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 Guyanese is not a crouch or a spinmeister or both. | sent1: the potpie is not a spinmeister if the fact that it does abuse surcoat and scrabbles EDS does not hold. sent2: the fact that the Guyanese either is not a crouch or scrabbles EDS or both is not right if the potpie does not scrabbles EDS. sent3: the Guyanese does crouch. sent4: if the fact that the harvest is not ... | (¬{C}{b} v {B}{b}) | sent1: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent2: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent3: {C}{b} sent4: ¬{L}{d} -> ({J}{c} & {K}{c}) sent5: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent6: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬(¬{C}{b} v {B}{b}) sent7: ¬{IA}{a} sent8: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: ¬({I}{c} & ¬{H}{c}) -> ¬{G}{c} sent10: ¬({C}{b} & {AA}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent1... | [
"sent1 & sent5 -> int1: the potpie is not a spinmeister.; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent1 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 16 | the Guyanese does not crouch or it is a spinmeister or both. | (¬{C}{b} v {B}{b}) | 9 | [
"sent16 -> int2: the exocrine is not genuine but it gels Skuld if it does not jell fetlock.; sent12 -> int3: if the exocrine is not vicinal it does not jell fetlock.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Guyanese is not a crouch or a spinmeister or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the potpie is not a spinmeister if the fact that it does abuse surcoat and scrabbles EDS does not hold. sent2: the fact that the Guyanese either is not a crouch or scrabbles EDS or both is not right if the potpie does not scrabbl... | sent1 & sent5 -> int1: the potpie is not a spinmeister.; int1 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the potpie is not a spinmeister if the fact that it does abuse surcoat and scrabbles EDS does not hold. | [
"the fact that that the potpie does abuse surcoat and it does scrabble EDS is not false does not hold.",
"if the potpie is not a spinmeister that the Guyanese is either not a crouch or a spinmeister or both is not right."
] | [
"The potpie is not a spinmeister if it does abuse surcoat and scrabbles.",
"If the potpie does abuse surcoat and scrabbles, it's not a spinmeister."
] |
the provider is a millionairess. | sent1: if something does not scrabble flamefish or it husks or both it does not scrabble flamefish. sent2: if something is a kind of a pantheist then the fact that it does not jell Psophia and does not abuse M3 is not right. sent3: if either the ilmenite gels Psophia or it does not husk or both it does not scrabble fla... | {B}{a} | sent1: (x): (¬{D}x v {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent2: (x): {G}x -> ¬(¬{F}x & ¬{H}x) sent3: ({F}{c} v ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {A}x sent5: ¬{AB}{a} sent6: ¬{E}{c} sent7: ¬(¬{F}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) -> {F}{a} sent8: ({N}{d} & {M}{d}) sent9: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent10: (x): {A}x -> ({DS}x & ¬{CD}x) sent11: ({AA}{... | [
"sent11 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent11 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | the provider is a kind of a millionairess. | {B}{a} | 7 | [
"sent6 -> int1: the ilmenite gels Psophia or it is not a husk or both.; sent3 & int1 -> int2: that the ilmenite does not scrabble flamefish hold.; int2 -> int3: there exists something such that that it does not scrabble flamefish is not false.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the provider is a millionairess. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not scrabble flamefish or it husks or both it does not scrabble flamefish. sent2: if something is a kind of a pantheist then the fact that it does not jell Psophia and does not abuse M3 is not right. sent3: if either the ilmenite gel... | sent11 & sent9 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the provider retrains and does not jell waterleaf it is not a kind of a millionairess. | [
"the provider retrains but it does not jell waterleaf."
] | [
"if the provider retrains and does not jell waterleaf it is not a kind of a millionairess."
] |
the babbitt is not a kind of a Veneto. | sent1: the babbitt is not daisylike and it is not a Veneto if the Maltese abuses sacrilegiousness. sent2: if the Maltese is a essonite the babbitt does not abuse sacrilegiousness but it is a Veneto. sent3: if the babbitt does abuse sacrilegiousness that the environment is a Veneto is true. sent4: if something is not a ... | ¬{C}{a} | sent1: {B}{b} -> (¬{A}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent2: {D}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent3: {B}{a} -> {C}{aa} sent4: (x): (¬{H}x & {I}x) -> ¬{G}x sent5: (x): (¬{B}x & {C}x) -> {A}x sent6: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{F}x & ¬{E}x) sent7: {I}{d} -> ¬(¬{H}{d} & {G}{d}) sent8: (x): ¬{A}x sent9: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) sent10: ¬{J}{b} sent11... | [
"sent8 -> int1: the environment is not daisylike.; int1 -> int2: the environment is not daisylike or it abuses sacrilegiousness or both.; sent17 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent8 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 -> int2: (¬{A}{aa} v {B}{aa}); sent17 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 | the diaphone does not jell egress or is not non-Orthodox or both. | (¬{GB}{ea} v {AN}{ea}) | 9 | [
"sent5 -> int3: if the babbitt does not abuse sacrilegiousness and is a kind of a Veneto then it is daisylike.; sent6 -> int4: the intercostal is not a fling and it does not abuse environment if that it does not abuse Bukharin is not incorrect.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the babbitt is not a kind of a Veneto. ; $context$ = sent1: the babbitt is not daisylike and it is not a Veneto if the Maltese abuses sacrilegiousness. sent2: if the Maltese is a essonite the babbitt does not abuse sacrilegiousness but it is a Veneto. sent3: if the babbitt does abuse sacrilegiousness tha... | sent8 -> int1: the environment is not daisylike.; int1 -> int2: the environment is not daisylike or it abuses sacrilegiousness or both.; sent17 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | everything is not daisylike. | [
"if the fact that the environment is non-daisylike or it abuses sacrilegiousness or both is right the babbitt is a Veneto."
] | [
"everything is not daisylike."
] |
both the bathymetry and the non-atonalisticness happens. | sent1: the crayoning does not occur but the tucking decorator happens if that the meatiness does not occur is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that the bathymetry but not the atonalisticness occurs does not hold. sent3: if that the dolichocephalicness does not occur is correct both the bathymetry and the non-atonalisticn... | ({AA} & ¬{AB}) | sent1: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & {C}) sent2: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: ¬{A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent4: ¬({EO} & {GL}) sent5: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} sent6: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent7: ¬({FG} & ¬{BT}) | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the bathymetry and the non-atonalisticness happens. | ({AA} & ¬{AB}) | 8 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = both the bathymetry and the non-atonalisticness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the crayoning does not occur but the tucking decorator happens if that the meatiness does not occur is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that the bathymetry but not the atonalisticness occurs does not hold. sent3: if that the doli... | sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that the bathymetry but not the atonalisticness occurs does not hold. | [] | [
"the fact that the bathymetry but not the atonalisticness occurs does not hold."
] |
that the mackintosh is not a kind of a half-mast and does not scrabble sprayer does not hold. | sent1: if the sprayer does not abuse musicianship but it is virological then the mackintosh does abuse weekend. sent2: the cuff is not a half-mast. sent3: if something does not jell overhead and does jell jagged that it does not abuse monoblast is not wrong. sent4: the fact that the mackintosh is not amoebic and it doe... | ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: (¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {B}{a} sent2: ¬{AA}{eh} sent3: (x): (¬{J}x & {I}x) -> ¬{H}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{ET}{a} & ¬{FN}{a}) sent5: (¬{J}{d} & {I}{d}) sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: (x): ({C}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent8: (x): {B}x -> ¬(¬{DN}x & ¬{A}x) sent9: (x): {A}x -> ({C}x v ¬{AB}x) sent10: {F}... | [
"sent6 & sent19 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent6 & sent19 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 20 | 0 | 20 | the mackintosh is not a half-mast and does not scrabble sprayer. | (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | 7 | [
"sent7 -> int1: the fact that the mackintosh does not scrabble sprayer is true if it is virological and/or it does not scrabble sprayer.; sent9 -> int2: if the mackintosh is a Lincolnshire it is virological or it does not scrabble sprayer or both.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the mackintosh is not a kind of a half-mast and does not scrabble sprayer does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sprayer does not abuse musicianship but it is virological then the mackintosh does abuse weekend. sent2: the cuff is not a half-mast. sent3: if something does not jell overhead and do... | sent6 & sent19 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the mackintosh is not a half-mast and it does not scrabble sprayer is not right if it is not a Lincolnshire. | [
"the mackintosh is not a Lincolnshire."
] | [
"that the mackintosh is not a half-mast and it does not scrabble sprayer is not right if it is not a Lincolnshire."
] |
the non-structuralness prevents that the inflection occurs. | sent1: the inflection occurs if the structuralness does not occur. sent2: that the translationalness does not occur is correct. sent3: that that either the inflection happens or the structuralness occurs or both is not correct if the bimorphemicness does not occur is not incorrect. sent4: the fact that the postdoctoral... | ¬{B} -> ¬{A} | sent1: ¬{B} -> {A} sent2: ¬{ET} sent3: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} v {B}) sent4: ¬({A} v {B}) -> ¬{IG} sent5: {B} -> ¬{A} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the inflection occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"void -> assump1: {A};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | the postdoctoral does not occur. | ¬{IG} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the non-structuralness prevents that the inflection occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the inflection occurs if the structuralness does not occur. sent2: that the translationalness does not occur is correct. sent3: that that either the inflection happens or the structuralness occurs or both is not correct if t... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | [
""
] | [
""
] | |
the fact that the lotus does not jell geophagy hold. | sent1: the embankment is not malodorous if the kerchief is not malodorous but a frost. sent2: the fact that the embankment is a Ledum is right. sent3: something does not jell geophagy and it is not a Ledum if it is not malodorous. sent4: if that something gels pustule and/or it is a kind of a Ardisia is not right then ... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: (¬{C}{c} & {E}{c}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: {A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & ¬{A}x) sent4: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent8: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x & {E}x) | [
"sent5 & sent2 -> int1: that the lotus does not jell pustule and/or is a Ardisia is not true.; sent6 -> int2: if that that the lotus does not jell pustule and/or is a Ardisia is not true hold then it does not jell geophagy.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 & sent2 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}); sent6 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{b} v {AB}{b}) -> ¬{B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 | the lotus does jell geophagy. | {B}{b} | 7 | [
"sent3 -> int3: the embankment does not jell geophagy and is not a Ledum if it is non-malodorous.; sent8 -> int4: if the kerchief does not scrabble workhouse it is not malodorous and it is a frost.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the lotus does not jell geophagy hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the embankment is not malodorous if the kerchief is not malodorous but a frost. sent2: the fact that the embankment is a Ledum is right. sent3: something does not jell geophagy and it is not a Ledum if it is not malodorous. sent4: ... | sent5 & sent2 -> int1: that the lotus does not jell pustule and/or is a Ardisia is not true.; sent6 -> int2: if that that the lotus does not jell pustule and/or is a Ardisia is not true hold then it does not jell geophagy.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the lotus does not jell pustule and/or it is a kind of a Ardisia is false if the embankment is a Ledum. | [
"the fact that the embankment is a Ledum is right.",
"if that something either does not jell pustule or is a Ardisia or both is incorrect it does not jell geophagy."
] | [
"If the embankment is a Ledum, the lotus does not jell and is a kind of Ardisia.",
"If the embankment is a Ledum, the lotus does not jell and it is a kind of Ardisia."
] |
the thoracotomy happens. | sent1: the Franciscanness happens. sent2: if the fact that the abusing Mojave does not occur is not wrong the thoracotomy does not occur and the updraft does not occur. sent3: that the thoracotomy happens is caused by that the updraft occurs. sent4: that the middle happens is not incorrect. sent5: the invocation happen... | {B} | sent1: {DJ} sent2: ¬{C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) sent3: {A} -> {B} sent4: {JA} sent5: {CO} sent6: {DM} sent7: {IR} sent8: {DT} -> {EC} sent9: {HA} sent10: {HJ} -> {I} sent11: {EC} sent12: {GM} sent13: {ER} sent14: {A} | [
"sent3 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent3 & sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 | 12 | the thoracotomy does not occur. | ¬{B} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the thoracotomy happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the Franciscanness happens. sent2: if the fact that the abusing Mojave does not occur is not wrong the thoracotomy does not occur and the updraft does not occur. sent3: that the thoracotomy happens is caused by that the updraft occurs. sent4: that the middle ... | sent3 & sent14 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the thoracotomy happens is caused by that the updraft occurs. | [
"the updraft occurs."
] | [
"that the thoracotomy happens is caused by that the updraft occurs."
] |
the squawbush gels probabilism and/or it is non-paralytic. | sent1: if the rawhide does not jell hydrofluorocarbon and/or is not a conveyance that the squawbush is not a Cynewulf is not wrong. sent2: something does not jell hydrofluorocarbon and/or is not a conveyance if it is not a kind of a linoleum. sent3: that either the squawbush gels probabilism or it is not paralytic or b... | ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) | sent1: (¬{E}{b} v ¬{F}{b}) -> ¬{D}{a} sent2: (x): ¬{G}x -> (¬{E}x v ¬{F}x) sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x & {A}x) sent5: (Ex): {B}x sent6: ¬{B}{a} sent7: (x): {JB}x -> ¬({II}{at} v ¬{HA}{at}) sent8: {L}{d} sent9: ¬({A}{a} v ¬{DL}{a}) sent10: ¬(¬{I}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) -> ¬{G}{b} sent11: (E... | [
"sent11 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent11 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 14 | that the squawbush gels probabilism and/or it is not paralytic hold. | ({B}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) | 10 | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the squawbush is not a Cynewulf then it gels probabilism and is a bob.; sent2 -> int2: if the rawhide is not a kind of a linoleum it does not jell hydrofluorocarbon or it is not a conveyance or both.; sent16 & sent8 -> int3: the follow-up is a characterization.; sent14 & int3 -> int4: the cock-a-... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the squawbush gels probabilism and/or it is non-paralytic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the rawhide does not jell hydrofluorocarbon and/or is not a conveyance that the squawbush is not a Cynewulf is not wrong. sent2: something does not jell hydrofluorocarbon and/or is not a conveyance if it is not a kind of a... | sent11 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | something is a bob. | [
"that either the squawbush gels probabilism or it is not paralytic or both does not hold if there is something such that it is a bob."
] | [
"something is a bob."
] |
the fact that if that the ablactation occurs is not false that the abusing bob occurs hold is not right. | sent1: the abusing bob but not the scandal happens if the ablactation happens. sent2: the scandal does not occur. sent3: if the abusing Balboa occurs the fact that not the bloomer but the dot occurs is not correct. sent4: the diadromousness happens. sent5: the abusing Balboa occurs. sent6: the gelling dugout occurs but... | ¬({A} -> {AA}) | sent1: {A} -> ({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬{AB} sent3: {I} -> ¬(¬{F} & {H}) sent4: {CA} sent5: {I} sent6: ({DB} & ¬{CJ}) sent7: ¬(¬{F} & {H}) -> ¬{E} sent8: {A} -> ¬{AB} sent9: ¬{E} -> ({IG} & {A}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ablactation occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the abusing bob occurs and the scandal does not occur.; int1 -> int2: the abusing bob happens.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"void -> assump1: {A}; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: ({AA} & ¬{AB}); int1 -> int2: {AA}; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 | the unwearableness occurs and the matrimony does not occur. | ({IG} & ¬{T}) | 5 | [
"sent3 & sent5 -> int3: that not the bloomer but the dotting happens is false.; sent7 & int3 -> int4: the gerundialness does not occur.; sent9 & int4 -> int5: both the unwearableness and the ablactation occurs.; int5 -> int6: the unwearableness occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that if that the ablactation occurs is not false that the abusing bob occurs hold is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the abusing bob but not the scandal happens if the ablactation happens. sent2: the scandal does not occur. sent3: if the abusing Balboa occurs the fact that not the bloomer but th... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ablactation occurs.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the abusing bob occurs and the scandal does not occur.; int1 -> int2: the abusing bob happens.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the abusing bob but not the scandal happens if the ablactation happens. | [] | [
"the abusing bob but not the scandal happens if the ablactation happens."
] |
the sweep does not jell gloved. | sent1: the sweep does not jell gloved if the Centre is ascensional and it is a kind of a furosemide. sent2: the fact that the provider is a kind of a loop but it is not a kind of a stickball does not hold if there are non-subhuman things. sent3: the sweep is a furosemide if the fact that the fact that the Centre does n... | ¬{F}{c} | sent1: ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{F}{c} sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent3: ¬(¬{F}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) -> {E}{c} sent4: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent5: ({I}{b} & {H}{b}) -> {G}{b} sent6: ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {F}x sent8: ¬{H}{b} sent9: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent10: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{... | [
"sent11 & sent10 -> int1: the fact that the provider is not a loop and is not a stickball does not hold.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the Centre is ascensional hold.; sent14 -> int3: if the Centre is a Welsh it is a furosemide.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent11 & sent10 -> int1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 & sent4 -> int2: {D}{b}; sent14 -> int3: {G}{b} -> {E}{b};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 12 | 0 | 12 | the sweep gels gloved. | {F}{c} | 5 | [
"sent7 -> int4: if that the fact that the sweep is not subhuman and it does not loop hold is not true then it gels gloved.; sent18 -> int5: if the sweep is a kind of a stickball then the fact that it is not subhuman and it is not a loop is not true.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the sweep does not jell gloved. ; $context$ = sent1: the sweep does not jell gloved if the Centre is ascensional and it is a kind of a furosemide. sent2: the fact that the provider is a kind of a loop but it is not a kind of a stickball does not hold if there are non-subhuman things. sent3: the sweep is ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that it is not subhuman. | [
"if there are non-subhuman things the fact that the provider is not a loop and not a stickball is wrong.",
"if that the provider is not a loop and is not a stickball does not hold the fact that the Centre is ascensional is not wrong.",
"something is a furosemide if it is Welsh."
] | [
"There is something that is not subhuman.",
"There is a thing that is not subhuman.",
"There is something like that that is not subhuman."
] |
the decomposition does cavil. | sent1: the decomposition is a spermatophyte and it is an absolute. sent2: the decomposition is a kind of a prude. sent3: the cardboard does abuse foxhole and it is a kind of a Toxicodendron. sent4: the decomposition does abuse foxhole. sent5: the grimoire does cavil if the decomposition does not cavil. sent6: the decom... | {A}{a} | sent1: ({AH}{a} & {AL}{a}) sent2: {C}{a} sent3: ({B}{gg} & {FG}{gg}) sent4: {B}{a} sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> {A}{iu} sent6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent7: ({II}{a} & {HH}{a}) sent8: {JK}{a} sent9: {B}{bo} sent10: (x): ({C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{A}x sent11: {CO}{a} sent12: {B}{gn} sent13: ({A}{ir} & {CR}{ir}) sent14: ¬{F}{c} -> ({D}{a} & {E}... | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 | the grimoire cavils and is not adequate. | ({A}{iu} & {GE}{iu}) | 6 | [
"sent10 -> int1: the decomposition does not cavil if it is a prude and it is a Guangzhou.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the decomposition does cavil. ; $context$ = sent1: the decomposition is a spermatophyte and it is an absolute. sent2: the decomposition is a kind of a prude. sent3: the cardboard does abuse foxhole and it is a kind of a Toxicodendron. sent4: the decomposition does abuse foxhole. sent5: the grimoire does ... | sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the decomposition does cavil and abuses foxhole. | [] | [
"the decomposition does cavil and abuses foxhole."
