hypothesis stringlengths 11 215 | context stringlengths 0 2.9k | hypothesis_formula stringlengths 3 39 | context_formula stringlengths 0 905 | proofs list | proof_label stringclasses 3
values | proofs_formula list | world_assump_label stringclasses 3
values | 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 | negative_hypothesis stringlengths 15 193 ⌀ | negative_hypothesis_formula stringlengths 3 37 ⌀ | negative_original_tree_depth int64 0 25 ⌀ | negative_proofs list | negative_proof_label stringclasses 2
values | negative_world_assump_label stringclasses 2
values | prompt_serial stringlengths 89 3.09k | proof_serial stringlengths 11 654 | version stringclasses 1
value | premise stringlengths 0 195 | assumptions list | paraphrased_premises list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
the suggestion does not occur. | sent1: that that the inconsiderableness does not occur and the heaves does not occur is incorrect if the speaking Maracaibo occurs hold. sent2: the shape-up happens and the untranslatableness occurs if that the swooping erythroderma does not occur hold. sent3: the apologeticsness occurs. sent4: if the swooping erythrod... | ¬{C} | sent1: {G} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) sent2: ¬{B} -> ({EL} & {A}) sent3: {FH} sent4: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) sent5: {AN} sent6: ¬(¬{R} & {S}) -> {O} sent7: ({O} & ¬{N}) -> ¬{M} sent8: ¬(¬{R} & {S}) sent9: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) sent10: {B} sent11: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent12: {K} -> ¬({J} & ¬{I}) sent13: ({AH} & {IJ}) sent14: ¬{M} -> (... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | the suggestion happens. | {C} | 14 | [
"sent6 & sent8 -> int1: the meniscectomy occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the suggestion does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that that the inconsiderableness does not occur and the heaves does not occur is incorrect if the speaking Maracaibo occurs hold. sent2: the shape-up happens and the untranslatableness occurs if that the swooping erythroderma does not occur hold. sent3:... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the shape-up happens and the untranslatableness occurs if that the swooping erythroderma does not occur hold. | [
"that the dodging Lawrence does not occur leads to that both the recruiting Ur and the speaking Maracaibo occurs."
] | [
"the shape-up happens and the untranslatableness occurs if that the swooping erythroderma does not occur hold."
] |
the ministerialness does not occur. | sent1: the recruiting reproducibility occurs. sent2: if the fact that the coo but not the hooking happens is not correct then the recruiting winning occurs. sent3: the ministerialness is prevented by that the solarizing occurs and the recruiting winning occurs. sent4: both the solarizing and the feat occurs if the purr... | ¬{D} | sent1: {A} sent2: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent3: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{D} sent4: ¬{F} -> ({C} & {E}) sent5: ¬{F} | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the solarizing and the feat happens.; int1 -> int2: the fact that the solarizing happens is not false.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: ({C} & {E}); int1 -> int2: {C};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the ministerialness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the recruiting reproducibility occurs. sent2: if the fact that the coo but not the hooking happens is not correct then the recruiting winning occurs. sent3: the ministerialness is prevented by that the solarizing occurs and the recruiting winning o... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | both the solarizing and the feat occurs if the purring does not occur. | [
"the purring does not occur."
] | [
"both the solarizing and the feat occurs if the purring does not occur."
] |
the popper is a kind of a TLC and it is an appearance. | sent1: that the popper is a TLC is right if the honoree is valvular. sent2: the honoree is methodological and/or it is valvular if the fact that it does not recruit abiotrophy hold. sent3: if the Cathaya does not recruit Stuttgart the cumulonimbus is a canyon. sent4: the popper does not recruit abiotrophy if the honore... | ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: {AB}{a} -> {B}{b} sent2: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent3: ¬{F}{d} -> {E}{c} sent4: {A}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{J}x & {K}x) -> {I}x sent6: (x): ({JF}x & {CE}x) sent7: {D}{b} sent8: (x): ({C}x & {D}x) sent9: (x): {D}x sent10: {L}{e} -> ¬(¬{J}{e} & {K}{e}) sent11: (x): {G}x -> ¬{F}x sent12: (x): {H}x -> ... | [
"sent8 -> int1: the popper is an appearance and it is a tributyrin.; int1 -> int2: the popper is an appearance.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent8 -> int1: ({C}{b} & {D}{b}); int1 -> int2: {C}{b};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | the fact that the popper is a TLC and it is an appearance does not hold. | ¬({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | 12 | [
"sent18 -> int3: if the popper does not recruit abiotrophy the fact that it is a TLC and it is an appearance is incorrect.; sent11 -> int4: the Cathaya does not recruit Stuttgart if it does recruit reduplication.; sent12 -> int5: if the Cathaya is sociolinguistic it does recruit reduplication.; sent5 -> int6: if th... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the popper is a kind of a TLC and it is an appearance. ; $context$ = sent1: that the popper is a TLC is right if the honoree is valvular. sent2: the honoree is methodological and/or it is valvular if the fact that it does not recruit abiotrophy hold. sent3: if the Cathaya does not recruit Stuttgart the c... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | everything is a kind of an appearance that is a tributyrin. | [] | [
"everything is a kind of an appearance that is a tributyrin."
] |
there exists something such that if it is not zymotic then the fact that it is not a kind of a freak is not false. | sent1: there exists something such that if it is not zymotic the fact that it does freak hold. sent2: if something is not philological it is not a kind of a bugged. sent3: there is something such that if it is not viceregal that it does mutiny is correct. sent4: if something is not pyogenic that it is not a kind of a A... | (Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x | sent1: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent2: (x): ¬{M}x -> ¬{FK}x sent3: (Ex): ¬{EE}x -> {GF}x sent4: (x): ¬{CD}x -> ¬{CJ}x sent5: {B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent7: (Ex): {B}x -> ¬{C}x | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | there exists something such that if it is not philological then it is not a bugged. | (Ex): ¬{M}x -> ¬{FK}x | 2 | [
"sent2 -> int1: if the exchanger is not philological then it is not a bugged.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not zymotic then the fact that it is not a kind of a freak is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not zymotic the fact that it does freak hold. sent2: if something is not philological it is not a kind of a bugged. sent3: ther... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if the soapwort is zymotic that it is not a freak is not wrong. | [
"if something is not pyogenic that it is not a kind of a Albanian is not false."
] | [
"if the soapwort is zymotic that it is not a freak is not wrong."
] |
the inaudibleness does not occur. | sent1: the recruiting formation happens. sent2: that the inaudibleness occurs is prevented by that the recruiting formation does not occur but the off-lineness occurs. sent3: both the inaudibleness and the recruiting formation happens. sent4: if that the balminess happens but the Wagnerianness does not occur is incorre... | ¬{A} | sent1: {B} sent2: (¬{B} & {C}) -> ¬{A} sent3: ({A} & {B}) sent4: ¬({E} & ¬{D}) -> {D} sent5: {D} -> (¬{B} & {C}) | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | the inaudibleness does not occur. | ¬{A} | 8 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the inaudibleness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the recruiting formation happens. sent2: that the inaudibleness occurs is prevented by that the recruiting formation does not occur but the off-lineness occurs. sent3: both the inaudibleness and the recruiting formation happens. sent4: if that the ba... | sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | both the inaudibleness and the recruiting formation happens. | [] | [
"both the inaudibleness and the recruiting formation happens."
] |
the dextrose is not terpsichorean. | sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it does not recruit beat and it is a Glaswegian is not true. sent2: there exists nothing such that it is a bullshit and a scrapbook. sent3: if that something is Brobdingnagian thing that is a kind of a Taiwanese does not hold it is not a kind of a Taiwanese. sent4: ... | ¬{B}{a} | sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{F}x & {G}x) sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬({E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent5: ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {G}x) -> {F}{c} sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent2 -> int1: that that the beat is a kind of a bullshit that is a scrapbook does not hold is correct.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the dextrose is not a binary.; sent8 -> int3: the dextrose is not terpsichorean if it is not a binary.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & sent7 -> int2: ¬{A}{a}; sent8 -> int3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | the fact that the dextrose is terpsichorean is not incorrect. | {B}{a} | 7 | [
"sent4 -> int4: if the aggravator is not a kind of a Taiwanese then it is not a ramie and is not a binary.; sent3 -> int5: if that the aggravator is Brobdingnagian and it is Taiwanese does not hold it is not a Taiwanese.; sent1 & sent6 -> int6: that the clearing does recruit beat hold.; int6 -> int7: there is somet... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the dextrose is not terpsichorean. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it does not recruit beat and it is a Glaswegian is not true. sent2: there exists nothing such that it is a bullshit and a scrapbook. sent3: if that something is Brobdingnagian thing that is a kind of a ... | sent2 -> int1: that that the beat is a kind of a bullshit that is a scrapbook does not hold is correct.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the dextrose is not a binary.; sent8 -> int3: the dextrose is not terpsichorean if it is not a binary.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there exists nothing such that it is a bullshit and a scrapbook. | [
"if that the beat bullshits and is a scrapbook is not true then the dextrose is not a binary.",
"something that is not a binary is not terpsichorean."
] | [
"There is no such thing as a bullshit and a scrapbook.",
"There is no such thing as a bullshit."
] |
the sex is a kind of a cecum. | sent1: if something is licit then it does not dodge touristed or it dodges SLS or both. sent2: if either something is not a copyright or it is a kind of a belemnite or both it is not a copyright. sent3: the SLS does not dodge barred if the pantheist does dodge barred. sent4: the SLS does recruit beeswax. sent5: if that... | {B}{b} | sent1: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x v {C}x) sent2: (x): (¬{F}x v {H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent3: {G}{f} -> ¬{G}{e} sent4: {J}{e} sent5: ¬{F}{d} -> {E}{d} sent6: (x): (¬{D}x v {C}x) -> {C}{c} sent7: (¬{G}{e} & ¬{F}{e}) -> ¬{F}{d} sent8: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent9: ({G}{f} v {I}{f}) sent10: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent11: (x): {J}x -> (¬{F}x v {... | [
"sent8 -> int1: the fact that the beeswax is a C-horizon that does bestow is incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is a C-horizon and it does bestow is not right.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent8 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x);"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | the sex is not a kind of a cecum. | ¬{B}{b} | 12 | [
"sent1 -> int3: either the piezometer does not dodge touristed or it dodges SLS or both if it is licit.; sent9 & sent3 & sent12 -> int4: the SLS does not dodge barred.; sent2 -> int5: the SLS is not a copyright if either it does not copyright or it is a belemnite or both.; sent11 -> int6: the SLS is not a copyright... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the sex is a kind of a cecum. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is licit then it does not dodge touristed or it dodges SLS or both. sent2: if either something is not a copyright or it is a kind of a belemnite or both it is not a copyright. sent3: the SLS does not dodge barred if the pantheist does dodge ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there exists nothing such that it is a C-horizon and it bestows. | [] | [
"there exists nothing such that it is a C-horizon and it bestows."
] |
that there is something such that if it is a occiput and it is forgetful it does not swoop bordelaise is not true. | sent1: the circuit does not swoop bordelaise if it is a kind of a flounder and it inhabits. sent2: there is something such that if it wolfs and it is a kind of a tick it is not indehiscent. sent3: something is not a kind of a pocketcomb if it does swoop bolster and is not non-ductless. sent4: if the bolster does dodge ... | ¬((Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x) | sent1: ({EJ}{ha} & {JG}{ha}) -> ¬{B}{ha} sent2: (Ex): ({U}x & {AE}x) -> ¬{CO}x sent3: (x): ({A}x & {GK}x) -> ¬{EM}x sent4: ({L}{aa} & {GG}{aa}) -> ¬{FS}{aa} sent5: (Ex): ({BS}x & {EU}x) -> ¬{AH}x sent6: ({EO}{ao} & {AB}{ao}) -> ¬{JC}{ao} sent7: ({AA}{aa} & {CK}{aa}) -> ¬{AT}{aa} sent8: ({AQ}{bq} & {FB}{bq}) -> ¬{AA}{bq... | [
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 | there is something such that if it is osseous and photoelectric it is not a kind of a tall. | (Ex): ({EP}x & {CK}x) -> ¬{JC}x | 2 | [
"sent14 -> int1: the sprig is not a tall if it is osseous and is photoelectric.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is a occiput and it is forgetful it does not swoop bordelaise is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the circuit does not swoop bordelaise if it is a kind of a flounder and it inhabits. sent2: there is something such that if it wolfs and it is a kind of a tick it is not... | sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the bolster is a occiput and forgetful then it does not swoop bordelaise. | [] | [
"if the bolster is a occiput and forgetful then it does not swoop bordelaise."
] |
there exists something such that if it is not avionic that it is not a kind of a bluefish and it is not an invertebrate is not right. | sent1: that the cereal is not a bluefish and not invertebrate is incorrect if it is not avionic. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not avionic then the fact that it is not a bluefish and it is a kind of an invertebrate does not hold. sent3: there exists something such that if it is avionic the fact that ... | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬{HM}x -> ¬(¬{DT}x & ¬{HJ}x) | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | that the litigant is not leptosporangiate and it is not a homing does not hold if it is not a anole. | ¬{HM}{ic} -> ¬(¬{DT}{ic} & ¬{HJ}{ic}) | 1 | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not avionic that it is not a kind of a bluefish and it is not an invertebrate is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that the cereal is not a bluefish and not invertebrate is incorrect if it is not avionic. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not avionic... | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the cereal is not a bluefish and not invertebrate is incorrect if it is not avionic. | [] | [
"that the cereal is not a bluefish and not invertebrate is incorrect if it is not avionic."
] |
that there is something such that if it is a kind of a grasshopper it is not deductive and does not puddle is wrong. | sent1: that there is something such that if it is a footing then it does not stab and it is not a snorkeling is correct. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a grasshopper then the fact that it is not a puddle is not wrong. sent3: there is something such that if it speaks anachronism then it is adoptive and... | ¬((Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: (Ex): {BP}x -> (¬{ER}x & ¬{HQ}x) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent3: (Ex): {EE}x -> ({EU}x & ¬{BH}x) sent4: {T}{fu} -> (¬{GR}{fu} & ¬{IT}{fu}) sent5: (x): {DH}x -> (¬{IL}x & ¬{R}x) sent6: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent7: (Ex): {CA}x -> ¬{EO}x sent8: {DR}{aa} -> (¬{A}{aa} & {EP}{aa}) | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 | if the NGF is conditional it is not a Hubbard and it is not bimorphemic. | {DH}{ap} -> (¬{IL}{ap} & ¬{R}{ap}) | 1 | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is a kind of a grasshopper it is not deductive and does not puddle is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: that there is something such that if it is a footing then it does not stab and it is not a snorkeling is correct. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a gr... | sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the resonance is not deductive and does not puddle if it is a grasshopper. | [] | [
"the resonance is not deductive and does not puddle if it is a grasshopper."
] |
the iodination is not faecal. | sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is faecal and it does disband is wrong. sent2: that the vulture is not a inexplicitness and not a Saone is incorrect if it is exodontic. sent3: if that there exists something such that it is not a seigniorage is not false the graft is not a code. sent4: there is ... | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: (Ex): ¬({D}x & {C}x) sent2: {F}{c} -> ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{S}{a} sent4: (Ex): ¬({B}x & {D}x) sent5: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent6: {E}{c} -> {B}{a} sent7: (x): (¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) -> {C}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: (x): {B}x -> ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent10: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{G}{c})... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | the fact that the iodination is faecal hold. | {D}{b} | 10 | [
"sent18 -> int1: if the iodination does dodge candlenut it is faecal.; sent15 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the graft disbands is not wrong.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the iodination is not faecal. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is faecal and it does disband is wrong. sent2: that the vulture is not a inexplicitness and not a Saone is incorrect if it is exodontic. sent3: if that there exists something such that it is not a seignio... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that the fact that it is faecal and it does disband is wrong. | [
"the fact that the iodination is a inexplicitness and it does disband does not hold."
] | [
"there exists something such that the fact that it is faecal and it does disband is wrong."
] |
either the trophoblasticness or the liquidation or both occurs. | sent1: the countershot happens and/or the astronomicness happens. sent2: the supertwister does not occur if not the swooping abiotrophy but the swish happens. sent3: that the elastic or the dodging mercantilism or both occurs is caused by that the supertwister does not occur. sent4: if the fact that the dodging electro... | ({A} v {B}) | sent1: ({EM} v {GU}) sent2: (¬{H} & {I}) -> ¬{G} sent3: ¬{G} -> ({F} v {E}) sent4: ¬{N} -> ¬(¬{M} & ¬{L}) sent5: ¬({L} & {M}) sent6: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & {D}) sent7: {B} sent8: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} v {B}) sent9: {P} -> (¬{O} & ¬{N}) sent10: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) sent11: {I} -> (¬{G} & {H}) sent12: ¬({L} & {M}) -> ¬{L} sent13: {Q} ->... | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 | the demographic happens. | {CE} | 11 | [
"sent12 & sent5 -> int1: that the swooping Gymnosporangium does not occur hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = either the trophoblasticness or the liquidation or both occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the countershot happens and/or the astronomicness happens. sent2: the supertwister does not occur if not the swooping abiotrophy but the swish happens. sent3: that the elastic or the dodging mercantilism or both occurs i... | sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the liquidation occurs. | [] | [
"the liquidation occurs."
] |
that there exists something such that it is not an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus does not hold. | sent1: the warehouse is not a kind of an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus if something is a sourwood. sent2: there is something such that it does not incline. sent3: that something is a sourwood that does not dodge ranch does not hold if it is not an elite. sent4: something does not swoop midbrain and it ... | ¬((Ex): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x)) | sent1: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent2: (Ex): ¬{BA}x sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{HP}x) sent4: (Ex): (¬{IT}x & ¬{JJ}x) sent5: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{HP}x) -> {HP}x sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent7: (Ex): ({AQ}x & ¬{CO}x) sent8: (x): {B}x -> (¬{IL}{a} & ¬{IN}{a}) sent9: (Ex): {A}x sent10: (Ex): ({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent11... | [
"sent9 & sent1 -> int1: the warehouse is not an elite and not a Fuscoboletinus.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent9 & sent1 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 | there exists something such that it dodges ranch. | (Ex): {HP}x | 5 | [
"sent5 -> int2: if the fact that the warehouse is a kind of a sourwood that does not dodge ranch is false then it dodge ranch.; sent3 -> int3: if the warehouse is not an elite that it is a sourwood and does not dodge ranch is wrong.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that it is not an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the warehouse is not a kind of an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus if something is a sourwood. sent2: there is something such that it does not incline. sent3... | sent9 & sent1 -> int1: the warehouse is not an elite and not a Fuscoboletinus.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is a kind of a sourwood. | [
"the warehouse is not a kind of an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus if something is a sourwood."
