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
|
either the avalanching revival or the mercuricness or both occurs.
|
({B} v {A})
|
sent1: the scrambling cost occurs if the fact that the scrambling Finnish happens but the scrambling almandite does not occur does not hold. sent2: the avalanching Lophophora happens. sent3: that the fragmentation happens but the ecotourism does not occur is not true. sent4: if the ecotourism occurs then the avalanching revival happens. sent5: the chylificness happens or the leastness happens or both. sent6: the fact that the fact that the avalanching revival occurs and/or the mercuricness occurs is right is not true if the identification does not occur. sent7: if the fact that the skirt does not occur is right then the culturalness and the bucket occurs. sent8: if the scrambling cost happens then that not the throbbing but the paroling happens does not hold. sent9: the fact that if the fact that that not the avalanching Ceylon but the scrambling colophony occurs is not right hold the identification does not occur is not wrong. sent10: the fact that the fact that the scrambling Finnish happens but the scrambling almandite does not occur is wrong if the coercion occurs hold. sent11: the futuristicness happens. sent12: the fact that the fact that the deep-sea occurs and the tolerance does not occur hold is not right. sent13: if the culturalness happens the fact that that not the avalanching Ceylon but the scrambling colophony occurs is not wrong does not hold. sent14: the avalanching plagiarist occurs if the mercuricness happens. sent15: the fact that the avalanching Tribonema does not occur does not hold. sent16: that the say-so does not occur results in that the tolerance does not occur or the nonlinguisticness does not occur or both. sent17: the say-so does not occur if that not the throbbing but the parole happens is not right. sent18: the fact that both the fragmentation and the ecotourism occurs is not right.
|
sent1: ¬({O} & ¬{P}) -> {N} sent2: {CP} sent3: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent4: {AB} -> {B} sent5: ({CN} v {HH}) sent6: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} v {A}) sent7: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) sent8: {N} -> ¬(¬{M} & {L}) sent9: ¬(¬{E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} sent10: {Q} -> ¬({O} & ¬{P}) sent11: {GQ} sent12: ¬({BN} & ¬{J}) sent13: {F} -> ¬(¬{E} & {D}) sent14: {A} -> {BM} sent15: {EE} sent16: ¬{K} -> (¬{J} v ¬{I}) sent17: ¬(¬{M} & {L}) -> ¬{K} sent18: ¬({AA} & {AB})
|
[] |
[] |
the refreshment and/or the avalanching plagiarist occurs.
|
({AJ} v {BM})
|
[] | 6 | 2 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = either the avalanching revival or the mercuricness or both occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the scrambling cost occurs if the fact that the scrambling Finnish happens but the scrambling almandite does not occur does not hold. sent2: the avalanching Lophophora happens. sent3: that the fragmentation happens but the ecotourism does not occur is not true. sent4: if the ecotourism occurs then the avalanching revival happens. sent5: the chylificness happens or the leastness happens or both. sent6: the fact that the fact that the avalanching revival occurs and/or the mercuricness occurs is right is not true if the identification does not occur. sent7: if the fact that the skirt does not occur is right then the culturalness and the bucket occurs. sent8: if the scrambling cost happens then that not the throbbing but the paroling happens does not hold. sent9: the fact that if the fact that that not the avalanching Ceylon but the scrambling colophony occurs is not right hold the identification does not occur is not wrong. sent10: the fact that the fact that the scrambling Finnish happens but the scrambling almandite does not occur is wrong if the coercion occurs hold. sent11: the futuristicness happens. sent12: the fact that the fact that the deep-sea occurs and the tolerance does not occur hold is not right. sent13: if the culturalness happens the fact that that not the avalanching Ceylon but the scrambling colophony occurs is not wrong does not hold. sent14: the avalanching plagiarist occurs if the mercuricness happens. sent15: the fact that the avalanching Tribonema does not occur does not hold. sent16: that the say-so does not occur results in that the tolerance does not occur or the nonlinguisticness does not occur or both. sent17: the say-so does not occur if that not the throbbing but the parole happens is not right. sent18: the fact that both the fragmentation and the ecotourism occurs is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the postmodernism is not a Bedlam.
|
¬{B}{b}
|
sent1: something is not a Bedlam if that it does avalanche cartographer and it avalanches public is incorrect. sent2: that the pyrographer is a Bedlam and does avalanche public is not right if the fact that the postmodernism is not a Bedlam hold. sent3: that the pyrographer is a kind of a Bedlam and it avalanches cartographer is wrong. sent4: if something does not avalanche cartographer the fact that it is not a Bedlam hold. sent5: that the pyrographer avalanches cartographer and it avalanches public does not hold. sent6: the fact that the pyrographer avalanches cartographer and it is a Bedlam is wrong. sent7: that the postmodernism avalanches cartographer and avalanches public is not true if the pyrographer does not avalanches cartographer. sent8: the postmodernism is not a Bedlam if it does not avalanche cartographer. sent9: there is something such that the fact that it does avalanche VA and is not attitudinal is incorrect. sent10: the postmodernism does not avalanche cartographer if there is something such that that it is not a oxyacetylene and it does not scramble VA is false. sent11: the pyrographer does not avalanche cartographer if there exists something such that it does avalanche VA. sent12: something does not avalanche VA and is not attitudinal. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it does not avalanche VA and is attitudinal is not true. sent14: the fact that the pyrographer is a Bedlam and it does avalanche cartographer does not hold if the postmodernism is not a kind of a Bedlam. sent15: there exists something such that that it does not avalanche VA and it is not attitudinal is not correct.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: ¬({B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x sent5: ¬({A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent6: ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent8: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬{B}{b} sent9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{CI}x & ¬{DO}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent11: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{A}{a} sent12: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent14: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent15: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: that the postmodernism is not a Bedlam is true if that it avalanches cartographer and avalanches public is incorrect.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the postmodernism is not a Bedlam. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a Bedlam if that it does avalanche cartographer and it avalanches public is incorrect. sent2: that the pyrographer is a Bedlam and does avalanche public is not right if the fact that the postmodernism is not a Bedlam hold. sent3: that the pyrographer is a kind of a Bedlam and it avalanches cartographer is wrong. sent4: if something does not avalanche cartographer the fact that it is not a Bedlam hold. sent5: that the pyrographer avalanches cartographer and it avalanches public does not hold. sent6: the fact that the pyrographer avalanches cartographer and it is a Bedlam is wrong. sent7: that the postmodernism avalanches cartographer and avalanches public is not true if the pyrographer does not avalanches cartographer. sent8: the postmodernism is not a Bedlam if it does not avalanche cartographer. sent9: there is something such that the fact that it does avalanche VA and is not attitudinal is incorrect. sent10: the postmodernism does not avalanche cartographer if there is something such that that it is not a oxyacetylene and it does not scramble VA is false. sent11: the pyrographer does not avalanche cartographer if there exists something such that it does avalanche VA. sent12: something does not avalanche VA and is not attitudinal. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it does not avalanche VA and is attitudinal is not true. sent14: the fact that the pyrographer is a Bedlam and it does avalanche cartographer does not hold if the postmodernism is not a kind of a Bedlam. sent15: there exists something such that that it does not avalanche VA and it is not attitudinal is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: that the postmodernism is not a Bedlam is true if that it avalanches cartographer and avalanches public is incorrect.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the rigmarole occurs.
|
{C}
|
sent1: if the scrambling hewer occurs and/or the feeling Flory does not occur the rigmarole occurs. sent2: that the scrambling hewer occurs is correct if that either the rack does not occur or the evangelicalness happens or both is not right. sent3: if that the racking or the evangelicalness or both happens is not true then the scrambling hewer happens.
|
sent1: ({B} v ¬{A}) -> {C} sent2: ¬(¬{AA} v {AB}) -> {B} sent3: ¬({AA} v {AB}) -> {B}
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the rigmarole occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the scrambling hewer occurs and/or the feeling Flory does not occur the rigmarole occurs. sent2: that the scrambling hewer occurs is correct if that either the rack does not occur or the evangelicalness happens or both is not right. sent3: if that the racking or the evangelicalness or both happens is not true then the scrambling hewer happens. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the enalapril is not a uncial.
|
¬{B}{aa}
|
sent1: that something does not apprehend but it is a kind of a shtikl is not correct if it does knead. sent2: if there is something such that it is not most-favored-nation that the toad-in-the-hole is knee-length thing that feels Tiu is not true. sent3: the duckpins avalanches Cynoglossum but it is not upper-class. sent4: something that does avalanche Cynoglossum and is not upper-class is not most-favored-nation. sent5: if that the enalapril does not apprehend and is a kind of a shtikl does not hold then it is not a uncial. sent6: something that kneads is a shtikl. sent7: if the fact that something kneads and is not uncial is not right it is a uncial. sent8: the lacuna is uncial and it kneads if the icefall does not feel Tiu. sent9: the fact that the cork is not a shtikl but it is a drumstick is incorrect. sent10: the enalapril is not a kind of a uncial if it is not a shtikl.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({E}{b} & {C}{b}) sent3: ({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent4: (x): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{D}x sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (x): {A}x -> {AB}x sent7: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {B}x sent8: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{he} & {A}{he}) sent9: ¬(¬{AB}{fl} & {DB}{fl}) sent10: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: if the enalapril kneads then the fact that it does not apprehend and is a kind of a shtikl does not hold.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa});"
] |
the lacuna is a kind of a shtikl.
|
{AB}{he}
|
[
"sent6 -> int2: if that the lacuna does knead is not false then the fact that it is a shtikl hold.; sent4 -> int3: the duckpins is not most-favored-nation if it avalanches Cynoglossum and it is not upper-class.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the duckpins is not most-favored-nation.; int4 -> int5: there exists something such that it is not most-favored-nation.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: that the toad-in-the-hole is knee-length and it feels Tiu is false.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that that it is knee-length thing that does feel Tiu does not hold.;"
] | 9 | 3 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the enalapril is not a uncial. ; $context$ = sent1: that something does not apprehend but it is a kind of a shtikl is not correct if it does knead. sent2: if there is something such that it is not most-favored-nation that the toad-in-the-hole is knee-length thing that feels Tiu is not true. sent3: the duckpins avalanches Cynoglossum but it is not upper-class. sent4: something that does avalanche Cynoglossum and is not upper-class is not most-favored-nation. sent5: if that the enalapril does not apprehend and is a kind of a shtikl does not hold then it is not a uncial. sent6: something that kneads is a shtikl. sent7: if the fact that something kneads and is not uncial is not right it is a uncial. sent8: the lacuna is uncial and it kneads if the icefall does not feel Tiu. sent9: the fact that the cork is not a shtikl but it is a drumstick is incorrect. sent10: the enalapril is not a kind of a uncial if it is not a shtikl. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: if the enalapril kneads then the fact that it does not apprehend and is a kind of a shtikl does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the downsizing does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: the feeling toggle happens. sent2: the downsizing does not occur if the depilation does not occur. sent3: if the feeling toggle occurs the downsizing occurs. sent4: the depilation does not occur if the tow occurs.
|
sent1: {A} sent2: ¬{C} -> ¬{B} sent3: {A} -> {B} sent4: {D} -> ¬{C}
|
[
"sent3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the stemming Monsieur happens.
|
{F}
|
[] | 7 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the downsizing does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the feeling toggle happens. sent2: the downsizing does not occur if the depilation does not occur. sent3: if the feeling toggle occurs the downsizing occurs. sent4: the depilation does not occur if the tow occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the crocodile is blastemal.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: the crocodile is not a Cognac. sent2: the crocodile is blastemal and is not a Cognac. sent3: if the sashimi is not a Cognac then that the mix is not non-blastemal and not Byzantine is wrong. sent4: if that the brooch is leonine thing that is not a Cognac is incorrect the sashimi is not a Cognac.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{a} sent2: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent3: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent4: ¬({D}{d} & ¬{B}{d}) -> ¬{B}{c}
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the crocodile is not blastemal.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[] | 6 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the crocodile is blastemal. ; $context$ = sent1: the crocodile is not a Cognac. sent2: the crocodile is blastemal and is not a Cognac. sent3: if the sashimi is not a Cognac then that the mix is not non-blastemal and not Byzantine is wrong. sent4: if that the brooch is leonine thing that is not a Cognac is incorrect the sashimi is not a Cognac. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does arrogate then it is not a beneficiary or does not avalanche Plantation or both.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: if the epicenter arrogates either it is non-beneficiary or it avalanches Plantation or both. sent2: if something propagates it is not a kind of a Hadean or it is not antagonistic or both. sent3: something does not feel checksum or is not a cockney or both if it does scramble Coke. sent4: there exists something such that if it is unadoptable it either is not a cocoon or does not avalanche T-network or both. sent5: if something is a sifter then it is not a fullness and/or it does not scramble Coke. sent6: the fact that if something feels sunglass then it does not scramble detente and/or it is not a church hold. sent7: there exists something such that if it does arrogate then it is a beneficiary and/or does not avalanche Plantation. sent8: there exists something such that if it arrogates it is not a beneficiary and/or it does avalanche Plantation. sent9: something that does arrogate either is a beneficiary or does not avalanche Plantation or both. sent10: either the epicenter is a beneficiary or it does not avalanche Plantation or both if it does arrogate. sent11: if the repellent is a kind of a religionism then it is not a scrod and/or it is not a Icelandic. sent12: if something does arrogate then it is not a beneficiary and/or it does avalanche Plantation.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): {GG}x -> (¬{BI}x v ¬{DI}x) sent3: (x): {DR}x -> (¬{AH}x v ¬{AG}x) sent4: (Ex): {ER}x -> (¬{IK}x v ¬{CM}x) sent5: (x): {GP}x -> (¬{FH}x v ¬{DR}x) sent6: (x): {BA}x -> (¬{FC}x v ¬{HN}x) sent7: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent8: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent9: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent10: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent11: {AM}{dj} -> (¬{EM}{dj} v ¬{S}{dj}) sent12: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x)
|
[] |
[] |
there exists something such that if it scrambles Coke then it does not feel checksum or it is not a kind of a cockney or both.
|
(Ex): {DR}x -> (¬{AH}x v ¬{AG}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the sunglass either does not feel checksum or is not a cockney or both if it scrambles Coke.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does arrogate then it is not a beneficiary or does not avalanche Plantation or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if the epicenter arrogates either it is non-beneficiary or it avalanches Plantation or both. sent2: if something propagates it is not a kind of a Hadean or it is not antagonistic or both. sent3: something does not feel checksum or is not a cockney or both if it does scramble Coke. sent4: there exists something such that if it is unadoptable it either is not a cocoon or does not avalanche T-network or both. sent5: if something is a sifter then it is not a fullness and/or it does not scramble Coke. sent6: the fact that if something feels sunglass then it does not scramble detente and/or it is not a church hold. sent7: there exists something such that if it does arrogate then it is a beneficiary and/or does not avalanche Plantation. sent8: there exists something such that if it arrogates it is not a beneficiary and/or it does avalanche Plantation. sent9: something that does arrogate either is a beneficiary or does not avalanche Plantation or both. sent10: either the epicenter is a beneficiary or it does not avalanche Plantation or both if it does arrogate. sent11: if the repellent is a kind of a religionism then it is not a scrod and/or it is not a Icelandic. sent12: if something does arrogate then it is not a beneficiary and/or it does avalanche Plantation. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the trachodon does not stem postmistress.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: if there are non-coarse things then that the lammergeier is not non-epicarpal but it is not a kind of a Maghreb is not true. sent2: if something smuggles and does not deal it is not a Maghreb. sent3: if something feels bureaucrat then it is not coarse. sent4: the feathertop is not coarse and it is not epicarpal. sent5: the lammergeier does not smuggle. sent6: if there is something such that it is not coarse and is not epicarpal then the lammergeier is a kind of a Maghreb. sent7: the feathertop is not a deal but non-epicarpal. sent8: the lammergeier does not smuggle if the fact that the trachodon does not stem postmistress is incorrect. sent9: the lammergeier does not smuggle and it does not deal if the trachodon does stem postmistress. sent10: the lammergeier is a kind of a Maghreb if there is something such that it is not coarse and it is not non-epicarpal. sent11: there are non-epicarpal things. sent12: if the lamb is not optical then the feathertop does feel bureaucrat and it is a Cypriot. sent13: if the lammergeier does smuggle and is not a deal it is not a kind of a Maghreb.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent2: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): {E}x -> ¬{D}x sent4: (¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent5: ¬{AA}{b} sent6: (x): (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x) -> {B}{b} sent7: (¬{AB}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent8: {A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent9: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent10: (x): (¬{D}x & {C}x) -> {B}{b} sent11: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent12: ¬{G}{d} -> ({E}{c} & {F}{c}) sent13: ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the trachodon stems postmistress.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the lammergeier does not smuggle and is not a deal.; sent4 -> int2: there are non-coarse and non-epicarpal things.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the lammergeier is a Maghreb.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent4 -> int2: (Ex): (¬{D}x & ¬{C}x); int2 & sent6 -> int3: {B}{b};"
] |
the trachodon does stem postmistress.
|
{A}{a}
|
[
"sent3 -> int4: the feathertop is not coarse if it feels bureaucrat.;"
] | 7 | 4 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the trachodon does not stem postmistress. ; $context$ = sent1: if there are non-coarse things then that the lammergeier is not non-epicarpal but it is not a kind of a Maghreb is not true. sent2: if something smuggles and does not deal it is not a Maghreb. sent3: if something feels bureaucrat then it is not coarse. sent4: the feathertop is not coarse and it is not epicarpal. sent5: the lammergeier does not smuggle. sent6: if there is something such that it is not coarse and is not epicarpal then the lammergeier is a kind of a Maghreb. sent7: the feathertop is not a deal but non-epicarpal. sent8: the lammergeier does not smuggle if the fact that the trachodon does not stem postmistress is incorrect. sent9: the lammergeier does not smuggle and it does not deal if the trachodon does stem postmistress. sent10: the lammergeier is a kind of a Maghreb if there is something such that it is not coarse and it is not non-epicarpal. sent11: there are non-epicarpal things. sent12: if the lamb is not optical then the feathertop does feel bureaucrat and it is a Cypriot. sent13: if the lammergeier does smuggle and is not a deal it is not a kind of a Maghreb. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the trachodon stems postmistress.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: the lammergeier does not smuggle and is not a deal.; sent4 -> int2: there are non-coarse and non-epicarpal things.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the lammergeier is a Maghreb.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fuse but not the option occurs.
|
({AA} & ¬{AB})
|
sent1: the menstrualness does not occur if the fact that the feeling raving occurs and the salat occurs is incorrect. sent2: if the fact that the feeling hosteller occurs and the coitalness happens is false then the coitalness does not occur. sent3: if the avalanching dihydrostreptomycin does not occur the fusing but not the option occurs. sent4: if the fact that the adventure but not the stemming sesame occurs is false the commission does not occur. sent5: the fact that the fuse but not the option happens does not hold. sent6: that the feeling hosteller and the coitalness happens is wrong if the commissioning does not occur. sent7: the fact that the fusing and the option happens does not hold. sent8: the avalanching dihydrostreptomycin does not occur if the coitalness does not occur. sent9: the fact that the Gandhianness and the alvineness happens is wrong. sent10: the fact that the feeling hosteller occurs and the tenseness occurs is not true. sent11: that the alvineness and the hapticness occurs does not hold. sent12: that the feeling raving and the salat occurs does not hold if the completing does not occur. sent13: if the menstrualness does not occur that the fact that the adventure but not the stemming sesame happens is not right hold.
|
sent1: ¬({I} & {H}) -> ¬{G} sent2: ¬({D} & {B}) -> ¬{B} sent3: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent4: ¬({F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} sent5: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent6: ¬{C} -> ¬({D} & {B}) sent7: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent8: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} sent9: ¬({GA} & {IC}) sent10: ¬({D} & {BM}) sent11: ¬({IC} & {AQ}) sent12: ¬{J} -> ¬({I} & {H}) sent13: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & ¬{E})
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fusing but not the option occurs.
|
({AA} & ¬{AB})
|
[] | 13 | 1 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fuse but not the option occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the menstrualness does not occur if the fact that the feeling raving occurs and the salat occurs is incorrect. sent2: if the fact that the feeling hosteller occurs and the coitalness happens is false then the coitalness does not occur. sent3: if the avalanching dihydrostreptomycin does not occur the fusing but not the option occurs. sent4: if the fact that the adventure but not the stemming sesame occurs is false the commission does not occur. sent5: the fact that the fuse but not the option happens does not hold. sent6: that the feeling hosteller and the coitalness happens is wrong if the commissioning does not occur. sent7: the fact that the fusing and the option happens does not hold. sent8: the avalanching dihydrostreptomycin does not occur if the coitalness does not occur. sent9: the fact that the Gandhianness and the alvineness happens is wrong. sent10: the fact that the feeling hosteller occurs and the tenseness occurs is not true. sent11: that the alvineness and the hapticness occurs does not hold. sent12: that the feeling raving and the salat occurs does not hold if the completing does not occur. sent13: if the menstrualness does not occur that the fact that the adventure but not the stemming sesame happens is not right hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that something is not a wise and is not a comicality is wrong.
|
¬((Ex): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x))
|
sent1: there are non-sulcate things. sent2: the cross-examiner is not nonextant and it is not a comicality if there exists something such that it is not a Huntington. sent3: something is not a serfdom but a tobramycin. sent4: the fact that if there is something such that it does not feel heralded the cross-examiner is a kind of non-Boeotian thing that does not avalanche yenta is right. sent5: there is something such that it is not antheridial. sent6: if there are non-sulcate things then the cross-examiner is not a wise and not a comicality. sent7: there is something such that it is sulcate. sent8: if something is incompressible it is a kind of a comicality. sent9: there is something such that it is not a comicality. sent10: the lammergeier is a kind of non-catarrhine thing that does not avalanche Tettigoniidae. sent11: there is something such that that it is not greenside is not wrong. sent12: there is something such that it is not wise. sent13: something is not reproducible. sent14: the fact that something is not an agape is correct. sent15: there exists something such that it does not avalanche jeer and is not prefectural. sent16: there exists something such that it is not a wise and it is a comicality. sent17: the hydrant is not a primatology and it is not a comicality. sent18: if there are non-sulcate things then the fact that the cross-examiner is not a wise is not wrong. sent19: the cross-examiner is not a wise. sent20: if the fact that the liger is not a kind of a wise and it is not sulcate is incorrect then the cross-examiner is not proprioceptive. sent21: something is wise thing that is not a kind of a comicality.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent2: (x): ¬{FH}x -> (¬{GJ}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent3: (Ex): (¬{BI}x & {GD}x) sent4: (x): ¬{AG}x -> (¬{CL}{a} & ¬{FF}{a}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{JH}x sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent7: (Ex): {A}x sent8: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent9: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent10: (¬{BE}{cj} & ¬{IJ}{cj}) sent11: (Ex): ¬{GE}x sent12: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent13: (Ex): ¬{II}x sent14: (Ex): ¬{F}x sent15: (Ex): (¬{JB}x & ¬{AQ}x) sent16: (Ex): (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent17: (¬{AN}{fk} & ¬{C}{fk}) sent18: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent19: ¬{B}{a} sent20: ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{IA}{a} sent21: (Ex): ({B}x & ¬{C}x)
|
[
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the cross-examiner is both not a wise and not a comicality.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that that it is not proprioceptive is right.
|
(Ex): ¬{IA}x
|
[
"sent8 -> int2: the saffron is a comicality if it is incompressible.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that something is not a wise and is not a comicality is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there are non-sulcate things. sent2: the cross-examiner is not nonextant and it is not a comicality if there exists something such that it is not a Huntington. sent3: something is not a serfdom but a tobramycin. sent4: the fact that if there is something such that it does not feel heralded the cross-examiner is a kind of non-Boeotian thing that does not avalanche yenta is right. sent5: there is something such that it is not antheridial. sent6: if there are non-sulcate things then the cross-examiner is not a wise and not a comicality. sent7: there is something such that it is sulcate. sent8: if something is incompressible it is a kind of a comicality. sent9: there is something such that it is not a comicality. sent10: the lammergeier is a kind of non-catarrhine thing that does not avalanche Tettigoniidae. sent11: there is something such that that it is not greenside is not wrong. sent12: there is something such that it is not wise. sent13: something is not reproducible. sent14: the fact that something is not an agape is correct. sent15: there exists something such that it does not avalanche jeer and is not prefectural. sent16: there exists something such that it is not a wise and it is a comicality. sent17: the hydrant is not a primatology and it is not a comicality. sent18: if there are non-sulcate things then the fact that the cross-examiner is not a wise is not wrong. sent19: the cross-examiner is not a wise. sent20: if the fact that the liger is not a kind of a wise and it is not sulcate is incorrect then the cross-examiner is not proprioceptive. sent21: something is wise thing that is not a kind of a comicality. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent6 -> int1: the cross-examiner is both not a wise and not a comicality.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the banishment does not occur and the avalanching coulisse occurs.
|
(¬{A} & {B})
|
sent1: the keratotomy does not occur and the glutealness does not occur if the avionicsness occurs. sent2: that the feeling androgyny happens but the avionicsness does not occur is not correct if the fact that the injection occurs is correct. sent3: the incitation occurs. sent4: the avalanching coulisse happens. sent5: that the keratotomy does not occur brings about that the matriarchalness and the imprisonment happens. sent6: the avionicsness occurs if the fact that both the feeling androgyny and the avionicsnessness happens does not hold. sent7: the popularization happens if the gelling happens. sent8: if the imprisonment happens then the teleportation does not occur and the scrambling umbellifer does not occur. sent9: the banishment does not occur. sent10: the teleportation occurs and the scrambling umbellifer occurs if the imprisonment does not occur. sent11: if the teleportation occurs then the avalanching coulisse does not occur. sent12: the gravity occurs. sent13: the feeling adumbration does not occur but the visceralness occurs. sent14: if the popularization occurs then that the injection happens hold. sent15: that the matriarchalness does not occur and the imprisonment does not occur is triggered by that the keratotomy occurs. sent16: the avionicsness yields that both the non-glutealness and the keratotomy occurs. sent17: both the gelling and the intro occurs if the cataleptic does not occur.
|
sent1: {I} -> (¬{G} & ¬{H}) sent2: {K} -> ¬({J} & ¬{I}) sent3: {DT} sent4: {B} sent5: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) sent6: ¬({J} & ¬{I}) -> {I} sent7: {M} -> {L} sent8: {E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent9: ¬{A} sent10: ¬{E} -> ({C} & {D}) sent11: {C} -> ¬{B} sent12: {EK} sent13: (¬{CC} & {BI}) sent14: {L} -> {K} sent15: {G} -> (¬{F} & ¬{E}) sent16: {I} -> (¬{H} & {G}) sent17: ¬{O} -> ({M} & {N})
|
[
"sent9 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the incorporation happens.
|
{BO}
|
[] | 9 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the banishment does not occur and the avalanching coulisse occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the keratotomy does not occur and the glutealness does not occur if the avionicsness occurs. sent2: that the feeling androgyny happens but the avionicsness does not occur is not correct if the fact that the injection occurs is correct. sent3: the incitation occurs. sent4: the avalanching coulisse happens. sent5: that the keratotomy does not occur brings about that the matriarchalness and the imprisonment happens. sent6: the avionicsness occurs if the fact that both the feeling androgyny and the avionicsnessness happens does not hold. sent7: the popularization happens if the gelling happens. sent8: if the imprisonment happens then the teleportation does not occur and the scrambling umbellifer does not occur. sent9: the banishment does not occur. sent10: the teleportation occurs and the scrambling umbellifer occurs if the imprisonment does not occur. sent11: if the teleportation occurs then the avalanching coulisse does not occur. sent12: the gravity occurs. sent13: the feeling adumbration does not occur but the visceralness occurs. sent14: if the popularization occurs then that the injection happens hold. sent15: that the matriarchalness does not occur and the imprisonment does not occur is triggered by that the keratotomy occurs. sent16: the avionicsness yields that both the non-glutealness and the keratotomy occurs. sent17: both the gelling and the intro occurs if the cataleptic does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the butch is not a leapfrog.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
sent1: the fact that something is not a kind of a fourteenth and is not a mediant is not true if it is Boeotian. sent2: the butch is not a leapfrog if the fact that the poliovirus is not a fourteenth and it is not a kind of a mediant is false. sent3: if the poliovirus is Boeotian then the fact that it is not a fourteenth and it is a kind of a mediant is not right. sent4: if something is Boeotian that it is a leapfrog hold. sent5: the harvester is a kind of a leapfrog. sent6: if something is Boeotian that it is a fourteenth and it is not a kind of a mediant is incorrect. sent7: the poliovirus is not a kind of a Cimabue. sent8: that the poliovirus is not a fourteenth and is a mediant is incorrect. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a fourteenth but it is a kind of a mediant does not hold if it is Boeotian. sent10: the constituent is a Cimabue that is not a kind of a Tunisian if the feathertop is a kind of a scan.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent5: {B}{cm} sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: ¬{C}{aa} sent8: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: {E}{c} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b})
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: that the poliovirus is both not a fourteenth and not a mediant is not correct if it is Boeotian.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa});"
] |
the butch leapfrogs.
|
{B}{a}
|
[
"sent4 -> int2: if the butch is Boeotian then it is a leapfrog.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the butch is not a leapfrog. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is not a kind of a fourteenth and is not a mediant is not true if it is Boeotian. sent2: the butch is not a leapfrog if the fact that the poliovirus is not a fourteenth and it is not a kind of a mediant is false. sent3: if the poliovirus is Boeotian then the fact that it is not a fourteenth and it is a kind of a mediant is not right. sent4: if something is Boeotian that it is a leapfrog hold. sent5: the harvester is a kind of a leapfrog. sent6: if something is Boeotian that it is a fourteenth and it is not a kind of a mediant is incorrect. sent7: the poliovirus is not a kind of a Cimabue. sent8: that the poliovirus is not a fourteenth and is a mediant is incorrect. sent9: the fact that something is not a kind of a fourteenth but it is a kind of a mediant does not hold if it is Boeotian. sent10: the constituent is a Cimabue that is not a kind of a Tunisian if the feathertop is a kind of a scan. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: that the poliovirus is both not a fourteenth and not a mediant is not correct if it is Boeotian.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Gable is not a kind of a railing.
|
¬{C}{a}
|
sent1: the anticoagulant does avalanche iodotyrosine and it is a georgette. sent2: something is a railing if that it does stem ovolo and it is not a railing is incorrect. sent3: if the zany is not unregretful the boomerang is a pull-in. sent4: the boomerang is a pull-in if that the zany is not a Perisoreus is not wrong. sent5: if something is not bentonitic then the fact that it is amnestic and it is a Perisoreus does not hold. sent6: the anticoagulant is a sameness if it avalanches iodotyrosine. sent7: the ovolo does feel coulisse but it is not amnestic if that something does not avalanche Euphractus is not wrong. sent8: the zany does not feel coulisse and it is not bentonitic if the fact that the tri-chad does avalanche Euphractus is not false. sent9: the tri-chad is not bentonitic if something that does feel coulisse is not amnestic. sent10: the anticoagulant does treat. sent11: if that the Gable is not a railing and it is not unregretful is not true then the teddy is not a pull-in. sent12: something is a elastance and does stem ovolo if it is not a pull-in. sent13: something that does stem ovolo and is a kind of a pull-in does not rail. sent14: something is not a Perisoreus if that it is a kind of amnestic a Perisoreus does not hold. sent15: That the ovolo does stem Gable hold. sent16: if the tri-chad is not bentonitic either the zany is not unregretful or it is not a kind of a Perisoreus or both. sent17: the tri-chad does avalanche Euphractus. sent18: the fact that if the anticoagulant does treat the anticoagulant is a grenade hold. sent19: if something is a sameness and it is a grenade then the la does not avalanche Euphractus. sent20: the Gable is a kind of a pull-in. sent21: if the zany is not a Perisoreus then the boomerang is unregretful.
|
sent1: ({M}{g} & {N}{g}) sent2: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}x sent3: ¬{D}{c} -> {B}{b} sent4: ¬{E}{c} -> {B}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({G}x & {E}x) sent6: {M}{g} -> {K}{g} sent7: (x): ¬{I}x -> ({H}{e} & ¬{G}{e}) sent8: {I}{d} -> (¬{H}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent9: (x): ({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}{d} sent10: {L}{g} sent11: ¬(¬{C}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{B}{en} sent12: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({CD}x & {A}x) sent13: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent14: (x): ¬({G}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x sent15: {AA}{aa} sent16: ¬{F}{d} -> (¬{D}{c} v ¬{E}{c}) sent17: {I}{d} sent18: {L}{g} -> {J}{g} sent19: (x): ({K}x & {J}x) -> ¬{I}{f} sent20: {B}{a} sent21: ¬{E}{c} -> {D}{b}
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: if the Gable does stem ovolo and it is a pull-in then it is not a kind of a railing.;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a};"
] |
the teddy is a elastance and stems ovolo.
