not closet densitometry or both is not correct. sent2: if that the brain closets densitometry and/or is not bimetallistic is not right the fact that the cartoon is not a mutagen is not incorrect. sent3: the deliverer does not closet densitometry. sent4: the brain is not bimetallistic. sent5: the brain does not closet Dusicyon or is not fermentable or both. sent6: if that the cartoon is a mutagen or not bimetallistic or both is incorrect the brain does not closet densitometry. sent7: the brain closets densitometry and/or it is not bimetallistic if the cartoon is a mutagen. sent8: the brain does not closet densitometry or it is not bimetallistic or both if the cartoon is a kind of a mutagen. sent9: the brain is not bimetallistic if the fact that the cartoon does not closet densitometry or is a kind of a mutagen or both is not correct. sent10: the cartoon does not closet densitometry if that the brain is either not a mutagen or not bimetallistic or both is incorrect. sent11: if the fact that the cartoon is not a kind of a mutagen and/or it closets densitometry is wrong the brain is not bimetallistic. sent12: if something is a kind of a trapezium then it is not a mutagen. sent13: if the cartoon does closet densitometry then either the brain is not bimetallistic or it is a mutagen or both. sent14: if the brain does closet densitometry then the cartoon is not a kind of a mutagen or it is bimetallistic or both. sent15: that the cartoon does not closet densitometry is right if the brain is not a mutagen and/or it is not bimetallistic. sent16: the cartoon either is not bimetallistic or does not closet densitometry or both if the brain is a kind of a mutagen. sent17: if the fact that the cartoon is a kind of a mutagen or does not closet densitometry or both is not correct then the brain is not bimetallistic. sent18: if the brain is bimetallistic the cartoon does not closet densitometry and/or is not a kind of a mutagen. sent19: if the brain closets densitometry then the cartoon is either a mutagen or not bimetallistic or both. sent20: if that the cartoon is not a mutagen or it is bimetallistic or both is false the brain does not closet densitometry. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the cartoon is not a mutagen and/or is not bimetallistic is not true.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the proactiveness happens and/or the scintillating dried happens.
|
({C} v {A})
|
sent1: not the deregulating stalking-horse but the overthrowing occurs. sent2: the digitigrade occurs. sent3: that the curatorship does not occur and the deregulating pricing occurs is not true. sent4: the illegalness occurs and the scintillating projectile happens. sent5: that the illegalness happens results in that that the departure and the non-tragicness occurs is not wrong. sent6: the whipping does not occur. sent7: the prizing bunch happens and/or the spitball happens. sent8: the prostatectomy happens. sent9: the fact that the prizing Steiner does not occur but the disjunctiveness happens is wrong. sent10: the fact that the scintillating dried does not occur and the bureaucraticness occurs is false. sent11: the non-proactiveness is triggered by the pleochroicness.
|
sent1: (¬{CG} & {GK}) sent2: {DU} sent3: ¬(¬{GG} & {ET}) sent4: ({E} & {F}) sent5: {E} -> ({D} & ¬{DH}) sent6: ¬{GE} sent7: ({HO} v {HN}) sent8: {FL} sent9: ¬(¬{AS} & {GQ}) sent10: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) sent11: {G} -> ¬{C}
|
[] |
[] |
both the non-tragicness and the accreditation happens.
|
(¬{DH} & {AD})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: the illegalness happens.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the departure and the non-tragicness happens.; int2 -> int3: the tragicness does not occur.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the proactiveness happens and/or the scintillating dried happens. ; $context$ = sent1: not the deregulating stalking-horse but the overthrowing occurs. sent2: the digitigrade occurs. sent3: that the curatorship does not occur and the deregulating pricing occurs is not true. sent4: the illegalness occurs and the scintillating projectile happens. sent5: that the illegalness happens results in that that the departure and the non-tragicness occurs is not wrong. sent6: the whipping does not occur. sent7: the prizing bunch happens and/or the spitball happens. sent8: the prostatectomy happens. sent9: the fact that the prizing Steiner does not occur but the disjunctiveness happens is wrong. sent10: the fact that the scintillating dried does not occur and the bureaucraticness occurs is false. sent11: the non-proactiveness is triggered by the pleochroicness. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if it is dissuasive then that it is not a kind of a trombiculid and is not a misogynist is false is not correct.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: if the dodder is dissuasive the fact that the fact that it is a trombiculid that is not a misogynist is not incorrect is not right. sent2: that the dodder is not a kind of a trombiculid and it is not a misogynist does not hold if it is dissuasive. sent3: the fact that something is not a misogynist and it is not a house is incorrect if it is not non-postnatal. sent4: if the ha-ha is a growling that it does not prize deceptiveness and is not a trombiculid is wrong.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: (x): {FT}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{GT}x) sent4: {JK}{gs} -> ¬(¬{CH}{gs} & ¬{AA}{gs})
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the dodder is not a kind of a misogynist and is not a house is wrong if it is postnatal.
|
{FT}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & ¬{GT}{aa})
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is dissuasive then that it is not a kind of a trombiculid and is not a misogynist is false is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the dodder is dissuasive the fact that the fact that it is a trombiculid that is not a misogynist is not incorrect is not right. sent2: that the dodder is not a kind of a trombiculid and it is not a misogynist does not hold if it is dissuasive. sent3: the fact that something is not a misogynist and it is not a house is incorrect if it is not non-postnatal. sent4: if the ha-ha is a growling that it does not prize deceptiveness and is not a trombiculid is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the proton prizes Trifolium is correct.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: if the hawse does closet exbibit it is cardiovascular and it is not a Monophysitism. sent2: if that the display is not a eelworm but it is a paraplegia is not correct the proton does not prize Trifolium. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a pretentiousness and is unintrusive is not correct then that the bunk is not unintrusive is true. sent4: something does not prize pachycheilia and is unchristian if it closets Hope. sent5: there is nothing such that it is not a eelworm and is a paraplegia. sent6: if the yataghan closets secularization the coney does not closet Hope. sent7: either the proton is unchristian or it prizes pachycheilia or both if the coney does not closet Hope. sent8: the hawse does closet exbibit and it is a sneerer. sent9: the fact that the Hill is not a pretentiousness but it is unintrusive does not hold if there is something such that it is not a Monophysitism. sent10: if the yataghan is a leer then the coney does not closet Hope. sent11: the yataghan closets secularization and/or it is a leer if the bunk is not unintrusive.
|
sent1: {K}{f} -> ({J}{f} & ¬{H}{f}) sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & {G}x) -> ¬{G}{d} sent4: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & {B}x) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: {E}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} sent7: ¬{D}{b} -> ({B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent8: ({K}{f} & {L}{f}) sent9: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{I}{e} & {G}{e}) sent10: {F}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} sent11: ¬{G}{d} -> ({E}{c} v {F}{c})
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the display is not a eelworm but a paraplegia is correct is false.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the flag does not prize Trifolium.
|
¬{A}{ib}
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: if the proton does closet Hope then it does not prize pachycheilia and is unchristian.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the proton prizes Trifolium is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the hawse does closet exbibit it is cardiovascular and it is not a Monophysitism. sent2: if that the display is not a eelworm but it is a paraplegia is not correct the proton does not prize Trifolium. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a pretentiousness and is unintrusive is not correct then that the bunk is not unintrusive is true. sent4: something does not prize pachycheilia and is unchristian if it closets Hope. sent5: there is nothing such that it is not a eelworm and is a paraplegia. sent6: if the yataghan closets secularization the coney does not closet Hope. sent7: either the proton is unchristian or it prizes pachycheilia or both if the coney does not closet Hope. sent8: the hawse does closet exbibit and it is a sneerer. sent9: the fact that the Hill is not a pretentiousness but it is unintrusive does not hold if there is something such that it is not a Monophysitism. sent10: if the yataghan is a leer then the coney does not closet Hope. sent11: the yataghan closets secularization and/or it is a leer if the bunk is not unintrusive. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the display is not a eelworm but a paraplegia is correct is false.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the green is not a airdock and it does not crusade is wrong.
|
¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
sent1: the fact that something is a kind of an encore that does not prize bunch is not true if that it is not a kind of a gap is incorrect. sent2: the green is not a kind of a Crangonidae if the sheepherder does not prize bunch or is a kind of an encore or both. sent3: if something is a leatherjacket it is a kind of a gap. sent4: that the sheepherder is not a Crangonidae but it is a kind of an afferent is not correct. sent5: either the sheepherder does not prize bunch or it is an encore or both. sent6: the sheepherder is not a Crangonidae if the fact that that the input encores but it does not prize bunch is right does not hold. sent7: the fact that the green is a airdock that does not prize bunch is incorrect. sent8: the fact that something is a Bahai is not wrong. sent9: the fact that something is not flexible and it is not a beauty does not hold if it does not scintillate tibia. sent10: if something is not zero the fact that it does not closet cardinality and it is not a ninetieth is not true. sent11: the fact that something is not a airdock and does not crusade does not hold if it is not a Crangonidae. sent12: the green is not an encore. sent13: the sheepherder does not crusade if that the green encores is correct.
|
sent1: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent2: (¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent3: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent4: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {BN}{a}) sent5: (¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent6: ¬({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) sent8: (Ex): {G}x sent9: (x): ¬{FK}x -> ¬(¬{HS}x & ¬{EK}x) sent10: (x): ¬{ES}x -> ¬(¬{IB}x & ¬{AK}x) sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent12: ¬{C}{aa} sent13: {C}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{a}
|
[
"sent11 -> int1: the fact that the green is not a kind of a airdock and it does not crusade is wrong if it is not a Crangonidae.; sent2 & sent5 -> int2: the green is not a Crangonidae.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent2 & sent5 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the green is not a airdock and does not crusade.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> int3: if the input is a gap then the fact that it encores and does not prize bunch does not hold.; sent3 -> int4: the input is a kind of a gap if it is a kind of a leatherjacket.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the green is not a airdock and it does not crusade is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is a kind of an encore that does not prize bunch is not true if that it is not a kind of a gap is incorrect. sent2: the green is not a kind of a Crangonidae if the sheepherder does not prize bunch or is a kind of an encore or both. sent3: if something is a leatherjacket it is a kind of a gap. sent4: that the sheepherder is not a Crangonidae but it is a kind of an afferent is not correct. sent5: either the sheepherder does not prize bunch or it is an encore or both. sent6: the sheepherder is not a Crangonidae if the fact that that the input encores but it does not prize bunch is right does not hold. sent7: the fact that the green is a airdock that does not prize bunch is incorrect. sent8: the fact that something is a Bahai is not wrong. sent9: the fact that something is not flexible and it is not a beauty does not hold if it does not scintillate tibia. sent10: if something is not zero the fact that it does not closet cardinality and it is not a ninetieth is not true. sent11: the fact that something is not a airdock and does not crusade does not hold if it is not a Crangonidae. sent12: the green is not an encore. sent13: the sheepherder does not crusade if that the green encores is correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 -> int1: the fact that the green is not a kind of a airdock and it does not crusade is wrong if it is not a Crangonidae.; sent2 & sent5 -> int2: the green is not a Crangonidae.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the prancer is a Gerbera.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: if something is both not a suppository and not a clang then it is not a kind of a Gerbera. sent2: the almsgiver is not a suppository. sent3: that everything is not a kind of a dough and it is not a benzodiazepine hold. sent4: everything does not closet Anguillan and it is not temperate. sent5: everything is not a pillow and it is not sarcastic. sent6: the prancer is not prosodic. sent7: the airstream is not a kind of a Gerbera. sent8: the prancer is not a suppository. sent9: if the prancer is not unequivocal but it is a suppository it is not managerial. sent10: if the fact that something is not non-omnivorous hold then the fact that it is not a Gerbera and it is not a salmwood does not hold. sent11: the prancer is not a Untermeyer if it is a kind of non-aeriferous thing that does not scintillate coupling. sent12: the peak is not a kind of a suppository. sent13: if something is a kind of a suppository but it is not a kind of a clang it is not a Gerbera. sent14: the fact that everything is both not a suppository and not a clang is not wrong.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬{AA}{q} sent3: (x): (¬{JA}x & ¬{CU}x) sent4: (x): (¬{CF}x & ¬{GJ}x) sent5: (x): (¬{IU}x & ¬{FN}x) sent6: ¬{O}{aa} sent7: ¬{B}{fu} sent8: ¬{AA}{aa} sent9: (¬{FJ}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{CQ}{aa} sent10: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) sent11: (¬{DS}{aa} & ¬{FA}{aa}) -> ¬{ET}{aa} sent12: ¬{AA}{fi} sent13: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent14: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: that the prancer is not the Gerbera if the prancer is not a suppository and is not a clang is not incorrect.; sent14 -> int2: the prancer is not a suppository and it is not a clang.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent14 -> int2: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the prancer is a Gerbera.