] | [
"there is something such that it is a kind of a sourwood."
] |
the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur. | sent1: the fact that both the non-Texanness and the non-fossilness happens is false if the jurisprudentialness does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the Bosnianness and the recruiting huisache occurs does not hold then the recruiting huisache does not occur. sent3: the inflection does not occur. sent4: if the jurispr... | (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | sent1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬({B} & {HC}) -> ¬{HC} sent3: ¬{AF} sent4: {A} -> {B} sent5: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: ¬(¬{DQ} & ¬{HN}) sent7: {A} sent8: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent9: {HJ} sent10: {DP} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur is incorrect.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the Bosnianness does not occur.; sent4 & sent7 -> int2: the Bosnianness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent5 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent4 & sent7 -> int2: {B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the recruiting huisache does not occur. | ¬{HC} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that both the non-Texanness and the non-fossilness happens is false if the jurisprudentialness does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the Bosnianness and the recruiting huisache occurs does not hold then the recruiting... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur is incorrect.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the Bosnianness does not occur.; sent4 & sent7 -> int2: the Bosnianness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the Bosnianness does not occur if that that the non-Texanness and the non-fossilness occurs hold does not hold. | [
"if the jurisprudentialness happens the Bosnianness occurs.",
"the jurisprudentialness happens."
] | [
"The Bosnianness doesn't happen if the non-Texanness and non-fossilness doesn't hold.",
"The Bosnianness doesn't occur if the non-Texanness and non-fossilness doesn't hold."
] |
the fact that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is not correct. | sent1: if the fact that the precinct is not estrous is not wrong then that the expanse either is not a manatee or is estrous or both does not hold. sent2: that the precinct is not a Phanerozoic or it is a manatee or both is not true if the expanse is not a kind of a manatee. sent3: that something is not a microflora bu... | ¬(¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | sent1: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} v {D}{b}) sent2: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} v {A}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{P}{b} sent6: {D}{b} sent7: ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬{C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent10: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the precinct is not a kind of a microflora.; sent9 -> int2: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic if it is not a microflora.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent9 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{a}; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | that the expanse is not estrous and/or it is a Phanerozoic hold. | (¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | 5 | [
"sent3 -> int4: if the precinct is not butyric then the fact that it is not a microflora but a manatee is incorrect.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the precinct is not estrous is not wrong then that the expanse either is not a manatee or is estrous or both does not hold. sent2: that the precinct is not a Phanerozoic or it is a m... | sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the precinct is not a kind of a microflora.; sent9 -> int2: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic if it is not a microflora.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the precinct is not a kind of a microflora if it is not a manatee. | [
"the precinct is not a manatee.",
"if something is not a microflora then it is not a Phanerozoic.",
"if the precinct is not a Phanerozoic the fact that that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is incorrect is correct."
] | [
"The precinct isn't a microflora if it isn't a manatee.",
"The precinct is not a microflora if it is not a manatee.",
"If it is not a manatee, the precinct is not a microflora."
] |
the tropic is over-the-counter and/or it is not nonrepetitive. | sent1: that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold. sent2: either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue. sent3: the celibate is not a dialogue if the fact that the molding is Noachian and/or not a Bhutanese is not true. | ({A}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) | sent1: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: ¬{B}{b} -> ({A}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) sent3: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the celibate is not a dialogue.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the tropic is over-the-counter and/or it is not nonrepetitive. ; $context$ = sent1: that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold. sent2: either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue. sent3: the celibate is not a di... | sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the celibate is not a dialogue.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the celibate is not a dialogue if the fact that the molding is Noachian and/or not a Bhutanese is not true. | [
"that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold.",
"either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue."
] | [
"The celibate is not a dialogue if the mold is Noachian or not a Bhutanese.",
"The celibate is not a dialogue if the molding is Noachian or not a Bhutanese."
] |
there exists something such that if that it does not recruit mercantilism and it does not dodge muezzin is false then it is not exodontic. | sent1: the Salvadoran is not exodontic if that it does not recruit mercantilism and does not dodge muezzin is not wrong. sent2: that if the fact that something does not recruit mercantilism and it is not bronchiolar is false then it is not Minoan is not incorrect. sent3: there is something such that if that it is not a... | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{EE}x) -> ¬{G}x sent3: (Ex): ¬(¬{FI}x & ¬{FU}x) -> ¬{BR}x sent4: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: ¬(¬{GD}{ef} & ¬{AA}{ef}) -> ¬{EU}{ef} sent6: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{... | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 | if the fact that the cottonwick does not recruit mercantilism and is not bronchiolar does not hold it is not a Minoan. | ¬(¬{AA}{et} & ¬{EE}{et}) -> ¬{G}{et} | 1 | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that it does not recruit mercantilism and it does not dodge muezzin is false then it is not exodontic. ; $context$ = sent1: the Salvadoran is not exodontic if that it does not recruit mercantilism and does not dodge muezzin is not wrong. sent2: that if the fact that so... | sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the Salvadoran is not exodontic is not wrong if that it does not recruit mercantilism and it does not dodge muezzin is not true. | [] | [
"that the Salvadoran is not exodontic is not wrong if that it does not recruit mercantilism and it does not dodge muezzin is not true."
] |
the fact that the stearin dodges transplant and it is a pastorale is not right. | sent1: if something does not dodge haymow that it does dodge osteopathy and it elegizes is not correct. sent2: the speed does dodge polyptoton and grits. sent3: the ganoin is not sinkable and does bring. sent4: if that the haymow is a sky but it is not unsinkable is not wrong the ganoin is not unsinkable. sent5: the ga... | ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({I}x & {J}x) sent2: ({HS}{je} & {JG}{je}) sent3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent4: ({E}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent5: {C}{a} sent6: ({E}{b} & {D}{b}) sent7: {E}{a} sent8: (x): ({F}x v ¬{G}x) -> {E}{c} sent9: ¬({I}{c} & {J}{c}) -> ¬{H}{c} sent10: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent11: ({F}{d} v ¬{G}{d}) s... | [
"sent3 -> int1: the ganoin brings.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the stearin is a pastorale.; sent6 -> int3: the stearin dodges transplant.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent15 -> int2: {C}{b}; sent6 -> int3: {D}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | the fact that the stearin does dodge transplant and it is a pastorale does not hold. | ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) | 9 | [
"sent11 -> int4: there exists something such that either it is a December or it is not a kind of a salvo or both.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the haymow is a sky.; sent10 -> int6: the haymow is not unsinkable and does not bring if it is not a crocolite.; sent1 -> int7: the fact that the haymow dodges osteopathy and eleg... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the stearin dodges transplant and it is a pastorale is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not dodge haymow that it does dodge osteopathy and it elegizes is not correct. sent2: the speed does dodge polyptoton and grits. sent3: the ganoin is not sinkable and does bring. sent4: ... | sent3 -> int1: the ganoin brings.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the stearin is a pastorale.; sent6 -> int3: the stearin dodges transplant.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the ganoin is not sinkable and does bring. | [
"if the ganoin brings the stearin is a pastorale.",
"the fact that the stearin is a sky and it dodges transplant is true."
] | [
"The ganoin does bring and is not sinkable.",
"The ganoin is not sinkable."
] |
the apple is mayoral. | sent1: the macedoine is impure. sent2: the combatant is mayoral. sent3: the Laconian is a kind of a workpiece and is impure. sent4: the ouzo is mayoral. sent5: there exists something such that the fact that it is impure is not incorrect. sent6: something is a kind of a thorax and is impure if that it is not a quoits is... | {C}{b} | sent1: {A}{a} sent2: {C}{ge} sent3: ({DD}{hn} & {A}{hn}) sent4: {C}{fh} sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({L}x & {A}x) sent7: (Ex): ({HL}x & {GG}x) sent8: {A}{b} sent9: {C}{a} sent10: (x): ¬({B}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent11: (Ex): {FQ}x sent12: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent13: {DG}{b} sent14: {IE}{b} sent15: (Ex)... | [
"sent1 & sent19 -> int1: the macedoine is impure and it is a kind of a quoits.; int1 -> int2: the fact that there is something such that it is impure and it is a quoits is not false.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent1 & sent19 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x);"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | something is a kind of a toast that is a thorax. | (Ex): ({AO}x & {L}x) | 6 | [
"sent17 -> int3: the macedoine is a toast.; sent6 -> int4: if the macedoine is not a quoits it is a thorax that is impure.; sent10 -> int5: the macedoine is not a quoits if the fact that it is a quoits and it is animating is not right.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the apple is mayoral. ; $context$ = sent1: the macedoine is impure. sent2: the combatant is mayoral. sent3: the Laconian is a kind of a workpiece and is impure. sent4: the ouzo is mayoral. sent5: there exists something such that the fact that it is impure is not incorrect. sent6: something is a kind of a... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the macedoine is impure. | [
"the macedoine is a quoits."
] | [
"the macedoine is impure."
] |
that that the galacticness occurs and the tragedy happens is not incorrect is incorrect. | sent1: the retraction occurs and the breeziness occurs. sent2: if the recruiting hee-haw does not occur the fact that the metallic happens hold. sent3: if the necessariness does not occur then the fact that the speaking Dromaeosauridae occurs is true. sent4: the dodging Xenopodidae does not occur. sent5: the inversion ... | ¬({C} & {D}) | sent1: ({CO} & {CF}) sent2: ¬{CE} -> {IF} sent3: ¬{AB} -> {AQ} sent4: ¬{JK} sent5: ¬{HS} sent6: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent7: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent8: ({DN} & {T}) sent9: ¬{B} -> {C} sent10: ¬{BI} -> ({R} & {GK}) sent11: ¬{F} sent12: ¬{CJ} sent13: ({GM} & {HB}) | [
"sent6 -> int1: the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the galacticness happens.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: both the tragedy and the placation happens.; int3 -> int4: the tragedy occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> int1: ¬{B}; int1 & sent9 -> int2: {C}; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: ({D} & {E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that that the galacticness occurs and the tragedy happens is not incorrect is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the retraction occurs and the breeziness occurs. sent2: if the recruiting hee-haw does not occur the fact that the metallic happens hold. sent3: if the necessariness does not occur then the fact ... | sent6 -> int1: the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the galacticness happens.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: both the tragedy and the placation happens.; int3 -> int4: the tragedy occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the swooping cereal does not occur and the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur. | [
"that the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur prevents the non-galacticness.",
"if that the denotativeness does not occur is not incorrect both the tragedy and the placation happens.",
"the denotativeness does not occur."
] | [
"The swooping cereal doesn't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen.",
"The swooping cereals don't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen.",
"The swooping cereal does not happen."
] |
the fact that there is something such that if it does recruit bailee and is not a meticulousness then it is a kind of a foreshore is false. | sent1: the apple is a string if it is a Nantucket and it is a meticulousness. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a Chesterton and a gazelle it chafes. sent3: if the apple does recruit bailee and is not a meticulousness then it is a foreshore. sent4: there exists something such that if it dodges central an... | ¬((Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x) | sent1: ({JF}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {HN}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ({P}x & {FK}x) -> {CR}x sent3: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent4: (Ex): ({CH}x & {BL}x) -> {DQ}x sent5: (x): ({CU}x & ¬{GT}x) -> {AU}x sent6: ({DN}{aa} & {DI}{aa}) -> {AA}{aa} sent7: (Ex): ({ER}x & {AI}x) -> {ED}x sent8: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent9:... | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | there exists something such that if it is a suborder and is not mechanistic then it is carposporic. | (Ex): ({CU}x & ¬{GT}x) -> {AU}x | 2 | [
"sent5 -> int1: the fact that the lactose is carposporic is not incorrect if it is a suborder and not mechanistic.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it does recruit bailee and is not a meticulousness then it is a kind of a foreshore is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the apple is a string if it is a Nantucket and it is a meticulousness. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a Chesterton and a gazel... | sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the apple does recruit bailee and is not a meticulousness then it is a foreshore. | [] | [
"if the apple does recruit bailee and is not a meticulousness then it is a foreshore."
] |
both the non-cheliceralness and the underageness happens. | sent1: that the tracing does not occur is brought about by the dodging gamete or that the dodging setter does not occur or both. sent2: the conversing and the confession occurs if the macrencephalicness does not occur. sent3: that the conversing does not occur causes that the underageness occurs and the cheliceralness ... | (¬{C} & {D}) | sent1: ({L} v ¬{M}) -> ¬{K} sent2: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent3: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) sent4: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & ¬{F}) sent5: ¬{K} -> ({J} & {I}) sent6: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent7: {D} sent8: {A} sent9: ¬{J} -> ¬({H} & {I}) sent10: {DA} sent11: ¬(¬{B} v {A}) -> ¬{HC} sent12: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent13: {I} -> ({H} & ¬{G}) sen... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | that the electricalness does not occur is not wrong. | ¬{HC} | 11 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = both the non-cheliceralness and the underageness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the tracing does not occur is brought about by the dodging gamete or that the dodging setter does not occur or both. sent2: the conversing and the confession occurs if the macrencephalicness does not occur. sent3: that th... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the tasting occurs. | [
"the underageness happens."
] | [
"the tasting occurs."
] |
the falcon does dodge Homer. | sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. sent4: the manikin is not invulnerable if there exists somet... | {C}{b} | sent1: ¬({I}{g} & ¬{J}{g}) -> {F}{d} sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {C}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): ({J}x & {K}x) sent4: (x): {J}x -> ¬{I}{e} sent5: ¬{D}{c} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬{I}{e} -> ({H}{d} v {F}{d}) sent8: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: {B}{a} -> {A}{jg} sent10: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent11: ¬{K... | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hyp... | PROVED | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}); sent17 -> int4: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 | the heliometer is dizygotic. | {A}{jg} | 12 | [
"sent21 -> int5: the Pneumovax does not dodge longbowman if that it dodge longbowman and it is not a Haitian does not hold.; sent25 -> int6: the fact that the Pneumovax does dodge longbowman but it is not a kind of a Haitian is not correct if the fact that it is a tenrec hold.; sent3 -> int7: the customer dodges So... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the falcon does dodge Homer. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. se... | sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothes... | DeductionInstance | the falcon is not a kind of a bailor if that the melosa does hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect. | [
"the fact that the melosa is a hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect.",
"something is not a materialist.",
"that the falcon is dizygotic is not incorrect if there is something such that it is not a materialist.",
"if something is not a kind of a bailor but it is dizygotic then it dodges Homer."
... | [
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare.",
"If the melosa does hare and it is incorrect, the falcon is not a bailor.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is an interstate.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is incorrect."
] |
something is avirulent. | sent1: the neoclassicist is not a densitometry. sent2: if something is not a densitometry and it is not a pleat it is avirulent. sent3: the neoclassicist does not swoop semiprofessional and it is not a OPCW. sent4: the nonmember is not a kind of a densitometry. sent5: there exists something such that it occults. sent6:... | (Ex): {C}x | sent1: ¬{A}{a} sent2: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {C}x sent3: (¬{CE}{a} & ¬{HO}{a}) sent4: ¬{A}{cc} sent5: (Ex): {FN}x sent6: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent7: (Ex): {G}x sent8: (x): {D}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent9: (¬{B}{fi} & ¬{DK}{fi}) -> {CA}{fi} | [
"sent2 -> int1: that the neoclassicist is avirulent is not wrong if it is not a densitometry and it is not a pleat.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent2 -> int1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> {C}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | the semiprofessional is not avirulent. | ¬{C}{ej} | 6 | [
"sent8 -> int2: the fact that if that the neoclassicist does dodge central is not false that the neoclassicist is a kind of a densitometry that is not a pleat is wrong is right.; sent6 -> int3: the neoclassicist does dodge central if it is evangelical.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = something is avirulent. ; $context$ = sent1: the neoclassicist is not a densitometry. sent2: if something is not a densitometry and it is not a pleat it is avirulent. sent3: the neoclassicist does not swoop semiprofessional and it is not a OPCW. sent4: the nonmember is not a kind of a densitometry. sent5... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if something is not a densitometry and it is not a pleat it is avirulent. | [] | [
"if something is not a densitometry and it is not a pleat it is avirulent."
] |
either the matricide does not occur or the gauntlet happens or both. | sent1: the refocusing occurs. sent2: the matricide does not occur if the recruiting humin occurs. | (¬{C} v {D}) | sent1: {B} sent2: {A} -> ¬{C} | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = either the matricide does not occur or the gauntlet happens or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the refocusing occurs. sent2: the matricide does not occur if the recruiting humin occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the matricide does not occur if the recruiting humin occurs. | [
"the refocusing occurs."
] | [
"the matricide does not occur if the recruiting humin occurs."
] |
the fact that the firestorm does not occur is right. | sent1: the fact that the filling and the unjustness occurs if the amputation does not occur hold. sent2: the swooping quetzal happens if the postnatalness happens. sent3: that the bludgeoning and the dodging climacteric occurs is brought about by that the recruiting fieriness does not occur. sent4: the dodging climacte... | ¬{D} | sent1: ¬{C} -> ({CR} & {B}) sent2: {L} -> {K} sent3: ¬{H} -> ({EI} & {A}) sent4: {A} sent5: ¬(¬{G} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{E} sent6: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & {G}) sent7: ({A} & {B}) sent8: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{D} sent9: ({HG} & {GJ}) sent10: ¬{E} -> ¬({B} & {C}) sent11: {E} sent12: ¬(¬{L} & {N}) -> {L} sent13: ¬{E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent14: {K... | [
"sent7 -> int1: the unjustness occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent7 -> int1: {B};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | the filling and the bludgeoning happens. | ({CR} & {EI}) | 10 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the firestorm does not occur is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the filling and the unjustness occurs if the amputation does not occur hold. sent2: the swooping quetzal happens if the postnatalness happens. sent3: that the bludgeoning and the dodging climacteric occurs is brought ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the dodging climacteric and the unjustness happens. | [] | [
"the dodging climacteric and the unjustness happens."
