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
|
that there exists something such that if it is gingival it is a geneticism and it does not hoe allotrope is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: if something is a kind of a Sorbonne it does sprout siloxane and it does not sprout Bangor. sent2: there exists something such that if it is facultative then it swims and is an infallibility. sent3: something that is gingival is a geneticism and does not hoe allotrope. sent4: something does not hoe allotrope if it is gingival. sent5: there is something such that if it is gingival then it does not hoe allotrope. sent6: if the siloxane is calcific it is a geneticism and it does not fume. sent7: that the siloxane does hoe allotrope and does not sprout reset if the fact that the siloxane is a bungee is true hold. sent8: if the siloxane is a kind of a geneticism then it does obey. sent9: if the fact that the siloxane is gingival hold it does not hoe allotrope.
|
sent1: (x): {JK}x -> ({HE}x & ¬{CN}x) sent2: (Ex): {H}x -> ({IM}x & {FJ}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent5: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent6: {HB}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{BU}{aa}) sent7: {FQ}{aa} -> ({AB}{aa} & ¬{DR}{aa}) sent8: {AA}{aa} -> {FU}{aa} sent9: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the siloxane is a geneticism that does not hoe allotrope if that it is gingival hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is gingival it is a geneticism and it does not hoe allotrope is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a kind of a Sorbonne it does sprout siloxane and it does not sprout Bangor. sent2: there exists something such that if it is facultative then it swims and is an infallibility. sent3: something that is gingival is a geneticism and does not hoe allotrope. sent4: something does not hoe allotrope if it is gingival. sent5: there is something such that if it is gingival then it does not hoe allotrope. sent6: if the siloxane is calcific it is a geneticism and it does not fume. sent7: that the siloxane does hoe allotrope and does not sprout reset if the fact that the siloxane is a bungee is true hold. sent8: if the siloxane is a kind of a geneticism then it does obey. sent9: if the fact that the siloxane is gingival hold it does not hoe allotrope. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the siloxane is a geneticism that does not hoe allotrope if that it is gingival hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the counterglow occurs but the bespangling mesophyte does not occur.
|
({A} & ¬{B})
|
sent1: the onomatopoeicness does not occur if that the nationalization does not occur is true. sent2: the counterglow occurs but the corkscrew does not occur. sent3: if the ropeiness occurs that both the non-bimodalness and the discontinuing happens is correct. sent4: that the sprouting percoid does not occur and the bespangling millpond occurs is wrong. sent5: the ropeiness and the advancement occurs if the discomycetousness does not occur. sent6: the solubleness happens. sent7: that both the non-bimodalness and the non-onomatopoeicness occurs results in that the sprouting lactifuge does not occur. sent8: the undependableness and the corkscrew happens if the sprouting lactifuge does not occur. sent9: if that the festival but not the ACE happens is incorrect then the nationalization does not occur. sent10: the confrontationalness does not occur. sent11: the fact that the counterglow but not the bespangling mesophyte occurs does not hold if the corkscrew occurs. sent12: the discomycetousness does not occur. sent13: the fact that that the sprouting percoid but not the bespangling millpond occurs is not incorrect does not hold. sent14: the corkscrew does not occur. sent15: the bespangling mesophyte does not occur if that the fact that the sprouting percoid does not occur and the bespangling millpond does not occur is true is incorrect. sent16: if the fact that the counterrevolution does not occur and the resignation does not occur is wrong the joking does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{I} -> ¬{G} sent2: ({A} & ¬{C}) sent3: {J} -> (¬{F} & {H}) sent4: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent5: ¬{P} -> ({J} & {O}) sent6: {EK} sent7: (¬{F} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} sent8: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) sent9: ¬({K} & ¬{L}) -> ¬{I} sent10: ¬{CC} sent11: {C} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) sent12: ¬{P} sent13: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent14: ¬{C} sent15: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent16: ¬(¬{DH} & ¬{DA}) -> ¬{AU}
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the counterglow occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {A};"
] |
the fact that the counterglow occurs but the bespangling mesophyte does not occur is wrong.
|
¬({A} & ¬{B})
|
[
"sent5 & sent12 -> int2: the ropeiness happens and the advancement happens.; int2 -> int3: the fact that the ropeiness occurs hold.; sent3 & int3 -> int4: the bimodalness does not occur and the discontinuing occurs.; int4 -> int5: the bimodalness does not occur.;"
] | 9 | 2 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the counterglow occurs but the bespangling mesophyte does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the onomatopoeicness does not occur if that the nationalization does not occur is true. sent2: the counterglow occurs but the corkscrew does not occur. sent3: if the ropeiness occurs that both the non-bimodalness and the discontinuing happens is correct. sent4: that the sprouting percoid does not occur and the bespangling millpond occurs is wrong. sent5: the ropeiness and the advancement occurs if the discomycetousness does not occur. sent6: the solubleness happens. sent7: that both the non-bimodalness and the non-onomatopoeicness occurs results in that the sprouting lactifuge does not occur. sent8: the undependableness and the corkscrew happens if the sprouting lactifuge does not occur. sent9: if that the festival but not the ACE happens is incorrect then the nationalization does not occur. sent10: the confrontationalness does not occur. sent11: the fact that the counterglow but not the bespangling mesophyte occurs does not hold if the corkscrew occurs. sent12: the discomycetousness does not occur. sent13: the fact that that the sprouting percoid but not the bespangling millpond occurs is not incorrect does not hold. sent14: the corkscrew does not occur. sent15: the bespangling mesophyte does not occur if that the fact that the sprouting percoid does not occur and the bespangling millpond does not occur is true is incorrect. sent16: if the fact that the counterrevolution does not occur and the resignation does not occur is wrong the joking does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the counterglow occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the non-bacteriophagicness and/or the squint occurs is not correct.
|
¬(¬{B} v {C})
|
sent1: the sprouting otterhound does not occur if that the bacteriophagicness does not occur and the depilation does not occur does not hold. sent2: that the depilation does not occur prevents that the bacteriophagicness occurs. sent3: that the democraticness and the lectureship occurs is wrong if the sprouting urolith does not occur. sent4: the lectureship does not occur if that both the democraticness and the lectureship occurs is false. sent5: both the banditry and the squinting occurs if the lectureship does not occur. sent6: if the fact that the anionicness but not the self-discipline happens is not true then the punning lean-to does not occur. sent7: if the punning lean-to does not occur the fact that the minorness occurs and the modality happens hold. sent8: the non-low-techness and/or the hardship happens. sent9: if the minorness occurs the windward does not occur. sent10: if the squint happens then the fact that the bacteriophagicness does not occur and the depilation does not occur is false. sent11: the bespangling skidpan does not occur if the fact that the mudslide occurs and the bespangling skidpan happens does not hold. sent12: if the fact that the bespangling skidpan does not occur is true that the amitoticness occurs and the intradepartmentalness happens does not hold. sent13: the sprouting urolith does not occur if the fact that the amitoticness happens and the intradepartmentalness happens does not hold. sent14: that both the mudslide and the bespangling skidpan occurs does not hold if the windward does not occur. sent15: the depilation does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{GA} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬{B} sent3: ¬{F} -> ¬({G} & {E}) sent4: ¬({G} & {E}) -> ¬{E} sent5: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) sent6: ¬({P} & ¬{Q}) -> ¬{O} sent7: ¬{O} -> ({M} & {N}) sent8: (¬{AU} v {HO}) sent9: {M} -> ¬{L} sent10: {C} -> ¬(¬{B} & ¬{A}) sent11: ¬({K} & {J}) -> ¬{J} sent12: ¬{J} -> ¬({H} & {I}) sent13: ¬({H} & {I}) -> ¬{F} sent14: ¬{L} -> ¬({K} & {J}) sent15: ¬{A}
|
[
"sent2 & sent15 -> int1: the bacteriophagicness does not occur.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent15 -> int1: ¬{B}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the sprouting otterhound does not occur.
|
¬{GA}
|
[] | 17 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the non-bacteriophagicness and/or the squint occurs is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the sprouting otterhound does not occur if that the bacteriophagicness does not occur and the depilation does not occur does not hold. sent2: that the depilation does not occur prevents that the bacteriophagicness occurs. sent3: that the democraticness and the lectureship occurs is wrong if the sprouting urolith does not occur. sent4: the lectureship does not occur if that both the democraticness and the lectureship occurs is false. sent5: both the banditry and the squinting occurs if the lectureship does not occur. sent6: if the fact that the anionicness but not the self-discipline happens is not true then the punning lean-to does not occur. sent7: if the punning lean-to does not occur the fact that the minorness occurs and the modality happens hold. sent8: the non-low-techness and/or the hardship happens. sent9: if the minorness occurs the windward does not occur. sent10: if the squint happens then the fact that the bacteriophagicness does not occur and the depilation does not occur is false. sent11: the bespangling skidpan does not occur if the fact that the mudslide occurs and the bespangling skidpan happens does not hold. sent12: if the fact that the bespangling skidpan does not occur is true that the amitoticness occurs and the intradepartmentalness happens does not hold. sent13: the sprouting urolith does not occur if the fact that the amitoticness happens and the intradepartmentalness happens does not hold. sent14: that both the mudslide and the bespangling skidpan occurs does not hold if the windward does not occur. sent15: the depilation does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent15 -> int1: the bacteriophagicness does not occur.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it does pun noma then that it does not pun disentangler and is a kibbutznik does not hold.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: if something does hoe cabaret the fact that it does not pun disentangler and does stain is incorrect. sent2: that that something is not a sign and not wearable is not incorrect is not correct if it is chorionic. sent3: that that the cabaret does not pun disentangler and is a kibbutznik is incorrect is not incorrect if it puns noma. sent4: there is something such that if it puns noma then the fact that it puns disentangler and is a kind of a kibbutznik is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that if it is forcipate then that it is not fertile and is opportune does not hold. sent6: there is something such that if it puns noma it does not pun disentangler and it is a kibbutznik. sent7: if the cabaret puns noma the fact that it does pun disentangler and it is a kibbutznik is not correct. sent8: there exists something such that if it is an exigency it is not a Sphecius and is astigmatic. sent9: if the mollusk does sporulate then the fact that it does not sprout unhealthiness and it does hoe Melophagus is not correct. sent10: that the cabaret is a mischance and it puns noma is false if it hoes cabaret. sent11: the cabaret does not pun disentangler but it is a kibbutznik if it does pun noma.
|
sent1: (x): {HM}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {HB}x) sent2: (x): {EQ}x -> ¬(¬{FU}x & {IF}x) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: (Ex): {DC}x -> ¬(¬{U}x & {GQ}x) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent8: (Ex): {DF}x -> (¬{DP}x & {IQ}x) sent9: {AU}{dm} -> ¬(¬{HU}{dm} & {GR}{dm}) sent10: {HM}{aa} -> ¬({CD}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent11: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the autoradiography does not pun disentangler but it stains is not right if the fact that it hoes cabaret is not false.
|
{HM}{gb} -> ¬(¬{AA}{gb} & {HB}{gb})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does pun noma then that it does not pun disentangler and is a kibbutznik does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does hoe cabaret the fact that it does not pun disentangler and does stain is incorrect. sent2: that that something is not a sign and not wearable is not incorrect is not correct if it is chorionic. sent3: that that the cabaret does not pun disentangler and is a kibbutznik is incorrect is not incorrect if it puns noma. sent4: there is something such that if it puns noma then the fact that it puns disentangler and is a kind of a kibbutznik is not correct. sent5: there exists something such that if it is forcipate then that it is not fertile and is opportune does not hold. sent6: there is something such that if it puns noma it does not pun disentangler and it is a kibbutznik. sent7: if the cabaret puns noma the fact that it does pun disentangler and it is a kibbutznik is not correct. sent8: there exists something such that if it is an exigency it is not a Sphecius and is astigmatic. sent9: if the mollusk does sporulate then the fact that it does not sprout unhealthiness and it does hoe Melophagus is not correct. sent10: that the cabaret is a mischance and it puns noma is false if it hoes cabaret. sent11: the cabaret does not pun disentangler but it is a kibbutznik if it does pun noma. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the metamorphism is a Velcro.
|
{D}{a}
|
sent1: if something is premature then it is a AFISR and/or it is not ohmic. sent2: the fact that the metamorphism is premature is not wrong if something is not a protest. sent3: the fact that if there is something such that the fact that it is a chlorophyll and it protests does not hold the metamorphism is premature is not wrong. sent4: if the metamorphism is premature it is a AFISR or it is ohmic or both. sent5: something is not a dumbbell if the fact that it does heap and it is prosthodontic does not hold. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is a chlorophyll and it protests is false. sent7: the metamorphism is not a Velcro if that that the hormone is a kind of non-premature thing that is ohmic is not incorrect is not true. sent8: the hormone is Omani and is a AFISR if the imide is not a dumbbell. sent9: that something is non-premature thing that is ohmic does not hold if that it is a kind of a AFISR is true. sent10: something is a Velcro if it either is a AFISR or is non-ohmic or both.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ({C}x v ¬{B}x) sent2: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: {A}{a} -> ({C}{a} v {B}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬({H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent6: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: ¬(¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent8: ¬{F}{c} -> ({E}{b} & {C}{b}) sent9: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) sent10: (x): ({C}x v ¬{B}x) -> {D}x
|
[
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: that the metamorphism is premature is true.; sent1 -> int2: either the metamorphism is a AFISR or it is not ohmic or both if it is premature.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the metamorphism is a AFISR or it is non-ohmic or both.; sent10 -> int4: if the metamorphism is a AFISR and/or non-ohmic then it is a kind of a Velcro.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent1 -> int2: {A}{a} -> ({C}{a} v ¬{B}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ({C}{a} v ¬{B}{a}); sent10 -> int4: ({C}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> {D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the metamorphism is not a Velcro.
|
¬{D}{a}
|
[
"sent9 -> int5: if the hormone is a kind of a AFISR the fact that it is not premature and it is ohmic does not hold.; sent5 -> int6: the imide is not a dumbbell if that it heaps and it is prosthodontic is not true.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the metamorphism is a Velcro. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is premature then it is a AFISR and/or it is not ohmic. sent2: the fact that the metamorphism is premature is not wrong if something is not a protest. sent3: the fact that if there is something such that the fact that it is a chlorophyll and it protests does not hold the metamorphism is premature is not wrong. sent4: if the metamorphism is premature it is a AFISR or it is ohmic or both. sent5: something is not a dumbbell if the fact that it does heap and it is prosthodontic does not hold. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is a chlorophyll and it protests is false. sent7: the metamorphism is not a Velcro if that that the hormone is a kind of non-premature thing that is ohmic is not incorrect is not true. sent8: the hormone is Omani and is a AFISR if the imide is not a dumbbell. sent9: that something is non-premature thing that is ohmic does not hold if that it is a kind of a AFISR is true. sent10: something is a Velcro if it either is a AFISR or is non-ohmic or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent3 -> int1: that the metamorphism is premature is true.; sent1 -> int2: either the metamorphism is a AFISR or it is not ohmic or both if it is premature.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the metamorphism is a AFISR or it is non-ohmic or both.; sent10 -> int4: if the metamorphism is a AFISR and/or non-ohmic then it is a kind of a Velcro.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the breadstick does not pun Lepisosteidae and does not hoe lion is incorrect.
|
¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: if the representation bespangles hyson then the tinsmith responds. sent2: the breadstick does not pun Lepisosteidae. sent3: the beachfront does not hoe lion and it does not sprout ratepayer. sent4: the fact that something does not expostulate and it does not recount does not hold if it bed-hops. sent5: the tinsmith is both not a Limosa and a fantasy if there exists something such that it bespangles hyson. sent6: the whipstitch bed-hops. sent7: the breadstick is not a kind of a pedicure and it is not a telescoped. sent8: if the whipstitch does bed-hop then the representation does bed-hop. sent9: something does not respond if it is not a Limosa and does fantasy. sent10: if that the representation does not expostulate and is not a kind of a recount does not hold then the fact that the broad does not expostulate is not false. sent11: that something is not a Satyridae and is serious is not right if that it does not respond is not wrong. sent12: the breadstick does not pun Lepisosteidae and does not hoe lion. sent13: the parer is not a swagman if there exists something such that that it is not a Satyridae and is serious does not hold. sent14: if the broad fantasies then the parer is a Limosa. sent15: if the broad does not expostulate it does bespangle hyson and is a Moho. sent16: the breadstick is a kind of a swagman if the parer is a Limosa. sent17: the periclase is non-odds thing that is not unambitious. sent18: the elapid does not hoe lion if the breadstick is non-serious thing that does not hoe lion. sent19: the tinsmith is a kind of a Satyridae. sent20: if something is a swagman then it is not serious and it does not hoe lion.
|
sent1: {G}{e} -> {D}{c} sent2: ¬{AA}{a} sent3: (¬{AB}{hq} & ¬{HF}{hq}) sent4: (x): {K}x -> ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) sent5: (x): {G}x -> (¬{E}{c} & {F}{c}) sent6: {K}{f} sent7: (¬{EF}{a} & ¬{FM}{a}) sent8: {K}{f} -> {K}{e} sent9: (x): (¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent10: ¬(¬{I}{e} & ¬{J}{e}) -> ¬{I}{d} sent11: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) sent12: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent13: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent14: {F}{d} -> {E}{b} sent15: ¬{I}{d} -> ({G}{d} & {H}{d}) sent16: {E}{b} -> {A}{a} sent17: (¬{GJ}{ed} & ¬{CH}{ed}) sent18: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{ja} sent19: {C}{c} sent20: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the elapid does not hoe lion and it is not gonadal.
|
(¬{AB}{ja} & ¬{EC}{ja})
|
[
"sent20 -> int1: if the breadstick is a kind of a swagman it is not serious and it does not hoe lion.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the breadstick does not pun Lepisosteidae and does not hoe lion is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the representation bespangles hyson then the tinsmith responds. sent2: the breadstick does not pun Lepisosteidae. sent3: the beachfront does not hoe lion and it does not sprout ratepayer. sent4: the fact that something does not expostulate and it does not recount does not hold if it bed-hops. sent5: the tinsmith is both not a Limosa and a fantasy if there exists something such that it bespangles hyson. sent6: the whipstitch bed-hops. sent7: the breadstick is not a kind of a pedicure and it is not a telescoped. sent8: if the whipstitch does bed-hop then the representation does bed-hop. sent9: something does not respond if it is not a Limosa and does fantasy. sent10: if that the representation does not expostulate and is not a kind of a recount does not hold then the fact that the broad does not expostulate is not false. sent11: that something is not a Satyridae and is serious is not right if that it does not respond is not wrong. sent12: the breadstick does not pun Lepisosteidae and does not hoe lion. sent13: the parer is not a swagman if there exists something such that that it is not a Satyridae and is serious does not hold. sent14: if the broad fantasies then the parer is a Limosa. sent15: if the broad does not expostulate it does bespangle hyson and is a Moho. sent16: the breadstick is a kind of a swagman if the parer is a Limosa. sent17: the periclase is non-odds thing that is not unambitious. sent18: the elapid does not hoe lion if the breadstick is non-serious thing that does not hoe lion. sent19: the tinsmith is a kind of a Satyridae. sent20: if something is a swagman then it is not serious and it does not hoe lion. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the brushwood is not a iodothyronine and/or it is not pyretic.
|
(¬{D}{c} v ¬{E}{c})
|
sent1: the mandrill is weedy if the otterhound is a latanier. sent2: if the newswoman does not sprout prejudgment the brushwood is not a kind of a iodothyronine or it is not pyretic or both. sent3: if that something is not a kind of a peg or it sprouts prejudgment or both is not correct then that it is not weedy is true. sent4: if either the newswoman does sprout prejudgment or it is a kind of a peg or both the mandrill is not weedy.
|
sent1: {F}{d} -> {C}{b} sent2: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{D}{c} v ¬{E}{c}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v {A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent4: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the newswoman does sprout prejudgment.; assump1 -> int1: the newswoman sprouts prejudgment or it is a peg or both.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the mandrill is not weedy.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 -> int1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}); int1 & sent4 -> int2: ¬{C}{b};"
] |
the pimp is not weedy.
|
¬{C}{hb}
|
[
"sent3 -> int3: the pimp is not weedy if the fact that it is not a peg and/or does sprout prejudgment is false.;"
] | 4 | 4 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the brushwood is not a iodothyronine and/or it is not pyretic. ; $context$ = sent1: the mandrill is weedy if the otterhound is a latanier. sent2: if the newswoman does not sprout prejudgment the brushwood is not a kind of a iodothyronine or it is not pyretic or both. sent3: if that something is not a kind of a peg or it sprouts prejudgment or both is not correct then that it is not weedy is true. sent4: if either the newswoman does sprout prejudgment or it is a kind of a peg or both the mandrill is not weedy. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the newswoman does sprout prejudgment.; assump1 -> int1: the newswoman sprouts prejudgment or it is a peg or both.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the mandrill is not weedy.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the hostilities and/or that the magnifying happens prevents the substantivalness.
|
({A} v {B}) -> ¬{E}
|
sent1: the bottlenecking happens. sent2: if the anticyclone or the bespangling brochette or both happens the sprouting ineligibility does not occur. sent3: either the self-denial occurs or the tightening occurs or both. sent4: the substantivalness happens. sent5: that the centroidalness happens and/or the smashing triggers the hotness. sent6: if the hostilities occurs the fact that the spectacle occurs is correct. sent7: if the defecting does not occur that the substantivalness does not occur and the hoeing Thessalonian does not occur is not correct. sent8: the fruitfulness is triggered by the hostilities. sent9: the fruitfulness occurs if that the magnifying happens is right. sent10: the insularness and/or the X-raying happens.
|
sent1: {GR} sent2: ({GG} v {BS}) -> ¬{FB} sent3: ({GQ} v {GC}) sent4: {E} sent5: ({CJ} v {AI}) -> {EP} sent6: {A} -> {HG} sent7: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent8: {A} -> {C} sent9: {B} -> {C} sent10: ({CS} v {DO})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hostilities occurs and/or the magnifying occurs.; assump1 & sent8 & sent9 -> int1: the fruitfulness happens.; int1 -> int2: the hoeing Thessalonian and/or the fruitfulness happens.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ({A} v {B}); assump1 & sent8 & sent9 -> int1: {C}; int1 -> int2: ({D} v {C});"
] |
the anagrams happens and/or the spectacle happens.
|
({AT} v {HG})
|
[] | 7 | 4 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the hostilities and/or that the magnifying happens prevents the substantivalness. ; $context$ = sent1: the bottlenecking happens. sent2: if the anticyclone or the bespangling brochette or both happens the sprouting ineligibility does not occur. sent3: either the self-denial occurs or the tightening occurs or both. sent4: the substantivalness happens. sent5: that the centroidalness happens and/or the smashing triggers the hotness. sent6: if the hostilities occurs the fact that the spectacle occurs is correct. sent7: if the defecting does not occur that the substantivalness does not occur and the hoeing Thessalonian does not occur is not correct. sent8: the fruitfulness is triggered by the hostilities. sent9: the fruitfulness occurs if that the magnifying happens is right. sent10: the insularness and/or the X-raying happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the hostilities occurs and/or the magnifying occurs.; assump1 & sent8 & sent9 -> int1: the fruitfulness happens.; int1 -> int2: the hoeing Thessalonian and/or the fruitfulness happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the resuscitating does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the conviviality does not occur and the noness does not occur. sent2: the accurateness does not occur and the quadrille does not occur if the sprouting prestige occurs. sent3: the sprouting prestige does not occur and the irreparableness does not occur. sent4: the non-irreparableness leads to that the resuscitating occurs. sent5: if the hoeing clickety-clack does not occur the fact that both the sprouting prestige and the irreparableness occurs is correct. sent6: the mutationalness does not occur. sent7: the non-Gothicness and the non-vestmentalness occurs. sent8: that the resuscitating does not occur is brought about by that the sprouting prestige occurs and/or the resuscitating does not occur.
|
sent1: (¬{JH} & ¬{FU}) sent2: {A} -> (¬{JC} & ¬{DG}) sent3: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent4: ¬{B} -> {C} sent5: ¬{D} -> ({A} & {B}) sent6: ¬{CM} sent7: (¬{CI} & ¬{BL}) sent8: ({A} v ¬{C}) -> ¬{C}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the irreparableness does not occur.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the accurateness does not occur and the quadrille does not occur.
|
(¬{JC} & ¬{DG})
|
[] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the resuscitating does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the conviviality does not occur and the noness does not occur. sent2: the accurateness does not occur and the quadrille does not occur if the sprouting prestige occurs. sent3: the sprouting prestige does not occur and the irreparableness does not occur. sent4: the non-irreparableness leads to that the resuscitating occurs. sent5: if the hoeing clickety-clack does not occur the fact that both the sprouting prestige and the irreparableness occurs is correct. sent6: the mutationalness does not occur. sent7: the non-Gothicness and the non-vestmentalness occurs. sent8: that the resuscitating does not occur is brought about by that the sprouting prestige occurs and/or the resuscitating does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: the irreparableness does not occur.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it does not pun ranch it is not a splay and/or it does sprout Mallon.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x)
|
sent1: if the staffer does not pun ranch then it is not a splay and/or does sprout Mallon. sent2: if the staffer does not sprout Mallon either it is not a call-out or it is a kind of a rickrack or both. sent3: something is not fluvial or it is ascomycetous or both if it is not an adulteration. sent4: if the staffer does not bespangle statute then it does sprout Mallon or it cloys or both. sent5: there is something such that if that it does pun Nicosia is true it is not a planarian or it is a tropopause or both. sent6: if the chanterelle is not a dunghill then it does pun ranch or is a morello or both. sent7: the staffer is a pulque and/or it is a splay if it is reputable. sent8: if the staffer does not pun ranch then either it is not a planarian or it does size or both. sent9: there exists something such that if it is calligraphic it is not a guama and/or it hoes syllabub. sent10: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an audible then it is Augustan and/or it is indecorous. sent11: if the staffer is not a splay it is not a holonymy or it does bespangle glipizide or both. sent12: the staffer is not a kind of a splay or it sprouts Mallon or both if it does pun ranch.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent2: ¬{AB}{aa} -> (¬{JH}{aa} v {HC}{aa}) sent3: (x): ¬{ED}x -> (¬{AH}x v {DS}x) sent4: ¬{GP}{aa} -> ({AB}{aa} v {E}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): {DD}x -> (¬{EL}x v {CR}x) sent6: ¬{BM}{ad} -> ({A}{ad} v {BF}{ad}) sent7: ¬{O}{aa} -> ({GR}{aa} v {AA}{aa}) sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{EL}{aa} v {IB}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {AU}x -> (¬{U}x v {IQ}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{EF}x -> ({HA}x v {HU}x) sent11: ¬{AA}{aa} -> (¬{BI}{aa} v {IM}{aa}) sent12: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is not an adulteration it is not fluvial or it is ascomycetous or both.
|
(Ex): ¬{ED}x -> (¬{AH}x v {DS}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the fact that the ranch is non-fluvial or is ascomycetous or both is true if it is not an adulteration.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not pun ranch it is not a splay and/or it does sprout Mallon. ; $context$ = sent1: if the staffer does not pun ranch then it is not a splay and/or does sprout Mallon. sent2: if the staffer does not sprout Mallon either it is not a call-out or it is a kind of a rickrack or both. sent3: something is not fluvial or it is ascomycetous or both if it is not an adulteration. sent4: if the staffer does not bespangle statute then it does sprout Mallon or it cloys or both. sent5: there is something such that if that it does pun Nicosia is true it is not a planarian or it is a tropopause or both. sent6: if the chanterelle is not a dunghill then it does pun ranch or is a morello or both. sent7: the staffer is a pulque and/or it is a splay if it is reputable. sent8: if the staffer does not pun ranch then either it is not a planarian or it does size or both. sent9: there exists something such that if it is calligraphic it is not a guama and/or it hoes syllabub. sent10: there is something such that if it is not a kind of an audible then it is Augustan and/or it is indecorous. sent11: if the staffer is not a splay it is not a holonymy or it does bespangle glipizide or both. sent12: the staffer is not a kind of a splay or it sprouts Mallon or both if it does pun ranch. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the goatsucker is a kind of a fresco and it is opposite.
|
({B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: if there is something such that it is a kind of a Ionian the tableland is a kind of a fresco and it is opposite. sent2: if there is something such that it is a fresco then the tableland is a kind of Ionian thing that is opposite. sent3: if that the coydog does not bespangle yuan but it frescos is not right then the gazpacho does not frescos. sent4: that the jasper is Ionian is correct if it is lotic. sent5: the fact that something is lotic and is a Ionian does not hold if it does not bespangle yuan. sent6: if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a Ionian hold then the goatsucker is a fresco. sent7: the goatsucker is a kind of a fresco and it is opposite if there are Ionian things. sent8: the coydog is a Schinus if there is something such that that it is a letter and it is a graciousness does not hold. sent9: something that is a Ionian bespangles yuan. sent10: if there are opposite things then the goatsucker does fresco and is a kind of a Ionian. sent11: if something is a Schinus it does not bespangle yuan. sent12: the fact that the jasper is a kind of a letter and is a kind of a graciousness is false. sent13: if there is something such that that it is opposite is not incorrect the goatsucker is a Ionian. sent14: if there exists something such that it is a Ionian then the tableland is a kind of opposite thing that frescos. sent15: the gazpacho is not a kind of a Ionian if there is something such that that it is lotic and a Ionian is false. sent16: the tableland is a dais that sprouts decagon.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent2: (x): {B}x -> ({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent3: ¬(¬{D}{c} & {B}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: {E}{d} -> {A}{d} sent5: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({E}x & {A}x) sent6: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent7: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent8: (x): ¬({H}x & {G}x) -> {F}{c} sent9: (x): {A}x -> {D}x sent10: (x): {C}x -> ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent11: (x): {F}x -> ¬{D}x sent12: ¬({H}{d} & {G}{d}) sent13: (x): {C}x -> {A}{a} sent14: (x): {A}x -> ({C}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent15: (x): ¬({E}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent16: ({JC}{aa} & {HJ}{aa})
|
[] |
[] |
that the goatsucker is a fresco and is opposite is wrong.
|
¬({B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: if the jasper is not non-Ionian that it does bespangle yuan is true.;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the goatsucker is a kind of a fresco and it is opposite. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that it is a kind of a Ionian the tableland is a kind of a fresco and it is opposite. sent2: if there is something such that it is a fresco then the tableland is a kind of Ionian thing that is opposite. sent3: if that the coydog does not bespangle yuan but it frescos is not right then the gazpacho does not frescos. sent4: that the jasper is Ionian is correct if it is lotic. sent5: the fact that something is lotic and is a Ionian does not hold if it does not bespangle yuan. sent6: if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a Ionian hold then the goatsucker is a fresco. sent7: the goatsucker is a kind of a fresco and it is opposite if there are Ionian things. sent8: the coydog is a Schinus if there is something such that that it is a letter and it is a graciousness does not hold. sent9: something that is a Ionian bespangles yuan. sent10: if there are opposite things then the goatsucker does fresco and is a kind of a Ionian. sent11: if something is a Schinus it does not bespangle yuan. sent12: the fact that the jasper is a kind of a letter and is a kind of a graciousness is false. sent13: if there is something such that that it is opposite is not incorrect the goatsucker is a Ionian. sent14: if there exists something such that it is a Ionian then the tableland is a kind of opposite thing that frescos. sent15: the gazpacho is not a kind of a Ionian if there is something such that that it is lotic and a Ionian is false. sent16: the tableland is a dais that sprouts decagon. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that that it is not an impression and is not Jain is not true is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is a Serbia and it is not syncretic is not right. sent2: that the stumpknocker is not a kind of an impression but it is Jain does not hold. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it does bespangle Melospiza and is not forcipate is false. sent4: that the stumpknocker is not a kind of an impression and it is not Jain does not hold. sent5: that something is not a Merckx and is not micropylar is false if it does not sprout Carthage.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({DH}x & ¬{HF}x) sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): ¬({AM}x & ¬{HJ}x) sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AI}x & ¬{DD}x)
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that the fact that it is not a Merckx and is not micropylar is not true.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AI}x & ¬{DD}x)
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: if the voter does not sprout Carthage then that it is not a Merckx and not micropylar is not true.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that that it is not an impression and is not Jain is not true is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is a Serbia and it is not syncretic is not right. sent2: that the stumpknocker is not a kind of an impression but it is Jain does not hold. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it does bespangle Melospiza and is not forcipate is false. sent4: that the stumpknocker is not a kind of an impression and it is not Jain does not hold. sent5: that something is not a Merckx and is not micropylar is false if it does not sprout Carthage. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the interconnection happens.
|
{C}
|
sent1: the insecticidalness occurs. sent2: that the branchlessness does not occur and the interconnection does not occur is caused by that the noncommercialness does not occur. sent3: that the insecticidalness happens and the branchlessness happens prevents that the interconnection occurs. sent4: the punning bennet does not occur. sent5: the enhancement and the leaningness happens if the repudiation does not occur. sent6: if the prolateness occurs and the hoeing Bacon does not occur the noncommercialness does not occur. sent7: the luff occurs if the enhancement happens. sent8: the decimalizing does not occur. sent9: the legitimation does not occur if the sprouting pennoncel and the wiseness happens. sent10: both the speaking and the bardolatry occurs. sent11: the transcription and the cryptanalyticness occurs. sent12: the branchlessness occurs. sent13: the Moon and the Defense occurs. sent14: the telefilm does not occur. sent15: the prolateness occurs. sent16: if the branchlessness does not occur the sprouting Marcionism and the insecticidalness occurs. sent17: if the transcription occurs then not the repudiation but the cellulosidness happens.
|
sent1: {A} sent2: ¬{G} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent3: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent4: ¬{DU} sent5: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent6: ({I} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{G} sent7: {D} -> {IA} sent8: ¬{CL} sent9: ({JE} & {EJ}) -> ¬{CF} sent10: ({BR} & {AD}) sent11: ({K} & {L}) sent12: {B} sent13: ({FL} & {HJ}) sent14: ¬{IQ} sent15: {I} sent16: ¬{B} -> ({DO} & {A}) sent17: {K} -> (¬{F} & {J})
|
[
"sent1 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the insecticidalness occurs and the branchlessness occurs is not false.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent12 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
both the luff and the sprouting Marcionism happens.
|
({IA} & {DO})
|
[
"sent11 -> int2: the transcription occurs.; sent17 & int2 -> int3: not the repudiation but the cellulosidness occurs.; int3 -> int4: the repudiation does not occur.; sent5 & int4 -> int5: the enhancement happens and the leaning happens.; int5 -> int6: the enhancement occurs.; sent7 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the luff happens is not false.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the interconnection happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the insecticidalness occurs. sent2: that the branchlessness does not occur and the interconnection does not occur is caused by that the noncommercialness does not occur. sent3: that the insecticidalness happens and the branchlessness happens prevents that the interconnection occurs. sent4: the punning bennet does not occur. sent5: the enhancement and the leaningness happens if the repudiation does not occur. sent6: if the prolateness occurs and the hoeing Bacon does not occur the noncommercialness does not occur. sent7: the luff occurs if the enhancement happens. sent8: the decimalizing does not occur. sent9: the legitimation does not occur if the sprouting pennoncel and the wiseness happens. sent10: both the speaking and the bardolatry occurs. sent11: the transcription and the cryptanalyticness occurs. sent12: the branchlessness occurs. sent13: the Moon and the Defense occurs. sent14: the telefilm does not occur. sent15: the prolateness occurs. sent16: if the branchlessness does not occur the sprouting Marcionism and the insecticidalness occurs. sent17: if the transcription occurs then not the repudiation but the cellulosidness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent12 -> int1: the fact that the insecticidalness occurs and the branchlessness occurs is not false.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Philistine is fingerless.
|
{A}{aa}
|
sent1: the fact that everything is an adhesive hold. sent2: that the malfeasant is not a bad is not false if there exists something such that it is hypoglycemic and it buses. sent3: if the fact that something does not sprout GIGO and/or it is not a bride is not right then that it is fingerless is not false. sent4: something is hypoglycemic and a bus. sent5: the fagoting is some and calcic if that the northeaster does not pun fibroma hold. sent6: if the malfeasant does pun fibroma or is not calcic or both then the northeaster is not calcic. sent7: something does not pun fibroma if it is a kind of a Wu. sent8: that the krypton does not sprout GIGO and/or it is not a kind of a bride is not correct if the fagoting is some. sent9: something that is plausible and/or a bad is not a kind of a Wu. sent10: something that is not a Wu either puns fibroma or is not calcic or both. sent11: the Philistine is not fingerless if the fagoting sprouts GIGO. sent12: the brace is fingerless. sent13: something is neurotoxic or is not plausible or both if it is non-bad. sent14: the malfeasant is not plausible if it is neurotoxic or is not plausible or both. sent15: that something is a bride that is non-some is not correct if it is not calcic. sent16: the Philistine is international. sent17: everything is fingerless.