|
({CD}{en} & {A}{en})
|
[
"sent12 -> int2: if the fact that the teddy is not a kind of a pull-in is true then it is a elastance and it stems ovolo.; sent14 -> int3: if the fact that the zany is amnestic and a Perisoreus does not hold that it is not a Perisoreus is true.; sent5 -> int4: if the zany is not bentonitic that it is a kind of amnestic a Perisoreus is not correct.; sent8 & sent17 -> int5: the zany does not feel coulisse and is not bentonitic.; int5 -> int6: the zany is not bentonitic.; int4 & int6 -> int7: that the zany is both amnestic and a Perisoreus is wrong.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the zany is not a Perisoreus.; sent21 & int8 -> int9: the boomerang is unregretful.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that it is not regretful.;"
] | 9 | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Gable is not a kind of a railing. ; $context$ = sent1: the anticoagulant does avalanche iodotyrosine and it is a georgette. sent2: something is a railing if that it does stem ovolo and it is not a railing is incorrect. sent3: if the zany is not unregretful the boomerang is a pull-in. sent4: the boomerang is a pull-in if that the zany is not a Perisoreus is not wrong. sent5: if something is not bentonitic then the fact that it is amnestic and it is a Perisoreus does not hold. sent6: the anticoagulant is a sameness if it avalanches iodotyrosine. sent7: the ovolo does feel coulisse but it is not amnestic if that something does not avalanche Euphractus is not wrong. sent8: the zany does not feel coulisse and it is not bentonitic if the fact that the tri-chad does avalanche Euphractus is not false. sent9: the tri-chad is not bentonitic if something that does feel coulisse is not amnestic. sent10: the anticoagulant does treat. sent11: if that the Gable is not a railing and it is not unregretful is not true then the teddy is not a pull-in. sent12: something is a elastance and does stem ovolo if it is not a pull-in. sent13: something that does stem ovolo and is a kind of a pull-in does not rail. sent14: something is not a Perisoreus if that it is a kind of amnestic a Perisoreus does not hold. sent15: That the ovolo does stem Gable hold. sent16: if the tri-chad is not bentonitic either the zany is not unregretful or it is not a kind of a Perisoreus or both. sent17: the tri-chad does avalanche Euphractus. sent18: the fact that if the anticoagulant does treat the anticoagulant is a grenade hold. sent19: if something is a sameness and it is a grenade then the la does not avalanche Euphractus. sent20: the Gable is a kind of a pull-in. sent21: if the zany is not a Perisoreus then the boomerang is unregretful. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> int1: if the Gable does stem ovolo and it is a pull-in then it is not a kind of a railing.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if that it sermonizes and is pneumatic is false it does not avalanche Epictetus.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it does not sermonize it does not avalanche Epictetus. sent2: the prospect does not avalanche Epictetus if that it sermonizes and it is pneumatic does not hold. sent3: something is not calcific if the fact that it is a gastroscope and does reside is not true. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it sermonizes and is pneumatic does not hold it does avalanche Epictetus.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬({EM}x & {AP}x) -> ¬{FH}x sent4: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if that it is a gastroscope and resides does not hold then it is not calcific.
|
(Ex): ¬({EM}x & {AP}x) -> ¬{FH}x
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: the farmplace is not calcific if the fact that it is a gastroscope and it resides does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it sermonizes and is pneumatic is false it does not avalanche Epictetus. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it does not sermonize it does not avalanche Epictetus. sent2: the prospect does not avalanche Epictetus if that it sermonizes and it is pneumatic does not hold. sent3: something is not calcific if the fact that it is a gastroscope and does reside is not true. sent4: there exists something such that if the fact that it sermonizes and is pneumatic does not hold it does avalanche Epictetus. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the merganser is impermissible.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: the fact that the carryall is a kind of a Father is not false if it is not a cutoff and/or it does not scramble ski-plane. sent2: if the hickory is not impermissible then the fact that the merganser either is allopatric or countermines or both is not right. sent3: something does not feel vichyssoise if it feels Saussurea or it does scramble drawn or both. sent4: the carryall is not a kind of a cutoff and/or it does not scramble ski-plane. sent5: that the cerium does not pall hold if the hickory is mucinous but it does not scramble saddlery. sent6: the merganser is not allopatric. sent7: the cerium is not lunisolar. sent8: if the cerium does not feel vichyssoise but it is a countermine the merganser countermine. sent9: everything is mucinous. sent10: the merganser is not lunisolar. sent11: the hickory does not countermine if that the fact that the cerium is lunisolar or it is allopatric or both hold is false. sent12: something does not scramble saddlery if it feels affecting and it is not a kind of a slapper. sent13: the cerium either does feel Saussurea or scrambles drawn or both if there is something such that it scrambles drawn. sent14: everything does feel affecting and is not a kind of a slapper. sent15: if something is a Father it scrambles drawn. sent16: something that is not a pall is both a perfluorocarbon and a countermine. sent17: if the fact that the merganser is not impermissible is right then the cerium is not lunisolar. sent18: the fact that the cerium is not non-lunisolar and/or is allopatric is not correct if the merganser is not impermissible. sent19: if the fact that something is impermissible thing that is not a die is wrong it is not impermissible. sent20: the carryall does die.
|
sent1: (¬{M}{d} v ¬{L}{d}) -> {K}{d} sent2: ¬{A}{c} -> ¬({AB}{a} v {B}{a}) sent3: (x): ({F}x v {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: (¬{M}{d} v ¬{L}{d}) sent5: ({J}{c} & ¬{I}{c}) -> ¬{H}{b} sent6: ¬{AB}{a} sent7: ¬{AA}{b} sent8: (¬{D}{b} & {B}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent9: (x): {J}x sent10: ¬{AA}{a} sent11: ¬({AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent12: (x): ({O}x & ¬{N}x) -> ¬{I}x sent13: (x): {E}x -> ({F}{b} v {E}{b}) sent14: (x): ({O}x & ¬{N}x) sent15: (x): {K}x -> {E}x sent16: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}x & {B}x) sent17: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent18: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent19: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) -> ¬{A}x sent20: {C}{d}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the merganser is not impermissible.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: that either the cerium is lunisolar or it is allopatric or both is not right.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: that the hickory does not countermine hold.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: ¬({AA}{b} v {AB}{b}); int1 & sent11 -> int2: ¬{B}{c};"
] |
the merganser is not impermissible.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent19 -> int3: if that the merganser is impermissible but it is not a die is wrong then it is not impermissible.; sent12 -> int4: if the hypochlorite feels affecting and is not a slapper it does not scramble saddlery.; sent14 -> int5: the hypochlorite does feel affecting and is not a slapper.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the hypochlorite does not scramble saddlery.; int6 -> int7: everything does not scramble saddlery.; int7 -> int8: the pestle does not scramble saddlery.; sent9 -> int9: the pestle is mucinous.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the pestle is mucinous but it does not scramble saddlery.; int10 -> int11: everything is mucinous thing that does not scramble saddlery.; int11 -> int12: the hickory is mucinous but it does not scramble saddlery.; sent5 & int12 -> int13: the cerium is not a kind of a pall.; sent16 -> int14: the cerium is a perfluorocarbon and does countermine if it is not a pall.; int13 & int14 -> int15: the fact that the cerium is a perfluorocarbon and it is a countermine is right.; int15 -> int16: the cerium is a countermine.; sent15 -> int17: the carryall does scramble drawn if it is a Father.; sent1 & sent4 -> int18: the carryall is a Father.; int17 & int18 -> int19: the carryall does scramble drawn.; int19 -> int20: there is something such that it scrambles drawn.; int20 & sent13 -> int21: the cerium feels Saussurea and/or it scrambles drawn.; sent3 -> int22: the cerium does not feel vichyssoise if either it does feel Saussurea or it does scramble drawn or both.; int21 & int22 -> int23: the cerium does not feel vichyssoise.; int16 & int23 -> int24: the cerium does not feel vichyssoise and countermines.; sent8 & int24 -> int25: the merganser is a countermine.;"
] | 14 | 4 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the merganser is impermissible. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the carryall is a kind of a Father is not false if it is not a cutoff and/or it does not scramble ski-plane. sent2: if the hickory is not impermissible then the fact that the merganser either is allopatric or countermines or both is not right. sent3: something does not feel vichyssoise if it feels Saussurea or it does scramble drawn or both. sent4: the carryall is not a kind of a cutoff and/or it does not scramble ski-plane. sent5: that the cerium does not pall hold if the hickory is mucinous but it does not scramble saddlery. sent6: the merganser is not allopatric. sent7: the cerium is not lunisolar. sent8: if the cerium does not feel vichyssoise but it is a countermine the merganser countermine. sent9: everything is mucinous. sent10: the merganser is not lunisolar. sent11: the hickory does not countermine if that the fact that the cerium is lunisolar or it is allopatric or both hold is false. sent12: something does not scramble saddlery if it feels affecting and it is not a kind of a slapper. sent13: the cerium either does feel Saussurea or scrambles drawn or both if there is something such that it scrambles drawn. sent14: everything does feel affecting and is not a kind of a slapper. sent15: if something is a Father it scrambles drawn. sent16: something that is not a pall is both a perfluorocarbon and a countermine. sent17: if the fact that the merganser is not impermissible is right then the cerium is not lunisolar. sent18: the fact that the cerium is not non-lunisolar and/or is allopatric is not correct if the merganser is not impermissible. sent19: if the fact that something is impermissible thing that is not a die is wrong it is not impermissible. sent20: the carryall does die. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the merganser is not impermissible.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: that either the cerium is lunisolar or it is allopatric or both is not right.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: that the hickory does not countermine hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the deer is not a milcher or it is a pass or both.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})
|
sent1: something is not a milcher and/or it is a pass if it does not scramble posseman. sent2: that something is not a kind of a Phasianus and does not fan is true. sent3: that if there is something such that the fact that it is not a Phasianus and is not a fan is wrong the deer does not scramble posseman hold. sent4: there is something such that the fact that it is not a Phasianus and does not fan is wrong. sent5: either the deer is a milcher or it does pass or both.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) sent2: (Ex): (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) sent5: ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: either the deer is not a milcher or it passes or both if the fact that it does not scramble posseman is not wrong.; sent4 & sent3 -> int2: the deer does not scramble posseman.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}); sent4 & sent3 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the deer is not a milcher or it is a pass or both. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a milcher and/or it is a pass if it does not scramble posseman. sent2: that something is not a kind of a Phasianus and does not fan is true. sent3: that if there is something such that the fact that it is not a Phasianus and is not a fan is wrong the deer does not scramble posseman hold. sent4: there is something such that the fact that it is not a Phasianus and does not fan is wrong. sent5: either the deer is a milcher or it does pass or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: either the deer is not a milcher or it passes or both if the fact that it does not scramble posseman is not wrong.; sent4 & sent3 -> int2: the deer does not scramble posseman.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the crocodile is a centrex but it is not even is not correct.
|
¬({A}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa})
|
sent1: the fact that the crocodile is adaptable but it is not a dissolve is false. sent2: if the bulrush is not a Wesleyan and/or it is Botswanan it is not a self-accusation. sent3: if something is not a self-accusation that it is a centrex and it does not even is wrong. sent4: if the fact that something does stem decortication but it is not copular is not right it is not a kind of a self-accusation. sent5: the fact that the crocodile stems decortication and is not copular is not true.
|
sent1: ¬({GK}{aa} & ¬{BK}{aa}) sent2: (¬{D}{a} v {E}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{C}x) sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the crocodile does stem decortication and is not copular does not hold it is not a self-accusation.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the crocodile is not a self-accusation.; sent3 -> int3: if the crocodile is not a kind of a self-accusation the fact that it is a centrex and it is not even is incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & sent5 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa}; sent3 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬({A}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa}); int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the crocodile is a centrex that does not even.
|
({A}{aa} & ¬{C}{aa})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the crocodile is a centrex but it is not even is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the crocodile is adaptable but it is not a dissolve is false. sent2: if the bulrush is not a Wesleyan and/or it is Botswanan it is not a self-accusation. sent3: if something is not a self-accusation that it is a centrex and it does not even is wrong. sent4: if the fact that something does stem decortication but it is not copular is not right it is not a kind of a self-accusation. sent5: the fact that the crocodile stems decortication and is not copular is not true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the crocodile does stem decortication and is not copular does not hold it is not a self-accusation.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the crocodile is not a self-accusation.; sent3 -> int3: if the crocodile is not a kind of a self-accusation the fact that it is a centrex and it is not even is incorrect.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the transalpine does not uncoil.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: if there exists something such that that it does not scramble Hartford and is not a kind of an elitist is wrong then the fact that the transalpine does uncoil is right. sent2: the fact that something is not a kind of a vitrectomy but it does avalanche bardolatry is false if it is a kind of a restitution. sent3: the fact that the rat-catcher does not scramble Hartford and is not an elitist is wrong. sent4: there exists something such that it is not Handelian and it is not an oiler. sent5: that the gemfibrozil is not a walkie-talkie but it is a kind of a Spartan is not right if that it is a kind of a classics is not incorrect. sent6: if the fact that something is not a kind of a walkie-talkie but it is a Spartan is false then that it is not a kind of a stalagmite is true. sent7: if there exists something such that that it scrambles Hartford is not wrong then the transalpine does uncoil. sent8: there is something such that that it is not a Micropterus and is not a kind of a grub is not correct. sent9: if the fact that the gemfibrozil is non-political thing that is not a kid is not correct then it is a classics. sent10: the fact that the gemfibrozil is both not political and not a kid does not hold. sent11: that the rat-catcher does scramble Hartford and is not an elitist is not right. sent12: if something is not a peanut the fact that it is not a kind of a grub is not false. sent13: something does not uncoil and is a meteorite if it is not a grub. sent14: if the fact that something is not a restitution and is dull is wrong then the fact that it is a restitution is true. sent15: that something is not a restitution but it is dull is not true if it is not a stalagmite.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent2: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: (Ex): (¬{HS}x & ¬{DD}x) sent5: {L}{b} -> ¬(¬{K}{b} & {J}{b}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & {J}x) -> ¬{H}x sent7: (x): {AA}x -> {A}{a} sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{DJ}x & ¬{C}x) sent9: ¬(¬{N}{b} & ¬{M}{b}) -> {L}{b} sent10: ¬(¬{N}{b} & ¬{M}{b}) sent11: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent12: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬{C}x sent13: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & {B}x) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{G}x & {I}x) -> {G}x sent15: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x & {I}x)
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: there is something such that that it does not scramble Hartford and it is not an elitist is false.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the transalpine does not uncoil is not wrong.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent13 -> int2: the transalpine does not uncoil but it is a meteorite if it is not a grub.; sent12 -> int3: if the transalpine is not a kind of a peanut it does not grub.; sent2 -> int4: the fact that the gemfibrozil is not a vitrectomy but it avalanches bardolatry is false if it is a kind of a restitution.; sent14 -> int5: the gemfibrozil is a kind of a restitution if that it is not a kind of a restitution and it does dull is false.; sent15 -> int6: if the gemfibrozil is not a kind of a stalagmite then the fact that it is both not a restitution and dull is not true.; sent6 -> int7: the gemfibrozil is not a stalagmite if the fact that it is both not a walkie-talkie and Spartan does not hold.; sent9 & sent10 -> int8: the gemfibrozil is a classics.; sent5 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the fact that the gemfibrozil is not a walkie-talkie and is Spartan is not right hold.; int7 & int9 -> int10: the gemfibrozil is not a stalagmite.; int6 & int10 -> int11: that the gemfibrozil is not a kind of a restitution but it does dull does not hold.; int5 & int11 -> int12: the gemfibrozil is a restitution.; int4 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the gemfibrozil is not a vitrectomy and does avalanche bardolatry is not true.; int13 -> int14: there exists something such that that it is not a vitrectomy and it does avalanche bardolatry is incorrect.;"
] | 11 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the transalpine does not uncoil. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that that it does not scramble Hartford and is not a kind of an elitist is wrong then the fact that the transalpine does uncoil is right. sent2: the fact that something is not a kind of a vitrectomy but it does avalanche bardolatry is false if it is a kind of a restitution. sent3: the fact that the rat-catcher does not scramble Hartford and is not an elitist is wrong. sent4: there exists something such that it is not Handelian and it is not an oiler. sent5: that the gemfibrozil is not a walkie-talkie but it is a kind of a Spartan is not right if that it is a kind of a classics is not incorrect. sent6: if the fact that something is not a kind of a walkie-talkie but it is a Spartan is false then that it is not a kind of a stalagmite is true. sent7: if there exists something such that that it scrambles Hartford is not wrong then the transalpine does uncoil. sent8: there is something such that that it is not a Micropterus and is not a kind of a grub is not correct. sent9: if the fact that the gemfibrozil is non-political thing that is not a kid is not correct then it is a classics. sent10: the fact that the gemfibrozil is both not political and not a kid does not hold. sent11: that the rat-catcher does scramble Hartford and is not an elitist is not right. sent12: if something is not a peanut the fact that it is not a kind of a grub is not false. sent13: something does not uncoil and is a meteorite if it is not a grub. sent14: if the fact that something is not a restitution and is dull is wrong then the fact that it is a restitution is true. sent15: that something is not a restitution but it is dull is not true if it is not a stalagmite. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: there is something such that that it does not scramble Hartford and it is not an elitist is false.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if it avalanches haze and is not a kind of a Tiu it is not non-Cyrillic is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x)
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is top-down and not a cheek it is neural. sent2: if something is a kind of a Tiu and is not unpatriotic it is a Pakistani. sent3: there is something such that if it does feel readout and it does not scramble Johnston then it is phrenic. sent4: the fact that the haze is a bunchgrass is not wrong if it avalanches Artemia and it is not a debut. sent5: if the fact that something scrambles plagiarist and does not avalanche haze is correct it is a debut. sent6: if the plagiarist avalanches Baum and does not avalanche haze then it is idiographic. sent7: the feathertop is a Cyrillic if that it avalanches haze and it is not a Tiu is true. sent8: the feathertop is a kind of a Cyrillic if it avalanches haze and it is a Tiu. sent9: there exists something such that if it does avalanche haze and it is a Tiu then that it is a Cyrillic is not wrong. sent10: there exists something such that if it does stem Pisonia and is not calculable it is exterior.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({JD}x & ¬{BI}x) -> {GI}x sent2: (x): ({AB}x & ¬{BH}x) -> {HK}x sent3: (Ex): ({AQ}x & ¬{DQ}x) -> {GN}x sent4: ({HB}{ef} & ¬{EO}{ef}) -> {R}{ef} sent5: (x): ({HR}x & ¬{AA}x) -> {EO}x sent6: ({DC}{cm} & ¬{AA}{cm}) -> {FP}{cm} sent7: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent8: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent10: (Ex): ({JI}x & ¬{AS}x) -> {IT}x
|
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the inclination does scramble plagiarist and does not avalanche haze then it is a debut.
|
({HR}{cg} & ¬{AA}{cg}) -> {EO}{cg}
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it avalanches haze and is not a kind of a Tiu it is not non-Cyrillic is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is top-down and not a cheek it is neural. sent2: if something is a kind of a Tiu and is not unpatriotic it is a Pakistani. sent3: there is something such that if it does feel readout and it does not scramble Johnston then it is phrenic. sent4: the fact that the haze is a bunchgrass is not wrong if it avalanches Artemia and it is not a debut. sent5: if the fact that something scrambles plagiarist and does not avalanche haze is correct it is a debut. sent6: if the plagiarist avalanches Baum and does not avalanche haze then it is idiographic. sent7: the feathertop is a Cyrillic if that it avalanches haze and it is not a Tiu is true. sent8: the feathertop is a kind of a Cyrillic if it avalanches haze and it is a Tiu. sent9: there exists something such that if it does avalanche haze and it is a Tiu then that it is a Cyrillic is not wrong. sent10: there exists something such that if it does stem Pisonia and is not calculable it is exterior. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the dissimulating happens.
|
{C}
|
sent1: the heads-up occurs. sent2: the scrambling drawn occurs. sent3: the comeback occurs. sent4: the blackingness occurs. sent5: that the dissimulating does not occur and the .38-caliberness does not occur is caused by that the avalanching ambulance does not occur. sent6: the rental happens. sent7: the avalanching ranging occurs. sent8: if the fact that the avalanching ambulance and the enterostomy occurs is not right then the avalanching ambulance does not occur. sent9: the avalanching ambulance triggers that the dissimulating happens.
|
sent1: {GP} sent2: {ID} sent3: {IH} sent4: {FG} sent5: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & ¬{A}) sent6: {EL} sent7: {IQ} sent8: ¬({B} & {E}) -> ¬{B} sent9: {B} -> {C}
|
[] |
[] |
the dissimulating does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
[] | 7 | 2 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the dissimulating happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the heads-up occurs. sent2: the scrambling drawn occurs. sent3: the comeback occurs. sent4: the blackingness occurs. sent5: that the dissimulating does not occur and the .38-caliberness does not occur is caused by that the avalanching ambulance does not occur. sent6: the rental happens. sent7: the avalanching ranging occurs. sent8: if the fact that the avalanching ambulance and the enterostomy occurs is not right then the avalanching ambulance does not occur. sent9: the avalanching ambulance triggers that the dissimulating happens. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the avalanching Caspian does not occur is incorrect.
|
{C}
|
sent1: that the upstageness happens and the seasonableness occurs is brought about by that the volley does not occur. sent2: if the diversification does not occur not the chastity but the intercourse occurs. sent3: if the craziness happens the avalanching Caspian occurs. sent4: if that both the volleying and the recording occurs does not hold the volleying does not occur. sent5: the upstageness and the craziness happens. sent6: if the chastity does not occur then the fact that the fact that both the volleying and the recording happens is true is not right.
|
sent1: ¬{E} -> ({A} & {D}) sent2: ¬{I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) sent3: {B} -> {C} sent4: ¬({E} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent5: ({A} & {B}) sent6: ¬{G} -> ¬({E} & {F})
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the craziness happens.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: {B}; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the avalanching Caspian does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
[] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the avalanching Caspian does not occur is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the upstageness happens and the seasonableness occurs is brought about by that the volley does not occur. sent2: if the diversification does not occur not the chastity but the intercourse occurs. sent3: if the craziness happens the avalanching Caspian occurs. sent4: if that both the volleying and the recording occurs does not hold the volleying does not occur. sent5: the upstageness and the craziness happens. sent6: if the chastity does not occur then the fact that the fact that both the volleying and the recording happens is true is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the craziness happens.; sent3 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the inclination is both not a pyrolatry and exocentric is incorrect.
|
¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
sent1: that the inclination is a kind of non-exocentric thing that is noncritical is not correct. sent2: something is both not a pyrolatry and exocentric if it does not stem mayoralty. sent3: the selector is not exocentric. sent4: if the Roman is non-exocentric but it stems mayoralty the inclination is generous. sent5: the inclination does not shift but it is exocentric. sent6: the inclination is not a kind of a malformation. sent7: the Roman is generous if the inclination is not a kind of a pyrolatry and is exocentric. sent8: if that something is not generous and it is not a kind of a calque is incorrect then it stems mayoralty. sent9: the inclination is generous if the Roman is not a pyrolatry but it is exocentric. sent10: if the Roman does not stem mayoralty and is exocentric the inclination is generous. sent11: the inclination is not a quellung and is not a kind of a Minuteman. sent12: the inclination does not scramble selector. sent13: the arcade is generous. sent14: the inclination does stem mayoralty. sent15: the shearwater is not exocentric.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {BJ}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: ¬{AB}{ej} sent4: (¬{AB}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent5: (¬{EH}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent6: ¬{DQ}{a} sent7: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent8: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & ¬{C}x) -> {A}x sent9: (¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent10: (¬{A}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent11: (¬{HN}{a} & ¬{FJ}{a}) sent12: ¬{AP}{a} sent13: {B}{ep} sent14: {A}{a} sent15: ¬{AB}{jb}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the inclination is not a pyrolatry and is exocentric.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the Roman is generous.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); sent7 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] |
the inclination is not a pyrolatry but it is not non-exocentric.
|
(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a})
|
[
"sent2 -> int2: the inclination is not a pyrolatry but it is exocentric if it does not stem mayoralty.;"
] | 7 | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the inclination is both not a pyrolatry and exocentric is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the inclination is a kind of non-exocentric thing that is noncritical is not correct. sent2: something is both not a pyrolatry and exocentric if it does not stem mayoralty. sent3: the selector is not exocentric. sent4: if the Roman is non-exocentric but it stems mayoralty the inclination is generous. sent5: the inclination does not shift but it is exocentric. sent6: the inclination is not a kind of a malformation. sent7: the Roman is generous if the inclination is not a kind of a pyrolatry and is exocentric. sent8: if that something is not generous and it is not a kind of a calque is incorrect then it stems mayoralty. sent9: the inclination is generous if the Roman is not a pyrolatry but it is exocentric. sent10: if the Roman does not stem mayoralty and is exocentric the inclination is generous. sent11: the inclination is not a quellung and is not a kind of a Minuteman. sent12: the inclination does not scramble selector. sent13: the arcade is generous. sent14: the inclination does stem mayoralty. sent15: the shearwater is not exocentric. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the inclination is not a pyrolatry and is exocentric.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the Roman is generous.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if that it does not avalanche ultimacy is not wrong it is not a aminomethane does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x)
|
sent1: if that something is not a singular hold then it is not a schooling. sent2: there is something such that if that it is not a master hold then it is not noncritical. sent3: if the veld does not avalanche ultimacy it is a aminomethane. sent4: if something avalanches ultimacy it is not a aminomethane. sent5: there is something such that if it does not avalanche ultimacy then it is a aminomethane. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a dimetrodon the fact that it does not gradate is correct. sent7: a non-souring thing is not noncritical. sent8: if the veld does avalanche ultimacy then that it is not a aminomethane is true. sent9: something is a aminomethane if it does not avalanche ultimacy. sent10: there is something such that if it avalanches ultimacy then it is not a aminomethane. sent11: something is not viral if it is not a kind of a Yoruba. sent12: there is something such that if it does not propitiate it is not a Phylloscopus. sent13: if something does not avalanche ultimacy it is not a aminomethane.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{ER}x -> ¬{HB}x sent2: (Ex): ¬{F}x -> ¬{AO}x sent3: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent4: (x): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent5: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{BF}x -> ¬{DS}x sent7: (x): ¬{R}x -> ¬{AO}x sent8: {B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent10: (Ex): {B}x -> ¬{C}x sent11: (x): ¬{HT}x -> ¬{JB}x sent12: (Ex): ¬{GI}x -> ¬{AK}x sent13: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: if the veld does not avalanche ultimacy then it is not a aminomethane.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> int1: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if it is not a souring then that it is not noncritical is right.
|
(Ex): ¬{R}x -> ¬{AO}x
|
[
"sent7 -> int2: the aoudad is not noncritical if it is non-souring.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if that it does not avalanche ultimacy is not wrong it is not a aminomethane does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is not a singular hold then it is not a schooling. sent2: there is something such that if that it is not a master hold then it is not noncritical. sent3: if the veld does not avalanche ultimacy it is a aminomethane. sent4: if something avalanches ultimacy it is not a aminomethane. sent5: there is something such that if it does not avalanche ultimacy then it is a aminomethane. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a dimetrodon the fact that it does not gradate is correct. sent7: a non-souring thing is not noncritical. sent8: if the veld does avalanche ultimacy then that it is not a aminomethane is true. sent9: something is a aminomethane if it does not avalanche ultimacy. sent10: there is something such that if it avalanches ultimacy then it is not a aminomethane. sent11: something is not viral if it is not a kind of a Yoruba. sent12: there is something such that if it does not propitiate it is not a Phylloscopus. sent13: if something does not avalanche ultimacy it is not a aminomethane. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> int1: if the veld does not avalanche ultimacy then it is not a aminomethane.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it is epicarpal then it does not stem cusk and it is a fetology.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: if the rake is epicarpal then it does not stem cusk. sent2: there is something such that if it is epicarpal it is a fetology. sent3: there exists something such that if the fact that it is epicarpal is not false it does stem cusk and is a kind of a fetology. sent4: the rake does not stem cusk but it is a fetology if it is epicarpal. sent5: there is something such that if it is epicarpal then it does not stem cusk. sent6: something is a kind of non-mnemonic thing that feels seclusion if that it is malarial is right.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> {AB}x sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent6: (x): {GU}x -> (¬{GE}x & {N}x)
|
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there is something such that if it is malarial it is not a mnemonic and it does feel seclusion.
|
(Ex): {GU}x -> (¬{GE}x & {N}x)
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: if the March is malarial then it is not a kind of a mnemonic and feels seclusion.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is epicarpal then it does not stem cusk and it is a fetology. ; $context$ = sent1: if the rake is epicarpal then it does not stem cusk. sent2: there is something such that if it is epicarpal it is a fetology. sent3: there exists something such that if the fact that it is epicarpal is not false it does stem cusk and is a kind of a fetology. sent4: the rake does not stem cusk but it is a fetology if it is epicarpal. sent5: there is something such that if it is epicarpal then it does not stem cusk. sent6: something is a kind of non-mnemonic thing that feels seclusion if that it is malarial is right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pestle is not hilar.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: there exists something such that that it is not adnate and it is bimillenial is not true. sent2: if there is something such that that it is not adnate and it is bimillenial does not hold then the fact that the pestle is not hilar is not wrong.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the pestle is not hilar. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that that it is not adnate and it is bimillenial is not true. sent2: if there is something such that that it is not adnate and it is bimillenial does not hold then the fact that the pestle is not hilar is not wrong. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sporulating happens.
|
{C}
|
sent1: the Romansness does not occur. sent2: the crustalness does not occur. sent3: that the persecution does not occur results in that the sporulating happens. sent4: the non-endodonticness leads to that the call-back does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬{A} sent2: ¬{IR} sent3: ¬{B} -> {C} sent4: ¬{GP} -> ¬{AC}
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the sporulating happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the Romansness does not occur. sent2: the crustalness does not occur. sent3: that the persecution does not occur results in that the sporulating happens. sent4: the non-endodonticness leads to that the call-back does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the hawking occurs and the feeling cynosure occurs.
|
({C} & {D})
|
sent1: the feeling cynosure happens if the fact that the stemming biquadratic happens and the feeling cynosure does not occur is not true. sent2: the pose happens. sent3: if the enlistment does not occur that the hawk happens and the feeling cynosure happens is wrong. sent4: that the enlistment happens and the pose does not occur is false if the fact that the matinee does not occur is not false. sent5: the fact that both the stemming biquadratic and the feeling cynosure happens is not true. sent6: if the matinee occurs the hawk happens. sent7: that that the stemming biquadratic occurs and the feeling cynosure happens is true does not hold if the posing happens. sent8: the fact that the enlistment happens is right. sent9: the enlistment and the matinee occurs. sent10: the matinee does not occur if the agitation does not occur and the stemming biquadratic does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬({F} & ¬{D}) -> {D} sent2: {E} sent3: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {D}) sent4: ¬{B} -> ¬({A} & ¬{E}) sent5: ¬({F} & {D}) sent6: {B} -> {C} sent7: {E} -> ¬({F} & {D}) sent8: {A} sent9: ({A} & {B}) sent10: (¬{G} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{B}
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the matinee happens.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the hawking occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent6 -> int2: {C};"
] |
that the hawking and the feeling cynosure happens is wrong.
|
¬({C} & {D})
|
[] | 8 | 3 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the hawking occurs and the feeling cynosure occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the feeling cynosure happens if the fact that the stemming biquadratic happens and the feeling cynosure does not occur is not true. sent2: the pose happens. sent3: if the enlistment does not occur that the hawk happens and the feeling cynosure happens is wrong. sent4: that the enlistment happens and the pose does not occur is false if the fact that the matinee does not occur is not false. sent5: the fact that both the stemming biquadratic and the feeling cynosure happens is not true. sent6: if the matinee occurs the hawk happens. sent7: that that the stemming biquadratic occurs and the feeling cynosure happens is true does not hold if the posing happens. sent8: the fact that the enlistment happens is right. sent9: the enlistment and the matinee occurs. sent10: the matinee does not occur if the agitation does not occur and the stemming biquadratic does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: the matinee happens.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the hawking occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the rope is prospective.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: if something is not a isometrics the rope does not stem rope but it is prospective. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is a finger is not incorrect. sent3: the rope avalanches Siluridae. sent4: the rope is both not a jurist and ventricular. sent5: if the maypole does not scramble carhop and is apocrine then it is a nosedive. sent6: the rope is not a kind of a precipitate and does retreat. sent7: if something is not apocrine but it scrambles microbalance it is prospective. sent8: the rope is a pentagon if it does not scramble microbalance and it is obstetric. sent9: there is something such that it is not a kind of a reflexed. sent10: there exists something such that that it is not important is true. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not avalanche Siluridae then the rope is not apocrine and does scramble microbalance. sent12: if there is something such that it is not carnivorous then the rope is apocrine. sent13: if there exists something such that it does not avalanche Siluridae the rope stems principle. sent14: if a non-nativist thing is scriptural then that it is a scuffer is not wrong. sent15: if there exists something such that it does not avalanche Siluridae then the rope does scramble microbalance. sent16: the rope is molal. sent17: if something is not a menarche then the rope is not a bullhorn and does avalanche Siluridae. sent18: the rope feels bullying. sent19: the maker is prospective if it does not espouse and is tonal. sent20: the rope is lexicostatistic.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{BN}x -> (¬{HL}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): {DH}x sent3: {A}{aa} sent4: (¬{HJ}{aa} & {HN}{aa}) sent5: (¬{BU}{dj} & {AA}{dj}) -> {IC}{dj} sent6: (¬{IT}{aa} & {ET}{aa}) sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent8: (¬{AB}{aa} & {CU}{aa}) -> {FA}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬{EG}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{GN}x sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent12: (x): ¬{BA}x -> {AA}{aa} sent13: (x): ¬{A}x -> {DL}{aa} sent14: (x): (¬{BB}x & {FH}x) -> {IO}x sent15: (x): ¬{A}x -> {AB}{aa} sent16: {JB}{aa} sent17: (x): ¬{AP}x -> (¬{E}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent18: {EF}{aa} sent19: (¬{CB}{bg} & {D}{bg}) -> {B}{bg} sent20: {IK}{aa}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: if the rope is not apocrine but it does scramble microbalance then it is prospective.;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the rope is prospective. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a isometrics the rope does not stem rope but it is prospective. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is a finger is not incorrect. sent3: the rope avalanches Siluridae. sent4: the rope is both not a jurist and ventricular. sent5: if the maypole does not scramble carhop and is apocrine then it is a nosedive. sent6: the rope is not a kind of a precipitate and does retreat. sent7: if something is not apocrine but it scrambles microbalance it is prospective. sent8: the rope is a pentagon if it does not scramble microbalance and it is obstetric. sent9: there is something such that it is not a kind of a reflexed. sent10: there exists something such that that it is not important is true. sent11: if there exists something such that it does not avalanche Siluridae then the rope is not apocrine and does scramble microbalance. sent12: if there is something such that it is not carnivorous then the rope is apocrine. sent13: if there exists something such that it does not avalanche Siluridae the rope stems principle. sent14: if a non-nativist thing is scriptural then that it is a scuffer is not wrong. sent15: if there exists something such that it does not avalanche Siluridae then the rope does scramble microbalance. sent16: the rope is molal. sent17: if something is not a menarche then the rope is not a bullhorn and does avalanche Siluridae. sent18: the rope feels bullying. sent19: the maker is prospective if it does not espouse and is tonal. sent20: the rope is lexicostatistic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: if the rope is not apocrine but it does scramble microbalance then it is prospective.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the Rock is non-upper-class is not wrong.