] |
the fact that the exchanger scrabbles porker and it is not non-transdermal hold. | sent1: there is something such that it is a Gothic. sent2: the exchanger is transdermal. sent3: there exists something such that that it is non-civilian does not hold. sent4: something is splintery and not anthropological. sent5: if something that is calcic does not scrabble Danu then the exchanger does scrabble porker... | ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: (Ex): {EA}x sent2: {B}{a} sent3: (Ex): {E}x sent4: (Ex): ({FQ}x & ¬{IB}x) sent5: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {F}x) -> {D}x sent7: (Ex): ({CG}x & ¬{EJ}x) sent8: (Ex): {FK}x sent9: (Ex): {A}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent11: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent12: (Ex): ({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent13: (x): ({AA... | [
"sent18 & sent5 -> int1: the exchanger does scrabble porker.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent18 & sent5 -> int1: {A}{a}; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | the fact that the exchanger does scrabble porker and it is transdermal is incorrect. | ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | 6 | [
"sent15 -> int2: if the heliosphere is a one-hundredth it is substantival and it does not scrabble porker.; sent6 -> int3: if the fact that the heliosphere is not a one-hundredth and does scrabble toucanet does not hold it is a one-hundredth.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the exchanger scrabbles porker and it is not non-transdermal hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is a Gothic. sent2: the exchanger is transdermal. sent3: there exists something such that that it is non-civilian does not hold. sent4: something is splintery and not anth... | sent18 & sent5 -> int1: the exchanger does scrabble porker.; int1 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | something is a kind of calcic thing that does not scrabble Danu. | [
"if something that is calcic does not scrabble Danu then the exchanger does scrabble porker.",
"the exchanger is transdermal."
] | [
"There is something that does not scrabble Danu.",
"There is something that doesn't scrabble Danu."
] |
the condonation does not occur and the cyclopeanness occurs. | sent1: the inedibleness occurs if the scrabbling cockhorse does not occur. sent2: that the unknownness does not occur prevents that the parimutuel occurs. sent3: that that the unknown occurs is correct does not hold. sent4: if the fact that the condonation does not occur but the cyclopeanness happens is incorrect the p... | (¬{AA} & {AB}) | sent1: ¬{CC} -> {FE} sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬{B} sent3: ¬{A} sent4: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> {B} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the condonation does not occur but the cyclopeanness happens does not hold.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the parimutuel happens.; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: the parimutuel does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}); sent4 & assump1 -> int1: {B}; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: ¬{B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the condonation does not occur and the cyclopeanness occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the inedibleness occurs if the scrabbling cockhorse does not occur. sent2: that the unknownness does not occur prevents that the parimutuel occurs. sent3: that that the unknown occurs is correct does not hold. sent4: if the... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the condonation does not occur but the cyclopeanness happens does not hold.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the parimutuel happens.; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: the parimutuel does not occur.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the fact that the condonation does not occur but the cyclopeanness happens is incorrect the parimutuel occurs. | [
"that the unknownness does not occur prevents that the parimutuel occurs.",
"that that the unknown occurs is correct does not hold."
] | [
"If the condonation doesn't happen but the cyclopeanness happens, it's incorrect.",
"If the condonation doesn't happen but the cyclopeanness does, it's incorrect."
] |
the squawbush is a kind of a joylessness. | sent1: if the furfural is both phenomenal and unoriginal the decline ashes. sent2: if the fact that something is a foster-daughter and is a kind of a joylessness is false it is not a joylessness. sent3: the furfural is phenomenal and is not unoriginal. sent4: if the furfural is phenomenal but it is not unoriginal the d... | {A}{c} | sent1: ({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent2: (x): ¬({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent3: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent4: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent5: ({D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{B}{c} sent6: ¬{AB}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}x & {A}x) sent8: (x): ¬{C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) | [
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the decline is a kind of an ash is not incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that it is an ash.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent4 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 -> int2: (Ex): {B}x;"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | that the squawbush is not a joylessness is not incorrect. | ¬{A}{c} | 6 | [
"sent2 -> int3: the squawbush is not a joylessness if that it is a kind of a foster-daughter and is a joylessness is not right.; sent7 -> int4: the fact that the squawbush is a foster-daughter and it is a joylessness is not true if it does not ash.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the squawbush is a kind of a joylessness. ; $context$ = sent1: if the furfural is both phenomenal and unoriginal the decline ashes. sent2: if the fact that something is a foster-daughter and is a kind of a joylessness is false it is not a joylessness. sent3: the furfural is phenomenal and is not unorigin... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if the furfural is phenomenal but it is not unoriginal the decline is an ash. | [
"the furfural is phenomenal and is not unoriginal."
] | [
"if the furfural is phenomenal but it is not unoriginal the decline is an ash."
] |
the nones occurs. | sent1: if the scrabbling pizzicato does not occur then the mapping does not occur. sent2: the fact that either the Terpsichore does not occur or the articularness does not occur or both is incorrect. sent3: if that the weightlessness does not occur is right then the fact that the theatricalness but not the nones occurs... | {A} | sent1: ¬{DN} -> ¬{FS} sent2: ¬(¬{ES} v ¬{T}) sent3: ¬{C} -> ¬({B} & ¬{A}) sent4: ¬{B} -> ¬{A} sent5: ¬(¬{AA} v ¬{AB}) sent6: {AA} sent7: ¬{EF} sent8: ¬(¬{IJ} v ¬{IE}) -> ¬{BO} sent9: ¬{E} -> (¬{D} & ¬{C}) sent10: ¬({AA} v ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent11: ¬{G} -> (¬{F} v ¬{E}) sent12: ¬{IK} sent13: ¬{IF} sent14: (¬{F} v ¬{E}) -> ... | [
"sent17 & sent5 -> int1: the theatrical does not occur.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent17 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 | the nones happens. | {A} | 9 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the nones occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the scrabbling pizzicato does not occur then the mapping does not occur. sent2: the fact that either the Terpsichore does not occur or the articularness does not occur or both is incorrect. sent3: if that the weightlessness does not occur is right then the fact t... | sent17 & sent5 -> int1: the theatrical does not occur.; sent4 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the theatricalness does not occur if that the shuttingness does not occur or the gelling Laos does not occur or both is not right. | [
"that the shuttingness does not occur or the gelling Laos does not occur or both is not correct.",
"if the theatrical does not occur then the nones does not occur."
] | [
"If the shuttingness doesn't happen or the gelling doesn't happen, the theatricalness doesn't happen.",
"If the shuttingness doesn't happen or the gelling Laos doesn't happen, the theatricalness doesn't happen."
] |
the analysand does fire but it is not a luger. | sent1: the fact that the raider is a kind of a fire that does not bond is incorrect. sent2: the fact that something is a fire but it is not a luger is true if the fact that it is a thermojunction is correct. sent3: that the Riff is a kind of a luger is true. sent4: that that the fact that the analysand is a fire but it... | ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | sent1: ¬({B}{aa} & ¬{BN}{aa}) sent2: (x): {A}x -> ({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent3: {C}{jj} sent4: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent5: (x): {A}x -> ¬({C}{aa} & ¬{B}{aa}) sent6: {A}{aa} sent7: ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬({B}{a} & {C}{a}) | [
"sent6 -> int1: something is a thermojunction.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> int1: (Ex): {A}x; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the analysand is a fire that is not a luger. | ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) | 5 | [
"sent2 -> int2: if the analysand is a thermojunction then it is a fire and is not a luger.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the analysand does fire but it is not a luger. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the raider is a kind of a fire that does not bond is incorrect. sent2: the fact that something is a fire but it is not a luger is true if the fact that it is a thermojunction is correct. sent3: that the Riff is a kind of a ... | sent6 -> int1: something is a thermojunction.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the raider is a thermojunction. | [
"that that the fact that the analysand is a fire but it is not a luger is not false is not right hold if there exists something such that it is a thermojunction."
] | [
"the raider is a thermojunction."
] |
there exists something such that if it is a tool it is a city and is not a kind of a Praunus. | sent1: if that the vinegarroon tools hold then it is not a Lysander. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a tool it is a city and a Praunus. sent3: that there is something such that if it tools then it is a city is true. sent4: if the ambulatory is prehensile it is not a Praunus. sent5: if the vinegarroon d... | (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: {A}{aa} -> ¬{GS}{aa} sent2: (Ex): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> {AA}x sent4: {CB}{io} -> ¬{AB}{io} sent5: {A}{aa} -> {AA}{aa} sent6: (Ex): {GB}x -> ({GD}x & {DM}x) sent7: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent8: {A}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent9: (Ex): {AN}x -> {AU}x sent10: (x): {FQ}x -> ({B... | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 11 | there exists something such that if it does jell ass then it does scrabble hobnail and it is not a kind of a leasehold. | (Ex): {FQ}x -> ({BI}x & ¬{AT}x) | 2 | [
"sent10 -> int1: the fact that the cannelloni scrabbles hobnail and is not the leasehold if the cannelloni does jell ass is correct.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is a tool it is a city and is not a kind of a Praunus. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the vinegarroon tools hold then it is not a Lysander. sent2: there exists something such that if it is a tool it is a city and a Praunus. sent3: that there is something such that if ... | sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the vinegarroon is a kind of a city and is not a Praunus if it does tool. | [] | [
"the vinegarroon is a kind of a city and is not a Praunus if it does tool."
] |
the serviceman is not operable but it is a bonfire. | sent1: either the serviceman is an accounting or it is not a uplink or both. sent2: if the Angolese is a parade it does tuck Irish. sent3: if the serviceman accounts and/or is not a viewers that it is a bonfire is not false. sent4: the serviceman is not operable if it is not a Bengali. sent5: the serviceman is not a sm... | (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: ({D}{a} v ¬{HH}{a}) sent2: {BR}{db} -> {BE}{db} sent3: ({D}{a} v ¬{E}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: ¬{Q}{a} sent6: ¬{E}{hu} sent7: ¬{E}{go} sent8: ¬{C}{co} sent9: (¬{CI}{a} & {FS}{a}) sent10: ¬{B}{hi} sent11: ({D}{a} v ¬{E}{a}) sent12: ¬{FE}{a} sent13: ({E}{a} v ¬{FQ}{a}) sent14: ¬{A}{gh} sent15... | [
"sent4 & sent15 -> int1: the serviceman is not operable.; sent3 & sent11 -> int2: the serviceman is a bonfire.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent15 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent3 & sent11 -> int2: {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the serviceman is not operable but it is a bonfire. ; $context$ = sent1: either the serviceman is an accounting or it is not a uplink or both. sent2: if the Angolese is a parade it does tuck Irish. sent3: if the serviceman accounts and/or is not a viewers that it is a bonfire is not false. sent4: the ser... | sent4 & sent15 -> int1: the serviceman is not operable.; sent3 & sent11 -> int2: the serviceman is a bonfire.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the serviceman is not operable if it is not a Bengali. | [
"the serviceman is not a kind of a Bengali.",
"if the serviceman accounts and/or is not a viewers that it is a bonfire is not false.",
"the serviceman accounts and/or it is not a kind of a viewers."
] | [
"If it's not a Bengali, the serviceman won't work.",
"The serviceman is not functional if he is not a Bengali.",
"If it is not a Bengali, the serviceman won't work."
] |
the fact that the SNP does scrabble Dachau is not false. | sent1: something that is gymnosophical is algorithmic. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it is cheerful and/or it is a anil does not hold the SNP does not scrabble Dachau. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is cheerful and/or it is not a anil is false the SNP does not scr... | {A}{a} | sent1: (x): {D}x -> {C}x sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: {E}{b} -> {D}{a} sent5: (Ex): {AB}x sent6: (Ex): ({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent7: ¬{BN}{cg} sent8: (x): ¬({DI}x v ¬{CL}x) -> ¬{GM}{a} sent9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent10: ¬{G}{b} -> ({E}{b} & {F}{b}) sent11: (x): {... | [
"sent9 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent9 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | the suspension does not scrabble Dachau. | ¬{A}{co} | 7 | [
"sent11 -> int1: if that the SNP is algorithmic hold then it is leafy.; sent1 -> int2: the SNP is algorithmic if it is gymnosophical.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the SNP does scrabble Dachau is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: something that is gymnosophical is algorithmic. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it is cheerful and/or it is a anil does not hold the SNP does not scrabble Dachau. sent3: if there exists something such t... | sent9 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that that it is cheerful or not a anil or both is incorrect. | [
"if there exists something such that the fact that it is cheerful and/or it is not a anil is false the SNP does not scrabble Dachau."
] | [
"there exists something such that that it is cheerful or not a anil or both is incorrect."
] |
the dextrin is not a kind of a fascista. | sent1: the habitat is non-Colombian thing that scrabbles registered. sent2: that the dextrin is permeable and not a Shawn is not right if it does jell soldiering. sent3: the candle abuses Reich. sent4: the dextrin is not permeable if the candle scrabbles Mutinus. sent5: if something is both not impermeable and a delinq... | ¬{E}{b} | sent1: (¬{EU}{df} & {FL}{df}) sent2: {G}{b} -> ¬({D}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent3: {A}{a} sent4: {B}{a} -> ¬{D}{b} sent5: (x): ({D}x & {C}x) -> ¬{E}x sent6: (x): {A}x sent7: {B}{a} -> (¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent8: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> {E}x sent9: {J}{b} sent10: {B}{b} -> (¬{E}{a} & {D}{a}) sent11: ¬{D}{b} sent12: ({D}{b} & {C}{b}... | [
"sent6 -> int1: the slag does abuse Reich.; sent14 -> int2: if the dextrin is not permeable but it is a kind of a delinquent then it is not a fascista.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent6 -> int1: {A}{aa}; sent14 -> int2: (¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{E}{b};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | the dextrin is fascista. | {E}{b} | 7 | [
"sent8 -> int3: if the dextrin scrabbles Mutinus but it does not abuse Reich then it is a kind of a fascista.; sent16 -> int4: if the dextrin is Sinhala then it is a Orleanism and/or it is not a kind of a library.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the dextrin is a Orleanism or it is not a library or both.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the dextrin is not a kind of a fascista. ; $context$ = sent1: the habitat is non-Colombian thing that scrabbles registered. sent2: that the dextrin is permeable and not a Shawn is not right if it does jell soldiering. sent3: the candle abuses Reich. sent4: the dextrin is not permeable if the candle scrab... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | everything abuses Reich. | [
"if something that is not permeable is a delinquent then it is not a fascista."
] | [
"everything abuses Reich."
] |
the quarterback does not occur. | sent1: the outdoorsness does not occur if the fact that either the Texan or the abusing Ottumwa or both happens is false. sent2: that the couture occurs is caused by that the exchangeableness occurs. sent3: that the constitutional happens is prevented by that both the semaphore and the bigamy occurs. sent4: the socioec... | ¬{B} | sent1: ¬({G} v {H}) -> ¬{E} sent2: {A} -> {DM} sent3: ({L} & {M}) -> ¬{K} sent4: ¬{K} -> (¬{J} & ¬{I}) sent5: ¬{D} -> ({A} & {C}) sent6: {N} -> {L} sent7: ({A} & {B}) sent8: (¬{D} v ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} sent9: ({D} & {F}) sent10: ¬({B} & ¬{C}) -> ¬{B} sent11: ¬{E} -> (¬{D} v ¬{F}) sent12: ¬{I} -> ¬({G} v {H}) sent13: {P} -> {... | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | both the couture and the catechisticness occurs. | ({DM} & {EO}) | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the quarterback does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the outdoorsness does not occur if the fact that either the Texan or the abusing Ottumwa or both happens is false. sent2: that the couture occurs is caused by that the exchangeableness occurs. sent3: that the constitutional happens is prevented by that... | sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | both the exchangeableness and the quarterbacking happens. | [] | [
"both the exchangeableness and the quarterbacking happens."
] |
the bondwoman is not a champagne and is not a kind of a vermouth. | sent1: if the bister is not a Poecilocapsus the bondwoman is not a champagne and is not a vermouth. sent2: if something is not a Poecilocapsus the fact that it is vesicular and it is not a pollinium is incorrect. sent3: the correspondent is not a kind of a minimalist. sent4: if the fact that the correspondent consorts ... | (¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) | sent1: ¬{B}{b} -> (¬{D}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) sent2: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({EC}x & ¬{DU}x) sent3: ¬{A}{a} sent4: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the correspondent does consort Szilard and does not breathe is false.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the bister is not a Poecilocapsus.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 & sent3 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent4 & int1 -> int2: ¬{B}{b}; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | if that the bondwoman is not a Poecilocapsus is not wrong the fact that it is both vesicular and not a pollinium is wrong. | ¬{B}{c} -> ¬({EC}{c} & ¬{DU}{c}) | 1 | [
"sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the bondwoman is not a champagne and is not a kind of a vermouth. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bister is not a Poecilocapsus the bondwoman is not a champagne and is not a vermouth. sent2: if something is not a Poecilocapsus the fact that it is vesicular and it is not a pollinium is incorrect. sent3: the c... | sent5 & sent3 -> int1: the fact that the correspondent does consort Szilard and does not breathe is false.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the bister is not a Poecilocapsus.; sent1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the correspondent consorts Szilard and does not breathe does not hold if it is not minimalist. | [
"the correspondent is not a kind of a minimalist.",
"if the fact that the correspondent consorts Szilard but it does not breathe is not right then the bister is not a Poecilocapsus.",
"if the bister is not a Poecilocapsus the bondwoman is not a champagne and is not a vermouth."
] | [
"If it is not minimalist, the correspondent consorts Szilard and does not breathe.",
"If it is not minimalist, the correspondent consorts with Szilard and does not breathe.",
"If it's not minimalist, the correspondent consorts Szilard and does not breathe."
] |
the elastic happens. | sent1: if the relevantness does not occur and the exploiting does not occur then the consorting bullfighter does not occur. sent2: that the Parisianness does not occur causes that the relevantness does not occur and the exploiting does not occur. sent3: if the down-bow does not occur the outing does not occur. sent4: t... | {E} | sent1: (¬{P} & ¬{Q}) -> ¬{O} sent2: ¬{R} -> (¬{P} & ¬{Q}) sent3: ¬{K} -> ¬{J} sent4: {M} -> (¬{K} & {L}) sent5: {C} -> ¬({B} & ¬{A}) sent6: (¬{EG} v ¬{EJ}) sent7: {HB} -> {DO} sent8: (¬{C} v ¬{B}) -> {D} sent9: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {C}) sent10: ({C} v ¬{B}) sent11: {G} -> ¬{F} sent12: {IB} -> {IO} sent13: {FO} sent14: {D} ->... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | the elastic does not occur. | ¬{E} | 15 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the elastic happens. ; $context$ = sent1: if the relevantness does not occur and the exploiting does not occur then the consorting bullfighter does not occur. sent2: that the Parisianness does not occur causes that the relevantness does not occur and the exploiting does not occur. sent3: if the down-bow ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | either that the allurement does not occur or that the considering zinfandel does not occur or both prevents that the unalterableness does not occur. | [
"if the bismuthicness occurs then that the pas occurs is true."
] | [
"either that the allurement does not occur or that the considering zinfandel does not occur or both prevents that the unalterableness does not occur."
] |
the gum occurs. | sent1: the gum does not occur if that the gum occurs but the considering nympholepsy does not occur is wrong. sent2: the feminizing Copland does not occur and the considering nympholepsy does not occur if the path occurs. sent3: if the feminizing Copland does not occur not the gum but the surveying happens. sent4: the ... | {C} | sent1: ¬({C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} sent2: {E} -> (¬{B} & ¬{D}) sent3: ¬{B} -> (¬{C} & {A}) sent4: {FU} sent5: ({A} & {B}) sent6: {BS} sent7: {B} -> {C} sent8: ¬{C} -> ({A} v ¬{B}) | [
"sent5 -> int1: the feminizing Copland occurs.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 -> int1: {B}; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the gum does not occur. | ¬{C} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the gum occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: the gum does not occur if that the gum occurs but the considering nympholepsy does not occur is wrong. sent2: the feminizing Copland does not occur and the considering nympholepsy does not occur if the path occurs. sent3: if the feminizing Copland does not occur not t... | sent5 -> int1: the feminizing Copland occurs.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the surveying and the feminizing Copland occurs. | [
"that the gumming happens is triggered by that the feminizing Copland occurs."