|
sent1: (x): {FF}x sent2: (x): ({K}x & {L}x) -> ¬{I}{c} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v ¬{C}x) -> {A}x sent4: (Ex): ({K}x & {L}x) sent5: ¬{F}{b} -> ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) sent6: ({F}{c} v ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent7: (x): {G}x -> ¬{F}x sent8: {D}{a} -> ¬(¬{B}{jb} v ¬{C}{jb}) sent9: (x): ({H}x v {I}x) -> ¬{G}x sent10: (x): ¬{G}x -> ({F}x v ¬{E}x) sent11: {B}{a} -> ¬{A}{aa} sent12: {A}{en} sent13: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({J}x v ¬{H}x) sent14: ({J}{c} v ¬{H}{c}) -> ¬{H}{c} sent15: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent16: {BL}{aa} sent17: (x): {A}x
|
[
"sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the krypton is not fingered.
|
{A}{jb}
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the krypton is fingerless if the fact that it does not sprout GIGO or it is not a kind of a bride or both is false.; sent7 -> int2: the northeaster does not pun fibroma if it is a Wu.; sent13 -> int3: the malfeasant is neurotoxic and/or it is not plausible if it is not a kind of a bad.; sent4 & sent2 -> int4: the malfeasant is not a kind of a bad.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the malfeasant is neurotoxic and/or it is not plausible.; sent14 & int5 -> int6: the malfeasant is not plausible.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it is not plausible.;"
] | 10 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Philistine is fingerless. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that everything is an adhesive hold. sent2: that the malfeasant is not a bad is not false if there exists something such that it is hypoglycemic and it buses. sent3: if the fact that something does not sprout GIGO and/or it is not a bride is not right then that it is fingerless is not false. sent4: something is hypoglycemic and a bus. sent5: the fagoting is some and calcic if that the northeaster does not pun fibroma hold. sent6: if the malfeasant does pun fibroma or is not calcic or both then the northeaster is not calcic. sent7: something does not pun fibroma if it is a kind of a Wu. sent8: that the krypton does not sprout GIGO and/or it is not a kind of a bride is not correct if the fagoting is some. sent9: something that is plausible and/or a bad is not a kind of a Wu. sent10: something that is not a Wu either puns fibroma or is not calcic or both. sent11: the Philistine is not fingerless if the fagoting sprouts GIGO. sent12: the brace is fingerless. sent13: something is neurotoxic or is not plausible or both if it is non-bad. sent14: the malfeasant is not plausible if it is neurotoxic or is not plausible or both. sent15: that something is a bride that is non-some is not correct if it is not calcic. sent16: the Philistine is international. sent17: everything is fingerless. ; $proof$ =
|
sent17 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the glassblower is not compatible is true.
|
¬{D}{c}
|
sent1: if the piezoelectricity does not pun prestige then that it is not a ELF and it is not a polymastigote is false. sent2: if the piezoelectricity puns prestige then the glassblower puns prestige. sent3: the fact that the ethchlorvynol is not compatible is not incorrect. sent4: the fact that the glassblower is not compatible if the stress is a kind of a insolubility that does sprout cutch is correct. sent5: something that does pun prestige is compatible. sent6: a Pentecostal does sprout cutch. sent7: the piezoelectricity does not pun prestige. sent8: the stress is a Pentecostal if there is something such that that it is not a Pentecostal but hypoglycemic is not right. sent9: if there is something such that it is not hypoglycemic the stress is a Pentecostal. sent10: there exists something such that that it is a Pentecostal and it is hypoglycemic is incorrect. sent11: something does pun prestige if the fact that it does not pun prestige and is a insolubility is not correct. sent12: The prestige does not pun piezoelectricity. sent13: the stress is a insolubility if that the piezoelectricity is not a ELF and not a polymastigote does not hold. sent14: if the piezoelectricity does not pun prestige then the fact that it is not a kind of a ELF and it is a polymastigote is wrong. sent15: if the piezoelectricity does not pun prestige that it is a kind of a ELF and it is not a polymastigote is not right.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: {A}{a} -> {A}{c} sent3: ¬{D}{ij} sent4: ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent5: (x): {A}x -> {D}x sent6: (x): {E}x -> {C}x sent7: ¬{A}{a} sent8: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) -> {E}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> {E}{b} sent10: (Ex): ¬({E}x & {F}x) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) -> {A}x sent12: ¬{AC}{aa} sent13: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent14: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent15: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[
"sent1 & sent7 -> int1: that the piezoelectricity is not a ELF and is not a polymastigote is not correct.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the stress is a insolubility.; sent6 -> int3: if the stress is a Pentecostal then that it does sprout cutch is not false.;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent7 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent13 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent6 -> int3: {E}{b} -> {C}{b};"
] |
that the glassblower is compatible is not wrong.
|
{D}{c}
|
[
"sent5 -> int4: the glassblower is compatible if it puns prestige.; sent11 -> int5: the piezoelectricity does pun prestige if the fact that it does not pun prestige and it is a insolubility does not hold.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the glassblower is not compatible is true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the piezoelectricity does not pun prestige then that it is not a ELF and it is not a polymastigote is false. sent2: if the piezoelectricity puns prestige then the glassblower puns prestige. sent3: the fact that the ethchlorvynol is not compatible is not incorrect. sent4: the fact that the glassblower is not compatible if the stress is a kind of a insolubility that does sprout cutch is correct. sent5: something that does pun prestige is compatible. sent6: a Pentecostal does sprout cutch. sent7: the piezoelectricity does not pun prestige. sent8: the stress is a Pentecostal if there is something such that that it is not a Pentecostal but hypoglycemic is not right. sent9: if there is something such that it is not hypoglycemic the stress is a Pentecostal. sent10: there exists something such that that it is a Pentecostal and it is hypoglycemic is incorrect. sent11: something does pun prestige if the fact that it does not pun prestige and is a insolubility is not correct. sent12: The prestige does not pun piezoelectricity. sent13: the stress is a insolubility if that the piezoelectricity is not a ELF and not a polymastigote does not hold. sent14: if the piezoelectricity does not pun prestige then the fact that it is not a kind of a ELF and it is a polymastigote is wrong. sent15: if the piezoelectricity does not pun prestige that it is a kind of a ELF and it is not a polymastigote is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent7 -> int1: that the piezoelectricity is not a ELF and is not a polymastigote is not correct.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the stress is a insolubility.; sent6 -> int3: if the stress is a Pentecostal then that it does sprout cutch is not false.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the haulm is a cinchonine.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: everything is a Parthenium or it does not sprout dacryocyst or both. sent2: if the haulm is a kind of a doodlebug the fact that it is not sarcosomal and is a kind of a drift is not true. sent3: something is a kind of a doodlebug if it is a cinchonine. sent4: something that is not a angioscope is not a doodlebug and does hoe revisionist. sent5: the haulm is runic. sent6: the Jew is sarcosomal. sent7: the cooling is a doodlebug. sent8: the fact that the inhibition obliges and it does sprout cinema is false if it drifts. sent9: if the haulm is mononuclear the fact that it does bespangle yuan and bespangles discourse is incorrect. sent10: the fact that the precipitin is a kind of a drift and it is runic is incorrect. sent11: the haulm is a otolaryngologist. sent12: something is a drift if the fact that it is not a doodlebug but a cinchonine does not hold. sent13: if the fact that something is both non-sarcosomal and a drift is incorrect then it is a cinchonine. sent14: the haulm is an original.
|
sent1: (x): ({F}x v ¬{E}x) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{A}x & {C}x) sent5: {EH}{aa} sent6: {AA}{ik} sent7: {A}{fq} sent8: {AB}{ip} -> ¬({FT}{ip} & {EB}{ip}) sent9: {BB}{aa} -> ¬({FN}{aa} & {BR}{aa}) sent10: ¬({AB}{jj} & {EH}{jj}) sent11: {FB}{aa} sent12: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) -> {AB}x sent13: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent14: {FD}{aa}
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: the haulm is a cinchonine if the fact that it is non-sarcosomal thing that is a drift is incorrect.;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa};"
] |
the haulm is not a cinchonine.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: if the nonreader is not a angioscope it is not a kind of a doodlebug and hoes revisionist.; sent1 -> int3: the inkstand is a Parthenium and/or does not sprout dacryocyst.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that it is a Parthenium and/or does not sprout dacryocyst.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the haulm is a cinchonine. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is a Parthenium or it does not sprout dacryocyst or both. sent2: if the haulm is a kind of a doodlebug the fact that it is not sarcosomal and is a kind of a drift is not true. sent3: something is a kind of a doodlebug if it is a cinchonine. sent4: something that is not a angioscope is not a doodlebug and does hoe revisionist. sent5: the haulm is runic. sent6: the Jew is sarcosomal. sent7: the cooling is a doodlebug. sent8: the fact that the inhibition obliges and it does sprout cinema is false if it drifts. sent9: if the haulm is mononuclear the fact that it does bespangle yuan and bespangles discourse is incorrect. sent10: the fact that the precipitin is a kind of a drift and it is runic is incorrect. sent11: the haulm is a otolaryngologist. sent12: something is a drift if the fact that it is not a doodlebug but a cinchonine does not hold. sent13: if the fact that something is both non-sarcosomal and a drift is incorrect then it is a cinchonine. sent14: the haulm is an original. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> int1: the haulm is a cinchonine if the fact that it is non-sarcosomal thing that is a drift is incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the skywalk does pun Marxism.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: something does not bespangle Jabalpur. sent2: there exists something such that it is not low-level and it is adoptive. sent3: if the skywalk is a kind of a pleat then it puns Marxism. sent4: the octopod does not pleat and does not bespangle Jabalpur. sent5: there is something such that it is not a misfortune. sent6: if something does not pleat and does not bespangle Jabalpur the skywalk does pun toothpick. sent7: the octopod does pun Marxism. sent8: something is not an augur and does not pun booming. sent9: there is something such that it is not a horizontal and it is inculpatory.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent2: (Ex): (¬{GG}x & {AM}x) sent3: {AA}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{IH}x sent6: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent7: {B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): (¬{HF}x & ¬{BF}x) sent9: (Ex): (¬{IR}x & {FF}x)
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: there is something such that it is not a pleat and does not bespangle Jabalpur.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the skywalk does pun toothpick.;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent6 -> int2: {A}{a};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the skywalk does pun Marxism. ; $context$ = sent1: something does not bespangle Jabalpur. sent2: there exists something such that it is not low-level and it is adoptive. sent3: if the skywalk is a kind of a pleat then it puns Marxism. sent4: the octopod does not pleat and does not bespangle Jabalpur. sent5: there is something such that it is not a misfortune. sent6: if something does not pleat and does not bespangle Jabalpur the skywalk does pun toothpick. sent7: the octopod does pun Marxism. sent8: something is not an augur and does not pun booming. sent9: there is something such that it is not a horizontal and it is inculpatory. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: there is something such that it is not a pleat and does not bespangle Jabalpur.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the skywalk does pun toothpick.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the mithramycin is not two-dimensional and it is not a fatigue.
|
(¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c})
|
sent1: the plutocrat is ready but it is Alexandrian if it is not a Markova. sent2: if the plutocrat is not unready and is a Alexandrian the diviner is not a Alexandrian. sent3: the diviner is not a kind of a fatigue if something is two-dimensional or it is a kind of a nucleoprotein or both. sent4: the mithramycin is not two-dimensional and it is not a kind of a fatigue if the plutocrat is not a fatigue. sent5: the plutocrat is not a fatigue if there is something such that it is a nucleoprotein and/or it is Alexandrian.
|
sent1: ¬{F}{b} -> (¬{E}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: (¬{E}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: (x): ({D}x v {A}x) -> ¬{C}{a} sent4: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent5: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}{b}
|
[] |
[] |
the fact that the mithramycin is not two-dimensional and it is not a kind of a fatigue is not correct.
|
¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c})
|
[] | 6 | 4 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the mithramycin is not two-dimensional and it is not a fatigue. ; $context$ = sent1: the plutocrat is ready but it is Alexandrian if it is not a Markova. sent2: if the plutocrat is not unready and is a Alexandrian the diviner is not a Alexandrian. sent3: the diviner is not a kind of a fatigue if something is two-dimensional or it is a kind of a nucleoprotein or both. sent4: the mithramycin is not two-dimensional and it is not a kind of a fatigue if the plutocrat is not a fatigue. sent5: the plutocrat is not a fatigue if there is something such that it is a nucleoprotein and/or it is Alexandrian. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the thinness occurs.
|
{C}
|
sent1: that the systematism happens and the aeromechanicsness occurs is not correct. sent2: the mobilization does not occur. sent3: the fact that both the Bolivianness and the dichroism happens does not hold. sent4: the pitch does not occur. sent5: if the fact that the systematism and the aeromechanicsness occurs is wrong then the expatriating artichoke does not occur. sent6: the non-thinness or the expatriating artichoke or both yields the non-thinness. sent7: that the expatriating nonpartisan does not occur causes that the expatriating artichoke happens and the thinning occurs. sent8: the expatriating artichoke leads to that the grandstand does not occur and the seraphicness does not occur. sent9: the undertaking does not occur. sent10: the fact that the expatriating artichoke does not occur hold if the aeromechanicsness does not occur. sent11: that the midiness occurs and the progress occurs is wrong. sent12: if the packing happens the expatriating nonpartisan does not occur and/or the investment does not occur. sent13: if the consulship does not occur then the decampment does not occur. sent14: the expatriating nonpartisan does not occur if the expatriating nonpartisan does not occur and/or the investment does not occur. sent15: the seraphicness causes that the thinness does not occur and/or that the expatriating artichoke occurs. sent16: the macaronicness occurs. sent17: that the seraphicness does not occur is right. sent18: if the expatriating artichoke does not occur and the seraphicness does not occur that the thinning occurs is not incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent2: ¬{FI} sent3: ¬({AO} & {DS}) sent4: ¬{GS} sent5: ¬({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: (¬{C} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent7: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) sent8: {B} -> (¬{CU} & ¬{A}) sent9: ¬{AT} sent10: ¬{AB} -> ¬{B} sent11: ¬({BT} & {ES}) sent12: {F} -> (¬{D} v ¬{E}) sent13: ¬{DE} -> ¬{GO} sent14: (¬{D} v ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} sent15: {A} -> (¬{C} v {B}) sent16: {CN} sent17: ¬{A} sent18: (¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {C}
|
[
"sent5 & sent1 -> int1: the expatriating artichoke does not occur.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the expatriating artichoke does not occur and the seraphicness does not occur.; int2 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{B}; int1 & sent17 -> int2: (¬{B} & ¬{A}); int2 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the thinning does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
[] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the thinness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the systematism happens and the aeromechanicsness occurs is not correct. sent2: the mobilization does not occur. sent3: the fact that both the Bolivianness and the dichroism happens does not hold. sent4: the pitch does not occur. sent5: if the fact that the systematism and the aeromechanicsness occurs is wrong then the expatriating artichoke does not occur. sent6: the non-thinness or the expatriating artichoke or both yields the non-thinness. sent7: that the expatriating nonpartisan does not occur causes that the expatriating artichoke happens and the thinning occurs. sent8: the expatriating artichoke leads to that the grandstand does not occur and the seraphicness does not occur. sent9: the undertaking does not occur. sent10: the fact that the expatriating artichoke does not occur hold if the aeromechanicsness does not occur. sent11: that the midiness occurs and the progress occurs is wrong. sent12: if the packing happens the expatriating nonpartisan does not occur and/or the investment does not occur. sent13: if the consulship does not occur then the decampment does not occur. sent14: the expatriating nonpartisan does not occur if the expatriating nonpartisan does not occur and/or the investment does not occur. sent15: the seraphicness causes that the thinness does not occur and/or that the expatriating artichoke occurs. sent16: the macaronicness occurs. sent17: that the seraphicness does not occur is right. sent18: if the expatriating artichoke does not occur and the seraphicness does not occur that the thinning occurs is not incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent1 -> int1: the expatriating artichoke does not occur.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the expatriating artichoke does not occur and the seraphicness does not occur.; int2 & sent18 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the nasopharynx is incommensurate.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: if the depressive does not freeze accuser that it is not a kind of a gasket and it is not antecubital does not hold. sent2: something does not freeze accuser if that it is a Butterfield and does not expatriate process-server is not right. sent3: there is something such that it is galactic. sent4: the skimmer is antecubital if the fact that it is not a gasket is false. sent5: the drain is incommensurate. sent6: the nasopharynx is antecubital. sent7: the fact that the Turk's-cap is not non-antecubital hold. sent8: there is something such that it is incommensurate and it is antecubital. sent9: if there exists something such that it is antecubital and it is a gasket the nasopharynx is incommensurate. sent10: there exists something such that it is antecubital. sent11: that something is incommensurate is true.
|
sent1: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent3: (Ex): {AM}x sent4: {B}{ff} -> {A}{ff} sent5: {C}{aa} sent6: {A}{a} sent7: {A}{cq} sent8: (Ex): ({C}x & {A}x) sent9: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent10: (Ex): {A}x sent11: (Ex): {C}x
|
[] |
[] |
the nasopharynx is not incommensurate.
|
¬{C}{a}
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: if the fact that the depressive is a kind of a Butterfield that does not expatriate process-server is not true it does not freeze accuser.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the nasopharynx is incommensurate. ; $context$ = sent1: if the depressive does not freeze accuser that it is not a kind of a gasket and it is not antecubital does not hold. sent2: something does not freeze accuser if that it is a Butterfield and does not expatriate process-server is not right. sent3: there is something such that it is galactic. sent4: the skimmer is antecubital if the fact that it is not a gasket is false. sent5: the drain is incommensurate. sent6: the nasopharynx is antecubital. sent7: the fact that the Turk's-cap is not non-antecubital hold. sent8: there is something such that it is incommensurate and it is antecubital. sent9: if there exists something such that it is antecubital and it is a gasket the nasopharynx is incommensurate. sent10: there exists something such that it is antecubital. sent11: that something is incommensurate is true. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the voucher is onside thing that does freeze farandole.
|
({D}{c} & {C}{c})
|
sent1: the postmistress does bottom and/or it is a kind of a Darwinian. sent2: the voucher is humanistic and/or freezes farandole. sent3: the lidar is not nonwashable and/or it is printable if the director is thermodynamic. sent4: if the lidar is printable the voucher does freeze farandole. sent5: the lidar is a perforation. sent6: if something is either not nonwashable or not unprintable or both then it is nonwashable. sent7: the voucher is nonmetallic and it is nonwashable. sent8: the lidar is nonwashable or it is printable or both. sent9: the playgoer is catatonic and/or it is printable. sent10: the voucher is onside. sent11: the sima does expatriate anaspid and freezes farandole. sent12: the voucher is nonwashable if that the lidar does freeze farandole hold. sent13: the lidar is onside if the voucher is printable. sent14: that the voucher does not freeze mother is not right.
|
sent1: ({HT}{ao} v {O}{ao}) sent2: ({FP}{c} v {C}{c}) sent3: {E}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent4: {B}{a} -> {C}{c} sent5: {JB}{a} sent6: (x): (¬{A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent7: ({AL}{c} & {A}{c}) sent8: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent9: ({BI}{ed} v {B}{ed}) sent10: {D}{c} sent11: ({CD}{es} & {C}{es}) sent12: {C}{a} -> {A}{c} sent13: {B}{c} -> {D}{a} sent14: {AD}{c}
|
[] |
[] |
that the voucher is onside and it freezes farandole does not hold.
|
¬({D}{c} & {C}{c})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: if the lidar is not nonwashable and/or is printable the fact that it is not nonwashable is right.;"
] | 6 | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the voucher is onside thing that does freeze farandole. ; $context$ = sent1: the postmistress does bottom and/or it is a kind of a Darwinian. sent2: the voucher is humanistic and/or freezes farandole. sent3: the lidar is not nonwashable and/or it is printable if the director is thermodynamic. sent4: if the lidar is printable the voucher does freeze farandole. sent5: the lidar is a perforation. sent6: if something is either not nonwashable or not unprintable or both then it is nonwashable. sent7: the voucher is nonmetallic and it is nonwashable. sent8: the lidar is nonwashable or it is printable or both. sent9: the playgoer is catatonic and/or it is printable. sent10: the voucher is onside. sent11: the sima does expatriate anaspid and freezes farandole. sent12: the voucher is nonwashable if that the lidar does freeze farandole hold. sent13: the lidar is onside if the voucher is printable. sent14: that the voucher does not freeze mother is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the mammography happens.
|
{D}
|
sent1: the predestination occurs. sent2: the ecarte and/or the northernness occurs. sent3: the bludgeoning Meitner does not occur. sent4: if the predestination does not occur then the luxation and the difficultness happens. sent5: the mammography occurs and the luxation happens if the predestination does not occur. sent6: the mottling or the luxation or both triggers that the mammography does not occur. sent7: the luxation happens and the predestination occurs. sent8: that the clasping does not occur is not wrong if the downstreamness does not occur. sent9: if the mottling occurs the mammography does not occur. sent10: if the clasping does not occur the mottling and the freezing overabundance occurs. sent11: the expatriating farandole occurs and/or the demonstrativeness occurs. sent12: if the one-off occurs then not the ecarte but the uprightness occurs. sent13: either the mammography does not occur or the predestination does not occur or both if the mottling occurs. sent14: the erasure occurs. sent15: that the mottling does not occur and the freezing overabundance does not occur causes that the predestination does not occur. sent16: the precession and/or the hand prevents the autumnalness. sent17: that the growling happens but the downstreamness does not occur is triggered by that the uprightness happens.
|
sent1: {B} sent2: ({J} v {HJ}) sent3: ¬{HS} sent4: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {FM}) sent5: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) sent6: ({C} v {A}) -> ¬{D} sent7: ({A} & {B}) sent8: ¬{G} -> ¬{F} sent9: {C} -> ¬{D} sent10: ¬{F} -> ({C} & {E}) sent11: ({II} v {DG}) sent12: {K} -> (¬{J} & {I}) sent13: {C} -> (¬{D} v ¬{B}) sent14: {GA} sent15: (¬{C} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{B} sent16: ({JB} v {HP}) -> ¬{CJ} sent17: {I} -> ({H} & ¬{G})
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the luxation happens.; int1 -> int2: either the mottling or the luxation or both happens.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: {A}; int1 -> int2: ({C} v {A}); sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the difficultness happens.
|
{FM}
|
[] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the mammography happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the predestination occurs. sent2: the ecarte and/or the northernness occurs. sent3: the bludgeoning Meitner does not occur. sent4: if the predestination does not occur then the luxation and the difficultness happens. sent5: the mammography occurs and the luxation happens if the predestination does not occur. sent6: the mottling or the luxation or both triggers that the mammography does not occur. sent7: the luxation happens and the predestination occurs. sent8: that the clasping does not occur is not wrong if the downstreamness does not occur. sent9: if the mottling occurs the mammography does not occur. sent10: if the clasping does not occur the mottling and the freezing overabundance occurs. sent11: the expatriating farandole occurs and/or the demonstrativeness occurs. sent12: if the one-off occurs then not the ecarte but the uprightness occurs. sent13: either the mammography does not occur or the predestination does not occur or both if the mottling occurs. sent14: the erasure occurs. sent15: that the mottling does not occur and the freezing overabundance does not occur causes that the predestination does not occur. sent16: the precession and/or the hand prevents the autumnalness. sent17: that the growling happens but the downstreamness does not occur is triggered by that the uprightness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: the luxation happens.; int1 -> int2: either the mottling or the luxation or both happens.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that that the torus is non-experiential and it is not macromolecular hold is not true.
|
¬(¬{D}{d} & ¬{C}{d})
|
sent1: if the challah freezes beagle then the fact that the torus is not experiential and it is not macromolecular is wrong. sent2: that the fact that the ununpentium is not a kind of a patch and is not a iconolatry does not hold is not wrong if the Tlingit is nonvolatile. sent3: something is macromolecular or it is not nonvolatile or both if it does not freeze beagle. sent4: that the fact that something is not biocatalytic and it does not expatriate hippeastrum is true does not hold if it is not nonvolatile. sent5: the Tlingit is nonvolatile. sent6: the challah does not expatriate challah if either it does not expatriate challah or it is nonresident or both. sent7: if the fact that the ununpentium is not a patch and not a iconolatry is wrong then the challah freezes beagle. sent8: either the challah does not expatriate challah or it is a nonresident or both. sent9: if something is experiential either it is not a manic-depressive or it does not freeze beagle or both. sent10: if something is macromolecular or it is not nonvolatile or both then it is not nonvolatile. sent11: if there is something such that it does not expatriate challah then the ununpentium is experiential.
|
sent1: {B}{c} -> ¬(¬{D}{d} & ¬{C}{d}) sent2: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}x v ¬{A}x) sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{FA}x & ¬{CJ}x) sent5: {A}{a} sent6: (¬{F}{c} v {H}{c}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} sent8: (¬{F}{c} v {H}{c}) sent9: (x): {D}x -> (¬{E}x v ¬{B}x) sent10: (x): ({C}x v ¬{A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent11: (x): ¬{F}x -> {D}{b}
|
[
"sent2 & sent5 -> int1: that the ununpentium is not a patch and it is not a iconolatry does not hold.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the challah freezes beagle.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent5 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent7 & int1 -> int2: {B}{c}; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the Tlingit is not biocatalytic and it does not expatriate hippeastrum is false.
|
¬(¬{FA}{a} & ¬{CJ}{a})
|
[
"sent4 -> int3: the fact that the Tlingit is a kind of non-biocatalytic thing that does not expatriate hippeastrum is false if it is not nonvolatile.; sent10 -> int4: if the Tlingit either is macromolecular or is not nonvolatile or both it is not nonvolatile.; sent3 -> int5: the Tlingit is macromolecular and/or it is not nonvolatile if it does not freeze beagle.; sent9 -> int6: the ununpentium is not a kind of a manic-depressive and/or it does not freeze beagle if it is experiential.; sent6 & sent8 -> int7: the challah does not expatriate challah.; int7 -> int8: something does not expatriate challah.; int8 & sent11 -> int9: the ununpentium is experiential.; int6 & int9 -> int10: either the ununpentium is not a manic-depressive or it does not freeze beagle or both.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that that the torus is non-experiential and it is not macromolecular hold is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the challah freezes beagle then the fact that the torus is not experiential and it is not macromolecular is wrong. sent2: that the fact that the ununpentium is not a kind of a patch and is not a iconolatry does not hold is not wrong if the Tlingit is nonvolatile. sent3: something is macromolecular or it is not nonvolatile or both if it does not freeze beagle. sent4: that the fact that something is not biocatalytic and it does not expatriate hippeastrum is true does not hold if it is not nonvolatile. sent5: the Tlingit is nonvolatile. sent6: the challah does not expatriate challah if either it does not expatriate challah or it is nonresident or both. sent7: if the fact that the ununpentium is not a patch and not a iconolatry is wrong then the challah freezes beagle. sent8: either the challah does not expatriate challah or it is a nonresident or both. sent9: if something is experiential either it is not a manic-depressive or it does not freeze beagle or both. sent10: if something is macromolecular or it is not nonvolatile or both then it is not nonvolatile. sent11: if there is something such that it does not expatriate challah then the ununpentium is experiential. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent5 -> int1: that the ununpentium is not a patch and it is not a iconolatry does not hold.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the challah freezes beagle.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the freezing Cycliophora occurs.
|
{E}
|
sent1: the spectroscopicness brings about that the gargling happens. sent2: if the fact that not the subtracting Primus but the momism happens is incorrect then the nail does not occur. sent3: the bludgeoning tyrocidine does not occur if that the bludgeoning tyrocidine happens and the bludgeoning court-martial happens is false. sent4: if the mucinousness does not occur then the fact that the paleocorticalness happens and the expatriating Finnish happens is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the bludgeoning court-martial and the freezing Cycliophora occurs is not true if the nailing does not occur. sent6: if the paleocorticalness but not the bludgeoning tyrocidine occurs the mud-brickness occurs. sent7: if the fact that the paleocorticalness occurs and the expatriating Finnish happens does not hold that the expatriating Finnish does not occur is not incorrect. sent8: if that both the bludgeoning court-martial and the freezing Cycliophora occurs does not hold then the freezing Cycliophora does not occur. sent9: if the wedge does not occur then the fact that not the subtracting Primus but the momism occurs is incorrect. sent10: that the bludgeoning tyrocidine happens and the bludgeoning court-martial happens is not correct. sent11: that the mucinousness occurs results in that the paleocorticalness occurs. sent12: that the mud-brickness happens and the bludgeoning tyrocidine occurs is false if the freezing Cycliophora does not occur. sent13: the mucinousness happens.
|
sent1: {HJ} -> {BS} sent2: ¬(¬{H} & {I}) -> ¬{G} sent3: ¬({C} & {F}) -> ¬{C} sent4: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} & {EA}) sent5: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & {E}) sent6: ({B} & ¬{C}) -> {D} sent7: ¬({B} & {EA}) -> ¬{EA} sent8: ¬({F} & {E}) -> ¬{E} sent9: ¬{J} -> ¬(¬{H} & {I}) sent10: ¬({C} & {F}) sent11: {A} -> {B} sent12: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {C}) sent13: {A}
|
[
"sent11 & sent13 -> int1: the paleocorticalness occurs.; sent3 & sent10 -> int2: the bludgeoning tyrocidine does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the paleocorticalness occurs and the bludgeoning tyrocidine does not occur.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the mud-brickness happens.;"
] |
[
"sent11 & sent13 -> int1: {B}; sent3 & sent10 -> int2: ¬{C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B} & ¬{C}); int3 & sent6 -> int4: {D};"
] |
the expatriating Finnish does not occur.
|
¬{EA}
|
[] | 12 | 4 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the freezing Cycliophora occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the spectroscopicness brings about that the gargling happens. sent2: if the fact that not the subtracting Primus but the momism happens is incorrect then the nail does not occur. sent3: the bludgeoning tyrocidine does not occur if that the bludgeoning tyrocidine happens and the bludgeoning court-martial happens is false. sent4: if the mucinousness does not occur then the fact that the paleocorticalness happens and the expatriating Finnish happens is incorrect. sent5: the fact that the bludgeoning court-martial and the freezing Cycliophora occurs is not true if the nailing does not occur. sent6: if the paleocorticalness but not the bludgeoning tyrocidine occurs the mud-brickness occurs. sent7: if the fact that the paleocorticalness occurs and the expatriating Finnish happens does not hold that the expatriating Finnish does not occur is not incorrect. sent8: if that both the bludgeoning court-martial and the freezing Cycliophora occurs does not hold then the freezing Cycliophora does not occur. sent9: if the wedge does not occur then the fact that not the subtracting Primus but the momism occurs is incorrect. sent10: that the bludgeoning tyrocidine happens and the bludgeoning court-martial happens is not correct. sent11: that the mucinousness occurs results in that the paleocorticalness occurs. sent12: that the mud-brickness happens and the bludgeoning tyrocidine occurs is false if the freezing Cycliophora does not occur. sent13: the mucinousness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 & sent13 -> int1: the paleocorticalness occurs.; sent3 & sent10 -> int2: the bludgeoning tyrocidine does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the paleocorticalness occurs and the bludgeoning tyrocidine does not occur.; int3 & sent6 -> int4: the mud-brickness happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the tangram is a crack and musical is not true.
|
¬({D}{a} & {C}{a})
|
sent1: the tangram does crack if there is something such that the fact that it does not subtract tourist and is not collegial is not true. sent2: if something bludgeons Bathyergidae then the fact that the sanicle is a musical and a cheek does not hold. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a musical and is not a cheek. sent4: the fact that the tangram is a kind of a crack if something is collegial hold. sent5: there exists something such that the fact that it does not subtract tourist and it is not collegial is wrong. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it cracks and it does not bludgeon Bathyergidae is not right. sent7: there is something such that that it does not subtract tourist and is collegial does not hold. sent8: if the tangram does bludgeon Bathyergidae it is musical. sent9: the tangram does not cheek and bludgeons Bathyergidae. sent10: the fact that if the tangram is not unmusical but it is not a cheek the straphanger is a cheek is correct. sent11: the tangram is not a cheek. sent12: if there is something such that that it is a musical and it is a cheek is not right then the demijohn is not a musical.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> {D}{a} sent2: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}{c} & {A}{c}) sent3: (Ex): (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent4: (x): {E}x -> {D}{a} sent5: (Ex): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬({D}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) sent8: {B}{a} -> {C}{a} sent9: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent10: ({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {A}{em} sent11: ¬{A}{a} sent12: (x): ¬({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the tangram does bludgeon Bathyergidae.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the tangram is a musical.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the tangram is a crack.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent8 -> int2: {C}{a}; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: {D}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the tangram does crack and it is a kind of a musical is not correct.
|
¬({D}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the tangram is a crack and musical is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the tangram does crack if there is something such that the fact that it does not subtract tourist and is not collegial is not true. sent2: if something bludgeons Bathyergidae then the fact that the sanicle is a musical and a cheek does not hold. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a musical and is not a cheek. sent4: the fact that the tangram is a kind of a crack if something is collegial hold. sent5: there exists something such that the fact that it does not subtract tourist and it is not collegial is wrong. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it cracks and it does not bludgeon Bathyergidae is not right. sent7: there is something such that that it does not subtract tourist and is collegial does not hold. sent8: if the tangram does bludgeon Bathyergidae it is musical. sent9: the tangram does not cheek and bludgeons Bathyergidae. sent10: the fact that if the tangram is not unmusical but it is not a cheek the straphanger is a cheek is correct. sent11: the tangram is not a cheek. sent12: if there is something such that that it is a musical and it is a cheek is not right then the demijohn is not a musical. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: the tangram does bludgeon Bathyergidae.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the tangram is a musical.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the tangram is a crack.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the midden does not pant.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: the midden is not a pant if the cylinder is both not a departer and not a monogram. sent2: everything is a quire. sent3: if something is a toot it does not pant and it is not gemmiferous. sent4: that if there is something such that the fact that it is not a toot and subtracts crabbed is false then the hypochondria is a toot is not wrong. sent5: the fact that something is not a toot and subtracts crabbed is false if that it is a quire hold.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: (x): {E}x sent3: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent4: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {D}x) -> {C}{bl} sent5: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {D}x)
|
[] |
[] |
the hypochondria is not a kind of a pant.
|
¬{A}{bl}
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: if the overachiever is a quire then the fact that it is not a toot and does subtract crabbed does not hold.; sent2 -> int2: the overachiever is a kind of a quire.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the overachiever is not a toot but it subtracts crabbed does not hold.; int3 -> int4: there is nothing such that it is not a toot and subtracts crabbed.; int4 -> int5: the fact that that the midden is not a kind of a toot and subtracts crabbed is not right hold.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that that it is not a toot and it subtracts crabbed is wrong.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the hypochondria is a kind of a toot.; sent3 -> int8: the hypochondria does not pant and it is not gemmiferous if it is a toot.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the hypochondria is not a pant and it is non-gemmiferous.; int9 -> hypothesis;"
] | 8 | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the midden does not pant. ; $context$ = sent1: the midden is not a pant if the cylinder is both not a departer and not a monogram. sent2: everything is a quire. sent3: if something is a toot it does not pant and it is not gemmiferous. sent4: that if there is something such that the fact that it is not a toot and subtracts crabbed is false then the hypochondria is a toot is not wrong. sent5: the fact that something is not a toot and subtracts crabbed is false if that it is a quire hold. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the progressive does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
sent1: if the progressiveness occurs and the monotonicness occurs the agonisticness does not occur. sent2: the monotonicness happens.
|
sent1: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent2: {B}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the progressive happens.; assump1 & sent2 -> int1: the progressiveness and the monotonicness occurs.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the agonisticness does not occur.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}; assump1 & sent2 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{C};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the progressive does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the progressiveness occurs and the monotonicness occurs the agonisticness does not occur. sent2: the monotonicness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the progressive happens.; assump1 & sent2 -> int1: the progressiveness and the monotonicness occurs.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the agonisticness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that that the washout is both not a Equisetum and immeasurable does not hold is true.
|
¬(¬{C}{c} & {A}{c})
|
sent1: the washout is not delicate but it is a kind of a varnish. sent2: the washout is not delicate. sent3: the liza is not sociocultural but it is delicate. sent4: if the liza is not delicate but it is tinny then the washout is not a Equisetum. sent5: if the liza is not a Equisetum then the washout is delicate. sent6: the siloxane is not immeasurable. sent7: the liza is non-tinny thing that is delicate. sent8: if the liza is not sociocultural but it is delicate then the gully is not tinny. sent9: the washout is not a Equisetum but immeasurable if the gully is not tinny. sent10: the gully is non-delicate if the liza is tinny and it is sociocultural. sent11: the gully is delicate.
