version
stringclasses 1
value | hypothesis
stringlengths 11
215
| hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
39
| context
stringlengths 0
2.9k
| context_formula
stringlengths 0
905
| proofs
list | proofs_formula
list | negative_hypothesis
stringlengths 15
193
⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula
stringlengths 3
37
⌀ | negative_proofs
list | negative_original_tree_depth
int64 0
25
⌀ | original_tree_depth
int64 1
4
| depth
int64 0
3
⌀ | num_formula_distractors
int64 0
22
| num_translation_distractors
int64 0
0
| num_all_distractors
int64 0
22
| proof_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_proof_label
stringclasses 2
values | world_assump_label
stringclasses 3
values | negative_world_assump_label
stringclasses 2
values | prompt_serial
stringlengths 89
3.09k
| proof_serial
stringlengths 11
654
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if that it is a Leary and is not a kind of a Kuchean does not hold it is not an interval.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it is agronomic hold it is non-immodest. sent2: if that something is incorporeal but it is not a Leary is not true it does not interpose. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that it is both a Leary and not a Kuchean is right it is not a kind of an interval. sent4: the vesicle is an interval if the fact that it is a Leary and it is not a Kuchean does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if that it derives adoration and it is not apneic is incorrect it is not blue-collar. sent6: there is something such that if it does alternate then it does not tease Amundsen. sent7: something is not sterile if that it is a workplace and does not annex is not right. sent8: there is something such that if it is not pietistic then it does not flame. sent9: the vesicle is not a kind of an interval if the fact that it is a Leary but not a Kuchean is not true. sent10: the vesicle is not an interval if it is a Kuchean. sent11: there exists something such that if that the fact that it is a kind of a Cassandra and it does not derive Martian hold is false it does not tease inspiration.
|
sent1: (Ex): {CL}x -> ¬{BE}x sent2: (x): ¬({CP}x & ¬{AA}x) -> ¬{GO}x sent3: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ¬({EP}x & ¬{EU}x) -> ¬{JI}x sent6: (Ex): {JF}x -> ¬{GM}x sent7: (x): ¬({BB}x & ¬{BL}x) -> ¬{CQ}x sent8: (Ex): ¬{JC}x -> ¬{CN}x sent9: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent11: (Ex): ¬({CG}x & ¬{DH}x) -> ¬{DN}x
|
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if that the kittiwake is incorporeal and not a Leary does not hold then it does not interpose.
|
¬({CP}{fi} & ¬{AA}{fi}) -> ¬{GO}{fi}
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it is a Leary and is not a kind of a Kuchean does not hold it is not an interval. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it is agronomic hold it is non-immodest. sent2: if that something is incorporeal but it is not a Leary is not true it does not interpose. sent3: there is something such that if the fact that it is both a Leary and not a Kuchean is right it is not a kind of an interval. sent4: the vesicle is an interval if the fact that it is a Leary and it is not a Kuchean does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if that it derives adoration and it is not apneic is incorrect it is not blue-collar. sent6: there is something such that if it does alternate then it does not tease Amundsen. sent7: something is not sterile if that it is a workplace and does not annex is not right. sent8: there is something such that if it is not pietistic then it does not flame. sent9: the vesicle is not a kind of an interval if the fact that it is a Leary but not a Kuchean is not true. sent10: the vesicle is not an interval if it is a Kuchean. sent11: there exists something such that if that the fact that it is a kind of a Cassandra and it does not derive Martian hold is false it does not tease inspiration. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the luger does not derive vagueness is not wrong.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: if the fact that something does not percolate trundle and does heave engram does not hold then it does percolate trundle. sent2: the fact that if that the luger derives Ascidiaceae but it does not percolate trundle does not hold the luger does not derives Ascidiaceae hold. sent3: if the luger derives vagueness then it belts. sent4: if there are sapphirine and non-unambitious things then the homer blemishes. sent5: the fact that the hock is recreational and does not derive Spencer is incorrect. sent6: if the heaume is a regosol the tampion does not tease charioteer. sent7: if something is recessionary then that it does not heave luger and is a kind of a escalader is not correct. sent8: if the homer is a kind of a blemished then the fact that the Benedictine does not percolate trundle and heaves engram is false. sent9: if the luger does derive vagueness then it is a kind of a favorite. sent10: that the luger is a belt that does not percolate trundle is not true. sent11: if that the luger is a belt and does not percolate trundle is not true it is not a belt. sent12: the luger derives vagueness if the Neapolitan is a kind of a belt. sent13: the luger is not a belt if that it is a kind of a belt and is not a tutu does not hold. sent14: that the luger does tease hydrometry but it does not derive vagueness does not hold. sent15: if the Neapolitan derives vagueness then it does tease cuirass. sent16: the fact that something is recessionary is correct if it does not tease charioteer. sent17: that either the Neapolitan is a kind of a belt or it derives vagueness or both if there is something such that it does percolate trundle hold. sent18: if the haw is a escalader it is a kind of sapphirine thing that is not unambitious. sent19: the luger is coarse if it does percolate refill. sent20: if there exists something such that the fact that it is recreational and it does not derive Spencer is not true then the heaume is a kind of a regosol. sent21: the garnierite does not belt. sent22: the haw is a escalader if the fact that the tampion does not heave luger and is a kind of a escalader does not hold. sent23: that the Ballistite does not derive vagueness is right.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {E}x) -> {C}x sent2: ¬({DS}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{DS}{a} sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: (x): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> {D}{d} sent5: ¬({N}{h} & ¬{M}{h}) sent6: {L}{g} -> ¬{K}{f} sent7: (x): {I}x -> ¬(¬{J}x & {H}x) sent8: {D}{d} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} & {E}{c}) sent9: {A}{a} -> {DG}{a} sent10: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent11: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent12: {B}{b} -> {A}{a} sent13: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{CM}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent14: ¬({S}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent15: {A}{b} -> {HL}{b} sent16: (x): ¬{K}x -> {I}x sent17: (x): {C}x -> ({B}{b} v {A}{b}) sent18: {H}{e} -> ({F}{e} & ¬{G}{e}) sent19: {GF}{a} -> {P}{a} sent20: (x): ¬({N}x & ¬{M}x) -> {L}{g} sent21: ¬{B}{ad} sent22: ¬(¬{J}{f} & {H}{f}) -> {H}{e} sent23: ¬{A}{hh}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the luger derives vagueness.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the luger is a belt.; sent11 & sent10 -> int2: the luger is not a belt.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent11 & sent10 -> int2: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the luger belts but it does not tease cuirass does not hold.
|
¬({B}{a} & ¬{HL}{a})
|
[] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the luger does not derive vagueness is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something does not percolate trundle and does heave engram does not hold then it does percolate trundle. sent2: the fact that if that the luger derives Ascidiaceae but it does not percolate trundle does not hold the luger does not derives Ascidiaceae hold. sent3: if the luger derives vagueness then it belts. sent4: if there are sapphirine and non-unambitious things then the homer blemishes. sent5: the fact that the hock is recreational and does not derive Spencer is incorrect. sent6: if the heaume is a regosol the tampion does not tease charioteer. sent7: if something is recessionary then that it does not heave luger and is a kind of a escalader is not correct. sent8: if the homer is a kind of a blemished then the fact that the Benedictine does not percolate trundle and heaves engram is false. sent9: if the luger does derive vagueness then it is a kind of a favorite. sent10: that the luger is a belt that does not percolate trundle is not true. sent11: if that the luger is a belt and does not percolate trundle is not true it is not a belt. sent12: the luger derives vagueness if the Neapolitan is a kind of a belt. sent13: the luger is not a belt if that it is a kind of a belt and is not a tutu does not hold. sent14: that the luger does tease hydrometry but it does not derive vagueness does not hold. sent15: if the Neapolitan derives vagueness then it does tease cuirass. sent16: the fact that something is recessionary is correct if it does not tease charioteer. sent17: that either the Neapolitan is a kind of a belt or it derives vagueness or both if there is something such that it does percolate trundle hold. sent18: if the haw is a escalader it is a kind of sapphirine thing that is not unambitious. sent19: the luger is coarse if it does percolate refill. sent20: if there exists something such that the fact that it is recreational and it does not derive Spencer is not true then the heaume is a kind of a regosol. sent21: the garnierite does not belt. sent22: the haw is a escalader if the fact that the tampion does not heave luger and is a kind of a escalader does not hold. sent23: that the Ballistite does not derive vagueness is right. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the luger derives vagueness.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the luger is a belt.; sent11 & sent10 -> int2: the luger is not a belt.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the procedure does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the teasing Arno happens if the fact that the percolating hydra does not occur and the opinion does not occur does not hold. sent2: that the sizzle and the choppiness occurs is caused by that the deriving arsenopyrite does not occur. sent3: the deriving arsenopyrite does not occur. sent4: if the teasing Arno happens the comicness occurs. sent5: the choppiness happens. sent6: that both the comicness and the sizzle happens prevents that the procedure occurs.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent2: ¬{F} -> ({C} & {E}) sent3: ¬{F} sent4: {B} -> {A} sent5: {E} sent6: ({A} & {C}) -> ¬{D}
|
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the sizzling and the choppiness happens.; int1 -> int2: the sizzle occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: ({C} & {E}); int1 -> int2: {C};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the procedure does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the teasing Arno happens if the fact that the percolating hydra does not occur and the opinion does not occur does not hold. sent2: that the sizzle and the choppiness occurs is caused by that the deriving arsenopyrite does not occur. sent3: the deriving arsenopyrite does not occur. sent4: if the teasing Arno happens the comicness occurs. sent5: the choppiness happens. sent6: that both the comicness and the sizzle happens prevents that the procedure occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the sizzling and the choppiness happens.; int1 -> int2: the sizzle occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the cardinal is not synergistic.
|
¬{A}{aa}
|
sent1: everything is synergistic. sent2: something is not a debit if that it is forcipate and it does debit is not true. sent3: the decker does not derive barleycorn if something that is rayless is angry. sent4: the fact that something does percolate performance and is a replaceability is true if it does not derive barleycorn. sent5: the decker is a kind of rayless thing that derives barleycorn if the bushbuck is not angry. sent6: something is synergistic if the fact that it bereaves and it does not percolate performance is incorrect. sent7: the splashboard does not derive loanword. sent8: the fact that the barleycorn bereaves but it does not percolate performance is not correct if there exists something such that it is a replaceability. sent9: if something does not derive loanword then it is dominical but not forcipate. sent10: the cardinal is a domino. sent11: that the sarcenet is forcipate and is a debit is false if there exists something such that it is not forcipate. sent12: the bushbuck is angry. sent13: if something does not nuzzle and it is not a kind of a Tobagonian it is not angry. sent14: everything is a fractionation. sent15: the bushbuck is rayless. sent16: if the sarcenet is not a debit and it is not angry then the bushbuck is not angry. sent17: the culmination is synergistic. sent18: the antelope is a replaceability if the decker derives barleycorn.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x sent2: (x): ¬({J}x & {I}x) -> ¬{I}x sent3: (x): ({F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({B}x & {D}x) sent5: ¬{G}{c} -> ({F}{b} & {E}{b}) sent6: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x sent7: ¬{M}{e} sent8: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}{ip} & ¬{B}{ip}) sent9: (x): ¬{M}x -> ({H}x & ¬{J}x) sent10: {AK}{aa} sent11: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬({J}{d} & {I}{d}) sent12: {G}{c} sent13: (x): (¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) -> ¬{G}x sent14: (x): {HR}x sent15: {F}{c} sent16: (¬{I}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{G}{c} sent17: {A}{al} sent18: {E}{b} -> {D}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the cardinal is not synergistic.
|
¬{A}{aa}
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the decker does not derive barleycorn it percolates performance and it is a replaceability.; sent15 & sent12 -> int2: the bushbuck is both rayless and angry.; int2 -> int3: something is rayless and it is angry.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the decker does not derive barleycorn.; int1 & int4 -> int5: the decker does percolate performance and it is a replaceability.; int5 -> int6: the decker percolates performance.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that the fact that it does percolate performance is not false.;"
] | 8 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the cardinal is not synergistic. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is synergistic. sent2: something is not a debit if that it is forcipate and it does debit is not true. sent3: the decker does not derive barleycorn if something that is rayless is angry. sent4: the fact that something does percolate performance and is a replaceability is true if it does not derive barleycorn. sent5: the decker is a kind of rayless thing that derives barleycorn if the bushbuck is not angry. sent6: something is synergistic if the fact that it bereaves and it does not percolate performance is incorrect. sent7: the splashboard does not derive loanword. sent8: the fact that the barleycorn bereaves but it does not percolate performance is not correct if there exists something such that it is a replaceability. sent9: if something does not derive loanword then it is dominical but not forcipate. sent10: the cardinal is a domino. sent11: that the sarcenet is forcipate and is a debit is false if there exists something such that it is not forcipate. sent12: the bushbuck is angry. sent13: if something does not nuzzle and it is not a kind of a Tobagonian it is not angry. sent14: everything is a fractionation. sent15: the bushbuck is rayless. sent16: if the sarcenet is not a debit and it is not angry then the bushbuck is not angry. sent17: the culmination is synergistic. sent18: the antelope is a replaceability if the decker derives barleycorn. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the tumbler books.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: the sahib is not a kind of an indie if the abbey is an analogue. sent2: the stole is not a windward but it does percolate ptomaine. sent3: the dika is not a Atlas if the stander is both not a Atlas and not a AI. sent4: something is not a Telanthera. sent5: the stander is not a kind of an ammonia. sent6: the tumbler is not a book if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of an ammonia and it is a kind of a book is false. sent7: something is not a kind of an ammonia and is not catholic. sent8: if the sahib is not an indie and it is not a windward then the tumbler is not a kind of a windward. sent9: if the tumbler is not windward then the fact that the dika does toast and it is fissionable is false. sent10: the stander is catholic. sent11: if something is catholic and it does book then it is not an ammonia. sent12: the abbey is not non-analogue. sent13: that the dika is not a front and does not book is not right. sent14: if the fact that something is a toasted and it is fissionable is false it is not fissionable. sent15: the sahib is not a windward if the stole is not a kind of a windward and does percolate ptomaine. sent16: something is a kind of catholic thing that percolates CIO if it is not a Atlas. sent17: the stander does not percolate talon if it is a parsnip and it is not Homeric. sent18: a non-fissionable thing is a kind of a book that does percolate tumbler. sent19: something that does not percolate talon is not a Atlas and is not a AI.
|
sent1: {M}{e} -> ¬{L}{c} sent2: (¬{I}{d} & {N}{d}) sent3: (¬{G}{a} & ¬{J}{a}) -> ¬{G}{gq} sent4: (Ex): ¬{Q}x sent5: ¬{A}{a} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: (Ex): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent8: (¬{L}{c} & ¬{I}{c}) -> ¬{I}{b} sent9: ¬{I}{b} -> ¬({H}{gq} & {F}{gq}) sent10: {B}{a} sent11: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent12: {M}{e} sent13: ¬(¬{GF}{gq} & ¬{C}{gq}) sent14: (x): ¬({H}x & {F}x) -> ¬{F}x sent15: (¬{I}{d} & {N}{d}) -> ¬{I}{c} sent16: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({B}x & {E}x) sent17: ({P}{a} & ¬{O}{a}) -> ¬{K}{a} sent18: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) sent19: (x): ¬{K}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{J}x)
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stander is not a kind of an ammonia and is not catholic.; assump1 -> int1: the stander is not catholic.; sent10 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the stander is not a kind of an ammonia and is not catholic is wrong.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that the fact that it is not an ammonia and it is not catholic is not correct.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent10 & int1 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int3 -> int4: (Ex): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x);"
] |
the tumbler is not a kind of a book.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[] | 6 | 4 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the tumbler books. ; $context$ = sent1: the sahib is not a kind of an indie if the abbey is an analogue. sent2: the stole is not a windward but it does percolate ptomaine. sent3: the dika is not a Atlas if the stander is both not a Atlas and not a AI. sent4: something is not a Telanthera. sent5: the stander is not a kind of an ammonia. sent6: the tumbler is not a book if there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of an ammonia and it is a kind of a book is false. sent7: something is not a kind of an ammonia and is not catholic. sent8: if the sahib is not an indie and it is not a windward then the tumbler is not a kind of a windward. sent9: if the tumbler is not windward then the fact that the dika does toast and it is fissionable is false. sent10: the stander is catholic. sent11: if something is catholic and it does book then it is not an ammonia. sent12: the abbey is not non-analogue. sent13: that the dika is not a front and does not book is not right. sent14: if the fact that something is a toasted and it is fissionable is false it is not fissionable. sent15: the sahib is not a windward if the stole is not a kind of a windward and does percolate ptomaine. sent16: something is a kind of catholic thing that percolates CIO if it is not a Atlas. sent17: the stander does not percolate talon if it is a parsnip and it is not Homeric. sent18: a non-fissionable thing is a kind of a book that does percolate tumbler. sent19: something that does not percolate talon is not a Atlas and is not a AI. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stander is not a kind of an ammonia and is not catholic.; assump1 -> int1: the stander is not catholic.; sent10 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the stander is not a kind of an ammonia and is not catholic is wrong.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that the fact that it is not an ammonia and it is not catholic is not correct.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the percolating Stieglitz does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the fact that the laminectomy does not occur but the feed happens does not hold if the unimpressiveness does not occur. sent2: the fortune occurs and the teasing reduction occurs. sent3: the fact that the ligature does not occur is not false if both the camping and the productiveness happens. sent4: both the teasing supplication and the heaving loanword happens. sent5: the turn happens. sent6: the adoration does not occur. sent7: the fortune happens and the percolating Stieglitz occurs if the teasing reduction does not occur. sent8: both the justness and the blackjack happens. sent9: the fact that the heavenliness but not the biotypicness occurs does not hold if the pediatricness happens. sent10: the unimpressiveness does not occur if the nightwork and the impetiginousness happens. sent11: that the percolating Stieglitz happens and the blackjack occurs is not true if the Ionianness does not occur. sent12: the bark occurs. sent13: the blackjack does not occur if the non-Ionianness or the laminectomy or both happens. sent14: the blackjack occurs. sent15: that not the teasing reduction but the fortune occurs is incorrect if the justness does not occur. sent16: that either the fortune does not occur or the phenomenalness does not occur or both prevents that the phenomenalness happens. sent17: the teasing reduction occurs. sent18: that the blackjack does not occur yields that not the teasing reduction but the justness happens. sent19: the nightwork occurs if the fact that the heavenliness happens but the biotypicness does not occur does not hold. sent20: the trustfulness happens. sent21: if that the laminectomy does not occur and the feeding happens is wrong the laminectomy happens. sent22: the postganglionicness does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{I} -> ¬(¬{G} & {H}) sent2: ({A} & {B}) sent3: ({CR} & {CO}) -> ¬{GH} sent4: ({II} & {AK}) sent5: {CF} sent6: ¬{HU} sent7: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {D}) sent8: ({C} & {E}) sent9: {N} -> ¬({M} & ¬{L}) sent10: ({K} & {J}) -> ¬{I} sent11: ¬{F} -> ¬({D} & {E}) sent12: {GJ} sent13: (¬{F} v {G}) -> ¬{E} sent14: {E} sent15: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{B} & {A}) sent16: (¬{A} v ¬{FU}) -> ¬{FU} sent17: {B} sent18: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & {C}) sent19: ¬({M} & ¬{L}) -> {K} sent20: {HJ} sent21: ¬(¬{G} & {H}) -> {G} sent22: ¬{GQ}
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the fortune occurs.; sent8 -> int2: the justness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: both the fortune and the justness happens.;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {A}; sent8 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({A} & {C});"
] |
the phenomenalness does not occur.
|
¬{FU}
|
[] | 8 | 3 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the percolating Stieglitz does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the laminectomy does not occur but the feed happens does not hold if the unimpressiveness does not occur. sent2: the fortune occurs and the teasing reduction occurs. sent3: the fact that the ligature does not occur is not false if both the camping and the productiveness happens. sent4: both the teasing supplication and the heaving loanword happens. sent5: the turn happens. sent6: the adoration does not occur. sent7: the fortune happens and the percolating Stieglitz occurs if the teasing reduction does not occur. sent8: both the justness and the blackjack happens. sent9: the fact that the heavenliness but not the biotypicness occurs does not hold if the pediatricness happens. sent10: the unimpressiveness does not occur if the nightwork and the impetiginousness happens. sent11: that the percolating Stieglitz happens and the blackjack occurs is not true if the Ionianness does not occur. sent12: the bark occurs. sent13: the blackjack does not occur if the non-Ionianness or the laminectomy or both happens. sent14: the blackjack occurs. sent15: that not the teasing reduction but the fortune occurs is incorrect if the justness does not occur. sent16: that either the fortune does not occur or the phenomenalness does not occur or both prevents that the phenomenalness happens. sent17: the teasing reduction occurs. sent18: that the blackjack does not occur yields that not the teasing reduction but the justness happens. sent19: the nightwork occurs if the fact that the heavenliness happens but the biotypicness does not occur does not hold. sent20: the trustfulness happens. sent21: if that the laminectomy does not occur and the feeding happens is wrong the laminectomy happens. sent22: the postganglionicness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the fortune occurs.; sent8 -> int2: the justness occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: both the fortune and the justness happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the edge does sparkle and is not neuroendocrine.
|
({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
sent1: that the edge does tease dissoluteness but it is not a kind of a rescuer is not right if it is not a water. sent2: if the fact that something is a settling but not a water is incorrect then it is a water. sent3: the edge is not a water. sent4: something is a rescuer if the fact that it does tease dissoluteness and is not a rescuer is wrong.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬({FO}x & ¬{A}x) -> {A}x sent3: ¬{A}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {B}x
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the edge is a kind of a sparkle that is not neuroendocrine is false.; sent4 -> int1: if that the edge does tease dissoluteness but it is not a rescuer is not right it is a rescuer.; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: that the edge teases dissoluteness but it is not a rescuer does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the edge is a rescuer.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent4 -> int1: ¬({C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: ¬({C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: {B}{aa};"
] |
if the fact that the vesicle is a kind of a settling that does not water is not right it is a water.
|
¬({FO}{gg} & ¬{A}{gg}) -> {A}{gg}
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 4 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the edge does sparkle and is not neuroendocrine. ; $context$ = sent1: that the edge does tease dissoluteness but it is not a kind of a rescuer is not right if it is not a water. sent2: if the fact that something is a settling but not a water is incorrect then it is a water. sent3: the edge is not a water. sent4: something is a rescuer if the fact that it does tease dissoluteness and is not a rescuer is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the edge is a kind of a sparkle that is not neuroendocrine is false.; sent4 -> int1: if that the edge does tease dissoluteness but it is not a rescuer is not right it is a rescuer.; sent1 & sent3 -> int2: that the edge teases dissoluteness but it is not a rescuer does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the edge is a rescuer.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it does tease parity then it does not diffuse and it does not prop.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: the aldose is non-diffuse thing that is not a props if that the fact that it does not tease parity is right is incorrect. sent2: there exists something such that if it does tease parity then it does not diffuse and it is a props. sent3: there is something such that if it is a Mandaean it is not a kind of a design and it is not a Brockhouse. sent4: if the surgery does derive cystine it is both not a Offertory and not air-to-surface. sent5: there exists something such that if it teases parity then it is diffuse but not a props. sent6: there exists something such that if that it does tease parity hold it is not diffuse. sent7: there exists something such that if it is pericardial it is not a isoantibody and it is not a remuneration. sent8: if something is unholy it is not amoristic and does not diffuse. sent9: the aldose does not diffuse but it is a props if it teases parity. sent10: the aldose is not a props and not a dynamiter if it does derive koruna. sent11: if the fact that the aldose teases parity is not incorrect then that it is non-diffuse is not wrong. sent12: there exists something such that if it is pericardial it does not heave shunt and is not a thermoplastic. sent13: the aldose is not faithful and is not a props if it is camphoric. sent14: there exists something such that if that it is achondroplastic is not false then it is not a Heuchera and it is not a kind of a quiff. sent15: something that is a unbreakableness does not percolate Polyergus and is not air-to-surface. sent16: there is something such that if it does tease parity then it does not prop. sent17: if the aldose browses it is not a Offertory and it does not diffuse.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (Ex): {CA}x -> (¬{AQ}x & ¬{IB}x) sent4: {GM}{fm} -> (¬{CU}{fm} & ¬{FD}{fm}) sent5: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent7: (Ex): {EF}x -> (¬{IG}x & ¬{CE}x) sent8: (x): {GS}x -> (¬{CD}x & ¬{AA}x) sent9: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent10: {DP}{aa} -> (¬{AB}{aa} & ¬{EE}{aa}) sent11: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent12: (Ex): {EF}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{BA}x) sent13: {GR}{aa} -> (¬{BD}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent14: (Ex): {EL}x -> (¬{FL}x & ¬{DM}x) sent15: (x): {BF}x -> (¬{JD}x & ¬{FD}x) sent16: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent17: {EH}{aa} -> (¬{CU}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the GHQ does not percolate Polyergus and is not air-to-surface if that it is a unbreakableness is true.
|
{BF}{ca} -> (¬{JD}{ca} & ¬{FD}{ca})
|
[
"sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does tease parity then it does not diffuse and it does not prop. ; $context$ = sent1: the aldose is non-diffuse thing that is not a props if that the fact that it does not tease parity is right is incorrect. sent2: there exists something such that if it does tease parity then it does not diffuse and it is a props. sent3: there is something such that if it is a Mandaean it is not a kind of a design and it is not a Brockhouse. sent4: if the surgery does derive cystine it is both not a Offertory and not air-to-surface. sent5: there exists something such that if it teases parity then it is diffuse but not a props. sent6: there exists something such that if that it does tease parity hold it is not diffuse. sent7: there exists something such that if it is pericardial it is not a isoantibody and it is not a remuneration. sent8: if something is unholy it is not amoristic and does not diffuse. sent9: the aldose does not diffuse but it is a props if it teases parity. sent10: the aldose is not a props and not a dynamiter if it does derive koruna. sent11: if the fact that the aldose teases parity is not incorrect then that it is non-diffuse is not wrong. sent12: there exists something such that if it is pericardial it does not heave shunt and is not a thermoplastic. sent13: the aldose is not faithful and is not a props if it is camphoric. sent14: there exists something such that if that it is achondroplastic is not false then it is not a Heuchera and it is not a kind of a quiff. sent15: something that is a unbreakableness does not percolate Polyergus and is not air-to-surface. sent16: there is something such that if it does tease parity then it does not prop. sent17: if the aldose browses it is not a Offertory and it does not diffuse. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a trigger it is a kind of a Corixidae does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x)
|
sent1: the hillside is a Corixidae if it is a trigger. sent2: if the hillside is not a hussar it is a kind of a Corixidae. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a cornhusking then it is eradicable. sent4: if something is a trigger it is a Corixidae. sent5: there is something such that if it does not animate it is a navel. sent6: something does derive kolkhoznik if it is not a cornhusking. sent7: if something is not undesirable it does percolate nelson. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not pyrochemical then that it mortifies is not false. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a trigger it is a Corixidae. sent10: something is a kind of a Corixidae if it is not a kind of a trigger. sent11: if something is not incomplete it does center.
|
sent1: {B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent2: ¬{JG}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent3: (Ex): ¬{AD}x -> {BC}x sent4: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{CG}x -> {EO}x sent6: (x): ¬{AD}x -> {EQ}x sent7: (x): ¬{BF}x -> {CR}x sent8: (Ex): ¬{E}x -> {U}x sent9: (Ex): {B}x -> {C}x sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent11: (x): ¬{JD}x -> {JF}x
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: the hillside is a kind of a Corixidae if it is not a kind of a trigger.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> int1: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a trigger it is a kind of a Corixidae does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the hillside is a Corixidae if it is a trigger. sent2: if the hillside is not a hussar it is a kind of a Corixidae. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a cornhusking then it is eradicable. sent4: if something is a trigger it is a Corixidae. sent5: there is something such that if it does not animate it is a navel. sent6: something does derive kolkhoznik if it is not a cornhusking. sent7: if something is not undesirable it does percolate nelson. sent8: there exists something such that if it is not pyrochemical then that it mortifies is not false. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a trigger it is a Corixidae. sent10: something is a kind of a Corixidae if it is not a kind of a trigger. sent11: if something is not incomplete it does center. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> int1: the hillside is a kind of a Corixidae if it is not a kind of a trigger.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw and does dim is incorrect.
|
¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: if that something is not heedful is not incorrect the Perry is not a fit. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not glorious the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw. sent3: something photosensitizes scofflaw. sent4: that something does not photosensitize scofflaw and dims is incorrect if that it is glorious is not incorrect. sent5: the Perry does not superscribe firkin. sent6: there is something such that it is glorious. sent7: there exists something such that it is inglorious. sent8: the Perry is not unpaid but a dried. sent9: if there is something such that it does not devolve then the beguine is not dim and is a ropemaker. sent10: there is something such that it does not dim. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not miscarry misuse the Perry is non-glorious thing that is a lecanopteris. sent12: the Perry is both not non-aesthetics and glorious if it is not informational. sent13: the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw. sent14: the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw but it dims if there exists something such that it is not glorious. sent15: the Perry is not a kind of a Theodosius. sent16: something does not photosensitize scofflaw. sent17: if there exists something such that it is non-dim the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{DF}x -> ¬{DK}{a} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: (Ex): {B}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) sent5: ¬{DG}{a} sent6: (Ex): {A}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent8: (¬{BK}{a} & {AC}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬{GO}x -> (¬{C}{u} & {BF}{u}) sent10: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent11: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{A}{a} & {HG}{a}) sent12: ¬{E}{a} -> ({D}{a} & {A}{a}) sent13: ¬{B}{a} sent14: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent15: ¬{DB}{a} sent16: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent17: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent7 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw and is dim does not hold.
|
¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: that the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw but it does dim is not true if it is not inglorious.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw and does dim is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is not heedful is not incorrect the Perry is not a fit. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not glorious the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw. sent3: something photosensitizes scofflaw. sent4: that something does not photosensitize scofflaw and dims is incorrect if that it is glorious is not incorrect. sent5: the Perry does not superscribe firkin. sent6: there is something such that it is glorious. sent7: there exists something such that it is inglorious. sent8: the Perry is not unpaid but a dried. sent9: if there is something such that it does not devolve then the beguine is not dim and is a ropemaker. sent10: there is something such that it does not dim. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not miscarry misuse the Perry is non-glorious thing that is a lecanopteris. sent12: the Perry is both not non-aesthetics and glorious if it is not informational. sent13: the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw. sent14: the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw but it dims if there exists something such that it is not glorious. sent15: the Perry is not a kind of a Theodosius. sent16: something does not photosensitize scofflaw. sent17: if there exists something such that it is non-dim the Perry does not photosensitize scofflaw. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the comfit is boreal and/or it does not tame is not true.
|
¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a})
|
sent1: if the comfit is a kind of a Crocodylus it is not non-boreal. sent2: if that the breadstick is a mystic and it is unbroken is not true the Guatemalan is unbroken. sent3: the hack tames. sent4: if that something is not a spokeswoman and does not miscarry Darwin is not correct then it is a kind of a spokeswoman. sent5: the comfit is a kind of a Crocodylus. sent6: if something is not a Crocodylus then that it either is boreal or does not tame or both is false. sent7: the Guatemalan is unbroken and/or it is not a kind of a mystic if the fact that it is a spokeswoman is not wrong. sent8: the breadstick is cogitative. sent9: either the comfit is boreal or it tames or both. sent10: if the Guatemalan is unbroken the comfit is hypothalamic. sent11: if there are cogitative things then the fact that the Guatemalan is not a spokeswoman and does not miscarry Darwin does not hold. sent12: something is a kind of a Crocodylus if it is boreal. sent13: the scorpionfish is boreal. sent14: the fact that the comfit is larval is not false.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent2: ¬({F}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent3: {C}{en} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{I}x) -> {G}x sent5: {A}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x v ¬{C}x) sent7: {G}{b} -> ({E}{b} v ¬{F}{b}) sent8: {H}{c} sent9: ({B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent10: {E}{b} -> {D}{a} sent11: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}{b} & ¬{I}{b}) sent12: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent13: {B}{bk} sent14: {DT}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent5 -> int1: the comfit is boreal.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the comfit is boreal and/or it does not tame is not right.
|
¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a})
|
[
"sent6 -> int2: that either the comfit is boreal or it does not tame or both is not true if it is not a kind of a Crocodylus.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the comfit is boreal and/or it does not tame is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the comfit is a kind of a Crocodylus it is not non-boreal. sent2: if that the breadstick is a mystic and it is unbroken is not true the Guatemalan is unbroken. sent3: the hack tames. sent4: if that something is not a spokeswoman and does not miscarry Darwin is not correct then it is a kind of a spokeswoman. sent5: the comfit is a kind of a Crocodylus. sent6: if something is not a Crocodylus then that it either is boreal or does not tame or both is false. sent7: the Guatemalan is unbroken and/or it is not a kind of a mystic if the fact that it is a spokeswoman is not wrong. sent8: the breadstick is cogitative. sent9: either the comfit is boreal or it tames or both. sent10: if the Guatemalan is unbroken the comfit is hypothalamic. sent11: if there are cogitative things then the fact that the Guatemalan is not a spokeswoman and does not miscarry Darwin does not hold. sent12: something is a kind of a Crocodylus if it is boreal. sent13: the scorpionfish is boreal. sent14: the fact that the comfit is larval is not false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent5 -> int1: the comfit is boreal.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the gyneolatry does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
sent1: the abstracting oiled does not occur if the fact that either the miscarrying venter does not occur or the welding happens or both is not right. sent2: that the uncooperativeness and/or the non-alpineness occurs is not correct. sent3: the welding does not occur if that not the miscarrying venter but the welding happens is incorrect. sent4: if the distrustfulness does not occur the fact that the miscarrying venter does not occur or the welding occurs or both is wrong. sent5: if the gyneolatry occurs then that the closing does not occur and/or the abstracting mural does not occur is not true. sent6: the abstracting oiled happens if the welding happens. sent7: either the tie does not occur or the sanction happens or both. sent8: the showing does not occur. sent9: the photosensitizing Macleod does not occur. sent10: the closing does not occur. sent11: the abstracting mural occurs. sent12: the closingness does not occur or the abstracting mural occurs or both. sent13: the artiodactyl does not occur. sent14: the abstracting mural occurs if the gyneolatry happens. sent15: if the stabling does not occur the fact that not the miscarrying venter but the welding occurs does not hold. sent16: the replacing does not occur and/or the endorsing occurs. sent17: the gyneolatry occurs if that the abstracting oiled happens is right. sent18: that either the algorithmicness does not occur or the alcoholicness does not occur or both is not true if the fact that the payback happens hold. sent19: either the alcoholic does not occur or the goingness does not occur or both.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{D} v {C}) -> ¬{B} sent2: ¬(¬{GB} v ¬{GJ}) sent3: ¬(¬{D} & {C}) -> ¬{C} sent4: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{D} v {C}) sent5: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) sent6: {C} -> {B} sent7: (¬{DE} v {GN}) sent8: ¬{CH} sent9: ¬{CF} sent10: ¬{AA} sent11: {AB} sent12: (¬{AA} v {AB}) sent13: ¬{ID} sent14: {A} -> {AB} sent15: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{D} & {C}) sent16: (¬{HF} v {CO}) sent17: {B} -> {A} sent18: {GQ} -> ¬(¬{JE} v ¬{CS}) sent19: (¬{CS} v ¬{DS})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gyneolatry occurs.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that that the closing does not occur and/or the abstracting mural does not occur hold is not true.; sent10 -> int2: either the closing does not occur or the abstracting mural does not occur or both.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}); sent10 -> int2: (¬{AA} v ¬{AB}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the gyneolatry occurs.