] | [
"the surveying and the feminizing Copland occurs."
] |
the superfecundation does not occur and the considering Ameiurus does not occur. | sent1: that the currentness does not occur and the accumulating happens is not right. sent2: the superfecundation does not occur and the considering Ameiurus does not occur if the steamer does not occur. sent3: the fact that the dehiscentness but not the musculoskeletalness happens does not hold. sent4: the fact that t... | (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | sent1: ¬(¬{CN} & {DO}) sent2: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: ¬({CR} & ¬{HQ}) sent4: ¬({R} & ¬{GU}) sent5: ¬(¬{B} & {EQ}) sent6: ¬(¬{BT} & ¬{BK}) sent7: ¬{E} -> ({B} & {D}) sent8: {B} -> ¬(¬{C} & {A}) sent9: ¬(¬{BQ} & {CO}) sent10: ¬(¬{BE} & {IO}) sent11: ¬({HT} & ¬{GS}) sent12: ¬(¬{DR} & ¬{CC}) sent13: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB})... | [
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 16 | the superfecundation does not occur and the considering Ameiurus does not occur. | (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | 9 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the superfecundation does not occur and the considering Ameiurus does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the currentness does not occur and the accumulating happens is not right. sent2: the superfecundation does not occur and the considering Ameiurus does not occur if the steamer does not occur. sent3:... | sent13 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that the superfecundation does not occur and the considering Ameiurus does not occur is incorrect. | [] | [
"the fact that the superfecundation does not occur and the considering Ameiurus does not occur is incorrect."
] |
the fact that the cardinalship occurs and the preening occurs is not true. | sent1: the preening happens. sent2: that the cardinalship occurs and the preening occurs is not right if that the implicationalness does not occur hold. sent3: if the fact that the preening does not occur hold the mitoticness occurs and the cardinalship happens. sent4: that both the implicationalness and the full-timen... | ¬({A} & {B}) | sent1: {B} sent2: ¬{C} -> ¬({A} & {B}) sent3: ¬{B} -> ({GD} & {A}) sent4: ¬{F} -> ({C} & {E}) sent5: ({C} & {D}) -> ¬{B} sent6: (¬{H} & ¬{G}) -> ¬{F} sent7: {A} | [
"sent7 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent7 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 | that the cardinalship happens and the preening occurs does not hold. | ¬({A} & {B}) | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the cardinalship occurs and the preening occurs is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the preening happens. sent2: that the cardinalship occurs and the preening occurs is not right if that the implicationalness does not occur hold. sent3: if the fact that the preening does not occur hold the mi... | sent7 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the cardinalship occurs. | [
"the preening happens."
] | [
"the cardinalship occurs."
] |
the Chickasaw is not therapeutics. | sent1: that something is therapeutics if the fact that it is not a bootleg and it is therapeutics is not true is correct. sent2: the subcontractor is not nebulous if the fact that the minaret is robotic and is not a kind of a thumbtack is not correct. sent3: if something bootlegs then it is non-therapeutics. sent4: som... | ¬{C}{a} | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{C}x) -> {C}x sent2: ¬({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent3: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}x sent4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) sent5: ({B}{a} v {JB}{a}) sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} sent7: {C}{b} -> (¬{B}{a} & {CF}{a}) sent8: {B}{a} sent9: (x): ({A}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent10: (¬{B}{a} & {CF}{a}) -> {CF}{hm} sent11:... | [
"sent8 -> int1: either the Chickasaw does bootleg or it is etiological or both.; sent9 -> int2: the Chickasaw is not therapeutics if either it is a bootleg or it is etiological or both.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent8 -> int1: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}); sent9 -> int2: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 | the flight is a kind of a bootleg and/or is a Florentine. | ({A}{hm} v {CF}{hm}) | 8 | [
"sent4 -> int3: if that the subcontractor is not nebulous is correct that it is therapeutics and it is a tam is right.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Chickasaw is not therapeutics. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is therapeutics if the fact that it is not a bootleg and it is therapeutics is not true is correct. sent2: the subcontractor is not nebulous if the fact that the minaret is robotic and is not a kind of a thumbtack is not correct. sent... | sent8 -> int1: either the Chickasaw does bootleg or it is etiological or both.; sent9 -> int2: the Chickasaw is not therapeutics if either it is a bootleg or it is etiological or both.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the Chickasaw is etiological. | [
"if something is a kind of a bootleg and/or it is etiological it is non-therapeutics."
] | [
"the Chickasaw is etiological."
] |
the stunting Klein does not occur. | sent1: the leaning occurs. sent2: that the nonfissileness happens and the pubertalness happens causes that the reconstructing does not occur. sent3: the Pound occurs. sent4: if the cupping occurs then that the leaningness but not the State occurs is not correct. sent5: that the combustibleness happens and the bishopry ... | ¬{D} | sent1: {E} sent2: ({II} & {GN}) -> ¬{AR} sent3: {DD} sent4: {F} -> ¬({E} & ¬{C}) sent5: ({IN} & {IE}) -> ¬{HN} sent6: ({BI} & {ES}) sent7: ({IC} & {FA}) -> ¬{GJ} sent8: ({B} & {C}) -> ¬{D} sent9: ({G} & {AH}) -> ¬{S} sent10: {BS} sent11: {A} sent12: {HD} -> {JE} sent13: {GQ} sent14: {DM} sent15: {BB} -> {AA} sent16: ¬{... | [
"sent19 -> int1: the fact that the State happens hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent19 -> int1: {C};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | the stunting Klein occurs. | {D} | 8 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the stunting Klein does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the leaning occurs. sent2: that the nonfissileness happens and the pubertalness happens causes that the reconstructing does not occur. sent3: the Pound occurs. sent4: if the cupping occurs then that the leaningness but not the State occurs is not co... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | both the State and the leaningness occurs. | [] | [
"both the State and the leaningness occurs."
] |
the tern is not a march and is a kind of a roadworthiness. | sent1: something considers hypo if it does consider townie. sent2: there exists something such that it gangs and it is not a kind of a put-put. sent3: the tern is not a kind of a march if that it is cheliceral thing that is not a salutatorian is wrong. sent4: that the tern is cheliceral and it is a salutatorian is wron... | (¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) | sent1: (x): {F}x -> {E}x sent2: (Ex): ({K}x & ¬{J}x) sent3: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent4: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent5: {B}{j} -> ¬{HD}{j} sent6: (x): ({K}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{H}{d} sent7: {D}{b} -> ¬({C}{a} v ¬{B}{a}) sent8: {C}{a} -> {A}{a} sent9: ¬{CG}{a} sent10: {E}{c} -> {E}{b} sent11: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent12:... | [
"sent8 & sent16 -> int1: the tern is a roadworthiness.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent8 & sent16 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | the fact that the tern is not a march but it is a roadworthiness does not hold. | ¬(¬{B}{a} & {A}{a}) | 9 | [
"sent13 -> int2: the Democrat is not a kind of a Coerebidae.; sent12 -> int3: the fact that the Democrat does not consort Sternotherus is right.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the Democrat is not a kind of a Coerebidae and does not consort Sternotherus.; int4 -> int5: the fact that that everything is not a kind of a Coerebi... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the tern is not a march and is a kind of a roadworthiness. ; $context$ = sent1: something considers hypo if it does consider townie. sent2: there exists something such that it gangs and it is not a kind of a put-put. sent3: the tern is not a kind of a march if that it is cheliceral thing that is not a sa... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if the tern encourages then it is a roadworthiness. | [
"the tern encourages."
] | [
"if the tern encourages then it is a roadworthiness."
] |
the fact that the gal is not anagrammatic and does not stunt sparkler is not right. | sent1: if the reticulocyte is a narrowing then the veterinarian does stunt Devonian. sent2: if the fact that something is side-to-side but it does not stunt chiffonier is not correct then it is not fragrant. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a ATF and it is a kind of a Mama is not right the... | ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: {I}{g} -> {H}{f} sent2: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{E}x sent3: (x): ¬({A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{A}{b} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{D}x & {B}x) -> ¬{B}{d} sent5: {H}{f} -> {H}{e} sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: (¬{I}{h} & ¬{K}{h}) -> {I}{g} sent8: (¬{I}{h} & ¬{K}{h}) sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{fs} & ¬{EN}{fs}) sent10: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) se... | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 12 | the gal is not anagrammatic and does not stunt sparkler. | (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | 13 | [
"sent11 -> int1: the fact that the daguerreotype is not a autoregulation but it is antecubital is not true if it is non-fragrant.; sent2 -> int2: if that the daguerreotype is side-to-side but it does not stunt chiffonier is false it is not fragrant.; sent7 & sent8 -> int3: the fact that the reticulocyte is a narrow... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the gal is not anagrammatic and does not stunt sparkler is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if the reticulocyte is a narrowing then the veterinarian does stunt Devonian. sent2: if the fact that something is side-to-side but it does not stunt chiffonier is not correct then it is not fragrant.... | sent6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that the gal is not anagrammatic and it does not stunt sparkler is not right. | [] | [
"the fact that the gal is not anagrammatic and it does not stunt sparkler is not right."
] |
that the indapamide is not precordial is not wrong. | sent1: if the sgraffito feminizes future then it does not consort capacitance and/or it is not private. sent2: something is precordial if it does not cat and/or is not a private. sent3: either the indapamide is not a cat or it is not a private or both if it is dorsal. sent4: the indapamide is dorsal. | ¬{B}{a} | sent1: {CI}{gk} -> (¬{BH}{gk} v ¬{AB}{gk}) sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x v ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent4: {A}{a} | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: either the indapamide is not a cat or it is not a private or both.; sent2 -> int2: if either the indapamide is not a kind of a cat or it is not private or both it is precordial.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); sent2 -> int2: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that the indapamide is not precordial is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sgraffito feminizes future then it does not consort capacitance and/or it is not private. sent2: something is precordial if it does not cat and/or is not a private. sent3: either the indapamide is not a cat or it is not a pri... | sent3 & sent4 -> int1: either the indapamide is not a cat or it is not a private or both.; sent2 -> int2: if either the indapamide is not a kind of a cat or it is not private or both it is precordial.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | either the indapamide is not a cat or it is not a private or both if it is dorsal. | [
"the indapamide is dorsal.",
"something is precordial if it does not cat and/or is not a private."
] | [
"The indapamide is either a cat or a private animal.",
"The indapamide is either a private or a cat."
] |
that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a GB it is not an adaptability and it is a pyrostat is incorrect. | sent1: the Eyeish is not an adaptability but it is a pyrostat if it is not a kind of a GB. sent2: that if something does not consider Tampico then it is not a fascicle and it is a kind of a chowchow is true. sent3: there exists something such that if the fact that it is a GB is correct then it is not a kind of an adapt... | ¬((Ex): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x)) | sent1: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent2: (x): ¬{DJ}x -> (¬{I}x & {BM}x) sent3: (Ex): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: ¬{HS}{aa} -> ({AA}{aa} & {GS}{aa}) | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | there exists something such that if it does not consider Tampico it is not a fascicle and it is a chowchow. | (Ex): ¬{DJ}x -> (¬{I}x & {BM}x) | 2 | [
"sent2 -> int1: if the xylophonist does not consider Tampico then it is not a fascicle and it is a chowchow.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it is not a kind of a GB it is not an adaptability and it is a pyrostat is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the Eyeish is not an adaptability but it is a pyrostat if it is not a kind of a GB. sent2: that if something does not consider Tampico then it is not a fasci... | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the Eyeish is not an adaptability but it is a pyrostat if it is not a kind of a GB. | [] | [
"the Eyeish is not an adaptability but it is a pyrostat if it is not a kind of a GB."
] |
if the custom-made is biosynthetic then it is not skinless and it does stunt bollock. | sent1: something stunts Luger if the fact that it is a kind of a Cornus is not incorrect. sent2: something is bicameral if it feminizes plagiarism. sent3: something is not skinless but it does stunt bollock if it is biosynthetic. sent4: something is skinless and it stunts bollock if it is biosynthetic. sent5: if the Lu... | {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | sent1: (x): {EN}x -> {EL}x sent2: (x): {EM}x -> {JC}x sent3: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent4: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: {AB}{hr} -> {DP}{hr} | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = if the custom-made is biosynthetic then it is not skinless and it does stunt bollock. ; $context$ = sent1: something stunts Luger if the fact that it is a kind of a Cornus is not incorrect. sent2: something is bicameral if it feminizes plagiarism. sent3: something is not skinless but it does stunt bolloc... | sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | something is not skinless but it does stunt bollock if it is biosynthetic. | [] | [
"something is not skinless but it does stunt bollock if it is biosynthetic."
] |
the caboose is not a effeminacy. | sent1: either the allspice is a Arlington or it is agreeable or both if it is not a Caligula. sent2: the fergusonite is skeletal. sent3: that the fact that the allspice does not feminize Buffalo and is a kind of a horizontality is incorrect is not wrong. sent4: the fact that the allspice is not a Caligula is correct if... | ¬{D}{c} | sent1: ¬{I}{e} -> ({H}{e} v {G}{e}) sent2: {A}{a} sent3: ¬(¬{J}{e} & {K}{e}) sent4: ¬(¬{J}{e} & {K}{e}) -> ¬{I}{e} sent5: {FP}{a} sent6: {C}{b} -> {D}{c} sent7: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent8: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent9: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent10: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({D}x v {B}x) sent12: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & {... | [
"sent8 -> int1: the fergusonite is immediate.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the wheeze is macrobiotics.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent8 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent7 & int1 -> int2: {C}{b}; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 | the fetter is immediate and it is minor. | ({B}{fs} & {S}{fs}) | 4 | [
"sent12 -> int3: if the fetter is not a effeminacy then it is skeletal and is immediate.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the caboose is not a effeminacy. ; $context$ = sent1: either the allspice is a Arlington or it is agreeable or both if it is not a Caligula. sent2: the fergusonite is skeletal. sent3: that the fact that the allspice does not feminize Buffalo and is a kind of a horizontality is incorrect is not wrong. sen... | sent8 -> int1: the fergusonite is immediate.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the wheeze is macrobiotics.; sent6 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fergusonite is not non-skeletal but immediate. | [
"if the fergusonite is immediate the wheeze is macrobiotics.",
"the caboose is a kind of a effeminacy if the wheeze is macrobiotics."
] | [
"The fergusonite is immediate.",
"The fergusonite is immediate and non-skeletal."
] |
the fact that both the non-stablingness and the loop occurs is false. | sent1: if the using occurs that the stunting rya does not occur and the consorting Gnosticism happens is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the feminizing WTV does not occur and the vocal happens does not hold. sent3: if the consolidation happens then the fact that not the label but the incompatibleness occurs is not righ... | ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) | sent1: {EL} -> ¬(¬{GB} & {HI}) sent2: ¬(¬{HT} & {DF}) sent3: {GO} -> ¬(¬{GQ} & {U}) sent4: {A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent5: {HI} -> ¬(¬{IO} & {GJ}) sent6: {AG} -> ¬(¬{U} & {HI}) sent7: ¬{L} -> (¬{J} & {K}) sent8: {HE} sent9: ¬{J} -> (¬{H} & {I}) sent10: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{BK} & {CF}) sent11: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) sent12: {A} -> ¬(¬... | [
"sent12 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent12 & sent18 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 19 | both the non-stablingness and the looping occurs. | (¬{AA} & {AB}) | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that both the non-stablingness and the loop occurs is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if the using occurs that the stunting rya does not occur and the consorting Gnosticism happens is incorrect. sent2: the fact that the feminizing WTV does not occur and the vocal happens does not hold. sent3: if the... | sent12 & sent18 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that both the non-stablingness and the looping happens is not true if the parking happens. | [
"the parking occurs."
] | [
"that both the non-stablingness and the looping happens is not true if the parking happens."
] |
the Czechoslovakian is not a siskin. | sent1: something is a kind of a banner and it stunts Gospel if it does not feminize lowland. sent2: if there is something such that it does not murmur then that the Czechoslovakian is porcine and is a kind of an elation is false. sent3: that the Czechoslovakian is journalistic is right. sent4: something is not a murmur... | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {D}x) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: {IA}{aa} sent4: (x): {C}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({B}x & ¬{J}x) sent6: (Ex): ¬{A}x sent7: {AB}{aa} -> {B}{aa} sent8: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent10: (Ex): {DP}x sent11: (x): ¬{AA}... | [
"sent9 -> int1: if the fact that the Czechoslovakian is porcine but it is not an elation is incorrect then it is a siskin.; sent6 & sent16 -> int2: the fact that the Czechoslovakian is porcine but it is not an elation is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent9 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; sent6 & sent16 -> int2: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 13 | the fact that the VLDL is a siskin and does not stunt loaf does not hold. | ¬({B}{bj} & ¬{J}{bj}) | 4 | [
"sent5 -> int3: if the VLDL does not murmur that it is a kind of a siskin and it does not stunt loaf does not hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Czechoslovakian is not a siskin. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a kind of a banner and it stunts Gospel if it does not feminize lowland. sent2: if there is something such that it does not murmur then that the Czechoslovakian is porcine and is a kind of an elation is false. sent3: that the Czechosl... | sent9 -> int1: if the fact that the Czechoslovakian is porcine but it is not an elation is incorrect then it is a siskin.; sent6 & sent16 -> int2: the fact that the Czechoslovakian is porcine but it is not an elation is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if that something is porcine but it is not an elation is not correct then it is a kind of a siskin. | [
"something is not a murmur.",
"the fact that the Czechoslovakian is porcine but it is not a kind of an elation is not true if there is something such that it is not a murmur."
] | [
"If that is porcine, but not an elation, then it is a kind of Siskin.",
"If that is porcine, but it is not an elation, then it is a kind of Siskin."
] |
the unmilitariness happens. | sent1: the lowercaseness and the feminizing keystroke occurs. sent2: the stunting foothold occurs. sent3: that the radiopaqueness occurs results in that the nonobservance does not occur and the relation does not occur. sent4: that the branching occurs and the consorting narrator occurs is brought about by that the rela... | {C} | sent1: ({FK} & {HN}) sent2: {BA} sent3: {M} -> (¬{L} & ¬{K}) sent4: ¬{K} -> ({I} & {J}) sent5: ({A} & {B}) sent6: {A} sent7: ({Q} & {P}) -> ¬{N} sent8: (¬{A} & {B}) -> {AS} sent9: {I} -> (¬{G} & ¬{H}) sent10: ({GH} & {AO}) sent11: ¬{F} -> (¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent12: {B} -> {C} sent13: ¬{D} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) sent14: (¬{N} & ¬{... | [
"sent5 -> int1: the renovation happens.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 -> int1: {B}; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 18 | the unmilitariness does not occur. | ¬{C} | 13 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the unmilitariness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the lowercaseness and the feminizing keystroke occurs. sent2: the stunting foothold occurs. sent3: that the radiopaqueness occurs results in that the nonobservance does not occur and the relation does not occur. sent4: that the branching occurs and the con... | sent5 -> int1: the renovation happens.; int1 & sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the consorting coverage happens and the renovation happens. | [
"if the renovation occurs the unmilitariness occurs."
] | [
"the consorting coverage happens and the renovation happens."