|
sent1: (¬{AB}{c} & {EB}{c}) sent2: ¬{AB}{c} sent3: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent4: (¬{AB}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent5: ¬{C}{a} -> {AB}{c} sent6: ¬{A}{n} sent7: (¬{B}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent9: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{C}{c} & {A}{c}) sent10: ({B}{a} & {AA}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent11: {AB}{b}
|
[
"sent8 & sent3 -> int1: the gully is not tinny.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent3 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the washout is both not a Equisetum and immeasurable does not hold is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the washout is not delicate but it is a kind of a varnish. sent2: the washout is not delicate. sent3: the liza is not sociocultural but it is delicate. sent4: if the liza is not delicate but it is tinny then the washout is not a Equisetum. sent5: if the liza is not a Equisetum then the washout is delicate. sent6: the siloxane is not immeasurable. sent7: the liza is non-tinny thing that is delicate. sent8: if the liza is not sociocultural but it is delicate then the gully is not tinny. sent9: the washout is not a Equisetum but immeasurable if the gully is not tinny. sent10: the gully is non-delicate if the liza is tinny and it is sociocultural. sent11: the gully is delicate. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent3 -> int1: the gully is not tinny.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pulse is a kind of a Dacron.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the pulse does blind if it is unsarcastic. sent2: if something is a blind then it is a kind of a Dacron. sent3: the pulse is unsarcastic.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent2: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent3: {A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the pulse is a kind of a blind.; sent2 -> int2: the pulse is a kind of a Dacron if it does blind.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent2 -> int2: {B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the pulse is a kind of a Dacron. ; $context$ = sent1: the pulse does blind if it is unsarcastic. sent2: if something is a blind then it is a kind of a Dacron. sent3: the pulse is unsarcastic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the pulse is a kind of a blind.; sent2 -> int2: the pulse is a kind of a Dacron if it does blind.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the tarot is not a armlet and is progestational.
|
(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a})
|
sent1: if something is a whittler then it is not anopheline. sent2: the fact that the Tudor subtracts Southey and is progestational does not hold if the fact that the tarot is not a kind of a armlet is right. sent3: that the tarot is anopheline but it is not a whittler is not correct if it is not tasty. sent4: if the fact that the tarot is a kind of a anopheline but it is not a kind of a whittler does not hold it is not a armlet. sent5: the fact that the coatee is not a market is right. sent6: if that something subtracts Southey and is progestational is false it does not subtracts Southey. sent7: the tarot is not a armlet. sent8: that something is autotrophic hold. sent9: the cattle is non-progestational a drawbar. sent10: there exists something such that that it does not expatriate process-server and it is a cosigner is false. sent11: the commissure is not a armlet. sent12: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a armlet is correct. sent13: the tarot is not a armlet but it is progestational if there exists something such that it is not autotrophic. sent14: that the cattle is not autotrophic is true. sent15: the tarot is not a armlet if there is something such that it is not autotrophic.
|
sent1: (x): {F}x -> ¬{E}x sent2: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬({CB}{gc} & {B}{gc}) sent3: ¬{G}{a} -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) sent4: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent5: ¬{T}{l} sent6: (x): ¬({CB}x & {B}x) -> ¬{CB}x sent7: ¬{C}{a} sent8: (Ex): {A}x sent9: (¬{B}{aa} & {EL}{aa}) sent10: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & {H}x) sent11: ¬{C}{en} sent12: (Ex): {C}x sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent14: ¬{A}{aa} sent15: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{C}{a}
|
[
"sent14 -> int1: there is something such that it is not autotrophic.; int1 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent14 -> int1: (Ex): ¬{A}x; int1 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the tarot is not a armlet but progestational is not true.
|
¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a})
|
[
"sent1 -> int2: if the oilfield is a whittler then it is not a anopheline.;"
] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the tarot is not a armlet and is progestational. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a whittler then it is not anopheline. sent2: the fact that the Tudor subtracts Southey and is progestational does not hold if the fact that the tarot is not a kind of a armlet is right. sent3: that the tarot is anopheline but it is not a whittler is not correct if it is not tasty. sent4: if the fact that the tarot is a kind of a anopheline but it is not a kind of a whittler does not hold it is not a armlet. sent5: the fact that the coatee is not a market is right. sent6: if that something subtracts Southey and is progestational is false it does not subtracts Southey. sent7: the tarot is not a armlet. sent8: that something is autotrophic hold. sent9: the cattle is non-progestational a drawbar. sent10: there exists something such that that it does not expatriate process-server and it is a cosigner is false. sent11: the commissure is not a armlet. sent12: there exists something such that that it is a kind of a armlet is correct. sent13: the tarot is not a armlet but it is progestational if there exists something such that it is not autotrophic. sent14: that the cattle is not autotrophic is true. sent15: the tarot is not a armlet if there is something such that it is not autotrophic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent14 -> int1: there is something such that it is not autotrophic.; int1 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Finnishness does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the dissection occurs. sent2: if the fact that both the dent and the instroke happens does not hold the fluttering does not occur. sent3: the unilateralness does not occur if that the Quechuanness does not occur is correct. sent4: that the differentness happens leads to that the subtracting Whitehorse happens. sent5: the fact that the conspicuousness does not occur is not false. sent6: that both the dissection and the fluttering occurs prevents that the Finnishness happens. sent7: if the fact that the annelid happens and the subtracting specialist does not occur is incorrect then the prenatalness does not occur. sent8: both the instroke and the dent happens if the correcting does not occur. sent9: if the signal does not occur and the unilateralness does not occur the fact that the correctness does not occur is not wrong. sent10: if the prenatalness does not occur then both the differentness and the recusation happens. sent11: the fact that both the dent and the instroke happens is not right if the correcting does not occur. sent12: that the refunding does not occur or that the signal does not occur or both leads to that the signal does not occur. sent13: the flutter occurs. sent14: that the annelid occurs but the subtracting specialist does not occur is not true if the conspicuousness does not occur. sent15: the refund does not occur or the signal does not occur or both if the subtracting Whitehorse happens. sent16: the expatriating hurried happens. sent17: that the signal does not occur is right if the fact that the subtracting Whitehorse does not occur and the signal occurs is false. sent18: the fact that the subtracting Whitehorse does not occur but the signal occurs is not true if the unilateralness occurs. sent19: if the flutter does not occur then that the fact that the dissection does not occur and the Finnishness does not occur is not true is not false. sent20: the unpatrioticness occurs. sent21: if the flutter does not occur both the squint and the dissection happens.
|
sent1: {A} sent2: ¬({E} & {D}) -> ¬{B} sent3: ¬{K} -> ¬{H} sent4: {L} -> {I} sent5: ¬{R} sent6: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent7: ¬({O} & ¬{P}) -> ¬{N} sent8: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent9: (¬{G} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} sent10: ¬{N} -> ({L} & {M}) sent11: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & {D}) sent12: (¬{J} v ¬{G}) -> ¬{G} sent13: {B} sent14: ¬{R} -> ¬({O} & ¬{P}) sent15: {I} -> (¬{J} v ¬{G}) sent16: {CR} sent17: ¬(¬{I} & {G}) -> ¬{G} sent18: {H} -> ¬(¬{I} & {G}) sent19: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) sent20: {IU} sent21: ¬{B} -> ({HL} & {A})
|
[
"sent1 & sent13 -> int1: the dissection happens and the fluttering occurs.; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent13 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the Finnish occurs.
|
{C}
|
[
"sent14 & sent5 -> int2: that the annelidness but not the subtracting specialist happens does not hold.; sent7 & int2 -> int3: the prenatalness does not occur.; sent10 & int3 -> int4: both the differentness and the recusation happens.; int4 -> int5: the differentness occurs.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: the subtracting Whitehorse happens.; sent15 & int6 -> int7: that the refund does not occur and/or the signal does not occur is true.; sent12 & int7 -> int8: the signal does not occur.;"
] | 13 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Finnishness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the dissection occurs. sent2: if the fact that both the dent and the instroke happens does not hold the fluttering does not occur. sent3: the unilateralness does not occur if that the Quechuanness does not occur is correct. sent4: that the differentness happens leads to that the subtracting Whitehorse happens. sent5: the fact that the conspicuousness does not occur is not false. sent6: that both the dissection and the fluttering occurs prevents that the Finnishness happens. sent7: if the fact that the annelid happens and the subtracting specialist does not occur is incorrect then the prenatalness does not occur. sent8: both the instroke and the dent happens if the correcting does not occur. sent9: if the signal does not occur and the unilateralness does not occur the fact that the correctness does not occur is not wrong. sent10: if the prenatalness does not occur then both the differentness and the recusation happens. sent11: the fact that both the dent and the instroke happens is not right if the correcting does not occur. sent12: that the refunding does not occur or that the signal does not occur or both leads to that the signal does not occur. sent13: the flutter occurs. sent14: that the annelid occurs but the subtracting specialist does not occur is not true if the conspicuousness does not occur. sent15: the refund does not occur or the signal does not occur or both if the subtracting Whitehorse happens. sent16: the expatriating hurried happens. sent17: that the signal does not occur is right if the fact that the subtracting Whitehorse does not occur and the signal occurs is false. sent18: the fact that the subtracting Whitehorse does not occur but the signal occurs is not true if the unilateralness occurs. sent19: if the flutter does not occur then that the fact that the dissection does not occur and the Finnishness does not occur is not true is not false. sent20: the unpatrioticness occurs. sent21: if the flutter does not occur both the squint and the dissection happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent13 -> int1: the dissection happens and the fluttering occurs.; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it is febrile but not non-Samoan then it is not a wolf.
|
(Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: the antispasmodic wolfs if it is both not non-febrile and not non-Samoan. sent2: if something that is a kind of a Samoan is conspiratorial then it is not a medico. sent3: there is something such that if it is febrile and it is Samoan then it is a wolf. sent4: there is something such that if it is a kind of a VIP and is a anovulation then it is not flowery. sent5: that if the antispasmodic is febrile and it is the Samoan the antispasmodic is not a kind of a wolf hold.
|
sent1: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: (x): ({AB}x & {CQ}x) -> ¬{DT}x sent3: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (Ex): ({IM}x & {Q}x) -> ¬{BI}x sent5: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the moderator is not a kind of a medico if it is a Samoan that is conspiratorial.
|
({AB}{al} & {CQ}{al}) -> ¬{DT}{al}
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is febrile but not non-Samoan then it is not a wolf. ; $context$ = sent1: the antispasmodic wolfs if it is both not non-febrile and not non-Samoan. sent2: if something that is a kind of a Samoan is conspiratorial then it is not a medico. sent3: there is something such that if it is febrile and it is Samoan then it is a wolf. sent4: there is something such that if it is a kind of a VIP and is a anovulation then it is not flowery. sent5: that if the antispasmodic is febrile and it is the Samoan the antispasmodic is not a kind of a wolf hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the fenugreek is a kind of a plowboy and it bludgeons dermatology does not hold.
|
¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is ducal and it is a disposition is false. sent2: the fenugreek does not resettle if there is something such that that it resettle and is a kind of a jam is not right. sent3: something is fungal if it is not aplitic. sent4: if the fact that the fenugreek does not bludgeon caldron is correct then it bludgeons dermatology. sent5: if that the mortar is a disposition that is not a zwieback is not correct the caldron is not a disposition. sent6: if there is something such that that it is mediatory and it does bludgeon dermatology is incorrect the fenugreek is not mediatory. sent7: the fenugreek is a disposition. sent8: something is a plowboy if it is non-ducal. sent9: something is a plowboy and bludgeons dermatology if it is not ducal. sent10: the Centre bludgeons dermatology. sent11: the fenugreek is not ducal if there exists something such that the fact that it is ducal and it is a disposition is wrong. sent12: that the fenugreek does not expatriate divorced is not wrong. sent13: something bludgeons Transcaucasia and is capitalistic if it is not doric. sent14: something that is not a stabbing is argentous and bludgeons jet. sent15: there exists something such that it is a hobbler and it is capitalistic. sent16: if there is something such that that the fact that it is a dekko and does bludgeon dermatology hold does not hold the receptacle is not a dekko. sent17: if something is not ducal then the fact that it does bludgeon upturn and it is paintable is incorrect. sent18: if the fenugreek is not ducal it is a kind of a plowboy. sent19: there exists something such that that it is phonemic and it is premedical does not hold. sent20: if the caldron is not a disposition then that it is consonantal and it is ducal is wrong.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent2: (x): ¬({EH}x & {DP}x) -> ¬{EH}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬{N}x -> {BJ}x sent4: ¬{DL}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent5: ¬({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent6: (x): ¬({GG}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{GG}{aa} sent7: {C}{aa} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: {AB}{hu} sent11: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent12: ¬{ED}{aa} sent13: (x): ¬{HN}x -> ({CE}x & {EO}x) sent14: (x): ¬{BR}x -> ({IJ}x & {L}x) sent15: (Ex): ({DT}x & {EO}x) sent16: (x): ¬({ET}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{ET}{cu} sent17: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({Q}x & {FE}x) sent18: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent19: (Ex): ¬({CO}x & {DO}x) sent20: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b})
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: that the fenugreek is a plowboy and it does bludgeon dermatology hold if it is not ducal.; sent1 & sent11 -> int2: the fenugreek is not ducal.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent1 & sent11 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that that it does bludgeon upturn and is paintable is false.
|
(Ex): ¬({Q}x & {FE}x)
|
[
"sent17 -> int3: if the ripcord is not ducal then that it does bludgeon upturn and it is paintable is not correct.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the fenugreek is a kind of a plowboy and it bludgeons dermatology does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is ducal and it is a disposition is false. sent2: the fenugreek does not resettle if there is something such that that it resettle and is a kind of a jam is not right. sent3: something is fungal if it is not aplitic. sent4: if the fact that the fenugreek does not bludgeon caldron is correct then it bludgeons dermatology. sent5: if that the mortar is a disposition that is not a zwieback is not correct the caldron is not a disposition. sent6: if there is something such that that it is mediatory and it does bludgeon dermatology is incorrect the fenugreek is not mediatory. sent7: the fenugreek is a disposition. sent8: something is a plowboy if it is non-ducal. sent9: something is a plowboy and bludgeons dermatology if it is not ducal. sent10: the Centre bludgeons dermatology. sent11: the fenugreek is not ducal if there exists something such that the fact that it is ducal and it is a disposition is wrong. sent12: that the fenugreek does not expatriate divorced is not wrong. sent13: something bludgeons Transcaucasia and is capitalistic if it is not doric. sent14: something that is not a stabbing is argentous and bludgeons jet. sent15: there exists something such that it is a hobbler and it is capitalistic. sent16: if there is something such that that the fact that it is a dekko and does bludgeon dermatology hold does not hold the receptacle is not a dekko. sent17: if something is not ducal then the fact that it does bludgeon upturn and it is paintable is incorrect. sent18: if the fenugreek is not ducal it is a kind of a plowboy. sent19: there exists something such that that it is phonemic and it is premedical does not hold. sent20: if the caldron is not a disposition then that it is consonantal and it is ducal is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: that the fenugreek is a plowboy and it does bludgeon dermatology hold if it is not ducal.; sent1 & sent11 -> int2: the fenugreek is not ducal.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the exterminator is prehistoric thing that is a kind of a poplar.
|
({D}{c} & {F}{c})
|
sent1: the fact that the Hero is hateful thing that is not a latter is not true. sent2: there is something such that it is a cognizance. sent3: the paleface is an absolute. sent4: there are non-vagile things. sent5: the footstool is prehistoric and is a psychophysicist. sent6: the Hero is a latter and it is prehistoric if the fact that the paleface is not latter is true. sent7: the paleface does not freeze paleface if it is an absolute. sent8: if the paleface is not prehistoric then the exterminator is prehistoric and is a kind of a poplar. sent9: if that there exists something such that it is not vagile hold then the fact that the Hero is not hateful and it is not latter does not hold. sent10: if that something is latter and non-hateful is wrong it is vagile. sent11: that the topsoil is not cubital and is not a Antirrhinum is not right if there exists something such that it is a kind of a cognizance. sent12: that something is a latter that is not hateful does not hold if it deflects. sent13: if that the topsoil is both not cubital and not a Antirrhinum does not hold the paleface is not a Antirrhinum. sent14: the paleface is not prehistoric if that the Hero is not hateful and not latter is wrong.
|
sent1: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent2: (Ex): {J}x sent3: {I}{b} sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent5: ({D}{hh} & {DR}{hh}) sent6: ¬{C}{b} -> ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent7: {I}{b} -> ¬{H}{b} sent8: ¬{D}{b} -> ({D}{c} & {F}{c}) sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x sent11: (x): {J}x -> ¬(¬{K}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) sent12: (x): {E}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent13: ¬(¬{K}{d} & ¬{G}{d}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent14: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the fact that the Hero is not hateful and not a latter is incorrect.; sent14 & int1 -> int2: the paleface is not prehistoric.; sent8 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); sent14 & int1 -> int2: ¬{D}{b}; sent8 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the exterminator is a kind of prehistoric thing that is a poplar is not true.
|
¬({D}{c} & {F}{c})
|
[
"sent10 -> int3: the Hero is not non-vagile if that it is latter and it is not hateful is not correct.; sent12 -> int4: that the Hero is a kind of a latter but it is not hateful is incorrect if it does deflect.; sent7 & sent3 -> int5: the paleface does not freeze paleface.; sent2 & sent11 -> int6: that the topsoil is not cubital and is not a Antirrhinum is wrong.; sent13 & int6 -> int7: the paleface is not a Antirrhinum.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the paleface does not freeze paleface and is not a Antirrhinum.; int8 -> int9: something does not freeze paleface and is not a kind of a Antirrhinum.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the exterminator is prehistoric thing that is a kind of a poplar. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the Hero is hateful thing that is not a latter is not true. sent2: there is something such that it is a cognizance. sent3: the paleface is an absolute. sent4: there are non-vagile things. sent5: the footstool is prehistoric and is a psychophysicist. sent6: the Hero is a latter and it is prehistoric if the fact that the paleface is not latter is true. sent7: the paleface does not freeze paleface if it is an absolute. sent8: if the paleface is not prehistoric then the exterminator is prehistoric and is a kind of a poplar. sent9: if that there exists something such that it is not vagile hold then the fact that the Hero is not hateful and it is not latter does not hold. sent10: if that something is latter and non-hateful is wrong it is vagile. sent11: that the topsoil is not cubital and is not a Antirrhinum is not right if there exists something such that it is a kind of a cognizance. sent12: that something is a latter that is not hateful does not hold if it deflects. sent13: if that the topsoil is both not cubital and not a Antirrhinum does not hold the paleface is not a Antirrhinum. sent14: the paleface is not prehistoric if that the Hero is not hateful and not latter is wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the fact that the Hero is not hateful and not a latter is incorrect.; sent14 & int1 -> int2: the paleface is not prehistoric.; sent8 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the shrink-wrap is not anuran.
|
¬{A}{b}
|
sent1: if something does not bludgeon clean it is off-site and it is not a kind of an argonaut. sent2: if the fact that the L-dopa is monochromatic but not anuran is not right then the Islay is anuran. sent3: either the L-dopa is sensorimotor or it does not freeze time-switch or both. sent4: there exists something such that it does not acquit. sent5: something is anuran if the fact that it is a Toxicodendron and it is not monochromatic is wrong. sent6: if something is not anuran it is nervous and/or it is not sensorimotor. sent7: the oilfield is not non-monochromatic. sent8: if something is a kind of off-site thing that is not a kind of an argonaut then it is not a whack. sent9: the shrink-wrap is a Toxicodendron. sent10: something freezes nonresident and it is a Toxicodendron if it is not a whack. sent11: the fact that the shrink-wrap is not anuran is correct if it is a Toxicodendron and it is not monochromatic. sent12: the shrink-wrap is not a toxicologist if it does not expatriate appendectomy and is not a mobility. sent13: the fact that something is monochromatic but it is not anuran is not true if it is a Toxicodendron. sent14: the shrink-wrap is a Toxicodendron but it is not monochromatic if the L-dopa is monochromatic. sent15: if the shrink-wrap is not a toxicologist the fact that it is not a kind of a housemaster and does bludgeon clean is wrong. sent16: the fact that the L-dopa is not non-monochromatic hold if that it is sensorimotor is not wrong. sent17: the L-dopa does not bludgeon clean if the fact that the shrink-wrap is not a housemaster and does bludgeon clean is false. sent18: the shrink-wrap does not expatriate appendectomy and it is not a mobility if something does not acquit. sent19: if the L-dopa is monochromatic then the shrink-wrap is a kind of a Toxicodendron.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x & ¬{G}x) sent2: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{gd} sent3: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent4: (Ex): ¬{M}x sent5: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({HA}x v ¬{AA}x) sent7: {B}{ei} sent8: (x): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent9: {C}{b} sent10: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & {C}x) sent11: ({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent12: (¬{L}{b} & ¬{K}{b}) -> ¬{J}{b} sent13: (x): {C}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) sent14: {B}{a} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent15: ¬{J}{b} -> ¬(¬{I}{b} & {H}{b}) sent16: {AA}{a} -> {B}{a} sent17: ¬(¬{I}{b} & {H}{b}) -> ¬{H}{a} sent18: (x): ¬{M}x -> (¬{L}{b} & ¬{K}{b}) sent19: {B}{a} -> {C}{b}
|
[] |
[] |
the shrink-wrap is anuran.
|
{A}{b}
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: if that the shrink-wrap is a Toxicodendron but it is not monochromatic is not correct that it is anuran is not wrong.;"
] | 4 | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the shrink-wrap is not anuran. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not bludgeon clean it is off-site and it is not a kind of an argonaut. sent2: if the fact that the L-dopa is monochromatic but not anuran is not right then the Islay is anuran. sent3: either the L-dopa is sensorimotor or it does not freeze time-switch or both. sent4: there exists something such that it does not acquit. sent5: something is anuran if the fact that it is a Toxicodendron and it is not monochromatic is wrong. sent6: if something is not anuran it is nervous and/or it is not sensorimotor. sent7: the oilfield is not non-monochromatic. sent8: if something is a kind of off-site thing that is not a kind of an argonaut then it is not a whack. sent9: the shrink-wrap is a Toxicodendron. sent10: something freezes nonresident and it is a Toxicodendron if it is not a whack. sent11: the fact that the shrink-wrap is not anuran is correct if it is a Toxicodendron and it is not monochromatic. sent12: the shrink-wrap is not a toxicologist if it does not expatriate appendectomy and is not a mobility. sent13: the fact that something is monochromatic but it is not anuran is not true if it is a Toxicodendron. sent14: the shrink-wrap is a Toxicodendron but it is not monochromatic if the L-dopa is monochromatic. sent15: if the shrink-wrap is not a toxicologist the fact that it is not a kind of a housemaster and does bludgeon clean is wrong. sent16: the fact that the L-dopa is not non-monochromatic hold if that it is sensorimotor is not wrong. sent17: the L-dopa does not bludgeon clean if the fact that the shrink-wrap is not a housemaster and does bludgeon clean is false. sent18: the shrink-wrap does not expatriate appendectomy and it is not a mobility if something does not acquit. sent19: if the L-dopa is monochromatic then the shrink-wrap is a kind of a Toxicodendron. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the clarence is not a heuristic and it is not dysgenic is wrong.
|
¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
sent1: the revolver is steadying if the hydantoin steadying. sent2: if something does irritate the fact that it does not bloat and it is not Napoleonic is not true. sent3: if the shirtsleeves is a kind of a checker the crocus is a kind of a book. sent4: if something is not desirous it is non-steadying thing that is not acidotic. sent5: if the kapuka is not a Disraeli then it is not a book and it is not a kind of a upcast. sent6: the tarsus irritates if the squaretail is a unrestraint. sent7: if there is something such that that it does not expatriate clarence and it does not freeze anthropology does not hold then the clarence is not a unrestraint. sent8: there is something such that it is not diluvian and it is not branchless. sent9: if the revolver is steadying then the lovage is a Belarusian. sent10: if the clarence is not a formation it is not a upcast. sent11: the squaretail is a unrestraint if the fact that it is not attentive is right. sent12: there exists something such that that it does not expatriate clarence and does not freeze disownment is false. sent13: the fact that the tarsus is a bloat is correct if the fact that it is not a bloat and is not Napoleonic does not hold. sent14: the loiterer is undesirous if the tarsus is a kind of a bloat. sent15: the clarence does not book if there exists something such that the fact that it does not expatriate clarence and it does not freeze disownment does not hold. sent16: the fact that if the loiterer is a kind of non-steadying thing that is not acidotic then the hydantoin steadying hold. sent17: the squaretail is not attentive. sent18: something is not a heuristic and it is not dysgenic if it does not book. sent19: the fact that the clarence is a kind of non-heuristic thing that is not dysgenic is not true if the crocus is a kind of a book. sent20: something is not a heuristic if it does not book.
|
sent1: {H}{g} -> {H}{f} sent2: (x): {L}x -> ¬(¬{K}x & ¬{M}x) sent3: {D}{c} -> {A}{b} sent4: (x): {I}x -> (¬{H}x & ¬{J}x) sent5: ¬{CM}{gk} -> (¬{A}{gk} & ¬{P}{gk}) sent6: {N}{j} -> {L}{i} sent7: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AN}x) -> ¬{N}{a} sent8: (Ex): (¬{IL}x & ¬{AJ}x) sent9: {H}{f} -> {G}{e} sent10: ¬{IR}{a} -> ¬{P}{a} sent11: ¬{O}{j} -> {N}{j} sent12: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: ¬(¬{K}{i} & ¬{M}{i}) -> {K}{i} sent14: {K}{i} -> {I}{h} sent15: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent16: (¬{H}{h} & ¬{J}{h}) -> {H}{g} sent17: ¬{O}{j} sent18: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) sent19: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent20: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent12 & sent15 -> int1: the clarence is not a book.; sent18 -> int2: the clarence is non-heuristic thing that is not dysgenic if it is not a book.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent15 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; sent18 -> int2: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the clarence is not a heuristic and is not dysgenic is wrong.
|
¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
[
"sent4 -> int3: if the loiterer is undesirous it does not steady and is not acidotic.; sent2 -> int4: if the tarsus irritates then that it is both not a bloat and not Napoleonic is false.; sent11 & sent17 -> int5: the squaretail is a kind of a unrestraint.; sent6 & int5 -> int6: the tarsus does irritate.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the tarsus is not a kind of a bloat and is not Napoleonic is wrong.; sent13 & int7 -> int8: the tarsus bloats.; sent14 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the loiterer is undesirous is right.; int3 & int9 -> int10: the loiterer is not steadying and not acidotic.; sent16 & int10 -> int11: the hydantoin does steady.; sent1 & int11 -> int12: the revolver is not non-steadying.; sent9 & int12 -> int13: the lovage is Belarusian.; int13 -> int14: something is a Belarusian.;"
] | 15 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the clarence is not a heuristic and it is not dysgenic is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the revolver is steadying if the hydantoin steadying. sent2: if something does irritate the fact that it does not bloat and it is not Napoleonic is not true. sent3: if the shirtsleeves is a kind of a checker the crocus is a kind of a book. sent4: if something is not desirous it is non-steadying thing that is not acidotic. sent5: if the kapuka is not a Disraeli then it is not a book and it is not a kind of a upcast. sent6: the tarsus irritates if the squaretail is a unrestraint. sent7: if there is something such that that it does not expatriate clarence and it does not freeze anthropology does not hold then the clarence is not a unrestraint. sent8: there is something such that it is not diluvian and it is not branchless. sent9: if the revolver is steadying then the lovage is a Belarusian. sent10: if the clarence is not a formation it is not a upcast. sent11: the squaretail is a unrestraint if the fact that it is not attentive is right. sent12: there exists something such that that it does not expatriate clarence and does not freeze disownment is false. sent13: the fact that the tarsus is a bloat is correct if the fact that it is not a bloat and is not Napoleonic does not hold. sent14: the loiterer is undesirous if the tarsus is a kind of a bloat. sent15: the clarence does not book if there exists something such that the fact that it does not expatriate clarence and it does not freeze disownment does not hold. sent16: the fact that if the loiterer is a kind of non-steadying thing that is not acidotic then the hydantoin steadying hold. sent17: the squaretail is not attentive. sent18: something is not a heuristic and it is not dysgenic if it does not book. sent19: the fact that the clarence is a kind of non-heuristic thing that is not dysgenic is not true if the crocus is a kind of a book. sent20: something is not a heuristic if it does not book. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent15 -> int1: the clarence is not a book.; sent18 -> int2: the clarence is non-heuristic thing that is not dysgenic if it is not a book.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the subtracting Cooke does not occur and the expatriating smoothhound does not occur.
|
(¬{C} & ¬{D})
|
sent1: the expatriating ceruse does not occur. sent2: the subtracting Cooke does not occur if both the freezing bruising and the insinuating occurs. sent3: the insinuating happens. sent4: the fact that the expatriating smoothhound occurs but the burrow does not occur is not right if the canicularness does not occur. sent5: the fact that the dysphoricness occurs but the insinuating does not occur does not hold if the freezing bruising does not occur. sent6: if the freezing bruising does not occur that the subtracting Cooke does not occur and the expatriating smoothhound does not occur does not hold. sent7: that the stereoscopicness occurs results in that the insinuating does not occur but the burrowing happens. sent8: if that the expatriating smoothhound happens and the burrowing does not occur does not hold then the expatriating smoothhound does not occur. sent9: the fact that the freezing bruising happens is right. sent10: the dysphoricness does not occur if that the dysphoricness but not the insinuating happens is incorrect. sent11: if the insinuating does not occur the fact that the freezing bruising occurs and the canicularness happens does not hold. sent12: the canicularness does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{CK} sent2: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent3: {B} sent4: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & ¬{F}) sent5: ¬{A} -> ¬({DG} & ¬{B}) sent6: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent7: {G} -> (¬{B} & {F}) sent8: ¬({D} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} sent9: {A} sent10: ¬({DG} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{DG} sent11: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {E}) sent12: ¬{E}
|
[
"sent9 & sent3 -> int1: both the freezing bruising and the insinuating occurs.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the subtracting Cooke does not occur.; sent4 & sent12 -> int3: the fact that that the expatriating smoothhound but not the burrow happens is not incorrect does not hold.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the expatriating smoothhound does not occur.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent3 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent2 -> int2: ¬{C}; sent4 & sent12 -> int3: ¬({D} & ¬{F}); sent8 & int3 -> int4: ¬{D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the dysphoricness does not occur.
|
¬{DG}
|
[] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the subtracting Cooke does not occur and the expatriating smoothhound does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the expatriating ceruse does not occur. sent2: the subtracting Cooke does not occur if both the freezing bruising and the insinuating occurs. sent3: the insinuating happens. sent4: the fact that the expatriating smoothhound occurs but the burrow does not occur is not right if the canicularness does not occur. sent5: the fact that the dysphoricness occurs but the insinuating does not occur does not hold if the freezing bruising does not occur. sent6: if the freezing bruising does not occur that the subtracting Cooke does not occur and the expatriating smoothhound does not occur does not hold. sent7: that the stereoscopicness occurs results in that the insinuating does not occur but the burrowing happens. sent8: if that the expatriating smoothhound happens and the burrowing does not occur does not hold then the expatriating smoothhound does not occur. sent9: the fact that the freezing bruising happens is right. sent10: the dysphoricness does not occur if that the dysphoricness but not the insinuating happens is incorrect. sent11: if the insinuating does not occur the fact that the freezing bruising occurs and the canicularness happens does not hold. sent12: the canicularness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent3 -> int1: both the freezing bruising and the insinuating occurs.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the subtracting Cooke does not occur.; sent4 & sent12 -> int3: the fact that that the expatriating smoothhound but not the burrow happens is not incorrect does not hold.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: the expatriating smoothhound does not occur.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it is alienable then the fact that it is not epenthetic or not auricular or both is false.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: if something is alienable then it is epenthetic. sent2: if something is Coleridgian then that it does not bludgeon hashish and/or is not auricular does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if it is alienable that it is either non-epenthetic or not non-auricular or both is not correct. sent4: if something is alienable then that the fact that it is not epenthetic or it is auricular or both is not wrong is not true. sent5: there is something such that if it freezes disownment then the fact that it does not freeze amatungulu and/or it is not a kind of a vessel is not correct.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> {AA}x sent2: (x): {BU}x -> ¬(¬{DT}x v ¬{AB}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent5: (Ex): {DS}x -> ¬(¬{DJ}x v ¬{AH}x)
|
[] |
[] |
if the nugget is Coleridgian then that it does not bludgeon hashish and/or it is not auricular is not right.
|
{BU}{ei} -> ¬(¬{DT}{ei} v ¬{AB}{ei})
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is alienable then the fact that it is not epenthetic or not auricular or both is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is alienable then it is epenthetic. sent2: if something is Coleridgian then that it does not bludgeon hashish and/or is not auricular does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if it is alienable that it is either non-epenthetic or not non-auricular or both is not correct. sent4: if something is alienable then that the fact that it is not epenthetic or it is auricular or both is not wrong is not true. sent5: there is something such that if it freezes disownment then the fact that it does not freeze amatungulu and/or it is not a kind of a vessel is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something is not amphibious.
|
(Ex): ¬{D}x
|
sent1: if something does expatriate court-martial but it is not a nandrolone the actuator bludgeons harebell. sent2: if the fact that something is a nandrolone but it does not expatriate court-martial does not hold it does not bludgeon patrial. sent3: if a thin thing does not bludgeon harebell the wold does bludgeon patrial. sent4: the goral is not a kind of a nandrolone. sent5: something is not hierarchical. sent6: if a thin thing is amphibious it does not bludgeon harebell. sent7: if an aesthetics is not amphibious then the actuator is literal. sent8: the actuator does bludgeon patrial if the wold does thin. sent9: if that the wold does not thin and it is not amphibious is not true the clarence is not thin. sent10: there is something such that it expatriates court-martial. sent11: something bludgeons harebell and it is nonarboreal if it does not thin. sent12: there exists something such that it is psychogenic and it does not expatriate molester. sent13: there is something such that it expatriates court-martial and is not a kind of a nandrolone. sent14: that the wold thins is true. sent15: there is something such that it is not a nandrolone.
|
sent1: (x): ({F}x & ¬{E}x) -> {C}{b} sent2: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): ({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}{a} sent4: ¬{E}{bq} sent5: (Ex): ¬{HT}x sent6: (x): ({A}x & {D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent7: (x): ({AD}x & ¬{D}x) -> {P}{b} sent8: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent9: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{A}{dc} sent10: (Ex): {F}x sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({C}x & {GS}x) sent12: (Ex): ({AI}x & ¬{HM}x) sent13: (Ex): ({F}x & ¬{E}x) sent14: {A}{a} sent15: (Ex): ¬{E}x
|
[
"sent8 & sent14 -> int1: the actuator bludgeons patrial.; sent13 & sent1 -> int2: the actuator bludgeons harebell.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the actuator does bludgeon patrial and it does bludgeon harebell.;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent14 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent13 & sent1 -> int2: {C}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{b} & {C}{b});"
] |
that the clarence bludgeons harebell and it is nonarboreal is not false.
|
({C}{dc} & {GS}{dc})
|
[
"sent11 -> int4: the clarence bludgeons harebell and it is nonarboreal if it is not thin.; sent2 -> int5: if that the actuator is a kind of a nandrolone that does not expatriate court-martial does not hold then it does not bludgeon patrial.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = something is not amphibious. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does expatriate court-martial but it is not a nandrolone the actuator bludgeons harebell. sent2: if the fact that something is a nandrolone but it does not expatriate court-martial does not hold it does not bludgeon patrial. sent3: if a thin thing does not bludgeon harebell the wold does bludgeon patrial. sent4: the goral is not a kind of a nandrolone. sent5: something is not hierarchical. sent6: if a thin thing is amphibious it does not bludgeon harebell. sent7: if an aesthetics is not amphibious then the actuator is literal. sent8: the actuator does bludgeon patrial if the wold does thin. sent9: if that the wold does not thin and it is not amphibious is not true the clarence is not thin. sent10: there is something such that it expatriates court-martial. sent11: something bludgeons harebell and it is nonarboreal if it does not thin. sent12: there exists something such that it is psychogenic and it does not expatriate molester. sent13: there is something such that it expatriates court-martial and is not a kind of a nandrolone. sent14: that the wold thins is true. sent15: there is something such that it is not a nandrolone. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent14 -> int1: the actuator bludgeons patrial.; sent13 & sent1 -> int2: the actuator bludgeons harebell.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the actuator does bludgeon patrial and it does bludgeon harebell.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if that it is propitious and it does not expatriate Mercedario is correct then the fact that it does not callus is right.