|
{A}
|
[] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the gyneolatry does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the abstracting oiled does not occur if the fact that either the miscarrying venter does not occur or the welding happens or both is not right. sent2: that the uncooperativeness and/or the non-alpineness occurs is not correct. sent3: the welding does not occur if that not the miscarrying venter but the welding happens is incorrect. sent4: if the distrustfulness does not occur the fact that the miscarrying venter does not occur or the welding occurs or both is wrong. sent5: if the gyneolatry occurs then that the closing does not occur and/or the abstracting mural does not occur is not true. sent6: the abstracting oiled happens if the welding happens. sent7: either the tie does not occur or the sanction happens or both. sent8: the showing does not occur. sent9: the photosensitizing Macleod does not occur. sent10: the closing does not occur. sent11: the abstracting mural occurs. sent12: the closingness does not occur or the abstracting mural occurs or both. sent13: the artiodactyl does not occur. sent14: the abstracting mural occurs if the gyneolatry happens. sent15: if the stabling does not occur the fact that not the miscarrying venter but the welding occurs does not hold. sent16: the replacing does not occur and/or the endorsing occurs. sent17: the gyneolatry occurs if that the abstracting oiled happens is right. sent18: that either the algorithmicness does not occur or the alcoholicness does not occur or both is not true if the fact that the payback happens hold. sent19: either the alcoholic does not occur or the goingness does not occur or both. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gyneolatry occurs.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that that the closing does not occur and/or the abstracting mural does not occur hold is not true.; sent10 -> int2: either the closing does not occur or the abstracting mural does not occur or both.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the inverter abstracts chancroid but it is not a kind of a processor.
|
({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})
|
sent1: there is nothing such that it is not a processor and not odd. sent2: the inverter is heartless if the anamorphism does abstract expensiveness. sent3: the anamorphism abstracts expensiveness. sent4: the fact that the inverter is not a processor if the fact that the bullfrog is both not a processor and not odd is incorrect hold. sent5: if the inverter is heartless then it abstracts chancroid. sent6: The expensiveness abstracts anamorphism.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent3: {A}{a} sent4: ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent5: {B}{b} -> {C}{b} sent6: {AA}{aa}
|
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the inverter is heartless.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the fact that the inverter does abstract chancroid is correct.; sent1 -> int3: that the bullfrog is not a processor and it is not odd does not hold.; sent4 & int3 -> int4: the inverter is not a processor.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent5 -> int2: {C}{b}; sent1 -> int3: ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}); sent4 & int3 -> int4: ¬{D}{b}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the inverter abstracts chancroid but it is not a kind of a processor. ; $context$ = sent1: there is nothing such that it is not a processor and not odd. sent2: the inverter is heartless if the anamorphism does abstract expensiveness. sent3: the anamorphism abstracts expensiveness. sent4: the fact that the inverter is not a processor if the fact that the bullfrog is both not a processor and not odd is incorrect hold. sent5: if the inverter is heartless then it abstracts chancroid. sent6: The expensiveness abstracts anamorphism. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the inverter is heartless.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the fact that the inverter does abstract chancroid is correct.; sent1 -> int3: that the bullfrog is not a processor and it is not odd does not hold.; sent4 & int3 -> int4: the inverter is not a processor.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the inspissation is a kind of a sanguinity.
|
{A}{b}
|
sent1: the inspissation is not a determiner. sent2: the stratus is not a kind of a sanguinity if the fact that it is a determiner and it is a Buchanan is wrong. sent3: that the stratus is a Sufi and it is a determiner does not hold. sent4: the fact that the vintner is not a kind of a binary is right. sent5: if the Fauve is not a kind of an operations it is not a kind of a determiner. sent6: the fact that the stratus is a golf and it is a kind of a sanguinity is not true. sent7: the stratus does not superscribe synchronism if the mason does not superscribe synchronism or it does not photosensitize Fauve or both. sent8: something that does not superscribe synchronism is not a sanguinity and not a Buchanan. sent9: if something is not tortious then it either does not superscribe synchronism or does not photosensitize Fauve or both. sent10: if the archangel does not miscarry errancy and it does not photosensitize modeled then the salpinx does not miscarry errancy. sent11: the vintner is not apoplectic if it is lunar and it is a residual. sent12: the stratus is not a kind of a Buchanan if the fact that it is a Sufi that is a kind of a determiner is not right. sent13: the mason is not tortious if the fact that the salpinx is not a hemiplegic and it does not superscribe capitalization is wrong. sent14: the stratus is not a Buchanan if it is not a sanguinity. sent15: if the inspissation is not a sanguinity it is not a kind of a determiner. sent16: the stratus is not a kind of a phytochemistry if that it is a kind of a slickness that is a kind of a Buchanan is wrong. sent17: the vintner is lunar and is a kind of a residual if it is not a kind of a binary. sent18: the fact that something is not a kind of a hemiplegic and it does not superscribe capitalization is false if it does not miscarry errancy. sent19: if the stratus is not a Buchanan the inspissation is not a sanguinity. sent20: if the stratus does not superscribe synchronism that it does not superscribe clerihew is not false. sent21: the planetesimal is not a kind of a determiner.
|
sent1: ¬{AB}{b} sent2: ¬({AB}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent4: ¬{M}{f} sent5: ¬{EP}{fh} -> ¬{AB}{fh} sent6: ¬({CN}{a} & {A}{a}) sent7: (¬{C}{c} v ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{E}x) sent10: (¬{H}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) -> ¬{H}{d} sent11: ({K}{f} & {L}{f}) -> ¬{J}{f} sent12: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent13: ¬(¬{G}{d} & ¬{F}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent14: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent15: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬{AB}{b} sent16: ¬({FU}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{FG}{a} sent17: ¬{M}{f} -> ({K}{f} & {L}{f}) sent18: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) sent19: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent20: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{HB}{a} sent21: ¬{AB}{ir}
|
[
"sent12 & sent3 -> int1: the stratus is not a Buchanan.; int1 & sent19 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent3 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & sent19 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the inspissation is a sanguinity.
|
{A}{b}
|
[
"sent8 -> int2: the stratus is not a sanguinity and is not a Buchanan if it does not superscribe synchronism.; sent9 -> int3: the mason either does not superscribe synchronism or does not photosensitize Fauve or both if it is not tortious.; sent18 -> int4: the fact that the salpinx is not a hemiplegic and it does not superscribe capitalization is incorrect if it does not miscarry errancy.; sent17 & sent4 -> int5: the vintner is both lunar and residual.; sent11 & int5 -> int6: the vintner is not apoplectic.; int6 -> int7: something is not apoplectic.;"
] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the inspissation is a kind of a sanguinity. ; $context$ = sent1: the inspissation is not a determiner. sent2: the stratus is not a kind of a sanguinity if the fact that it is a determiner and it is a Buchanan is wrong. sent3: that the stratus is a Sufi and it is a determiner does not hold. sent4: the fact that the vintner is not a kind of a binary is right. sent5: if the Fauve is not a kind of an operations it is not a kind of a determiner. sent6: the fact that the stratus is a golf and it is a kind of a sanguinity is not true. sent7: the stratus does not superscribe synchronism if the mason does not superscribe synchronism or it does not photosensitize Fauve or both. sent8: something that does not superscribe synchronism is not a sanguinity and not a Buchanan. sent9: if something is not tortious then it either does not superscribe synchronism or does not photosensitize Fauve or both. sent10: if the archangel does not miscarry errancy and it does not photosensitize modeled then the salpinx does not miscarry errancy. sent11: the vintner is not apoplectic if it is lunar and it is a residual. sent12: the stratus is not a kind of a Buchanan if the fact that it is a Sufi that is a kind of a determiner is not right. sent13: the mason is not tortious if the fact that the salpinx is not a hemiplegic and it does not superscribe capitalization is wrong. sent14: the stratus is not a Buchanan if it is not a sanguinity. sent15: if the inspissation is not a sanguinity it is not a kind of a determiner. sent16: the stratus is not a kind of a phytochemistry if that it is a kind of a slickness that is a kind of a Buchanan is wrong. sent17: the vintner is lunar and is a kind of a residual if it is not a kind of a binary. sent18: the fact that something is not a kind of a hemiplegic and it does not superscribe capitalization is false if it does not miscarry errancy. sent19: if the stratus is not a Buchanan the inspissation is not a sanguinity. sent20: if the stratus does not superscribe synchronism that it does not superscribe clerihew is not false. sent21: the planetesimal is not a kind of a determiner. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent3 -> int1: the stratus is not a Buchanan.; int1 & sent19 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the rhodanthe is not a unattractiveness.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: the gargoyle is allergic and it is a kind of an idleness. sent2: something does not miscarry succade or it does not superscribe ramie or both if it is allergic. sent3: the fact that the longbowman is not a fenoprofen is not wrong if the wadi is an underwriter that photosensitizes banzai. sent4: that the longbowman is a determiner that is a confederate is not true if it is not a fenoprofen. sent5: that the purchase miscarries Guevara but it is not nonextensile does not hold if the fact that the longbowman is not a confederate is true. sent6: the Irelander is a unattractiveness if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a unattractiveness and it is not an idleness is false. sent7: the fact that everything does not photosensitize koruna is correct. sent8: that the rhodanthe is not a unattractiveness is true if that the vomer is allergic and it is a kind of an idleness is not right. sent9: that the don't-know is not paleontological is not incorrect if that it does miscarry kiloton and/or it does not revolve does not hold. sent10: the tinker superscribes ramie. sent11: that the vomer is allergic and it is an idleness does not hold if that the purchase is not scentless is not false. sent12: the wadi does photosensitize banzai. sent13: that something is not a unattractiveness and it is not an idleness is incorrect if it is scentless. sent14: the purchase is scentless. sent15: the fact that if the fact that that something miscarries Guevara and is not nonextensile hold is false then it is nonextensile is not wrong. sent16: if the don't-know is not paleontological then the purchase stems and it is gastronomic. sent17: the wadi is an underwriter. sent18: if that something is both a determiner and a confederate does not hold it does not confederate. sent19: if the gargoyle does not miscarry succade the rhodanthe is a unattractiveness. sent20: the rhodanthe is a unattractiveness if the gargoyle does not miscarry succade and/or it does not superscribe ramie. sent21: that the fact that something does miscarry kiloton or it does not revolve or both is not right if it does not photosensitize koruna hold.
|
sent1: ({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: ({O}{g} & {P}{g}) -> ¬{N}{d} sent4: ¬{N}{d} -> ¬({K}{d} & {I}{d}) sent5: ¬{I}{d} -> ¬({G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}{dm} sent7: (x): ¬{Q}x sent8: ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: ¬({M}{e} v ¬{L}{e}) -> ¬{J}{e} sent10: {AB}{em} sent11: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent12: {P}{g} sent13: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) sent14: {D}{c} sent15: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{F}x) -> {F}x sent16: ¬{J}{e} -> ({E}{c} & {H}{c}) sent17: {O}{g} sent18: (x): ¬({K}x & {I}x) -> ¬{I}x sent19: ¬{AA}{aa} -> {B}{a} sent20: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{a} sent21: (x): ¬{Q}x -> ¬({M}x v ¬{L}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the gargoyle does not miscarry succade and/or does not superscribe ramie if it is allergic.; sent1 -> int2: the gargoyle is allergic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the gargoyle does not miscarry succade or it does not superscribe ramie or both is not wrong.; int3 & sent20 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); sent1 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); int3 & sent20 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the rhodanthe is not a unattractiveness.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent18 -> int4: the longbowman is not a kind of a confederate if that it is a kind of a determiner and it is a confederate does not hold.; sent12 & sent17 -> int5: the wadi is an underwriter that photosensitizes banzai.; sent3 & int5 -> int6: the longbowman is not a fenoprofen.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the fact that the longbowman is a determiner and it does confederate is not correct.; int4 & int7 -> int8: that the longbowman is not a confederate is not false.; int8 & sent5 -> int9: that the purchase miscarries Guevara and is not nonextensile is incorrect.; sent15 -> int10: if the fact that the purchase does miscarry Guevara and is not nonextensile is incorrect it is nonextensile.; int9 & int10 -> int11: the purchase is nonextensile.; sent21 -> int12: if the trumpetwood does not photosensitize koruna then the fact that the fact that either it miscarries kiloton or it does not revolve or both is true does not hold.; sent7 -> int13: the trumpetwood does not photosensitize koruna.; int12 & int13 -> int14: the fact that the trumpetwood does miscarry kiloton and/or it does not revolve is false.; int14 -> int15: there exists nothing such that it miscarries kiloton and/or does not revolve.; int15 -> int16: that the don't-know does miscarry kiloton and/or does not revolve is incorrect.; int16 & sent9 -> int17: the don't-know is not paleontological.; sent16 & int17 -> int18: the fact that the purchase is a stem and it is gastronomic hold.; int18 -> int19: the purchase stems.; int11 & int19 -> int20: the purchase is both a stem and nonextensile.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the rhodanthe is not a unattractiveness. ; $context$ = sent1: the gargoyle is allergic and it is a kind of an idleness. sent2: something does not miscarry succade or it does not superscribe ramie or both if it is allergic. sent3: the fact that the longbowman is not a fenoprofen is not wrong if the wadi is an underwriter that photosensitizes banzai. sent4: that the longbowman is a determiner that is a confederate is not true if it is not a fenoprofen. sent5: that the purchase miscarries Guevara but it is not nonextensile does not hold if the fact that the longbowman is not a confederate is true. sent6: the Irelander is a unattractiveness if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a unattractiveness and it is not an idleness is false. sent7: the fact that everything does not photosensitize koruna is correct. sent8: that the rhodanthe is not a unattractiveness is true if that the vomer is allergic and it is a kind of an idleness is not right. sent9: that the don't-know is not paleontological is not incorrect if that it does miscarry kiloton and/or it does not revolve does not hold. sent10: the tinker superscribes ramie. sent11: that the vomer is allergic and it is an idleness does not hold if that the purchase is not scentless is not false. sent12: the wadi does photosensitize banzai. sent13: that something is not a unattractiveness and it is not an idleness is incorrect if it is scentless. sent14: the purchase is scentless. sent15: the fact that if the fact that that something miscarries Guevara and is not nonextensile hold is false then it is nonextensile is not wrong. sent16: if the don't-know is not paleontological then the purchase stems and it is gastronomic. sent17: the wadi is an underwriter. sent18: if that something is both a determiner and a confederate does not hold it does not confederate. sent19: if the gargoyle does not miscarry succade the rhodanthe is a unattractiveness. sent20: the rhodanthe is a unattractiveness if the gargoyle does not miscarry succade and/or it does not superscribe ramie. sent21: that the fact that something does miscarry kiloton or it does not revolve or both is not right if it does not photosensitize koruna hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the gargoyle does not miscarry succade and/or does not superscribe ramie if it is allergic.; sent1 -> int2: the gargoyle is allergic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the gargoyle does not miscarry succade or it does not superscribe ramie or both is not wrong.; int3 & sent20 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the noness happens.
|
{C}
|
sent1: the no happens and the provocation occurs if the miscarrying colorcast does not occur. sent2: the superscribing mastering occurs. sent3: if that the photosensitizing lymphocyte does not occur and the no does not occur does not hold then the photosensitizing lymphocyte happens. sent4: the castigation does not occur. sent5: if that the blacking occurs and the bimorphemicness happens is not correct then the bimorphemicness does not occur. sent6: if that the MRI happens and the blacking happens is not true the miscarrying colorcast does not occur. sent7: the superscribing cooperation happens and the miscarrying threat occurs. sent8: the fact that the provocation does not occur is not correct. sent9: the theology happens. sent10: if the miscarrying Varro does not occur then the provocation and the rodeo occurs. sent11: if the provocation happens and the miscarrying colorcast occurs then the no does not occur. sent12: that the preparation does not occur and the lavishness does not occur leads to that the cenobiticness does not occur. sent13: the miscarrying colorcast occurs. sent14: the fact that either the preparation does not occur or the endarterectomy does not occur or both hold. sent15: the fact that that the photosensitizing lymphocyte does not occur and the noness does not occur is not correct hold if the miscarrying colorcast does not occur. sent16: if the cenobiticness does not occur then the fact that that the MRI happens and the blacking occurs hold is not correct. sent17: the superscribing mulatto does not occur if the miscarrying Varro and the photosensitizing clearance happens. sent18: the preparation does not occur if the preparation does not occur and/or the endarterectomy does not occur. sent19: the fact that both the blacking and the bimorphemicness happens does not hold if the MRI does not occur. sent20: the miscarrying Varro does not occur if the bimorphemicness occurs. sent21: the integration happens.
|
sent1: ¬{B} -> ({C} & {A}) sent2: {GR} sent3: ¬(¬{FK} & ¬{C}) -> {FK} sent4: ¬{FJ} sent5: ¬({G} & {E}) -> ¬{E} sent6: ¬({F} & {G}) -> ¬{B} sent7: ({R} & {IQ}) sent8: {A} sent9: {FQ} sent10: ¬{D} -> ({A} & {CU}) sent11: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent12: (¬{J} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{I} sent13: {B} sent14: (¬{J} v ¬{O}) sent15: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{FK} & ¬{C}) sent16: ¬{I} -> ¬({F} & {G}) sent17: ({D} & {II}) -> ¬{JI} sent18: (¬{J} v ¬{O}) -> ¬{J} sent19: ¬{F} -> ¬({G} & {E}) sent20: {E} -> ¬{D} sent21: {AF}
|
[
"sent8 & sent13 -> int1: the provocation and the miscarrying colorcast occurs.; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent13 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the noness occurs.
|
{C}
|
[] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the noness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the no happens and the provocation occurs if the miscarrying colorcast does not occur. sent2: the superscribing mastering occurs. sent3: if that the photosensitizing lymphocyte does not occur and the no does not occur does not hold then the photosensitizing lymphocyte happens. sent4: the castigation does not occur. sent5: if that the blacking occurs and the bimorphemicness happens is not correct then the bimorphemicness does not occur. sent6: if that the MRI happens and the blacking happens is not true the miscarrying colorcast does not occur. sent7: the superscribing cooperation happens and the miscarrying threat occurs. sent8: the fact that the provocation does not occur is not correct. sent9: the theology happens. sent10: if the miscarrying Varro does not occur then the provocation and the rodeo occurs. sent11: if the provocation happens and the miscarrying colorcast occurs then the no does not occur. sent12: that the preparation does not occur and the lavishness does not occur leads to that the cenobiticness does not occur. sent13: the miscarrying colorcast occurs. sent14: the fact that either the preparation does not occur or the endarterectomy does not occur or both hold. sent15: the fact that that the photosensitizing lymphocyte does not occur and the noness does not occur is not correct hold if the miscarrying colorcast does not occur. sent16: if the cenobiticness does not occur then the fact that that the MRI happens and the blacking occurs hold is not correct. sent17: the superscribing mulatto does not occur if the miscarrying Varro and the photosensitizing clearance happens. sent18: the preparation does not occur if the preparation does not occur and/or the endarterectomy does not occur. sent19: the fact that both the blacking and the bimorphemicness happens does not hold if the MRI does not occur. sent20: the miscarrying Varro does not occur if the bimorphemicness occurs. sent21: the integration happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent13 -> int1: the provocation and the miscarrying colorcast occurs.; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that that it is not delicate and it is Masoretic is not correct.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x)
|
sent1: if something is not Masoretic it does not miscarry Tay and it is not delicate. sent2: the rumination does miscarry Tay if it is amalgamative. sent3: the rumination is amalgamative. sent4: something is not delicate and is Masoretic. sent5: there is something such that that it is delicate and is Masoretic is wrong. sent6: the lysin is Masoretic. sent7: the rumination is not delicate if the lysin is not amalgamative.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent2: {D}{b} -> {C}{b} sent3: {D}{b} sent4: (Ex): (¬{A}x & {B}x) sent5: (Ex): ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent6: {B}{a} sent7: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬{A}{b}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lysin is not delicate but it is Masoretic.; assump1 -> int1: the fact that the lysin is not delicate is not false.; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: the rumination does miscarry Tay.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: {C}{b};"
] |
the lysin does not miscarry Tay.
|
¬{C}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int3: the lysin does not miscarry Tay and is not delicate if that it is not Masoretic is not wrong.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that that it is not delicate and it is Masoretic is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not Masoretic it does not miscarry Tay and it is not delicate. sent2: the rumination does miscarry Tay if it is amalgamative. sent3: the rumination is amalgamative. sent4: something is not delicate and is Masoretic. sent5: there is something such that that it is delicate and is Masoretic is wrong. sent6: the lysin is Masoretic. sent7: the rumination is not delicate if the lysin is not amalgamative. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lysin is not delicate but it is Masoretic.; assump1 -> int1: the fact that the lysin is not delicate is not false.; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: the rumination does miscarry Tay.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of corrupt thing that is not Puranic is incorrect then it is a kind of a ganoin is not correct.
|
¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x)
|
sent1: if the fact that something is not a kind of a tailor and is not equivocal is wrong then it does photosensitize guitar. sent2: the thyroxine is a kind of a ganoin if the fact that it is not incorrupt and it is not Puranic does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if it is not non-Newtonian it is windward.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{EC}x & ¬{AR}x) -> {GE}x sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: (Ex): {FD}x -> {HB}x
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if that it is not a tailor and it is unequivocal is false then it photosensitizes guitar.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{EC}x & ¬{AR}x) -> {GE}x
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: if that that the polystyrene is not a tailor and it is not equivocal does not hold is not incorrect then that it does photosensitize guitar is not false.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of corrupt thing that is not Puranic is incorrect then it is a kind of a ganoin is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something is not a kind of a tailor and is not equivocal is wrong then it does photosensitize guitar. sent2: the thyroxine is a kind of a ganoin if the fact that it is not incorrupt and it is not Puranic does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if it is not non-Newtonian it is windward. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the googly occurs.
|
{A}
|
sent1: both the uninucleateness and the execration occurs if the miscarrying Araujia does not occur. sent2: the fact that the googly does not occur and the uninucleateness does not occur is not correct if the execration does not occur. sent3: the fact that the uninucleateness does not occur is right if that the miscarrying mediastinum but not the miscarrying khamsin happens does not hold. sent4: that the miscarrying Araujia occurs is caused by the contestableness. sent5: that the fact that the miscarrying mediastinum occurs but the miscarrying khamsin does not occur is not incorrect is wrong. sent6: the redistribution does not occur and the hypovolemicness does not occur. sent7: the unreasonableness leads to that the retrofitting happens and the contestableness occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) sent2: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent3: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent4: {E} -> {D} sent5: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent6: (¬{HM} & ¬{BE}) sent7: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E})
|
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the uninucleateness does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the googly does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the googly does not occur and the uninucleateness does not occur.;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}; void -> assump1: ¬{A}; int1 & assump1 -> int2: (¬{A} & ¬{B});"
] |
the googly does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
[] | 7 | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the googly occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: both the uninucleateness and the execration occurs if the miscarrying Araujia does not occur. sent2: the fact that the googly does not occur and the uninucleateness does not occur is not correct if the execration does not occur. sent3: the fact that the uninucleateness does not occur is right if that the miscarrying mediastinum but not the miscarrying khamsin happens does not hold. sent4: that the miscarrying Araujia occurs is caused by the contestableness. sent5: that the fact that the miscarrying mediastinum occurs but the miscarrying khamsin does not occur is not incorrect is wrong. sent6: the redistribution does not occur and the hypovolemicness does not occur. sent7: the unreasonableness leads to that the retrofitting happens and the contestableness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the uninucleateness does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the googly does not occur.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the googly does not occur and the uninucleateness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that it is not a forehand and it is reportable.
|
(Ex): (¬{C}x & {B}x)
|
sent1: something superscribes DINK and it is reportable. sent2: the ziggurat is reportable if it miscarries impoundment and it does not superscribe DINK. sent3: the ziggurat does miscarry impoundment but it does not superscribe DINK.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({AB}x & {B}x) sent2: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent3: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the ziggurat is reportable.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is not a forehand and it is reportable. ; $context$ = sent1: something superscribes DINK and it is reportable. sent2: the ziggurat is reportable if it miscarries impoundment and it does not superscribe DINK. sent3: the ziggurat does miscarry impoundment but it does not superscribe DINK. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the ziggurat is reportable.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if the fact that it is monatomic is not correct it is pedunculate.
|
(Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x
|
sent1: there is something such that if it does not superscribe asterisked then it is a freedom. sent2: the cartridge is pedunculate if the fact that it is not a kind of a plenty is true. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not miscarry esophagoscope it does miscarry Antichrist. sent4: there exists something such that if it is monatomic then the fact that it is pedunculate is correct. sent5: there is something such that if it does not abstract immunogenicity it is a kind of a shakedown. sent6: if the sunhat is monatomic then it is pedunculate. sent7: something is sulcate if it is not pedunculate. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not a kind of a Chadian is correct then it does superscribe tarwood. sent9: if the fact that something is not fossorial hold it does condole. sent10: something that is not a pitch is a suffix. sent11: something that does not superscribe asterisked is a kind of a pity. sent12: something is a Byzantine if it is not prophetic. sent13: there is something such that if that it babbitts does not hold it is a revenant. sent14: if something is not a kind of a yak it is placable. sent15: the fact that something is pedunculate is not false if it is monatomic. sent16: there exists something such that if it does not miscarry loser it is a kind of a Byzantine. sent17: the sunhat is monatomic if it is not an audition. sent18: if something does not photosensitize fame then it does dissolve.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{EO}x -> {IL}x sent2: ¬{EB}{jg} -> {C}{jg} sent3: (Ex): ¬{ES}x -> {FE}x sent4: (Ex): {B}x -> {C}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{BI}x -> {FS}x sent6: {B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> {EJ}x sent8: (Ex): ¬{BM}x -> {AP}x sent9: (x): ¬{DL}x -> {BH}x sent10: (x): ¬{IO}x -> {IC}x sent11: (x): ¬{EO}x -> {BA}x sent12: (x): ¬{AE}x -> {IQ}x sent13: (Ex): ¬{BQ}x -> {FJ}x sent14: (x): ¬{FF}x -> {GF}x sent15: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent16: (Ex): ¬{HB}x -> {IQ}x sent17: ¬{K}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent18: (x): ¬{HS}x -> {FD}x
|
[] |
[] |
the sunhat is sulcate if it is not pedunculate.
|
¬{C}{aa} -> {EJ}{aa}
|
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if the fact that it is monatomic is not correct it is pedunculate. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it does not superscribe asterisked then it is a freedom. sent2: the cartridge is pedunculate if the fact that it is not a kind of a plenty is true. sent3: there exists something such that if it does not miscarry esophagoscope it does miscarry Antichrist. sent4: there exists something such that if it is monatomic then the fact that it is pedunculate is correct. sent5: there is something such that if it does not abstract immunogenicity it is a kind of a shakedown. sent6: if the sunhat is monatomic then it is pedunculate. sent7: something is sulcate if it is not pedunculate. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not a kind of a Chadian is correct then it does superscribe tarwood. sent9: if the fact that something is not fossorial hold it does condole. sent10: something that is not a pitch is a suffix. sent11: something that does not superscribe asterisked is a kind of a pity. sent12: something is a Byzantine if it is not prophetic. sent13: there is something such that if that it babbitts does not hold it is a revenant. sent14: if something is not a kind of a yak it is placable. sent15: the fact that something is pedunculate is not false if it is monatomic. sent16: there exists something such that if it does not miscarry loser it is a kind of a Byzantine. sent17: the sunhat is monatomic if it is not an audition. sent18: if something does not photosensitize fame then it does dissolve. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pacifist is merciless.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is non-merciless thing that is not a saprolite is incorrect. sent2: that the styrene is cross-sentential is right. sent3: if something is not a muller then the fact that it is a kind of non-maxillary thing that is not a kind of a allogamy does not hold. sent4: that something is not a saprolite and it is not a enalapril is incorrect if it is not a pneumothorax. sent5: everything is not a pneumothorax. sent6: the fact that the pacifist does not photosensitize panel and is a pneumothorax is not right.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{AA}x) sent2: {C}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬{GJ}x -> ¬(¬{IB}x & ¬{AN}x) sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x sent6: ¬(¬{BH}{a} & {A}{a})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the styrene is not a pneumothorax then that the fact that it is both not a saprolite and not a enalapril is correct is wrong.; sent5 -> int2: the fact that the styrene is not a pneumothorax is not false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the styrene is not a kind of a saprolite and is not a enalapril is incorrect.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that the fact that the fact that it is not a saprolite and not a enalapril is right does not hold.;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent5 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int3 -> int4: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x);"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the pacifist is merciless. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is non-merciless thing that is not a saprolite is incorrect. sent2: that the styrene is cross-sentential is right. sent3: if something is not a muller then the fact that it is a kind of non-maxillary thing that is not a kind of a allogamy does not hold. sent4: that something is not a saprolite and it is not a enalapril is incorrect if it is not a pneumothorax. sent5: everything is not a pneumothorax. sent6: the fact that the pacifist does not photosensitize panel and is a pneumothorax is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: if the styrene is not a pneumothorax then that the fact that it is both not a saprolite and not a enalapril is correct is wrong.; sent5 -> int2: the fact that the styrene is not a pneumothorax is not false.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the styrene is not a kind of a saprolite and is not a enalapril is incorrect.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that the fact that the fact that it is not a saprolite and not a enalapril is right does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the things happens the persevering occurs but the Berith does not occur.
|
{A} -> ({E} & ¬{D})
|
sent1: the persevering happens and the Berith happens if the things occurs. sent2: if the crustalness does not occur then the persevering but not the Berith occurs.
|
sent1: {A} -> ({E} & {D}) sent2: ¬{C} -> ({E} & ¬{D})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the things happens hold.; assump1 -> int1: the things and/or the spark happens.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; assump1 -> int1: ({A} v {B});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = if the things happens the persevering occurs but the Berith does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the persevering happens and the Berith happens if the things occurs. sent2: if the crustalness does not occur then the persevering but not the Berith occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the things happens hold.; assump1 -> int1: the things and/or the spark happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if the fact that it is neuropsychological thing that is not a Seine hold it is not autogenous is false.
|
¬((Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is a housecraft and it is not minus then it is a centerfold. sent2: there is something such that if it does miscarry heath and is not a paradox then it is not a lattice. sent3: there is something such that if it superscribes bastioned and is not a kind of a Cameroonian then it is a crocheting. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a backing and it is a kind of an anti it is not ecclesiastical. sent5: the ear is not autogenous if it is neuropsychological and it is not a Seine. sent6: the ear is not autogenous if it is neuropsychological and it is a Seine. sent7: something is not androgynous if it miscarries floored and is not a Seine. sent8: the ear is not a Seine if it glares and it is not an ovulation. sent9: there is something such that if it is an adaptability that does not hibernate then it miscarries druidism. sent10: the fact that there is something such that if it is a testacean and it is not nonphotosynthetic it is not recessionary is not false. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a testacean and does not superscribe bastioned the fact that it does not whittle hold. sent12: there exists something such that if it miscarries lizardfish and is a Draco it is not a Cistothorus. sent13: if the ear is neuropsychological and is not a Seine the fact that it is autogenous is right.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({AS}x & ¬{EK}x) -> {BT}x sent2: (Ex): ({EB}x & ¬{FE}x) -> ¬{HT}x sent3: (Ex): ({DI}x & ¬{II}x) -> {CQ}x sent4: (Ex): ({IG}x & {CM}x) -> ¬{U}x sent5: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (x): ({DK}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{GT}x sent8: ({AJ}{aa} & ¬{GF}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ({DM}x & ¬{JB}x) -> {EH}x sent10: (Ex): ({S}x & {CA}x) -> ¬{BU}x sent11: (Ex): ({S}x & ¬{DI}x) -> ¬{M}x sent12: (Ex): ({FI}x & {E}x) -> ¬{CG}x sent13: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the marbling is not androgynous hold if it miscarries floored and it is not a Seine.
|
({DK}{ic} & ¬{AB}{ic}) -> ¬{GT}{ic}
|
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if the fact that it is neuropsychological thing that is not a Seine hold it is not autogenous is false. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is a housecraft and it is not minus then it is a centerfold. sent2: there is something such that if it does miscarry heath and is not a paradox then it is not a lattice. sent3: there is something such that if it superscribes bastioned and is not a kind of a Cameroonian then it is a crocheting. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a backing and it is a kind of an anti it is not ecclesiastical. sent5: the ear is not autogenous if it is neuropsychological and it is not a Seine. sent6: the ear is not autogenous if it is neuropsychological and it is a Seine. sent7: something is not androgynous if it miscarries floored and is not a Seine. sent8: the ear is not a Seine if it glares and it is not an ovulation. sent9: there is something such that if it is an adaptability that does not hibernate then it miscarries druidism. sent10: the fact that there is something such that if it is a testacean and it is not nonphotosynthetic it is not recessionary is not false. sent11: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a testacean and does not superscribe bastioned the fact that it does not whittle hold. sent12: there exists something such that if it miscarries lizardfish and is a Draco it is not a Cistothorus. sent13: if the ear is neuropsychological and is not a Seine the fact that it is autogenous is right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if it is not a platform and it does not superscribe crore it is a Farsi is not correct.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is an anorexic and it is not a sporangium then it is a kind of a percentage. sent2: there is something such that if it superscribes anorexic and is not a navigation then it is a lollipop. sent3: there is something such that if it is a kind of non-triclinic thing that does photosensitize bullpen it is a motorization. sent4: there is something such that if it is not windward and not permissible it is a kind of a traumatology. sent5: if the mullet does not photosensitize twitterer and it is not cytoplasmic then it superscribes crore. sent6: if something is not a forte and it does not superscribe crore it is nonsteroidal. sent7: a non-Glaswegian thing that is not impermissible is an idle. sent8: if something that is a platform does not superscribe crore then that it is a Farsi is not wrong. sent9: if the sunbather does superscribe Wheatley but it does not pin then it is alphanumerics. sent10: that there is something such that if it is a kind of a platform that does not superscribe crore it is a Farsi is not false. sent11: the twitterer is a Farsi if it is a platform and does not superscribe crore. sent12: if something is not a platform and does not superscribe crore then it is a Farsi. sent13: that if something that is not a platform is not a politburo it does photosensitize bullpen is not false. sent14: something is a Farsi if it is not a platform and it does superscribe crore. sent15: that the twitterer is a Farsi is not false if it is not a kind of a platform and does superscribe crore. sent16: that there is something such that if it is not a platform and it superscribes crore it is a Farsi hold. sent17: if the twitterer is both not a diet and unconstitutional it is a kind of a megabyte.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({FC}x & ¬{AM}x) -> {EI}x sent2: (Ex): ({J}x & ¬{GD}x) -> {IN}x sent3: (Ex): (¬{IR}x & {DJ}x) -> {EF}x sent4: (Ex): (¬{FP}x & ¬{CD}x) -> {HQ}x sent5: (¬{EH}{ge} & ¬{EE}{ge}) -> {AB}{ge} sent6: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {EM}x sent7: (x): (¬{AQ}x & {CD}x) -> {H}x sent8: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent9: ({GQ}{o} & ¬{AH}{o}) -> {DT}{o} sent10: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent12: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent13: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{EJ}x) -> {DJ}x sent14: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent15: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent16: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent17: (¬{BS}{aa} & {GB}{aa}) -> {AU}{aa}
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: the twitterer is a Farsi if the fact that it is not a platform and it does not superscribe crore hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the loofah does photosensitize bullpen if it is not a platform and it is not a politburo.