] |
that there exists something such that if it is not a Olympian then the fact that it is biomedical and it does not swoop gnome is incorrect is not true. | sent1: if something is not a tyrothricin then that it does service and it is not a reorientation is not correct. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a Olympian that it is biomedical and does not swoop gnome is incorrect. sent3: the fact that the sparkler is biomedical and it swoops gnome is not correct if ... | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: (x): ¬{HK}x -> ¬({EA}x & ¬{C}x) sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent3: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent4: ¬{GL}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{DN}{aa}) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬{FU}x -> ¬({Q}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{... | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 14 | there exists something such that if it is not a tyrothricin then the fact that it is a service and it is not a reorientation is not true. | (Ex): ¬{HK}x -> ¬({EA}x & ¬{C}x) | 2 | [
"sent1 -> int1: the fact that the DMZ services but it is not a reorientation is not right if it is not a tyrothricin.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is not a Olympian then the fact that it is biomedical and it does not swoop gnome is incorrect is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a tyrothricin then that it does service and it is not a reorientation is not correct. sent2: there exists someth... | sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the sparkler is not a Olympian the fact that it is a kind of biomedical thing that does not swoop gnome does not hold. | [] | [
"if the sparkler is not a Olympian the fact that it is a kind of biomedical thing that does not swoop gnome does not hold."
] |
the butt does not swoop cosmetic. | sent1: there is something such that it is not costive. sent2: the lineman is not a rind. sent3: the lineman is not costive if something that does not recruit Synentognathi does not swoop cosmetic. sent4: a coal swoops cosmetic. sent5: that the lineman does not recruit Synentognathi is not incorrect if something does no... | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent2: ¬{BQ}{aa} sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent4: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent5: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent6: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {CU}{a}) sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent9: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent10: ¬{E}{b} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | the laryngopharynx is not a kind of an insolvency and it does not swoop Hargeisa. | (¬{CU}{ae} & ¬{DT}{ae}) | 3 | [
"sent6 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-liliaceous an insolvency does not hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the butt does not swoop cosmetic. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not costive. sent2: the lineman is not a rind. sent3: the lineman is not costive if something that does not recruit Synentognathi does not swoop cosmetic. sent4: a coal swoops cosmetic. sent5: that the lineman does ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the lineman is not a rind. | [
"the lineman is not costive if something that does not recruit Synentognathi does not swoop cosmetic."
] | [
"the lineman is not a rind."
] |
there exists something such that it swoops monetarism or it does not dodge 1870s or both. | sent1: the courlan is not abiogenetic. sent2: the courlan either does swoop monetarism or does dodge 1870s or both. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a deaf or it does not speak chinked or both. sent4: the zinc hums if there is something such that the fact that it is a Key and/or is not strategics is ... | (Ex): ({A}x v ¬{B}x) | sent1: ¬{HH}{a} sent2: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent3: (Ex): ({R}x v ¬{JD}x) sent4: (x): ¬({H}x v ¬{G}x) -> {F}{f} sent5: ¬{AA}{aa} sent6: {A}{c} -> {A}{b} sent7: (x): {I}x sent8: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {DN}{b}) sent9: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {DN}x) -> ¬{DN}{a} sent10: (x): ¬({E}x & {D}x) -> {C}{d} sent11: (x): {I}x -> ¬({H}x v ¬{G}x) ... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | the courlan does not speak Humulus. | ¬{DN}{a} | 15 | [
"sent7 -> int1: the cloud does recruit stint.; sent11 -> int2: the fact that the cloud is a kind of a Key and/or it is not strategics does not hold if that it does recruit stint is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the cloud is a Key and/or it is not strategics is not right.; int3 -> int4: there exists nothing ... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it swoops monetarism or it does not dodge 1870s or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the courlan is not abiogenetic. sent2: the courlan either does swoop monetarism or does dodge 1870s or both. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a deaf or it does not speak chink... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the courlan either does swoop monetarism or does dodge 1870s or both. | [
"the courlan is not abiogenetic."
] | [
"the courlan either does swoop monetarism or does dodge 1870s or both."
] |
there is something such that if the fact that it does not dodge arborist is not wrong that it is both not a mandrill and a fetology is false. | sent1: the redoubt is not a mandrill and is a fetology if it does not dodge arborist. sent2: if the gemma is not a Carew then the fact that it does not dodge backswimmer and it is a traumatophobia is not true. sent3: there is something such that if it dodges arborist then the fact that it is not a kind of a mandrill an... | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: ¬{JH}{p} -> ¬(¬{EM}{p} & {ID}{p}) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{GO}x -> ¬(¬{DB}x & {GM}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{CC}x -> ¬(¬{FP}x & {AU}x) sent7: ¬{GC}{fo} -> ¬(¬{JF}{fo} & {HU}{fo}) sent8: ¬{AS}{aa} -> ¬(¬{GU}{aa}... | [
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 | there is something such that if it is not a Huxley then the fact that it is not an apple and does speak redoubt does not hold. | (Ex): ¬{GO}x -> ¬(¬{DB}x & {GM}x) | 2 | [
"sent5 -> int1: if the bolster is not a Huxley then the fact that it is not a kind of an apple and does speak redoubt does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it does not dodge arborist is not wrong that it is both not a mandrill and a fetology is false. ; $context$ = sent1: the redoubt is not a mandrill and is a fetology if it does not dodge arborist. sent2: if the gemma is not a Carew then the fact that it does n... | sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the redoubt is not a mandrill and is a fetology is not correct if that it does not dodge arborist hold. | [] | [
"that the redoubt is not a mandrill and is a fetology is not correct if that it does not dodge arborist hold."
] |
the beeswax is not a kind of a sixtieth or is not a Petaurus or both. | sent1: that the beeswax is not a sixtieth and/or is not a Petaurus is not right if the screwtop does not swoop beeswax. sent2: the sieve does not recruit chondrichthian if the fact that it is not a numeral and recruit chondrichthian is incorrect. sent3: the fact that if something is legless but it does not read then it... | (¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent2: ¬(¬{K}{f} & {I}{f}) -> ¬{I}{f} sent3: (x): ({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent4: ¬{F}{e} -> ¬({D}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {AC}{aa} sent7: ¬{I}{f} -> ({G}{e} & ¬{H}{e}) sent8: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent9: ¬({D}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent10: {A}{a} -> ({AA}... | [
"sent8 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent8 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | the fact that that either the beeswax is not a sixtieth or it is not a Petaurus or both is not true is not false. | ¬(¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) | 11 | [
"sent3 -> int1: if the spear is legless but it does not read it is not nonalcoholic.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the beeswax is not a kind of a sixtieth or is not a Petaurus or both. ; $context$ = sent1: that the beeswax is not a sixtieth and/or is not a Petaurus is not right if the screwtop does not swoop beeswax. sent2: the sieve does not recruit chondrichthian if the fact that it is not a numeral and recruit cho... | sent8 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the beeswax is not a sixtieth and/or it is not a Petaurus if the screwtop does swoop beeswax. | [
"the screwtop does swoop beeswax."
] | [
"the beeswax is not a sixtieth and/or it is not a Petaurus if the screwtop does swoop beeswax."
] |
the repulsiveness does not occur. | sent1: the deadening does not occur if the reimposition but not the dodging chromogen occurs. sent2: the swooping aquaplane and the repulsiveness occurs if the deadening does not occur. sent3: the fact that the advocacy does not occur is right. sent4: the pleomorphicness happens. sent5: if the indexlessness happens the... | ¬{A} | sent1: ({D} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{C} sent2: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent3: ¬{BU} sent4: {GS} sent5: {I} -> ¬{G} sent6: ¬{F} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) sent7: ({H} v ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} sent8: (¬{B} & {C}) sent9: {FQ} sent10: {IK} -> {HC} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the repulsiveness happens.; sent8 -> int1: the swooping aquaplane does not occur.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent8 -> int1: ¬{B};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | the repulsiveness occurs. | {A} | 10 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the repulsiveness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the deadening does not occur if the reimposition but not the dodging chromogen occurs. sent2: the swooping aquaplane and the repulsiveness occurs if the deadening does not occur. sent3: the fact that the advocacy does not occur is right. sent4: the p... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the swooping aquaplane does not occur and the deadening occurs. | [] | [
"the swooping aquaplane does not occur and the deadening occurs."
] |
the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a OWLT either it is not a Reverend or it is arteriosclerotic or both is not right. | sent1: either something does not swoop laryngospasm or it is abasic or both if it does not dodge lamination. sent2: either something is not a kind of a Reverend or it is arteriosclerotic or both if it is not a OWLT. | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x)) | sent1: (x): ¬{GG}x -> (¬{DP}x v {IB}x) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) | [
"sent2 -> int1: if that the mayfish is not a OWLT is not wrong then it is not a kind of a Reverend or it is arteriosclerotic or both.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | there is something such that if it does not dodge lamination it does not swoop laryngospasm and/or it is abasic. | (Ex): ¬{GG}x -> (¬{DP}x v {IB}x) | 2 | [
"sent1 -> int2: if the holophyte does not dodge lamination then it does not swoop laryngospasm and/or it is abasic.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a OWLT either it is not a Reverend or it is arteriosclerotic or both is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: either something does not swoop laryngospasm or it is abasic or both if it does not dodge lamination. sent2: either something is not a kind o... | sent2 -> int1: if that the mayfish is not a OWLT is not wrong then it is not a kind of a Reverend or it is arteriosclerotic or both.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | either something is not a kind of a Reverend or it is arteriosclerotic or both if it is not a OWLT. | [] | [
"either something is not a kind of a Reverend or it is arteriosclerotic or both if it is not a OWLT."
] |
the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of an impressionist then the fact that it is not a kind of a drawbridge and/or it is not a save is wrong is incorrect. | sent1: the fact that the warthog is not a drawbridge and/or it does not save is not true if it is not an impressionist. sent2: if something is not Afghani the fact that either it does not swoop warthog or it is not a sunburned or both is wrong. sent3: if the warthog is an impressionist then that it is not a kind of a d... | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬{DE}x -> ¬(¬{JK}x v ¬{BI}x) sent3: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent4: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent5: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent6: (Ex): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent7: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{... | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | there exists something such that if it is non-Afghani that it does not swoop warthog and/or does not sunburn is incorrect. | (Ex): ¬{DE}x -> ¬(¬{JK}x v ¬{BI}x) | 2 | [
"sent2 -> int1: that the whitebait does not swoop warthog or does not sunburn or both is not right if it is not Afghani.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of an impressionist then the fact that it is not a kind of a drawbridge and/or it is not a save is wrong is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the warthog is not a drawbridge and/or it does not save is not true if it is not an ... | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that the warthog is not a drawbridge and/or it does not save is not true if it is not an impressionist. | [] | [
"the fact that the warthog is not a drawbridge and/or it does not save is not true if it is not an impressionist."
] |
the SLS does dodge masted. | sent1: everything is not holistic. sent2: the fact that if something dodges masted then the fact that either it is not a coupon or it is a bylaw or both is false hold. sent3: the SLS is not a podetium. sent4: the SLS does not swoop state. sent5: something is not a Vanbrugh if it is alkahestic and/or it is not a kind of... | {A}{a} | sent1: (x): ¬{E}x sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{HE}x v {IR}x) sent3: ¬{AB}{a} sent4: ¬{B}{a} sent5: (x): ({D}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent6: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{E}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent8: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent9: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent10: {I}{c} -> ¬({H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) sent11: ¬{E}{a} -> (... | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the SLS does dodge masted.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: either the SLS is not a crocodile or it is a podetium or both.; sent13 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the SLS is not a crocodile and/or is a podetium is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> h... | DISPROVED | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); sent13 & sent4 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | that the hairpin is not a coupon or a bylaw or both is false. | ¬(¬{HE}{ht} v {IR}{ht}) | 10 | [
"sent2 -> int4: the fact that the hairpin is not a kind of a coupon and/or it is a bylaw is not right if that it dodges masted is right.; sent7 -> int5: the hairpin does dodge masted and it does swoop state if it is not a Vanbrugh.; sent5 -> int6: if the hairpin is not non-alkahestic or it is not a Vanbrugh or both... | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the SLS does dodge masted. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is not holistic. sent2: the fact that if something dodges masted then the fact that either it is not a coupon or it is a bylaw or both is false hold. sent3: the SLS is not a podetium. sent4: the SLS does not swoop state. sent5: something is not a... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the SLS does dodge masted.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: either the SLS is not a crocodile or it is a podetium or both.; sent13 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the SLS is not a crocodile and/or is a podetium is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypoth... | DeductionInstance | if the SLS dodges masted it is not a crocodile and/or it is a podetium. | [
"if the SLS does not swoop state then the fact that it either is not a crocodile or is a podetium or both is incorrect.",
"the SLS does not swoop state."
] | [
"If the SLS dodges masted it is either a crocodile or a podetium.",
"If the SLS dodges masted, it is either a crocodile or a podetium."
] |
the preempting does not occur. | sent1: if the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs then that the recruiting Altaic but not the swooping expressionism happens does not hold. sent2: the recruiting behaviorism does not occur and the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs. | ¬{E} | sent1: {B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent2: (¬{A} & {B}) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the recruiting Altaic but not the swooping expressionism occurs is not true.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent2 -> int1: {B}; sent1 & int1 -> int2: ¬({C} & ¬{D});"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the preempting does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs then that the recruiting Altaic but not the swooping expressionism happens does not hold. sent2: the recruiting behaviorism does not occur and the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the recruiting behaviorism does not occur and the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs. | [
"if the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs then that the recruiting Altaic but not the swooping expressionism happens does not hold."
] | [
"the recruiting behaviorism does not occur and the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs."
] |
the fife dodges Monterey and is not a PAYE. | sent1: the fact that something does emigrate but it is not bladdery is incorrect if it is a Bretagne. sent2: the rayon freezes. | ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬({CJ}x & ¬{FU}x) sent2: {B}{b} | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | that the craniometer does emigrate and is not bladdery is not right. | ¬({CJ}{ap} & ¬{FU}{ap}) | 4 | [
"sent1 -> int1: if that the craniometer is not a kind of a Bretagne is false then the fact that it does emigrate and is not bladdery is not correct.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fife dodges Monterey and is not a PAYE. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something does emigrate but it is not bladdery is incorrect if it is a Bretagne. sent2: the rayon freezes. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the rayon freezes. | [
"the fact that something does emigrate but it is not bladdery is incorrect if it is a Bretagne."
] | [
"the rayon freezes."
] |
the fact that the salute does not occur is right. | sent1: the slavery occurs. sent2: the theming occurs. sent3: the saluting does not occur if the accountancy does not occur. sent4: that the connection does not occur causes that the neurobiologicalness does not occur and the suppling does not occur. sent5: the dodging lunchtime happens if the traditionalism happens. se... | ¬{C} | sent1: {B} sent2: {FO} sent3: ¬{A} -> ¬{C} sent4: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) sent5: {AR} -> {EN} sent6: {A} -> {C} sent7: {ED} sent8: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) sent9: ({A} & {B}) | [
"sent9 -> int1: the accountancy occurs.; sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent9 -> int1: {A}; sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the salute does not occur. | ¬{C} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the salute does not occur is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the slavery occurs. sent2: the theming occurs. sent3: the saluting does not occur if the accountancy does not occur. sent4: that the connection does not occur causes that the neurobiologicalness does not occur and the suppling does no... | sent9 -> int1: the accountancy occurs.; sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the accountancy and the slavery happens. | [
"if the accountancy happens the salute occurs."
] | [
"the accountancy and the slavery happens."
] |
the fact that the roadhouse is not a kind of a stifle hold. | sent1: that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS. sent2: the Donatist is a kind of non-nutritional thing that does not revamp if the streptocarpus does germinate. sent3: if the Donatist is non-nutritional thing that does not revamp the muton revamp. sent4: if the linocut is unrespectable i... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent2: {G}{e} -> (¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent3: (¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) -> {E}{c} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent6: {H}{e} -> {G}{e} sent7: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) sent9: {A}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the linocut is a MS.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the roadhouse is not a stifle. | ¬{C}{b} | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the roadhouse is not a kind of a stifle hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS. sent2: the Donatist is a kind of non-nutritional thing that does not revamp if the streptocarpus does germinate. sent3: if the Donatist is non-nutritio... | sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the linocut is a MS.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the linocut is unrespectable it is a MS. | [
"the linocut is unrespectable.",
"that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS."
] | [
"The linocut is unrespectable.",
"It is aMS if the linocut is unrespectable."
] |
that the lip-gloss is both a sherry and a builder is incorrect. | sent1: if the pith is not a kind of a Assamese that the lip-gloss is a kind of a sherry and it is a builder does not hold. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a Rhinobatidae the vigilante recruits Cunningham and it does team. sent3: the signor is both an antigen and a guillemot. sent4: if something is ... | ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({G}{e} & {I}{e}) sent3: ({FC}{bn} & {GN}{bn}) sent4: (x): {M}x -> ¬({L}{f} & {N}{f}) sent5: (Ex): {M}x sent6: ¬({L}{f} & {N}{f}) -> ¬{L}{f} sent7: (¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent8: {A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) sent10: {B}{a} sent11: {K}{f} se... | [
"sent8 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent8 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | that the lip-gloss is a sherry and it is a builder is incorrect. | ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | 13 | [
"sent9 -> int1: if the tampion is not nonarbitrable then it is non-majors and is not a kind of a yodh.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: that the Moro is corvine and does recruit escutcheon is false.; sent6 & int2 -> int3: the Moro is non-corvine.; sent11 & int3 -> int4: the Moro does continue and is not corvine.; sent12 & i... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the lip-gloss is both a sherry and a builder is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the pith is not a kind of a Assamese that the lip-gloss is a kind of a sherry and it is a builder does not hold. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a Rhinobatidae the vigilante recruits Cunningham an... | sent8 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the lip-gloss is a sherry. | [
"the lip-gloss is a kind of a builder."