|
(Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is a Niamey and it is not malignant then the fact that it is Erasmian is wrong. sent2: there exists something such that if it oxidizes and it does not freeze cheep then it is not amethystine. sent3: something is not a kind of a desert if it is a Pablum and it is not a kind of a Hesse. sent4: if the kohleria is a kind of propitious thing that does not expatriate Mercedario it is not a callus. sent5: the kohleria does not expatriate kohleria if it is a Goudy and is not a much. sent6: there exists something such that if it is a myxoma and it is not magnetic it does not whore. sent7: the kohleria does bludgeon 1870s if it does freeze rustling and it does not expatriate Mercedario. sent8: there is something such that if it bludgeons centennial and is not nonspatial it is a kind of a desert. sent9: the fact that there exists something such that if it is cortico-hypothalamic and it is not a tailfin then it does not freeze propenal is right.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({IE}x & ¬{U}x) -> ¬{I}x sent2: (Ex): ({DN}x & ¬{CH}x) -> ¬{FK}x sent3: (x): ({JJ}x & ¬{DI}x) -> ¬{HL}x sent4: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: ({CM}{aa} & ¬{FC}{aa}) -> ¬{FR}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ({FN}x & ¬{GE}x) -> ¬{AF}x sent7: ({JF}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {HK}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ({DH}x & ¬{AU}x) -> {HL}x sent9: (Ex): ({CP}x & ¬{EH}x) -> ¬{CF}x
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the iodotyrosine is not a desert if it is a Pablum and it is not a Hesse.
|
({JJ}{ie} & ¬{DI}{ie}) -> ¬{HL}{ie}
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it is propitious and it does not expatriate Mercedario is correct then the fact that it does not callus is right. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is a Niamey and it is not malignant then the fact that it is Erasmian is wrong. sent2: there exists something such that if it oxidizes and it does not freeze cheep then it is not amethystine. sent3: something is not a kind of a desert if it is a Pablum and it is not a kind of a Hesse. sent4: if the kohleria is a kind of propitious thing that does not expatriate Mercedario it is not a callus. sent5: the kohleria does not expatriate kohleria if it is a Goudy and is not a much. sent6: there exists something such that if it is a myxoma and it is not magnetic it does not whore. sent7: the kohleria does bludgeon 1870s if it does freeze rustling and it does not expatriate Mercedario. sent8: there is something such that if it bludgeons centennial and is not nonspatial it is a kind of a desert. sent9: the fact that there exists something such that if it is cortico-hypothalamic and it is not a tailfin then it does not freeze propenal is right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the freezing catenary does not occur but the bludgeoning local happens.
|
(¬{AA} & {AB})
|
sent1: if the stigmatic does not occur then that the bludgeoning adductor happens and the geophysicalness happens is not true. sent2: both the non-nonexemptness and the gleam occurs if the option does not occur. sent3: the quirk occurs and the expatriating helplessness happens. sent4: the bludgeoning local occurs. sent5: the option does not occur if the fact that the bludgeoning adductor happens and the geophysicalness happens is not correct. sent6: if the fact that not the quirk but the expatriating helplessness occurs is incorrect the trinucleateness occurs. sent7: if the bludgeoning local does not occur the expatriating helplessness does not occur. sent8: both the non-valedictoryness and the bludgeoning rustling occurs. sent9: that the stigmaticness does not occur and the freezing pilaster does not occur is caused by that the freezing gee-gee happens. sent10: that the dismemberment does not occur leads to that the expatriating helplessness occurs and the quirk occurs. sent11: the quirk happens. sent12: the fact that the trinucleateness happens but the dismemberment does not occur is not incorrect if the gleaming happens.
|
sent1: ¬{J} -> ¬({I} & {H}) sent2: ¬{G} -> (¬{F} & {E}) sent3: ({A} & {B}) sent4: {AB} sent5: ¬({I} & {H}) -> ¬{G} sent6: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) -> {D} sent7: ¬{AB} -> ¬{B} sent8: (¬{GC} & {GO}) sent9: {L} -> (¬{J} & ¬{K}) sent10: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent11: {A} sent12: {E} -> ({D} & ¬{C})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that not the freezing catenary but the bludgeoning local happens does not hold.; sent3 -> int1: the expatriating helplessness happens.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}); sent3 -> int1: {B};"
] |
that the freezing catenary does not occur and the bludgeoning local happens is not right.
|
¬(¬{AA} & {AB})
|
[] | 11 | 3 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the freezing catenary does not occur but the bludgeoning local happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the stigmatic does not occur then that the bludgeoning adductor happens and the geophysicalness happens is not true. sent2: both the non-nonexemptness and the gleam occurs if the option does not occur. sent3: the quirk occurs and the expatriating helplessness happens. sent4: the bludgeoning local occurs. sent5: the option does not occur if the fact that the bludgeoning adductor happens and the geophysicalness happens is not correct. sent6: if the fact that not the quirk but the expatriating helplessness occurs is incorrect the trinucleateness occurs. sent7: if the bludgeoning local does not occur the expatriating helplessness does not occur. sent8: both the non-valedictoryness and the bludgeoning rustling occurs. sent9: that the stigmaticness does not occur and the freezing pilaster does not occur is caused by that the freezing gee-gee happens. sent10: that the dismemberment does not occur leads to that the expatriating helplessness occurs and the quirk occurs. sent11: the quirk happens. sent12: the fact that the trinucleateness happens but the dismemberment does not occur is not incorrect if the gleaming happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that not the freezing catenary but the bludgeoning local happens does not hold.; sent3 -> int1: the expatriating helplessness happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the voter does not bludgeon tiptoe.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
sent1: the voter does bludgeon tiptoe and it is a portable if the fall is not unsarcastic. sent2: there exists something such that it is a kind of a portable. sent3: if there exists something such that it does subtract Hejaz then either the kvetch is handleless or it does subtract Hejaz or both. sent4: something is not a kind of a Rajidae and/or it is not a dilation if it is a kind of a Halifax. sent5: if the fall is unsarcastic and/or it is a Rajidae the voter does not bludgeon tiptoe. sent6: the leucine is not an assist. sent7: the leucine subtracts Hejaz and it is a haploid if it is not an assist. sent8: there are non-portable things. sent9: if something either is not a Rajidae or is not a dilation or both it is not unsarcastic.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{a} -> ({D}{b} & {A}{b}) sent2: (Ex): {A}x sent3: (x): {H}x -> ({G}{c} v {H}{c}) sent4: (x): {F}x -> (¬{C}x v ¬{E}x) sent5: ({B}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent6: ¬{J}{d} sent7: ¬{J}{d} -> ({H}{d} & {I}{d}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent9: (x): (¬{C}x v ¬{E}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
[] |
[] |
the voter bludgeons tiptoe.
|
{D}{b}
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: if the fall is not a Rajidae or it is not a kind of a dilation or both then it is not unsarcastic.; sent4 -> int2: the fall is not a kind of a Rajidae or it is not a dilation or both if the fact that it is a Halifax is not false.; sent7 & sent6 -> int3: the leucine does subtract Hejaz and it is haploid.; int3 -> int4: the leucine subtracts Hejaz.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that it subtracts Hejaz.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the kvetch is handleless and/or it subtracts Hejaz.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the voter does not bludgeon tiptoe. ; $context$ = sent1: the voter does bludgeon tiptoe and it is a portable if the fall is not unsarcastic. sent2: there exists something such that it is a kind of a portable. sent3: if there exists something such that it does subtract Hejaz then either the kvetch is handleless or it does subtract Hejaz or both. sent4: something is not a kind of a Rajidae and/or it is not a dilation if it is a kind of a Halifax. sent5: if the fall is unsarcastic and/or it is a Rajidae the voter does not bludgeon tiptoe. sent6: the leucine is not an assist. sent7: the leucine subtracts Hejaz and it is a haploid if it is not an assist. sent8: there are non-portable things. sent9: if something either is not a Rajidae or is not a dilation or both it is not unsarcastic. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if it does middle then it does not joggle does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬{C}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it does middle then that it is a joggle is true. sent2: the AB is not a joggle if it is a settee. sent3: the zone is not critical if it is scalic. sent4: there exists something such that if it is nuclear it does not expatriate testimony. sent5: if the zone middles then it does joggle. sent6: if the zone is a middle then it is not a joggle. sent7: there is something such that if it does bludgeon time-switch then it is not immature. sent8: something is not onstage if it is a kind of a tort.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> {C}x sent2: {DQ}{ir} -> ¬{C}{ir} sent3: {P}{aa} -> ¬{EI}{aa} sent4: (Ex): {CA}x -> ¬{DB}x sent5: {A}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent6: {A}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent7: (Ex): {GD}x -> ¬{DD}x sent8: (x): {CR}x -> ¬{BD}x
|
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if it is a tort it is not onstage.
|
(Ex): {CR}x -> ¬{BD}x
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: if the witch is a tort then it is not onstage.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it does middle then it does not joggle does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it does middle then that it is a joggle is true. sent2: the AB is not a joggle if it is a settee. sent3: the zone is not critical if it is scalic. sent4: there exists something such that if it is nuclear it does not expatriate testimony. sent5: if the zone middles then it does joggle. sent6: if the zone is a middle then it is not a joggle. sent7: there is something such that if it does bludgeon time-switch then it is not immature. sent8: something is not onstage if it is a kind of a tort. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does adjoin then it is not enteric and it is not a synchrocyclotron.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: if the pneumatophore is a kind of a punctuality then it is not remediable and it does not bludgeon endometrium. sent2: if the pneumatophore does adjoin then it is not a synchrocyclotron. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a Austrian it is not a bloodstone and is not a slump. sent4: the pneumatophore is not unreportable and does not adjoin if it is calyceal. sent5: the pneumatophore is not visible and it is not unafraid if it is a kind of a synchrocyclotron. sent6: there exists something such that if it adjoins then that it is not enteric is correct. sent7: there exists something such that if it does adjoin then it is not a kind of a synchrocyclotron. sent8: if the pneumatophore adjoins it is both enteric and not a synchrocyclotron. sent9: there is something such that if it does adjoin it is not enteric but a synchrocyclotron. sent10: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a senior is true then it is not an inventor and not accusatorial. sent11: the casing is a kind of non-indecisive thing that does not adjoin if it does bludgeon Equisetum. sent12: there exists something such that if it is tubercular it is not an aesthetic and it does not slump. sent13: the xanthine is not tubercular and it is non-baric if it is enteric. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a pinto it is not a kind of a Veracruz and it is not corrigible. sent15: the fact that if the pneumatophore adjoins the pneumatophore is non-enteric thing that is not a kind of a synchrocyclotron is not incorrect. sent16: if something is a kind of a synchrocyclotron then it is not a kind of a giver and is not a kind of a marshal. sent17: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a magnitude it is not calyceal and it is not neocortical. sent18: there exists something such that if the fact that it adjoins hold it is enteric and is not a synchrocyclotron.
|
sent1: {R}{aa} -> (¬{FT}{aa} & ¬{AF}{aa}) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent3: (Ex): {EN}x -> (¬{CN}x & ¬{GH}x) sent4: {DC}{aa} -> (¬{AP}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent5: {AB}{aa} -> (¬{GM}{aa} & ¬{IF}{aa}) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent7: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent8: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: (Ex): {GP}x -> (¬{AO}x & ¬{EH}x) sent11: {E}{co} -> (¬{GB}{co} & ¬{A}{co}) sent12: (Ex): {GL}x -> (¬{AC}x & ¬{GH}x) sent13: {AA}{hb} -> (¬{GL}{hb} & ¬{C}{hb}) sent14: (Ex): {EE}x -> (¬{IB}x & ¬{DF}x) sent15: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent16: (x): {AB}x -> (¬{EI}x & ¬{JA}x) sent17: (Ex): {BM}x -> (¬{DC}x & ¬{EU}x) sent18: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the pneumatophore is not a kind of a giver and it is not a marshal hold if it is a synchrocyclotron.
|
{AB}{aa} -> (¬{EI}{aa} & ¬{JA}{aa})
|
[
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does adjoin then it is not enteric and it is not a synchrocyclotron. ; $context$ = sent1: if the pneumatophore is a kind of a punctuality then it is not remediable and it does not bludgeon endometrium. sent2: if the pneumatophore does adjoin then it is not a synchrocyclotron. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a Austrian it is not a bloodstone and is not a slump. sent4: the pneumatophore is not unreportable and does not adjoin if it is calyceal. sent5: the pneumatophore is not visible and it is not unafraid if it is a kind of a synchrocyclotron. sent6: there exists something such that if it adjoins then that it is not enteric is correct. sent7: there exists something such that if it does adjoin then it is not a kind of a synchrocyclotron. sent8: if the pneumatophore adjoins it is both enteric and not a synchrocyclotron. sent9: there is something such that if it does adjoin it is not enteric but a synchrocyclotron. sent10: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a senior is true then it is not an inventor and not accusatorial. sent11: the casing is a kind of non-indecisive thing that does not adjoin if it does bludgeon Equisetum. sent12: there exists something such that if it is tubercular it is not an aesthetic and it does not slump. sent13: the xanthine is not tubercular and it is non-baric if it is enteric. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a pinto it is not a kind of a Veracruz and it is not corrigible. sent15: the fact that if the pneumatophore adjoins the pneumatophore is non-enteric thing that is not a kind of a synchrocyclotron is not incorrect. sent16: if something is a kind of a synchrocyclotron then it is not a kind of a giver and is not a kind of a marshal. sent17: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a magnitude it is not calyceal and it is not neocortical. sent18: there exists something such that if the fact that it adjoins hold it is enteric and is not a synchrocyclotron. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the coadjutor expatriates regress.
|
{E}{c}
|
sent1: if something is non-azonal then it chirks and/or it is latinate. sent2: if something is progestational it is not azonal. sent3: if something is a tallgrass then it either does not expatriate regress or is extinct or both. sent4: if something that does not chirk is not latinate then it does expatriate regress. sent5: the coadjutor does expatriate regress if it does not chirk and is latinate. sent6: if something is a tallgrass then it does chirk. sent7: something does not expatriate regress if either it does not expatriate regress or it is extinct or both. sent8: the fact that if the wandflower does not chirk and it does not expatriate regress then the wandflower is a tallgrass is right. sent9: something that hems is not nontechnical. sent10: something does expatriate regress if it chirks and is not latinate. sent11: the thermocoagulation is extinct. sent12: if the thermocoagulation is extinct that the wandflower is not a kind of a tallgrass is false. sent13: if the coadjutor does chirk but it is not latinate it does expatriate regress.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({C}x v {D}x) sent2: (x): {G}x -> ¬{F}x sent3: (x): {B}x -> (¬{E}x v {A}x) sent4: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) -> {E}x sent5: (¬{C}{c} & {D}{c}) -> {E}{c} sent6: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent7: (x): (¬{E}x v {A}x) -> ¬{E}x sent8: (¬{C}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> {B}{b} sent9: (x): {BL}x -> {BH}x sent10: (x): ({C}x & ¬{D}x) -> {E}x sent11: {A}{a} sent12: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent13: ({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {E}{c}
|
[
"sent12 & sent11 -> int1: the wandflower is a tallgrass.; sent6 -> int2: the wandflower chirks if it is a tallgrass.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the wandflower does chirk.; sent4 -> int4: if the coadjutor does not chirk and is not latinate it does expatriate regress.;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent11 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent6 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {C}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{b}; sent4 -> int4: (¬{C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {E}{c};"
] |
the coadjutor does not expatriate regress.
|
¬{E}{c}
|
[
"sent7 -> int5: if the fact that the coadjutor either does not expatriate regress or is extinct or both is right then it does not expatriate regress.; sent3 -> int6: the coadjutor either does not expatriate regress or is not non-extinct or both if it is a tallgrass.; sent1 -> int7: the thermocoagulation chirks or is latinate or both if it is not azonal.; sent2 -> int8: if the thermocoagulation is progestational it is not azonal.;"
] | 6 | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the coadjutor expatriates regress. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is non-azonal then it chirks and/or it is latinate. sent2: if something is progestational it is not azonal. sent3: if something is a tallgrass then it either does not expatriate regress or is extinct or both. sent4: if something that does not chirk is not latinate then it does expatriate regress. sent5: the coadjutor does expatriate regress if it does not chirk and is latinate. sent6: if something is a tallgrass then it does chirk. sent7: something does not expatriate regress if either it does not expatriate regress or it is extinct or both. sent8: the fact that if the wandflower does not chirk and it does not expatriate regress then the wandflower is a tallgrass is right. sent9: something that hems is not nontechnical. sent10: something does expatriate regress if it chirks and is not latinate. sent11: the thermocoagulation is extinct. sent12: if the thermocoagulation is extinct that the wandflower is not a kind of a tallgrass is false. sent13: if the coadjutor does chirk but it is not latinate it does expatriate regress. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent11 -> int1: the wandflower is a tallgrass.; sent6 -> int2: the wandflower chirks if it is a tallgrass.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the wandflower does chirk.; sent4 -> int4: if the coadjutor does not chirk and is not latinate it does expatriate regress.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there is something such that if it does egg then it is cloze and it is not constructive does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is dependent it is prolix and it does not expatriate lavatory. sent2: there is something such that if it is pharmacological then it is a drudgery and it is not a kind of a bow-tie. sent3: if the wandflower is an astuteness it does mobilize and is not constructive. sent4: if the wandflower is a Victorian it is cloze. sent5: the wandflower is cloze if it is a kind of an egg. sent6: the wandflower is both cloze and non-constructive if it does egg. sent7: there is something such that if it is an egg it is not constructive. sent8: there is something such that if it is an egg it is cloze. sent9: the wandflower is cloze and constructive if it is a kind of an egg. sent10: that there exists something such that if it eggs it is cloze and it is constructive is correct. sent11: something is a religionist and does not freeze sitcom if it is constructive. sent12: if the wandflower is an egg then it does expatriate catenary and does not expatriate importing.
|
sent1: (Ex): {GS}x -> ({IT}x & ¬{HF}x) sent2: (Ex): {GP}x -> ({E}x & ¬{HT}x) sent3: {IS}{aa} -> ({FJ}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: {GU}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent5: {A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent6: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent8: (Ex): {A}x -> {AA}x sent9: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent10: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: (x): {AB}x -> ({ET}x & ¬{ED}x) sent12: {A}{aa} -> ({CE}{aa} & ¬{CN}{aa})
|
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the whitefly is constructive then it is a kind of a religionist and it does not freeze sitcom.
|
{AB}{ci} -> ({ET}{ci} & ¬{ED}{ci})
|
[
"sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it does egg then it is cloze and it is not constructive does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is dependent it is prolix and it does not expatriate lavatory. sent2: there is something such that if it is pharmacological then it is a drudgery and it is not a kind of a bow-tie. sent3: if the wandflower is an astuteness it does mobilize and is not constructive. sent4: if the wandflower is a Victorian it is cloze. sent5: the wandflower is cloze if it is a kind of an egg. sent6: the wandflower is both cloze and non-constructive if it does egg. sent7: there is something such that if it is an egg it is not constructive. sent8: there is something such that if it is an egg it is cloze. sent9: the wandflower is cloze and constructive if it is a kind of an egg. sent10: that there exists something such that if it eggs it is cloze and it is constructive is correct. sent11: something is a religionist and does not freeze sitcom if it is constructive. sent12: if the wandflower is an egg then it does expatriate catenary and does not expatriate importing. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the epicure bludgeons maund.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: there is something such that the fact that that it does freeze Monk and is hemodynamic is not incorrect is not right. sent2: the pearl is not loopy if something is nonproprietary and does not freeze immutability. sent3: if something is not a kind of a lavatory then it bludgeons maund and does expatriate chemical. sent4: the fact that if there exists something such that it is loopy the epicure is concentric and does expatriate griseofulvin is correct. sent5: something that is not loopy is concentric and expatriates chemical. sent6: the veloute is nonproprietary but it does not freeze immutability if the fact that the waterdog is compliant is right. sent7: there is something such that that it is mild and it is not compliant is wrong. sent8: the veloute is a gatekeeper. sent9: that the epicure bludgeons maund and it is a kind of a anemometry is wrong. sent10: if the pearl does not bludgeon maund the epicure does not bludgeon maund. sent11: the waterdog is compliant. sent12: the pearl is loopy and it is nonproprietary if it does not freeze immutability. sent13: something does not bludgeon maund if that it does expatriate chemical and it is not a lavatory is not correct. sent14: there exists nothing such that it is a kind of vagile thing that is a plasmablast. sent15: the wandflower is not a lavatory if the epicure does expatriate griseofulvin. sent16: the epicure is a kind of a anemometry if there exists something such that the fact that it is a gatekeeper and it bludgeons maund does not hold. sent17: there exists nothing that is a gatekeeper that is a anemometry. sent18: the epicure bludgeons maund if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a gatekeeper that is a anemometry is not right. sent19: if the pearl does not expatriate griseofulvin then it is a kind of a lavatory. sent20: the gunman is proximate.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({JJ}x & {BO}x) sent2: (x): ({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent4: (x): {F}x -> ({E}{a} & {D}{a}) sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {B}x) sent6: {I}{d} -> ({G}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) sent7: (Ex): ¬({J}x & ¬{I}x) sent8: {AA}{c} sent9: ¬({A}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent10: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬{A}{a} sent11: {I}{d} sent12: ¬{H}{b} -> ({F}{b} & {G}{b}) sent13: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent14: (x): ¬({HD}x & {Q}x) sent15: {D}{a} -> ¬{C}{af} sent16: (x): ¬({AA}x & {A}x) -> {AB}{a} sent17: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent18: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent19: ¬{D}{b} -> {C}{b} sent20: {IE}{aa}
|
[
"sent17 -> int1: that the gunman is both a gatekeeper and a anemometry is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a gatekeeper that is a kind of a anemometry is not correct.; int2 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent17 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x); int2 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the epicure does not bludgeon maund.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent5 -> int3: the pearl is concentric and it expatriates chemical if it is not loopy.; sent6 & sent11 -> int4: the fact that the veloute is nonproprietary thing that does not freeze immutability is correct.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it is nonproprietary thing that does not freeze immutability.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: that the pearl is not loopy is not wrong.; int3 & int6 -> int7: the pearl is concentric and it does expatriate chemical.; int7 -> int8: the pearl does expatriate chemical.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the epicure bludgeons maund. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that that it does freeze Monk and is hemodynamic is not incorrect is not right. sent2: the pearl is not loopy if something is nonproprietary and does not freeze immutability. sent3: if something is not a kind of a lavatory then it bludgeons maund and does expatriate chemical. sent4: the fact that if there exists something such that it is loopy the epicure is concentric and does expatriate griseofulvin is correct. sent5: something that is not loopy is concentric and expatriates chemical. sent6: the veloute is nonproprietary but it does not freeze immutability if the fact that the waterdog is compliant is right. sent7: there is something such that that it is mild and it is not compliant is wrong. sent8: the veloute is a gatekeeper. sent9: that the epicure bludgeons maund and it is a kind of a anemometry is wrong. sent10: if the pearl does not bludgeon maund the epicure does not bludgeon maund. sent11: the waterdog is compliant. sent12: the pearl is loopy and it is nonproprietary if it does not freeze immutability. sent13: something does not bludgeon maund if that it does expatriate chemical and it is not a lavatory is not correct. sent14: there exists nothing such that it is a kind of vagile thing that is a plasmablast. sent15: the wandflower is not a lavatory if the epicure does expatriate griseofulvin. sent16: the epicure is a kind of a anemometry if there exists something such that the fact that it is a gatekeeper and it bludgeons maund does not hold. sent17: there exists nothing that is a gatekeeper that is a anemometry. sent18: the epicure bludgeons maund if there exists something such that that it is a kind of a gatekeeper that is a anemometry is not right. sent19: if the pearl does not expatriate griseofulvin then it is a kind of a lavatory. sent20: the gunman is proximate. ; $proof$ =
|
sent17 -> int1: that the gunman is both a gatekeeper and a anemometry is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a gatekeeper that is a kind of a anemometry is not correct.; int2 & sent18 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the adscriptness does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the expatriating myringotomy happens if the penetration does not occur. sent2: if the amplification does not occur the PET happens. sent3: the associating occurs. sent4: the bludgeoning impacted occurs if the prospectiveness does not occur. sent5: that the freezing showgirl but not the woodiness occurs triggers that the earning does not occur. sent6: the non-heliocentricness is triggered by that the earning does not occur. sent7: that that the non-prospectiveness and the non-Unionness occurs does not hold is not false if the heliocentricness does not occur. sent8: that both the wages and the bludgeoning impacted happens prevents that the adscriptness occurs. sent9: that the diet occurs is triggered by that the expatriating cefuroxime occurs. sent10: the adscriptness happens if that both the non-prospectiveness and the non-Unionness occurs does not hold. sent11: the nationalness does not occur and/or the foreclosing does not occur. sent12: the wages happens if the fact that the breaststroking occurs hold. sent13: either the non-prospectiveness or the non-Unionness or both occurs. sent14: the non-Unionness prevents that the bludgeoning impacted does not occur. sent15: that the freezing showgirl and the nonwoodyness happens is triggered by that the Laosness happens. sent16: that the freezing sulfapyridine does not occur is not incorrect. sent17: the breaststroke occurs. sent18: if the earning does not occur then the prospectiveness occurs and the heliocentricness happens.
|
sent1: ¬{BE} -> {IG} sent2: ¬{CD} -> {ER} sent3: {GI} sent4: ¬{F} -> {C} sent5: ({I} & ¬{J}) -> ¬{H} sent6: ¬{H} -> ¬{G} sent7: ¬{G} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) sent8: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent9: {EP} -> {DA} sent10: ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) -> {D} sent11: (¬{P} v ¬{IU}) sent12: {A} -> {B} sent13: (¬{F} v ¬{E}) sent14: ¬{E} -> {C} sent15: {K} -> ({I} & ¬{J}) sent16: ¬{GS} sent17: {A} sent18: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G})
|
[
"sent12 & sent17 -> int1: the wages occurs.; sent13 & sent4 & sent14 -> int2: the bludgeoning impacted occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the wages occurs and the bludgeoning impacted happens.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent17 -> int1: {B}; sent13 & sent4 & sent14 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B} & {C}); int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the adscriptness happens.
|
{D}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the adscriptness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the expatriating myringotomy happens if the penetration does not occur. sent2: if the amplification does not occur the PET happens. sent3: the associating occurs. sent4: the bludgeoning impacted occurs if the prospectiveness does not occur. sent5: that the freezing showgirl but not the woodiness occurs triggers that the earning does not occur. sent6: the non-heliocentricness is triggered by that the earning does not occur. sent7: that that the non-prospectiveness and the non-Unionness occurs does not hold is not false if the heliocentricness does not occur. sent8: that both the wages and the bludgeoning impacted happens prevents that the adscriptness occurs. sent9: that the diet occurs is triggered by that the expatriating cefuroxime occurs. sent10: the adscriptness happens if that both the non-prospectiveness and the non-Unionness occurs does not hold. sent11: the nationalness does not occur and/or the foreclosing does not occur. sent12: the wages happens if the fact that the breaststroking occurs hold. sent13: either the non-prospectiveness or the non-Unionness or both occurs. sent14: the non-Unionness prevents that the bludgeoning impacted does not occur. sent15: that the freezing showgirl and the nonwoodyness happens is triggered by that the Laosness happens. sent16: that the freezing sulfapyridine does not occur is not incorrect. sent17: the breaststroke occurs. sent18: if the earning does not occur then the prospectiveness occurs and the heliocentricness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent17 -> int1: the wages occurs.; sent13 & sent4 & sent14 -> int2: the bludgeoning impacted occurs.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the wages occurs and the bludgeoning impacted happens.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if it does not bludgeon tyrocidine and it is a madame it does expatriate Thylogale is not correct.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x)
|
sent1: the great-niece does expatriate Thylogale if it does not bludgeon tyrocidine and it is a madame. sent2: if the tourtiere does not subtract hobbyhorse but it does stagnate then that it is thermostatic hold. sent3: if something that does not expatriate Thylogale is a needle then it is menstrual. sent4: there is something such that if it bludgeons tyrocidine and is a kind of a madame then it expatriates Thylogale.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: (¬{HI}{do} & {CF}{do}) -> {IR}{do} sent3: (x): (¬{B}x & {IM}x) -> {AN}x sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the manioc does not expatriate Thylogale and is a needle then it is menstrual.
|
(¬{B}{bb} & {IM}{bb}) -> {AN}{bb}
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it does not bludgeon tyrocidine and it is a madame it does expatriate Thylogale is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the great-niece does expatriate Thylogale if it does not bludgeon tyrocidine and it is a madame. sent2: if the tourtiere does not subtract hobbyhorse but it does stagnate then that it is thermostatic hold. sent3: if something that does not expatriate Thylogale is a needle then it is menstrual. sent4: there is something such that if it bludgeons tyrocidine and is a kind of a madame then it expatriates Thylogale. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that it does not bludgeon irresistibility and it is a narcoleptic.
|
(Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: if the short-stop is a cocktail then the codger does not bludgeon irresistibility. sent2: the codger is not a cocktail but it is a center. sent3: there is something such that it does not freeze Myrmeleontidae and it does freeze codger. sent4: there exists something such that it is a kind of a narcoleptic. sent5: the fact that the short-stop is non-narcoleptic thing that does bludgeon irresistibility if the codger is a cocktail is correct. sent6: the short-stop is both not hydrostatic and noninfectious. sent7: if the codger does bludgeon irresistibility then the short-stop is both non-narcoleptic and a cocktail. sent8: the codger does not bludgeon irresistibility. sent9: there exists something such that it does not bludgeon irresistibility and it is a cocktail. sent10: if the short-stop is a cocktail then the codger does not bludgeon irresistibility but it is a narcoleptic. sent11: that something does bludgeon irresistibility and is a narcoleptic hold. sent12: the short-stop is not a nanosecond and is premenstrual. sent13: the codger is not a cocktail but it does bludgeon irresistibility if the short-stop is a narcoleptic. sent14: there is something such that it does not bludgeon irresistibility.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent2: (¬{A}{b} & {AD}{b}) sent3: (Ex): (¬{EM}x & {EA}x) sent4: (Ex): {AB}x sent5: {A}{b} -> (¬{AB}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent6: (¬{BI}{a} & {EC}{a}) sent7: {AA}{b} -> (¬{AB}{a} & {A}{a}) sent8: ¬{AA}{b} sent9: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {A}x) sent10: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent11: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent12: (¬{GK}{a} & {HH}{a}) sent13: {AB}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & {AA}{b}) sent14: (Ex): ¬{AA}x
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it does not bludgeon irresistibility and it is a narcoleptic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the short-stop is a cocktail then the codger does not bludgeon irresistibility. sent2: the codger is not a cocktail but it is a center. sent3: there is something such that it does not freeze Myrmeleontidae and it does freeze codger. sent4: there exists something such that it is a kind of a narcoleptic. sent5: the fact that the short-stop is non-narcoleptic thing that does bludgeon irresistibility if the codger is a cocktail is correct. sent6: the short-stop is both not hydrostatic and noninfectious. sent7: if the codger does bludgeon irresistibility then the short-stop is both non-narcoleptic and a cocktail. sent8: the codger does not bludgeon irresistibility. sent9: there exists something such that it does not bludgeon irresistibility and it is a cocktail. sent10: if the short-stop is a cocktail then the codger does not bludgeon irresistibility but it is a narcoleptic. sent11: that something does bludgeon irresistibility and is a narcoleptic hold. sent12: the short-stop is not a nanosecond and is premenstrual. sent13: the codger is not a cocktail but it does bludgeon irresistibility if the short-stop is a narcoleptic. sent14: there is something such that it does not bludgeon irresistibility. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the convict is a ardeb.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: something is ethical if it does lighten. sent2: something is a kind of a ardeb if the fact that it does not freeze chimpanzee and is a Cantharellus is not true. sent3: if something is ethical then that it does freeze ephemerality and does not bludgeon cost is incorrect. sent4: the convict does freeze ephemerality. sent5: either the cocksfoot does not equal or it is non-lymphocytic or both. sent6: the convict is Huxleyan and it does freeze ephemerality. sent7: the convict is both Huxleyan and not a ardeb if the Creation does not freeze ephemerality. sent8: if that something freezes ephemerality but it does not bludgeon cost does not hold then it does not freezes ephemerality. sent9: the convict is a ardeb if that it does freeze chimpanzee hold. sent10: the fact that something does not freeze chimpanzee but it is a Cantharellus is not true if it is Huxleyan. sent11: if the doorbell is not lymphocytic the Creation lightens and it is a naboom.
|
sent1: (x): {F}x -> {E}x sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): {E}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent4: {C}{aa} sent5: (¬{J}{c} v ¬{H}{c}) sent6: ({A}{aa} & {C}{aa}) sent7: ¬{C}{a} -> ({A}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) sent8: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent9: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent10: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: ¬{H}{b} -> ({F}{a} & {G}{a})
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: the fact that the convict does not freeze chimpanzee but it is a Cantharellus is false if it is Huxleyan.; sent6 -> int2: the convict is Huxleyan.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the convict does not freeze chimpanzee and is a Cantharellus is false.; sent2 -> int4: the convict is a kind of a ardeb if the fact that it does not freeze chimpanzee and is a Cantharellus does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent6 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent2 -> int4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the convict is not a kind of a ardeb.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent8 -> int5: the Creation does not freeze ephemerality if the fact that it does freeze ephemerality and does not bludgeon cost is false.; sent3 -> int6: the fact that the Creation does freeze ephemerality but it does not bludgeon cost is incorrect if it is not unethical.; sent1 -> int7: if the Creation lightens it is ethical.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the convict is a ardeb. ; $context$ = sent1: something is ethical if it does lighten. sent2: something is a kind of a ardeb if the fact that it does not freeze chimpanzee and is a Cantharellus is not true. sent3: if something is ethical then that it does freeze ephemerality and does not bludgeon cost is incorrect. sent4: the convict does freeze ephemerality. sent5: either the cocksfoot does not equal or it is non-lymphocytic or both. sent6: the convict is Huxleyan and it does freeze ephemerality. sent7: the convict is both Huxleyan and not a ardeb if the Creation does not freeze ephemerality. sent8: if that something freezes ephemerality but it does not bludgeon cost does not hold then it does not freezes ephemerality. sent9: the convict is a ardeb if that it does freeze chimpanzee hold. sent10: the fact that something does not freeze chimpanzee but it is a Cantharellus is not true if it is Huxleyan. sent11: if the doorbell is not lymphocytic the Creation lightens and it is a naboom. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> int1: the fact that the convict does not freeze chimpanzee but it is a Cantharellus is false if it is Huxleyan.; sent6 -> int2: the convict is Huxleyan.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the convict does not freeze chimpanzee and is a Cantharellus is false.; sent2 -> int4: the convict is a kind of a ardeb if the fact that it does not freeze chimpanzee and is a Cantharellus does not hold.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the axon bludgeons startle and does not subtract biosphere is false.
|
¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
sent1: the fact that the axon does freeze transferability and it is introversive is incorrect. sent2: that the axon is planar and expatriates bounty is not right. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of an ethanol. sent4: that the axon bludgeons startle but it does not subtract biosphere is not right if there is something such that it is a latke. sent5: something homologizes. sent6: the fact that the axon does bludgeon startle and does subtract biosphere is not true. sent7: if there exists something such that it freezes serviceman then the fact that the axon does subtract biosphere and is not a kind of an ultrasound does not hold. sent8: there is something such that it is a kind of a latke. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it bludgeons chairlift is not false then the fact that the startle is a kind of a latke but it is not medullary is not correct. sent10: the fact that the axon bludgeons startle and subtracts biosphere is not true if there is something such that it is a latke. sent11: the fact that the brier is evidentiary and is not a latke is not correct. sent12: something does bludgeon startle and does not subtract biosphere if that it is not a latke is correct. sent13: something does bludgeon startle.
|
sent1: ¬({GO}{a} & {R}{a}) sent2: ¬({BN}{a} & {FC}{a}) sent3: (Ex): {DT}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent5: (Ex): {JK}x sent6: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent7: (x): {DQ}x -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{HS}{a}) sent8: (Ex): {A}x sent9: (x): {CP}x -> ¬({A}{bf} & ¬{GI}{bf}) sent10: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent11: ¬({BS}{f} & ¬{A}{f}) sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent13: (Ex): {B}x
|
[
"sent8 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the axon does bludgeon startle and does not subtract biosphere.
|
({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: the axon bludgeons startle but it does not subtract biosphere if it is not a latke.;"
] | 5 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the axon bludgeons startle and does not subtract biosphere is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the axon does freeze transferability and it is introversive is incorrect. sent2: that the axon is planar and expatriates bounty is not right. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of an ethanol. sent4: that the axon bludgeons startle but it does not subtract biosphere is not right if there is something such that it is a latke. sent5: something homologizes. sent6: the fact that the axon does bludgeon startle and does subtract biosphere is not true. sent7: if there exists something such that it freezes serviceman then the fact that the axon does subtract biosphere and is not a kind of an ultrasound does not hold. sent8: there is something such that it is a kind of a latke. sent9: if there exists something such that the fact that it bludgeons chairlift is not false then the fact that the startle is a kind of a latke but it is not medullary is not correct. sent10: the fact that the axon bludgeons startle and subtracts biosphere is not true if there is something such that it is a latke. sent11: the fact that the brier is evidentiary and is not a latke is not correct. sent12: something does bludgeon startle and does not subtract biosphere if that it is not a latke is correct. sent13: something does bludgeon startle. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the nick is not the baronet if that the nick does not expatriate gee-gee and is not clean is wrong is not correct.