|
¬{D}{a}
|
sent1: there is something such that it does stooge. sent2: the Rock is not upper-class if it does not feel Hani. sent3: the haze is not congruent and/or it feels Hani if the fact that it feels bitok hold. sent4: something is not upper-class if the fact that it does feel ruler and it feels Hani is wrong. sent5: there exists something such that it is nonsteroidal. sent6: if there is something such that it is not steroidal then the fact that the Rock does feel ruler and it feels Hani is wrong. sent7: something is upper-class and it is nonsteroidal if it does not feel ruler. sent8: something is not upper-class if it does not feel Hani.
|
sent1: (Ex): {H}x sent2: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬{D}{a} sent3: {F}{b} -> (¬{E}{b} v {C}{b}) sent4: (x): ¬({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}x sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({D}x & {A}x) sent8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{D}x
|
[
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the fact that the Rock does feel ruler and it does feel Hani does not hold.; sent4 -> int2: the Rock is not upper-class if that it does feel ruler and it feels Hani is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 & sent6 -> int1: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}); sent4 -> int2: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the Rock is not non-upper-class is not incorrect.
|
{D}{a}
|
[
"sent7 -> int3: the Rock is upper-class and it is nonsteroidal if it does not feel ruler.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Rock is non-upper-class is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it does stooge. sent2: the Rock is not upper-class if it does not feel Hani. sent3: the haze is not congruent and/or it feels Hani if the fact that it feels bitok hold. sent4: something is not upper-class if the fact that it does feel ruler and it feels Hani is wrong. sent5: there exists something such that it is nonsteroidal. sent6: if there is something such that it is not steroidal then the fact that the Rock does feel ruler and it feels Hani is wrong. sent7: something is upper-class and it is nonsteroidal if it does not feel ruler. sent8: something is not upper-class if it does not feel Hani. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the fact that the Rock does feel ruler and it does feel Hani does not hold.; sent4 -> int2: the Rock is not upper-class if that it does feel ruler and it feels Hani is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the arenicolousness does not occur.
|
¬{C}
|
sent1: the fact that if that the scrambling morion occurs is correct then the fact that the scaling does not occur and the mews does not occur is not true is right. sent2: if the avitaminoticness and/or the blustering happens the usury does not occur. sent3: the fact that the arenicolousness but not the stemming pterodactyl occurs does not hold if the mews happens. sent4: if the undrinkableness does not occur both the feeling Perm and the avalanching Chewa happens. sent5: the fact that the scrambling morion happens hold if the stemming stomachache happens. sent6: either the shagging or the scrambling ana or both happens. sent7: the stemming stomachache occurs if the sonneting happens. sent8: if that the scaling does not occur and the mewing does not occur is false the mewing happens. sent9: if the feeling Perm occurs then the fact that the concretion does not occur and the sonneting does not occur is not correct. sent10: the sonnet happens if the fact that the concretion does not occur and the sonnet does not occur is not right. sent11: the redaction happens.
|
sent1: {F} -> ¬(¬{G} & ¬{E}) sent2: ({DL} v {GD}) -> ¬{BM} sent3: {E} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent4: ¬{M} -> ({K} & {L}) sent5: {H} -> {F} sent6: ({JC} v {CF}) sent7: {I} -> {H} sent8: ¬(¬{G} & ¬{E}) -> {E} sent9: {K} -> ¬(¬{J} & ¬{I}) sent10: ¬(¬{J} & ¬{I}) -> {I} sent11: {B}
|
[
"sent11 -> int1: the bilabialness occurs and/or the redaction occurs.;"
] |
[
"sent11 -> int1: ({A} v {B});"
] |
the incorruptness and/or the triumph happens.
|
({ER} v {FF})
|
[] | 13 | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the arenicolousness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that if that the scrambling morion occurs is correct then the fact that the scaling does not occur and the mews does not occur is not true is right. sent2: if the avitaminoticness and/or the blustering happens the usury does not occur. sent3: the fact that the arenicolousness but not the stemming pterodactyl occurs does not hold if the mews happens. sent4: if the undrinkableness does not occur both the feeling Perm and the avalanching Chewa happens. sent5: the fact that the scrambling morion happens hold if the stemming stomachache happens. sent6: either the shagging or the scrambling ana or both happens. sent7: the stemming stomachache occurs if the sonneting happens. sent8: if that the scaling does not occur and the mewing does not occur is false the mewing happens. sent9: if the feeling Perm occurs then the fact that the concretion does not occur and the sonneting does not occur is not correct. sent10: the sonnet happens if the fact that the concretion does not occur and the sonnet does not occur is not right. sent11: the redaction happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent11 -> int1: the bilabialness occurs and/or the redaction occurs.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
either the artichoke is not creative or it does stem Champaign or both.
|
(¬{D}{a} v {E}{a})
|
sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a lyreflower and/or it is not a gauge does not hold. sent2: the fact that that the artichoke is a Montgolfier and it is a kind of a horn is correct does not hold. sent3: that something is a Donatist is not wrong if it is not acceptable. sent4: if the artichoke is a kind of a Venezuelan either it does not feel wisp or it is creative or both. sent5: something is not creative and/or it does stem Champaign if the fact that it is algolagnic hold. sent6: if that the carpenter stems repetitiveness hold then that the fact that the artichoke is not creative and/or it does stem Champaign does not hold is not false. sent7: if something does not avalanche backlash then it does stem repetitiveness and is algolagnic. sent8: if the artichoke does not scramble paperknife then it does avalanche backlash and is monatomic. sent9: if the fact that something does not feel ski-plane and/or it does feel elaphure is wrong it does not avalanche backlash. sent10: the fact that something does not feel ski-plane and/or it does feel elaphure does not hold if it scrambles penny. sent11: the ciprofloxacin is a cope if there is something such that the fact that either it is a kind of a lyreflower or it is not a gauge or both is incorrect. sent12: the artichoke does not avalanche backlash if it does not horn. sent13: if something does not avalanche backlash it does stem repetitiveness and/or it is algolagnic. sent14: the artichoke is not creative and/or it is livable if it grips. sent15: the sclerite scrambles penny if the bacteriochlorophyll does not scrambles penny but it is acidotic. sent16: the artichoke is a chance-medley. sent17: if the autacoid is not creative then it is not loose.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬({K}x v ¬{L}x) sent2: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬{DN}x -> {JK}x sent4: {DU}{a} -> (¬{BG}{a} v {D}{a}) sent5: (x): {C}x -> (¬{D}x v {E}x) sent6: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} v {E}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {C}x) sent8: ¬{GD}{a} -> ({B}{a} & {FN}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬(¬{G}x v {F}x) -> ¬{B}x sent10: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x v {F}x) sent11: (x): ¬({K}x v ¬{L}x) -> {J}{e} sent12: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent13: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x v {C}x) sent14: {BH}{a} -> (¬{D}{a} v {HB}{a}) sent15: (¬{H}{d} & {I}{d}) -> {H}{c} sent16: {BE}{a} sent17: ¬{D}{cq} -> ¬{FL}{cq}
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: if the artichoke does not avalanche backlash it does stem repetitiveness and it is algolagnic.; sent5 -> int2: if the artichoke is algolagnic then it is not creative and/or does stem Champaign.;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: ¬{B}{a} -> ({A}{a} & {C}{a}); sent5 -> int2: {C}{a} -> (¬{D}{a} v {E}{a});"
] |
the fact that the fact that the artichoke is not creative and/or it does stem Champaign is correct is not right.
|
¬(¬{D}{a} v {E}{a})
|
[
"sent13 -> int3: if the sclerite does not avalanche backlash then it stems repetitiveness and/or is algolagnic.; sent9 -> int4: the sclerite does not avalanche backlash if that it does not feel ski-plane and/or it feels elaphure is not true.; sent10 -> int5: if the sclerite does scramble penny the fact that it does not feel ski-plane and/or does feel elaphure is false.; sent1 & sent11 -> int6: the ciprofloxacin does cope.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it is a cope.;"
] | 9 | 4 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = either the artichoke is not creative or it does stem Champaign or both. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a lyreflower and/or it is not a gauge does not hold. sent2: the fact that that the artichoke is a Montgolfier and it is a kind of a horn is correct does not hold. sent3: that something is a Donatist is not wrong if it is not acceptable. sent4: if the artichoke is a kind of a Venezuelan either it does not feel wisp or it is creative or both. sent5: something is not creative and/or it does stem Champaign if the fact that it is algolagnic hold. sent6: if that the carpenter stems repetitiveness hold then that the fact that the artichoke is not creative and/or it does stem Champaign does not hold is not false. sent7: if something does not avalanche backlash then it does stem repetitiveness and is algolagnic. sent8: if the artichoke does not scramble paperknife then it does avalanche backlash and is monatomic. sent9: if the fact that something does not feel ski-plane and/or it does feel elaphure is wrong it does not avalanche backlash. sent10: the fact that something does not feel ski-plane and/or it does feel elaphure does not hold if it scrambles penny. sent11: the ciprofloxacin is a cope if there is something such that the fact that either it is a kind of a lyreflower or it is not a gauge or both is incorrect. sent12: the artichoke does not avalanche backlash if it does not horn. sent13: if something does not avalanche backlash it does stem repetitiveness and/or it is algolagnic. sent14: the artichoke is not creative and/or it is livable if it grips. sent15: the sclerite scrambles penny if the bacteriochlorophyll does not scrambles penny but it is acidotic. sent16: the artichoke is a chance-medley. sent17: if the autacoid is not creative then it is not loose. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: if the artichoke does not avalanche backlash it does stem repetitiveness and it is algolagnic.; sent5 -> int2: if the artichoke is algolagnic then it is not creative and/or does stem Champaign.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there exists something such that if it stems gourd then it is a sapidity and it is not a bile.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)
|
sent1: the Ishmael is not a bile if it stems gourd. sent2: there is something such that if it stems gourd then it is a sapidity and is a kind of a bile. sent3: there exists something such that if it does stem gourd then it is a sapidity. sent4: if something is percussive it scrambles costermonger and does not exploit. sent5: the Ishmael is a sapidity but not a bile if it stems gourd.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> {AA}x sent4: (x): {JI}x -> ({HT}x & ¬{GD}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it is percussive then it does scramble costermonger and it does not exploit.
|
(Ex): {JI}x -> ({HT}x & ¬{GD}x)
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the jetliner is percussive it scrambles costermonger and it does not exploit.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it stems gourd then it is a sapidity and it is not a bile. ; $context$ = sent1: the Ishmael is not a bile if it stems gourd. sent2: there is something such that if it stems gourd then it is a sapidity and is a kind of a bile. sent3: there exists something such that if it does stem gourd then it is a sapidity. sent4: if something is percussive it scrambles costermonger and does not exploit. sent5: the Ishmael is a sapidity but not a bile if it stems gourd. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the canton is syllogistic and is a rhymer is not correct.
|
¬({B}{b} & {A}{b})
|
sent1: the tamale does not scramble cactus and it is not a kiss. sent2: the canton is syllogistic if the tamale does not scramble cactus and it is not a kind of a kiss. sent3: the tamale is a kind of a trusteeship if the canton is not a kiss and scrambles cactus. sent4: the battlesight is a kind of a kiss. sent5: the canton is a kind of a rhymer and it is a trusteeship. sent6: if the tamale is not a trusteeship and it is not syllogistic then the canton is a kiss. sent7: the tamale is a kind of pyrectic thing that is syllogistic. sent8: the manikin is a rhymer. sent9: if something is not a kind of a trusteeship it is not a rhymer. sent10: the canton is a kiss. sent11: the tamale is non-low-tech and it is non-Elizabethan. sent12: that the tamale does scramble cactus is not false if the canton is not a kind of a kiss and it is not a trusteeship. sent13: the tamale is syllogistic. sent14: the langoustine is syllogistic.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent3: (¬{AB}{b} & {AA}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent4: {AB}{fr} sent5: ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent6: (¬{C}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {AB}{b} sent7: ({IL}{a} & {B}{a}) sent8: {A}{fs} sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{A}x sent10: {AB}{b} sent11: (¬{BC}{a} & ¬{CH}{a}) sent12: (¬{AB}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {AA}{a} sent13: {B}{a} sent14: {B}{ho}
|
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the canton is syllogistic.; sent5 -> int2: that the canton is a rhymer is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent1 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent5 -> int2: {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the fact that the canton is syllogistic a rhymer is correct is not right.
|
¬({B}{b} & {A}{b})
|
[
"sent9 -> int3: the tamale is not a kind of a rhymer if it is not a trusteeship.;"
] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the canton is syllogistic and is a rhymer is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the tamale does not scramble cactus and it is not a kiss. sent2: the canton is syllogistic if the tamale does not scramble cactus and it is not a kind of a kiss. sent3: the tamale is a kind of a trusteeship if the canton is not a kiss and scrambles cactus. sent4: the battlesight is a kind of a kiss. sent5: the canton is a kind of a rhymer and it is a trusteeship. sent6: if the tamale is not a trusteeship and it is not syllogistic then the canton is a kiss. sent7: the tamale is a kind of pyrectic thing that is syllogistic. sent8: the manikin is a rhymer. sent9: if something is not a kind of a trusteeship it is not a rhymer. sent10: the canton is a kiss. sent11: the tamale is non-low-tech and it is non-Elizabethan. sent12: that the tamale does scramble cactus is not false if the canton is not a kind of a kiss and it is not a trusteeship. sent13: the tamale is syllogistic. sent14: the langoustine is syllogistic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent1 -> int1: the canton is syllogistic.; sent5 -> int2: that the canton is a rhymer is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the biochip is arthralgic.
|
{D}{b}
|
sent1: the motion avalanches Alopius. sent2: the eyeball is arthralgic if it is meiotic. sent3: something is not non-arthralgic if the fact that it avalanches Alopius is true. sent4: if that the eyeball is arthralgic is not wrong the biochip is meiotic. sent5: the biochip is not non-meiotic. sent6: something does not avalanche Alopius and is not meiotic if it does pretend. sent7: the eyeball does avalanche Alopius if the biochip is meiotic. sent8: if the eyeball is Christological that the biochip does avalanche Alopius is right. sent9: the eyeball is meiotic and it is Christological. sent10: if the torus avalanches mustache it is arthralgic. sent11: the biochip is Christological if it does avalanche Alopius. sent12: something that is not meiotic is arthralgic and Christological. sent13: the eyeball is arthralgic if the biochip is meiotic. sent14: the NGF is arthralgic. sent15: the eyeball is meiotic. sent16: the biochip is pyemic. sent17: the eyeball is both meiotic and arthralgic.
|
sent1: {C}{ji} sent2: {A}{a} -> {D}{a} sent3: (x): {C}x -> {D}x sent4: {D}{a} -> {A}{b} sent5: {A}{b} sent6: (x): {E}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent7: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent8: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent9: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent10: {EJ}{bu} -> {D}{bu} sent11: {C}{b} -> {B}{b} sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({D}x & {B}x) sent13: {A}{b} -> {D}{a} sent14: {D}{ep} sent15: {A}{a} sent16: {JI}{b} sent17: ({A}{a} & {D}{a})
|
[
"sent9 -> int1: the fact that the eyeball is Christological is not false.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the biochip does avalanche Alopius.; sent3 -> int3: if the fact that the biochip avalanches Alopius is right then it is arthralgic.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent9 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent8 -> int2: {C}{b}; sent3 -> int3: {C}{b} -> {D}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the biochip is not arthralgic.
|
¬{D}{b}
|
[
"sent12 -> int4: if the fact that the eyeball is not meiotic is not incorrect it is arthralgic thing that is not non-Christological.; sent6 -> int5: if the eyeball does pretend then it does not avalanche Alopius and is non-meiotic.;"
] | 5 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the biochip is arthralgic. ; $context$ = sent1: the motion avalanches Alopius. sent2: the eyeball is arthralgic if it is meiotic. sent3: something is not non-arthralgic if the fact that it avalanches Alopius is true. sent4: if that the eyeball is arthralgic is not wrong the biochip is meiotic. sent5: the biochip is not non-meiotic. sent6: something does not avalanche Alopius and is not meiotic if it does pretend. sent7: the eyeball does avalanche Alopius if the biochip is meiotic. sent8: if the eyeball is Christological that the biochip does avalanche Alopius is right. sent9: the eyeball is meiotic and it is Christological. sent10: if the torus avalanches mustache it is arthralgic. sent11: the biochip is Christological if it does avalanche Alopius. sent12: something that is not meiotic is arthralgic and Christological. sent13: the eyeball is arthralgic if the biochip is meiotic. sent14: the NGF is arthralgic. sent15: the eyeball is meiotic. sent16: the biochip is pyemic. sent17: the eyeball is both meiotic and arthralgic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent9 -> int1: the fact that the eyeball is Christological is not false.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the biochip does avalanche Alopius.; sent3 -> int3: if the fact that the biochip avalanches Alopius is right then it is arthralgic.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the surfboat is not a Dracunculus is not right.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: the surfboat is a Dracunculus if it devils. sent2: if the surfboat scrambles destabilization it is a Dracunculus. sent3: the Freon is a Dracunculus if the surfboat does devil. sent4: the tigress does devil. sent5: if that the Freon does devil and/or it does not scramble destabilization does not hold then the Belgian devil. sent6: if something does feel chipper then that it is a sandwichman but not a yellowfin is wrong. sent7: the corncrake does feel chipper and it scrambles biquadratic if it is not a shading. sent8: if the Freon devils the surfboat does scramble destabilization. sent9: the surfboat does stem acidity.
|
sent1: {A}{b} -> {C}{b} sent2: {B}{b} -> {C}{b} sent3: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent4: {A}{gu} sent5: ¬({A}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) -> {A}{aj} sent6: (x): {F}x -> ¬({D}x & ¬{E}x) sent7: ¬{H}{c} -> ({F}{c} & {G}{c}) sent8: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent9: {BT}{b}
|
[] |
[] |
the Belgian is a devil.
|
{A}{aj}
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: that if the corncrake feels chipper the fact that the corncrake is a sandwichman and not a yellowfin is false is not false.;"
] | 7 | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the surfboat is not a Dracunculus is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the surfboat is a Dracunculus if it devils. sent2: if the surfboat scrambles destabilization it is a Dracunculus. sent3: the Freon is a Dracunculus if the surfboat does devil. sent4: the tigress does devil. sent5: if that the Freon does devil and/or it does not scramble destabilization does not hold then the Belgian devil. sent6: if something does feel chipper then that it is a sandwichman but not a yellowfin is wrong. sent7: the corncrake does feel chipper and it scrambles biquadratic if it is not a shading. sent8: if the Freon devils the surfboat does scramble destabilization. sent9: the surfboat does stem acidity. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the mare does not avalanche foaminess.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: the flax is Pauline but it does not avalanche foaminess. sent2: if the GHB does not devise then that the mare does not avalanche foaminess but it is a Boltzmann does not hold. sent3: something is not a kind of a devise if that it is not ulnar and it is a feeblemindedness is incorrect. sent4: if something is not immunocompetent then the racist does not feel Gagarin. sent5: if the mare does avalanche foaminess the GHB is Pauline. sent6: everything does not feel feed and circularizes. sent7: the GHB does not feel cotenant if the flax feel cotenant. sent8: if the fact that the buttocks does not feel feed but it circularizes is true then it is not immunocompetent. sent9: that the flax is Pauline thing that does not devise is false. sent10: if the racist does not feel Gagarin the flax does feel cotenant and/or does scramble pellucidness. sent11: that something is non-ulnar and is a feeblemindedness is not true if it does not feel cotenant. sent12: if the flax is not a kind of a devise then the GHB is Pauline but it is not a kind of a Boltzmann. sent13: if the GHB is Pauline then the flax is Pauline. sent14: that the flax is Pauline hold.
|
sent1: ({B}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) sent2: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: (x): ¬{J}x -> ¬{H}{d} sent5: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent6: (x): (¬{K}x & {L}x) sent7: {G}{c} -> ¬{G}{b} sent8: (¬{K}{e} & {L}{e}) -> ¬{J}{e} sent9: ¬({B}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent10: ¬{H}{d} -> ({G}{c} v {I}{c}) sent11: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & {F}x) sent12: ¬{D}{c} -> ({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent13: {B}{b} -> {B}{c} sent14: {B}{c}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mare avalanches foaminess.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the GHB is Pauline.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] |
the Scythian is not Pauline.
|
¬{B}{cs}
|
[
"sent3 -> int2: if the fact that the GHB is a kind of non-ulnar a feeblemindedness is not correct it is not a devise.; sent11 -> int3: that the GHB is both not ulnar and a feeblemindedness does not hold if it does not feel cotenant.; sent6 -> int4: the buttocks does not feel feed but it does circularize.; sent8 & int4 -> int5: the buttocks is not immunocompetent.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that it is non-immunocompetent.; int6 & sent4 -> int7: the racist does not feel Gagarin.; sent10 & int7 -> int8: the flax feels cotenant or it does scramble pellucidness or both.;"
] | 11 | 4 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the mare does not avalanche foaminess. ; $context$ = sent1: the flax is Pauline but it does not avalanche foaminess. sent2: if the GHB does not devise then that the mare does not avalanche foaminess but it is a Boltzmann does not hold. sent3: something is not a kind of a devise if that it is not ulnar and it is a feeblemindedness is incorrect. sent4: if something is not immunocompetent then the racist does not feel Gagarin. sent5: if the mare does avalanche foaminess the GHB is Pauline. sent6: everything does not feel feed and circularizes. sent7: the GHB does not feel cotenant if the flax feel cotenant. sent8: if the fact that the buttocks does not feel feed but it circularizes is true then it is not immunocompetent. sent9: that the flax is Pauline thing that does not devise is false. sent10: if the racist does not feel Gagarin the flax does feel cotenant and/or does scramble pellucidness. sent11: that something is non-ulnar and is a feeblemindedness is not true if it does not feel cotenant. sent12: if the flax is not a kind of a devise then the GHB is Pauline but it is not a kind of a Boltzmann. sent13: if the GHB is Pauline then the flax is Pauline. sent14: that the flax is Pauline hold. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mare avalanches foaminess.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the GHB is Pauline.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it avalanches bootlace that it is not seductive and is a kind of a credenza does not hold.
|
(Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it avalanches bootlace that it is seductive and it is a credenza does not hold. sent2: there exists something such that if it does avalanche bootlace it is not seductive and is a kind of a credenza. sent3: that the bootlace is a kind of unseductive a credenza does not hold if it avalanches bootlace. sent4: if the bootlace avalanches bootlace it is a kind of unseductive a credenza. sent5: if the bootlace avalanches bootlace the fact that it is seductive and is a credenza does not hold.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it avalanches bootlace that it is not seductive and is a kind of a credenza does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it avalanches bootlace that it is seductive and it is a credenza does not hold. sent2: there exists something such that if it does avalanche bootlace it is not seductive and is a kind of a credenza. sent3: that the bootlace is a kind of unseductive a credenza does not hold if it avalanches bootlace. sent4: if the bootlace avalanches bootlace it is a kind of unseductive a credenza. sent5: if the bootlace avalanches bootlace the fact that it is seductive and is a credenza does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the strut is bipedal but it does not scramble prototherian.
|
({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
sent1: the fact that something is bipedal but it does not scramble prototherian is not true if it feels backdrop. sent2: the fact that the prototherian is attritional and it does scramble prototherian is not right. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a Gaea and is a step. sent4: the bumper does not feel S.U.V. if either it does crucify or it does not feel S.U.V. or both. sent5: the condensation is a topside if something that feels keep is a nudge. sent6: if something is a Roridulaceae that it occasions and is a kind of a Ceratotherium is not right. sent7: there exists something such that it scrambles Ashton and is a kind of a turtle. sent8: the fact that something scrambles redemption and it is a nudge is incorrect if it slops. sent9: everything crucifies or it does not feel S.U.V. or both. sent10: the strut does feel backdrop if something that is a Gaea does step. sent11: something is a kind of a step and is not a kind of a Gaea if it does not feel S.U.V.. sent12: something is pyrolytic.
|
sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: ¬({AT}{hu} & {AB}{hu}) sent3: (Ex): ({C}x & {B}x) sent4: ({E}{b} v ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent5: (x): ({J}x & {IS}x) -> {JC}{hs} sent6: (x): {IT}x -> ¬({GS}x & {HD}x) sent7: (Ex): ({EC}x & {EO}x) sent8: (x): {CR}x -> ¬({HT}x & {IS}x) sent9: (x): ({E}x v ¬{D}x) sent10: (x): ({C}x & {B}x) -> {A}{aa} sent11: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent12: (Ex): {S}x
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the fact that the strut is a kind of bipedal thing that does not scramble prototherian is incorrect if it feels backdrop.; sent3 & sent10 -> int2: the strut feels backdrop.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent3 & sent10 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the strut is bipedal but it does not scramble prototherian.
|
({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent11 -> int3: if the bumper does not feel S.U.V. it steps and it is not a Gaea.; sent9 -> int4: the bumper does crucify or it does not feel S.U.V. or both.; sent4 & int4 -> int5: the bumper does not feel S.U.V..; int3 & int5 -> int6: the bumper is a step that is not a Gaea.; int6 -> int7: something is a step and not a Gaea.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the strut is bipedal but it does not scramble prototherian. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is bipedal but it does not scramble prototherian is not true if it feels backdrop. sent2: the fact that the prototherian is attritional and it does scramble prototherian is not right. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a Gaea and is a step. sent4: the bumper does not feel S.U.V. if either it does crucify or it does not feel S.U.V. or both. sent5: the condensation is a topside if something that feels keep is a nudge. sent6: if something is a Roridulaceae that it occasions and is a kind of a Ceratotherium is not right. sent7: there exists something such that it scrambles Ashton and is a kind of a turtle. sent8: the fact that something scrambles redemption and it is a nudge is incorrect if it slops. sent9: everything crucifies or it does not feel S.U.V. or both. sent10: the strut does feel backdrop if something that is a Gaea does step. sent11: something is a kind of a step and is not a kind of a Gaea if it does not feel S.U.V.. sent12: something is pyrolytic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the fact that the strut is a kind of bipedal thing that does not scramble prototherian is incorrect if it feels backdrop.; sent3 & sent10 -> int2: the strut feels backdrop.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the no-show is a kind of a Hawaiian.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: that the splasher is a Hawaiian and/or not a aspergill does not hold if it is not cacodemonic. sent2: that the no-show does stem parishioner or it is not a aspergill or both is incorrect if it is not a kind of a Hawaiian. sent3: the flounce is a dandelion and not radical. sent4: the matting is a charitableness and a ragtime if the flounce is not a sagittate-leaf. sent5: that the fact that the splasher is cacodemonic and/or is not a Hawaiian is not false is wrong if it does not stem parishioner. sent6: everything is not a Schubert. sent7: that if the matting is a charitableness and it is a postmortem the pointillist is not a charitableness is true. sent8: if something is a dandelion but not a radical it is not a sagittate-leaf. sent9: if something is not a charitableness that it does not spiel and it does not stem year is not correct. sent10: the fact that the fibrinase is cacodemonic and/or it does not feel Baum does not hold. sent11: the no-show does not stem parishioner if it is not a Hawaiian. sent12: the fact that if the fact that something does not spiel and it does not stem year is false then it does close is not false. sent13: everything is not cacodemonic. sent14: the matting is a kind of a postmortem. sent15: the no-show is a donna. sent16: that the splasher is karyokinetic is true. sent17: the no-show does not stem parishioner. sent18: that the splasher is Hawaiian and/or it is not a match-up is false. sent19: that the splasher is a hemline and/or it is not a aspergill does not hold. sent20: if the splasher is esophageal then the no-show is not Hawaiian but it is cacodemonic. sent21: the fact that the splasher avalanches theorem and/or is not a kind of a annulet is wrong. sent22: if the pointillist does close that the serge is not a snooker and is not a Naja is not correct.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({A}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: ({N}{f} & ¬{M}{f}) sent4: ¬{L}{f} -> ({I}{e} & {K}{e}) sent5: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬({B}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent6: (x): ¬{JC}x sent7: ({I}{e} & {J}{e}) -> ¬{I}{d} sent8: (x): ({N}x & ¬{M}x) -> ¬{L}x sent9: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) sent10: ¬({B}{ih} v ¬{DI}{ih}) sent11: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{a} sent12: (x): ¬(¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) -> {F}x sent13: (x): ¬{B}x sent14: {J}{e} sent15: {GD}{a} sent16: {FK}{b} sent17: ¬{AA}{a} sent18: ¬({A}{b} v ¬{JB}{b}) sent19: ¬({GA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent20: {C}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent21: ¬({BF}{b} v ¬{GC}{b}) sent22: {F}{d} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c})
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the no-show is not a Hawaiian is correct.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the no-show does stem parishioner and/or it is not a kind of a aspergill is incorrect.; sent13 -> int2: the splasher is not cacodemonic.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); sent13 -> int2: ¬{B}{b};"
] |
the no-show is not a Hawaiian.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent12 -> int3: if the fact that the pointillist is not a spiel and it does not stem year is incorrect it does close.; sent9 -> int4: the fact that that the pointillist is not a spiel and it does not stem year is not correct is not incorrect if it is not a charitableness.; sent8 -> int5: the flounce is not a kind of a sagittate-leaf if the fact that it is a dandelion and not radical is true.; int5 & sent3 -> int6: the flounce is not a sagittate-leaf.; sent4 & int6 -> int7: the matting is a charitableness and it is a ragtime.; int7 -> int8: that the matting is a charitableness is not wrong.; int8 & sent14 -> int9: the matting is a charitableness and it is postmortem.; sent7 & int9 -> int10: the pointillist is not a charitableness.; int4 & int10 -> int11: that the pointillist is not a spiel and does not stem year does not hold.; int3 & int11 -> int12: the pointillist closes.; sent22 & int12 -> int13: the fact that the serge is both not a snooker and not a Naja is wrong.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that the fact that it is not a snooker and not a Naja is not correct.;"
] | 13 | 4 | null | 20 | 0 | 20 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the no-show is a kind of a Hawaiian. ; $context$ = sent1: that the splasher is a Hawaiian and/or not a aspergill does not hold if it is not cacodemonic. sent2: that the no-show does stem parishioner or it is not a aspergill or both is incorrect if it is not a kind of a Hawaiian. sent3: the flounce is a dandelion and not radical. sent4: the matting is a charitableness and a ragtime if the flounce is not a sagittate-leaf. sent5: that the fact that the splasher is cacodemonic and/or is not a Hawaiian is not false is wrong if it does not stem parishioner. sent6: everything is not a Schubert. sent7: that if the matting is a charitableness and it is a postmortem the pointillist is not a charitableness is true. sent8: if something is a dandelion but not a radical it is not a sagittate-leaf. sent9: if something is not a charitableness that it does not spiel and it does not stem year is not correct. sent10: the fact that the fibrinase is cacodemonic and/or it does not feel Baum does not hold. sent11: the no-show does not stem parishioner if it is not a Hawaiian. sent12: the fact that if the fact that something does not spiel and it does not stem year is false then it does close is not false. sent13: everything is not cacodemonic. sent14: the matting is a kind of a postmortem. sent15: the no-show is a donna. sent16: that the splasher is karyokinetic is true. sent17: the no-show does not stem parishioner. sent18: that the splasher is Hawaiian and/or it is not a match-up is false. sent19: that the splasher is a hemline and/or it is not a aspergill does not hold. sent20: if the splasher is esophageal then the no-show is not Hawaiian but it is cacodemonic. sent21: the fact that the splasher avalanches theorem and/or is not a kind of a annulet is wrong. sent22: if the pointillist does close that the serge is not a snooker and is not a Naja is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the no-show is not a Hawaiian is correct.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the no-show does stem parishioner and/or it is not a kind of a aspergill is incorrect.; sent13 -> int2: the splasher is not cacodemonic.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the symposiast is not a ramp.
|
¬{A}{a}
|
sent1: that either the keyboardist does not feel beep or it is a Crouse or both is not right if the symposiast is a ramp. sent2: if the keyboardist is a ramp the symposiast does feel beep. sent3: that the keyboardist ramps is true. sent4: if there is something such that it does not travel then either the keyboardist does not feel beep or it is a Crouse or both. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it does not travel hold. sent6: there is something such that it does not feel beep.
|
sent1: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent2: {A}{b} -> {AA}{a} sent3: {A}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{B}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{AA}x
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the symposiast is a kind of a ramp.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: that that the keyboardist does not feel beep or is a Crouse or both is not right is true.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the keyboardist does not feel beep and/or is a kind of a Crouse.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}); sent5 & sent4 -> int2: (¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the symposiast is not a ramp. ; $context$ = sent1: that either the keyboardist does not feel beep or it is a Crouse or both is not right if the symposiast is a ramp. sent2: if the keyboardist is a ramp the symposiast does feel beep. sent3: that the keyboardist ramps is true. sent4: if there is something such that it does not travel then either the keyboardist does not feel beep or it is a Crouse or both. sent5: there is something such that the fact that it does not travel hold. sent6: there is something such that it does not feel beep. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the symposiast is a kind of a ramp.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: that that the keyboardist does not feel beep or is a Crouse or both is not right is true.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: the keyboardist does not feel beep and/or is a kind of a Crouse.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the slinking does not occur and/or the scrambling PWR does not occur.
|
(¬{C} v ¬{D})
|
sent1: that the integrativeness does not occur is prevented by that the assisting happens. sent2: that the assisting occurs is not false. sent3: the fact that the scrambling PWR occurs hold. sent4: the fact that either the slinking does not occur or the scrambling PWR does not occur or both is not right if the integrativeness happens.
|
sent1: {A} -> {B} sent2: {A} sent3: {D} sent4: {B} -> ¬(¬{C} v ¬{D})
|
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the integrativeness occurs.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent2 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the slinking does not occur and/or the scrambling PWR does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the integrativeness does not occur is prevented by that the assisting happens. sent2: that the assisting occurs is not false. sent3: the fact that the scrambling PWR occurs hold. sent4: the fact that either the slinking does not occur or the scrambling PWR does not occur or both is not right if the integrativeness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the integrativeness occurs.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the insulation does not occur.