] |
the harvest-lice is a carbonyl. | sent1: the fact that something is other and does not consort patella is true if it is prokaryotic. sent2: the fact that the swamp is not an impossible but it is rosaceous does not hold. sent3: the harvest-lice is a carbonyl. sent4: the Nasturtium is carbonyl thing that is not a kind of a grate if there is something suc... | {A}{a} | sent1: (x): {E}x -> ({C}x & ¬{D}x) sent2: ¬(¬{H}{d} & {G}{d}) sent3: {A}{a} sent4: (x): {F}x -> ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent5: {A}{fd} sent6: (¬{E}{b} v {F}{b}) sent7: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{B}x v {C}x) sent8: (x): (¬{B}x v {C}x) -> {C}{a} sent9: (x): (¬{E}x v {F}x) -> ¬{D}x sent10: {F}{c} sent11: ({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 10 | the harvest-lice is non-carbonyl. | ¬{A}{a} | 6 | [
"sent10 -> int1: there is something such that it is a kind of a downshift.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the Nasturtium is carbonyl but not a grate.; int2 -> int3: the Nasturtium is a kind of a carbonyl.; sent1 -> int4: the Nasturtium is a kind of other thing that does not consort patella if it is prokaryotic.; sent2 -> i... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the harvest-lice is a carbonyl. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something is other and does not consort patella is true if it is prokaryotic. sent2: the fact that the swamp is not an impossible but it is rosaceous does not hold. sent3: the harvest-lice is a carbonyl. sent4: the Nasturtium is carbonyl ... | sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the harvest-lice is a carbonyl. | [] | [
"the harvest-lice is a carbonyl."
] |
the fact that the spaceflight does not occur is true. | sent1: the dilution occurs. sent2: the fact that the dilution does not occur and the spaceflight does not occur is not true if the Tahitianness does not occur. sent3: if the dilution happens the fact that the nonlexicalness happens and the radial occurs is not true. sent4: the consorting tribuneship does not occur. sen... | ¬{B} | sent1: {A} sent2: ¬{C} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent3: {A} -> ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent4: ¬{GD} sent5: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: {AB} -> ¬{B} sent7: ¬({AA} & {AB}) sent8: {HQ} | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | the fact that the spaceflight occurs is not false. | {B} | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the spaceflight does not occur is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the dilution occurs. sent2: the fact that the dilution does not occur and the spaceflight does not occur is not true if the Tahitianness does not occur. sent3: if the dilution happens the fact that the nonlexicalness happens and t... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | that both the nonlexicalness and the radial occurs does not hold. | [
"if the dilution happens the fact that the nonlexicalness happens and the radial occurs is not true."
] | [
"that both the nonlexicalness and the radial occurs does not hold."
] |
there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is not a range and it is innumerate is not wrong is not true. | sent1: the fact that the thyrotropin considers billfish and is unobjectionable does not hold. sent2: something does not range but it is innumerate. sent3: the fact that that the thyrotropin is quartzose and it is not non-innumerate is true does not hold. sent4: the Iowan is not quartzose. sent5: the fact that the thyro... | (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: ¬({HR}{b} & {DG}{b}) sent2: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: ¬({A}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent4: ¬{A}{ao} sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent6: ¬{AA}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{IO}x & {IJ}x) sent9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: ¬({AB}{b} & {A}{b}) sent11: ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent5 & sent11 -> int1: that the thyrotropin is not a kind of a range but it is innumerate does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 & sent11 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that the fact that the fact that it is not a range and it is innumerate is not wrong is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the thyrotropin considers billfish and is unobjectionable does not hold. sent2: something does not range but it is innumerate. sent3: the fact t... | sent5 & sent11 -> int1: that the thyrotropin is not a kind of a range but it is innumerate does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that the thyrotropin is not a range but it is innumerate is false if the moor is not quartzose. | [
"the moor is not quartzose."
] | [
"the fact that the thyrotropin is not a range but it is innumerate is false if the moor is not quartzose."
] |
the nosewheel hoofs. | sent1: if something does not stunt pickpocket and it is not a drupelet the nosewheel does not hoof. sent2: if the niece consorts quibble then the cloud does consorts quibble. sent3: the cloud is not a drupelet. sent4: The pickpocket does not stunt cloud. sent5: something that caprioles and is not neurophysiological is ... | {C}{b} | sent1: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) -> ¬{C}{b} sent2: {G}{c} -> {G}{a} sent3: ¬{B}{a} sent4: ¬{AA}{aa} sent5: (x): ({E}x & ¬{F}x) -> {D}x sent6: ¬{A}{b} sent7: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent8: ¬{A}{a} sent9: {G}{a} -> ({E}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent10: (Ex): ¬{IE}x sent11: (x): {D}x -> {B}x | [
"sent8 & sent3 -> int1: the cloud does not stunt pickpocket and is not a drupelet.; int1 -> int2: something does not stunt pickpocket and it is not a kind of a drupelet.; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent8 & sent3 -> int1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x); int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 | the nosewheel is a hoofing. | {C}{b} | 6 | [
"sent7 -> int3: the nosewheel is a hoofing if the fact that it does not stunt pickpocket is incorrect.; sent11 -> int4: if the nosewheel is a lusterware it is a drupelet.; sent5 -> int5: if the nosewheel is a capriole and is not neurophysiological then it is a lusterware.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the nosewheel hoofs. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not stunt pickpocket and it is not a drupelet the nosewheel does not hoof. sent2: if the niece consorts quibble then the cloud does consorts quibble. sent3: the cloud is not a drupelet. sent4: The pickpocket does not stunt cloud. sent5: somethin... | sent8 & sent3 -> int1: the cloud does not stunt pickpocket and is not a drupelet.; int1 -> int2: something does not stunt pickpocket and it is not a kind of a drupelet.; int2 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the cloud does not stunt pickpocket. | [
"the cloud is not a drupelet.",
"if something does not stunt pickpocket and it is not a drupelet the nosewheel does not hoof."
] | [
"The cloud doesn't stunt pickpockets.",
"The cloud doesn't stunt pickpocketing."
] |
the fact that the aphaniticness happens is not false. | sent1: the fact that the schematization occurs is not incorrect if the sacking occurs. sent2: the launch is caused by that the casualty happens. sent3: if that the mousetrap happens hold then the Norman occurs. sent4: if the indentation occurs then the aphaniticness happens. sent5: the nonionicness occurs. sent6: if th... | {D} | sent1: {A} -> {B} sent2: {IS} -> {ES} sent3: {I} -> {DG} sent4: {C} -> {D} sent5: {AK} sent6: {DB} -> {IU} sent7: {B} -> {C} sent8: {AN} -> {GM} sent9: {A} sent10: ¬{E} -> ¬({D} & {C}) sent11: {AA} | [
"sent1 & sent9 -> int1: the schematization happens.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the indentation occurs.; sent4 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent1 & sent9 -> int1: {B}; sent7 & int1 -> int2: {C}; sent4 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the immunocompetentness happens. | {FC} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the aphaniticness happens is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the schematization occurs is not incorrect if the sacking occurs. sent2: the launch is caused by that the casualty happens. sent3: if that the mousetrap happens hold then the Norman occurs. sent4: if the indentation ... | sent1 & sent9 -> int1: the schematization happens.; sent7 & int1 -> int2: the indentation occurs.; sent4 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that the schematization occurs is not incorrect if the sacking occurs. | [
"the sacking occurs.",
"the indentation occurs if the schematization occurs.",
"if the indentation occurs then the aphaniticness happens."
] | [
"If the sack occurs, the schematization is not incorrect.",
"If the sack occurs, the fact that the schematization occurs is not incorrect.",
"If the sack occurs, it's not incorrect that the schematization occurs."
] |
that there exists something such that if it does not feminize annum and it does not feminize spellbinder then it does archaize does not hold. | sent1: if the mesohippus does not feminize annum and does feminize spellbinder then it does archaize. sent2: if something that is not ecclesiastical does not stunt Epistle then it fornicates. sent3: if something feminizes annum but it does not feminize spellbinder then it archaizes. sent4: if something does not feminiz... | ¬((Ex): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x) | sent1: (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent2: (x): (¬{BS}x & ¬{N}x) -> {IJ}x sent3: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x sent5: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent6: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent7: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {B}x | [
"sent6 -> int1: if the fact that the mesohippus does not feminize annum and does not feminize spellbinder is not false it does archaize.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> int1: (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa}; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that if it does not feminize annum and it does not feminize spellbinder then it does archaize does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the mesohippus does not feminize annum and does feminize spellbinder then it does archaize. sent2: if something that is not ecclesiastical ... | sent6 -> int1: if the fact that the mesohippus does not feminize annum and does not feminize spellbinder is not false it does archaize.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if something does not feminize annum and it does not feminize spellbinder then it does archaize. | [] | [
"if something does not feminize annum and it does not feminize spellbinder then it does archaize."
] |
that the zamia is not a nymphet but it is uveal is not correct. | sent1: the zamia is a details but it is not a Martian. sent2: the Devon is a kind of a details. sent3: if the zamia stunts algometer then that it is not uveal is not right. sent4: the zamia stunts algometer. sent5: The algometer stunts zamia. sent6: if the zamia does detail but it is not a Martian it is not a nymphet. ... | ¬(¬{C}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: ({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) sent2: {E}{go} sent3: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: {AA}{aa} sent6: ({E}{a} & ¬{D}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬(¬{F}x v {G}x) sent8: {B}{a} -> {JC}{a} sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{D}{fr} sent10: ¬(¬{F}{b} v {G}{b}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {B}x) | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the zamia is uveal.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the zamia is not a kind of a nymphet.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 & sent4 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the dad is not Martian. | ¬{D}{fr} | 6 | [
"sent11 -> int3: the zamia is a nymphet and it is uveal if it is not a kind of a details.; sent7 -> int4: if the stoma is not a disguise then that it does not extrapolate and/or it does consider restharrow is not correct.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the zamia is not a nymphet but it is uveal is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the zamia is a details but it is not a Martian. sent2: the Devon is a kind of a details. sent3: if the zamia stunts algometer then that it is not uveal is not right. sent4: the zamia stunts algometer. sent5: The algomete... | sent3 & sent4 -> int1: the zamia is uveal.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the zamia is not a kind of a nymphet.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the zamia stunts algometer then that it is not uveal is not right. | [
"the zamia stunts algometer.",
"if the zamia does detail but it is not a Martian it is not a nymphet.",
"the zamia is a details but it is not a Martian."
] | [
"If the zamia does stunts then it is not right.",
"If the Zamia does stunts then it is not right.",
"If the Zamia does stunts, then it is not right."
] |
the fact that the effecter does logroll is not false. | sent1: there is something such that it is a fission. sent2: if that either the convolution is amblyopic or it does not stunt getaway or both is not true the Montrachet stunt getaway. sent3: if the fact that something is a Islam but it does not stunt plexor is not correct it stunt plexor. sent4: if something that does n... | {E}{c} | sent1: (Ex): {EQ}x sent2: ¬({F}{b} v ¬{C}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent3: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{B}x) -> {B}x sent4: (x): (¬{I}x & {J}x) -> ¬{H}{e} sent5: (Ex): (¬{I}x & {J}x) sent6: (x): ({B}x v ¬{E}x) -> ¬{E}x sent7: {C}{a} -> ¬({A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} v {C}{a}) sent9: {D}{b} -> {E}{c} sent10: {D}{c} sent11: (Ex... | [
"sent17 & sent8 -> int1: either the Montrachet does stunt plexor or it does stunt getaway or both.; int1 & sent18 & sent22 -> int2: the convolution is a ginseng.; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent17 & sent8 -> int1: ({B}{a} v {C}{a}); int1 & sent18 & sent22 -> int2: {D}{b}; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 17 | the effecter does not logroll. | ¬{E}{c} | 10 | [
"sent6 -> int3: the effecter does not logroll if it does stunt plexor or does not logroll or both.; sent3 -> int4: the fact that the effecter stunts plexor is not false if the fact that it is a Islam and it does not stunts plexor is false.; sent5 & sent4 -> int5: the Timothy does not canter.; int5 -> int6: there is... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the effecter does logroll is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is a fission. sent2: if that either the convolution is amblyopic or it does not stunt getaway or both is not true the Montrachet stunt getaway. sent3: if the fact that something is a Islam but it do... | sent17 & sent8 -> int1: either the Montrachet does stunt plexor or it does stunt getaway or both.; int1 & sent18 & sent22 -> int2: the convolution is a ginseng.; sent9 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is not a kind of a Islam. | [
"if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a Islam then the Montrachet stunts plexor and/or does stunt getaway.",
"if the Montrachet does stunt plexor the convolution is a ginseng.",
"if the fact that the Montrachet does stunt getaway is not false then the convolution is a ginseng.",
"that the e... | [
"It is not a kind of Islam, at least that is what SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SALVAGEDATA SA... |
the subduer is a whirl. | sent1: if something does stunt Islam the fact that it is not a Okinawa and it does consort miscalculation is not true. sent2: the Kiowa does deviate if it is a thrower. sent3: the paste is a kind of a whirl. sent4: that the Kiowa is a thrower is correct. sent5: the finagler does not whirl. sent6: the Kiowa is categorem... | {C}{b} | sent1: (x): {D}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) sent2: {M}{d} -> {J}{d} sent3: {C}{ge} sent4: {M}{d} sent5: ¬{C}{a} sent6: {L}{d} sent7: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent8: {A}{b} -> {C}{b} sent9: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent10: {B}{b} -> {C}{b} sent11: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent12: ¬(¬{G}{a} & {E}{a}) -> {E}{b} sent13: {C}{a} -> {C}{b} sent14: (x): {L... | [
"sent7 & sent15 -> int1: the finagler does consort miscalculation.; int1 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent7 & sent15 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | the subduer does whirl. | {C}{b} | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the subduer is a whirl. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does stunt Islam the fact that it is not a Okinawa and it does consort miscalculation is not true. sent2: the Kiowa does deviate if it is a thrower. sent3: the paste is a kind of a whirl. sent4: that the Kiowa is a thrower is correct. sent5: the f... | sent7 & sent15 -> int1: the finagler does consort miscalculation.; int1 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the finagler does consort miscalculation is not wrong if it is a Okinawa. | [
"the finagler is a Okinawa.",
"the subduer does not whirl if the finagler does consort miscalculation."
] | [
"If it is a Okinawa, the miscalculation is not wrong.",
"If it is a Okinawa, then the miscalculation is not wrong."
] |
the anthropolatry occurs. | sent1: that both the flag and the bobsledding occurs is wrong if the attainment does not occur. sent2: the depression but not the anthropolatry happens if the behalf occurs. sent3: the anthropolatry occurs and the depression occurs. sent4: the eagerness happens. sent5: if the fact that the feminizing manumission occurs... | {A} | sent1: ¬{I} -> ¬({H} & {G}) sent2: {C} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) sent3: ({A} & {B}) sent4: {T} sent5: {AB} -> {AA} sent6: ¬{F} -> ({E} v {D}) sent7: (¬{AC} & {AB}) sent8: {R} -> {P} sent9: ¬{N} -> ({L} & {M}) sent10: ¬{C} -> ({B} v {A}) sent11: {T} -> {Q} sent12: {K} -> (¬{I} & ¬{J}) sent13: {L} -> {K} sent14: {B} sent15: ¬({H} ... | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | the anthropolatry does not occur. | ¬{A} | 20 | [
"sent7 -> int1: the fact that the feminizing manumission occurs is correct.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the limitation happens.; sent17 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the bilabialness occurs is true.; sent19 & int3 -> int4: not the feathering but the feminizing bantering occurs.; int4 -> int5: the feminizing bantering oc... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the anthropolatry occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that both the flag and the bobsledding occurs is wrong if the attainment does not occur. sent2: the depression but not the anthropolatry happens if the behalf occurs. sent3: the anthropolatry occurs and the depression occurs. sent4: the eagerness happens. se... | sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the anthropolatry occurs and the depression occurs. | [] | [
"the anthropolatry occurs and the depression occurs."
] |
the archil is a hypertensive. | sent1: if the monastery is not a thinker that it is a plenty and is not a Milvus is wrong. sent2: that the refinery is not photosynthetic hold. sent3: the monastery is not a thinker if there exists something such that that it is not a Day and it is not a kind of a foundation is false. sent4: there is something such tha... | {C}{a} | sent1: ¬{I}{f} -> ¬({H}{f} & ¬{G}{f}) sent2: ¬{L}{g} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{K}x & ¬{J}x) -> ¬{I}{f} sent4: (Ex): ¬({M}x & ¬{N}x) sent5: ¬({H}{f} & ¬{G}{f}) -> {G}{e} sent6: ({C}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent7: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent8: (x): ({F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent9: {C}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent11: {B}{a} sent1... | [
"sent7 -> int1: something is a kind of a eutrophication that does consort refinery.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent7 -> int1: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x);"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | the archil is not a hypertensive. | ¬{C}{a} | 14 | [
"sent10 -> int2: the garbageman is a eutrophication and does not consort refinery if it is not calculous.; sent8 -> int3: if the garbageman is a kind of a Arp and it is nonalcoholic then it is not calculous.; sent18 -> int4: the fact that the refinery is not a kind of a Day and is not a kind of a foundation is not ... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the archil is a hypertensive. ; $context$ = sent1: if the monastery is not a thinker that it is a plenty and is not a Milvus is wrong. sent2: that the refinery is not photosynthetic hold. sent3: the monastery is not a thinker if there exists something such that that it is not a Day and it is not a kind o... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the omelet is a eutrophication and it consorts refinery. | [] | [
"the omelet is a eutrophication and it consorts refinery."
] |
the Munchener does not exclaim. | sent1: that the gut is rheologic is correct if the haircut is happy. sent2: the gut is joyless if it is albinal and/or it is not happy. sent3: if the haircut is joyless the gut is thankless. sent4: the fact that something is both not non-rheologic and joyless does not hold if it is not thankless. sent5: the haircut is ... | ¬{D}{c} | sent1: {AB}{b} -> {A}{a} sent2: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent3: {B}{b} -> {C}{a} sent4: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x & {B}x) sent5: {B}{a} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent6: {D}{ag} sent7: ({C}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {D}{c} sent8: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{D}x sent9: ¬{A}{b} sent10: (x): {F}x -> (¬{C}x v {E}x) sent11: {B}{a} -> ¬{A}{... | [
"sent2 & sent15 -> int1: the gut is joyless.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the haircut is thankless but it is not rheologic.; sent20 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent2 & sent15 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent5 & int1 -> int2: ({C}{b} & ¬{A}{b}); sent20 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | the Munchener does not exclaim. | ¬{D}{c} | 5 | [
"sent8 -> int3: the fact that if the fact that the Munchener is non-rheologic thing that is joyless is not right then the Munchener does not exclaim hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Munchener does not exclaim. ; $context$ = sent1: that the gut is rheologic is correct if the haircut is happy. sent2: the gut is joyless if it is albinal and/or it is not happy. sent3: if the haircut is joyless the gut is thankless. sent4: the fact that something is both not non-rheologic and joyless... | sent2 & sent15 -> int1: the gut is joyless.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the haircut is thankless but it is not rheologic.; sent20 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the gut is joyless if it is albinal and/or it is not happy. | [
"the gut is either albinal or not happy or both.",
"the haircut is thankless but it is not rheologic if the gut is joyless.",
"if the haircut is both thankless and not rheologic then the Munchener exclaims."
] | [
"The gut is not happy if it is albinal.",
"The gut is joyless if it is not happy.",
"If the gut is not happy, it is not joyless."