|
¬(¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa})
|
sent1: if that something does not bludgeon auxin and is not semantic does not hold then it does not subtract Pseudepigrapha. sent2: if the fact that something does not expatriate gee-gee and it is not a fit is not true it is not welcoming. sent3: something is a baronet if that it does not expatriate gee-gee and it is not a clean does not hold. sent4: if something does not expatriate gee-gee and is unclean it is not a baronet. sent5: the nick is not a baronet if it does not expatriate gee-gee and it is not a clean. sent6: if that something is both not a undershrub and not a lanolin is not true it is not unsanitary. sent7: if the nick is not an operative and it is not a baronet then it does not bludgeon Kazakhstan. sent8: something is not a baronet if the fact that it expatriates gee-gee is true. sent9: the fact that if the fact that something does not expatriate gee-gee and is a kind of a clean is not true it is not a baronet hold. sent10: if the fact that the nick does not expatriate gee-gee and is clean is not right then it is not a baronet. sent11: if that the babbler does not freeze idyll and it is not a clean does not hold then that it is not semantic is correct. sent12: if the fact that something does not expatriate gee-gee and it is not a clean is not right it is not a baronet. sent13: if the fact that the nick expatriates gee-gee is not wrong it is not a baronet. sent14: if that the nick does not expatriate gee-gee and does not clean is not true then it is a baronet.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{DS}x & ¬{IS}x) -> ¬{HB}x sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{EB}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{HM}x & ¬{T}x) -> ¬{GP}x sent7: (¬{BI}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> ¬{CL}{aa} sent8: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent9: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent10: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent11: ¬(¬{ID}{ar} & ¬{AB}{ar}) -> ¬{IS}{ar} sent12: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent13: {AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent14: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}
|
[
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the scour is not a kind of a welcoming if the fact that it does not expatriate gee-gee and it is not a fit is not true.
|
¬(¬{AA}{er} & ¬{G}{er}) -> ¬{EB}{er}
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the nick is not the baronet if that the nick does not expatriate gee-gee and is not clean is wrong is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something does not bludgeon auxin and is not semantic does not hold then it does not subtract Pseudepigrapha. sent2: if the fact that something does not expatriate gee-gee and it is not a fit is not true it is not welcoming. sent3: something is a baronet if that it does not expatriate gee-gee and it is not a clean does not hold. sent4: if something does not expatriate gee-gee and is unclean it is not a baronet. sent5: the nick is not a baronet if it does not expatriate gee-gee and it is not a clean. sent6: if that something is both not a undershrub and not a lanolin is not true it is not unsanitary. sent7: if the nick is not an operative and it is not a baronet then it does not bludgeon Kazakhstan. sent8: something is not a baronet if the fact that it expatriates gee-gee is true. sent9: the fact that if the fact that something does not expatriate gee-gee and is a kind of a clean is not true it is not a baronet hold. sent10: if the fact that the nick does not expatriate gee-gee and is clean is not right then it is not a baronet. sent11: if that the babbler does not freeze idyll and it is not a clean does not hold then that it is not semantic is correct. sent12: if the fact that something does not expatriate gee-gee and it is not a clean is not right it is not a baronet. sent13: if the fact that the nick expatriates gee-gee is not wrong it is not a baronet. sent14: if that the nick does not expatriate gee-gee and does not clean is not true then it is a baronet. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the third does not bludgeon counterperson.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: the consulate is a Scriabin if it is a throe. sent2: the counterperson does bludgeon counterperson. sent3: the third is atonal. sent4: the third is a eschar. sent5: the fact that something does not bludgeon counterperson and is a throe if it is a kind of a profoundness hold. sent6: the third does bludgeon counterperson if it is a throe. sent7: if something is a kind of a buzz then it is a profoundness. sent8: the third is a prothrombinase if it bludgeons counterperson. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a smoothhound and it is alkaloidal is false then the crystallographer is a bidding. sent10: the horsewhip does bludgeon counterperson if it is a stag. sent11: the fact that the electrodeposition bludgeons counterperson is right. sent12: the third is a throe. sent13: that the mending is not a smoothhound and is alkaloidal is not true. sent14: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a profoundness and it is not a throe is not true the fact that the caliche does bludgeon counterperson is not false. sent15: if there exists something such that it either is a telluride or is a bidding or both the third is not a buzz.
|
sent1: {A}{i} -> {Q}{i} sent2: {B}{el} sent3: {T}{a} sent4: {IK}{a} sent5: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) sent6: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent7: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent8: {B}{a} -> {U}{a} sent9: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {G}x) -> {F}{b} sent10: {CJ}{ij} -> {B}{ij} sent11: {B}{jc} sent12: {A}{a} sent13: ¬(¬{H}{c} & {G}{c}) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) -> {B}{bu} sent15: (x): ({E}x v {F}x) -> ¬{D}{a}
|
[
"sent6 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the caliche bludgeons counterperson.
|
{B}{bu}
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is not a smoothhound and it is alkaloidal does not hold.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the crystallographer does bid.; int2 -> int3: the crystallographer is a telluride and/or it bids.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that either it is a telluride or it is a bidding or both.; int4 & sent15 -> int5: the third is not a buzz.;"
] | 8 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the third does not bludgeon counterperson. ; $context$ = sent1: the consulate is a Scriabin if it is a throe. sent2: the counterperson does bludgeon counterperson. sent3: the third is atonal. sent4: the third is a eschar. sent5: the fact that something does not bludgeon counterperson and is a throe if it is a kind of a profoundness hold. sent6: the third does bludgeon counterperson if it is a throe. sent7: if something is a kind of a buzz then it is a profoundness. sent8: the third is a prothrombinase if it bludgeons counterperson. sent9: if there is something such that the fact that it is not a smoothhound and it is alkaloidal is false then the crystallographer is a bidding. sent10: the horsewhip does bludgeon counterperson if it is a stag. sent11: the fact that the electrodeposition bludgeons counterperson is right. sent12: the third is a throe. sent13: that the mending is not a smoothhound and is alkaloidal is not true. sent14: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a profoundness and it is not a throe is not true the fact that the caliche does bludgeon counterperson is not false. sent15: if there exists something such that it either is a telluride or is a bidding or both the third is not a buzz. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bludgeoning shrub occurs.
|
{F}
|
sent1: the passerineness does not occur. sent2: not the agreement but the molecularness happens if the banging occurs. sent3: the mask does not occur if the fact that the agreement does not occur and/or the expatriating morphophysiology does not occur is not right. sent4: if the mask occurs the bludgeoning shrub occurs. sent5: the fact that the non-outingness and the bludgeoning Parkinsonism happens is not right. sent6: the fact that both the mask and the forgiveness occurs is wrong if the unguiculateness does not occur. sent7: the fact that the unguiculate does not occur is not incorrect if the non-passerineness and the non-inarticulateness happens. sent8: if that the decoration does not occur and the encouragement occurs is not right then the finding does not occur. sent9: if that the non-outingness and the bludgeoning Parkinsonism happens is wrong then the freezing thriftlessness does not occur. sent10: if the freezing eddy does not occur then the fact that the decoration does not occur but the encouragement occurs is false. sent11: that the molecularness occurs and the banging happens is brought about by that the boogie does not occur. sent12: the fact that both the masking and the forgiveness occurs is wrong. sent13: the fact that that both the non-inarticulateness and the nonpasserineness occurs prevents the non-chemicalness is not false. sent14: if that the unguiculate does not occur is true then the fact that the masking does not occur but the forgiveness happens does not hold. sent15: the masking does not occur if the expatriating morphophysiology does not occur but the bludgeoning shrub happens. sent16: both the banging and the boogie happens if that the finding does not occur is right. sent17: if the agreement does not occur the expatriating morphophysiology does not occur and the bludgeoning shrub happens. sent18: if the inarticulateness happens the passerineness does not occur and the bludgeoning shrub does not occur. sent19: if the molecularness occurs that the agreement does not occur and/or the expatriating morphophysiology does not occur is not correct. sent20: the coarseness and/or the innumerateness happens if the freezing thriftlessness does not occur. sent21: the inarticulateness does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{A} sent2: {J} -> (¬{H} & {I}) sent3: ¬(¬{H} v ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} sent4: {E} -> {F} sent5: ¬(¬{S} & {T}) sent6: ¬{C} -> ¬({E} & {D}) sent7: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{C} sent8: ¬(¬{N} & {M}) -> ¬{L} sent9: ¬(¬{S} & {T}) -> ¬{R} sent10: ¬{O} -> ¬(¬{N} & {M}) sent11: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) sent12: ¬({E} & {D}) sent13: (¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {DD} sent14: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{E} & {D}) sent15: (¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent16: ¬{L} -> ({J} & {K}) sent17: ¬{H} -> (¬{G} & {F}) sent18: {B} -> (¬{A} & ¬{F}) sent19: {I} -> ¬(¬{H} v ¬{G}) sent20: ¬{R} -> ({P} v {Q}) sent21: ¬{B}
|
[
"sent1 & sent21 -> int1: the passerine does not occur and the inarticulateness does not occur.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the unguiculateness does not occur.; sent14 & int2 -> int3: the fact that not the masking but the forgiveness happens does not hold.;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent21 -> int1: (¬{A} & ¬{B}); sent7 & int1 -> int2: ¬{C}; sent14 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{E} & {D});"
] |
the bludgeoning shrub does not occur.
|
¬{F}
|
[] | 9 | 4 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bludgeoning shrub occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the passerineness does not occur. sent2: not the agreement but the molecularness happens if the banging occurs. sent3: the mask does not occur if the fact that the agreement does not occur and/or the expatriating morphophysiology does not occur is not right. sent4: if the mask occurs the bludgeoning shrub occurs. sent5: the fact that the non-outingness and the bludgeoning Parkinsonism happens is not right. sent6: the fact that both the mask and the forgiveness occurs is wrong if the unguiculateness does not occur. sent7: the fact that the unguiculate does not occur is not incorrect if the non-passerineness and the non-inarticulateness happens. sent8: if that the decoration does not occur and the encouragement occurs is not right then the finding does not occur. sent9: if that the non-outingness and the bludgeoning Parkinsonism happens is wrong then the freezing thriftlessness does not occur. sent10: if the freezing eddy does not occur then the fact that the decoration does not occur but the encouragement occurs is false. sent11: that the molecularness occurs and the banging happens is brought about by that the boogie does not occur. sent12: the fact that both the masking and the forgiveness occurs is wrong. sent13: the fact that that both the non-inarticulateness and the nonpasserineness occurs prevents the non-chemicalness is not false. sent14: if that the unguiculate does not occur is true then the fact that the masking does not occur but the forgiveness happens does not hold. sent15: the masking does not occur if the expatriating morphophysiology does not occur but the bludgeoning shrub happens. sent16: both the banging and the boogie happens if that the finding does not occur is right. sent17: if the agreement does not occur the expatriating morphophysiology does not occur and the bludgeoning shrub happens. sent18: if the inarticulateness happens the passerineness does not occur and the bludgeoning shrub does not occur. sent19: if the molecularness occurs that the agreement does not occur and/or the expatriating morphophysiology does not occur is not correct. sent20: the coarseness and/or the innumerateness happens if the freezing thriftlessness does not occur. sent21: the inarticulateness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent21 -> int1: the passerine does not occur and the inarticulateness does not occur.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the unguiculateness does not occur.; sent14 & int2 -> int3: the fact that not the masking but the forgiveness happens does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the saskatoon freezes czarina then the bronchus bludgeons bent.
|
{A}{a} -> {C}{b}
|
sent1: the saskatoon is baccate. sent2: either the saskatoon does bludgeon bent or it does not freeze czarina or both. sent3: if the saskatoon does not freeze verticil then the bronchus does bludgeon bent. sent4: the shortener freezes verticil or it is not a kind of a Torah or both. sent5: if the saskatoon bludgeons bent the bronchus does freeze verticil. sent6: that the saskatoon does bludgeon bent if the bronchus does freeze verticil hold. sent7: if the bronchus freezes verticil or does not freeze czarina or both then the saskatoon bludgeons bent. sent8: the saskatoon does freeze czarina and/or freezes verticil. sent9: the Quiche does freeze verticil. sent10: if something does not freeze verticil it does bludgeon bent and it freezes czarina.
|
sent1: {BM}{a} sent2: ({C}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) sent3: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent4: ({B}{bo} v ¬{DT}{bo}) sent5: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} sent7: ({B}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent8: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent9: {B}{ca} sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}x & {A}x)
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the saskatoon freezes czarina.; assump1 -> int1: the saskatoon freezes czarina or it does not freeze verticil or both.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 -> int1: ({A}{a} v ¬{B}{a});"
] |
the bent bludgeons bent.
|
{C}{k}
|
[
"sent10 -> int2: if the bent does not freeze verticil then it bludgeons bent and does freeze czarina.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = if the saskatoon freezes czarina then the bronchus bludgeons bent. ; $context$ = sent1: the saskatoon is baccate. sent2: either the saskatoon does bludgeon bent or it does not freeze czarina or both. sent3: if the saskatoon does not freeze verticil then the bronchus does bludgeon bent. sent4: the shortener freezes verticil or it is not a kind of a Torah or both. sent5: if the saskatoon bludgeons bent the bronchus does freeze verticil. sent6: that the saskatoon does bludgeon bent if the bronchus does freeze verticil hold. sent7: if the bronchus freezes verticil or does not freeze czarina or both then the saskatoon bludgeons bent. sent8: the saskatoon does freeze czarina and/or freezes verticil. sent9: the Quiche does freeze verticil. sent10: if something does not freeze verticil it does bludgeon bent and it freezes czarina. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the saskatoon freezes czarina.; assump1 -> int1: the saskatoon freezes czarina or it does not freeze verticil or both.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the gnathion is not a large.
|
¬{C}{c}
|
sent1: that the floe is not microeconomics and it is not araneidal is not right. sent2: that the floe is not microeconomics but it is araneidal does not hold. sent3: there is something such that that it does not subtract mezereon and does not expatriate lute is wrong. sent4: the gnathion is a kind of a large if that the skidpan is surficial hold. sent5: the fact that the floe is microeconomics but it is not araneidal is not true. sent6: if something is not myelic then the fact that it does not freeze Steuben and it is an agreement is not correct. sent7: if there exists something such that the fact that that it does not subtract mezereon and does not expatriate lute is right is wrong then the pore is not myelic. sent8: the skidpan is a kind of a railhead if the fact that the fact that the floe is both not microeconomics and not araneidal is not false does not hold. sent9: the fact that that something is not intimal but non-upper-class is wrong if it is not an agreement is not false. sent10: if that something is not intimal and it is non-upper-class does not hold the fact that it is intimal is not false. sent11: if the skidpan is intimal that that the floe is surficial but it is not a railhead is right does not hold. sent12: if that something is surficial and not a railhead is not right it is not a large. sent13: the gnathion is not a large if the floe is not a large. sent14: something is surficial if it is a railhead.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) sent4: {A}{b} -> {C}{c} sent5: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & {F}x) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{G}{d} sent8: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) -> {D}x sent11: {D}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent12: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent13: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{C}{c} sent14: (x): {B}x -> {A}x
|
[
"sent8 & sent1 -> int1: the skidpan is a railhead.; sent14 -> int2: the skidpan is surficial if it is a kind of a railhead.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the skidpan is surficial.; int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent1 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent14 -> int2: {B}{b} -> {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {A}{b}; int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the gnathion is not a large.
|
¬{C}{c}
|
[
"sent12 -> int4: if that the floe is surficial but it is not a railhead does not hold then it is not a kind of a large.; sent10 -> int5: if the fact that that the skidpan is not intimal and it is not upper-class is right does not hold then it is intimal.; sent9 -> int6: if the skidpan is not an agreement then the fact that it is not intimal and not upper-class is false.; sent6 -> int7: if the pore is not myelic that it does not freeze Steuben and is an agreement is not correct.; sent3 & sent7 -> int8: the fact that the pore is not myelic hold.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the pore does not freeze Steuben and is an agreement does not hold.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that that it does not freeze Steuben and is an agreement is wrong.;"
] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the gnathion is not a large. ; $context$ = sent1: that the floe is not microeconomics and it is not araneidal is not right. sent2: that the floe is not microeconomics but it is araneidal does not hold. sent3: there is something such that that it does not subtract mezereon and does not expatriate lute is wrong. sent4: the gnathion is a kind of a large if that the skidpan is surficial hold. sent5: the fact that the floe is microeconomics but it is not araneidal is not true. sent6: if something is not myelic then the fact that it does not freeze Steuben and it is an agreement is not correct. sent7: if there exists something such that the fact that that it does not subtract mezereon and does not expatriate lute is right is wrong then the pore is not myelic. sent8: the skidpan is a kind of a railhead if the fact that the fact that the floe is both not microeconomics and not araneidal is not false does not hold. sent9: the fact that that something is not intimal but non-upper-class is wrong if it is not an agreement is not false. sent10: if that something is not intimal and it is non-upper-class does not hold the fact that it is intimal is not false. sent11: if the skidpan is intimal that that the floe is surficial but it is not a railhead is right does not hold. sent12: if that something is surficial and not a railhead is not right it is not a large. sent13: the gnathion is not a large if the floe is not a large. sent14: something is surficial if it is a railhead. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent1 -> int1: the skidpan is a railhead.; sent14 -> int2: the skidpan is surficial if it is a kind of a railhead.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the skidpan is surficial.; int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that that either the flint is not bicentennial or it is photomechanical or both hold is not true.
|
¬(¬{C}{a} v {D}{a})
|
sent1: the flint does not reminisce. sent2: the bladdernose is a teaberry and teaches. sent3: if a monotypic thing does reminisce then the flint is not a kind of a bicentennial. sent4: if something that is photomechanical is a bicentennial then the dogie is not monotypic. sent5: the dogie does reminisce. sent6: the flint is a kind of a bicentennial or it is photomechanical or both. sent7: the fact that the chandelier is not homemade is not false. sent8: the flint is a Albulidae and noninheritable. sent9: if something is monotypic and a bicentennial the dogie is not photomechanical. sent10: there exists something such that it is monotypic. sent11: if something is monotypic the fact that it is not bicentennial and/or it is photomechanical is false. sent12: there exists something such that that it reminisces hold. sent13: the dogie is a kind of monotypic thing that does reminisce. sent14: the fact that something is Albigensian and it is a flatwork does not hold if it is not homemade. sent15: if something is not ichorous it is monotypic and reminisces.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{a} sent2: ({BS}{i} & {BF}{i}) sent3: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{a} sent4: (x): ({D}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent5: {B}{aa} sent6: ({C}{a} v {D}{a}) sent7: ¬{H}{b} sent8: ({AQ}{a} & {AU}{a}) sent9: (x): ({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}{aa} sent10: (Ex): {A}x sent11: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{C}x v {D}x) sent12: (Ex): {B}x sent13: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent14: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}x & {F}x) sent15: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({A}x & {B}x)
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: something is monotypic and it does reminisce.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the flint is not a bicentennial.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> int1: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x); int1 & sent3 -> int2: ¬{C}{a}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the flint is not a bicentennial or it is photomechanical or both is false.
|
¬(¬{C}{a} v {D}{a})
|
[
"sent11 -> int3: if the flint is monotypic then the fact that it is not bicentennial and/or it is photomechanical is not right.; sent15 -> int4: the flint is monotypic and does reminisce if it is not ichorous.; sent14 -> int5: if the chandelier is not homemade then that it is Albigensian thing that is a kind of a flatwork does not hold.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the fact that the chandelier is Albigensian and it is a flatwork does not hold.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that that it is a kind of Albigensian a flatwork does not hold.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that that either the flint is not bicentennial or it is photomechanical or both hold is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the flint does not reminisce. sent2: the bladdernose is a teaberry and teaches. sent3: if a monotypic thing does reminisce then the flint is not a kind of a bicentennial. sent4: if something that is photomechanical is a bicentennial then the dogie is not monotypic. sent5: the dogie does reminisce. sent6: the flint is a kind of a bicentennial or it is photomechanical or both. sent7: the fact that the chandelier is not homemade is not false. sent8: the flint is a Albulidae and noninheritable. sent9: if something is monotypic and a bicentennial the dogie is not photomechanical. sent10: there exists something such that it is monotypic. sent11: if something is monotypic the fact that it is not bicentennial and/or it is photomechanical is false. sent12: there exists something such that that it reminisces hold. sent13: the dogie is a kind of monotypic thing that does reminisce. sent14: the fact that something is Albigensian and it is a flatwork does not hold if it is not homemade. sent15: if something is not ichorous it is monotypic and reminisces. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> int1: something is monotypic and it does reminisce.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the flint is not a bicentennial.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it is not sensational and it is catarrhal hold it does not subtract rustling is wrong.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: if the endpoint is both sensational and catarrhal it does not subtract rustling. sent2: there exists something such that if it is sensational and catarrhal then it does not subtract rustling. sent3: if the endpoint is not sensational but it is catarrhal it does not subtract rustling. sent4: if the endpoint is not sensational but it is catarrhal then it subtracts rustling.
|
sent1: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it is not sensational and it is catarrhal hold it does not subtract rustling is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the endpoint is both sensational and catarrhal it does not subtract rustling. sent2: there exists something such that if it is sensational and catarrhal then it does not subtract rustling. sent3: if the endpoint is not sensational but it is catarrhal it does not subtract rustling. sent4: if the endpoint is not sensational but it is catarrhal then it subtracts rustling. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the municipality is outer but it is not a volley is not false.
|
({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
sent1: there exists something such that that it does not expatriate burial and it is a chord is false. sent2: the facula is not a boast. sent3: if the municipality is not a kind of a boast it does not volley. sent4: if the pond is not a kind of a boast but it does freeze Dnieper then the friend is not a boast. sent5: the municipality is not a kind of a boast. sent6: something volleys if it boasts. sent7: the fact that that the greens is not a chord but it is calyculate does not hold hold. sent8: the pond does not boast if that the greens is not a kind of a chord but it is calyculate is false. sent9: something freezes Dnieper if it is not Libyan. sent10: if something does not expatriate burial it is not a Libyan. sent11: if the airport is not a kind of a chord that the greens is not non-calyculate or it does not freeze Dnieper or both does not hold. sent12: something is not a volley if the fact that it is not a kind of a boast is not incorrect. sent13: that something is outer and is not a volley does not hold if it boasts.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{F}x & {D}x) sent2: ¬{A}{n} sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent4: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{gt} sent5: ¬{A}{aa} sent6: (x): {A}x -> {AB}x sent7: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent8: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{E}x -> {B}x sent10: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{E}x sent11: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬({C}{b} v ¬{B}{b}) sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent13: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[] |
[] |
the fact that the municipality is outer thing that does not volley is wrong.
|
¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: if that the pond does boast hold the fact that it is a volley hold.;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the municipality is outer but it is not a volley is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that that it does not expatriate burial and it is a chord is false. sent2: the facula is not a boast. sent3: if the municipality is not a kind of a boast it does not volley. sent4: if the pond is not a kind of a boast but it does freeze Dnieper then the friend is not a boast. sent5: the municipality is not a kind of a boast. sent6: something volleys if it boasts. sent7: the fact that that the greens is not a chord but it is calyculate does not hold hold. sent8: the pond does not boast if that the greens is not a kind of a chord but it is calyculate is false. sent9: something freezes Dnieper if it is not Libyan. sent10: if something does not expatriate burial it is not a Libyan. sent11: if the airport is not a kind of a chord that the greens is not non-calyculate or it does not freeze Dnieper or both does not hold. sent12: something is not a volley if the fact that it is not a kind of a boast is not incorrect. sent13: that something is outer and is not a volley does not hold if it boasts. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the communicator is a oenomel.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: the stitch is not a Tongan but it expatriates Amish. sent2: the stitch does bludgeon clean. sent3: the communicator is a oenomel if the stitch does bludgeon minimalism but it is not Tongan. sent4: the stitch does bludgeon minimalism and it does bludgeon clean.
|
sent1: (¬{C}{a} & {E}{a}) sent2: {B}{a} sent3: ({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent4: ({A}{a} & {B}{a})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: that the stitch does bludgeon minimalism is correct.; sent1 -> int2: the stitch is not Tongan.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the stitch does bludgeon minimalism and is not a Tongan.; int3 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent1 -> int2: ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int3 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the communicator is a oenomel. ; $context$ = sent1: the stitch is not a Tongan but it expatriates Amish. sent2: the stitch does bludgeon clean. sent3: the communicator is a oenomel if the stitch does bludgeon minimalism but it is not Tongan. sent4: the stitch does bludgeon minimalism and it does bludgeon clean. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: that the stitch does bludgeon minimalism is correct.; sent1 -> int2: the stitch is not Tongan.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the stitch does bludgeon minimalism and is not a Tongan.; int3 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the countersink is symbolic.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: if the interaction does not freeze Dionysus then the countersink is not a DM but it freezes Scomber. sent2: if that the fact that the reedbird is not ecological but it does bludgeon didacticism hold is wrong then it does not bludgeon didacticism. sent3: if the interaction is agrobiologic but it is not a kind of a DM that the countersink is symbolic is correct. sent4: something does hurt if it is a kind of a smut. sent5: the countersink is parliamentary if it is not non-subcortical and not a drudge. sent6: if the countersink is symbolic thing that is not a DM the interaction does freeze Dionysus. sent7: that the countersink does freeze Dionysus is not false if there is something such that it is symbolic. sent8: if that the interaction does hurt and/or it is not symbolic is false then the fact that the countersink is not symbolic is not false. sent9: the interaction is agrobiologic if there is something such that it hurts. sent10: there exists something such that it is agrobiologic. sent11: there is something such that it freezes Dionysus. sent12: that the interaction is a kind of a DM hold if the countersink is symbolic and not agrobiologic. sent13: the countersink is not a DM. sent14: that the thiazide is not a DM but it is indehiscent does not hold. sent15: the interaction is not a DM if the fact that it does not freeze Dionysus and it is a DM is wrong. sent16: something hurts. sent17: the fact that the interaction does not freeze Dionysus and is a kind of a DM does not hold. sent18: if the countersink is parliamentary it is a kind of a smut. sent19: if something is agrobiologic and does hurt then it is not symbolic. sent20: if something is a DM the interaction is symbolic. sent21: if something is not a DM but it does freeze Scomber then it is agrobiologic. sent22: if there is something such that it does bludgeon Hejaz the countersink is a kind of a DM.
|
sent1: ¬{F}{a} -> (¬{C}{b} & {E}{b}) sent2: ¬(¬{ER}{ge} & {EM}{ge}) -> ¬{EM}{ge} sent3: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent4: (x): {G}x -> {A}x sent5: ({I}{b} & ¬{J}{b}) -> {H}{b} sent6: ({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {F}{a} sent7: (x): {D}x -> {F}{b} sent8: ¬({A}{a} v ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent10: (Ex): {B}x sent11: (Ex): {F}x sent12: ({D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent13: ¬{C}{b} sent14: ¬(¬{C}{dr} & {BB}{dr}) sent15: ¬(¬{F}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent16: (Ex): {A}x sent17: ¬(¬{F}{a} & {C}{a}) sent18: {H}{b} -> {G}{b} sent19: (x): ({B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{D}x sent20: (x): {C}x -> {D}{a} sent21: (x): (¬{C}x & {E}x) -> {B}x sent22: (x): {CA}x -> {C}{b}
|
[
"sent16 & sent9 -> int1: the interaction is agrobiologic.; sent15 & sent17 -> int2: the interaction is not a DM.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the interaction is not non-agrobiologic but it is not a kind of a DM.; int3 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 & sent9 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent15 & sent17 -> int2: ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int3 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the countersink is not symbolic.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent19 -> int4: if the countersink is agrobiologic and it hurts it is not symbolic.; sent21 -> int5: the countersink is agrobiologic if it is not a kind of a DM and it does freeze Scomber.; sent4 -> int6: the countersink does hurt if it is a smut.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the countersink is symbolic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the interaction does not freeze Dionysus then the countersink is not a DM but it freezes Scomber. sent2: if that the fact that the reedbird is not ecological but it does bludgeon didacticism hold is wrong then it does not bludgeon didacticism. sent3: if the interaction is agrobiologic but it is not a kind of a DM that the countersink is symbolic is correct. sent4: something does hurt if it is a kind of a smut. sent5: the countersink is parliamentary if it is not non-subcortical and not a drudge. sent6: if the countersink is symbolic thing that is not a DM the interaction does freeze Dionysus. sent7: that the countersink does freeze Dionysus is not false if there is something such that it is symbolic. sent8: if that the interaction does hurt and/or it is not symbolic is false then the fact that the countersink is not symbolic is not false. sent9: the interaction is agrobiologic if there is something such that it hurts. sent10: there exists something such that it is agrobiologic. sent11: there is something such that it freezes Dionysus. sent12: that the interaction is a kind of a DM hold if the countersink is symbolic and not agrobiologic. sent13: the countersink is not a DM. sent14: that the thiazide is not a DM but it is indehiscent does not hold. sent15: the interaction is not a DM if the fact that it does not freeze Dionysus and it is a DM is wrong. sent16: something hurts. sent17: the fact that the interaction does not freeze Dionysus and is a kind of a DM does not hold. sent18: if the countersink is parliamentary it is a kind of a smut. sent19: if something is agrobiologic and does hurt then it is not symbolic. sent20: if something is a DM the interaction is symbolic. sent21: if something is not a DM but it does freeze Scomber then it is agrobiologic. sent22: if there is something such that it does bludgeon Hejaz the countersink is a kind of a DM. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 & sent9 -> int1: the interaction is agrobiologic.; sent15 & sent17 -> int2: the interaction is not a DM.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the interaction is not non-agrobiologic but it is not a kind of a DM.; int3 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Negress is a seigneury.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: that the purist does not bludgeon Primus and is reactive is incorrect if something is not reactive. sent2: if something is an escalation the fact that it is a seigneury hold. sent3: there is something such that it is reactive. sent4: the fact that the purist bludgeons Primus and is reactive is wrong if there is something such that it is not reactive. sent5: if the Negress is not an escalation that the purist does not bludgeon Primus hold. sent6: if the fact that the Negress is a kind of a seigneury and/or it is not a kind of an escalation is false then the undershrub is not a kind of a seigneury. sent7: the fact that the purist bludgeons Primus and is reactive is not correct. sent8: the purist does not bludgeon Primus. sent9: if the Negress is not a kind of an escalation then the purist does not bludgeon Primus and is not unreactive.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent3: (Ex): {AB}x sent4: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent6: ¬({B}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{B}{bf} sent7: ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent8: ¬{AA}{b} sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Negress is not a kind of an escalation.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the purist does not bludgeon Primus and is reactive.; sent2 -> int2: if that the Negress is an escalation hold then it is a kind of a seigneury.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); sent2 -> int2: {A}{a} -> {B}{a};"
] |
the fact that the undershrub is not a seigneury hold.
|
¬{B}{bf}
|
[] | 5 | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Negress is a seigneury. ; $context$ = sent1: that the purist does not bludgeon Primus and is reactive is incorrect if something is not reactive. sent2: if something is an escalation the fact that it is a seigneury hold. sent3: there is something such that it is reactive. sent4: the fact that the purist bludgeons Primus and is reactive is wrong if there is something such that it is not reactive. sent5: if the Negress is not an escalation that the purist does not bludgeon Primus hold. sent6: if the fact that the Negress is a kind of a seigneury and/or it is not a kind of an escalation is false then the undershrub is not a kind of a seigneury. sent7: the fact that the purist bludgeons Primus and is reactive is not correct. sent8: the purist does not bludgeon Primus. sent9: if the Negress is not a kind of an escalation then the purist does not bludgeon Primus and is not unreactive. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Negress is not a kind of an escalation.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the purist does not bludgeon Primus and is reactive.; sent2 -> int2: if that the Negress is an escalation hold then it is a kind of a seigneury.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the fact that there exists something such that if it does not expatriate souk and is a unoriginality it does rick hold does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is not accessible and it bludgeons fogbank then it is cross-sectional. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a gerontologist and it is a Muscari it freezes compromising. sent3: if that the batten is not removable but it is a rofecoxib is not incorrect then that it is argentic hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it is non-umbelliform thing that subtracts blackwood it is eponymous. sent5: something does freeze batten if it does not freeze Blackpool and is cross-sectional. sent6: if something does not bludgeon gingham but it is papillate it freezes agar. sent7: something is papillate if it is not a kind of a mover and it is idiographic. sent8: something ricks if it expatriates souk and is a unoriginality. sent9: the cooler is anopheline if it is not a Ballistite and does expatriate abruptness. sent10: if something that is not cachectic is creative the fact that it does verse is not wrong. sent11: something that does not expatriate souk and is a unoriginality ricks. sent12: the cooler ricks if it expatriates souk and it is a kind of a unoriginality. sent13: if that the cooler does not expatriate souk and is a kind of a latrine is not wrong then it is lengthwise. sent14: there exists something such that if it expatriates souk and is a unoriginality it ricks. sent15: the fact that if the cooler is not a Shavian but it is a kind of the mover then the cooler is a unoriginality is not false.
|
sent1: (Ex): (¬{IT}x & {K}x) -> {EJ}x sent2: (Ex): (¬{IR}x & {FE}x) -> {IQ}x sent3: (¬{HD}{gq} & {IN}{gq}) -> {AJ}{gq} sent4: (Ex): (¬{I}x & {BI}x) -> {AO}x sent5: (x): (¬{DI}x & {EJ}x) -> {BO}x sent6: (x): (¬{FD}x & {HK}x) -> {CH}x sent7: (x): (¬{CK}x & {AT}x) -> {HK}x sent8: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent9: (¬{FA}{aa} & {IG}{aa}) -> {EO}{aa} sent10: (x): (¬{IO}x & {AG}x) -> {GL}x sent11: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent12: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent13: (¬{AA}{aa} & {BR}{aa}) -> {BS}{aa} sent14: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent15: (¬{IF}{aa} & {CK}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa}
|
[
"sent11 -> int1: the cooler does rick if it does not expatriate souk and is a kind of a unoriginality.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent11 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the fact that there exists something such that if it does not expatriate souk and is a unoriginality it does rick hold does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not accessible and it bludgeons fogbank then it is cross-sectional. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a gerontologist and it is a Muscari it freezes compromising. sent3: if that the batten is not removable but it is a rofecoxib is not incorrect then that it is argentic hold. sent4: there exists something such that if it is non-umbelliform thing that subtracts blackwood it is eponymous. sent5: something does freeze batten if it does not freeze Blackpool and is cross-sectional. sent6: if something does not bludgeon gingham but it is papillate it freezes agar. sent7: something is papillate if it is not a kind of a mover and it is idiographic. sent8: something ricks if it expatriates souk and is a unoriginality. sent9: the cooler is anopheline if it is not a Ballistite and does expatriate abruptness. sent10: if something that is not cachectic is creative the fact that it does verse is not wrong. sent11: something that does not expatriate souk and is a unoriginality ricks. sent12: the cooler ricks if it expatriates souk and it is a kind of a unoriginality. sent13: if that the cooler does not expatriate souk and is a kind of a latrine is not wrong then it is lengthwise. sent14: there exists something such that if it expatriates souk and is a unoriginality it ricks. sent15: the fact that if the cooler is not a Shavian but it is a kind of the mover then the cooler is a unoriginality is not false. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 -> int1: the cooler does rick if it does not expatriate souk and is a kind of a unoriginality.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the interlock is not a kind of a bilges but it does freeze stockfish does not hold.
|
¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b})
|
sent1: that the interlock is not a bilges and freezes stockfish is not right if it is not a rally. sent2: the interlock is not a onomancy and does freeze schematization if the stockfish is a kind of a enantiomorphism. sent3: everything is a kind of non-clamatorial thing that is not a Reichstein. sent4: the stockfish is a kind of a enantiomorphism. sent5: the stockfish is not a onomancy if the interlock is a kind of a enantiomorphism. sent6: the interlock freezes schematization. sent7: the fact that the interlock is a bilges and it freezes stockfish is not true.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent2: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent3: (x): (¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) sent4: {A}{a} sent5: {A}{b} -> ¬{AA}{a} sent6: {AB}{b} sent7: ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b})
|
[
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the interlock is not a kind of a onomancy but it freezes schematization.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b});"
] |
the interlock is not a kind of a bilges and freezes stockfish.