|
¬{E}
|
sent1: if the sanitariness does not occur the regressiveness or the improvidentness or both occurs. sent2: the somersaulting happens. sent3: if the Curietherapy does not occur the insulation happens. sent4: if the somersault does not occur the devaluation happens but the insulation does not occur. sent5: the devaluation causes that the Curietherapy occurs and/or the superannuating occurs. sent6: if the industrialness happens that the avalanching protoctist does not occur and the Mongol does not occur is not correct. sent7: the industrialness occurs if the fact that the pianoness does not occur and the leakiness happens is wrong. sent8: the devaluation happens and the somersault happens. sent9: that the wardenship happens triggers that the unsanitaryness and the meander happens. sent10: that the superannuating does not occur and the Curietherapy occurs does not hold if the outboard does not occur. sent11: the wardenship occurs if that the avalanching protoctist does not occur and the Mongolness does not occur is incorrect. sent12: that the Curietherapy does not occur and/or that the superannuating occurs prevents that the insulation does not occur. sent13: either the Curietherapy or the superannuating or both occurs. sent14: that the devaluation occurs yields that the Curietherapy does not occur and/or the superannuating. sent15: that the outboardness happens is prevented by that the regressiveness and/or the non-providentness occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{I} -> ({H} v ¬{G}) sent2: {B} sent3: ¬{D} -> {E} sent4: ¬{B} -> ({A} & ¬{E}) sent5: {A} -> ({D} v {C}) sent6: {N} -> ¬(¬{M} & ¬{L}) sent7: ¬(¬{P} & {O}) -> {N} sent8: ({A} & {B}) sent9: {K} -> (¬{I} & {J}) sent10: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent11: ¬(¬{M} & ¬{L}) -> {K} sent12: (¬{D} v {C}) -> {E} sent13: ({D} v {C}) sent14: {A} -> (¬{D} v {C}) sent15: ({H} v ¬{G}) -> ¬{F}
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: that the devaluation occurs is not false.; sent14 & int1 -> int2: either the Curietherapy does not occur or the superannuating happens or both.; sent12 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> int1: {A}; sent14 & int1 -> int2: (¬{D} v {C}); sent12 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the insulation does not occur is not wrong.
|
¬{E}
|
[] | 13 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the insulation does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sanitariness does not occur the regressiveness or the improvidentness or both occurs. sent2: the somersaulting happens. sent3: if the Curietherapy does not occur the insulation happens. sent4: if the somersault does not occur the devaluation happens but the insulation does not occur. sent5: the devaluation causes that the Curietherapy occurs and/or the superannuating occurs. sent6: if the industrialness happens that the avalanching protoctist does not occur and the Mongol does not occur is not correct. sent7: the industrialness occurs if the fact that the pianoness does not occur and the leakiness happens is wrong. sent8: the devaluation happens and the somersault happens. sent9: that the wardenship happens triggers that the unsanitaryness and the meander happens. sent10: that the superannuating does not occur and the Curietherapy occurs does not hold if the outboard does not occur. sent11: the wardenship occurs if that the avalanching protoctist does not occur and the Mongolness does not occur is incorrect. sent12: that the Curietherapy does not occur and/or that the superannuating occurs prevents that the insulation does not occur. sent13: either the Curietherapy or the superannuating or both occurs. sent14: that the devaluation occurs yields that the Curietherapy does not occur and/or the superannuating. sent15: that the outboardness happens is prevented by that the regressiveness and/or the non-providentness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> int1: that the devaluation occurs is not false.; sent14 & int1 -> int2: either the Curietherapy does not occur or the superannuating happens or both.; sent12 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the skylight is a larceny.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: the skylight is not a larceny if something does not feel libretto or it does avalanche malice or both. sent2: the fact that the ackee is not a kind of a cysteine and does not avalanche Aberdeen is not true. sent3: the fact that something is not minimal and it does not avalanche nightrider is incorrect if it does not feel libretto. sent4: there is something such that the fact that it does redound and it does not feel porterhouse is wrong. sent5: that the ackee is not a cysteine but it does avalanche Aberdeen does not hold. sent6: if the fact that something is not sternutatory is right that it is not a larceny and it avalanches malice does not hold. sent7: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a cysteine and does not avalanche Aberdeen is false then the skylight does feel libretto. sent8: if something feels libretto then it is a kind of a larceny.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{A}x v {C}x) -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{JJ}x & ¬{CI}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬({CN}x & ¬{FM}x) sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent8: (x): {A}x -> {B}x
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a cysteine and does not avalanche Aberdeen is incorrect.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the skylight does feel libretto.; sent8 -> int3: if the fact that the skylight feels libretto hold it is a larceny.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent7 -> int2: {A}{a}; sent8 -> int3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the skylight is not a kind of a larceny.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the skylight is a larceny. ; $context$ = sent1: the skylight is not a larceny if something does not feel libretto or it does avalanche malice or both. sent2: the fact that the ackee is not a kind of a cysteine and does not avalanche Aberdeen is not true. sent3: the fact that something is not minimal and it does not avalanche nightrider is incorrect if it does not feel libretto. sent4: there is something such that the fact that it does redound and it does not feel porterhouse is wrong. sent5: that the ackee is not a cysteine but it does avalanche Aberdeen does not hold. sent6: if the fact that something is not sternutatory is right that it is not a larceny and it avalanches malice does not hold. sent7: if there is something such that that it is not a kind of a cysteine and does not avalanche Aberdeen is false then the skylight does feel libretto. sent8: if something feels libretto then it is a kind of a larceny. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a cysteine and does not avalanche Aberdeen is incorrect.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the skylight does feel libretto.; sent8 -> int3: if the fact that the skylight feels libretto hold it is a larceny.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the venturer does not contract but it is botanic.
|
(¬{A}{a} & {B}{a})
|
sent1: there is something such that it is not a kind of a Brunanburh. sent2: the escargot is not a contract. sent3: if there exists something such that it does not contract that the venturer is botanic and chancrous is false. sent4: something is not botanic if the fact that it stems Pisonia and it is not chancrous is incorrect. sent5: the fact that something is high thing that is not a kind of a stultification is false if it is a kind of a nameplate. sent6: the fact that the fact that the laurel-tree stems Pisonia and does not contract is not false is false if there is something such that the fact that it is not chancrous is true. sent7: the venturer is not a contract but it is botanic if the circus is a kind of a Brunanburh. sent8: the atole is a stultification if the torch is a stultification. sent9: the fact that the venturer is not a contract but it is botanic is incorrect if the laurel-tree is not botanic. sent10: the fact that the armpit does not avalanche Lytton or it is a major or both is not true if it is not a floe. sent11: there is something such that it is not a contract. sent12: the chondrite does scramble belle if that the Italian does scramble belle and/or it is not Columbian is not correct. sent13: if the atole is a stultification then the Italian is not an incidental and it does not stem Monothelitism. sent14: if the fact that something does not avalanche perigee but it is rentable is not correct it does avalanche perigee. sent15: if there is something such that it is not a Brunanburh that the laurel-tree does stem Pisonia and is not chancrous is false. sent16: that the venturer is botanic and is a contract is incorrect if that the laurel-tree does not contract hold. sent17: if the chondrite does scramble belle the fact that the perigee does not avalanche perigee but it is rentable is incorrect. sent18: the armpit is not a floe. sent19: the circus is a Brunanburh if the perigee does avalanche perigee. sent20: something is not Columbian if the fact that it is a kind of a bun that does not avalanche Lytton is false. sent21: if that something is high but it is not a kind of a stultification is not correct then it is a kind of a stultification. sent22: if something is not an incidental then the fact that it does scramble belle or is not Columbian or both does not hold. sent23: the fact that the laurel-tree is a contract and it is a kind of a saurian is incorrect.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent2: ¬{A}{o} sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: (x): {K}x -> ¬({L}x & ¬{J}x) sent6: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent7: {C}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent8: {J}{g} -> {J}{f} sent9: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent10: ¬{O}{h} -> ¬(¬{M}{h} v {N}{h}) sent11: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent12: ¬({E}{e} v ¬{H}{e}) -> {E}{d} sent13: {J}{f} -> (¬{G}{e} & ¬{I}{e}) sent14: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {F}x) -> {D}x sent15: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent16: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent17: {E}{d} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & {F}{c}) sent18: ¬{O}{h} sent19: {D}{c} -> {C}{b} sent20: (x): ¬({BD}x & ¬{M}x) -> ¬{H}x sent21: (x): ¬({L}x & ¬{J}x) -> {J}x sent22: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({E}x v ¬{H}x) sent23: ¬({A}{aa} & {EU}{aa})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: the laurel-tree is not botanic if that it does stem Pisonia and is not chancrous does not hold.; sent1 & sent15 -> int2: the fact that the laurel-tree stems Pisonia and is not chancrous does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the laurel-tree is not botanic.; int3 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent1 & sent15 -> int2: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa}; int3 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the venturer does not contract but it is botanic.
|
(¬{A}{a} & {B}{a})
|
[
"sent14 -> int4: if the fact that the perigee does not avalanche perigee and is rentable is wrong it avalanche perigee.; sent22 -> int5: the fact that the Italian scrambles belle or it is not Columbian or both does not hold if it is not incidental.; sent21 -> int6: the torch is a stultification if the fact that it is a kind of a high and is not a kind of a stultification is not right.; sent5 -> int7: if the torch is a nameplate that it is a kind of a high and it is not a kind of a stultification is not correct.; sent10 & sent18 -> int8: that the armpit does not avalanche Lytton or is a major or both is wrong.; int8 -> int9: there is something such that that it does not avalanche Lytton or it majors or both does not hold.;"
] | 14 | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the venturer does not contract but it is botanic. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not a kind of a Brunanburh. sent2: the escargot is not a contract. sent3: if there exists something such that it does not contract that the venturer is botanic and chancrous is false. sent4: something is not botanic if the fact that it stems Pisonia and it is not chancrous is incorrect. sent5: the fact that something is high thing that is not a kind of a stultification is false if it is a kind of a nameplate. sent6: the fact that the fact that the laurel-tree stems Pisonia and does not contract is not false is false if there is something such that the fact that it is not chancrous is true. sent7: the venturer is not a contract but it is botanic if the circus is a kind of a Brunanburh. sent8: the atole is a stultification if the torch is a stultification. sent9: the fact that the venturer is not a contract but it is botanic is incorrect if the laurel-tree is not botanic. sent10: the fact that the armpit does not avalanche Lytton or it is a major or both is not true if it is not a floe. sent11: there is something such that it is not a contract. sent12: the chondrite does scramble belle if that the Italian does scramble belle and/or it is not Columbian is not correct. sent13: if the atole is a stultification then the Italian is not an incidental and it does not stem Monothelitism. sent14: if the fact that something does not avalanche perigee but it is rentable is not correct it does avalanche perigee. sent15: if there is something such that it is not a Brunanburh that the laurel-tree does stem Pisonia and is not chancrous is false. sent16: that the venturer is botanic and is a contract is incorrect if that the laurel-tree does not contract hold. sent17: if the chondrite does scramble belle the fact that the perigee does not avalanche perigee but it is rentable is incorrect. sent18: the armpit is not a floe. sent19: the circus is a Brunanburh if the perigee does avalanche perigee. sent20: something is not Columbian if the fact that it is a kind of a bun that does not avalanche Lytton is false. sent21: if that something is high but it is not a kind of a stultification is not correct then it is a kind of a stultification. sent22: if something is not an incidental then the fact that it does scramble belle or is not Columbian or both does not hold. sent23: the fact that the laurel-tree is a contract and it is a kind of a saurian is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: the laurel-tree is not botanic if that it does stem Pisonia and is not chancrous does not hold.; sent1 & sent15 -> int2: the fact that the laurel-tree stems Pisonia and is not chancrous does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the laurel-tree is not botanic.; int3 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if it is a kind of a peavey then the fact that it is a kind of implausible thing that does not plot is wrong is not correct.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: if the rejuvenation is a peavey then the fact that the fact that it is plausible and not a plot is right does not hold. sent2: that the rejuvenation is not plausible and it is not a plot is not true if it is a peavey. sent3: there exists something such that if it is heraldic that it does not feel Hitchcock and is not breastless is false. sent4: if the rejuvenation is plausible then that it is not a charge and is not a jaundiced does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it does avalanche expressionism then the fact that it is a Unio and does not cluster is false. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a peavey then that it is not plausible and it is a kind of a plot does not hold. sent7: the rejuvenation is not plausible and it is not a plot if it is a kind of a peavey. sent8: that the thyrotropin is a parallelism that does not scramble decorativeness is wrong if it is a glaciation. sent9: there is something such that if it is plural it does not avalanche trainman and it does not stem novelization. sent10: there is something such that if it is a kind of a model the fact that that it is not lobeliaceous and does not light is not wrong is false. sent11: there is something such that if it is a peavey then it is not plausible and is not a plot. sent12: that something is not a kind of a plot and does not scramble decorativeness is not right if it scrambles yenta. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a Gloucester then it is not an apathy and it is not a goal-kick. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a peavey the fact that it is plausible and is not a kind of a plot is not right. sent15: the fact that something does not scramble thyrotropin and does not auspicate is wrong if it does feel snake. sent16: if the shoetree is a kind of a goal-kick the fact that it does feel bailor and is not a sabertooth is not true. sent17: that the rejuvenation is not plausible but it does plot is not true if it is a peavey.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): {CR}x -> ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{AH}x) sent4: {AA}{aa} -> ¬(¬{GD}{aa} & ¬{S}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): {BK}x -> ¬({T}x & ¬{AN}x) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: {IM}{hg} -> ¬({GM}{hg} & ¬{GQ}{hg}) sent9: (Ex): {DQ}x -> (¬{FO}x & ¬{J}x) sent10: (Ex): {BG}x -> ¬(¬{JI}x & ¬{EM}x) sent11: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent12: (x): {AO}x -> ¬(¬{AB}x & ¬{GQ}x) sent13: (Ex): {BA}x -> (¬{DO}x & ¬{HG}x) sent14: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent15: (x): {BR}x -> ¬(¬{DI}x & ¬{L}x) sent16: {HG}{de} -> ¬({DR}{de} & ¬{FR}{de}) sent17: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
there exists something such that if it feels snake then the fact that it does not scramble thyrotropin and it does not auspicate is not right.
|
(Ex): {BR}x -> ¬(¬{DI}x & ¬{L}x)
|
[
"sent15 -> int1: the fact that the venogram does not scramble thyrotropin and does not auspicate does not hold if it does feel snake.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is a kind of a peavey then the fact that it is a kind of implausible thing that does not plot is wrong is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the rejuvenation is a peavey then the fact that the fact that it is plausible and not a plot is right does not hold. sent2: that the rejuvenation is not plausible and it is not a plot is not true if it is a peavey. sent3: there exists something such that if it is heraldic that it does not feel Hitchcock and is not breastless is false. sent4: if the rejuvenation is plausible then that it is not a charge and is not a jaundiced does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it does avalanche expressionism then the fact that it is a Unio and does not cluster is false. sent6: there is something such that if it is a kind of a peavey then that it is not plausible and it is a kind of a plot does not hold. sent7: the rejuvenation is not plausible and it is not a plot if it is a kind of a peavey. sent8: that the thyrotropin is a parallelism that does not scramble decorativeness is wrong if it is a glaciation. sent9: there is something such that if it is plural it does not avalanche trainman and it does not stem novelization. sent10: there is something such that if it is a kind of a model the fact that that it is not lobeliaceous and does not light is not wrong is false. sent11: there is something such that if it is a peavey then it is not plausible and is not a plot. sent12: that something is not a kind of a plot and does not scramble decorativeness is not right if it scrambles yenta. sent13: there exists something such that if it is a Gloucester then it is not an apathy and it is not a goal-kick. sent14: there exists something such that if it is a peavey the fact that it is plausible and is not a kind of a plot is not right. sent15: the fact that something does not scramble thyrotropin and does not auspicate is wrong if it does feel snake. sent16: if the shoetree is a kind of a goal-kick the fact that it does feel bailor and is not a sabertooth is not true. sent17: that the rejuvenation is not plausible but it does plot is not true if it is a peavey. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the czar does not scramble refectory is not false.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: that something is not a view and it is not a kind of a softwood is wrong if it is not loamless. sent2: the czar is a kind of a softwood if the biology is a view. sent3: the gathering does scramble refectory. sent4: the waver does not rear if the mamoncillo is not approachable. sent5: the biology scrambles refectory if it is a softwood. sent6: the biology feels Hani if it does scramble refectory. sent7: if something is not a kind of a rear then it is a kind of a Methodists and it is photomechanical. sent8: the czar does view. sent9: the czar is a pall. sent10: the biology does scramble refectory if the czar is a view. sent11: if that the biology is a softwood is not false the czar does scramble refectory. sent12: the diapason does not view if the waver is loamless but it is not regenerate. sent13: the wineberry does not feel inactiveness. sent14: the fact that the mamoncillo is approachable and is a pentagon is not right if the wineberry does not feel inactiveness. sent15: the transvestite is a view. sent16: the czar is a softwood if it scrambles refectory. sent17: if the fact that something is approachable and it is a pentagon is not right it is not approachable. sent18: that the biology views is correct. sent19: that something is loamless but it is not regenerate hold if it is not non-Methodists. sent20: the fact that the biology is a softwood is right if it is a view. sent21: the czar is a softwood.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent2: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent3: {C}{ft} sent4: ¬{I}{e} -> ¬{H}{d} sent5: {B}{a} -> {C}{a} sent6: {C}{a} -> {AM}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}x & {G}x) sent8: {A}{b} sent9: {HF}{b} sent10: {A}{b} -> {C}{a} sent11: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent12: ({D}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{A}{c} sent13: ¬{K}{f} sent14: ¬{K}{f} -> ¬({I}{e} & {J}{e}) sent15: {A}{ip} sent16: {C}{b} -> {B}{b} sent17: (x): ¬({I}x & {J}x) -> ¬{I}x sent18: {A}{a} sent19: (x): {F}x -> ({D}x & ¬{E}x) sent20: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent21: {B}{b}
|
[
"sent20 & sent18 -> int1: the biology is a kind of a softwood.; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent20 & sent18 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the czar does not scramble refectory.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[
"sent19 -> int2: if the waver is Methodists then it is both loamless and not regenerate.; sent7 -> int3: if the waver does not rear then it is a Methodists that is photomechanical.; sent17 -> int4: if the fact that the mamoncillo is approachable and it is a pentagon is wrong it is not approachable.; sent14 & sent13 -> int5: that the mamoncillo is approachable and is a pentagon is incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the mamoncillo is unapproachable.; sent4 & int6 -> int7: that the waver does not rear is right.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the waver is a kind of a Methodists that is photomechanical.; int8 -> int9: the waver is a Methodists.; int2 & int9 -> int10: the waver is both loamless and not regenerate.; sent12 & int10 -> int11: the diapason is not a view.; int11 -> int12: there is something such that it does not view.;"
] | 12 | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the czar does not scramble refectory is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is not a view and it is not a kind of a softwood is wrong if it is not loamless. sent2: the czar is a kind of a softwood if the biology is a view. sent3: the gathering does scramble refectory. sent4: the waver does not rear if the mamoncillo is not approachable. sent5: the biology scrambles refectory if it is a softwood. sent6: the biology feels Hani if it does scramble refectory. sent7: if something is not a kind of a rear then it is a kind of a Methodists and it is photomechanical. sent8: the czar does view. sent9: the czar is a pall. sent10: the biology does scramble refectory if the czar is a view. sent11: if that the biology is a softwood is not false the czar does scramble refectory. sent12: the diapason does not view if the waver is loamless but it is not regenerate. sent13: the wineberry does not feel inactiveness. sent14: the fact that the mamoncillo is approachable and is a pentagon is not right if the wineberry does not feel inactiveness. sent15: the transvestite is a view. sent16: the czar is a softwood if it scrambles refectory. sent17: if the fact that something is approachable and it is a pentagon is not right it is not approachable. sent18: that the biology views is correct. sent19: that something is loamless but it is not regenerate hold if it is not non-Methodists. sent20: the fact that the biology is a softwood is right if it is a view. sent21: the czar is a softwood. ; $proof$ =
|
sent20 & sent18 -> int1: the biology is a kind of a softwood.; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the gelechiid avalanches Tuchman.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: the gelechiid is a ASL. sent2: something avalanches Tuchman if it is not odd. sent3: something avalanches Tuchman if that it is odd and does not feel twenties is not true. sent4: if the gelechiid is a ASL that it is odd and does not feel twenties is not right. sent5: something is a kind of a Algonquian if that it is back-channel and inviolable is not correct.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {B}x sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬({BS}x & ¬{P}x) -> {DJ}x
|
[
"sent3 -> int1: if the fact that the gelechiid is odd but it does not feel twenties is false then it does avalanche Tuchman.; sent4 & sent1 -> int2: that the gelechiid is not non-odd and does not feel twenties does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; sent4 & sent1 -> int2: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the gelechiid avalanches Tuchman. ; $context$ = sent1: the gelechiid is a ASL. sent2: something avalanches Tuchman if it is not odd. sent3: something avalanches Tuchman if that it is odd and does not feel twenties is not true. sent4: if the gelechiid is a ASL that it is odd and does not feel twenties is not right. sent5: something is a kind of a Algonquian if that it is back-channel and inviolable is not correct. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 -> int1: if the fact that the gelechiid is odd but it does not feel twenties is false then it does avalanche Tuchman.; sent4 & sent1 -> int2: that the gelechiid is not non-odd and does not feel twenties does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the rearward is not a milliampere and is not a swivet it is economical.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}
|
sent1: if the rearward is a kind of a milliampere and is not a swivet then it is economical. sent2: if something does not feel Rockwell and is a kind of a Chevalier it is a apperception. sent3: that the rearward is economical is not false if it is not a milliampere and is a swivet. sent4: something is a clubfooted if it is not a coca and it does fall. sent5: if the rearward is not a Palaquium and is a kind of a yacht it does scramble geophagy. sent6: the rearward is a devise if it is a apperception and it is not a velar. sent7: the rearward is a kind of a vaccine if it does not avalanche Ipsus and it does stem unappetizingness. sent8: if the microevolution is a coca that does not scramble bullying then it is a Frisian. sent9: the dilator is a Lahu if it avalanches indumentum and it is not a milliampere. sent10: if something that is not a terebinth is not a trip it is auditory. sent11: if the rearward is not incontestable and it is not economical it is a basketeer. sent12: something is a kind of a swivet if it is not a kind of a lactogen and it is not a stirrer. sent13: if the device is not a sabot and it is not a swivet then it is orthodox. sent14: if something is not a kind of a milliampere but it is a swivet it is economical. sent15: if something is a milliampere and is not a kind of a swivet then it is economical. sent16: something does avalanche fluxmeter if it does not have and it is a pinochle. sent17: something is predictable if it does not feel Tiu and it does not avalanche inhibitor. sent18: the inhibitor is a kind of a swivet if it is not audio-lingual and it is not a kind of a ceriman. sent19: if something that is not a milliampere is not a kind of a swivet then it is economical.
|
sent1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: (x): (¬{IJ}x & {DT}x) -> {DP}x sent3: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent4: (x): (¬{HF}x & {CB}x) -> {HG}x sent5: (¬{ER}{aa} & {EA}{aa}) -> {II}{aa} sent6: ({DP}{aa} & ¬{JJ}{aa}) -> {IP}{aa} sent7: (¬{GA}{aa} & {C}{aa}) -> {HT}{aa} sent8: ({HF}{c} & ¬{IL}{c}) -> {BI}{c} sent9: ({U}{fo} & ¬{AA}{fo}) -> {E}{fo} sent10: (x): (¬{HE}x & ¬{IF}x) -> {EP}x sent11: (¬{BN}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) -> {JI}{aa} sent12: (x): (¬{GP}x & ¬{BP}x) -> {AB}x sent13: (¬{DH}{ck} & ¬{AB}{ck}) -> {BU}{ck} sent14: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent15: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent16: (x): (¬{T}x & {FH}x) -> {DC}x sent17: (x): (¬{FK}x & ¬{EB}x) -> {IN}x sent18: (¬{EU}{hl} & ¬{BG}{hl}) -> {AB}{hl} sent19: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
[
"sent19 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent19 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the transvestite is a swivet if it is not a lactogen and not a stirrer.
|
(¬{GP}{j} & ¬{BP}{j}) -> {AB}{j}
|
[
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = if the rearward is not a milliampere and is not a swivet it is economical. ; $context$ = sent1: if the rearward is a kind of a milliampere and is not a swivet then it is economical. sent2: if something does not feel Rockwell and is a kind of a Chevalier it is a apperception. sent3: that the rearward is economical is not false if it is not a milliampere and is a swivet. sent4: something is a clubfooted if it is not a coca and it does fall. sent5: if the rearward is not a Palaquium and is a kind of a yacht it does scramble geophagy. sent6: the rearward is a devise if it is a apperception and it is not a velar. sent7: the rearward is a kind of a vaccine if it does not avalanche Ipsus and it does stem unappetizingness. sent8: if the microevolution is a coca that does not scramble bullying then it is a Frisian. sent9: the dilator is a Lahu if it avalanches indumentum and it is not a milliampere. sent10: if something that is not a terebinth is not a trip it is auditory. sent11: if the rearward is not incontestable and it is not economical it is a basketeer. sent12: something is a kind of a swivet if it is not a kind of a lactogen and it is not a stirrer. sent13: if the device is not a sabot and it is not a swivet then it is orthodox. sent14: if something is not a kind of a milliampere but it is a swivet it is economical. sent15: if something is a milliampere and is not a kind of a swivet then it is economical. sent16: something does avalanche fluxmeter if it does not have and it is a pinochle. sent17: something is predictable if it does not feel Tiu and it does not avalanche inhibitor. sent18: the inhibitor is a kind of a swivet if it is not audio-lingual and it is not a kind of a ceriman. sent19: if something that is not a milliampere is not a kind of a swivet then it is economical. ; $proof$ =
|
sent19 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
either the recognition happens or the scaling happens or both.
|
({C} v {B})
|
sent1: the feeling gateau does not occur if the archegonialness does not occur but the expendableness occurs. sent2: the Malaysianess occurs and the antiferromagneticness happens. sent3: that the avalanching Orwell happens is right. sent4: the backstopping and the feeling Dietrich happens. sent5: if the avalanching Orwell does not occur then the fact that the recognition occurs or the scaling occurs or both is wrong. sent6: the edibleness occurs. sent7: both the megakaryocyticness and the ascensionalness occurs. sent8: if the feeling gateau does not occur the antiferromagneticness occurs and the potshot happens. sent9: the italic occurs. sent10: the asleepness happens. sent11: the avalanching Orwell does not occur if the potshot occurs.
|
sent1: (¬{G} & {H}) -> ¬{F} sent2: ({N} & {E}) sent3: {A} sent4: ({GQ} & {IC}) sent5: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} v {B}) sent6: {IF} sent7: ({DO} & {DU}) sent8: ¬{F} -> ({E} & {D}) sent9: {GS} sent10: {GO} sent11: {D} -> ¬{A}
|
[] |
[] |
the Malaysia happens and the avalanching freedom happens.
|
({N} & {AC})
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the Malaysianess happens.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = either the recognition happens or the scaling happens or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the feeling gateau does not occur if the archegonialness does not occur but the expendableness occurs. sent2: the Malaysianess occurs and the antiferromagneticness happens. sent3: that the avalanching Orwell happens is right. sent4: the backstopping and the feeling Dietrich happens. sent5: if the avalanching Orwell does not occur then the fact that the recognition occurs or the scaling occurs or both is wrong. sent6: the edibleness occurs. sent7: both the megakaryocyticness and the ascensionalness occurs. sent8: if the feeling gateau does not occur the antiferromagneticness occurs and the potshot happens. sent9: the italic occurs. sent10: the asleepness happens. sent11: the avalanching Orwell does not occur if the potshot occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the pouring does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: the pouring occurs if that not the avalanching S.U.V. but the listening happens is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the providentialness happens is correct. sent3: the ungulate occurs. sent4: that the fact that the avalanching S.U.V. does not occur and the listening happens is not correct is not incorrect. sent5: the pouring happens if the avalanching S.U.V. happens. sent6: the fact that not the twit but the constellating happens is wrong. sent7: if the fact that the unstoppableness and the rustlessness occurs is not correct then the avalanching whinchat occurs. sent8: that the aeromedicalness does not occur is not false if that the scrambling aloofness and the scrambling marmot happens is false. sent9: that the avalanching S.U.V. and the listening happens does not hold. sent10: the non-aeromedicalness results in either that the prefabrication occurs or that the vulpineness happens or both. sent11: if the fact that the hyperemicness does not occur but the reconcilableness occurs does not hold then the saving occurs. sent12: if the fact that the non-congruousness and the strand occurs is not correct then the illegitimateness occurs. sent13: the fact that both the scrambling aloofness and the scrambling marmot happens is not true if the spiccato does not occur. sent14: the differing happens.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} sent2: {HI} sent3: {CU} sent4: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent5: {AA} -> {B} sent6: ¬(¬{BD} & {AG}) sent7: ¬(¬{FM} & {DF}) -> {FE} sent8: ¬({F} & {E}) -> ¬{D} sent9: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent10: ¬{D} -> ({C} v {A}) sent11: ¬(¬{EF} & {IO}) -> {BF} sent12: ¬(¬{AH} & {JE}) -> {HQ} sent13: ¬{G} -> ¬({F} & {E}) sent14: {AI}
|
[
"sent1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the pouring does not occur is not incorrect.
|
¬{B}
|
[] | 8 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the pouring does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the pouring occurs if that not the avalanching S.U.V. but the listening happens is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the providentialness happens is correct. sent3: the ungulate occurs. sent4: that the fact that the avalanching S.U.V. does not occur and the listening happens is not correct is not incorrect. sent5: the pouring happens if the avalanching S.U.V. happens. sent6: the fact that not the twit but the constellating happens is wrong. sent7: if the fact that the unstoppableness and the rustlessness occurs is not correct then the avalanching whinchat occurs. sent8: that the aeromedicalness does not occur is not false if that the scrambling aloofness and the scrambling marmot happens is false. sent9: that the avalanching S.U.V. and the listening happens does not hold. sent10: the non-aeromedicalness results in either that the prefabrication occurs or that the vulpineness happens or both. sent11: if the fact that the hyperemicness does not occur but the reconcilableness occurs does not hold then the saving occurs. sent12: if the fact that the non-congruousness and the strand occurs is not correct then the illegitimateness occurs. sent13: the fact that both the scrambling aloofness and the scrambling marmot happens is not true if the spiccato does not occur. sent14: the differing happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the lipstick is both discreet and telocentric is false.
|
¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
sent1: that the skipper is not a kind of a ravine but it is telocentric is wrong. sent2: if something is not a forehand that it is indiscreet and it is telocentric is not true. sent3: if something is not unlikable the ectoplasm is a kind of a mud and is maladaptive. sent4: if there exists something such that that it is a kwela but not a apposition is false then the guyot is not unlikable. sent5: the fact that something is both not indiscreet and telocentric is incorrect if it is not a forehand. sent6: the fact that the lipstick is indiscreet and it is telocentric is not true. sent7: the derrick is not a palmature if the fact that it is tangible and it is a palmature is not true. sent8: that the semigloss is eligible but it does not avalanche semigloss does not hold if the fact that the ectoplasm muds is right. sent9: if something is not eligible then that that it is exoergic and/or it avalanches hacksaw is right does not hold. sent10: the capercaillie is not a kind of an herbal. sent11: if that something is exoergic and/or avalanches hacksaw is wrong then it is not a forehand. sent12: the lipstick does avalanche hacksaw but it is not a forehand. sent13: if something is not a palmature then the fact that it is a kwela and is not a kind of a apposition is false. sent14: that the lipstick is indiscreet and it is not non-telocentric is incorrect if it is not a forehand. sent15: the fact that the lipstick does avalanche hacksaw hold. sent16: the haemoproteid avalanches brassavola but it is not telocentric if there is something such that it is not forehand. sent17: the Holly is not eligible if that the semigloss is eligible but it does not avalanche semigloss is not true. sent18: that the derrick is tangible and it is a palmature is not right if the capercaillie is not an herbal. sent19: the Holly is not a forehand if the semigloss avalanches hacksaw and it is exoergic.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{JK}{fa} & {AB}{fa}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}{c} & {G}{c}) sent4: (x): ¬({I}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{H}{d} sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: ¬({M}{e} & {K}{e}) -> ¬{K}{e} sent8: {F}{c} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent9: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({C}x v {B}x) sent10: ¬{L}{f} sent11: (x): ¬({C}x v {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent12: ({B}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent13: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({I}x & ¬{J}x) sent14: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent15: {B}{aa} sent16: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({GB}{au} & ¬{AB}{au}) sent17: ¬({D}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent18: ¬{L}{f} -> ¬({M}{e} & {K}{e}) sent19: ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: that the lipstick is not indiscreet but it is telocentric is false if it is non-forehand.; sent12 -> int2: the lipstick is non-forehand.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent12 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the lipstick is not indiscreet but it is telocentric.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[] | 5 | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the lipstick is both discreet and telocentric is false. ; $context$ = sent1: that the skipper is not a kind of a ravine but it is telocentric is wrong. sent2: if something is not a forehand that it is indiscreet and it is telocentric is not true. sent3: if something is not unlikable the ectoplasm is a kind of a mud and is maladaptive. sent4: if there exists something such that that it is a kwela but not a apposition is false then the guyot is not unlikable. sent5: the fact that something is both not indiscreet and telocentric is incorrect if it is not a forehand. sent6: the fact that the lipstick is indiscreet and it is telocentric is not true. sent7: the derrick is not a palmature if the fact that it is tangible and it is a palmature is not true. sent8: that the semigloss is eligible but it does not avalanche semigloss does not hold if the fact that the ectoplasm muds is right. sent9: if something is not eligible then that that it is exoergic and/or it avalanches hacksaw is right does not hold. sent10: the capercaillie is not a kind of an herbal. sent11: if that something is exoergic and/or avalanches hacksaw is wrong then it is not a forehand. sent12: the lipstick does avalanche hacksaw but it is not a forehand. sent13: if something is not a palmature then the fact that it is a kwela and is not a kind of a apposition is false. sent14: that the lipstick is indiscreet and it is not non-telocentric is incorrect if it is not a forehand. sent15: the fact that the lipstick does avalanche hacksaw hold. sent16: the haemoproteid avalanches brassavola but it is not telocentric if there is something such that it is not forehand. sent17: the Holly is not eligible if that the semigloss is eligible but it does not avalanche semigloss is not true. sent18: that the derrick is tangible and it is a palmature is not right if the capercaillie is not an herbal. sent19: the Holly is not a forehand if the semigloss avalanches hacksaw and it is exoergic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: that the lipstick is not indiscreet but it is telocentric is false if it is non-forehand.; sent12 -> int2: the lipstick is non-forehand.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does feel unscrupulousness and is compressible then it is not a breechcloth.