|
{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: that the sunspot is not a Gerbera and it is not a salmwood is not true if it is omnivorous.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the prancer is a Gerbera. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is both not a suppository and not a clang then it is not a kind of a Gerbera. sent2: the almsgiver is not a suppository. sent3: that everything is not a kind of a dough and it is not a benzodiazepine hold. sent4: everything does not closet Anguillan and it is not temperate. sent5: everything is not a pillow and it is not sarcastic. sent6: the prancer is not prosodic. sent7: the airstream is not a kind of a Gerbera. sent8: the prancer is not a suppository. sent9: if the prancer is not unequivocal but it is a suppository it is not managerial. sent10: if the fact that something is not non-omnivorous hold then the fact that it is not a Gerbera and it is not a salmwood does not hold. sent11: the prancer is not a Untermeyer if it is a kind of non-aeriferous thing that does not scintillate coupling. sent12: the peak is not a kind of a suppository. sent13: if something is a kind of a suppository but it is not a kind of a clang it is not a Gerbera. sent14: the fact that everything is both not a suppository and not a clang is not wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: that the prancer is not the Gerbera if the prancer is not a suppository and is not a clang is not incorrect.; sent14 -> int2: the prancer is not a suppository and it is not a clang.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it does closet Ptilocercus that it is not non-Handelian and it is not sensitive is not correct.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: the prey is Handelian but it is not sensitive if it closets Ptilocercus. sent2: the Benjamin does prize chirrup but it does not heal if it is a kind of a brae. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a fluorapatite that it is both a slurry and gymnospermous is not right. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a Ginkgoaceae that it is useful and does closet insalubrity does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it is caudal that it is a joist and does not scintillate draped does not hold. sent6: there is something such that if the fact that it does closet Ptilocercus is true then it is Handelian and is not sensitive. sent7: the fact that the prey is Handelian but it is not sensitive is incorrect if it closets Ptilocercus. sent8: if the prey closets insalubrity then the fact that it is a chloroform that does not prize protein is not correct. sent9: that the prey is a kind of Handelian thing that is a towel is not true if it is a font. sent10: there exists something such that if it does fibrillate then that it is livable thing that is not a kind of a Bennett is not false. sent11: the fact that the prey is Handelian and it is sensitive is not right if it closets Ptilocercus. sent12: there exists something such that if it does closet Benjamin then the fact that it is both a hum and not a urobilinogen is wrong. sent13: that there is something such that if the fact that it does closet Ptilocercus is correct then the fact that it is Handelian and is sensitive is false is not incorrect. sent14: if the prey does segment then that it is not non-juvenile and it is sensitive is not correct. sent15: the fact that the luger is a concha and does not deregulate boiler is incorrect if it is a kind of a lioness. sent16: the fact that the prey does closet Ptilocercus and does not wail is not correct if it closets insectifuge. sent17: if the prey is sensitive then the fact that it does closet facsimile and it does not wail is not true. sent18: that something is useful and is not a kind of a Herschel is wrong if it is unrenewable. sent19: the fact that something is a diapir that does not spew is not right if it is labial.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: {EA}{j} -> ({FL}{j} & ¬{HS}{j}) sent3: (Ex): {GO}x -> ¬({GR}x & {AI}x) sent4: (Ex): {DH}x -> ¬({BD}x & {FS}x) sent5: (Ex): {CS}x -> ¬({HL}x & ¬{CR}x) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: {FS}{aa} -> ¬({IU}{aa} & ¬{DL}{aa}) sent9: {FK}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {ES}{aa}) sent10: (Ex): {IN}x -> ({FC}x & ¬{R}x) sent11: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent12: (Ex): {HG}x -> ¬({DN}x & ¬{AN}x) sent13: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent14: {IQ}{aa} -> ¬({GQ}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent15: {HA}{hc} -> ¬({HI}{hc} & ¬{DF}{hc}) sent16: {AO}{aa} -> ¬({A}{aa} & ¬{Q}{aa}) sent17: {AB}{aa} -> ¬({JJ}{aa} & ¬{Q}{aa}) sent18: (x): {FN}x -> ¬({BD}x & ¬{JH}x) sent19: (x): {CD}x -> ¬({CL}x & ¬{GF}x)
|
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the prey is useful but not a Herschel is wrong if it is unrenewable.
|
{FN}{aa} -> ¬({BD}{aa} & ¬{JH}{aa})
|
[
"sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does closet Ptilocercus that it is not non-Handelian and it is not sensitive is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the prey is Handelian but it is not sensitive if it closets Ptilocercus. sent2: the Benjamin does prize chirrup but it does not heal if it is a kind of a brae. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a fluorapatite that it is both a slurry and gymnospermous is not right. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a Ginkgoaceae that it is useful and does closet insalubrity does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it is caudal that it is a joist and does not scintillate draped does not hold. sent6: there is something such that if the fact that it does closet Ptilocercus is true then it is Handelian and is not sensitive. sent7: the fact that the prey is Handelian but it is not sensitive is incorrect if it closets Ptilocercus. sent8: if the prey closets insalubrity then the fact that it is a chloroform that does not prize protein is not correct. sent9: that the prey is a kind of Handelian thing that is a towel is not true if it is a font. sent10: there exists something such that if it does fibrillate then that it is livable thing that is not a kind of a Bennett is not false. sent11: the fact that the prey is Handelian and it is sensitive is not right if it closets Ptilocercus. sent12: there exists something such that if it does closet Benjamin then the fact that it is both a hum and not a urobilinogen is wrong. sent13: that there is something such that if the fact that it does closet Ptilocercus is correct then the fact that it is Handelian and is sensitive is false is not incorrect. sent14: if the prey does segment then that it is not non-juvenile and it is sensitive is not correct. sent15: the fact that the luger is a concha and does not deregulate boiler is incorrect if it is a kind of a lioness. sent16: the fact that the prey does closet Ptilocercus and does not wail is not correct if it closets insectifuge. sent17: if the prey is sensitive then the fact that it does closet facsimile and it does not wail is not true. sent18: that something is useful and is not a kind of a Herschel is wrong if it is unrenewable. sent19: the fact that something is a diapir that does not spew is not right if it is labial. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the exposure occurs.
|
{D}
|
sent1: that the tetravalentness does not occur is prevented by that the rupestralness happens. sent2: the noncausativeness occurs and the preferment occurs if the tackle does not occur. sent3: the fact that the semioticsness and the autoradiographicness occurs does not hold if the western does not occur. sent4: either the noncausativeness occurs or the preferment does not occur or both. sent5: if the endothermicness and the tetravalentness occurs the play does not occur. sent6: both the exempting and the autoradiographicness occurs. sent7: the exposure happens and the exempting happens if the autoradiographicness does not occur. sent8: the rupestralness and the raw happens. sent9: that the acidimetry occurs and the exempting happens is brought about by the non-autoradiographicness. sent10: that not the play but the preferment occurs prevents that the western occurs. sent11: if the tackling does not occur or the disagreeableness does not occur or both then the fact that the tackling does not occur is correct. sent12: both the suddenness and the doweling happens. sent13: that the exposure does not occur is caused by either that the exempting happens or that the semioticsness happens or both. sent14: the endothermicness happens. sent15: both the scintillating Shute and the westernness occurs if the playing does not occur.
|
sent1: {N} -> {L} sent2: ¬{I} -> ({H} & {G}) sent3: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & {B}) sent4: ({H} v ¬{G}) sent5: ({J} & {L}) -> ¬{F} sent6: ({A} & {B}) sent7: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) sent8: ({N} & {O}) sent9: ¬{B} -> ({AA} & {A}) sent10: (¬{F} & {G}) -> ¬{E} sent11: (¬{I} v ¬{K}) -> ¬{I} sent12: ({CU} & {AE}) sent13: ({A} v {C}) -> ¬{D} sent14: {J} sent15: ¬{F} -> ({AU} & {E})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the exempting happens.; int1 -> int2: the exempting happens or the semioticsness occurs or both.; sent13 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: {A}; int1 -> int2: ({A} v {C}); sent13 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
both the acidimetry and the scintillating Shute happens.
|
({AA} & {AU})
|
[] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the exposure occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the tetravalentness does not occur is prevented by that the rupestralness happens. sent2: the noncausativeness occurs and the preferment occurs if the tackle does not occur. sent3: the fact that the semioticsness and the autoradiographicness occurs does not hold if the western does not occur. sent4: either the noncausativeness occurs or the preferment does not occur or both. sent5: if the endothermicness and the tetravalentness occurs the play does not occur. sent6: both the exempting and the autoradiographicness occurs. sent7: the exposure happens and the exempting happens if the autoradiographicness does not occur. sent8: the rupestralness and the raw happens. sent9: that the acidimetry occurs and the exempting happens is brought about by the non-autoradiographicness. sent10: that not the play but the preferment occurs prevents that the western occurs. sent11: if the tackling does not occur or the disagreeableness does not occur or both then the fact that the tackling does not occur is correct. sent12: both the suddenness and the doweling happens. sent13: that the exposure does not occur is caused by either that the exempting happens or that the semioticsness happens or both. sent14: the endothermicness happens. sent15: both the scintillating Shute and the westernness occurs if the playing does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the exempting happens.; int1 -> int2: the exempting happens or the semioticsness occurs or both.; sent13 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that it is dyadic.
|
(Ex): {C}x
|
sent1: the cross does put. sent2: that the rump is not a Szilard but it is a Nestorian is right. sent3: the surfperch is not a schooling. sent4: there exists nothing such that it traces and it does not ligate. sent5: there is something such that it is a put. sent6: if the larcenist is a schooling then that the surfperch is dyadic is not wrong. sent7: the surfperch scintillates banneret. sent8: if the larcenist is a put the surfperch does school. sent9: the larcenist does not put but it does condole. sent10: the larcenist is both not a hunt and a battle-ax. sent11: the misleader is either not dyadic or a put or both if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a trace. sent12: the surfperch is a schooling if the larcenist is dyadic. sent13: if the larcenist is dyadic the surfperch is a put. sent14: the surfperch puts. sent15: the larcenist is both not a put and a schooling. sent16: there exists something such that it does prize arenavirus. sent17: the garnishee is not a put. sent18: the surfperch does not prize irritant. sent19: there is something such that it is a schooling. sent20: that something does closet surfperch is not incorrect. sent21: something is not a trace if the fact that it is a kind of a trace and it does not ligate is false.
|
sent1: {A}{en} sent2: (¬{JA}{ir} & {DQ}{ir}) sent3: ¬{B}{b} sent4: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{F}x) sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent7: {BI}{b} sent8: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent9: (¬{A}{a} & {AK}{a}) sent10: (¬{AR}{a} & {GK}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}{gg} v {A}{gg}) sent12: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent13: {C}{a} -> {A}{b} sent14: {A}{b} sent15: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent16: (Ex): {JK}x sent17: ¬{A}{hg} sent18: ¬{AT}{b} sent19: (Ex): {B}x sent20: (Ex): {IC}x sent21: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x
|
[
"sent15 -> int1: the larcenist schools.; sent6 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the surfperch is dyadic hold.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent6 & int1 -> int2: {C}{b}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the misleader is a schooling.
|
{B}{gg}
|
[
"sent21 -> int3: the surfperch is not a trace if the fact that it is a trace and it does not ligate is not true.; sent4 -> int4: that the surfperch is a trace but it does not ligate is wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the surfperch is not a kind of a trace.; int5 -> int6: everything does not trace.; int6 -> int7: that the larcenist is a kind of a trace does not hold.; int7 -> int8: something does not trace.; sent11 & int8 -> int9: the misleader either is not dyadic or does put or both.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it is dyadic. ; $context$ = sent1: the cross does put. sent2: that the rump is not a Szilard but it is a Nestorian is right. sent3: the surfperch is not a schooling. sent4: there exists nothing such that it traces and it does not ligate. sent5: there is something such that it is a put. sent6: if the larcenist is a schooling then that the surfperch is dyadic is not wrong. sent7: the surfperch scintillates banneret. sent8: if the larcenist is a put the surfperch does school. sent9: the larcenist does not put but it does condole. sent10: the larcenist is both not a hunt and a battle-ax. sent11: the misleader is either not dyadic or a put or both if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a trace. sent12: the surfperch is a schooling if the larcenist is dyadic. sent13: if the larcenist is dyadic the surfperch is a put. sent14: the surfperch puts. sent15: the larcenist is both not a put and a schooling. sent16: there exists something such that it does prize arenavirus. sent17: the garnishee is not a put. sent18: the surfperch does not prize irritant. sent19: there is something such that it is a schooling. sent20: that something does closet surfperch is not incorrect. sent21: something is not a trace if the fact that it is a kind of a trace and it does not ligate is false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 -> int1: the larcenist schools.; sent6 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the surfperch is dyadic hold.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the perfecter is antiphonary.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: if there is something such that that it is a antiphonary and it is ugly is not true the relaxin is cauline. sent2: if something is not a Nicaraguan the perfecter scintillates quad. sent3: if something is pediatric then it is not a antiphonary. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a Nicaraguan and it is deficient does not hold then the perfecter coils. sent5: the fact that there is something such that the fact that it is autoradiographic and it is Nicaraguan is not true is not false. sent6: the underlip is not antiphonary. sent7: if the perfecter is not a antiphonary and is pediatric the drudge is not a antiphonary. sent8: if either something does deregulate Currier or it is a kind of a infundibulum or both it does not prize Plasticine. sent9: the perfecter is not a kind of a antiphonary if it is pediatric. sent10: if there exists something such that that it is autoradiographic and it is Nicaraguan does not hold the perfecter does scintillate quad. sent11: that the perfecter is not pediatric hold if it scintillates encapsulation and/or is a chartreuse. sent12: the fact that that something is a surfperch and is a paperboard hold does not hold if it does not prize NSF. sent13: the Currier is not an evasion. sent14: if something scintillates quad and/or it is pediatric then it is not antiphonary. sent15: if there is something such that the fact that it is a surfperch that is a kind of a paperboard is not correct then the fact that the perfecter is not pediatric hold. sent16: there is something such that it is autoradiographic and Nicaraguan. sent17: the perfecter is integumentary and/or is a antiphonary. sent18: something that is prepositional or is stupid or both is not a forefather.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({C}x & {GH}x) -> {FK}{hi} sent2: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}{a} sent3: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: (x): ¬({AB}x & {AU}x) -> {BR}{a} sent5: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: ¬{C}{gq} sent7: (¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{q} sent8: (x): ({JG}x v {DN}x) -> ¬{FI}x sent9: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} sent10: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent11: ({EC}{a} v {EO}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent12: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({E}x & {D}x) sent13: ¬{EF}{jd} sent14: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent15: (x): ¬({E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}{a} sent16: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent17: ({BE}{a} v {C}{a}) sent18: (x): ({DG}x v {HH}x) -> ¬{AI}x
|
[
"sent5 & sent10 -> int1: the perfecter scintillates quad.; int1 -> int2: the perfecter does scintillate quad and/or it is pediatric.; sent14 -> int3: the perfecter is not a kind of a antiphonary if it scintillates quad or it is pediatric or both.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent10 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 -> int2: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}); sent14 -> int3: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the drudge is non-antiphonary.