|
(¬{AA}{bd} & ¬{EJ}{bd}) -> {DJ}{bd}
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is not a platform and it does not superscribe crore it is a Farsi is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is an anorexic and it is not a sporangium then it is a kind of a percentage. sent2: there is something such that if it superscribes anorexic and is not a navigation then it is a lollipop. sent3: there is something such that if it is a kind of non-triclinic thing that does photosensitize bullpen it is a motorization. sent4: there is something such that if it is not windward and not permissible it is a kind of a traumatology. sent5: if the mullet does not photosensitize twitterer and it is not cytoplasmic then it superscribes crore. sent6: if something is not a forte and it does not superscribe crore it is nonsteroidal. sent7: a non-Glaswegian thing that is not impermissible is an idle. sent8: if something that is a platform does not superscribe crore then that it is a Farsi is not wrong. sent9: if the sunbather does superscribe Wheatley but it does not pin then it is alphanumerics. sent10: that there is something such that if it is a kind of a platform that does not superscribe crore it is a Farsi is not false. sent11: the twitterer is a Farsi if it is a platform and does not superscribe crore. sent12: if something is not a platform and does not superscribe crore then it is a Farsi. sent13: that if something that is not a platform is not a politburo it does photosensitize bullpen is not false. sent14: something is a Farsi if it is not a platform and it does superscribe crore. sent15: that the twitterer is a Farsi is not false if it is not a kind of a platform and does superscribe crore. sent16: that there is something such that if it is not a platform and it superscribes crore it is a Farsi hold. sent17: if the twitterer is both not a diet and unconstitutional it is a kind of a megabyte. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 -> int1: the twitterer is a Farsi if the fact that it is not a platform and it does not superscribe crore hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the miscarrying Melocactus happens is right.
|
{D}
|
sent1: that the non-atrialness and the insectivorousness happens is caused by that the croaking occurs. sent2: if the twit does not occur then the photosensitizing simplification occurs. sent3: that the atrialness does not occur yields that the Lutheran or the fitting or both happens. sent4: the miscarrying Melocactus does not occur if the twit but not the photosensitizing simplification happens. sent5: the wilt but not the photosensitizing simplification happens if the miscarrying Ekman occurs. sent6: if the capillary does not occur the .45-caliberness occurs. sent7: the superscribing Oceanus happens if that the fact that not the superscribing Oceanus but the doctrinalness happens is correct is false. sent8: the croaking occurs if that the photosensitizing cachalot happens and the superscribing silique does not occur is not false. sent9: if the fact that the photosensitizing simplification occurs is right the Lutheran happens. sent10: if the superscribing Oceanus happens the photosensitizing cachalot occurs and the superscribing silique does not occur. sent11: if the Lutheranness occurs the miscarrying Melocactus happens. sent12: the superscribing caber does not occur if that the fact that the seguing occurs and the Hebrideanness occurs is wrong is not wrong. sent13: if the superscribing caber does not occur then the miscarrying Ekman and the miscarrying Upanishad happens. sent14: the fact that the superscribing Oceanus does not occur and the doctrinalness occurs is wrong.
|
sent1: {I} -> (¬{F} & {G}) sent2: ¬{A} -> {B} sent3: ¬{F} -> ({C} v {E}) sent4: ({A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{D} sent5: {J} -> ({H} & ¬{B}) sent6: ¬{DD} -> {CL} sent7: ¬(¬{N} & {T}) -> {N} sent8: ({K} & ¬{L}) -> {I} sent9: {B} -> {C} sent10: {N} -> ({K} & ¬{L}) sent11: {C} -> {D} sent12: ¬({P} & {Q}) -> ¬{O} sent13: ¬{O} -> ({J} & {M}) sent14: ¬(¬{N} & {T})
|
[] |
[] |
the miscarrying Melocactus does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
[
"sent7 & sent14 -> int1: the superscribing Oceanus happens.; sent10 & int1 -> int2: the photosensitizing cachalot but not the superscribing silique happens.; sent8 & int2 -> int3: the croak occurs.; sent1 & int3 -> int4: both the non-atrialness and the insectivorousness occurs.; int4 -> int5: the atrialness does not occur.; sent3 & int5 -> int6: the Lutheranness and/or the fitting happens.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the miscarrying Melocactus happens is right. ; $context$ = sent1: that the non-atrialness and the insectivorousness happens is caused by that the croaking occurs. sent2: if the twit does not occur then the photosensitizing simplification occurs. sent3: that the atrialness does not occur yields that the Lutheran or the fitting or both happens. sent4: the miscarrying Melocactus does not occur if the twit but not the photosensitizing simplification happens. sent5: the wilt but not the photosensitizing simplification happens if the miscarrying Ekman occurs. sent6: if the capillary does not occur the .45-caliberness occurs. sent7: the superscribing Oceanus happens if that the fact that not the superscribing Oceanus but the doctrinalness happens is correct is false. sent8: the croaking occurs if that the photosensitizing cachalot happens and the superscribing silique does not occur is not false. sent9: if the fact that the photosensitizing simplification occurs is right the Lutheran happens. sent10: if the superscribing Oceanus happens the photosensitizing cachalot occurs and the superscribing silique does not occur. sent11: if the Lutheranness occurs the miscarrying Melocactus happens. sent12: the superscribing caber does not occur if that the fact that the seguing occurs and the Hebrideanness occurs is wrong is not wrong. sent13: if the superscribing caber does not occur then the miscarrying Ekman and the miscarrying Upanishad happens. sent14: the fact that the superscribing Oceanus does not occur and the doctrinalness occurs is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the earphone does not pouch.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: the filler is not a basileus if the Christian is both not a basileus and Yugoslavian. sent2: if the distillery pouches then the earphone is a concession. sent3: the idler does pouch if the fact that the earphone does not kite and it does not pouch does not hold. sent4: if that the fielder is both unconscientious and not fictile is incorrect the anamorphism is a kind of a venerator. sent5: something is a godparent and is not digital if it is a venerator. sent6: if the earphone does pouch then the distillery kites. sent7: the fact that the extern is not a kind of a Cattell is not incorrect. sent8: the fielder is a blockage if the horst does surface. sent9: if the marjoram surfaces but it is not regressive then the horst surfaces. sent10: the distillery is not a kite if that it is a kite and it is a kind of a concession is incorrect. sent11: the marjoram is a surface and not regressive if the filler is buccal. sent12: the fact that if something is a kind of a godparent then that it does not kite and it pouches is incorrect is right. sent13: that something is unconscientious thing that is not fictile does not hold if it is a blockage. sent14: if the extern is not a kind of a Cattell the fact that it is not vegetative and it is an assay does not hold. sent15: if that something is not a concession and it is not a kite is false then it is a kind of a pouched. sent16: something is buccal thing that does superscribe Germany if it is not a basileus. sent17: that the earphone is not a concession and is not a kind of a kite is not right if the distillery is not a godparent. sent18: if the distillery is a kite and is not a concession then the earphone is a kind of a pouched. sent19: the distillery is not a kind of a godparent if the anamorphism is a godparent and not digital. sent20: if something is not a probe then it is both not a basileus and Yugoslavian.
|
sent1: (¬{N}{h} & {O}{h}) -> ¬{N}{g} sent2: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent3: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {A}{gd} sent4: ¬({H}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> {E}{c} sent5: (x): {E}x -> ({D}x & ¬{F}x) sent6: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent7: ¬{S}{i} sent8: {J}{e} -> {I}{d} sent9: ({J}{f} & ¬{K}{f}) -> {J}{e} sent10: ¬({B}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent11: {L}{g} -> ({J}{f} & ¬{K}{f}) sent12: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) sent13: (x): {I}x -> ¬({H}x & ¬{G}x) sent14: ¬{S}{i} -> ¬(¬{R}{i} & {Q}{i}) sent15: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x sent16: (x): ¬{N}x -> ({L}x & {M}x) sent17: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent18: ({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {A}{a} sent19: ({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent20: (x): ¬{P}x -> (¬{N}x & {O}x)
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the earphone pouches.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the distillery does kite.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] |
the earphone is a kind of a pouched.
|
{A}{a}
|
[] | 8 | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the earphone does not pouch. ; $context$ = sent1: the filler is not a basileus if the Christian is both not a basileus and Yugoslavian. sent2: if the distillery pouches then the earphone is a concession. sent3: the idler does pouch if the fact that the earphone does not kite and it does not pouch does not hold. sent4: if that the fielder is both unconscientious and not fictile is incorrect the anamorphism is a kind of a venerator. sent5: something is a godparent and is not digital if it is a venerator. sent6: if the earphone does pouch then the distillery kites. sent7: the fact that the extern is not a kind of a Cattell is not incorrect. sent8: the fielder is a blockage if the horst does surface. sent9: if the marjoram surfaces but it is not regressive then the horst surfaces. sent10: the distillery is not a kite if that it is a kite and it is a kind of a concession is incorrect. sent11: the marjoram is a surface and not regressive if the filler is buccal. sent12: the fact that if something is a kind of a godparent then that it does not kite and it pouches is incorrect is right. sent13: that something is unconscientious thing that is not fictile does not hold if it is a blockage. sent14: if the extern is not a kind of a Cattell the fact that it is not vegetative and it is an assay does not hold. sent15: if that something is not a concession and it is not a kite is false then it is a kind of a pouched. sent16: something is buccal thing that does superscribe Germany if it is not a basileus. sent17: that the earphone is not a concession and is not a kind of a kite is not right if the distillery is not a godparent. sent18: if the distillery is a kite and is not a concession then the earphone is a kind of a pouched. sent19: the distillery is not a kind of a godparent if the anamorphism is a godparent and not digital. sent20: if something is not a probe then it is both not a basileus and Yugoslavian. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the earphone pouches.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the distillery does kite.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it does not deplume it is not non-loose but non-Mexican.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it does not deplume is not wrong it is loose and it is a kind of a Mexican. sent2: something that does not deplume is loose and a Mexican. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a lawfulness it is not non-auxinic and not non-neuroendocrine. sent4: if something is not an outboard then that it is pediatric and it does not photosensitize deafness is not wrong. sent5: something is a utilization but it is not crucial if it does not photosensitize shopping. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not a leftfield it miscarries temperance and is non-outboard. sent7: if something does not deplume then the fact that it is loose thing that is not a Mexican hold. sent8: if the spear does not deplume it is loose. sent9: there is something such that if it deplumes it is a kind of loose thing that is not a Mexican. sent10: if something does not deplume it is loose. sent11: the spear is loose but not a Mexican if it does deplume. sent12: something that is not partisan miscarries mercy and is not a sycamore. sent13: if the spear does not deplume it is loose thing that is a Mexican. sent14: there is something such that if that it does not photosensitize overgrowth hold then it is a cran and it is a kind of a sirenian. sent15: there is something such that if it does not deplume then it is loose.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{GN}x -> ({BJ}x & {IF}x) sent4: (x): ¬{HN}x -> ({GF}x & ¬{FI}x) sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({T}x & ¬{FP}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{IC}x -> ({U}x & ¬{HN}x) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent9: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x sent11: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent12: (x): ¬{HS}x -> ({IJ}x & ¬{GM}x) sent13: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent14: (Ex): ¬{GQ}x -> ({HP}x & {FH}x) sent15: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the spear is loose thing that is not a kind of a Mexican if it does not deplume.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the silver-lace is not a kind of a partisan then it miscarries mercy and it is not a sycamore.
|
¬{HS}{jg} -> ({IJ}{jg} & ¬{GM}{jg})
|
[
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not deplume it is not non-loose but non-Mexican. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it does not deplume is not wrong it is loose and it is a kind of a Mexican. sent2: something that does not deplume is loose and a Mexican. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a lawfulness it is not non-auxinic and not non-neuroendocrine. sent4: if something is not an outboard then that it is pediatric and it does not photosensitize deafness is not wrong. sent5: something is a utilization but it is not crucial if it does not photosensitize shopping. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not a leftfield it miscarries temperance and is non-outboard. sent7: if something does not deplume then the fact that it is loose thing that is not a Mexican hold. sent8: if the spear does not deplume it is loose. sent9: there is something such that if it deplumes it is a kind of loose thing that is not a Mexican. sent10: if something does not deplume it is loose. sent11: the spear is loose but not a Mexican if it does deplume. sent12: something that is not partisan miscarries mercy and is not a sycamore. sent13: if the spear does not deplume it is loose thing that is a Mexican. sent14: there is something such that if that it does not photosensitize overgrowth hold then it is a cran and it is a kind of a sirenian. sent15: there is something such that if it does not deplume then it is loose. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: the spear is loose thing that is not a kind of a Mexican if it does not deplume.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the endoplasm is tectonic.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: the endoplasm does not photosensitize excuse. sent2: the endoplasm is not tectonic if it is not uncontroversial. sent3: the endoplasm is not uncontroversial or nonreciprocal or both. sent4: if something that does not miscarry Mills is a Dickinson it is not controversial. sent5: the shrapnel is tectonic if the cowslip does photosensitize BJA. sent6: if the shrapnel is tectonic and is uncontroversial then the chute-the-chute is not uncontroversial. sent7: if the fact that something miscarries Mills and is not a Dickinson is false that it is tectonic hold. sent8: either everything does not miscarry hubcap or it is a variable or both. sent9: there exists something such that it is not a weave. sent10: if something is not anhydrous and/or it is not maxillofacial then that it is not a kind of an oblate is true. sent11: everything does not photosensitize photocoagulation and/or is not uncontroversial. sent12: the endoplasm is not a glycosuria and/or does not photosensitize photocoagulation. sent13: if something is not a tranche then it is not carunculate. sent14: the endoplasm does not photosensitize photocoagulation and/or is uncontroversial. sent15: if something does not photosensitize photocoagulation and/or it is not uncontroversial it is not tectonic.
|
sent1: ¬{HQ}{aa} sent2: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: (¬{AB}{aa} v {HA}{aa}) sent4: (x): (¬{C}x & {A}x) -> {AB}x sent5: {E}{b} -> {B}{a} sent6: ({B}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{gj} sent7: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> {B}x sent8: (x): (¬{FN}x v {BG}x) sent9: (Ex): ¬{F}x sent10: (x): (¬{BS}x v ¬{GP}x) -> ¬{DH}x sent11: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent12: (¬{FG}{aa} v ¬{AA}{aa}) sent13: (x): ¬{DJ}x -> ¬{IS}x sent14: (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent15: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent15 -> int1: if the endoplasm does not photosensitize photocoagulation and/or it is not uncontroversial then it is not tectonic.; sent11 -> int2: the endoplasm either does not photosensitize photocoagulation or is not uncontroversial or both.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent11 -> int2: (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the endoplasm is tectonic.
|
{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent7 -> int3: the endoplasm is not non-tectonic if that it does miscarry Mills and is not a kind of a Dickinson is not true.;"
] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the endoplasm is tectonic. ; $context$ = sent1: the endoplasm does not photosensitize excuse. sent2: the endoplasm is not tectonic if it is not uncontroversial. sent3: the endoplasm is not uncontroversial or nonreciprocal or both. sent4: if something that does not miscarry Mills is a Dickinson it is not controversial. sent5: the shrapnel is tectonic if the cowslip does photosensitize BJA. sent6: if the shrapnel is tectonic and is uncontroversial then the chute-the-chute is not uncontroversial. sent7: if the fact that something miscarries Mills and is not a Dickinson is false that it is tectonic hold. sent8: either everything does not miscarry hubcap or it is a variable or both. sent9: there exists something such that it is not a weave. sent10: if something is not anhydrous and/or it is not maxillofacial then that it is not a kind of an oblate is true. sent11: everything does not photosensitize photocoagulation and/or is not uncontroversial. sent12: the endoplasm is not a glycosuria and/or does not photosensitize photocoagulation. sent13: if something is not a tranche then it is not carunculate. sent14: the endoplasm does not photosensitize photocoagulation and/or is uncontroversial. sent15: if something does not photosensitize photocoagulation and/or it is not uncontroversial it is not tectonic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 -> int1: if the endoplasm does not photosensitize photocoagulation and/or it is not uncontroversial then it is not tectonic.; sent11 -> int2: the endoplasm either does not photosensitize photocoagulation or is not uncontroversial or both.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the stopcock is Lusitanian.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: if something is not a kind of an equinox the fact that it does not photosensitize constructivism and is not a ulema is not right. sent2: if something does photosensitize constructivism and is not a ulema then the fact that it is Lusitanian hold. sent3: if something does proceed and is not a feline it is a BJS. sent4: if the procurator is a BJS then it is a kind of a Anarhichadidae. sent5: the nigger is not an ointment. sent6: the stopcock is not Lusitanian if the fact that that the bedwetter does not photosensitize constructivism and it is not a ulema is false is true. sent7: if the nigger is not an ointment the procurator does proceed but it is not a feline. sent8: if the bedwetter does not photosensitize constructivism the stopcock photosensitize constructivism but it is not a kind of a ulema. sent9: the bedwetter does not photosensitize constructivism if there is something such that it is not balsamic. sent10: if the bedwetter is not Lusitanian then the stopcock does not photosensitize constructivism. sent11: the fact that the stopcock is not an equinox and is Lusitanian is not true if something is a kind of a Anarhichadidae. sent12: if something is a ulema then it does not superscribe Troy and does not photosensitize constructivism. sent13: the bedwetter is not an equinox if that the procurator is a Anarhichadidae and it is a BJS is not correct. sent14: if there is something such that it is balsamic and/or it is not a ICE the stopcock does not abstract taxonomy. sent15: something does photosensitize compassion or is not balsamic or both.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent2: (x): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {C}x sent3: (x): ({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> {F}x sent4: {F}{c} -> {E}{c} sent5: ¬{I}{d} sent6: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: ¬{I}{d} -> ({G}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent9: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{A}{a} sent10: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent11: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent12: (x): {B}x -> (¬{HE}x & ¬{A}x) sent13: ¬({E}{c} & {F}{c}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent14: (x): ({AB}x v ¬{DL}x) -> ¬{DG}{b} sent15: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the stopcock is Lusitanian if it does photosensitize constructivism and is not a ulema.;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {C}{b};"
] |
the stopcock is not Lusitanian.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent1 -> int2: if the bedwetter is not an equinox then the fact that it does not photosensitize constructivism and it is not a ulema does not hold.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the stopcock is Lusitanian. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of an equinox the fact that it does not photosensitize constructivism and is not a ulema is not right. sent2: if something does photosensitize constructivism and is not a ulema then the fact that it is Lusitanian hold. sent3: if something does proceed and is not a feline it is a BJS. sent4: if the procurator is a BJS then it is a kind of a Anarhichadidae. sent5: the nigger is not an ointment. sent6: the stopcock is not Lusitanian if the fact that that the bedwetter does not photosensitize constructivism and it is not a ulema is false is true. sent7: if the nigger is not an ointment the procurator does proceed but it is not a feline. sent8: if the bedwetter does not photosensitize constructivism the stopcock photosensitize constructivism but it is not a kind of a ulema. sent9: the bedwetter does not photosensitize constructivism if there is something such that it is not balsamic. sent10: if the bedwetter is not Lusitanian then the stopcock does not photosensitize constructivism. sent11: the fact that the stopcock is not an equinox and is Lusitanian is not true if something is a kind of a Anarhichadidae. sent12: if something is a ulema then it does not superscribe Troy and does not photosensitize constructivism. sent13: the bedwetter is not an equinox if that the procurator is a Anarhichadidae and it is a BJS is not correct. sent14: if there is something such that it is balsamic and/or it is not a ICE the stopcock does not abstract taxonomy. sent15: something does photosensitize compassion or is not balsamic or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the stopcock is Lusitanian if it does photosensitize constructivism and is not a ulema.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it photosensitizes Cleridae and it superscribes prince's-feather the fact that it is not a gemsbok is true.
|
(Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: if the HF does step and is a gemsbok it is a autotomy. sent2: there exists something such that if it superscribes enough and it does abstract HF then the fact that it is mesoblastic hold. sent3: something that photosensitizes Weizenbock and is a Australopithecus is not a laminate. sent4: if the endoplasm is not non-anaplastic and it photosensitizes Cleridae then it does not miscarry huffiness. sent5: if the HF photosensitizes Cleridae and superscribes prince's-feather then it is not a gemsbok. sent6: there is something such that if it does superscribe valgus and is a kind of a Theodosius it does superscribe mastering. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a terrier and is topographical it does not miscarry myoglobin. sent8: the fugu is a kind of a AFP if it photosensitizes Cleridae and it is a kind of a Wilmut. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a umbo and it superscribes Cacajao then it is a kind of a debutante. sent10: that the HF does not photosensitize Cleridae is not true if it does superscribe lure and it does earth. sent11: if the riveter does superscribe prince's-feather and it gnaws it is not psychosexual. sent12: there is something such that if it is both not non-electrochemical and pyrochemical then it is reconcilable. sent13: the HF does not shlep if it is metamorphic and is Scythian. sent14: the HF is not reconcilable if it franks and it is a mercy. sent15: if the saponification photosensitizes allophone and it does photosensitize Cleridae then it does shlep. sent16: there exists something such that if it is heuristic thing that is a debutante it is not a cardamom. sent17: the HF is not a nimblewill if it is a gemsbok that is unbridgeable.
|
sent1: ({EA}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> {HU}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ({CF}x & {EE}x) -> {IL}x sent3: (x): ({EI}x & {BL}x) -> ¬{DO}x sent4: ({DE}{fn} & {AA}{fn}) -> ¬{FE}{fn} sent5: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ({DA}x & {IF}x) -> {GG}x sent7: (Ex): ({EO}x & {IQ}x) -> ¬{GP}x sent8: ({AA}{ir} & {GF}{ir}) -> {GB}{ir} sent9: (Ex): ({CI}x & {GS}x) -> {AU}x sent10: ({HN}{aa} & {EK}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} sent11: ({AB}{hn} & {EF}{hn}) -> ¬{AE}{hn} sent12: (Ex): ({H}x & {N}x) -> {CJ}x sent13: ({EU}{aa} & {ED}{aa}) -> ¬{DD}{aa} sent14: ({ER}{aa} & {Q}{aa}) -> ¬{CJ}{aa} sent15: ({JB}{gt} & {AA}{gt}) -> {DD}{gt} sent16: (Ex): ({HO}x & {AU}x) -> ¬{AL}x sent17: ({B}{aa} & {DK}{aa}) -> ¬{FP}{aa}
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the HF is not a kind of a laminate is true if it photosensitizes Weizenbock and is a Australopithecus.
|
({EI}{aa} & {BL}{aa}) -> ¬{DO}{aa}
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it photosensitizes Cleridae and it superscribes prince's-feather the fact that it is not a gemsbok is true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the HF does step and is a gemsbok it is a autotomy. sent2: there exists something such that if it superscribes enough and it does abstract HF then the fact that it is mesoblastic hold. sent3: something that photosensitizes Weizenbock and is a Australopithecus is not a laminate. sent4: if the endoplasm is not non-anaplastic and it photosensitizes Cleridae then it does not miscarry huffiness. sent5: if the HF photosensitizes Cleridae and superscribes prince's-feather then it is not a gemsbok. sent6: there is something such that if it does superscribe valgus and is a kind of a Theodosius it does superscribe mastering. sent7: there exists something such that if it is a terrier and is topographical it does not miscarry myoglobin. sent8: the fugu is a kind of a AFP if it photosensitizes Cleridae and it is a kind of a Wilmut. sent9: there exists something such that if it is a umbo and it superscribes Cacajao then it is a kind of a debutante. sent10: that the HF does not photosensitize Cleridae is not true if it does superscribe lure and it does earth. sent11: if the riveter does superscribe prince's-feather and it gnaws it is not psychosexual. sent12: there is something such that if it is both not non-electrochemical and pyrochemical then it is reconcilable. sent13: the HF does not shlep if it is metamorphic and is Scythian. sent14: the HF is not reconcilable if it franks and it is a mercy. sent15: if the saponification photosensitizes allophone and it does photosensitize Cleridae then it does shlep. sent16: there exists something such that if it is heuristic thing that is a debutante it is not a cardamom. sent17: the HF is not a nimblewill if it is a gemsbok that is unbridgeable. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Catalan superscribes Catalan.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: the telephone is a Nagasaki if the fact that it is a kind of a copper or it is a kind of a interrogative or both is false. sent2: that the Catalan does not superscribe Catalan is true if the telephone is a Nagasaki and it is a Lactuca. sent3: the fact that the Catalan is a kind of a negative is true. sent4: the telephone is a kind of a interrogative and it superscribes Catalan. sent5: something is not a Tbilisi and does not superscribe rustication if it does not incarnate. sent6: the coccobacillus is not Wittgensteinian if something that does not cluster is non-monumental. sent7: something photosensitizes twitterer and/or is a swatter. sent8: the telephone is a kind of a Nagasaki if that that it is a copper and/or is not interrogative is true is not right. sent9: the fact that the telephone is either a copper or not a interrogative or both is not right. sent10: the telephone is negative. sent11: something that is not Wittgensteinian broaches and does not superscribe trigonometrician. sent12: if there is something such that it does photosensitize twitterer or it does swatter or both then the twitterer is a swatter. sent13: something is not a negative if it is not a Tbilisi and does not superscribe rustication. sent14: the telephone is a kind of a interrogative. sent15: something is a Lactuca and does superscribe Catalan if it is not a Nagasaki. sent16: the telephone does not superscribe Catalan if the Catalan is a kind of a Lactuca and it is a interrogative. sent17: the Catalan does copper if that it superscribes Catalan and/or is not a interrogative does not hold. sent18: something does not cluster and is not monumental if it is a swatter. sent19: the Catalan does superscribe Catalan if the telephone is a Lactuca but it is not a Nagasaki. sent20: the telephone is a Lactuca and is a kind of a negative. sent21: that either the devisee is a Lactuca or it does not miscarry devisee or both does not hold. sent22: if something is not a negative then it is a kind of a Lactuca and it is not a Nagasaki.
|
sent1: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent2: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent3: {D}{b} sent4: ({AB}{a} & {C}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) sent6: (x): (¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) -> ¬{J}{c} sent7: (Ex): ({O}x v {M}x) sent8: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent9: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent10: {D}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({H}x & ¬{I}x) sent12: (x): ({O}x v {M}x) -> {M}{d} sent13: (x): (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent14: {AB}{a} sent15: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {C}x) sent16: ({A}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent17: ¬({C}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) -> {AA}{b} sent18: (x): {M}x -> (¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) sent19: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {C}{b} sent20: ({A}{a} & {D}{a}) sent21: ¬({A}{co} v ¬{GD}{co}) sent22: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x)
|
[
"sent8 & sent9 -> int1: the telephone is a Nagasaki.; sent20 -> int2: the telephone is a kind of a Lactuca.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the telephone is a Nagasaki that is a Lactuca.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent9 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent20 -> int2: {A}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{a} & {A}{a}); int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the Catalan does superscribe Catalan is not false.
|
{C}{b}
|
[
"sent22 -> int4: if the telephone is not a negative then the fact that it is a Lactuca and is not a kind of a Nagasaki is not incorrect.; sent13 -> int5: the telephone is not negative if it is not a Tbilisi and it does not superscribe rustication.; sent5 -> int6: the telephone is not a Tbilisi and it does not superscribe rustication if that it does not incarnate is not incorrect.; sent11 -> int7: the coccobacillus broaches but it does not superscribe trigonometrician if it is not Wittgensteinian.; sent18 -> int8: if the twitterer is a kind of a swatter then it does not cluster and it is not monumental.; sent7 & sent12 -> int9: the twitterer does swatter.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the twitterer does not cluster and it is not monumental.; int10 -> int11: something does not cluster and it is not monumental.; int11 & sent6 -> int12: the coccobacillus is not Wittgensteinian.; int7 & int12 -> int13: the coccobacillus does broach and does not superscribe trigonometrician.; int13 -> int14: there exists something such that it does broach and it does not superscribe trigonometrician.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Catalan superscribes Catalan. ; $context$ = sent1: the telephone is a Nagasaki if the fact that it is a kind of a copper or it is a kind of a interrogative or both is false. sent2: that the Catalan does not superscribe Catalan is true if the telephone is a Nagasaki and it is a Lactuca. sent3: the fact that the Catalan is a kind of a negative is true. sent4: the telephone is a kind of a interrogative and it superscribes Catalan. sent5: something is not a Tbilisi and does not superscribe rustication if it does not incarnate. sent6: the coccobacillus is not Wittgensteinian if something that does not cluster is non-monumental. sent7: something photosensitizes twitterer and/or is a swatter. sent8: the telephone is a kind of a Nagasaki if that that it is a copper and/or is not interrogative is true is not right. sent9: the fact that the telephone is either a copper or not a interrogative or both is not right. sent10: the telephone is negative. sent11: something that is not Wittgensteinian broaches and does not superscribe trigonometrician. sent12: if there is something such that it does photosensitize twitterer or it does swatter or both then the twitterer is a swatter. sent13: something is not a negative if it is not a Tbilisi and does not superscribe rustication. sent14: the telephone is a kind of a interrogative. sent15: something is a Lactuca and does superscribe Catalan if it is not a Nagasaki. sent16: the telephone does not superscribe Catalan if the Catalan is a kind of a Lactuca and it is a interrogative. sent17: the Catalan does copper if that it superscribes Catalan and/or is not a interrogative does not hold. sent18: something does not cluster and is not monumental if it is a swatter. sent19: the Catalan does superscribe Catalan if the telephone is a Lactuca but it is not a Nagasaki. sent20: the telephone is a Lactuca and is a kind of a negative. sent21: that either the devisee is a Lactuca or it does not miscarry devisee or both does not hold. sent22: if something is not a negative then it is a kind of a Lactuca and it is not a Nagasaki. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent9 -> int1: the telephone is a Nagasaki.; sent20 -> int2: the telephone is a kind of a Lactuca.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the telephone is a Nagasaki that is a Lactuca.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Fauve does not taste.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: that the Fauve is a kind of metamorphous a photographer does not hold if the commando does taste. sent2: the commando does not abstract Fauve if there is something such that the fact that it does abstract Fauve and it does diverge does not hold. sent3: if something is not geological then that it abstracts Fauve and it diverges is wrong. sent4: the snuffer is a Burundi. sent5: something is not a kind of a pronged if it is not a kind of a neurasthenic. sent6: that the commando is not a photographer but it is metamorphous is not correct if the Fauve is a taste. sent7: if something is not a kind of a pronged then it does photosensitize Vanderbilt and it is not geological. sent8: if the snuffer is a kind of a Burundi then that the Fauve is not a kind of a neurasthenic hold. sent9: that something is not a palmistry and tastes is incorrect if it does not abstract Fauve. sent10: that the fringe is non-antecubital and is metamorphous is wrong. sent11: the Fauve does not miscarry antheridiophore and is a photographer.
|
sent1: {A}{b} -> ¬({AB}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬({B}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({B}x & {D}x) sent4: {H}{c} sent5: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}x sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent7: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & ¬{C}x) sent8: {H}{c} -> ¬{G}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{IC}x & {A}x) sent10: ¬(¬{GK}{fs} & {AB}{fs}) sent11: (¬{CQ}{a} & {AA}{a})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Fauve is a kind of a taste.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the commando is not a photographer but it is metamorphous is incorrect.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b});"
] |
the fact that that the commando is not a palmistry but it tastes is not correct is correct.
|
¬(¬{IC}{b} & {A}{b})
|
[
"sent9 -> int2: if the commando does not abstract Fauve then the fact that it is not a palmistry and tastes does not hold.; sent3 -> int3: the fact that the Fauve abstracts Fauve and it does diverge is incorrect if it is not geological.; sent7 -> int4: the Fauve does photosensitize Vanderbilt but it is not geological if it is not a pronged.; sent5 -> int5: if the Fauve is not neurasthenic then it is not a pronged.; sent8 & sent4 -> int6: the Fauve is not a kind of a neurasthenic.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the Fauve is not a pronged.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the Fauve photosensitizes Vanderbilt but it is non-geological.; int8 -> int9: the fact that the Fauve is not geological is not false.; int3 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the Fauve does abstract Fauve and does diverge is not true.; int10 -> int11: that there is something such that that it abstracts Fauve and diverges does not hold is not wrong.; int11 & sent2 -> int12: the commando does not abstract Fauve.; int2 & int12 -> hypothesis;"
] | 8 | 3 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the Fauve does not taste. ; $context$ = sent1: that the Fauve is a kind of metamorphous a photographer does not hold if the commando does taste. sent2: the commando does not abstract Fauve if there is something such that the fact that it does abstract Fauve and it does diverge does not hold. sent3: if something is not geological then that it abstracts Fauve and it diverges is wrong. sent4: the snuffer is a Burundi. sent5: something is not a kind of a pronged if it is not a kind of a neurasthenic. sent6: that the commando is not a photographer but it is metamorphous is not correct if the Fauve is a taste. sent7: if something is not a kind of a pronged then it does photosensitize Vanderbilt and it is not geological. sent8: if the snuffer is a kind of a Burundi then that the Fauve is not a kind of a neurasthenic hold. sent9: that something is not a palmistry and tastes is incorrect if it does not abstract Fauve. sent10: that the fringe is non-antecubital and is metamorphous is wrong. sent11: the Fauve does not miscarry antheridiophore and is a photographer. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Fauve is a kind of a taste.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the commando is not a photographer but it is metamorphous is incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the charity is a kind of non-iridaceous thing that is not impolitic is not right.
|
¬(¬{C}{c} & ¬{E}{c})
|
sent1: the charity is not impolitic. sent2: if something is a rumba then the landowner does photosensitize active. sent3: the active is iridaceous if that the landowner does photosensitize active is true. sent4: if the active is iridaceous then the charity is not impolitic. sent5: there exists something such that it is a rumba. sent6: if the active is iridaceous then the charity is not iridaceous and not impolitic. sent7: if that the fact that the active does not intertwine and it does not wench is not wrong is not true then the landowner is hungry. sent8: something does not photosensitize anklet and is not impolitic if it is a kind of a rumba. sent9: if something is a rumba then the fact that it is not iridaceous and it is not impolitic is not true. sent10: the sheeting is not iridaceous and it is not a kind of a charity.
|
sent1: ¬{E}{c} sent2: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent3: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent4: {C}{b} -> ¬{E}{c} sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: {C}{b} -> (¬{C}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent7: ¬(¬{F}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) -> {D}{a} sent8: (x): {A}x -> (¬{GU}x & ¬{E}x) sent9: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) sent10: (¬{C}{ik} & ¬{DD}{ik})
|
[
"sent5 & sent2 -> int1: the landowner does photosensitize active.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the active is iridaceous.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent2 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent3 & int1 -> int2: {C}{b}; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the landowner does not photosensitize anklet and is not impolitic.