] | [
"the lip-gloss is a sherry."
] |
the jiqui is not a skid. | sent1: the hawse is not a kind of a Lugosi and/or it is not a sirrah. sent2: the hawse is differentiable and it dodges Betelgeuse if it is not an invader. sent3: the jiqui is not a skid and does swoop receptacle if the hawse is not non-trochaic. sent4: the jiqui does swoop receptacle. sent5: that the hatchery swoops re... | ¬{B}{a} | sent1: (¬{M}{b} v ¬{L}{b}) sent2: ¬{K}{b} -> ({J}{b} & {F}{b}) sent3: {C}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent4: {A}{a} sent5: {A}{at} sent6: ¬(¬{H}{b} & {I}{b}) -> {D}{b} sent7: (x): ({D}x & ¬{E}x) -> {C}x sent8: ¬(¬{H}{b} & {I}{b}) sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}{ge} & {JC}{ge}) sent10: (x): ({F}x v {G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent11: (Ex): ¬... | [
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 | the jiqui does not skid. | ¬{B}{a} | 9 | [
"sent7 -> int1: the fact that if the hawse does dodge Larousse but it does not speak buskin the hawse is trochaic hold.; sent6 & sent8 -> int2: the hawse does dodge Larousse.; sent10 -> int3: the hawse does not speak buskin if it does dodge Betelgeuse or it is penal or both.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the jiqui is not a skid. ; $context$ = sent1: the hawse is not a kind of a Lugosi and/or it is not a sirrah. sent2: the hawse is differentiable and it dodges Betelgeuse if it is not an invader. sent3: the jiqui is not a skid and does swoop receptacle if the hawse is not non-trochaic. sent4: the jiqui doe... | sent12 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the jiqui does swoop receptacle and is a kind of a skid. | [] | [
"the jiqui does swoop receptacle and is a kind of a skid."
] |
the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. | sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the length is a kind of a patient then the phosphatase is a oxheart. sent4: the phosphatas... | ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: ¬(¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) sent3: {D}{c} -> {C}{b} sent4: {D}{b} sent5: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent6: {A}{c} sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent9: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent11: {E}{a} -> {A}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {C}{b} sent13: {... | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent14 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: {C}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the lengt... | sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat. | [
"if a non-arachnoid thing is not a kind of an overcoat then the dimorphism is not a kind of a sherbert.",
"if the dimorphism is not a sherbert then the phosphatase is holy.",
"if that the length does not swoop A-line and is not patient does not hold the phosphatase is a oxheart.",
"that the length does not sw... | [
"It is not an overcoat and it is not arachnoid.",
"It isn't an overcoat and it isn't arachnoid.",
"It is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat.",
"It's not an overcoat and it's not arachnoid."
] |
the rangpur is not comparable. | sent1: the thrombolytic is not comparable if the rangpur is deniable and is a mulloway. sent2: the thrombolytic is a sphenoid. sent3: the thrombolytic is a mulloway. sent4: the rangpur is scentless. sent5: the rangpur is cystic. sent6: the fact that the rangpur is Senecan is correct. sent7: the rangpur is not deniable ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: {CS}{a} sent3: {B}{a} sent4: {ER}{b} sent5: {DB}{b} sent6: {HE}{b} sent7: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent8: {C}{a} sent9: ¬{C}{gb} sent10: {A}{a} sent11: {C}{cb} sent12: ¬{C}{du} sent13: {A}{ap} sent14: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent15: ¬{C}{da} sent16: {CR}{a} sent17: ({... | [
"sent10 & sent3 -> int1: the thrombolytic is deniable and it is a mulloway.; sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent10 & sent3 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the rangpur is not comparable. ; $context$ = sent1: the thrombolytic is not comparable if the rangpur is deniable and is a mulloway. sent2: the thrombolytic is a sphenoid. sent3: the thrombolytic is a mulloway. sent4: the rangpur is scentless. sent5: the rangpur is cystic. sent6: the fact that the rangpu... | sent10 & sent3 -> int1: the thrombolytic is deniable and it is a mulloway.; sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the thrombolytic is deniable. | [
"the thrombolytic is a mulloway.",
"the rangpur is not comparable if the thrombolytic is a kind of deniable thing that is a mulloway."
] | [
"The disease is deniable.",
"Thelytic is deniable."
] |
the knob does not swoop Gambian. | sent1: that the knob swoops cornered and it does swoop Gambian is wrong. sent2: the aquavit is not a Polyodon. sent3: something does not swoop Gambian but it is a Polyodon if it is a kind of a Malebranche. sent4: if something is a kind of a flats the aquavit swoops Gambian. sent5: the knob swoops Gambian if there exist... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: ¬({AA}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) sent4: (x): {AB}x -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: (Ex): ({HN}x & ¬{BL}x) sent8: {A}{l} sent9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {A}x) | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the aquavit swoops cornered but it is not a flats is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it does swoop cornered and is not a kind of a flats is false.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the knob does not swoop Gambian. | ¬{B}{b} | 6 | [
"sent3 -> int3: that the aquavit does not swoop Gambian and is the Polyodon if the aquavit is a Malebranche is true.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the knob does not swoop Gambian. ; $context$ = sent1: that the knob swoops cornered and it does swoop Gambian is wrong. sent2: the aquavit is not a Polyodon. sent3: something does not swoop Gambian but it is a Polyodon if it is a kind of a Malebranche. sent4: if something is a kind of a flats the aquavit... | sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the aquavit swoops cornered but it is not a flats is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it does swoop cornered and is not a kind of a flats is false.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that if the aquavit is not the Polyodon then the fact that the aquavit does swoop cornered and is not flats is false hold. | [
"the aquavit is not a Polyodon.",
"the knob swoops Gambian if there exists something such that that it swoops cornered and is not a kind of a flats is not correct."
] | [
"The fact that the aquavit does swoop cornered and is not flats is false.",
"The fact that the aquavit swoops cornered and is not flats is false."
] |
there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of undemocratic thing that is a taxon does not hold it does not hoot. | sent1: if the links is not undemocratic then it is not a hoot. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it does uncoil and is a facial is not right then it is a kind of a Djiboutian. sent3: if that something does dodge Larousse and tames is not correct it is not a hoariness. sent4: the serge is a spreadshee... | (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: ¬{AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ¬({JF}x & {BB}x) -> {GN}x sent3: (x): ¬({AG}x & {BT}x) -> ¬{O}x sent4: ¬({AA}{bf} & {HS}{bf}) -> {DE}{bf} sent5: (Ex): ¬{DU}x -> ¬{JI}x sent6: (Ex): ¬{DP}x -> ¬{GC}x sent7: (Ex): ¬{T}x -> ¬{CM}x sent8: (Ex): ({IG}x & {HA}x) -> ¬{DH}x sent9: (Ex): ¬({FO}x & {GB}x) -> {EQ}x sent1... | [
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | there exists something such that if the fact that it does dodge Larousse and it is tame is not right it is not a hoariness. | (Ex): ¬({AG}x & {BT}x) -> ¬{O}x | 2 | [
"sent3 -> int1: if the fact that the planation dodges Larousse and tames is wrong it is not a hoariness.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it is a kind of undemocratic thing that is a taxon does not hold it does not hoot. ; $context$ = sent1: if the links is not undemocratic then it is not a hoot. sent2: there is something such that if the fact that it does uncoil and is a facial is not right th... | sent16 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the fact that the links is undemocratic and it is a taxon is wrong it is not a hoot. | [] | [
"if the fact that the links is undemocratic and it is a taxon is wrong it is not a hoot."
] |
the terpene is not entrepreneurial. | sent1: if the fact that the missal is indirect and it does corrupt is wrong then the terpene is non-adverbial. sent2: the bascule does not swoop cosmetic and is not a kind of a kishke if it is a weekend. sent3: if the missal is not Dickensian then the bascule is a kind of an adverbial. sent4: the fact that something is... | ¬{D}{c} | sent1: ¬({F}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent2: {K}{b} -> (¬{J}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) sent3: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}x & {E}x) sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (x): ¬({E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}x & {I}x) sent8: (x): ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) -> {D}x sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) sent10: (Ex): ... | [
"sent5 & sent14 -> int1: the missal is not Dickensian.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the bascule is an adverbial but not Dickensian.; sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 & sent14 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent16 & int1 -> int2: ({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}); sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | the terpene is entrepreneurial. | {D}{c} | 10 | [
"sent8 -> int3: if the fact that the terpene is gastric or it is not Dickensian or both is not correct then it is entrepreneurial.; sent9 -> int4: if the terpene is not an adverbial that it is gastric or it is not Dickensian or both is not true.; sent4 -> int5: if the missal is not ipsilateral then the fact that it... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the terpene is not entrepreneurial. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the missal is indirect and it does corrupt is wrong then the terpene is non-adverbial. sent2: the bascule does not swoop cosmetic and is not a kind of a kishke if it is a weekend. sent3: if the missal is not Dickensian then the bas... | sent5 & sent14 -> int1: the missal is not Dickensian.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the bascule is an adverbial but not Dickensian.; sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the missal is not gastric it is not Dickensian. | [
"the missal is not gastric.",
"if that the missal is not Dickensian is not incorrect the bascule is a kind of an adverbial but it is not Dickensian.",
"if the bascule is a kind of adverbial thing that is not Dickensian the terpene is not entrepreneurial."
] | [
"The missal is not Dickensian.",
"The missal is not Dickensian if it is not gastric.",
"It is not Dickensian if the missal is not gastric."
] |
the swooping Taiwanese does not occur and the swooping Balsaminaceae occurs. | sent1: that the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidentalness happens is brought about by that the swooping Babesiidae does not occur. sent2: the unquietness occurs and/or the scallop occurs. sent3: if the internationalness does not occur then that the swooping Taiwanese does not occur and the swooping Balsaminaceae ha... | (¬{C} & {D}) | sent1: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent2: ({GH} v {DA}) sent3: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent4: ¬({E} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} sent5: ¬{J} -> ({I} & ¬{H}) sent6: {B} -> ¬{C} sent7: ¬{JG} -> {IJ} sent8: ¬{F} sent9: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent10: {M} -> (¬{K} & ¬{L}) sent11: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) sent12: {HT} sent13: {BI} sent14: ¬{IH} -> ({JC} &... | [
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: both the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidental happens.; int1 -> int2: the swooping Balsaminaceae occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: ({D} & {E}); int1 -> int2: {D};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | the fact that not the swooping Taiwanese but the swooping Balsaminaceae happens is not right. | ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | 11 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the swooping Taiwanese does not occur and the swooping Balsaminaceae occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidentalness happens is brought about by that the swooping Babesiidae does not occur. sent2: the unquietness occurs and/or the scallop occurs. sent3: if the internat... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | that the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidentalness happens is brought about by that the swooping Babesiidae does not occur. | [
"the swooping Babesiidae does not occur."
] | [
"that the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidentalness happens is brought about by that the swooping Babesiidae does not occur."
] |
if the corkscrew is not a kind of an outfield that the footer does swoop alcoholism but it is not a squareness is false. | sent1: if something is a seven-up the fact that it does swoop alcoholism and it is not a squareness does not hold. | ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | sent1: (x): {AA}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{C}x) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the corkscrew is not an outfield is true.; sent1 -> int1: if the footer is a seven-up the fact that it does swoop alcoholism and it is not a kind of a squareness is incorrect.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"void -> assump1: ¬{A}{a}; sent1 -> int1: {AA}{b} -> ¬({B}{b} & ¬{C}{b});"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = if the corkscrew is not a kind of an outfield that the footer does swoop alcoholism but it is not a squareness is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a seven-up the fact that it does swoop alcoholism and it is not a squareness does not hold. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if something is a seven-up the fact that it does swoop alcoholism and it is not a squareness does not hold. | [] | [
"if something is a seven-up the fact that it does swoop alcoholism and it is not a squareness does not hold."
] |
that the fact that that the tabby is not the Skuld and does scrabble dealing does not hold if the tabby is limacine is correct does not hold. | sent1: that the cytokine is both not a Skuld and bromidic is incorrect if it is a committedness. sent2: that something is not a sociometry but it is comfortable is not right if it is a kind of a thysanopter. sent3: if the tabby gels hiker then that it does not scrabble dealing and it is vitiliginous is false. sent4: th... | ¬({A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa})) | sent1: {U}{gb} -> ¬(¬{AA}{gb} & {DP}{gb}) sent2: (x): {AR}x -> ¬(¬{JG}x & {EB}x) sent3: {DA}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AB}{aa} & {DJ}{aa}) sent4: {AA}{bm} -> ¬(¬{HQ}{bm} & {GM}{bm}) sent5: {HG}{en} -> ¬({S}{en} & {A}{en}) sent6: (x): {CS}x -> (¬{AU}x & {GN}x) sent7: (x): {DG}x -> (¬{BJ}x & {AR}x) sent8: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{a... | [
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that the fact that that the tabby is not the Skuld and does scrabble dealing does not hold if the tabby is limacine is correct does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the cytokine is both not a Skuld and bromidic is incorrect if it is a committedness. sent2: that something is not a sociometry but it is ... | sent16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that something is not a Skuld but it scrabbles dealing does not hold if it is limacine. | [] | [
"that something is not a Skuld but it scrabbles dealing does not hold if it is limacine."
] |
either the H-bomb is agonal or it does not abuse Phoeniculus or both. | sent1: if something is not elastic then the fact that that it is agonal and/or does not abuse Phoeniculus is not wrong is incorrect. sent2: the H-bomb is agonal and/or it does not abuse Phoeniculus if the everyman does abuse Phoeniculus. sent3: either the everyman abuses Phoeniculus or it is not agonal or both. sent4: ... | ({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) | sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}x v ¬{A}x) sent2: {A}{a} -> ({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent3: ({A}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent4: {A}{a} -> ({C}{b} v {A}{b}) | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | the fact that either the H-bomb is agonal or it does not abuse Phoeniculus or both is false. | ¬({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) | 4 | [
"sent1 -> int1: if the H-bomb is not an elastic that it is agonal or it does not abuse Phoeniculus or both does not hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = either the H-bomb is agonal or it does not abuse Phoeniculus or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not elastic then the fact that that it is agonal and/or does not abuse Phoeniculus is not wrong is incorrect. sent2: the H-bomb is agonal and/or it does not abuse Phoeniculus if the everyman does ab... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | either the everyman abuses Phoeniculus or it is not agonal or both. | [
"if the everyman abuses Phoeniculus then the H-bomb is not non-agonal and/or abuses Phoeniculus."
] | [
"either the everyman abuses Phoeniculus or it is not agonal or both."
] |
the getaway does not occur. | sent1: the pyrogallicness does not occur and the omission does not occur if the gelling bilocation does not occur. sent2: that the gelling bilocation does not occur is triggered by that the Malian but not the congregation occurs. sent3: the antitrade does not occur and the kneading does not occur. sent4: the virologica... | ¬{AB} | sent1: ¬{D} -> (¬{C} & ¬{B}) sent2: ({F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} sent3: (¬{JH} & ¬{DU}) sent4: (¬{IC} & ¬{JG}) sent5: ¬{GJ} sent6: {BJ} -> (¬{HL} & ¬{EU}) sent7: (¬{IM} & ¬{IN}) sent8: (¬{AI} & ¬{FH}) sent9: (¬{FC} & ¬{DK}) sent10: ¬{DC} sent11: {B} -> (¬{FQ} & ¬{A}) sent12: {JC} sent13: {EE} -> (¬{IA} & ¬{AL}) sent14: (¬{C} &... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | the getaway happens. | {AB} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the getaway does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the pyrogallicness does not occur and the omission does not occur if the gelling bilocation does not occur. sent2: that the gelling bilocation does not occur is triggered by that the Malian but not the congregation occurs. sent3: the antitrade does not occ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the abusing validation occurs. | [
"the pyrogallicness does not occur and the omission does not occur if the gelling bilocation does not occur."
] | [
"the abusing validation occurs."
] |
the astrolabe is not a Pongo. | sent1: if something is not non-handmade but doctoral then it is not a Pongo. sent2: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten and is uncertain is wrong. sent3: the nuthatch does not abuse vent. sent4: the nuthatch tucks durance. sent5: that the astrolabe is uncertain thing that is a kind of a Pongo is incorrect. sent6: if some... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: (x): ({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: ¬{G}{c} sent4: {L}{c} sent5: ¬({AB}{b} & {B}{b}) sent6: (x): ({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent7: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent8: ¬{F}{c} -> ({D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬({K}x & {J}x) -> ¬{J}x sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent11: (x):... | [
"sent10 & sent13 -> int1: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten but it is not uncertain does not hold.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent10 & sent13 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | the astrolabe is not a Pongo. | ¬{B}{b} | 8 | [
"sent1 -> int2: that the astrolabe is not a Pongo is not false if it is handmade and it is doctoral.; sent6 -> int3: if the nuthatch scrabbles Cardiff but it does not abuse vent it is not cross-sentential.; sent14 & sent4 -> int4: the nuthatch does scrabble Cardiff.; int4 & sent3 -> int5: the nuthatch does scrabble... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the astrolabe is not a Pongo. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not non-handmade but doctoral then it is not a Pongo. sent2: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten and is uncertain is wrong. sent3: the nuthatch does not abuse vent. sent4: the nuthatch tucks durance. sent5: that the astrolabe is uncertain t... | sent10 & sent13 -> int1: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten but it is not uncertain does not hold.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that that the isoagglutinin is wheaten thing that is not uncertain is incorrect is true if it is not doctoral. | [
"the isoagglutinin is not doctoral.",
"if that the isoagglutinin is both wheaten and not uncertain is false the astrolabe is a Pongo."
] | [
"If it is not a PhD, the fact that isoagglutinin is wheaten is incorrect.",
"The fact that the isoagglutinin is wheaten is incorrect if it is not a PhD."