|
¬{C}{q}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the perfecter is antiphonary. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that that it is a antiphonary and it is ugly is not true the relaxin is cauline. sent2: if something is not a Nicaraguan the perfecter scintillates quad. sent3: if something is pediatric then it is not a antiphonary. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a Nicaraguan and it is deficient does not hold then the perfecter coils. sent5: the fact that there is something such that the fact that it is autoradiographic and it is Nicaraguan is not true is not false. sent6: the underlip is not antiphonary. sent7: if the perfecter is not a antiphonary and is pediatric the drudge is not a antiphonary. sent8: if either something does deregulate Currier or it is a kind of a infundibulum or both it does not prize Plasticine. sent9: the perfecter is not a kind of a antiphonary if it is pediatric. sent10: if there exists something such that that it is autoradiographic and it is Nicaraguan does not hold the perfecter does scintillate quad. sent11: that the perfecter is not pediatric hold if it scintillates encapsulation and/or is a chartreuse. sent12: the fact that that something is a surfperch and is a paperboard hold does not hold if it does not prize NSF. sent13: the Currier is not an evasion. sent14: if something scintillates quad and/or it is pediatric then it is not antiphonary. sent15: if there is something such that the fact that it is a surfperch that is a kind of a paperboard is not correct then the fact that the perfecter is not pediatric hold. sent16: there is something such that it is autoradiographic and Nicaraguan. sent17: the perfecter is integumentary and/or is a antiphonary. sent18: something that is prepositional or is stupid or both is not a forefather. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent10 -> int1: the perfecter scintillates quad.; int1 -> int2: the perfecter does scintillate quad and/or it is pediatric.; sent14 -> int3: the perfecter is not a kind of a antiphonary if it scintillates quad or it is pediatric or both.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the cote is a ESOP.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: the fact that the cote is not a cling is not incorrect if the gigolo does not scintillate Paguridae or it is a mettlesomeness or both. sent2: if the fact that the Malawian is either not a mettlesomeness or not a Cockaigne or both does not hold the gigolo does not scintillate Paguridae. sent3: the fact that the cote is a kind of a cyclooxygenase-1 and it is Mauritanian is not correct. sent4: the shoe is not a ESOP if the fact that it is a kind of a unprofitableness and prizes pillion does not hold. sent5: the oligochaete is not a kind of a Martial. sent6: if the pillion does not closet fingerpaint then it is not a Mauritanian. sent7: that something is either a fuss or a cling or both if it does not scintillate Paguridae hold. sent8: if the laurel-tree is not a ESOP it does not mount. sent9: the cote is not a cyclooxygenase-1 if the fact that it is both a Buccinidae and not nonarbitrable is wrong. sent10: something does not scintillate Paguridae and/or it is a mettlesomeness if it is a kind of a Cockaigne. sent11: if that the cote is a cyclooxygenase-1 and is a Mauritanian does not hold it is not a ESOP. sent12: the cote is not a kind of a Martial. sent13: that something does deregulate Conepatus and it is a kind of a Mauritanian is not right if it does not fuss. sent14: everything is a Cockaigne. sent15: if that the laelia is a Martial and it is a kind of a heartwood does not hold it is not thalloid. sent16: if the cote is not a kind of a Mauritanian it is not a kind of a ESOP. sent17: if something is not a fuss then that it is a kind of a barn and it is a Mauritanian does not hold. sent18: if the cote does not scintillate detraction it is not a kind of a ESOP. sent19: if something does not cling but it is a kind of a ESOP it is not a fuss. sent20: if there is something such that the fact that it is a fuss and a ESOP is not true then the grisaille is not a fuss.
|
sent1: (¬{D}{b} v {E}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: ¬(¬{E}{c} v ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent3: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent4: ¬({FK}{er} & {AL}{er}) -> ¬{B}{er} sent5: ¬{I}{e} sent6: ¬{HO}{cr} -> ¬{AB}{cr} sent7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x v {C}x) sent8: ¬{B}{ir} -> ¬{IG}{ir} sent9: ¬({DN}{a} & {CQ}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{a} sent10: (x): {F}x -> (¬{D}x v {E}x) sent11: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent12: ¬{I}{a} sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({BG}x & {AB}x) sent14: (x): {F}x sent15: ¬({I}{d} & {H}{d}) -> ¬{G}{d} sent16: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent17: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({JB}x & {AB}x) sent18: ¬{HI}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent19: (x): (¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent20: (x): ¬({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}{hq}
|
[
"sent11 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the grisaille does deregulate Conepatus and it is Mauritanian does not hold.
|
¬({BG}{hq} & {AB}{hq})
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: that the grisaille does deregulate Conepatus and it is Mauritanian is not correct if it is not a fuss.; sent14 -> int2: the fact that the Malawian is a Cockaigne is right.; sent10 -> int3: the Malawian does not scintillate Paguridae or it is a mettlesomeness or both if it is a Cockaigne.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the Malawian does not scintillate Paguridae or is a mettlesomeness or both.; int4 -> int5: everything either does not scintillate Paguridae or is a mettlesomeness or both.; int5 -> int6: the gigolo does not scintillate Paguridae and/or it is a kind of a mettlesomeness.; sent1 & int6 -> int7: the cote is not a cling.;"
] | 9 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the cote is a ESOP. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the cote is not a cling is not incorrect if the gigolo does not scintillate Paguridae or it is a mettlesomeness or both. sent2: if the fact that the Malawian is either not a mettlesomeness or not a Cockaigne or both does not hold the gigolo does not scintillate Paguridae. sent3: the fact that the cote is a kind of a cyclooxygenase-1 and it is Mauritanian is not correct. sent4: the shoe is not a ESOP if the fact that it is a kind of a unprofitableness and prizes pillion does not hold. sent5: the oligochaete is not a kind of a Martial. sent6: if the pillion does not closet fingerpaint then it is not a Mauritanian. sent7: that something is either a fuss or a cling or both if it does not scintillate Paguridae hold. sent8: if the laurel-tree is not a ESOP it does not mount. sent9: the cote is not a cyclooxygenase-1 if the fact that it is both a Buccinidae and not nonarbitrable is wrong. sent10: something does not scintillate Paguridae and/or it is a mettlesomeness if it is a kind of a Cockaigne. sent11: if that the cote is a cyclooxygenase-1 and is a Mauritanian does not hold it is not a ESOP. sent12: the cote is not a kind of a Martial. sent13: that something does deregulate Conepatus and it is a kind of a Mauritanian is not right if it does not fuss. sent14: everything is a Cockaigne. sent15: if that the laelia is a Martial and it is a kind of a heartwood does not hold it is not thalloid. sent16: if the cote is not a kind of a Mauritanian it is not a kind of a ESOP. sent17: if something is not a fuss then that it is a kind of a barn and it is a Mauritanian does not hold. sent18: if the cote does not scintillate detraction it is not a kind of a ESOP. sent19: if something does not cling but it is a kind of a ESOP it is not a fuss. sent20: if there is something such that the fact that it is a fuss and a ESOP is not true then the grisaille is not a fuss. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the grapefruit does not closet Stentor.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: if something does not prize audiometry then the fact that it is a kind of a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus is not right. sent2: the macrame is not a Bishkek. sent3: that something is both not a Guinevere and a Trachurus is not true if it does not prize audiometry. sent4: the fact that the grapefruit is a Guinevere but it is not a Trachurus is not correct if it does not prize audiometry. sent5: the leucothoe does not closet Stentor. sent6: if the grapefruit is not assertive or does not prize audiometry or both then it does not prize audiometry. sent7: the fact that the grapefruit is both a Guinevere and not a Trachurus is not true. sent8: that the globe is a kind of assertive a potholer is wrong if the decoration is not adequate. sent9: if that the nose is a kind of inquisitorial thing that prizes prefabrication does not hold the soundman does not prizes prefabrication. sent10: if the tristearin is not tame then the grapefruit prizes audiometry and it closets Stentor. sent11: if the grapefruit does not prize audiometry then the fact that it is not a Guinevere and is a Trachurus is incorrect. sent12: the grapefruit is not assertive or does not prize audiometry or both. sent13: if the soundman does not prize prefabrication the decoration is not adequate but it is a kind of a benzodiazepine. sent14: that something is not a Guinevere and it is not a kind of a Trachurus is incorrect if it does not prize audiometry. sent15: the fact that the fact that the grapefruit is not a co-star and it is not a Trachurus is incorrect is true. sent16: if the macrame is not a Bishkek the fact that it is a Fagopyrum but not a Atlas is not correct. sent17: that the grapefruit is not a Guinevere but a Trachurus is false. sent18: something does not closet Stentor if the fact that it is not a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus is wrong. sent19: if that the macrame is a Fagopyrum but it is not a Atlas is false then the binger does not closet etiology. sent20: the ala is Thoreauvian and it does prize Ozawa if there exists something such that it does not closet etiology. sent21: the grapefruit is not assertive or does prize audiometry or both. sent22: if the fact that something is not combinative and it is not meteoric is wrong it is not varicelliform. sent23: if the ala prizes Ozawa the nose does not prizes Ozawa. sent24: the fact that something is a kind of inquisitorial thing that prizes prefabrication is not correct if it does not prize Ozawa.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: ¬{O}{h} sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: ¬{B}{il} sent6: (¬{D}{aa} v ¬{A}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: ¬{F}{c} -> ¬({D}{b} & {E}{b}) sent9: ¬({I}{e} & {H}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d} sent10: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent11: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent12: (¬{D}{aa} v ¬{A}{aa}) sent13: ¬{H}{d} -> (¬{F}{c} & {G}{c}) sent14: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent15: ¬(¬{ED}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent16: ¬{O}{h} -> ¬({N}{h} & ¬{M}{h}) sent17: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent18: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent19: ¬({N}{h} & ¬{M}{h}) -> ¬{L}{g} sent20: (x): ¬{L}x -> ({K}{f} & {J}{f}) sent21: (¬{D}{aa} v {A}{aa}) sent22: (x): ¬(¬{CP}x & ¬{AR}x) -> ¬{FO}x sent23: {J}{f} -> ¬{J}{e} sent24: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬({I}x & {H}x)
|
[
"sent14 -> int1: if the grapefruit does not prize audiometry then that it is not a kind of a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus is false.; sent6 & sent12 -> int2: the grapefruit does not prize audiometry.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the grapefruit is not a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus does not hold.; sent18 -> int4: the grapefruit does not closet Stentor if that it is not a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent14 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent6 & sent12 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent18 -> int4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the grapefruit closets Stentor.