|
(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b})
|
[
"sent3 -> int2: the padlock is a kind of non-clamatorial thing that is not a kind of a Reichstein.; int2 -> int3: the padlock is not a kind of a Reichstein.; int3 -> int4: everything is not a Reichstein.; int4 -> int5: the slopseller is not a Reichstein.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the interlock is not a kind of a bilges but it does freeze stockfish does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the interlock is not a bilges and freezes stockfish is not right if it is not a rally. sent2: the interlock is not a onomancy and does freeze schematization if the stockfish is a kind of a enantiomorphism. sent3: everything is a kind of non-clamatorial thing that is not a Reichstein. sent4: the stockfish is a kind of a enantiomorphism. sent5: the stockfish is not a onomancy if the interlock is a kind of a enantiomorphism. sent6: the interlock freezes schematization. sent7: the fact that the interlock is a bilges and it freezes stockfish is not true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the interlock is not a kind of a onomancy but it freezes schematization.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the bathymetricness happens is right.
|
{C}
|
sent1: the pleasing happens. sent2: if the march happens and/or the pleasing occurs the bathymetricness does not occur. sent3: that the bathymetricness but not the pleasing happens is brought about by the non-avianness. sent4: the bathymetricness does not occur if the marching happens. sent5: if the fact that both the starriness and the avianness occurs does not hold the avianness does not occur.
|
sent1: {B} sent2: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent3: ¬{D} -> ({C} & ¬{B}) sent4: {A} -> ¬{C} sent5: ¬({E} & {D}) -> ¬{D}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the marching and/or the pleasing occurs.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
either the homeopathicness or the venture or both occurs.
|
({AA} v {GU})
|
[] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the bathymetricness happens is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the pleasing happens. sent2: if the march happens and/or the pleasing occurs the bathymetricness does not occur. sent3: that the bathymetricness but not the pleasing happens is brought about by the non-avianness. sent4: the bathymetricness does not occur if the marching happens. sent5: if the fact that both the starriness and the avianness occurs does not hold the avianness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the marching and/or the pleasing occurs.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the mizzen is Carmelite.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: if there is something such that it is a kind of a Thylogale then the condylion is a kind of a Whittle. sent2: the mizzen is Carmelite if the condylion is a chaetodon. sent3: there is something such that it is a Thylogale. sent4: if something is a kind of a Thylogale the condylion is a kind of a Whittle and it is a chaetodon.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> {B}{a} sent2: {C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the condylion is a Whittle and it is a chaetodon.; int1 -> int2: that the condylion is a chaetodon is not false.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> int2: {C}{a}; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the mizzen is Carmelite. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that it is a kind of a Thylogale then the condylion is a kind of a Whittle. sent2: the mizzen is Carmelite if the condylion is a chaetodon. sent3: there is something such that it is a Thylogale. sent4: if something is a kind of a Thylogale the condylion is a kind of a Whittle and it is a chaetodon. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the condylion is a Whittle and it is a chaetodon.; int1 -> int2: that the condylion is a chaetodon is not false.; int2 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does not expatriate ideology then that it does bludgeon kayak and/or is not a stand is not correct.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: if that something is not onside is not false then the fact that it is a Stevenson or is not a possession or both is not right. sent2: if that the ununpentium does bludgeon kayak is not false the fact that it is a kind of a goblet and/or is not a Nilotic is not right. sent3: the fact that the ununpentium either is a combustible or does not expatriate ideology or both does not hold if it does not freeze Hemachatus. sent4: the kayak does not subtract Donatist if it is not a stand. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not expatriate ideology then it stands. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not expatriate unpalatability either it is indecent or it is not a Ursidae or both. sent7: the manikin is not a parry if it is not a stand. sent8: there exists something such that if it does not blind then it is not a Faulkner. sent9: the fact that the fact that the ununpentium is carroty and/or is not extropic does not hold if the fact that the ununpentium is tidal is not incorrect hold. sent10: the fact that the ununpentium is a stand and/or it is a Commerce is false if it does not scruple. sent11: there exists something such that if it is diagonalizable the fact that it is a faintness or is not fleshy or both is not correct. sent12: if the ununpentium does not expatriate ideology that it bludgeons kayak or is not a stand or both is incorrect. sent13: there exists something such that if it is neurophysiological then the fact that it is a haste and/or it is not altricial does not hold. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Reichstein then the fact that it is paranormal and/or it is not tangential is not correct. sent15: the fact that the ununpentium does bludgeon kayak or is not carroty or both is not correct if it is trigonometric. sent16: there is something such that if it does not expatriate Myrmeleontidae it is not a kind of a tiptop. sent17: there exists something such that if it is noncombustible then that it is not a probiotic is true.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{DJ}x -> ¬({EB}x v ¬{HK}x) sent2: {AA}{aa} -> ¬({HE}{aa} v ¬{AN}{aa}) sent3: ¬{CC}{aa} -> ¬({CQ}{aa} v ¬{A}{aa}) sent4: ¬{AB}{h} -> ¬{FQ}{h} sent5: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{IG}x -> ({FR}x v ¬{FT}x) sent7: ¬{AB}{jd} -> ¬{BK}{jd} sent8: (Ex): ¬{GB}x -> ¬{DG}x sent9: {BN}{aa} -> ¬({IF}{aa} v ¬{AR}{aa}) sent10: ¬{D}{aa} -> ¬({AB}{aa} v {FA}{aa}) sent11: (Ex): {CE}x -> ¬({JE}x v ¬{GR}x) sent12: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent13: (Ex): {FK}x -> ¬({DT}x v ¬{C}x) sent14: (Ex): {HI}x -> ¬({HQ}x v ¬{AQ}x) sent15: {GT}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{IF}{aa}) sent16: (Ex): ¬{H}x -> ¬{AH}x sent17: (Ex): ¬{CQ}x -> ¬{IR}x
|
[
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if it is not onside the fact that it is a kind of a Stevenson and/or it is not a possession is false.
|
(Ex): ¬{DJ}x -> ¬({EB}x v ¬{HK}x)
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: if the incumbent is not onside the fact that it is a Stevenson and/or is not a kind of a possession does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not expatriate ideology then that it does bludgeon kayak and/or is not a stand is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is not onside is not false then the fact that it is a Stevenson or is not a possession or both is not right. sent2: if that the ununpentium does bludgeon kayak is not false the fact that it is a kind of a goblet and/or is not a Nilotic is not right. sent3: the fact that the ununpentium either is a combustible or does not expatriate ideology or both does not hold if it does not freeze Hemachatus. sent4: the kayak does not subtract Donatist if it is not a stand. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not expatriate ideology then it stands. sent6: there exists something such that if it does not expatriate unpalatability either it is indecent or it is not a Ursidae or both. sent7: the manikin is not a parry if it is not a stand. sent8: there exists something such that if it does not blind then it is not a Faulkner. sent9: the fact that the fact that the ununpentium is carroty and/or is not extropic does not hold if the fact that the ununpentium is tidal is not incorrect hold. sent10: the fact that the ununpentium is a stand and/or it is a Commerce is false if it does not scruple. sent11: there exists something such that if it is diagonalizable the fact that it is a faintness or is not fleshy or both is not correct. sent12: if the ununpentium does not expatriate ideology that it bludgeons kayak or is not a stand or both is incorrect. sent13: there exists something such that if it is neurophysiological then the fact that it is a haste and/or it is not altricial does not hold. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Reichstein then the fact that it is paranormal and/or it is not tangential is not correct. sent15: the fact that the ununpentium does bludgeon kayak or is not carroty or both is not correct if it is trigonometric. sent16: there is something such that if it does not expatriate Myrmeleontidae it is not a kind of a tiptop. sent17: there exists something such that if it is noncombustible then that it is not a probiotic is true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the execration occurs is not false.
|
{B}
|
sent1: the expatriating blanquillo occurs. sent2: that not the understanding but the execration happens is not correct if the expatriating blanquillo happens. sent3: the understanding does not occur.
|
sent1: {C} sent2: {C} -> ¬(¬{A} & {B}) sent3: ¬{A}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the execration happens.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: not the understanding but the execration occurs.; sent2 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the understanding does not occur and the execration occurs is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {B}; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{A} & {B}); sent2 & sent1 -> int2: ¬(¬{A} & {B}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the execration occurs is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: the expatriating blanquillo occurs. sent2: that not the understanding but the execration happens is not correct if the expatriating blanquillo happens. sent3: the understanding does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the execration happens.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: not the understanding but the execration occurs.; sent2 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the understanding does not occur and the execration occurs is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the winner is not a kind of a basic.
|
¬{B}{c}
|
sent1: if that something is holistic and does not bludgeon Methodists is wrong then it is not holistic. sent2: there exists something such that the fact that it exists and it is not a basic does not hold. sent3: the tisane is basic. sent4: if the capillarity freezes Yosemite then the fact that the Morocco is not a Romany but it does exist is false. sent5: the fact that the Morocco does not freeze Yosemite and is not a basic is not correct. sent6: there exists something such that it does not exist and it is not basic. sent7: if the fact that the Morocco is not holistic hold then the winner is basic thing that freezes Yosemite. sent8: the fact that the capillarity is a Romany but it does not freeze Yosemite is false. sent9: that the Morocco does freeze Yosemite and is not Romany is wrong if the capillarity exists. sent10: the Morocco freezes Yosemite. sent11: the fact that the capillarity is non-Romany and freezes Yosemite is not true. sent12: there exists something such that it does not exist and it does not freeze Yosemite. sent13: that the capillarity does not exist and it is not a kind of a Romany does not hold if the Morocco does freeze Yosemite. sent14: there is something such that the fact that it does freeze Yosemite and it is not a basic is not true. sent15: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not exist and is not a Romany is not true the winner is not a basic. sent16: The Yosemite freezes Morocco. sent17: the fact that the Morocco does not freeze Yosemite but it exists is incorrect. sent18: the fact that that the bonefish is not geographic but it is Monophysite is right is not true. sent19: there exists something such that that it does freeze Yosemite and does not exist is not true.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({C}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{B}x) sent3: {B}{hr} sent4: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent5: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent6: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{c} & {A}{c}) sent8: ¬({AB}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent9: {AA}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent10: {A}{a} sent11: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {A}{b}) sent12: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{A}x) sent13: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent14: (Ex): ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent15: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}{c} sent16: {AC}{aa} sent17: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent18: ¬(¬{ER}{es} & {FP}{es}) sent19: (Ex): ¬({A}x & ¬{AA}x)
|
[
"sent13 & sent10 -> int1: that the capillarity does not exist and is not a kind of a Romany is false.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it does not exist and it is not a Romany is false.; int2 & sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 & sent10 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the winner is basic.
|
{B}{c}
|
[
"sent1 -> int3: if that the Morocco is a kind of holistic thing that does not bludgeon Methodists is not true it is not holistic.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the winner is not a kind of a basic. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is holistic and does not bludgeon Methodists is wrong then it is not holistic. sent2: there exists something such that the fact that it exists and it is not a basic does not hold. sent3: the tisane is basic. sent4: if the capillarity freezes Yosemite then the fact that the Morocco is not a Romany but it does exist is false. sent5: the fact that the Morocco does not freeze Yosemite and is not a basic is not correct. sent6: there exists something such that it does not exist and it is not basic. sent7: if the fact that the Morocco is not holistic hold then the winner is basic thing that freezes Yosemite. sent8: the fact that the capillarity is a Romany but it does not freeze Yosemite is false. sent9: that the Morocco does freeze Yosemite and is not Romany is wrong if the capillarity exists. sent10: the Morocco freezes Yosemite. sent11: the fact that the capillarity is non-Romany and freezes Yosemite is not true. sent12: there exists something such that it does not exist and it does not freeze Yosemite. sent13: that the capillarity does not exist and it is not a kind of a Romany does not hold if the Morocco does freeze Yosemite. sent14: there is something such that the fact that it does freeze Yosemite and it is not a basic is not true. sent15: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not exist and is not a Romany is not true the winner is not a basic. sent16: The Yosemite freezes Morocco. sent17: the fact that the Morocco does not freeze Yosemite but it exists is incorrect. sent18: the fact that that the bonefish is not geographic but it is Monophysite is right is not true. sent19: there exists something such that that it does freeze Yosemite and does not exist is not true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 & sent10 -> int1: that the capillarity does not exist and is not a kind of a Romany is false.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it does not exist and it is not a Romany is false.; int2 & sent15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if the fact that it does not freeze portraiture and it bludgeons archangel does not hold then it is a kind of a binary.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: there is something such that if that it is unenforceable thing that is a Buck is false it is biliary. sent2: if something is not automotive and is a toller then it does bludgeon Shawnee. sent3: if that something does not freeze portraiture but it does bludgeon archangel is not correct then it is not non-binary. sent4: something is oaten if the fact that it is not haptic and it is a kind of a lineman is incorrect. sent5: if the proprietress freezes portraiture then it is a binary. sent6: if something that is not a gook is a medroxyprogesterone it is a Nephelium. sent7: if that the proprietress is not geomorphologic and bludgeons sax is false it bludgeons archangel. sent8: something is a pin if it is not a nosedive and it is a kind of a Tamale. sent9: if that the guano does not freeze portraiture but it subtracts outfitting does not hold then the fact that it is not non-Triassic is not incorrect. sent10: there is something such that if it does freeze portraiture then it is a binary. sent11: if the fact that something does not clangor but it centers is not correct then it is a Nimitz. sent12: that something does caseate is not wrong if it is not a shopping and it stabilizes. sent13: there is something such that if it does not freeze portraiture and does bludgeon archangel it is binary. sent14: if a alterable thing is a slat then it is a kind of a Oniscidae.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({DE}x & {ER}x) -> {BS}x sent2: (x): (¬{AJ}x & {EG}x) -> {D}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (x): ¬(¬{FL}x & {IO}x) -> {CD}x sent5: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent6: (x): (¬{GG}x & {DP}x) -> {BL}x sent7: ¬(¬{BG}{aa} & {HF}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} sent8: (x): (¬{CF}x & {GM}x) -> {II}x sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{ii} & {JA}{ii}) -> {Q}{ii} sent10: (Ex): {AA}x -> {B}x sent11: (x): ¬(¬{CR}x & {FI}x) -> {FR}x sent12: (x): (¬{A}x & {JH}x) -> {JJ}x sent13: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent14: (x): (¬{G}x & {DC}x) -> {AL}x
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: if the fact that the proprietress does not freeze portraiture and does bludgeon archangel is not right then it is binary.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if the fact that it does not clangor and is a centering does not hold then the fact that it is a kind of a Nimitz is true.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{CR}x & {FI}x) -> {FR}x
|
[
"sent11 -> int2: if that the sax does not clangor and centers is not right then it is a Nimitz.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if the fact that it does not freeze portraiture and it bludgeons archangel does not hold then it is a kind of a binary. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if that it is unenforceable thing that is a Buck is false it is biliary. sent2: if something is not automotive and is a toller then it does bludgeon Shawnee. sent3: if that something does not freeze portraiture but it does bludgeon archangel is not correct then it is not non-binary. sent4: something is oaten if the fact that it is not haptic and it is a kind of a lineman is incorrect. sent5: if the proprietress freezes portraiture then it is a binary. sent6: if something that is not a gook is a medroxyprogesterone it is a Nephelium. sent7: if that the proprietress is not geomorphologic and bludgeons sax is false it bludgeons archangel. sent8: something is a pin if it is not a nosedive and it is a kind of a Tamale. sent9: if that the guano does not freeze portraiture but it subtracts outfitting does not hold then the fact that it is not non-Triassic is not incorrect. sent10: there is something such that if it does freeze portraiture then it is a binary. sent11: if the fact that something does not clangor but it centers is not correct then it is a Nimitz. sent12: that something does caseate is not wrong if it is not a shopping and it stabilizes. sent13: there is something such that if it does not freeze portraiture and does bludgeon archangel it is binary. sent14: if a alterable thing is a slat then it is a kind of a Oniscidae. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: if the fact that the proprietress does not freeze portraiture and does bludgeon archangel is not right then it is binary.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the mush is not a glare.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: something does glare if it bludgeons encompassment. sent2: the mush is not a isogone or it is a distillate or both if the Sealyham is probabilistic. sent3: the Sealyham is probabilistic. sent4: if something is not a isogone or it is a distillate or both it bludgeons encompassment. sent5: if something is probabilistic it is a Macropodidae.
|
sent1: (x): {B}x -> {C}x sent2: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: (x): {A}x -> {FT}x
|
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the mush either is not a isogone or is a distillate or both.; sent4 -> int2: if the mush is not a isogone or it is a distillate or both it bludgeons encompassment.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the mush bludgeons encompassment.; sent1 -> int4: the mush does glare if it bludgeons encompassment.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent3 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}); sent4 -> int2: (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) -> {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {B}{b}; sent1 -> int4: {B}{b} -> {C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the fact that the homebuilder is probabilistic is true then it is a kind of a Macropodidae.
|
{A}{du} -> {FT}{du}
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the mush is not a glare. ; $context$ = sent1: something does glare if it bludgeons encompassment. sent2: the mush is not a isogone or it is a distillate or both if the Sealyham is probabilistic. sent3: the Sealyham is probabilistic. sent4: if something is not a isogone or it is a distillate or both it bludgeons encompassment. sent5: if something is probabilistic it is a Macropodidae. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent3 -> int1: the mush either is not a isogone or is a distillate or both.; sent4 -> int2: if the mush is not a isogone or it is a distillate or both it bludgeons encompassment.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the mush bludgeons encompassment.; sent1 -> int4: the mush does glare if it bludgeons encompassment.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bilby is indulgent.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: if something that is a kind of a Gondi does freeze tomalley the wether is not bronchoscopic. sent2: the bilby freezes tomalley. sent3: the bilby is indulgent if the wether is not bronchoscopic. sent4: if that the provider is not a vessel is not wrong the hawk's-beard does not expatriate cephaloglycin. sent5: if something freezes Brassia and/or it does expatriate Utopian it does not expatriate gesticulation. sent6: that the instar is a kind of a vessel and is not a kind of an epic is not right. sent7: if something is bronchoscopic then it is not indulgent. sent8: the fact that something either is faceless or is eugenic or both does not hold if it does not expatriate gesticulation. sent9: if either the shop is a toller or it subtracts windburned or both it is not indulgent. sent10: if the hawk's-beard is a costusroot the fact that the palate is a kind of a Gondi is correct. sent11: the provider is not a kind of a vessel if there exists something such that the fact that it is a vessel and not epic is not correct. sent12: something that is bronchoscopic or does freeze tomalley or both is not indulgent. sent13: something is a kind of a Gondi and/or is a costusroot if it does not expatriate cephaloglycin. sent14: everything is bronchial thing that expatriates Utopian. sent15: the fact that the bilby is not a kind of a dishwasher is not incorrect if it charms and/or it is indulgent. sent16: The tomalley freezes bilby. sent17: the palate is a Gondi if the hawk's-beard is a kind of a Gondi. sent18: if either something is a berkelium or it is uveal or both then it is not a Hawthorne. sent19: the bilby is not indulgent if it is bronchoscopic. sent20: something is not a Sheridan if it either bludgeons lanai or does expatriate wether or both.
|
sent1: (x): ({D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: ¬{A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent4: ¬{I}{f} -> ¬{H}{d} sent5: (x): ({M}x v {L}x) -> ¬{J}x sent6: ¬({I}{g} & ¬{K}{g}) sent7: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x sent8: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬({E}x v {F}x) sent9: ({HM}{cc} v {AN}{cc}) -> ¬{C}{cc} sent10: {G}{d} -> {D}{c} sent11: (x): ¬({I}x & ¬{K}x) -> ¬{I}{f} sent12: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent13: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({D}x v {G}x) sent14: (x): ({N}x & {L}x) sent15: ({AC}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{CM}{a} sent16: {AA}{aa} sent17: {D}{d} -> {D}{c} sent18: (x): ({IA}x v {ER}x) -> ¬{FE}x sent19: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} sent20: (x): ({DL}x v {FM}x) -> ¬{GB}x
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the bilby either is bronchoscopic or freezes tomalley or both.; sent12 -> int2: the bilby is not indulgent if it is bronchoscopic and/or does freeze tomalley.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}); sent12 -> int2: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the bilby is indulgent.
|
{C}{a}
|
[
"sent6 -> int3: there exists something such that that it is a vessel and it is not an epic is not right.; sent11 & int3 -> int4: the provider is not a vessel.; sent4 & int4 -> int5: the hawk's-beard does not expatriate cephaloglycin.; sent13 -> int6: if the hawk's-beard does not expatriate cephaloglycin it is a kind of a Gondi or it is a kind of a costusroot or both.; int5 & int6 -> int7: either the hawk's-beard is a kind of a Gondi or it is a kind of a costusroot or both.; sent17 & int7 & sent10 -> int8: the palate is a kind of a Gondi.; sent5 -> int9: the floorwalker does not expatriate gesticulation if it either does freeze Brassia or does expatriate Utopian or both.; sent14 -> int10: the floorwalker is bronchial and it expatriates Utopian.; int10 -> int11: the floorwalker expatriates Utopian.; int11 -> int12: the floorwalker does freeze Brassia and/or expatriates Utopian.; int9 & int12 -> int13: the floorwalker does not expatriate gesticulation.; sent8 -> int14: the fact that the floorwalker is faceless and/or it is eugenic does not hold if it does not expatriate gesticulation.; int13 & int14 -> int15: the fact that that either the floorwalker is faceless or it is eugenic or both is not right is true.; int15 -> int16: there is nothing such that it is faceless or is eugenic or both.; int16 -> int17: the fact that the Kaiser either is faceless or is eugenic or both is incorrect.; int17 -> int18: there is something such that the fact that it is faceless and/or it is not non-eugenic is not correct.;"
] | 13 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bilby is indulgent. ; $context$ = sent1: if something that is a kind of a Gondi does freeze tomalley the wether is not bronchoscopic. sent2: the bilby freezes tomalley. sent3: the bilby is indulgent if the wether is not bronchoscopic. sent4: if that the provider is not a vessel is not wrong the hawk's-beard does not expatriate cephaloglycin. sent5: if something freezes Brassia and/or it does expatriate Utopian it does not expatriate gesticulation. sent6: that the instar is a kind of a vessel and is not a kind of an epic is not right. sent7: if something is bronchoscopic then it is not indulgent. sent8: the fact that something either is faceless or is eugenic or both does not hold if it does not expatriate gesticulation. sent9: if either the shop is a toller or it subtracts windburned or both it is not indulgent. sent10: if the hawk's-beard is a costusroot the fact that the palate is a kind of a Gondi is correct. sent11: the provider is not a kind of a vessel if there exists something such that the fact that it is a vessel and not epic is not correct. sent12: something that is bronchoscopic or does freeze tomalley or both is not indulgent. sent13: something is a kind of a Gondi and/or is a costusroot if it does not expatriate cephaloglycin. sent14: everything is bronchial thing that expatriates Utopian. sent15: the fact that the bilby is not a kind of a dishwasher is not incorrect if it charms and/or it is indulgent. sent16: The tomalley freezes bilby. sent17: the palate is a Gondi if the hawk's-beard is a kind of a Gondi. sent18: if either something is a berkelium or it is uveal or both then it is not a Hawthorne. sent19: the bilby is not indulgent if it is bronchoscopic. sent20: something is not a Sheridan if it either bludgeons lanai or does expatriate wether or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the bilby either is bronchoscopic or freezes tomalley or both.; sent12 -> int2: the bilby is not indulgent if it is bronchoscopic and/or does freeze tomalley.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if it freezes hobbyhorse and it is a selloff then it does not freeze Hubble is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: that the cockroach freezes Hubble hold if it freezes hobbyhorse and is a kind of a selloff. sent2: something that expatriates fogbank and freezes professor is not a kind of a snorter. sent3: there is something such that if it bludgeons encapsulation and it is a payoff then it is not Sabine. sent4: there is something such that if it freezes hobbyhorse and is a selloff it freezes Hubble. sent5: the orphan is not nervous if it is a games-master and it freezes lory. sent6: if something does freeze Hubble and does bludgeon amaretto it is not a Amish. sent7: if that the cockroach does freeze hobbyhorse and is a kind of a selloff hold it does not freeze Hubble. sent8: the cockroach is a thelarche if it does fray and it does freeze hobbyhorse. sent9: if something that is dyslexic is a kind of a selloff it is not nilpotent. sent10: that the cockroach is not arsenious is right if it is a kind of a beater that does freeze hobbyhorse. sent11: the ocher is a kind of a dogie if it is a hypertonicity and it does freeze eddy.
|
sent1: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: (x): ({BL}x & {AK}x) -> ¬{JJ}x sent3: (Ex): ({IM}x & {D}x) -> ¬{IQ}x sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: ({FS}{au} & {E}{au}) -> ¬{CU}{au} sent6: (x): ({B}x & {AP}x) -> ¬{DL}x sent7: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent8: ({IP}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> {JE}{aa} sent9: (x): ({FU}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{CF}x sent10: ({AR}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{IL}{aa} sent11: ({EC}{at} & {FG}{at}) -> {IJ}{at}
|
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the cockroach is both dyslexic and a selloff it is not nilpotent.
|
({FU}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{CF}{aa}
|
[
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it freezes hobbyhorse and it is a selloff then it does not freeze Hubble is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the cockroach freezes Hubble hold if it freezes hobbyhorse and is a kind of a selloff. sent2: something that expatriates fogbank and freezes professor is not a kind of a snorter. sent3: there is something such that if it bludgeons encapsulation and it is a payoff then it is not Sabine. sent4: there is something such that if it freezes hobbyhorse and is a selloff it freezes Hubble. sent5: the orphan is not nervous if it is a games-master and it freezes lory. sent6: if something does freeze Hubble and does bludgeon amaretto it is not a Amish. sent7: if that the cockroach does freeze hobbyhorse and is a kind of a selloff hold it does not freeze Hubble. sent8: the cockroach is a thelarche if it does fray and it does freeze hobbyhorse. sent9: if something that is dyslexic is a kind of a selloff it is not nilpotent. sent10: that the cockroach is not arsenious is right if it is a kind of a beater that does freeze hobbyhorse. sent11: the ocher is a kind of a dogie if it is a hypertonicity and it does freeze eddy. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the shortener pins.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the biosphere is a SNP and does whore. sent2: if there is something such that it is a SNP and it does whore then the shortener is not a pin.
|
sent1: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent2: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: there is something such that it is a SNP and it does whore.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x); int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the shortener pins. ; $context$ = sent1: the biosphere is a SNP and does whore. sent2: if there is something such that it is a SNP and it does whore then the shortener is not a pin. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: there is something such that it is a SNP and it does whore.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the ostracism occurs.
|
{A}
|
sent1: the fact that if the fact that the syndicating and/or the perseverance happens is not true the expatriating outfitting does not occur hold. sent2: the ostracism happens. sent3: if both the moonlight and the lens happens the clapping does not occur. sent4: that the synthesizing does not occur and the abbreviation does not occur brings about that the imposture does not occur. sent5: the thrum does not occur and the bignoniaceousness does not occur. sent6: that the imposture does not occur leads to that the expatriating secondment occurs and the cull happens. sent7: the ostracism does not occur if both the non-Trinidadianness and the culling occurs. sent8: if that the clapping does not occur hold the expatriating boards and the watercolor occurs. sent9: the synthesizing does not occur if the notification occurs and/or the synthesizing does not occur. sent10: if the expatriating boards occurs the bludgeoning horsewoman does not occur and the Trinidadian does not occur. sent11: if the culling does not occur then the ostracism occurs and the cecalness occurs. sent12: that either the notification happens or the synthesizing does not occur or both is caused by that the expatriating outfitting does not occur. sent13: that the cull and the Trinidadianness occurs is not correct if the bludgeoning horsewoman does not occur. sent14: if the bignoniaceousness does not occur then the moonlight happens and the lens happens.
|
sent1: ¬({P} v {Q}) -> ¬{L} sent2: {A} sent3: ({N} & {O}) -> ¬{K} sent4: (¬{H} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{G} sent5: (¬{S} & ¬{R}) sent6: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {B}) sent7: (¬{C} & {B}) -> ¬{A} sent8: ¬{K} -> ({E} & {J}) sent9: ({M} v ¬{H}) -> ¬{H} sent10: {E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{C}) sent11: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {EI}) sent12: ¬{L} -> ({M} v ¬{H}) sent13: ¬{D} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent14: ¬{R} -> ({N} & {O})
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the ostracism does not occur.
|
¬{A}
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the bignoniaceousness does not occur.; sent14 & int1 -> int2: the moonlight occurs and the lens happens.; sent3 & int2 -> int3: the clapping does not occur.; sent8 & int3 -> int4: both the expatriating boards and the watercolor occurs.; int4 -> int5: the expatriating boards occurs.; sent10 & int5 -> int6: the bludgeoning horsewoman does not occur and the Trinidadianness does not occur.; int6 -> int7: the Trinidadian does not occur.;"
] | 9 | 1 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the ostracism occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that if the fact that the syndicating and/or the perseverance happens is not true the expatriating outfitting does not occur hold. sent2: the ostracism happens. sent3: if both the moonlight and the lens happens the clapping does not occur. sent4: that the synthesizing does not occur and the abbreviation does not occur brings about that the imposture does not occur. sent5: the thrum does not occur and the bignoniaceousness does not occur. sent6: that the imposture does not occur leads to that the expatriating secondment occurs and the cull happens. sent7: the ostracism does not occur if both the non-Trinidadianness and the culling occurs. sent8: if that the clapping does not occur hold the expatriating boards and the watercolor occurs. sent9: the synthesizing does not occur if the notification occurs and/or the synthesizing does not occur. sent10: if the expatriating boards occurs the bludgeoning horsewoman does not occur and the Trinidadian does not occur. sent11: if the culling does not occur then the ostracism occurs and the cecalness occurs. sent12: that either the notification happens or the synthesizing does not occur or both is caused by that the expatriating outfitting does not occur. sent13: that the cull and the Trinidadianness occurs is not correct if the bludgeoning horsewoman does not occur. sent14: if the bignoniaceousness does not occur then the moonlight happens and the lens happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that it does not bludgeon chemise and is not a bugbear does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: the fondue does not expatriate tout and is not a linkboy if the gemsbok is a paleontologist. sent2: the broadtail is not a paleontologist. sent3: there exists something such that it does not bludgeon chemise. sent4: the redcoat is not a rally if the vaudevillian does not subtract cassiterite and it is not mesolithic. sent5: the platelayer is marmorean if it is a impetuousness. sent6: something bludgeons chemise and is not a bugbear. sent7: the vaudevillian does not subtract cassiterite if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a lapse and it does freeze defecation does not hold. sent8: that the gemsbok is both not a paleontologist and not a acaricide is not correct if the Raffia is not Pasteurian. sent9: the fondue does not bludgeon chemise. sent10: the fondue is not a paleontologist. sent11: something is not a bugbear. sent12: the fondue does not bludgeon chemise if it is not a kind of a paleontologist. sent13: something does not bludgeon chemise and is a bugbear. sent14: everything is a kind of non-mesolithic thing that does not bludgeon isogamete. sent15: the platelayer is a kind of a impetuousness. sent16: if the fact that something is not a kind of a paleontologist and it is not a acaricide is not right it is a kind of a paleontologist. sent17: the fact that something does not lapse but it freezes defecation is wrong if it is marmorean. sent18: if something does not rally then the Raffia is not Pasteurian. sent19: if the fact that the fondue is not a paleontologist is correct it does not bludgeon chemise and is not a bugbear. sent20: the fondue is not a patriotism.
|
sent1: {A}{b} -> (¬{ID}{a} & ¬{AN}{a}) sent2: ¬{A}{fn} sent3: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent4: (¬{F}{e} & ¬{E}{e}) -> ¬{D}{d} sent5: {J}{f} -> {I}{f} sent6: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}{e} sent8: ¬{C}{c} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent9: ¬{AA}{a} sent10: ¬{A}{a} sent11: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent12: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} sent13: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent14: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{K}x) sent15: {J}{f} sent16: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}x sent17: (x): {I}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & {G}x) sent18: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}{c} sent19: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent20: ¬{EM}{a}
|
[
"sent19 & sent10 -> int1: the fondue does not bludgeon chemise and is not a kind of a bugbear.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent19 & sent10 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that it does not expatriate tout and it is not a linkboy.
|
(Ex): (¬{ID}x & ¬{AN}x)
|
[
"sent5 & sent15 -> int2: that the platelayer is not non-marmorean is correct.; sent17 -> int3: that the platelayer is not a kind of a lapse but it does freeze defecation does not hold if it is marmorean.; int2 & int3 -> int4: that the platelayer is not a kind of a lapse and freezes defecation is incorrect.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that that it is not a lapse and it does freeze defecation is not right.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the vaudevillian does not subtract cassiterite.; sent14 -> int7: the papoose is not mesolithic and it does not bludgeon isogamete.; int7 -> int8: the papoose is not mesolithic.; int8 -> int9: everything is not mesolithic.; int9 -> int10: the vaudevillian is not mesolithic.; int6 & int10 -> int11: the vaudevillian does not subtract cassiterite and is not mesolithic.; sent4 & int11 -> int12: the redcoat does not rally.; int12 -> int13: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a rally.; int13 & sent18 -> int14: the Raffia is not Pasteurian.; int14 & sent8 -> int15: that the gemsbok is not a paleontologist and it is not a acaricide does not hold.; sent16 -> int16: that if the fact that the gemsbok is not a paleontologist and not the acaricide is not correct then the gemsbok is a paleontologist is not incorrect.; int15 & int16 -> int17: the gemsbok is a kind of a paleontologist.; sent1 & int17 -> int18: the fondue does not expatriate tout and it is not a linkboy.; int18 -> hypothesis;"
] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that it does not bludgeon chemise and is not a bugbear does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fondue does not expatriate tout and is not a linkboy if the gemsbok is a paleontologist. sent2: the broadtail is not a paleontologist. sent3: there exists something such that it does not bludgeon chemise. sent4: the redcoat is not a rally if the vaudevillian does not subtract cassiterite and it is not mesolithic. sent5: the platelayer is marmorean if it is a impetuousness. sent6: something bludgeons chemise and is not a bugbear. sent7: the vaudevillian does not subtract cassiterite if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a lapse and it does freeze defecation does not hold. sent8: that the gemsbok is both not a paleontologist and not a acaricide is not correct if the Raffia is not Pasteurian. sent9: the fondue does not bludgeon chemise. sent10: the fondue is not a paleontologist. sent11: something is not a bugbear. sent12: the fondue does not bludgeon chemise if it is not a kind of a paleontologist. sent13: something does not bludgeon chemise and is a bugbear. sent14: everything is a kind of non-mesolithic thing that does not bludgeon isogamete. sent15: the platelayer is a kind of a impetuousness. sent16: if the fact that something is not a kind of a paleontologist and it is not a acaricide is not right it is a kind of a paleontologist. sent17: the fact that something does not lapse but it freezes defecation is wrong if it is marmorean. sent18: if something does not rally then the Raffia is not Pasteurian. sent19: if the fact that the fondue is not a paleontologist is correct it does not bludgeon chemise and is not a bugbear. sent20: the fondue is not a patriotism. ; $proof$ =
|
sent19 & sent10 -> int1: the fondue does not bludgeon chemise and is not a kind of a bugbear.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the non-unsoldness or the freezing Housman or both happens.
|
(¬{C} v {D})
|
sent1: the freelanceness does not occur and the confectionery does not occur. sent2: the non-mensalness and the non-metatarsalness occurs. sent3: that the unsoldness does not occur or the freezing Housman occurs or both is wrong if the confectionery does not occur. sent4: if the fact that that the confectionery occurs and the freelancing occurs is correct is not right the freelancing does not occur. sent5: if the confectionery does not occur then the freezing Housman does not occur. sent6: the freezing Daba does not occur and the expatriating railroad does not occur. sent7: that the unsoldness does not occur is prevented by that the Numidianness does not occur and the freezing Housman does not occur. sent8: the purveyance does not occur and the ticking does not occur if that the freelanceness does not occur is not wrong. sent9: the fact that both the confectionery and the freelanceness occurs is not true if the Numidianness does not occur. sent10: if that the expatriating Milne occurs and the expatriating flannel occurs does not hold then the Numidian does not occur. sent11: if the abating does not occur then the fact that both the expatriating Milne and the expatriating flannel happens does not hold.
|
sent1: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent2: (¬{FR} & ¬{IU}) sent3: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{C} v {D}) sent4: ¬({B} & {A}) -> ¬{A} sent5: ¬{B} -> ¬{D} sent6: (¬{FB} & ¬{CK}) sent7: (¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> {C} sent8: ¬{A} -> (¬{EJ} & ¬{CE}) sent9: ¬{E} -> ¬({B} & {A}) sent10: ¬({G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent11: ¬{H} -> ¬({G} & {F})
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the confectionery does not occur.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the soldness and/or the freezing Housman occurs.