] |
the teasel is not a hydrolysate but it is a kind of a recombinant. | sent1: if that the teasel is not a inutility is true the fact that it is Afghani and is not a abvolt is false. sent2: that the flank is articulate thing that is a Benedictine is not false if it is not Erasmian. sent3: the flank is non-Erasmian. sent4: the fact that the fact that the brine is a kind of a maze but it is ... | (¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: ¬{CI}{a} -> ¬({EM}{a} & ¬{BO}{a}) sent2: ¬{M}{f} -> ({L}{f} & {H}{f}) sent3: ¬{M}{f} sent4: ¬{EJ}{iq} -> ¬({FH}{iq} & ¬{C}{iq}) sent5: ¬{A}{t} sent6: ¬{K}{g} sent7: ({BO}{a} & ¬{IM}{a}) sent8: ¬{EO}{de} -> ¬{CP}{de} sent9: ¬({A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> {A}{b} sent10: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent11: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬({... | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the teasel is dispensable.; assump1 & sent13 -> int1: the teasel is dispensable but it is not a epigone.; sent11 & sent18 -> int2: the fact that the teasel is a kind of dispensable thing that is not a kind of a epigone is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assu... | UNKNOWN | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 & sent13 -> int1: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); sent11 & sent18 -> int2: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: ¬{A}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | the fact that the teasel is not a hydrolysate but recombinant is wrong. | ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) | 11 | [
"sent2 & sent3 -> int5: the flank is a kind of articulate thing that is a Benedictine.; int5 -> int6: the flank is a Benedictine.; sent15 & int6 -> int7: the leech is non-mecopterous.; sent17 -> int8: that that the fact that the entrecote is a Montespan and is not the poise hold is not true if the entrecote is not ... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the teasel is not a hydrolysate but it is a kind of a recombinant. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the teasel is not a inutility is true the fact that it is Afghani and is not a abvolt is false. sent2: that the flank is articulate thing that is a Benedictine is not false if it is not Erasmian. sent3: the fl... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the teasel is not a epigone. | [
"the fact that the teasel is dispensable but it is not a kind of a epigone does not hold if it is not a Didion.",
"that the teasel is not a Didion hold."
] | [
"The teasel isn't a epigone.",
"The teasel isn't an Epigone."
] |
that the azotemicness does not occur is not wrong. | sent1: if that the papillariness does not occur and the gelling yttrium happens does not hold then the gelling yttrium does not occur. sent2: if the annelidness occurs then the intermezzo and the non-baryticness occurs. sent3: if that both the extinguishableness and the azotemicness happens is not right the Christian d... | ¬{B} | sent1: ¬(¬{H} & {F}) -> ¬{F} sent2: {I} -> ({E} & ¬{G}) sent3: ¬({C} & {B}) -> ¬{A} sent4: ¬{P} -> ¬({L} & {O}) sent5: ¬{L} -> ¬(¬{H} & {F}) sent6: ¬({K} & {M}) -> ¬{K} sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬({DT} & ¬{EM}) sent8: ¬({L} & {O}) -> ¬{L} sent9: ({E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} sent10: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {B}) sent11: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent12: ¬({... | [
"sent17 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent17 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 | the fact that the Land happens and the paper does not occur is false. | ¬({DT} & ¬{EM}) | 12 | [
"sent19 -> int1: the deflationariness does not occur.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the fact that that both the cryocautery and the granulomatousness occurs is false is correct.; sent6 & int2 -> int3: the cryocautery does not occur.; sent14 & int3 -> int4: the annelidness happens and the Catalan happens.; int4 -> int5: t... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the azotemicness does not occur is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the papillariness does not occur and the gelling yttrium happens does not hold then the gelling yttrium does not occur. sent2: if the annelidness occurs then the intermezzo and the non-baryticness occurs. sent3: if that both ... | sent17 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the fact that the chuck happens but the maternalness does not occur is false the azotemicness does not occur. | [
"the fact that both the chuck and the non-maternalness occurs is not correct."
] | [
"if the fact that the chuck happens but the maternalness does not occur is false the azotemicness does not occur."
] |
the fact that the tsetse is not unactable and it does not scrabble consecration is incorrect. | sent1: if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration. sent2: the burrow is not non-clinker-built if there is something such that it is cybernetics and not tertian. sent3: if the haustorium is an ulcer then the mammy scrabbles consecration. s... | ¬(¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) | sent1: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {E}{c} sent2: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}{br} sent3: {D}{b} -> {E}{c} sent4: {E}{c} -> ¬({F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent5: ¬({H}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent6: (x): {D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{F}x) -> {F}x sent8: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent9: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent10: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {E}{a... | [
"sent11 -> int1: the fact that the snuffle is tertian is not wrong.; sent9 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the haustorium is not an ulcer but it is cybernetics is not right.; sent1 & int2 -> int3: the mammy scrabbles consecration.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent11 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent9 & int1 -> int2: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}); sent1 & int2 -> int3: {E}{c};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | the burrow is clinker-built. | {A}{br} | 8 | [
"sent6 -> int4: if the snuffle is an ulcer it is cybernetics and it is not tertian.; sent7 -> int5: if that the haustorium is both not unfruitful and actable is wrong it is actable.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the haustorium is unactable.; int6 -> int7: something is unactable.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the tsetse is not unactable and it does not scrabble consecration is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration. sent2: the burrow is not non-clinker-built if there is something... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the snuffle is clinker-built and is tertian. | [
"that the haustorium is not an ulcer and is cybernetics is not correct if the snuffle is tertian.",
"if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration."
] | [
"The snuffle is made of tertian material.",
"The snuffle is made of tertian."
] |
that the leech does tailor and is not a Gadsden is incorrect. | sent1: that the mirasol is not purposeless is not incorrect. sent2: if the mirasol is non-purposeless the leech is not a bones and it does not intertwine. sent3: there is something such that that it is not geomorphologic and it does not untie is not right. sent4: there exists something such that the fact that it is geo... | ¬({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) | sent1: ¬{F}{c} sent2: ¬{F}{c} -> (¬{E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent3: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: {F}{b} -> ¬({G}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent7: ({F}{b} & {H}{b}) sent8: ¬({G}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> {E}{a} sent9: (x): {B}x -> ¬({BO}x & ¬{A}x) sent10: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{D}... | [
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the aril is not offstage.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{A}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | the fact that the truant is a rutabaga and not offstage does not hold. | ¬({BO}{ie} & ¬{A}{ie}) | 8 | [
"sent9 -> int2: that the fact that the truant is a rutabaga but it is not offstage is correct is false if it is a Gadsden.; sent12 -> int3: if the aril is a kind of a bones it does not intertwine and it does tailor.; sent7 -> int4: the fact that the leech is purposeless is not false.; sent6 & int4 -> int5: that the... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the leech does tailor and is not a Gadsden is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the mirasol is not purposeless is not incorrect. sent2: if the mirasol is non-purposeless the leech is not a bones and it does not intertwine. sent3: there is something such that that it is not geomorphologic and it d... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that that it is not geomorphologic and it does not untie is not right. | [
"if there is something such that that it is a kind of non-geomorphologic thing that does not untie does not hold the aril is not offstage."
] | [
"there is something such that that it is not geomorphologic and it does not untie is not right."
] |
the fact that the photomontage is not unwearable if the fact that the photomontage is not a parted and not inexpedient does not hold is wrong. | sent1: if that the coop is not unicellular and it is not a whiffletree is not correct it is not unwearable. sent2: something is wearable if it is inexpedient. sent3: if that the ribbon does not jell Sue and is not a kind of a unsociability is not right the fact that it is universalistic is not true. sent4: if that the ... | ¬(¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}) | sent1: ¬(¬{EO}{at} & ¬{GF}{at}) -> ¬{B}{at} sent2: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: ¬(¬{HM}{de} & ¬{DG}{de}) -> ¬{U}{de} sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{GJ}x & ¬{AM}x) -> ¬{C}x sent7: ¬(¬{HC}{co} & ¬{M}{co}) -> ¬{AB}{co} sent8: {AB}{aa} -> ¬{B}{aa} sent9: ... | [
"sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the photomontage is not unwearable if the fact that the photomontage is not a parted and not inexpedient does not hold is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the coop is not unicellular and it is not a whiffletree is not correct it is not unwearable. sent2: something is wearable if it is in... | sent15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if that something is not a parted and it is not inexpedient is wrong it is not unwearable. | [] | [
"if that something is not a parted and it is not inexpedient is wrong it is not unwearable."
] |
the shrubbery is not a beet if it abuses differential. | sent1: something is not a kind of a beet if it does abuse differential and it is symmetrical. sent2: the shrubbery is not a cephaloglycin if it does descant and it abuses differential. sent3: the hookup abuses differential. sent4: the shrubbery is symmetrical. sent5: something does abuse differential if the fact that i... | {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} | sent1: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent2: ({M}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{DH}{a} sent3: {A}{hk} sent4: {B}{a} sent5: (x): {B}x -> {A}x | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shrubbery does abuse differential.; assump1 & sent4 -> int1: the shrubbery abuses differential and is symmetrical.; sent1 -> int2: that if the shrubbery does abuse differential and it is symmetrical the shrubbery is not a beet is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the shrubbery is ... | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 & sent4 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent1 -> int2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{a}; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | the differential does abuse differential. | {A}{b} | 5 | [
"sent5 -> int4: the fact that the differential abuses differential if the differential is symmetrical hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the shrubbery is not a beet if it abuses differential. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a kind of a beet if it does abuse differential and it is symmetrical. sent2: the shrubbery is not a cephaloglycin if it does descant and it abuses differential. sent3: the hookup abuses differential. sent4: the s... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shrubbery does abuse differential.; assump1 & sent4 -> int1: the shrubbery abuses differential and is symmetrical.; sent1 -> int2: that if the shrubbery does abuse differential and it is symmetrical the shrubbery is not a beet is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the shrubbery is not a... | DeductionInstance | the shrubbery is symmetrical. | [
"something is not a kind of a beet if it does abuse differential and it is symmetrical."
] | [
"the shrubbery is symmetrical."
] |
there is something such that it is a kind of a rebroadcast that does jell Shema. | sent1: the chiropractor does jell Shema if the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner. sent2: the chiropractor is a kind of a rebroadcast if it is a soda and is a pressmark. sent3: the fact that the paloverde is a kind of a rebroadcast is right. sent4: the chiropractor is a kind of a rebroadcast if it is a soda but not a pr... | (Ex): ({C}x & {B}x) | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent2: ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) -> {C}{b} sent3: {C}{a} sent4: ({D}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> {C}{b} sent5: {A}{c} -> {A}{a} sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent7: ¬{AA}{aa} sent8: ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the fact that the chiropractor does jell Shema hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | the chiropractor does not abuse Faulkner. | ¬{A}{b} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is a kind of a rebroadcast that does jell Shema. ; $context$ = sent1: the chiropractor does jell Shema if the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner. sent2: the chiropractor is a kind of a rebroadcast if it is a soda and is a pressmark. sent3: the fact that the paloverde is a k... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the chiropractor does jell Shema if the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner. | [
"the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner."
] | [
"the chiropractor does jell Shema if the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner."
] |
the Uighur is a kind of a compound. | sent1: if the fact that the firedamp does not jell farce and is a fundamentalist does not hold then the philatelist is a pollster. sent2: that the mum does not jell Basque and it does not jell proboscidean is incorrect. sent3: if the yttrium is not rhythmical then the Uighur is compound. sent4: if the yttrium does jell... | {F}{d} | sent1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent2: ¬(¬{L}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) sent3: {E}{c} -> {F}{d} sent4: {K}{c} -> {J}{c} sent5: ({E}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) -> {K}{c} sent7: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{d} & {B}{d}) sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent9: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{D}x) -> {E}{b} sent10: (x): ¬(... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | there exists something such that it is a Istanbul. | (Ex): {AJ}x | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Uighur is a kind of a compound. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the firedamp does not jell farce and is a fundamentalist does not hold then the philatelist is a pollster. sent2: that the mum does not jell Basque and it does not jell proboscidean is incorrect. sent3: if the yttrium is not rhythm... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | that the mum does not jell Basque and it does not jell proboscidean is incorrect. | [
"the yttrium is unrhythmical if the philatelist is a kind of a pollster."
] | [
"that the mum does not jell Basque and it does not jell proboscidean is incorrect."
] |
the presidentialness happens. | sent1: that both the scrabbling postilion and the non-caulescentness happens is incorrect. sent2: the rhinoscopy does not occur. sent3: that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy happens and the rhinoscopy occurs is incorrect. sent4: the presidentialness does not occur if the rhinoscopy but not the scrabbling hysterocataleps... | {C} | sent1: ¬({EA} & ¬{HR}) sent2: ¬{B} sent3: ¬({A} & {B}) sent4: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{C} sent5: {B} -> {C} sent6: ¬({FD} & ¬{GM}) sent7: ¬{A} sent8: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{IQ} sent9: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) -> {C} sent10: {D} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) sent11: ¬(¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} sent12: {CD} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy but not the rhinoscopy occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy happens.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy but not the rhinoscopy occurs is not tr... | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: ({A} & ¬{B}); assump1 -> int1: {A}; int1 & sent7 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬({A} & ¬{B}); sent9 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 | the presidentialness does not occur. | ¬{C} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the presidentialness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that both the scrabbling postilion and the non-caulescentness happens is incorrect. sent2: the rhinoscopy does not occur. sent3: that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy happens and the rhinoscopy occurs is incorrect. sent4: the presidentialness does not occ... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy but not the rhinoscopy occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy happens.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy but not the rhinoscopy occurs is not true.; ... | DeductionInstance | the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy does not occur. | [
"that the presidentialness happens is correct if that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy occurs and the rhinoscopy does not occur is false."
] | [
"the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy does not occur."
] |
there exists something such that if that either it does jell shirtwaist or it is lithomantic or both is not correct then it is not a desire. | sent1: if the fact that something does jell braid and/or is a Syzygium does not hold it is a decidua. sent2: if that something does jell shirtwaist and/or it is lithomantic is incorrect then it does desire. sent3: if that the Mojave is a Dowland and/or does jell shirtwaist is not right it is not a cytokine. sent4: some... | (Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: (x): ¬({ES}x v {O}x) -> {BA}x sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: ¬({BB}{fi} v {AA}{fi}) -> ¬{DI}{fi} sent4: (x): ¬({IB}x v {BR}x) -> ¬{CK}x sent5: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: (Ex): ¬({C}x v {FS}x) -> ¬{G}x sent8: (Ex): ¬({DP}x v {DE}x) -> ¬{HB}x sent9: ... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that either it does jell shirtwaist or it is lithomantic or both is not correct then it is not a desire. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something does jell braid and/or is a Syzygium does not hold it is a decidua. sent2: if that something does jell shirtwaist an... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if that either it tucks Sterope or it is a statics or both does not hold then it is not a dowse. | [
"there exists something such that if it does jell shirtwaist or it is lithomantic or both then the fact that it is not a desire is true."
] | [
"there exists something such that if that either it tucks Sterope or it is a statics or both does not hold then it is not a dowse."
] |
the thecodont does not abuse Lancashire but it does jell vise. | sent1: there is something such that it is not hydrostatic and it is meaningless. sent2: if something gels vise that it is not a Titanosauridae and does abuse Lancashire is not true. sent3: that the belly abuses Lancashire is true if there exists something such that the fact that it is not hydrostatic and it is meaningl... | (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: (Ex): ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent7: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: ¬({B}{c} v ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: (x): ¬({F}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}x sent10: (x): {G}x -... | [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: the belly does abuse Lancashire.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | there exists something such that the fact that it does not abuse Schleiden and it does abuse brass is wrong. | (Ex): ¬(¬{ES}x & {FQ}x) | 8 | [
"sent5 -> int2: if that the thecodont is not a Titanosauridae but it does abuse Lancashire does not hold it does not abuse Lancashire.; sent2 -> int3: if the thecodont does jell vise then the fact that it is not a Titanosauridae and abuses Lancashire does not hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the thecodont does not abuse Lancashire but it does jell vise. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not hydrostatic and it is meaningless. sent2: if something gels vise that it is not a Titanosauridae and does abuse Lancashire is not true. sent3: that the belly abuses Lancashire is tru... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that that it is both not hydrostatic and meaningless is not correct. | [
"that the belly abuses Lancashire is true if there exists something such that the fact that it is not hydrostatic and it is meaningless does not hold."
] | [
"there exists something such that that it is both not hydrostatic and meaningless is not correct."
] |
the mamoncillo is a concourse and it does abuse sackcloth. | sent1: the mamoncillo does abuse sackcloth. sent2: the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both if it is long-distance. sent3: The sackcloth does abuse mamoncillo. sent4: the shoebill is long-distance. sent5: the shoebill is a falsehood and/or it is a Epirus. sent6: if the mamoncillo is not long-distance t... | ({C}{b} & {D}{b}) | sent1: {D}{b} sent2: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: {AC}{aa} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent6: ¬{A}{b} -> {D}{a} sent7: ({C}{bf} v ¬{HP}{bf}) -> ¬{IG}{bf} sent8: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{D}{a} sent10: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the shoebill is a falsehood and/or it is not a Epirus.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the shoebill is not a ukase.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent8 -> int2: ¬{B}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the mamoncillo is a concourse and it does abuse sackcloth. ; $context$ = sent1: the mamoncillo does abuse sackcloth. sent2: the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both if it is long-distance. sent3: The sackcloth does abuse mamoncillo. sent4: the shoebill is long-distance. sent5: the shoebi... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both if it is long-distance. | [
"the shoebill is long-distance.",
"if the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both then it is not a ukase."
] | [
"The shoebill is a lie if it is long-distance.",
"If it is long-distance, the shoebill is a lie."
] |
that there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a swinger and scrabbles Menninger is not right it does challenge does not hold. | sent1: if the everyman is a swinger then it is a pentathlon. sent2: the everyman does challenge if the fact that it is not a swinger and it does scrabble Menninger is false. sent3: there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a swinger and it does scrabble Menninger then it does challenge. sent4: there exist... | ¬((Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x) | sent1: {AA}{aa} -> {DB}{aa} sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent3: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (Ex): ¬(¬{AM}x & {AC}x) -> {D}x sent5: (Ex): ¬(¬{JG}x & {IS}x) -> {BL}x sent6: {AA}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent7: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent9: (Ex): ¬{AB}x -> {B}x... | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if the fact that it is not a swinger and scrabbles Menninger is not right it does challenge does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the everyman is a swinger then it is a pentathlon. sent2: the everyman does challenge if the fact that it is not a swinger and it does s... | sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the everyman does challenge if the fact that it is not a swinger and it does scrabble Menninger is false. | [] | [
"the everyman does challenge if the fact that it is not a swinger and it does scrabble Menninger is false."