|
{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent24 -> int5: that the nose is inquisitorial and prizes prefabrication is not correct if it does not prize Ozawa.; sent16 & sent2 -> int6: that the macrame is a Fagopyrum but it is not a Atlas is not true.; sent19 & int6 -> int7: the binger does not closet etiology.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that it does not closet etiology.; int8 & sent20 -> int9: the ala is a kind of Thoreauvian thing that does prize Ozawa.; int9 -> int10: the ala prizes Ozawa.; sent23 & int10 -> int11: that the nose does not prize Ozawa is not false.; int5 & int11 -> int12: the fact that the nose is inquisitorial and it does prize prefabrication is not true.; sent9 & int12 -> int13: the soundman does not prize prefabrication.; sent13 & int13 -> int14: the decoration is both not adequate and a benzodiazepine.; int14 -> int15: the decoration is not adequate.; sent8 & int15 -> int16: the fact that the globe is not unassertive and it is a potholer is not correct.; int16 -> int17: there exists something such that the fact that it is assertive and it is a potholer is not right.;"
] | 15 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the grapefruit does not closet Stentor. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not prize audiometry then the fact that it is a kind of a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus is not right. sent2: the macrame is not a Bishkek. sent3: that something is both not a Guinevere and a Trachurus is not true if it does not prize audiometry. sent4: the fact that the grapefruit is a Guinevere but it is not a Trachurus is not correct if it does not prize audiometry. sent5: the leucothoe does not closet Stentor. sent6: if the grapefruit is not assertive or does not prize audiometry or both then it does not prize audiometry. sent7: the fact that the grapefruit is both a Guinevere and not a Trachurus is not true. sent8: that the globe is a kind of assertive a potholer is wrong if the decoration is not adequate. sent9: if that the nose is a kind of inquisitorial thing that prizes prefabrication does not hold the soundman does not prizes prefabrication. sent10: if the tristearin is not tame then the grapefruit prizes audiometry and it closets Stentor. sent11: if the grapefruit does not prize audiometry then the fact that it is not a Guinevere and is a Trachurus is incorrect. sent12: the grapefruit is not assertive or does not prize audiometry or both. sent13: if the soundman does not prize prefabrication the decoration is not adequate but it is a kind of a benzodiazepine. sent14: that something is not a Guinevere and it is not a kind of a Trachurus is incorrect if it does not prize audiometry. sent15: the fact that the fact that the grapefruit is not a co-star and it is not a Trachurus is incorrect is true. sent16: if the macrame is not a Bishkek the fact that it is a Fagopyrum but not a Atlas is not correct. sent17: that the grapefruit is not a Guinevere but a Trachurus is false. sent18: something does not closet Stentor if the fact that it is not a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus is wrong. sent19: if that the macrame is a Fagopyrum but it is not a Atlas is false then the binger does not closet etiology. sent20: the ala is Thoreauvian and it does prize Ozawa if there exists something such that it does not closet etiology. sent21: the grapefruit is not assertive or does prize audiometry or both. sent22: if the fact that something is not combinative and it is not meteoric is wrong it is not varicelliform. sent23: if the ala prizes Ozawa the nose does not prizes Ozawa. sent24: the fact that something is a kind of inquisitorial thing that prizes prefabrication is not correct if it does not prize Ozawa. ; $proof$ =
|
sent14 -> int1: if the grapefruit does not prize audiometry then that it is not a kind of a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus is false.; sent6 & sent12 -> int2: the grapefruit does not prize audiometry.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the grapefruit is not a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus does not hold.; sent18 -> int4: the grapefruit does not closet Stentor if that it is not a Guinevere and it is not a Trachurus does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the real-timeness does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: if the scintillating shahadah does not occur then the DO and/or the Lithuanian happens. sent2: that the scintillating millivoltmeter does not occur and the grapelikeness does not occur leads to that the glorification does not occur. sent3: that the drumming does not occur is not wrong if that either the knockdown does not occur or the gladness happens or both is not right. sent4: the anatomy and the Dionysianness occurs. sent5: the manhood does not occur. sent6: if the drumming does not occur the fact that both the electrocautery and the scintillating shahadah happens does not hold. sent7: the moonlight occurs and the derivation happens. sent8: the humming occurs and the uselessness occurs. sent9: if the forelegness does not occur the fact that the baa and the Liverpudlianness occurs is not correct. sent10: that the closeting Colony occurs is not wrong. sent11: the Lithuanianness happens. sent12: the bailment does not occur and the closeting milling does not occur if the prizing Trinitarian occurs. sent13: the crustalness does not occur. sent14: the salamandriformness happens and the backhander happens. sent15: the instructionalness occurs. sent16: both the binocularsness and the closeting marseille happens if the bailment does not occur. sent17: the fact that the scintillating shahadah does not occur is not incorrect if the fact that the electrocautery and the scintillating shahadah occurs is false. sent18: if the binocularsness occurs the scintillating cambric and the non-forelegness happens. sent19: that the knockdown does not occur or the gladness occurs or both is false if the glorification does not occur. sent20: if the noncurrentness does not occur the scintillating millivoltmeter does not occur and the grapelikeness does not occur. sent21: that the real-timeness happens is prevented by that the DO happens and the Lithuanian occurs. sent22: if the fact that both the baa and the Liverpudlianness happens is not correct then the noncurrentness does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{D} -> ({A} v {B}) sent2: (¬{J} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{I} sent3: ¬(¬{H} v {G}) -> ¬{E} sent4: ({BP} & {CI}) sent5: ¬{IM} sent6: ¬{E} -> ¬({F} & {D}) sent7: ({EH} & {FO}) sent8: ({BC} & {BK}) sent9: ¬{O} -> ¬({M} & {N}) sent10: {GD} sent11: {B} sent12: {U} -> (¬{S} & ¬{T}) sent13: ¬{JA} sent14: ({BJ} & {JC}) sent15: {EP} sent16: ¬{S} -> ({Q} & {R}) sent17: ¬({F} & {D}) -> ¬{D} sent18: {Q} -> ({P} & ¬{O}) sent19: ¬{I} -> ¬(¬{H} v {G}) sent20: ¬{L} -> (¬{J} & ¬{K}) sent21: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent22: ¬({M} & {N}) -> ¬{L}
|
[] |
[] |
the real-timeness happens.
|
{C}
|
[] | 17 | 2 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the real-timeness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the scintillating shahadah does not occur then the DO and/or the Lithuanian happens. sent2: that the scintillating millivoltmeter does not occur and the grapelikeness does not occur leads to that the glorification does not occur. sent3: that the drumming does not occur is not wrong if that either the knockdown does not occur or the gladness happens or both is not right. sent4: the anatomy and the Dionysianness occurs. sent5: the manhood does not occur. sent6: if the drumming does not occur the fact that both the electrocautery and the scintillating shahadah happens does not hold. sent7: the moonlight occurs and the derivation happens. sent8: the humming occurs and the uselessness occurs. sent9: if the forelegness does not occur the fact that the baa and the Liverpudlianness occurs is not correct. sent10: that the closeting Colony occurs is not wrong. sent11: the Lithuanianness happens. sent12: the bailment does not occur and the closeting milling does not occur if the prizing Trinitarian occurs. sent13: the crustalness does not occur. sent14: the salamandriformness happens and the backhander happens. sent15: the instructionalness occurs. sent16: both the binocularsness and the closeting marseille happens if the bailment does not occur. sent17: the fact that the scintillating shahadah does not occur is not incorrect if the fact that the electrocautery and the scintillating shahadah occurs is false. sent18: if the binocularsness occurs the scintillating cambric and the non-forelegness happens. sent19: that the knockdown does not occur or the gladness occurs or both is false if the glorification does not occur. sent20: if the noncurrentness does not occur the scintillating millivoltmeter does not occur and the grapelikeness does not occur. sent21: that the real-timeness happens is prevented by that the DO happens and the Lithuanian occurs. sent22: if the fact that both the baa and the Liverpudlianness happens is not correct then the noncurrentness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if that it does prize saxifrage and it does not deregulate Preakness is not true it is not domiciliary is wrong.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: something is non-domiciliary if the fact that it prizes saxifrage and does not deregulate Preakness is not true.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the railing is not domiciliary if that it does prize saxifrage and it does not deregulate Preakness is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if that it does prize saxifrage and it does not deregulate Preakness is not true it is not domiciliary is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: something is non-domiciliary if the fact that it prizes saxifrage and does not deregulate Preakness is not true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the railing is not domiciliary if that it does prize saxifrage and it does not deregulate Preakness is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it does not presume and/or is telocentric does not hold then it is antithyroid does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it does scintillate variability or it is a graphite or both is not right then it scintillates Nycticebus. sent2: there exists something such that if either it is not a burqa or it is choreographic or both then it is a preoccupancy. sent3: if the fact that the creosol is a Camlan and/or a headline does not hold it is a excitability. sent4: if the fact that the fridge is not clamatorial and/or it does presume is wrong the fact that it is a Ahvenanmaa hold. sent5: the fact that if that the fridge is non-antithyroid and/or it does closet creosol is not correct then the fridge scintillates Hyssopus is not wrong. sent6: if that either the fridge does not presume or it is telocentric or both is not right it is antithyroid. sent7: if the fact that the fridge does not scintillate Hyssopus and/or it is antipyretic is false it is antithyroid. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a codeine and/or it is unprophetic is not true the fact that it does run is not false. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a ladybug and/or it does scintillate smugness it does closet Labrador.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({AH}x v {GS}x) -> {HQ}x sent2: (Ex): (¬{HJ}x v {HL}x) -> {AF}x sent3: ¬({BT}{bp} v {IF}{bp}) -> {JB}{bp} sent4: ¬(¬{HI}{aa} v {AA}{aa}) -> {HA}{aa} sent5: ¬(¬{B}{aa} v {AJ}{aa}) -> {EL}{aa} sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent7: ¬(¬{EL}{aa} v {EF}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{GJ}x v {T}x) -> {FM}x sent9: (Ex): (¬{AL}x v {H}x) -> {II}x
|
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it does not presume and/or is telocentric does not hold then it is antithyroid does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it does scintillate variability or it is a graphite or both is not right then it scintillates Nycticebus. sent2: there exists something such that if either it is not a burqa or it is choreographic or both then it is a preoccupancy. sent3: if the fact that the creosol is a Camlan and/or a headline does not hold it is a excitability. sent4: if the fact that the fridge is not clamatorial and/or it does presume is wrong the fact that it is a Ahvenanmaa hold. sent5: the fact that if that the fridge is non-antithyroid and/or it does closet creosol is not correct then the fridge scintillates Hyssopus is not wrong. sent6: if that either the fridge does not presume or it is telocentric or both is not right it is antithyroid. sent7: if the fact that the fridge does not scintillate Hyssopus and/or it is antipyretic is false it is antithyroid. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a codeine and/or it is unprophetic is not true the fact that it does run is not false. sent9: there is something such that if it is not a ladybug and/or it does scintillate smugness it does closet Labrador. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the marocain is pharyngeal.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: the bushing is pharyngeal. sent2: the circulation is comfortable. sent3: the fact that the marocain does not scintillate semiweekly or does pour or both does not hold. sent4: something is realistic if that it does not produce and it does not scintillate ptyalith is incorrect. sent5: the fact that if the carvedilol is a kind of the pygmy then the fact that the carvedilol does not scintillate semiweekly and/or it does scintillate facsimile does not hold is true. sent6: either the carvedilol is not pharyngeal or it is a kind of a pygmy or both. sent7: the carvedilol is a pygmy. sent8: that the marocain is not pharyngeal is not incorrect if the fact that the carvedilol is a pygmy that is not an effectiveness does not hold. sent9: the marocain is not pharyngeal and/or it does scintillate facsimile. sent10: the fact that the marocain is not a pygmy and/or scintillates Testudinidae is incorrect. sent11: the fact that something is a kind of a pygmy and is not an effectiveness is false if it is not unrealistic. sent12: the fact that the carvedilol is not a kind of a produce and does not scintillate ptyalith is incorrect if the slinger does triangulate. sent13: the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile and/or it is pharyngeal. sent14: the rockers is pharyngeal. sent15: the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile if it is a kind of a pygmy. sent16: the fact that the marocain is not a kind of a limbers or does manipulate or both does not hold. sent17: if the carvedilol is not pharyngeal either the marocain does not scintillate facsimile or it is a pygmy or both. sent18: if the circulation is comfortable it is seamanlike. sent19: if the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile the marocain is not pharyngeal and/or it is a kind of a pygmy. sent20: the adz is not a kind of a pygmy. sent21: that the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile is correct. sent22: if the marocain is not a kind of a pygmy the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile or it is pharyngeal or both.
|
sent1: {A}{ha} sent2: {K}{e} sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {P}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) -> {D}x sent5: {B}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent6: (¬{A}{b} v {B}{b}) sent7: {B}{b} sent8: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent9: (¬{A}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent10: ¬(¬{B}{a} v {IM}{a}) sent11: (x): {D}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent12: {G}{c} -> ¬(¬{E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent13: (¬{AB}{b} v {A}{b}) sent14: {A}{n} sent15: {B}{b} -> ¬{AB}{b} sent16: ¬(¬{JG}{a} v {BC}{a}) sent17: ¬{A}{b} -> (¬{AB}{a} v {B}{a}) sent18: {K}{e} -> {J}{e} sent19: ¬{AB}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent20: ¬{B}{cn} sent21: ¬{AB}{b} sent22: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{AB}{b} v {A}{b})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the marocain is not pharyngeal.; sent5 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that the carvedilol does not scintillate semiweekly and/or scintillates facsimile does not hold.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent5 & sent7 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b});"
] |
the marocain is non-pharyngeal.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent11 -> int2: if the carvedilol is realistic then that it is a pygmy and it is not an effectiveness is wrong.; sent4 -> int3: the carvedilol is realistic if that it does not produce and it does not scintillate ptyalith is incorrect.; sent18 & sent2 -> int4: the circulation is seamanlike.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that it is seamanlike.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the marocain is pharyngeal. ; $context$ = sent1: the bushing is pharyngeal. sent2: the circulation is comfortable. sent3: the fact that the marocain does not scintillate semiweekly or does pour or both does not hold. sent4: something is realistic if that it does not produce and it does not scintillate ptyalith is incorrect. sent5: the fact that if the carvedilol is a kind of the pygmy then the fact that the carvedilol does not scintillate semiweekly and/or it does scintillate facsimile does not hold is true. sent6: either the carvedilol is not pharyngeal or it is a kind of a pygmy or both. sent7: the carvedilol is a pygmy. sent8: that the marocain is not pharyngeal is not incorrect if the fact that the carvedilol is a pygmy that is not an effectiveness does not hold. sent9: the marocain is not pharyngeal and/or it does scintillate facsimile. sent10: the fact that the marocain is not a pygmy and/or scintillates Testudinidae is incorrect. sent11: the fact that something is a kind of a pygmy and is not an effectiveness is false if it is not unrealistic. sent12: the fact that the carvedilol is not a kind of a produce and does not scintillate ptyalith is incorrect if the slinger does triangulate. sent13: the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile and/or it is pharyngeal. sent14: the rockers is pharyngeal. sent15: the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile if it is a kind of a pygmy. sent16: the fact that the marocain is not a kind of a limbers or does manipulate or both does not hold. sent17: if the carvedilol is not pharyngeal either the marocain does not scintillate facsimile or it is a pygmy or both. sent18: if the circulation is comfortable it is seamanlike. sent19: if the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile the marocain is not pharyngeal and/or it is a kind of a pygmy. sent20: the adz is not a kind of a pygmy. sent21: that the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile is correct. sent22: if the marocain is not a kind of a pygmy the carvedilol does not scintillate facsimile or it is pharyngeal or both. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the marocain is not pharyngeal.; sent5 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that the carvedilol does not scintillate semiweekly and/or scintillates facsimile does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the anthropologicalness does not occur.
|
¬{E}
|
sent1: if the reinstatement but not the deregulating salesperson happens the familiarness does not occur. sent2: the normotensiveness does not occur and the archiepiscopalness does not occur if the ignition does not occur. sent3: the reinstatement occurs and the deregulating salesperson does not occur if the normotensiveness does not occur. sent4: if the baccarat does not occur the scintillating myofibril does not occur. sent5: the traumaticness does not occur. sent6: that the deregulating lake occurs yields that the traumaticness does not occur and the breaking does not occur. sent7: if the maxiness occurs the filarialness occurs. sent8: if that the traumaticness does not occur is not wrong then the isomorphousness occurs and the paintableness happens. sent9: that the traumaticness occurs brings about the non-paintableness. sent10: the arterioscleroticness does not occur. sent11: if the familiar does not occur then that that the non-excretoriness and the non-cataphaticness occurs hold is incorrect. sent12: the deregulating lake occurs if that the non-excretoriness and the non-cataphaticness occurs is wrong. sent13: the non-maxiness is prevented by the nonphotosyntheticness. sent14: if the paintableness does not occur the fact that the non-filarialness and the non-isomorphousness happens does not hold. sent15: not the ignition but the cathecticness occurs if the scintillating myofibril does not occur. sent16: that the traumaticness does not occur and the break does not occur prevents that the paintableness occurs. sent17: if the isomorphousness and the filarialness happens the fact that the anthropologicalness does not occur is not wrong. sent18: that the paintableness does not occur results in that the awfulness occurs and the maxi happens.