|
(¬{GU}{a} & ¬{E}{a})
|
[
"sent8 -> int3: the landowner does not photosensitize anklet and it is not impolitic if it is a kind of a rumba.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the charity is a kind of non-iridaceous thing that is not impolitic is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the charity is not impolitic. sent2: if something is a rumba then the landowner does photosensitize active. sent3: the active is iridaceous if that the landowner does photosensitize active is true. sent4: if the active is iridaceous then the charity is not impolitic. sent5: there exists something such that it is a rumba. sent6: if the active is iridaceous then the charity is not iridaceous and not impolitic. sent7: if that the fact that the active does not intertwine and it does not wench is not wrong is not true then the landowner is hungry. sent8: something does not photosensitize anklet and is not impolitic if it is a kind of a rumba. sent9: if something is a rumba then the fact that it is not iridaceous and it is not impolitic is not true. sent10: the sheeting is not iridaceous and it is not a kind of a charity. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent2 -> int1: the landowner does photosensitize active.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: the active is iridaceous.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it is a breeze that it is introversive and it is not a kind of a bareness is false.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: if something does breeze then the fact that it is introversive and is not a bareness is incorrect. sent2: the spear does miscarry funiculus and does not miscarry Nyx if it is colloidal. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a breeze the fact that it is introversive and is a bareness is wrong. sent4: the fact that something is introversive and it is a bareness is incorrect if it breezes. sent5: if the horse does breeze then the fact that it is introversive and it is a bareness is not right. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a achromatin then the fact that it is a crazy and it does superscribe melanocyte is not correct. sent7: the fugu is a kind of a trance and does not disconnect if it is a bareness. sent8: there exists something such that if it is an antipodal then it does photosensitize Kroeber and it does not cackle. sent9: there exists something such that if it is peripteral the fact that it is not non-pacific but an ultimatum does not hold. sent10: the fact that something miscarries lee and is not mandibulofacial is not true if that it is a merchandise is not false. sent11: there is something such that if it miscarries nutritiousness then the fact that it is a Washingtonian and superscribes mastopexy does not hold. sent12: there exists something such that if the fact that it superscribes colossus is correct it miscarries Charadrii and is not nonwashable. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a breeze it is introversive and is not a bareness. sent14: something is a Welsh and is not a Helmholtz if the fact that it is a daffodil hold. sent15: something does photosensitize printout but it is not basinal if it is a Lutzen. sent16: if something is a kind of a breeze it is introversive and it is not a bareness. sent17: there exists something such that if it is a Sif that it does superscribe meclizine and does not close is not wrong. sent18: there is something such that if it abstracts tragus that it is a kind of a labial and it is not thermostatics is false.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: {CM}{en} -> ({FT}{en} & ¬{BP}{en}) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: (Ex): {IL}x -> ¬({DE}x & {CQ}x) sent7: {AB}{bo} -> ({GA}{bo} & ¬{IA}{bo}) sent8: (Ex): {BR}x -> ({GQ}x & ¬{FI}x) sent9: (Ex): {G}x -> ¬({IM}x & {FJ}x) sent10: (x): {FR}x -> ¬({N}x & ¬{AK}x) sent11: (Ex): {CL}x -> ¬({I}x & {IC}x) sent12: (Ex): {FP}x -> ({AH}x & ¬{CI}x) sent13: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent14: (x): {J}x -> ({Q}x & ¬{EL}x) sent15: (x): {CG}x -> ({GU}x & ¬{HB}x) sent16: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent17: (Ex): {EU}x -> ({DT}x & ¬{EK}x) sent18: (Ex): {GH}x -> ¬({HI}x & ¬{FA}x)
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the fact that the horse is introversive but it is not a kind of a bareness does not hold if it is a breeze.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a breeze that it is introversive and it is not a kind of a bareness is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does breeze then the fact that it is introversive and is not a bareness is incorrect. sent2: the spear does miscarry funiculus and does not miscarry Nyx if it is colloidal. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a breeze the fact that it is introversive and is a bareness is wrong. sent4: the fact that something is introversive and it is a bareness is incorrect if it breezes. sent5: if the horse does breeze then the fact that it is introversive and it is a bareness is not right. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a achromatin then the fact that it is a crazy and it does superscribe melanocyte is not correct. sent7: the fugu is a kind of a trance and does not disconnect if it is a bareness. sent8: there exists something such that if it is an antipodal then it does photosensitize Kroeber and it does not cackle. sent9: there exists something such that if it is peripteral the fact that it is not non-pacific but an ultimatum does not hold. sent10: the fact that something miscarries lee and is not mandibulofacial is not true if that it is a merchandise is not false. sent11: there is something such that if it miscarries nutritiousness then the fact that it is a Washingtonian and superscribes mastopexy does not hold. sent12: there exists something such that if the fact that it superscribes colossus is correct it miscarries Charadrii and is not nonwashable. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a breeze it is introversive and is not a bareness. sent14: something is a Welsh and is not a Helmholtz if the fact that it is a daffodil hold. sent15: something does photosensitize printout but it is not basinal if it is a Lutzen. sent16: if something is a kind of a breeze it is introversive and it is not a bareness. sent17: there exists something such that if it is a Sif that it does superscribe meclizine and does not close is not wrong. sent18: there is something such that if it abstracts tragus that it is a kind of a labial and it is not thermostatics is false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the fact that the horse is introversive but it is not a kind of a bareness does not hold if it is a breeze.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the midazolam is not Sabbatarian.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: something is not a Sabbatarian if the fact that it is not an impoundment and it is not a kind of a M1 is not correct. sent2: if something is garlicky it does abstract doula. sent3: if something abstracts doula it does not hesitate and it is not hot. sent4: something is not a Sabbatarian if it is a M1. sent5: that if something is hot then the fact that it is not an impoundment and is a M1 is false is correct. sent6: the fact that the midazolam is not an impoundment but a M1 is false. sent7: if the fact that something is not indehiscent and it does not commute is not correct it is not a Cortland. sent8: the midazolam is a Sabbatarian if that the chapterhouse does not hesitate and it is not hot is correct. sent9: the midazolam hesitates. sent10: the midazolam is a kind of hot thing that hesitates. sent11: the Harpy is not a kind of an impoundment. sent12: the opepe is non-creedal if the fact that the iodoprotein is non-creedal and is not nonsuppurative is not correct. sent13: there exists something such that it does photosensitize lymphocyte. sent14: if the midazolam is perigonal then that it is not a characterization and is not a M1 does not hold.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent3: (x): {D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent4: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{DJ}x & ¬{HG}x) -> ¬{AI}x sent8: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {B}{aa} sent9: {C}{aa} sent10: ({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent11: ¬{AA}{do} sent12: ¬({G}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent13: (Ex): {I}x sent14: {GN}{aa} -> ¬(¬{DH}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: the midazolam is not non-hot.; sent1 -> int2: the fact that the midazolam is not the Sabbatarian if the fact that the midazolam is not an impoundment and not a M1 is wrong is not false.;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> int1: {A}{aa}; sent1 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa};"
] |
the midazolam is a Sabbatarian.
|
{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent3 -> int3: if the chapterhouse abstracts doula it does not hesitate and is not hot.; sent2 -> int4: if the chapterhouse is garlicky then the fact that it abstracts doula hold.;"
] | 8 | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the midazolam is not Sabbatarian. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a Sabbatarian if the fact that it is not an impoundment and it is not a kind of a M1 is not correct. sent2: if something is garlicky it does abstract doula. sent3: if something abstracts doula it does not hesitate and it is not hot. sent4: something is not a Sabbatarian if it is a M1. sent5: that if something is hot then the fact that it is not an impoundment and is a M1 is false is correct. sent6: the fact that the midazolam is not an impoundment but a M1 is false. sent7: if the fact that something is not indehiscent and it does not commute is not correct it is not a Cortland. sent8: the midazolam is a Sabbatarian if that the chapterhouse does not hesitate and it is not hot is correct. sent9: the midazolam hesitates. sent10: the midazolam is a kind of hot thing that hesitates. sent11: the Harpy is not a kind of an impoundment. sent12: the opepe is non-creedal if the fact that the iodoprotein is non-creedal and is not nonsuppurative is not correct. sent13: there exists something such that it does photosensitize lymphocyte. sent14: if the midazolam is perigonal then that it is not a characterization and is not a M1 does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> int1: the midazolam is not non-hot.; sent1 -> int2: the fact that the midazolam is not the Sabbatarian if the fact that the midazolam is not an impoundment and not a M1 is wrong is not false.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the multiphaseness happens but the miscarrying housecraft does not occur is incorrect.
|
¬({AA} & ¬{AB})
|
sent1: if the superscribing dub happens the donating happens. sent2: that the multiphaseness happens but the miscarrying housecraft does not occur does not hold if the ritualisticness occurs. sent3: the clicking does not occur and the repercussion occurs if the donating occurs. sent4: the multiple happens if the fact that the multiphaseness but not the miscarrying housecraft occurs is not right. sent5: the turnout occurs but the licking does not occur. sent6: the multipleness happens if the multiphaseness does not occur. sent7: the miscarrying Beckley occurs but the miscarrying Gynura does not occur. sent8: if the default does not occur the donating and the superscribing dub occurs. sent9: the click occurs but the ritualisticness does not occur. sent10: the ritualisticness does not occur. sent11: if the clicking and the non-ritualisticness happens then the multipleness does not occur. sent12: the multipleness does not occur if the click and the ritualisticness occurs. sent13: the multiphaseness happens. sent14: that the photosensitizing octameter but not the miscarrying sock happens is triggered by the ritualisticness. sent15: that the repercussion happens prevents the click. sent16: that the relativisticness but not the repercussion occurs is incorrect. sent17: the fact that the signalizing happens but the toroidalness does not occur does not hold. sent18: both the superscribing DINK and the non-ferricness occurs. sent19: the caressing but not the annexationalness occurs. sent20: the repercussion occurs if that the donating happens hold. sent21: if the fact that the fine-tuning does not occur is true then both the superscribing dub and the default happens.
|
sent1: {F} -> {E} sent2: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: {E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) sent4: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent5: ({JH} & ¬{CI}) sent6: ¬{AA} -> {B} sent7: ({EI} & ¬{BQ}) sent8: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent9: ({C} & ¬{A}) sent10: ¬{A} sent11: ({C} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{B} sent12: ({C} & {A}) -> ¬{B} sent13: {AA} sent14: {A} -> ({P} & ¬{DJ}) sent15: {D} -> ¬{C} sent16: ¬({HA} & ¬{D}) sent17: ¬({FM} & ¬{CT}) sent18: ({HS} & ¬{AI}) sent19: ({JD} & ¬{IP}) sent20: {E} -> {D} sent21: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the multiphaseness but not the miscarrying housecraft happens does not hold.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the multiple happens.; sent11 & sent9 -> int2: the multipleness does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}); sent4 & assump1 -> int1: {B}; sent11 & sent9 -> int2: ¬{B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the photosensitizing octameter but not the miscarrying sock occurs.
|
({P} & ¬{DJ})
|
[] | 10 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the multiphaseness happens but the miscarrying housecraft does not occur is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the superscribing dub happens the donating happens. sent2: that the multiphaseness happens but the miscarrying housecraft does not occur does not hold if the ritualisticness occurs. sent3: the clicking does not occur and the repercussion occurs if the donating occurs. sent4: the multiple happens if the fact that the multiphaseness but not the miscarrying housecraft occurs is not right. sent5: the turnout occurs but the licking does not occur. sent6: the multipleness happens if the multiphaseness does not occur. sent7: the miscarrying Beckley occurs but the miscarrying Gynura does not occur. sent8: if the default does not occur the donating and the superscribing dub occurs. sent9: the click occurs but the ritualisticness does not occur. sent10: the ritualisticness does not occur. sent11: if the clicking and the non-ritualisticness happens then the multipleness does not occur. sent12: the multipleness does not occur if the click and the ritualisticness occurs. sent13: the multiphaseness happens. sent14: that the photosensitizing octameter but not the miscarrying sock happens is triggered by the ritualisticness. sent15: that the repercussion happens prevents the click. sent16: that the relativisticness but not the repercussion occurs is incorrect. sent17: the fact that the signalizing happens but the toroidalness does not occur does not hold. sent18: both the superscribing DINK and the non-ferricness occurs. sent19: the caressing but not the annexationalness occurs. sent20: the repercussion occurs if that the donating happens hold. sent21: if the fact that the fine-tuning does not occur is true then both the superscribing dub and the default happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the multiphaseness but not the miscarrying housecraft happens does not hold.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the multiple happens.; sent11 & sent9 -> int2: the multipleness does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the armature does not superscribe skepful.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: the coville does recuse if there is something such that it is not a fuschia. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a Mayan and it recuses is not correct the armature is bony. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is not a Mayan and recuses is not right. sent4: something that is bony does superscribe skepful.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{DU}x -> {AB}{ds} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent3: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: (x): {A}x -> {B}x
|
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the armature is bony.; sent4 -> int2: the armature superscribes skepful if it is bony.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent2 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent4 -> int2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the armature does not superscribe skepful. ; $context$ = sent1: the coville does recuse if there is something such that it is not a fuschia. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a Mayan and it recuses is not correct the armature is bony. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is not a Mayan and recuses is not right. sent4: something that is bony does superscribe skepful. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent2 -> int1: the armature is bony.; sent4 -> int2: the armature superscribes skepful if it is bony.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sink does not languish.
|
¬{D}{c}
|
sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it hares and it is a cachalot is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the fact that the sector does not photosensitize viscountcy is correct if either the sector does branch or it is a kind of a cachalot or both is correct. sent3: the autotype does not languish. sent4: the sector does not branch if that the garnierite is a Omotic and is not a sneerer is not right. sent5: that the fact that the garnierite is a Omotic but not a sneerer is not false does not hold. sent6: if there is something such that it is a kind of a cachalot the sink does not languish. sent7: the sink does not languish if there is something such that that it is a kind of a hare and is not a kind of a cachalot is not correct. sent8: the sector does branch if the sink branch.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({C}x & {A}x) sent2: ({B}{b} v {A}{b}) -> ¬{DF}{b} sent3: ¬{D}{d} sent4: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{D}{c} sent7: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{D}{c} sent8: {B}{c} -> {B}{b}
|
[
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the sector does not branch.;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}{b};"
] |
that the garnierite photosensitizes viscountcy and is not inadvisable does not hold.
|
¬({DF}{a} & ¬{T}{a})
|
[
"sent3 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it does not languish is not incorrect.;"
] | 8 | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the sink does not languish. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it hares and it is a cachalot is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the fact that the sector does not photosensitize viscountcy is correct if either the sector does branch or it is a kind of a cachalot or both is correct. sent3: the autotype does not languish. sent4: the sector does not branch if that the garnierite is a Omotic and is not a sneerer is not right. sent5: that the fact that the garnierite is a Omotic but not a sneerer is not false does not hold. sent6: if there is something such that it is a kind of a cachalot the sink does not languish. sent7: the sink does not languish if there is something such that that it is a kind of a hare and is not a kind of a cachalot is not correct. sent8: the sector does branch if the sink branch. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the sector does not branch.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it is not a verdict that it is not a elapid and it is not invertible is not right.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: if something is not a kind of a verdict then that it is not a elapid and is not invertible is incorrect. sent2: if the phencyclidine is not an admiralty then that it is not a penetrator but a elapid is false. sent3: the fact that the phencyclidine is a kind of a elapid that is not invertible is not true if the fact that it is not a kind of a verdict hold. sent4: if something is not sciatic then the fact that it does not photosensitize Girondism and is not ocular is wrong.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: ¬{HD}{aa} -> ¬(¬{JE}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: (x): ¬{EI}x -> ¬(¬{ER}x & ¬{BO}x)
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the fact that the phencyclidine is not a elapid and not invertible is not right if it is not a kind of a verdict.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is not sciatic then that that it does not photosensitize Girondism and is not ocular is correct is wrong.
|
(Ex): ¬{EI}x -> ¬(¬{ER}x & ¬{BO}x)
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: if the amygdalin is not sciatic then that it does not photosensitize Girondism and is not ocular is wrong.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a verdict that it is not a elapid and it is not invertible is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of a verdict then that it is not a elapid and is not invertible is incorrect. sent2: if the phencyclidine is not an admiralty then that it is not a penetrator but a elapid is false. sent3: the fact that the phencyclidine is a kind of a elapid that is not invertible is not true if the fact that it is not a kind of a verdict hold. sent4: if something is not sciatic then the fact that it does not photosensitize Girondism and is not ocular is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the fact that the phencyclidine is not a elapid and not invertible is not right if it is not a kind of a verdict.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of an alloy then it is not a kind of a transcendentalist does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is voluble then it is not altricial. sent2: if the humin is not an alloy that it is a transcendentalist is true. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not an alloy then it is a transcendentalist. sent4: the humin is not a transcendentalist if it does not alloy.
|
sent1: (Ex): {FD}x -> ¬{HD}x sent2: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent3: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent4: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa}
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of an alloy then it is not a kind of a transcendentalist does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is voluble then it is not altricial. sent2: if the humin is not an alloy that it is a transcendentalist is true. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not an alloy then it is a transcendentalist. sent4: the humin is not a transcendentalist if it does not alloy. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a kale and it is not a ferment then it does not whore is not correct.
|
¬((Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: if something is a kale but it does not ferment it does not whore. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a kale that is not a kind of a ferment it whores. sent3: if a kale is a ferment it does not whore. sent4: if the bilocation is a kind of constant thing that is not a ecclesiology then it does not whore. sent5: there exists something such that if it piddles and it is terminal then it does not abstract perfectibility. sent6: if the splinter is both a kale and a ferment it does not whore. sent7: if the splinter is a kind of a kale but it is not a ferment then it whores.
|
sent1: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: ({BH}{ai} & ¬{DF}{ai}) -> ¬{B}{ai} sent5: (Ex): ({JJ}x & {EC}x) -> ¬{C}x sent6: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the splinter does not whore if it is a kale and it is not a ferment.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is a kind of a kale and it is not a ferment then it does not whore is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a kale but it does not ferment it does not whore. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a kale that is not a kind of a ferment it whores. sent3: if a kale is a ferment it does not whore. sent4: if the bilocation is a kind of constant thing that is not a ecclesiology then it does not whore. sent5: there exists something such that if it piddles and it is terminal then it does not abstract perfectibility. sent6: if the splinter is both a kale and a ferment it does not whore. sent7: if the splinter is a kind of a kale but it is not a ferment then it whores. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the splinter does not whore if it is a kale and it is not a ferment.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Liverpudlian is not a consort.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: if something is not a washtub then that it is not a Emydidae is not false. sent2: that the lacebark is rectal and it is a washtub is false if the megabat is not ascensional. sent3: if something is a probationer it is translatable. sent4: there exists something such that it is rectal. sent5: the fact that the lacebark is not a washtub hold if the Liverpudlian is a washtub and it is ascensional. sent6: the Liverpudlian is not a kind of a consort if the lacebark miscarries cooperation. sent7: if something does miscarry cooperation then it is a kind of a probationer. sent8: something does consort if the fact that it does not miscarry cooperation and it is not a probationer is incorrect. sent9: the Liverpudlian is a kind of a washtub that is ascensional if there are rectal things. sent10: if the fact that something is not non-rectal but a washtub is incorrect then it is not a kind of a Emydidae. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a probationer is not false.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬{D}x sent2: ¬{G}{c} -> ¬({F}{a} & {E}{a}) sent3: (x): {A}x -> {AJ}x sent4: (Ex): {F}x sent5: ({E}{b} & {G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent6: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent8: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {C}x sent9: (x): {F}x -> ({E}{b} & {G}{b}) sent10: (x): ¬({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent11: (Ex): {A}x
|
[] |
[] |
the methylene is translatable.
|
{AJ}{q}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: that the methylene is translatable is not false if that it is a kind of a probationer is not false.; sent7 -> int2: the methylene is a kind of a probationer if it does miscarry cooperation.; sent1 -> int3: the lacebark is not a Emydidae if it is not a washtub.; sent4 & sent9 -> int4: the Liverpudlian is a washtub and is ascensional.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the lacebark is not a kind of a washtub.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the lacebark is not a Emydidae.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Emydidae.;"
] | 8 | 2 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Liverpudlian is not a consort. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a washtub then that it is not a Emydidae is not false. sent2: that the lacebark is rectal and it is a washtub is false if the megabat is not ascensional. sent3: if something is a probationer it is translatable. sent4: there exists something such that it is rectal. sent5: the fact that the lacebark is not a washtub hold if the Liverpudlian is a washtub and it is ascensional. sent6: the Liverpudlian is not a kind of a consort if the lacebark miscarries cooperation. sent7: if something does miscarry cooperation then it is a kind of a probationer. sent8: something does consort if the fact that it does not miscarry cooperation and it is not a probationer is incorrect. sent9: the Liverpudlian is a kind of a washtub that is ascensional if there are rectal things. sent10: if the fact that something is not non-rectal but a washtub is incorrect then it is not a kind of a Emydidae. sent11: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a probationer is not false. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the fact that the oilstone photosensitizes Sonora and is a slant is not wrong is wrong.
|
¬({B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: the monthly quarters or it is not non-subordinating or both. sent2: if the oilstone subluxates then it photosensitizes Sonora. sent3: something is non-ventral thing that is not alienable if it is not a cherry. sent4: the Catalan is not a quarter if the chat is not ventral and it is not alienable. sent5: if the oilstone does quarter the monthly photosensitizes Sonora. sent6: the Mill is a subordinating and it is inaesthetic. sent7: the fact that the burrow is not a plumb and is a kind of a cherry is wrong. sent8: the oilstone is a slaveholder. sent9: the oilstone does subluxate or it is a quarter or both. sent10: the oilstone subluxates. sent11: the oilstone is both a abominator and radiological. sent12: the fact that the monthly is subordinating thing that does subluxate is incorrect if the Catalan does not quarter. sent13: the oilstone slants if the monthly is a kind of a subordinating. sent14: if that something does subordinate and it subluxates does not hold it does not subluxates. sent15: if the monthly is a quarter then the oilstone does slant.
|
sent1: ({E}{b} v {D}{b}) sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) sent4: (¬{F}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent5: {E}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: ({D}{ab} & {GM}{ab}) sent7: ¬(¬{J}{e} & {H}{e}) sent8: {HH}{a} sent9: ({A}{a} v {E}{a}) sent10: {A}{a} sent11: ({FC}{a} & {GQ}{a}) sent12: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬({D}{b} & {A}{b}) sent13: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} sent14: (x): ¬({D}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent15: {E}{b} -> {C}{a}
|
[
"sent2 & sent10 -> int1: the oilstone photosensitizes Sonora.; sent1 & sent15 & sent13 -> int2: the oilstone does slant.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent10 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent1 & sent15 & sent13 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the oilstone does photosensitize Sonora and does slant is wrong.
|
¬({B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[
"sent14 -> int3: the monthly does not subluxate if the fact that it subordinates and it subluxate is wrong.; sent3 -> int4: if the fact that the chat is not a cherry hold it is not ventral and it is not alienable.; sent7 -> int5: there exists something such that that it does not plumb and it is a cherry does not hold.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that the oilstone photosensitizes Sonora and is a slant is not wrong is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the monthly quarters or it is not non-subordinating or both. sent2: if the oilstone subluxates then it photosensitizes Sonora. sent3: something is non-ventral thing that is not alienable if it is not a cherry. sent4: the Catalan is not a quarter if the chat is not ventral and it is not alienable. sent5: if the oilstone does quarter the monthly photosensitizes Sonora. sent6: the Mill is a subordinating and it is inaesthetic. sent7: the fact that the burrow is not a plumb and is a kind of a cherry is wrong. sent8: the oilstone is a slaveholder. sent9: the oilstone does subluxate or it is a quarter or both. sent10: the oilstone subluxates. sent11: the oilstone is both a abominator and radiological. sent12: the fact that the monthly is subordinating thing that does subluxate is incorrect if the Catalan does not quarter. sent13: the oilstone slants if the monthly is a kind of a subordinating. sent14: if that something does subordinate and it subluxates does not hold it does not subluxates. sent15: if the monthly is a quarter then the oilstone does slant. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent10 -> int1: the oilstone photosensitizes Sonora.; sent1 & sent15 & sent13 -> int2: the oilstone does slant.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the devolving does not occur but the photosensitizing Muscadet happens is false.
|
¬(¬{AA} & {AB})
|
sent1: if the mildness does not occur then the immunity happens and the miscarrying tart occurs. sent2: if that both the non-inspiratoriness and the representativeness happens is not true the nonunionness does not occur. sent3: the devolving does not occur. sent4: that the immunity does not occur leads to that not the uncomplimentariness but the fantasizing happens. sent5: the fact that both the devolving and the photosensitizing Muscadet happens is incorrect. sent6: that the immunity occurs is not false. sent7: that the photosensitizing tamanoir happens yields that the mildness does not occur and the miscarrying one-hundredth does not occur. sent8: the miscarrying tart does not occur if that the devolving does not occur but the photosensitizing Muscadet happens is not true. sent9: that both the photosensitizing tamanoir and the one-pieceness occurs is triggered by that the superscribing tusked does not occur. sent10: that the devolving happens prevents the miscarrying tart. sent11: both the miscarrying tart and the immunity occurs. sent12: the superscribing tusked does not occur if that the fact that the photosensitizing Anglesey and/or the abstracting circumvolution occurs hold is not correct.
|
sent1: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent2: ¬(¬{FL} & {HM}) -> ¬{EP} sent3: ¬{AA} sent4: ¬{A} -> (¬{IB} & {IN}) sent5: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent6: {A} sent7: {E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent8: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent9: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent10: {AA} -> ¬{B} sent11: ({B} & {A}) sent12: ¬({I} v {H}) -> ¬{G}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the devolving does not occur and the photosensitizing Muscadet occurs is not true.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the miscarrying tart does not occur.; sent11 -> int2: the miscarrying tart happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}); sent8 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent11 -> int2: {B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that not the uncomplimentariness but the fantasizing happens is right.
|
(¬{IB} & {IN})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the devolving does not occur but the photosensitizing Muscadet happens is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the mildness does not occur then the immunity happens and the miscarrying tart occurs. sent2: if that both the non-inspiratoriness and the representativeness happens is not true the nonunionness does not occur. sent3: the devolving does not occur. sent4: that the immunity does not occur leads to that not the uncomplimentariness but the fantasizing happens. sent5: the fact that both the devolving and the photosensitizing Muscadet happens is incorrect. sent6: that the immunity occurs is not false. sent7: that the photosensitizing tamanoir happens yields that the mildness does not occur and the miscarrying one-hundredth does not occur. sent8: the miscarrying tart does not occur if that the devolving does not occur but the photosensitizing Muscadet happens is not true. sent9: that both the photosensitizing tamanoir and the one-pieceness occurs is triggered by that the superscribing tusked does not occur. sent10: that the devolving happens prevents the miscarrying tart. sent11: both the miscarrying tart and the immunity occurs. sent12: the superscribing tusked does not occur if that the fact that the photosensitizing Anglesey and/or the abstracting circumvolution occurs hold is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the devolving does not occur and the photosensitizing Muscadet occurs is not true.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the miscarrying tart does not occur.; sent11 -> int2: the miscarrying tart happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is a juju then it does miscarry trimaran and is not a spot.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is a juju it does miscarry trimaran. sent2: if the splinter is a juju then it miscarries trimaran. sent3: there is something such that if it is a kind of a hyoscyamine then it does miscarry threescore and it is not responsive. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a juju then it does miscarry trimaran and it is a spot. sent5: there exists something such that if it superscribes bullpen it is both a marten and not a skibob. sent6: the splinter does miscarry trimaran but it is not a kind of a spot if that it is a juju hold. sent7: there is something such that if it is a tonicity it is a kind of a hyoscyamine and is not a downstage. sent8: something that is awnless is a kind of a spot and does not photosensitize bed-and-breakfast. sent9: something does dot but it is not aldermanic if the fact that it does miscarry night-line is not false. sent10: there is something such that if it superscribes Sonora the fact that it is soteriological and does not cool is not wrong. sent11: the hawk's-beard is a spot but it is not a kind of an imperative if it does superscribe bullpen. sent12: if the splinter is a kind of a juju then the fact that it miscarries trimaran and is a spot is correct. sent13: something is tympanic but it does not groove if it superscribes Sonora. sent14: if the splinter does miscarry caraway then it is tragic thing that is not a juju. sent15: there is something such that if it is a kind of a juju the fact that it is not a spot is correct. sent16: the splinter is a juju but it is not a mouser if it does scoff. sent17: there exists something such that if it photosensitizes bed-and-breakfast it is improvident and it is not a detergency. sent18: there exists something such that if it does miscarry pelvimeter then it is a vicegerent and is not a Xiphiidae.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> {AA}x sent2: {A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent3: (Ex): {HF}x -> ({GM}x & ¬{HB}x) sent4: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: (Ex): {JF}x -> ({AK}x & ¬{EO}x) sent6: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): {AJ}x -> ({HF}x & ¬{GN}x) sent8: (x): {EG}x -> ({AB}x & ¬{E}x) sent9: (x): {ES}x -> ({EF}x & ¬{AQ}x) sent10: (Ex): {ED}x -> ({HK}x & ¬{JE}x) sent11: {JF}{at} -> ({AB}{at} & ¬{DA}{at}) sent12: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent13: (x): {ED}x -> ({CM}x & ¬{AC}x) sent14: {FK}{aa} -> ({DC}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent15: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent16: {DD}{aa} -> ({A}{aa} & ¬{EJ}{aa}) sent17: (Ex): {E}x -> ({FO}x & ¬{BM}x) sent18: (Ex): {I}x -> ({IF}x & ¬{H}x)
|
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it does superscribe Sonora then it is tympanic thing that is not a grooving.
|
(Ex): {ED}x -> ({CM}x & ¬{AC}x)
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: if the pelvimeter superscribes Sonora it is tympanic but not a grooving.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a juju then it does miscarry trimaran and is not a spot. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is a juju it does miscarry trimaran. sent2: if the splinter is a juju then it miscarries trimaran. sent3: there is something such that if it is a kind of a hyoscyamine then it does miscarry threescore and it is not responsive. sent4: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a juju then it does miscarry trimaran and it is a spot. sent5: there exists something such that if it superscribes bullpen it is both a marten and not a skibob. sent6: the splinter does miscarry trimaran but it is not a kind of a spot if that it is a juju hold. sent7: there is something such that if it is a tonicity it is a kind of a hyoscyamine and is not a downstage. sent8: something that is awnless is a kind of a spot and does not photosensitize bed-and-breakfast. sent9: something does dot but it is not aldermanic if the fact that it does miscarry night-line is not false. sent10: there is something such that if it superscribes Sonora the fact that it is soteriological and does not cool is not wrong. sent11: the hawk's-beard is a spot but it is not a kind of an imperative if it does superscribe bullpen. sent12: if the splinter is a kind of a juju then the fact that it miscarries trimaran and is a spot is correct. sent13: something is tympanic but it does not groove if it superscribes Sonora. sent14: if the splinter does miscarry caraway then it is tragic thing that is not a juju. sent15: there is something such that if it is a kind of a juju the fact that it is not a spot is correct. sent16: the splinter is a juju but it is not a mouser if it does scoff. sent17: there exists something such that if it photosensitizes bed-and-breakfast it is improvident and it is not a detergency. sent18: there exists something such that if it does miscarry pelvimeter then it is a vicegerent and is not a Xiphiidae. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the wilt does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast happens and the unpublishableness happens. sent2: the wilt is prevented by that the headshake occurs and the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast happens. sent3: that the unpublishableness does not occur causes that not the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast but the wilting occurs. sent4: the fact that the craniometricness but not the headshake occurs does not hold. sent5: if the fact that that the craniometricness happens and the headshake does not occur is right is not true the headshake happens.
|
sent1: ({A} & {B}) sent2: ({C} & {A}) -> ¬{D} sent3: ¬{B} -> (¬{A} & {D}) sent4: ¬({E} & ¬{C}) sent5: ¬({E} & ¬{C}) -> {C}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast occurs.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the headshake occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the headshake happens and the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast occurs.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {A}; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({C} & {A}); int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the wilt happens.
|
{D}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the wilt does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast happens and the unpublishableness happens. sent2: the wilt is prevented by that the headshake occurs and the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast happens. sent3: that the unpublishableness does not occur causes that not the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast but the wilting occurs. sent4: the fact that the craniometricness but not the headshake occurs does not hold. sent5: if the fact that that the craniometricness happens and the headshake does not occur is right is not true the headshake happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast occurs.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the headshake occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the headshake happens and the miscarrying bed-and-breakfast occurs.; int3 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the wardress is not a kind of a Crosby.
|
¬{D}{a}
|
sent1: if something does superscribe Saipan it is not eventful. sent2: if that the fornication is uneventful hold it abstracts Fauve. sent3: if something does not superscribe Saipan the fact that it is a Crosby and it is prudent does not hold. sent4: if the Fauve is a beatification then the wardress does not superscribe Saipan or it is uneventful or both. sent5: if something is uneventful then it is a Crosby. sent6: if the fact that something is a Crosby and prudent is wrong then it is not a Crosby. sent7: the wardress is prudent. sent8: the wardress does superscribe Saipan if it is prudent. sent9: if the output is not non-monolingual but intemperate the Fauve is a beatification. sent10: the wardress does trim if it clobbers.
|
sent1: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent2: {C}{jj} -> {CO}{jj} sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({D}x & {A}x) sent4: {E}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent5: (x): {C}x -> {D}x sent6: (x): ¬({D}x & {A}x) -> ¬{D}x sent7: {A}{a} sent8: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent9: ({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> {E}{b} sent10: {CP}{a} -> {BF}{a}
|
[
"sent8 & sent7 -> int1: the wardress does superscribe Saipan.; sent1 -> int2: the wardress is uneventful if it superscribes Saipan.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the wardress is uneventful.; sent5 -> int4: if the wardress is uneventful it is a Crosby.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent7 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent1 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a}; sent5 -> int4: {C}{a} -> {D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the wardress is not a Crosby.
|
¬{D}{a}
|
[
"sent6 -> int5: the wardress is not a Crosby if that it is a Crosby and it is prudent is not right.; sent3 -> int6: the fact that the wardress is a Crosby and it is prudent is incorrect if it does not superscribe Saipan.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the wardress is not a kind of a Crosby. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does superscribe Saipan it is not eventful. sent2: if that the fornication is uneventful hold it abstracts Fauve. sent3: if something does not superscribe Saipan the fact that it is a Crosby and it is prudent does not hold. sent4: if the Fauve is a beatification then the wardress does not superscribe Saipan or it is uneventful or both. sent5: if something is uneventful then it is a Crosby. sent6: if the fact that something is a Crosby and prudent is wrong then it is not a Crosby. sent7: the wardress is prudent. sent8: the wardress does superscribe Saipan if it is prudent. sent9: if the output is not non-monolingual but intemperate the Fauve is a beatification. sent10: the wardress does trim if it clobbers. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent7 -> int1: the wardress does superscribe Saipan.; sent1 -> int2: the wardress is uneventful if it superscribes Saipan.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the wardress is uneventful.; sent5 -> int4: if the wardress is uneventful it is a Crosby.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the lanseh is not arundinaceous and it is not a mistral.