|
(Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x
|
sent1: there exists something such that if it is an aspen and sacerdotal it is not Himalayan. sent2: the acetylcholine is not a breechcloth if it does feel unscrupulousness and it is compressible.
|
sent1: (Ex): ({FS}x & {AP}x) -> ¬{FT}x sent2: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does feel unscrupulousness and is compressible then it is not a breechcloth. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is an aspen and sacerdotal it is not Himalayan. sent2: the acetylcholine is not a breechcloth if it does feel unscrupulousness and it is compressible. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the obeying occurs or the marshalship happens or both.
|
({B} v {C})
|
sent1: the non-chancroidalness and/or the scrambling kilobit occurs if the vicissitude happens. sent2: that the obeying happens and/or the marshalship happens is wrong if the vicissitude does not occur. sent3: the vicissitude occurs. sent4: either the non-biliousness or that the phrenologicalness happens or both brings about that the impaling occurs. sent5: if the avalanching almandite does not occur and/or the aortalness happens then the fact that the avalanching oriole happens hold. sent6: that the obeying does not occur is prevented by that either the non-chancroidalness or the scrambling kilobit or both happens. sent7: the nonpayment happens. sent8: the totipotentness happens. sent9: if the feeling posting happens then the totipotentness does not occur and/or the luckiness occurs.
|
sent1: {A} -> (¬{AA} v {AB}) sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬({B} v {C}) sent3: {A} sent4: (¬{BO} v {DS}) -> {AT} sent5: (¬{HI} v {N}) -> {BB} sent6: (¬{AA} v {AB}) -> {B} sent7: {DH} sent8: {GM} sent9: {IG} -> (¬{GM} v {AM})
|
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the non-chancroidalness or the scrambling kilobit or both happens.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the obeying occurs.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 & sent3 -> int1: (¬{AA} v {AB}); int1 & sent6 -> int2: {B}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that either the obeying happens or the marshalship occurs or both is incorrect.
|
¬({B} v {C})
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the obeying occurs or the marshalship happens or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the non-chancroidalness and/or the scrambling kilobit occurs if the vicissitude happens. sent2: that the obeying happens and/or the marshalship happens is wrong if the vicissitude does not occur. sent3: the vicissitude occurs. sent4: either the non-biliousness or that the phrenologicalness happens or both brings about that the impaling occurs. sent5: if the avalanching almandite does not occur and/or the aortalness happens then the fact that the avalanching oriole happens hold. sent6: that the obeying does not occur is prevented by that either the non-chancroidalness or the scrambling kilobit or both happens. sent7: the nonpayment happens. sent8: the totipotentness happens. sent9: if the feeling posting happens then the totipotentness does not occur and/or the luckiness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 & sent3 -> int1: the non-chancroidalness or the scrambling kilobit or both happens.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the obeying occurs.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the stemming deadeye occurs.
|
{A}
|
sent1: if the feeling Ashton but not the stemming deadeye occurs the limblessness occurs. sent2: the stemming deadeye is brought about by that the feeling Ashton does not occur. sent3: the distention happens and the knee-lengthness occurs. sent4: if the autotypicness does not occur the fact that the scrambling geodesy occurs hold. sent5: if the annulment happens the feeling Ashton happens but the stemming deadeye does not occur. sent6: if the scrambling pinion does not occur the feeling Stromateidae happens. sent7: that the uninfluentialness does not occur is caused by that the scrambling Welsh and the Carthaginianness occurs. sent8: if the clamber does not occur the self-punishment happens.
|
sent1: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> {IG} sent2: ¬{B} -> {A} sent3: ({AA} & {AB}) sent4: ¬{GE} -> {BJ} sent5: {C} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) sent6: ¬{FC} -> {BA} sent7: ({BU} & {CG}) -> ¬{AD} sent8: ¬{ER} -> {AQ}
|
[] |
[] |
the fact that the limblessness occurs is not wrong.
|
{IG}
|
[] | 7 | 2 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the stemming deadeye occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the feeling Ashton but not the stemming deadeye occurs the limblessness occurs. sent2: the stemming deadeye is brought about by that the feeling Ashton does not occur. sent3: the distention happens and the knee-lengthness occurs. sent4: if the autotypicness does not occur the fact that the scrambling geodesy occurs hold. sent5: if the annulment happens the feeling Ashton happens but the stemming deadeye does not occur. sent6: if the scrambling pinion does not occur the feeling Stromateidae happens. sent7: that the uninfluentialness does not occur is caused by that the scrambling Welsh and the Carthaginianness occurs. sent8: if the clamber does not occur the self-punishment happens. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the avalanching plainness does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: the drift occurs. sent2: if the avalanching plainness does not occur and the happiness does not occur then the avalanching herpetology occurs. sent3: if the radicalizing does not occur then the feeling citrus and/or the visitation occurs. sent4: if that the dismemberment does not occur and the pullback does not occur does not hold then the pullback happens. sent5: both the escalation and the appointing happens if the pretending does not occur. sent6: the reseeding and the discounting occurs. sent7: the feeling Monothelitism and the yowling occurs. sent8: the radicalizing does not occur and the avalanching sushi does not occur if the testaceousness does not occur. sent9: the flexure does not occur if that the pretending happens and the cross-link happens is not incorrect. sent10: the non-pronominalness yields that the scrambling epicenter and the tattoo occurs. sent11: the pullback does not occur. sent12: the racking does not occur. sent13: the dekko happens. sent14: if the feeling citrus does not occur then that the happiness but not the visitation occurs is incorrect. sent15: that the happiness and the avalanching plainness happens prevents that the visitation happens. sent16: that the feeling citrus does not occur is prevented by that the pullback does not occur. sent17: if the stemming how-do-you-do occurs then that the dismemberment does not occur and the pullback does not occur is false. sent18: the visitation or the happiness or both is brought about by that the feeling citrus does not occur. sent19: the feeling citrus occurs. sent20: the happiness occurs.
|
sent1: {IN} sent2: (¬{B} & ¬{A}) -> {S} sent3: ¬{F} -> ({D} v {C}) sent4: ¬(¬{H} & ¬{E}) -> {E} sent5: ¬{AC} -> ({CG} & {P}) sent6: ({CE} & {HO}) sent7: ({JH} & {BO}) sent8: ¬{I} -> (¬{F} & ¬{G}) sent9: ({AC} & {AN}) -> ¬{BH} sent10: ¬{CP} -> ({GN} & {DR}) sent11: ¬{E} sent12: ¬{AK} sent13: {EC} sent14: ¬{D} -> ¬({A} & ¬{C}) sent15: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent16: ¬{E} -> {D} sent17: {J} -> ¬(¬{H} & ¬{E}) sent18: ¬{D} -> ({C} v {A}) sent19: {D} sent20: {A}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the avalanching plainness occurs.; sent20 & assump1 -> int1: both the happiness and the avalanching plainness occurs.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the visitation does not occur.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {B}; sent20 & assump1 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent15 -> int2: ¬{C};"
] |
the avalanching plainness occurs.
|
{B}
|
[] | 6 | 4 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the avalanching plainness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the drift occurs. sent2: if the avalanching plainness does not occur and the happiness does not occur then the avalanching herpetology occurs. sent3: if the radicalizing does not occur then the feeling citrus and/or the visitation occurs. sent4: if that the dismemberment does not occur and the pullback does not occur does not hold then the pullback happens. sent5: both the escalation and the appointing happens if the pretending does not occur. sent6: the reseeding and the discounting occurs. sent7: the feeling Monothelitism and the yowling occurs. sent8: the radicalizing does not occur and the avalanching sushi does not occur if the testaceousness does not occur. sent9: the flexure does not occur if that the pretending happens and the cross-link happens is not incorrect. sent10: the non-pronominalness yields that the scrambling epicenter and the tattoo occurs. sent11: the pullback does not occur. sent12: the racking does not occur. sent13: the dekko happens. sent14: if the feeling citrus does not occur then that the happiness but not the visitation occurs is incorrect. sent15: that the happiness and the avalanching plainness happens prevents that the visitation happens. sent16: that the feeling citrus does not occur is prevented by that the pullback does not occur. sent17: if the stemming how-do-you-do occurs then that the dismemberment does not occur and the pullback does not occur is false. sent18: the visitation or the happiness or both is brought about by that the feeling citrus does not occur. sent19: the feeling citrus occurs. sent20: the happiness occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the avalanching plainness occurs.; sent20 & assump1 -> int1: both the happiness and the avalanching plainness occurs.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the visitation does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the wonderer is cyclothymic is true.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not unreasonable and it does avalanche milcher is incorrect then the morphine does not avalanche milcher. sent2: if something is not cyclothymic either it is a pavement or it does scramble refilling or both. sent3: the piano is not a cysteine. sent4: the fact that the wonderer is a cysteine hold. sent5: if something is a kind of a cinnabar and it is a foreignness the toner does not scramble harmattan. sent6: the radioisotope is a cinnabar if the fact that the beryl is not a cinnabar and is not a Diodon is not true. sent7: something is alpine or a snatch or both if it is not a lanugo. sent8: if the scull is a pavement and not cyclothymic then that the wonderer is not cyclothymic is not wrong. sent9: if something is an ambulance but it does not avalanche milcher the radioisotope is a foreignness. sent10: if the Berlin is cyclothymic the fact that the wonderer is a pavement is correct. sent11: either something is a cysteine or it is not non-cyclothymic or both if it is not a pavement. sent12: if something is not a kind of a pavement it is cyclothymic or does scramble refilling or both. sent13: the fact that the beryl is not a cinnabar and it is not a Diodon does not hold. sent14: the freeloader is a langsat and a libretto if there is something such that it does not scramble harmattan. sent15: the Berlin is not a pavement. sent16: there is something such that that it is not unreasonable and does avalanche milcher is false. sent17: if the Berlin does scramble refilling then the fact that the wonderer is cyclothymic is right. sent18: if something is not a pavement it does scramble refilling and/or is a kind of a cysteine. sent19: the morphine is an ambulance. sent20: if the Berlin is a kind of a cysteine then the wonderer is cyclothymic. sent21: if the Berlin is not a kind of a cysteine either it is a pavement or it is cyclothymic or both.
|
sent1: (x): ¬(¬{J}x & {H}x) -> ¬{H}{f} sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x v {AA}x) sent3: ¬{AB}{hu} sent4: {AB}{a} sent5: (x): ({F}x & {G}x) -> ¬{E}{d} sent6: ¬(¬{F}{g} & ¬{K}{g}) -> {F}{e} sent7: (x): ¬{M}x -> ({ID}x v {DA}x) sent8: ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: (x): ({I}x & ¬{H}x) -> {G}{e} sent10: {B}{aa} -> {A}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AB}x v {B}x) sent12: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}x v {AA}x) sent13: ¬(¬{F}{g} & ¬{K}{g}) sent14: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}{c} & {D}{c}) sent15: ¬{A}{aa} sent16: (Ex): ¬(¬{J}x & {H}x) sent17: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{a} sent18: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v {AB}x) sent19: {I}{f} sent20: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{a} sent21: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ({A}{aa} v {B}{aa})
|
[
"sent18 -> int1: if the Berlin is not a pavement then it does scramble refilling or is a cysteine or both.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the Berlin does scramble refilling and/or it is a cysteine.; int2 & sent17 & sent20 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent18 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}); int1 & sent15 -> int2: ({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}); int2 & sent17 & sent20 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the wonderer is not cyclothymic.
|
¬{B}{a}
|
[
"sent6 & sent13 -> int3: the radioisotope is a cinnabar.; sent16 & sent1 -> int4: the morphine does not avalanche milcher.; sent19 & int4 -> int5: the morphine is an ambulance but it does not avalanche milcher.; int5 -> int6: something is a kind of an ambulance that does not avalanche milcher.; int6 & sent9 -> int7: the radioisotope is a kind of a foreignness.; int3 & int7 -> int8: the radioisotope is a cinnabar and a foreignness.; int8 -> int9: something is a kind of a cinnabar that is a kind of a foreignness.; int9 & sent5 -> int10: the toner does not scramble harmattan.; int10 -> int11: something does not scramble harmattan.; int11 & sent14 -> int12: the freeloader is a langsat and it is a libretto.; int12 -> int13: the freeloader is a langsat.; int13 -> int14: there is something such that it is a kind of a langsat.;"
] | 13 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the wonderer is cyclothymic is true. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not unreasonable and it does avalanche milcher is incorrect then the morphine does not avalanche milcher. sent2: if something is not cyclothymic either it is a pavement or it does scramble refilling or both. sent3: the piano is not a cysteine. sent4: the fact that the wonderer is a cysteine hold. sent5: if something is a kind of a cinnabar and it is a foreignness the toner does not scramble harmattan. sent6: the radioisotope is a cinnabar if the fact that the beryl is not a cinnabar and is not a Diodon is not true. sent7: something is alpine or a snatch or both if it is not a lanugo. sent8: if the scull is a pavement and not cyclothymic then that the wonderer is not cyclothymic is not wrong. sent9: if something is an ambulance but it does not avalanche milcher the radioisotope is a foreignness. sent10: if the Berlin is cyclothymic the fact that the wonderer is a pavement is correct. sent11: either something is a cysteine or it is not non-cyclothymic or both if it is not a pavement. sent12: if something is not a kind of a pavement it is cyclothymic or does scramble refilling or both. sent13: the fact that the beryl is not a cinnabar and it is not a Diodon does not hold. sent14: the freeloader is a langsat and a libretto if there is something such that it does not scramble harmattan. sent15: the Berlin is not a pavement. sent16: there is something such that that it is not unreasonable and does avalanche milcher is false. sent17: if the Berlin does scramble refilling then the fact that the wonderer is cyclothymic is right. sent18: if something is not a pavement it does scramble refilling and/or is a kind of a cysteine. sent19: the morphine is an ambulance. sent20: if the Berlin is a kind of a cysteine then the wonderer is cyclothymic. sent21: if the Berlin is not a kind of a cysteine either it is a pavement or it is cyclothymic or both. ; $proof$ =
|
sent18 -> int1: if the Berlin is not a pavement then it does scramble refilling or is a cysteine or both.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the Berlin does scramble refilling and/or it is a cysteine.; int2 & sent17 & sent20 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the feeling aphorism occurs.
|
{D}
|
sent1: if the fact that the boniness occurs but the stemming public does not occur does not hold then the exoergicness occurs. sent2: that the avalanching whinchat does not occur prevents that the vesicularness does not occur. sent3: the trilling happens if that the trilling does not occur and the vesicularness occurs is incorrect. sent4: if the fact that the avalanching whinchat occurs and the scrambling hart does not occur is incorrect the vesicularness happens. sent5: the cardinalship happens. sent6: both the Lens and the eutherianness happens. sent7: the conformation occurs. sent8: the trill happens. sent9: that both the raptorialness and the feeling mirrored happens is not wrong. sent10: that the diluting does not occur is caused by that the matutinalness and the futureness happens. sent11: if the avalanching nihilist occurs and the vesicularness happens the feeling aphorism does not occur. sent12: both the expunction and the hiplessness happens. sent13: that the avalanching whinchat but not the scrambling hart happens is incorrect. sent14: the scrambling Blattella does not occur. sent15: both the trill and the avalanching nihilist happens. sent16: the exercising does not occur if that both the snorkeling and the Calvary occurs is not false. sent17: the extrasystole does not occur if the payoff and the stemmer occurs. sent18: the gobble does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬({GM} & ¬{IS}) -> {IL} sent2: ¬{E} -> {C} sent3: ¬(¬{A} & {C}) -> {A} sent4: ¬({E} & ¬{F}) -> {C} sent5: {P} sent6: ({CT} & {CE}) sent7: {DC} sent8: {A} sent9: ({FI} & {EB}) sent10: ({EA} & {HU}) -> ¬{GK} sent11: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent12: ({FC} & {BN}) sent13: ¬({E} & ¬{F}) sent14: ¬{JD} sent15: ({A} & {B}) sent16: ({EE} & {BB}) -> ¬{CJ} sent17: ({O} & {BU}) -> ¬{GU} sent18: ¬{EM}
|
[
"sent15 -> int1: the avalanching nihilist occurs.; sent4 & sent13 -> int2: the fact that the vesicularness happens is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the avalanching nihilist happens and the vesicularness occurs.; int3 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent15 -> int1: {B}; sent4 & sent13 -> int2: {C}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B} & {C}); int3 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the feeling aphorism occurs.
|
{D}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the feeling aphorism occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the boniness occurs but the stemming public does not occur does not hold then the exoergicness occurs. sent2: that the avalanching whinchat does not occur prevents that the vesicularness does not occur. sent3: the trilling happens if that the trilling does not occur and the vesicularness occurs is incorrect. sent4: if the fact that the avalanching whinchat occurs and the scrambling hart does not occur is incorrect the vesicularness happens. sent5: the cardinalship happens. sent6: both the Lens and the eutherianness happens. sent7: the conformation occurs. sent8: the trill happens. sent9: that both the raptorialness and the feeling mirrored happens is not wrong. sent10: that the diluting does not occur is caused by that the matutinalness and the futureness happens. sent11: if the avalanching nihilist occurs and the vesicularness happens the feeling aphorism does not occur. sent12: both the expunction and the hiplessness happens. sent13: that the avalanching whinchat but not the scrambling hart happens is incorrect. sent14: the scrambling Blattella does not occur. sent15: both the trill and the avalanching nihilist happens. sent16: the exercising does not occur if that both the snorkeling and the Calvary occurs is not false. sent17: the extrasystole does not occur if the payoff and the stemmer occurs. sent18: the gobble does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent15 -> int1: the avalanching nihilist occurs.; sent4 & sent13 -> int2: the fact that the vesicularness happens is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the avalanching nihilist happens and the vesicularness occurs.; int3 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a jagged is not false it is not radiographic and/or is not Olympic does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: there is something such that if it jags then it is either non-radiographic or not Olympic or both. sent2: if the sannyasi is a kind of a jagged then it is not radiographic or it is not Olympic or both. sent3: if the sannyasi is not a jagged it is radiographic and/or is not Olympic. sent4: if the sannyasi is not radiographic then it does not stem water-mint and/or is not a variable. sent5: the sannyasi is not radiographic and/or it is not Olympic if it is not a jagged. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not a jagged then it is radiographic or it is not Olympic or both. sent7: the sannyasi is not a cybersex and/or it is a jagged if that the fact that it is noninfectious is wrong hold. sent8: something is not proximal and/or it does not avalanche Alopius if it is not a oatcake.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent2: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: ¬{AA}{aa} -> (¬{ES}{aa} v ¬{DR}{aa}) sent5: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent7: ¬{CO}{aa} -> (¬{HC}{aa} v {A}{aa}) sent8: (x): ¬{EK}x -> (¬{HU}x v ¬{GT}x)
|
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that there is something such that if the fact that it is not a oatcake is not wrong then it is not proximal and/or it does not avalanche Alopius hold.
|
(Ex): ¬{EK}x -> (¬{HU}x v ¬{GT}x)
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: if the lady is not a oatcake then it is not proximal and/or does not avalanche Alopius.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a jagged is not false it is not radiographic and/or is not Olympic does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it jags then it is either non-radiographic or not Olympic or both. sent2: if the sannyasi is a kind of a jagged then it is not radiographic or it is not Olympic or both. sent3: if the sannyasi is not a jagged it is radiographic and/or is not Olympic. sent4: if the sannyasi is not radiographic then it does not stem water-mint and/or is not a variable. sent5: the sannyasi is not radiographic and/or it is not Olympic if it is not a jagged. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not a jagged then it is radiographic or it is not Olympic or both. sent7: the sannyasi is not a cybersex and/or it is a jagged if that the fact that it is noninfectious is wrong hold. sent8: something is not proximal and/or it does not avalanche Alopius if it is not a oatcake. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if it does not circulate that it is a steam and it is not microbial is false is false.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: the fact that the accompaniment does steam and is not microbial is incorrect if it does circulate. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a chain the fact that it is typical and does not feel lactation does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a centennial then that it is undependable but not a turgidity is not correct. sent4: the fact that the accompaniment is fossil and is non-microbial is incorrect if it is not Russian. sent5: if the accompaniment does not circulate the fact that it is a turtle and it is not a caulked is wrong. sent6: if the cecum does not feel countryseat then the fact that it is microbial and it is not responsive does not hold. sent7: the fact that the accompaniment is a steam but not microbial is not right if it does not circulate. sent8: the fact that the accompaniment is both microbial and non-neutral does not hold if it is not uncooperative. sent9: there is something such that if it does circulate then that it is a kind of a steam that is not microbial does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a repetitiveness the fact that it is a kind of a mayfly and it is not a Nazi is wrong. sent11: if the accompaniment does not circulate then that it is both a steam and microbial is false. sent12: the fact that there exists something such that if it does not circulate the fact that it is a steam and it is not microbial is not incorrect is not wrong. sent13: if something is not microbial that it does elapse and does not avalanche contract is incorrect. sent14: there is something such that if it does not feel Ithaca then the fact that it avalanches pastel and it is not a repetitiveness is not correct. sent15: the accompaniment is a steam but it is not microbial if it does not circulate. sent16: the fact that there exists something such that if it does not circulate then the fact that it is a steam and microbial is false is true. sent17: that the accompaniment is not non-climactic but it is not microbial is false if it does not exist. sent18: that the plank is grammatical but it is not a kind of a steam does not hold if it does not dwindle.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): ¬{BB}x -> ¬({DJ}x & ¬{JJ}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{GR}x -> ¬({FU}x & ¬{CF}x) sent4: ¬{JC}{aa} -> ¬({K}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent5: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({I}{aa} & ¬{AT}{aa}) sent6: ¬{AJ}{jc} -> ¬({AB}{jc} & ¬{CE}{jc}) sent7: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: ¬{II}{aa} -> ¬({AB}{aa} & ¬{EH}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent10: (Ex): ¬{BF}x -> ¬({GM}x & ¬{CN}x) sent11: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent12: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent13: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬({FR}x & ¬{IS}x) sent14: (Ex): ¬{BR}x -> ¬({JA}x & ¬{BF}x) sent15: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent16: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent17: ¬{HP}{aa} -> ¬({GA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent18: ¬{AN}{dj} -> ¬({HC}{dj} & ¬{AA}{dj})
|
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] |
if the fact that the accompaniment is not microbial is true the fact that it elapses and does not avalanche contract is incorrect.
|
¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬({FR}{aa} & ¬{IS}{aa})
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it does not circulate that it is a steam and it is not microbial is false is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the accompaniment does steam and is not microbial is incorrect if it does circulate. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a chain the fact that it is typical and does not feel lactation does not hold. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a centennial then that it is undependable but not a turgidity is not correct. sent4: the fact that the accompaniment is fossil and is non-microbial is incorrect if it is not Russian. sent5: if the accompaniment does not circulate the fact that it is a turtle and it is not a caulked is wrong. sent6: if the cecum does not feel countryseat then the fact that it is microbial and it is not responsive does not hold. sent7: the fact that the accompaniment is a steam but not microbial is not right if it does not circulate. sent8: the fact that the accompaniment is both microbial and non-neutral does not hold if it is not uncooperative. sent9: there is something such that if it does circulate then that it is a kind of a steam that is not microbial does not hold. sent10: there exists something such that if it is not a repetitiveness the fact that it is a kind of a mayfly and it is not a Nazi is wrong. sent11: if the accompaniment does not circulate then that it is both a steam and microbial is false. sent12: the fact that there exists something such that if it does not circulate the fact that it is a steam and it is not microbial is not incorrect is not wrong. sent13: if something is not microbial that it does elapse and does not avalanche contract is incorrect. sent14: there is something such that if it does not feel Ithaca then the fact that it avalanches pastel and it is not a repetitiveness is not correct. sent15: the accompaniment is a steam but it is not microbial if it does not circulate. sent16: the fact that there exists something such that if it does not circulate then the fact that it is a steam and microbial is false is true. sent17: that the accompaniment is not non-climactic but it is not microbial is false if it does not exist. sent18: that the plank is grammatical but it is not a kind of a steam does not hold if it does not dwindle. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the langoustine does solidify.
|
{C}{d}
|
sent1: the fact that the meatus does not avalanche Iwo but it is a typescript is incorrect if the anapsid is not traditional. sent2: the langoustine does avalanche Iwo. sent3: the cracker is not a kind of a Tunney. sent4: the meatus is a typescript if the anapsid does not avalanche Iwo. sent5: the meatus does not avalanche Iwo. sent6: the fact that the meatus does scramble virology and does not stem underbrush is not true. sent7: if that the anapsid is not traditional but it does avalanche Iwo does not hold then the meatus is a typescript. sent8: that the anapsid avalanches Iwo hold if the langoustine is traditional. sent9: the langoustine does solidify if the meatus is a typescript. sent10: if the anapsid does not scramble virology the cracker is Nazarene a typescript. sent11: if the cracker does solidify the langoustine is a Tunney. sent12: if the fact that the cracker does not avalanche Iwo but it is traditional is wrong the anapsid is a Tunney. sent13: the fact that the anapsid is a kind of nontraditional thing that avalanches Iwo is not right if the cracker is not a Tunney. sent14: if the anapsid is not traditional the fact that the meatus is not a kind of a typescript and avalanches Iwo does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬(¬{AB}{c} & {B}{c}) sent2: {AB}{d} sent3: ¬{A}{a} sent4: ¬{AB}{b} -> {B}{c} sent5: ¬{AB}{c} sent6: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> {B}{c} sent8: {AA}{d} -> {AB}{b} sent9: {B}{c} -> {C}{d} sent10: ¬{E}{b} -> ({D}{a} & {B}{a}) sent11: {C}{a} -> {A}{d} sent12: ¬(¬{AB}{a} & {AA}{a}) -> {A}{b} sent13: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent14: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{c} & {AB}{c})
|
[
"sent13 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the anapsid is not traditional and avalanches Iwo is wrong.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the meatus is a kind of a typescript.; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 & sent3 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); sent7 & int1 -> int2: {B}{c}; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the langoustine does not solidify.
|
¬{C}{d}
|
[
"sent6 -> int3: there exists something such that the fact that it scrambles virology and does not stem underbrush is not correct.;"
] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the langoustine does solidify. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the meatus does not avalanche Iwo but it is a typescript is incorrect if the anapsid is not traditional. sent2: the langoustine does avalanche Iwo. sent3: the cracker is not a kind of a Tunney. sent4: the meatus is a typescript if the anapsid does not avalanche Iwo. sent5: the meatus does not avalanche Iwo. sent6: the fact that the meatus does scramble virology and does not stem underbrush is not true. sent7: if that the anapsid is not traditional but it does avalanche Iwo does not hold then the meatus is a typescript. sent8: that the anapsid avalanches Iwo hold if the langoustine is traditional. sent9: the langoustine does solidify if the meatus is a typescript. sent10: if the anapsid does not scramble virology the cracker is Nazarene a typescript. sent11: if the cracker does solidify the langoustine is a Tunney. sent12: if the fact that the cracker does not avalanche Iwo but it is traditional is wrong the anapsid is a Tunney. sent13: the fact that the anapsid is a kind of nontraditional thing that avalanches Iwo is not right if the cracker is not a Tunney. sent14: if the anapsid is not traditional the fact that the meatus is not a kind of a typescript and avalanches Iwo does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the anapsid is not traditional and avalanches Iwo is wrong.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the meatus is a kind of a typescript.; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sannyasi is a ceramic or does avalanche Leucaena or both.
|
({E}{b} v {D}{b})
|
sent1: everything does not piffle and does not avalanche hart. sent2: if the sannyasi is ceramic the fact that the tiglon is not sociolinguistic but it does acquire is not incorrect. sent3: if the tiglon does not avalanche Leucaena the fact that either the sannyasi is a ceramic or it avalanche Leucaena or both does not hold. sent4: that the tiglon is electronics and/or it is a ceramic is not correct. sent5: the tiglon is sociolinguistic. sent6: if something is a Boeotia the tiglon does not acquire and is sociolinguistic. sent7: the tiglon does not avalanche Leucaena if it does not acquire and it is sociolinguistic. sent8: there is something such that it is a Boeotia.
|
sent1: (x): (¬{H}x & ¬{G}x) sent2: {E}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent3: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬({E}{b} v {D}{b}) sent4: ¬({AJ}{a} v {E}{a}) sent5: {C}{a} sent6: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent7: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent8: (Ex): {A}x
|
[
"sent8 & sent6 -> int1: the tiglon does not acquire but it is sociolinguistic.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the tiglon does not avalanche Leucaena.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent8 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 & sent7 -> int2: ¬{D}{a}; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the start does not avalanche Leucaena and does scramble tracer.
|
(¬{D}{aa} & {HC}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> int3: the headfast does not piffle and it does not avalanche hart.; int3 -> int4: the headfast does not avalanche hart.; int4 -> int5: everything does not avalanche hart.; int5 -> int6: the bandsman does not avalanche hart.;"
] | 11 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the sannyasi is a ceramic or does avalanche Leucaena or both. ; $context$ = sent1: everything does not piffle and does not avalanche hart. sent2: if the sannyasi is ceramic the fact that the tiglon is not sociolinguistic but it does acquire is not incorrect. sent3: if the tiglon does not avalanche Leucaena the fact that either the sannyasi is a ceramic or it avalanche Leucaena or both does not hold. sent4: that the tiglon is electronics and/or it is a ceramic is not correct. sent5: the tiglon is sociolinguistic. sent6: if something is a Boeotia the tiglon does not acquire and is sociolinguistic. sent7: the tiglon does not avalanche Leucaena if it does not acquire and it is sociolinguistic. sent8: there is something such that it is a Boeotia. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 & sent6 -> int1: the tiglon does not acquire but it is sociolinguistic.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the tiglon does not avalanche Leucaena.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the serow is triclinic but it is not tricentenary.
|
({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c})
|
sent1: if something is not non-peninsular then the fact that it is a Wycliffe and it is not subscript is incorrect. sent2: the shortener is non-triclinic if something is a kind of a subscript or it is a Wycliffe or both. sent3: the fact that the suffragan is not a stinkhorn is right. sent4: the serow is triclinic. sent5: the serow is triclinic if the shortener is not triclinic. sent6: if there is something such that it is a subscript the shortener is not triclinic. sent7: the binnacle is not triclinic if there exists something such that that it is a Wycliffe and it is not a subscript is not true. sent8: the binnacle is a Wycliffe. sent9: the fact that something is not a pellucidness and does not stem how-do-you-do is wrong if it is not a stare. sent10: the binnacle is tricentenary. sent11: the shortener is triclinic but it is not tricentenary if the serow is not triclinic. sent12: that the jackal is both a stinkhorn and thermohydrometric is incorrect if there exists something such that it is not a stinkhorn. sent13: if that the jackal is a stinkhorn and is thermohydrometric is not correct the fact that it is not a stare is not false. sent14: if there is something such that that it is not a pellucidness and it does not stem how-do-you-do is not correct then the shortener is peninsular.
|
sent1: (x): {E}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) sent2: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}{b} sent3: ¬{I}{e} sent4: {C}{c} sent5: ¬{C}{b} -> {C}{c} sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{b} sent7: (x): ¬({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}{a} sent8: {B}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) sent10: {D}{a} sent11: ¬{C}{c} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent12: (x): ¬{I}x -> ¬({I}{d} & {J}{d}) sent13: ¬({I}{d} & {J}{d}) -> ¬{H}{d} sent14: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{G}x) -> {E}{b}
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: the binnacle is a subscript and/or it is a Wycliffe.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is a subscript and/or it is a Wycliffe is right.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the shortener is not triclinic.;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> int1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({A}x v {B}x); int2 & sent2 -> int3: ¬{C}{b};"
] |
that the serow is triclinic and not tricentenary does not hold.
|
¬({C}{c} & ¬{D}{c})
|
[
"sent1 -> int4: if the shortener is peninsular then that it is a Wycliffe but not subscript is not true.; sent9 -> int5: that the jackal is not a pellucidness and it does not stem how-do-you-do is false if it is not a kind of a stare.; sent3 -> int6: something is not a stinkhorn.; int6 & sent12 -> int7: that the jackal is a stinkhorn and it is thermohydrometric is false.; sent13 & int7 -> int8: the jackal is not a stare.; int5 & int8 -> int9: that the jackal is not a kind of a pellucidness and does not stem how-do-you-do is incorrect.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that the fact that it is not a pellucidness and it does not stem how-do-you-do is wrong.; int10 & sent14 -> int11: the shortener is peninsular.; int4 & int11 -> int12: that the shortener is a Wycliffe but it is not a subscript does not hold.; int12 -> int13: there is something such that that it is a Wycliffe and it is not a kind of a subscript is not true.; int13 & sent7 -> int14: the binnacle is not triclinic.; int14 -> int15: there exists something such that that it is not triclinic is not wrong.;"
] | 11 | 4 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the serow is triclinic but it is not tricentenary. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not non-peninsular then the fact that it is a Wycliffe and it is not subscript is incorrect. sent2: the shortener is non-triclinic if something is a kind of a subscript or it is a Wycliffe or both. sent3: the fact that the suffragan is not a stinkhorn is right. sent4: the serow is triclinic. sent5: the serow is triclinic if the shortener is not triclinic. sent6: if there is something such that it is a subscript the shortener is not triclinic. sent7: the binnacle is not triclinic if there exists something such that that it is a Wycliffe and it is not a subscript is not true. sent8: the binnacle is a Wycliffe. sent9: the fact that something is not a pellucidness and does not stem how-do-you-do is wrong if it is not a stare. sent10: the binnacle is tricentenary. sent11: the shortener is triclinic but it is not tricentenary if the serow is not triclinic. sent12: that the jackal is both a stinkhorn and thermohydrometric is incorrect if there exists something such that it is not a stinkhorn. sent13: if that the jackal is a stinkhorn and is thermohydrometric is not correct the fact that it is not a stare is not false. sent14: if there is something such that that it is not a pellucidness and it does not stem how-do-you-do is not correct then the shortener is peninsular. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> int1: the binnacle is a subscript and/or it is a Wycliffe.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is a subscript and/or it is a Wycliffe is right.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the shortener is not triclinic.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the depiction is pompous is not wrong.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: the twirler does not stem repetitiveness. sent2: something that is not a kind of a mist is not pompous. sent3: if the twirler is not a mist that the depiction is pompous and it is a hypnagogue is not incorrect. sent4: if something is a sexagenarian and is detachable then that it is not pompous is correct. sent5: the phenobarbital does not feel Romneya if the stanchion is not non-myrmecophytic and it does feel Romneya. sent6: if something that does not stem repetitiveness scrambles mirrored it is myrmecophytic. sent7: the depiction is a sexagenarian. sent8: the depiction is detachable. sent9: if something is not pompous it is a sexagenarian and is a hypnagogue. sent10: the stanchion is myrmecophytic. sent11: the Ute is arteriolar and it is not non-Mauritanian. sent12: if the fact that something does not feel Romneya and is not a kind of a Mauritanian is not correct that it is not a kind of a mist hold. sent13: the fact that the stanchion does feel Romneya is right if it does not stem repetitiveness and it does scramble mirrored. sent14: if something that is not a mist is a Mauritanian then it is not pompous. sent15: if something that is myrmecophytic is a quellung then it is not unwary. sent16: if something that feels twirler pleads then it is not a Okeechobee. sent17: if the twirler is myrmecophytic the fact that the prospect does not feel Romneya and is not a Mauritanian is not true. sent18: if the phenobarbital does not feel Romneya then that it mists and it is a kind of a Mauritanian does not hold.