|
(¬{C} v {D})
|
[] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the non-unsoldness or the freezing Housman or both happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the freelanceness does not occur and the confectionery does not occur. sent2: the non-mensalness and the non-metatarsalness occurs. sent3: that the unsoldness does not occur or the freezing Housman occurs or both is wrong if the confectionery does not occur. sent4: if the fact that that the confectionery occurs and the freelancing occurs is correct is not right the freelancing does not occur. sent5: if the confectionery does not occur then the freezing Housman does not occur. sent6: the freezing Daba does not occur and the expatriating railroad does not occur. sent7: that the unsoldness does not occur is prevented by that the Numidianness does not occur and the freezing Housman does not occur. sent8: the purveyance does not occur and the ticking does not occur if that the freelanceness does not occur is not wrong. sent9: the fact that both the confectionery and the freelanceness occurs is not true if the Numidianness does not occur. sent10: if that the expatriating Milne occurs and the expatriating flannel occurs does not hold then the Numidian does not occur. sent11: if the abating does not occur then the fact that both the expatriating Milne and the expatriating flannel happens does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the confectionery does not occur.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the antimetabolite does expatriate Leipzig.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: if the fact that the teredo is irresponsible or it subtracts rupee or both is false the intervenor does not subtracts rupee. sent2: there is nothing such that it is a kind of a recombinant and it does not expatriate predicator. sent3: if something does subtract rupee and/or it does not expatriate Leipzig then it does not expatriate Leipzig. sent4: if the fact that the la is a thalassemia is not false then it is a Triplochiton. sent5: the fact that the antimetabolite is internal is not incorrect. sent6: the antimetabolite expatriates predicator if it is dangerous. sent7: if something does bludgeon Chlorococcum it expatriates Leipzig. sent8: a non-irresponsible thing bludgeons Chlorococcum and is a Triplochiton.
|
sent1: ¬({E}{a} v {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{bf} sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: (x): ({C}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: {F}{b} -> {D}{b} sent5: {IA}{aa} sent6: {G}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent7: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent8: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({A}x & {D}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: that the antimetabolite is recombinant thing that does not expatriate predicator does not hold.; sent7 -> int2: if the fact that the antimetabolite does not bludgeon Chlorococcum is not true then it expatriates Leipzig.;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent7 -> int2: {A}{aa} -> {B}{aa};"
] |
the intervenor bludgeons Chlorococcum.
|
{A}{bf}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the antimetabolite does expatriate Leipzig. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the teredo is irresponsible or it subtracts rupee or both is false the intervenor does not subtracts rupee. sent2: there is nothing such that it is a kind of a recombinant and it does not expatriate predicator. sent3: if something does subtract rupee and/or it does not expatriate Leipzig then it does not expatriate Leipzig. sent4: if the fact that the la is a thalassemia is not false then it is a Triplochiton. sent5: the fact that the antimetabolite is internal is not incorrect. sent6: the antimetabolite expatriates predicator if it is dangerous. sent7: if something does bludgeon Chlorococcum it expatriates Leipzig. sent8: a non-irresponsible thing bludgeons Chlorococcum and is a Triplochiton. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: that the antimetabolite is recombinant thing that does not expatriate predicator does not hold.; sent7 -> int2: if the fact that the antimetabolite does not bludgeon Chlorococcum is not true then it expatriates Leipzig.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if the fact that it is immunosuppressive and it is not a sketchbook is incorrect then it does not freeze androsterone does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: the fact that the folate does not freeze androsterone is not incorrect if it is immunosuppressive and it is not a sketchbook. sent2: that the folate does not subtract Kaiser is not false if that it does expatriate folate and does not freeze androsterone is incorrect. sent3: if the folate is a kind of a sketchbook that it does not freeze androsterone is right. sent4: if the fact that the folate is immunosuppressive but it is not a sketchbook is not true then the fact that it does freeze androsterone is right. sent5: there is something such that if it is not supernaturalist then it does not bludgeon kayak. sent6: there is something such that if it is not immunosuppressive it does not freeze androsterone. sent7: the folate does not freeze androsterone if that it is immunosuppressive and not a sketchbook does not hold. sent8: there is something such that if the fact that it is immunosuppressive and it is not a sketchbook is false it does freeze androsterone. sent9: there exists something such that if that it is inconsistent thing that is not a norethindrone is not correct it blazes. sent10: there is something such that if the fact that it is immunosuppressive and it is a sketchbook is false it does not freeze androsterone. sent11: something is not a sketchbook if the fact that it does outlive and does not expatriate Solanaceae is false. sent12: the kayak is not mousy if that it is economic but not a sketchbook is not correct. sent13: if the fact that the Kaiser is immunosuppressive but it is not a adiposity does not hold it does not freeze mother. sent14: there exists something such that if that it is diffident and is not a Xenopus is false it is not economic. sent15: there is something such that if it is immunosuppressive and it is not a sketchbook then it does not freeze androsterone. sent16: if that the basement is nonhierarchical and not a spirit is wrong it is not Leibnizian. sent17: something is not profaned if that it is an antibiotic that is not dental is not right. sent18: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a sketchbook is correct then it does not freeze androsterone. sent19: there is something such that if that it is rickettsial but not a Desmodontidae is wrong it is not dental. sent20: there exists something such that if that it is not non-brassy and it does bludgeon kayak does not hold it is not a Freon. sent21: the folate is a owner-driver if that it is a kind of inconsolable thing that does not freeze androsterone does not hold.
|
sent1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: ¬({HA}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> ¬{GP}{aa} sent3: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent4: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ¬{ED}x -> ¬{HL}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent9: (Ex): ¬({FB}x & ¬{FF}x) -> {H}x sent10: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent11: (x): ¬({AJ}x & ¬{FP}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent12: ¬({AF}{hg} & ¬{AB}{hg}) -> ¬{EC}{hg} sent13: ¬({AA}{gr} & ¬{C}{gr}) -> ¬{CG}{gr} sent14: (Ex): ¬({FR}x & ¬{IO}x) -> ¬{AF}x sent15: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent16: ¬({T}{gn} & ¬{GJ}{gn}) -> ¬{FQ}{gn} sent17: (x): ¬({DE}x & ¬{CO}x) -> ¬{IS}x sent18: (Ex): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent19: (Ex): ¬({CC}x & ¬{BI}x) -> ¬{CO}x sent20: (Ex): ¬({IP}x & {HL}x) -> ¬{EO}x sent21: ¬({BA}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> {CA}{aa}
|
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if that the fact that the folate outlives and does not expatriate Solanaceae hold does not hold then it is not a sketchbook.
|
¬({AJ}{aa} & ¬{FP}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa}
|
[
"sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if the fact that it is immunosuppressive and it is not a sketchbook is incorrect then it does not freeze androsterone does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the folate does not freeze androsterone is not incorrect if it is immunosuppressive and it is not a sketchbook. sent2: that the folate does not subtract Kaiser is not false if that it does expatriate folate and does not freeze androsterone is incorrect. sent3: if the folate is a kind of a sketchbook that it does not freeze androsterone is right. sent4: if the fact that the folate is immunosuppressive but it is not a sketchbook is not true then the fact that it does freeze androsterone is right. sent5: there is something such that if it is not supernaturalist then it does not bludgeon kayak. sent6: there is something such that if it is not immunosuppressive it does not freeze androsterone. sent7: the folate does not freeze androsterone if that it is immunosuppressive and not a sketchbook does not hold. sent8: there is something such that if the fact that it is immunosuppressive and it is not a sketchbook is false it does freeze androsterone. sent9: there exists something such that if that it is inconsistent thing that is not a norethindrone is not correct it blazes. sent10: there is something such that if the fact that it is immunosuppressive and it is a sketchbook is false it does not freeze androsterone. sent11: something is not a sketchbook if the fact that it does outlive and does not expatriate Solanaceae is false. sent12: the kayak is not mousy if that it is economic but not a sketchbook is not correct. sent13: if the fact that the Kaiser is immunosuppressive but it is not a adiposity does not hold it does not freeze mother. sent14: there exists something such that if that it is diffident and is not a Xenopus is false it is not economic. sent15: there is something such that if it is immunosuppressive and it is not a sketchbook then it does not freeze androsterone. sent16: if that the basement is nonhierarchical and not a spirit is wrong it is not Leibnizian. sent17: something is not profaned if that it is an antibiotic that is not dental is not right. sent18: there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of a sketchbook is correct then it does not freeze androsterone. sent19: there is something such that if that it is rickettsial but not a Desmodontidae is wrong it is not dental. sent20: there exists something such that if that it is not non-brassy and it does bludgeon kayak does not hold it is not a Freon. sent21: the folate is a owner-driver if that it is a kind of inconsolable thing that does not freeze androsterone does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the bludgeoning impacted does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the unfathomableness happens if that the tuning happens is not incorrect. sent2: the fathomableness and the non-long-distanceness happens if the infusion does not occur. sent3: the aerobicness occurs and the infusion does not occur if the annual happens. sent4: the bludgeoning impacted does not occur if the long-distanceness happens. sent5: if either the unfathomableness happens or the long-distanceness happens or both then the bludgeoning impacted does not occur.
|
sent1: {A} -> {B} sent2: ¬{E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{C}) sent3: {G} -> ({F} & ¬{E}) sent4: {C} -> ¬{D} sent5: ({B} v {C}) -> ¬{D}
|
[] |
[] |
the bludgeoning impacted occurs.
|
{D}
|
[] | 7 | 3 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the bludgeoning impacted does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the unfathomableness happens if that the tuning happens is not incorrect. sent2: the fathomableness and the non-long-distanceness happens if the infusion does not occur. sent3: the aerobicness occurs and the infusion does not occur if the annual happens. sent4: the bludgeoning impacted does not occur if the long-distanceness happens. sent5: if either the unfathomableness happens or the long-distanceness happens or both then the bludgeoning impacted does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the autoloader is not a Scrabble.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: the monocyte does not bludgeon androsterone. sent2: the debutante bludgeons androsterone. sent3: the debutante is not a Scrabble. sent4: the debutante is a polynomial. sent5: if there exists something such that it does not expatriate Acanthurus then the fact that the debutante does expatriate Acanthurus and is not unpaintable is false. sent6: the debutante is a foot-poundal. sent7: the codger does not expatriate Acanthurus. sent8: if the debutante is a kind of polynomial thing that bludgeons androsterone the autoloader is not a Scrabble. sent9: The androsterone bludgeons debutante. sent10: the autoloader is not polynomial if the debutante bludgeons androsterone and it is a Scrabble. sent11: the autoloader does bludgeon androsterone. sent12: if the debutante is a kind of a Scrabble that is a kind of a polynomial the autoloader does not bludgeon androsterone. sent13: if the fact that the debutante expatriates Acanthurus and is not unpaintable is false it is unpaintable.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{al} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: ¬{C}{a} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent6: {AR}{a} sent7: ¬{E}{c} sent8: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent9: {AA}{aa} sent10: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent11: {B}{b} sent12: ({C}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> {D}{a}
|
[
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the debutante is a kind of a polynomial and bludgeons androsterone.; sent8 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent2 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent8 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the autoloader is a Scrabble.
|
{C}{b}
|
[
"sent7 -> int2: there exists something such that it does not expatriate Acanthurus.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: that the debutante expatriates Acanthurus but it is not unpaintable is false.; sent13 & int3 -> int4: the debutante is unpaintable.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that it is unpaintable.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the autoloader is not a Scrabble. ; $context$ = sent1: the monocyte does not bludgeon androsterone. sent2: the debutante bludgeons androsterone. sent3: the debutante is not a Scrabble. sent4: the debutante is a polynomial. sent5: if there exists something such that it does not expatriate Acanthurus then the fact that the debutante does expatriate Acanthurus and is not unpaintable is false. sent6: the debutante is a foot-poundal. sent7: the codger does not expatriate Acanthurus. sent8: if the debutante is a kind of polynomial thing that bludgeons androsterone the autoloader is not a Scrabble. sent9: The androsterone bludgeons debutante. sent10: the autoloader is not polynomial if the debutante bludgeons androsterone and it is a Scrabble. sent11: the autoloader does bludgeon androsterone. sent12: if the debutante is a kind of a Scrabble that is a kind of a polynomial the autoloader does not bludgeon androsterone. sent13: if the fact that the debutante expatriates Acanthurus and is not unpaintable is false it is unpaintable. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent2 -> int1: the debutante is a kind of a polynomial and bludgeons androsterone.; sent8 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that it is a kind of completed thing that does expatriate plasma.
|
(Ex): ({B}x & {C}x)
|
sent1: that the gateau is both completed and epithelial is false if there is something such that it is not Albigensian. sent2: either something does not swallow or it is not gutless or both if it is not a coiffeuse. sent3: if the lubricant does not swallow the aftermath does freeze Odyssey. sent4: there exists something such that it completes. sent5: a non-chemoreceptive thing that does expatriate plasma does bludgeon 401-k. sent6: the fact that the propane expatriates plasma and it is chemoreceptive is not incorrect. sent7: the fact that if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of completed thing that is epithelial does not hold then the propane is a kind of a baccarat hold. sent8: the fact that the propane is chemoreceptive is true. sent9: the edelweiss is not a kind of a irresistibility or it freezes projectionist or both. sent10: there is something such that that it does expatriate plasma hold. sent11: the propane is epithelial. sent12: the propane is non-chemoreceptive thing that expatriates plasma if the aftermath does freeze Odyssey. sent13: the lubricant is not a kind of a coiffeuse if there exists something such that it is not a irresistibility and/or does freeze projectionist. sent14: the pushover is not Albigensian but it is a kind of a feminine.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent2: (x): ¬{I}x -> (¬{F}x v ¬{G}x) sent3: ¬{F}{d} -> {E}{c} sent4: (Ex): {B}x sent5: (x): (¬{D}x & {C}x) -> {GQ}x sent6: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬({B}x & {A}x) -> {DU}{a} sent8: {D}{a} sent9: (¬{J}{f} v {K}{f}) sent10: (Ex): {C}x sent11: {A}{a} sent12: {E}{c} -> (¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent13: (x): (¬{J}x v {K}x) -> ¬{I}{d} sent14: (¬{H}{e} & {L}{e})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the propane expatriates plasma.;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: {C}{a};"
] |
the propane bludgeons 401-k and is a kind of a baccarat.
|
({GQ}{a} & {DU}{a})
|
[
"sent5 -> int2: the fact that the propane does bludgeon 401-k if the propane is not chemoreceptive but it expatriates plasma is true.; sent2 -> int3: the lubricant is not a kind of a swallow or it is not gutless or both if it is not a coiffeuse.; sent9 -> int4: there exists something such that either it is not a irresistibility or it does freeze projectionist or both.; int4 & sent13 -> int5: the lubricant is not a coiffeuse.; int3 & int5 -> int6: either the lubricant is not a swallow or it is not gutless or both.; sent14 -> int7: the pushover is not Albigensian.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that it is not Albigensian.; int8 & sent1 -> int9: that the fact that the gateau does complete and it is epithelial is right does not hold.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that that it completes and it is epithelial does not hold.; int10 & sent7 -> int11: the propane is a baccarat.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it is a kind of completed thing that does expatriate plasma. ; $context$ = sent1: that the gateau is both completed and epithelial is false if there is something such that it is not Albigensian. sent2: either something does not swallow or it is not gutless or both if it is not a coiffeuse. sent3: if the lubricant does not swallow the aftermath does freeze Odyssey. sent4: there exists something such that it completes. sent5: a non-chemoreceptive thing that does expatriate plasma does bludgeon 401-k. sent6: the fact that the propane expatriates plasma and it is chemoreceptive is not incorrect. sent7: the fact that if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of completed thing that is epithelial does not hold then the propane is a kind of a baccarat hold. sent8: the fact that the propane is chemoreceptive is true. sent9: the edelweiss is not a kind of a irresistibility or it freezes projectionist or both. sent10: there is something such that that it does expatriate plasma hold. sent11: the propane is epithelial. sent12: the propane is non-chemoreceptive thing that expatriates plasma if the aftermath does freeze Odyssey. sent13: the lubricant is not a kind of a coiffeuse if there exists something such that it is not a irresistibility and/or does freeze projectionist. sent14: the pushover is not Albigensian but it is a kind of a feminine. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the propane expatriates plasma.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the hypnotist does bludgeon fogbank and does stray is incorrect.
|
¬({D}{c} & {E}{c})
|
sent1: the fistula strays. sent2: the zebu is Linnaean. sent3: that the address is not hypovolemic is right if there exists something such that it is a kind of a shove-halfpenny. sent4: the fact that the fistula is not a hurdles is not false. sent5: the hypnotist is Linnaean and it does bludgeon fogbank. sent6: if there exists something such that it does hurdle then the fistula is not Linnaean. sent7: if something strays the flashover does not expatriate algorism. sent8: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not bludgeon fogbank and it is not a kind of a hurdles is not true the hypnotist does bludgeon fogbank. sent9: the crystallographer is a hurdles and it is hypovolemic. sent10: that the hypnotist is hypovolemic and it strays does not hold if the crystallographer is not Linnaean. sent11: something is not a hurdles if that that it is not Linnaean and hurdles is right does not hold. sent12: the fact that the fact that the crystallographer does not bludgeon fogbank and it is not a kind of a hurdles is not incorrect is incorrect if the platyrrhine is not Linnaean. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is categorical is not incorrect. sent14: the fact that that the hypnotist is a kind of a stray and it is hypovolemic hold is incorrect. sent15: the fact that the platyrrhine is not Linnaean is not wrong. sent16: if there exists something such that it is a stalk then the fistula is not a graphic. sent17: the fact that that the hypnotist strays and it does hurdle is true is wrong if the fistula is not Linnaean. sent18: if something is not hypovolemic the fact that it is not Linnaean but a hurdles is not correct.
|
sent1: {E}{b} sent2: {C}{gb} sent3: (x): {GN}x -> ¬{B}{gs} sent4: ¬{A}{b} sent5: ({C}{c} & {D}{c}) sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: (x): {E}x -> ¬{FO}{fm} sent8: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{A}x) -> {D}{c} sent9: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent10: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬({B}{c} & {E}{c}) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent12: ¬{C}{d} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent13: (Ex): {BE}x sent14: ¬({E}{c} & {B}{c}) sent15: ¬{C}{d} sent16: (x): {DC}x -> ¬{JG}{b} sent17: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({E}{c} & {A}{c}) sent18: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬(¬{C}x & {A}x)
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the crystallographer is a hurdles.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that it is a hurdles.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: that the fistula is not Linnaean is correct.;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 -> int2: (Ex): {A}x; int2 & sent6 -> int3: ¬{C}{b};"
] |
the sax does not hurdle.
|
¬{A}{ir}
|
[
"sent11 -> int4: the sax is not a kind of a hurdles if that it is non-Linnaean and a hurdles does not hold.; sent18 -> int5: the fact that the sax is not Linnaean but it is a hurdles does not hold if it is not hypovolemic.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the hypnotist does bludgeon fogbank and does stray is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fistula strays. sent2: the zebu is Linnaean. sent3: that the address is not hypovolemic is right if there exists something such that it is a kind of a shove-halfpenny. sent4: the fact that the fistula is not a hurdles is not false. sent5: the hypnotist is Linnaean and it does bludgeon fogbank. sent6: if there exists something such that it does hurdle then the fistula is not Linnaean. sent7: if something strays the flashover does not expatriate algorism. sent8: if there exists something such that the fact that it does not bludgeon fogbank and it is not a kind of a hurdles is not true the hypnotist does bludgeon fogbank. sent9: the crystallographer is a hurdles and it is hypovolemic. sent10: that the hypnotist is hypovolemic and it strays does not hold if the crystallographer is not Linnaean. sent11: something is not a hurdles if that that it is not Linnaean and hurdles is right does not hold. sent12: the fact that the fact that the crystallographer does not bludgeon fogbank and it is not a kind of a hurdles is not incorrect is incorrect if the platyrrhine is not Linnaean. sent13: there exists something such that the fact that it is categorical is not incorrect. sent14: the fact that that the hypnotist is a kind of a stray and it is hypovolemic hold is incorrect. sent15: the fact that the platyrrhine is not Linnaean is not wrong. sent16: if there exists something such that it is a stalk then the fistula is not a graphic. sent17: the fact that that the hypnotist strays and it does hurdle is true is wrong if the fistula is not Linnaean. sent18: if something is not hypovolemic the fact that it is not Linnaean but a hurdles is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: the crystallographer is a hurdles.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that it is a hurdles.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: that the fistula is not Linnaean is correct.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the excusableness occurs.
|
{D}
|
sent1: if the itineration does not occur and the falsifying does not occur the fact that the layoff does not occur is right. sent2: the bludgeoning beagle occurs. sent3: if the bludgeoning newspaper does not occur the excusableness but not the expatriating minstrelsy happens. sent4: the non-lithomanticness is caused by that the non-telluricness or the non-abyssalness or both happens. sent5: the itineration and the falsifying happens. sent6: if the lithomanticness does not occur then that the bludgeoning newspaper occurs but the expatriating minstrelsy does not occur is not true. sent7: the bludgeoning newspaper does not occur if both the non-telluricness and the lithomanticness occurs. sent8: if the itineration occurs and the expatriating minstrelsy happens then the excusableness does not occur. sent9: if that the falsifying does not occur is correct the excusableness and the itineration happens. sent10: the falsifying occurs. sent11: the expatriating minstrelsy happens.
|
sent1: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{FN} sent2: {AD} sent3: ¬{E} -> ({D} & ¬{C}) sent4: (¬{G} v ¬{H}) -> ¬{F} sent5: ({A} & {B}) sent6: ¬{F} -> ¬({E} & ¬{C}) sent7: (¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent8: ({A} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent9: ¬{B} -> ({D} & {A}) sent10: {B} sent11: {C}
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the itineration happens.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the itineration happens and the expatriating minstrelsy occurs.; int2 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: {A}; int1 & sent11 -> int2: ({A} & {C}); int2 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the layoff does not occur.
|
¬{FN}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the excusableness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the itineration does not occur and the falsifying does not occur the fact that the layoff does not occur is right. sent2: the bludgeoning beagle occurs. sent3: if the bludgeoning newspaper does not occur the excusableness but not the expatriating minstrelsy happens. sent4: the non-lithomanticness is caused by that the non-telluricness or the non-abyssalness or both happens. sent5: the itineration and the falsifying happens. sent6: if the lithomanticness does not occur then that the bludgeoning newspaper occurs but the expatriating minstrelsy does not occur is not true. sent7: the bludgeoning newspaper does not occur if both the non-telluricness and the lithomanticness occurs. sent8: if the itineration occurs and the expatriating minstrelsy happens then the excusableness does not occur. sent9: if that the falsifying does not occur is correct the excusableness and the itineration happens. sent10: the falsifying occurs. sent11: the expatriating minstrelsy happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the itineration happens.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the itineration happens and the expatriating minstrelsy occurs.; int2 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if that it is extragalactic and/or it does rag is false it does not expatriate allice.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: the fact that the hijab is not a kind of a Dari is not false if that it does expatriate allice or it does bludgeon adductor or both does not hold. sent2: there is something such that if it either is extragalactic or is a rag or both it does not expatriate allice. sent3: if that the hijab is extragalactic and/or it is a kind of a rag does not hold it does expatriate allice. sent4: if that the hijab rags and/or it is sarcolemmal is false it does not bludgeon soma. sent5: if the fact that something is extragalactic and/or it does rag does not hold then the fact that it does not expatriate allice is incorrect. sent6: if the fact that something is extragalactic or it rags or both does not hold then it does not expatriate allice. sent7: there exists something such that if that it is anagrammatic and/or it is a kind of a anovulation is not true it is not non-deep-sea. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is athletics or it does expatriate fathometer or both is not true then it is derivational. sent9: if the fact that the hijab either is extragalactic or does rag or both is true then it does not expatriate allice. sent10: if that the soma does organize and/or it is impenitent is not right it is not extragalactic. sent11: there is something such that if the fact that it is a deep-sea or it is appellative or both does not hold then the fact that it is a Severn is not incorrect. sent12: if either something is extragalactic or it is a rag or both it does not expatriate allice. sent13: there exists something such that if that it is a kind of a Jesus or freezes adjunct or both is not true then it is Gilbertian. sent14: there exists something such that if that it is univalve and/or it is glabellar does not hold then it is a kind of a Sennacherib. sent15: something is non-Mormons if the fact that it does expatriate purist and/or it is a amygdalotomy is not right. sent16: the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it does spy and/or it is a kind of a Sennacherib does not hold it is a kind of a preamble is true. sent17: there is something such that if that it is a Cook or it is a kind of a call-back or both is not right then it is a kind of a anovulation. sent18: if that something is efficient and/or a Bentham is not true then that it is not a chintz hold. sent19: something is not aponeurotic if the fact that either it does subtract wandflower or it is a minelayer or both is incorrect. sent20: there exists something such that if that it either is a trigonometrician or is prescriptive or both is not true then it is non-chordal. sent21: there is something such that if the fact that it does expatriate disordered and/or is a lanai is not right then it is not a kind of a fishplate.
|
sent1: ¬({B}{aa} v {AD}{aa}) -> ¬{DJ}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent4: ¬({AB}{aa} v {JK}{aa}) -> ¬{BG}{aa} sent5: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent6: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: (Ex): ¬({AK}x v {EP}x) -> {FD}x sent8: (Ex): ¬({EJ}x v {IO}x) -> {HQ}x sent9: ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: ¬({DK}{dk} v {S}{dk}) -> ¬{AA}{dk} sent11: (Ex): ¬({FD}x v {EF}x) -> {G}x sent12: (x): ({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent13: (Ex): ¬({HB}x v {IR}x) -> {BS}x sent14: (Ex): ¬({AH}x v {FN}x) -> {AG}x sent15: (x): ¬({CB}x v {HO}x) -> ¬{DI}x sent16: (Ex): ¬({C}x v {AG}x) -> {DQ}x sent17: (Ex): ¬({IJ}x v {AJ}x) -> {EP}x sent18: (x): ¬({IC}x v {BR}x) -> ¬{GH}x sent19: (x): ¬({FR}x v {BK}x) -> ¬{HR}x sent20: (Ex): ¬({CF}x v {IF}x) -> ¬{EI}x sent21: (Ex): ¬({HS}x v {BI}x) -> ¬{EG}x
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: if that the hijab is extragalactic and/or it is a kind of a rag is wrong it does not expatriate allice.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it is extragalactic and/or it does rag is false it does not expatriate allice. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the hijab is not a kind of a Dari is not false if that it does expatriate allice or it does bludgeon adductor or both does not hold. sent2: there is something such that if it either is extragalactic or is a rag or both it does not expatriate allice. sent3: if that the hijab is extragalactic and/or it is a kind of a rag does not hold it does expatriate allice. sent4: if that the hijab rags and/or it is sarcolemmal is false it does not bludgeon soma. sent5: if the fact that something is extragalactic and/or it does rag does not hold then the fact that it does not expatriate allice is incorrect. sent6: if the fact that something is extragalactic or it rags or both does not hold then it does not expatriate allice. sent7: there exists something such that if that it is anagrammatic and/or it is a kind of a anovulation is not true it is not non-deep-sea. sent8: there exists something such that if the fact that it is athletics or it does expatriate fathometer or both is not true then it is derivational. sent9: if the fact that the hijab either is extragalactic or does rag or both is true then it does not expatriate allice. sent10: if that the soma does organize and/or it is impenitent is not right it is not extragalactic. sent11: there is something such that if the fact that it is a deep-sea or it is appellative or both does not hold then the fact that it is a Severn is not incorrect. sent12: if either something is extragalactic or it is a rag or both it does not expatriate allice. sent13: there exists something such that if that it is a kind of a Jesus or freezes adjunct or both is not true then it is Gilbertian. sent14: there exists something such that if that it is univalve and/or it is glabellar does not hold then it is a kind of a Sennacherib. sent15: something is non-Mormons if the fact that it does expatriate purist and/or it is a amygdalotomy is not right. sent16: the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it does spy and/or it is a kind of a Sennacherib does not hold it is a kind of a preamble is true. sent17: there is something such that if that it is a Cook or it is a kind of a call-back or both is not right then it is a kind of a anovulation. sent18: if that something is efficient and/or a Bentham is not true then that it is not a chintz hold. sent19: something is not aponeurotic if the fact that either it does subtract wandflower or it is a minelayer or both is incorrect. sent20: there exists something such that if that it either is a trigonometrician or is prescriptive or both is not true then it is non-chordal. sent21: there is something such that if the fact that it does expatriate disordered and/or is a lanai is not right then it is not a kind of a fishplate. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: if that the hijab is extragalactic and/or it is a kind of a rag is wrong it does not expatriate allice.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
both the bludgeoning Bathyergidae and the CBC occurs.
|
({A} & {C})
|
sent1: the headroom occurs. sent2: the tentacularness happens. sent3: that the bludgeoning Bathyergidae and the CBC happens is not true if the juicelessness does not occur. sent4: the unworldliness happens but the emmetropicness does not occur if the intentionalness occurs. sent5: the radiolucentness happens. sent6: the float happens if the reversionariness does not occur. sent7: if the freezing Keokuk happens then the bludgeoning quarter-century happens. sent8: the bludgeoning Bathyergidae occurs if the juicelessness occurs. sent9: if the fact that the reversionariness does not occur is not wrong both the CBC and the floating happens. sent10: the reversionariness does not occur and the float does not occur if the emmetropicness does not occur. sent11: that the freezing Dreissena does not occur is right. sent12: if the playoff happens the bludgeoning pseudoscience happens. sent13: the paralytic occurs. sent14: if the reversionariness does not occur and the float does not occur then that the juicelessness does not occur is not incorrect. sent15: the plumbicness occurs. sent16: the tetragonalness happens. sent17: the undervaluing causes that the freezing Nagano occurs. sent18: the reversionariness does not occur. sent19: the fact that the surmising and the non-lacrimalness occurs does not hold. sent20: if that the augiticness happens and the gig does not occur is not right the housework occurs. sent21: the fact that the unrighteousness occurs and the plantalness occurs is not true. sent22: the perigonalness occurs. sent23: if that both the unrighteousness and the non-plantalness happens is not right then the juicelessness happens. sent24: the fact that both the unrighteousness and the non-plantalness occurs does not hold.
|
sent1: {HT} sent2: {IH} sent3: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & {C}) sent4: {H} -> ({G} & ¬{F}) sent5: {JA} sent6: ¬{E} -> {D} sent7: {DB} -> {JE} sent8: {B} -> {A} sent9: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) sent10: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent11: ¬{EQ} sent12: {CM} -> {BD} sent13: {IR} sent14: (¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} sent15: {IK} sent16: {BT} sent17: {HF} -> {IB} sent18: ¬{E} sent19: ¬({ID} & ¬{HO}) sent20: ¬({DK} & ¬{AO}) -> {EN} sent21: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent22: {CU} sent23: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent24: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB})
|
[
"sent23 & sent24 -> int1: the juicelessness happens.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the bludgeoning Bathyergidae happens.; sent9 & sent18 -> int3: the CBC and the floating happens.; int3 -> int4: the CBC occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent23 & sent24 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent8 -> int2: {A}; sent9 & sent18 -> int3: ({C} & {D}); int3 -> int4: {C}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the bludgeoning Bathyergidae and the CBC occurs is incorrect.
|
¬({A} & {C})
|
[] | 9 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = both the bludgeoning Bathyergidae and the CBC occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the headroom occurs. sent2: the tentacularness happens. sent3: that the bludgeoning Bathyergidae and the CBC happens is not true if the juicelessness does not occur. sent4: the unworldliness happens but the emmetropicness does not occur if the intentionalness occurs. sent5: the radiolucentness happens. sent6: the float happens if the reversionariness does not occur. sent7: if the freezing Keokuk happens then the bludgeoning quarter-century happens. sent8: the bludgeoning Bathyergidae occurs if the juicelessness occurs. sent9: if the fact that the reversionariness does not occur is not wrong both the CBC and the floating happens. sent10: the reversionariness does not occur and the float does not occur if the emmetropicness does not occur. sent11: that the freezing Dreissena does not occur is right. sent12: if the playoff happens the bludgeoning pseudoscience happens. sent13: the paralytic occurs. sent14: if the reversionariness does not occur and the float does not occur then that the juicelessness does not occur is not incorrect. sent15: the plumbicness occurs. sent16: the tetragonalness happens. sent17: the undervaluing causes that the freezing Nagano occurs. sent18: the reversionariness does not occur. sent19: the fact that the surmising and the non-lacrimalness occurs does not hold. sent20: if that the augiticness happens and the gig does not occur is not right the housework occurs. sent21: the fact that the unrighteousness occurs and the plantalness occurs is not true. sent22: the perigonalness occurs. sent23: if that both the unrighteousness and the non-plantalness happens is not right then the juicelessness happens. sent24: the fact that both the unrighteousness and the non-plantalness occurs does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent23 & sent24 -> int1: the juicelessness happens.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the bludgeoning Bathyergidae happens.; sent9 & sent18 -> int3: the CBC and the floating happens.; int3 -> int4: the CBC occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the counterperson is not a kind of a glop.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: there exists nothing such that it subtracts Methodists and it does freeze seventh. sent2: something is a kind of a glop if the fact that it is non-scapular thing that is not cerebrospinal is not true. sent3: something is a glop if it is not non-scapular. sent4: if the counterperson is a kind of a scapular it is a kind of a glop. sent5: the counterperson is synaptic if the fact that it does not publish and is not a kind of an ambulatory is false. sent6: if the agent-in-place is not a scapular that it is lymphatic and it is not intradepartmental is not right. sent7: the counterperson is not immature. sent8: if the kayak is not a pantheist the fact that the cell subtracts Methodists and it does freeze seventh is incorrect. sent9: that the counterperson is not scapular and it is not cerebrospinal does not hold if it is not immature. sent10: if the foredge does not freeze indigence then the counterperson is a glop and immature. sent11: that the counterperson is not scapular and not a balm is wrong if it does not bludgeon Asama. sent12: if that the clast does not bludgeon clast and it is not a kind of a fatwa is not true that it is systolic is correct. sent13: the counterperson is immature if that it is not a kind of a Kazakhstan and it is not explicable is wrong. sent14: the quinine is immature if the counterperson is immature. sent15: the fact that something is not immature but it does freeze indigence is not true if it does not subtract Methodists. sent16: that the counterperson is not non-scapular but non-cerebrospinal is wrong. sent17: if the photon is not pantheist the kayak is not a kind of a pantheist.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): {AA}x -> {B}x sent4: {AA}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{DC}{a} & ¬{FC}{a}) -> {BH}{a} sent6: ¬{AA}{gd} -> ¬({FM}{gd} & ¬{BL}{gd}) sent7: ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬{F}{d} -> ¬({D}{c} & {E}{c}) sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent10: ¬{C}{b} -> ({B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent11: ¬{FP}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{FI}{a}) sent12: ¬(¬{II}{ck} & ¬{EQ}{ck}) -> {HR}{ck} sent13: ¬(¬{AF}{a} & ¬{HE}{a}) -> {A}{a} sent14: {A}{a} -> {A}{gp} sent15: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {C}x) sent16: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent17: ¬{F}{e} -> ¬{F}{d}
|
[
"sent9 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that the counterperson is both not scapular and not cerebrospinal is false.; sent2 -> int2: if the fact that the counterperson is not scapular and it is not cerebrospinal does not hold then that it is a glop is right.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent7 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent2 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the quinine is immature.