] |
there exists something such that if it does not abuse stripe then it does jell hysterocatalepsy and tucks narthex. | sent1: something does scrabble multiple and it is a ritual if the fact that it does not direct is correct. sent2: something is dorsal and it is a Cyprinodontidae if the fact that it is non-arsenious is not incorrect. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a serology then it is a strophe and discontinues. sent... | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: (x): ¬{CQ}x -> ({HG}x & {CN}x) sent2: (x): ¬{AR}x -> ({BK}x & {AJ}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{HU}x -> ({BJ}x & {CE}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x sent5: (x): ¬{BT}x -> ({JJ}x & {K}x) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent7: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | there exists something such that if it is not arsenious then it is both dorsal and a Cyprinodontidae. | (Ex): ¬{AR}x -> ({BK}x & {AJ}x) | 2 | [
"sent2 -> int1: the flannelbush is dorsal and it is a kind of a Cyprinodontidae if it is not arsenious.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not abuse stripe then it does jell hysterocatalepsy and tucks narthex. ; $context$ = sent1: something does scrabble multiple and it is a ritual if the fact that it does not direct is correct. sent2: something is dorsal and it is a Cyprinodontidae if the fact th... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | something does scrabble multiple and it is a ritual if the fact that it does not direct is correct. | [
"there is something such that if it is not a serology then it is a strophe and discontinues."
] | [
"something does scrabble multiple and it is a ritual if the fact that it does not direct is correct."
] |
that there are proconsular and forgetful things is wrong. | sent1: something is a pug and it is elementary. sent2: there is something such that it is a Reich. sent3: the burner is forgetful. sent4: the burner is a Reich. sent5: the burner abuses conductress. sent6: the conductress is forgetful. sent7: the cleaver is forgetful. sent8: there exists something such that it does hee... | ¬((Ex): ({A}x & {B}x)) | sent1: (Ex): ({EH}x & {FR}x) sent2: (Ex): {DR}x sent3: {B}{a} sent4: {DR}{a} sent5: {IE}{a} sent6: {B}{hp} sent7: {B}{fk} sent8: (Ex): {G}x sent9: {A}{a} sent10: (Ex): ({GK}x & {BA}x) sent11: (Ex): {IG}x sent12: {M}{a} sent13: (Ex): ({GK}x & {BQ}x) sent14: (Ex): {DG}x | [
"sent9 & sent3 -> int1: the burner is both not non-proconsular and not non-forgetful.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent9 & sent3 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 | there is something such that it is a Reich and does abuse frontispiece. | (Ex): ({DR}x & {EO}x) | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that there are proconsular and forgetful things is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a pug and it is elementary. sent2: there is something such that it is a Reich. sent3: the burner is forgetful. sent4: the burner is a Reich. sent5: the burner abuses conductress. sent6: the conductress is forgetfu... | sent9 & sent3 -> int1: the burner is both not non-proconsular and not non-forgetful.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the burner is proconsular. | [
"the burner is forgetful."
] | [
"the burner is proconsular."
] |
that the Dickensianness occurs but the study does not occur does not hold. | sent1: if the tucking porridge happens the Dickensianness but not the study occurs. sent2: the fact that the Dickensianness occurs and the study does not occur is not correct. sent3: if the extraction does not occur the tucking porridge and the whitelash happens. sent4: if the tucking pebble happens the gelling flecain... | ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) | sent1: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent4: {G} -> (¬{D} & {F}) sent5: ¬(¬{E} & {C}) -> ¬{C} sent6: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent7: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{E} & {C}) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the Dickensianness occurs but the studying does not occur. | ({AA} & ¬{AB}) | 10 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the Dickensianness occurs but the study does not occur does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the tucking porridge happens the Dickensianness but not the study occurs. sent2: the fact that the Dickensianness occurs and the study does not occur is not correct. sent3: if the extraction does not occur ... | sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that the Dickensianness occurs and the study does not occur is not correct. | [] | [
"the fact that the Dickensianness occurs and the study does not occur is not correct."
] |
that not the reorganizing but the waxing occurs is not right. | sent1: the binary happens. sent2: that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs. sent3: the hemiparasiticness occurs. sent4: the fact that the Bruneianness happens is right. sent5: if that the binary occurs is correct the waxing occurs and the dash does not occur. sent6:... | ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | sent1: {F} sent2: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent3: {A} sent4: {CO} sent5: {F} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) sent6: ¬{E} sent7: ({CU} v {GT}) sent8: ¬{GO} | [
"sent3 -> int1: either the hemiparasiticness occurs or the rendering occurs or both.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the reorganizing does not occur.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the waxing occurs but the dash does not occur.; int3 -> int4: that the waxing occurs is right.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); int1 & sent2 -> int2: ¬{C}; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: ({D} & ¬{E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that not the reorganizing but the waxing occurs is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the binary happens. sent2: that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs. sent3: the hemiparasiticness occurs. sent4: the fact that the Bruneianness happens is right. sent5:... | sent3 -> int1: either the hemiparasiticness occurs or the rendering occurs or both.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the reorganizing does not occur.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the waxing occurs but the dash does not occur.; int3 -> int4: that the waxing occurs is right.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the hemiparasiticness occurs. | [
"that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs.",
"if that the binary occurs is correct the waxing occurs and the dash does not occur.",
"the binary happens."
] | [
"The hemiparasiticness occurs.",
"The hemiparasiticness happens.",
"There is hemiparasiticness."
] |
that the oleaster is not a salp but it whips does not hold. | sent1: the oleaster is a whip if it is unobtrusive. sent2: if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false. sent3: the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure. sent4: if something is unobtrusive then it is not a salp and is a whip. sent5: either the oleaster is sure or it is a Emberizi... | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | sent1: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent2: {B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent3: {C}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent4: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: ({C}{aa} v {B}{aa}) | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the oleaster is unobtrusive then it is both not a salp and a whip.; sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the oleaster is unobtrusive.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that the oleaster is not a salp but it whips does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the oleaster is a whip if it is unobtrusive. sent2: if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false. sent3: the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure. sent4: if something is unobtrusive th... | sent4 -> int1: if the oleaster is unobtrusive then it is both not a salp and a whip.; sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the oleaster is unobtrusive.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if something is unobtrusive then it is not a salp and is a whip. | [
"either the oleaster is sure or it is a Emberizidae or both.",
"the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure.",
"if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false."
] | [
"If something is not obvious then it is not a salp.",
"If something is not obvious then it is not a salp and is a whip.",
"If something is not noticeable then it is not a salp and is a whip."
] |
the twitterer does not jell inutility. | sent1: the Oregonian forecloses. sent2: something does not miscarry if it is an orthodontist. sent3: the introitus does not approximate if that it is both not a bronco and a hastiness is not correct. sent4: the Oregonian is an orthodontist and forecloses. sent5: if something is not surgical then it is a chlorofucin and... | ¬{B}{a} | sent1: {D}{aa} sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x sent3: ¬(¬{G}{b} & {F}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent4: ({A}{aa} & {D}{aa}) sent5: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({I}x & {H}x) sent6: (x): (¬{E}x v ¬{D}x) -> ¬{D}x sent7: (x): (¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) -> ¬{J}x sent8: {H}{c} -> ¬(¬{G}{b} & {F}{b}) sent9: (x): (¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) | [
"sent2 -> int1: if the Oregonian is an orthodontist then it does not miscarry.; sent4 -> int2: the Oregonian is an orthodontist.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the Oregonian does not miscarry.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent2 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa}; sent4 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{aa};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | the twitterer does jell inutility. | {B}{a} | 14 | [
"sent9 -> int4: the fiduciary does not tuck sloping and it does not scrabble discernability.; sent7 -> int5: that if the fact that the fiduciary does not tuck sloping and it does not scrabble discernability is correct then the fiduciary is not surgical is not incorrect.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the fiduciary is nonsur... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the twitterer does not jell inutility. ; $context$ = sent1: the Oregonian forecloses. sent2: something does not miscarry if it is an orthodontist. sent3: the introitus does not approximate if that it is both not a bronco and a hastiness is not correct. sent4: the Oregonian is an orthodontist and foreclos... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | something does not miscarry if it is an orthodontist. | [
"the Oregonian is an orthodontist and forecloses."
] | [
"something does not miscarry if it is an orthodontist."
] |
the fact that the buttocks is not brave is true. | sent1: the closer does not abuse saskatoon if the fact that it scrabbles indecorum hold. sent2: the tetranychid is not a kind of a Onsager if it gels teacart and it does not scrabble droshky. sent3: the buttocks burrows but it is not a Redford. sent4: if the buttocks is a kind of dyslexic thing that does jell easel it ... | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: {FE}{hl} -> ¬{GI}{hl} sent2: ({A}{dh} & ¬{FM}{dh}) -> ¬{JG}{dh} sent3: ({BB}{aa} & ¬{CJ}{aa}) sent4: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: {AC}{ab} sent6: ¬{AB}{aa} sent7: {CS}{aa} sent8: ({B}{aa} & {DC}{aa}) -> ¬{GU}{aa} sent9: (x): ({AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent10: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent11: ({DS... | [
"sent10 -> int1: if the buttocks is dyslexic but it does not jell easel it is not a brave.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent10 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa};"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the buttocks is not brave is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the closer does not abuse saskatoon if the fact that it scrabbles indecorum hold. sent2: the tetranychid is not a kind of a Onsager if it gels teacart and it does not scrabble droshky. sent3: the buttocks burrows but it is not a Redfor... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if something is dyslexic but it does not jell easel then it is not a brave. | [] | [
"if something is dyslexic but it does not jell easel then it is not a brave."
] |
the cuticle is not a Greece. | sent1: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a salp or does not abuse Okinawa or both the cuticle does not abuse Okinawa. sent2: if that either something does scrabble strip or it is a Kurdish or both is not right it is not a buffet. sent3: the cuticle is a kind of a gravity and it is a salp. sent4: t... | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: (x): (¬{D}x v ¬{B}x) -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: (x): ¬({L}x v {M}x) -> ¬{F}x sent3: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent4: {D}{a} sent5: ¬{N}{e} sent6: (x): ({P}x & ¬{Q}x) sent7: {F}{d} -> ¬({E}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent8: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: (x): {I}x -> (¬{G}x & {H}x) sent10: (¬{F}{e} & {H}{e}) -> {F}{d} sent11: (x): ({P}... | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cuticle is a kind of a Greece.; assump1 & sent14 -> int1: the cuticle is a Greece and it abuses Okinawa.; sent3 -> int2: the fact that the cuticle is a kind of a gravity is correct.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 & sent14 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent3 -> int2: {C}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | the cuticle is a nod and it is a kind of a salp. | ({BI}{a} & {D}{a}) | 5 | [
"sent15 -> int3: the cuticle does nod and it is a Greece if it does not abuse Okinawa.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the cuticle is not a Greece. ; $context$ = sent1: if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a salp or does not abuse Okinawa or both the cuticle does not abuse Okinawa. sent2: if that either something does scrabble strip or it is a Kurdish or both is not right it is not a buffet. sent3: the... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the cuticle abuses Okinawa. | [
"the cuticle is a kind of a gravity and it is a salp."
] | [
"the cuticle abuses Okinawa."
] |
the scrabbling breadth does not occur. | sent1: that the territoriality but not the abusing insidiousness occurs does not hold if the hailstorm does not occur. sent2: both the mineralness and the scrabbling lapin happens if the interconnection does not occur. sent3: the fact that the scrabbling chartreuse happens but the intrapulmonariness does not occur is n... | ¬{B} | sent1: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent2: ¬{P} -> ({K} & {O}) sent3: ¬{BM} -> ¬({H} & ¬{BE}) sent4: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & ¬{F}) sent5: (¬{N} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} sent6: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent8: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent9: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} v ¬{B}) sent10: (¬{G} v {I}) -> ¬{G} sent11: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{... | [
"sent7 & sent18 -> int1: that the noncollapsibleness happens but the baffle does not occur is not correct.; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent7 & sent18 -> int1: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}); sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 | the scrabbling breadth happens. | {B} | 14 | [
"sent2 & sent12 -> int2: the mineralness occurs and the scrabbling lapin happens.; int2 -> int3: the mineralness occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the scrabbling breadth does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the territoriality but not the abusing insidiousness occurs does not hold if the hailstorm does not occur. sent2: both the mineralness and the scrabbling lapin happens if the interconnection does not occur. sent3: the fact that the scrabbli... | sent7 & sent18 -> int1: that the noncollapsibleness happens but the baffle does not occur is not correct.; sent11 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the phosphorousness does not occur then that the noncollapsibleness occurs and the baffle does not occur is incorrect. | [
"the phosphorousness does not occur.",
"the scrabbling breadth does not occur if that the noncollapsibleness but not the baffle happens does not hold."
] | [
"The noncollapsibleness is incorrect if the phosphorousness doesn't occur.",
"The noncollapsibleness is incorrect if the phosphorousness does not occur."
] |
there is something such that if the fact that it is a isometric and/or it is not integral is false then it is not a psychotic. | sent1: there is something such that if that either it is a isometric or it is not integral or both does not hold then it is a psychotic. sent2: if that something abuses agnosia and/or is not a mapping is wrong it does not scrabble myxomycete. sent3: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a isometric and/or... | (Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: (x): ¬({FE}x v ¬{AT}x) -> ¬{HL}x sent3: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: ({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent5: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent6: ¬({BG}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{CH}{aa} sent7: (x): ¬({AA}x v ¬{EB}x) -> ¬{DP}x sent8: (Ex): ¬({JG}x v ¬{IB}x) ->... | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 14 | the disbeliever is not resolute if that it is a isometric or does not scrabble coupon or both is not true. | ¬({AA}{ed} v ¬{EB}{ed}) -> ¬{DP}{ed} | 1 | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it is a isometric and/or it is not integral is false then it is not a psychotic. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if that either it is a isometric or it is not integral or both does not hold then it is a psychotic. sent2: if that something ab... | sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the Inca is not a kind of a psychotic if the fact that it either is a kind of a isometric or is not a kind of an integral or both is not right. | [] | [
"the Inca is not a kind of a psychotic if the fact that it either is a kind of a isometric or is not a kind of an integral or both is not right."
] |
the gneiss is unwieldy. | sent1: if the analyst does abuse heterocycle the gneiss is unwieldy. sent2: the fact that the gneiss is fearful thing that is not sclerotic is not true if there is something such that the fact that it is not unpublishable is not correct. sent3: something is unwieldy and it is coital if it is non-fearful. sent4: that th... | {B}{b} | sent1: {AB}{a} -> {B}{b} sent2: (x): {F}x -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {C}x) sent4: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent5: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({CS}x & ¬{AA}x) sent7: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent8: (Ex): {F}x sent9: {B}{a} -> {B}{iu} sent10: (x): {B}x -> ¬{A}x | [
"sent7 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent7 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 8 | the fact that the mandarin is a kind of intramuscular thing that is not an extension is not correct. | ¬({CS}{iu} & ¬{AA}{iu}) | 8 | [
"sent6 -> int1: if that the mandarin is not oneiric is not incorrect then that it is intramuscular and is not an extension is false.; sent10 -> int2: if the mandarin is unwieldy it is not oneiric.; sent3 -> int3: if the analyst is not fearful then it is unwieldy and it is coital.; sent8 & sent2 -> int4: that the gn... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the gneiss is unwieldy. ; $context$ = sent1: if the analyst does abuse heterocycle the gneiss is unwieldy. sent2: the fact that the gneiss is fearful thing that is not sclerotic is not true if there is something such that the fact that it is not unpublishable is not correct. sent3: something is unwieldy ... | sent7 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the gneiss is unwieldy if that the analyst is an extension and does not abuse heterocycle is not right. | [
"the fact that the analyst is an extension and does not abuse heterocycle is not right."
] | [
"the gneiss is unwieldy if that the analyst is an extension and does not abuse heterocycle is not right."
] |
the scrabbling ripple occurs and the nonreversibleness happens. | sent1: the Byzantineness occurs. sent2: both the salvage and the asclepiadaceousness happens. sent3: the mugging occurs. sent4: the tucking Rubinstein happens. sent5: if the resolution does not occur and the Spanishness does not occur the nonreversibleness does not occur. sent6: the wait happens. sent7: the androgynous... | ({A} & {B}) | sent1: {EQ} sent2: ({HS} & {EM}) sent3: {GC} sent4: {HK} sent5: (¬{C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} sent6: {U} sent7: ({CP} & {JF}) sent8: ¬({E} v {F}) -> ¬{C} sent9: {GG} sent10: ({BI} & {BR}) sent11: {BO} sent12: {GF} sent13: ¬{H} -> ¬({E} v {F}) sent14: {DS} sent15: ({HO} & {CT}) sent16: ({FE} & {GJ}) sent17: {B} sent18: {A} | [
"sent18 & sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent18 & sent17 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 | the eyeful happens. | {EN} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the scrabbling ripple occurs and the nonreversibleness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the Byzantineness occurs. sent2: both the salvage and the asclepiadaceousness happens. sent3: the mugging occurs. sent4: the tucking Rubinstein happens. sent5: if the resolution does not occur and the Spanishness does no... | sent18 & sent17 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the scrabbling ripple happens. | [
"the nonreversibleness occurs."
] | [
"the scrabbling ripple happens."