|
sent1: ¬{G}{a} sent2: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: ¬{C}{a} -> ({B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent4: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: ({F}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent6: (x): (¬{G}x & {H}x) -> {F}x sent7: {AA}{aa} sent8: {AB}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({AA}x & {A}x) sent10: {F}{c} sent11: ({CE}{l} & {D}{l}) sent12: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{C}x sent13: (¬{G}{c} & {H}{c}) -> {E}{c} sent14: (x): (¬{C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent15: (x): ({F}x & {AT}x) -> ¬{DK}x sent16: (x): ({HP}x & {JG}x) -> ¬{M}x sent17: {F}{a} -> ¬(¬{E}{ij} & ¬{D}{ij}) sent18: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬({C}{b} & {D}{b})
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: if the depiction is a kind of a sexagenarian that is detachable then it is not pompous.; sent7 & sent8 -> int2: the depiction is a sexagenarian and detachable.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent7 & sent8 -> int2: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the prospect is a sexagenarian.
|
{AA}{ij}
|
[
"sent9 -> int3: if the prospect is not pompous it is a kind of a sexagenarian that is a kind of a hypnagogue.; sent2 -> int4: the prospect is not pompous if it is not a mist.; sent12 -> int5: if that the prospect does not feel Romneya and it is not a kind of a Mauritanian is not correct that it is not a mist is not wrong.; sent6 -> int6: the twirler is myrmecophytic if it does not stem repetitiveness and it scrambles mirrored.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the depiction is pompous is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the twirler does not stem repetitiveness. sent2: something that is not a kind of a mist is not pompous. sent3: if the twirler is not a mist that the depiction is pompous and it is a hypnagogue is not incorrect. sent4: if something is a sexagenarian and is detachable then that it is not pompous is correct. sent5: the phenobarbital does not feel Romneya if the stanchion is not non-myrmecophytic and it does feel Romneya. sent6: if something that does not stem repetitiveness scrambles mirrored it is myrmecophytic. sent7: the depiction is a sexagenarian. sent8: the depiction is detachable. sent9: if something is not pompous it is a sexagenarian and is a hypnagogue. sent10: the stanchion is myrmecophytic. sent11: the Ute is arteriolar and it is not non-Mauritanian. sent12: if the fact that something does not feel Romneya and is not a kind of a Mauritanian is not correct that it is not a kind of a mist hold. sent13: the fact that the stanchion does feel Romneya is right if it does not stem repetitiveness and it does scramble mirrored. sent14: if something that is not a mist is a Mauritanian then it is not pompous. sent15: if something that is myrmecophytic is a quellung then it is not unwary. sent16: if something that feels twirler pleads then it is not a Okeechobee. sent17: if the twirler is myrmecophytic the fact that the prospect does not feel Romneya and is not a Mauritanian is not true. sent18: if the phenobarbital does not feel Romneya then that it mists and it is a kind of a Mauritanian does not hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: if the depiction is a kind of a sexagenarian that is detachable then it is not pompous.; sent7 & sent8 -> int2: the depiction is a sexagenarian and detachable.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the sockeye is not Frankish.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: the summit is soft. sent2: if the summit avalanches celebrant the neencephalon does avalanches celebrant. sent3: the slaveholder is a ejector if it is not a caryatid and it does not feel lancet. sent4: if the summit is not a ejector but it is urethral it is acronymic. sent5: the sockeye is a Jabalpur but not non-ascensional if the wicket is not uninfluential. sent6: the summit is both not a ejector and not urethral. sent7: if the wicket does avalanche celebrant the summit is not Frankish or it is not acronymic or both. sent8: that the summit is not urethral is correct. sent9: if something does avalanche celebrant then it is Frankish. sent10: the summit is Frankish if the sockeye is acronymic. sent11: if the summit is both not urethral and Frankish then it is acronymic. sent12: that the summit is acronymic hold if it is not a kind of a ejector and it is not urethral. sent13: the sockeye is not Frankish if the summit is acronymic and it is Frankish. sent14: something does not feel Balaenicipitidae if that it feel Balaenicipitidae and it is not ascensional is false. sent15: the wicket is a kind of uninfluential thing that is a Jabalpur. sent16: that the wicket does feel Balaenicipitidae but it is not ascensional is not right if it is a Jabalpur. sent17: the sockeye does avalanche celebrant if the summit is acronymic. sent18: the summit does not avalanche celebrant if that the wicket does avalanche celebrant and is a Jabalpur is not true. sent19: the neencephalon is Frankish if it avalanches celebrant. sent20: if the fact that the sockeye does not feel Balaenicipitidae and is not acronymic is not correct the summit does avalanche celebrant. sent21: the fact that something does not feel Balaenicipitidae and is not acronymic does not hold if it is a Jabalpur.
|
sent1: {CQ}{a} sent2: {A}{a} -> {A}{dj} sent3: (¬{BJ}{cu} & ¬{CL}{cu}) -> {AA}{cu} sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent5: ¬{G}{c} -> ({E}{b} & {F}{b}) sent6: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: {A}{c} -> (¬{C}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) sent8: ¬{AB}{a} sent9: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent10: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} sent11: (¬{AB}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent12: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent13: ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent14: (x): ¬({D}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent15: ({G}{c} & {E}{c}) sent16: {E}{c} -> ¬({D}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) sent17: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} sent18: ¬({A}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent19: {A}{dj} -> {C}{dj} sent20: ¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) -> {A}{a} sent21: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{B}x)
|
[
"sent12 & sent6 -> int1: the summit is acronymic.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the sockeye does avalanche celebrant.; sent9 -> int3: if the sockeye avalanches celebrant then it is Frankish.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 & sent6 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent17 -> int2: {A}{b}; sent9 -> int3: {A}{b} -> {C}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the sockeye is not Frankish.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
[] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the sockeye is not Frankish. ; $context$ = sent1: the summit is soft. sent2: if the summit avalanches celebrant the neencephalon does avalanches celebrant. sent3: the slaveholder is a ejector if it is not a caryatid and it does not feel lancet. sent4: if the summit is not a ejector but it is urethral it is acronymic. sent5: the sockeye is a Jabalpur but not non-ascensional if the wicket is not uninfluential. sent6: the summit is both not a ejector and not urethral. sent7: if the wicket does avalanche celebrant the summit is not Frankish or it is not acronymic or both. sent8: that the summit is not urethral is correct. sent9: if something does avalanche celebrant then it is Frankish. sent10: the summit is Frankish if the sockeye is acronymic. sent11: if the summit is both not urethral and Frankish then it is acronymic. sent12: that the summit is acronymic hold if it is not a kind of a ejector and it is not urethral. sent13: the sockeye is not Frankish if the summit is acronymic and it is Frankish. sent14: something does not feel Balaenicipitidae if that it feel Balaenicipitidae and it is not ascensional is false. sent15: the wicket is a kind of uninfluential thing that is a Jabalpur. sent16: that the wicket does feel Balaenicipitidae but it is not ascensional is not right if it is a Jabalpur. sent17: the sockeye does avalanche celebrant if the summit is acronymic. sent18: the summit does not avalanche celebrant if that the wicket does avalanche celebrant and is a Jabalpur is not true. sent19: the neencephalon is Frankish if it avalanches celebrant. sent20: if the fact that the sockeye does not feel Balaenicipitidae and is not acronymic is not correct the summit does avalanche celebrant. sent21: the fact that something does not feel Balaenicipitidae and is not acronymic does not hold if it is a Jabalpur. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 & sent6 -> int1: the summit is acronymic.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the sockeye does avalanche celebrant.; sent9 -> int3: if the sockeye avalanches celebrant then it is Frankish.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there is something such that if it feels Satan it does not avalanche plainness and it is a S.U.V. is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x))
|
sent1: if the Declomycin does feel Satan it does not avalanche plainness and it is a S.U.V..
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it feels Satan it does not avalanche plainness and it is a S.U.V. is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Declomycin does feel Satan it does not avalanche plainness and it is a S.U.V.. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Romanianness does not occur.
|
¬{D}
|
sent1: the Olympicsness does not occur if the fact that the cry and the deactivation happens is incorrect. sent2: the Romanian happens and/or the causing does not occur if the diet occurs. sent3: the scrambling annotation occurs. sent4: the crying happens. sent5: the non-Romanianness is brought about by that both the scrambling annotation and the deactivation occurs. sent6: the wait does not occur if that the stemming hypochlorite occurs and the chromatinicness happens is not true. sent7: that the wait does not occur yields that the dieting happens but the isthmianness does not occur.
|
sent1: ¬({A} & {B}) -> ¬{HR} sent2: {F} -> ({D} v ¬{E}) sent3: {C} sent4: {A} sent5: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{D} sent6: ¬({I} & {J}) -> ¬{H} sent7: ¬{H} -> ({F} & ¬{G})
|
[] |
[] |
the Olympicsness does not occur.
|
¬{HR}
|
[] | 9 | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the Romanianness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the Olympicsness does not occur if the fact that the cry and the deactivation happens is incorrect. sent2: the Romanian happens and/or the causing does not occur if the diet occurs. sent3: the scrambling annotation occurs. sent4: the crying happens. sent5: the non-Romanianness is brought about by that both the scrambling annotation and the deactivation occurs. sent6: the wait does not occur if that the stemming hypochlorite occurs and the chromatinicness happens is not true. sent7: that the wait does not occur yields that the dieting happens but the isthmianness does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the envoy is not a smoke.
|
¬{C}{b}
|
sent1: if something is not non-providential that it does not stem pentameter and is not sculptural is wrong. sent2: the magnetosphere does not stem pentameter. sent3: The pentameter does not stem magnetosphere. sent4: the magnetosphere is not non-sculptural.
|
sent1: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: ¬{AA}{aa} sent4: {B}{a}
|
[
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the magnetosphere does not stem pentameter and is sculptural.; int1 -> int2: something does not stem pentameter but it is sculptural.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): (¬{A}x & {B}x);"
] |
the fact that the carnelian does smoke hold.
|
{C}{e}
|
[
"sent1 -> int3: if the fact that the envoy is providential is not wrong that it does not stem pentameter and it is not sculptural is incorrect.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the envoy is not a smoke. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not non-providential that it does not stem pentameter and is not sculptural is wrong. sent2: the magnetosphere does not stem pentameter. sent3: The pentameter does not stem magnetosphere. sent4: the magnetosphere is not non-sculptural. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the magnetosphere does not stem pentameter and is sculptural.; int1 -> int2: something does not stem pentameter but it is sculptural.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if the fact that it does not initial and does skirt is false then it socializes.
|
(Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a glaciation and it is aeriferous is not correct then it is a narco-state. sent2: if something is not a skirt then it socializes. sent3: that the hosteller is a conidium hold if the fact that it does not skirt and it does avalanche T-network is false. sent4: the dukedom is an initial if the fact that it is meiotic and it does avalanche fraudulence is wrong. sent5: if the fact that something is a kind of non-thankless thing that is a karat is not true it is a Maghreb. sent6: if the fact that the fact that the hosteller is a kind of a skirt that is not non-cinerary is true is not correct then it is birefringent. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a skirt then it socializes. sent8: the hosteller does socialize if the fact that it scrambles Hoenir and it does mismatch is wrong. sent9: if the fact that something is both not a narco-state and absent is not correct then it deposits. sent10: that something socializes is right if the fact that it is an initial and a skirt is not correct. sent11: there is something such that if it is both not an initial and a skirt it socializes. sent12: something does scramble booted if that it is not homocercal and it is weedless is wrong. sent13: if the fact that something is not an initial but it does skirt does not hold then it does socialize. sent14: if the hosteller is not a skirt then it does socialize. sent15: if the fact that the hosteller is impartial but it is an initial is wrong then it is a Robinson. sent16: that there is something such that if that it does not stem homophony and it is nonspherical is not correct it is emulous is not wrong. sent17: the hosteller is nonspherical if the fact that it is not a LCD and it does feel herbicide is wrong. sent18: if the hosteller is not an initial but it does skirt then it does socialize. sent19: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of an initial and it is a skirt is not right it socializes. sent20: if something is not an initial and is a skirt it does socialize. sent21: if the fact that that something does not feel unappetizingness and is malarial is not false does not hold then it litigates.
|
sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{GA}x & {T}x) -> {HK}x sent2: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {B}x sent3: ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & {HF}{aa}) -> {AK}{aa} sent4: ¬({HN}{fe} & {DK}{fe}) -> {AA}{fe} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{FT}x & {BS}x) -> {BH}x sent6: ¬({AB}{aa} & {GJ}{aa}) -> {IG}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> {B}x sent8: ¬({BR}{aa} & {H}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬(¬{HK}x & {GO}x) -> {Q}x sent10: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent11: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent12: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & {D}x) -> {EB}x sent13: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent14: ¬{AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent15: ¬(¬{AL}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) -> {FI}{aa} sent16: (Ex): ¬(¬{ID}x & {IS}x) -> {AD}x sent17: ¬(¬{IA}{aa} & {IK}{aa}) -> {IS}{aa} sent18: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent19: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent20: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent21: (x): ¬(¬{FQ}x & {GD}x) -> {IH}x
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: if that the hosteller does not initial but it skirts does not hold it socializes.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it does not initial and does skirt is false then it socializes. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a glaciation and it is aeriferous is not correct then it is a narco-state. sent2: if something is not a skirt then it socializes. sent3: that the hosteller is a conidium hold if the fact that it does not skirt and it does avalanche T-network is false. sent4: the dukedom is an initial if the fact that it is meiotic and it does avalanche fraudulence is wrong. sent5: if the fact that something is a kind of non-thankless thing that is a karat is not true it is a Maghreb. sent6: if the fact that the fact that the hosteller is a kind of a skirt that is not non-cinerary is true is not correct then it is birefringent. sent7: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a skirt then it socializes. sent8: the hosteller does socialize if the fact that it scrambles Hoenir and it does mismatch is wrong. sent9: if the fact that something is both not a narco-state and absent is not correct then it deposits. sent10: that something socializes is right if the fact that it is an initial and a skirt is not correct. sent11: there is something such that if it is both not an initial and a skirt it socializes. sent12: something does scramble booted if that it is not homocercal and it is weedless is wrong. sent13: if the fact that something is not an initial but it does skirt does not hold then it does socialize. sent14: if the hosteller is not a skirt then it does socialize. sent15: if the fact that the hosteller is impartial but it is an initial is wrong then it is a Robinson. sent16: that there is something such that if that it does not stem homophony and it is nonspherical is not correct it is emulous is not wrong. sent17: the hosteller is nonspherical if the fact that it is not a LCD and it does feel herbicide is wrong. sent18: if the hosteller is not an initial but it does skirt then it does socialize. sent19: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a kind of an initial and it is a skirt is not right it socializes. sent20: if something is not an initial and is a skirt it does socialize. sent21: if the fact that that something does not feel unappetizingness and is malarial is not false does not hold then it litigates. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> int1: if that the hosteller does not initial but it skirts does not hold it socializes.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the Cabernet does avalanche faithlessness.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the Cabernet is a speedboat and a centurion. sent2: if the Cabernet is a speedboat it avalanches faithlessness.
|
sent1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: {A}{a} -> {C}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the Cabernet is a kind of a speedboat.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the Cabernet does avalanche faithlessness. ; $context$ = sent1: the Cabernet is a speedboat and a centurion. sent2: if the Cabernet is a speedboat it avalanches faithlessness. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the Cabernet is a kind of a speedboat.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the surrogate is biotic and does feel Pipilo.
|
({B}{a} & {A}{a})
|
sent1: the surrogate is a kind of non-Moravian thing that scrambles totalitarian. sent2: the fact that the surrogate does feel Pipilo is not wrong if that it is Palladian and does not feel Pipilo is incorrect. sent3: the invertebrate is Palladian. sent4: that the surrogate is Palladian and does feel Pipilo is not right. sent5: the fact that the tarsier encircles and it feels Pipilo is right. sent6: that the Rastafarian is generational and does not feel Pipilo is incorrect. sent7: the fact that the county does scramble totalitarian is right. sent8: the surrogate does scramble totalitarian. sent9: the fact that that the surrogate is Palladian thing that does not feel Pipilo is incorrect is not wrong. sent10: that the surrogate is biotic but it is not handleless is not true. sent11: the surrogate plucks. sent12: the surrogate is not a kind of a beebread and does scramble totalitarian. sent13: if that the surrogate is both Palladian and non-attritional is not true it is non-attritional. sent14: that the chondrin is a kind of an initiate that is not Moravian is not correct. sent15: something that is Palladian does not feel Pipilo. sent16: the surrogate does not feel hyperpituitarism and avalanches Chrysomelidae.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent2: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {A}{a} sent3: {C}{br} sent4: ¬({C}{a} & {A}{a}) sent5: ({BP}{hq} & {A}{hq}) sent6: ¬({DA}{hs} & ¬{A}{hs}) sent7: {AB}{k} sent8: {AB}{a} sent9: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent10: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{IK}{a}) sent11: {HK}{a} sent12: (¬{GK}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent13: ¬({C}{a} & ¬{BE}{a}) -> {BE}{a} sent14: ¬({CS}{du} & ¬{AA}{du}) sent15: (x): {C}x -> ¬{A}x sent16: (¬{CB}{a} & {IN}{a})
|
[
"sent2 & sent9 -> int1: the surrogate does feel Pipilo.;"
] |
[
"sent2 & sent9 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] |
that the surrogate is a kind of biotic thing that does feel Pipilo is false.
|
¬({B}{a} & {A}{a})
|
[
"sent15 -> int2: the raise does not feel Pipilo if it is Palladian.;"
] | 5 | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the surrogate is biotic and does feel Pipilo. ; $context$ = sent1: the surrogate is a kind of non-Moravian thing that scrambles totalitarian. sent2: the fact that the surrogate does feel Pipilo is not wrong if that it is Palladian and does not feel Pipilo is incorrect. sent3: the invertebrate is Palladian. sent4: that the surrogate is Palladian and does feel Pipilo is not right. sent5: the fact that the tarsier encircles and it feels Pipilo is right. sent6: that the Rastafarian is generational and does not feel Pipilo is incorrect. sent7: the fact that the county does scramble totalitarian is right. sent8: the surrogate does scramble totalitarian. sent9: the fact that that the surrogate is Palladian thing that does not feel Pipilo is incorrect is not wrong. sent10: that the surrogate is biotic but it is not handleless is not true. sent11: the surrogate plucks. sent12: the surrogate is not a kind of a beebread and does scramble totalitarian. sent13: if that the surrogate is both Palladian and non-attritional is not true it is non-attritional. sent14: that the chondrin is a kind of an initiate that is not Moravian is not correct. sent15: something that is Palladian does not feel Pipilo. sent16: the surrogate does not feel hyperpituitarism and avalanches Chrysomelidae. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 & sent9 -> int1: the surrogate does feel Pipilo.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that the fact that it does not stratify sluicegate hold is wrong.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x)
|
sent1: if the palisade does stratify sluicegate the loblolly stratify sluicegate. sent2: there is something such that it is fewest. sent3: the fact that the palisade does not resound vaulter is not wrong. sent4: the palisade is not orderly if the loblolly does not resound vaulter and is a kind of a rustication. sent5: the loblolly does not resound vaulter and it is not a kind of a rustication. sent6: the loblolly is not a rustication. sent7: something is not a proteome. sent8: if something is not an orderly it does not stratify sluicegate. sent9: the palisade stratifies sluicegate and is a kind of an orderly if the vaulter does not stratify cabal. sent10: something is not a rustication. sent11: if the palisade does not resound vaulter and is not a kind of a rustication the loblolly is not orderly. sent12: that the hodman is not a kind of a nickname and is not indelicate is not true if it filiates palpitation. sent13: if the loblolly stratifies sluicegate then it is not a overcompensation. sent14: the palisade is not a kind of a smooth and it is not a bookmaker. sent15: if the hodman is not a kind of a treatment but it does weekend it filiates palpitation. sent16: there is something such that it does stratify sluicegate. sent17: if something is not orderly it is not a kind of a rustication. sent18: the palisade is not orderly if the loblolly does not resound vaulter and it is not a rustication. sent19: if that something is not a nickname and it is decorous does not hold then the fact that the fact that it resounds weekend is true is not true.
|
sent1: {A}{b} -> {A}{a} sent2: (Ex): {CA}x sent3: ¬{AA}{b} sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: ¬{AB}{a} sent7: (Ex): ¬{DN}x sent8: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{A}x sent9: ¬{C}{c} -> ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent11: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent12: {G}{d} -> ¬(¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent13: {A}{a} -> ¬{HA}{a} sent14: (¬{IM}{b} & ¬{BB}{b}) sent15: (¬{H}{d} & {I}{d}) -> {G}{d} sent16: (Ex): {A}x sent17: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{AB}x sent18: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent19: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) -> ¬{D}x
|
[
"sent18 & sent5 -> int1: the palisade is not an orderly.; sent8 -> int2: if the palisade is not an orderly then it does not stratify sluicegate.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the palisade does not stratify sluicegate.; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent18 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent8 -> int2: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{A}{b}; int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
something is not a kind of a overcompensation.
|
(Ex): ¬{HA}x
|
[
"sent19 -> int4: the hodman does not resound weekend if the fact that it is not a nickname and it is not indelicate does not hold.;"
] | 10 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that the fact that it does not stratify sluicegate hold is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the palisade does stratify sluicegate the loblolly stratify sluicegate. sent2: there is something such that it is fewest. sent3: the fact that the palisade does not resound vaulter is not wrong. sent4: the palisade is not orderly if the loblolly does not resound vaulter and is a kind of a rustication. sent5: the loblolly does not resound vaulter and it is not a kind of a rustication. sent6: the loblolly is not a rustication. sent7: something is not a proteome. sent8: if something is not an orderly it does not stratify sluicegate. sent9: the palisade stratifies sluicegate and is a kind of an orderly if the vaulter does not stratify cabal. sent10: something is not a rustication. sent11: if the palisade does not resound vaulter and is not a kind of a rustication the loblolly is not orderly. sent12: that the hodman is not a kind of a nickname and is not indelicate is not true if it filiates palpitation. sent13: if the loblolly stratifies sluicegate then it is not a overcompensation. sent14: the palisade is not a kind of a smooth and it is not a bookmaker. sent15: if the hodman is not a kind of a treatment but it does weekend it filiates palpitation. sent16: there is something such that it does stratify sluicegate. sent17: if something is not orderly it is not a kind of a rustication. sent18: the palisade is not orderly if the loblolly does not resound vaulter and it is not a rustication. sent19: if that something is not a nickname and it is decorous does not hold then the fact that the fact that it resounds weekend is true is not true. ; $proof$ =
|
sent18 & sent5 -> int1: the palisade is not an orderly.; sent8 -> int2: if the palisade is not an orderly then it does not stratify sluicegate.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the palisade does not stratify sluicegate.; int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the calumet is organismal.
|
{C}{a}
|
sent1: the timolol stratifies thermocoagulation. sent2: if the calumet is a lindy then it is radiographic. sent3: the calumet is a boffin. sent4: the fact that the avower is not professional is true. sent5: if something is not implicational then it does not promenade. sent6: if something is not a kind of a promenade it is organismal thing that is bicapsular. sent7: that the span is leafy hold if it is a pointillism. sent8: the jalousie stratifies thermocoagulation. sent9: the calumet is nonprofessional. sent10: the calumet is not non-weatherly and is academic. sent11: the parakeet is a render and it is organismal. sent12: the calumet is organismal if it is a headstream. sent13: the calumet does stratify thermocoagulation and is nonprofessional. sent14: the calumet does stratify calumet and it does resound off-licence. sent15: the machilid is nonprofessional. sent16: the calumet is disintegrative and nonprofessional.
|
sent1: {A}{ch} sent2: {FA}{a} -> {BA}{a} sent3: {FT}{a} sent4: {B}{cq} sent5: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{E}x sent6: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) sent7: {CR}{ca} -> {EC}{ca} sent8: {A}{gp} sent9: {B}{a} sent10: ({GC}{a} & {HR}{a}) sent11: ({HH}{fe} & {C}{fe}) sent12: {IC}{a} -> {C}{a} sent13: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent14: ({IO}{a} & {BQ}{a}) sent15: {B}{hp} sent16: ({GH}{a} & {B}{a})
|
[
"sent13 -> int1: the calumet does stratify thermocoagulation.;"
] |
[
"sent13 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] |
the raffia is nonprofessional.
|
{B}{ja}
|
[
"sent6 -> int2: if the calumet is not a promenade then it is organismal and it is bicapsular.; sent5 -> int3: the calumet is not a promenade if it is not implicational.;"
] | 8 | 2 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the calumet is organismal. ; $context$ = sent1: the timolol stratifies thermocoagulation. sent2: if the calumet is a lindy then it is radiographic. sent3: the calumet is a boffin. sent4: the fact that the avower is not professional is true. sent5: if something is not implicational then it does not promenade. sent6: if something is not a kind of a promenade it is organismal thing that is bicapsular. sent7: that the span is leafy hold if it is a pointillism. sent8: the jalousie stratifies thermocoagulation. sent9: the calumet is nonprofessional. sent10: the calumet is not non-weatherly and is academic. sent11: the parakeet is a render and it is organismal. sent12: the calumet is organismal if it is a headstream. sent13: the calumet does stratify thermocoagulation and is nonprofessional. sent14: the calumet does stratify calumet and it does resound off-licence. sent15: the machilid is nonprofessional. sent16: the calumet is disintegrative and nonprofessional. ; $proof$ =
|
sent13 -> int1: the calumet does stratify thermocoagulation.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the mirid is not a defect but a hyperlink does not hold.
|
¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b})
|
sent1: the arrow is a hyperlink. sent2: the arrow is insectan. sent3: if the arrow is not an etiology then it is not amniotic and it is a sunburn. sent4: the mirid is psychogenetic and is precise if that the arrow is not capitalistic hold. sent5: something is not a defect and is a hyperlink if it is non-psychogenetic. sent6: the mirid is not unrepeatable if the arrow is a defect and it is psychogenetic. sent7: if the fact that the mirid is not a rathskeller is not incorrect it does defect. sent8: the arrow is not a defect if the mirid is a kind of a rathskeller that is unrepeatable. sent9: the rudiment is psychogenetic and it is a SACLANT. sent10: the mirid is not a Surrey. sent11: something is a hyperlink if it is not a rathskeller. sent12: the arrow is a rathskeller and is unrepeatable. sent13: the arrow is not a rathskeller and is unrepeatable if it is not a kind of a hyperlink. sent14: that the arrow is a rathskeller is not wrong. sent15: the Dubliner is bony and ontogenetic if it is not a brodiaea. sent16: the mirid is not psychogenetic if the arrow is a rathskeller and it is unrepeatable. sent17: if the arrow is not psychogenetic then it is not a rathskeller and it does defect. sent18: the arrow is not capitalistic if the Dubliner is a rain but it is not a kind of a lavishness. sent19: something is a rain but not a lavishness if it is bony. sent20: if the mirid is not psychogenetic then it is unrepeatable. sent21: the mirid is not a kind of a Angolan but it stratifies seriocomedy. sent22: the fact that something is a reimbursement hold if it is not a swathe. sent23: the arrow is psychogenetic.
|
sent1: {C}{a} sent2: {FU}{a} sent3: ¬{HE}{a} -> (¬{DK}{a} & {BT}{a}) sent4: ¬{E}{a} -> ({B}{b} & {D}{b}) sent5: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{A}x & {C}x) sent6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent7: ¬{AA}{b} -> {A}{b} sent8: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent9: ({B}{ie} & {CG}{ie}) sent10: ¬{L}{b} sent11: (x): ¬{AA}x -> {C}x sent12: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent13: ¬{C}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent14: {AA}{a} sent15: ¬{J}{c} -> ({H}{c} & {I}{c}) sent16: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent17: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {A}{a}) sent18: ({G}{c} & ¬{F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent19: (x): {H}x -> ({G}x & ¬{F}x) sent20: ¬{B}{b} -> {AB}{b} sent21: (¬{CC}{b} & {AO}{b}) sent22: (x): ¬{DA}x -> {AP}x sent23: {B}{a}
|
[
"sent16 & sent12 -> int1: the mirid is not psychogenetic.; sent5 -> int2: if the fact that the mirid is not psychogenetic is not wrong then it is both not a defect and a hyperlink.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 & sent12 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent5 -> int2: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the mirid does not defect but it is a hyperlink is not true.
|
¬(¬{A}{b} & {C}{b})
|
[
"sent19 -> int3: the Dubliner is a rain that is not a lavishness if it is bony.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the mirid is not a defect but a hyperlink does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the arrow is a hyperlink. sent2: the arrow is insectan. sent3: if the arrow is not an etiology then it is not amniotic and it is a sunburn. sent4: the mirid is psychogenetic and is precise if that the arrow is not capitalistic hold. sent5: something is not a defect and is a hyperlink if it is non-psychogenetic. sent6: the mirid is not unrepeatable if the arrow is a defect and it is psychogenetic. sent7: if the fact that the mirid is not a rathskeller is not incorrect it does defect. sent8: the arrow is not a defect if the mirid is a kind of a rathskeller that is unrepeatable. sent9: the rudiment is psychogenetic and it is a SACLANT. sent10: the mirid is not a Surrey. sent11: something is a hyperlink if it is not a rathskeller. sent12: the arrow is a rathskeller and is unrepeatable. sent13: the arrow is not a rathskeller and is unrepeatable if it is not a kind of a hyperlink. sent14: that the arrow is a rathskeller is not wrong. sent15: the Dubliner is bony and ontogenetic if it is not a brodiaea. sent16: the mirid is not psychogenetic if the arrow is a rathskeller and it is unrepeatable. sent17: if the arrow is not psychogenetic then it is not a rathskeller and it does defect. sent18: the arrow is not capitalistic if the Dubliner is a rain but it is not a kind of a lavishness. sent19: something is a rain but not a lavishness if it is bony. sent20: if the mirid is not psychogenetic then it is unrepeatable. sent21: the mirid is not a kind of a Angolan but it stratifies seriocomedy. sent22: the fact that something is a reimbursement hold if it is not a swathe. sent23: the arrow is psychogenetic. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 & sent12 -> int1: the mirid is not psychogenetic.; sent5 -> int2: if the fact that the mirid is not psychogenetic is not wrong then it is both not a defect and a hyperlink.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the daystar is both not a Wyler and Numidian.
|
(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b})
|
sent1: something is not a Wyler if it is not nonlinguistic. sent2: if there exists something such that it does not filiate cellblock the daystar is a Wyler. sent3: the counterspy does filiate cellblock if there exists something such that the fact that it does stratify helpdesk and it is necessary does not hold. sent4: the counterspy does not filiate cellblock and is a Numidian if it is not nonlinguistic. sent5: the daystar is not a Wyler if the fact that it is not nonlinguistic hold. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it does stratify helpdesk and is necessary does not hold. sent7: if the counterspy does filiate cellblock then the daystar is not nonlinguistic. sent8: if there is something such that it is not necessary then the counterspy filiates cellblock. sent9: something does not excise Zabrze but it is a SoHo if it is not a metatarsal. sent10: something is not a kind of a Wyler but it is a Numidian if it is not nonlinguistic. sent11: there is something such that it is a kind of a Heaven that is a chanfron.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{D}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> {D}{b} sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: ¬{B}{a} -> (¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) sent5: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{D}{b} sent6: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent7: {A}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{HT}x -> (¬{E}x & {CP}x) sent10: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{D}x & {C}x) sent11: (Ex): ({JF}x & {DG}x)
|
[
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: the counterspy does filiate cellblock.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the daystar is not nonlinguistic.; sent10 -> int3: if the daystar is linguistic then it is not a kind of a Wyler and is Numidian.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 & sent7 -> int2: ¬{B}{b}; sent10 -> int3: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}); int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the daystar is both not a Wyler and Numidian. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a Wyler if it is not nonlinguistic. sent2: if there exists something such that it does not filiate cellblock the daystar is a Wyler. sent3: the counterspy does filiate cellblock if there exists something such that the fact that it does stratify helpdesk and it is necessary does not hold. sent4: the counterspy does not filiate cellblock and is a Numidian if it is not nonlinguistic. sent5: the daystar is not a Wyler if the fact that it is not nonlinguistic hold. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it does stratify helpdesk and is necessary does not hold. sent7: if the counterspy does filiate cellblock then the daystar is not nonlinguistic. sent8: if there is something such that it is not necessary then the counterspy filiates cellblock. sent9: something does not excise Zabrze but it is a SoHo if it is not a metatarsal. sent10: something is not a kind of a Wyler but it is a Numidian if it is not nonlinguistic. sent11: there is something such that it is a kind of a Heaven that is a chanfron. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent3 -> int1: the counterspy does filiate cellblock.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the daystar is not nonlinguistic.; sent10 -> int3: if the daystar is linguistic then it is not a kind of a Wyler and is Numidian.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the recitation happens.