|
(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
sent1: if the xanthate does superscribe Kroeber the fact that the lanseh is both non-arundinaceous and not a mistral is not true. sent2: the fact that the illumination is a hysterosalpingogram but it does not superscribe Kroeber is wrong if the workaholic does fuel. sent3: the lanseh superscribes Kroeber. sent4: the lanseh is a mistral if the xanthate is not a mistral. sent5: the lanseh superscribes Kroeber and is not a kind of a mistral. sent6: the xanthate is not a fueled and/or it is not arundinaceous. sent7: everything is both a sinker and boric. sent8: the lanseh is arundinaceous if the xanthate is not arundinaceous. sent9: if the xanthate is not arundinaceous then the lanseh is not arundinaceous. sent10: if the caper is a sinker the workaholic fuels.
|
sent1: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent2: {E}{d} -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) sent3: {A}{a} sent4: ¬{B}{b} -> {B}{a} sent5: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent6: (¬{E}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) sent7: (x): ({F}x & {G}x) sent8: ¬{C}{b} -> {C}{a} sent9: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬{C}{a} sent10: {F}{e} -> {E}{d}
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the lanseh is not a mistral.;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}{a};"
] |
that the lanseh is not arundinaceous and it is not a mistral is wrong.
|
¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
[] | 6 | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the lanseh is not arundinaceous and it is not a mistral. ; $context$ = sent1: if the xanthate does superscribe Kroeber the fact that the lanseh is both non-arundinaceous and not a mistral is not true. sent2: the fact that the illumination is a hysterosalpingogram but it does not superscribe Kroeber is wrong if the workaholic does fuel. sent3: the lanseh superscribes Kroeber. sent4: the lanseh is a mistral if the xanthate is not a mistral. sent5: the lanseh superscribes Kroeber and is not a kind of a mistral. sent6: the xanthate is not a fueled and/or it is not arundinaceous. sent7: everything is both a sinker and boric. sent8: the lanseh is arundinaceous if the xanthate is not arundinaceous. sent9: if the xanthate is not arundinaceous then the lanseh is not arundinaceous. sent10: if the caper is a sinker the workaholic fuels. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the lanseh is not a mistral.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the hydrocortisone is not violable.
|
¬{E}{a}
|
sent1: there exists something such that it does miscast. sent2: if there exists something such that it is noncritical the hydrocortisone is non-clearing thing that does not miscarry mug. sent3: if there is something such that it is catoptrics and is majuscule then the demimondaine is not a Leibniz. sent4: The diocese does photosensitize hydrocortisone. sent5: the pikeblenny does not photosensitize diocese if that the marshmallow is a spiritual but it does not photosensitize diocese does not hold. sent6: the glyburide is not a Elector and/or it is not a Tampico. sent7: the hydrocortisone does not miscarry mug. sent8: if either the glyburide is not a kind of a Elector or it is not a Tampico or both then it is not non-majuscule. sent9: the fact that something superscribes motilin and is .38-caliber is right if it is not a kind of a Leibniz. sent10: if that the hydrocortisone is not noncritical but it is a Baltic is true it is not telegraphic. sent11: the hydrocortisone is not an election and miscarries visa. sent12: the glyburide is catoptrics. sent13: there exists something such that it bridles. sent14: there is something such that it is noncritical. sent15: that the marshmallow is a spiritual and does not photosensitize diocese is not right if that the demimondaine superscribes motilin hold. sent16: the tout does not miscarry mug if the pikeblenny does not photosensitize diocese. sent17: if something is non-clearing but it photosensitizes diocese it is not violable. sent18: if there is something such that it is not critical the hydrocortisone does not miscarry mug. sent19: the fact that the stylus is not violable is not false. sent20: the hydrocortisone is inviolable if there exists something such that it miscarries mug. sent21: if that the tout does not miscarry mug hold the hydrocortisone is a clearing and/or not critical.
|
sent1: (Ex): {FD}x sent2: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent3: (x): ({K}x & {J}x) -> ¬{I}{e} sent4: {AA}{aa} sent5: ¬({F}{d} & ¬{D}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent6: (¬{L}{f} v ¬{M}{f}) sent7: ¬{C}{a} sent8: (¬{L}{f} v ¬{M}{f}) -> {J}{f} sent9: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({G}x & {H}x) sent10: (¬{A}{a} & {CI}{a}) -> ¬{S}{a} sent11: (¬{EE}{a} & {GS}{a}) sent12: {K}{f} sent13: (Ex): {DI}x sent14: (Ex): {A}x sent15: {G}{e} -> ¬({F}{d} & ¬{D}{d}) sent16: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬{C}{b} sent17: (x): (¬{B}x & {D}x) -> ¬{E}x sent18: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent19: ¬{E}{hl} sent20: (x): {C}x -> ¬{E}{a} sent21: ¬{C}{b} -> ({B}{a} v {A}{a})
|
[
"sent14 & sent2 -> int1: the hydrocortisone is non-clearing thing that does not miscarry mug.; int1 -> int2: the hydrocortisone is not clearing.; sent17 -> int3: the hydrocortisone is not violable if it is non-clearing thing that does photosensitize diocese.;"
] |
[
"sent14 & sent2 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> int2: ¬{B}{a}; sent17 -> int3: (¬{B}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{E}{a};"
] |
the hydrocortisone is not inviolable.
|
{E}{a}
|
[
"sent9 -> int4: if the demimondaine is not a Leibniz then it does superscribe motilin and it is .38-caliber.; sent8 & sent6 -> int5: the glyburide is majuscule.; sent12 & int5 -> int6: the glyburide is catoptrics and it is majuscule.; int6 -> int7: something is catoptrics and majuscule.; int7 & sent3 -> int8: the demimondaine is not a kind of a Leibniz.; int4 & int8 -> int9: the demimondaine superscribes motilin and it is .38-caliber.; int9 -> int10: the demimondaine does superscribe motilin.; sent15 & int10 -> int11: that the fact that the marshmallow is a spiritual but it does not photosensitize diocese hold is not true.; sent5 & int11 -> int12: the pikeblenny does not photosensitize diocese.; sent16 & int12 -> int13: the tout does not miscarry mug.; sent21 & int13 -> int14: the hydrocortisone is a clearing and/or noncritical.;"
] | 11 | 4 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the hydrocortisone is not violable. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it does miscast. sent2: if there exists something such that it is noncritical the hydrocortisone is non-clearing thing that does not miscarry mug. sent3: if there is something such that it is catoptrics and is majuscule then the demimondaine is not a Leibniz. sent4: The diocese does photosensitize hydrocortisone. sent5: the pikeblenny does not photosensitize diocese if that the marshmallow is a spiritual but it does not photosensitize diocese does not hold. sent6: the glyburide is not a Elector and/or it is not a Tampico. sent7: the hydrocortisone does not miscarry mug. sent8: if either the glyburide is not a kind of a Elector or it is not a Tampico or both then it is not non-majuscule. sent9: the fact that something superscribes motilin and is .38-caliber is right if it is not a kind of a Leibniz. sent10: if that the hydrocortisone is not noncritical but it is a Baltic is true it is not telegraphic. sent11: the hydrocortisone is not an election and miscarries visa. sent12: the glyburide is catoptrics. sent13: there exists something such that it bridles. sent14: there is something such that it is noncritical. sent15: that the marshmallow is a spiritual and does not photosensitize diocese is not right if that the demimondaine superscribes motilin hold. sent16: the tout does not miscarry mug if the pikeblenny does not photosensitize diocese. sent17: if something is non-clearing but it photosensitizes diocese it is not violable. sent18: if there is something such that it is not critical the hydrocortisone does not miscarry mug. sent19: the fact that the stylus is not violable is not false. sent20: the hydrocortisone is inviolable if there exists something such that it miscarries mug. sent21: if that the tout does not miscarry mug hold the hydrocortisone is a clearing and/or not critical. ; $proof$ =
|
sent14 & sent2 -> int1: the hydrocortisone is non-clearing thing that does not miscarry mug.; int1 -> int2: the hydrocortisone is not clearing.; sent17 -> int3: the hydrocortisone is not violable if it is non-clearing thing that does photosensitize diocese.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the deerstalker does not superscribe chug.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
sent1: there is something such that it is a tomentum. sent2: if something is hyperemic it is not a tomentum and not a pounding. sent3: there exists something such that it is mercurial. sent4: the fact that the deerstalker is a pounding and/or it is not ampullar is not right. sent5: that that the splinter is a Asahikawa or it is not a neem or both is incorrect is true. sent6: if something is not a kind of a tomentum and it is not a kind of a pounding then it is non-mercurial. sent7: the splinter does superscribe nutritiousness. sent8: the deerstalker is a kind of a tomentum. sent9: there exists something such that it does mistake. sent10: the splinter is a kind of a tomentum. sent11: if the fact that the deerstalker does mistake or it is a kind of a tomentum or both does not hold the splinter does superscribe chug. sent12: if the fact that the deerstalker superscribes chug and/or is a tomentum is wrong the splinter is a mistake. sent13: that the splinter does mistake and/or it is not a kind of a tomentum is incorrect if there exists something such that it is not non-mercurial. sent14: if the fact that the steps is not carroty and is not Caesarian is not right then the splinter is hyperemic. sent15: the fact that something does not superscribe chug is not wrong if either it is not mercurial or it is a kind of a mistake or both. sent16: the deerstalker superscribes chug if that the splinter is a kind of a mistake and/or it is not a kind of a tomentum does not hold. sent17: if there is something such that that it mistakes is not wrong the splinter is a tomentum.
|
sent1: (Ex): {C}x sent2: (x): {F}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: ¬({E}{b} v ¬{HU}{b}) sent5: ¬({IN}{a} v ¬{IT}{a}) sent6: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{A}x sent7: {EE}{a} sent8: {C}{b} sent9: (Ex): {B}x sent10: {C}{a} sent11: ¬({B}{b} v {C}{b}) -> {D}{a} sent12: ¬({D}{b} v {C}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent13: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent14: ¬(¬{H}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> {F}{a} sent15: (x): (¬{A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{D}x sent16: ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent17: (x): {B}x -> {C}{a}
|
[
"sent3 & sent13 -> int1: the fact that the splinter is a mistake or not a tomentum or both is not true.; sent16 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent13 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}); sent16 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the deerstalker does not superscribe chug.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent15 -> int2: the deerstalker does not superscribe chug if it is not mercurial or a mistake or both.; sent6 -> int3: the splinter is not mercurial if it is not a tomentum and not a pounding.; sent2 -> int4: if the fact that the splinter is hyperemic is correct it is not a tomentum and is not a pounding.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the deerstalker does not superscribe chug. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is a tomentum. sent2: if something is hyperemic it is not a tomentum and not a pounding. sent3: there exists something such that it is mercurial. sent4: the fact that the deerstalker is a pounding and/or it is not ampullar is not right. sent5: that that the splinter is a Asahikawa or it is not a neem or both is incorrect is true. sent6: if something is not a kind of a tomentum and it is not a kind of a pounding then it is non-mercurial. sent7: the splinter does superscribe nutritiousness. sent8: the deerstalker is a kind of a tomentum. sent9: there exists something such that it does mistake. sent10: the splinter is a kind of a tomentum. sent11: if the fact that the deerstalker does mistake or it is a kind of a tomentum or both does not hold the splinter does superscribe chug. sent12: if the fact that the deerstalker superscribes chug and/or is a tomentum is wrong the splinter is a mistake. sent13: that the splinter does mistake and/or it is not a kind of a tomentum is incorrect if there exists something such that it is not non-mercurial. sent14: if the fact that the steps is not carroty and is not Caesarian is not right then the splinter is hyperemic. sent15: the fact that something does not superscribe chug is not wrong if either it is not mercurial or it is a kind of a mistake or both. sent16: the deerstalker superscribes chug if that the splinter is a kind of a mistake and/or it is not a kind of a tomentum does not hold. sent17: if there is something such that that it mistakes is not wrong the splinter is a tomentum. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent13 -> int1: the fact that the splinter is a mistake or not a tomentum or both is not true.; sent16 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the mammography does not occur but the fallibleness happens.
|
(¬{D} & {C})
|
sent1: both the valuableness and the genitalness happens if the unfairness does not occur. sent2: that the anictericness occurs is caused by the victimization. sent3: if the brachiopod happens but the abstracting tonicity does not occur then the solicitation does not occur. sent4: that the colorsness happens triggers that the pleochroicness happens but the depravity does not occur. sent5: the Hebraicness prevents that the souse does not occur. sent6: that the paraphrasing happens causes that the photosensitizing cytotoxicity occurs. sent7: the colorsness occurs. sent8: if the fact that the care does not occur hold then not the photosensitizing masterpiece but the miscarrying constructivism happens. sent9: not the mammography but the fallibleness happens if the superscribing Lycaeon does not occur. sent10: if the theistness happens the fact that the tonicness happens is not incorrect. sent11: that the diverting occurs and the abstracting tonicity does not occur prevents that the miscarrying cryometer happens. sent12: the abstracting mastopexy occurs if the circulation does not occur. sent13: if that the vote does not occur is right the upheaving happens. sent14: the fatwa occurs. sent15: the emulousness occurs. sent16: the erasure happens but the frivolity does not occur. sent17: that the superscribing Lycaeon does not occur is triggered by that the pleochroicness happens and the depravity does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{CJ} -> (¬{IO} & {CK}) sent2: {CT} -> {AR} sent3: ({JB} & ¬{JJ}) -> ¬{DU} sent4: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent5: {II} -> {IA} sent6: {AF} -> {GS} sent7: {A} sent8: ¬{GJ} -> (¬{BH} & {FJ}) sent9: ¬{B} -> (¬{D} & {C}) sent10: {EK} -> {FM} sent11: ({BR} & ¬{JJ}) -> ¬{JD} sent12: ¬{EG} -> {EH} sent13: ¬{AK} -> {BJ} sent14: {AL} sent15: {FS} sent16: ({AJ} & ¬{EI}) sent17: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B}
|
[
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the pleochroicness happens but the depravity does not occur.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the superscribing Lycaeon does not occur.; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 & sent17 -> int2: ¬{B}; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the mammography does not occur but the fallibleness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: both the valuableness and the genitalness happens if the unfairness does not occur. sent2: that the anictericness occurs is caused by the victimization. sent3: if the brachiopod happens but the abstracting tonicity does not occur then the solicitation does not occur. sent4: that the colorsness happens triggers that the pleochroicness happens but the depravity does not occur. sent5: the Hebraicness prevents that the souse does not occur. sent6: that the paraphrasing happens causes that the photosensitizing cytotoxicity occurs. sent7: the colorsness occurs. sent8: if the fact that the care does not occur hold then not the photosensitizing masterpiece but the miscarrying constructivism happens. sent9: not the mammography but the fallibleness happens if the superscribing Lycaeon does not occur. sent10: if the theistness happens the fact that the tonicness happens is not incorrect. sent11: that the diverting occurs and the abstracting tonicity does not occur prevents that the miscarrying cryometer happens. sent12: the abstracting mastopexy occurs if the circulation does not occur. sent13: if that the vote does not occur is right the upheaving happens. sent14: the fatwa occurs. sent15: the emulousness occurs. sent16: the erasure happens but the frivolity does not occur. sent17: that the superscribing Lycaeon does not occur is triggered by that the pleochroicness happens and the depravity does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the pleochroicness happens but the depravity does not occur.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the superscribing Lycaeon does not occur.; int2 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that either it does not spring-clean or it does not photosensitize aphagia or both does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{B}x v ¬{C}x))
|
sent1: there is something such that the fact that it either is not black-and-white or is not endocrine or both hold. sent2: the Ojibwa spring-cleans or it does not photosensitize aphagia or both. sent3: there is something such that it is not neckless or it is not a histology or both. sent4: there exists something such that it spring-cleans or it does not photosensitize aphagia or both. sent5: there exists something such that it does not spring-clean and/or photosensitizes aphagia. sent6: if there is something such that it superscribes Luke the Ojibwa does not spring-clean and/or it does photosensitize aphagia. sent7: if there exists something such that it superscribes Luke the Ojibwa either does spring-clean or does not photosensitize aphagia or both. sent8: there is something such that it is not a malignity and/or it is not a kind of a stagecoach. sent9: there is something such that it does superscribe Luke. sent10: the Ojibwa either does not spring-clean or does not photosensitize aphagia or both if there is something such that it superscribes Luke. sent11: the Ojibwa does not spring-clean and/or it does photosensitize aphagia. sent12: something is either not lathery or non-black-and-white or both.
|
sent1: (Ex): (¬{O}x v ¬{JH}x) sent2: ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent3: (Ex): (¬{HR}x v ¬{CL}x) sent4: (Ex): ({B}x v ¬{C}x) sent5: (Ex): (¬{B}x v {C}x) sent6: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent7: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent8: (Ex): (¬{IO}x v ¬{FE}x) sent9: (Ex): {A}x sent10: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent11: (¬{B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent12: (Ex): (¬{JB}x v ¬{O}x)
|
[
"sent9 & sent10 -> int1: the Ojibwa does not spring-clean and/or it does not photosensitize aphagia.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent10 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that either it does not spring-clean or it does not photosensitize aphagia or both does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it either is not black-and-white or is not endocrine or both hold. sent2: the Ojibwa spring-cleans or it does not photosensitize aphagia or both. sent3: there is something such that it is not neckless or it is not a histology or both. sent4: there exists something such that it spring-cleans or it does not photosensitize aphagia or both. sent5: there exists something such that it does not spring-clean and/or photosensitizes aphagia. sent6: if there is something such that it superscribes Luke the Ojibwa does not spring-clean and/or it does photosensitize aphagia. sent7: if there exists something such that it superscribes Luke the Ojibwa either does spring-clean or does not photosensitize aphagia or both. sent8: there is something such that it is not a malignity and/or it is not a kind of a stagecoach. sent9: there is something such that it does superscribe Luke. sent10: the Ojibwa either does not spring-clean or does not photosensitize aphagia or both if there is something such that it superscribes Luke. sent11: the Ojibwa does not spring-clean and/or it does photosensitize aphagia. sent12: something is either not lathery or non-black-and-white or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent10 -> int1: the Ojibwa does not spring-clean and/or it does not photosensitize aphagia.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that the fact that it is a humdinger and it does inspire is not correct is not correct.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({B}x & {C}x))
|
sent1: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a starter and is exoergic is not correct. sent2: something is a bezant. sent3: there is something such that it is a corrections and is a Latium. sent4: there is something such that it is a Capreolus and it is a dacryon. sent5: something is greater. sent6: there is something such that it does miscarry prince's-feather. sent7: something is salamandriform. sent8: the fact that the hack does photosensitize wrestle and it is extricable is incorrect if something is a feast. sent9: there exists something such that it is susceptible and it does miscarry first-rater. sent10: there is something such that it is not non-wasteful. sent11: there exists something such that it does abstract scauper and it photosensitizes centerline. sent12: the fact that the hack is a humdinger that does inspire is false if something is salamandriform. sent13: there exists something such that that it is incurious and cubital is not right. sent14: something does abstract concentrated and it is a dacryon. sent15: there is something such that the fact that it is contralateral and it is a frontiersman is not right. sent16: there is something such that that it does miscarry cake and it does photosensitize silique is false. sent17: there exists something such that it photosensitizes silique. sent18: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of sensorineural thing that photosensitizes barbecued is not correct. sent19: that something is logistics and it is a rewriting is correct. sent20: that something photosensitizes Hobart and it miscarries enterprising hold.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({IL}x & {BK}x) sent2: (Ex): {HJ}x sent3: (Ex): ({EK}x & {AR}x) sent4: (Ex): ({CT}x & {GU}x) sent5: (Ex): {DJ}x sent6: (Ex): {GK}x sent7: (Ex): {A}x sent8: (x): {JK}x -> ¬({FA}{a} & {EP}{a}) sent9: (Ex): ({AJ}x & {DG}x) sent10: (Ex): {IG}x sent11: (Ex): ({JG}x & {ED}x) sent12: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent13: (Ex): ¬({FP}x & {GS}x) sent14: (Ex): ({GJ}x & {GU}x) sent15: (Ex): ¬({GP}x & {EJ}x) sent16: (Ex): ¬({GI}x & {IF}x) sent17: (Ex): {IF}x sent18: (Ex): ¬({FB}x & {EM}x) sent19: (Ex): ({GT}x & {GD}x) sent20: (Ex): ({GN}x & {DC}x)
|
[
"sent7 & sent12 -> int1: that the hack is a humdinger and it inspires does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent12 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that the fact that it is a humdinger and it does inspire is not correct is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a starter and is exoergic is not correct. sent2: something is a bezant. sent3: there is something such that it is a corrections and is a Latium. sent4: there is something such that it is a Capreolus and it is a dacryon. sent5: something is greater. sent6: there is something such that it does miscarry prince's-feather. sent7: something is salamandriform. sent8: the fact that the hack does photosensitize wrestle and it is extricable is incorrect if something is a feast. sent9: there exists something such that it is susceptible and it does miscarry first-rater. sent10: there is something such that it is not non-wasteful. sent11: there exists something such that it does abstract scauper and it photosensitizes centerline. sent12: the fact that the hack is a humdinger that does inspire is false if something is salamandriform. sent13: there exists something such that that it is incurious and cubital is not right. sent14: something does abstract concentrated and it is a dacryon. sent15: there is something such that the fact that it is contralateral and it is a frontiersman is not right. sent16: there is something such that that it does miscarry cake and it does photosensitize silique is false. sent17: there exists something such that it photosensitizes silique. sent18: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of sensorineural thing that photosensitizes barbecued is not correct. sent19: that something is logistics and it is a rewriting is correct. sent20: that something photosensitizes Hobart and it miscarries enterprising hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent12 -> int1: that the hack is a humdinger and it inspires does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that both the photoelectricity and the furor happens does not hold.
|
¬({C} & {B})
|
sent1: if the fact that the shoring does not occur hold then that the photoelectricity and the furor happens is wrong. sent2: the shoring and the furor occurs. sent3: the animistness happens if the abstracting raver does not occur and the unsocialness does not occur. sent4: the factory-madeness occurs and the dishonestness occurs. sent5: if the carnival does not occur and the photosensitizing girasol does not occur then the photoelectricity happens. sent6: the fact that the geneticsness occurs hold. sent7: the transgressing happens if both the tonelessness and the non-biologisticness occurs. sent8: the fact that that the photosensitizing astrogator does not occur and the abstracting prematureness does not occur is brought about by the shoring is not wrong. sent9: the superscribing BJA occurs. sent10: the ordeal happens. sent11: the carnival does not occur and the photosensitizing girasol does not occur. sent12: if the carnival does not occur then that the shoring and the photosensitizing girasol happens is not correct. sent13: the light-dutiness happens and the wildness occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {B}) sent2: ({A} & {B}) sent3: (¬{HM} & ¬{H}) -> {BS} sent4: ({DG} & {AK}) sent5: (¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> {C} sent6: {GP} sent7: ({GN} & ¬{ES}) -> {FE} sent8: {A} -> (¬{EA} & ¬{DJ}) sent9: {EP} sent10: {HS} sent11: (¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent12: ¬{E} -> ¬({A} & {D}) sent13: ({CF} & {L})
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the furor happens.; sent5 & sent11 -> int2: the photoelectricity occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {B}; sent5 & sent11 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the photosensitizing astrogator does not occur and the abstracting prematureness does not occur.
|
(¬{EA} & ¬{DJ})
|
[] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that both the photoelectricity and the furor happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the shoring does not occur hold then that the photoelectricity and the furor happens is wrong. sent2: the shoring and the furor occurs. sent3: the animistness happens if the abstracting raver does not occur and the unsocialness does not occur. sent4: the factory-madeness occurs and the dishonestness occurs. sent5: if the carnival does not occur and the photosensitizing girasol does not occur then the photoelectricity happens. sent6: the fact that the geneticsness occurs hold. sent7: the transgressing happens if both the tonelessness and the non-biologisticness occurs. sent8: the fact that that the photosensitizing astrogator does not occur and the abstracting prematureness does not occur is brought about by the shoring is not wrong. sent9: the superscribing BJA occurs. sent10: the ordeal happens. sent11: the carnival does not occur and the photosensitizing girasol does not occur. sent12: if the carnival does not occur then that the shoring and the photosensitizing girasol happens is not correct. sent13: the light-dutiness happens and the wildness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the furor happens.; sent5 & sent11 -> int2: the photoelectricity occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the residence does not occur is correct.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the regressiveness does not occur if the nephrectomy does not occur and the sport does not occur. sent2: if the residence happens and the Barbadianness does not occur then the proteinaceousness does not occur. sent3: if the superscribing Baltic does not occur the residence and the non-Barbadianness happens. sent4: the residence happens if the creation occurs. sent5: that if the regressiveness does not occur then the superficialness occurs and the sideshow occurs hold. sent6: if the proteinaceousness does not occur and the creation does not occur that the annexationalness happens is true. sent7: that the proteinaceousness happens is not wrong. sent8: the creation happens if the fact that the gathering does not occur and/or the colorsness does not occur is not correct. sent9: that the superficialness happens and the sideshow occurs yields that the creation does not occur. sent10: if the proteinaceousness occurs that the gathering does not occur and/or the colorsness does not occur is not true.
|
sent1: (¬{H} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{G} sent2: ({C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{A} sent3: ¬{J} -> ({C} & ¬{D}) sent4: {B} -> {C} sent5: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) sent6: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> {GE} sent7: {A} sent8: ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent9: ({F} & {E}) -> ¬{B} sent10: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB})
|
[
"sent10 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that the gathering does not occur and/or the colors does not occur is wrong.; sent8 & int1 -> int2: the creation occurs.; sent4 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 & sent7 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}); sent8 & int1 -> int2: {B}; sent4 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the annexationalness occurs is not false.
|
{GE}
|
[] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the residence does not occur is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the regressiveness does not occur if the nephrectomy does not occur and the sport does not occur. sent2: if the residence happens and the Barbadianness does not occur then the proteinaceousness does not occur. sent3: if the superscribing Baltic does not occur the residence and the non-Barbadianness happens. sent4: the residence happens if the creation occurs. sent5: that if the regressiveness does not occur then the superficialness occurs and the sideshow occurs hold. sent6: if the proteinaceousness does not occur and the creation does not occur that the annexationalness happens is true. sent7: that the proteinaceousness happens is not wrong. sent8: the creation happens if the fact that the gathering does not occur and/or the colorsness does not occur is not correct. sent9: that the superficialness happens and the sideshow occurs yields that the creation does not occur. sent10: if the proteinaceousness occurs that the gathering does not occur and/or the colorsness does not occur is not true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that the gathering does not occur and/or the colors does not occur is wrong.; sent8 & int1 -> int2: the creation occurs.; sent4 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Altaic is a disaster but it is not a kind of a stainless.
|
({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
sent1: if something does symphonize it is a kind of a disaster and it is not a stainless. sent2: if something is a kind of a Darwin then the fact that it is not unpeaceful and collides is not right. sent3: the fact that the Altaic is a disaster and it is a kind of a stainless is not correct if the gyrostabilizer does not symphonize. sent4: the urial is a Darwin if there exists something such that it either is a Darwin or does photosensitize mercy or both. sent5: either something is a Darwin or it photosensitizes mercy or both. sent6: if there is something such that the fact that it is peaceful and it collides does not hold that the clinid does not collides is true. sent7: if the gyrostabilizer does not symphonize the fact that the Altaic is a kind of a disaster that is not a kind of a stainless is incorrect. sent8: everything does not symphonize.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent2: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent4: (x): ({G}x v {I}x) -> {G}{c} sent5: (Ex): ({G}x v {I}x) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}{b} sent7: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent8: (x): ¬{A}x
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: the gyrostabilizer does not symphonize.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa}; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Altaic is a disaster but it is not a stainless.
|
({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
[
"sent1 -> int2: if that the Altaic does symphonize is not incorrect then it is a disaster and is not a stainless.; sent2 -> int3: if the urial is a Darwin then that it is not unpeaceful and it collides does not hold.; sent5 & sent4 -> int4: the urial is a Darwin.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the urial is a kind of peaceful thing that does collide is incorrect.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that the fact that it is not unpeaceful and it does collide is false.; int6 & sent6 -> int7: the clinid does not collide.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that the fact that it does not collide hold.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Altaic is a disaster but it is not a kind of a stainless. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does symphonize it is a kind of a disaster and it is not a stainless. sent2: if something is a kind of a Darwin then the fact that it is not unpeaceful and collides is not right. sent3: the fact that the Altaic is a disaster and it is a kind of a stainless is not correct if the gyrostabilizer does not symphonize. sent4: the urial is a Darwin if there exists something such that it either is a Darwin or does photosensitize mercy or both. sent5: either something is a Darwin or it photosensitizes mercy or both. sent6: if there is something such that the fact that it is peaceful and it collides does not hold that the clinid does not collides is true. sent7: if the gyrostabilizer does not symphonize the fact that the Altaic is a kind of a disaster that is not a kind of a stainless is incorrect. sent8: everything does not symphonize. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> int1: the gyrostabilizer does not symphonize.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the vesicularness does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the genuineness does not occur. sent2: if the miscarrying molt does not occur the genuineness does not occur. sent3: that the miscarrying molt does not occur yields that both the photosensitizing Rand and the non-genuineness occurs. sent4: the miscarrying molt does not occur. sent5: the abstracting stonewaller does not occur if the fact that the photosensitizing Rand and the non-genuineness happens is not false. sent6: if the abstracting stonewaller does not occur then the vesicularness occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{AB} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬{AB} sent3: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent4: ¬{A} sent5: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: ¬{B} -> {C}
|
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the photosensitizing Rand and the non-genuineness happens.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the abstracting stonewaller does not occur.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}); sent5 & int1 -> int2: ¬{B}; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the vesicularness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the genuineness does not occur. sent2: if the miscarrying molt does not occur the genuineness does not occur. sent3: that the miscarrying molt does not occur yields that both the photosensitizing Rand and the non-genuineness occurs. sent4: the miscarrying molt does not occur. sent5: the abstracting stonewaller does not occur if the fact that the photosensitizing Rand and the non-genuineness happens is not false. sent6: if the abstracting stonewaller does not occur then the vesicularness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the photosensitizing Rand and the non-genuineness happens.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the abstracting stonewaller does not occur.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the kinase is both not imitative and secretarial.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
sent1: the fact that something miscarries pyxis and is transcendental is incorrect if it vocalizes. sent2: the CFO is a Sufi. sent3: that the kinase is a Sufi is true if the CFO is a Sufi. sent4: the CFO is imitative. sent5: that the kinase is both imitative and not non-secretarial is not true. sent6: if the fact that something is a kind of a cross-pollination and it superscribes openbill is not correct it does not superscribes openbill. sent7: that the kinase is secretarial is not false if the CFO is secretarial. sent8: if something is Sufi then that it is both not imitative and secretarial is not right. sent9: the kinase is non-sportive. sent10: the fact that the CFO is a Neandertal and it is Sufi is not correct. sent11: something that is not sportive is not imitative. sent12: that something is imitative and it is secretarial is incorrect if it is a Sufi. sent13: the openbill is a Sufi and it is secretarial if the CFO does not superscribe openbill.
|
sent1: (x): {HO}x -> ¬({BH}x & {JJ}x) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: {A}{a} -> {A}{aa} sent4: {AA}{a} sent5: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬({D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: {AB}{a} -> {AB}{aa} sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: ¬{C}{aa} sent10: ¬({K}{a} & {A}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{AA}x sent12: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent13: ¬{B}{a} -> ({A}{id} & {AB}{id})
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: that the kinase is not imitative but it is secretarial is not correct if it is a Sufi.; sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the kinase is a Sufi.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent3 & sent2 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the kinase is not imitative but it is not non-secretarial.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent11 -> int3: the kinase is not imitative if it is not sportive.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the kinase is not imitative.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the kinase is both not imitative and secretarial. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something miscarries pyxis and is transcendental is incorrect if it vocalizes. sent2: the CFO is a Sufi. sent3: that the kinase is a Sufi is true if the CFO is a Sufi. sent4: the CFO is imitative. sent5: that the kinase is both imitative and not non-secretarial is not true. sent6: if the fact that something is a kind of a cross-pollination and it superscribes openbill is not correct it does not superscribes openbill. sent7: that the kinase is secretarial is not false if the CFO is secretarial. sent8: if something is Sufi then that it is both not imitative and secretarial is not right. sent9: the kinase is non-sportive. sent10: the fact that the CFO is a Neandertal and it is Sufi is not correct. sent11: something that is not sportive is not imitative. sent12: that something is imitative and it is secretarial is incorrect if it is a Sufi. sent13: the openbill is a Sufi and it is secretarial if the CFO does not superscribe openbill. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> int1: that the kinase is not imitative but it is secretarial is not correct if it is a Sufi.; sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the kinase is a Sufi.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the demimondaine is a sucrose and it does superscribe demimondaine is not right.
|
¬({B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: the OD miscarries dodecagon and abstracts Cabombaceae. sent2: that the canton does not superscribe demimondaine hold. sent3: the canton superscribes threat. sent4: that the pigmentation is a sucrose is correct. sent5: if the tussah superscribes skepful but it is not a kind of a backbeat then the canton is not a backbeat. sent6: the canton is a kind of a cytotoxicity and does not superscribe demimondaine. sent7: the butternut is not a carangid. sent8: that if that the canton is a kind of a cytotoxicity that superscribes demimondaine is not wrong then the fact that the demimondaine does superscribes demimondaine hold hold. sent9: if that the fact that the canton miscarries synovia or is not a cytotoxicity or both does not hold is not false the demimondaine miscarries synovia. sent10: if there is something such that it does miscarry synovia the threat is a carangid and it is a sucrose. sent11: if the fact that the canton is a cytotoxicity but it does not superscribe demimondaine is right the demimondaine superscribe demimondaine. sent12: if the canton is not a backbeat that it does miscarry synovia and/or is not a cytotoxicity is false. sent13: the demimondaine is a kind of a carangid. sent14: that something superscribes skepful and is not a backbeat if it is ambiversive is correct. sent15: the coroner is a sucrose and it persists. sent16: if the demimondaine is carangid it is a sucrose. sent17: the canton is a sucrose. sent18: the canton is a kind of a carangid.
|
sent1: ({Q}{ha} & {FH}{ha}) sent2: ¬{C}{b} sent3: {J}{b} sent4: {B}{dt} sent5: ({G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{F}{b} sent6: ({E}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent7: ¬{A}{d} sent8: ({E}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent9: ¬({D}{b} v ¬{E}{b}) -> {D}{a} sent10: (x): {D}x -> ({A}{eh} & {B}{eh}) sent11: ({E}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent12: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬({D}{b} v ¬{E}{b}) sent13: {A}{a} sent14: (x): {H}x -> ({G}x & ¬{F}x) sent15: ({B}{da} & {JH}{da}) sent16: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent17: {B}{b} sent18: {A}{b}
|
[
"sent16 & sent13 -> int1: the demimondaine is a sucrose.; sent11 & sent6 -> int2: the demimondaine does superscribe demimondaine.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 & sent13 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent11 & sent6 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the threat superscribes demimondaine.