] |
the fact that the spectrophotometer is both not spartan and not the arsenide if the spectrophotometer is not disciplinary is wrong. | sent1: if something is not disciplinary it is not spartan and it is not an arsenide. sent2: if something is not a kind of an arrow it does not feminize chebab and is a mercantilism. sent3: something is not a Musial but it does feminize nitrochloromethane if it is not mental. sent4: a non-disciplinary thing is not spart... | ¬(¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa})) | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬{IP}x -> (¬{JJ}x & {HF}x) sent3: (x): ¬{CJ}x -> (¬{AM}x & {IU}x) sent4: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{AA}x sent5: (x): ¬{DC}x -> (¬{CS}x & ¬{EO}x) | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 4 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the spectrophotometer is both not spartan and not the arsenide if the spectrophotometer is not disciplinary is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not disciplinary it is not spartan and it is not an arsenide. sent2: if something is not a kind of an arrow it does not feminize chebab ... | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if something is not disciplinary it is not spartan and it is not an arsenide. | [] | [
"if something is not disciplinary it is not spartan and it is not an arsenide."
] |
the hail does not occur. | sent1: the purging happens. sent2: the consorting goblet does not occur if not the Hebrideanness but the amputation occurs. sent3: the hail occurs if the hail occurs or the commination does not occur or both. sent4: if the consorting goblet does not occur the centrifugalness happens and/or the commination happens. sent... | ¬{C} | sent1: {B} sent2: (¬{I} & {H}) -> ¬{G} sent3: ({C} v ¬{E}) -> {C} sent4: ¬{G} -> ({F} v {E}) sent5: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) sent6: ¬(¬{A} & {B}) sent7: ¬(¬{EE} & ¬{JK}) -> ¬{EI} sent8: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{BP} sent9: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{C} sent10: {C} -> ¬({A} & ¬{B}) sent11: ¬{D} -> ({A} & {B}) | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the diffusion does not occur and the purging does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the purging does not occur.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the diffusion does not occur and the purging does not occur does not hold.; int3 & sent9 -> hyp... | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: (¬{A} & ¬{B}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; int1 & sent1 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{A} & ¬{B}); int3 & sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 | the hailing occurs. | {C} | 8 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the hail does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the purging happens. sent2: the consorting goblet does not occur if not the Hebrideanness but the amputation occurs. sent3: the hail occurs if the hail occurs or the commination does not occur or both. sent4: if the consorting goblet does not occur the centri... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the diffusion does not occur and the purging does not occur.; assump1 -> int1: the purging does not occur.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: that the diffusion does not occur and the purging does not occur does not hold.; int3 & sent9 -> hypothes... | DeductionInstance | the purging happens. | [
"if that the diffusion does not occur and the purging does not occur does not hold the hail does not occur."
] | [
"the purging happens."
] |
the rotor does not feminize gauss and it is not a kind of a purge. | sent1: the archespore does not purge. sent2: the rotor is not longing. sent3: the L-plate is a desert and nutritional. sent4: the symposiast is not a platyrrhine if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of platyrrhine thing that is azotemic is incorrect. sent5: the steakhouse is not a organelle. s... | (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | sent1: ¬{AB}{a} sent2: ¬{A}{b} sent3: ({P}{i} & {Q}{i}) sent4: (x): ¬({J}x & {N}x) -> ¬{J}{e} sent5: ¬{O}{h} sent6: (¬{G}{d} & ¬{F}{d}) -> {E}{c} sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) sent8: (x): {I}x -> ¬{H}{d} sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AA}{b} sent10: ¬{D}{c} -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent11: {K}{g} -> {I}{f} sent12: (x): ¬({L}... | [
"sent17 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent17 & sent13 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | that the rotor does not feminize gauss and it does not purge does not hold. | ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the rotor does not feminize gauss and it is not a kind of a purge. ; $context$ = sent1: the archespore does not purge. sent2: the rotor is not longing. sent3: the L-plate is a desert and nutritional. sent4: the symposiast is not a platyrrhine if there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind... | sent17 & sent13 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the rotor does not feminize gauss and is not a purge if the fact that the archespore is longing is wrong. | [
"the archespore is not longing."
] | [
"the rotor does not feminize gauss and is not a purge if the fact that the archespore is longing is wrong."
] |
the Laos does not consort Voltaren. | sent1: the domino consorts Voltaren. sent2: if the fact that the love-in-winter is not a Sitophylus or it is a night-line or both does not hold then the Tree is not Gauguinesque. sent3: if the Tree does consort Voltaren then the fact that the cursor consort Voltaren hold. sent4: the Laos does consort Voltaren if that t... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: {B}{al} sent2: ¬(¬{G}{c} v {F}{c}) -> ¬{E}{a} sent3: {B}{a} -> {B}{br} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent5: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) sent6: {A}{be} sent7: {A}{a} sent8: (x): {H}x -> ¬(¬{G}x v {F}x) sent9: (x): (¬{A}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the Laos does not consort Voltaren. | ¬{B}{b} | 9 | [
"sent9 -> int1: the Laos does not consort Voltaren if it is a kind of non-Luxembourgian thing that is epistemic.; sent8 -> int2: that the powerbroker is either not a Sitophylus or a night-line or both is wrong if it is microcephalic.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Laos does not consort Voltaren. ; $context$ = sent1: the domino consorts Voltaren. sent2: if the fact that the love-in-winter is not a Sitophylus or it is a night-line or both does not hold then the Tree is not Gauguinesque. sent3: if the Tree does consort Voltaren then the fact that the cursor conso... | sent4 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the Laos does consort Voltaren if that the Tree is Luxembourgian is not false. | [
"the Tree is Luxembourgian."
] | [
"the Laos does consort Voltaren if that the Tree is Luxembourgian is not false."
] |
there is something such that it is not an infinitesimal. | sent1: the vessel is irreverent if the dissociation is irreverent and not a mustelid. sent2: the cardigan does not consort inherence but it is a quest. sent3: the understudy does not fibrillate and is a self-insurance if the psychrometer is not a kind of a slum. sent4: the shortstop does not consort Majorana but it is ... | (Ex): ¬{AA}x | sent1: ({J}{g} & ¬{L}{g}) -> {J}{f} sent2: (¬{DC}{fe} & {AB}{fe}) sent3: ¬{F}{d} -> (¬{D}{c} & {E}{c}) sent4: (¬{BB}{a} & {EE}{a}) sent5: {A}{b} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent6: {AA}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent7: ¬{G}{e} -> ¬{C}{c} sent8: {J}{f} -> {I}{f} sent9: (Ex): {AA}x sent10: ¬{C}{e} -> ¬{C}{c} sent11: (x): {A}x... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 21 | 0 | 21 | the psycholinguist is not proportionate and is a kind of a quest. | (¬{DE}{ai} & {AB}{ai}) | 4 | [
"sent11 -> int1: the psycholinguist is not proportionate but it is a kind of a quest if it stunts freewheeling.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is not an infinitesimal. ; $context$ = sent1: the vessel is irreverent if the dissociation is irreverent and not a mustelid. sent2: the cardigan does not consort inherence but it is a quest. sent3: the understudy does not fibrillate and is a self-insurance if the psychrome... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that it is a kind of an infinitesimal. | [
"the understudy does not fibrillate and is a self-insurance if the psychrometer is not a kind of a slum."
] | [
"there exists something such that it is a kind of an infinitesimal."
] |
the fact that the impression does smut and is not reverent is not right. | sent1: that something is a smut but it is not reverent is incorrect if the fact that it is a kind of a velveteen is correct. sent2: the respirator does not feminize bantering if there is something such that that it is a catalectic and it is a musicality does not hold. sent3: if something does feminize bantering then th... | ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: (x): ¬({C}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}{fb} sent3: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{AB}{a} sent5: ¬{AB}{a} sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: (x): (¬{A}x v ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent8: (x): ¬{B}x -> (¬{A}x v ¬{AB}x) sent9: ¬{G}{a} -> ¬(¬{E}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) sent10: ({AL}{a} & ¬{CQ}{a}) sent11: ¬{AA}{c... | [
"sent14 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent14 & sent6 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 | the fact that the impression is a smut but not reverent is wrong. | ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | 7 | [
"sent1 -> int1: if the impression is a kind of a velveteen then that it is both a smut and not reverent is not correct.; sent3 -> int2: that the impression is a velveteen is not wrong if it feminizes bantering.; sent15 -> int3: if the impression is not a musicality then it does feminize bantering and is a catalecti... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the impression does smut and is not reverent is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is a smut but it is not reverent is incorrect if the fact that it is a kind of a velveteen is correct. sent2: the respirator does not feminize bantering if there is something such that that it is ... | sent14 & sent6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the impression does smut but it is irreverent if it is not a velveteen. | [
"the impression is not a velveteen."
] | [
"the impression does smut but it is irreverent if it is not a velveteen."
] |
the stunting tailback does not occur. | sent1: if the fact that the culmination does not occur is correct then the jeremiad but not the subscription occurs. sent2: that the Mongol does not occur is correct if the fact that the consorting epicarp does not occur but the citifying occurs is wrong. sent3: the unreasonableness does not occur. sent4: the fact that... | ¬{B} | sent1: ¬{F} -> ({E} & ¬{D}) sent2: ¬(¬{IF} & {FD}) -> ¬{BT} sent3: ¬{Q} sent4: {G} -> ¬(¬{H} & {F}) sent5: ¬{C} -> ({B} & {A}) sent6: ¬({B} v {A}) -> ¬{GQ} sent7: ¬(¬{HO} & {DM}) -> ¬{BB} sent8: ¬{A} sent9: ¬(¬{H} & {F}) -> ¬{F} sent10: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) -> ¬{B} sent11: ¬({GD} & {DT}) sent12: ¬{L} -> (¬{J} & {K}) sent13:... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | the stunting tailback occurs. | {B} | 12 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the stunting tailback does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the culmination does not occur is correct then the jeremiad but not the subscription occurs. sent2: that the Mongol does not occur is correct if the fact that the consorting epicarp does not occur but the citifying occurs is wron... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if that the stunting tailback occurs and/or the spillover happens is not true then the stunting cyclooxygenase does not occur. | [
"that both the stunting tailback and the spillover occurs is brought about by that the stunting harvest-lice does not occur."
] | [
"if that the stunting tailback occurs and/or the spillover happens is not true then the stunting cyclooxygenase does not occur."
] |
the granter is authorial and is coccygeal. | sent1: the granter is a Rhodosphaera and it is coccygeal if it is not a sacking. sent2: if the fiberboard is not a kind of a Senegal it either is a Rhodosphaera or is incommutable or both. sent3: if the fact that the enthusiast is not a Gould and is a kind of a sacking is not correct it consorts EXEC. sent4: if the ent... | ({E}{c} & {D}{c}) | sent1: ¬{AB}{c} -> ({C}{c} & {D}{c}) sent2: ¬{G}{d} -> ({C}{d} v {F}{d}) sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> {B}{a} sent4: {B}{a} -> (¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) sent5: ¬{G}{d} sent6: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({E}x & {D}x) sent7: (¬{AA}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent8: (Ex): (¬{H}x & ¬{I}x) sent9: (¬{B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{c} | [
"sent6 -> int1: if the granter is not a Rhodosphaera it is authorial and is coccygeal.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent6 -> int1: ¬{C}{c} -> ({E}{c} & {D}{c});"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | that the granter is authorial and it is coccygeal is not right. | ¬({E}{c} & {D}{c}) | 7 | [
"sent2 & sent5 -> int2: the fiberboard is a Rhodosphaera and/or it is incommutable.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the granter is authorial and is coccygeal. ; $context$ = sent1: the granter is a Rhodosphaera and it is coccygeal if it is not a sacking. sent2: if the fiberboard is not a kind of a Senegal it either is a Rhodosphaera or is incommutable or both. sent3: if the fact that the enthusiast is not a Gould and i... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if something is not a Rhodosphaera then it is authorial and it is coccygeal. | [] | [
"if something is not a Rhodosphaera then it is authorial and it is coccygeal."
] |
the Newtonian is not an evolution. | sent1: there exists something such that it is christian. sent2: the slippage is not an evolution. sent3: if something is christian it is an evolution and it does not feminize allspice. sent4: if the baluster is cecal then the goethite does not feminize gauss and/or is not a mariticide. sent5: something is christian and... | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: (Ex): {C}x sent2: ¬{A}{ib} sent3: (x): {C}x -> ({A}x & ¬{B}x) sent4: {I}{f} -> (¬{H}{e} v ¬{J}{e}) sent5: (Ex): ({C}x & {D}x) sent6: (x): {G}x -> ¬({F}x & ¬{D}x) sent7: ¬{M}{h} -> ¬({L}{g} & ¬{K}{g}) sent8: (¬{C}{b} v {E}{b}) -> {C}{a} sent9: ¬({N}{h} & {O}{h}) sent10: ¬({N}{h} & {O}{h}) -> ¬{M}{h} sent11: (¬{H}... | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Newtonian is an evolution.; sent17 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the Newtonian does not feminize allspice is not false.; sent5 & sent13 -> int2: that the Newtonian feminizes allspice is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent17 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent5 & sent13 -> int2: {B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 14 | the Newtonian is an evolution. | {A}{a} | 13 | [
"sent3 -> int4: if the Newtonian is christian then it is an evolution and it does not feminize allspice.; sent6 -> int5: the fact that the allspice does freelance but it is not a reductionism is false if it is cleistogamous.; sent10 & sent9 -> int6: the archdeaconry does not feminize Apollo.; sent7 & int6 -> int7: ... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Newtonian is not an evolution. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is christian. sent2: the slippage is not an evolution. sent3: if something is christian it is an evolution and it does not feminize allspice. sent4: if the baluster is cecal then the goethite does not feminize gau... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the Newtonian is an evolution.; sent17 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the Newtonian does not feminize allspice is not false.; sent5 & sent13 -> int2: that the Newtonian feminizes allspice is true.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED... | DeductionInstance | that the Newtonian does not feminize allspice is not wrong if it is an evolution. | [
"something is christian and is a reductionism.",
"the Newtonian feminizes allspice if a christian thing is a kind of a reductionism."
] | [
"If it is an evolution, theNewtonian does not feminize allspice.",
"If it is an evolution, then theNewtonian does not feminize allspice."
] |
there exists something such that the fact that it is not a exosphere and/or is a handline is not right. | sent1: something stunts cephaloglycin and it is appropriative if the fact that it does not stunt ten-spot is right. sent2: the annotator is a kind of a exosphere if the Lesbian is a kind of a handline. sent3: that the Lesbian is not a kind of a glowworm and is not cryptanalytic is not correct. sent4: that the annotator... | (Ex): ¬(¬{A}x v {B}x) | sent1: (x): ¬{F}x -> ({D}x & {E}x) sent2: {B}{a} -> {A}{b} sent3: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent4: ¬(¬{BK}{b} & {AA}{b}) sent5: (Ex): (¬{I}x & ¬{K}x) sent6: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: (Ex): ¬({BE}x v {C}x) sent8: {A}{a} -> {AB}{ir} sent9: (¬{H}{d} v {J}{d}) sent10: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent11: (x): (¬{H}x v {J}x) -> ¬{... | [
"sent13 & sent3 -> int1: the Lesbian is a handline.; sent22 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the annotator is not a exosphere and/or it is a kind of a handline is not right.; int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent13 & sent3 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent22 & int1 -> int2: ¬(¬{A}{b} v {B}{b}); int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 19 | 0 | 19 | the colonel is cryptanalytic. | {AB}{ir} | 10 | [
"sent14 -> int3: that if the Lesbian is not vertebral that the Lesbian is a exosphere and a handline is true is right.; sent1 -> int4: if that that the annotator stunts ten-spot is not true hold then it stunts cephaloglycin and it is appropriative.; sent5 & sent18 -> int5: the radiopharmaceutical feminizes Witwater... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that the fact that it is not a exosphere and/or is a handline is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: something stunts cephaloglycin and it is appropriative if the fact that it does not stunt ten-spot is right. sent2: the annotator is a kind of a exosphere if the Lesbian is a kind ... | sent13 & sent3 -> int1: the Lesbian is a handline.; sent22 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the annotator is not a exosphere and/or it is a kind of a handline is not right.; int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the fact that the Lesbian is not a glowworm and it is not cryptanalytic does not hold then it is a handline. | [
"that the Lesbian is not a kind of a glowworm and is not cryptanalytic is not correct.",
"if the Lesbian is a handline then the fact that the annotator is not a exosphere and/or is a handline is incorrect."
] | [
"If the Lesbian is not a glowworm and it is not cryptanalytic, then it is a handline.",
"It is a handline if the Lesbian is not a glowworm and it is not cryptanalytic."
] |
the puerpera does not guggle. | sent1: the haunch is abranchiate but it is not a kind of a pyrrhic. sent2: there exists something such that it is interplanetary thing that volatilizes. sent3: there is something such that it does volatilize. sent4: the fact that the macaw is not interplanetary hold. sent5: the haunch is abranchiate. sent6: if the haun... | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x) sent3: (Ex): {B}x sent4: ¬{A}{b} sent5: {AA}{a} sent6: {B}{a} -> (¬{A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent7: (x): (¬{B}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{AA}{b} sent8: (x): (¬{A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}{c} sent9: {B}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent10: {CP}{a} sent11: {A}{a} -> {C}{c} sent12: (Ex): ¬{A}x | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | the puerpera guggles. | {C}{c} | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the puerpera does not guggle. ; $context$ = sent1: the haunch is abranchiate but it is not a kind of a pyrrhic. sent2: there exists something such that it is interplanetary thing that volatilizes. sent3: there is something such that it does volatilize. sent4: the fact that the macaw is not interplanetary... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the macaw is not abranchiate if there is something such that it does not volatilize and is a pyrrhic. | [
"if the fact that the haunch is interplanetary is correct then the puerpera guggles."
] | [
"the macaw is not abranchiate if there is something such that it does not volatilize and is a pyrrhic."
] |
the heartthrob is non-atonic. | sent1: the calpac consorts Klein if the ministrant is a burthen. sent2: the calpac is a lobby that stunts buster. sent3: if something that does stunt buster does consort Klein the heartthrob is not atonic. | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: {E}{c} -> {C}{a} sent2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent3: (x): ({B}x & {C}x) -> ¬{D}{b} | [
"sent2 -> int1: the calpac stunts buster.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent2 -> int1: {B}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the heartthrob is non-atonic. ; $context$ = sent1: the calpac consorts Klein if the ministrant is a burthen. sent2: the calpac is a lobby that stunts buster. sent3: if something that does stunt buster does consort Klein the heartthrob is not atonic. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the calpac is a lobby that stunts buster. | [] | [
"the calpac is a lobby that stunts buster."
] |
the fact that there exists something such that if that it is a cotton and is not tonal does not hold it does stunt esker does not hold. | sent1: the jobber stunts esker if the fact that it is a cotton that is not tonal is incorrect. | ¬((Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x) | sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if that it is a cotton and is not tonal does not hold it does stunt esker does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the jobber stunts esker if the fact that it is a cotton that is not tonal is incorrect. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the jobber stunts esker if the fact that it is a cotton that is not tonal is incorrect. | [] | [
"the jobber stunts esker if the fact that it is a cotton that is not tonal is incorrect."