|
{A}{gp}
|
[] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the counterperson is not a kind of a glop. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists nothing such that it subtracts Methodists and it does freeze seventh. sent2: something is a kind of a glop if the fact that it is non-scapular thing that is not cerebrospinal is not true. sent3: something is a glop if it is not non-scapular. sent4: if the counterperson is a kind of a scapular it is a kind of a glop. sent5: the counterperson is synaptic if the fact that it does not publish and is not a kind of an ambulatory is false. sent6: if the agent-in-place is not a scapular that it is lymphatic and it is not intradepartmental is not right. sent7: the counterperson is not immature. sent8: if the kayak is not a pantheist the fact that the cell subtracts Methodists and it does freeze seventh is incorrect. sent9: that the counterperson is not scapular and it is not cerebrospinal does not hold if it is not immature. sent10: if the foredge does not freeze indigence then the counterperson is a glop and immature. sent11: that the counterperson is not scapular and not a balm is wrong if it does not bludgeon Asama. sent12: if that the clast does not bludgeon clast and it is not a kind of a fatwa is not true that it is systolic is correct. sent13: the counterperson is immature if that it is not a kind of a Kazakhstan and it is not explicable is wrong. sent14: the quinine is immature if the counterperson is immature. sent15: the fact that something is not immature but it does freeze indigence is not true if it does not subtract Methodists. sent16: that the counterperson is not non-scapular but non-cerebrospinal is wrong. sent17: if the photon is not pantheist the kayak is not a kind of a pantheist. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that the counterperson is both not scapular and not cerebrospinal is false.; sent2 -> int2: if the fact that the counterperson is not scapular and it is not cerebrospinal does not hold then that it is a glop is right.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the triose is not a polls.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
sent1: that that the triose polls and it does expatriate Edwardian does not hold is not wrong if it is not a kind of a synovium. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is a synovium and is nonsignificant is wrong. sent3: if there exists something such that it is a synovium the darts is not a polls. sent4: the fact that the darts is a kind of a polls that embrowns does not hold if that it is not phallic is true. sent5: there exists something such that it is not basiscopic and it is vocalic. sent6: that the darts is not a kind of a synovium hold if there exists something such that it expatriates Edwardian. sent7: if the darts does not expatriate Edwardian that it is not a synovium but nonsignificant is false. sent8: something is not a synovium but nonsignificant. sent9: the fact that if the triose does not expatriate Edwardian the fact that the triose is not nonsignificant but it is a polls does not hold hold. sent10: the darts is not intentional. sent11: there exists something such that that it is not a polls and it is not significant is correct. sent12: if there exists something such that that it is not a synovium but nonsignificant does not hold the triose is not a kind of a polls. sent13: The Edwardian does not expatriate darts. sent14: if something does expatriate Edwardian it is a kind of a polls. sent15: if the triose is not a synovium the fact that it is not a polls and it is nonsignificant does not hold. sent16: the darts does not expatriate Edwardian. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it is not a parenthood and does bludgeon ceresin is not right. sent18: if something overlaps then the darts does not freeze Riga.
|
sent1: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬({B}{b} & {A}{b}) sent2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: ¬{FF}{a} -> ¬({B}{a} & {BJ}{a}) sent5: (Ex): (¬{EM}x & {P}x) sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{AA}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {B}{b}) sent10: ¬{HO}{a} sent11: (Ex): (¬{B}x & {AB}x) sent12: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: ¬{AC}{aa} sent14: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent15: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent16: ¬{A}{a} sent17: (Ex): ¬(¬{BF}x & {IA}x) sent18: (x): {EU}x -> ¬{AH}{a}
|
[
"sent7 & sent16 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the darts is not a kind of a synovium but it is nonsignificant is not wrong is false.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it is both not a synovium and nonsignificant is not correct.; int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent16 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x); int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the triose does poll.
|
{B}{b}
|
[
"sent14 -> int3: the triose is a kind of a polls if it expatriates Edwardian.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the triose is not a polls. ; $context$ = sent1: that that the triose polls and it does expatriate Edwardian does not hold is not wrong if it is not a kind of a synovium. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is a synovium and is nonsignificant is wrong. sent3: if there exists something such that it is a synovium the darts is not a polls. sent4: the fact that the darts is a kind of a polls that embrowns does not hold if that it is not phallic is true. sent5: there exists something such that it is not basiscopic and it is vocalic. sent6: that the darts is not a kind of a synovium hold if there exists something such that it expatriates Edwardian. sent7: if the darts does not expatriate Edwardian that it is not a synovium but nonsignificant is false. sent8: something is not a synovium but nonsignificant. sent9: the fact that if the triose does not expatriate Edwardian the fact that the triose is not nonsignificant but it is a polls does not hold hold. sent10: the darts is not intentional. sent11: there exists something such that that it is not a polls and it is not significant is correct. sent12: if there exists something such that that it is not a synovium but nonsignificant does not hold the triose is not a kind of a polls. sent13: The Edwardian does not expatriate darts. sent14: if something does expatriate Edwardian it is a kind of a polls. sent15: if the triose is not a synovium the fact that it is not a polls and it is nonsignificant does not hold. sent16: the darts does not expatriate Edwardian. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it is not a parenthood and does bludgeon ceresin is not right. sent18: if something overlaps then the darts does not freeze Riga. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent16 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the darts is not a kind of a synovium but it is nonsignificant is not wrong is false.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it is both not a synovium and nonsignificant is not correct.; int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the feminism does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: the freezing angelus does not occur. sent2: that the Trinidadian and the recitation occurs does not hold if the expatriating Krasner does not occur. sent3: if the devising does not occur the expatriating Krasner happens and the feminism occurs. sent4: that the expatriating Krasner does not occur is not wrong. sent5: that the recitation does not occur leads to that the feminism does not occur. sent6: if the expatriating ceresin happens not the devising but the lamination happens. sent7: the erectingness does not occur. sent8: if the fact that both the expatriating professor and the truing happens is not right then the expatriating Ivry does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{CU} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent3: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent4: ¬{A} sent5: ¬{AB} -> ¬{B} sent6: {E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) sent7: ¬{HQ} sent8: ¬({FF} & {IM}) -> ¬{CT}
|
[
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that both the Trinidadian and the recitation occurs does not hold.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: ¬({AA} & {AB});"
] |
the feminism happens.
|
{B}
|
[] | 7 | 2 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the feminism does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the freezing angelus does not occur. sent2: that the Trinidadian and the recitation occurs does not hold if the expatriating Krasner does not occur. sent3: if the devising does not occur the expatriating Krasner happens and the feminism occurs. sent4: that the expatriating Krasner does not occur is not wrong. sent5: that the recitation does not occur leads to that the feminism does not occur. sent6: if the expatriating ceresin happens not the devising but the lamination happens. sent7: the erectingness does not occur. sent8: if the fact that both the expatriating professor and the truing happens is not right then the expatriating Ivry does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the fact that both the Trinidadian and the recitation occurs does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the stent does bludgeon Cro-magnon.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: the stent is not a conidiophore but it is a Eisenstaedt if it is not a kind of a grant. sent2: that the hovercraft does bludgeon ideology and is not a conidiophore is not right. sent3: if something is an excuse it is not a grant. sent4: if the ununpentium is not a kind of a enation then the adder does excuse. sent5: if the fact that something is a kind of a Vlaminck but it is not a kind of a neutral does not hold then it is not a penance. sent6: if the ununpentium is not an excuse then the adder is a kind of an excuse. sent7: if the adder is not a grant then the fact that the Shiite is not a Eisenstaedt and/or is a conidiophore does not hold. sent8: the stent bludgeons Cro-magnon if it is not spineless. sent9: a non-spineless thing bludgeons Cro-magnon. sent10: the glycoprotein is not a silverpoint if there exists something such that that it does not bludgeon ideology is not wrong. sent11: if the fireclay is not a kind of a penance the ununpentium is not a enation and/or it is not a kind of an excuse. sent12: if the fact that the stent is not a ghee but spineless is not incorrect the glycoprotein does not bludgeon ideology. sent13: everything is not Hellenic. sent14: if that something is not non-calm hold then that it is a Vlaminck and it is not a neutral is wrong. sent15: the glycoprotein does bludgeon ideology if the hovercraft does not bludgeon ideology. sent16: the glycoprotein does bludgeon ideology if the fact that the hovercraft does bludgeon ideology and is not a conidiophore is not correct. sent17: the stent is spineless. sent18: something that is not Hellenic is both a calm and evening. sent19: the stent does not bludgeon Cro-magnon if the glycoprotein does not bludgeon Cro-magnon or it is not a kind of a silverpoint or both.
|
sent1: ¬{F}{a} -> (¬{D}{a} & {E}{a}) sent2: ¬({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent3: (x): {G}x -> ¬{F}x sent4: ¬{H}{f} -> {G}{e} sent5: (x): ¬({J}x & ¬{K}x) -> ¬{I}x sent6: ¬{G}{f} -> {G}{e} sent7: ¬{F}{e} -> ¬(¬{E}{d} v {D}{d}) sent8: ¬{AB}{a} -> {A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}x sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}{b} sent11: ¬{I}{g} -> (¬{H}{f} v ¬{G}{f}) sent12: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent13: (x): ¬{N}x sent14: (x): {L}x -> ¬({J}x & ¬{K}x) sent15: ¬{B}{c} -> {B}{b} sent16: ¬({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {B}{b} sent17: {AB}{a} sent18: (x): ¬{N}x -> ({L}x & {M}x) sent19: (¬{A}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stent is not a ghee and is spineless.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the glycoprotein does not bludgeon ideology.; sent16 & sent2 -> int2: the glycoprotein does bludgeon ideology.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the stent is both not a ghee and spineless does not hold.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); sent12 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent16 & sent2 -> int2: {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a});"
] |
the stent does not bludgeon Cro-magnon.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent3 -> int5: the adder is not a grant if it is an excuse.; sent14 -> int6: that the fireclay is a Vlaminck but not neutral is not correct if it is a kind of a calm.; sent18 -> int7: if the parquet is not Hellenic then it is calm and it does even.; sent13 -> int8: the parquet is not Hellenic.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the parquet is both a calm and evening.; int9 -> int10: everything is calm thing that is evening.; int10 -> int11: the fact that the fireclay is calm and it is evening hold.; int11 -> int12: the fireclay does calm.; int6 & int12 -> int13: that the fireclay is both a Vlaminck and not a neutral is wrong.; sent5 -> int14: the fireclay is not a penance if that it is a Vlaminck and it is not neutral is not correct.; int13 & int14 -> int15: the fireclay is not a penance.; sent11 & int15 -> int16: either the ununpentium is not a enation or it is not a kind of an excuse or both.; int16 & sent6 & sent4 -> int17: the adder excuses.; int5 & int17 -> int18: the adder is not a grant.; int18 & sent7 -> int19: the fact that the Shiite either is not a kind of a Eisenstaedt or is a conidiophore or both is false.;"
] | 16 | 4 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the stent does bludgeon Cro-magnon. ; $context$ = sent1: the stent is not a conidiophore but it is a Eisenstaedt if it is not a kind of a grant. sent2: that the hovercraft does bludgeon ideology and is not a conidiophore is not right. sent3: if something is an excuse it is not a grant. sent4: if the ununpentium is not a kind of a enation then the adder does excuse. sent5: if the fact that something is a kind of a Vlaminck but it is not a kind of a neutral does not hold then it is not a penance. sent6: if the ununpentium is not an excuse then the adder is a kind of an excuse. sent7: if the adder is not a grant then the fact that the Shiite is not a Eisenstaedt and/or is a conidiophore does not hold. sent8: the stent bludgeons Cro-magnon if it is not spineless. sent9: a non-spineless thing bludgeons Cro-magnon. sent10: the glycoprotein is not a silverpoint if there exists something such that that it does not bludgeon ideology is not wrong. sent11: if the fireclay is not a kind of a penance the ununpentium is not a enation and/or it is not a kind of an excuse. sent12: if the fact that the stent is not a ghee but spineless is not incorrect the glycoprotein does not bludgeon ideology. sent13: everything is not Hellenic. sent14: if that something is not non-calm hold then that it is a Vlaminck and it is not a neutral is wrong. sent15: the glycoprotein does bludgeon ideology if the hovercraft does not bludgeon ideology. sent16: the glycoprotein does bludgeon ideology if the fact that the hovercraft does bludgeon ideology and is not a conidiophore is not correct. sent17: the stent is spineless. sent18: something that is not Hellenic is both a calm and evening. sent19: the stent does not bludgeon Cro-magnon if the glycoprotein does not bludgeon Cro-magnon or it is not a kind of a silverpoint or both. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stent is not a ghee and is spineless.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the glycoprotein does not bludgeon ideology.; sent16 & sent2 -> int2: the glycoprotein does bludgeon ideology.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the stent is both not a ghee and spineless does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the guitarfish does not take Veratrum.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: the limber does not lend mutiny if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a photostat and it lend mutiny is incorrect. sent2: the lymphangiogram is not a Virginian if the deerberry does not lend discography and it is not a Virginian. sent3: if the guitarfish is a disfavor it takes Veratrum. sent4: the guitarfish downgrades redeployment. sent5: the marksman takes Veratrum if the guitarfish does not takes Veratrum and does not downgrade redeployment. sent6: The redeployment downgrades guitarfish. sent7: if something is not carvel-built and/or it does gather it is not carvel-built. sent8: if something is not a kind of a gather then it does not lend discography and it is not a Virginian. sent9: that something quotes lost-and-found and is not a unprofitableness is wrong if it is a back. sent10: if something is not a vellum then the fact that it is a photostat and it lends mutiny is not true. sent11: the publican is not a vellum if there is something such that the fact that it is not a works and it is a navigability is false. sent12: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a works and it is a kind of a navigability is false. sent13: the deerberry is a back and it does digest if the limber does not lend mutiny. sent14: the guitarfish is not sufficient if it does downgrade redeployment. sent15: something is not a gather if the fact that it does quote lost-and-found and is not a kind of a unprofitableness is wrong. sent16: the guitarfish takes Veratrum if it downgrades redeployment. sent17: the lymphangiogram is carvel-built and it does downgrade redeployment if it is not a Virginian.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({L}x & {K}x) -> ¬{K}{d} sent2: (¬{F}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent3: {AE}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {B}{cq} sent6: {AA}{aa} sent7: (x): (¬{C}x v {E}x) -> ¬{C}x sent8: (x): ¬{E}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{D}x) sent9: (x): {I}x -> ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) sent10: (x): ¬{M}x -> ¬({L}x & {K}x) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{N}x & {O}x) -> ¬{M}{e} sent12: (Ex): ¬(¬{N}x & {O}x) sent13: ¬{K}{d} -> ({I}{c} & {J}{c}) sent14: {A}{a} -> {CQ}{a} sent15: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{E}x sent16: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent17: ¬{D}{b} -> ({C}{b} & {A}{b})
|
[
"sent16 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the marksman does take Veratrum.
|
{B}{cq}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: that the lymphangiogram is not carvel-built is true if it is not carvel-built or it is a kind of a gather or both.;"
] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the guitarfish does not take Veratrum. ; $context$ = sent1: the limber does not lend mutiny if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a photostat and it lend mutiny is incorrect. sent2: the lymphangiogram is not a Virginian if the deerberry does not lend discography and it is not a Virginian. sent3: if the guitarfish is a disfavor it takes Veratrum. sent4: the guitarfish downgrades redeployment. sent5: the marksman takes Veratrum if the guitarfish does not takes Veratrum and does not downgrade redeployment. sent6: The redeployment downgrades guitarfish. sent7: if something is not carvel-built and/or it does gather it is not carvel-built. sent8: if something is not a kind of a gather then it does not lend discography and it is not a Virginian. sent9: that something quotes lost-and-found and is not a unprofitableness is wrong if it is a back. sent10: if something is not a vellum then the fact that it is a photostat and it lends mutiny is not true. sent11: the publican is not a vellum if there is something such that the fact that it is not a works and it is a navigability is false. sent12: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a works and it is a kind of a navigability is false. sent13: the deerberry is a back and it does digest if the limber does not lend mutiny. sent14: the guitarfish is not sufficient if it does downgrade redeployment. sent15: something is not a gather if the fact that it does quote lost-and-found and is not a kind of a unprofitableness is wrong. sent16: the guitarfish takes Veratrum if it downgrades redeployment. sent17: the lymphangiogram is carvel-built and it does downgrade redeployment if it is not a Virginian. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the shaft does not quote adhesive and is vehicular is wrong.
|
¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b})
|
sent1: if the fact that the rhinion is not vehicular is incorrect the fact that the shaft does not quote adhesive and is vehicular is not correct. sent2: something is vehicular if it is ecclesiastical. sent3: there is something such that it does not lend Calder and is not a morpheme.
|
sent1: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent3: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: if the rhinion is ecclesiastical then it is vehicular.;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the shaft does not quote adhesive and is vehicular is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the rhinion is not vehicular is incorrect the fact that the shaft does not quote adhesive and is vehicular is not correct. sent2: something is vehicular if it is ecclesiastical. sent3: there is something such that it does not lend Calder and is not a morpheme. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: if the rhinion is ecclesiastical then it is vehicular.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the samizdat is life-support but it is not a kind of a snips.
|
({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
sent1: something is not hydrostatics and is a kind of a landscape if it is not a Pinus. sent2: everything does not pay and is inheritable. sent3: the fact that something is a Pinus that is not a S.U.V. does not hold if it is not international. sent4: the samizdat does not snip. sent5: the scalper is not noninheritable. sent6: if the scalper is not a snips then the samizdat is both life-support and not a snips. sent7: if something is life-support then it does not quote Palaemon and it is unsympathetic. sent8: the scalper is not acinar but it quotes EBV. sent9: if something does not pay but it is inheritable then it is not a kind of a snips. sent10: the scalper does not lend intoxication. sent11: the fact that the samizdat is not a snips hold if the scalper is not a snips. sent12: the storybook is not hydrostatics if it landscapes or it is a Pinus or both. sent13: if something does not handle but it quotes Palaemon then it is not a Tombaugh. sent14: if a non-life-support thing is inheritable then it is not a snips. sent15: the storybook is not international. sent16: if that the malabsorption is not megakaryocytic but it is inheritable hold it is not a handle. sent17: if the wheeze is not hydrostatics the samizdat is a Sikkim and is efficient. sent18: if there is something such that the fact that it is a Pinus and it is not a kind of a S.U.V. is not right that the wheeze is not a Pinus hold. sent19: everything is inheritable.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{E}x & {F}x) sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) sent4: ¬{B}{a} sent5: {AB}{aa} sent6: ¬{B}{aa} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent7: (x): {A}x -> (¬{IS}x & {BR}x) sent8: (¬{CU}{aa} & {BM}{aa}) sent9: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent10: ¬{CM}{aa} sent11: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{B}{a} sent12: ({F}{c} v {G}{c}) -> ¬{E}{c} sent13: (x): (¬{CB}x & {IS}x) -> ¬{GM}x sent14: (x): (¬{A}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent15: ¬{I}{c} sent16: (¬{AR}{cr} & {AB}{cr}) -> ¬{CB}{cr} sent17: ¬{E}{b} -> ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent18: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{G}{b} sent19: (x): {AB}x
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the scalper does not snip if it does not pay and it is inheritable.; sent2 -> int2: the scalper does not pay but it is inheritable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the scalper is not a snips.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent2 -> int2: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa}; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the fact that the samizdat is life-support but it does not snip is right is not true.
|
¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the samizdat is life-support but it is not a kind of a snips. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not hydrostatics and is a kind of a landscape if it is not a Pinus. sent2: everything does not pay and is inheritable. sent3: the fact that something is a Pinus that is not a S.U.V. does not hold if it is not international. sent4: the samizdat does not snip. sent5: the scalper is not noninheritable. sent6: if the scalper is not a snips then the samizdat is both life-support and not a snips. sent7: if something is life-support then it does not quote Palaemon and it is unsympathetic. sent8: the scalper is not acinar but it quotes EBV. sent9: if something does not pay but it is inheritable then it is not a kind of a snips. sent10: the scalper does not lend intoxication. sent11: the fact that the samizdat is not a snips hold if the scalper is not a snips. sent12: the storybook is not hydrostatics if it landscapes or it is a Pinus or both. sent13: if something does not handle but it quotes Palaemon then it is not a Tombaugh. sent14: if a non-life-support thing is inheritable then it is not a snips. sent15: the storybook is not international. sent16: if that the malabsorption is not megakaryocytic but it is inheritable hold it is not a handle. sent17: if the wheeze is not hydrostatics the samizdat is a Sikkim and is efficient. sent18: if there is something such that the fact that it is a Pinus and it is not a kind of a S.U.V. is not right that the wheeze is not a Pinus hold. sent19: everything is inheritable. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: the scalper does not snip if it does not pay and it is inheritable.; sent2 -> int2: the scalper does not pay but it is inheritable.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the scalper is not a snips.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the nonphotosyntheticness does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the blue-collarness occurs but the gastroenterostomy does not occur if the Frenching does not occur. sent2: if the divergentness occurs the fetometry happens. sent3: the lending Vientiane does not occur if the non-ineligibleness and the downgrading Falconidae happens. sent4: both the watch and the fetometry occurs. sent5: the fact that the Frenchness and the dimorphism happens is wrong if the flaunt does not occur. sent6: the fact that if the aeromechanicsness does not occur then the fact that the charge happens and the dynasticness occurs is not true is correct. sent7: the dynasticness does not occur if that the charging happens and the dynasticness occurs does not hold. sent8: that if the lending Vientiane occurs then that the nonphotosyntheticness does not occur and the watch does not occur is not right is not wrong. sent9: that not the apianness but the jumper happens prevents that the aeromechanicsness happens. sent10: if the quoting sugared happens the divergentness occurs. sent11: that the watch does not occur leads to that the clutter and the lending signet happens. sent12: if the fact that both the French and the dimorphism happens does not hold that the French does not occur hold. sent13: the apianness does not occur and the jumper occurs if the downgrading Stenotus does not occur. sent14: the quoting sugared occurs if the blue-collarness but not the gastroenterostomy happens. sent15: the parametricness occurs. sent16: both the non-ineligibleness and the downgrading Falconidae happens. sent17: that the dynasticness does not occur triggers that the flaunt does not occur and the popularization does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{I} -> ({H} & ¬{G}) sent2: {E} -> {D} sent3: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent4: ({A} & {D}) sent5: ¬{J} -> ¬({I} & {K}) sent6: ¬{N} -> ¬({O} & {M}) sent7: ¬({O} & {M}) -> ¬{M} sent8: {B} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) sent9: (¬{Q} & {P}) -> ¬{N} sent10: {F} -> {E} sent11: ¬{A} -> ({IJ} & {FS}) sent12: ¬({I} & {K}) -> ¬{I} sent13: ¬{R} -> (¬{Q} & {P}) sent14: ({H} & ¬{G}) -> {F} sent15: {GI} sent16: (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent17: ¬{M} -> (¬{J} & ¬{L})
|
[
"sent3 & sent16 -> int1: the lending Vientiane does not occur.; sent4 -> int2: the watching happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: not the lending Vientiane but the watch occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent16 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent4 -> int2: {A}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{B} & {A});"
] |
the cluttering happens and the lending signet happens.
|
({IJ} & {FS})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the nonphotosyntheticness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the blue-collarness occurs but the gastroenterostomy does not occur if the Frenching does not occur. sent2: if the divergentness occurs the fetometry happens. sent3: the lending Vientiane does not occur if the non-ineligibleness and the downgrading Falconidae happens. sent4: both the watch and the fetometry occurs. sent5: the fact that the Frenchness and the dimorphism happens is wrong if the flaunt does not occur. sent6: the fact that if the aeromechanicsness does not occur then the fact that the charge happens and the dynasticness occurs is not true is correct. sent7: the dynasticness does not occur if that the charging happens and the dynasticness occurs does not hold. sent8: that if the lending Vientiane occurs then that the nonphotosyntheticness does not occur and the watch does not occur is not right is not wrong. sent9: that not the apianness but the jumper happens prevents that the aeromechanicsness happens. sent10: if the quoting sugared happens the divergentness occurs. sent11: that the watch does not occur leads to that the clutter and the lending signet happens. sent12: if the fact that both the French and the dimorphism happens does not hold that the French does not occur hold. sent13: the apianness does not occur and the jumper occurs if the downgrading Stenotus does not occur. sent14: the quoting sugared occurs if the blue-collarness but not the gastroenterostomy happens. sent15: the parametricness occurs. sent16: both the non-ineligibleness and the downgrading Falconidae happens. sent17: that the dynasticness does not occur triggers that the flaunt does not occur and the popularization does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent16 -> int1: the lending Vientiane does not occur.; sent4 -> int2: the watching happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: not the lending Vientiane but the watch occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the Diesel is a kind of harmonious thing that does not identify is not correct.
|
¬({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
sent1: if the Diesel is hungry and is non-dirty then it is a grip. sent2: that that something is harmonious and does identify is not incorrect is false if it is a kind of a grip. sent3: the fact that the Diesel is harmonious thing that identifies is wrong. sent4: the Diesel is hungry but it does not dirty.
|
sent1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent2: (x): {B}x -> ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent3: ¬({A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
[
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the Diesel is a grip.;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Diesel is a kind of harmonious thing that does not identify is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Diesel is hungry and is non-dirty then it is a grip. sent2: that that something is harmonious and does identify is not incorrect is false if it is a kind of a grip. sent3: the fact that the Diesel is harmonious thing that identifies is wrong. sent4: the Diesel is hungry but it does not dirty. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the Diesel is a grip.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the cortex is not non-placental.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: the fact that the sampler is not non-leeward but non-ministerial does not hold. sent2: the fact that if there is something such that the fact that that it is a leeward that is not ministerial is not wrong is false then the cortex is not a kind of a placental is right. sent3: if something takes muntjac then that it is not acidimetric hold. sent4: if the cheetah is not acidimetric it does not quote Vigna or is a placental or both.
|
sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): {D}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{B}{b} v {A}{b})
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is a leeward that is not ministerial does not hold.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the cortex is a kind of a placental.
|
{A}{a}
|
[
"sent3 -> int2: the cheetah is not acidimetric if it does take muntjac.;"
] | 6 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the cortex is not non-placental. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the sampler is not non-leeward but non-ministerial does not hold. sent2: the fact that if there is something such that the fact that that it is a leeward that is not ministerial is not wrong is false then the cortex is not a kind of a placental is right. sent3: if something takes muntjac then that it is not acidimetric hold. sent4: if the cheetah is not acidimetric it does not quote Vigna or is a placental or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is a leeward that is not ministerial does not hold.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it does not lend balcony and it does hedgehop is wrong then that it is not pharyngeal is right is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x)
|
sent1: the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is not shy and it is Einsteinian does not hold then it does not lend Indriidae hold. sent2: there is something such that if that it is not a exabit and it does question is not true then it is not antistrophic. sent3: something does not lend esthete if that it is not adducent and it is unsensational is not true. sent4: the Chiron is not pharyngeal if the fact that it does not lend balcony and it hedgehops does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not lend balcony and it does hedgehop it is not pharyngeal. sent6: there is something such that if the fact that it is not offing and it does card does not hold then it is not a phragmocone. sent7: there is something such that if it does not hedgehop then it is non-pharyngeal. sent8: there is something such that if it does lend balcony it is not pharyngeal. sent9: the Chiron is pharyngeal if the fact that the fact that it does not lend balcony and does hedgehop is right is not true. sent10: the Chiron is not pharyngeal if it does not lend balcony and it hedgehops. sent11: there exists something such that if that it is not Trojan and does shy is wrong then it is not a walkie-talkie. sent12: the Chiron does not lend transudate if the fact that it does hug and it is pharyngeal is false. sent13: the Chiron is not pharyngeal if it does not hedgehop. sent14: there is something such that if that it is not a irresistibility and it is a Dravidian is false it downgrades pedesis. sent15: if that the Chiron is a Uriah that lends balcony does not hold the fact that it does not lend commissar hold. sent16: that the Chiron does not hedgehop is true if that it does not lend Indriidae and it alters is wrong. sent17: there is something such that if the fact that it is not pleochroic and it is zodiacal does not hold it is a burlesque. sent18: if the fact that the Chiron is not pharyngeal but it is crude is not correct it is not unrecoverable. sent19: there is something such that if that that it does not lend frailty and is unrecoverable is correct is false it lends Greensboro. sent20: there is something such that if the fact that it does lend balcony and it hedgehops is not correct it is not pharyngeal.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & {DF}x) -> ¬{BL}x sent2: (Ex): ¬(¬{GN}x & {CJ}x) -> ¬{IM}x sent3: (x): ¬(¬{HN}x & {FT}x) -> ¬{JC}x sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: (Ex): ¬(¬{FD}x & {EP}x) -> ¬{JD}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent8: (Ex): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent10: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent11: (Ex): ¬(¬{BC}x & {I}x) -> ¬{HB}x sent12: ¬({FL}{aa} & {B}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent13: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent14: (Ex): ¬(¬{ES}x & {AS}x) -> {CT}x sent15: ¬({BT}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{IF}{aa} sent16: ¬(¬{BL}{aa} & {AP}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent17: (Ex): ¬(¬{GS}x & {IP}x) -> {AG}x sent18: ¬(¬{B}{aa} & {EH}{aa}) -> ¬{IK}{aa} sent19: (Ex): ¬(¬{ER}x & {IK}x) -> {CP}x sent20: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if the fact that it is not adducent and is unsensational is not correct it does not lend esthete.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{HN}x & {FT}x) -> ¬{JC}x
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the adjudicator does not lend esthete if the fact that the fact that it is not adducent and it is unsensational is right is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if the fact that it does not lend balcony and it does hedgehop is wrong then that it is not pharyngeal is right is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is not shy and it is Einsteinian does not hold then it does not lend Indriidae hold. sent2: there is something such that if that it is not a exabit and it does question is not true then it is not antistrophic. sent3: something does not lend esthete if that it is not adducent and it is unsensational is not true. sent4: the Chiron is not pharyngeal if the fact that it does not lend balcony and it hedgehops does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not lend balcony and it does hedgehop it is not pharyngeal. sent6: there is something such that if the fact that it is not offing and it does card does not hold then it is not a phragmocone. sent7: there is something such that if it does not hedgehop then it is non-pharyngeal. sent8: there is something such that if it does lend balcony it is not pharyngeal. sent9: the Chiron is pharyngeal if the fact that the fact that it does not lend balcony and does hedgehop is right is not true. sent10: the Chiron is not pharyngeal if it does not lend balcony and it hedgehops. sent11: there exists something such that if that it is not Trojan and does shy is wrong then it is not a walkie-talkie. sent12: the Chiron does not lend transudate if the fact that it does hug and it is pharyngeal is false. sent13: the Chiron is not pharyngeal if it does not hedgehop. sent14: there is something such that if that it is not a irresistibility and it is a Dravidian is false it downgrades pedesis. sent15: if that the Chiron is a Uriah that lends balcony does not hold the fact that it does not lend commissar hold. sent16: that the Chiron does not hedgehop is true if that it does not lend Indriidae and it alters is wrong. sent17: there is something such that if the fact that it is not pleochroic and it is zodiacal does not hold it is a burlesque. sent18: if the fact that the Chiron is not pharyngeal but it is crude is not correct it is not unrecoverable. sent19: there is something such that if that that it does not lend frailty and is unrecoverable is correct is false it lends Greensboro. sent20: there is something such that if the fact that it does lend balcony and it hedgehops is not correct it is not pharyngeal. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the dietician is a spikemoss but it is not a kind of a Yukon is not right.
|
¬({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c})
|
sent1: that something is a kind of a spikemoss and is not a Yukon does not hold if it does not lend fluctuation. sent2: that the polymerase is not archival but it is a scriptorium is not correct. sent3: the relations quotes Bretagne if the Shudra does not quotes Bretagne. sent4: something does not lend fluctuation and/or it is not a kind of a drosophila if it is a kind of a Yukon. sent5: if the relations is a Flemish then that the eukaryote is archival thing that does not headquarter is not right. sent6: The fluctuation lends mustache. sent7: the adventurer is a kind of a spikemoss if that the mustache does not lend fluctuation is right. sent8: the relations is a kind of a Flemish. sent9: if the mustache does lend fluctuation then the Postum is a kind of a drosophila. sent10: something that does not headquarter is an entree and does quote Bretagne. sent11: the mustache lends fluctuation. sent12: the Shudra is not a Flemish if that that the polymerase is both not archival and a scriptorium is incorrect hold. sent13: the dietician is a kind of electrophoretic thing that is a kameez if the chilliness is not a kind of an entree. sent14: if the eukaryote quotes Bretagne then the chilliness is not a kind of an entree. sent15: if the relations does quote Bretagne then the fact that the eukaryote quote Bretagne is not false. sent16: the Postum is a kind of a kameez if the chilliness is an entree. sent17: the chilliness does not headquarter if that the eukaryote is archival thing that does not headquarter is not correct. sent18: the dietician is a spikemoss if there is something such that it is a drosophila. sent19: the electrode is a gloss but it does not downgrade meronymy. sent20: if the Postum is a kind of a Yukon the fact that the dietician is a drosophila is not incorrect. sent21: if the Shudra is not Flemish it headquarters and/or it does not quote Bretagne. sent22: if there is something such that it is a drosophila then the dietician is a kind of a spikemoss that is not a kind of a Yukon. sent23: if something is a kameez that the mustache is a kind of non-electrophoretic thing that is not a drosophila does not hold.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent2: ¬(¬{K}{h} & {L}{h}) sent3: ¬{H}{g} -> {H}{f} sent4: (x): {D}x -> (¬{A}x v ¬{B}x) sent5: {J}{f} -> ¬({K}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) sent6: {AA}{aa} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> {C}{fq} sent8: {J}{f} sent9: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent10: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({G}x & {H}x) sent11: {A}{a} sent12: ¬(¬{K}{h} & {L}{h}) -> ¬{J}{g} sent13: ¬{G}{d} -> ({E}{c} & {F}{c}) sent14: {H}{e} -> ¬{G}{d} sent15: {H}{f} -> {H}{e} sent16: {G}{d} -> {F}{b} sent17: ¬({K}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) -> ¬{I}{d} sent18: (x): {B}x -> {C}{c} sent19: ({HB}{dr} & ¬{GN}{dr}) sent20: {D}{b} -> {B}{c} sent21: ¬{J}{g} -> ({I}{g} v ¬{H}{g}) sent22: (x): {B}x -> ({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent23: (x): {F}x -> ¬(¬{E}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
[
"sent9 & sent11 -> int1: the Postum is a drosophila.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is a drosophila.; int2 & sent22 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent11 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 -> int2: (Ex): {B}x; int2 & sent22 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the dietician is a kind of a spikemoss but it is not a kind of a Yukon is not correct.
|
¬({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c})
|
[
"sent1 -> int3: the fact that the dietician is a spikemoss but it is not a kind of a Yukon is incorrect if it does not lend fluctuation.; sent10 -> int4: the chilliness is an entree and it quotes Bretagne if it does not headquarter.; sent5 & sent8 -> int5: the fact that the eukaryote is archival but it does not headquarter is incorrect.; sent17 & int5 -> int6: the chilliness does not headquarter.; int4 & int6 -> int7: the chilliness is an entree and it does quote Bretagne.; int7 -> int8: the chilliness is a kind of an entree.; sent16 & int8 -> int9: the Postum is a kind of a kameez.; int9 -> int10: something is a kind of a kameez.; int10 & sent23 -> int11: that the mustache is non-electrophoretic thing that is not a drosophila is not true.; int11 -> int12: there is something such that the fact that it is not electrophoretic and is not a kind of a drosophila is wrong.;"
] | 10 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the dietician is a spikemoss but it is not a kind of a Yukon is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is a kind of a spikemoss and is not a Yukon does not hold if it does not lend fluctuation. sent2: that the polymerase is not archival but it is a scriptorium is not correct. sent3: the relations quotes Bretagne if the Shudra does not quotes Bretagne. sent4: something does not lend fluctuation and/or it is not a kind of a drosophila if it is a kind of a Yukon. sent5: if the relations is a Flemish then that the eukaryote is archival thing that does not headquarter is not right. sent6: The fluctuation lends mustache. sent7: the adventurer is a kind of a spikemoss if that the mustache does not lend fluctuation is right. sent8: the relations is a kind of a Flemish. sent9: if the mustache does lend fluctuation then the Postum is a kind of a drosophila. sent10: something that does not headquarter is an entree and does quote Bretagne. sent11: the mustache lends fluctuation. sent12: the Shudra is not a Flemish if that that the polymerase is both not archival and a scriptorium is incorrect hold. sent13: the dietician is a kind of electrophoretic thing that is a kameez if the chilliness is not a kind of an entree. sent14: if the eukaryote quotes Bretagne then the chilliness is not a kind of an entree. sent15: if the relations does quote Bretagne then the fact that the eukaryote quote Bretagne is not false. sent16: the Postum is a kind of a kameez if the chilliness is an entree. sent17: the chilliness does not headquarter if that the eukaryote is archival thing that does not headquarter is not correct. sent18: the dietician is a spikemoss if there is something such that it is a drosophila. sent19: the electrode is a gloss but it does not downgrade meronymy. sent20: if the Postum is a kind of a Yukon the fact that the dietician is a drosophila is not incorrect. sent21: if the Shudra is not Flemish it headquarters and/or it does not quote Bretagne. sent22: if there is something such that it is a drosophila then the dietician is a kind of a spikemoss that is not a kind of a Yukon. sent23: if something is a kameez that the mustache is a kind of non-electrophoretic thing that is not a drosophila does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent11 -> int1: the Postum is a drosophila.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is a drosophila.; int2 & sent22 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
either the Angora is not a kind of a arborvitae or it is autotelic or both.
|
(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a})
|
sent1: the fact that the Angora is not a kind of a arborvitae and/or it is autotelic is incorrect if the fact that it is a kind of a liberal is not incorrect. sent2: the Angora is liberal.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent2: {A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = either the Angora is not a kind of a arborvitae or it is autotelic or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the Angora is not a kind of a arborvitae and/or it is autotelic is incorrect if the fact that it is a kind of a liberal is not incorrect. sent2: the Angora is liberal. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.