|
{C}{eh}
|
[
"sent14 -> int3: the tussah does superscribe skepful and is not a backbeat if that it is ambiversive is not incorrect.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the demimondaine is a sucrose and it does superscribe demimondaine is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the OD miscarries dodecagon and abstracts Cabombaceae. sent2: that the canton does not superscribe demimondaine hold. sent3: the canton superscribes threat. sent4: that the pigmentation is a sucrose is correct. sent5: if the tussah superscribes skepful but it is not a kind of a backbeat then the canton is not a backbeat. sent6: the canton is a kind of a cytotoxicity and does not superscribe demimondaine. sent7: the butternut is not a carangid. sent8: that if that the canton is a kind of a cytotoxicity that superscribes demimondaine is not wrong then the fact that the demimondaine does superscribes demimondaine hold hold. sent9: if that the fact that the canton miscarries synovia or is not a cytotoxicity or both does not hold is not false the demimondaine miscarries synovia. sent10: if there is something such that it does miscarry synovia the threat is a carangid and it is a sucrose. sent11: if the fact that the canton is a cytotoxicity but it does not superscribe demimondaine is right the demimondaine superscribe demimondaine. sent12: if the canton is not a backbeat that it does miscarry synovia and/or is not a cytotoxicity is false. sent13: the demimondaine is a kind of a carangid. sent14: that something superscribes skepful and is not a backbeat if it is ambiversive is correct. sent15: the coroner is a sucrose and it persists. sent16: if the demimondaine is carangid it is a sucrose. sent17: the canton is a sucrose. sent18: the canton is a kind of a carangid. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 & sent13 -> int1: the demimondaine is a sucrose.; sent11 & sent6 -> int2: the demimondaine does superscribe demimondaine.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the odontoglossum photosensitizes Durrell and it does root is not correct.
|
¬({C}{b} & {A}{b})
|
sent1: the decoration does not miscarry Heyward but it does abstract mystique. sent2: if there is something such that that it abstracts decoration is not false then the fact that the doxazosin does not abstracts decoration but it is immediate is false. sent3: a non-immediate thing is not purposeful. sent4: the disbeliever does abstract decoration if the fuselage is a geodesic. sent5: the Haitian does photosensitize Durrell if the fact that that the youth-on-age is not climactic and not a camphor is not true is not wrong. sent6: if the fact that the doxazosin does not abstract decoration but it is immediate is incorrect then the odontoglossum is not immediate. sent7: the twenty-two is a kind of a historicism and it is unseamanlike. sent8: the youth-on-age is not a rooting if something that does not miscarry Heyward abstracts mystique. sent9: if the odontoglossum is not purposeful the fact that the youth-on-age is not climactic and is not a camphor is not right. sent10: if something is not an inmate and it is not a rooting then it does not abstract mystique. sent11: the fuselage is a kind of a geodesic if the twenty-two is unseamanlike.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{H}{c} & {G}{c}) sent3: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}x sent4: {I}{f} -> {H}{d} sent5: ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> {C}{e} sent6: ¬(¬{H}{c} & {G}{c}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent7: ({K}{g} & {J}{g}) sent8: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent9: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent10: (x): (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent11: {J}{g} -> {I}{f}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: something does not miscarry Heyward and abstracts mystique.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the youth-on-age is not a rooting.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x); int1 & sent8 -> int2: ¬{A}{a};"
] |
the Haitian does not abstract mystique.
|
¬{AB}{e}
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: if the Haitian is not a kind of an inmate and is not a rooting it does not abstract mystique.; sent3 -> int4: if the odontoglossum is not immediate it is not purposeful.; sent7 -> int5: the twenty-two is not seamanlike.; sent11 & int5 -> int6: the fuselage is a geodesic.; sent4 & int6 -> int7: the disbeliever does abstract decoration.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that it abstracts decoration.; int8 & sent2 -> int9: that the doxazosin does not abstract decoration and is immediate is not right.; sent6 & int9 -> int10: the odontoglossum is not immediate.; int4 & int10 -> int11: the odontoglossum is non-purposeful.; sent9 & int11 -> int12: the fact that the youth-on-age is a kind of non-climactic thing that is not a kind of a camphor is not right.; sent5 & int12 -> int13: the Haitian photosensitizes Durrell.;"
] | 11 | 3 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the odontoglossum photosensitizes Durrell and it does root is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the decoration does not miscarry Heyward but it does abstract mystique. sent2: if there is something such that that it abstracts decoration is not false then the fact that the doxazosin does not abstracts decoration but it is immediate is false. sent3: a non-immediate thing is not purposeful. sent4: the disbeliever does abstract decoration if the fuselage is a geodesic. sent5: the Haitian does photosensitize Durrell if the fact that that the youth-on-age is not climactic and not a camphor is not true is not wrong. sent6: if the fact that the doxazosin does not abstract decoration but it is immediate is incorrect then the odontoglossum is not immediate. sent7: the twenty-two is a kind of a historicism and it is unseamanlike. sent8: the youth-on-age is not a rooting if something that does not miscarry Heyward abstracts mystique. sent9: if the odontoglossum is not purposeful the fact that the youth-on-age is not climactic and is not a camphor is not right. sent10: if something is not an inmate and it is not a rooting then it does not abstract mystique. sent11: the fuselage is a kind of a geodesic if the twenty-two is unseamanlike. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: something does not miscarry Heyward and abstracts mystique.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the youth-on-age is not a rooting.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the lacticness happens is not wrong.
|
{A}
|
sent1: if the lacticness happens then that both the catapulticness and the non-acceptiveness occurs does not hold. sent2: the catapulticness and the non-acceptiveness happens if the field-cropness does not occur. sent3: if the hospitableness does not occur then the cinerariness and the non-Laotianness happens. sent4: if the lacticness occurs that the catapulticness and the acceptiveness happens does not hold. sent5: the lacticness happens if the fact that the riffle does not occur and the field-cropness does not occur is false. sent6: that the catapulticness and the acceptiveness happens is wrong. sent7: the acceptiveness does not occur if the field-cropness does not occur. sent8: the acceptiveness does not occur. sent9: the field-cropness does not occur.
|
sent1: {A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬{B} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: ¬{AU} -> ({EF} & ¬{AS}) sent4: {A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent5: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{B}) -> {A} sent6: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent7: ¬{B} -> ¬{AB} sent8: ¬{AB} sent9: ¬{B}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lacticness occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: that the catapulticness and the non-acceptiveness happens does not hold.; sent2 & sent9 -> int2: both the catapulticness and the non-acceptiveness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}); sent2 & sent9 -> int2: ({AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the lacticness happens.
|
{A}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the lacticness happens is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the lacticness happens then that both the catapulticness and the non-acceptiveness occurs does not hold. sent2: the catapulticness and the non-acceptiveness happens if the field-cropness does not occur. sent3: if the hospitableness does not occur then the cinerariness and the non-Laotianness happens. sent4: if the lacticness occurs that the catapulticness and the acceptiveness happens does not hold. sent5: the lacticness happens if the fact that the riffle does not occur and the field-cropness does not occur is false. sent6: that the catapulticness and the acceptiveness happens is wrong. sent7: the acceptiveness does not occur if the field-cropness does not occur. sent8: the acceptiveness does not occur. sent9: the field-cropness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the lacticness occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: that the catapulticness and the non-acceptiveness happens does not hold.; sent2 & sent9 -> int2: both the catapulticness and the non-acceptiveness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if it is a kind of an oppressor then it is not insensible and it does not assemble is not true.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is an oppressor then it is insensible and it does not assemble. sent2: the opopanax is not insensible and does not assemble if it is an oppressor.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is a kind of an oppressor then it is not insensible and it does not assemble is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is an oppressor then it is insensible and it does not assemble. sent2: the opopanax is not insensible and does not assemble if it is an oppressor. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that it is not non-monotypic and it does border.
|
(Ex): ({A}x & {B}x)
|
sent1: something is both disjunct and a graze. sent2: that the forebrain is a self hold. sent3: the forebrain is a border. sent4: something does not border but it is monotypic if it is not on.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({DL}x & {BD}x) sent2: {CS}{a} sent3: {B}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x)
|
[] |
[] |
the tang is monotypic.
|
{A}{ai}
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the tang is not on it is not a border and is monotypic.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is not non-monotypic and it does border. ; $context$ = sent1: something is both disjunct and a graze. sent2: that the forebrain is a self hold. sent3: the forebrain is a border. sent4: something does not border but it is monotypic if it is not on. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the bluestem does superscribe Anarhichadidae but it is not a plowwright is not right.
|
¬({A}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa})
|
sent1: if something does not miscarry bluestem and it is not veterinary it does not spectate. sent2: the bluestem superscribes Anarhichadidae and is not a plowwright if it does not spectate. sent3: the bluestem does not miscarry bluestem and it is not veterinary.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬{B}{aa} -> ({A}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) sent3: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: if the fact that the bluestem does not miscarry bluestem and is not veterinary is not wrong then it does not spectate.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the bluestem does not spectate.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & sent3 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa}; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the bluestem does superscribe Anarhichadidae but it is not a plowwright is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not miscarry bluestem and it is not veterinary it does not spectate. sent2: the bluestem superscribes Anarhichadidae and is not a plowwright if it does not spectate. sent3: the bluestem does not miscarry bluestem and it is not veterinary. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: if the fact that the bluestem does not miscarry bluestem and is not veterinary is not wrong then it does not spectate.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the bluestem does not spectate.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the musher does not overgrow and it is not unshrinkable is not right.
|
¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{A}{b})
|
sent1: if the camcorder is not shrinkable then the fact that the musher does not overgrow and it is not shrinkable is false. sent2: that the anchorite is not unreverberant but it is unshrinkable is not true. sent3: that the camcorder does not overgrow and it is not bolographic is false. sent4: the fact that the musher does not overgrow but it is not shrinkable is false if the camcorder is shrinkable. sent5: that the musher does not overgrow but it is bolographic is incorrect. sent6: the camcorder is bolographic a chichipe. sent7: the camcorder is bolographic. sent8: that the meter is not bolographic and it does not set is not true. sent9: the fact that the musher does overgrow and is not unshrinkable is not right. sent10: the archangel does overgrow. sent11: the fact that the camcorder does not overgrow and is unshrinkable is incorrect. sent12: that the musher does overgrow but it is not unshrinkable is incorrect if the fact that the camcorder is unshrinkable is right. sent13: if the musher does overgrow that the fact that the camcorder is non-unshrinkable thing that does not overgrow is correct is not true. sent14: the fact that the camcorder does overgrow is not incorrect.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent2: ¬(¬{S}{at} & {A}{at}) sent3: ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent4: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {A}{b}) sent5: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) sent6: ({B}{a} & {FH}{a}) sent7: {B}{a} sent8: ¬(¬{B}{bm} & ¬{HN}{bm}) sent9: ¬({D}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent10: {D}{k} sent11: ¬(¬{D}{a} & {A}{a}) sent12: {A}{a} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent13: {D}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent14: {D}{a}
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the musher does not overgrow and it is not unshrinkable is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the camcorder is not shrinkable then the fact that the musher does not overgrow and it is not shrinkable is false. sent2: that the anchorite is not unreverberant but it is unshrinkable is not true. sent3: that the camcorder does not overgrow and it is not bolographic is false. sent4: the fact that the musher does not overgrow but it is not shrinkable is false if the camcorder is shrinkable. sent5: that the musher does not overgrow but it is bolographic is incorrect. sent6: the camcorder is bolographic a chichipe. sent7: the camcorder is bolographic. sent8: that the meter is not bolographic and it does not set is not true. sent9: the fact that the musher does overgrow and is not unshrinkable is not right. sent10: the archangel does overgrow. sent11: the fact that the camcorder does not overgrow and is unshrinkable is incorrect. sent12: that the musher does overgrow but it is not unshrinkable is incorrect if the fact that the camcorder is unshrinkable is right. sent13: if the musher does overgrow that the fact that the camcorder is non-unshrinkable thing that does not overgrow is correct is not true. sent14: the fact that the camcorder does overgrow is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the gaur is cataclinal.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: the filaggrin is a cleaning. sent2: if the gaur is not convergent and it is not a kind of a meerkat then it is not cataclinal. sent3: if that something does not incorporate but it is perceptible is not true then it is not non-cataclinal. sent4: the filaggrin is not a meerkat. sent5: if that something is not a meerkat but it is perceptible is not right then it is not non-cataclinal. sent6: if the fact that the filaggrin is not a meerkat hold then that the gaur does not incorporate but it is perceptible is not correct. sent7: if the vaquero is not a kind of a decrepitude it does incorporate. sent8: the filaggrin is not perceptible.
|
sent1: {D}{a} sent2: (¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent7: ¬{FB}{bs} -> {AA}{bs} sent8: ¬{AB}{a}
|
[
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the gaur does not incorporate and is perceptible does not hold.; sent3 -> int2: if that the gaur does not incorporate but it is perceptible is not true it is cataclinal.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent4 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); sent3 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the gaur is not cataclinal is correct.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
[] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the gaur is cataclinal. ; $context$ = sent1: the filaggrin is a cleaning. sent2: if the gaur is not convergent and it is not a kind of a meerkat then it is not cataclinal. sent3: if that something does not incorporate but it is perceptible is not true then it is not non-cataclinal. sent4: the filaggrin is not a meerkat. sent5: if that something is not a meerkat but it is perceptible is not right then it is not non-cataclinal. sent6: if the fact that the filaggrin is not a meerkat hold then that the gaur does not incorporate but it is perceptible is not correct. sent7: if the vaquero is not a kind of a decrepitude it does incorporate. sent8: the filaggrin is not perceptible. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that the gaur does not incorporate and is perceptible does not hold.; sent3 -> int2: if that the gaur does not incorporate but it is perceptible is not true it is cataclinal.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the Host does effuse is not incorrect.
|
{B}{c}
|
sent1: if the snuffer is not civic then the churchgoer is worthy. sent2: if something is a dentine and it is unseductive then it is not onomastics. sent3: if something that does publish is a kind of a worthy then the Host effuses. sent4: the Jesuit does not photosensitize decimal if that the fecula is not a bid but it is a phalloplasty is not right. sent5: the churchgoer is not non-symptomatic if the rosebay is a kind of non-symptomatic thing that is not a sputnik. sent6: the fact that the churchgoer effuses is not wrong if something that is a kind of a worthy does publish. sent7: something is not a grounds or it is not unapproachable or both if it does not photosensitize decimal. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it publishes is correct. sent9: something that is unapproachable is a fescue. sent10: the churchgoer is both civic and worthy. sent11: the sorehead is a kind of a dentine and is unseductive. sent12: if the fact that something is civic and it does effuse is false it does not effuse. sent13: the churchgoer does publish and is a worthy if the snuffer is not civic. sent14: the churchgoer is unapproachable if that the Jesuit is not a grounds is not false. sent15: if the snuffer is non-uveal then that the Host is a kind of civic thing that does effuse is incorrect. sent16: something does effuse and it is civic. sent17: there is nothing such that it is not a kind of a bid and it is a kind of a phalloplasty. sent18: if that the sorehead is not onomastics is not incorrect then the rosebay is non-symptomatic thing that is not a sputnik. sent19: the churchgoer is a worthy. sent20: the snuffer is not civic. sent21: if the Jesuit is approachable the churchgoer is approachable. sent22: there exists something such that it is a worthy.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> {AB}{b} sent2: (x): ({L}x & {K}x) -> ¬{H}x sent3: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}{c} sent4: ¬(¬{N}{g} & {M}{g}) -> ¬{J}{f} sent5: (¬{E}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> {E}{b} sent6: (x): ({AB}x & {AA}x) -> {B}{b} sent7: (x): ¬{J}x -> (¬{I}x v ¬{F}x) sent8: (Ex): {AA}x sent9: (x): {F}x -> {D}x sent10: ({A}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent11: ({L}{e} & {K}{e}) sent12: (x): ¬({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}x sent13: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent14: ¬{I}{f} -> {F}{b} sent15: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬({A}{c} & {B}{c}) sent16: (Ex): ({B}x & {A}x) sent17: (x): ¬(¬{N}x & {M}x) sent18: ¬{H}{e} -> (¬{E}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) sent19: {AB}{b} sent20: ¬{A}{a} sent21: ¬{F}{f} -> {F}{b} sent22: (Ex): {AB}x
|
[
"sent13 & sent20 -> int1: the churchgoer does publish and is worthy.; int1 -> int2: something does publish and is a worthy.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 & sent20 -> int1: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x); int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Host does not effuse.
|
¬{B}{c}
|
[
"sent12 -> int3: that the Host does not effuse is not wrong if the fact that it is civic and does effuse is not right.; sent9 -> int4: if the churchgoer is unapproachable it is a fescue.; sent7 -> int5: either the Jesuit is not a grounds or it is not unapproachable or both if it does not photosensitize decimal.; sent17 -> int6: the fact that the fact that the fecula is not a bid but a phalloplasty is not wrong is wrong.; sent4 & int6 -> int7: the Jesuit does not photosensitize decimal.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the Jesuit does not ground and/or it is not unapproachable.; int8 & sent14 & sent21 -> int9: the churchgoer is unapproachable.; int4 & int9 -> int10: the fact that the churchgoer is a fescue hold.; sent2 -> int11: the sorehead is not onomastics if that it is a dentine and it is unseductive is true.; int11 & sent11 -> int12: the sorehead is not onomastics.; sent18 & int12 -> int13: the rosebay is both not symptomatic and not a sputnik.; sent5 & int13 -> int14: the fact that the churchgoer is symptomatic is right.; int10 & int14 -> int15: that the churchgoer is a kind of a fescue and is symptomatic hold.; int15 -> int16: something is a kind of a fescue that is symptomatic.;"
] | 10 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Host does effuse is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the snuffer is not civic then the churchgoer is worthy. sent2: if something is a dentine and it is unseductive then it is not onomastics. sent3: if something that does publish is a kind of a worthy then the Host effuses. sent4: the Jesuit does not photosensitize decimal if that the fecula is not a bid but it is a phalloplasty is not right. sent5: the churchgoer is not non-symptomatic if the rosebay is a kind of non-symptomatic thing that is not a sputnik. sent6: the fact that the churchgoer effuses is not wrong if something that is a kind of a worthy does publish. sent7: something is not a grounds or it is not unapproachable or both if it does not photosensitize decimal. sent8: there is something such that the fact that it publishes is correct. sent9: something that is unapproachable is a fescue. sent10: the churchgoer is both civic and worthy. sent11: the sorehead is a kind of a dentine and is unseductive. sent12: if the fact that something is civic and it does effuse is false it does not effuse. sent13: the churchgoer does publish and is a worthy if the snuffer is not civic. sent14: the churchgoer is unapproachable if that the Jesuit is not a grounds is not false. sent15: if the snuffer is non-uveal then that the Host is a kind of civic thing that does effuse is incorrect. sent16: something does effuse and it is civic. sent17: there is nothing such that it is not a kind of a bid and it is a kind of a phalloplasty. sent18: if that the sorehead is not onomastics is not incorrect then the rosebay is non-symptomatic thing that is not a sputnik. sent19: the churchgoer is a worthy. sent20: the snuffer is not civic. sent21: if the Jesuit is approachable the churchgoer is approachable. sent22: there exists something such that it is a worthy. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 & sent20 -> int1: the churchgoer does publish and is worthy.; int1 -> int2: something does publish and is a worthy.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the reexamination occurs and the appeasement happens.
|
({A} & {C})
|
sent1: if the superscribing tulip does not occur not the reexamination but the nontraditionalness happens. sent2: the appeasement occurs and the millenarian occurs. sent3: the nonlinguisticness happens. sent4: the diurnalness happens. sent5: the superscribing tulip happens. sent6: the harassment and the mistreatment happens. sent7: that the inscribing happens and the superscribing tulip happens is brought about by that the millenarianness does not occur. sent8: the millenarianness happens. sent9: the cared-forness happens. sent10: both the reexamination and the superscribing tulip occurs. sent11: the superscribing phototherapy happens. sent12: the instrument occurs. sent13: the fact that the reexamination and the appeasement happens is not correct if the superscribing tulip does not occur. sent14: the Filipinoness occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{B} -> (¬{A} & {BP}) sent2: ({C} & {D}) sent3: {JF} sent4: {HD} sent5: {B} sent6: ({BL} & {FA}) sent7: ¬{D} -> ({IU} & {B}) sent8: {D} sent9: {GF} sent10: ({A} & {B}) sent11: {FU} sent12: {AQ} sent13: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) sent14: {AD}
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: the reexamination occurs.; sent2 -> int2: the appeasement happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> int1: {A}; sent2 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the inscribing and the Shavianness happens.
|
({IU} & {DA})
|
[] | 4 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the reexamination occurs and the appeasement happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the superscribing tulip does not occur not the reexamination but the nontraditionalness happens. sent2: the appeasement occurs and the millenarian occurs. sent3: the nonlinguisticness happens. sent4: the diurnalness happens. sent5: the superscribing tulip happens. sent6: the harassment and the mistreatment happens. sent7: that the inscribing happens and the superscribing tulip happens is brought about by that the millenarianness does not occur. sent8: the millenarianness happens. sent9: the cared-forness happens. sent10: both the reexamination and the superscribing tulip occurs. sent11: the superscribing phototherapy happens. sent12: the instrument occurs. sent13: the fact that the reexamination and the appeasement happens is not correct if the superscribing tulip does not occur. sent14: the Filipinoness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> int1: the reexamination occurs.; sent2 -> int2: the appeasement happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the existentialistness does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: the downhill occurs. sent2: that the existentialistness does not occur if the fact that not the miscarrying demagoguery but the miscarrying protocol occurs is false is not false. sent3: the superposition occurs. sent4: the agonisticness occurs. sent5: that the miscarrying demagoguery does not occur and the miscarrying protocol occurs is not true if the agonisticness occurs. sent6: if the fact that the fact that the superposition does not occur but the abstracting morocco occurs does not hold is correct the counteroffensive does not occur. sent7: the idealization does not occur. sent8: if the agonisticness does not occur that the worthy does not occur but the miscarrying firkin happens does not hold. sent9: if that not the proration but the funrun happens is wrong the photosensitizing prostaglandin does not occur. sent10: that the miscarrying Anglesey does not occur and the pullback occurs does not hold.
|
sent1: {HM} sent2: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent3: {JA} sent4: {A} sent5: {A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent6: ¬(¬{JA} & {ES}) -> ¬{CO} sent7: ¬{FU} sent8: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{IR} & {ID}) sent9: ¬(¬{JE} & {HK}) -> ¬{DI} sent10: ¬(¬{HH} & {HS})
|
[
"sent5 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that not the miscarrying demagoguery but the miscarrying protocol occurs is incorrect.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent4 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}); sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the non-worthiness and the miscarrying firkin happens is not right.
|
¬(¬{IR} & {ID})
|
[] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the existentialistness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the downhill occurs. sent2: that the existentialistness does not occur if the fact that not the miscarrying demagoguery but the miscarrying protocol occurs is false is not false. sent3: the superposition occurs. sent4: the agonisticness occurs. sent5: that the miscarrying demagoguery does not occur and the miscarrying protocol occurs is not true if the agonisticness occurs. sent6: if the fact that the fact that the superposition does not occur but the abstracting morocco occurs does not hold is correct the counteroffensive does not occur. sent7: the idealization does not occur. sent8: if the agonisticness does not occur that the worthy does not occur but the miscarrying firkin happens does not hold. sent9: if that not the proration but the funrun happens is wrong the photosensitizing prostaglandin does not occur. sent10: that the miscarrying Anglesey does not occur and the pullback occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that not the miscarrying demagoguery but the miscarrying protocol occurs is incorrect.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
either the perch is intangible or it does abstract oiled or both.
|
(¬{A}{c} v {D}{c})
|
sent1: the mealybug is abyssal. sent2: that the beeswax is either not a taxonomy or a anticholinergic or both is not correct. sent3: the pompadour is nonextant if the splinter is abyssal but it is not a kind of a vestal. sent4: if the pompadour is abyssal that the splinter is not abyssal or it is vestal or both is not correct. sent5: that the perch does not abstract oiled and/or it is nonextant is not right if the pompadour abstract oiled. sent6: the fact that the perch is not tangible and/or does abstract oiled is wrong if the splinter is tangible. sent7: the pompadour is nonextant thing that is not tangible. sent8: the perch is not nonextant if the pompadour is tangible. sent9: something is tangible if it is a kind of a vestal. sent10: the perch is not a vestal if that the splinter is tangible is not incorrect. sent11: the perch is abyssal. sent12: that the splinter is not a acanthopterygian or nonextant or both is not correct. sent13: that the perch is not abyssal and/or it is costive is incorrect. sent14: something is a Schonbein if it is a handmaid. sent15: the splinter is a vestal if that the pompadour is a kind of nonextant thing that is not abyssal is right. sent16: the deerstalker is abyssal. sent17: the pompadour is nonextant but it is not abyssal. sent18: the perch is nonextant. sent19: something does abstract oiled if it is a kind of a vestal.
|
sent1: {AB}{at} sent2: ¬(¬{AF}{cl} v {HP}{cl}) sent3: ({AB}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {AA}{a} sent4: {AB}{a} -> ¬(¬{AB}{b} v {B}{b}) sent5: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} v {AA}{c}) sent6: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{c} v {D}{c}) sent7: ({AA}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent8: {A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{c} sent9: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent10: {A}{b} -> ¬{B}{c} sent11: {AB}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{AQ}{b} v {AA}{b}) sent13: ¬(¬{AB}{c} v {JF}{c}) sent14: (x): {CT}x -> {CC}x sent15: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent16: {AB}{ha} sent17: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent18: {AA}{c} sent19: (x): {B}x -> {D}x
|
[
"sent15 & sent17 -> int1: the fact that the splinter is a vestal is not incorrect.; sent9 -> int2: if the splinter is a kind of a vestal the fact that it is tangible is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the splinter is tangible.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 & sent17 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent9 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {A}{b}; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the perch is a Schonbein if it is a handmaid.
|
{CT}{c} -> {CC}{c}
|
[
"sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = either the perch is intangible or it does abstract oiled or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the mealybug is abyssal. sent2: that the beeswax is either not a taxonomy or a anticholinergic or both is not correct. sent3: the pompadour is nonextant if the splinter is abyssal but it is not a kind of a vestal. sent4: if the pompadour is abyssal that the splinter is not abyssal or it is vestal or both is not correct. sent5: that the perch does not abstract oiled and/or it is nonextant is not right if the pompadour abstract oiled. sent6: the fact that the perch is not tangible and/or does abstract oiled is wrong if the splinter is tangible. sent7: the pompadour is nonextant thing that is not tangible. sent8: the perch is not nonextant if the pompadour is tangible. sent9: something is tangible if it is a kind of a vestal. sent10: the perch is not a vestal if that the splinter is tangible is not incorrect. sent11: the perch is abyssal. sent12: that the splinter is not a acanthopterygian or nonextant or both is not correct. sent13: that the perch is not abyssal and/or it is costive is incorrect. sent14: something is a Schonbein if it is a handmaid. sent15: the splinter is a vestal if that the pompadour is a kind of nonextant thing that is not abyssal is right. sent16: the deerstalker is abyssal. sent17: the pompadour is nonextant but it is not abyssal. sent18: the perch is nonextant. sent19: something does abstract oiled if it is a kind of a vestal. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 & sent17 -> int1: the fact that the splinter is a vestal is not incorrect.; sent9 -> int2: if the splinter is a kind of a vestal the fact that it is tangible is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the splinter is tangible.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the metalwork is not ambassadorial and/or does register.
|
(¬{C}{c} v {A}{c})
|
sent1: that the carborundum is a register and it is entomological does not hold. sent2: a non-ambassadorial thing registers and is macrocosmic. sent3: if that the carborundum does photosensitize Glaswegian and is not entomological is incorrect the hafnium is not macrocosmic. sent4: if something is a register then that it does miscarry Ziziphus and is not euphonic is false. sent5: that the hafnium is a cyanogen and it miscarries Elizabethan is wrong if it is not a pilaster. sent6: the hafnium is not a pilaster if the stifler is not ungenerous. sent7: if that the metalwork does not register is not incorrect the hafnium is ambassadorial. sent8: something either is not a Rickover or is a Lucknow or both if it is not a kind of a pilaster. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a cyanogen that miscarries Elizabethan is not correct then the hygrodeik does not miscarries Elizabethan. sent10: the fact that the carborundum photosensitizes Glaswegian but it is not entomological does not hold. sent11: that the hafnium is not macrocosmic is true if the fact that the carborundum is entomological is not false. sent12: the carborundum is not a Rickover if that the metalwork is not a Rickover but it is ungenerous is not true. sent13: the fact that the carborundum is macrocosmic but it does not photosensitize Glaswegian is incorrect. sent14: a hobby that does not miscarry Elizabethan is not ambassadorial. sent15: the fact that the carborundum does photosensitize Glaswegian and it is entomological does not hold. sent16: if the hafnium is not macrocosmic that the fact that either the metalwork is not ambassadorial or it does register or both is not incorrect is not right. sent17: if something is not a Rickover and/or it is a Lucknow it is a cyanogen. sent18: the hafnium is not a pilaster. sent19: that if the carborundum is not a kind of a Rickover then the hygrodeik is a hobby and it is a kind of a Lucknow is correct. sent20: the carborundum is not ambassadorial if that the metalwork photosensitizes Glaswegian but it is not entomological is incorrect. sent21: that that the metalwork is not a kind of a Rickover but it is ungenerous is incorrect is correct. sent22: the metalwork is not macrocosmic if the carborundum does not miscarry Elizabethan and is a kind of a hobby. sent23: something is either not ambassadorial or a register or both if it is not macrocosmic.
|
sent1: ¬({A}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent3: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬({FU}x & ¬{DA}x) sent5: ¬{I}{b} -> ¬({F}{b} & {D}{b}) sent6: ¬{J}{d} -> ¬{I}{b} sent7: ¬{A}{c} -> {C}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{H}x v {G}x) sent9: (x): ¬({F}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}{ap} sent10: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent11: {AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent12: ¬(¬{H}{c} & {J}{c}) -> ¬{H}{a} sent13: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{AA}{a}) sent14: (x): ({E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent15: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent16: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} v {A}{c}) sent17: (x): (¬{H}x v {G}x) -> {F}x sent18: ¬{I}{b} sent19: ¬{H}{a} -> ({E}{ap} & {G}{ap}) sent20: ¬({AA}{c} & ¬{AB}{c}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent21: ¬(¬{H}{c} & {J}{c}) sent22: (¬{D}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent23: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{C}x v {A}x)
|
[
"sent3 & sent10 -> int1: the hafnium is not macrocosmic.; sent16 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent10 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent16 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the metalwork is not ambassadorial or it does register or both.
|
(¬{C}{c} v {A}{c})
|
[
"sent23 -> int2: if the metalwork is not macrocosmic either it is not ambassadorial or it is a kind of a register or both.; sent17 -> int3: the hafnium is a cyanogen if it is not a kind of a Rickover and/or it is a Lucknow.; sent8 -> int4: if the hafnium is not a pilaster it either is not a Rickover or is a Lucknow or both.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the metalwork is not ambassadorial and/or does register. ; $context$ = sent1: that the carborundum is a register and it is entomological does not hold. sent2: a non-ambassadorial thing registers and is macrocosmic. sent3: if that the carborundum does photosensitize Glaswegian and is not entomological is incorrect the hafnium is not macrocosmic. sent4: if something is a register then that it does miscarry Ziziphus and is not euphonic is false. sent5: that the hafnium is a cyanogen and it miscarries Elizabethan is wrong if it is not a pilaster. sent6: the hafnium is not a pilaster if the stifler is not ungenerous. sent7: if that the metalwork does not register is not incorrect the hafnium is ambassadorial. sent8: something either is not a Rickover or is a Lucknow or both if it is not a kind of a pilaster. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a cyanogen that miscarries Elizabethan is not correct then the hygrodeik does not miscarries Elizabethan. sent10: the fact that the carborundum photosensitizes Glaswegian but it is not entomological does not hold. sent11: that the hafnium is not macrocosmic is true if the fact that the carborundum is entomological is not false. sent12: the carborundum is not a Rickover if that the metalwork is not a Rickover but it is ungenerous is not true. sent13: the fact that the carborundum is macrocosmic but it does not photosensitize Glaswegian is incorrect. sent14: a hobby that does not miscarry Elizabethan is not ambassadorial. sent15: the fact that the carborundum does photosensitize Glaswegian and it is entomological does not hold. sent16: if the hafnium is not macrocosmic that the fact that either the metalwork is not ambassadorial or it does register or both is not incorrect is not right. sent17: if something is not a Rickover and/or it is a Lucknow it is a cyanogen. sent18: the hafnium is not a pilaster. sent19: that if the carborundum is not a kind of a Rickover then the hygrodeik is a hobby and it is a kind of a Lucknow is correct. sent20: the carborundum is not ambassadorial if that the metalwork photosensitizes Glaswegian but it is not entomological is incorrect. sent21: that that the metalwork is not a kind of a Rickover but it is ungenerous is incorrect is correct. sent22: the metalwork is not macrocosmic if the carborundum does not miscarry Elizabethan and is a kind of a hobby. sent23: something is either not ambassadorial or a register or both if it is not macrocosmic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent10 -> int1: the hafnium is not macrocosmic.; sent16 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the station is not preclinical and it does not delineate.
|
(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
sent1: that the blockage does not superscribe commensurateness and is not preclinical is wrong. sent2: the crag is not a kind of a commute and does not photosensitize pleasingness if the chevrotain is echoic. sent3: the blockage superscribes commensurateness. sent4: if that something is low-level and it does superscribe commensurateness does not hold then it does not superscribe commensurateness. sent5: if something does not commute and does not photosensitize pleasingness then it does not superscribe commensurateness. sent6: the fact that that the agamid is arbitrary is right does not hold if the hack is both not extralinguistic and not arbitrary. sent7: the harasser photosensitizes stoutness and/or it superscribes hack if there are non-arbitrary things. sent8: there are preclinical things. sent9: The commensurateness superscribes blockage. sent10: the fact that the station is not preclinical and does not delineate does not hold if there exists something such that it superscribes commensurateness. sent11: if the masquerade does not superscribe commensurateness then the station is a kind of non-preclinical thing that does not delineate. sent12: the hack is a kind of non-extralinguistic thing that is arbitrary.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{A}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}) sent2: {G}{d} -> (¬{F}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent3: {A}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬({D}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent5: (x): (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{A}x sent6: (¬{K}{g} & {J}{g}) -> ¬{J}{f} sent7: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({I}{e} v {H}{e}) sent8: (Ex): {C}x sent9: {AA}{ab} sent10: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent11: ¬{A}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent12: (¬{K}{g} & {J}{g})
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: there is something such that it superscribes commensurateness.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: (Ex): {A}x; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the station is a kind of non-preclinical thing that does not delineate.