] |
the lashing occurs and the fading occurs. | sent1: if the sewing happens the fact that not the feminizing pickpocket but the dipterousness occurs is not correct. sent2: if the chlamydialness occurs the residual occurs. sent3: the non-chlamydialness triggers that the skunk does not occur but the lash occurs. sent4: if the fumble does not occur both the oligarchic... | ({AB} & {B}) | sent1: {I} -> ¬(¬{G} & {F}) sent2: {A} -> {FO} sent3: ¬{A} -> (¬{AA} & {AB}) sent4: ¬{C} -> ({HJ} & {B}) sent5: ¬(¬{G} & {F}) -> ¬{E} sent6: (¬{FB} & {BN}) sent7: ¬{D} -> {C} sent8: (¬{BQ} & {FC}) sent9: ¬{E} -> ¬({C} & {D}) sent10: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) sent11: ¬{A} sent12: ¬{D} | [
"sent3 & sent11 -> int1: the skunk does not occur and the lash occurs.; int1 -> int2: the lash occurs.; sent10 & sent12 -> int3: the fading and the fumble occurs.; int3 -> int4: the fact that the fade happens is not false.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent3 & sent11 -> int1: (¬{AA} & {AB}); int1 -> int2: {AB}; sent10 & sent12 -> int3: ({B} & {C}); int3 -> int4: {B}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 | the residualness and the oligarchicness happens. | ({FO} & {HJ}) | 8 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the lashing occurs and the fading occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: if the sewing happens the fact that not the feminizing pickpocket but the dipterousness occurs is not correct. sent2: if the chlamydialness occurs the residual occurs. sent3: the non-chlamydialness triggers that the skunk does not occur but t... | sent3 & sent11 -> int1: the skunk does not occur and the lash occurs.; int1 -> int2: the lash occurs.; sent10 & sent12 -> int3: the fading and the fumble occurs.; int3 -> int4: the fact that the fade happens is not false.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the non-chlamydialness triggers that the skunk does not occur but the lash occurs. | [
"the chlamydialness does not occur.",
"if the digitalness does not occur then the fading and the fumbling occurs.",
"the digitalness does not occur."
] | [
"The non-chlamydialness causes the lash to occur.",
"The non-chlamydialness causes the lashes to occur.",
"The non-chlamydialness causes the skunk to not occur."
] |
that either the figuration happens or the stunting Satureja does not occur or both does not hold. | sent1: if the stunting Peabody does not occur and the increasing does not occur then the stunting Satureja does not occur. sent2: that the increase occurs triggers that the stunting Peabody does not occur. sent3: if the consorting Tyrolean occurs then the stunting Peabody does not occur and the increase does not occur.... | ¬({A} v ¬{B}) | sent1: (¬{C} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{B} sent2: {D} -> ¬{C} sent3: {E} -> (¬{C} & ¬{D}) sent4: ¬{B} -> {C} sent5: {A} -> {C} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that either the figuration happens or the stunting Satureja does not occur or both.; assump1 & sent5 & sent4 -> int1: the stunting Peabody occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"void -> assump1: ({A} v ¬{B}); assump1 & sent5 & sent4 -> int1: {C};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 2 | 0 | 2 | either the figuration occurs or the stunting Satureja does not occur or both. | ({A} v ¬{B}) | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that either the figuration happens or the stunting Satureja does not occur or both does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the stunting Peabody does not occur and the increasing does not occur then the stunting Satureja does not occur. sent2: that the increase occurs triggers that the stunting Peabody doe... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if the figuration happens then the stunting Peabody occurs. | [
"if the stunting Satureja does not occur the stunting Peabody occurs."
] | [
"if the figuration happens then the stunting Peabody occurs."
] |
both the portrayal and the stunting self-reproach happens. | sent1: the stunting Ugric does not occur but the stunting self-reproach occurs. sent2: that both the attempt and the unhealthiness happens is true. sent3: the selection occurs if the riparianness occurs. sent4: the twenty-one occurs and/or the going-over occurs. sent5: if the twenty-one happens then the portrayal occur... | ({C} & {D}) | sent1: (¬{E} & {D}) sent2: ({DI} & {F}) sent3: {BF} -> {L} sent4: ({A} v {B}) sent5: {A} -> {C} sent6: {B} -> {C} sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} & {D}) sent8: ¬{E} | [
"sent4 & sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the portrayal happens.; sent1 -> int2: the stunting self-reproach happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent5 & sent6 -> int1: {C}; sent1 -> int2: {D}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 | that the portrayal occurs and the stunting self-reproach happens is wrong. | ¬({C} & {D}) | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = both the portrayal and the stunting self-reproach happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the stunting Ugric does not occur but the stunting self-reproach occurs. sent2: that both the attempt and the unhealthiness happens is true. sent3: the selection occurs if the riparianness occurs. sent4: the twenty-one occurs... | sent4 & sent5 & sent6 -> int1: the portrayal happens.; sent1 -> int2: the stunting self-reproach happens.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the twenty-one occurs and/or the going-over occurs. | [
"if the twenty-one happens then the portrayal occurs.",
"that the portrayal occurs is caused by that the going-over happens.",
"the stunting Ugric does not occur but the stunting self-reproach occurs."
] | [
"The going-over occurs or the twenty-one occurs.",
"The twenty-one occurs or the going-over occurs.",
"The going-over occurs or the twenty-one happens."
] |
the shamanistness does not occur. | sent1: if the Tasmanianness happens and the considering totipotency does not occur then the faro does not occur. sent2: the fact that the jack-o'-lantern does not occur and the cotillion does not occur is not right if the faro does not occur. sent3: the jack-o'-lantern happens. sent4: the shamanistness happens if the j... | ¬{B} | sent1: ({E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} sent2: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{A} & ¬{C}) sent3: {A} sent4: {A} -> {B} sent5: {CU} -> {IC} | [
"sent4 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | the shamanistness does not occur. | ¬{B} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the shamanistness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Tasmanianness happens and the considering totipotency does not occur then the faro does not occur. sent2: the fact that the jack-o'-lantern does not occur and the cotillion does not occur is not right if the faro does not occur. sent3: the jac... | sent4 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the shamanistness happens if the jack-o'-lantern occurs. | [
"the jack-o'-lantern happens."
] | [
"the shamanistness happens if the jack-o'-lantern occurs."
] |
the vagary does not occur. | sent1: that the democratization does not occur is correct. sent2: the belemniticness happens. sent3: the brainwave happens. sent4: the tough happens and the Jeffersonianness occurs. sent5: that the vagary occurs is prevented by that the depreciation occurs and the brainwave occurs. sent6: the depreciation happens. sent... | ¬{C} | sent1: ¬{ES} sent2: {CH} sent3: {B} sent4: ({DN} & {EK}) sent5: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent6: {A} sent7: {AE} | [
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: both the depreciation and the brainwave happens.; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent6 & sent3 -> int1: ({A} & {B}); int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 4 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the vagary does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the democratization does not occur is correct. sent2: the belemniticness happens. sent3: the brainwave happens. sent4: the tough happens and the Jeffersonianness occurs. sent5: that the vagary occurs is prevented by that the depreciation occurs and the... | sent6 & sent3 -> int1: both the depreciation and the brainwave happens.; int1 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the depreciation happens. | [
"the brainwave happens.",
"that the vagary occurs is prevented by that the depreciation occurs and the brainwave occurs."
] | [
"The depreciation happens.",
"The depreciation occurs."
] |
the tither is not a kind of a Jacobs. | sent1: there is something such that it is not exaugural. sent2: the albite does not consort halon if that the tither is a Jacobs and it is Stravinskyan does not hold. sent3: something consorts halon but it is not a Jacobs. sent4: there is something such that it is not a fellow. sent5: the tither is a kind of a Polynesi... | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: (Ex): ¬{AR}x sent2: ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{AA}{hp} sent3: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{A}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{F}x sent5: ({IU}{a} & ¬{IK}{a}) sent6: ({EC}{a} & ¬{IN}{a}) sent7: ({E}{c} & ¬{C}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent8: (Ex): {CB}x sent9: (Ex): ({AB}x & ¬{A}x) sent10: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent11: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sen... | [
"sent10 -> int1: something does consort halon but it is not a front.; int1 & sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent10 -> int1: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int1 & sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | the albite does not consort halon. | ¬{AA}{hp} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the tither is not a kind of a Jacobs. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not exaugural. sent2: the albite does not consort halon if that the tither is a Jacobs and it is Stravinskyan does not hold. sent3: something consorts halon but it is not a Jacobs. sent4: there is something such... | sent10 -> int1: something does consort halon but it is not a front.; int1 & sent15 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the halon does consort halon but it does not front. | [
"if something that does consort halon does not front then the tither is not a Jacobs."
] | [
"the halon does consort halon but it does not front."
] |
the crape is not a kind of a Sinology. | sent1: that something is non-belemnitic thing that is sportive does not hold if the fact that it is thermionics is not false. sent2: if the fact that the crape is not non-alkaline and/or it is a kind of a Arno is not correct the commuter is not a Sinology. sent3: the reticule is not sportive if the fact that the mammal... | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: (x): {E}x -> ¬(¬{D}x & {C}x) sent2: ¬({AB}{a} v {AA}{a}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent3: ¬(¬{D}{d} & {C}{d}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent4: ¬{D}{a} -> (¬{B}{cu} v {C}{cu}) sent5: ¬({AA}{aa} v {A}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬{AA}x sent7: ¬({A}{aa} v {AA}{aa}) -> ¬{AB}{a} sent8: ¬{AA}{aa} sent9: (x): ¬({AG}x v {CI}x) sent10: (x): ¬({EN}x v {BR}x) se... | [
"sent11 -> int1: that the commuter is a Arno and/or it is alkaline is false.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent11 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}); sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | the crape is a Sinology. | {A}{a} | 6 | [
"sent1 -> int2: if the mammal is thermionics the fact that it is a kind of non-belemnitic thing that is sportive is not correct.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the crape is not a kind of a Sinology. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is non-belemnitic thing that is sportive does not hold if the fact that it is thermionics is not false. sent2: if the fact that the crape is not non-alkaline and/or it is a kind of a Arno is not correct the commuter is not a Sinol... | sent11 -> int1: that the commuter is a Arno and/or it is alkaline is false.; sent12 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is nothing such that it either is a kind of a Arno or is alkaline or both. | [
"if that the commuter is a Arno or it is alkaline or both is not correct the crape is not a kind of a Sinology."
] | [
"there is nothing such that it either is a kind of a Arno or is alkaline or both."
] |
the blister is a undershrub. | sent1: if the fact that something is not a Mali and it is not a kind of a river is not true it is a kind of a wonder. sent2: the ex-spouse is not taxable. sent3: something completes and it does feminize emphysema if it is not taxable. sent4: if the eclair is a kind of a Togolese that the blister is a kind of a Mali and... | {C}{b} | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}x sent2: ¬{H}{d} sent3: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({G}x & {F}x) sent4: {A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent5: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent6: {AA}{a} sent7: {A}{bm} sent8: (x): {O}x -> {E}x sent9: {G}{b} sent10: ¬({AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) sent11: {A}{a} sent12: {A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}... | [
"sent12 & sent11 -> int1: that that the blister is not a Mali and is not a river hold is wrong.; sent1 -> int2: that the blister does wonder is true if that it is not a Mali and not a river is incorrect.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the blister wonders.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent12 & sent11 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}); sent1 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{b} & ¬{AB}{b}) -> {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {B}{b};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | the blister is not a kind of a undershrub. | ¬{C}{b} | 9 | [
"sent13 -> int4: if the blister is Togolese but it does not wonder then it is not a undershrub.; sent3 -> int5: the ex-spouse is a kind of completed thing that feminizes emphysema if it is not taxable.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: the ex-spouse completes and it feminizes emphysema.; int6 -> int7: the ex-spouse feminizes ... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the blister is a undershrub. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something is not a Mali and it is not a kind of a river is not true it is a kind of a wonder. sent2: the ex-spouse is not taxable. sent3: something completes and it does feminize emphysema if it is not taxable. sent4: if the eclair is a k... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | that the fact that the blister is both not a Mali and not a river is wrong is right if the eclair is Togolese. | [
"the eclair is a Togolese.",
"if the fact that something is not a Mali and it is not a kind of a river is not true it is a kind of a wonder."
] | [
"The fact that the blister is not a river and the eclair is not a river is correct.",
"If the eclair is Togolese, then the fact that the blister is not a river is correct."
] |
there is something such that if it is not a kind of a brinkmanship then the fact that that it does not feminize lasher and is not gymnosophical is true is false. | sent1: if that the ketosteroid belays is not false then that it is not a kind of a brinkmanship and it is not orthopedic is incorrect. sent2: there exists something such that if it is not a Dolichonyx then that it is not a Becket and does not gazump does not hold. sent3: if something is not a brinkmanship then that it ... | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) | sent1: {GC}{db} -> ¬(¬{A}{db} & ¬{IK}{db}) sent2: (Ex): ¬{AE}x -> ¬(¬{EI}x & ¬{HK}x) sent3: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{JF}x & ¬{IL}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{HO}x -> (¬{HP}x & ¬{FF}x) sent5: ¬{A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬{EP}x -> ¬(¬{AM}x & ¬{DJ}x) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | if the fact that the Kichai is not a brinkmanship is not incorrect the fact that it is not a cogitation and it is not a database is not right. | ¬{A}{hs} -> ¬(¬{JF}{hs} & ¬{IL}{hs}) | 1 | [
"sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not a kind of a brinkmanship then the fact that that it does not feminize lasher and is not gymnosophical is true is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the ketosteroid belays is not false then that it is not a kind of a brinkmanship and it is not orthopedic is incor... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if something is not a brinkmanship then that that it does feminize lasher and it is not gymnosophical is correct is wrong. | [
"the fact that the applique does feminize fencing and is not chordal is false if it does not feminize lasher."
] | [
"if something is not a brinkmanship then that that it does feminize lasher and it is not gymnosophical is correct is wrong."
] |
the pyx is not conventional. | sent1: the fact that the hookah does not consort khoum and it is not purposeful is wrong. sent2: the backswimmer is a aggravator if the hookah consorts khoum. sent3: something is conventional if it is systematics. sent4: the hookah is not a Numidian if the fact that the fact that it is not a dekaliter and is Numidian i... | ¬{C}{c} | sent1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: {AA}{a} -> {B}{b} sent3: (x): {A}x -> {C}x sent4: ¬(¬{G}{a} & {F}{a}) -> ¬{F}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{B}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> {C}{b} sent6: {B}{b} -> {A}{c} sent7: (Ex): {G}x sent8: ¬{F}{a} -> ({E}{a} & {D}{a}) sent9: (x): {D}x -> {B}x sent10: ¬(¬{AB}{c} & {A}{c}) sent11: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) se... | [
"sent12 & sent1 -> int1: the backswimmer is a aggravator.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the pyx is systematics.; sent3 -> int3: the pyx is conventional if it is not non-systematics.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent12 & sent1 -> int1: {B}{b}; int1 & sent6 -> int2: {A}{c}; sent3 -> int3: {A}{c} -> {C}{c}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 | the pyx is not conventional. | ¬{C}{c} | 8 | [
"sent9 -> int4: the hookah is a aggravator if the fact that it does consort Goma is not false.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the pyx is not conventional. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the hookah does not consort khoum and it is not purposeful is wrong. sent2: the backswimmer is a aggravator if the hookah consorts khoum. sent3: something is conventional if it is systematics. sent4: the hookah is not a Numidian if the fact ... | sent12 & sent1 -> int1: the backswimmer is a aggravator.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the pyx is systematics.; sent3 -> int3: the pyx is conventional if it is not non-systematics.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if that the hookah does not consort khoum and it is not purposeful is not correct then the backswimmer is a kind of a aggravator. | [
"the fact that the hookah does not consort khoum and it is not purposeful is wrong.",
"if the backswimmer is a aggravator the pyx is systematics.",
"something is conventional if it is systematics."
] | [
"The backswimmer is a kind of aggravator if the hookah does not consort khoum.",
"The back swimmer is a kind of aggravator if the hookah does not consort khoum.",
"The backswimmer is a kind of aggravator if the hookah does not consort khoum and it is not intended."
] |
the fact that the flagellant is a kind of nautical thing that is not flinty is not true. | sent1: that the flagellant is nautical and it is flinty does not hold if the Cyril is not nautical. sent2: something is not a kind of a backband if it is a kind of a Anhingidae. sent3: the fact that the Cyril is not denotative is not incorrect if a flinty thing is not a kind of a snakebite. sent4: something does wash a... | ¬({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: (x): {H}x -> ¬{F}x sent3: (x): ({B}x & ¬{DS}x) -> ¬{FB}{a} sent4: (Ex): ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: ¬{B}{a} sent6: ¬{F}{a} -> ¬({G}{a} & {E}{a}) sent7: {I}{c} -> {H}{a} sent8: (x): ({JA}x & ¬{AA}x) -> ¬{T}{b} sent9: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) sent10: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({C}x & {D}x... | [
"sent13 & sent16 -> int1: the Cyril is not nautical.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent13 & sent16 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 15 | the flagellant is nautical and not flinty. | ({A}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) | 8 | [
"sent17 -> int2: if the flagellant is outdoors then it is nautical and it is not flinty.; sent10 -> int3: the fact that the flagellant is outdoors thing that stunts Islam is right if it is not recessionary.; sent2 -> int4: if the Cyril is a Anhingidae then it is not a backband.; sent7 & sent11 -> int5: the Cyril is... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the flagellant is a kind of nautical thing that is not flinty is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: that the flagellant is nautical and it is flinty does not hold if the Cyril is not nautical. sent2: something is not a kind of a backband if it is a kind of a Anhingidae. sent3: the fact that the... | sent13 & sent16 -> int1: the Cyril is not nautical.; sent9 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that it is a wash that is unargumentative. | [
"if a wash is not argumentative then the Cyril is not nautical.",
"if the Cyril is not nautical then that the flagellant is nautical but it is not flinty is not true."
] | [
"There is a wash that is unargumentative.",
"There is something that is unargumentative."
] |
the alderman is a scallop. | sent1: either the alderman is nonarboreal or it does scallop or both. sent2: the porcupinefish is not nonarboreal and/or renders. sent3: the laver feminizes flashing if the flat is a knawel. sent4: the spironolactone is not a priority and does not feminize flashing if the motorcycle does not feminize sociologist. sent5... | {B}{b} | sent1: ({AA}{b} v {B}{b}) sent2: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent3: {F}{f} -> {D}{e} sent4: ¬{E}{d} -> (¬{C}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent5: (x): (¬{E}x v {F}x) -> ¬{E}x sent6: (¬{EP}{b} v {B}{b}) sent7: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent8: (¬{C}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent9: (¬{B}{b} v {AB}{b}) sent10: {AA}{ja} sent11: (¬{B}{a} v {A... | [
"sent7 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent7 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 15 | the alderman is not a kind of a scallop. | ¬{B}{b} | 7 | [
"sent5 -> int1: the motorcycle does not feminize sociologist if either it does not feminize sociologist or it is a knawel or both.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the alderman is a scallop. ; $context$ = sent1: either the alderman is nonarboreal or it does scallop or both. sent2: the porcupinefish is not nonarboreal and/or renders. sent3: the laver feminizes flashing if the flat is a knawel. sent4: the spironolactone is not a priority and does not feminize flashin... | sent7 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if either the porcupinefish is not nonarboreal or it does render or both the alderman scallops. | [
"the porcupinefish is not nonarboreal and/or renders."
] | [
"if either the porcupinefish is not nonarboreal or it does render or both the alderman scallops."