] |
the Irani is not impersonal. | sent1: the Irani is both not febrile and not actinometric. sent2: if the Irani is both actinometric and not restful then the fact that it is not impersonal is correct. sent3: if something is not actinometric and it is not restful it is not impersonal. sent4: if something is not communal it is not actinometric and it is... | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: (¬{BG}{aa} & ¬{AA}{aa}) sent2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{CC}x) sent5: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: ¬{D}{b} -> ({A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent8: ¬(¬{F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> {F}{c} sent9: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x... | [
"sent3 -> int1: the Irani is not impersonal if that it is not actinometric but non-restful is not wrong.; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent3 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 | the lagan is not actinometric and it is not psychometric. | (¬{AA}{o} & ¬{CC}{o}) | 6 | [
"sent4 -> int2: the lagan is a kind of non-actinometric thing that is not psychometric if it is not communal.; sent6 -> int3: the lagan is a kind of non-communal thing that is not impersonal if it is not an approaching.; sent15 -> int4: the lagan is not an approaching if it is not an approaching and/or is a kind of... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Irani is not impersonal. ; $context$ = sent1: the Irani is both not febrile and not actinometric. sent2: if the Irani is both actinometric and not restful then the fact that it is not impersonal is correct. sent3: if something is not actinometric and it is not restful it is not impersonal. sent4: if ... | sent3 -> int1: the Irani is not impersonal if that it is not actinometric but non-restful is not wrong.; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if something is not actinometric and it is not restful it is not impersonal. | [
"the Irani is not actinometric and it is not restful."
] | [
"if something is not actinometric and it is not restful it is not impersonal."
] |
the skate is not a kind of a civilian. | sent1: if the fact that that something is a kind of non-unusual thing that does jell Dijon is not incorrect is incorrect it is not a civilian. sent2: everything does not jell Segway. sent3: if that something does not jell Segway hold then that it is non-unusual thing that gels Dijon is incorrect. | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: (x): ¬{A}x sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | [
"sent3 -> int1: if the skate does not jell Segway the fact that it is not unusual and it does jell Dijon is not correct.; sent2 -> int2: the fact that the skate does not jell Segway is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the skate is a kind of non-unusual thing that does jell Dijon is not correct.; sent1 -> i... | PROVED | [
"sent3 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent2 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent1 -> int4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the skate is not a kind of a civilian. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that that something is a kind of non-unusual thing that does jell Dijon is not incorrect is incorrect it is not a civilian. sent2: everything does not jell Segway. sent3: if that something does not jell Segway hold then that it is no... | sent3 -> int1: if the skate does not jell Segway the fact that it is not unusual and it does jell Dijon is not correct.; sent2 -> int2: the fact that the skate does not jell Segway is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the skate is a kind of non-unusual thing that does jell Dijon is not correct.; sent1 -> int4: ... | DeductionInstance | if that something does not jell Segway hold then that it is non-unusual thing that gels Dijon is incorrect. | [
"everything does not jell Segway.",
"if the fact that that something is a kind of non-unusual thing that does jell Dijon is not incorrect is incorrect it is not a civilian."
] | [
"Dijon is incorrect if something doesn't jell Segway hold.",
"Dijon is incorrect if something does not jell Segway hold."
] |
that the colored abuses keratoconus hold. | sent1: if the scorpaenoid is not nonwoody the ginseng is a kind of a importunity. sent2: if the colored is not nonwoody the ginseng abuses keratoconus. sent3: if that the scorpaenoid is a importunity and is not a kind of a Hungarian does not hold then the colored does abuse keratoconus. sent4: the scorpaenoid abuses ke... | {E}{c} | sent1: ¬{B}{b} -> {D}{a} sent2: ¬{B}{c} -> {E}{a} sent3: ¬({D}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> {E}{c} sent4: {E}{b} sent5: (x): {C}x -> ¬({GK}{dq} & ¬{C}{dq}) sent6: ¬({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> {D}{a} sent7: {E}{fo} sent8: {B}{b} sent9: ({E}{b} & {D}{b}) sent10: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent11: ¬({E}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) sent12: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ... | [
"sent10 -> int1: the ginseng is a Wagnerian.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent10 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | that the waterproof is involuntary but not a Hungarian does not hold. | ¬({GK}{dq} & ¬{C}{dq}) | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the colored abuses keratoconus hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the scorpaenoid is not nonwoody the ginseng is a kind of a importunity. sent2: if the colored is not nonwoody the ginseng abuses keratoconus. sent3: if that the scorpaenoid is a importunity and is not a kind of a Hungarian does not hold th... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the ginseng is Wagnerian and nonwoody. | [] | [
"the ginseng is Wagnerian and nonwoody."
] |
there exists something such that if it does not scrabble Saskatoon then that it is not a kind of a scorpaenoid and it does not jell hotchpotch is wrong. | sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a GIGO is not incorrect then that it is both not a Bhaga and non-collective is not correct. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a Golan the fact that it is not a Khamti and it is not dioecious is not correct. sent3: there is something... | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: (Ex): ¬{FT}x -> ¬(¬{AK}x & ¬{BD}x) sent2: (Ex): ¬{GN}x -> ¬(¬{AD}x & ¬{D}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: (x): ¬{AB}x -> ¬(¬{IK}x & ¬{FL}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: ¬{A}{gn} -> ¬(¬{CI}{gn} & ¬{GE}{gn}) sent8: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ... | [
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 14 | that the cleaver is not a mill-hand and it is not a kind of a pas is incorrect if the fact that it does not jell hotchpotch is true. | ¬{AB}{ba} -> ¬(¬{IK}{ba} & ¬{FL}{ba}) | 1 | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not scrabble Saskatoon then that it is not a kind of a scorpaenoid and it does not jell hotchpotch is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if the fact that it is not a GIGO is not incorrect then that it is both not a Bhaga and non-collective... | sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the hotchpotch does not scrabble Saskatoon then that it is not a scorpaenoid and does not jell hotchpotch is incorrect. | [] | [
"if the hotchpotch does not scrabble Saskatoon then that it is not a scorpaenoid and does not jell hotchpotch is incorrect."
] |
that the scrabbling magnetite happens hold. | sent1: the fact that the tonic does not occur and the diastolicness does not occur hold if the digitalness does not occur. sent2: the gelling agelessness does not occur and the referral does not occur. sent3: the recidivism does not occur. sent4: if the diastolicness does not occur then the swoosh occurs and/or the spl... | {B} | sent1: ¬{I} -> (¬{H} & ¬{G}) sent2: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: ¬{DA} sent4: ¬{G} -> ({F} v ¬{E}) sent5: ¬{EE} sent6: ¬(¬{N} & ¬{M}) -> ¬{L} sent7: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent8: {O} -> ¬(¬{N} & ¬{M}) sent9: ¬(¬{Q} & ¬{P}) -> {O} sent10: (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent11: (¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent12: ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) -> {B} sen... | [
"sent10 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent10 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 16 | the scrabbling magnetite happens. | {B} | 14 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the scrabbling magnetite happens hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the tonic does not occur and the diastolicness does not occur hold if the digitalness does not occur. sent2: the gelling agelessness does not occur and the referral does not occur. sent3: the recidivism does not occur. sent4: ... | sent10 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the gelling agelessness does not occur and the referral does not occur the fact that the scrabbling magnetite does not occur is right. | [
"the gelling agelessness does not occur and the referral does not occur."
] | [
"if the gelling agelessness does not occur and the referral does not occur the fact that the scrabbling magnetite does not occur is right."
] |
the fact that the fountain happens and the clip-clop occurs is not true. | sent1: the freighting does not occur if the smoldering does not occur and the confluence occurs. sent2: that the confluence does not occur and the freight does not occur does not hold if that the smoldering does not occur is not wrong. sent3: if the unreadiness does not occur that the fountain and the clip-clop happens... | ¬({D} & {E}) | sent1: (¬{H} & {G}) -> ¬{F} sent2: ¬{H} -> ¬(¬{G} & ¬{F}) sent3: ¬{A} -> ¬({D} & {E}) sent4: {N} -> ¬(¬{K} & {M}) sent5: {C} -> {D} sent6: {AD} -> ¬({U} & ¬{AA}) sent7: (¬{D} & {C}) -> ¬{B} sent8: ¬{P} -> ({N} & {O}) sent9: (¬{J} & {K}) -> ¬{H} sent10: ¬(¬{K} & {M}) -> {K} sent11: ({A} v {B}) sent12: (¬{J} & {I}) -> ¬{... | [
"sent11 & sent14 & sent13 -> int1: the countermand occurs.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the fountain happens.; sent24 & sent26 -> int3: the clip-clop and the freight happens.; int3 -> int4: the clip-clop happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent11 & sent14 & sent13 -> int1: {C}; int1 & sent5 -> int2: {D}; sent24 & sent26 -> int3: ({E} & {F}); int3 -> int4: {E}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 | that the fountain happens and the clip-clop happens is false. | ¬({D} & {E}) | 14 | [
"sent21 -> int5: the fact that the disintegrativeness happens is right.; sent6 & int5 -> int6: that the fruitfulness and the non-ampleness occurs is not true.; sent15 & int6 -> int7: the succussion does not occur.; sent8 & int7 -> int8: the hailing and the canter happens.; int8 -> int9: the hail occurs.; sent4 & in... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the fountain happens and the clip-clop occurs is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the freighting does not occur if the smoldering does not occur and the confluence occurs. sent2: that the confluence does not occur and the freight does not occur does not hold if that the smoldering does not oc... | sent11 & sent14 & sent13 -> int1: the countermand occurs.; int1 & sent5 -> int2: the fountain happens.; sent24 & sent26 -> int3: the clip-clop and the freight happens.; int3 -> int4: the clip-clop happens.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | either the unreadiness happens or the Tantricness happens or both. | [
"that the unreadiness happens causes that the countermand occurs.",
"that the Tantricness occurs prevents that the countermand does not occur.",
"that the fountain does not occur is prevented by the countermand.",
"if the confluence does not occur both the clip-clop and the freighting happens.",
"the conflu... | [
"Either the unreadiness happens or the Tantricness happens.",
"Either the unreadiness or the Tantricness happens.",
"Either the unreadiness or Tantricness happens.",
"Either the unreadiness occurs or the Tantricness occurs.",
"The unreadiness happens or the Tantricness happens."
] |
the depression does scrabble murre. | sent1: the fact that the fact that something is proper or it is not a kind of a brutalization or both is correct is not true if it is residential. sent2: if something is not a kind of a brutalization then the fact that it scrabbles murre is not false. sent3: if something is not radical and bombproofs then it is not ant... | {A}{a} | sent1: (x): {D}x -> ¬({C}x v ¬{B}x) sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> {A}x sent3: (x): (¬{H}x & {G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent4: {A}{gi} sent5: {A}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) sent7: (¬{H}{b} & {G}{b}) sent8: {AA}{a} sent9: {AB}{aa} sent10: ¬(¬{E}{b} & {D}{b}) sent11: {A}{is} | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 10 | the depression does not scrabble murre. | ¬{A}{a} | 7 | [
"sent1 -> int1: that the nutshell is proper and/or it is not a brutalization is not right if it is residential.; sent6 -> int2: the nutshell gels backdrop and is residential if it is not antigenic.; sent3 -> int3: the fact that the nutshell is not antigenic is not incorrect if it is not a kind of a radical and is a... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the depression does scrabble murre. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the fact that something is proper or it is not a kind of a brutalization or both is correct is not true if it is residential. sent2: if something is not a kind of a brutalization then the fact that it scrabbles murre is not false. sen... | sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the depression does scrabble murre. | [] | [
"the depression does scrabble murre."
] |
there is something such that if it is a phycobilin it is avuncular and it is not astigmatic. | sent1: something is both a lack and not a Macleod if that it is a kind of a cocarboxylase is not false. sent2: if the Wight is a Mexican it is immaterial and it is not a kind of a phycobilin. sent3: if something does tuck Guadeloupe it is Indian and it does not abuse testimony. sent4: if something is a meadowgrass it i... | (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: (x): {JB}x -> ({GP}x & ¬{FG}x) sent2: {HL}{m} -> ({EE}{m} & ¬{A}{m}) sent3: (x): {EO}x -> ({IR}x & ¬{BD}x) sent4: (x): {EB}x -> ({HN}x & ¬{HG}x) sent5: (x): {S}x -> ({DA}x & ¬{L}x) sent6: (Ex): {JH}x -> ({FI}x & ¬{DL}x) sent7: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (x): {DQ}... | [
"sent16 -> int1: the reflex is avuncular and is not astigmatic if it is a kind of a phycobilin.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent16 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 | there is something such that if it is bentonitic it is a Bryum and is not a pegmatite. | (Ex): {JA}x -> ({BH}x & ¬{ED}x) | 2 | [
"sent15 -> int2: if the chock is bentonitic it is a Bryum and is not a kind of a pegmatite.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is a phycobilin it is avuncular and it is not astigmatic. ; $context$ = sent1: something is both a lack and not a Macleod if that it is a kind of a cocarboxylase is not false. sent2: if the Wight is a Mexican it is immaterial and it is not a kind of a phycobilin. sent3:... | sent16 -> int1: the reflex is avuncular and is not astigmatic if it is a kind of a phycobilin.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | a phycobilin is not non-avuncular and not astigmatic. | [] | [
"a phycobilin is not non-avuncular and not astigmatic."
] |
the fact that the trombonist is not stenographic and it is not a Thuja does not hold. | sent1: the ionization is non-stenographic and/or abuses undercoat. sent2: the fact that the ionization does not abuse undercoat but it is stenographic is not right if the trombonist does not abuse undercoat. sent3: if there is something such that it either does not abuse undercoat or is not internal or both then the ch... | ¬(¬{A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) | sent1: (¬{A}{aa} v {AA}{aa}) sent2: ¬{AA}{b} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) sent5: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent6: (x): (¬{D}x & {E}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: {A}{a} -> (¬{II}{a} v ¬{FH}{a}) sent8: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) s... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | there exists something such that it is not a deep or is not respiratory or both. | (Ex): (¬{II}x v ¬{FH}x) | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the trombonist is not stenographic and it is not a Thuja does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the ionization is non-stenographic and/or abuses undercoat. sent2: the fact that the ionization does not abuse undercoat but it is stenographic is not right if the trombonist does not abuse undercoa... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if the chlorofucin is not stenographic the fact that the trombonist is not stenographic and it is not a Thuja is incorrect. | [
"that the chlorofucin is non-stenographic thing that does not abuse undercoat is not correct."
] | [
"if the chlorofucin is not stenographic the fact that the trombonist is not stenographic and it is not a Thuja is incorrect."
] |
the fact that something is an oleander is incorrect. | sent1: the decumary is a kind of an oleander if the assemblyman is a kind of a durance. sent2: the assemblyman is a durance if there exists something such that the fact that it scrabbles decumary and is a kind of a Mutinus is wrong. sent3: the go-kart is a durance. sent4: there exists something such that that it does s... | ¬((Ex): {B}x) | sent1: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent3: {A}{f} sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: (x): {F}x sent6: (Ex): {GG}x sent7: (Ex): {BE}x sent8: (x): ¬{AB}x -> {A}{a} sent9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: (x): {F}x -> ({E}x & ¬{D}x) sent11: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | [
"sent9 & sent2 -> int1: that the assemblyman is a durance is not false.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the decumary is an oleander.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent9 & sent2 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent1 & int1 -> int2: {B}{b}; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 | there exists something such that that it gels Mutinus and abuses ripple does not hold. | (Ex): ¬({JF}x & {ED}x) | 9 | [
"sent10 -> int3: the jotter is a kind of a hymeneal but it is not an appeasement if it is a guereza.; sent5 -> int4: the jotter is a kind of a guereza.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the jotter is a kind of hymeneal thing that is not an appeasement.; int5 -> int6: everything is a kind of a hymeneal that is not a kind of an ... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that something is an oleander is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the decumary is a kind of an oleander if the assemblyman is a kind of a durance. sent2: the assemblyman is a durance if there exists something such that the fact that it scrabbles decumary and is a kind of a Mutinus is wrong. sent3... | sent9 & sent2 -> int1: that the assemblyman is a durance is not false.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the decumary is an oleander.; int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that that it does scrabble decumary and it is a Mutinus does not hold. | [
"the assemblyman is a durance if there exists something such that the fact that it scrabbles decumary and is a kind of a Mutinus is wrong.",
"the decumary is a kind of an oleander if the assemblyman is a kind of a durance."
] | [
"It is a Mutinus that does not hold and it does scrabble decumary.",
"There is a Mutinus that does not hold and a scrabble decumary that does."
] |
the punchboard is not a indigestibility but it is a Kuroshio. | sent1: the dovekie is not a tremble. sent2: if that the punchboard is not a kind of a indigestibility but it is a kind of a Kuroshio is not right the dovekie does jell Carum. sent3: something that does not scrabble punchboard is not a kind of a Kuroshio. sent4: if that that either the punchboard does abuse acetate or i... | (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) | sent1: ¬{F}{b} sent2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AB}x sent4: ¬({C}{a} v ¬{A}{a}) -> ¬{A}{cj} sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}{b} sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent7: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}x v ¬{A}x) sent8: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬({E}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) sent9: (x): ¬({E}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent10: ¬{AB}{a} -> {B}{b} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the punchboard is not a indigestibility but it is a Kuroshio does not hold.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the dovekie does jell Carum.; sent6 & sent5 -> int2: the dovekie does not jell Carum.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"... | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); sent2 & assump1 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent6 & sent5 -> int2: ¬{B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the photocopier is not a Kuroshio. | ¬{AB}{cj} | 8 | [
"sent3 -> int4: the photocopier is not a Kuroshio if it does not scrabble punchboard.; sent7 -> int5: that either the punchboard abuses acetate or it does not scrabble punchboard or both is wrong if it does jell Carum.; sent9 -> int6: the dovekie does not scrabble fitter if the fact that it scrabble fitter and it i... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the punchboard is not a indigestibility but it is a Kuroshio. ; $context$ = sent1: the dovekie is not a tremble. sent2: if that the punchboard is not a kind of a indigestibility but it is a kind of a Kuroshio is not right the dovekie does jell Carum. sent3: something that does not scrabble punchboard is ... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the punchboard is not a indigestibility but it is a Kuroshio does not hold.; sent2 & assump1 -> int1: the dovekie does jell Carum.; sent6 & sent5 -> int2: the dovekie does not jell Carum.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PRO... | DeductionInstance | if that the punchboard is not a kind of a indigestibility but it is a kind of a Kuroshio is not right the dovekie does jell Carum. | [
"there exists something such that it does not scrabble punchboard.",
"the dovekie does not jell Carum if there exists something such that it does not scrabble punchboard."
] | [
"Carum does not think that the punchboard is a kind of indigestibility.",
"Carum doesn't think that the punchboard is a kind of indigestibility."