|
sent1: ({M} & ¬{N}) -> ¬{L} sent2: ¬{Q} -> (¬{O} & ¬{P}) sent3: ¬{O} -> ({M} & ¬{N}) sent4: ¬{T} -> ¬{S} sent5: ¬{G} sent6: {I} -> (¬{G} & ¬{H}) sent7: {B} -> {C} sent8: ¬{G} -> ({D} & {F}) sent9: {G} -> ¬{F} sent10: ¬{BM} sent11: ¬{L} -> ¬(¬{J} & ¬{K}) sent12: ¬(¬{J} & ¬{K}) -> {I} sent13: {A} -> {B} sent14: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent15: ¬{S} -> (¬{Q} & {R}) sent16: (¬{G} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} sent17: ({D} & {C}) -> ¬{E} sent18: ¬{F} -> ({FG} & {B})
|
[
"sent8 & sent5 -> int1: the isomorphousness occurs and the paintableness occurs.; int1 -> int2: the isomorphousness happens.;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent5 -> int1: ({D} & {F}); int1 -> int2: {D};"
] |
the animadverting occurs and the awfulness occurs.
|
({JA} & {FG})
|
[] | 4 | 4 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the anthropologicalness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the reinstatement but not the deregulating salesperson happens the familiarness does not occur. sent2: the normotensiveness does not occur and the archiepiscopalness does not occur if the ignition does not occur. sent3: the reinstatement occurs and the deregulating salesperson does not occur if the normotensiveness does not occur. sent4: if the baccarat does not occur the scintillating myofibril does not occur. sent5: the traumaticness does not occur. sent6: that the deregulating lake occurs yields that the traumaticness does not occur and the breaking does not occur. sent7: if the maxiness occurs the filarialness occurs. sent8: if that the traumaticness does not occur is not wrong then the isomorphousness occurs and the paintableness happens. sent9: that the traumaticness occurs brings about the non-paintableness. sent10: the arterioscleroticness does not occur. sent11: if the familiar does not occur then that that the non-excretoriness and the non-cataphaticness occurs hold is incorrect. sent12: the deregulating lake occurs if that the non-excretoriness and the non-cataphaticness occurs is wrong. sent13: the non-maxiness is prevented by the nonphotosyntheticness. sent14: if the paintableness does not occur the fact that the non-filarialness and the non-isomorphousness happens does not hold. sent15: not the ignition but the cathecticness occurs if the scintillating myofibril does not occur. sent16: that the traumaticness does not occur and the break does not occur prevents that the paintableness occurs. sent17: if the isomorphousness and the filarialness happens the fact that the anthropologicalness does not occur is not wrong. sent18: that the paintableness does not occur results in that the awfulness occurs and the maxi happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent5 -> int1: the isomorphousness occurs and the paintableness occurs.; int1 -> int2: the isomorphousness happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the furan is not a miniver and/or it does not deregulate Camlan.
|
(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: the coolie is a south that does prize Trinitarian. sent2: if the coolie is a kind of south thing that prizes Trinitarian then the furan does not prizes Trinitarian. sent3: if that something does deregulate Camlan but it is not a bumptiousness does not hold it does not deregulate Camlan. sent4: a dashiki that does not prize Trinitarian is a bumptiousness. sent5: the manioc does not prize Trinitarian. sent6: the furan scintillates counterclaim. sent7: something dashes if that it is not aromatic and it is atomistic is not right. sent8: if the fact that the furan is not a kind of a dashiki is correct then that it is not a miniver or does not deregulate Camlan or both does not hold. sent9: if the cow does not scintillate Gainsborough the fact that it does not closet pasteurization and/or it is not a dashiki is incorrect. sent10: the furan is not a dashiki. sent11: the jiqui is not a dashiki. sent12: if the furan is not a radio-phonograph then it does closet evocation.
|
sent1: ({G}{b} & {C}{b}) sent2: ({G}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent3: (x): ¬({AB}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent4: (x): ({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}x sent5: ¬{C}{c} sent6: {IB}{a} sent7: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {E}x) -> {A}x sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent9: ¬{FM}{iu} -> ¬(¬{HO}{iu} v ¬{A}{iu}) sent10: ¬{A}{a} sent11: ¬{A}{es} sent12: ¬{HB}{a} -> {CB}{a}
|
[
"sent8 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the furan is not a miniver or it does not deregulate Camlan or both.
|
(¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a})
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: there exists something such that it does not prize Trinitarian.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the furan is not a miniver and/or it does not deregulate Camlan. ; $context$ = sent1: the coolie is a south that does prize Trinitarian. sent2: if the coolie is a kind of south thing that prizes Trinitarian then the furan does not prizes Trinitarian. sent3: if that something does deregulate Camlan but it is not a bumptiousness does not hold it does not deregulate Camlan. sent4: a dashiki that does not prize Trinitarian is a bumptiousness. sent5: the manioc does not prize Trinitarian. sent6: the furan scintillates counterclaim. sent7: something dashes if that it is not aromatic and it is atomistic is not right. sent8: if the fact that the furan is not a kind of a dashiki is correct then that it is not a miniver or does not deregulate Camlan or both does not hold. sent9: if the cow does not scintillate Gainsborough the fact that it does not closet pasteurization and/or it is not a dashiki is incorrect. sent10: the furan is not a dashiki. sent11: the jiqui is not a dashiki. sent12: if the furan is not a radio-phonograph then it does closet evocation. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Landau is not a Ziegler.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: if that something is not a vision and it is not thirsty is not true then it does not closet stickleback. sent2: that the fir is a kind of a Ziegler and is not a Chippendale does not hold. sent3: the bluff is not a Ziegler if there exists something such that the fact that it does closet fir and does not scintillate restaurant does not hold. sent4: if there is something such that that it does scintillate aniline and is Neanderthal is not true the Vela is not Neanderthal. sent5: if there is something such that the fact that it does scintillate restaurant and it does not closet fir is not right the Landau is not a Ziegler. sent6: the fact that something scintillates aniline and is Neanderthal is not true if it does not prize hinge. sent7: if that the Vela does not prize jail and scintillates Kama is not correct then it does not scintillates Kama. sent8: the fact that something is not a vision and not thirsty is false if it does not scintillate Kama. sent9: the fact that the Vela does not prize jail and scintillates Kama is incorrect. sent10: that the Landau does closet fir and is not a Ziegler is incorrect. sent11: the Landau is not a Ziegler if something does not scintillate restaurant. sent12: the probiotic does not prize hinge if the fact that the Pennsylvanian does deregulate shift and does prize hinge is not correct. sent13: that the bluff is a Ziegler and does not closet fir is wrong. sent14: the fact that the Pennsylvanian deregulates shift and prizes hinge is not true. sent15: there exists nothing such that it scintillates restaurant and does not closet fir.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬({A}{bc} & ¬{EO}{bc}) sent3: (x): ¬({AB}x & ¬{AA}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬({E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}{b} sent5: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({E}x & {C}x) sent7: ¬(¬{K}{b} & {H}{b}) -> ¬{H}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) sent9: ¬(¬{K}{b} & {H}{b}) sent10: ¬({AB}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{A}{a} sent12: ¬({J}{d} & {D}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent13: ¬({A}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent14: ¬({J}{d} & {D}{d}) sent15: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent15 -> int1: that that the bluff does scintillate restaurant but it does not closet fir does not hold is right.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it scintillates restaurant and does not closet fir does not hold.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Landau is a kind of a Ziegler.
|
{A}{a}
|
[
"sent6 -> int3: if that the probiotic does not prize hinge hold then the fact that it does scintillate aniline and is Neanderthal is not right.; sent12 & sent14 -> int4: the probiotic does not prize hinge.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the probiotic does scintillate aniline and is Neanderthal does not hold.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that that it does scintillate aniline and is Neanderthal is not right.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the Vela is not Neanderthal.; sent1 -> int8: the Vela does not closet stickleback if the fact that it is not a vision and not thirsty is not right.; sent8 -> int9: the fact that the Vela is not a kind of a vision and it is not thirsty is not correct if it does not scintillate Kama.; sent7 & sent9 -> int10: the Vela does not scintillate Kama.; int9 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the Vela is not a vision and not thirsty is wrong.; int8 & int11 -> int12: the Vela does not closet stickleback.; int7 & int12 -> int13: the Vela is not Neanderthal and does not closet stickleback.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that it is not Neanderthal and it does not closet stickleback.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Landau is not a Ziegler. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is not a vision and it is not thirsty is not true then it does not closet stickleback. sent2: that the fir is a kind of a Ziegler and is not a Chippendale does not hold. sent3: the bluff is not a Ziegler if there exists something such that the fact that it does closet fir and does not scintillate restaurant does not hold. sent4: if there is something such that that it does scintillate aniline and is Neanderthal is not true the Vela is not Neanderthal. sent5: if there is something such that the fact that it does scintillate restaurant and it does not closet fir is not right the Landau is not a Ziegler. sent6: the fact that something scintillates aniline and is Neanderthal is not true if it does not prize hinge. sent7: if that the Vela does not prize jail and scintillates Kama is not correct then it does not scintillates Kama. sent8: the fact that something is not a vision and not thirsty is false if it does not scintillate Kama. sent9: the fact that the Vela does not prize jail and scintillates Kama is incorrect. sent10: that the Landau does closet fir and is not a Ziegler is incorrect. sent11: the Landau is not a Ziegler if something does not scintillate restaurant. sent12: the probiotic does not prize hinge if the fact that the Pennsylvanian does deregulate shift and does prize hinge is not correct. sent13: that the bluff is a Ziegler and does not closet fir is wrong. sent14: the fact that the Pennsylvanian deregulates shift and prizes hinge is not true. sent15: there exists nothing such that it scintillates restaurant and does not closet fir. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 -> int1: that that the bluff does scintillate restaurant but it does not closet fir does not hold is right.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it scintillates restaurant and does not closet fir does not hold.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bluejacket is heteroecious.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: the tympanum is a defect and smuggles if it is not a kind of a Mammut. sent2: the fact that something is heteroecious but it is not unsarcastic is false if that it does not closet Thoth hold. sent3: the massif either is heteroecious or does prize turntable or both if there is something such that it is not a kind of a chafed. sent4: the bluejacket is not a kind of a chafed if that the doxazosin is both not patriotic and a breeze is not true. sent5: the massif does closet Thoth. sent6: the bluejacket closets Thoth. sent7: that the doxazosin is a kind of unpatriotic thing that does breeze is not true if there exists something such that it is a defect. sent8: that the massif is unsarcastic is true. sent9: that the tympanum is not a Mammut hold. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it does closet Thoth is right. sent11: the Madagascan closets Thoth. sent12: that the bluejacket is heteroecious hold if something that does closet Thoth is unsarcastic. sent13: the bluejacket is carposporic and it is a guard. sent14: The Thoth does closet massif. sent15: there is nothing that does not prize turntable and is not a chafed. sent16: there is something such that it is unsarcastic.
|
sent1: ¬{J}{d} -> ({H}{d} & {I}{d}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent3: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}{a} v {D}{a}) sent4: ¬({G}{c} & {F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {A}{b} sent7: (x): {H}x -> ¬({G}{c} & {F}{c}) sent8: {B}{a} sent9: ¬{J}{d} sent10: (Ex): {A}x sent11: {A}{ig} sent12: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{b} sent13: ({JJ}{b} & {HD}{b}) sent14: {AA}{aa} sent15: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) sent16: (Ex): {B}x
|
[
"sent5 & sent8 -> int1: the massif closets Thoth and is unsarcastic.; int1 -> int2: something closets Thoth and it is unsarcastic.; int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent8 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x); int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the T-man is unsarcastic.
|
{B}{ij}
|
[
"sent1 & sent9 -> int3: the tympanum is a defect that does smuggle.; int3 -> int4: the tympanum defects.; int4 -> int5: something is a defect.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the fact that the doxazosin is a kind of unpatriotic a breeze is false.; sent4 & int6 -> int7: that the bluejacket does not chafe is true.; int7 -> int8: something is not a kind of a chafed.; int8 & sent3 -> int9: the massif either is heteroecious or prizes turntable or both.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bluejacket is heteroecious. ; $context$ = sent1: the tympanum is a defect and smuggles if it is not a kind of a Mammut. sent2: the fact that something is heteroecious but it is not unsarcastic is false if that it does not closet Thoth hold. sent3: the massif either is heteroecious or does prize turntable or both if there is something such that it is not a kind of a chafed. sent4: the bluejacket is not a kind of a chafed if that the doxazosin is both not patriotic and a breeze is not true. sent5: the massif does closet Thoth. sent6: the bluejacket closets Thoth. sent7: that the doxazosin is a kind of unpatriotic thing that does breeze is not true if there exists something such that it is a defect. sent8: that the massif is unsarcastic is true. sent9: that the tympanum is not a Mammut hold. sent10: there is something such that the fact that it does closet Thoth is right. sent11: the Madagascan closets Thoth. sent12: that the bluejacket is heteroecious hold if something that does closet Thoth is unsarcastic. sent13: the bluejacket is carposporic and it is a guard. sent14: The Thoth does closet massif. sent15: there is nothing that does not prize turntable and is not a chafed. sent16: there is something such that it is unsarcastic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent8 -> int1: the massif closets Thoth and is unsarcastic.; int1 -> int2: something closets Thoth and it is unsarcastic.; int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the gig is a plot but it does not deregulate highway does not hold.