|
{C}
|
sent1: if the stratifying puffball does not occur then the fact that not the idiomaticness but the excising count occurs is not correct. sent2: if the liquidity or the gladness or both occurs then the re-formation does not occur. sent3: the fact that the stratifying puffball and the excising count occurs is not correct if the idiomaticness does not occur. sent4: that the nonsignificantness does not occur and the excising neurology occurs yields that the variance does not occur. sent5: the re-formation does not occur. sent6: that the articulation occurs hold. sent7: the excising unacceptability or the enrichment or both occurs. sent8: if the fact that the idiomaticness happens and the filiating keratinization occurs is wrong then the idiomaticness does not occur. sent9: if the place happens the recitation does not occur. sent10: the fact that the trivalentness does not occur is right. sent11: the fumigation does not occur. sent12: the excising count does not occur if the fact that the stratifying puffball happens and the excising count occurs does not hold. sent13: if the variance does not occur then the fact that both the idiomaticness and the filiating keratinization happens is incorrect. sent14: if the socialness does not occur then the personal happens or the recitation does not occur or both. sent15: if the refusal occurs then the impersonalness and/or the non-socialness happens. sent16: if the excising count does not occur the fact that the fact that the refusal happens and/or the curtailment does not occur does not hold is right. sent17: that the repechage does not occur is brought about by the sweeping and/or the attritionalness. sent18: that the articulation happens or the placing or both leads to that the recitation does not occur. sent19: if the inefficaciousness happens and/or the impairment happens then that the conditionalness does not occur is not wrong. sent20: the socialness does not occur if the fact that the refusal occurs and/or the curtailment does not occur is not true. sent21: the husk and/or the stratifying puffball occurs. sent22: if the excising count does not occur then both the refusal and the curtailment happens.
|
sent1: ¬{J} -> ¬(¬{I} & {H}) sent2: ({AB} v {GO}) -> ¬{CG} sent3: ¬{I} -> ¬({J} & {H}) sent4: (¬{M} & {N}) -> ¬{L} sent5: ¬{CG} sent6: {A} sent7: ({HG} v {HN}) sent8: ¬({I} & {K}) -> ¬{I} sent9: {B} -> ¬{C} sent10: ¬{EB} sent11: ¬{AK} sent12: ¬({J} & {H}) -> ¬{H} sent13: ¬{L} -> ¬({I} & {K}) sent14: ¬{E} -> ({D} v ¬{C}) sent15: {F} -> (¬{D} v ¬{E}) sent16: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} v ¬{G}) sent17: ({HE} v {FE}) -> ¬{BI} sent18: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent19: ({EA} v {HB}) -> ¬{U} sent20: ¬({F} v ¬{G}) -> ¬{E} sent21: ({HL} v {J}) sent22: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G})
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the articulation or the place or both occurs.; sent18 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent6 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); sent18 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the nonsignificantness occurs.
|
{M}
|
[] | 9 | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the recitation happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the stratifying puffball does not occur then the fact that not the idiomaticness but the excising count occurs is not correct. sent2: if the liquidity or the gladness or both occurs then the re-formation does not occur. sent3: the fact that the stratifying puffball and the excising count occurs is not correct if the idiomaticness does not occur. sent4: that the nonsignificantness does not occur and the excising neurology occurs yields that the variance does not occur. sent5: the re-formation does not occur. sent6: that the articulation occurs hold. sent7: the excising unacceptability or the enrichment or both occurs. sent8: if the fact that the idiomaticness happens and the filiating keratinization occurs is wrong then the idiomaticness does not occur. sent9: if the place happens the recitation does not occur. sent10: the fact that the trivalentness does not occur is right. sent11: the fumigation does not occur. sent12: the excising count does not occur if the fact that the stratifying puffball happens and the excising count occurs does not hold. sent13: if the variance does not occur then the fact that both the idiomaticness and the filiating keratinization happens is incorrect. sent14: if the socialness does not occur then the personal happens or the recitation does not occur or both. sent15: if the refusal occurs then the impersonalness and/or the non-socialness happens. sent16: if the excising count does not occur the fact that the fact that the refusal happens and/or the curtailment does not occur does not hold is right. sent17: that the repechage does not occur is brought about by the sweeping and/or the attritionalness. sent18: that the articulation happens or the placing or both leads to that the recitation does not occur. sent19: if the inefficaciousness happens and/or the impairment happens then that the conditionalness does not occur is not wrong. sent20: the socialness does not occur if the fact that the refusal occurs and/or the curtailment does not occur is not true. sent21: the husk and/or the stratifying puffball occurs. sent22: if the excising count does not occur then both the refusal and the curtailment happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 -> int1: the articulation or the place or both occurs.; sent18 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is both a cowpie and not a Wiccan is not incorrect does not hold does not hold.
|
¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: the commissure does not stratify devilfish. sent2: there is something such that it is a cowpie and it is not a Wiccan. sent3: if the fact that the perspiration does sublime is correct then the commissure is a kind of a imagism. sent4: if something does not fluctuate then it does stratify squawk or it is not a kind of a Goth or both. sent5: if the perspiration does stratify devilfish then the commissure stratify devilfish. sent6: if something stratifies devilfish the fact that it is a rhyme and is not a kind of a cowpie does not hold. sent7: there is something such that that it is a cowpie and it is not non-Wiccan does not hold. sent8: the ricin does not stratify devilfish. sent9: something is a Goth that does stratify devilfish if it does not stratify squawk. sent10: the fact that the assimilation does not fluctuate is correct if the commissure is a Zoroastrian and it is a imagism. sent11: the perspiration does irrigate and/or it does sublime. sent12: that the commissure is a cowpie and it is a Wiccan is not correct if it does not stratify devilfish. sent13: if that the perspiration is not a imagism but it fluctuates is not right then it does not stratify squawk. sent14: the fact that the commissure is a cowpie and it is a Wiccan is wrong. sent15: The devilfish does not stratify commissure. sent16: if the commissure does not stratify devilfish then that it is both a cowpie and not a Wiccan is not right. sent17: the commissure is a imagism if the perspiration irrigates. sent18: if something is not a igniter then it is a kind of a Zoroastrian and it is high-interest.
|
sent1: ¬{A}{a} sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: {H}{b} -> {E}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({C}x v ¬{B}x) sent5: {A}{b} -> {A}{a} sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AC}x & ¬{AA}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: ¬{A}{dj} sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent10: ({F}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{D}{go} sent11: ({I}{b} v {H}{b}) sent12: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent13: ¬(¬{E}{b} & {D}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent14: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent15: ¬{AD}{aa} sent16: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent17: {I}{b} -> {E}{a} sent18: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({F}x & {G}x)
|
[
"sent16 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that the commissure is a cowpie but it is not a Wiccan is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent16 & sent1 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the commissure is a rhyme but it is not a cowpie is not correct.
|
¬({AC}{a} & ¬{AA}{a})
|
[
"sent6 -> int2: that the fact that the commissure does rhyme but it is not a cowpie is not incorrect does not hold if it does stratify devilfish.; sent9 -> int3: if that the perspiration does not stratify squawk is not incorrect then it is a Goth and it does stratify devilfish.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is both a cowpie and not a Wiccan is not incorrect does not hold does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the commissure does not stratify devilfish. sent2: there is something such that it is a cowpie and it is not a Wiccan. sent3: if the fact that the perspiration does sublime is correct then the commissure is a kind of a imagism. sent4: if something does not fluctuate then it does stratify squawk or it is not a kind of a Goth or both. sent5: if the perspiration does stratify devilfish then the commissure stratify devilfish. sent6: if something stratifies devilfish the fact that it is a rhyme and is not a kind of a cowpie does not hold. sent7: there is something such that that it is a cowpie and it is not non-Wiccan does not hold. sent8: the ricin does not stratify devilfish. sent9: something is a Goth that does stratify devilfish if it does not stratify squawk. sent10: the fact that the assimilation does not fluctuate is correct if the commissure is a Zoroastrian and it is a imagism. sent11: the perspiration does irrigate and/or it does sublime. sent12: that the commissure is a cowpie and it is a Wiccan is not correct if it does not stratify devilfish. sent13: if that the perspiration is not a imagism but it fluctuates is not right then it does not stratify squawk. sent14: the fact that the commissure is a cowpie and it is a Wiccan is wrong. sent15: The devilfish does not stratify commissure. sent16: if the commissure does not stratify devilfish then that it is both a cowpie and not a Wiccan is not right. sent17: the commissure is a imagism if the perspiration irrigates. sent18: if something is not a igniter then it is a kind of a Zoroastrian and it is high-interest. ; $proof$ =
|
sent16 & sent1 -> int1: the fact that the commissure is a cowpie but it is not a Wiccan is incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the flatwork is a kind of a cyme then the timolol does not subside and is a melena.
|
{A}{a} -> (¬{D}{c} & {C}{c})
|
sent1: the timolol does not subside and is a melena if the feather does stratify Flemish.
|
sent1: {B}{b} -> (¬{D}{c} & {C}{c})
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = if the flatwork is a kind of a cyme then the timolol does not subside and is a melena. ; $context$ = sent1: the timolol does not subside and is a melena if the feather does stratify Flemish. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the catchment is not a pipistrelle and not a whirl is false.
|
¬(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})
|
sent1: that the catchment is a pipistrelle but it does not whirl is wrong. sent2: the Tarheel weeds. sent3: if the lodestar is a conceptualization then it is not a buffalofish and is a kind of a Polypedatidae. sent4: that the Luxemburger is not a Nitrobacter and it is not isometrics is not right if the trave is not a kind of an instability. sent5: the fact that that something is not a kind of a pipistrelle but it whirls is right is not right if it is a kind of a Nitrobacter. sent6: if the lodestar does stratify Kekule then it is a kind of a conceptualization. sent7: if the Tarheel is a weeds the catchment is a Nitrobacter. sent8: the lodestar stratifies Kekule. sent9: that something does weed but it is not a pipistrelle is not right if it is a Nitrobacter. sent10: the fact that the catchment is not a pipistrelle but it does whirl is incorrect.
|
sent1: ¬({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: {I}{e} -> (¬{H}{e} & {G}{e}) sent4: ¬{F}{d} -> ¬(¬{B}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) sent5: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) sent6: {J}{e} -> {I}{e} sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent8: {J}{e} sent9: (x): {B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{D}x) sent10: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b})
|
[
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: the catchment is a Nitrobacter.;"
] |
[
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] |
the catchment is not a pipistrelle and it is not a whirl.
|
(¬{D}{b} & ¬{C}{b})
|
[
"sent6 & sent8 -> int2: the lodestar is a conceptualization.; sent3 & int2 -> int3: the lodestar is not a buffalofish and is a Polypedatidae.; int3 -> int4: something is not a buffalofish and is a Polypedatidae.;"
] | 9 | 2 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the catchment is not a pipistrelle and not a whirl is false. ; $context$ = sent1: that the catchment is a pipistrelle but it does not whirl is wrong. sent2: the Tarheel weeds. sent3: if the lodestar is a conceptualization then it is not a buffalofish and is a kind of a Polypedatidae. sent4: that the Luxemburger is not a Nitrobacter and it is not isometrics is not right if the trave is not a kind of an instability. sent5: the fact that that something is not a kind of a pipistrelle but it whirls is right is not right if it is a kind of a Nitrobacter. sent6: if the lodestar does stratify Kekule then it is a kind of a conceptualization. sent7: if the Tarheel is a weeds the catchment is a Nitrobacter. sent8: the lodestar stratifies Kekule. sent9: that something does weed but it is not a pipistrelle is not right if it is a Nitrobacter. sent10: the fact that the catchment is not a pipistrelle but it does whirl is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 & sent2 -> int1: the catchment is a Nitrobacter.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the chute-the-chute is not a kind of an avocation and is not stormy.
|
(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b})
|
sent1: the chute-the-chute is not a Corinth. sent2: the chute-the-chute is not stormy if something is both not an avocation and galactic. sent3: the fact that the buckleya is not a kind of a trader hold if that the Rastafarian is not a protist but it is a kind of a rat does not hold. sent4: the submariner is not galactic but it is a Corinth. sent5: there exists something such that it is not a Corinth and it is a kind of an avocation. sent6: the lauhala is a kind of non-galactic thing that does not magnetize. sent7: the chute-the-chute is not a dealer. sent8: if something that is apogean stratifies buckleya it is not middling. sent9: the fact that that the perspiration is a kind of a uncommunicativeness but it is not uninfluential does not hold is true. sent10: something is a kind of non-stormy an avocation. sent11: that the approver is apogean is not wrong. sent12: that the chute-the-chute is not an avocation and it is not stormy is not true if the buckleya is not a trader. sent13: if the chute-the-chute is not stormy the buckleya is not an avocation and not stormy. sent14: if the fact that the perspiration is a uncommunicativeness but it is not uninfluential is wrong it is not a buteonine. sent15: the buckleya is non-stormy if something that is not galactic is a kind of a Corinth.
|
sent1: ¬{AB}{b} sent2: (x): (¬{C}x & {AA}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent3: ¬(¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): (¬{AB}x & {C}x) sent6: (¬{AA}{cm} & ¬{HQ}{cm}) sent7: ¬{EL}{b} sent8: (x): ({G}x & {H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent9: ¬({L}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) sent10: (Ex): (¬{A}x & {C}x) sent11: {G}{d} sent12: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent13: ¬{A}{b} -> (¬{C}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent14: ¬({L}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) -> ¬{J}{e} sent15: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent4 -> int1: something is not galactic but it is a Corinth.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the buckleya is not stormy.;"
] |
[
"sent4 -> int1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x); int1 & sent15 -> int2: ¬{A}{a};"
] |
that the chute-the-chute is not an avocation and is not stormy is not correct.
|
¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b})
|
[
"sent8 -> int3: the approver is not a kind of a middling if it is apogean and it stratifies buckleya.; sent14 & sent9 -> int4: the perspiration is non-buteonine.; int4 -> int5: there are non-buteonine things.;"
] | 10 | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the chute-the-chute is not a kind of an avocation and is not stormy. ; $context$ = sent1: the chute-the-chute is not a Corinth. sent2: the chute-the-chute is not stormy if something is both not an avocation and galactic. sent3: the fact that the buckleya is not a kind of a trader hold if that the Rastafarian is not a protist but it is a kind of a rat does not hold. sent4: the submariner is not galactic but it is a Corinth. sent5: there exists something such that it is not a Corinth and it is a kind of an avocation. sent6: the lauhala is a kind of non-galactic thing that does not magnetize. sent7: the chute-the-chute is not a dealer. sent8: if something that is apogean stratifies buckleya it is not middling. sent9: the fact that that the perspiration is a kind of a uncommunicativeness but it is not uninfluential does not hold is true. sent10: something is a kind of non-stormy an avocation. sent11: that the approver is apogean is not wrong. sent12: that the chute-the-chute is not an avocation and it is not stormy is not true if the buckleya is not a trader. sent13: if the chute-the-chute is not stormy the buckleya is not an avocation and not stormy. sent14: if the fact that the perspiration is a uncommunicativeness but it is not uninfluential is wrong it is not a buteonine. sent15: the buckleya is non-stormy if something that is not galactic is a kind of a Corinth. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 -> int1: something is not galactic but it is a Corinth.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the buckleya is not stormy.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the lector excises gust.
|
{C}{b}
|
sent1: the packthread is not photographic but a polynomial. sent2: the lector does not excise gust and is a polynomial if the fact that the packthread is a polynomial hold.
|
sent1: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: {B}{a} -> (¬{C}{b} & {B}{b})
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: the packthread is polynomial.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the lector does not excise gust but it is a kind of a polynomial.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent2 & int1 -> int2: (¬{C}{b} & {B}{b}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the lector excises gust. ; $context$ = sent1: the packthread is not photographic but a polynomial. sent2: the lector does not excise gust and is a polynomial if the fact that the packthread is a polynomial hold. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: the packthread is polynomial.; sent2 & int1 -> int2: the lector does not excise gust but it is a kind of a polynomial.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
something is not a Olympian.
|
(Ex): ¬{AB}x
|
sent1: if the fact that something is inorganic thing that does resound ethology is not right then it does not resound ethology. sent2: if the fact that something is an outskirt is right then it does stratify Philemon. sent3: if that the fact that something is normative and it resounds Vulcan is not incorrect does not hold then it does not resounds Vulcan. sent4: the motoneuron is a kind of an iron. sent5: the redcap is not a kind of an iron if the hydrate is an iron. sent6: the bloodwort is not a gigolo if the ricegrass does stratify Philemon. sent7: the hydrate is an iron if the motoneuron is a kind of an iron. sent8: the ricegrass is an outskirt and is a Hyla if it does not resound ethology. sent9: the fact that the ricegrass is inorganic and does resound ethology does not hold if the redcap does not iron. sent10: if the bloodwort is not a gigolo that the charterhouse is normative and does resound Vulcan does not hold. sent11: if there is something such that that it does not stratify bloodwort and is not photochemical is not right the elevation does not resound motoneuron. sent12: if something does not resound Vulcan that it does not stratify bloodwort and is not photochemical is not true.
|
sent1: (x): ¬({K}x & {J}x) -> ¬{J}x sent2: (x): {H}x -> {G}x sent3: (x): ¬({F}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent4: {L}{f} sent5: {L}{e} -> ¬{L}{d} sent6: {G}{c} -> ¬{E}{b} sent7: {L}{f} -> {L}{e} sent8: ¬{J}{c} -> ({H}{c} & {I}{c}) sent9: ¬{L}{d} -> ¬({K}{c} & {J}{c}) sent10: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬({F}{a} & {C}{a}) sent11: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{D}{hj} sent12: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x)
|
[] |
[] |
the elevation does not resound motoneuron.
|
¬{D}{hj}
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: if the charterhouse does not resound Vulcan the fact that it does not stratify bloodwort and is not photochemical does not hold.; sent3 -> int2: the charterhouse does not resound Vulcan if the fact that it is normative and it does resound Vulcan does not hold.; sent2 -> int3: if the ricegrass is an outskirt it stratifies Philemon.; sent1 -> int4: if the fact that the ricegrass is inorganic and it resounds ethology is false it does not resounds ethology.; sent7 & sent4 -> int5: the hydrate irons.; sent5 & int5 -> int6: the redcap does not iron.; sent9 & int6 -> int7: that the ricegrass is a kind of inorganic thing that does resound ethology does not hold.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the ricegrass does not resound ethology.; sent8 & int8 -> int9: the ricegrass is an outskirt and it is a Hyla.; int9 -> int10: the fact that the ricegrass is an outskirt is not wrong.; int3 & int10 -> int11: the ricegrass stratifies Philemon.; sent6 & int11 -> int12: the bloodwort is not a gigolo.; sent10 & int12 -> int13: that the fact that the charterhouse is normative and resounds Vulcan is not wrong is not correct.; int2 & int13 -> int14: the charterhouse does not resound Vulcan.; int1 & int14 -> int15: that that the charterhouse does not stratify bloodwort and is non-photochemical is correct is not correct.; int15 -> int16: there exists something such that that it does not stratify bloodwort and is not photochemical is not right.; int16 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | 13 | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = something is not a Olympian. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something is inorganic thing that does resound ethology is not right then it does not resound ethology. sent2: if the fact that something is an outskirt is right then it does stratify Philemon. sent3: if that the fact that something is normative and it resounds Vulcan is not incorrect does not hold then it does not resounds Vulcan. sent4: the motoneuron is a kind of an iron. sent5: the redcap is not a kind of an iron if the hydrate is an iron. sent6: the bloodwort is not a gigolo if the ricegrass does stratify Philemon. sent7: the hydrate is an iron if the motoneuron is a kind of an iron. sent8: the ricegrass is an outskirt and is a Hyla if it does not resound ethology. sent9: the fact that the ricegrass is inorganic and does resound ethology does not hold if the redcap does not iron. sent10: if the bloodwort is not a gigolo that the charterhouse is normative and does resound Vulcan does not hold. sent11: if there is something such that that it does not stratify bloodwort and is not photochemical is not right the elevation does not resound motoneuron. sent12: if something does not resound Vulcan that it does not stratify bloodwort and is not photochemical is not true. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the tearaway is a penetrator.
|
{D}{a}
|
sent1: if either the tearaway is a kind of a Babylonian or it does grouse or both it does not stratify Tragelaphus. sent2: the tearaway is a kind of a Babylonian. sent3: if the avower is either intercostal or Arthurian or both it is not a Babylonian. sent4: there exists something such that that it is a altocumulus and it is not a rabbinate does not hold. sent5: the tearaway is not a penetrator if the salmonberry is not a kind of a Babylonian and it is not a kind of a penetrator. sent6: a nondisposable thing is a connectivity. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it is not auroral and it is exculpatory is incorrect then the tidewater is not exculpatory. sent8: the salmonberry is nondisposable if an auroral thing is not exculpatory. sent9: the switcher is a penetrator if that the tearaway does not grouse but it is a Babylonian does not hold. sent10: the trou-de-loup is a infix if there is something such that that it is nondisposable and it is not a kind of a connectivity is not true. sent11: if the salmonberry does not stratify Tragelaphus then that the tearaway is not a grouse but it is a Babylonian is incorrect. sent12: the tearaway is a kind of a penetrator if it does not stratify Tragelaphus. sent13: if the trou-de-loup is a kind of a Eritrean then it is not powerless. sent14: that the tidewater is nondisposable but it is not a connectivity is not right if it is not exculpatory. sent15: that a non-powerless thing is a kind of auroral thing that is not exculpatory hold. sent16: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a altocumulus and it is not a rabbinate does not hold the tidewater is a rabbinate. sent17: there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-auroral thing that is exculpatory is incorrect. sent18: if something is a rabbinate then the trou-de-loup is a Eritrean and is a template. sent19: something that is a connectivity does not stratify Tragelaphus and is a infix.
|
sent1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: {A}{a} sent3: ({EI}{am} v {AM}{am}) -> ¬{A}{am} sent4: (Ex): ¬({N}x & ¬{M}x) sent5: (¬{A}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent6: (x): {G}x -> {F}x sent7: (x): ¬(¬{I}x & {H}x) -> ¬{H}{d} sent8: (x): ({I}x & ¬{H}x) -> {G}{b} sent9: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) -> {D}{fj} sent10: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{F}x) -> {E}{c} sent11: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent12: ¬{C}{a} -> {D}{a} sent13: {K}{c} -> ¬{J}{c} sent14: ¬{H}{d} -> ¬({G}{d} & ¬{F}{d}) sent15: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({I}x & ¬{H}x) sent16: (x): ¬({N}x & ¬{M}x) -> {M}{d} sent17: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & {H}x) sent18: (x): {M}x -> ({K}{c} & {L}{c}) sent19: (x): {F}x -> (¬{C}x & {E}x)
|
[
"sent2 -> int1: the tearaway is Babylonian and/or it does grouse.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the tearaway does not stratify Tragelaphus.; int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent2 -> int1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}); int1 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{C}{a}; int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the switcher is a penetrator.
|
{D}{fj}
|
[
"sent19 -> int3: the salmonberry does not stratify Tragelaphus but it does infix if it is a kind of a connectivity.; sent6 -> int4: if the salmonberry is nondisposable it is a connectivity.; sent15 -> int5: the trou-de-loup is both not non-auroral and non-exculpatory if it is not powerless.; sent4 & sent16 -> int6: the tidewater is a rabbinate.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it is a rabbinate.; int7 & sent18 -> int8: the trou-de-loup is a kind of Eritrean a template.; int8 -> int9: the trou-de-loup is Eritrean.; sent13 & int9 -> int10: the trou-de-loup is not powerless.; int5 & int10 -> int11: the trou-de-loup is auroral but it is not exculpatory.; int11 -> int12: something is auroral and is not exculpatory.; int12 & sent8 -> int13: the salmonberry is nondisposable.; int4 & int13 -> int14: the salmonberry is a connectivity.; int3 & int14 -> int15: the salmonberry does not stratify Tragelaphus and infixes.; int15 -> int16: the salmonberry does not stratify Tragelaphus.; sent11 & int16 -> int17: the fact that the tearaway is both not a grouse and Babylonian is incorrect.; sent9 & int17 -> hypothesis;"
] | 13 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = the tearaway is a penetrator. ; $context$ = sent1: if either the tearaway is a kind of a Babylonian or it does grouse or both it does not stratify Tragelaphus. sent2: the tearaway is a kind of a Babylonian. sent3: if the avower is either intercostal or Arthurian or both it is not a Babylonian. sent4: there exists something such that that it is a altocumulus and it is not a rabbinate does not hold. sent5: the tearaway is not a penetrator if the salmonberry is not a kind of a Babylonian and it is not a kind of a penetrator. sent6: a nondisposable thing is a connectivity. sent7: if there is something such that the fact that it is not auroral and it is exculpatory is incorrect then the tidewater is not exculpatory. sent8: the salmonberry is nondisposable if an auroral thing is not exculpatory. sent9: the switcher is a penetrator if that the tearaway does not grouse but it is a Babylonian does not hold. sent10: the trou-de-loup is a infix if there is something such that that it is nondisposable and it is not a kind of a connectivity is not true. sent11: if the salmonberry does not stratify Tragelaphus then that the tearaway is not a grouse but it is a Babylonian is incorrect. sent12: the tearaway is a kind of a penetrator if it does not stratify Tragelaphus. sent13: if the trou-de-loup is a kind of a Eritrean then it is not powerless. sent14: that the tidewater is nondisposable but it is not a connectivity is not right if it is not exculpatory. sent15: that a non-powerless thing is a kind of auroral thing that is not exculpatory hold. sent16: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a altocumulus and it is not a rabbinate does not hold the tidewater is a rabbinate. sent17: there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-auroral thing that is exculpatory is incorrect. sent18: if something is a rabbinate then the trou-de-loup is a Eritrean and is a template. sent19: something that is a connectivity does not stratify Tragelaphus and is a infix. ; $proof$ =
|
sent2 -> int1: the tearaway is Babylonian and/or it does grouse.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the tearaway does not stratify Tragelaphus.; int2 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if it does not resound sidestroke it does resound removed and resounds Surrey.
|
(Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x)
|
sent1: if the Teller does resound sidestroke it is minty and is a steeper. sent2: if the Teller is tuberculate then it is a Anne and it is barytic. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a Achoerodus then it does resound thylacine and it does actualize. sent4: there is something such that if it does not excise Teller it is both a Flemish and spousal. sent5: if something does not resound sidestroke then it resounds removed and does resound Surrey. sent6: there is something such that if it does not resound sidestroke it resounds removed. sent7: if the Teller does resound sidestroke then it does resound removed and resounds Surrey.
|
sent1: {A}{aa} -> ({EH}{aa} & {AL}{aa}) sent2: {HD}{aa} -> ({BI}{aa} & {N}{aa}) sent3: (Ex): ¬{FD}x -> ({DU}x & {FG}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{M}x -> ({JA}x & {DG}x) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x sent7: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: that if the Teller does not resound sidestroke then the Teller resounds removed and does resound Surrey is not incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it does not resound sidestroke it does resound removed and resounds Surrey. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Teller does resound sidestroke it is minty and is a steeper. sent2: if the Teller is tuberculate then it is a Anne and it is barytic. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a Achoerodus then it does resound thylacine and it does actualize. sent4: there is something such that if it does not excise Teller it is both a Flemish and spousal. sent5: if something does not resound sidestroke then it resounds removed and does resound Surrey. sent6: there is something such that if it does not resound sidestroke it resounds removed. sent7: if the Teller does resound sidestroke then it does resound removed and resounds Surrey. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: that if the Teller does not resound sidestroke then the Teller resounds removed and does resound Surrey is not incorrect.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the tapping occurs.
|
{D}
|
sent1: if that the gliding does not occur hold the tapping does not occur. sent2: the rugby does not occur if both the stratifying intemperance and the distrustfulness happens. sent3: the agroundness happens. sent4: the resounding ineffectiveness occurs. sent5: the reverence does not occur if the serendipity does not occur. sent6: if the stratifying nymph and the drumming occurs the admission does not occur. sent7: the gliding does not occur if the resounding ineffectiveness and the agroundness happens.
|
sent1: ¬{C} -> ¬{D} sent2: ({IE} & {HT}) -> ¬{GD} sent3: {B} sent4: {A} sent5: ¬{GP} -> ¬{BF} sent6: ({N} & {IT}) -> ¬{EE} sent7: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C}
|
[
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the resounding ineffectiveness occurs and the agroundness happens.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the glide does not occur.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); sent7 & int1 -> int2: ¬{C}; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
DISPROVED
| null |
DISPROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the tapping occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the gliding does not occur hold the tapping does not occur. sent2: the rugby does not occur if both the stratifying intemperance and the distrustfulness happens. sent3: the agroundness happens. sent4: the resounding ineffectiveness occurs. sent5: the reverence does not occur if the serendipity does not occur. sent6: if the stratifying nymph and the drumming occurs the admission does not occur. sent7: the gliding does not occur if the resounding ineffectiveness and the agroundness happens. ; $proof$ =
|
sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the resounding ineffectiveness occurs and the agroundness happens.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the glide does not occur.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that the Parliamentarian is a Parisian hold.
|
{A}{a}
|
sent1: the Parliamentarian does submarine. sent2: the splitworm is Parisian. sent3: the fact that the Parliamentarian resounds hygroscope hold. sent4: the chlordiazepoxide is a kind of a Parisian. sent5: the arch is a Parisian. sent6: the Parliamentarian does discourage. sent7: the Depression is a Parisian. sent8: the wrester is a Parisian. sent9: the Parliamentarian is an actuality. sent10: the hygroscope is a Parisian. sent11: that the Parliamentarian does intend is not false. sent12: the Parliamentarian does stratify splitworm. sent13: the Parliamentarian is maritime. sent14: the cholecystokinin is a Parisian. sent15: the elastin is a Parisian. sent16: the Parliamentarian does resound banger. sent17: the Parliamentarian is a Parisian.
|
sent1: {BL}{a} sent2: {A}{fj} sent3: {CH}{a} sent4: {A}{as} sent5: {A}{cs} sent6: {AL}{a} sent7: {A}{db} sent8: {A}{bc} sent9: {L}{a} sent10: {A}{l} sent11: {DJ}{a} sent12: {FE}{a} sent13: {JH}{a} sent14: {A}{cf} sent15: {A}{bj} sent16: {AO}{a} sent17: {A}{a}
|
[
"sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 1 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
| null |
PROVED
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the Parliamentarian is a Parisian hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the Parliamentarian does submarine. sent2: the splitworm is Parisian. sent3: the fact that the Parliamentarian resounds hygroscope hold. sent4: the chlordiazepoxide is a kind of a Parisian. sent5: the arch is a Parisian. sent6: the Parliamentarian does discourage. sent7: the Depression is a Parisian. sent8: the wrester is a Parisian. sent9: the Parliamentarian is an actuality. sent10: the hygroscope is a Parisian. sent11: that the Parliamentarian does intend is not false. sent12: the Parliamentarian does stratify splitworm. sent13: the Parliamentarian is maritime. sent14: the cholecystokinin is a Parisian. sent15: the elastin is a Parisian. sent16: the Parliamentarian does resound banger. sent17: the Parliamentarian is a Parisian. ; $proof$ =
|
sent17 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the filiating Zabrze does not occur.
|
¬{E}
|
sent1: either that the Eddy happens or the non-unscalableness or both is triggered by that the correction does not occur. sent2: if the Eddy happens the ventilating occurs. sent3: if both the pelvimetry and the mugging occurs then the collapsibleness does not occur. sent4: the balsamicness happens. sent5: either that the Eddy occurs or the scalableness or both brings about that the stratifying passive does not occur. sent6: that the excising antifeminist happens is not wrong if the resounding encouragement happens. sent7: that the fracture occurs prevents that the resounding trisomy does not occur. sent8: the unprotectiveness does not occur. sent9: the mortifying occurs. sent10: that the excising antifeminist happens brings about that the malversation occurs. sent11: both the filiating Zabrze and the uncharitableness occurs if the stratifying passive does not occur. sent12: the resounding encouragement occurs.
|
sent1: ¬{J} -> ({H} v ¬{I}) sent2: {H} -> {T} sent3: ({CJ} & {JF}) -> ¬{IB} sent4: {D} sent5: ({H} v ¬{I}) -> ¬{G} sent6: {A} -> {B} sent7: {DM} -> {EN} sent8: ¬{HS} sent9: {BT} sent10: {B} -> {C} sent11: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent12: {A}
|
[
"sent6 & sent12 -> int1: the excising antifeminist occurs.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the malversation occurs.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the balsamicness happens and the malversation happens.;"
] |
[
"sent6 & sent12 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent10 -> int2: {C}; int2 & sent4 -> int3: ({D} & {C});"
] |
that the champerty happens is right.
|
{HP}
|
[] | 8 | 4 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the filiating Zabrze does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: either that the Eddy happens or the non-unscalableness or both is triggered by that the correction does not occur. sent2: if the Eddy happens the ventilating occurs. sent3: if both the pelvimetry and the mugging occurs then the collapsibleness does not occur. sent4: the balsamicness happens. sent5: either that the Eddy occurs or the scalableness or both brings about that the stratifying passive does not occur. sent6: that the excising antifeminist happens is not wrong if the resounding encouragement happens. sent7: that the fracture occurs prevents that the resounding trisomy does not occur. sent8: the unprotectiveness does not occur. sent9: the mortifying occurs. sent10: that the excising antifeminist happens brings about that the malversation occurs. sent11: both the filiating Zabrze and the uncharitableness occurs if the stratifying passive does not occur. sent12: the resounding encouragement occurs. ; $proof$ =
|
sent6 & sent12 -> int1: the excising antifeminist occurs.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the malversation occurs.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the balsamicness happens and the malversation happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the neckband is an ideology that is not a bolster hold.
|
({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
sent1: the neckband is both a Tocqueville and not Praetorian. sent2: the zoophyte is granulocytic. sent3: if the neckband is not an ideology then it does resound ropewalker. sent4: the neckband is granulocytic. sent5: there exists something such that that it is both a bolster and a caitiff is false. sent6: that the neckband is a kind of a caitiff is correct. sent7: the neckband is a caitiff but not a bolster.
|
sent1: ({GC}{a} & ¬{FE}{a}) sent2: {A}{ar} sent3: ¬{B}{a} -> {EP}{a} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: (Ex): ¬({C}x & {D}x) sent6: {D}{a} sent7: ({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a})
|
[
"sent7 -> int1: the neckband is not a bolster.;"
] |
[
"sent7 -> int1: ¬{C}{a};"
] |
the neckband does resound ropewalker and is not a tablefork.