] |
the carotene is a kind of a counterespionage that is a Mammut. | sent1: the carotene is a counterespionage if it is a neutral. sent2: the carotene is heathlike if there exists something such that it is a thumbprint and is not a demythologization. sent3: there exists something such that the fact that it is a demythologization is right. sent4: if a counterespionage is a Mammut the car... | ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) | sent1: {C}{a} -> {D}{a} sent2: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {DA}{a} sent3: (Ex): {A}x sent4: (x): ({D}x & {E}x) -> {C}{a} sent5: {D}{b} sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({B}x & ¬{A}x) sent7: {E}{a} sent8: (Ex): {E}x sent9: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x & {E}x) sent10: (x): {E}x -> ¬({C}{c} & {F}{c}) sent11: (Ex): {B}x sent12: {DE}{a} -> {ED}{a} ... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | that the carotene is a counterespionage and it is a Mammut is incorrect. | ¬({D}{a} & {E}{a}) | 5 | [
"sent9 -> int1: that the carotene is a kind of a counterespionage and it is a Mammut is not right if it is not a demythologization.; sent19 -> int2: the carotene is not a demythologization and is a thumbprint if it is not a neutral.; sent18 -> int3: the carotene is not a neutral if it does not jell diathermy and it... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the carotene is a kind of a counterespionage that is a Mammut. ; $context$ = sent1: the carotene is a counterespionage if it is a neutral. sent2: the carotene is heathlike if there exists something such that it is a thumbprint and is not a demythologization. sent3: there exists something such that the fa... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | something that does not jell diathermy and is not a unappetizingness is not a neutral. | [
"something is a kind of a thumbprint."
] | [
"something that does not jell diathermy and is not a unappetizingness is not a neutral."
] |
there exists something such that if it does not abuse city then that it is Incan and/or it is a Myocastor does not hold. | sent1: if the sandfly is not Incan the fact that it is least or does jell blowing or both does not hold. sent2: if the browntail is not pathological that it is technological and/or detracts is not correct. sent3: the browntail is not a kind of a latch if it is not a Myocastor. sent4: there exists something such that if... | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) | sent1: ¬{AA}{em} -> ¬({FI}{em} v {HL}{em}) sent2: ¬{AF}{aa} -> ¬({DP}{aa} v {BF}{aa}) sent3: ¬{AB}{aa} -> ¬{DG}{aa} sent4: (Ex): ¬{GA}x -> ({BF}x v {DD}x) sent5: ¬{C}{hs} -> ¬({A}{hs} v {AQ}{hs}) sent6: (Ex): ¬{CH}x -> ¬{HF}x sent7: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{AR}x -> ({IL}x v {C}x) sent9: {IJ}{do... | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | that the churchyard is a kind of a fill and/or it does transport is not correct if it is not mesenteric. | ¬{EL}{hp} -> ¬({JI}{hp} v {BP}{hp}) | 1 | [
"sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not abuse city then that it is Incan and/or it is a Myocastor does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sandfly is not Incan the fact that it is least or does jell blowing or both does not hold. sent2: if the browntail is not pathological that it is technologi... | sent7 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that either the browntail is Incan or it is a kind of a Myocastor or both is not correct if it does not abuse city. | [] | [
"that either the browntail is Incan or it is a kind of a Myocastor or both is not correct if it does not abuse city."
] |
the monotype does scrabble bummer. | sent1: the treat is not a gentile. sent2: something does not scrabble bummer if it is a love-in-a-mist. sent3: that the monotype is not a simian is not wrong. sent4: if the zeaxanthin is a transferrin then it is not brachial. sent5: that the monotype is not a love-in-a-mist and it is not a Romneya is false if it is not... | {B}{aa} | sent1: ¬{A}{hj} sent2: (x): {AA}x -> ¬{B}x sent3: ¬{AE}{aa} sent4: {HG}{iu} -> ¬{BM}{iu} sent5: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: ¬{A}{aa} sent8: {BG}{aa} -> ¬{A}{aa} sent9: ¬{AA}{df} sent10: (x): {A}x -> ¬{AA}x | [
"sent6 -> int1: that that the monotype does not scrabble bummer is not wrong if that the monotype is both not a love-in-a-mist and not a Romneya is wrong is not incorrect.; sent5 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the monotype is not a love-in-a-mist and not a Romneya does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent5 & sent7 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the monotype does scrabble bummer. ; $context$ = sent1: the treat is not a gentile. sent2: something does not scrabble bummer if it is a love-in-a-mist. sent3: that the monotype is not a simian is not wrong. sent4: if the zeaxanthin is a transferrin then it is not brachial. sent5: that the monotype is no... | sent6 -> int1: that that the monotype does not scrabble bummer is not wrong if that the monotype is both not a love-in-a-mist and not a Romneya is wrong is not incorrect.; sent5 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the monotype is not a love-in-a-mist and not a Romneya does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if that something is not a love-in-a-mist and it is not a Romneya does not hold then it does not scrabble bummer. | [
"that the monotype is not a love-in-a-mist and it is not a Romneya is false if it is not a gentile.",
"the monotype is not a kind of a gentile."
] | [
"It does not scrabble bummer if that is not a love-in-a-mist and it is not a Romneya.",
"If it's not a love-in-a-mist and it's not a Romneya, then it's not scrabble bummer."
] |
the estimableness and/or the dynamic happens. | sent1: both the Oldness and the estimableness occurs. | ({B} v {C}) | sent1: ({A} & {B}) | [
"sent1 -> int1: the estimableness occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent1 -> int1: {B}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the estimableness and/or the dynamic happens. ; $context$ = sent1: both the Oldness and the estimableness occurs. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> int1: the estimableness occurs.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | both the Oldness and the estimableness occurs. | [] | [
"both the Oldness and the estimableness occurs."
] |
the fact that there is something such that the fact that it abuses postscript and does not tuck Uighur is false is wrong. | sent1: if the fact that the rugulah is not a kind of a wagtail is not incorrect then that it does scrabble angioplasty and is a thiazide is wrong. sent2: the rugulah is not a kind of a voluntary. sent3: if there exists something such that it does not jell Transfiguration then that the inspiration is autographic and doe... | ¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: ¬{FO}{a} -> ¬({BN}{a} & {AK}{a}) sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}{d} & ¬{I}{d}) sent4: {A}{b} -> ¬({EU}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) sent5: ¬{J}{f} -> (¬{K}{f} v ¬{H}{f}) sent6: ¬({M}{g} & ¬{J}{g}) -> ¬{J}{f} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent8: (x): ¬({G}x & ¬{I}x) -> ¬{G}x sent9: (x): ¬({EU}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬... | [
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the rugulah abuses postscript and does not tuck Uighur is false.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent7 & sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 | the additive is not quadraphonic. | ¬{EU}{dc} | 17 | [
"sent15 -> int2: if the fact that the hatchery is a kind of a none but it does not abuse bummer is not correct it is voluntary.; sent8 -> int3: if that the inspiration is autographic and does not scrabble dressing is not correct it is not autographic.; sent16 & sent12 -> int4: the fact that the LP is a soffit and i... | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that the fact that it abuses postscript and does not tuck Uighur is false is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the rugulah is not a kind of a wagtail is not incorrect then that it does scrabble angioplasty and is a thiazide is wrong. sent2: the rugulah is ... | sent7 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the rugulah abuses postscript and does not tuck Uighur is false.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the rugulah does abuse postscript but it does not tuck Uighur is not correct if it is not a voluntary. | [
"the rugulah is not a kind of a voluntary."
] | [
"that the rugulah does abuse postscript but it does not tuck Uighur is not correct if it is not a voluntary."
] |
the reproduction does not scrabble pretermission. | sent1: if that something is Mycenaean is true then the fact that the reproduction does not jell sinker is correct. sent2: the yachtsman is a kind of a lurker if it scrabbles pretermission. sent3: if something is non-Mediterranean thing that does not scrabble pretermission then the follow-up is not a lurker. sent4: the ... | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬{IQ}{b} sent2: {D}{c} -> {B}{c} sent3: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: ¬{C}{a} sent5: (Ex): ¬{C}x sent6: (x): (¬{C}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{D}{a} sent7: {A}{a} -> (¬{HJ}{a} & ¬{FE}{a}) sent8: (Ex): (¬{B}x & {C}x) sent9: ¬(¬{A}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) -> {A}{a} sent10: (¬{IG}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent11: ¬{B}{b} sent1... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | there is something such that it does not abuse chance-medley and it does not rise. | (Ex): (¬{HJ}x & ¬{FE}x) | 8 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the reproduction does not scrabble pretermission. ; $context$ = sent1: if that something is Mycenaean is true then the fact that the reproduction does not jell sinker is correct. sent2: the yachtsman is a kind of a lurker if it scrabbles pretermission. sent3: if something is non-Mediterranean thing that ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the yachtsman is a kind of a lurker if it scrabbles pretermission. | [
"if the fact that the fact that the reproduction is not Mycenaean and/or is not Mediterranean hold is false then the follow-up is Mycenaean."
] | [
"the yachtsman is a kind of a lurker if it scrabbles pretermission."
] |
the fact that the speculating does not occur and the counterattraction occurs does not hold. | sent1: the processing occurs and the chlamydialness happens. sent2: the uncreativeness occurs. sent3: that the stead does not occur and the codification does not occur is false. sent4: the flouncing does not occur if the fact that the elimination does not occur and the manicure does not occur is wrong. sent5: that both... | ¬(¬{B} & {A}) | sent1: ({HQ} & {EH}) sent2: {C} sent3: ¬(¬{O} & ¬{ED}) sent4: ¬(¬{AL} & ¬{HI}) -> ¬{IL} sent5: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent6: ({CR} & {FH}) sent7: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{B} & {A}) sent8: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent9: ¬(¬{BU} & ¬{GR}) -> ¬{CC} sent10: {FQ} sent11: {FB} sent12: {AQ} sent13: {AB} -> ¬{B} sent14: {EO} sent15: ({A} & {C}) ... | [
"sent8 & sent5 -> int1: the speculating does not occur.; sent15 -> int2: the counterattraction occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent8 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent15 -> int2: {A}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 | that the fact that the speculating does not occur but the counterattraction occurs is not incorrect does not hold. | ¬(¬{B} & {A}) | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the speculating does not occur and the counterattraction occurs does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the processing occurs and the chlamydialness happens. sent2: the uncreativeness occurs. sent3: that the stead does not occur and the codification does not occur is false. sent4: the flouncing... | sent8 & sent5 -> int1: the speculating does not occur.; sent15 -> int2: the counterattraction occurs.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if that the non-nomotheticness and the non-impenitentness occurs is incorrect then the speculating does not occur. | [
"that both the non-nomotheticness and the penitentness occurs is wrong.",
"the counterattraction happens and the uncreativeness occurs."
] | [
"The speculating does not occur if the non-nomotheticness is incorrect.",
"The speculating doesn't happen if the non-nomotheticness is incorrect."
] |
there exists something such that if it does not scrabble imperfectibility and/or it does encourage then it is a forklift. | sent1: the carotene is utopian if it either is not a kind of a Walesa or is a kind of a triumvir or both. sent2: there exists something such that if either it zeroes or it does abuse adnoun or both it is an affirmative. sent3: the carotene encourages if it is a kind of a turmeric and/or is greenside. sent4: if the caro... | (Ex): (¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x | sent1: (¬{FF}{aa} v {BO}{aa}) -> {HK}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ({BR}x v {II}x) -> {FM}x sent3: ({BK}{aa} v {HU}{aa}) -> {AB}{aa} sent4: (¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent5: ({FB}{gp} v {BQ}{gp}) -> {DK}{gp} sent6: (Ex): ({EJ}x v {HK}x) -> {AG}x sent7: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent8: (Ex): (¬{HG}x v {FR}x) -> {JG}x sent9: (Ex): ... | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not scrabble imperfectibility and/or it does encourage then it is a forklift. ; $context$ = sent1: the carotene is utopian if it either is not a kind of a Walesa or is a kind of a triumvir or both. sent2: there exists something such that if either it zeroes or ... | sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the carotene does not scrabble imperfectibility or encourages or both it is a kind of a forklift. | [] | [
"if the carotene does not scrabble imperfectibility or encourages or both it is a kind of a forklift."
] |
the repression does not occur and the hoofing occurs. | sent1: the repression is prevented by that the fumigation occurs but the abusing onrush does not occur. sent2: the fearfulness does not occur. sent3: the labialness occurs. sent4: the fact that the repression does not occur and the hoofing occurs is not true if that the labial does not occur is true. sent5: that the ho... | (¬{B} & {A}) | sent1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent2: ¬{N} sent3: {C} sent4: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{B} & {A}) sent5: ¬{A} -> (¬{DN} & {FT}) sent6: ¬{K} -> ({J} & {G}) sent7: ¬{AB} sent8: {D} -> ({C} v ¬{B}) sent9: (¬{E} & {D}) -> ¬{C} sent10: ({AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent11: {AJ} sent12: {G} -> ({F} & ¬{E}) sent13: ({A} & {C}) sent14: {EN} sent15: ¬... | [
"sent13 -> int1: the hoofing occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent13 -> int1: {A};"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | that the repression does not occur and the hoofing happens is incorrect. | ¬(¬{B} & {A}) | 8 | [
"sent15 & sent2 -> int2: the cabaret does not occur.; sent6 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the Hadith occurs and the inextinguishableness happens hold.; int3 -> int4: the fact that the inextinguishableness happens is true.; sent12 & int4 -> int5: the masculine happens and the interruption does not occur.; int5 -> in... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the repression does not occur and the hoofing occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the repression is prevented by that the fumigation occurs but the abusing onrush does not occur. sent2: the fearfulness does not occur. sent3: the labialness occurs. sent4: the fact that the repression does not occur and the hoofi... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the hoofing and the labial happens. | [] | [
"the hoofing and the labial happens."
] |
that there is something such that if it is not a cider then the fact that it is either not amniotic or not epilithic or both does not hold is incorrect. | sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a cider then it is epilithic. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a kind of a manifold then the fact that it is not patriotic and/or it is not illegal is not true. sent3: if something does not abuse Monopoly that it does not explode or is not a kind of a... | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x)) | sent1: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x sent2: (Ex): ¬{DM}x -> ¬(¬{HC}x v ¬{FG}x) sent3: (x): ¬{JF}x -> ¬(¬{HA}x v ¬{CE}x) sent4: (Ex): {CU}x -> ¬(¬{GC}x v ¬{AH}x) sent5: ¬{HJ}{aa} -> ¬(¬{R}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent7: {A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sent8: (Ex): ¬{EG}x -> ¬(¬{FM}x v ¬{DA... | [
"sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | there is something such that if it is not a kind of a dejection then that either it is unplayful or it is not alternating or both does not hold. | (Ex): ¬{IP}x -> ¬(¬{IQ}x v ¬{BL}x) | 2 | [
"sent10 -> int1: if the macadamia is not a dejection the fact that it is not playful and/or it is not alternating is false.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if it is not a cider then the fact that it is either not amniotic or not epilithic or both does not hold is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not a cider then it is epilithic. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a kind... | sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that the submariner is either not amniotic or not epilithic or both is false if it is not a cider. | [] | [
"the fact that the submariner is either not amniotic or not epilithic or both is false if it is not a cider."
] |
the bars does not occur. | sent1: the Zoroastrian occurs if the oblateness occurs. sent2: the Zoroastrianness does not occur if the non-deductiveness and the abusing fuzz occurs. sent3: if that the stopover happens hold both the non-deductiveness and the abusing fuzz happens. sent4: the oblate happens. sent5: the barring does not occur if the Zo... | ¬{D} | sent1: {A} -> {B} sent2: (¬{C} & {E}) -> ¬{B} sent3: {F} -> (¬{C} & {E}) sent4: {A} sent5: ({B} v {C}) -> ¬{D} sent6: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {C}) | [
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the Zoroastrian happens.; int1 -> int2: the Zoroastrian happens or the deductiveness happens or both.; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: {B}; int1 -> int2: ({B} v {C}); sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | the bars happens. | {D} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the bars does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the Zoroastrian occurs if the oblateness occurs. sent2: the Zoroastrianness does not occur if the non-deductiveness and the abusing fuzz occurs. sent3: if that the stopover happens hold both the non-deductiveness and the abusing fuzz happens. sent4: the oblat... | sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the Zoroastrian happens.; int1 -> int2: the Zoroastrian happens or the deductiveness happens or both.; sent5 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the Zoroastrian occurs if the oblateness occurs. | [
"the oblate happens.",
"the barring does not occur if the Zoroastrianness and/or the deductiveness happens."
] | [
"If the oblateness occurs, the Zoroastrian occurs.",
"If the oblateness occurs, the Zoroastrian will occur."
] |
that there is something such that if the fact that it does not scrabble Maltese is not incorrect it is alimentative is right. | sent1: the fact that the dugout is alimentative if that the dugout does not scrabble Maltese hold is not false. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a calcium it is odds. sent3: if something is not municipal that it does delineate is not false. sent4: there is something such that if it scrabbles Maltese... | (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x | sent1: ¬{B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent2: (Ex): ¬{EM}x -> {FB}x sent3: (x): ¬{DK}x -> {CL}x sent4: (Ex): {B}x -> {C}x sent5: ¬{C}{fb} -> {JJ}{fb} sent6: (x): ¬{DO}x -> {AG}x sent7: ¬{J}{ie} -> {CH}{ie} sent8: (Ex): ¬{HJ}x -> {HN}x sent9: {B}{aa} -> {C}{aa} sent10: ¬{CK}{aa} -> {B}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | there exists something such that if it is not cucurbitaceous then it is Moldovan. | (Ex): ¬{DO}x -> {AG}x | 2 | [
"sent6 -> int1: the hollowware is Moldovan if the fact that it is not cucurbitaceous is not wrong.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there is something such that if the fact that it does not scrabble Maltese is not incorrect it is alimentative is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the dugout is alimentative if that the dugout does not scrabble Maltese hold is not false. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not ... | sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that the dugout is alimentative if that the dugout does not scrabble Maltese hold is not false. | [] | [
"the fact that the dugout is alimentative if that the dugout does not scrabble Maltese hold is not false."
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.