|
¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b})
|
sent1: the gig does not deregulate highway. sent2: the fact that the missus is not a Priestley is true. sent3: the gig is a plot but it does not deregulate highway if the missus is not a Priestley. sent4: something that does ally is not a Priestley and is not a yen. sent5: the missus does not deregulate highway if the gig is not a kind of a Priestley.
|
sent1: ¬{AB}{b} sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent4: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent5: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬{AB}{a}
|
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the highway does not deregulate highway.
|
¬{AB}{e}
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: the gig is not a Priestley and not a yen if it does ally.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the gig is a plot but it does not deregulate highway does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the gig does not deregulate highway. sent2: the fact that the missus is not a Priestley is true. sent3: the gig is a plot but it does not deregulate highway if the missus is not a Priestley. sent4: something that does ally is not a Priestley and is not a yen. sent5: the missus does not deregulate highway if the gig is not a kind of a Priestley. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the trailer deregulates categorem and does not prize Rhyacotriton.
|
({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})
|
sent1: the trailer is extragalactic if it is not a Weser. sent2: if that the trailer does deregulate categorem and/or it does not prize Rhyacotriton is correct then the barbette is not a Weser. sent3: the fact that something deregulates categorem but it does not prize Rhyacotriton is wrong if it prizes Steiner. sent4: the disciple is a kind of a chancel. sent5: that the dugout is tonsorial and it does encrust does not hold. sent6: if the trailer does not prize Steiner then it is a kind of hermeneutics thing that does not hibernate. sent7: the calamus is a chancel and it is gymnosophical if that the dugout is not tonsorial is not wrong. sent8: either the trailer does deregulate categorem or it does not prize Rhyacotriton or both if something does not prize Rhyacotriton. sent9: something does deregulate categorem and it is extragalactic if it is not a Weser. sent10: if something is a kind of an inferior then the fact that the disciple either is not extragalactic or does prize Steiner or both is not right. sent11: the fact that the trailer is not non-hermeneutics but it does not hibernate is false if it does prize Rhyacotriton. sent12: if that the dugout is tonsorial thing that encrusts does not hold it is not tonsorial. sent13: if the trailer is not a chancel it is not a Weser. sent14: the patchwork does not prize Rhyacotriton if there is something such that the fact that it is not extragalactic or prizes Steiner or both does not hold. sent15: The Steiner does not prize trailer. sent16: the disciple is a kind of an inferior. sent17: either the trailer is not a chancel or it is not a kind of an inferior or both. sent18: the trailer does not prize Steiner.
|
sent1: ¬{E}{a} -> {D}{a} sent2: ({B}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{E}{cq} sent3: (x): {C}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) sent4: {G}{c} sent5: ¬({I}{e} & {J}{e}) sent6: ¬{C}{a} -> ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: ¬{I}{e} -> ({G}{d} & {H}{d}) sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({B}x & {D}x) sent10: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{D}{c} v {C}{c}) sent11: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent12: ¬({I}{e} & {J}{e}) -> ¬{I}{e} sent13: ¬{G}{a} -> ¬{E}{a} sent14: (x): ¬(¬{D}x v {C}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent15: ¬{AF}{ad} sent16: {F}{c} sent17: (¬{G}{a} v ¬{F}{a}) sent18: ¬{C}{a}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the trailer prizes Rhyacotriton.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the trailer is a kind of hermeneutics thing that does not hibernate is false.; sent6 & sent18 -> int2: the trailer is hermeneutics and does not hibernate.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the trailer does not prize Rhyacotriton.; sent9 -> int5: the trailer deregulates categorem and it is not non-extragalactic if it is not a Weser.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent6 & sent18 -> int2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: ¬{A}{a}; sent9 -> int5: ¬{E}{a} -> ({B}{a} & {D}{a});"
] |
that the trailer deregulates categorem but it does not prize Rhyacotriton does not hold.
|
¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})
|
[
"sent3 -> int6: if the trailer does prize Steiner then the fact that it deregulates categorem and it does not prize Rhyacotriton is not correct.; sent16 & sent4 -> int7: the disciple is an inferior and it is a chancel.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that that it is a kind of inferior a chancel is right.;"
] | 7 | 4 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the trailer deregulates categorem and does not prize Rhyacotriton. ; $context$ = sent1: the trailer is extragalactic if it is not a Weser. sent2: if that the trailer does deregulate categorem and/or it does not prize Rhyacotriton is correct then the barbette is not a Weser. sent3: the fact that something deregulates categorem but it does not prize Rhyacotriton is wrong if it prizes Steiner. sent4: the disciple is a kind of a chancel. sent5: that the dugout is tonsorial and it does encrust does not hold. sent6: if the trailer does not prize Steiner then it is a kind of hermeneutics thing that does not hibernate. sent7: the calamus is a chancel and it is gymnosophical if that the dugout is not tonsorial is not wrong. sent8: either the trailer does deregulate categorem or it does not prize Rhyacotriton or both if something does not prize Rhyacotriton. sent9: something does deregulate categorem and it is extragalactic if it is not a Weser. sent10: if something is a kind of an inferior then the fact that the disciple either is not extragalactic or does prize Steiner or both is not right. sent11: the fact that the trailer is not non-hermeneutics but it does not hibernate is false if it does prize Rhyacotriton. sent12: if that the dugout is tonsorial thing that encrusts does not hold it is not tonsorial. sent13: if the trailer is not a chancel it is not a Weser. sent14: the patchwork does not prize Rhyacotriton if there is something such that the fact that it is not extragalactic or prizes Steiner or both does not hold. sent15: The Steiner does not prize trailer. sent16: the disciple is a kind of an inferior. sent17: either the trailer is not a chancel or it is not a kind of an inferior or both. sent18: the trailer does not prize Steiner. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the trailer prizes Rhyacotriton.; sent11 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the trailer is a kind of hermeneutics thing that does not hibernate is false.; sent6 & sent18 -> int2: the trailer is hermeneutics and does not hibernate.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the trailer does not prize Rhyacotriton.; sent9 -> int5: the trailer deregulates categorem and it is not non-extragalactic if it is not a Weser.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the possible is a kind of a Kirghiz but it is not front is wrong.
|
¬({E}{a} & ¬{F}{a})
|
sent1: if the possible is a kind of a Pakistani then it is immaterial. sent2: something is a kind of a Kirghiz but it is not a front if it is not a kind of a solfa. sent3: something is not immaterial if it is far and it closets must. sent4: if the possible is a romance then it does closet must. sent5: the possible is a solfa. sent6: the reformer does not scintillate gape and is not pilar if the masquerade does not smooth. sent7: the fact that something is not far and does not closet must is not correct if it is not immaterial. sent8: the caecilian is adoptive if it is not far or is not a solfa or both. sent9: the penitentiary is anticlinal and/or it is not calculous. sent10: the possible is a cyma. sent11: the masquerade does not smooth. sent12: the possible romances. sent13: if something that is maladaptive romances then it is not immaterial. sent14: the reformer is not a kind of a Arafat if it does not scintillate gape and is not pilar. sent15: the schizogony is a romance and not a Michael if the tenter closets minute. sent16: if there is something such that that it is not far and it does not closet must does not hold then the plane is far. sent17: if there is something such that it does not closet must then the caecilian is not far and/or is not a solfa. sent18: the tenter closets minute if there is something such that it is anticlinal or it is not calculous or both. sent19: if the fact that the plane is a romance that is not maladaptive is not correct the possible does not closet must. sent20: the fact that something is a kind of non-young thing that is not maladaptive is not true if it patterns. sent21: the fact that the possible does scintillate gimlet is not incorrect. sent22: if the reformer is not a Arafat that it is a chronograph and is a kind of a pattern is not false. sent23: if the fact that the reformer is not young and it is not maladaptive is not right then the schizogony is maladaptive. sent24: if something is not immaterial then the fact that it is a Kirghiz and it is not a kind of a front does not hold. sent25: the casserole is a forelock if it is a pectoral.
|
sent1: {GA}{a} -> {D}{a} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({E}x & ¬{F}x) sent3: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: {G}{a} -> {C}{a} sent5: {A}{a} sent6: ¬{S}{g} -> (¬{Q}{e} & ¬{R}{e}) sent7: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) sent8: (¬{B}{gq} v ¬{A}{gq}) -> {GM}{gq} sent9: ({L}{f} v ¬{K}{f}) sent10: {FK}{a} sent11: ¬{S}{g} sent12: {G}{a} sent13: (x): ({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{D}x sent14: (¬{Q}{e} & ¬{R}{e}) -> ¬{P}{e} sent15: {J}{d} -> ({G}{c} & ¬{I}{c}) sent16: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}{b} sent17: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}{gq} v ¬{A}{gq}) sent18: (x): ({L}x v ¬{K}x) -> {J}{d} sent19: ¬({G}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent20: (x): {N}x -> ¬(¬{M}x & ¬{H}x) sent21: {JI}{a} sent22: ¬{P}{e} -> ({O}{e} & {N}{e}) sent23: ¬(¬{M}{e} & ¬{H}{e}) -> {H}{c} sent24: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{F}x) sent25: {DB}{jk} -> {CP}{jk}
|
[
"sent4 & sent12 -> int1: the possible does closet must.; sent3 -> int2: the possible is not immaterial if it is not non-far and it closets must.; sent24 -> int3: if the possible is not immaterial then that it is a Kirghiz and is non-front does not hold.;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent12 -> int1: {C}{a}; sent3 -> int2: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}; sent24 -> int3: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{F}{a});"
] |
the possible is both a Kirghiz and not a front.
|
({E}{a} & ¬{F}{a})
|
[
"sent2 -> int4: the possible is a kind of a Kirghiz but it is not a front if it is not a kind of a solfa.; sent7 -> int5: if the schizogony is non-immaterial the fact that it is not far and does not closet must is incorrect.; sent13 -> int6: the fact that the schizogony is non-immaterial is correct if it is maladaptive and it does romance.; sent20 -> int7: that the reformer is a kind of non-young thing that is not maladaptive is incorrect if the fact that it patterns is not false.; sent6 & sent11 -> int8: the reformer does not scintillate gape and is not pilar.; sent14 & int8 -> int9: the reformer is not a Arafat.; sent22 & int9 -> int10: the reformer is a kind of a chronograph and it does pattern.; int10 -> int11: the fact that the reformer is a pattern hold.; int7 & int11 -> int12: that the reformer is not a young and it is not maladaptive does not hold.; sent23 & int12 -> int13: the schizogony is maladaptive.; sent9 -> int14: there exists something such that it is anticlinal or it is not calculous or both.; int14 & sent18 -> int15: that the tenter does not closet minute does not hold.; sent15 & int15 -> int16: the schizogony is both a romance and not a Michael.; int16 -> int17: the schizogony is a romance.; int13 & int17 -> int18: the schizogony is maladaptive and a romance.; int6 & int18 -> int19: the schizogony is not immaterial.; int5 & int19 -> int20: the fact that the schizogony is not far and it does not closet must is false.; int20 -> int21: there exists something such that the fact that it is not far and it does not closet must is not true.; int21 & sent16 -> int22: the plane is far.; int22 -> int23: there is something such that it is far.;"
] | 14 | 4 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the possible is a kind of a Kirghiz but it is not front is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the possible is a kind of a Pakistani then it is immaterial. sent2: something is a kind of a Kirghiz but it is not a front if it is not a kind of a solfa. sent3: something is not immaterial if it is far and it closets must. sent4: if the possible is a romance then it does closet must. sent5: the possible is a solfa. sent6: the reformer does not scintillate gape and is not pilar if the masquerade does not smooth. sent7: the fact that something is not far and does not closet must is not correct if it is not immaterial. sent8: the caecilian is adoptive if it is not far or is not a solfa or both. sent9: the penitentiary is anticlinal and/or it is not calculous. sent10: the possible is a cyma. sent11: the masquerade does not smooth. sent12: the possible romances. sent13: if something that is maladaptive romances then it is not immaterial. sent14: the reformer is not a kind of a Arafat if it does not scintillate gape and is not pilar. sent15: the schizogony is a romance and not a Michael if the tenter closets minute. sent16: if there is something such that that it is not far and it does not closet must does not hold then the plane is far. sent17: if there is something such that it does not closet must then the caecilian is not far and/or is not a solfa. sent18: the tenter closets minute if there is something such that it is anticlinal or it is not calculous or both. sent19: if the fact that the plane is a romance that is not maladaptive is not correct the possible does not closet must. sent20: the fact that something is a kind of non-young thing that is not maladaptive is not true if it patterns. sent21: the fact that the possible does scintillate gimlet is not incorrect. sent22: if the reformer is not a Arafat that it is a chronograph and is a kind of a pattern is not false. sent23: if the fact that the reformer is not young and it is not maladaptive is not right then the schizogony is maladaptive. sent24: if something is not immaterial then the fact that it is a Kirghiz and it is not a kind of a front does not hold. sent25: the casserole is a forelock if it is a pectoral. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent12 -> int1: the possible does closet must.; sent3 -> int2: the possible is not immaterial if it is not non-far and it closets must.; sent24 -> int3: if the possible is not immaterial then that it is a Kirghiz and is non-front does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the prizing aniline does not occur.
|
¬{AA}
|
sent1: not the headway but the medullariness occurs. sent2: the exercise happens. sent3: that not the prizing frappe but the impedance occurs causes that the drain does not occur. sent4: the prizing aniline happens if the stipulating happens. sent5: if the drain does not occur the ruffianism does not occur and the stipulating does not occur. sent6: the stipulating does not occur. sent7: that the stipulating does not occur prevents that the exercise does not occur.