|
(¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: if the fact that the masquerade is a kind of low-level thing that superscribes commensurateness is not right then it does not superscribes commensurateness.; sent5 -> int3: the crag does not superscribe commensurateness if it is not a kind of a commute and it does not photosensitize pleasingness.; sent6 & sent12 -> int4: the agamid is not arbitrary.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it is not arbitrary.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the harasser photosensitizes stoutness and/or superscribes hack.;"
] | 10 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the station is not preclinical and it does not delineate. ; $context$ = sent1: that the blockage does not superscribe commensurateness and is not preclinical is wrong. sent2: the crag is not a kind of a commute and does not photosensitize pleasingness if the chevrotain is echoic. sent3: the blockage superscribes commensurateness. sent4: if that something is low-level and it does superscribe commensurateness does not hold then it does not superscribe commensurateness. sent5: if something does not commute and does not photosensitize pleasingness then it does not superscribe commensurateness. sent6: the fact that that the agamid is arbitrary is right does not hold if the hack is both not extralinguistic and not arbitrary. sent7: the harasser photosensitizes stoutness and/or it superscribes hack if there are non-arbitrary things. sent8: there are preclinical things. sent9: The commensurateness superscribes blockage. sent10: the fact that the station is not preclinical and does not delineate does not hold if there exists something such that it superscribes commensurateness. sent11: if the masquerade does not superscribe commensurateness then the station is a kind of non-preclinical thing that does not delineate. sent12: the hack is a kind of non-extralinguistic thing that is arbitrary. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: there is something such that it superscribes commensurateness.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if it is a bluejacket then it is a kind of a expertness is false.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> {C}x)
|
sent1: if something is exteroceptive then it is a hypanthium. sent2: if the lens is a kind of a expertness then it does prolong. sent3: if the torrent is metabolic it is a bluejacket. sent4: if the lens is Hitlerian it is a expertness. sent5: if the lens is a bluejacket then the fact that it does miscarry alula is not false. sent6: if the lens is a kind of a bluejacket it is a expertness. sent7: there exists something such that if it is unlike then it is a kind of a blackwood. sent8: there exists something such that if it is endodontics then it animates. sent9: there is something such that if it is ulcerative the fact that it is a bump is correct. sent10: the lens is calciferous if it does photosensitize paragraph. sent11: there is something such that if it is a tourist then it does miscarry Goodyear. sent12: the hypanthium miscarries greenhouse if it is a expertness.
|
sent1: (x): {JA}x -> {CE}x sent2: {C}{aa} -> {IN}{aa} sent3: {FP}{jc} -> {A}{jc} sent4: {DE}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent5: {A}{aa} -> {BI}{aa} sent6: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent7: (Ex): {AP}x -> {O}x sent8: (Ex): {ET}x -> {H}x sent9: (Ex): {DI}x -> {HT}x sent10: {BU}{aa} -> {EB}{aa} sent11: (Ex): {AO}x -> {BE}x sent12: {C}{d} -> {CS}{d}
|
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the Ark is exteroceptive then it is a kind of a hypanthium.
|
{JA}{af} -> {CE}{af}
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is a bluejacket then it is a kind of a expertness is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is exteroceptive then it is a hypanthium. sent2: if the lens is a kind of a expertness then it does prolong. sent3: if the torrent is metabolic it is a bluejacket. sent4: if the lens is Hitlerian it is a expertness. sent5: if the lens is a bluejacket then the fact that it does miscarry alula is not false. sent6: if the lens is a kind of a bluejacket it is a expertness. sent7: there exists something such that if it is unlike then it is a kind of a blackwood. sent8: there exists something such that if it is endodontics then it animates. sent9: there is something such that if it is ulcerative the fact that it is a bump is correct. sent10: the lens is calciferous if it does photosensitize paragraph. sent11: there is something such that if it is a tourist then it does miscarry Goodyear. sent12: the hypanthium miscarries greenhouse if it is a expertness. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the planetesimal does not lie and is circulatory.
|
(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: if the horse does miscarry horse the Chartreuse does miscarry horse. sent2: there exists something such that the fact that it does superscribe Melanoplus and does not miscarry Muscadet is incorrect. sent3: if the plush is an absorbent then it does photosensitize changeableness. sent4: something that is a wonder and a superego is not chitinous. sent5: the planetesimal does not photosensitize secession if the fact that the Chartreuse is Afghani and does not photosensitize secession does not hold. sent6: the fact that the Chartreuse is both not chitinous and circulatory is incorrect if it does miscarry horse. sent7: something is not circulatory if that it is non-chitinous thing that is circulatory is not right. sent8: the planetesimal does not lie if the proprietress is not chitinous. sent9: something is Afghani if it does photosensitize changeableness. sent10: the cattleya is not circulatory if the planetesimal is circulatory. sent11: the cattleya is chitinous. sent12: something that is chitinous abstracts boilerplate. sent13: if the planetesimal does not photosensitize secession it is circulatory and it does miscarry horse. sent14: if there exists something such that the fact that it does superscribe Melanoplus and does not miscarry Muscadet is not correct the plush is an absorbent. sent15: the planetesimal is not a lying. sent16: the fact that the proprietress does not wonder is wrong. sent17: if the proprietress is not chitinous then the planetesimal is not a lying and is circulatory. sent18: the horse photosensitizes secession and it miscarries horse if there is something such that the fact that it is Afghani hold.
|
sent1: {D}{c} -> {D}{b} sent2: (Ex): ¬({J}x & ¬{I}x) sent3: {H}{d} -> {G}{d} sent4: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: ¬({F}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent6: {D}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {C}{b}) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent8: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{A}{a} sent9: (x): {G}x -> {F}x sent10: {C}{a} -> ¬{C}{gc} sent11: {B}{gc} sent12: (x): {B}x -> {EB}x sent13: ¬{E}{a} -> ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent14: (x): ¬({J}x & ¬{I}x) -> {H}{d} sent15: ¬{A}{a} sent16: {AA}{aa} sent17: ¬{B}{aa} -> (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent18: (x): {F}x -> ({E}{c} & {D}{c})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the proprietress is a wonder that is a superego it is not chitinous.;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa};"
] |
the cattleya does abstract boilerplate and it is curtainless.
|
({EB}{gc} & {II}{gc})
|
[
"sent12 -> int2: the cattleya abstracts boilerplate if it is chitinous.; int2 & sent11 -> int3: the cattleya abstracts boilerplate.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the planetesimal does not lie and is circulatory. ; $context$ = sent1: if the horse does miscarry horse the Chartreuse does miscarry horse. sent2: there exists something such that the fact that it does superscribe Melanoplus and does not miscarry Muscadet is incorrect. sent3: if the plush is an absorbent then it does photosensitize changeableness. sent4: something that is a wonder and a superego is not chitinous. sent5: the planetesimal does not photosensitize secession if the fact that the Chartreuse is Afghani and does not photosensitize secession does not hold. sent6: the fact that the Chartreuse is both not chitinous and circulatory is incorrect if it does miscarry horse. sent7: something is not circulatory if that it is non-chitinous thing that is circulatory is not right. sent8: the planetesimal does not lie if the proprietress is not chitinous. sent9: something is Afghani if it does photosensitize changeableness. sent10: the cattleya is not circulatory if the planetesimal is circulatory. sent11: the cattleya is chitinous. sent12: something that is chitinous abstracts boilerplate. sent13: if the planetesimal does not photosensitize secession it is circulatory and it does miscarry horse. sent14: if there exists something such that the fact that it does superscribe Melanoplus and does not miscarry Muscadet is not correct the plush is an absorbent. sent15: the planetesimal is not a lying. sent16: the fact that the proprietress does not wonder is wrong. sent17: if the proprietress is not chitinous then the planetesimal is not a lying and is circulatory. sent18: the horse photosensitizes secession and it miscarries horse if there is something such that the fact that it is Afghani hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: if the proprietress is a wonder that is a superego it is not chitinous.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that something is both not dysphoric and Avestan does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{B}x & {C}x))
|
sent1: if the fact that something is not a Avestan but it is dysphoric is not right it is not inadequate. sent2: something does not eat but it is a kind of a zygoma if the fact that it is not inadequate hold. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a stickpin. sent4: there exists something such that it is inadequate. sent5: the chapman is not dysphoric if something is inadequate. sent6: the chapman is non-dysphoric thing that is a Avestan if there is something such that that it is not adequate is correct. sent7: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Avestan. sent8: something is a kind of dysphoric thing that is a Avestan. sent9: the chapman is not dysphoric.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{GM}x & {DS}x) sent3: (Ex): {DL}x sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent7: (Ex): {C}x sent8: (Ex): ({B}x & {C}x) sent9: ¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the chapman is non-dysphoric thing that is not non-Avestan.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that it does not eat and it is a zygoma.
|
(Ex): (¬{GM}x & {DS}x)
|
[
"sent1 -> int2: if the fact that the concierge is not Avestan but it is dysphoric is incorrect the fact that it is not inadequate is not false.; sent2 -> int3: if the concierge is not inadequate then it does not eat and it is a zygoma.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that something is both not dysphoric and Avestan does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something is not a Avestan but it is dysphoric is not right it is not inadequate. sent2: something does not eat but it is a kind of a zygoma if the fact that it is not inadequate hold. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a stickpin. sent4: there exists something such that it is inadequate. sent5: the chapman is not dysphoric if something is inadequate. sent6: the chapman is non-dysphoric thing that is a Avestan if there is something such that that it is not adequate is correct. sent7: there exists something such that it is a kind of a Avestan. sent8: something is a kind of dysphoric thing that is a Avestan. sent9: the chapman is not dysphoric. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the chapman is non-dysphoric thing that is not non-Avestan.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if it is not a capriole it is not implausible is wrong.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x)
|
sent1: if the cactus does not superscribe basidium it is a kind of a forehanded. sent2: there exists something such that if that it is not a Unitarianism hold then it is not abactinal. sent3: the parodist photosensitizes cactus if it does not melodize. sent4: if the parodist is not implausible then that it is not intense hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not integrative it is not inalienable. sent6: if the parodist is not a capriole it is not implausible. sent7: there is something such that if that it is not rabbinical is not false it does not superscribe maidenliness. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not a Eurasian hold then it is not a kind of a Diderot. sent9: if something is non-chromatinic then it is not a capriole.
|
sent1: ¬{IR}{ck} -> {GK}{ck} sent2: (Ex): ¬{BF}x -> ¬{FA}x sent3: ¬{K}{aa} -> {DG}{aa} sent4: ¬{C}{aa} -> ¬{EN}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ¬{IT}x -> ¬{DP}x sent6: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ¬{HS}x -> ¬{ES}x sent8: (Ex): ¬{GR}x -> ¬{GM}x sent9: (x): ¬{FF}x -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the hypanthium is not chromatinic it is not a capriole.
|
¬{FF}{es} -> ¬{B}{es}
|
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is not a capriole it is not implausible is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the cactus does not superscribe basidium it is a kind of a forehanded. sent2: there exists something such that if that it is not a Unitarianism hold then it is not abactinal. sent3: the parodist photosensitizes cactus if it does not melodize. sent4: if the parodist is not implausible then that it is not intense hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not integrative it is not inalienable. sent6: if the parodist is not a capriole it is not implausible. sent7: there is something such that if that it is not rabbinical is not false it does not superscribe maidenliness. sent8: there is something such that if that it is not a Eurasian hold then it is not a kind of a Diderot. sent9: if something is non-chromatinic then it is not a capriole. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bubonicness happens.
|
{B}
|
sent1: the bubonicness does not occur if the fact that both the dissidence and the Byzantine occurs is not right. sent2: both the sonography and the bubonicness happens if the fragmentation does not occur. sent3: the fact that both the Peloponnesianness and the photosensitizing rumination occurs is not right if the miscarrying tackle does not occur. sent4: that the dissidence does not occur triggers that the bubonicness does not occur. sent5: if the fact that the paleontologicalness does not occur hold then that the Kantianness and the proctoplasty happens does not hold. sent6: the proctoplasty does not occur if that the Kantianness occurs and the proctoplasty occurs is not right. sent7: if the philosophicalness does not occur then the fact that the operableness happens and the miscarrying particular occurs is false. sent8: if the superscribing fringe does not occur the bubonicness happens and the fragmentation occurs. sent9: the cyprianness does not occur. sent10: the splurging does not occur. sent11: if the augiticness does not occur the fact that the harlequin occurs and the superscribing rattlesnake happens does not hold. sent12: that the proctoplasty does not occur triggers that the racialness does not occur. sent13: if the going happens and the homeopathy happens the paleontologicalness does not occur. sent14: the fact that both the fomentation and the miscarrying rosary happens is false. sent15: the superscribing Anarhichadidae does not occur. sent16: if the racialness does not occur the superscribing fringe does not occur and the allomerism does not occur. sent17: the sonography does not occur. sent18: that the fact that the dissidence occurs and the Byzantineness happens is not correct if the sonography does not occur hold.
|
sent1: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent2: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent3: ¬{EL} -> ¬({AG} & {Q}) sent4: ¬{AA} -> ¬{B} sent5: ¬{I} -> ¬({H} & {G}) sent6: ¬({H} & {G}) -> ¬{G} sent7: ¬{AM} -> ¬({CC} & {FR}) sent8: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) sent9: ¬{HU} sent10: ¬{CD} sent11: ¬{HK} -> ¬({EI} & {HD}) sent12: ¬{G} -> ¬{F} sent13: ({K} & {J}) -> ¬{I} sent14: ¬({JC} & {IS}) sent15: ¬{FG} sent16: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) sent17: ¬{A} sent18: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB})
|
[
"sent18 & sent17 -> int1: the fact that both the dissidence and the Byzantine happens is not right.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent18 & sent17 -> int1: ¬({AA} & {AB}); sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the repossession does not occur.
|
¬{BK}
|
[] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bubonicness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the bubonicness does not occur if the fact that both the dissidence and the Byzantine occurs is not right. sent2: both the sonography and the bubonicness happens if the fragmentation does not occur. sent3: the fact that both the Peloponnesianness and the photosensitizing rumination occurs is not right if the miscarrying tackle does not occur. sent4: that the dissidence does not occur triggers that the bubonicness does not occur. sent5: if the fact that the paleontologicalness does not occur hold then that the Kantianness and the proctoplasty happens does not hold. sent6: the proctoplasty does not occur if that the Kantianness occurs and the proctoplasty occurs is not right. sent7: if the philosophicalness does not occur then the fact that the operableness happens and the miscarrying particular occurs is false. sent8: if the superscribing fringe does not occur the bubonicness happens and the fragmentation occurs. sent9: the cyprianness does not occur. sent10: the splurging does not occur. sent11: if the augiticness does not occur the fact that the harlequin occurs and the superscribing rattlesnake happens does not hold. sent12: that the proctoplasty does not occur triggers that the racialness does not occur. sent13: if the going happens and the homeopathy happens the paleontologicalness does not occur. sent14: the fact that both the fomentation and the miscarrying rosary happens is false. sent15: the superscribing Anarhichadidae does not occur. sent16: if the racialness does not occur the superscribing fringe does not occur and the allomerism does not occur. sent17: the sonography does not occur. sent18: that the fact that the dissidence occurs and the Byzantineness happens is not correct if the sonography does not occur hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent18 & sent17 -> int1: the fact that both the dissidence and the Byzantine happens is not right.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the headgear is not a kind of a Megaera.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
sent1: there is something such that it is non-clausal thing that is a Cronus. sent2: the ear is uncommunicative if there is something such that it is not clausal and it is a kind of a Cronus. sent3: that the headgear photosensitizes lee but it is not a Megaera is false. sent4: the fact that the desperate is a Merovingian and not a GIA does not hold. sent5: the la is a thermoplastic. sent6: if the ear is uncommunicative then the fact that the scriber does superscribe ear is not wrong. sent7: if the fact that the videotape does not superscribe ear and is a Pristidae is not right it does not superscribe Kahn. sent8: if the la is gallinaceous then the headgear is cinerary. sent9: the headgear is a Megaera if the fact that the la is cinerary is right. sent10: if the fact that the headgear does not photosensitize lee is not wrong then that it is a kind of a Megaera and it is not gallinaceous is not correct. sent11: the headgear is not a Megaera if the la is both gallinaceous and not unswept. sent12: the la is not gallinaceous. sent13: if something is gallinaceous it is not a Megaera and it is not unswept. sent14: if the headgear is gallinaceous then the la is gallinaceous. sent15: if the fact that that the la photosensitizes lee but it is not cinerary is true is false then the headgear is a Megaera. sent16: if the la does not photosensitize lee that it is cinerary and is not a Megaera is not true. sent17: something is both not a Pluto and not apetalous if it does not superscribe Kahn. sent18: if that the la is gallinaceous does not hold that it does photosensitize lee and it is not cinerary is false. sent19: the videotape superscribes Kahn and is apetalous if the scriber is not a Pristidae. sent20: the wet-nurse is a kind of a Megaera if the la is both not a Megaera and not unswept. sent21: that if that the la photosensitizes lee but it is not gallinaceous does not hold then the headgear is cinerary is correct. sent22: that the la is cinerary and it is gallinaceous is not true if it is not a kind of a Megaera.
|
sent1: (Ex): (¬{J}x & {K}x) sent2: (x): (¬{J}x & {K}x) -> {I}{e} sent3: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent4: ¬({JJ}{be} & ¬{EE}{be}) sent5: {GH}{a} sent6: {I}{e} -> {H}{d} sent7: ¬(¬{H}{c} & {G}{c}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent8: {A}{a} -> {AB}{b} sent9: {AB}{a} -> {B}{b} sent10: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent11: ({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent12: ¬{A}{a} sent13: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) sent14: {A}{b} -> {A}{a} sent15: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent16: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬({AB}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent17: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) sent18: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent19: ¬{G}{d} -> ({F}{c} & {E}{c}) sent20: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {B}{bc} sent21: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {AB}{b} sent22: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬({AB}{a} & {A}{a})
|
[
"sent18 & sent12 -> int1: that that the la photosensitizes lee and is not cinerary is wrong is right.; sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent18 & sent12 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the headgear is not a Megaera.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
[
"sent17 -> int2: the videotape is not a Pluto and it is not apetalous if it does not superscribe Kahn.; sent1 & sent2 -> int3: the ear is uncommunicative.; sent6 & int3 -> int4: the scriber does superscribe ear.; int4 -> int5: something does superscribe ear.;"
] | 10 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the headgear is not a kind of a Megaera. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is non-clausal thing that is a Cronus. sent2: the ear is uncommunicative if there is something such that it is not clausal and it is a kind of a Cronus. sent3: that the headgear photosensitizes lee but it is not a Megaera is false. sent4: the fact that the desperate is a Merovingian and not a GIA does not hold. sent5: the la is a thermoplastic. sent6: if the ear is uncommunicative then the fact that the scriber does superscribe ear is not wrong. sent7: if the fact that the videotape does not superscribe ear and is a Pristidae is not right it does not superscribe Kahn. sent8: if the la is gallinaceous then the headgear is cinerary. sent9: the headgear is a Megaera if the fact that the la is cinerary is right. sent10: if the fact that the headgear does not photosensitize lee is not wrong then that it is a kind of a Megaera and it is not gallinaceous is not correct. sent11: the headgear is not a Megaera if the la is both gallinaceous and not unswept. sent12: the la is not gallinaceous. sent13: if something is gallinaceous it is not a Megaera and it is not unswept. sent14: if the headgear is gallinaceous then the la is gallinaceous. sent15: if the fact that that the la photosensitizes lee but it is not cinerary is true is false then the headgear is a Megaera. sent16: if the la does not photosensitize lee that it is cinerary and is not a Megaera is not true. sent17: something is both not a Pluto and not apetalous if it does not superscribe Kahn. sent18: if that the la is gallinaceous does not hold that it does photosensitize lee and it is not cinerary is false. sent19: the videotape superscribes Kahn and is apetalous if the scriber is not a Pristidae. sent20: the wet-nurse is a kind of a Megaera if the la is both not a Megaera and not unswept. sent21: that if that the la photosensitizes lee but it is not gallinaceous does not hold then the headgear is cinerary is correct. sent22: that the la is cinerary and it is gallinaceous is not true if it is not a kind of a Megaera. ; $proof$ =
|
sent18 & sent12 -> int1: that that the la photosensitizes lee and is not cinerary is wrong is right.; sent15 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the spray is a kind of a beanbag and it is a keycard.
|
({C}{a} & {A}{a})
|
sent1: the scaffolding is unprofitable and miscarries grounder. sent2: the spray photosensitizes serenade. sent3: the spray is a keycard and is a kind of a male. sent4: something does photosensitize serenade and it oxidizes if it is not a keycard. sent5: the spray is a male.
|
sent1: ({ET}{be} & {IC}{be}) sent2: {D}{a} sent3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({D}x & {F}x) sent5: {B}{a}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the spray is a keycard.;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] |
the spray photosensitizes serenade and it does oxidize.
|
({D}{a} & {F}{a})
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: if the fact that the spray is not a keycard is not wrong it photosensitizes serenade and oxidizes.;"
] | 4 | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the spray is a kind of a beanbag and it is a keycard. ; $context$ = sent1: the scaffolding is unprofitable and miscarries grounder. sent2: the spray photosensitizes serenade. sent3: the spray is a keycard and is a kind of a male. sent4: something does photosensitize serenade and it oxidizes if it is not a keycard. sent5: the spray is a male. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the spray is a keycard.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Levantine happens.
|
{B}
|
sent1: the bolographicness does not occur. sent2: the casework does not occur if either the noncyclicness does not occur or the casework does not occur or both. sent3: if the fact that the cirrocumulus and the miscarrying yak happens is false then the miscarrying yak does not occur. sent4: if the gambit does not occur then the fact that the cirrocumulus occurs and the miscarrying yak happens is false. sent5: the talkie occurs. sent6: the talkie and the differentiating occurs if the bolographicness does not occur. sent7: the Levantine and the bolographicness occurs if the casework does not occur. sent8: the possessiveness happens and the Bohemian occurs if the miscarrying yak does not occur. sent9: that the talkie happens and the differentiating happens prevents that the Levantineness occurs. sent10: the noncyclicness does not occur and/or the casework does not occur if that the orchestralness happens hold. sent11: that the orchestralness occurs is brought about by that the Bohemianness happens. sent12: if the bolographicness does not occur then the talkie occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{A} sent2: (¬{D} v ¬{C}) -> ¬{C} sent3: ¬({I} & {H}) -> ¬{H} sent4: ¬{J} -> ¬({I} & {H}) sent5: {AA} sent6: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & {AB}) sent7: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent8: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) sent9: ({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent10: {E} -> (¬{D} v ¬{C}) sent11: {F} -> {E} sent12: ¬{A} -> {AA}
|
[
"sent6 & sent1 -> int1: the talkie occurs and the differentiating happens.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent1 -> int1: ({AA} & {AB}); sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Levantine occurs.
|
{B}
|
[] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Levantine happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the bolographicness does not occur. sent2: the casework does not occur if either the noncyclicness does not occur or the casework does not occur or both. sent3: if the fact that the cirrocumulus and the miscarrying yak happens is false then the miscarrying yak does not occur. sent4: if the gambit does not occur then the fact that the cirrocumulus occurs and the miscarrying yak happens is false. sent5: the talkie occurs. sent6: the talkie and the differentiating occurs if the bolographicness does not occur. sent7: the Levantine and the bolographicness occurs if the casework does not occur. sent8: the possessiveness happens and the Bohemian occurs if the miscarrying yak does not occur. sent9: that the talkie happens and the differentiating happens prevents that the Levantineness occurs. sent10: the noncyclicness does not occur and/or the casework does not occur if that the orchestralness happens hold. sent11: that the orchestralness occurs is brought about by that the Bohemianness happens. sent12: if the bolographicness does not occur then the talkie occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent1 -> int1: the talkie occurs and the differentiating happens.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that both the worrying and the non-auricularness happens does not hold.
|
¬({C} & ¬{D})
|
sent1: the unpropitiousness does not occur. sent2: if the dried does not occur that the fact that the force-out but not the slip happens is incorrect is not wrong. sent3: if the filicide does not occur then the fact that the worrying but not the auricularness happens is incorrect. sent4: if the miscarrying skibob does not occur then the fact that the dig occurs and the motorization happens does not hold. sent5: the filicide does not occur if that not the recouping but the photosensitizing moment occurs is not true. sent6: if the avirulentness does not occur the fact that not the medicolegalness but the medievalness happens is not true. sent7: that the worrying and the auricularness happens is triggered by that the slip does not occur. sent8: the worrying but not the auricularness occurs if the unpropitiousness happens. sent9: if the bore does not occur then that the insideness but not the photosensitizing PC occurs is not true. sent10: the fact that the proctorship happens and the Moravianness happens does not hold. sent11: that the boycott and the non-municipalness happens is false. sent12: the abasement is prevented by that the performance does not occur. sent13: if that both the filicide and the non-unpropitiousness happens is not true then the braggadocio does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{A} sent2: ¬{EA} -> ¬({CT} & ¬{E}) sent3: ¬{B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent4: ¬{AC} -> ¬({BM} & {P}) sent5: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: ¬{GJ} -> ¬(¬{IU} & {R}) sent7: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) sent8: {A} -> ({C} & ¬{D}) sent9: ¬{HB} -> ¬({AR} & ¬{AF}) sent10: ¬({HD} & {CU}) sent11: ¬({IG} & ¬{IH}) sent12: ¬{IB} -> ¬{CP} sent13: ¬({B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{GE}
|
[] |
[] |
the worrying occurs and the auricularness does not occur.
|
({C} & ¬{D})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that both the worrying and the non-auricularness happens does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the unpropitiousness does not occur. sent2: if the dried does not occur that the fact that the force-out but not the slip happens is incorrect is not wrong. sent3: if the filicide does not occur then the fact that the worrying but not the auricularness happens is incorrect. sent4: if the miscarrying skibob does not occur then the fact that the dig occurs and the motorization happens does not hold. sent5: the filicide does not occur if that not the recouping but the photosensitizing moment occurs is not true. sent6: if the avirulentness does not occur the fact that not the medicolegalness but the medievalness happens is not true. sent7: that the worrying and the auricularness happens is triggered by that the slip does not occur. sent8: the worrying but not the auricularness occurs if the unpropitiousness happens. sent9: if the bore does not occur then that the insideness but not the photosensitizing PC occurs is not true. sent10: the fact that the proctorship happens and the Moravianness happens does not hold. sent11: that the boycott and the non-municipalness happens is false. sent12: the abasement is prevented by that the performance does not occur. sent13: if that both the filicide and the non-unpropitiousness happens is not true then the braggadocio does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bap is not a Muridae.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: that the dairy is both not prosthetics and meretricious is not true. sent2: the pinche is not curable if the fact that the hack is curable but it is not a catarrh is not correct. sent3: something is not interlinear and/or it is wieldy if it is not meretricious. sent4: that the fact that the dairy is non-prosthetics thing that is not meretricious is correct is wrong. sent5: if something is meretricious the fact that it is wieldy and not prosthetics is not right. sent6: if the bap is a Muridae it is prosthetics. sent7: there is nothing such that it is a kind of curable thing that is not a kind of a catarrh. sent8: the dairy does abstract selfsameness if the bap is not prosthetics but it is a kind of a Muridae. sent9: the dairy is not a kind of a Draco. sent10: there exists something such that that the fact that it is meretricious and it blends is correct is not correct. sent11: that the dairy blends if the anticyclone is a blends is not false. sent12: the fact that the dairy is not a Muridae and it is not prosthetics does not hold. sent13: if something is not non-interlinear then it is meretricious. sent14: if that something is not a cloister and is not a blend is not correct then it does blend. sent15: if the dairy blends then that it is interlinear is not incorrect. sent16: the bap is not prosthetics if the fact that the fact that the dairy is not prosthetics and not meretricious is incorrect is right. sent17: the fact that the dairy is a kind of prosthetics thing that is not meretricious is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{B}{b} & {D}{b}) sent2: ¬({G}{e} & ¬{J}{e}) -> ¬{G}{d} sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{E}x v {C}x) sent4: ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent5: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent6: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent7: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{J}x) sent8: (¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> {ES}{b} sent9: ¬{HP}{b} sent10: (Ex): ¬({D}x & {F}x) sent11: {F}{c} -> {F}{b} sent12: ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent13: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent14: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{F}x) -> {F}x sent15: {F}{b} -> {E}{b} sent16: ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent17: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{D}{b})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bap is a kind of a Muridae.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the bap is prosthetics.; sent16 & sent4 -> int2: the bap is not prosthetics.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent16 & sent4 -> int2: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the bap is a kind of a Muridae.
|
{A}{a}
|
[
"sent5 -> int4: that the dairy is wieldy and not prosthetics is not true if that it is meretricious is not wrong.; sent13 -> int5: the dairy is meretricious if the fact that it is interlinear is not incorrect.; sent14 -> int6: the anticyclone blends if that it is not a cloister and it does not blends does not hold.; sent7 -> int7: the fact that the hack is both not incurable and not a catarrh is not correct.; sent2 & int7 -> int8: the pinche is not curable.; int8 -> int9: something is not curable.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bap is not a Muridae. ; $context$ = sent1: that the dairy is both not prosthetics and meretricious is not true. sent2: the pinche is not curable if the fact that the hack is curable but it is not a catarrh is not correct. sent3: something is not interlinear and/or it is wieldy if it is not meretricious. sent4: that the fact that the dairy is non-prosthetics thing that is not meretricious is correct is wrong. sent5: if something is meretricious the fact that it is wieldy and not prosthetics is not right. sent6: if the bap is a Muridae it is prosthetics. sent7: there is nothing such that it is a kind of curable thing that is not a kind of a catarrh. sent8: the dairy does abstract selfsameness if the bap is not prosthetics but it is a kind of a Muridae. sent9: the dairy is not a kind of a Draco. sent10: there exists something such that that the fact that it is meretricious and it blends is correct is not correct. sent11: that the dairy blends if the anticyclone is a blends is not false. sent12: the fact that the dairy is not a Muridae and it is not prosthetics does not hold. sent13: if something is not non-interlinear then it is meretricious. sent14: if that something is not a cloister and is not a blend is not correct then it does blend. sent15: if the dairy blends then that it is interlinear is not incorrect. sent16: the bap is not prosthetics if the fact that the fact that the dairy is not prosthetics and not meretricious is incorrect is right. sent17: the fact that the dairy is a kind of prosthetics thing that is not meretricious is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the bap is a kind of a Muridae.; sent6 & assump1 -> int1: the bap is prosthetics.; sent16 & sent4 -> int2: the bap is not prosthetics.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the nugget is a dapple-grey.
|
{E}{a}
|
sent1: the nugget is a benefaction if that it is coronary but not a lead is false. sent2: if the patroller does restrain then the nugget does not restrain. sent3: there exists something such that it does restrain. sent4: if something does not restrain it is not a dapple-grey. sent5: that the nugget is a kind of coronary thing that is not a lead is not correct if there is something such that the fact that it does restrain is correct.
|
sent1: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{a} sent2: {A}{b} -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{E}x sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: that the nugget is a coronary but it does not lead is not true.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the nugget is a kind of a benefaction.;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 & sent1 -> int2: {D}{a};"
] |
the nugget is not a kind of a dapple-grey.
|
¬{E}{a}
|
[
"sent4 -> int3: the nugget is not a kind of a dapple-grey if it does not restrain.;"
] | 5 | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the nugget is a dapple-grey. ; $context$ = sent1: the nugget is a benefaction if that it is coronary but not a lead is false. sent2: if the patroller does restrain then the nugget does not restrain. sent3: there exists something such that it does restrain. sent4: if something does not restrain it is not a dapple-grey. sent5: that the nugget is a kind of coronary thing that is not a lead is not correct if there is something such that the fact that it does restrain is correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent5 -> int1: that the nugget is a coronary but it does not lead is not true.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the nugget is a kind of a benefaction.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the disownment does not occur and the reformation does not occur is not correct.
|
¬(¬{A} & ¬{C})
|
sent1: the fact that the protrusiveness occurs if the fact that the pillowing hysterosalpingogram does not occur and/or the katharobicness occurs is not true is not incorrect. sent2: if the unintelligentness does not occur the disownment does not occur and the reformation does not occur. sent3: that the punishing kroon does not occur and/or the feline occurs is false. sent4: that the disownment does not occur and the reformation does not occur is false if that the unintelligentness occurs is not incorrect. sent5: the fact that the crayoning does not occur and the crop does not occur is not right if the wetting countryfolk happens. sent6: the suborbitalness happens if the pillowing hysterosalpingogram occurs. sent7: that the domination does not occur and the rowing does not occur is false if the punishing lever happens. sent8: both the intelligentness and the enactment occurs if the universalisticness happens. sent9: if the revealing occurs then that the Japanese does not occur and the pillowing affined does not occur is not true. sent10: the unintelligentness happens if the fact that the Bahamian does not occur or the recidivism happens or both is wrong. sent11: if the disownment occurs the fact that the non-inauspiciousness and/or the stealing occurs does not hold. sent12: that the wetting eristic does not occur and the brisance does not occur does not hold. sent13: if the suborbitalness happens the basalness does not occur and the punishing kroon does not occur. sent14: if the katharobicness occurs that the non-glandularness and the non-histologicalness happens is incorrect. sent15: that the basalness does not occur and the punishing kroon does not occur prevents the non-katharobicness. sent16: the fact that the Bahamianness does not occur and/or the recidivism happens is not true. sent17: if that the glandularness does not occur and the histologicalness does not occur does not hold then the universalisticness occurs. sent18: if the reconverting happens then that the basalness does not occur and the plunge does not occur is wrong. sent19: the fact that the disownment but not the reformation happens is incorrect. sent20: that the punishing spam does not occur and the Spanishness occurs does not hold. sent21: that the refracting does not occur and the pillowing arborolatry does not occur is not correct if the destining happens. sent22: the defeat happens if the fact that the pillowing alula does not occur or the apprenticeship occurs or both is wrong. sent23: the fact that the fact that the disownment does not occur and the reformation happens is right is false if the unintelligentness occurs.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{L} v {H}) -> {CA} sent2: ¬{B} -> (¬{A} & ¬{C}) sent3: ¬(¬{I} v {FU}) sent4: {B} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) sent5: {EG} -> ¬(¬{GI} & ¬{EI}) sent6: {L} -> {K} sent7: {HM} -> ¬(¬{EC} & ¬{CS}) sent8: {E} -> (¬{B} & {D}) sent9: {HE} -> ¬(¬{AH} & ¬{FN}) sent10: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) -> {B} sent11: {A} -> ¬(¬{JF} v {HU}) sent12: ¬(¬{GA} & ¬{EM}) sent13: {K} -> (¬{J} & ¬{I}) sent14: {H} -> ¬(¬{G} & ¬{F}) sent15: (¬{J} & ¬{I}) -> {H} sent16: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) sent17: ¬(¬{G} & ¬{F}) -> {E} sent18: {IF} -> ¬(¬{J} & ¬{IR}) sent19: ¬({A} & ¬{C}) sent20: ¬(¬{IL} & {EH}) sent21: {GR} -> ¬(¬{IN} & ¬{IH}) sent22: ¬(¬{FC} v {IM}) -> {BP} sent23: {B} -> ¬(¬{A} & {C})
|
[
"sent10 & sent16 -> int1: the unintelligentness occurs.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 & sent16 -> int1: {B}; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the disownment does not occur and the reformation does not occur.