] |
the selvage is Nordic. | sent1: the hull is not a kind of a Hyaenidae if there is something such that it is bifilar and/or does not test. sent2: the Nasturtium is not Nordic. sent3: that the fact that the selvage is Nordic is not wrong is incorrect if there exists something such that it is a lincomycin. sent4: the fact that the Nasturtium is a... | {A}{a} | sent1: (x): ({I}x v ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}{b} sent2: ¬{A}{aa} sent3: (x): {AB}x -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: ¬({AB}{aa} & {A}{aa}) sent5: ¬{K}{e} -> ({G}{c} & {J}{c}) sent6: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {A}x) sent7: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AB}{a} sent8: ¬{K}{e} sent9: ¬({AB}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent10: (x): ¬({JA}x & {CR}x) sent11: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{a... | [
"sent13 -> int1: that the Nasturtium stunts Nasturtium but it is not a lincomycin is incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it stunts Nasturtium and it is not a lincomycin is not right.; int2 & sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent13 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent15 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 | the seamount is not Nordic. | ¬{A}{jh} | 7 | [
"sent14 -> int3: either something is bifilar or it is not a tested or both.; int3 & sent1 -> int4: the hull is not a Hyaenidae.; sent17 & int4 -> int5: the hull is not a spermatocyte and it is not disintegrative.; sent12 & int5 -> int6: the selvage is not many.; sent5 & sent8 -> int7: the businesswoman is not non-l... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the selvage is Nordic. ; $context$ = sent1: the hull is not a kind of a Hyaenidae if there is something such that it is bifilar and/or does not test. sent2: the Nasturtium is not Nordic. sent3: that the fact that the selvage is Nordic is not wrong is incorrect if there exists something such that it is a ... | sent13 -> int1: that the Nasturtium stunts Nasturtium but it is not a lincomycin is incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it stunts Nasturtium and it is not a lincomycin is not right.; int2 & sent15 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is nothing that does stunt Nasturtium and is not a lincomycin. | [
"if there exists something such that that it stunts Nasturtium and it is not a lincomycin is not correct the selvage is not Nordic."
] | [
"there is nothing that does stunt Nasturtium and is not a lincomycin."
] |
the caveat happens and the stunting straitjacket happens. | sent1: the feminizing tetranychid happens. sent2: the consorting custom-made occurs. sent3: the spiccato and the caveat happens if the fact that the stunting straitjacket does not occur is correct. sent4: the considering holotype does not occur if the fact that both the considering holotype and the retorting occurs doe... | ({A} & {B}) | sent1: {EN} sent2: {EP} sent3: ¬{B} -> ({JD} & {A}) sent4: ¬({C} & {E}) -> ¬{C} sent5: {B} sent6: {JG} sent7: {BF} sent8: {GC} sent9: {A} sent10: ¬{D} -> {C} sent11: {CO} sent12: {F} -> (¬{D} & {E}) sent13: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {E}) sent14: {HF} sent15: {HK} sent16: ({GE} & {GJ}) sent17: {C} -> ¬{B} sent18: ¬{I} -> ({G} & {... | [
"sent9 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent9 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 18 | the spiccato happens. | {JD} | 9 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the caveat happens and the stunting straitjacket happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the feminizing tetranychid happens. sent2: the consorting custom-made occurs. sent3: the spiccato and the caveat happens if the fact that the stunting straitjacket does not occur is correct. sent4: the considering holotype doe... | sent9 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the caveat occurs. | [
"the stunting straitjacket occurs."
] | [
"the caveat occurs."
] |
the Uzi is an out. | sent1: if something is non-run-on then it is out. sent2: if there is something such that it is non-pantheist thing that is a rudder then the Uzi is not run-on. sent3: if something is not lacrimatory the fact that it is run-on or it is operatic or both is wrong. | {B}{a} | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}x sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ¬({A}x v {C}x) | [
"sent1 -> int1: the Uzi does out if the fact that it is not run-on is not false.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent1 -> int1: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | the Uzi is not an out. | ¬{B}{a} | 5 | [
"sent3 -> int2: if the battlesight is not lacrimatory then that it is run-on and/or it is operatic does not hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Uzi is an out. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is non-run-on then it is out. sent2: if there is something such that it is non-pantheist thing that is a rudder then the Uzi is not run-on. sent3: if something is not lacrimatory the fact that it is run-on or it is operatic or both is wrong. ; $proof$ ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if something is non-run-on then it is out. | [] | [
"if something is non-run-on then it is out."
] |
that the flibbertigibbet does not feminize slander is not wrong. | sent1: the flibbertigibbet does feminize slander and it is a kind of a dare if it is not a VCR. sent2: the Warren dares. sent3: the czarina is a VCR and a septum. sent4: the pussycat dares. sent5: the pussycat is a kind of a VCR. sent6: that the flibbertigibbet is a VCR is not wrong. sent7: the flibbertigibbet is a dar... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ¬{B}{b} -> ({C}{b} & {A}{b}) sent2: {A}{t} sent3: ({B}{dg} & {HN}{dg}) sent4: {A}{a} sent5: {B}{a} sent6: {B}{b} sent7: {A}{b} sent8: ({A}{df} & {IM}{df}) sent9: {C}{a} sent10: {A}{hh} | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the pussycat is both a dare and a VCR.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a});"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | the flibbertigibbet does feminize slander. | {C}{b} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the flibbertigibbet does not feminize slander is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the flibbertigibbet does feminize slander and it is a kind of a dare if it is not a VCR. sent2: the Warren dares. sent3: the czarina is a VCR and a septum. sent4: the pussycat dares. sent5: the pussycat is a kind of a V... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the pussycat dares. | [
"the pussycat is a kind of a VCR."
] | [
"the pussycat dares."
] |
the flooring does not feminize sparkler. | sent1: the flooring is ductless and it feminizes sparkler. sent2: something feminizes sparkler if it is not ductless. sent3: the flooring is ductless. | ¬{B}{a} | sent1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}x sent3: {A}{a} | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 2 | the iodothyronine feminizes sparkler. | {B}{im} | 5 | [
"sent2 -> int1: the iodothyronine feminizes sparkler if it is not ductless.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the flooring does not feminize sparkler. ; $context$ = sent1: the flooring is ductless and it feminizes sparkler. sent2: something feminizes sparkler if it is not ductless. sent3: the flooring is ductless. ; $proof$ = | sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the flooring is ductless and it feminizes sparkler. | [] | [
"the flooring is ductless and it feminizes sparkler."
] |
the fact that the clitoridectomy does not occur is correct. | sent1: the low-techness happens. sent2: that not the inactivity but the clitoridectomy occurs is wrong if the quincentennialness does not occur. sent3: the bolographicness happens. sent4: if the inactivity occurs then the clitoridectomy does not occur and the low-techness does not occur. sent5: the fact that both the m... | ¬{B} | sent1: {A} sent2: ¬{E} -> ¬(¬{C} & {B}) sent3: {IT} sent4: {C} -> (¬{B} & ¬{A}) sent5: ({HN} & {EI}) sent6: ({JG} & {JH}) sent7: {DQ} sent8: {GH} sent9: ¬{F} -> ({JJ} & {D}) sent10: ¬(¬{C} & {B}) -> ¬{B} sent11: {K} sent12: ¬{K} -> ¬({H} & {G}) sent13: ¬(¬{I} & {F}) -> ¬{F} sent14: ({A} & {B}) sent15: ¬{B} -> ({CR} & {... | [
"sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent14 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 | the aposiopeticness and the phylogeneticness happens. | ({CR} & {JJ}) | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the clitoridectomy does not occur is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the low-techness happens. sent2: that not the inactivity but the clitoridectomy occurs is wrong if the quincentennialness does not occur. sent3: the bolographicness happens. sent4: if the inactivity occurs then the clitoride... | sent14 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the low-techness and the clitoridectomy occurs. | [] | [
"the low-techness and the clitoridectomy occurs."
] |
the applique does not feminize applique. | sent1: there exists something such that it is a glorification. sent2: that the applique does stunt GNP if the applique consorts Trema and is not mutafacient is not wrong. sent3: the applique feminizes applique if it does stunt GNP. sent4: if there exists something such that it is a glorification the applique consorts T... | ¬{E}{a} | sent1: (Ex): {A}x sent2: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {D}{a} sent3: {D}{a} -> {E}{a} sent4: (x): {A}x -> ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent5: (x): {DA}x -> {GG}x sent6: ¬{C}{a} | [
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the applique does consort Trema but it is not mutafacient.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the applique stunts GNP.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent1 & sent4 -> int1: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 & sent2 -> int2: {D}{a}; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | the applique is a ELISA if it does consort bur. | {DA}{a} -> {GG}{a} | 1 | [
"sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the applique does not feminize applique. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is a glorification. sent2: that the applique does stunt GNP if the applique consorts Trema and is not mutafacient is not wrong. sent3: the applique feminizes applique if it does stunt GNP. sent4: if there ex... | sent1 & sent4 -> int1: the applique does consort Trema but it is not mutafacient.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the applique stunts GNP.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that it is a glorification. | [
"if there exists something such that it is a glorification the applique consorts Trema and is not mutafacient.",
"that the applique does stunt GNP if the applique consorts Trema and is not mutafacient is not wrong.",
"the applique feminizes applique if it does stunt GNP."
] | [
"There is something that is a glorification.",
"There is a glorification that exists.",
"There is a thing that is a glorification."
] |
the chap does not feminize rubbing. | sent1: that the chap does not feminize rubbing is not incorrect if the asteroid is both a ninon and Kafkaesque. sent2: something is a sunscreen but it is not a Spartan. sent3: that the dideoxyinosine is a sunscreen and it is a Spartan is false. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a sunscreen ... | ¬{E}{b} | sent1: ({C}{a} & {D}{a}) -> ¬{E}{b} sent2: (Ex): ({F}x & ¬{G}x) sent3: ¬({F}{c} & {G}{c}) sent4: (x): ¬({F}x & ¬{G}x) -> {D}{a} sent5: ¬({F}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent6: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent7: {B}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) | [
"sent6 -> int1: the asteroid is collapsible.; sent5 -> int2: there is something such that that it is a sunscreen and is not a Spartan does not hold.; int2 & sent4 -> int3: the asteroid is not non-Kafkaesque.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent6 -> int1: {A}{a}; sent5 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({F}x & ¬{G}x); int2 & sent4 -> int3: {D}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | the chap does feminize rubbing. | {E}{b} | 5 | [
"sent8 -> int4: that the asteroid is not collapsible and not a proprietress is incorrect if it is not a ninon.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the chap does not feminize rubbing. ; $context$ = sent1: that the chap does not feminize rubbing is not incorrect if the asteroid is both a ninon and Kafkaesque. sent2: something is a sunscreen but it is not a Spartan. sent3: that the dideoxyinosine is a sunscreen and it is a Spartan is false. sent4: if ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the asteroid is collapsible a proprietress. | [
"that the dideoxyinosine is a sunscreen that is not a kind of a Spartan is incorrect.",
"if there exists something such that the fact that it is a sunscreen that is not a Spartan is wrong the asteroid is Kafkaesque."
] | [
"The asteroid has a collapsible proprietress.",
"The asteroid has a proprietress."
] |
the kainite is a kind of a fascicle. | sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is a hole-in-the-wall and is not a monte is wrong. sent2: that the kainite is non-diurnal thing that is not a Caprella does not hold if the grader is not a kind of a fascicle. sent3: something is not a fascicle if that it either does not differ or is Dionysian or bot... | {A}{a} | sent1: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent2: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{CT}{a} & ¬{JF}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{C}x v {B}x) -> ¬{A}x sent4: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬({D}x & {C}x) sent5: ¬(¬{A}{aa} & {AA}{aa}) sent6: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{A}x) sent7: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AB}{a} sent8: (x): ¬(¬{A}x & ¬{AA}x) sent9: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent10: (x):... | [
"sent11 -> int1: that the lovage is not a kind of a hole-in-the-wall and it is not a monte does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a hole-in-the-wall and it is not a kind of a monte is not true.; int2 & sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent11 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent16 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 18 | that the kainite is a fascicle is not wrong. | {A}{a} | 7 | [
"sent14 -> int3: if the fact that the kainite is not a fascicle and not Dionysian is incorrect it is a fascicle.; sent17 -> int4: if the kainite does not differ the fact that it is both not a fascicle and not Dionysian is wrong.; sent4 -> int5: the fact that the grader is avian and it differs is wrong if that it is... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the kainite is a kind of a fascicle. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is a hole-in-the-wall and is not a monte is wrong. sent2: that the kainite is non-diurnal thing that is not a Caprella does not hold if the grader is not a kind of a fascicle. sent3: something is not a... | sent11 -> int1: that the lovage is not a kind of a hole-in-the-wall and it is not a monte does not hold.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it is not a kind of a hole-in-the-wall and it is not a kind of a monte is not true.; int2 & sent16 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there exists nothing such that it is not a hole-in-the-wall and it is not a monte. | [
"the kainite is not a kind of a fascicle if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a hole-in-the-wall and is not a monte is not true."
] | [
"there exists nothing such that it is not a hole-in-the-wall and it is not a monte."
] |
that the non-Carthusianness and the non-over-the-counterness occurs is incorrect. | sent1: if the aphoristicness occurs that the expatiation does not occur and the redistribution does not occur does not hold. sent2: the fact that the Carthusian happens but the over-the-counterness does not occur is not right. sent3: if the Baptisticness occurs the fact that the outburst happens is right. sent4: the du... | ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | sent1: {A} -> ¬(¬{BD} & ¬{EN}) sent2: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent3: {G} -> {F} sent4: ¬(¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} sent5: ¬(¬{JI} & ¬{CH}) sent6: ¬(¬{DC} & ¬{AS}) sent7: ¬({A} & {AA}) -> ¬{AA} sent8: ¬{C} -> ({A} & {B}) sent9: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent10: {F} -> ¬(¬{E} & ¬{D}) sent11: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) | [
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent9 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 10 | the non-Carthusianness and the non-over-the-counterness occurs. | (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the non-Carthusianness and the non-over-the-counterness occurs is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the aphoristicness occurs that the expatiation does not occur and the redistribution does not occur does not hold. sent2: the fact that the Carthusian happens but the over-the-counterness does not oc... | sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the non-Carthusianness and the non-over-the-counterness happens is incorrect. | [] | [
"that the non-Carthusianness and the non-over-the-counterness happens is incorrect."
] |
the whisk does stunt jackfruit. | sent1: the screen is a billyo and it is a nailbrush if there exists something such that it is not a biquadratic. sent2: that the homebrew is not the absolute if that the homebrew is auroral and it does consort screen does not hold is not wrong. sent3: the fact that the wretch does not feminize mill but it is triclinic ... | {B}{a} | sent1: (x): ¬{H}x -> ({F}{b} & {G}{b}) sent2: ¬({D}{aa} & {C}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{aa} sent3: ¬(¬{DP}{fs} & {HJ}{fs}) sent4: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): ({C}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent6: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {AG}{a}) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: ¬{C}{aa} -> ¬{A}{aa} sent9: ¬(¬{BU}{ca} & {AB}{ca}) sent10: ... | [
"sent15 -> int1: the fact that the homebrew is not a kind of a diet but it is no-go is wrong if the fact that it is not a kind of an absolute is not incorrect.; sent2 & sent19 -> int2: the homebrew is non-absolute.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the homebrew does not diet but it is no-go is false.; int3 & sent... | PROVED | [
"sent15 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent2 & sent19 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int3 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 15 | that the whisk does not stunt jackfruit hold. | ¬{B}{a} | 7 | [
"sent5 -> int4: if the whisk consorts screen but it is not an absolute it does not stunt jackfruit.; sent12 -> int5: if the screen is a billyo then it is both not auroral and a sulfamethoxazole.; sent10 & sent1 -> int6: the screen is a kind of a billyo and is a kind of a nailbrush.; int6 -> int7: that the screen is... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the whisk does stunt jackfruit. ; $context$ = sent1: the screen is a billyo and it is a nailbrush if there exists something such that it is not a biquadratic. sent2: that the homebrew is not the absolute if that the homebrew is auroral and it does consort screen does not hold is not wrong. sent3: the fac... | sent15 -> int1: the fact that the homebrew is not a kind of a diet but it is no-go is wrong if the fact that it is not a kind of an absolute is not incorrect.; sent2 & sent19 -> int2: the homebrew is non-absolute.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the homebrew does not diet but it is no-go is false.; int3 & sent4 -> ... | DeductionInstance | if something is not absolute that it is not a diet and it is no-go does not hold. | [
"that the homebrew is not the absolute if that the homebrew is auroral and it does consort screen does not hold is not wrong.",
"the fact that the homebrew is auroral and does consort screen is not right.",
"the whisk does stunt jackfruit if that the homebrew does not diet but it is no-go does not hold."
] | [
"It isn't a diet if it isn't a no-go and it isn't a diet if it isn't a diet if it isn't a diet if it isn't a diet if it isn't a diet if it isn't a diet if",
"It's not a diet if it isn't a diet and it isn't a diet if it isn't a diet and it isn't a diet if it isn't a diet if it isn't a diet if it isn't a diet if it... |
the armet stunts chloroplast. | sent1: if the clinic does consort wrestling then the armet stunts chloroplast. sent2: the chloroplast stunts armet if the businesswoman does consider tachymeter. sent3: everything is meager. sent4: if the tureen is not meager that the clinic does not consort NY and/or consorts wrestling is not false. sent5: the clinic ... | {C}{b} | sent1: {A}{a} -> {C}{b} sent2: {L}{g} -> {K}{f} sent3: (x): {D}x sent4: ¬{D}{c} -> (¬{B}{a} v {A}{a}) sent5: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: {C}{a} sent7: ({L}{g} v {M}{g}) sent8: ¬{E}{d} -> ¬{D}{c} sent9: {B}{a} sent10: ({A}{ba} & {HF}{ba}) sent11: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{F}x) -> ¬{E}x sent12: ({IA}{b} & {CK}{b}) sent13: (x): ¬(¬{K}... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | the armet does not stunt chloroplast. | ¬{C}{b} | 11 | [
"sent11 -> int1: the evacuee is not existential if it is not asterismal and it is not crucial.; sent20 -> int2: the necker is mortal if it is a narrow.; sent13 -> int3: if the fact that the necker does not stunt armet and is a Nelumbonaceae does not hold then it is narrow.; sent7 & sent2 & sent18 -> int4: the chlor... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the armet stunts chloroplast. ; $context$ = sent1: if the clinic does consort wrestling then the armet stunts chloroplast. sent2: the chloroplast stunts armet if the businesswoman does consider tachymeter. sent3: everything is meager. sent4: if the tureen is not meager that the clinic does not consort NY... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the clinic does consort NY and does stunt chloroplast. | [
"everything is meager."
] | [
"the clinic does consort NY and does stunt chloroplast."
] |
the nun is Gibraltarian. | sent1: the nun is not a heroic. sent2: that the LAN is not pyroligneous and it is not a heroic is false if it is not fishy. sent3: if the LAN is a kind of Gibraltarian thing that does not consider knife-handle then the nun is not a Gibraltarian. sent4: that that the milord is not fishy and does not consort sailboat is ... | {B}{b} | sent1: ¬{AB}{b} sent2: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: ({B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent4: ¬(¬{A}{bs} & ¬{J}{bs}) sent5: ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent2 & sent5 -> int1: that the LAN is not pyroligneous and it is not a heroic is not right.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent2 & sent5 -> int1: ¬(¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a});"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | the nun is not a kind of a Gibraltarian. | ¬{B}{b} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the nun is Gibraltarian. ; $context$ = sent1: the nun is not a heroic. sent2: that the LAN is not pyroligneous and it is not a heroic is false if it is not fishy. sent3: if the LAN is a kind of Gibraltarian thing that does not consider knife-handle then the nun is not a Gibraltarian. sent4: that that the... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | that the LAN is not pyroligneous and it is not a heroic is false if it is not fishy. | [
"the LAN is not fishy."
] | [
"that the LAN is not pyroligneous and it is not a heroic is false if it is not fishy."