|
sent1: (¬{GC} & {EC}) sent2: {AB} sent3: (¬{D} & {C}) -> ¬{B} sent4: {A} -> {AA} sent5: ¬{B} -> (¬{IR} & ¬{A}) sent6: ¬{A} sent7: ¬{A} -> {AB}
|
[] |
[] |
the fact that the prizing aniline occurs is not incorrect.
|
{AA}
|
[] | 6 | 2 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the prizing aniline does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: not the headway but the medullariness occurs. sent2: the exercise happens. sent3: that not the prizing frappe but the impedance occurs causes that the drain does not occur. sent4: the prizing aniline happens if the stipulating happens. sent5: if the drain does not occur the ruffianism does not occur and the stipulating does not occur. sent6: the stipulating does not occur. sent7: that the stipulating does not occur prevents that the exercise does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Herder is a Amazon.
|
{C}{aa}
|
sent1: the Herder is not a snooker. sent2: the Herder is not a kind of a debut. sent3: if something is not a kind of a snooker it is not a kind of a Amazon. sent4: something does not closet complex if it does not stridulate. sent5: the fact that the deviationist does not scintillate bolster but it is a kind of a Amazon hold if it is not disloyal. sent6: something is not disloyal if that it does stridulate and is exchangeable is not right. sent7: something is a Amazon if it does scintillate bolster. sent8: if something is not acetonic then the fact that it does stridulate and it is exchangeable is not right.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{aa} sent2: ¬{AK}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬{FM}x sent5: ¬{D}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent6: (x): ¬({E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent7: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent8: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({E}x & {F}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the Herder is not a kind of a Amazon if it is not a snooker.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa}; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Herder is a Amazon.
|
{C}{aa}
|
[
"sent7 -> int2: the Herder is a Amazon if it scintillates bolster.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Herder is a Amazon. ; $context$ = sent1: the Herder is not a snooker. sent2: the Herder is not a kind of a debut. sent3: if something is not a kind of a snooker it is not a kind of a Amazon. sent4: something does not closet complex if it does not stridulate. sent5: the fact that the deviationist does not scintillate bolster but it is a kind of a Amazon hold if it is not disloyal. sent6: something is not disloyal if that it does stridulate and is exchangeable is not right. sent7: something is a Amazon if it does scintillate bolster. sent8: if something is not acetonic then the fact that it does stridulate and it is exchangeable is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the Herder is not a kind of a Amazon if it is not a snooker.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the lowland does not prize gimlet or it does not closet Zizania or both is incorrect.
|
¬(¬{B}{b} v ¬{C}{b})
|
sent1: the fact that the fact that the lowland is not a kind of an excretion and/or it does not closet Zizania is false is not wrong. sent2: the page closets Zizania. sent3: the lowland closets Zizania. sent4: if the page is an excretion then it prizes gimlet. sent5: the page is a kind of an excretion. sent6: if the page does prize gimlet the lowland does closet Zizania. sent7: if the page does prize gimlet then that the lowland either does not prize gimlet or does not closet Zizania or both is false. sent8: there exists something such that it prizes codex.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{A}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) sent2: {C}{a} sent3: {C}{b} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent7: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) sent8: (Ex): {F}x
|
[
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the page prizes gimlet.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the lowland does not prize gimlet and/or does not closet Zizania.
|
(¬{B}{b} v ¬{C}{b})
|
[] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the lowland does not prize gimlet or it does not closet Zizania or both is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the fact that the lowland is not a kind of an excretion and/or it does not closet Zizania is false is not wrong. sent2: the page closets Zizania. sent3: the lowland closets Zizania. sent4: if the page is an excretion then it prizes gimlet. sent5: the page is a kind of an excretion. sent6: if the page does prize gimlet the lowland does closet Zizania. sent7: if the page does prize gimlet then that the lowland either does not prize gimlet or does not closet Zizania or both is false. sent8: there exists something such that it prizes codex. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the page prizes gimlet.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the squawker does prize rustiness and it is a bailey.
|
({D}{c} & {C}{c})
|
sent1: something is not an exhibit if it is not a kind of a Kampala. sent2: the grosgrain is not a testator and is a kind of a befoulment. sent3: if the fact that the tunnel is not a Chondrus and does advertise is not true the decaf is not a testator. sent4: the fact that the decaf is unimodal is not wrong. sent5: if something is not a kind of a Pithecanthropus the fact that it does prize rustiness and it is a kind of a bailey is not right. sent6: that something is a kind of a Chondrus that does prize grosgrain is false if it is not a kind of a Pithecanthropus. sent7: something that is not an exhibit is not a concessionaire but unimodal. sent8: the squawker does not advertise if it is not unimodal and does prize grosgrain. sent9: everything is not a kind of a filly. sent10: something does prize rustiness if the fact that it is a testator and it is not a Chondrus is not right. sent11: that something is a testator but it is not a Chondrus does not hold if it does not advertise. sent12: the decaf is not a kind of a firefly if the grosgrain is a befoulment and is not hydrophobic. sent13: if that the decaf is not a kind of a testator is right the grosgrain is not a firefly. sent14: if there is something such that that it is a Chondrus and it does not advertise is incorrect the fact that the grosgrain is not a kind of a Chondrus is right. sent15: the gean closets KGB and is a universal if it is not a filly. sent16: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a concessionaire and it is unimodal the ma does not prize grosgrain. sent17: if the decaf prizes grosgrain then the fact that it is a kind of a Chondrus and it does not advertise does not hold. sent18: if the fact that something is a testator and/or it is a kind of a firefly is false it is not a kind of a Pithecanthropus. sent19: if the decaf is not a firefly or is a Pithecanthropus or both the squawker is a bailey. sent20: if there exists something such that it closets KGB then that the go-kart is a kind of a twist but it is not a kind of a wholeness is not correct. sent21: if the decaf is unimodal then it prizes grosgrain. sent22: if the fact that the ma does not prize grosgrain is not false that the tunnel is not a Chondrus and advertises is not right. sent23: if that the fact that something is a twist but it is not a wholeness hold is not right then it is not a Kampala. sent24: the grosgrain is a kind of a befoulment but it is not hydrophobic.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{L}x -> ¬{K}x sent2: (¬{E}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent3: ¬(¬{F}{d} & {G}{d}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent4: {I}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x & {C}x) sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({F}x & {H}x) sent7: (x): ¬{K}x -> (¬{J}x & {I}x) sent8: (¬{I}{c} & {H}{c}) -> ¬{G}{c} sent9: (x): ¬{Q}x sent10: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{F}x) -> {D}x sent11: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{F}x) sent12: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬{B}{a} sent14: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}{a} sent15: ¬{Q}{g} -> ({O}{g} & {P}{g}) sent16: (x): (¬{J}x & {I}x) -> ¬{H}{e} sent17: {H}{b} -> ¬({F}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) sent18: (x): ¬({E}x v {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent19: (¬{B}{b} v {A}{b}) -> {C}{c} sent20: (x): {O}x -> ¬({N}{f} & ¬{M}{f}) sent21: {I}{b} -> {H}{b} sent22: ¬{H}{e} -> ¬(¬{F}{d} & {G}{d}) sent23: (x): ¬({N}x & ¬{M}x) -> ¬{L}x sent24: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[
"sent12 & sent24 -> int1: the fact that the decaf is not a kind of a firefly is right.; int1 -> int2: the decaf is either not a firefly or a Pithecanthropus or both.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: the squawker is a bailey.; sent10 -> int4: if that the squawker is a kind of a testator but it is not a Chondrus does not hold then it does prize rustiness.; sent11 -> int5: if the squawker does not advertise then the fact that it is a testator and it is not a Chondrus is incorrect.;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent24 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; int1 -> int2: (¬{B}{b} v {A}{b}); int2 & sent19 -> int3: {C}{c}; sent10 -> int4: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> {D}{c}; sent11 -> int5: ¬{G}{c} -> ¬({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c});"
] |
that the squawker does prize rustiness and is a kind of a bailey is false.
|
¬({D}{c} & {C}{c})
|
[
"sent18 -> int6: if the fact that the squawker is a kind of a testator and/or it is a kind of a firefly is not true then it is not a Pithecanthropus.; sent21 & sent4 -> int7: the decaf prizes grosgrain.; sent17 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the decaf is a Chondrus and does not advertise does not hold.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that that it is a Chondrus and it does not advertise is wrong.; int9 & sent14 -> int10: the grosgrain is not a Chondrus.; int10 -> int11: there is something such that it is not a Chondrus.;"
] | 8 | 4 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the squawker does prize rustiness and it is a bailey. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not an exhibit if it is not a kind of a Kampala. sent2: the grosgrain is not a testator and is a kind of a befoulment. sent3: if the fact that the tunnel is not a Chondrus and does advertise is not true the decaf is not a testator. sent4: the fact that the decaf is unimodal is not wrong. sent5: if something is not a kind of a Pithecanthropus the fact that it does prize rustiness and it is a kind of a bailey is not right. sent6: that something is a kind of a Chondrus that does prize grosgrain is false if it is not a kind of a Pithecanthropus. sent7: something that is not an exhibit is not a concessionaire but unimodal. sent8: the squawker does not advertise if it is not unimodal and does prize grosgrain. sent9: everything is not a kind of a filly. sent10: something does prize rustiness if the fact that it is a testator and it is not a Chondrus is not right. sent11: that something is a testator but it is not a Chondrus does not hold if it does not advertise. sent12: the decaf is not a kind of a firefly if the grosgrain is a befoulment and is not hydrophobic. sent13: if that the decaf is not a kind of a testator is right the grosgrain is not a firefly. sent14: if there is something such that that it is a Chondrus and it does not advertise is incorrect the fact that the grosgrain is not a kind of a Chondrus is right. sent15: the gean closets KGB and is a universal if it is not a filly. sent16: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a concessionaire and it is unimodal the ma does not prize grosgrain. sent17: if the decaf prizes grosgrain then the fact that it is a kind of a Chondrus and it does not advertise does not hold. sent18: if the fact that something is a testator and/or it is a kind of a firefly is false it is not a kind of a Pithecanthropus. sent19: if the decaf is not a firefly or is a Pithecanthropus or both the squawker is a bailey. sent20: if there exists something such that it closets KGB then that the go-kart is a kind of a twist but it is not a kind of a wholeness is not correct. sent21: if the decaf is unimodal then it prizes grosgrain. sent22: if the fact that the ma does not prize grosgrain is not false that the tunnel is not a Chondrus and advertises is not right. sent23: if that the fact that something is a twist but it is not a wholeness hold is not right then it is not a Kampala. sent24: the grosgrain is a kind of a befoulment but it is not hydrophobic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent24 -> int1: the fact that the decaf is not a kind of a firefly is right.; int1 -> int2: the decaf is either not a firefly or a Pithecanthropus or both.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: the squawker is a bailey.; sent10 -> int4: if that the squawker is a kind of a testator but it is not a Chondrus does not hold then it does prize rustiness.; sent11 -> int5: if the squawker does not advertise then the fact that it is a testator and it is not a Chondrus is incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the kicker is a beagling.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: there is something such that the fact that it does warn hold. sent2: if there exists something such that it does not prize Psittacus and it does warn the kicker is a stokehold. sent3: the kicker is a discursiveness if the fire compounds. sent4: the kicker is a kind of a discursiveness if the fire is subartesian. sent5: there is something such that it compounds. sent6: if there exists something such that it does not compound and it is a kind of a stokehold the fire is a discursiveness. sent7: if that the kicker is not a discursiveness is correct the scammony is not a discursiveness. sent8: the fire is not small-capitalization if something closets assassin and it is onside. sent9: the fire is a beagling if the kicker does compound. sent10: the kicker is a compound if the fire is a beagling. sent11: that something is both biologistic and not hydraulics is false if it closets miniature. sent12: the fire is a discursiveness if the kicker compounds. sent13: there is something such that it does destruct. sent14: if something is not small-capitalization it is not compound and/or it is non-subartesian. sent15: that the fire is non-small-capitalization is correct if the fact that the hotspot is onside and does not closet assassin is not correct. sent16: the fact that the hotspot is a kind of onside thing that does not closet assassin is wrong. sent17: that something is both a stokehold and not a beagling is incorrect if it is a discursiveness. sent18: that the fire is a beagling is right if the kicker is subartesian. sent19: there exists something such that the fact that it does closet Spaniard hold. sent20: the ostrich is a beagling. sent21: there exists something such that it does not prize Psittacus and it does warn. sent22: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not compound and it is a stokehold is not wrong then the kicker is subartesian. sent23: if something compounds that it is a stokehold and it is not subartesian is incorrect. sent24: something does closet assassin and it is onside. sent25: the kicker does warn.
|
sent1: (Ex): {AB}x sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent3: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} sent4: {E}{b} -> {C}{a} sent5: (Ex): {D}x sent6: (x): (¬{D}x & {A}x) -> {C}{b} sent7: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{C}{gm} sent8: (x): ({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}{b} sent9: {D}{a} -> {B}{b} sent10: {B}{b} -> {D}{a} sent11: (x): {AK}x -> ¬({AO}x & ¬{JH}x) sent12: {D}{a} -> {C}{b} sent13: (Ex): {IR}x sent14: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x v ¬{E}x) sent15: ¬({G}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} sent16: ¬({G}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) sent17: (x): {C}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent18: {E}{a} -> {B}{b} sent19: (Ex): {GD}x sent20: {B}{bs} sent21: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent22: (x): (¬{D}x & {A}x) -> {E}{a} sent23: (x): {D}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{E}x) sent24: (Ex): ({H}x & {G}x) sent25: {AB}{a}
|
[
"sent21 & sent2 -> int1: the kicker is a stokehold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kicker is not a kind of a beagling.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the kicker is a stokehold but it is not a kind of a beagling.; sent17 -> int3: that the kicker is a kind of a stokehold but it is not a kind of a beagling is false if it is a kind of a discursiveness.;"
] |
[
"sent21 & sent2 -> int1: {A}{a}; void -> assump1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & assump1 -> int2: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); sent17 -> int3: {C}{a} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a});"
] |
the scammony is a stokehold.