|
(¬{A} & ¬{C})
|
[] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the disownment does not occur and the reformation does not occur is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the protrusiveness occurs if the fact that the pillowing hysterosalpingogram does not occur and/or the katharobicness occurs is not true is not incorrect. sent2: if the unintelligentness does not occur the disownment does not occur and the reformation does not occur. sent3: that the punishing kroon does not occur and/or the feline occurs is false. sent4: that the disownment does not occur and the reformation does not occur is false if that the unintelligentness occurs is not incorrect. sent5: the fact that the crayoning does not occur and the crop does not occur is not right if the wetting countryfolk happens. sent6: the suborbitalness happens if the pillowing hysterosalpingogram occurs. sent7: that the domination does not occur and the rowing does not occur is false if the punishing lever happens. sent8: both the intelligentness and the enactment occurs if the universalisticness happens. sent9: if the revealing occurs then that the Japanese does not occur and the pillowing affined does not occur is not true. sent10: the unintelligentness happens if the fact that the Bahamian does not occur or the recidivism happens or both is wrong. sent11: if the disownment occurs the fact that the non-inauspiciousness and/or the stealing occurs does not hold. sent12: that the wetting eristic does not occur and the brisance does not occur does not hold. sent13: if the suborbitalness happens the basalness does not occur and the punishing kroon does not occur. sent14: if the katharobicness occurs that the non-glandularness and the non-histologicalness happens is incorrect. sent15: that the basalness does not occur and the punishing kroon does not occur prevents the non-katharobicness. sent16: the fact that the Bahamianness does not occur and/or the recidivism happens is not true. sent17: if that the glandularness does not occur and the histologicalness does not occur does not hold then the universalisticness occurs. sent18: if the reconverting happens then that the basalness does not occur and the plunge does not occur is wrong. sent19: the fact that the disownment but not the reformation happens is incorrect. sent20: that the punishing spam does not occur and the Spanishness occurs does not hold. sent21: that the refracting does not occur and the pillowing arborolatry does not occur is not correct if the destining happens. sent22: the defeat happens if the fact that the pillowing alula does not occur or the apprenticeship occurs or both is wrong. sent23: the fact that the fact that the disownment does not occur and the reformation happens is right is false if the unintelligentness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 & sent16 -> int1: the unintelligentness occurs.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the fact that the ixodid does punish internist and does not pillow Pearmain is not true is right.
|
¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
sent1: the ixodid punishes internist but it does not pillow Pearmain if something wets shoddiness. sent2: The shoddiness wets decrease. sent3: the decrease wets shoddiness.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent2: {AA}{ab} sent3: {A}{aa}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: something wets shoddiness.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: (Ex): {A}x; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the fact that the ixodid does punish internist and does not pillow Pearmain is not true is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the ixodid punishes internist but it does not pillow Pearmain if something wets shoddiness. sent2: The shoddiness wets decrease. sent3: the decrease wets shoddiness. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: something wets shoddiness.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the caudate is a kind of a gyro.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: the angledozer is not a gyro. sent2: The palatal does not punish caudate. sent3: the caudate is a gyro if it does not punish palatal. sent4: the caudate does not punish palatal. sent5: if the noodle is not a gyro then the caudate is not a gyro.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{r} sent2: ¬{AA}{aa} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: ¬{A}{a} sent5: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the caudate is not a gyro.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the caudate is a kind of a gyro. ; $context$ = sent1: the angledozer is not a gyro. sent2: The palatal does not punish caudate. sent3: the caudate is a gyro if it does not punish palatal. sent4: the caudate does not punish palatal. sent5: if the noodle is not a gyro then the caudate is not a gyro. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the retiree is tensile.
|
{B}{b}
|
sent1: if the bouquet is not an absinthe the fact that it inspires or it does opalize bouquet or both is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the bouquet does not inspire hold. sent3: everything is a tabloid. sent4: something inspires or it opalizes bouquet or both. sent5: the scheelite is not tensile. sent6: if something does not court it is tensile and an absinthe. sent7: the retiree is not tensile if there is something such that the fact that it does inspire and/or opalizes bouquet is not true. sent8: the bouquet is not a kind of an absinthe.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent2: ¬{AA}{a} sent3: (x): {D}x sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) sent5: ¬{B}{df} sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent7: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}{b} sent8: ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the fact that the bouquet inspires and/or it opalizes bouquet is not right.; int1 -> int2: the fact that there exists something such that that it either does inspire or does opalize bouquet or both is not correct is true.; int2 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x); int2 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the retiree is tensile.
|
{B}{b}
|
[
"sent6 -> int3: if the retiree is not a court then it is both tensile and an absinthe.; sent3 -> int4: the bouquet is a kind of a tabloid.; int4 -> int5: the bouquet is a kind of a tabloid and/or it is a coupling.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that it either is a tabloid or does couple or both.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the retiree is tensile. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bouquet is not an absinthe the fact that it inspires or it does opalize bouquet or both is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the bouquet does not inspire hold. sent3: everything is a tabloid. sent4: something inspires or it opalizes bouquet or both. sent5: the scheelite is not tensile. sent6: if something does not court it is tensile and an absinthe. sent7: the retiree is not tensile if there is something such that the fact that it does inspire and/or opalizes bouquet is not true. sent8: the bouquet is not a kind of an absinthe. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the fact that the bouquet inspires and/or it opalizes bouquet is not right.; int1 -> int2: the fact that there exists something such that that it either does inspire or does opalize bouquet or both is not correct is true.; int2 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the undynamicness happens.
|
{B}
|
sent1: that the concession occurs and the wetting Carpinus happens is right. sent2: the controllership and the plating happens. sent3: both the irregularity and the brave happens. sent4: the brotherliness occurs. sent5: the neuralgicness and the undynamicness happens. sent6: the anaplasticness occurs. sent7: the neuralgicness occurs. sent8: both the ataxicness and the appellateness occurs. sent9: the fact that the randomization happens hold. sent10: the orthopticness occurs. sent11: both the sharpening and the neuralgicness happens if the undynamicness does not occur. sent12: the melioration happens. sent13: that the aecialness happens brings about the fact that that both the non-undynamicness and the non-neuralgicness occurs is not incorrect.
|
sent1: ({HO} & {GL}) sent2: ({EI} & {FQ}) sent3: ({AB} & {FN}) sent4: {GR} sent5: ({A} & {B}) sent6: {DF} sent7: {A} sent8: ({HC} & {BC}) sent9: {BN} sent10: {CA} sent11: ¬{B} -> ({HJ} & {A}) sent12: {E} sent13: {C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A})
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the sharpening happens.
|
{HJ}
|
[] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the undynamicness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the concession occurs and the wetting Carpinus happens is right. sent2: the controllership and the plating happens. sent3: both the irregularity and the brave happens. sent4: the brotherliness occurs. sent5: the neuralgicness and the undynamicness happens. sent6: the anaplasticness occurs. sent7: the neuralgicness occurs. sent8: both the ataxicness and the appellateness occurs. sent9: the fact that the randomization happens hold. sent10: the orthopticness occurs. sent11: both the sharpening and the neuralgicness happens if the undynamicness does not occur. sent12: the melioration happens. sent13: that the aecialness happens brings about the fact that that both the non-undynamicness and the non-neuralgicness occurs is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the cymene is both not gingival and unidirectional does not hold.
|
¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: the cymene is both not metamorphous and a Jewry. sent2: if there is something such that it is metamorphous then the cymene is non-gingival thing that is unidirectional. sent3: that the cymene is not gingival but unidirectional is incorrect if the ice-skater is not metamorphous. sent4: there exists something such that it is unidirectional. sent5: something is not metamorphous but it does wet Canopus if it is gingival. sent6: if there exists something such that it is metamorphous then the cat's-paw is not a klaxon and does wet pond. sent7: the cymene is not gingival. sent8: the ice-skater is non-metamorphous if the peridot is not a kind of a rouged and is a profession. sent9: there is something such that it is antibacterial. sent10: if the Earth is not a rouged then it is both a profession and not non-unidirectional. sent11: if the fact that something is a kind of a deckle is true the cymene is not unidirectional but it is synergistic. sent12: something is metamorphous. sent13: the cymene does not pillow psychology but it is gingival if something wets thyroid. sent14: the cymene is not gingival if the fact that something is metamorphous hold. sent15: if there is something such that it is metamorphous then the bouquet does not pillow koala but it punishes Stenochlaena. sent16: there is something such that it is gingival.
|
sent1: (¬{A}{a} & {AD}{a}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: (Ex): {C}x sent5: (x): {B}x -> (¬{A}x & {HP}x) sent6: (x): {A}x -> (¬{JD}{ha} & {BM}{ha}) sent7: ¬{B}{a} sent8: (¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent9: (Ex): {K}x sent10: ¬{E}{bn} -> ({D}{bn} & {C}{bn}) sent11: (x): {FS}x -> (¬{C}{a} & {BQ}{a}) sent12: (Ex): {A}x sent13: (x): {AP}x -> (¬{FQ}{a} & {B}{a}) sent14: (x): {A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent15: (x): {A}x -> (¬{BH}{fa} & {EI}{fa}) sent16: (Ex): {B}x
|
[
"sent12 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Earth is non-metamorphous thing that does wet Canopus.
|
(¬{A}{bn} & {HP}{bn})
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: if the Earth is gingival it is non-metamorphous thing that wets Canopus.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the cymene is both not gingival and unidirectional does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the cymene is both not metamorphous and a Jewry. sent2: if there is something such that it is metamorphous then the cymene is non-gingival thing that is unidirectional. sent3: that the cymene is not gingival but unidirectional is incorrect if the ice-skater is not metamorphous. sent4: there exists something such that it is unidirectional. sent5: something is not metamorphous but it does wet Canopus if it is gingival. sent6: if there exists something such that it is metamorphous then the cat's-paw is not a klaxon and does wet pond. sent7: the cymene is not gingival. sent8: the ice-skater is non-metamorphous if the peridot is not a kind of a rouged and is a profession. sent9: there is something such that it is antibacterial. sent10: if the Earth is not a rouged then it is both a profession and not non-unidirectional. sent11: if the fact that something is a kind of a deckle is true the cymene is not unidirectional but it is synergistic. sent12: something is metamorphous. sent13: the cymene does not pillow psychology but it is gingival if something wets thyroid. sent14: the cymene is not gingival if the fact that something is metamorphous hold. sent15: if there is something such that it is metamorphous then the bouquet does not pillow koala but it punishes Stenochlaena. sent16: there is something such that it is gingival. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the negotiatress does not punish mandator.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: that the negotiatress is a watchfulness is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that the minion does not punish cheeseburger is not false if the fact that it is cytokinetic and it is not a demand does not hold. sent3: if something does not punish mandator that the chorister is surface is not wrong. sent4: there is something such that it is not a watchfulness. sent5: if the fact that the chorister punishes mandator and it does pillow arborolatry is wrong then the negotiatress does not punishes mandator. sent6: the chorister is microelectronic if the Martin either is not a Ukrainian or is not microelectronic or both. sent7: if the chorister is not Senecan that the negotiatress is a watchfulness and pillows arborolatry is not true. sent8: that the minion is cytokinetic but it is not a demand is not true. sent9: that something does punish mandator and it pillows arborolatry is false if it is not a watchfulness. sent10: something is a kind of a watchfulness. sent11: if something does not punish cheeseburger then the fact that it does not inhale and it is not a chorion does not hold. sent12: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a watchfulness the chorister pillows arborolatry. sent13: something wets Hesperus if it is microelectronic. sent14: the chorister does punish mandator if the negotiatress does pillow arborolatry. sent15: the Wain pillows arborolatry if there are non-metamorphous things. sent16: if the chorister punishes mandator then the negotiatress does pillow arborolatry. sent17: if something does wet Hesperus it is non-Senecan thing that is not a kind of a watchfulness. sent18: if something that is a washbasin does wet Hesperus then it is not Senecan. sent19: if there exists something such that that it does not inhale and is not a chorion does not hold then the chorister is a kind of a washbasin. sent20: if the fact that something is a kind of a watchfulness that pillows arborolatry is not right it does not punish mandator. sent21: if the chorister pillows arborolatry then the negotiatress does punish mandator.
|
sent1: {A}{b} sent2: ¬({M}{c} & ¬{L}{c}) -> ¬{J}{c} sent3: (x): ¬{C}x -> {FO}{a} sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent5: ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent6: (¬{K}{d} v {G}{d}) -> {G}{a} sent7: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent8: ¬({M}{c} & ¬{L}{c}) sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {B}x) sent10: (Ex): {A}x sent11: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{I}x) sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}{a} sent13: (x): {G}x -> {E}x sent14: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} sent15: (x): ¬{CB}x -> {B}{dg} sent16: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent17: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{A}x) sent18: (x): ({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent19: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{I}x) -> {F}{a} sent20: (x): ¬({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent21: {B}{a} -> {C}{b}
|
[
"sent4 & sent12 -> int1: the chorister does pillow arborolatry.; sent21 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent12 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent21 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the negotiatress does not punish mandator.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent20 -> int2: the negotiatress does not punish mandator if that it is a watchfulness and it does pillow arborolatry does not hold.; sent18 -> int3: if the chorister is a washbasin and it does wet Hesperus it is not Senecan.; sent11 -> int4: the fact that the minion does not inhale and it is not a kind of a chorion is wrong if it does not punish cheeseburger.; sent2 & sent8 -> int5: the minion does not punish cheeseburger.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the minion does not inhale and it is not a chorion is false.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it does not inhale and it is not a kind of a chorion is not true.; int7 & sent19 -> int8: the chorister is a kind of a washbasin.; sent13 -> int9: the chorister wets Hesperus if it is microelectronic.;"
] | 8 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the negotiatress does not punish mandator. ; $context$ = sent1: that the negotiatress is a watchfulness is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that the minion does not punish cheeseburger is not false if the fact that it is cytokinetic and it is not a demand does not hold. sent3: if something does not punish mandator that the chorister is surface is not wrong. sent4: there is something such that it is not a watchfulness. sent5: if the fact that the chorister punishes mandator and it does pillow arborolatry is wrong then the negotiatress does not punishes mandator. sent6: the chorister is microelectronic if the Martin either is not a Ukrainian or is not microelectronic or both. sent7: if the chorister is not Senecan that the negotiatress is a watchfulness and pillows arborolatry is not true. sent8: that the minion is cytokinetic but it is not a demand is not true. sent9: that something does punish mandator and it pillows arborolatry is false if it is not a watchfulness. sent10: something is a kind of a watchfulness. sent11: if something does not punish cheeseburger then the fact that it does not inhale and it is not a chorion does not hold. sent12: if there is something such that it is not a kind of a watchfulness the chorister pillows arborolatry. sent13: something wets Hesperus if it is microelectronic. sent14: the chorister does punish mandator if the negotiatress does pillow arborolatry. sent15: the Wain pillows arborolatry if there are non-metamorphous things. sent16: if the chorister punishes mandator then the negotiatress does pillow arborolatry. sent17: if something does wet Hesperus it is non-Senecan thing that is not a kind of a watchfulness. sent18: if something that is a washbasin does wet Hesperus then it is not Senecan. sent19: if there exists something such that that it does not inhale and is not a chorion does not hold then the chorister is a kind of a washbasin. sent20: if the fact that something is a kind of a watchfulness that pillows arborolatry is not right it does not punish mandator. sent21: if the chorister pillows arborolatry then the negotiatress does punish mandator. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent12 -> int1: the chorister does pillow arborolatry.; sent21 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the elongation idealizes but it is not a fruitwood.
|
({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
sent1: the teapot does not foster. sent2: the fact that the fact that the drivel is unemotional and/or it is not haemophilic is not right is not wrong if it is a till. sent3: the drivel is a till. sent4: that the elongation idealizes and is a fruitwood is false. sent5: if the drivel is not a fruitwood then that the elongation idealizes but it is not a fruitwood is not true. sent6: if that the drivel is unemotional or is haemophilic or both is false then it is not a fruitwood. sent7: something is not a fruitwood if that it is not emotional or not haemophilic or both is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬{F}{c} sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: {A}{aa} sent4: ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent5: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent6: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: (x): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the drivel is not a fruitwood if that it is unemotional and/or it is not haemophilic is false.; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: that the drivel is unemotional and/or it is not haemophilic does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the drivel is not a fruitwood.; int3 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa}; int3 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the elongation idealizes and is not a fruitwood.
|
({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
[
"sent1 -> int4: something does not foster.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the elongation idealizes but it is not a fruitwood. ; $context$ = sent1: the teapot does not foster. sent2: the fact that the fact that the drivel is unemotional and/or it is not haemophilic is not right is not wrong if it is a till. sent3: the drivel is a till. sent4: that the elongation idealizes and is a fruitwood is false. sent5: if the drivel is not a fruitwood then that the elongation idealizes but it is not a fruitwood is not true. sent6: if that the drivel is unemotional or is haemophilic or both is false then it is not a fruitwood. sent7: something is not a fruitwood if that it is not emotional or not haemophilic or both is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: the drivel is not a fruitwood if that it is unemotional and/or it is not haemophilic is false.; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: that the drivel is unemotional and/or it is not haemophilic does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the drivel is not a fruitwood.; int3 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the chichipe is a kind of regular thing that is a kind of a toiletry does not hold.
|
¬({D}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: something does agonize if the fact that it is not a pronominal and wets roughrider is not right. sent2: the Bible is not a toiletry. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Shapley. sent4: that the fact that something is regular and it is a kind of a toiletry is false if it is not monocarpic hold. sent5: the chichipe does not agonize if there exists something such that it is not monocarpic. sent6: if the fact that the chichipe does not agonize is true it is a regular. sent7: there is something such that it is a regular. sent8: that the wormcast is not a pronominal but it wets roughrider is wrong if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a Midgard is right. sent9: if that the horsemeat is not a Hillary but it slops is incorrect then it is a Hillary. sent10: something is a kind of a Midgard if it is a Hillary. sent11: there is something such that it is not monocarpic. sent12: the chichipe is a kind of a regular and it is a toiletry if it does not agonize. sent13: there is something such that it is not a regular. sent14: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Shapley that the horsemeat is not a Hillary and is a slop does not hold.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) -> {B}x sent2: ¬{C}{eg} sent3: (Ex): ¬{J}x sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x & {C}x) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: ¬{B}{a} -> {D}{a} sent7: (Ex): {D}x sent8: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{E}{b} & {F}{b}) sent9: ¬(¬{H}{c} & {I}{c}) -> {H}{c} sent10: (x): {H}x -> {G}x sent11: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent12: ¬{B}{a} -> ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent13: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent14: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬(¬{H}{c} & {I}{c})
|
[
"sent11 & sent5 -> int1: the chichipe does not agonize.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the chichipe is regular and is a kind of a toiletry is incorrect.
|
¬({D}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: that the chichipe is a regular and it is a kind of a toiletry is not right if it is not monocarpic.; sent1 -> int3: the wormcast agonizes if the fact that it is non-pronominal thing that wets roughrider is incorrect.; sent10 -> int4: if the horsemeat is a kind of a Hillary it is a Midgard.; sent3 & sent14 -> int5: the fact that the horsemeat is not a Hillary and is a slop is wrong.; sent9 & int5 -> int6: the horsemeat is a kind of a Hillary.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the horsemeat is a Midgard.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that it is a Midgard.; int8 & sent8 -> int9: that the wormcast is not pronominal but it wets roughrider is not true.; int3 & int9 -> int10: the wormcast does agonize.; int10 -> int11: there is something such that it does agonize.;"
] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the chichipe is a kind of regular thing that is a kind of a toiletry does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: something does agonize if the fact that it is not a pronominal and wets roughrider is not right. sent2: the Bible is not a toiletry. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Shapley. sent4: that the fact that something is regular and it is a kind of a toiletry is false if it is not monocarpic hold. sent5: the chichipe does not agonize if there exists something such that it is not monocarpic. sent6: if the fact that the chichipe does not agonize is true it is a regular. sent7: there is something such that it is a regular. sent8: that the wormcast is not a pronominal but it wets roughrider is wrong if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a Midgard is right. sent9: if that the horsemeat is not a Hillary but it slops is incorrect then it is a Hillary. sent10: something is a kind of a Midgard if it is a Hillary. sent11: there is something such that it is not monocarpic. sent12: the chichipe is a kind of a regular and it is a toiletry if it does not agonize. sent13: there is something such that it is not a regular. sent14: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Shapley that the horsemeat is not a Hillary and is a slop does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent5 -> int1: the chichipe does not agonize.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the spatula is a kind of an eagle and does not caseate.
|
({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: if something is an academy then it opalizes unknown and it is non-maturational. sent2: the spatula is not permissible. sent3: the longitude opalizes unknown and it is maturational. sent4: the snaffle is an academy if there is something such that it is not permissible. sent5: the longitude does not opalize unknown if the spatula eagles but it does not caseate.
|
sent1: (x): {D}x -> ({B}x & ¬{A}x) sent2: ¬{E}{a} sent3: ({B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent4: (x): ¬{E}x -> {D}{gj} sent5: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the spatula does eagle but it does not caseate.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: that the longitude does not opalize unknown hold.; sent3 -> int2: the longitude does opalize unknown.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent5 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent3 -> int2: {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the snaffle opalizes unknown but it is not a beam.
|
({B}{gj} & ¬{CN}{gj})
|
[
"sent1 -> int4: if the snaffle is a kind of an academy it does opalize unknown and is not maturational.; sent2 -> int5: there is something such that it is not permissible.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: the snaffle is an academy.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the snaffle does opalize unknown but it is not maturational.; int7 -> int8: the snaffle does opalize unknown.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the spatula is a kind of an eagle and does not caseate. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is an academy then it opalizes unknown and it is non-maturational. sent2: the spatula is not permissible. sent3: the longitude opalizes unknown and it is maturational. sent4: the snaffle is an academy if there is something such that it is not permissible. sent5: the longitude does not opalize unknown if the spatula eagles but it does not caseate. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the spatula does eagle but it does not caseate.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: that the longitude does not opalize unknown hold.; sent3 -> int2: the longitude does opalize unknown.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is a denationalization is not false then that it does not pillow coral and is not a Cambodian is not right is not right.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: the pinfish does not pillow coral and it is not a Cambodian if it is a denationalization. sent2: there exists something such that if it punishes velodrome it is not journalistic and is not a kind of a Aegean. sent3: there is something such that if it is a kind of a Cairo that it is a kind of non-igneous thing that does not opalize Minoan is not right. sent4: the fact that that the pinfish does not pillow coral and it is not a kind of the Cambodian is incorrect if the pinfish is a denationalization is not wrong. sent5: there exists something such that if it is official that it is abient and it is not a dewlap does not hold. sent6: the fact that something is not isotropic and not choreographic is false if it is .38-caliber. sent7: there is something such that if it is beneficent then it is not a prang and is not noncausative.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): {BC}x -> (¬{GM}x & ¬{CI}x) sent3: (Ex): {G}x -> ¬(¬{FS}x & ¬{BP}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): {DL}x -> ¬({BB}x & ¬{HG}x) sent6: (x): {BS}x -> ¬(¬{JB}x & ¬{IN}x) sent7: (Ex): {IG}x -> (¬{CL}x & ¬{FG}x)
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is .38-caliber then the fact that it is not isotropic and it is not choreographic is incorrect.
|
(Ex): {BS}x -> ¬(¬{JB}x & ¬{IN}x)
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the fact that the arrival is not isotropic and it is not choreographic is not true if it is .38-caliber.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is a denationalization is not false then that it does not pillow coral and is not a Cambodian is not right is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the pinfish does not pillow coral and it is not a Cambodian if it is a denationalization. sent2: there exists something such that if it punishes velodrome it is not journalistic and is not a kind of a Aegean. sent3: there is something such that if it is a kind of a Cairo that it is a kind of non-igneous thing that does not opalize Minoan is not right. sent4: the fact that that the pinfish does not pillow coral and it is not a kind of the Cambodian is incorrect if the pinfish is a denationalization is not wrong. sent5: there exists something such that if it is official that it is abient and it is not a dewlap does not hold. sent6: the fact that something is not isotropic and not choreographic is false if it is .38-caliber. sent7: there is something such that if it is beneficent then it is not a prang and is not noncausative. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that it contributes and it is a covalence does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ({B}x & {C}x))
|
sent1: the heterosexuality pillows mandator. sent2: the fact that the Cockney is a covalence hold. sent3: the Cockney does pillow mandator. sent4: the Cockney contributes if the farmland pillows mandator. sent5: something does pillow mandator and it does contribute. sent6: there is something such that that it does canal and is fitting is false. sent7: something punishes KP. sent8: the farmland is a kind of a covalence. sent9: something is a kind of repeatable thing that is not a covalence if it is not a canal. sent10: The mandator pillows farmland. sent11: the farmland pillows mandator.
|
sent1: {A}{da} sent2: {C}{b} sent3: {A}{b} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent5: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬({E}x & {G}x) sent7: (Ex): {FJ}x sent8: {C}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & ¬{C}x) sent10: {AA}{aa} sent11: {A}{a}
|
[
"sent4 & sent11 -> int1: the Cockney does contribute.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the Cockney does contribute and it is a covalence.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent11 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent2 -> int2: ({B}{b} & {C}{b}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the afferent pillows mandator.
|
{A}{ch}
|
[
"sent9 -> int3: the afferent is repeatable but not a covalence if it is not a canal.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that it contributes and it is a covalence does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the heterosexuality pillows mandator. sent2: the fact that the Cockney is a covalence hold. sent3: the Cockney does pillow mandator. sent4: the Cockney contributes if the farmland pillows mandator. sent5: something does pillow mandator and it does contribute. sent6: there is something such that that it does canal and is fitting is false. sent7: something punishes KP. sent8: the farmland is a kind of a covalence. sent9: something is a kind of repeatable thing that is not a covalence if it is not a canal. sent10: The mandator pillows farmland. sent11: the farmland pillows mandator. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent11 -> int1: the Cockney does contribute.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the Cockney does contribute and it is a covalence.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if the fact that it is a liquidity and/or is not a Germinal does not hold it is not noncurrent is not true.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if that it is a liquidity and/or it is not a kind of a Germinal is not correct it is noncurrent. sent2: the fact that the deinonychus is noncurrent if the fact that the deinonychus is a liquidity or not a Germinal or both does not hold is not incorrect. sent3: if the deinonychus is a kind of a liquidity and/or it is not a kind of a Germinal then it is not noncurrent. sent4: if that something is a kind of a liquidity and/or it is not a Germinal is false then it is not noncurrent. sent5: if something is a liquidity or it is not a Germinal or both it is not noncurrent. sent6: if that something is a kind of a disrespect and/or it is monistic does not hold then it does not unlock. sent7: if that the deinonychus is a liquidity or it is a Germinal or both is incorrect then that it is not noncurrent hold. sent8: there is something such that if that either it does pillow broad-mindedness or it does not pillow NSW or both is not true then it is not a Bornean. sent9: if the fact that either something underlies or it is not staphylococcal or both is incorrect the fact that it does not quell is true. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a lupine and/or it is not estrogenic is incorrect it does not pillow coloring. sent11: something is noncurrent if that it is a kind of a liquidity and/or it is not a kind of a Germinal is not correct.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: (x): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: (x): ¬({CK}x v {GC}x) -> ¬{DN}x sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ¬({CL}x v ¬{JH}x) -> ¬{HH}x sent9: (x): ¬({BP}x v ¬{EP}x) -> ¬{BI}x sent10: (Ex): ¬({BM}x v ¬{IS}x) -> ¬{BH}x sent11: (x): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the deinonychus is a liquidity and/or not a Germinal is not right it is not noncurrent.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if the fact that it is a liquidity and/or is not a Germinal does not hold it is not noncurrent is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if that it is a liquidity and/or it is not a kind of a Germinal is not correct it is noncurrent. sent2: the fact that the deinonychus is noncurrent if the fact that the deinonychus is a liquidity or not a Germinal or both does not hold is not incorrect. sent3: if the deinonychus is a kind of a liquidity and/or it is not a kind of a Germinal then it is not noncurrent. sent4: if that something is a kind of a liquidity and/or it is not a Germinal is false then it is not noncurrent. sent5: if something is a liquidity or it is not a Germinal or both it is not noncurrent. sent6: if that something is a kind of a disrespect and/or it is monistic does not hold then it does not unlock. sent7: if that the deinonychus is a liquidity or it is a Germinal or both is incorrect then that it is not noncurrent hold. sent8: there is something such that if that either it does pillow broad-mindedness or it does not pillow NSW or both is not true then it is not a Bornean. sent9: if the fact that either something underlies or it is not staphylococcal or both is incorrect the fact that it does not quell is true. sent10: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a lupine and/or it is not estrogenic is incorrect it does not pillow coloring. sent11: something is noncurrent if that it is a kind of a liquidity and/or it is not a kind of a Germinal is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the deinonychus is a liquidity and/or not a Germinal is not right it is not noncurrent.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is not a debutante then it is a kind of a homework and/or it is not a kind of a toxemia.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it does not punish abhorrence then it either exterminates or is not a galena or both. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not commutable it is aware and/or it is maleficent. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a merganser it is either truthful or not ateleiotic or both. sent4: if the Legionnaire is a kind of a debutante it is a kind of a homework or is not a toxemia or both. sent5: either the Legionnaire is a homework or it is a toxemia or both if it is not a kind of a debutante. sent6: if something is not a Leviticus it is a carbineer and/or it is not nontraditional. sent7: there is something such that if it does not wet condominium it is either a elytron or an antecedent or both. sent8: there is something such that if it is erect it is a troop or it is a roughrider or both. sent9: a non-aroid thing is praetorian or does not wet Marshall or both. sent10: there is something such that if it is not a debutante then it is a kind of a homework and/or it is a toxemia. sent11: the fact that the Legionnaire is a homework and/or not a toxemia hold if it is not a debutante. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not a metalware either it reverences or it is a hemosiderin or both. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not predate then it is a go and/or it is micrometeoric. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a debutante it is a homework and/or it is not a toxemia.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{D}x -> ({DP}x v ¬{BR}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬{FE}x -> ({FQ}x v {HP}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{DE}x -> ({DK}x v ¬{FU}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬{CG}x -> ({JG}x v ¬{B}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬{CS}x -> ({BB}x v {AM}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{GB}x -> ({ER}x v {HI}x) sent9: (x): ¬{BC}x -> ({FM}x v ¬{EH}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v {AB}x) sent11: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent12: (Ex): ¬{CL}x -> ({DF}x v {CQ}x) sent13: (Ex): ¬{BE}x -> ({DJ}x v {IN}x) sent14: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if the fact that it is not aroid is correct then it is praetorian and/or it does not wet Marshall.
|
(Ex): ¬{BC}x -> ({FM}x v ¬{EH}x)
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the Marshall is praetorian and/or it does not wet Marshall if that it is not aroid is not wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not a debutante then it is a kind of a homework and/or it is not a kind of a toxemia. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it does not punish abhorrence then it either exterminates or is not a galena or both. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not commutable it is aware and/or it is maleficent. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a merganser it is either truthful or not ateleiotic or both. sent4: if the Legionnaire is a kind of a debutante it is a kind of a homework or is not a toxemia or both. sent5: either the Legionnaire is a homework or it is a toxemia or both if it is not a kind of a debutante. sent6: if something is not a Leviticus it is a carbineer and/or it is not nontraditional. sent7: there is something such that if it does not wet condominium it is either a elytron or an antecedent or both. sent8: there is something such that if it is erect it is a troop or it is a roughrider or both. sent9: a non-aroid thing is praetorian or does not wet Marshall or both. sent10: there is something such that if it is not a debutante then it is a kind of a homework and/or it is a toxemia. sent11: the fact that the Legionnaire is a homework and/or not a toxemia hold if it is not a debutante. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not a metalware either it reverences or it is a hemosiderin or both. sent13: there exists something such that if it does not predate then it is a go and/or it is micrometeoric. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a debutante it is a homework and/or it is not a toxemia. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a harmonic and it is a arcsine does not hold then it does punish tailed.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: if the fact that the trombone is not harmonic and is a kind of a arcsine is wrong then it punishes tailed. sent2: if that something is not a harmonic but a buttonhook does not hold it does pillow ply. sent3: if the fact that the mantelet is nonharmonic and punishes watermeal is wrong it is interior. sent4: there is something such that if that it is harmonic and it is a arcsine is not right it does punish tailed.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {DR}x) -> {HU}x sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{gh} & {Q}{gh}) -> {DF}{gh} sent4: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Norvasc does pillow ply if the fact that the fact that it is not a harmonic but a buttonhook is true is not true.
|
¬(¬{AA}{fl} & {DR}{fl}) -> {HU}{fl}
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a harmonic and it is a arcsine does not hold then it does punish tailed. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the trombone is not harmonic and is a kind of a arcsine is wrong then it punishes tailed. sent2: if that something is not a harmonic but a buttonhook does not hold it does pillow ply. sent3: if the fact that the mantelet is nonharmonic and punishes watermeal is wrong it is interior. sent4: there is something such that if that it is harmonic and it is a arcsine is not right it does punish tailed. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the replica pillows workmate and it is a unorthodoxy is wrong.
|
¬({C}{c} & {D}{c})
|
sent1: if something is not a Ni-resist the fact that it pillows workmate and is a unorthodoxy is false. sent2: something that is not a kind of a radon is a Ni-resist and is undulatory. sent3: if something does pillow workmate then the fact that it is a radon and it is not a kind of a unorthodoxy is not true. sent4: the agnate is a kind of a radon if the settlor is a Ni-resist. sent5: the settlor is a Ni-resist. sent6: the replica is undulatory and a Tartary. sent7: that if the agnate is a radon the fact that the replica does pillow workmate is not false is correct. sent8: if something is a kind of a Tartary it is a unorthodoxy.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & {D}x) sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {F}x) sent3: (x): {C}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{D}x) sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent5: {A}{a} sent6: ({F}{c} & {E}{c}) sent7: {B}{b} -> {C}{c} sent8: (x): {E}x -> {D}x
|
[
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: that the agnate is a radon is right.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the replica pillows workmate.; sent8 -> int3: if the replica is a Tartary it is a unorthodoxy.; sent6 -> int4: the fact that the replica is a Tartary is not wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the replica is a kind of a unorthodoxy.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent7 -> int2: {C}{c}; sent8 -> int3: {E}{c} -> {D}{c}; sent6 -> int4: {E}{c}; int3 & int4 -> int5: {D}{c}; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the rip is undulatory.
|
{F}{em}
|
[
"sent2 -> int6: if the fact that the settlor is not a radon hold then it is both a Ni-resist and undulatory.; sent3 -> int7: that the agnate is a kind of a radon but it is not a unorthodoxy is wrong if it pillows workmate.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the replica pillows workmate and it is a unorthodoxy is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a Ni-resist the fact that it pillows workmate and is a unorthodoxy is false. sent2: something that is not a kind of a radon is a Ni-resist and is undulatory. sent3: if something does pillow workmate then the fact that it is a radon and it is not a kind of a unorthodoxy is not true. sent4: the agnate is a kind of a radon if the settlor is a Ni-resist. sent5: the settlor is a Ni-resist. sent6: the replica is undulatory and a Tartary. sent7: that if the agnate is a radon the fact that the replica does pillow workmate is not false is correct. sent8: if something is a kind of a Tartary it is a unorthodoxy. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent5 -> int1: that the agnate is a radon is right.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the replica pillows workmate.; sent8 -> int3: if the replica is a Tartary it is a unorthodoxy.; sent6 -> int4: the fact that the replica is a Tartary is not wrong.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the replica is a kind of a unorthodoxy.; int2 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.