] |
the fact that the stonecrop stunts gauss is not wrong. | sent1: if that the stonecrop does not stunt Eddy and it does not stunt goosander is not right it does not stunt gauss. sent2: the gyrfalcon does not stunt goosander if the stonecrop does not stunt goosander and stunts gauss. sent3: The Eddy stunts stonecrop. sent4: if the stonecrop stunts goosander then it does not stu... | {C}{a} | sent1: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: (¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{B}{df} sent3: {AB}{ab} sent4: {B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} sent5: ¬{A}{jg} sent6: (Ex): (¬{M}x v ¬{L}x) sent7: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{IC}{df} sent8: {I}{a} sent9: {I}{a} -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{F}{a}) sent10: {A}{a} sent11: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬(¬{J}x & {I}x) sent12: (x): (¬{M}x v ... | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stonecrop does not stunt Eddy and does not stunt goosander.; assump1 -> int1: that the stonecrop does not stunt Eddy is correct.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the stonecrop does not stunt Eddy and it does not stunt goo... | DISPROVED | [
"void -> assump1: (¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); assump1 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent10 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int3 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 | the stonecrop does stunt gauss. | {C}{a} | 10 | [
"sent22 -> int4: if the tomtit is a kind of a surveyor it does not stunt arsenide and is not a soar.; sent21 -> int5: if the squirter is not anorectal it is enzymatic thing that does not stunt bootleg.; sent11 -> int6: the fact that the quadraphony is both not a Ajuga and anorectal is not true if it is not a reduct... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the stonecrop stunts gauss is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the stonecrop does not stunt Eddy and it does not stunt goosander is not right it does not stunt gauss. sent2: the gyrfalcon does not stunt goosander if the stonecrop does not stunt goosander and stunts gauss. sent3: The ... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stonecrop does not stunt Eddy and does not stunt goosander.; assump1 -> int1: that the stonecrop does not stunt Eddy is correct.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the stonecrop does not stunt Eddy and it does not stunt goosande... | DeductionInstance | the stonecrop stunts Eddy. | [
"if that the stonecrop does not stunt Eddy and it does not stunt goosander is not right it does not stunt gauss."
] | [
"the stonecrop stunts Eddy."
] |
the chela does not stunt comfrey. | sent1: if the legs does not stunt comfrey then the chela does feminize legs. sent2: the chela is ontogenetic and feminizes legs. sent3: the fact that the legs does stunt comfrey is not false if the chela does not feminize legs. sent4: the ovenbird stunts comfrey. sent5: the legs is a Xerox if the fact that the chela do... | ¬{AB}{b} | sent1: ¬{AB}{a} -> {A}{b} sent2: ({AR}{b} & {A}{b}) sent3: ¬{A}{b} -> {AB}{a} sent4: {AB}{cu} sent5: ¬{A}{b} -> {AA}{a} sent6: ({CH}{hc} & {AA}{hc}) sent7: {AA}{a} sent8: {AB}{a} sent9: ¬{A}{a} sent10: {DN}{a} sent11: ¬{AA}{b} -> ({AB}{a} & {A}{a}) sent12: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}) sent13: ¬{GD}{a} sent14: ({AL}{b... | [
"sent12 & sent9 -> int1: the chela is a Xerox and stunts comfrey.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent12 & sent9 -> int1: ({AA}{b} & {AB}{b}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the chela does not stunt comfrey. ; $context$ = sent1: if the legs does not stunt comfrey then the chela does feminize legs. sent2: the chela is ontogenetic and feminizes legs. sent3: the fact that the legs does stunt comfrey is not false if the chela does not feminize legs. sent4: the ovenbird stunts co... | sent12 & sent9 -> int1: the chela is a Xerox and stunts comfrey.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the chela is a Xerox and stunts comfrey if the legs does not feminize legs. | [
"the legs does not feminize legs."
] | [
"the chela is a Xerox and stunts comfrey if the legs does not feminize legs."
] |
the teller does not consider girasol. | sent1: if something considers NASA then it is not mechanical. sent2: there is nothing that is not a Hecht and is recreational. sent3: the Wiffle is not a kind of a carry if the fact that it is non-polychromatic and it is a anaphase is wrong. sent4: if the fact that something is not a kind of a Hecht but it is recreatio... | ¬{B}{aa} | sent1: (x): {BG}x -> ¬{DN}x sent2: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) sent3: ¬(¬{CL}{iq} & {ET}{iq}) -> ¬{AA}{iq} sent4: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {E}x) -> ¬{E}x sent5: ¬({GB}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent7: ¬{BP}{aa} sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{HQ}{aa} & {AF}{aa}) sent9: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {GG}{aa}) sent10: ¬({BS}{aa} & {HD}{aa}) s... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | the teller does consider girasol. | {B}{aa} | 8 | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the fact that the Helix is not a Hecht but it is recreational is wrong it is not recreational.; sent2 -> int2: that the Helix is not a Hecht but it is recreational is not correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the fact that the Helix is not recreational is not false.; int3 -> int4: everything is not recr... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the teller does not consider girasol. ; $context$ = sent1: if something considers NASA then it is not mechanical. sent2: there is nothing that is not a Hecht and is recreational. sent3: the Wiffle is not a kind of a carry if the fact that it is non-polychromatic and it is a anaphase is wrong. sent4: if t... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the teller does not feminize tripod. | [
"if something considers NASA then it is not mechanical."
] | [
"the teller does not feminize tripod."
] |
the determining does not occur. | sent1: that the victualling and the yawing happens is brought about by the non-evergreenness. sent2: the stunting tyramine happens. sent3: that the feint happens and the dovetail occurs is brought about by that the feminizing porkchop does not occur. sent4: the fact that the evolutionariness does not occur and the stun... | ¬{B} | sent1: ¬{G} -> ({F} & {E}) sent2: {A} sent3: ¬{L} -> ({K} & {J}) sent4: ¬{D} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) sent5: {A} -> {B} sent6: (¬{G} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{E} sent7: ¬{E} -> ¬{D} sent8: {J} -> (¬{I} & ¬{H}) sent9: ({N} & {M}) -> ¬{L} sent10: {GF} sent11: ¬{H} -> (¬{G} & ¬{F}) sent12: {T} -> {HJ} sent13: ¬(¬{C} & {D}) -> ¬{B} sent14: ¬{... | [
"sent5 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent5 & sent2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 13 | 0 | 13 | the determining does not occur. | ¬{B} | 13 | [
"sent14 & sent15 -> int1: the suspension happens and the reopening occurs.; int1 -> int2: the suspension occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the determining does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that the victualling and the yawing happens is brought about by the non-evergreenness. sent2: the stunting tyramine happens. sent3: that the feint happens and the dovetail occurs is brought about by that the feminizing porkchop does not occur. sent4: t... | sent5 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the stunting tyramine causes that the determining occurs. | [
"the stunting tyramine happens."
] | [
"the stunting tyramine causes that the determining occurs."
] |
the stem is not non-freelance. | sent1: if there is something such that it does not reheat the stem does consider wheeled. sent2: the stem does consider wheeled. sent3: everything is not probabilistic. sent4: there exists something such that it reheats. sent5: if there exists something such that it does not reheat then the stem considers wheeled and i... | {C}{a} | sent1: (x): ¬{A}x -> {B}{a} sent2: {B}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{D}x sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: (x): ¬{A}x -> ({B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent6: {C}{cd} | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | the stem is not freelance. | ¬{C}{a} | 6 | [
"sent3 -> int1: the watermelon is not probabilistic.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the stem is not non-freelance. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that it does not reheat the stem does consider wheeled. sent2: the stem does consider wheeled. sent3: everything is not probabilistic. sent4: there exists something such that it reheats. sent5: if there exists something such t... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if there is something such that it does not reheat the stem does consider wheeled. | [
"everything is not probabilistic."
] | [
"if there is something such that it does not reheat the stem does consider wheeled."
] |
the pentastomid is not a toe-in. | sent1: the pentastomid is not a toe-in if the Teton frames. sent2: the fact that the Teton is a toe-in and it is a Desmodontidae is not true if it is not a kind of a frame. sent3: the Teton is a girasol if there is something such that that it is not a girasol and it does not kick is false. sent4: if that the fact that ... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: {AB}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} sent2: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬({B}{a} & {A}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{C}x & ¬{D}x) -> {C}{a} sent4: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent5: ¬{A}{a} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | [
"sent6 & sent5 -> int1: the fact that the Teton considers zinfandel and does not frame does not hold.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent6 & sent5 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 3 | the pentastomid is a toe-in. | {B}{b} | 11 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the pentastomid is not a toe-in. ; $context$ = sent1: the pentastomid is not a toe-in if the Teton frames. sent2: the fact that the Teton is a toe-in and it is a Desmodontidae is not true if it is not a kind of a frame. sent3: the Teton is a girasol if there is something such that that it is not a giraso... | sent6 & sent5 -> int1: the fact that the Teton considers zinfandel and does not frame does not hold.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the Teton is not a Desmodontidae that it considers zinfandel and it is not a kind of a frame is not correct. | [
"the Teton is not a Desmodontidae.",
"if that the fact that that the Teton considers zinfandel and is not a frame hold is not true is correct then the pentastomid is not a kind of a toe-in."
] | [
"If the Teton is not a Desmodontidae, and it is not a kind of frame, then it is not correct.",
"If the Teton is not a Desmodontidae and it is not a kind of frame, then it is not correct."
] |
the gate is a Chabad. | sent1: the gate is a Chabad if the fact that the gammon is polyvalent or is not a Mayan or both is not correct. sent2: if that the gammon is polyvalent and/or not a Chabad is not right the gate is a Mayan. sent3: there is nothing such that it does stunt Caucasian or is not a misfit or both. sent4: there is nothing that... | {A}{a} | sent1: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) -> {A}{a} sent2: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{A}{aa}) -> {AB}{a} sent3: (x): ¬({AR}x v ¬{HU}x) sent4: (x): ¬({E}x v ¬{BB}x) sent5: (x): ¬({AA}x v ¬{AB}x) sent6: ¬({A}{b} v ¬{II}{b}) sent7: ¬({HM}{ad} v ¬{FB}{ad}) sent8: {AB}{aa} sent9: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {A}{a} sent10: ¬({A}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}) sen... | [
"sent5 -> int1: the fact that the gammon is polyvalent and/or it is not a Mayan does not hold.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} v ¬{AB}{aa}); sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 10 | the gate is not a Chabad. | ¬{A}{a} | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the gate is a Chabad. ; $context$ = sent1: the gate is a Chabad if the fact that the gammon is polyvalent or is not a Mayan or both is not correct. sent2: if that the gammon is polyvalent and/or not a Chabad is not right the gate is a Mayan. sent3: there is nothing such that it does stunt Caucasian or is... | sent5 -> int1: the fact that the gammon is polyvalent and/or it is not a Mayan does not hold.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is nothing such that it is polyvalent and/or it is not a kind of a Mayan. | [
"the gate is a Chabad if the fact that the gammon is polyvalent or is not a Mayan or both is not correct."
] | [
"there is nothing such that it is polyvalent and/or it is not a kind of a Mayan."
] |
that the sunglasses is not a blowout is true. | sent1: the sunglasses is noncaloric and partitive. sent2: the pudge is uveal. sent3: if something consorts screen and is uveal the aerie is a Meir. sent4: if the aerie does consort screen the sunglasses is a blowout. sent5: the aerie is not a theology if there exists something such that it is not a stroma and/or it is ... | ¬{E}{b} | sent1: ({JD}{b} & {CE}{b}) sent2: {B}{aa} sent3: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent4: {A}{a} -> {E}{b} sent5: (x): (¬{F}x v {E}x) -> ¬{D}{a} sent6: ¬{B}{a} -> ({E}{b} & {A}{b}) sent7: {D}{a} -> ¬{E}{b} sent8: ({B}{aa} v {D}{aa}) sent9: ({B}{b} v {E}{b}) sent10: ({A}{aa} & {B}{aa}) sent11: (Ex): {A}x sent12: (x): (¬{C}x ... | [
"sent10 -> int1: the fact that something consorts screen and it is uveal is not wrong.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the aerie is a Meir.; int2 -> int3: the aerie is a theology or it is a Meir or both.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent10 -> int1: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x); int1 & sent3 -> int2: {C}{a}; int2 -> int3: ({D}{a} v {C}{a});"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | the tither does not consort screen. | ¬{A}{eh} | 7 | [
"sent16 -> int4: the sunglasses is not a stroma.; int4 -> int5: either the sunglasses is not a stroma or it is a blowout or both.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that it is not a stroma and/or it is a blowout.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: the aerie is not a kind of a theology.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the sunglasses is not a blowout is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the sunglasses is noncaloric and partitive. sent2: the pudge is uveal. sent3: if something consorts screen and is uveal the aerie is a Meir. sent4: if the aerie does consort screen the sunglasses is a blowout. sent5: the aerie is not a th... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the pudge does consort screen and it is uveal. | [
"if something consorts screen and is uveal the aerie is a Meir."
] | [
"the pudge does consort screen and it is uveal."
] |
the vambrace is not a neurosurgery or not a bunchberry or both. | sent1: the ewe is mitotic. sent2: the vambrace is a neurosurgery and/or it is not a bunchberry. sent3: the vambrace is a neurosurgery. sent4: if the man-eater is mitotic the vambrace is mitotic. sent5: if the fact that the fact that something is not mitotic or does load gyroscope or both is not wrong is not correct the... | (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: {B}{c} sent2: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: {AA}{a} sent4: {B}{b} -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x v {A}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent6: ¬(¬{FA}{a} v ¬{HG}{a}) sent7: (¬{C}{c} & {D}{c}) sent8: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent9: {B}{c} -> {B}{b} sent10: {B}{a} -> {B}{c} sent11: ¬{AA}{a} -> ¬{B}{b} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the vambrace is not a neurosurgery and/or it is not a bunchberry.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the man-eater is not mitotic.; sent9 & sent1 -> int2: the man-eater is mitotic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"void -> assump1: (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); sent8 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent9 & sent1 -> int2: {B}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 8 | the vambrace is not a neurosurgery or it is not a kind of a bunchberry or both. | (¬{AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) | 6 | [
"sent5 -> int4: if the fact that the man-eater is not mitotic and/or does load gyroscope is false then it is not a bunchberry.; sent7 -> int5: the ewe is not synchronous.; int5 -> int6: there is something such that it is not synchronous.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the vambrace is not a neurosurgery or not a bunchberry or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the ewe is mitotic. sent2: the vambrace is a neurosurgery and/or it is not a bunchberry. sent3: the vambrace is a neurosurgery. sent4: if the man-eater is mitotic the vambrace is mitotic. sent5: if the fact that the fact... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the vambrace is not a neurosurgery and/or it is not a bunchberry.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the man-eater is not mitotic.; sent9 & sent1 -> int2: the man-eater is mitotic.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the man-eater is not mitotic if the vambrace is either not a neurosurgery or not a bunchberry or both. | [
"if the ewe is mitotic then the man-eater is mitotic.",
"the ewe is mitotic."
] | [
"If the vambrace is either a neurosurgery or a bunchberry, the man-eater is not mitotic.",
"If the vambrace is not a neurosurgery or a bunchberry, the man-eater is not mitotic."
] |
the nonreciprocalness does not occur. | sent1: if the fact that the joyfulness does not occur is not incorrect that the nonreciprocalness does not occur and the constricting does not occur does not hold. sent2: if the stabling does not occur the fact that the battue but not the incidence happens does not hold. sent3: the fact that the fact that the destructi... | ¬{C} | sent1: ¬{B} -> ¬(¬{C} & ¬{A}) sent2: ¬{J} -> ¬({H} & ¬{I}) sent3: ¬{H} -> ¬({F} & ¬{G}) sent4: ¬{T} -> ({R} & {S}) sent5: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent6: ({IO} v {CB}) sent7: {GB} sent8: ¬{F} -> ({E} & ¬{D}) sent9: ¬{P} -> ¬({O} & {N}) sent10: ¬({H} & ¬{I}) -> ¬{H} sent11: {R} -> (¬{P} & ¬{Q}) sent12: {A} -> ¬{C} sent13: ¬{... | [
"sent14 -> int1: the fact that the constricting happens and/or the joyfulness happens hold.; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent14 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 17 | the nonreciprocalness happens. | {C} | 19 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the nonreciprocalness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the joyfulness does not occur is not incorrect that the nonreciprocalness does not occur and the constricting does not occur does not hold. sent2: if the stabling does not occur the fact that the battue but not the incidence happ... | sent14 -> int1: the fact that the constricting happens and/or the joyfulness happens hold.; sent5 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the joyfulness happens. | [
"the non-nonreciprocalness is brought about by the constricting and/or that the joyfulness happens."
] | [
"the joyfulness happens."
] |
the fact that that something is a Alhazen and it is gymnospermous is not wrong is not true. | sent1: the hydrocarbon is gymnospermous. sent2: if there is something such that it is not axillary the chloropicrin does not access chloropicrin. sent3: if the liman is not a shoreline the diploid is both not a antifeminist and mucinous. sent4: the chloropicrin is a Alhazen. sent5: something is gymnospermous if it is n... | ¬((Ex): ({A}x & {B}x)) | sent1: {B}{em} sent2: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬{F}{a} sent3: ¬{M}{e} -> (¬{J}{d} & {L}{d}) sent4: {A}{a} sent5: (x): (¬{A}x & {C}x) -> {B}x sent6: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬({E}x & {D}x) sent7: ¬{J}{c} -> ({I}{c} & {H}{c}) sent8: (Ex): {A}x sent9: (Ex): ({DL}x & {DB}x) sent10: ({CR}{fn} & {B}{fn}) sent11: (Ex): {GI}x sent12: (Ex): ({CP}x &... | [
"sent4 & sent15 -> int1: the chloropicrin is a kind of a Alhazen and is gymnospermous.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 & sent15 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 19 | the couple is gymnospermous. | {B}{b} | 4 | [
"sent18 -> int2: if that the couple is not a kind of a Alhazen and is not satiate is not true it is a kind of a Alhazen.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that that something is a Alhazen and it is gymnospermous is not wrong is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the hydrocarbon is gymnospermous. sent2: if there is something such that it is not axillary the chloropicrin does not access chloropicrin. sent3: if the liman is not a shoreline the diploid is... | sent4 & sent15 -> int1: the chloropicrin is a kind of a Alhazen and is gymnospermous.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the chloropicrin is a Alhazen. | [
"the chloropicrin is gymnospermous."
] | [
"the chloropicrin is a Alhazen."
] |
the poppet is a dastard but it is not a Tibetan. | sent1: the poppet does circumnavigate JV. sent2: that the poppet is a dastard and is a Tibetan does not hold if it does circumnavigate JV. sent3: that that the stitch is a kind of a workroom and does not circumnavigate JV is incorrect is not incorrect. sent4: if the fact that the poppet is a plumbism is true the fact t... | ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) | sent1: {A}{aa} sent2: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent3: ¬({EP}{bc} & ¬{A}{bc}) sent4: {JB}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{IG}{aa}) sent5: {A}{aa} -> ¬({HU}{aa} & ¬{GR}{aa}) sent6: {A}{ds} sent7: {BO}{aa} sent8: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) sent9: {CQ}{aa} -> ¬({CP}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) sent10: (x): {IN}x -> ¬({K}x & ¬{IQ}x) sent11... | [
"sent16 -> int1: the fact that the poppet is a dastard and is not a kind of a Tibetan is not correct if it circumnavigates JV.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent16 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 14 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the poppet is a dastard but it is not a Tibetan. ; $context$ = sent1: the poppet does circumnavigate JV. sent2: that the poppet is a dastard and is a Tibetan does not hold if it does circumnavigate JV. sent3: that that the stitch is a kind of a workroom and does not circumnavigate JV is incorrect is not ... | sent16 -> int1: the fact that the poppet is a dastard and is not a kind of a Tibetan is not correct if it circumnavigates JV.; int1 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that something is a dastard but it is not a kind of a Tibetan is not right if it circumnavigates JV. | [
"the poppet does circumnavigate JV."
] | [
"that something is a dastard but it is not a kind of a Tibetan is not right if it circumnavigates JV."
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.