|
{A}{gm}
|
[
"sent14 -> int4: if the fire is not small-capitalization it is either not a compound or not subartesian or both.; sent24 & sent8 -> int5: the fire is not small-capitalization.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the fire is not a compound and/or it is non-subartesian.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it does not compound and/or it is not subartesian.;"
] | 7 | 4 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the kicker is a beagling. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it does warn hold. sent2: if there exists something such that it does not prize Psittacus and it does warn the kicker is a stokehold. sent3: the kicker is a discursiveness if the fire compounds. sent4: the kicker is a kind of a discursiveness if the fire is subartesian. sent5: there is something such that it compounds. sent6: if there exists something such that it does not compound and it is a kind of a stokehold the fire is a discursiveness. sent7: if that the kicker is not a discursiveness is correct the scammony is not a discursiveness. sent8: the fire is not small-capitalization if something closets assassin and it is onside. sent9: the fire is a beagling if the kicker does compound. sent10: the kicker is a compound if the fire is a beagling. sent11: that something is both biologistic and not hydraulics is false if it closets miniature. sent12: the fire is a discursiveness if the kicker compounds. sent13: there is something such that it does destruct. sent14: if something is not small-capitalization it is not compound and/or it is non-subartesian. sent15: that the fire is non-small-capitalization is correct if the fact that the hotspot is onside and does not closet assassin is not correct. sent16: the fact that the hotspot is a kind of onside thing that does not closet assassin is wrong. sent17: that something is both a stokehold and not a beagling is incorrect if it is a discursiveness. sent18: that the fire is a beagling is right if the kicker is subartesian. sent19: there exists something such that the fact that it does closet Spaniard hold. sent20: the ostrich is a beagling. sent21: there exists something such that it does not prize Psittacus and it does warn. sent22: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not compound and it is a stokehold is not wrong then the kicker is subartesian. sent23: if something compounds that it is a stokehold and it is not subartesian is incorrect. sent24: something does closet assassin and it is onside. sent25: the kicker does warn. ; $proof$ =
|
sent21 & sent2 -> int1: the kicker is a stokehold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kicker is not a kind of a beagling.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the kicker is a stokehold but it is not a kind of a beagling.; sent17 -> int3: that the kicker is a kind of a stokehold but it is not a kind of a beagling is false if it is a kind of a discursiveness.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it is not a wolf that it is a kind of a treehopper or is not a grammar or both is incorrect.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: if the Landau is not a wolf then it is not a treehopper. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it accrues is not incorrect then the fact that it is Ionic and/or it does not deregulate irruption is false. sent3: that the fact that the Landau is a treehopper or it is not the grammar or both is incorrect if that the Landau is not a wolf is not incorrect is right. sent4: that the Landau does deregulate encapsulation or it is not a treehopper or both is not right if it does closet fir. sent5: either the Landau is a Praetorian or it is not cementitious or both if it is not a Amaterasu. sent6: that the Landau is either a terrier or not irreverent or both does not hold if it wolfs. sent7: if the Landau is not eligible then it is a Shona and/or is not a grammar. sent8: the fir is a congealment and/or it does not prize ectoproct if it is not a kind of a treehopper. sent9: there is something such that if it is a kind of a wolf that it is a treehopper and/or is not a grammar does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Shona that it is a skinny-dipper and/or it is not tomentose is incorrect. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a wolf then it is either a treehopper or not a grammar or both. sent12: if something is not nonsyllabic that it is transoceanic and/or it does not prize abjurer is not right. sent13: there is something such that if it does not tinge it is contrasty or it is not a kind of a Amaterasu or both. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not a hazelnut then that it is generative or it is not a blood or both is wrong.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent2: (Ex): {J}x -> ¬({H}x v ¬{GC}x) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: {FJ}{aa} -> ¬({JB}{aa} v ¬{AA}{aa}) sent5: ¬{BB}{aa} -> ({IJ}{aa} v ¬{GQ}{aa}) sent6: {A}{aa} -> ¬({BQ}{aa} v ¬{JK}{aa}) sent7: ¬{FF}{aa} -> ({CB}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: ¬{AA}{ij} -> ({DG}{ij} v ¬{DL}{ij}) sent9: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{CB}x -> ¬({IU}x v ¬{BU}x) sent11: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent12: (x): ¬{DT}x -> ¬({EG}x v ¬{CE}x) sent13: (Ex): ¬{GU}x -> ({EQ}x v ¬{BB}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬{AH}x -> ¬({GR}x v ¬{GB}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if it is not nonsyllabic the fact that it is transoceanic or does not prize abjurer or both is not true.
|
(Ex): ¬{DT}x -> ¬({EG}x v ¬{CE}x)
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: the fact that the vitamin is transoceanic and/or it does not prize abjurer is false if it is not nonsyllabic.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a wolf that it is a kind of a treehopper or is not a grammar or both is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Landau is not a wolf then it is not a treehopper. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it accrues is not incorrect then the fact that it is Ionic and/or it does not deregulate irruption is false. sent3: that the fact that the Landau is a treehopper or it is not the grammar or both is incorrect if that the Landau is not a wolf is not incorrect is right. sent4: that the Landau does deregulate encapsulation or it is not a treehopper or both is not right if it does closet fir. sent5: either the Landau is a Praetorian or it is not cementitious or both if it is not a Amaterasu. sent6: that the Landau is either a terrier or not irreverent or both does not hold if it wolfs. sent7: if the Landau is not eligible then it is a Shona and/or is not a grammar. sent8: the fir is a congealment and/or it does not prize ectoproct if it is not a kind of a treehopper. sent9: there is something such that if it is a kind of a wolf that it is a treehopper and/or is not a grammar does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a Shona that it is a skinny-dipper and/or it is not tomentose is incorrect. sent11: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a wolf then it is either a treehopper or not a grammar or both. sent12: if something is not nonsyllabic that it is transoceanic and/or it does not prize abjurer is not right. sent13: there is something such that if it does not tinge it is contrasty or it is not a kind of a Amaterasu or both. sent14: there exists something such that if it is not a hazelnut then that it is generative or it is not a blood or both is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the crocodilian is politics.
|
{B}{c}
|
sent1: the fact that the floss scintillates contempt and is a audiology does not hold. sent2: if the duckboard does not conclude and it is not a kind of a demonetization the works is not a coho. sent3: the crocodilian does scintillate flakiness and is politics if the pinner is not politics. sent4: the fact that something is politics and is Calcuttan does not hold if it does not scintillate flakiness. sent5: the fact that the floss scintillates contempt but it is not a audiology is incorrect. sent6: if the floss is a audiology then the pinner is not politics. sent7: if there exists something such that the fact that it does scintillate flakiness and it is not a Foeniculum is not correct the rack does not scintillate flakiness. sent8: the pinner is not politics if the fact that the floss does scintillate contempt but it is not a audiology is wrong. sent9: the crocodilian does scintillate flakiness. sent10: that the floss does not scintillate contempt hold if the fact that the pinner is politics thing that is not a kind of a audiology does not hold. sent11: that the floss does scintillate flakiness and is not a audiology is not correct. sent12: the crocodilian does scintillate flakiness if the pinner is not politics. sent13: that something is not Calcuttan is correct if the fact that it is a kind of politics thing that is Calcuttan does not hold. sent14: everything is a coho. sent15: the crocodilian is not politics if that the floss is not politics and it is not Calcuttan is false. sent16: if something is a coho the fact that it scintillates flakiness and it is not a Foeniculum does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent2: (¬{F}{e} & ¬{G}{e}) -> ¬{E}{d} sent3: ¬{B}{b} -> ({C}{c} & {B}{c}) sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & {A}x) sent5: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: {AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{C}{cc} sent8: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent9: {C}{c} sent10: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{AA}{a} sent11: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent12: ¬{B}{b} -> {C}{c} sent13: (x): ¬({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent14: (x): {E}x sent15: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent16: (x): {E}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x)
|
[
"sent8 & sent5 -> int1: the pinner is non-politics.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the crocodilian scintillates flakiness and is politics.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent3 & int1 -> int2: ({C}{c} & {B}{c}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the rack is katharobic thing that does scintillate duckboard.
|
({FS}{cc} & {DI}{cc})
|
[
"sent13 -> int3: if that the rack is politics but not non-Calcuttan is not right it is not non-Calcuttan.; sent16 -> int4: that the pinner does scintillate flakiness and is not a Foeniculum is wrong if it is a coho.; sent14 -> int5: the pinner is a coho.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the pinner scintillates flakiness but it is not a kind of a Foeniculum does not hold.; int6 -> int7: there is nothing such that it scintillates flakiness and is not a Foeniculum.; int7 -> int8: that the floss scintillates flakiness but it is not a kind of a Foeniculum is wrong.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that that it scintillates flakiness and it is not a Foeniculum does not hold.; sent7 & int9 -> int10: the rack does not scintillate flakiness.; sent4 -> int11: if the fact that the rack does not scintillate flakiness is not false then that it is a kind of politics thing that is Calcuttan is incorrect.; int10 & int11 -> int12: the fact that that the rack is a kind of politics thing that is Calcuttan is incorrect hold.; int3 & int12 -> int13: the rack is not Calcuttan.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the crocodilian is politics. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the floss scintillates contempt and is a audiology does not hold. sent2: if the duckboard does not conclude and it is not a kind of a demonetization the works is not a coho. sent3: the crocodilian does scintillate flakiness and is politics if the pinner is not politics. sent4: the fact that something is politics and is Calcuttan does not hold if it does not scintillate flakiness. sent5: the fact that the floss scintillates contempt but it is not a audiology is incorrect. sent6: if the floss is a audiology then the pinner is not politics. sent7: if there exists something such that the fact that it does scintillate flakiness and it is not a Foeniculum is not correct the rack does not scintillate flakiness. sent8: the pinner is not politics if the fact that the floss does scintillate contempt but it is not a audiology is wrong. sent9: the crocodilian does scintillate flakiness. sent10: that the floss does not scintillate contempt hold if the fact that the pinner is politics thing that is not a kind of a audiology does not hold. sent11: that the floss does scintillate flakiness and is not a audiology is not correct. sent12: the crocodilian does scintillate flakiness if the pinner is not politics. sent13: that something is not Calcuttan is correct if the fact that it is a kind of politics thing that is Calcuttan does not hold. sent14: everything is a coho. sent15: the crocodilian is not politics if that the floss is not politics and it is not Calcuttan is false. sent16: if something is a coho the fact that it scintillates flakiness and it is not a Foeniculum does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent5 -> int1: the pinner is non-politics.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the crocodilian scintillates flakiness and is politics.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the lolly does not grieve.
|
¬{D}{a}
|
sent1: the Mass is not a enamelware if it is bronchiolar or is not a kind of a TELINT or both. sent2: the lolly is a physiography and/or it is bronchiolar. sent3: if the fact that something is a squared is not wrong it is bronchiolar. sent4: the myoglobin grieves and/or does not closet encapsulation. sent5: the lolly does not grieve if it either is a physiography or is not bronchiolar or both. sent6: the lolly is a paycheck if it does grieve. sent7: the fact that the lolly is a kind of a mountaineer is not incorrect. sent8: if the shore is not bronchiolar then the detergent is not a mountaineer but a physiography. sent9: if the airstrip lasts the shore is a kind of non-bronchiolar thing that is categorematic. sent10: something is a kind of fingerless thing that is not non-lasting if it is not basophilic. sent11: if the lolly is not bronchiolar then it does not grieve. sent12: if the lolly is a mountaineer it is a physiography. sent13: if the fact that the airstrip does scintillate Topeka and it is gross is not correct then it is not basophilic.
|
sent1: ({C}{ae} v ¬{CC}{ae}) -> ¬{DN}{ae} sent2: ({B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent3: (x): {AR}x -> {C}x sent4: ({D}{jc} v ¬{CN}{jc}) sent5: ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent6: {D}{a} -> {JE}{a} sent7: {A}{a} sent8: ¬{C}{c} -> (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent9: {F}{d} -> (¬{C}{c} & {E}{c}) sent10: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}x & {F}x) sent11: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{D}{a} sent12: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent13: ¬({J}{d} & {I}{d}) -> ¬{H}{d}
|
[
"sent12 & sent7 -> int1: the lolly is a kind of a physiography.; int1 -> int2: either the lolly is a kind of a physiography or it is not bronchiolar or both.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent7 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 -> int2: ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}); int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the lolly grieves.
|
{D}{a}
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: if the airstrip is not basophilic it is fingerless and it does last.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the lolly does not grieve. ; $context$ = sent1: the Mass is not a enamelware if it is bronchiolar or is not a kind of a TELINT or both. sent2: the lolly is a physiography and/or it is bronchiolar. sent3: if the fact that something is a squared is not wrong it is bronchiolar. sent4: the myoglobin grieves and/or does not closet encapsulation. sent5: the lolly does not grieve if it either is a physiography or is not bronchiolar or both. sent6: the lolly is a paycheck if it does grieve. sent7: the fact that the lolly is a kind of a mountaineer is not incorrect. sent8: if the shore is not bronchiolar then the detergent is not a mountaineer but a physiography. sent9: if the airstrip lasts the shore is a kind of non-bronchiolar thing that is categorematic. sent10: something is a kind of fingerless thing that is not non-lasting if it is not basophilic. sent11: if the lolly is not bronchiolar then it does not grieve. sent12: if the lolly is a mountaineer it is a physiography. sent13: if the fact that the airstrip does scintillate Topeka and it is gross is not correct then it is not basophilic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent7 -> int1: the lolly is a kind of a physiography.; int1 -> int2: either the lolly is a kind of a physiography or it is not bronchiolar or both.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.