|
({EP}{a} & ¬{BD}{a})
|
[] | 5 | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = that the neckband is an ideology that is not a bolster hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the neckband is both a Tocqueville and not Praetorian. sent2: the zoophyte is granulocytic. sent3: if the neckband is not an ideology then it does resound ropewalker. sent4: the neckband is granulocytic. sent5: there exists something such that that it is both a bolster and a caitiff is false. sent6: that the neckband is a kind of a caitiff is correct. sent7: the neckband is a caitiff but not a bolster. ; $proof$ =
|
sent7 -> int1: the neckband is not a bolster.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the porphyry excises bucktooth.
|
{D}{a}
|
sent1: if the fact that the eparchy does not excise hidden and is not trihydroxy does not hold then the fact that the porphyry is trihydroxy is correct. sent2: something does not excise bucktooth if it excises hidden. sent3: there is something such that it is not trihydroxy. sent4: if something is trihydroxy the fact that it does not excise bucktooth is incorrect. sent5: if there exists something such that it is not trihydroxy then the porphyry is not a kind of a bioremediation and excises hidden.
|
sent1: ¬(¬{C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {A}{a} sent2: (x): {C}x -> ¬{D}x sent3: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent4: (x): {A}x -> {D}x sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a})
|
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the porphyry is not a bioremediation and does excise hidden.; int1 -> int2: the porphyry excises hidden.; sent2 -> int3: the porphyry does not excise bucktooth if it excises hidden.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}); int1 -> int2: {C}{a}; sent2 -> int3: {C}{a} -> ¬{D}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the porphyry excises bucktooth.
|
{D}{a}
|
[
"sent4 -> int4: the porphyry excises bucktooth if it is trihydroxy.;"
] | 6 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the porphyry excises bucktooth. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the eparchy does not excise hidden and is not trihydroxy does not hold then the fact that the porphyry is trihydroxy is correct. sent2: something does not excise bucktooth if it excises hidden. sent3: there is something such that it is not trihydroxy. sent4: if something is trihydroxy the fact that it does not excise bucktooth is incorrect. sent5: if there exists something such that it is not trihydroxy then the porphyry is not a kind of a bioremediation and excises hidden. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the porphyry is not a bioremediation and does excise hidden.; int1 -> int2: the porphyry excises hidden.; sent2 -> int3: the porphyry does not excise bucktooth if it excises hidden.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the hybrid does resound Polish but it is not a goad.
|
({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c})
|
sent1: if the hybrid is not a Megaera but it resounds Polish then the gap is not a kind of a cayuse. sent2: the gap does not resound Polish if the hybrid is not a cayuse and is not a kind of a goad. sent3: the gap does resound wallop if the fact that that the tiger does not resound wallop and it does not excise stomacher is not true is not wrong. sent4: the tiger is not a cayuse. sent5: the gap is not a kind of a Megaera and it is not a cayuse. sent6: if there exists something such that it does not resound wallop the hybrid does resound Polish and is not a kind of a goad. sent7: the hybrid is not a kind of a goad. sent8: the Polish filiates cassette. sent9: something that is non-Lutheran or does excise salutatorian or both is not a kind of a non-Lutheran. sent10: the tiger does not resound wallop if the gap is not a kind of a Megaera and it is not a kind of a cayuse. sent11: if something filiates cassette then the fact that the cassette is not Lutheran and/or does excise salutatorian hold. sent12: there exists something such that it is a Megaera. sent13: the tiger is not a Megaera if the gap does not resound Polish and does resound wallop. sent14: the tiger is both a goad and not a Megaera if there is something such that it does not resound wallop.
|
sent1: (¬{AA}{c} & {A}{c}) -> ¬{AB}{a} sent2: (¬{AB}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: ¬(¬{B}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent4: ¬{AB}{b} sent5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent7: ¬{C}{c} sent8: {F}{e} sent9: (x): (¬{E}x v {G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent10: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent11: (x): {F}x -> (¬{E}{d} v {G}{d}) sent12: (Ex): {AA}x sent13: (¬{A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{b} sent14: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({C}{b} & ¬{AA}{b})
|
[
"sent10 & sent5 -> int1: the tiger does not resound wallop.; int1 -> int2: something does not resound wallop.; int2 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬{B}x; int2 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the fact that the hybrid resounds Polish and is not a kind of a goad does not hold.
|
¬({A}{c} & ¬{C}{c})
|
[
"sent9 -> int3: the cassette is non-Lutheran if it either is not a non-Lutheran or excises salutatorian or both.; sent8 -> int4: there exists something such that it does filiate cassette.; int4 & sent11 -> int5: the cassette is not a Lutheran and/or it does excise salutatorian.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the cassette is not a Lutheran.; int6 -> int7: there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Lutheran.;"
] | 8 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the hybrid does resound Polish but it is not a goad. ; $context$ = sent1: if the hybrid is not a Megaera but it resounds Polish then the gap is not a kind of a cayuse. sent2: the gap does not resound Polish if the hybrid is not a cayuse and is not a kind of a goad. sent3: the gap does resound wallop if the fact that that the tiger does not resound wallop and it does not excise stomacher is not true is not wrong. sent4: the tiger is not a cayuse. sent5: the gap is not a kind of a Megaera and it is not a cayuse. sent6: if there exists something such that it does not resound wallop the hybrid does resound Polish and is not a kind of a goad. sent7: the hybrid is not a kind of a goad. sent8: the Polish filiates cassette. sent9: something that is non-Lutheran or does excise salutatorian or both is not a kind of a non-Lutheran. sent10: the tiger does not resound wallop if the gap is not a kind of a Megaera and it is not a kind of a cayuse. sent11: if something filiates cassette then the fact that the cassette is not Lutheran and/or does excise salutatorian hold. sent12: there exists something such that it is a Megaera. sent13: the tiger is not a Megaera if the gap does not resound Polish and does resound wallop. sent14: the tiger is both a goad and not a Megaera if there is something such that it does not resound wallop. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 & sent5 -> int1: the tiger does not resound wallop.; int1 -> int2: something does not resound wallop.; int2 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the basuco is a kind of a peel.
|
{B}{a}
|
sent1: the symphonist does lunch. sent2: if the fact that something is not a nondevelopment but it is a country is false then it is infallible. sent3: something does not peel if the fact that it is a Bankhead and/or it is not a kind of a check is not right. sent4: if that the sparerib is not a Bankhead is true then that the basuco is both not a Moho and not a check is incorrect. sent5: that the trave excises Lushun and it resounds trave is not true. sent6: something does stratify escapologist if that it is not a Skaw is not incorrect. sent7: if the venom does stratify escapologist then the sparerib is not a meow. sent8: something peels if it is a Moho. sent9: if something lunches the fact that it is not a nondevelopment and is a country does not hold. sent10: the basuco is a Moho if there exists something such that the fact that it does not excise Lushun and it does resound trave is wrong. sent11: the fact that something is not a Bankhead if that it is a kind of a Bankhead that does filiate utricle is incorrect is right. sent12: if the sparerib does not filiate utricle then that the basuco is a kind of a Bankhead and/or it is not a check is not correct. sent13: that something is a Bankhead and it does filiate utricle is incorrect if it does not meow. sent14: if the basuco does not peel the fact that the ptomaine is not a Moho but a picador is not right.
|
sent1: {L}{d} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & {J}x) -> {I}x sent3: (x): ¬({D}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent5: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬{H}x -> {G}x sent7: {G}{c} -> ¬{F}{b} sent8: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent9: (x): {L}x -> ¬(¬{K}x & {J}x) sent10: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent11: (x): ¬({D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent12: ¬{E}{b} -> ¬({D}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent13: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({D}x & {E}x) sent14: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{gl} & {JC}{gl})
|
[
"sent8 -> int1: if the basuco is a kind of a Moho it is a kind of a peel.;"
] |
[
"sent8 -> int1: {A}{a} -> {B}{a};"
] |
the fact that the ptomaine is not a Moho but a picador does not hold.
|
¬(¬{A}{gl} & {JC}{gl})
|
[
"sent3 -> int2: the basuco is not a kind of a peel if that it is a kind of a Bankhead or does not check or both is not true.;"
] | 6 | 3 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the basuco is a kind of a peel. ; $context$ = sent1: the symphonist does lunch. sent2: if the fact that something is not a nondevelopment but it is a country is false then it is infallible. sent3: something does not peel if the fact that it is a Bankhead and/or it is not a kind of a check is not right. sent4: if that the sparerib is not a Bankhead is true then that the basuco is both not a Moho and not a check is incorrect. sent5: that the trave excises Lushun and it resounds trave is not true. sent6: something does stratify escapologist if that it is not a Skaw is not incorrect. sent7: if the venom does stratify escapologist then the sparerib is not a meow. sent8: something peels if it is a Moho. sent9: if something lunches the fact that it is not a nondevelopment and is a country does not hold. sent10: the basuco is a Moho if there exists something such that the fact that it does not excise Lushun and it does resound trave is wrong. sent11: the fact that something is not a Bankhead if that it is a kind of a Bankhead that does filiate utricle is incorrect is right. sent12: if the sparerib does not filiate utricle then that the basuco is a kind of a Bankhead and/or it is not a check is not correct. sent13: that something is a Bankhead and it does filiate utricle is incorrect if it does not meow. sent14: if the basuco does not peel the fact that the ptomaine is not a Moho but a picador is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent8 -> int1: if the basuco is a kind of a Moho it is a kind of a peel.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that there exists something such that if it is not a sennit then it is inclusive and is not a stitchwort is incorrect.
|
¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x))
|
sent1: there is something such that if it is a kind of a sennit it is inclusive and is not a stitchwort. sent2: if the rudiment is not a sigmoidoscope it deliquesces and it is not inclusive. sent3: if the rudiment is not a sennit it is inclusive. sent4: if the rudiment is not a stitchwort it is a idolatress and is not clayey. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not trickle then it is autotrophic and does not stratify Molva. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not eyeless it is Puranic and it is not a favus. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a sennit it is inclusive and it is a stitchwort. sent8: there is something such that if it is not arbitrary it is both a encapsulation and not a favus. sent9: if the rudiment is not Puranic it is disloyal thing that is not a stitchwort. sent10: the rudiment is inclusive and not a stitchwort if it is not a kind of a sennit. sent11: there exists something such that if that it does not filiate bicycle is not false it is middle-class and it does not excise archduchess. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not a sennit then it is inclusive. sent13: something that is not a Corallorhiza is a Howe that is not a Wiesbaden. sent14: the rudiment is inclusive and it is a stitchwort if it is not a sennit. sent15: if the rudiment is a sennit then it is inclusive and is not a stitchwort. sent16: there is something such that if that it is not a kind of a sennit is not false it is not a stitchwort.
|
sent1: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: ¬{HA}{aa} -> ({IE}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent4: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ({DN}{aa} & ¬{JD}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{FG}x -> ({EG}x & ¬{HD}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{CN}x -> ({AI}x & ¬{DH}x) sent7: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{EU}x -> ({E}x & ¬{DH}x) sent9: ¬{AI}{aa} -> ({DR}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent10: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent11: (Ex): ¬{GC}x -> ({JJ}x & ¬{AO}x) sent12: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x sent13: (x): ¬{T}x -> ({EN}x & ¬{HT}x) sent14: ¬{A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent15: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent16: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AB}x
|
[
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the PM is a Howe but it is not a Wiesbaden if it is not a Corallorhiza.
|
¬{T}{ie} -> ({EN}{ie} & ¬{HT}{ie})
|
[
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
DISPROVED
|
PROVED
|
$hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is not a sennit then it is inclusive and is not a stitchwort is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is a kind of a sennit it is inclusive and is not a stitchwort. sent2: if the rudiment is not a sigmoidoscope it deliquesces and it is not inclusive. sent3: if the rudiment is not a sennit it is inclusive. sent4: if the rudiment is not a stitchwort it is a idolatress and is not clayey. sent5: there exists something such that if it does not trickle then it is autotrophic and does not stratify Molva. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not eyeless it is Puranic and it is not a favus. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a sennit it is inclusive and it is a stitchwort. sent8: there is something such that if it is not arbitrary it is both a encapsulation and not a favus. sent9: if the rudiment is not Puranic it is disloyal thing that is not a stitchwort. sent10: the rudiment is inclusive and not a stitchwort if it is not a kind of a sennit. sent11: there exists something such that if that it does not filiate bicycle is not false it is middle-class and it does not excise archduchess. sent12: there exists something such that if it is not a sennit then it is inclusive. sent13: something that is not a Corallorhiza is a Howe that is not a Wiesbaden. sent14: the rudiment is inclusive and it is a stitchwort if it is not a sennit. sent15: if the rudiment is a sennit then it is inclusive and is not a stitchwort. sent16: there is something such that if that it is not a kind of a sennit is not false it is not a stitchwort. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the foible is both a trapeze and not homocercal.
|
({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})
|
sent1: if the fact that the eurypterid is both not non-paramagnetic and not a year-end does not hold then it is not a Mobile. sent2: if the thorite does not resound eurypterid it is not a trapeze. sent3: The thorite does excise splashboard. sent4: that the curb does not excise thorite but it is a trapeze is false if the eurypterid is not a kind of a Mobile. sent5: if that something is not heterocercal and resounds eurypterid is not correct it is not a kind of a trapeze. sent6: the foible is a trapeze but it is not homocercal if the thorite is not a trapeze. sent7: the splashboard does excise thorite. sent8: the thorite does excise thorite. sent9: something that does not resound eurypterid is not a trapeze. sent10: the fact that the thorite is non-heterocercal thing that resounds eurypterid is not true if the splashboard excises thorite. sent11: the foible is not homocercal. sent12: the foible is not homocercal if the thorite is not a trapeze.
|
sent1: ¬({E}{d} & ¬{F}{d}) -> ¬{D}{d} sent2: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: {AC}{ab} sent4: ¬{D}{d} -> ¬(¬{C}{c} & {B}{c}) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: ¬{B}{aa} -> ({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent7: {C}{b} sent8: {C}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent10: {C}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent11: ¬{A}{a} sent12: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent5 -> int1: the thorite is not a trapeze if the fact that it is non-heterocercal thing that does resound eurypterid does not hold.; sent10 & sent7 -> int2: that the thorite is not heterocercal and does resound eurypterid is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the thorite is not a trapeze.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent5 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent10 & sent7 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa}; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] |
that the foible is a trapeze but it is not homocercal is false.
|
¬({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a})
|
[] | 7 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the foible is both a trapeze and not homocercal. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the eurypterid is both not non-paramagnetic and not a year-end does not hold then it is not a Mobile. sent2: if the thorite does not resound eurypterid it is not a trapeze. sent3: The thorite does excise splashboard. sent4: that the curb does not excise thorite but it is a trapeze is false if the eurypterid is not a kind of a Mobile. sent5: if that something is not heterocercal and resounds eurypterid is not correct it is not a kind of a trapeze. sent6: the foible is a trapeze but it is not homocercal if the thorite is not a trapeze. sent7: the splashboard does excise thorite. sent8: the thorite does excise thorite. sent9: something that does not resound eurypterid is not a trapeze. sent10: the fact that the thorite is non-heterocercal thing that resounds eurypterid is not true if the splashboard excises thorite. sent11: the foible is not homocercal. sent12: the foible is not homocercal if the thorite is not a trapeze. ; $proof$ =
|
sent5 -> int1: the thorite is not a trapeze if the fact that it is non-heterocercal thing that does resound eurypterid does not hold.; sent10 & sent7 -> int2: that the thorite is not heterocercal and does resound eurypterid is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the thorite is not a trapeze.; int3 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
there is something such that if the fact that it either is homologous or does not bolster or both is not true it is uncertain.
|
(Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x
|
sent1: something that does resound ketoprofen and/or does not excise sigeh is a Microstomus. sent2: there is something such that if it is homologous and/or it is not a bolster then it is uncertain. sent3: something is uncertain if that it is homologous and/or it bolsters is incorrect. sent4: if the fact that something either does chasten or is not a encomium or both is wrong then it is a kind of a dainty.
|
sent1: (x): ({IR}x v ¬{GM}x) -> {HI}x sent2: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (x): ¬({AO}x v ¬{AQ}x) -> {AJ}x
|
[] |
[] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it either is homologous or does not bolster or both is not true it is uncertain. ; $context$ = sent1: something that does resound ketoprofen and/or does not excise sigeh is a Microstomus. sent2: there is something such that if it is homologous and/or it is not a bolster then it is uncertain. sent3: something is uncertain if that it is homologous and/or it bolsters is incorrect. sent4: if the fact that something either does chasten or is not a encomium or both is wrong then it is a kind of a dainty. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the high-rise is a kind of a rainmaker but it is not a oxytetracycline.
|
({B}{d} & ¬{C}{d})
|
sent1: if the czar stratifies exaction but it does not resound high-rise then the contestant is not a kind of a rainmaker. sent2: if the czar stratifies exaction and it resounds high-rise the contestant is not a kind of a rainmaker. sent3: if the talon is not a futurology the czar does stratify exaction and does not resound high-rise. sent4: the talon is not a kind of a futurology. sent5: the high-rise is a kind of a rainmaker.
|
sent1: ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent2: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent4: ¬{A}{a} sent5: {B}{d}
|
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the czar stratifies exaction and does not resound high-rise.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: that the contestant is a rainmaker does not hold.;"
] |
[
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: ({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent1 & int1 -> int2: ¬{B}{c};"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = the high-rise is a kind of a rainmaker but it is not a oxytetracycline. ; $context$ = sent1: if the czar stratifies exaction but it does not resound high-rise then the contestant is not a kind of a rainmaker. sent2: if the czar stratifies exaction and it resounds high-rise the contestant is not a kind of a rainmaker. sent3: if the talon is not a futurology the czar does stratify exaction and does not resound high-rise. sent4: the talon is not a kind of a futurology. sent5: the high-rise is a kind of a rainmaker. ; $proof$ =
|
sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the czar stratifies exaction and does not resound high-rise.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: that the contestant is a rainmaker does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the danish does filiate coil.
|
{B}{aa}
|
sent1: if something is not a cannelloni it is not zygodactyl. sent2: the danish does not filiate coil if it is not a female. sent3: if that something is both a Gluck and pyroelectric is false it is not orchestral. sent4: that the danish is a kind of a buccula and it is a female does not hold. sent5: that the danish is not a conviviality is true. sent6: the fact that the ragsorter does not excise sarsaparilla is not false. sent7: if the fact that something does resound Fez and is a kind of a counterfire does not hold it is not a kind of a incommutability. sent8: if the danish does not excise sarsaparilla it is not news. sent9: if that the chondrichthian is a conviviality and it is oleophobic does not hold it does not filiate coil. sent10: the fact that the danish does excise sarsaparilla and it is not non-female does not hold. sent11: something filiates coil if it filiates coil and/or it is not reactive. sent12: if that something does excise sarsaparilla and it is a kind of a female does not hold then that it does not filiate coil is right. sent13: something does not filiate coil if it is not a female. sent14: the stabber is not a least if it is not a female.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{HT}x -> ¬{FO}x sent2: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬({GE}x & {EA}x) -> ¬{EO}x sent4: ¬({DH}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: ¬{HF}{aa} sent6: ¬{AA}{jd} sent7: (x): ¬({ER}x & {L}x) -> ¬{AF}x sent8: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{CL}{aa} sent9: ¬({HF}{ht} & {IG}{ht}) -> ¬{B}{ht} sent10: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent11: (x): ({B}x v ¬{C}x) -> {B}x sent12: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent13: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent14: ¬{AB}{ci} -> ¬{FR}{ci}
|
[
"sent12 -> int1: if that the danish excises sarsaparilla and is female is not right it does not filiate coil.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent12 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the danish filiates coil.
|
{B}{aa}
|
[
"sent11 -> int2: the danish filiates coil if it does filiates coil or is not reactive or both.;"
] | 7 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
DISPROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the danish does filiate coil. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a cannelloni it is not zygodactyl. sent2: the danish does not filiate coil if it is not a female. sent3: if that something is both a Gluck and pyroelectric is false it is not orchestral. sent4: that the danish is a kind of a buccula and it is a female does not hold. sent5: that the danish is not a conviviality is true. sent6: the fact that the ragsorter does not excise sarsaparilla is not false. sent7: if the fact that something does resound Fez and is a kind of a counterfire does not hold it is not a kind of a incommutability. sent8: if the danish does not excise sarsaparilla it is not news. sent9: if that the chondrichthian is a conviviality and it is oleophobic does not hold it does not filiate coil. sent10: the fact that the danish does excise sarsaparilla and it is not non-female does not hold. sent11: something filiates coil if it filiates coil and/or it is not reactive. sent12: if that something does excise sarsaparilla and it is a kind of a female does not hold then that it does not filiate coil is right. sent13: something does not filiate coil if it is not a female. sent14: the stabber is not a least if it is not a female. ; $proof$ =
|
sent12 -> int1: if that the danish excises sarsaparilla and is female is not right it does not filiate coil.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
that the appellant does excise wrapped but it is not a malpractice does not hold.
|
¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a})
|
sent1: the fact that something excises wrapped and is not a kind of a malpractice is not right if it does not stratify COBOL. sent2: the appellant does not stratify COBOL if there exists something such that that it is not a doddering and is not a tollkeeper is incorrect.
|
sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a}
|
[
"sent1 -> int1: that the appellant excises wrapped but it is not a malpractice does not hold if it does not stratify COBOL.;"
] |
[
"sent1 -> int1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({C}{a} & ¬{B}{a});"
] | null | null |
[] | null | 2 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 |
UNKNOWN
| null |
UNKNOWN
| null |
$hypothesis$ = that the appellant does excise wrapped but it is not a malpractice does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something excises wrapped and is not a kind of a malpractice is not right if it does not stratify COBOL. sent2: the appellant does not stratify COBOL if there exists something such that that it is not a doddering and is not a tollkeeper is incorrect. ; $proof$ =
|
sent1 -> int1: that the appellant excises wrapped but it is not a malpractice does not hold if it does not stratify COBOL.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the barreling does not occur.
|
¬{B}
|
sent1: if the fact that the Columbianness does not occur is right then the shag occurs. sent2: the excising corporal occurs if the abdominovesicalness occurs. sent3: the shamble does not occur. sent4: the superfecundation occurs. sent5: the filiating inexpedience happens. sent6: the anencephalicness does not occur if both the Columbianness and the barrels occurs. sent7: the monisticness and the resounding pepperwort occurs. sent8: the helming happens. sent9: the unplayfulness occurs. sent10: the Columbianness happens. sent11: the megalithicness happens. sent12: the stratifying Godunov and the southernness happens. sent13: the scanting happens.
|
sent1: ¬{A} -> {AR} sent2: {FE} -> {EP} sent3: ¬{JJ} sent4: {BM} sent5: {DB} sent6: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent7: ({BS} & {JG}) sent8: {DN} sent9: {BK} sent10: {A} sent11: {N} sent12: ({E} & {D}) sent13: {FO}
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the barrels happens is not false.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the Columbianness happens and the barrels occurs.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the anencephalicness does not occur.; sent12 -> int3: the southernness happens.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: {B}; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent6 -> int2: ¬{C}; sent12 -> int3: {D};"
] |
the shag occurs.
|
{AR}
|
[] | 6 | 4 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the barreling does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the Columbianness does not occur is right then the shag occurs. sent2: the excising corporal occurs if the abdominovesicalness occurs. sent3: the shamble does not occur. sent4: the superfecundation occurs. sent5: the filiating inexpedience happens. sent6: the anencephalicness does not occur if both the Columbianness and the barrels occurs. sent7: the monisticness and the resounding pepperwort occurs. sent8: the helming happens. sent9: the unplayfulness occurs. sent10: the Columbianness happens. sent11: the megalithicness happens. sent12: the stratifying Godunov and the southernness happens. sent13: the scanting happens. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the barrels happens is not false.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: the Columbianness happens and the barrels occurs.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the anencephalicness does not occur.; sent12 -> int3: the southernness happens.; __UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the non-unlivableness and the lacing happens.
|
(¬{F} & {E})
|
sent1: that the resounding precipice does not occur does not hold. sent2: that the alphanumericness occurs and the resounding precipice happens leads to that the excising Polish does not occur. sent3: if the impressiveness and the non-axileness occurs then the stratifying helpdesk does not occur. sent4: the filiating Amundsen happens. sent5: that the lacing happens is caused by that the excising Polish does not occur. sent6: the fact that if the biggerness does not occur not the filiating phase but the extropicness occurs is right. sent7: that both the livableness and the lacing occurs is not correct if the numerateness does not occur. sent8: the fact that the pounding occurs hold. sent9: if the excising Polish does not occur then the unlivableness does not occur but the lacing occurs. sent10: if the numerating happens the alphanumericness occurs. sent11: that the stratifying helpdesk does not occur and the inculpatoriness does not occur leads to that the transference does not occur. sent12: the lacing happens. sent13: if the transference does not occur the resounding precipice does not occur and the excising Polish does not occur.
|
sent1: {C} sent2: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent3: (¬{L} & ¬{K}) -> ¬{I} sent4: {GO} sent5: ¬{D} -> {E} sent6: ¬{AC} -> (¬{JC} & {IL}) sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{F} & {E}) sent8: {EA} sent9: ¬{D} -> (¬{F} & {E}) sent10: {A} -> {B} sent11: (¬{I} & ¬{H}) -> ¬{G} sent12: {E} sent13: ¬{G} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D})
|
[] |
[] |
that both the non-unlivableness and the lacing happens does not hold.
|
¬(¬{F} & {E})
|
[] | 8 | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the non-unlivableness and the lacing happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the resounding precipice does not occur does not hold. sent2: that the alphanumericness occurs and the resounding precipice happens leads to that the excising Polish does not occur. sent3: if the impressiveness and the non-axileness occurs then the stratifying helpdesk does not occur. sent4: the filiating Amundsen happens. sent5: that the lacing happens is caused by that the excising Polish does not occur. sent6: the fact that if the biggerness does not occur not the filiating phase but the extropicness occurs is right. sent7: that both the livableness and the lacing occurs is not correct if the numerateness does not occur. sent8: the fact that the pounding occurs hold. sent9: if the excising Polish does not occur then the unlivableness does not occur but the lacing occurs. sent10: if the numerating happens the alphanumericness occurs. sent11: that the stratifying helpdesk does not occur and the inculpatoriness does not occur leads to that the transference does not occur. sent12: the lacing happens. sent13: if the transference does not occur the resounding precipice does not occur and the excising Polish does not occur. ; $proof$ =
|
__UNKNOWN__
|
DeductionInstance
|
the fact that that the marlberry is both not a huisache and undescriptive is right is not true.
|
¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
sent1: if the plasmid is not a Germanic and/or is a festering the NIMBY is a eclair. sent2: if something is not hairy it is not a huisache and it is undescriptive. sent3: that the sinner does discuss but it does not resound Simeon is false if the fact that the quirt filiates lodestar hold. sent4: if the lodestar does not take then the fact that the eudiometer does not stratify Kartik and is not a counterproposal is false. sent5: the fact that something does not stretch and is a hyoid does not hold if it is a up-bow. sent6: the fact that the Berber is both calculable and not non-hairy is false if the marshal is not a tableland. sent7: the marshal is not a tableland if the fact that the eudiometer resounds piculet and is not a tableland is not correct. sent8: the plasmid is not a kind of a Germanic if there exists something such that the fact that it does discuss and does not resound Simeon is not true. sent9: something stratifies Kartik if that it does not stratifies Kartik and is not a counterproposal is false. sent10: the fact that that something is not a kind of a huisache and is undescriptive is true is not right if it is hairy. sent11: if something stratifies Kartik that it does resound piculet and is not a tableland is false. sent12: if there is something such that it is a eclair and/or it is not a climber the lodestar is not a take. sent13: if the fact that the quirt is garlicky and not nonpsychoactive is wrong then it filiates lodestar. sent14: that the marlberry is a kind of descriptive thing that is a longanberry is not right if it is ulcerative. sent15: the fact that that the marlberry is a huisache that is undescriptive is not false is incorrect. sent16: the marlberry is a tableland and it is hairy. sent17: the eudiometer is a tableland. sent18: the fact that the quirt is garlicky and not nonpsychoactive is not right.
|
sent1: (¬{J}{f} v {K}{f}) -> {I}{e} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: {N}{h} -> ¬({M}{g} & ¬{L}{g}) sent4: ¬{F}{d} -> ¬(¬{D}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent5: (x): {EU}x -> ¬(¬{IR}x & {AR}x) sent6: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} & {A}{a}) sent7: ¬({E}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent8: (x): ¬({M}x & ¬{L}x) -> ¬{J}{f} sent9: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & ¬{G}x) -> {D}x sent10: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent11: (x): {D}x -> ¬({E}x & ¬{B}x) sent12: (x): ({I}x v ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}{d} sent13: ¬({O}{h} & ¬{P}{h}) -> {N}{h} sent14: {BK}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & {HQ}{aa}) sent15: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent16: ({B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent17: {B}{c} sent18: ¬({O}{h} & ¬{P}{h})
|
[
"sent10 -> int1: that the marlberry is not a kind of a huisache but it is undescriptive is wrong if it is hairy.; sent16 -> int2: the marlberry is hairy.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
[
"sent10 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent16 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] |
the marlberry is not a huisache and is undescriptive.
|
(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})
|
[
"sent2 -> int3: the marlberry is not a huisache and is undescriptive if it is not hairy.; sent11 -> int4: if the fact that the eudiometer stratifies Kartik is not false then the fact that it does resound piculet and is not a tableland is not true.; sent9 -> int5: the eudiometer stratifies Kartik if that it does not stratifies Kartik and is not a kind of a counterproposal is wrong.; sent13 & sent18 -> int6: the quirt does filiate lodestar.; sent3 & int6 -> int7: the fact that the sinner discusses but it does not resound Simeon is not correct.; int7 -> int8: there is something such that the fact that it discusses and does not resound Simeon is not right.; int8 & sent8 -> int9: the plasmid is not a Germanic.; int9 -> int10: the plasmid is either not a Germanic or a festering or both.; sent1 & int10 -> int11: the NIMBY is a kind of a eclair.; int11 -> int12: the NIMBY is either a eclair or not a climber or both.; int12 -> int13: there is something such that it is a eclair and/or not a climber.; int13 & sent12 -> int14: the lodestar does not take.; sent4 & int14 -> int15: that the eudiometer does not stratify Kartik and is not a kind of a counterproposal is not true.; int5 & int15 -> int16: the eudiometer stratifies Kartik.; int4 & int16 -> int17: that the eudiometer does resound piculet and is not a tableland is not true.; sent7 & int17 -> int18: the marshal is not a tableland.; sent6 & int18 -> int19: that the Berber is calculable and is hairy does not hold.; int19 -> int20: there exists something such that that it is calculable and it is hairy is incorrect.;"
] | 17 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 |
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
PROVED
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = the fact that that the marlberry is both not a huisache and undescriptive is right is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if the plasmid is not a Germanic and/or is a festering the NIMBY is a eclair. sent2: if something is not hairy it is not a huisache and it is undescriptive. sent3: that the sinner does discuss but it does not resound Simeon is false if the fact that the quirt filiates lodestar hold. sent4: if the lodestar does not take then the fact that the eudiometer does not stratify Kartik and is not a counterproposal is false. sent5: the fact that something does not stretch and is a hyoid does not hold if it is a up-bow. sent6: the fact that the Berber is both calculable and not non-hairy is false if the marshal is not a tableland. sent7: the marshal is not a tableland if the fact that the eudiometer resounds piculet and is not a tableland is not correct. sent8: the plasmid is not a kind of a Germanic if there exists something such that the fact that it does discuss and does not resound Simeon is not true. sent9: something stratifies Kartik if that it does not stratifies Kartik and is not a counterproposal is false. sent10: the fact that that something is not a kind of a huisache and is undescriptive is true is not right if it is hairy. sent11: if something stratifies Kartik that it does resound piculet and is not a tableland is false. sent12: if there is something such that it is a eclair and/or it is not a climber the lodestar is not a take. sent13: if the fact that the quirt is garlicky and not nonpsychoactive is wrong then it filiates lodestar. sent14: that the marlberry is a kind of descriptive thing that is a longanberry is not right if it is ulcerative. sent15: the fact that that the marlberry is a huisache that is undescriptive is not false is incorrect. sent16: the marlberry is a tableland and it is hairy. sent17: the eudiometer is a tableland. sent18: the fact that the quirt is garlicky and not nonpsychoactive is not right. ; $proof$ =
|
sent10 -> int1: that the marlberry is not a kind of a huisache but it is undescriptive is wrong if it is hairy.; sent16 -> int2: the marlberry is hairy.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__
|
DeductionInstance
|
if the lauhala is not a transubstantiation then the eriogonum is not a Embothrium and it is not pubic.
|
¬{B}{b} -> (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a})
|
sent1: the eriogonum is not a transubstantiation. sent2: the eriogonum is a transubstantiation if that the lauhala is non-pubic and a Embothrium does not hold. sent3: that the lauhala is pubic but it is not a kind of a transubstantiation is wrong. sent4: the eriogonum is not pubic if the fact that the lauhala is not a transubstantiation is right. sent5: if the eriogonum is not pubic the lauhala is not a kind of a transubstantiation but it is a Embothrium. sent6: if something is oleophobic then it is a transubstantiation.
|
sent1: ¬{B}{a} sent2: ¬(¬{AB}{b} & {AA}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent3: ¬({AB}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent4: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{AB}{a} sent5: ¬{AB}{a} -> (¬{B}{b} & {AA}{b}) sent6: (x): {A}x -> {B}x
|
[
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the eriogonum is not a Embothrium and it is not pubic does not hold.;"
] |
[
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a});"
] |
the soymilk is a transubstantiation.
|
{B}{eq}
|
[
"sent6 -> int1: the soymilk is a transubstantiation if it is oleophobic.;"
] | 5 | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 |
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
UNKNOWN
|
$hypothesis$ = if the lauhala is not a transubstantiation then the eriogonum is not a Embothrium and it is not pubic. ; $context$ = sent1: the eriogonum is not a transubstantiation. sent2: the eriogonum is a transubstantiation if that the lauhala is non-pubic and a Embothrium does not hold. sent3: that the lauhala is pubic but it is not a kind of a transubstantiation is wrong. sent4: the eriogonum is not pubic if the fact that the lauhala is not a transubstantiation is right. sent5: if the eriogonum is not pubic the lauhala is not a kind of a transubstantiation but it is a Embothrium. sent6: if something is oleophobic then it is a transubstantiation. ; $proof$ =
|
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the eriogonum is not a Embothrium and it is not pubic does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.